Letters to the Editor
Daniel_28
Published Letters: 224 Editor's Choice: 8
-
Work Hard, Play Hard
[Read the article: Number of the day]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]You shouldn't knock Bush for taking so much time off from work. Perhaps it is a major reason for his success and why this country is recognizing so much peace and prosperity.
But in all seriousness, you know Bush's handlers have a much easier time running the country (aka fucking up the country) when Junior is off playing with his toys. Same thing went for Reagan.
It's a lot easier for Rove and Cheney to get things done when Junior isn't running around playing grown-up and acting as though he is actually capable of being POTUS.
-
Mitt Romney: "I cannot justify this war or it's result."
[Read the article: Iraq vet confronts Mitt]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]This might as well have been what he said. At leaast it is how it should be interpreted.
If starting this war- or even prolonging it's disasterous consequences- is even remotely justifiable, this would have been a PERFECT opportunity for Mitt to promote himself and the Iraq policy.
Instead he stuttered out a few lame ass talking points and ran away like a fucking little coward.
That should tell you all you need to know....
-
Shooter, What if Clinton used Warrantless Wiretapping After '93 WTC Attacks?
[Read the article: Zimbabwe passes warrantless eavesdropping law, cites U.S.]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Can you and your moron friends tell me you would've trusted Clinton to use warrantless eavesdropping techniques unabated? Or would you have accused him of spying on political enemies, etc.? You don't have to bother to answer, because we all already know the answer. Hell, you all accused him of "wagging the dog" when he was launching missles at bin Laden.
On the other hand, you can bet your stupid ass that liberals would have been on Clinton like stink on shit if he had pulled that.
It's what separates liberals from neoconservatives; love of country vs. love of party.
-
Shooter recognizes this is nothing more than denying the optimism of the war
[Read the article: The truth behind the Pollack-O'Hanlon trip to Iraq]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]When Clinton said "I did not have sexual relations with that woman..." all the Republicans said "EEEEEEK! Guarded optimism!DON'T LET IT OUT TO DESTROY OUR ATTEMPTS TO DESTROY!!!!!"
They couldn't leave well enough alone. They actually had to go and find out if he was telling the truth. But in this case, it was actually justifiable. What were the media and politicians supposed to do? Take his word for it? Lives were on the line!
I agree with Shooter. Questioning what people say is absolute bullshit. People, especially those who put non-cowards in the path of bullets, should be able to say whatever the hell they want without people questioning whether it is true.
What do you exect to gain from this Greenwald? It's not like you got O'Hanlon to admit the entire trip was staged by the military. And even if it was, they would obviously be objective.
If you cannot change Shooter's mind, you cannot change mine. You almost had my buying your crock of shit, but Shooter's well worded posts made me see otherwise. Nice try smart guy.
-
Geez, are you all STILL letting Rove fool you?
[Read the article: Rove: Bush has his own brain]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Rove says that Bush only plays dumb, and in reality he is very smart. Then you all fall for it and run with the harmless story about how Bush's regular Joe swagger is just an act.
I happen to speak Rovenese (or is that Rovian), so please allow me to translate; when Karl Rove says Bush is one of the smartest guys he knows, that can be translated into English as "Bush is without a doubt the dumbest person he has ever met."
Quit latching on to the herring.
-
Tiberius, please clarify what you meant-
[Read the article: Enforcing the community's foreign policy orthodoxy]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]When you said, "We talked softly and got hit with 9/11," were you referring to Condoleeza Rice's comments in January 2001 when she said the NSA under the Clinton administration was "fixated" on islamic terrorism?
Or were you referring to the fact that the Bush amdinistration literally IGNORED EVERY piece of evidence indicating an attack was coming? I'm guessing you are actually referring to the Republicans who accused Clinton of "wagging the dog" when he was launching missles at bin Ladens training camps.
Then your comment that followed saying, "So we've had to use the big stick." Since we were attacked by 19 morons armed with box cutters and plane tickets, I'm guessing your comment about using the big stick was a metaphor for installing reinforced cockpit doors with locks on them. I can see why we wouldn't have done that before 9/11. The intelligence reports stating terrorists might be training to hijack airplanes and use them as missles wasn't real believable to those with access to said reports.
Finally, when you say "It's not pleasent or fun. Responsibility rarely is," what exactly do you mean by that? How do YOU know whether any action we've taken in response to 9/11 is lacking pleasantry or fun? What portion of these solutions have you taken part in? I've heard Cindy Sheehan say it isn't pleasant or fun, but then she gave examples of her personal sacrifice to demonstrate this. Please do the same- that would be helpful.
-
Hey Shooter-
[Read the article: Enforcing the community's foreign policy orthodoxy]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Was Bush concerned about the welfare of the country when he received the PDB in August 2001 saying bin Laden determined to strike in US and then told the briefer, "okay, you've covered your ass now" and then proceeded to do nothing? Nothing!
Why don't you do some research on how Clinton reacted to the receipt of such briefings. He demanded daily personal follow-ups from NSA/CIA/FBI regarding their follow-through on previous warnings he'd received.
Rememeber when Clinton was launching missles into bin Laden's terrorist training camps BEFORE 9/11 and all the Republican leadership said he was reacting to a false threat and wagging the dog. Here we are 6 years after 9/11 and Bush has done less to capture or kill bin Laden then Clinton did PRIOR to 9/11.
Are you really dumb enough to believe this country is now at LESS risk of a terrorist attack then we were prior to Bush's misadventures?
Get over to Iraq you snivveling coward. I spent six months over there in 120 degree heat. Now it's the turn of people who actually "support" it.