Bush Supporters' Aftermath Thread IV

f anything, but McTag and Cavinism ...

At least not in the more than five years I know him .... and before? Nothiong like that, according to his friends who know him since ages

In this world of sin and sorrow there is always something to be thankful for; as for me, I rejoice that I am not a Republican.

Now here is a real, dedicated, for-no-other-purpose-than, full-time eye poker !!!

I agree with McTag that there's no joy in preaching to (or attempting to enlighten) the choir.

I'm also no believer in the exclusivity of any threads here. Challenging ideas and excanging conflicting views & interpretations is what it is all about. Hiowever, I do recall the general outrage on an old thread for Kerry supporters after the last U.S. Presidential election. The few conservative interlopers were widely condemned by the outraged, liberals on the thread who were engaged in mourning their bad outcome and rehashing various conspiracy theories about the forces of Republican darkness. I don't recall if any of the present commentators were among those so outraged, buit I have noted a somewhat greater degree of tolerance for opposing views among conservatives than among their left-wing counterparts. There are, of course, buffoons and mere name-callers on both sides, but, on average, I find conservatives here to be a bit more reasonable and willing to consider the contradictions that inevitably infect all doctrinal views on the matters we discuss so avidly.

The fact that Blatham came onto this thread for no other purpose but to personally excoriate the Conservatives here and used quite uncomplimentary language to do it, and the fact that McTag is on the record as agreeing with everything Blatham said about that, is enough evidence to me to know that McTag comes here for no other purpose than eye poking.

Ticomaya wrote:

Foxfyre wrote:

Bookmarked (while wondering while this thread gets restarted so often when older, longer ones don't.)

Also wondering why the anti-Bush people are so bored and inacpable of starting interesting threads of their own so they wouldn't spend so much time spreading trash in this one.

I'm wondering the same, Foxy.

It is necessary to seek the dragons where they may be found, in their very lair, so that they may be slain.

And, it's no fun exposing GWB on a reasonable persons' thread. :wink:

You fancy yourself a dragon-slayer, do you, McT?

I suppose I'll take that as a compliment.

Reid: Iraq war 'worst foreign policy mistake' in U.S. history

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- After months of heated rhetoric slamming President Bush's Iraq policy, the Senate's top Democrat moved into new terrain by declaring the Iraq war a worse blunder than Vietnam.

"This war is a serious situation. It involves the worst foreign policy mistake in the history of this country," Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nevada, told CNN's "Late Edition with Wolf Blitzer."

"So we should take everything seriously. We find ourselves in a very deep hole and we need to find a way to dig out of it."

Asked whether he considers it a worse blunder than Vietnam, Reid responded, "Yes."

Comparisons to Vietnam are nothing new, but a "worse than" designation from a top lawmaker is.

Sen. Chuck Hagel, a Nebraska Republican who has been one of the war's most outspoken critics, told Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice in January that President Bush's plan to send 21,500 more troops to Iraq "represents the most dangerous foreign policy blunder in this country since Vietnam."

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/02/18/reid.iraq/index.html

Do you really mean, "... for no other purpose..."? I'll argue that some of it is undoubtedly sincere and thoughtful. But we agree that he is clearly an episodic eye-poker.

"A man with a conviction is a hard man to change," wrote Festinger in his book on the cult, When Prophecy Fails. "Tell him you disagree and he turns away. Show him facts and figures and he questions your sources. Appeal to logic and he fails to see your point."

George Bush is a man of conviction and clearly a hard man to change. When reality confronts his plans he does not alter them but instead alters his understanding of reality. Like Keech and her crew, he stands with a tight band of followers, both deluded and determined, understanding each setback not as a sign to change course but as further proof that they must redouble their efforts to the original goal.[/QUOTE

From a comment in today's The Guardian: [URL=http://www.guardian.co.uk/Columnists/Column/0,,2016219,00.html]Once George Bush has got hold of a bad idea he just can't let it go[/URL]

georgeob1 wrote:

Do you really mean, "... for no other purpose..."? I'll argue that some of it is undoubtedly sincere and thoughtful. But we agree that he is clearly an episodic eye-poker.

Sincere on this thread? I'll give you that one. Thoughtful (on other threads) I'll also give you. Thoughtful on this one, no. I could have forgotten something back through the many hundreds of pages, but generally I see McTag's posts here are as blanket and uncompromising as the trolls, i.e. "I hate Bush" "Bush is a war criminal" "Bush is stupid", etc. etc. etc. And when Blatham accused Tico, me, and some others of being war criminals, immoral, supporters of torture, insipid, ignorant, cliched, dangerous, and some other choice adjectives, McTag backed him up. I gave McTag an opportunity to retract that part and he wouldn't.

So, I can only conclude that eye-poking is his purpose of haunting this thread on a regular basis. That was certainly Blatham's only purpose in being here, but he eventually did have the decency to withdraw.

Quote:

"A man with a conviction is a hard man to change," wrote Festinger in his book on the cult, When Prophecy Fails. "Tell him you disagree and he turns away. Show him facts and figures and he questions your sources. Appeal to logic and he fails to see your point."

George Bush is a man of conviction and clearly a hard man to change. When reality confronts his plans he does not alter them but instead alters his understanding of reality. Like Keech and her crew, he stands with a tight band of followers, both deluded and determined, understanding each setback not as a sign to change course but as further proof that they must redouble their efforts to the original goal.[/QUOTE

From a comment in today's The Guardian: [URL=http://www.guardian.co.uk/Columnists/Column/0,,2016219,00.html]Once George Bush has got hold of a bad idea he just can't let it go[/URL]

Thanks for the article, in my opinion it sums up George Bush and his followers to a tee.