Steeplerot
Lifer
- Mar 29, 2004
- 13,051
- 6
- 81
Simplistic right-wing nonsense gets old. I wonder if the Nazis and Stalinists and Japanese militarists before WWII used the same rhetoric.
I can hear it now in 1930's Germany to those discouraging war, "we tried it your way, look what it got us after WWI, now we stand up for Germany".
Steeplerot
Lifer
- Mar 29, 2004
- 13,051
- 6
- 81
And you are one who blinds himself to reality and our need to improve ourselves.
Here is a little clue: nuclear proliferation has been going on for a long time now, and nothing will stop it, now why are you using it as an excuse to turn this country into a sh1thole is what I want to know.
It is as silly as saying we should not have had civil rights marches in the 50s in the face of the USSR having tons of missles pointed at us. Huh?
He did alot of good work in the little time he was allowed to serve as Ambassador, and it is sad that the few Senators that didn't like him have been able to keep him from being confirmed, even though the majority of the Senate would support him.
Lemon law
Lifer
- Nov 6, 2005
- 20,984
- 3
- 0
How conviently short some memories are---the Bolton comfirmation fight in the prior congress was under the cloud of a Republican threat to vote out the Filibuster---and it was a republican senator who joined the the democrats to deprive Bolton of the committe endorsement.
And then another post was made to the effect---gee---Bolton must be dedicated to work for the government when someone would pay him more to be equally stupid in the private sector. Which has to be the most stupid argument ever.
Take the entire crowd that got us into the Iraq war---lets see---GWB, Cheney, Rice, Rumsfeld, Bolton, Tenet, Hadley, Libby, Wolfawitz, and add as many more names as you wish---then sum up their entire net worth and tell me that sum is even a tiny fraction of what it will cost this nation for their ill fated brainfart in Iraq.---and how much better off we would all be if they had never been allowed to serve their country.---and a better government would have seen them for what they are---dangerous nuts that should never be allowed to commit this country to anything.---with free speech rights to advocate their views---and with all the richly deserved credability of the moon is made of green cheese advocates.
And then another post was made to the effect---gee---Bolton must be dedicated to work for the government when someone would pay him more to be equally stupid in the private sector. Which has to be the most stupid argument ever.
Take the entire crowd that got us into the Iraq war---lets see---GWB, Cheney, Rice, Rumsfeld, Bolton, Tenet, Hadley, Libby, Wolfawitz, and add as many more names as you wish---then sum up their entire net worth and tell me that sum is even a tiny fraction of what it will cost this nation for their ill fated brainfart in Iraq.---and how much better off we would all be if they had never been allowed to serve their country.---and a better government would have seen them for what they are---dangerous nuts that should never be allowed to commit this country to anything.---with free speech rights to advocate their views---and with all the richly deserved credability of the moon is made of green cheese advocates.
JEDIYoda
Lifer
- Jul 13, 2005
- 33,986
- 3,320
- 126
actually you actually think any of the nations in the UN have diplomats who use diplomacy?
You really need to wake up and smell the roses Bolton was 100% pro American as he should have be....
Just because Bush gave him his position doesn`t mean he did a lousy job!!
In fact under the circumstances Bolton whould have been given a medal for his tireless work as an advicate the the American people!!
God Bless -- Bolton!!
Wrong, Mister Simplistic.
We do both good and evil. We're not one or the other. I want us to do more good and less evil. The analogy is not between the US and those countries, but between your argument and the arguments used by those others. When evil *movements* started in those countries, they too attacked those who tried to keep the nations on the right path, just as you try to lead the US down the road against democracy to harm others and you attack anyone who speaks against your evil cause.
- Oct 9, 1999
- 46,525
- 9,839
- 146
Bolton boltin'. The guy was a red-faced disaster, the opposite of everything a "diplomat" should be.
No more rubber-stamp congress for you, GWB.
From Jaskalas-
"I find it strange how the minority can control the majority in our government. Dems don?t even need to wait for control before acting in control and removing Bolton. All the minority has to do is use a few key players to obstruct the vote."
The rules of the Senate haven't changed since the early 70's, and that was only a minor change wrt breaking filibusters. Other than that, they've remained the same since~1917, iirc... Somehow, sensible people who are willing to compromise have been able to get things done... you know, some of that bipartisanship that GWB promises but never seems to deliver... Some of that political finesse that Clinton employed with a repub congress...
And that's because he represents a fringe element, even within his own party, who are mostly interested in ideological posturing and looting the treasury...
So I say lay on, GWB, lay on! Don't budge a single millimeter, set your party up for an even more serious ass-whupping in 2008... The world won't end if there's no ambassador to the UN, or if other posts needing senatorial approval remain vacant... if anything, the underlings will probably do a better job than anybody he'd appoint, anyway...
From Jaskalas-
"I find it strange how the minority can control the majority in our government. Dems don?t even need to wait for control before acting in control and removing Bolton. All the minority has to do is use a few key players to obstruct the vote."
The rules of the Senate haven't changed since the early 70's, and that was only a minor change wrt breaking filibusters. Other than that, they've remained the same since~1917, iirc... Somehow, sensible people who are willing to compromise have been able to get things done... you know, some of that bipartisanship that GWB promises but never seems to deliver... Some of that political finesse that Clinton employed with a repub congress...
And that's because he represents a fringe element, even within his own party, who are mostly interested in ideological posturing and looting the treasury...
So I say lay on, GWB, lay on! Don't budge a single millimeter, set your party up for an even more serious ass-whupping in 2008... The world won't end if there's no ambassador to the UN, or if other posts needing senatorial approval remain vacant... if anything, the underlings will probably do a better job than anybody he'd appoint, anyway...
Yeah, well... the current Congress probably wouldn't approve him, and the incoming Congress definitely wouldn't, so Bush can't show his contempt for the will of the people's elected officials again, not this time. I suppose he could afford to pay Bolton's salary out of pocket, but even Bush doesn't have that kind of chutzpah. Probably.
Bush hasn't had to work with Congress, since it's been willing to do his bidding these six years, for the most part. He could usually get what he wanted, usually under duress. Bush's problem is that political skills only extend to working with pliant and compliant legislative bodies. The Democrats in the Texas legislature were easy for Bush to work with; they weren't far off from the Republicans there, ideologically. When Bush was faced with a narrowly Democratic Senate for a year and a half, his only tactic was to run roughshod over them; you never saw him resorting to compromise, as narrow as the numeric advantage was.
The new Congress will give us a better idea as to what kind of a politician Bush is. Even with a friendly Congress, he had to beat and thrash them to get his will accomplished. Now that both houses of Congress are hostile, Bush is going to have to work extra hard, and I don't think he's up for the job. He'll probably drag out some other right-wing jackass to embarrass us at the UN, but sooner or later he's going to realize that such obstructionism will only hurt him. A little obstruction is fine; that's called principle. But too much obstruction is self-defeating. Those who like Bush might say he's got too much principle, to paint him in the best possible light. Me, I'd say this style of governing is better described as "going down with the ship." Anchors aweigh!
Bush hasn't had to work with Congress, since it's been willing to do his bidding these six years, for the most part. He could usually get what he wanted, usually under duress. Bush's problem is that political skills only extend to working with pliant and compliant legislative bodies. The Democrats in the Texas legislature were easy for Bush to work with; they weren't far off from the Republicans there, ideologically. When Bush was faced with a narrowly Democratic Senate for a year and a half, his only tactic was to run roughshod over them; you never saw him resorting to compromise, as narrow as the numeric advantage was.
The new Congress will give us a better idea as to what kind of a politician Bush is. Even with a friendly Congress, he had to beat and thrash them to get his will accomplished. Now that both houses of Congress are hostile, Bush is going to have to work extra hard, and I don't think he's up for the job. He'll probably drag out some other right-wing jackass to embarrass us at the UN, but sooner or later he's going to realize that such obstructionism will only hurt him. A little obstruction is fine; that's called principle. But too much obstruction is self-defeating. Those who like Bush might say he's got too much principle, to paint him in the best possible light. Me, I'd say this style of governing is better described as "going down with the ship." Anchors aweigh!
A rubber stamp is a rubber stamp, BMW540I6speed. It doesn't matter if it needs to be gently applied or pounded on the paper- the result is the same...
Bush had his ideological allies- Frist, Hastert, and DeLay- in place to do the pounding, for the most part. They never were inclined to go in another direction, anyway. Their brand of rightwing posturing and playing to the middle simultaneously carried them to the top, and their shameless exploitation of that position spelled their downfall.
Repub survivors will be ill-inclined to stand fast against the current shift in sentiment- they'll let GWB take the hit, try to set themselves up with a revised image for the next election. Those who continue to pander to the fringe won't survive, except in selected locales, and they know it... Bolton's demise serves their purposes- showing that they're willing to compromise, even if GWB isn't... a sort of kinder and gentler rightwing lootocracy...
Bush had his ideological allies- Frist, Hastert, and DeLay- in place to do the pounding, for the most part. They never were inclined to go in another direction, anyway. Their brand of rightwing posturing and playing to the middle simultaneously carried them to the top, and their shameless exploitation of that position spelled their downfall.
Repub survivors will be ill-inclined to stand fast against the current shift in sentiment- they'll let GWB take the hit, try to set themselves up with a revised image for the next election. Those who continue to pander to the fringe won't survive, except in selected locales, and they know it... Bolton's demise serves their purposes- showing that they're willing to compromise, even if GWB isn't... a sort of kinder and gentler rightwing lootocracy...
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 20K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 12K
-
Discussion Speculation: Zen 4 (EPYC 4 "Genoa", Ryzen 7000, etc.)- Started by Vattila
- Replies: 13K
-
Facebook
Twitter