Black Dog

More of the vaunted Republican "class". Audience boos as Bush offers best wishes for Clinton

And your point is...? Doesn't say much for your cause if that's the best response you can manage.

I see. Selective freedom of speech. Nope, that wasn't the case at all. Chicago polioce used hardline tactics to try and curb demonstrations, which, in turn, encited violence. Interesting: you'r eusing quotation marks, indicating you're quoting me. Funny thing, though: I neve rused the term. That comes straight from your fevered imaginings. Making stuff up: n that's classy.

Ahem. Anyway, getting back to the Two Minute Ha...er, Republican Convention, anyone catch the Bush Twins' speech? So good. As if the sporadic "dancing" exhibited by the delegates weren't proof enough of the Republicans' inherent lack of coolness or soul, the Twinkies' giggling, Paris Hilton-esque address sealed it. (EDIT) This just in: Miller's accusations (some of which were trundled out by Bush later) that Kerry vote drepeatedly to cancel certain weapons systems and "weaken the U.S. military" are based on an e-mail hoax. So sayeth Snopes.

Except that the doctrine of "pre-emptive" war (especially against countries that are not threats to the U.S) is a clear violation of international law, not to mention basic common sense. As for the success of the Bush doctrine on terrorism, it's hard to swallow the line that Americans are safer under Bush, given the almost weekly warnings and threats from the administration itself. I mean seriously, you're just wrong. Bush's popularity slipped after the election, spiked after 9-11 and has been stagnant or declining since Iraq emerged as a fiasco. It's only now inching up to above 50 per cent, thanks no doubt to hatred and personal attacks perpetuated by the likes of the Swift Boat Veterans, Miller and the G.O.P attack dogs in the mainstream press. Because American lives are the only ones that count, right? Never mind that the U.S. bombing and invasion of Afghanistan killed more civilians than dies on 9-11, while the Iraq death toll has been enormous. (Also, Iraq had no connection to 9-11). Furthermore, according to Global Securitty.org, "total U.S. dead in Iraq is reported at 1012 as at end of August (244 days of 2004 with 530 dead versus 482 dead in 2003's 287 days despite end of official war and return of "sovereignty"). Of at least equal concern is US casualties totalling 6987 as at end of August including a big jump of 1112 in the most recent month alone. Note that the wearing of bullet-proof vests means that many of these would have been deaths in earlier combats such as Vietnam. The vests have reduced deaths but greatly increased total incapacitation wounds such as brain injuries and limb loss. (Note that Pentagon has been trying to "spin" the number of wounded by only reporting "hostile" wounded since 1 April 2004). If you assume that the 6987 wounded cannot return to fight and nor can the 4416 reported non-battle injury evacuations, the US loses 21.47 soldiers per day to injury (and 36 per day in most recent month) on top of the 1.9 average deaths per day (total 23.37 per day equals 8530 per year that this continues, more if rates escalate as they are currently). Too many years at this rate and the US military is severely depleted, not to mention the increased vet costs and resultant family impact back home. Note also that most recent deaths have not been in Najaf, implying there is a largely unreported but much more effective uprising elsewhere in Iraq (Al-Anbar district seems to be where most deaths are still occuring). " That's more than 7,000 killed and maimed in Iraq alone, a country which, once again, presented no threat to the U.S.. Iraq is in turmoil. Americans and even more Iraqis are still dying on a daily basis. More than 11,000 innocent Iraqis have been killed in less than a year. Do you think their family and relatives give a damn about democracy, when scenes like these are part of day-to-day life in "liberated" Iraq? What kind of feelings do you think these people have for the U.S.? Do you actually think invading countires, slaughtering their people under the guise of liberation is going to turn the tide of opinion in the U.S.'s favour? Of course not. It's no secret why Bush and the RNC have steered well clear of his record. On both foreign and domestic fronts, Bush has been a failure.

"Democrat" Zel Miller and Cheney spoke today. Didn't see the Veep (I was in my secure, undisclosed loation), but Millers speech was a vitrioloc tirade that reminded nme of Orwell's "two minute hate" and was laden with hyperbolic ad hominems and foaming-at-the-mouth proto-fascist rhetoric that will no doubt play to the Bubba vote, but could turn off moderates and undecided voters. Miller went on to attempt to challenge "Hardball's" Chris Matthews to a duel. i'm serious. Cheney took a more moderate stand, but kept the focus squarely on Kerry, which speaks volumes about the G.O.P's confidence in their incumbents record. And what a record it is.

Oh please. Can you first explain how it is that you pay their premiums. In fact show me the line on your deductions saying "public service medical premiums" and I'll bite. Otherwise, your argument boils down to the usal gibber-jabber about "My taxes pay their salary blah blah blah." You pay taxes, taxes pay for a lot of services, including public employees' paycheques and benefits...big deal. If you have a heart attack, my taxes pay for your medical treatment. How's that fair. Same logic, different application. At the root is a narrow, selfish doctrine. I should also point out that the public sector is miniscule in both relative size and economic impact on the economy. Government is smaller now than in the past, which punches yet another hole in your blame unions for everything philosophy. The Consumer Price Index is the indicator I use, not anecdotes. And behold: CPI 1946-1998 I suspect that upward trend has not dropped significantly, if at all, in the last 5 years. Or total silence means most of us are just tired of your hot air.

No. However, civil disobedience is long-established and quite successful form of public activity and an expression of democratic rights and freedoms. Read your Thoreau. What's your point? I mean, you are, after all, the one arguing that a lack of class is endimic in "the left". Do you have a link for your allegations of "ripping up property"? Because there's no reports of this on any of teh major new sites. Did you know that numbe rof arrests at this convention have surpassed those made at the 1968 Chicago DNC, which was far, far more turbulent and violent? Doesn't that seem a tad odd? Indeed, the number of arrests has precious little to do with the "class" of the protestors and plenty to do with the zealotry of the power-flushed police and law enforcement types.

First: Tony Blair is hardly a paragon of leftist ideals. Secondly: what is this "class" you keep droning on about? Is it the kind of class displayed by President Bush in the 2000 campaign when he referred to a reporter as "a major league asshole"? Or when ol' Dick Cheney told a democratic Senator to "Go fuck yourself"? Furthermore, what is your beef with civil disobedience?

As to your second question: according to the true doctrinaires, Republicans simply revise their position after carefully considering the matter from all sides. Only Democrats "flip-flop".

Ah yes, the G.O.P on education and health care. I can see it now. "Education and Health Care: F**k 'Em."

FBI Suspects Israel Has Spy in Pentagon But wait: there's more! FBI espionage probe goes beyond Israeli allegations, sources say The investigation seems aimed at Douglas Fetith, who's office worked with Ahmed Chalabi's INC to pass onm Iraq "intelligence" prior to that war. There's also talk that Feith or his underlings were trying to steer the Pentagon towards regime change in Iran. Iran Contra II? Newsweek article The ever informative Juan Cole has a lengthy analysishere. As they say: developing.

Of course the gaping hole is that government employees pay taxes too. Their paycheques get as many deductions as anyone else, so the burden does not rest on the taxpayer, but remains on the individual. They pay, just not directly. "Competitive" in this case being the lowest common demoinator. The trends would indicate otherwise. Consumer prices have been mostly on the rise through the last few years, even as glopbalization picks up steam. Meanwhile, wages stagnate or fall, creating even more pressure on consumers. The growing gap Declining wages and rising costs would drag everyone down. We're seeing that right now in the U.S: falling wages, soaring real unemployment and more and more menial, low-paying jobs. That's pretty simplistic, as I doubt taxes are the key consideration for the vast majority of emigres. I can't believe how completely obstinate your reasonig is, especially in the face of prevailing economic trends. We can see what your union-free world looks like: it ain't pretty.

Perhaps, but we've already seen at least one case wher cash has gone from counterterroism into missile defense. As well, it's stil an awful lot of cheddar to spend on a system that doesn't work.

Ya know, I keep hearing about how we should consider missile defense, as the U.S. is our biggest trading partner and closest ally and friend. But it seems to me that should not preclude our nation's right to act on it's own principles. In this case, as with BSE and softwoood lumber, the U.S. is looking out, first and foremost, for it's own interests, which is understandable. However, Canada should be free in turn to look out for it's own interest and principles without the threat of bullying or reprisals. As we've seen in various trade disputes, the U.S. is not above throwing it's weight around to get it's own way, yet remains free of criticism. Instead, when Candad does stand up for principles that reflect the views of Candians, its leadership is branded as cowardly, treasonous and anti-American (whatever that means). I think NMD supporters, and anyone who likes tossing out the meaningless epithet "anti-American", should take a good look at what kind of friend and ally the U.S. is to Canada. Because it seems less like a relationship between equal partners and more of a relationship between a 250 pound biker and his 98 pound cell mate.

Yet you, nor Canadians, are anti-american. Right. For the umpteenth time, what does criticizing the Bush administrations policy have to do with anti-Americanism? What is this anti-Americanism the right is always banging on about? Is it bigger than a bread box? I think in the particular case, her Parrish's "idiot" comment was not directed soley at W or Americans in general, but anyone who supports missile defense (including Harper and the Cons).

I'm still waiting to see some meat here. I mean, it's on ething for someone to simply say Bush is incompetent, or other debateable conclusions It's another thing to lie outright, as many of the accusations leveled by the SBVFT (none of which, it should again be pointed out, actually served with Kerry) seem to be. Yeah, he had the gall to accuse American troops of committing atrocities, which apparently upset the vets more than the atrocities they committed did.

THnaks for proving my point. Clinton, for nothing mor ethan having his knob twiddled, was impeached, dragged through the mud in both the mainstream and right-wing press, even accused (by some) of murder...the works, all because of a well-funded and organized effort by the likes of Richard Mellon Scaife and Republican operatives to smear the president. Certainly Bush has been a target since the election fiasco. But, up ntil relatively recently, He was the mainstream's golden boy: untouchable largely due to post-9-11 "patriotic" sentiment peddled by the right that deemed any opposition to the president treason. And? I think an incompetent scoin of a wealthy family who owes much of his success to said familial connections is an accurate description, just as Clinton could be accurately described as a weasly womanizer. Again, right-wing conspiracy theories abound Clinton had Vince Foster murdered.

Makes perfect sense: come out after the damage has already been done and try to grab the moral high ground and distance the campaign from the emerging evidence of connections with the SBVT. Bush Campaign Drops Swift Boat Ad Figure Fatuous statements support your position...how, exactly? Pfft. My comment was in response to KK's allegation that poor Georgie Bush is the most put-upon and persecuted president in history. But when you contrast the treatment Bush has got with the way the G.O.P tried to crucify Clinton, it's plain that Bush has, for the bulk of his tenure, been given a free ride.

The ads have stopped running anyway. that's why Bush finally came out against them. Ah, but there's certainly a convincing case to be made that the SBVT are Bush campaign mouthpieces, certainly moreso than saying More is affiliated with Kerry because he went to the convention. *cough* Ken Starr*cough* F911 Facts What's the connection with the Kerry campaign? Let's see some proof. I think it's pretty clear that calling the SBVT "unaffiliated" is a stretch, base don the group's personal and financial ties to the Bush family and campaign.

Yawn. Fact is, you're ducking the debate. The first issue is the role of negative campaigning. the consensus among the righties on this thread is that "Kerry can't take it, even though (insert leftist cause here) was bashing Bush." You went on to say: The problem here is: 1. You don't cite comprable examples (given that the SBVT ads appear to be based on fabrication, I challenge you to come out with any out and out lies made by anti-Bush factions). 2. You don't show how Kerry has any connection with Moore (who originally endorsed Wesley Clark) or "Hollywood" and their political viewpoints, whereas the Swift Boat group has close ties with Bush and the G.O.P. So, you then opt to fall back on Kerry is into "censoring" the (deliberately misleading) ads, which of course isn't the case since the accusations within the ads are, once again, falsehoods. Finally, you try to paint a picture of Kerry as inconsistent in his views, which, as I demonstrated, applies to both candidates. So really: what is your point here?

Hypocrite? My posts pertained to the issue at hand. Yours delt with water in the great lakes, diverting from the issue. Thus red herring. BTW I remember reading a while back threatening to report someone for throwing around insults. Perhaps a moniker like 'Black Rat' would be more suitable for ya. Uh, you were trying to paint Kerry as a flip-flopper. I demonstrated Bush is one as well, which you dubbed a red-herring, despite being the first to throw a red herring into the mix. That makes you a hypocrite. That's not an insult, but a fact.

red herring Hypocrite.

Is that really a game you want to play? Give me a quote from Dole/Kerry conversation as there's nothing coming up on google. Attack the record, fine. But the Swift Boat ads are lies, plain and simple. Lies designed to draw attention away from the incumbent's conspicuous lack of service, not to mention his own shoddy record.

I thought it was the entree.