I hope Rummy reads this

[Downthestretch55]

Originally Posted by Danzig188

not going to read it.


i get my news from many and varied sites, not just one, and not from a place saying they're 'progressive'.....that's as amusing as fox saying they're 'fair and balanced'. just cause you say you are something, doesn't mean you are! besides, i like to consider all arguments...nothing is black and white, it's mostly grey. so if you only get things from one point of view, you're missing a good bit!

Danzig,
I agree that things are mostly grey.
Believe it or not, I also gain insight from a variety of sources.
Heck, I've even spent time at the townhall.com site.
Open minds are open to answers, not closed to them due to their prejudices.
Seek and you will find.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Downthestretch55

Danzig,
I agree that things are mostly grey.
Believe it or not, I also gain insight from a variety of sources.
Heck, I've even spent time at the townhall.com site.
Open minds are open to answers, not closed to them due to their prejudices.
Seek and you will find.

but dts, you only ever seem to refer to commondreams on here....

[Downthestretch55]

Originally Posted by Danzig188

but dts, you only ever seem to refer to commondreams on here....

Ok Danzig,
Point taken.
Here's something that has nothing to do with common dreams, in fact, it was published in the "heartland" of the US.

http://toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll...1018/-1/NEWS15

[dalakhani]

Originally Posted by Downthestretch55

Ok Danzig,
Point taken.
Here's something that has nothing to do with common dreams, in fact, it was published in the "heartland" of the US.

http://toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll...1018/-1/NEWS15

With all due respect DTS, your latest excerpt comes from the toledoblade. Now, in all fairness, is it not obvious that this publication would have just a small agenda? I mean, it is the blade. Not to say that the information is not accurate but your sources are easily questionable.

Surely there is a more universally accepted publication from which to garner the necessary ammo to support your points.

Again, no disrespecct.

[Downthestretch55]

Originally Posted by dalakhani

With all due respect DTS, your latest excerpt comes from the toledoblade. Now, in all fairness, is it not obvious that this publication would have just a small agenda? I mean, it is the blade. Not to say that the information is not accurate but your sources are easily questionable.

Surely there is a more universally accepted publication from which to garner the necessary ammo to support your points.

Again, no disrespecct.

Dala,
I was questioned as to my posting from common dreams. A quick search came up with the Toledo Blade.
There are plenty of views that oppose the policies of the current administration. Take your pick.
Seems to me that those that support current objectives in Iraq are now in the minority, and that no matter what Rummy calls them or which 1930's Europeans he paints them as, the reality of the disaster that the Repub neo-cons have brought upon our country can not be denied.
I'm just one of many messengers, and I didn't make the message, nor the mess.
DTS

[Danzig]

thing is....i don't like when someone opposes the other just because of party....are you telling me that the white house has got nothing right? or how about the house, the senate? they can't all get it all right, or all wrong. seems any alternate publication is going to attack any and every policy....whether right or wrong. yeah, there are plenty of views in opposition, but opposing automatically makes you no more right than the person you're opposing!

you coming on here with common dreams would be like me arguing with you by quoting the weekly standard!! they're both wrong. i don't like extremism on either side. zealots scare the crap out of me! they have no thought, they just automatically react. just like when our foreign policy was based on doing the exact opposite of everything the soviet union did.

[dalakhani]

Originally Posted by Danzig188

thing is....i don't like when someone opposes the other just because of party....are you telling me that the white house has got nothing right? or how about the house, the senate? they can't all get it all right, or all wrong. seems any alternate publication is going to attack any and every policy....whether right or wrong. yeah, there are plenty of views in opposition, but opposing automatically makes you no more right than the person you're opposing!

you coming on here with common dreams would be like me arguing with you by quoting the weekly standard!! they're both wrong. i don't like extremism on either side. zealots scare the crap out of me! they have no thought, they just automatically react. just like when our foreign policy was based on doing the exact opposite of everything the soviet union did.

Great post and good points. Although, in DTS's defense, even if he came on here with links to the New York times or the washington post to support his points, im sure his sources would still be questioned.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Downthestretch55

Dala,
I was questioned as to my posting from common dreams. A quick search came up with the Toledo Blade.
There are plenty of views that oppose the policies of the current administration. Take your pick.
Seems to me that those that support current objectives in Iraq are now in the minority, and that no matter what Rummy calls them or which 1930's Europeans he paints them as, the reality of the disaster that the Repub neo-cons have brought upon our country can not be denied.
I'm just one of many messengers, and I didn't make the message, nor the mess.
DTS

That is not true. Polls show that majority of Americans feel it would be a mistake to bail out of Iraq right now.

The main problem I have with your view is what you just said in this post: "The disaster that the Rupeb neo-cons have brought on our country." Let's say that you are right that going into Iraq was a huge mistake. If it was a mistake, which it looks like it was as of right now, there is plenty of blame to go around. There was bi-partisan support to go into Iraq. I don't understand why you want to villify Bush. It seems so juvenille to me when I hear these commnets from people who have such hatred for Bush. I wouldn't have a problem if someone simply said that they didn't think Bush was doing a good job and that his Administration has made a lot of mistakes. That would be fine with me. I think there are plenty of things that Bush could be crticized for. But when I listen to many people such as yourself that have such hatred for him, it just seems like a personal thing that is completely out of whack.

I honestly think there is a psychological component to the hatred. I just think it's a way for some people to blow off steam. They like to have a person who they can blame for everything. Instead of seeing geopolitics in a complex way, it's much easier to just say that all the problmes are because of this one terrible person. It's similar to fans of sporting teams who often times get carried away and actually hate the guys on the other team. It's silly. The truth of the matter is that the Republicans and Democrats in office are pretty much the same. There is very little difference. It's silly to hate the guts of any of these people. The views of Joe Biden and George Bush are not much different. When they give speeches, they try to accentuate the differences. They will try to criticize each other because that is what politicians do. They try to downplay their opponents accomplishments and they try to accentuate their failures. They don't even mean half the stuff they say. A lot of it is just for the cameras. Most of these guys are actually very friendly with each other. This whole thing is a case of the fans being more fired up than the players. Through their rhetoric, the players(politicians) do a good job of getting the fans(voters) fired up. The joke is on the fans because these politicians are all multi-millionaires and are actually good friends with each other. It's actually a little like pro wrestling.

One thing really funny is that if a Democrat was in office right now and had done all the things that Bush has done, most Republicans would be screaming about what a terrible job he was doing. Most Democrats would be defending him. These guys at commondreams.com would not have any problem with the job Bush was doing if he was a Democrat. The whole thing is silly. If you guys honestly think that commondreams.com would be bashing the Bush administration if Bush was a democrat, you are sadly mistaken. It's all about politics. That's all it is. I'm not saying that the Bush administration has not made mistakes. All I'm saying is that the criticisms lodged by the extreme partisans are more about politics than policy. These extreme partisans would have no problem with the policy if their man was in office with the exact same policy.

[Danzig]

too true rupert!!

i've even seen in the past where one party would back something and the other go into attack mode....and then later, maybe months or a couple years later, the attacking party would come up with something almost identical--the original proponent of the idea than attacks. it's almost laughable-except for the fact these fools are making decisions that affect us all.