Let's talk about replacing GWBush in 2004.

Apparently the opinion of the author does not sit well with you and I guess from your point of view he has no right to say it. Tres conversely much that you have to say particularly about the merits of Bush a good many of us disagree with. However, no one has told you have no right to voice your opinion.
As for the authors opinions and they are opinions I think he hit the nail square on.
As to Bush's heart. First we must establish if he has one than find out where he keeps it hidden
PS No offense taken.

No, that is clearly not what I wrote. Any chance you can address what I did?

Tres
Other than your opinion what did you write. What would you like me to address?

Your opinion is neither worth more or less than anyone elses.

au, my opinion is I agree with the author! Nice find - truth rings clear!

au, Your statement, "As to Bush's heart. First we must establish if he has one than find out where he keeps it hidden." I agree 100 percent. c.i.

au - How valuable would you consider my opinion of what Bill Clinton thought, felt, or intended, as opposed to an opinion piece discussing the value of his decisions, statements, or actions?

The issue here is not whether I agree with the author's point of view. (NEWS FLASH: Agreeing with something doesn't make it valuable, nor does disagreeing mean it has no value.) I don't question the value of the piece because I disagree with it; I question it because the author is pretending to KNOW what Bush thinks, what he feels, and clearly does not.

Of course the author has the right to write it. Of course you have the right to read it, agree with it, share it here. AND I have the right to comment that I do not find it of value.

Crystal?

Well, I think MY opinion is just thousands and thousands of times more valuable than ANYONE ELSE'S little paltry opinions. So THERE.

snood, I do not wish to shock you, but I agree! LOL c.i.

That could have been handled by PM, trespasser.

And now, Let's talk about replacing GW Bush in 2004!

On August 2, 1990, Iraqi troops led by dictator Saddam Hussein invaded the oil-producing nation of Kuwait. Like Noriega in Panama, Hussein had been a US ally for nearly a decade. From 1980 to 1988, he had killed about 150,000 Iranians, in addition to at least 13,000 of his own citizens. Despite complaints from international human rights group, however, the Reagan and Bush administrations had treated Hussein as a valuable ally in the US confrontation with Iran. As late as July 25 - a week before the invasion of Kuwait - US Ambassador April Glaspie commiserated with Hussein over a "cheap and unjust" profile by ABC's Diane Sawyer, and wished for an "appearance in the media, even for five minutes," by Hussein that "would help explain Iraq to the American people."

Glaspie's ill-chosen comments may have helped convince the dictator that Washington would look the other way if he "annexed" a neighboring kingdom. The invasion of Kuwait, however, crossed a line that the Bush Administration could not tolerate. This time Hussein's crime was far more serious than simply gassing to death another brood of Kurdish refugees. This time, oil was at stake.

How PR Sold a War in the Persian Gulf (Or, Lessons We Should've Already Learned)

PD - I am discussing the topic with another member. Why should I take that to PM?

Ummmm...because it was nasty, personal, and off-topic?

tres


I understood the position you took. What I did not understand was what you wanted me to reply to. As for value, everyone's position and opinion has value whether we agree or not. No more or no less. That is something some of us have never learned.

au - Perhaps I was not specific enough in my criticism. I specifically question the value of the author's opinion (regarding what he thinks Bush thinks or feels) in any discussion of the value of Bush's actions, statements, policies, etc., which is what I thought this discussion was about.

If you want to have a discussion of whether you think Bush is a "good person" or a "bad person", then I suppose trying to get inside his head might have some value, but otherwise, I think it does not.

If you want to pretend to know what Bush thinks or feels, that's up to you; but I don't consider the exercise valuable, and I am fairly certain you would consider it just as useless if I sat here and pretended to know what was in Bill Clinton's heart or mind.

As a newbie, I probably shouldn't get involved in matters of form in A2K. But I will...!... simply to add that skirmishes between two participants tend to make others feel uneasy... Like some other new members, I have moved to A2K bloodied and bruised from Abuzz. The A2K personal message system is a great addition and a superb vehicle for those who need to hash out a misunderstanding or a disagreement. I hope A2K will continue to protect itself not from uncomfortable opinions but from uncomfortable ways of expressing those opinions. (Yikes, on rereading this, I feel like that nasty little kid in the front row who never gets caught and sucks up to teacher! )

Tartar, You only need to bring a large, red, shiny, apple for teacher. c.i.

and who, pray tell, is teacher?

Then, please take care of this unruly class!

That teacher Tartar identifies in the last sentence of his post. c.i. Some people get caught, some bring an apple to "suck up."

:wink:

Tartarin - Thank you for stepping up and offering this opinion. I think this is another problem with the lack of nuances in text communication. I did not view my exchange with au as a "skirmish" but rather as two people aggressively discussing and debating issues raised here. But I can certainly see your point, and I know--perhaps better than most--how often people can elevate spirited debate to hostility and animus.

For my part I will certainly try to pay attention to the opinions of other participants and any flags they raise regarding the tone of these one-to-one exchanges.

And in case it needs to be written, au, I hope that the you do not take personal offense if I argue my position strenuously, and I apologize for any sarcasm that may have made it past my filters. I work to keep it as civil as possible, but acknowledge that sometimes my efforts fall short.

I'm sure we have failed in one way or another when our emotions gets to the best of us. Heated is probably acceptable. What is not acceptable is personal attacks. c.i.