"Those weapons of mass destruction have got to be somew

[Joe DeFuria]

And yet, it seems that the prior Spanish adminstration was going to get re-elected, if not for that bombing.

No, and we've already discussed this. The incumbents shot themselves in the foot by generating a huge swing vote against themselves when they were so quick to vehemently blame the Socialists for the bombings.

yes, so the theory goes.

But this is completely irrelevant to the point, not that you care to stay with the point, but I digress.

The point, again, to put it in black and white: despite the fact that there was such public opposition to Iraq in spain, they were still prepared to re-elect the administration.

 

[John Reynolds]

If you've forgotten, there were massive protests back in the day against deploying short/medium range missiles in Europe.

You could say they were against actions which eventually ended the cold war.

Do you blame them? They were the expected battlefield in the bi-polar Cold War world. And by what causal effect did the placement of those missiles alone bring about a swifter end to the Soviet Union's economic collapse?

Also, I never asserted our relations with European powers has been spotless. But to say that international opinion swinging against the Bush administration is a "myth", and when that that claim is disproven the tact of supposedly appeasing foreign citizens is raised as a sadly obvious red herring. . .it's truly moot to attempt engaging in such a discussion.

 

[Joe DeFuria]

The Spanish government was saying it was going to be re-elected Joe, that's the only people who were saying it. The people of Spain were against their governments support of the war and didn't re-elect 'em.

Can you guys get your stories straight? Was the incumbant administration's popularity high up to and immedately following attack even higher...and then only tanked because of conspiracy theories of purposeful deception?

Or was it low all along?

Pick one, and run with it.

 

[Joe DeFuria]

Do you blame them? They were the expected battlefield in the bi-polar Cold War world.

Don't blame them per se...it takes guts to actually take a stand. It's much easier (though short sighted) to not put yourself in harms way.

Also, I never asserted our relations with European powers has been spotless.

No, just that now our relations are total crap. Been reading too many liberal "talking point" web-sites I presume.

But to say that international opinion swinging against the Bush administration is a "myth",

To imply that I said public international opinion is not swinging against Bush, is to imply a falsehood. (Though it's ALWAYS been against bush right from the get-go.)

So yes, it's pretty pointless to continue to "discuss" if you're going to take your usual tactic of putting words in my mouth.

 

[digitalwanderer]

The Spanish government was saying it was going to be re-elected Joe, that's the only people who were saying it. The people of Spain were against their governments support of the war and didn't re-elect 'em.

Can you guys get your stories straight? Was the incumbant administration's popularity high up to and immedately following attack even higher...and then only tanked because of conspiracy theories of purposeful deception?

Or was it low all along?

Pick one, and run with it.

My premise is that the government in power in Spain was never going to get re-elected, they never had the support of the people, and the people's opinion of them just declined further after their botched dealings with the terrorist attack.

I ain't running anywhere with it Joe, I'm just standing on it.

 

[John Reynolds]

Because who gives a rats ass if someone else agrees with you on Iraq? What does that add to the discussion? Believe it or not, I happen to know that some people agree with you. At the same time, you might apparently be asontished to know that other people people agree with me. Big revelation there.

Whether or not anyone agrees with you or me. . .how does that relate to your constant hoop-jumping? Has the Iraq invasion under false pretenses cost us credibility? Are European polls accurate in portraying Bush as the greatest threat to world peace? Or is it all a myth that I'm making up to buttress my argument? Will the sun rise tomorrow? Will Joe continue to allow his arguments to drift like a rudderless galleon lost at sea?

The point is, opinions are like assholes, right? You hold up the former Navy Secretary like his opinion matters more than someone in, for example, the current administration, who's dealing with this here and now. If you hold his opinions so high, then you may want to rethink your evaluation of Clarke's credibility.

And Clarke's credibility--more importantly, what I think of it--relates to the discussion we were having how? And, if opinions are like assholes, how about the freedom to express them? How many people will speak their opinion when they feel free from any potential private or professional harm compared to when they do? My former boss was a total f'in joke of a supervisor who had no business whatsoever being in the position she was, but do you think I just walked into her office last fall and expressed that opinion to her?

 

[Joe DeFuria]

My premise is that the government in power in Spain was never going to get re-elected, they never had the support of the people, and the people's opinion of them just declined further after their botched dealings with the terrorist attack.

I ain't running anywhere with it Joe, I'm just standing on it.

No, I'm saying you're standing on this, while Sxotty is saying something else.

 

[digitalwanderer]

No, I'm saying you're standing on this, while Sxotty is saying something else.

Sxotty is entitled to his opinion, I just happen to have me own.

 

[RussSchultz]

And by what causal effect did the placement of those missiles alone bring about a swifter end to the Soviet Union's economic collapse?

That whole bankrupt the Soviet government trying to keep up with our military thing.

 

[John Reynolds]

No, just that now our relations are total crap. Been reading too many liberal "talking point" web-sites I presume.

For some who doesn't want words put in their mouth (as if anyone can straighten out your word salad argument style), you're awful quick to do it yourself. Where have I said our relations with Europe are now "total crap". Or should I "presume" you've been listening to too much Limbaugh lately?

To imply that I said public international opinion is not swinging against Bush, is to imply a falsehood. (Though it's ALWAYS been against bush right from the get-go.)

LOL Pat yourself on the back, Joe. You semantically dodged another one. . .or so you think. I guess it's only a myth that you claimed it was a myth.

So yes, it's pretty pointless to continue to "discuss" if you're going to take your usual tactic of putting words in my mouth.

Congrats, Joe, not only do you come off once against as an elitist American quick to point the fingers at others for their anti-semitism and apparent cowardice, but you're now a blatantly obvious hypocrite for crying foul over the very thing you're a master of. Tsk, tsk, perhaps I should now take another page from your book of flame bait trollery and start talking down to you.

 

[Joe DeFuria]

Whether or not anyone agrees with you or me. . .how does that relate to your constant hoop-jumping? Has the Iraq invasion under false pretenses cost us credibility?

I still don't know what these false pretenses are.

That we knew the status of WMD before going in? That Sadam was being cooperative?

John, international public opinion for bush is low. No question. This is completely besides the point of how our diplomatic relations are with others.

Or do you really not get that?

Will Joe continue to allow his arguments to drift like a rudderless galleon lost at sea?

That all depends on whether or not you care to see my point, or continue to waffle in irrelevancies. (See bold above.)

And Clarke's credibility--more importantly, what I think of it--relates to the discussion we were having how?

Um, I said it in my last post?

And, if opinions are like assholes, how about the freedom to express them?

What about it? Who said you, I, or anyone else shouldn't be expressing them?

How many people will speak their opinion when they feel free from any potential private or professional harm compared to when they do? My former boss was a total f'in joke of a supervisor who had no business whatsoever being in the position she was, but do you think I just walked into her office last fall and expressed that opinion to her?

You mean, you would LIE to her? If so, then you have no business working for her.

How many people would "stretch the truth" if by doing so, it can mean the difference of hundreds of thousands of dollars?

 

[John Reynolds]

[You mean, you would LIE to her? If so, then you have no business working for her.

OMFG. Now I'm a liar for not going out of my way and telling her she was a clusterf*ck of a boss (an attitude shared by all seven employees). LOL Oh, priceless, Joe, you've exceeded yourself.

 

[Natoma]

The point is, opinions are like assholes, right? You hold up the former Navy Secretary like his opinion matters more than someone in, for example, the current administration, who's dealing with this here and now. If you hold his opinions so high, then you may want to rethink your evaluation of Clarke's credibility.

And Clarke's credibility--more importantly, what I think of it--relates to the discussion we were having how? And, if opinions are like assholes, how about the freedom to express them? How many people will speak their opinion when they feel free from any potential private or professional harm compared to when they do? My former boss was a total f'in joke of a supervisor who had no business whatsoever being in the position she was, but do you think I just walked into her office last fall and expressed that opinion to her?

Speaking of feeling pressure from former bosses.... Richard Foster, an actuary for Medicare, is claiming that he was pressured last year with losing his job if he didn't release numbers that supported the administration's claims of keeping the price tag of the Prescription Drug Benefit below $400 Billion. His estimates were actually about ~$100 Billion higher.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4595920/

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4595442/

Hmm, tow the line or get fired it seems, and if you don't work for the administration, have your credibility attacked viciously. Richard Foster towed the line to keep his job (though he considered quitting out of disgust), but decided to come out and tell the truth. Paul O'Neill didn't tow the line. He got fired. Lawrence Lindsey didn't tow the line. He got fired. Ambassador Wilson didn't tow the line. His credibility was attacked and his wife outed as an undercover CIA operative, a crime I might add, perpetrated by someone in the bush white house. Richard Clarke didn't tow the line. His credibility is being attacked. The list goes on and on with this administration.

Anyone see a pattern here?

 

[John Reynolds]

And by what causal effect did the placement of those missiles alone bring about a swifter end to the Soviet Union's economic collapse?

That whole bankrupt the Soviet government trying to keep up with our military thing.

I agree. But I did write "alone" concerning those missiles. Whether or not we put those missiles in place is, IMO, totally irrelevent to the Soviets' collapse since it's such a minor slice of the pie when it comes to the Reagan era military buildup. Now if Europeans were clamoring for us to lower the percent of our annual budget apportioned to overall military spending. . . .

 

[Natoma]

And by what causal effect did the placement of those missiles alone bring about a swifter end to the Soviet Union's economic collapse?

That whole bankrupt the Soviet government trying to keep up with our military thing.

Was this an actual strategy or a "wow we weren't expecting that, but we'll take it!" thing?

 

[digitalwanderer]

Whether or not anyone agrees with you or me. . .how does that relate to your constant hoop-jumping? Has the Iraq invasion under false pretenses cost us credibility?

I still don't know what these false pretenses are.

That we knew the status of WMD before going in? That Sadam was being cooperative?

The imminent nature of the threat of Iraqi WMD, which not only don't seem to be all that "imminent" of a threat but they don't appear to exist at all. (And you bloody earned that "roll"! )

John, international public opinion for bush is low. No question. This is completely besides the point of how our diplomatic relations are with others.

Or do you really not get that?

I think you and him are missing on the same point me and you are missing on Joe. You seem to believe that public opinion has no effect on government opinions, the point I (and I think John) are trying to make is that the people being discontent with their governments actions/support can indeed take actions to voice their disaproval of it and change the governments policies.

Thus all the "see Spain" references.

 

[RussSchultz]

And by what causal effect did the placement of those missiles alone bring about a swifter end to the Soviet Union's economic collapse?

That whole bankrupt the Soviet government trying to keep up with our military thing.

Was this an actual strategy or a "wow we weren't expecting that, but we'll take it!" thing?

You do remember Reagan, don't you? The arms race? MAD? *boggle*

 

[Joe DeFuria]

No, just that now our relations are total crap. Been reading too many liberal "talking point" web-sites I presume.

For some who doesn't want words put in their mouth (as if anyone can straighten out your word salad argument style), you're awful quick to do it yourself. Where have I said our relations with Europe are now "total crap".

HINT: I hope I made my point.

LOL Pat yourself on the back, Joe. You semantically dodged another one. . .or so you think. I guess it's only a myth that you claimed it was a myth.

Sigh...I guess not.

Congrats, Joe, not only do you come off once against as an elitist American quick to point the fingers at others for their anti-semitism and apparent cowardice, but you're now a blatantly obvious hypocrite for crying foul over the very thing you're a master of.

Congrats, John, not only do you come off as a terrorist pandering American against America, quick to support anti-semitism while running away from instead of confronting the enemy, now you're a blatantly obvious hypocrite for crying foul over the very thing you're a master of.

(Did I do that right?)

Tsk, tsk, perhaps I should now take another page from your book of flame bait trollery and start talking down to you.

No, that's not becoming of you. Your track is putting on your mod hat and deleting posts, all the while denying that you're talking down to me at the same time...remember?

 

[John Reynolds]

Speaking of feeling pressure from former bosses.... Richard Foster, an actuary for Medicare, is claiming that he was pressured last year with losing his job if he didn't release numbers that supported the administration's claims of keeping the price tag of the Prescription Drug Benefit below $400 Billion. His estimates were actually about ~$100 Billion higher.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4595920/

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4595442/

Hmm, tow the line or get fired it seems, and if you don't work for the administration, have your credibility attacked viciously. Richard Foster towed the line to keep his job (though he considered quitting out of disgust), but decided to come out and tell the truth. Paul O'Neill didn't tow the line. He got fired. Lawrence Lindsey didn't tow the line. He got fired. Ambassador Wilson didn't tow the line. His credibility was attacked and his wife outed as an undercover CIA operative, a crime I might add, perpetrated by someone in the bush white house. Richard Clarke didn't tow the line. His credibility is being attacked. The list goes on and on with this administration.

Anyone see a pattern here?

How 'bout those Red Sox??

Now there's a real General Discussion pattern for 'ya.

 

[digitalwanderer]

Speaking of feeling pressure from former bosses.... Richard Foster, an actuary for Medicare, is claiming that he was pressured last year with losing his job if he didn't release numbers that supported the administration's claims of keeping the price tag of the Prescription Drug Benefit below $400 Billion. His estimates were actually about ~$100 Billion higher.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4595920/

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4595442/

Hmm, tow the line or get fired it seems, and if you don't work for the administration, have your credibility attacked viciously. Richard Foster towed the line to keep his job (though he considered quitting out of disgust), but decided to come out and tell the truth. Paul O'Neill didn't tow the line. He got fired. Lawrence Lindsey didn't tow the line. He got fired. Ambassador Wilson didn't tow the line. His credibility was attacked and his wife outed as an undercover CIA operative, a crime I might add, perpetrated by someone in the bush white house. Richard Clarke didn't tow the line. His credibility is being attacked. The list goes on and on with this administration.

Anyone see a pattern here?

How 'bout those Red Sox??

Now there's a real General Discussion pattern for 'ya.

ROFLMFAO~~~~

Damn it, you got coke all over my new monitor!