Serious discussion of Political Polarity

[ponyplayer]

Please put your guns down and try to read and respond to this post.

Maybe it is only my imagination, but it seems that this year the polarity between the two major parties is at the most extreme I can remember. I know the political spin on both sides is sometimes is working overtime.

It seems that the Democrats, not only dislike, but even hate Bush. Even some of our own posters here write as though there is extreme hatred for Bush. You would think he was the Anti-Christ. I’m sure Demos and the Republicans both can justify their opinions for and against the candidates…It just seems that this time around the gap is really wide.

I think the Republicans dislike Kerry, but don’t hate him, speaking for myself, he’s more of a joke. I think the Replublican view of Kerry is as a phony who has done nothing but try to find a way to get into the presidency ever since he was a kid. Nothing wrong with ambition, but to maneuver the way he has done, leads me at least to think this guy can’t be trusted.

I hope this widening disparity between the parties will lessen…if it continues like this, I don’t think any good can come of it for us, our future, and the future of our country.

Maybe this is just the "political process" at work...I don't know?


:confused:

[ceejay]

Originally posted by ponyplayer
I hope this widening disparity between the parties will lessen…if it continues like this, I don’t think any good can come of it for us, our future, and the future of our country.



I agree with that. I suspect that there are only 20 or 30 undecided voters remaining! :D

I think that the hatred comes from several factors. Just a few are:
Many R's think that Clinton was illegitimate and rode circumstanses that others (R's) put in place to popularity.
Many D's think that Bush stole the election in Y2K with the help of the Supreme court.
Congresspeople and Senators seem to be on the flanks of the parties, because that is how nominations are won; so legislators are less willing to compromise.

[betchatoo]

Originally posted by ponyplayer


Maybe it is only my imagination, but it seems that this year the polarity between the two major parties is at the most extreme I can remember. I know the political spin on both sides is sometimes is working overtime.

I hope this widening disparity between the parties will lessen…if it continues like this, I don’t think any good can come of it for us, our future, and the future of our country.

Maybe this is just the "political process" at work...I don't know?


:confused: [/B]

From the Democratic side of the fence I agree with you. There are few undecided voters and I have never before seen such total disdain for the opposing candidate as I have this year.

For my part, I don't hate the President, I am just in complete disagreement with so many of his policies. This is a man who promised to be the great unifier and the country is more divided now than at any time in my memory (and damn it, I'm old).

The real problem, as I see it, is that no matter who wins this election, the gap will only widen. If the President wins re-election he has no need to mend fences and can work as far to the right as he chooses. If Kerry wins he will do sweeping changes and cause great resentment. Both sides could have avoided this by taking the high road in campaigning, but that road seems to have been closed for the last several elections. The strategy seems to be sling as much dirt as you can at your opponent and hope some of it sticks. I would love to see them actually run on what they are going to do (and more importantly how they are going to accomplish their plans) but that does not seem to be in the cards. Oh well...maybe next election

[kenwoodallpromos]

Don't get excited Pony.
The political leaders just hate each other during election season while on the clock, then use the media to brainwash the public into believing it. 99% of the public are middle of the road.
Whoever wins there will be a "honeymoon" to stop another civil war, and whoever is elected will take orders from the corporations; congress will be in gridlock except on real issues like war, rich tax cuts, or Clinton's welfare cuts.
That is why it takes 60 votes in the blueblood Senate to stop debate and vote.
Just read the Trilateral Commission Reports, the Council on Foreign Relations' Foreign Affairs mags, and ther Wall Street Journal if you want the real scoops.
The real difference this time is the Patriot Act.

[Tom]

Personally, I hate Kerry and wish only bad things for him. What he did in 1971 was unforgivable. He will, IMHO burn in hell for it and that sentaence cannot start soon enough for me.
The world is a dangerous place and I cannot imagine putting our nation's security in the hands of such a low-life slimeball as Kerry.
If Kerry is elected, I hav e no doubt millions will die in terror attacks in the USA under his "watch."
And what will Edwards do, sue them?
GDJFK!:mad:

[ponyplayer]

Well Tom, I know we agree on a lot of things, and I can say I agree with what you are saying here...except, I hope you are wrong about the cost in lives if Kerry gets in.

[Tom]

Originally posted by ponyplayer
Well Tom, I know we agree on a lot of things, and I can say I agree with what you are saying here...except, I hope you are wrong about the cost in lives if Kerry gets in.

Like Mr, Bush, I have confidence that a higher power will not allow it to happen. And that means Kerry will not win.

[JustMissed]

The Demlibs are possessed by Demons and that is why they hate George W. Bush so much.

If you ever watched any movies about the devil you will understand what I am saying.

The Devil hates:

Sunlight
Truth
Honest people
Jesus
God
Boy Scouts
Freedom of choice

The first time George W. Bush mentioned the name of Jesus Christ, the Demons that possess the DemLibs were evoked and the DemLib's hate of President Bush began.

It is so unfortunate. At one time the members of the Democratic Party were good and decent people.

They were loving and caring people who believed in and cared for the poor and oppressed.

The Devil was looking for a political party to take over. He decided against the Republican party because they were so steadfast in their beliefs.

The Democratic Party felt like if they were going to succeed, they need to be an "unbrella" party and take in all of every beliefs.

This was the opening that the Devil was looking for. A flip-flop party.

Now the Devil controls a political party that promotes and defends:

Baby killers
Lesbians
Homosexuals
Gay marriage
Cloning
Ban on school prayer
Ban on Boy Scouts
Weak military
Weak husbands
Castration of men
Free and open society
And on and on and on

This is why the DemLibs hate Bush. He represents everything the Devil hates.

If you want further proof, just read your Bible.

It's all about good and evil and never be mistaken about that.

JM

[ponyplayer]

Wow.

[schweitz]

Originally posted by betchatoo
This is a man who promised to be the great unifier and the country is more divided now than at any time in my memory (and damn it, I'm old).


Why is this Bush's fault? You can't be unified if one side or the other doesn't want to. I think maybe those that are unhappy with Bush have a greater ownership of the division than Bush does,

[Steve 'StatMan']

The 9/11 attacks changed everything, by diverting our national focus, as well as funds. Much of the acrmony has been over 9/11, Iraq, the War On Terror, and the Tax Cuts. Had we not needed to divert our funds toward the first 3, there may have been room for more programs, that perhaps would have united us. The Tax Cuts were still important after 9/11 and the others, because it put more money in peoples hands during a time when many might have retreated, held on to their money, and reduced spending would have seriously crippled the economy. Thus other plans (no, I can't name them) would have to be sacrificed for now. Frankly, we'll never know how united we could have been with policies and programs had these serious national problems occured. So for the domestic policies that Bush implemented and/or had hoped to implement, I feel he deserves a 'Mulligan'.

[Secretariat]

Ponyplayer,

I suppose it is a matter of point of view. I see many people here as hating Kerry, smearing him, and his service to our nation. A man who was a vet, a prosecutor who was part of the Iran Contra investigation, and the BCCI scandals. He’s been a terrific government watchdog fighing big business interests and waste.

You state “hate” for Dem’s regarding Bush, and “dislike” for Kerry. To be fair I think it is pretty much BOTH ways. I used to dislike Bush, but I must admit it has grown into a disgust for the man. The 2000 election might figure prominently for some, and there is no denying that angers many Dems especially since Gore actually had the majority of the peoples votes, and the problems in his dismantling of civil liberties, his misinformation and sometimes lies to the people, his disregard for the environment, the largest deficits in history which my kids are going to have to pay so his rich contributors can live high on the hog, and the hatred that now exists for americans abroad. And I resent Repubs using 911 as an excuse for everything. A few terrorists got onto planes with 5.00 cardboard cutters while Bush sat and read a goat story and then hid all day, and the billions we’ve spent chasing down Al Quada and his “miscalculation” in Iraq, while Bush and Cheny cronies such as Halliburton bilk the government for billions. There’s so much more, than to say this is about the 2000 election.

Bush uses a wink, wink, nudge, nudge style of campagining in which he says he admires Kerry’s service, but then actually pretends to ignore SWV’s in his campaign and has hatchet men like Rove who didn’t serve to come out and question Kerry’s serrvice. I think of all things that is where I drew the line from dislike to disgust. The underhand questioning of Kerry’s service is where I changed my personal opinion of Bush from disagreement with his polices to utter disgust at his tactics. Those ads aired immediately after the Dem Convention and a lawyer for Bush's team was part of the co-ordination. I found the Willie Horton gimmick in 1988 distasteful ,but I still voted for George I. GW has crossed the line in my book, and has now matched Nixon as one of the lowest of all campaigners.

As tfor Kerry, like his crew including Rassmussen I'd have been proud to have served on his Swift Boat, and to salute him as my Commander in Chief.

[PaceAdvantage]

How is a man (John F. Kerry) who was closely associated with a group that plotted to KILL UNITED STATES CONGRESSMEN even up for debate as to whether he should be President of the United States??????

It boggles my mind. Just imagine for a second if there existed some sort of evidence that directly tied George W. Bush with any group that plotted to kill ANYONE, let alone certain members of the Congress. IMAGINE what the outrage would be?????

You know, back in 1971, even those in the VVAW saw that Kerry was only in it for political gain.....the guy's an opportunist of the highest order.

[JustMissed]

Originally posted by Secretariat

As tfor Kerry, like his crew including Rassmussen I'd have been proud to have served on his Swift Boat, and to salute him as my Commander in Chief.

I would have figured you would be proud to serve a lying demon.

I have been sending your post to John Ashcroft and I hope on November 3rd he nails your ass to a tree.

Anyone who would support an assasin plotting demon is an evil doer. Unbelievable that they let assasin supporters like you walk the streets.

JM

[Secretariat]

Originally posted by JustMissed
I would have figured you would be proud to serve a lying demon.

I have been sending your post to John Ashcroft and I hope on November 3rd he nails your ass to a tree.

Anyone who would support an assasin plotting demon is an evil doer. Unbelievable that they let assasin supporters like you walk the streets.

JM

Wow, JM...So much for freedom of speech and dissent.

Demon? Evil doer? You've been watching way too much Dubya...

[lsbets]

We are very polarized, and while a fair amount on the right dislike Kerry, what I have seen is total hate on the left for GWB. They compare him to Hitler, draw specious suppositions to cast doubt on the man, and continue to promulgate lies even after their lies have been exposed (yes Sec, I include you in this group, because you have been exposed here as a liar time and again, yet continue to spin the same tales). I guess some people might be put off by my last comment because Sec had a rather nice post regarding my return to Iraq and his hope that I and my soldiers all come home safe. I appreciate his post, but I do not compromise my morals and integrity simply because someone is nice to me. The level of rhetoric from the left has been so out of control that it has made me more jaded and bitter than ever before. I truly fear that we will lose the war on terror because we are becoming a nation of PC pansies who can't take the steps neccessary to defeat evil in its purest form. Remember, it was only a few days ago that another esteemed member of the left attempted to justify the actions of the terrorists in Russia, and compared what they did to what our soldiers have done in Iraq. That is simple lunacy, but I hate to say it, I think about 25% of America is that far gone that they would agree with that crap. While 25% is far from a majority, it is a large enough minority to hamper our efforts at every turn. I fear for the future of our nation. I really do. Too many people just don't get it - Bin Laden is not the problem, Cheny is. Hussein was not a problem, Wolfowitz is. Its a load of crap, and those guys actually believe it. Everything is relative in our society now. I believe in absolutes. I absolutely believe that while our nation is not perfect, it is the rgeatest hope for freedom in the world. While too many believe that our foreign policy causes nothing but problems around the globe, I believe that although it is imperfect, it has brought freedom and safety to more people around the world than any other nation ever has. Yes, we have our faults, but America is not the problem in the world today, and until people realize that, we are doomed to failure. The French don't like our policy - so what? They are on the fast track to becoming Europe's first Muslim nation, and someone please point me to a Muslim nation that has been a beacon of freedom in the world. Pretty incorrect of me to say, but guess what? I'm right. There is none. We don't need to cowtow to people who have no interest in our security. We need to stand up and lead the world in this fight. If others don't want to join us, thats fine. Being right does not equal being popular. If it cause jealosy and resentment - so what? We cannot equivicate in this matter. We must stand firm for our priciples and security. Anything less is un American.

[Secretariat]

Originally posted by lsbets
We must stand firm for our priciples and security. Anything less is un American.

Couldn't agree more. We just disagree on how to get there, and who better to lead us there. Someone who alienates the world, someone who by his own words "miscalculated" the war in Iraq, someone who has held no one accountable for anything.

The liberals I know have nothing but the greatest admiration for you guys fighting over there. We respect and admire your service to our country. Ive always tried to emphasize that in all my posts. However,what makes america great is not simply security, but the preservation of our liberties and the freedom to voice our opiion in disagreement to what many of us see as a very flawed policy. This is what Kerry was really saying in 1971 to the Senate. As a citizen it is our duty to speak out when we beleive our government is acting irresponsibly in placing our soldeirs in harms way. The mindset of a military soldier is to win the battle. I understand that. The mindset of a citizen is not to blindly follow what we perceive as a poor strategy, but to make our voices heard by those in power.

btw...If it makes you more comfortable calling me a liar, feel free. The right wing name calling, well one gets used to expecting it after awhile. Just about everything I 've posted here has been backed up with documentation. So much so I usually get grief for too many links.

[ElKabong]

Originally posted by Secretariat
Couldn't agree more. We just disagree on how to get there, and who better to lead us there. Someone who alienates the world, someone who by his own words "miscalculated" the war in Iraq, someone who has held no one accountable for anything.

.


some one who left Vietnam as soon as humanly possible, leaving his fellow soldiers and sailors behind, the one who testified a mountain of lies in 1971 for his own political gain and leaving POWs in a horrible spot, the one who sat in on VVAW meetings that plotted to kill US Senators, the one who short cut his duties in 1992 on the Senate Committee's POW investigations so his cousin (and himself?) could get an immediate contract worth tens of millions of dollars from the Vietnamese gov't, the one who has an approval rating of ZERO on a scale of 0-100 on Veterans issues, the one who voted against funding our war in the Middle east, the one who doesn't meet the swift's factual info head on, he chooses instead to threaten lawsuits to tv stations, publishers and warns bookstores not to sell a particular book.....

Great choice, sec....great choice.

[betchatoo]

Originally posted by JustMissed
The Demlibs are possessed by Demons and that is why they hate George W. Bush so much.

If you ever watched any movies about the devil you will understand what I am saying.

The Devil hates:

Sunlight
Truth
Honest people
Jesus
God
Boy Scouts
Freedom of choice

The first time George W. Bush mentioned the name of Jesus Christ, the Demons that possess the DemLibs were evoked and the DemLib's hate of President Bush began.

It is so unfortunate. At one time the members of the Democratic Party were good and decent people.

They were loving and caring people who believed in and cared for the poor and oppressed.

The Devil was looking for a political party to take over. He decided against the Republican party because they were so steadfast in their beliefs.

The Democratic Party felt like if they were going to succeed, they need to be an "unbrella" party and take in all of every beliefs.

This was the opening that the Devil was looking for. A flip-flop party.

Now the Devil controls a political party that promotes and defends:

Baby killers
Lesbians
Homosexuals
Gay marriage
Cloning
Ban on school prayer
Ban on Boy Scouts
Weak military
Weak husbands
Castration of men
Free and open society
And on and on and on

This is why the DemLibs hate Bush. He represents everything the Devil hates.

If you want further proof, just read your Bible.

It's all about good and evil and never be mistaken about that.

JM


JM

I kept looking at this post figuring it had to be satire of some sort. If so, I don't see it. If I read this correctly, you're accusing me of being in league with the Devil because I disagree with your point of view. You are a sick man. Not only are you a bigot, you state you are against a free and open society. Isn't that the principle that America was built on? So you are not only a nut, you are anti-American.

Well, Jesus believed in forgiveness and I will try to emulate him. I hope God gives you help because you need more than any person can give you

[Secretariat]

betachoo,

And they say we are the fringe, the fanatics, and the haters? Whew...

[ElKabong]

Originally posted by Secretariat
betachoo,

And they say we are the fringe, the fanatics, and the haters? Whew...


That answer was given by the conduct and subsequent arrests of the many Dem protestors in NYC....How many repub protestors did ya see in Boston? How many were arrested?

Yep, the dems ARE the fringe, the fanatics, the haters.

[betchatoo]

Originally posted by ElKabong
That answer was given by the conduct and subsequent arrests of the many Dem protestors in NYC....How many repub protestors did ya see in Boston? How many were arrested?

Yep, the dems ARE the fringe, the fanatics, the haters.

It's only because you agree with their political position that you don't see the hate, anger and fanaticism being spewed by the "right" thinking people.

[JustMissed]

Here's a couple of other issues I left off my list of things the DemLibs promote and defend:

1. Support of a presidential candidate who was a member of a group that plotted the assasination of a United States Senator.

2. The devil really loves this one. Support the ACLU in all their activities against Republican/Christians. The American Civil Liberties Union will represent a group that advocates sex between men and boys in a lawsuit brought by the family of a slain 10-year-old.

Doesn't matter what you fellows claim you believe. Its what you approve of and support that shows your true self.

You can try to put on a pretty face but George Bush and all the good and descent people can see right through your lies and we know who you really are.


JM

[betchatoo]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by JustMissed
[B]Here's a couple of other issues I left off my list of things the DemLibs promote and defend:

1. Support of a presidential candidate who was a member of a group that plotted the assasination of a United States Senator.

2. The devil really loves this one. Support the ACLU in all their activities against Republican/Christians. The American Civil Liberties Union will represent a group that advocates sex between men and boys in a lawsuit brought by the family of a slain 10-year-old.

Doesn't matter what you fellows claim you believe. Its what you approve of and support that shows your true self.

You can try to put on a pretty face but George Bush and all the good and descent people can see right through your lies and we know who you really are.

JM



Please see a doctor and get the treatment you need

[JustMissed]

Probably not a good thing to include your post within the "quoted post" of someone else and then to put someone else's initials at the bottom of your post.

Is that more trickery from the DNC or is it just that you don't know how to use the internet.

JM

[ponyplayer]

Isbets, Excellent Post. Spoken like the true Patriot and Warrior that you are. I think you summed up what I have been feeling lately. Especially the party of us becoming a nation of PC pansies. No one is going to look out for us, we have to look out for ourselves.

[lsbets]

Sec,

I am not name calling. A couple of weeks ago you threw up a post, that I presume was written by someone else (DNC?), where you stated that the troops in Iraq do not have the new body armor. When I called you on that for the umpteenth time, you backtracked, yet you insist on speaking in the present tense and saying we do not have the new body armor here. That is a lie and you know it.
A few days later you made another post referring to Halliburton's "no bid" contract. Before I had the chance to respond again to the myth of the no bid contract, JR corrected you. This matter has been hashed over many times, and your statement was once again a lie. You knew what you were saying was untue, because it had been explained and pointed out to you numerous times before, yet you continued to make the same statement. My two year old son can tell you that when you intentionally say something that you know to be untrue, you are lying. When you continually lie, you are a liar.
I love the libs attitude. They can criticize Bush all they want and it is fair, but when you criticize Kerry - for his voting record, or his action in and after the military, it is a smear. Its not name calling Sec, it is pointing out the truth. That is a concept that you appear to not be very familiar with. The lib response - "you're name calling." "Smear tactics". Whatever.

[lsbets]

Thanks Pony, its good to know I'm not the only one who feels that way.

[Tom]

After watching both conventions, it is so obvious to me which party is the one that reperesents American values and which represents special interests and corruption. The democratic party used to stand for something and it was a party people could respect even when they disagreed with some of the platforms.
Now I know where all the borderline dreggs of society went after Rudy J drove them out of Times Square.....

[betchatoo]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by ponyplayer
[B]Please put your guns down and try to read and respond to this post.

Pony:
You began this thread with the above quote. I think those of us on the liberal side did, in fact, try to honor your request. There is no Bush bashing, other than a disagreement about his policies, no name calling. On the other hand Kerry has been villified and I have been called a devil worshipper, a baby killer etc.

One of the real dividing things at this point is that anyone who has an honest disagreement with the administrator's policies is considered to be a traitor. If we can't freely have these disagreements than this is not the country our founding fathers imagined. When Clinton was in office I heard a lot of anti-administration rhetoric but while I may not have thought highly of the person speaking, I never considered that he didn't have the right to his opinions

I am not soft on terrorism or sympathetic toward terrorists. Hell, if it produced results that saved American lives a little torure is all right with me. It is just my belief that attacking Iraq was not a good way to spend billions of dollars and that it wasn't worth the cost of one American life. I don't believe that this method has reduced the terrorist threat at all.

This also does not mean that I don't support our troops who are there. I have a very close friend who is currently in Iraq and my wishes are that everyone there finishes their work and gets home safely.

When they get home I want them to find the America they fought for. Where people have the freedom to disagreee without being labled unpatriotic

[lsbets]

betchatoo,

"When they get home I want them to find the America they fought for. Where people have the freedom to disagreee without being labled unpatriotic"

If I misunderstand your post, I apologize, but I take this to be in response to my post. Show me where I said that people who disagree are unpatriotic. You can't because I did not. I stated that those who feel American is the problem in the world and our foreign policy does more harm than good are un American. I stand by that statement.

[betchatoo]

Originally posted by lsbets
betchatoo,

"When they get home I want them to find the America they fought for. Where people have the freedom to disagreee without being labled unpatriotic"

If I misunderstand your post, I apologize, but I take this to be in response to my post. Show me where I said that people who disagree are unpatriotic. You can't because I did not. I stated that those who feel American is the problem in the world and our foreign policy does more harm than good are un American. I stand by that statement.

LS
That statement was not aimed at you. While I don't necessarily agree with your political views, I respect your opinions. My feeling on the right to honest debate works both ways. And I do thoroughly appreciate the service you are doing for this country.

There are others on this forum who are extremely negative, insulting and downright malevolent. It is to those I say that if you don't offer every American equal freedom then you take it from all

[JustMissed]

Isbets, please don't be suckered in. Remember that lying John Kerry and his menions have the ability to present a "pretty face" to you while the whole time lying.

There favorite tactics is to say "let's be friends, let's just talk about the issues".

Then when you let your guard down and lying John Kerry gets in power, guess what happens:

Kerry puts US armed forces under control of evil United Nations(this directly affects you)

Kerry nominates US Supreme Court justice and numerous federal judges, this means:

Open season on unborn babies(Remember, lying John Kerry is a practicing Catholic yet he shakes a defiant fist in the face of the Pope and advocates pro-choice)

Open season on little children victimized by sexual predators

Open season on Boy Scouts, Christians, sanctity of marriage

Many other social evils to numerous to name in this short post

Please always keep in mind what their unltimate goal is and never let down your guard. Be like President Bush, strong and steadfast.

Always attack and never apoligize.

Thanks for your duty to our country.

JM

[Tom]

Kerry, yes, but I don't think betchcoo has any hidden agendas. He sounds like a square shooter to me and he is definatley a horseplayer. That's gotta count for something! :D

[Secretariat]

Isbets,

I looked at my previous posts, and I used the incorrect tense. I acknowledged that. However, I posted numerous posts on Bush's failed support of Veterans Affairs, and this is the issue you keep bringing up. My point in the body armor discussion was that our troops were not equipped properly for this fight based on a non "imminent" pre-emptive strike. Our Defense Department did not adequaltey equip our soldeirs before engaging in March 2003 and it took until Jan 2004 to do so. And even with that the Republican Head of the Defense Appropriations lambasted procurement as late as April of this year for not equipping humvees properly.

You miss my point on this. We entered a war which was non-imminent (Bush, and Tenet quotes), pre-emptively (Bush quote) without soldeirs properly equipped, without an exit strategy, and without strong international support. Sometihng Bush now states that he "miscalculated" on, yet no one has been held accountable. Even Pat Buchannan on C-SPan today said, "Wolfowitz must go." Buchanan doesn't understand the war in Iraq as doing anything to fighting terrorism, and please don't tell me this guy is a liberal. Buchannan is fearful of a Pakistan which has nuclear weapons, and a very shaky miltary in charge of the coutrny which could fall due to overwhelming non-support for their President.

If you choose to call me a liar, because I used an incorrect tense, feel free, but you are missing the forest for the trees. The body armor response was slow and initiated strongly at the demand of Congress.

Sometimes people here want links, sometimes they don't..you can't win. The multiple points which I've posted on Bush's failure to support our Vets (except with bluster) I've documented aover and over, and the general response is, well, no Pres's have really supported our vets. Is this the Bush excuse?

JR,

As to the Haliburton "no bid" contract I stand by my assertion. The defrauding of our taxpayers by that corp is offensive.

[JustMissed]

Originally posted by Tom
Kerry, yes, but I don't think betchcoo has any hidden agendas. He sounds like a square shooter to me and he is definatley a horseplayer. That's gotta count for something! :D

"The safest ROAD TO HELL is the gradual one -- the gentle slope, soft underfoot, without sudden turnings, without milestones, without signposts." C. S. Lewis

JM

[lsbets]

Sec,

It was not only one post where you made that statement about the body armor, it was many. And Haliburton does not have a "no bid" contract. You have insisted on making those statements which you know to be untrue. Take my words as a backdoor compliment - I give you credit for being smart enough to know that some of what you say is untrue. There are others who I don't think have the intelligence to know the difference.

As far as Buchanan goes, I have never liked him and have always thought that he has flirted on the edges of anti-semetism, and believe (I have nor proof, only annecdotal evidence from his life's work) that the biggest reason he dislikes Wolfowitz is that Wolfowitz is a Jew. Buchanan has also had a deep hatred for the Bush family going back to the 1980 primary elections. He is far from an objective critic of President Bush. He was run out of the Republican Party after the REpubs belatedly realized that the likes of Pat Buchanan are not good for the conservative movement. Buchanan is someone who I was glad to see leave the Republican Party, and considering his performance the last time that he ran, I was glad to see that he does not have much support. Pat Buchanan is one of the people who give conservatives a bad name and make it easy for people to label conservatives as intollerant and bigotted. The Republican Party and the conservative movement are much better off without Pat Buchanan, I only wish that the left would chase away and discredit their most fringe elements. I would love to see someone on the left speak out against the bigots who run the NAACP the way that I am willing to speak out against Buchanan. Too bad I don't think I will see that happen.

[Secretariat]

Isbets,

I know you don't beleive in the Halliburton No Bid contract, but even the encyclopedia refernces it as well as scores of others.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No-bid_contract

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0325-11.htm

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article3141.htm

http://www.usatoday.com/money/world/iraq/2003-05-07-iraq-halliburton_x.htm

http://www.politicsnj.com/lautenberg100203.htm

http://www.npr.org/features/feature.php?wfId=1254235

This is only a small number of links. Want more..Go ahead call me a liar, but include the encyclopedia in the process.

btw..I agree about Buchanan overall, but I think his perception on Iraq was correct. The 911 terrorists did not come from there.

I realize you're going back there, and for you it is a war of liberation. I weill say nothing more about that. I actually agree with a Mr. Bush's comment in 2000 though that we should not become involved in nation building.

[schweitz]

According to factcheck.org the Halliburton contract "is actually an extension to an earlier contract to support US troops overseas that Halliburton won under open bidding".

Regarding Halliburton getting the contract because of cronyism, Harvard professor Steven Kelman, who was Administrator of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy in the Clinton administration said, " One would be hard pressed to discover anyone with a working knowledge of how federal contracts are awarded who doesn't regard these allegations as being somewhere between highly improbable and utterly absurd."

[Tom]

Sec,
Did you miss the news about how only a few comapanies were even qualified to bid and several choose not to?
I guess facts would get in the way of your beliefs??

[lsbets]

Schweitz and factcheck.org are both right on this one, but it doesn't sound good for the libs to tell the truth. Propoganda and distortions work much better for them.

And Sec, I'm back already anxiously awaiting the change in season from damned friggin hot to just plain friggin hot.

[Secretariat]

Everytime I put a factcheck.org post up here the replies here are they're just liberal.

In this one instance they were commenting on a moveon.pac advertisement. Factcheck said what Halliburton did was technically not against the law, but they then go on to site gross overcharges of the company being investigated. Even with that moveon.pac stands by their ad and rebutted the factcheck.org article.

So if you want to use factcheck.org, then please by all means go back and re-read all the factcheck.org posts I've put up which have been rejected by so many posters here.

Obviously, USA Today didn't think I was lying about the no-bid Halliburton contract, or dozens of Congressmen, or even CNN for that matter.

But here's the Washington Post. Perhaps you are referring to the Jan. 16, 2004 contract rather than the orginal no bid one.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A23647-2004Jan16&notFound=true

Gto to love Waxman's comment in this.

[schweitz]

Originally posted by Secretariat
Everytime I put a factcheck.org post up here the replies here are they're just liberal.

In this one instance they were commenting on a moveon.pac advertisement. Factcheck said what Halliburton did was technically not against the law, but they then go on to site gross overcharges of the company being investigated. Even with that moveon.pac stands by their ad and rebutted the factcheck.org article.

So if you want to use factcheck.org, then please by all means go back and re-read all the factcheck.org posts I've put up which have been rejected by so many posters here.

Obviously, USA Today didn't think I was lying about the no-bid Halliburton contract, or dozens of Congressmen, or even CNN for that matter.

But here's the Washington Post. Perhaps you are referring to the Jan. 16, 2004 contract rather than the orginal no bid one.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A23647-2004Jan16&notFound=true

Gto to love Waxman's comment in this.

So is what I posted correct or not?

[Secretariat]

Originally posted by schweitz
So is what I posted correct or not?

Correct in so much as it is an "extension" of the contract. However, that extension was based on an original "no-bid" contract as the Washington Post and USA Today reports.

Hopefully, it won't be long that these gougers will be out of there. Just today, it looks like the Pentagon is actively seeking someone else and attmepting to recoup some of the graft from Hallburton.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=564&ncid=564&e=18&u=/nm/20040907/ts_nm/arms_halliburton_dc_3

[schweitz]

Originally posted by Secretariat
Correct in so much as it is an "extension" of the contract. However, that extension was based on an original "no-bid" contract as the Washington Post and USA Today reports.


Not according to factcheck.org.

[Tom]

Isbets,

I know you don't beleive in the Halliburton No Bid contract, but even the encyclopedia refernces it as well as scores of others.

This is only a small number of links. Want more..Go ahead call me a liar, but include the encyclopedia in the process.

btw..I agree about Buchanan overall, but I think his perception on Iraq was correct. The 911 terrorists did not come from there.

I realize you're going back there, and for you it is a war of liberation. I weill say nothing more about that. I actually agree with a Mr. Bush's comment in 2000 though that we should not become involved in nation building.

Hey Sec, are you prepared to condem Obama for engagin in nation builing now? We are actively aiding the rebels in Libya. I mean, what Khadafy has done lately pales in comparison to what Saddam did when he gassed tens of thousands of his own people.

Just curious.

[delayjf]

Little known fact: Kadafi conducted gas attacks against Chad.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/libya/cw.htm