OT: Politics: Vocabulary List For Dubya To Study

Page 1 of 10  
Gulf of Tonkin Incident. War Powers Resolution. Domino Theory. Escalation. Body Count. The Light At The End Of The Tunnel. Draft Lottery. Vietnamization. Secret Plan To End The War. Khmer Rouge. Hearts and Minds. Sideshow. Pol Pot. Ho Chi Minh. Operation Rolling Thunder. Khe Sanh. Back In The World. Tet. Deros. Operation Pegasus. Destroying The Village In Order To Save It. My Lai. Chu Lai. Napalm. Saturation Bombing. Agent Orange. Hue. Cambodia. Laos. William Westmoreland. Maxwell Taylor. Daniel Ellsberg. Kent State.
Regards, Tom.
"People funny. Life a funny thing." Sonny Liston
Thomas J.Watson - Cabinetmaker (ret.) tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email) http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"Tom Watson" wrote in message

Hadn't thought of that in years.
--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 7/10/04
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

<snip>
*yawn*
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Bored again? The list is pointless, as Dumbya himself says he doesn't read; that he has people that who tell him what he needs to know.

Looks like the effects of DU are going to make Agent Orange look like fruit juice in comparison.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
mp responds:

And to whom he refuses to listen.
Charlie Self "Half of the American people have never read a newspaper. Half never voted for President. One hopes it is the same half." Gore Vidal
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Charlie Self wrote:

Sure he reads. Proof posted to ABPW.
--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto, Iowa USA
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Truly pathetic. This campaign has set a new record for lacking substance. Hey, why don't you guys recycle the DUI again? Just keep going through the laundry list of past failed criticisms. This is becoming truly boring.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 23:03:35 GMT, "Frank Ketchum"

Ya know what Frank, you're right - almost.
I should have headlined this under both candidates names.
I do like taking shots at Dubya, because I don't trust him and don't think he's smart enough for his job.
But I'm no lover of Curry, either.
I would like anyone who is in the position of prosecuting this conflict to read that list; it might be worthwhile.
We have invaded a sovereign nation under false pretenses and continue to be there as an occupying force.
Over a thousand young Americans have died and a hell of a lot more Iraqis.
The other day I read a news report that referenced a study done by the provisional government of Iraq. In it was a statement that two thirds of the civilian casualties in this conflict have been caused by the Combined Forces, as opposed to those caused by the insurgents. One third of those casualties were in the form of women and children.
And this is a report from our hand selected officials.
It's wrong Frank.
It was wrong from the beginning and it gets more wrong every day that we are there.
Some people would say that the analogy to Vietnam is invalid.
I'm not one who agrees.
If Kerry had the strength of his convictions he would run as the candidate who would end the conflict - but he wants to be President too much - it's a damned shame.
Regards, Tom.
"People funny. Life a funny thing." Sonny Liston
Thomas J.Watson - Cabinetmaker (ret.) tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email) http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Then why are you being a puppet for him? This is exactly what his campaign said last week, something to the effect that it took ten years to turn the public opinion against Vietnam and Kerry only has 6 weeks to do it in Iraq. Next thing I know it is the Vietnam quagmire comparison everywhere I look including here. It just seemed a little transparent, that's all.

I think the only conviction Kerry has is to appear to be everything to everyone. I don't think he has any personal convictions. He is on record for being pro-Iraq action from up till the primaries this year. This election was a farce ever since the primaries. There was a strong anti war Dem who had no record of wavering (Dean) but he was bypassed in favor of Kerry. Now Kerry has decided that taking the Dean position is the only thing to save his candidacy. It's very puzzling.
BTW, isn't it odd that every Republican president we've had since I can recall is a stupid, racist, homophobe hell bent on destroying the world? I just get tired of the same criticisms over and over and over and over and over. You know, history remembers the Neville Chamberlains as the idiots, not the Winston Churchills.
Maybe the debates will be entertaining. Kerry is supposed to be a good debater (insert master-debater joke here). Frank
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 27 Sep 2004 00:35:59 GMT, "Frank Ketchum"

And why did you snip the meat of the post without comment?
Are you that much of a knee-jerk Republican?
I would have expected better from you, Frank.
Do you really think that the list is of so little merit, as a call to a thought process that must be gone through?
Answer on the merits, Frank.
Regards, Tom.
"People funny. Life a funny thing." Sonny Liston
Thomas J.Watson - Cabinetmaker (ret.) tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email) http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Ok Tom,

True, Kerry has supported the Iraq war.

Typical Liberal bilge. Every Republican is an idiot doofus miscreant.

Nobody is. It is Bush vs "whoever" this year.

We as a sovereign nation can do this in our own national security interest. To use the knee jerk left response that Iraq has nothing to do with our security interest is a bit like putting your head under the sand.

Be careful about bringing up numbers here Tom. If you want to see staggering numbers of dead Iraqis just take a look at Saddam's years behind the wheel. This is what gets me. It seems that the numbers of dead Iraqis only matter when they can damage Bush. Where was the outrage at the uncovered mass graves? None, instead we are treated to the "atrocities" of Abu Grab (sp?).

This is the regrettable part about war. Nobody said this would be easy or uncostly in terms of life and capital. It's too bad, but I must ask what is anyone else's better plan? Come home and try to understand terrorists more and then they will like us and leave us alone? I don't think a majority of people believe this.

Tom, I respect your opinion, but I have to disagree with you.

This reminds me of the intense criticism after WWII about rebuilding Germany and Japan. Why bother? We are making it worse by our presence. Really?

It is valid only in the sense that the only force that can defeat our armed forces is our own media. The Viet Cong said after the war that the only reason they were able to continue fighting was that our own media was winning the war for them. They realized that it was just a matter of time before we left. We did not loose, we quit.

Then why is he running? Who put him in the position to run?
regards, Frank
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 27 Sep 2004 01:04:34 GMT, "Frank Ketchum"
OK Frank, you gave me a fair shot.
We'll just have to disagree.
Best Regards,
Regards, Tom.
"People funny. Life a funny thing." Sonny Liston
Thomas J.Watson - Cabinetmaker (ret.) tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email) http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"Tom Watson" wrote in message

Actually, he did more than that ... it appears that Frank shredded each of your arguments to little bits and rolled them up like snot balls. :)
You don't get off that easy, Tom. You started this, and you said earlier "Answer on the merits, Frank".
He did ... now let's hear the same from you.
--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 7/10/04
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

You're kidding, right?
Regards, Tom.
"People funny. Life a funny thing." Sonny Liston
Thomas J.Watson - Cabinetmaker (ret.) tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email) http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Mike Hide posts, from elsewhere:

Well, we don't know how far back the poster can recall, but my memory of Republicans goes back to Eisenhower who was actually a pretty durned good President. And his ratings have risen over the years.
Nixon? Uh, let's not do too much there, because that was a guy with severe personality problems (of course, that leaves us with the question of the personal problems ALL Presidential candidates have...only a person who shouldn't have the damned job actually wants it badly enough to campaign for it).
Ford? Not much there, either in time in office or in examples of good or bad. He seemed like a pretty nice guy.
Reagan? I disliked the man and his policies, but I never once heard that he was a racist homophobe, nor was he bent on destroying the world. His goal seemed to be to take credit for the work done by adminstrations preceding his.
The elder Bush? Basically, ye olde basic failure as President. Built upon Reagan's failed tax policies and managed to increase the national debt to record levels.
The present Bush? Durned if I know whether he's racist or not. He does seem to be something of a homophobe, a life complexity that crops up with many fundamentalist Protestant religious sects. He doesn't seem to be intent on destroying the world, but prevention of the advancing of such destruction seems to me to lack a high priority with him.
Stupid? Well, yes. He's our Manchurian Candidate, guided from the exterior, and tends to get into a lot of trouble intellectually when his handlers turn him loose.
A good President? That's not even debatable. He is almost certainly going down as one of the worst Presidents in the history of this country, and he may well have helped us further along to Third World status than anyone yet knows. He has bought his way into office using tax money in the form of refunds, and has increased spending and debt to levels hithertofore undreamed of by anyone. Yet I read a letter to the local paper the other day screaming about "tax and spend" Democrats. Which is very unlike Bush's "borrow [from our great grandchildren] and spend" Republicans. Tax and spend is a pay as you go policy.
I very much doubt Bush represents true Republicans (which is an endangered species, IMO).
But I don't think he's a racist.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I was NOT the author of the above post, however I did respond to it, noting that Neville Chamberlain at least bought half a year for the UK to prepare for WW2. Which incidentally started for the UK in Sept 1939.

No thoughts on the man I was too young and could not vote anyhow. the only thing that comes to mind is John Foster Dulles, and the constant threat of nuclear obliteration.

Not too much eh, well at least he opened up relations with China and since we have not fought the Chinese overtly since that time [at the time I always thought when Macarthur wanted to invade China there were an awful lot of Chinese to fight]
I guess he also can be credited at least of ending a war started by a democrat vis a vis Vietnam.

What like Ford, what exactly was his claim to fame ? Then Reagan came into office after the totally failed Carter administration when no one could afford to buy anything [interest rates in excess of 20%] he also had to rebuild the armed forces which had fallen into disrepair under Carter. To me at least things were bright under Reagan. the Soviet threat had diminished considerably and America began to take pride in itself again.

Yes I remember the "no new taxes " bit and how he got caught up in the Democratic lies as Reagan did of reduction in government spend if only the democrats would be allowed to raise taxes, of course the spending cuts never took place ,to the contrary they spent even more . Remember Tip O'Neil saying proudly that the submitted presidential budgets were dead on arrival, what a shyster.

Thank goodness for diversity of opinion, I don't see anything wrong with being a person of faith, perhaps it is a shame the terrorists are not people of faith. We brand them as Muslim extremists, if they were true Muslims they would not be beheading people and killing the innocent.
Stupid, hardly seems to me he beat Gore in the last election regardless of the shenanigans Gore pulled , heck the shoe should be on the other foot the Dumb Gore democrats still think they won Florida even when the votes are recounted by the most Democrat friendly sources . Also it seems to me as a casual observer that someone who has a business degree from Harvard business school can't be that big an idiot.
It was the Republicans that forced Clinton to reduce the national debt [Newt if I recall] it certainly was not the Democrats, and I suppose it will be them that do it again. the national debt is not a major concern to me as it is by others for the most part the debt is about 80% owned by the US public. Of course the Democrats in the last few days have reinstated most of the Bush tax cuts ,with less than a handful of votes against it ,what of hypocrites the democrats are .I wonder how Kerry will explain that away as he always criticizes the republicans to voting for cuts in Taxes
And now once again Bush has to try and reverse the damage of the Clinton years, the threat of Russian missiles has been supplanted by Chinese and North Korean missiles targeted on US cities. Prior to one of the democrats major contributors, The Loral corporation giving the Chinese technical launch and targeting information the Chinese could not achieve a successful missile launch let alone target anything....mjh
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Mike Hide posts, for himself this time:
I'm not going to do a lot of point-by-point here. I'm too busy giggling over your last paragraph, to wit:

Pardon me for laughing, but Bush is not reversing anything Clinton did, except formation of a semi-sane government budget.
Bush is following big biz's lead, as he always has and always will.
Charlie Self "Ambition is a poor excuse for not having sense enough to be lazy." Edgar Bergen, (Charlie McCarthy)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

The threat of Russian missiles was largely diminished by Reagan, the missile threat to the US and others has essentially reappeared at the hands of Chinese and via them the North Koreans also.
As I said earlier the Chinese could hardly successfully launch a missile let alone target the payload until the technical expertise was given to then by Loral corporation. This particular information transfer was forbidden by the state department ,loral was never punished for the transfer,it was quietly swept under the rug, loral being a major contributor to the Clinton campaign. Loral at the time was in the business of selling communication satellites to the Chinese which of course uses the same techniques.
laugh as you may, probably one of their targets is probably the cities you and your family live in ......mjh
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Mike Hide states:

Not laughing at that part, but at your statement that Shrub is correcting problems created by Clinton.
Be that as it may, the Chinese work longer term than we're used to thinking, so trying to determine what they might do in the next decade, or even two, is a waste of time for most of us.
Now, the North Koreans, and Iran, are playing "missle, missle, got the missile" and, IMO, NK is where Bush should have started his world dominion run, AFTER he cleaned up the Afghanistan area.
Reagan benefited from the demise of the USSR, but the threat posed by their missiles still remains. It's not as severe in most ways, but is more severe in others, because of poor maintenance and control over the past decade and a half. Too, the various ex-USSR states have been busily selling bits and pieces to just about all comers for about a decade now, so Russia, or its weapons, remains a threat.
Charlie Self "Ambition is a poor excuse for not having sense enough to be lazy." Edgar Bergen, (Charlie McCarthy)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Site Timeline

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.