« What is it They Say About Returning to the Well? How About if That Well is Poisoned? | Main | Intelligent Design Tar Baby »

Comments

There are layers of dishonesty and any politician short of Cynthia McKinney is going to be dishonest. Most of the blogosphere can't be honest either.

It's all about tactics and ass-covering. There's Kos saying we shouldn't even try to impeach because of some tactical reason. What happened to honesty, decency, justice? What happened to obeying the law?

Practically no-body even on the blogs will condemn the US soldiers who cary out this criminal war. The lies go all the way down and Bush has everyone complicit -- or almost everyone. Their tongues are tied because they are in on the lies at some point.

The left will never recognise that Clinton did alot of the same stuff Bush did -- lied about Kosovo, manufactured the evidence and started a war of aggression for much the same reasons as Bush.

Lies about what the war was about. Everyone fucking knew it was about oil and securing the endless Reich from the very beginning but no one to the right of Michael Moore can say it out loud.

I guess a lot of people in this country are heartiily sick of being lied to about now but unfortunately lies is all they will ever get. It's all about "framing" and how to jockey for position.

American exceptionalism cannot be challenged -- few even on the blogs say "Why do we have to leave Iraq? Because it's a fucking CRIME for us to be there, ok? We're the murderers." Instead we have all sorts of shit about how we should stay the course.

The divide and conquer strategy of Democrat vs Republican party loyalty - which seems to mean most at the lowest levels - means we pull to forgive the liars on "our side" while laughing at the lies of the other side. How's this for a piece of truth: the Pentagon swallows up half the budget; America's business is international intimidation by violence. Piracy.

Can't condemn the troops.
Can't challenge US exceptionalism.
Can't attack your own "side" lies.

And if any group ever does dare to buck the trend and tell the truth (like ANSWER or Cynthia McKinney or Nader) then that's the real enemy and they have to be attacked with more lies again.

Class warfare plain and simple: good for them, bad for us.

No one can make anyone forgive and forget, and no one should have to forgive and forget. But if that's where you're coming from, nothing Edwards could say would ever change your mind anyway.

Edwards' 2005 "I was wrong" surely implies there was a 2002/2003 "I am right" to go with it. If we agree there was administration deception -- Downing Street, al-Libi, aluminum tubes, etc -- that can not logically have no bearing on votes taken by Edwards and others in good faith.

Yes, he then went beyond his Senate vote with that statement, but that's called standing behind what you've done and what you advocate; I think it compares favorably with others who did less, or equivocated more.

Others (including you, I take it) were prescient about the absence of WMD in a way that Edwards (and I) was not. While my "WMD+Saddam" apprehensions led me to disagree with anti-war analyses at the time, I did not dispute that those analyses were made in good faith. Is that your charge against Edwards? Was a good faith support for the war intrinsically impossible? If not, what would such a supporter say?

I don't see what the alternative is to a withdrawal timetable; I like the notion of some agency on our part better than throwing up our hands and saying we're there forever because our masters say we will be -- or abruptly leaving and shirking any responsibility for what happens thereafter.

And as for Kosovo, Mr. Byron, with all respect, don't get me started. Clinton and the West were if anything years too late in taking arms against Milosevic and his fellow bastards. I won't deny I probably drew the wrong lessons from that, but I do strongly dispute that it was the wrong thing to do.

Kosovo was a war of aggression waged in contradiction of the law - ie without UN SC permission. It was pushed using the same means as the Iraq war/s were - falsified stories created to demonise the side that the president wanted to attack. Media propaganda campaign which easily fooled all the useful idiots -- ie you in this case. The US actually funded a group it had previously recognised as terrorists (the KLA) as part of the falsification of intelligence. After the war the leader is dragged into a kangaro court specially set up by the US -- again in both wars. Come on. You have to be blind not to see the parallels.

I'd say a good faith support for the war was impossible. What possible good faith could anyone have? Aprehensions about Saddam's WMDs? But there were none. Iraq was very weak and known to be weak. If anything the security concern was that Iraq was too weak -- no longer a block against Iran. He didn't even controll most of his own country and you claim to have good faith he was about to invade the US?

Ridiculous.

Others (including you, I take it) were prescient about the absence of WMD in a way that Edwards (and I) was not.

That's a really good point because remember days when I walked around buying Team BushCo's lies and feeling pretty frightened. But I kept coming back to my sources online, which argued against the possibility, my abiding distrust of Team BushCo, the fact that we had Saddam contained and my anti-war bias. It was very hard. Somehow I expected Edwards to be at least as strong as I was. I'd love to mitigate his decision by saying that he was running for office or that his decision really meant something whereas mine did not, but those two points just make what he did worse.

While my "WMD+Saddam" apprehensions led me to disagree with anti-war analyses at the time, I did not dispute that those analyses were made in good faith. Is that your charge against Edwards?

Absolutely. He pandered then. He's pandering now. Is he also pandering on poverty? The guy feels like one big bait and switch to me.

Was a good faith support for the war intrinsically impossible? If not, what would such a supporter say?

That's so hard to answer now. I want to say yes because I know that you must have supported it in good faith. But I feel like there were enough knowledgable people throwing up enough flags that support of the war was, if not in bad faith, then inexplicable.

I don't see what the alternative is to a withdrawal timetable; I like the notion of some agency on our part better than throwing up our hands and saying we're there forever because our masters say we will be -- or abruptly leaving and shirking any responsibility for what happens thereafter.

I'm not arguing for or against a timetable. I'm saying that Edwards is planning to be in Iraq forever but he's acting like he's talking about withdrawal - sorry, redeployment. He's talking BushCo's line and pretending he isn't.

My plan for Iraq would involve big giveaways to whatever countries wanted in on the rebuilding and accomodating the Arab states as much as possible without endangering Israel (good luck to me). And I'd be nationalizing oil and encouraging unions instead of building a Neo-con Frankenstein, which is what is happening now.

I honestly do want to get on the Edwards bandwagon and I think I'm capable of forgiveness, but everytime he has a chance with me, he blows it.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Bang for the Buck: Boosting the American Economy

Compassionate Conservatism in Action

Molly


  • "We are the deciders. And every single day, every single one of us needs to step outside and take some action to help stop this war."

  • Photobucket

Zinn


  • "[O]ur time, our energy, should be spent in educating, agitating, organizing our fellow citizens in the workplace, in the neighborhood, in the schools. Our objective should be to build, painstakingly, patiently but energetically, a movement that, when it reaches a certain critical mass, would shake whoever is in the White House, in Congress, into changing national policy on matters of war and social justice."

Bono


  • "True religion will not let us fall asleep in the comfort of our freedom. Love thy neighbor is not a piece of advice, it's a command. ...

    God, my friends, is with the poor and God is with us, if we are with them. This is not a burden, this is an adventure."

The Reverend Al Sharpton


  • Ray wasn't singing about what he knew, 'cause Ray had been blind since he was a child. He hadn't seen many purple mountains. He hadn't seen many fruited plains. He was singing about what he believed to be.

    Mr. President, we love America, not because of all of us have seen the beauty all the time.

    But we believed if we kept on working, if we kept on marching, if we kept on voting, if we kept on believing, we would make America beautiful for everybody.

Marx


  • ''With adequate profit, capital is very bold. A certain 10 percent will ensure its employment anywhere; 20 percent will produce eagerness, 50 percent positive audacity; 100 percent will make it ready to trample on all human laws; 300 percent, and there is not a crime which it will not scruple, nor a risk it will not run, even to the chance of its owner being hanged.''

Join Us!


  • Member, Project Hamad

Happy 71st Anniversary Social Security!


  • Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

Countdown


Become a Proud Member of the Guppy Army


Blogroll

Count Me, Damnit!


Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 01/2004

Oh, I've Won Awards

alternative hippopotamus

Paperwight's Fair Shot

Your Liberal Media