Friday, September 15, 2006

I Spoke Too Soon

I spoke too soon. Unfortunately, the virus completely destroyed my computer's operating system. It's still in the hospital but I should be getting it back today after it's mind has been completely wiped. Wouldn't that be a nice luxury for all of us at times? Don't we all think it might be nice to just eliminate certain (if not all) memories?

The Latest Bush Debacle

My prediction about Bush's strategy has come to pass. We are now looking at a fierce fight including Sen. John McCain and Colin Powell on one side, and the Bushies on the other.

I remember years ago when Rush Limbaugh spoke mockingly of the "talking points" that the Clinton administration sent out to all news outlets. He pointed out the common words and themes that were repeated throughout the news, indicating the administration's influence. What do we have now, when all the conservative talk show hosts are unitedly speaking about how wildly insane McCain and Powell are? Inquiring minds want to know.

Although it's understandable to be scared of the terrorists, we need to realize that this is yet another tool we could give the administration to squash any dissidents in our own country.


js said...

well I think the whole country other than the left wing nuts and the right wing crazies are fed up with whole damn buunch of them. I know I am. every thing is political to these people, they couldn't give a good damn about us. They just want donations to run next time and do anything to try to get votes. anything that is except what the peopel want. They all suck. Both sides. I say we term limit them all, that would help.

Underground Logician said...


I understand your frustration, but may I suggest that your anger is misplaced? It is no accident that this topic has been pounded up our rearends. Your response is the effect that is desired by those who report it.

May I also ask you this: Who do we put in their place? Plus, for these new pols to get into office, will it not require donations? If so, then who do they appeal to, and how do they gain attention to themselves from the populace?

It's understandable that we want to start over fresh. However, the problem will never go away. What may be needed is to put all these EXTREMELY INTELLIGENT editors and pundits of the MSM into office. They'll help us and guide us through the murkiness, eh? I'm sure they'll scatter like cockroaches if they're nominated!

Saur: I'm sorry, friend. I don't share your opinion here. Not that I'm in favor of torture, but I hardly see that the claims of U.S. military torturing "detainees" has any basis in fact. What is needed I think, is a clear definition of torture, and to have these allegations documented (ladies underwear over a "detainees" head is hardly torture)

Frankly, given the MSM lack of objectivity, they are not the ones we should turn to to analyze what is happening at "Club Gitmo." Robert Miniter, of the Hudson Institute gives first-hand of a recent tour given to him and other reporters by the military brass at Guatanimo. He witnessed an appalling pampering of these terrorist types. If you want the URL, I'll give it to you.

There is no doubt in my mind that there is a thick rhetorical cloud that has been generated politically to cloud our vision on this and other issues. That's why we need a healthy skepticism towards any reporting by the big, rich, media.

OldHorsetailSnake said...

I like this. Reminds me of the old "let's you and him fight."

The Lazy Iguana said...

What gets me is that Bush was able to win the nomination in 2000 in the first place. what were Republican primary voters thinking? Probably something like this.

Duhhhh...who in tarnation what should I vote fer? That Bush guy talks just like me, and that McCain guy uses too many big fancy words like "the".

But what happened in 2000 will stay in 2000.

And Underground - do you think that the "main stream media" (state run news) is going to report the truth? Do you believe the Bill O'Riley "Factor Investigation" that found GETMO was an all inclusive resort similar to Sandals in Montego Bay? Oh look! Film footage of people sitting in cages not being tortured. What is that? You want to film inside that building? Sorry - that building is classified! Nothing going on there! Move along now! Just some gardening equipment! Boring stuff! HEY LOOK! I have a Frizbe!

But what is more alarming is the powers Bush is trying to convince us he has because he is a "war president". He can ignore congress. He can ignore federal law. He can ignore international treaties. He can make up words. And so on.

daveawayfromhome said...

As usual, UL cannot see the facts, most likely because his head is... well, in a dark place. "Facts" will be hard to come by, since this will be considered a "security" issue (and those who reveal them, like the NYTimes, are "traitors", right?). How about a bit of simple inference instead? Bush says, I want to be able to use "alternate interrogation methods" [torture]. Then denies such methods are used. Then, when denied such methods, gets angry, even though he claims not use them. In anybody else, this would be suspicious, to say the least. If it were my child, it'd certainly raise a red flag. If your child told you, "I want to be allowed to smoke dope, but I never actually will smoke dope", you'd be searching his sock drawer from now till the day he moves out.

"ladies underwear over a "detainees" head is hardly torture"

Perhaps not. But it is degrading treatment (banned by the Geneva Convention), especially when handed out to you by people who have complete power over you. I'm also quite sure that you wouldnt like to be treated in this manner, yet you seem to have no problem suggesting it for others. You dont need a "clear definition of terror", you need a clear definition of "morality"

I dont know about this Hudson Institute guy, but the British attorney general, Lord Goldsmith, didnt care much for Guantanamo. I think I'll take the word of the BBC over that of a Washington Think Tank, thank you very much.

There is no doubt in my mind that there is a thick rhetorical cloud that has been generated politically to cloud our vision on this and other issues. That's why we need a healthy skepticism towards any claims by the failed, corrupt and morally bankrupt Bush Administration.

Miss Cellania said...

I have yet to read up on the latest Bush-McCain flap, BUT about the Gitmo detainees... They've been there FIVE YEARS now, and they are still "detainees". No trial, no court hearings, no evidence. What's that all about? Are we just going to detain them foirever?

Underground Logician said...


I'm not going to insult you in return, but usually in debates, the one who makes the assertion, gets to prove it. So, tell me Dave, how is it that my head is "in a dark place?" You are not going to prove anything by an a priori assumption. Also, the inferences you are guiding us through really begs the question. You need to tie down your argument so that we don't get dizzy.

If there is torture going on, where is it happening? What is occurring? Do you have facts? Did you know that the questions I am asking indicate that my body is not in some weirdly contorted position but erect, I'm breathing fresh air, and I'm alert enough to know that when people make allegations, they usually have either the facts to back them or they enjoy smearing someone. Which is it?

I'm ready to look at the facts, Dave. Let me have it. Not innuendo, not MSM regurgitations, just the facts. And I'll thank you for increasing my knowledge.

Underground Logician said...

Lazy Iguana:

Hmmm. So the way you counter the fact that Bush is in the white house is that the people who voted for Bush are stupid? Plus, you think that I hold that the only news outlet is the O'Reilly Factor? I don't recall stating this.

I do have a question. I hear from liberals that Bush is an idiot, but he seems to get his way around with such low approval ratings. How can the man do it? It would seem that a president who requires high approval numbers to carry out his responsibilities as president would seem to be more mentally challenged. Do you have an idea about this? Or do you believe that Bush is a genius and we who elected him are stupid? Could you clarify this for me?

As to your news sources, if you want to believe the MSM and overlook their bias, I won't stop you. I take into account that all new outlets have a bias. It's understanding the bias of each and taking them into account when I weigh the different reports. And if I find an outlet that has no axe to grind, they will have greater objectivity than say David Greggory of NBC.