Joe, just because you agree with the sort of screed Dowd spews doesn't lend it any vallidity. That piece, as typical of Dowd's oeuvre fails critical examination precisely for employing the same cheap-shot rhetorical conveniences to which I took exception in your earlier post. To be fair, Ann Coulter is no better in such regard, nor are the likes of Limbaugh or Savage. Presenting one's assumptions and conclusions as fact simply is neither more nor less intellectual and ethical laziness at best, outright fraud at worst. Shrillness does not an argument make.
timberlandko wrote:Joe, just because you agree with the sort of screed Dowd spews doesn't lend it any vallidity.
Have a care whom you address, sir, lest you commit another strawdog fallacy!
AAAAAACkkkk ... damn, my keynoard just ain't payin' attention ... sorry Joe. All those barking, running, yellow dogs distracted me :wink:
Re: Frightening!
John Webb wrote:
By the way, at least five more American soldiers died in Iraq yesterday.
The good news being that none were related to Bush, Rumsfeld, Chaney or Rice. 
what? People dying in a war? Who woulda thunk it!
John Webb wrote:BWShooter wrote "what? People dying in a war? Who woulda thunk it!"
What war? The President told us the war ended a year ago. Are you calling him a liar?
Reuters have just announced at least nine more just killed and unknown numbers injured in a military convoy. Presumably none of these new victims were related to our heroic President and his buddies either?
you didn't catch my sarcasm. People die in war . Why? To defend and preserve your freedoms. There is no utopia so stop looking and stop blaming the prez for ****.
John Webb wrote:BWShooter wrote "what? People dying in a war? Who woulda thunk it!"
What war? The President told us the war ended a year ago. Are you calling him a liar?
Nonsense. That is not at all what was said, despite the energy some put into saying that is what was said. What is lying is to say that is what was said.
BWShooter wrote:John Webb wrote:BWShooter wrote "what? People dying in a war? Who woulda thunk it!"
What war? The President told us the war ended a year ago. Are you calling him a liar?
Reuters have just announced at least nine more just killed and unknown numbers injured in a military convoy. Presumably none of these new victims were related to our heroic President and his buddies either?
you didn't catch my sarcasm. People die in war . Why? To defend and preserve your freedoms.
How is the adventure in Iraq related to the defence of American "freedoms?"
hobitbob wrote:
How is the adventure in Iraq related to the defence of American "freedoms?"
If you read the papers and watched the news, you could pick up hints and inferences about how they are connected.
Not an answer. But to be fair, I didn't really expect one.
John Webb wrote:The resistance to the invasion seems to have entered a new phase involving kidnappings and threats of executions.
And this is exactly what you should expect from Sadr's gang of criminals. Why would one be surprised at seeing criminal behavior from criminals?
Criminal behavior from criminals is no less to be expected than is perjorative inuendo from some other folks ... both behaviors are sorta dismaying, and all too typical of their respective practitioners and apologists.
timbeeeeeeeeeeeeeerrrrrrrrrrrrr;
sorry to have to say this, considering a usually healthyrespect for your views, but it's supposed to be ostriches that bury their heads in the sand, not 'eagles'!
Curious, here, Bo ... how is observing that idiocy knows no ideology an avoidance of anything?
Quote:Of course, some of the disappearances may not be what is claimed officially, since suicides and desertions are more highly embarrassing for the Administration to admit to the media and could damage general morale.
You know, if I had this opinion of my country and/or my leadership, I would be a) leading a revolution into Washington DC or b) looking for a new country. No wonder the al Qaida is so emboldened. If they can get Americans thinking this way, they're half way to succeeding in their unconscionable goals.
A flaw in your assessment lies in the assumption that thinking, on the part of those espousing such tripe, is in any way involved, Foxfyre.
timberlandko wrote:Curious, here, Bo ... how is observing that idiocy knows no ideology an avoidance of anything?
unacceptable behaviour (especially from the administration of the most (physically) powerful nation on earth) will breed further unacceptable behavior, from every non-thinking assemblage of blindly accepting drones, whatever their driving force. Monkey see, monkey 'escalate'!
To suggest that this is not the case, places the author beneath the Sahara!
and this is not a GPS location i would expect you to occupy!
Oh. Well, provided one accepts the premis the behavior of The Current Administration as regards foreign policy is unnacceptable, your point would be valid. However, while certainly open to improvement, the behavior of The Current Administration in such regard is less unacceptable from my point of view than was the entire eight year history of The Previous Administration in such regard, or the behavior of the Democratic Administration prior to the immediate previous administration. What Carter planted, Reagan and Bush the Elder suppressed, only to have Clinton revive and nurture, as I see it, and it has fallen to Bush the Younger to eradicate the noxious weed. Of course else might have been done, or what has been done might have been done differently, hindsight never fails to reveal that. There have been setbacks and unexpected developments in the progress of transitioning Iraq to autonomy just as were setbacks and unexpected developments encountered during the runup to the reopening of hostilities with Saddam's regime. The overcoming of such impediments has been characteristic of the enterprise from the outset. I anticipate that will continue to be the case. The endeavor, as all endeavors of man, is, has been, and will continue to be imperfect. That proactive stance has been taken is to me preferable to the avoidance, inaction and inadequate reaction which precipitated the current state of affairs.
Others, of course, view the matter differently.
