When does it become 'politics'?
POSTED BY: chrisisall
UPDATED: Tuesday, February 21, 2006 18:35
VIEWED: 6108
PAGE 3 of 8
Quote:
Originally posted by ChrisPV:
Oh, and Citizen, stop playing semantic games. You know what Chrisisall meant. I know your games, I've seen you tearing apart those poor souls in the "Islamic cartoon riot" thread. You little heathen.
Is erm huh?
Confused as too your meaning
CitizenIsSlow on the uptake
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
You should never give powers to a leader you like that you’d hate to have given to a leader you fear
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
Crispy-VEE
(that's how it reads)
Actually, that's pretty much accurate. In fact, it's a little abbreviation for my proper name, Christopher Peavey. "PV" is the brand we use on our cattle on the family ranch, and it's become family shorthand for when we're too lazy to spell our last name.
Quote:
Oh no, the cover-up wasn't for the shooting. It was for something else.
One scenario, after Whittington got carted off, Cheney went and had a little drinky-pooh back at the ranch (fact). The only thing I can think is that IF he'd been unable to dodge being breathalyzed, he would have been able to claim - no you see officers, I wasn't snookered at them time, I got snookered afterwards.
Another scenario is that the long delay was about getting all the stories straight.
In all honesty, I hadn't heard about the drinky-pooh (like that term) bit. Did you get that from an outside source, or are you speculating? I'm just curious, not trying to condemn or such.
As for getting all of the stories straight, that I'd be willing to give him, even if there wasn't any outside influences such as drink involved. He probably knew how this would explode, and I don't think it would be too terribly unreasonable to try and have a unified defense up when the opposition turned the shooting into an issue.
In any case, this just isn't big enough, comparitively, to cause me to change my (already low) opinion of the man as the VP.
Curse your sudden but inevitable betrayal, Fox!
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:
Is erm huh?
Confused as too your meaning
CitizenIsSlow on the uptake
I was teasing, ever so slightly, regarding your debates on whether or not Islam is evil. During the course of that, you wound up mixing with a few folks (I don't want to mention names) who, rather vehemently, disagreed with you. I'm inclined to agree with your standpoint, but even if you weren't, you had my vote for arguing your point most effectively.
It was just a little jab, no offense meant.
ChrisPV looks like he's sucking up rather badly
Curse your sudden but inevitable betrayal, Fox!
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Ahh, none taken, just the sarcasm doesn't always come over so well on posts sometimes, so I didn't want to assume. I've had my fill of flame wars for awhile, not really up for sparking another 
.
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
You should never give powers to a leader you like that you’d hate to have given to a leader you fear
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Let's just say I can relate. I have a friend who, bless her heart, will straight facedly claim that God puts fossils in the Earth that look as old as they do because, quote, "God has a sense of humor." After awhile, the argument comes to naught.
Incidentally, the 
was actually my somewhat lame attempt at getting the joke across. It's my way of saying I'd insert a sarcastic emoticon here, but there isn't one. It's an old habit I have of creating smileys that don't exist.
Curse your sudden but inevitable betrayal, Fox!
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Well, I did not expect that. Now my tummy hurts.
What the fuck! my post was relevant to this fucking thread! Jesusfuckingchrist!
AUCitizen
Laughter keeps you young; now I'm 2 Chrisisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:Quote:Well, that didn't take long. I had hoped to see more personal, real life comments here, instead of the standard political rhetoric.
Originally posted by citizen:
Everything is politics.
Chrisisall
Didn't we warn you about that? Do it again and we WILL send you hunting with Dick Cheney.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:lol, Don't force me to employ a defensive pre-emptive strike!
Originally posted by Fletch2:
Didn't we warn you about that? Do it again and we WILL send you hunting with Dick Cheney.
Chrisisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/02/15/cheney/
Armstrong, a longtime friend of the Cheney family, told CNN before the vice president's interview that she never saw Cheney or Whittington "drink at all on the day of the shooting until after the accident occurred, when the vice president fixed himself a cocktail back at the house."
Two elements here - getting the story straight and drinking afterwards.
Nearly everything I know I learned by the grace of others.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Chirs,
You are, as usual, correct. I used to say things like 'Clinton is a bad democrat' or 'Bush is a bad republican' because I meant 'not in line with the ideals that their party purports to stand for. Sure, both are, objectively, bad presidents, particularly if you feel that presidents should not tarnish the image of America, or kill people wholesale.
I once got into an argument with a couple of liberals who were not nazis, yet were defending the position 'Hitler was a good leader of Germany.' I don't think the flaws in such a position need exosure, but these were educated people, one had a PhD. The thing is, taking aside the net effect, and the qualification of 'who exactly is a German' ...where does this leave us?
I guess ultimately, what is or isn't political and what is objective is subjective.
Fletch,
The thing about Monica is that the GOP was looking to get Clinton on anything they could, not because he was a democrat, but because he was evil. It had been widely known for some time that Clinton had a habit of whoring around, and using his position and connections to force women into sex with him. There were a few cases of missing children, turning up dead, and I'm sure Pirate News knows more about this than me. But the point is, this was a long series of cases about Bill Clinton, personally, as a career criminal, and it culminated in Monica.
To me, this is one of the great failings of the right. We tend to focus on what matters to us, and not what matters to the opposition. Any attack on Clinton, to be successful, would have to have struck a nerve with the left. I find, for myself, the idea that Bill Clinton was most probably involved in cocaine smuggling, abusive relations, and possibly child murders, that he is a truly depraved individual, tells you everything about him, and what he will do if in a position of power, and that his genocidal policies in Iraq and gun-running to Al Qaeda and all are sort of par for the course when you understand what kind of guy he is.
But this is a conservative perspective, a character-based assessment. Conservatives can try until they're blue in the face to convince the left that Clinton is a bad guy, but my guess is that for the most part they won't care as long as he supports the platforms that they want to vote for. I mean, point of fact, the democrats have Ted Kennedy, and they've known for years that he was a depraved individual, and don't care, because he votes the party line.
What we *should* have done, instead, was attack Clinton directly on policy decisions. We should have gotten him for the inhumane barring of food and medical supplies to the people of Iraq, or sending Hatian refugees back to be shot. Something that would have human appeal that the left would say, 'oh, we get it, he's evil.'
Similarly, I think the left misunderstands the right in the same way. Kerry was busy attacking Bush on the details of his health plan and whether or not no child left behind was a success. What he probably should have said way 'This is a cokehead who's cheating on his wife to sleep with his secretary... (of state)'
Anyway, Re:Cheney
Fletch, you are correct, the Cheney shot thing is a serious issue. The reason the whitehouse and press are trying to spin it is it's a devestating blow. My postmaster was one of the last die-hard Bush fans until just now. He says he just can't bend his mind around it. Cheney is a schmuck. He broke the hunting rules because either A) he was so into it he thought he was in 'Nam hunting cage raised quail, or b) he was drunk. I believe the VP when he said he had just 'one beer' but someone else at the scene said he had just 'one mixed drink.' What if it was one beer, one mixed drink, two glasses of wine, a shot of vodka, a double shot of tequila, and he's on heart medication. Anyway, Cheney lost the postmaster, the most stalwart republican I know, on the hunting accident. I now know no (zero) solidly pro-Bush republicans, and I'd say I know a lot of republicans. As a qualifier, this *is* New York, so he may still have fans o
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME