0
   

Bush supporters' aftermath thread

 
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Jul, 2005 12:24 pm
I on the other hand have zero retirement from any employer, no inheritance, no matching funds, and pay for my own supplemental healthcare insurance and still managed to squirrel away some investments over the years. If I had been able to invest a portion or all of my social security contributions, I would be on easy street now. Anybody willing to work and make the best of things can do what they need to do if provided an incentive to do it.
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Jul, 2005 12:39 pm
Foxfyre wrote:
Anybody willing to work and make the best of things can do what they need to do if provided an incentive to do it.

I sorta differ a bit - the incentive is there. What in some cases is not there is any understanding or acceptance of one's responsibility for one's own affairs. Freedom, liberty, and justice equate to equal opportunity, not equal result. What one does with the opportunities one recognizes, misses, creates, or squanders determines one's fate. Recall the fable of the grasshopper and the ant.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Jul, 2005 01:45 pm
Timber writes
Quote:
the incentive is there. What in some cases is not there is any understanding or acceptance of one's responsibility for one's own affairs. Freedom, liberty, and justice equate to equal opportunity, not equal result


But Timber, does not "understanding acceptance of one's responsibility for one's own affairs" create an incentive? I think that is what the founders meant by "promoting the general welfare". They sure didn't mean PROVIDE the general welfare. But if parents, teachers, role models, etc. would just keep driving home the point to play the hand you're dealt in the best possible way, you will enjoy a better life, a whole lot of societal problems would take care of themselves. Hand in hand with that, we should push for government policies that clear the way for people to better help themselves.

Also the grasshopper should be required to work or depend on charity, not government entitlements that make his personal responsibility irrelevent.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Jul, 2005 08:43 pm
Quote:
The NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll showed the percentage of Americans who believe Bush is "honest and straightforward" fell to 41 percent from 50 percent in January, while those who say they doubt his veracity climbed to 45 percent from 36 percent.
http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=worldNews&storyID=2005-07-14T022825Z_01_HO408873_RTRUKOC_0_BUSH-POLL.xml
0 Replies
 
JustWonders
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Jul, 2005 08:46 pm
Link expired. Possibly because it was 6 months old.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Jul, 2005 08:49 pm
Well, now there you could have added a valid LOL. I didn't even notice.
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Jul, 2005 08:51 pm
Its just not a laughing matter.

LOL!!!
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Jul, 2005 09:40 pm
JustWonders wrote:
Link expired. Possibly because it was 6 months old.


... and it didn't want to live its life as SPAM .... http://community.the-underdogs.org/smiley/misc/spam.gif
0 Replies
 
JustWonders
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Jul, 2005 10:34 pm
<Grins @ Suicide-Spam>
0 Replies
 
JustWonders
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Jul, 2005 10:40 pm
http://www.mc.maricopa.edu/~ladelia/images/Hell%20freezing%20over.jpg

MOLLY IVINS ADMITS SHE WAS WRONG!

CROW EATEN HERE: This is a horror. In a column written June 28, I asserted that more Iraqis (civilians) had now been killed in this war than had been killed by Saddam Hussein over his 24-year rule. WRONG. Really, really wrong.

The only problem is figuring out by how large a factor I was wrong. I had been keeping an eye on civilian deaths in Iraq for a couple of months, waiting for the most conservative estimates to creep over 20,000, which I had fixed in my mind as the number of Iraqi civilians Saddam had killed.

The high-end estimate of Iraqi civilian deaths in this war is 100,000, according to a Johns Hopkins University study published in the British medical journal The Lancet last October, but I was sticking to the low-end, most conservative estimates because I didn't want to be accused of exaggeration.

Ha! I could hardly have been more wrong, no matter how you count Saddam's killing of civilians. According to Human Rights Watch, Hussein killed several hundred thousand of his fellow citizens. The massacre of the Kurdish Barzani tribe in 1983 killed at least 8,000; the infamous gas attack on the Kurdish village of Halabja killed 5,000 in 1988; and seized documents from Iraqi security organizations show 182,000 were murdered during the Anfal ethnic cleansing campaign against Kurds, also in 1988.

In 1991, following the first Gulf War, both the Kurds and the Shiites rebelled. The allied forces did not intervene, and Saddam brutally suppressed both uprisings and drained the southern marshes that had been home to a local population for more than 5,000 years.

Saddam's regime left 271 mass graves, with more still being discovered. That figure alone was the source for my original mistaken estimate of 20,000. Saddam's widespread use of systematic torture, including rape, has been verified by the U.N. Committee on Human Rights and other human rights groups over the years.

There are wildly varying estimates of the number of civilians, especially babies and young children, who died as a result of the sanctions that followed the Gulf War. While it is true that the ill-advised sanctions were put in place by the United Nations, I do not see that that lessens Hussein's moral culpability, whatever blame attaches to the sanctions themselves -- particularly since Saddam promptly corrupted the Oil for Food Program put in place to mitigate the effects of the sanctions, and used the proceeds to build more palaces, etc.

There have been estimates as high as 1 million civilians killed by Saddam, though most agree on the 300,000 to 400,000 range, making my comparison to 20,000 civilian dead in this war pathetically wrong.

I was certainly under no illusions regarding Saddam Hussein, whom I have opposed through human rights work for decades. My sincere apologies. It is unforgivable of me not have checked. I am so sorry.
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 Jul, 2005 02:01 pm
She's just an example of the other idiotic lunatics who don't know what the hell they're talking about.

Saddam was Charlie in his Iraqi Chocolate Factory per most of them.

They don't even feel they need to know the history of the area, anything about Islam or what life in Iraq was like before the war.

God, that pisses me off.
0 Replies
 
BumbleBeeBoogie
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 Jul, 2005 02:13 pm
BBB
At least Molly Ivins, whom I adore, has enough integrity to admit it when she is wrong.

A lot of politicians and several A2Kers could learn something from Molly's example.

BBB
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 Jul, 2005 02:16 pm
C'Mon!! How DARE she give a "count" without counting!!! That's not a mistake--it's a LIE!
0 Replies
 
BumbleBeeBoogie
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 Jul, 2005 02:17 pm
Lash
Lash, calm down and take your meds.

BBB :wink:
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 Jul, 2005 02:55 pm
Well I can actually say Kudos to Molly who gets it wrong most of the time, but this time she did correct her error, and she did it without resorting to a single childish 'but. . . .' in doing it. I'm sure she was under pressure from an avalanche of mail and her editors, but nevertheless, she didn't have to print a whole column of correction or set the whole record straight. She did.

We should give praises where praise is warranted.'

(She'll no doubt revert to character and we can hold her in contempt again shortly. Smile)
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 Jul, 2005 02:58 pm
Should have known she did it because she was being assailed due to her LIES!!!!!


<tee>
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 Jul, 2005 04:08 pm
Here 's a fascinating new Pew Research poll out today. What do you think gang. Is the tide turning? Victory seems even more likely?

Support for bin Laden falls in Muslim countries
By Alan Elsner
Thu Jul 14, 2:10 PM ET

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Support for Osama bin Laden and suicide bombings have fallen sharply in much of the Muslim world, according to a multicountry poll released on Thursday.

The survey by the Pew Research Center examined public opinion in six predominantly Muslim nations: Morocco, Pakistan, Turkey, Indonesia, Jordan and Lebanon. It also examined views in nine North American and European countries as well as in India and China. In all, more than 17,000 people were questioned either by telephone of face-to-face.

"There's declining support for terrorism in the Muslim countries and support for Osama bin Laden is declining. There's also less support for suicide bombings," said Pew Center director Andrew Kohut.

"This is good news, but still there are substantial numbers who support bin Laden in some of these countries," he told a news conference.

In Morocco, 26 percent of the public now say they have a lot or some confidence in bin Laden, down from 49 percent in a similar poll two years ago.

In Lebanon, where both Muslims and Christians took part in the survey, only 2 percent expressed some confidence in the Saudi-born al Qaeda leader, down from 14 percent in 2003.

In Turkey, bin Laden's support has fallen to 7 percent from 15 percent in the past two years. In Indonesia, it has dropped to 35 percent from 58 percent.

However, in Jordan, confidence in bin Laden, who took responsibility for the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the United States and many other attacks, rose to 60 percent from 55 percent. In Pakistan, it went to 51 percent from 45 percent.

A similar picture emerged when respondents were asked whether suicide bombings were justifiable. In Morocco, 13 percent said they often or sometimes could be justified, down from 40 percent in 2004.

MORE JORDANIANS SUPPORT BOMBINGS

In Indonesia, 15 percent expressed that view, down from 27 percent in the summer of 2002. Support for suicide bombings also fell in Pakistan and dropped dramatically in Lebanon. However, support rose in Jordan, to 57 percent from 43 percent in 2002.

Kohut noted there had been devastating attacks on civilians in Indonesia, Morocco and Turkey in recent years and a rash of assassinations and bombings recently in Lebanon.

Both in western countries and the Muslim world, respondents expressed fears about Islamic extremism.

Seventy-three percent in Morocco and 52 percent in Pakistan saw Islamic extremism as a threat to their country. The figure was 84 percent in Russia, 78 percent in Germany, and an identical 70 percent in Britain and the United States. The poll was taken well before last week's bombings in London.

When asked what caused Islamic extremism, 40 percent in Lebanon and 38 percent in Jordan blamed U.S. policies and influence; in Morocco, Pakistan and Turkey, respondents were more likely to blame poverty, unemployment or poor education.

Despite terrorism fears, majorities in Britain, the United States, France, Canada and Russia and pluralities in Spain and Poland expressed favorable views about Muslims.

But in Germany and the Netherlands, opinion swung to an unfavorable view. Fifty-one percent of those surveyed in the Netherlands expressed an unfavorable view of Muslims. In Germany, 47 percent were unfavorable, compared with 40 percent who expressed favorable views.

Anti-Jewish sentiment was overwhelming in the Muslim countries. In Lebanon, 100 percent of Muslims and 99 percent of Christians said they had a very unfavorable view of Jews, while 99 percent of Jordanians also viewed Jews very unfavorably.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20050714/ts_nm/muslims_binladen_dc
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 Jul, 2005 04:24 pm
I'll tell you the truth. I have long thought most Arab Muslims haven't had access to anything resembling a free press. I think Islam's stranglehold on what they are allowed to consume has kept them almost completely in the dark about what is really going on in the world--and I had hoped--along with the Bush administration--that the more they found out, the less they would hate us and the more they would hate their oppressors.

I hope this is what we are seeing the beginnings of.
0 Replies
 
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Reply Fri 15 Jul, 2005 03:28 am
What she said. How long can people really pretend that A-holes like Saddam should be allowed to exist? Idea Were I oppressed by the likes of him; I'd probably want to hold the world's only superpower accountable, too, especially if I were raised from birth to do so. Hello.

And good on that fool for finally pulling her head out of her... Rolling Eyes
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Fri 15 Jul, 2005 06:53 am
You see, fox, the reason some of us keep trying with you is because you have principles which trump partisan knee-jerkness. We all get things wrong sometimes but when we do, the sort of correction which Iven's does here is exemplary...not merely admission (far too tough for many, or perhaps considered bad rhetorical/political strategy) but then forwarding the correct information in its embarrasing detail.

The principle here (as you see) is that truth, openness and honesty ought to trump political advantage. If we (as citizens, politicians, and media) play the game that way we move towards truth and away from falsehoods and misinformation, towards a truly educated and empowered citizenry. I truly do not think that democracy can last intact without this principle at the forefront.

So, well done on Molly and you, fox.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.06 seconds on 05/02/2024 at 11:33:26