Bush by numbers: Four years of double standards
POSTED BY: Ghoulman
UPDATED: Tuesday, November 9, 2004 19:16
VIEWED: 9195
PAGE 6 of 9
Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
And I didn't go off on, to quote you:
"You went off on a "The Government is hiding things from us!" rant."
Sorry. I considered "SUCH AS. Meaning *not* only. What else isn't included in these numbers? Just because they give you a break down *doesn't* mean that it's all that there is to break down. There wording even supports this! SUCH AS." a rant. Capitalization being considered internet shouting and all.
I'll try to watch my punctuation from now on.
Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:Quote:
So, in this light, do my questions and accusations seem rational? fair, logical? I think they do. Perhaps you should stop and think about that.
I guess if I automatically considered everything the goverment says a lie, I might agree with you. Since I consider them too inefficient to spin such a massive web of deceit, I accept what seems to me the obvious answer, as noted above; somebody provided the information requested, and noted that there was other information available.
I don't automatically think that what the government says is a lie. I just know that the US government has a horror of a track record when it comes to lieing. So, I treat everything that they produce with extreme scruteny.
I do think that the US government is *very* inefficient but not so much as to not be able to spin a massive web of deceit (see my pentagon papers remark above). They are just too inefficient to get away with it all the time. And with this administration I'd gather that they get caught *far* more than the others that preceeded them.
And the post above only stated that someone was /in the act/ of verifying the statements in the original post and no conclusion has come of it yet. I for one look forward to it.
----
"Canada being mad at you is like Mr. Rogers throwing a brick through your window." -Jon Stewart, The Daily Show
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
0 - Number of military funerals GWB has attended since becoming President.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Ghoulman:
0 - Number of military funerals GWB has attended since becoming President.
Apparently several othr presidents were slackers in this regard as well.
http://hnn.us/articles/1784.html
Have Presidents in the Past Attended the Funerals of Dead Soldiers?
By HNN Staff
HNN interns Lucas Rooney and Aaron Erlich contributed to this article.
Recently, President Bush has been criticized for failing to attend the funerals of the soldiers killed in Iraq. Maureen Dowd noted sarcastically in a recent NYT column that the president had not even bothered to attend the funeral of Specialist Darryl Dent, a "21-year-old National Guard officer from Washington who died outside Baghdad in late August when a bomb struck his truck while he was delivering mail to troops," though the service took place at a church just "three miles from the White House."
Have presidents in the past attended the funerals of soldiers who died in combat? Have they taken note of the deaths of U.S. soldiers? The record is mixed, as can be seen below. It would appear that few presidents have ever actually attended military funerals, though many used the bully pulpit to draw attention to lives lost in the service of their country.
"Keep the Shiny side up"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:Quote:
Originally posted by Ghoulman:
0 - Number of military funerals GWB has attended since becoming President.
Apparently several othr presidents were slackers in this regard as well.
I don't think this is an excuse that he didn't.
If he was sooooo confident that he has made the right choice (the contraversial decision to "go it alone"), then why hasn't he done this... at least once? Or is it the guilt?
----
"Canada being mad at you is like Mr. Rogers throwing a brick through your window." -Jon Stewart, The Daily Show
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
I don't think this is an excuse that he didn't.
If he was sooooo confident that he has made the right choice (the contraversial decision to "go it alone"), then why hasn't he done this... at least once? Or is it the guilt?
While looking for the article above, I found several commentary pieces on this subject. Some propose that Presidents don't go to military funerals because they know it would turn a family's private grief into a media circus. You have to admit that's a good possibility.
Also consider that even in peacetime, there is probably a military person killed just about every day, in training accidents, vehicle crashes, etc. Does the President go to every funeral? He does have other important things to do. If not, how does he choose?
"Keep the Shiny side up"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:
You have to admit that's a good possibility.
Indeed it is.
Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:
Also consider that even in peacetime, there is probably a military person killed just about every day, in training accidents, vehicle crashes, etc. Does the President go to every funeral? He does have other important things to do. If not, how does he choose?
My thought is that this is a special circumstance. How many times did we hear from this administration say that the invasion of Iraq would be over in days if not weeks. How long has it been again? And still no semblance of peace.
All this and not even the smallest hint of an acknowledgement that he made a mistake. Shows poor character if you ask me.
----
"Canada being mad at you is like Mr. Rogers throwing a brick through your window." -Jon Stewart, The Daily Show
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
My thought is that this is a special circumstance. How many times did we hear from this administration say that the invasion of Iraq would be over in days if not weeks. How long has it been again? And still no semblance of peace.
All this and not even the smallest hint of an acknowledgement that he made a mistake. Shows poor character if you ask me.
On the original topic, here's some Memorial Day remarks at Arlington Cemetery. Not at a particular funeral, but recognizing our losses.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/05/20030526-1.html
And probably as close to recognition of continuing problems as you'll get, from a May 2004 speech.
"Our work in Iraq has been hard. Our coalition has faced changing conditions of war, and that has required perseverance, sacrifice, and an ability to adapt. The swift removal of Saddam Hussein's regime last spring had an unintended effect: Instead of being killed or captured on the battlefield, some of Saddam's elite guards shed their uniforms and melted into the civilian population. These elements of Saddam's repressive regime and secret police have reorganized, rearmed, and adopted sophisticated terrorist tactics. They've linked up with foreign fighters and terrorists. In a few cities, extremists have tried to sow chaos and seize regional power for themselves. These groups and individuals have conflicting ambitions, but they share a goal: They hope to wear out the patience of Americans, our coalition, and Iraqis before the arrival of effective self-government, and before Iraqis have the capability to defend their freedom."
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/05/20040524-10.html
"Keep the Shiny side up"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:
On the original topic, here's some Memorial Day remarks at Arlington Cemetery. Not at a particular funeral, but recognizing our losses.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/05/20030526-1.html
Holly propaganda Batman! I pitty the fool who swollows this.
Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:
And probably as close to recognition of continuing problems as you'll get, from a May 2004 speech.
"Our work in Iraq has been hard. Our coalition has faced changing conditions of war, and that has required perseverance, sacrifice, and an ability to adapt. The swift removal of Saddam Hussein's regime last spring had an unintended effect: Instead of being killed or captured on the battlefield, some of Saddam's elite guards shed their uniforms and melted into the civilian population. These elements of Saddam's repressive regime and secret police have reorganized, rearmed, and adopted sophisticated terrorist tactics. They've linked up with foreign fighters and terrorists. In a few cities, extremists have tried to sow chaos and seize regional power for themselves. These groups and individuals have conflicting ambitions, but they share a goal: They hope to wear out the patience of Americans, our coalition, and Iraqis before the arrival of effective self-government, and before Iraqis have the capability to defend their freedom."
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/05/20040524-10.html
I still do see nor to I expect an acknowledgement of the severe mistake that was made my him and his administration by going and invading Iraq *illegally*.
He and his have shown no remorse nor regret and all I can do is sit here and hope that your guys down there will vote him out of office in Nov. I have only pitty for him and his for being such shallow shells of (and I use this term for them reluctantly) humans.
----
"Canada being mad at you is like Mr. Rogers throwing a brick through your window." -Jon Stewart, The Daily Show
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
This thread has gone on for some time now. For those pro Bush I have but one question. What has his administration do right? Jobs? Econonmy? Dipl... I cant even finsh that one. I was never for him since day one. He was the least quallified for the job. Recently I dispise the fact his people are all over Kerry's vietnam military history. None of those pansies ever put on a uniform. Bush himself can't even say he completed national guard duty. Call me crazy but I would much rather follow someone who had been through a war and not want to cause the horrors of war on others than follow a drunken frat boy with delusions of being some cowboy war hero. The bush administration has done a terrible job over the last four years. The Republicans think they are actually doing a good job is what scares me. How do I know Kerry will be better? I really don't know his record of flipflopping decisions bothers me but he can't be as bad as the fool in office now. No I am not a Democrat I am independant. This is my humble oppinion.
if we do not learn from our past we are doomed to repeat its mistakes
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:When they are a list of unsupported, unrelated statistics or polls.
Originally posted by rue:
I'm just wondering, when did facts become propaganda?
Statistics can only be considered meaningful when they are taken in context. The oldest trick in the book is to pull a bunch of statistics out of context and claim it proves your point. Anyone who has watched a toothpaste advertisement should know this.
These statistics prove nothing, except who is gullible or who is looking out for the anti-Bush talking points. No fair-minded person would take this article to be meaningful.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME