Archive through September 11, 2002
TV ClubHouse: Archive: Bush must stop:
Archive through September 11, 2002
Goddessatlaw | Wednesday, September 11, 2002 - 01:57 pm     I agree with that on the kids, Oregonfire - I question my 10-year-old nephew periodically about his spin on events, and am absolutely floored at how much he's picked up (and developed his own opinions, which aren't necessarily his parents'). I am so glad I don't have a child to have to guide through this mess right now. More power to those of you who do!! |
Babyruth | Wednesday, September 11, 2002 - 01:59 pm     I appreciate your post, Oregon. My nephews have been sharing some pretty interesting, uncluttered observations too. It is amazing sometimes. |
Margie | Wednesday, September 11, 2002 - 05:24 pm     I've noticed an interesting phenonemon. Most times, when you get into a discussion about the Bush administration, people try to divert attention from the subject at hand by throwing in the "Clinton's this or that" slogan. Can't this administration stand on it's own record? I have two boys, when one messes up and tries that argument (Well look what he did!) it never works with me. Each of them are responsible for their own deeds. Why would anyone think it would work in regard to adults? |
Goddessatlaw | Wednesday, September 11, 2002 - 06:05 pm     I certainly hope you're not addressing me, Margie. Not a single argument proffered raised Clinton but for one post indicating my intense dislike for the man, but that I would certainly never suggest he would endanger American lives for the purpose of a few Congressional seats - unlike suggestions to the contrary against Bush. I've addressed the subject at hand, as have most other posters to this thread. My thoughts on Clinton's culpability, and I have many, are for another thread and another day. |
Ocean_Islands | Wednesday, September 11, 2002 - 07:20 pm     Thank God for that. |
Twiggyish | Wednesday, September 11, 2002 - 07:23 pm     Goddess, I too am glad it wasn't anything other than an accidental fire. It was a tragedy, but it wasn't a terrorist act. |
Margie | Wednesday, September 11, 2002 - 07:50 pm     Goddess that is exactly it. What you are saying is because you haven't accused the president who is #1 on your sh!t list of doing something, then anyone who accuses Bush of doing it is wrong. Perhaps Bush is doing it. Just because Clinton didn't invade a country in part to increase democratic candidates chances of winning at the polls doesn't mean that Bush won't. Clinton has nothing to do with this conversation. Can't Bush stand on his own? Do we really need to bring someone else down just to make him look good? |
Azriel | Wednesday, September 11, 2002 - 07:57 pm     Can't the Democratic party and it's candidates stand on their own? |
Margie | Wednesday, September 11, 2002 - 08:01 pm     LOL Azriel, that is exactly what I'm talking about. Deflection. |
Azriel | Wednesday, September 11, 2002 - 08:11 pm     Well, actually Margie I don't think that was deflection. I don't understand the argument that Bush is doing this for political gain. If it's so clearly the wrong thing to do, how could he possibly gain from it? I think it's deflection from the Democrats side to say that he is doing this for political gain. If it's the wrong thing to do then they should just tell us why it's wrong, not sling political rhetoric around slamming Bush. |
Margie | Wednesday, September 11, 2002 - 08:38 pm     If you've read my posts, I've stated clearly why I think it's partially politically motivated. This is Bush's baby. He's insisting on an invasion of Iraq. The decisions he makes now will affect us all far into the future - shouldn't those decisions be able to stand up under a microscope? Since when have we been required to stop criticizing our presidents? Legitimate criticism of an administration's policies is not always mudslinging, it's necessary to ensure our government is doing its job. I disagree with most of his policies, but my reasons have been well thought out - they are certainly not hollow rhetoric. |
Azriel | Wednesday, September 11, 2002 - 08:52 pm     Margie I was referring to what you wrote here : Wednesday, September 11, 2002 - 07:55 pm - Just because Clinton didn't invade a country in part to increase democratic candidates chances of winning at the polls doesn't mean that Bush won't. I'm getting dizzy. I'm going to get off this ride now. |
Margie | Wednesday, September 11, 2002 - 09:04 pm     Azriel, I'm starting to get dizzy too... What I was trying to say was that just because goddessatlaw did not accuse Clinton of doing something does not mean that Bush isn't doing it. |
Observerx | Wednesday, September 11, 2002 - 09:23 pm     If it's so clearly the wrong thing to do, how could he possibly gain from it? Now George Bush, Sr. works for <The Carlyle Group>. They invest in defense companies, medical laboratories, and the telecommunications industry. The Carlyle Group is one of the government's biggest contractors. George Bush, Sr. and The Carlyle Group stand to make billions of dollars from the War on Terror. On September 11, The Carlyle Group was having a <conference at the Ritz Carlton Hotel> in Washington, DC with members of the Bin Laden family, one of their investors. |
Marysafan | Wednesday, September 11, 2002 - 09:24 pm     I am about as middle of the road as you can get. I vote in every election, but do not vote the party line in either direction. You would be had pressed to find evidence you consider me a liberal or a conservative. My Husband enlisted in the Navy in 1968. A year when I made several trips to the bus station saying good bye to many of my classmates. In 1968 in our mining community, you had three options, college, enlist, or wait to be drafted. Not many had the resources for college. So they went in droves. All but three came back. My old boyfriend's big brother Bobby, my friend's football buddy Earl (who stepped on a land mine on his first day in country)...and my cousin Tommy's best friend and quarterback of our football team Pete. In 1969, I flew to San Diego, to marry my finance. He couldn't get leave to come home...we wanted to be together in who knows how much time he had left. He was 21, I was 18. Six weeks later, I got the letter from home telling me about Pete. My husband served 11 years in the Navy. We were married six years before we had an anniversary together. He missed three Christmases in a row when we had young children. One year I sat down to Thanksgiving dinner with his parents. The phone rang..it was hubby calling from Turkey. (Surreal and bizarre). I have waved good bye from the piers in Norfolk, VA and in San Diego, CA. When the ship was in port, we made our home a haven for the guys to hang out to give them a place to go and keep them out of trouble. I have written more letters than most people ever will in their lifetime. I have a written record of our entire engagement. Most people went out dates...we laid on separate beds and wrote letters to each other. I sat outside one afternoon, with my neighbor as we watched her husband's ship leave. Two months later, I held her as she wept having just learned her husband had died on board and would not be coming home. One night in February 1973, I stood on a runway sometime after midnight in a misting rain, holding my sleeping toddler in my arms, with a handful of other diehards, waiting for a plane to land. I watched three men be reunited with their families. Then came the event that changed me forever. While the plane was being refueled the rest of the men were allowed to leave the plane. They walked toward us...we walked toward them knocking down the rope barriers that kept us apart. One man came directly to me. We hugged. He took my sleeping daughter from me, and with tears streaming down his face, looked me in the eyes and said, "Thank you for bringing her. It has been six years since I have seen a child." When someone does that...it changes you. This man had endured the worst mankind had to offer in a North Vietnamese prison camp...for six years...while I was "good girl" and did nothing. I wrote no letters. I didn't protest or speak out. I believed that the President was smart and the people in government knew a lot more than I did...and if the silent majority went along...then they must be doing the right thing. I went home and wept unconsolably. My husband tried to tell me that there wasn't anything I could have done. He also said that I did do something...something very few others did...I went to welcome them home. But I promised myself something. I vowed never again to remain silent. I promised that I would raise my voice. I would never again...send young men (boys) off to fight unless I felt the cause was just, and that there was no other option. I am no longer so naive to believe that politicians seek office to govern for the good of the people. They don't publish news stories to inform the public either. Some way or another it all comes down to money. If you are willing to shed the blood of our children you had better convince me and the whole rest of the world beyond a reasonable doubt that it is absolutely necessary. I won't settle for anything less. I don't care if the President is Republican or Democrat. I spoke out against Dessert Storm, I spoke out against Bosnia, and I will continue to speak out until I am convinced that there is no other option. That is my right...and I have earned it. You don't have to agree with my opinion. You are as equaly entitled to yours...but I do ask that you respect it..and please try not to judge me...until you have walked in my shoes. It has been a long journey that has brought me to this place. |
Azriel | Wednesday, September 11, 2002 - 09:38 pm     I'm so mad right now I could spit so I'm only going to say that if you lightly throw out that Bush will gain politically or economically, that you are saying that Bush is so cold, so inhuman, so immoral that he would he would send men to die for this. If anyone actually believes this then I'm not going to listen to any other argument or reasoning that you have because you obviously have a <>. ~waits to moderated and really doesn't give a damn~ |
Margie | Wednesday, September 11, 2002 - 09:44 pm     Marysafan, that was incredibly eloquent. I feel much the same way, but I doubt I could ever put it as well as you have. I believe it is not only our right, but our duty to speak out when we disagree with our government. We cannot sit by and let things we disagree with be done in our name. I have disagreed with policies of the Clinton administration and I've voiced them. I've disagreed with policies of the Bush administration and I have and will continue to voice them. This new idea where it is unpatriotic to question the president is nuts. If we didn't question our government we'd still be under British rule. Participation is required to ensure a healthy democracy and voting is essential. |
Observerx | Wednesday, September 11, 2002 - 09:53 pm     Thank You Marysafan! Thank you for sharing your experience. Thank you, thank you ,thank you. |
Faerygdds | Wednesday, September 11, 2002 - 09:55 pm     Wow Mary... thank you for sharing such heartfelt words and wisdom. I am among those of the newer generation who agree with you. I look back to those years just before I was born... I look at the turmoil, grief, and the heartache and I see the lessons of history. I have heard first hand accounts from those that went to Vietnam, those tha were present during the assinations of Dr. King, JFK, and Robert Kennedy. I have herad accounts of Kent State and Whitman. History has taught us that is is not only our right, but our obligation to question authority. The ultimate checks and balances lies in the hands of the American people. The ultimate "evil" lies in the hearts of men and women. I believe that you cannot defeat the devil with the devil's tools. You can not right the wrong of bloodshed with more bloodshed. I'm with you Mary... standing beside you, not behind you... we will keep shouting from the rooftops until someone hears our words.. or better yet... FEELS them. In the meantime I will continue to hope and pray for peace, compassion, and understanding in our world. And I will continue to speak out and see the other side, no matter how unpopular it may become. Blessed be... FaeryGdds |
Margie | Wednesday, September 11, 2002 - 09:57 pm     A friendly Iraq government with plenty of oil. A war pumps up the economy. A war fills the pockets of the defense industries who are also big campaign contributors. (Also the Bush/Carlyle connection) A war in October makes it more likely that the republican party keeps control of the house. That's off of the top of my head, but to sum it up, he gains in oil, poll numbers, party strength, happy contributors, and inheritence. I am not so innocent as to believe those are all just coincidental bonuses. By the way, what ever happened to Osama? We don't hear much about him from the administration anymore. |
Nightcrawler | Wednesday, September 11, 2002 - 10:03 pm     ok i'm getting here kinda late I'm with you goodes,whowere,mam. if this is the wrong time to go in too Iraq(I think its as good a time as any) THEN WHEN IS A GOOD TIME???? I'v been on Bush's side all a long. if we don't stop them NOW (Iraq) then when do we do it. do we wait untill he uses some of the gases he's got. or do we wait untill he uses a NUK.??? maybe the reson I'm all worked up is. I'm a firefighter and have spent most of the day going to 9/11 stuff all day. I'll say it again there will be NO good time to go in to Iraq. but if we wait to long Iraq will get the things they need to bild and USE the NUKS they have been looking for. I know this is not what most of you think. so I'm ready let me have it. I'll be back in thursday to see what I get. |
Faerygdds | Wednesday, September 11, 2002 - 10:25 pm     Nightcrawler... you're a fireman right??? OK.. let's use a fireman's analogy... When you go in to a fire.. how do you put it out? With Gasoline??? By lighting another match and tossing it in... N0? Why not? because that only FEEDS the fire, right? So how do you put it out... you use water or a chemical designed to snuff it out... but presumably water... the antithesis of fire. Same thing applies... Do you fight hate and bloodshed with MORE hate and bloodshed? No.. that just feeds the violence... you fight it with the antithesis of hate and bloodshed... that would be diplomacy and love... That said... I admire what you do for a living and thank you for keeping this chaotic world a tad saner... |
Nightcrawler | Wednesday, September 11, 2002 - 10:44 pm     yes I'm a fireman and I don't even get paid for it.I'm a volenter fireman. and to reply to you Faerygdds. yes, some time we do fight fire with fire. it's called a back fireing. one thing we don't do is wait for the fire to burn us be for we put the fire out. just like Iraq if we don't go in and put the fire out it will come in and burn us. do any of you REALLY think love and diplomacy would work with Iraq. what do you think hes been doing all this time after they kicked out the inspecters(spelling? i suck at spelling) do you think hes been working on his diplomacy skills????? my veiw is we should go in and put Iraqs fire out be for we get burned. and the sooner the beter thank you for the nice words at the end of your post Faer. i live in a small town so i don't know how much I help are word be a little saner. I just do it because its a RUSH and fun. and I just like helping people. |
Observerx | Wednesday, September 11, 2002 - 10:46 pm     Faerygdds, message in your folder. |
Faerygdds | Wednesday, September 11, 2002 - 11:04 pm     Night... you have to forgive me a little... I just couldn't resist the OBVIOUS metaphor! lol Didn't know that you could fight fire with fire... that's intersting.. I'd love to hear the theories behind that. Now... as far as Iraq... No... of course I'm not as naive to think that Saddam is going to bend over backwards to just love us, but then again... we aren't doing any bending either. I just think that you get what you put out. I think war should be the absolute last resort when all else fails. Why??? Because if great leaders hadn't thought that way in the past... we would all be dead right now. JFK could have EASILY justified a pre-emptive strike on Cuba during the missile crisis. Heck... his advisors were SCREAMING for action! Instead he used wisdom, patience, and diplomacy to solve the problem. Thank goodness he did. According to Kruchev's son his father had placed those missles in Cuba and they were indeed ready to fire. It was the biggest high risk game of chess ever played. Both sides won! Had it been necessary JFK would have used force, but he found other ways to avoid it. And thank goodness, because had we gone in and tried to use force... most of the South East would have been demolished! Here we have a similar situation. We have yet another game of hish stakes chess being played. I would LIKE to see our government try to work things out, but if force is necessary as a LAST resort, then so be it. I just haven't seen us put out the effort I would like before we declare war! The movie "13 days" chronicles the Cuban Missile Crisis quite well (according to my parents)... there is a quote in there that I think applies to today's situations. "Let us hope that the will of good men can stop this terrible thing..." |
|