yeah I think it has reached a point where there are irreconcileable beliefs and until there are new developments there is little else to discuss. You have a good night too.
Dana On Wed, 28 May 2003 19:46:03 -0500, Andy Ousterhout <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > No problem. This has been a fairly active thread. > > You and I can go on and on, tit for tat (don't go there ;-) ). We just > fundamentally disagree. Only time will tell which is more right. > > Have a good night. > > Andy > > -----Original Message----- > From: Dana Tierney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2003 6:47 PM > To: CF-Community > Subject: Re: Operation Iraqi Eradication > > > sorry, just saw this. My comment is not a debate of the issues -- I am > sure > the election was thoroughly hashed out here --- just a statement of my > personal opinion. As you say, get over it. In my personal opinion, it is > pretty much demonstrated that Sandra Day O'Connor at least allowed > personal > issues to sway her vote. Much as I hate to say so, since she is a woman. > I > distinctly recall the Bush camp ridiculing the Gore camp for wanting the > votes ot be counted Um, hello. Please feel free to disagree or remember > otehrwise. > > As for Clinton -- I believe I have previously stated that he is a flawed > egotist with a real problem about women. I think playing games with > definitions is beneath a leader, but let's face it clinton was a > consummate > politician in all the senses of the word. > > But his dishonesty was a personal thing, that makes you kind of admire > Hilary for not breaking out the gardening shears. He didnt gut the > Constitution and tell us it was for our own good. He didn't send in the > Marines to make his buddies money. Much as you may despise the guy you > have > to admit he didn't abuse his powers in that way. > > Dana > > On Wed, 28 May 2003 15:17:26 -0500, Andy Ousterhout > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > >> Dana - >> >> I seriously hope that you are tongue in cheek here. What do you call >> what >> you just did? A serious debate of the issues? >> >> Frankly, what I see in most debates on GWB is a smoldering anger at not >> being able to steal the election from Bush. Just get over it. Move on >> with >> your life. If Gore had won because of a State Supreme court ruling or >> through not counting Solders votes, would you be yelling loudly or >> laughing >> over the gamesmanship? Bush won the election according to all of the >> rules >> in play. He won because Gore didn't have what it takes. >> >> Is GWB as smart as Clinton, no. Is he more honest. Definitely. By the >> way, how much did you complain, or any of you who are challenging >> Bush's >> honesty complain, when Clinton looked you in the eye and said he had not >> had >> sex with Monica? Yikes. Clinton makes Nixon look honest. My guess is >> that >> you looked the other way, made some equivocating comment like "they all >> do >> it", then quickly avoided further discussion on the moral side that his >> inability to own up to his actions showed. >> >> Andy >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Dana Tierney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2003 2:40 PM >> To: CF-Community >> Subject: Re: Operation Iraqi Eradication >> >> >> Bushites are good at deriding the opposition. Got them the white house >> as >> I >> recall... >> >> On Wed, 28 May 2003 14:21:20 -0500, Kevin Graeme >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> Sorry if that response of mine seemed a bit harsh. I just recall >>> strongly >>> arguing about the red-herring argument about the WMD well before the >>> war >>> started, but I was repeatedly derided and given the brush-off. Now, I'm >>> just >>> generally sitting back and eating my popcorn with a bit of wistful >>> sadness >>> for the gullibility of the US people. >>> >>> Bottom line: GWB makes Nixon look honest. >>> >>> -Kevin >>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Andy Ousterhout [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2003 1:33 PM >>>> To: CF-Community >>>> Subject: RE: Operation Iraqi Eradication >>>> >>>> >>>> Perhaps. Having a selective memory if part of being human. And the >>>> one >>>> thing we all should admit is that we were and continue to be all >>>> poorly >>>> informed. We will probably not know what really happened and was >>>> known for >>>> some time. >>>> >>>> Peace. >>>> Andy >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Kevin Graeme [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2003 1:23 PM >>>> To: CF-Community >>>> Subject: RE: Operation Iraqi Eradication >>>> >>>> >>>> > Also, I don't remember any of the other countries challenging >>>> > that Iraq had >>>> > Wad's. I just remember them asking for more time to negotiate them >>>> away >>>> > from Sadaam. >>>> >>>> Then you're either choosing to not remember, or you were sorely >>>> uninformed >>>> about the debates leading up to the war. I recall several cases where >>>> countries early on tried to challenge the existence of WMD. I'm >>>> pretty sure >>>> I even gave links here before the war started. >>>> >>>> What happened though is that the Bush administration controlled the >>>> entire >>>> playing field. Just like when Kevin Schmidt here stated that >>>> anyone who said >>>> it was about oil had no credibility, Bush controlled the >>>> situation such that >>>> any country that tried to say it wasn't about the WMD had no >>>> credibility. So >>>> in order for _any_ discussion to take place, the countries had to >>>> pretend >>>> that they agreed that there were WMD. Heck, even Powell early on was >>>> publicly unsure of their existence and didn't even support going to >>>> war >>>> because he was concerned it would destabilize the region. Hm... >>>> >>>> -Kevin >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> >> > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=5 Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
