11/1/2006
They Are The Dividers…
by Shane Mason on 12:00 am.
President Bush will be here later this week to stump for Conrad Burns. Is he coming here as the decider? The uniter? No, he coming as the divider. Here is a preview from speeches he has made this week:
“When it comes to listening to the terrorists, what’s the Democrats’ answer? It’s just say no. When it come to detaining terrorists, what is the Democrats’ answer Just say no. When it comes to questioning terrorists, what’s the Democrats’ answer? Just say no. When it comes to trying terrorists, what’s the Democrats’ answer. Just say no.â€
He is not saying ‘the Republican plan to keep America safe is better than the Democrats’. What he is saying here is that we want the terroris to succeed. We want to see American lives lost. This isn’t how we work together, this is how we marginalize 50% of the American population.
“The Democrat approach in Iraq comes down to this: The terrorists win, and America loses.â€
I could point out that with over 100 Americans killed in Iraq this month, his approach to Iraq is working out really poorly. I am not saying that he wants us to fail. I am simply pointing out that he is incapable of a coherent strategy. There is a difference here. I am not questioning his motivation as he questions all democrats.
You can say that my ideas are wrong and I will have an active and spirited debate with you on that. However, if you question my motivations or patriotism then the debate is off the table and a fight is on the table. Too often that is what it comes down to from both sides and it is simply not OK. We have heard it time and again from this president and Conrad Burns. I hear it echoed here from thoughtless commenters “The democrats want us to fail in Iraq“. No, we don’t want to see people die. We don’t want to hear the death tolls everyday. If that was our goal we would not be trying to force a strategy, we would let Bush’s ’secret’ plan continue. Failure is where that secret plan is headed.
We want America to succeed with its values intact: the values of acceptance, equality and all the right granted us in the constitution. We want us to be the nation that works together to solve it’s problems. We don’t want to be a country that marginalizes 50% of it’s population. We want to be a country called The United States of America. We are done with dividers, we want uniters. We are taking our country back and we are starting on Tuesday.
| | Permanent Link | Categories: '06, Conrad Burns, dickhead, elections, ideologues, montana, political, republicans |
I don’t know if you knuckle-heads heard, but Kerry has said out loud what most Democrats think. That is that only dummies join the military. Only people with no other options will serve this country in Iraq.
Kerry is dispicable. I can’t believe he was the ringbearer for the demos in 2004.
Why doesn’t Tester denounce Kerry for his statement? Better yet, why doesn’t Tester have Kerry come out here to Montana to stump for him? Where is Durbin, Schumer, Howard Dean, Kennedy? I guess we all know why they don’t come out here. They’ve all said some pretty disparaging things about our troops themselves.
These kind of gaffes don’t bode well in a state that has more veterans per capita than any other state in the Union.
Was there any spelling or grammer problems with this post? I wanted to know because that is how you usually respond to these tough questions.
Burns +4
Mr Obrien, I have never once commented on your spelling or grammar. In fact, I am the last person that should do that as I am bad about both. You brought it up though:
Was there any spelling or grammer problems with this post?
Should be
Were there any spelling or grammar problems with this post?
What I have said multiple times is that you have pretended in the past to be a democrat many times. However, you have pasted stuff directly from Burns’s website. See here.
My question to you is simple: considering who you work for (I am not stupid), aren’t you supposed to post a campaign affiliation notice when acting on its behalf? You have yet to answer this question.
On the Kerry issue, he was saying that if they didn’t study hard they would end up with ideas as poor as Bush and “you get stuck in Iraq”. I agree with Kerry’s statement that “America is less safe today. They’re creating more terrorists. They’re putting Democrats on the defensive when they should be apologetic to the American people. … They’ve unleashed pent-up forces of religious extremism. They’ve pushed away our allies. They’ve failed to adequately protect our troops”
However, as I have said many time that I do not speak for Tester (who do you speak for?) He has his own thoughts on the issue (though I don’t always have to agree with him). Perhaps you could research the issues before coming here and making demands?
Shane on Mr. Hammond:
“He has the argumentative powers of Coobs on Valium.”
Yup, lots of acceptance, equality, working together, and uniting going on around here. No marginalization either. Nice.
You obviously missed the entire point of my post. Please reread it. Am I questioning Andy’s motivation? Nope. I think that he probably has the best interest at heart, he just goes about it poorly. Saying that does not make me ‘divisive’, I am pointing out the truth as I see it. I am not saying “Andy wants bad things to happen” or even “Andy has bad intentions”. Additionally, I am talking about 1 specific person in that quote, not an entire group of people such as ‘all conservatives’, so I would thank you to not set up any strawmen. Some people should be marginalized (Rush Limbaugh and Rick Jore come to mind), but not 50% of the people in the country as Bush did in those quotes.
You see, Andy is exactly the type of divider that I am talking about in this post. Let’s see some quotes from Mr Hammonds blog to demonstrate the type of behavior:
*So the extreme liberals are for terrorism and against democracy and liberty.
*Tester and His Supporters are Uniformed, Ignorant, and Dangerous
*Most Democrats don’t work or work in government jobs
*By liberals and Democrats opposing the war the way they do, they put our service men in more danger
*Yes, I blame the anti-war liberals and Democrats for the reason more Soldiers and Marines are dying than should be…It is in our county’s best interest to have stability in the Middle East. Frankly, we need a free flow of oil.
*The goal of the the Al Gore global warming crowd is to impose more government control on businesses and the population. By frightening people that they are causing the future doom of the planet, they can easily impose more control and restrictions on us.
Shane, I understood your argument to be against broad generalizations of Democrats. I did not intend to imply you felt the same way generally against us right wingers. The last paragraph of your original post appeared to me to be a call for civility, which I found odd considering your treatment of Mr. Hammond.
actually, i have a slight correction to your post. this is not how we marginalize 50% of the population. it’s how you imply treason among a MAJORITY of the population that in 2004 was inconveniently distributed among the states. and projecting Bush’s approval rating out to the end of his term, it looks like he might leave office as the only person who doesn’t hate America.
any half-decent president knows that you can’t go to war with a razor thin margin of popular support. unlike the elections that Bush is so good at winning, war is not a 50% +1 enterprise. FDR knew this, and champed at the bit while the Nazi’s gained power and took over neighbors but he didn’t even try to act until he could -and here’s the important part- prove overwhelmingly to the american people that this was a war that needed to be fought. this took years, and almost cost him reelection as his opponent painted him as a warmonger, eager to throw away the lives of americans for some useless international cause.
this is not to discount the horror Saddam wrought on his and other countries, but again a history lesson for the president: our country was formed from the ground up, by rebels within society who were sick of bad tax policy, questionable judicial appointments, and hijacking the legislatures. (quiz: what other emperor or imperial court does this sound like? hint: you pay their salary.) anyway, the point is, in comparison we declared independence for relatively minor grievances that were controversial among the population. but it worked, because it came from the people. imagine france had sailed over and instead of help our our grassroots revolt they had beat the british and occupied the colonies. everything falls to shit, and it’s a hotbed of spanish and Portuguese raiding and terror. it wouldn’t have worked. this country would be as democratic as burma. the point is, the viability of a fledgling democracy is not how bad it’s previous dictator was, but rather how bad the people worked to oust him.
and the parallel: the iraqis DID rise up in revolt after the Gulf War and just after revving all these people up we pulled out. and i’m sure they were all imprisoned, and tortured, and killed. the most dedicated group of Iraqis who would have brought about a ground up revolution were all eliminated, basically in front of our eyes. so mr. president, don’t give me this nation building bullshit. your father and his cronies who now work for you dropped the ball on the only chance you get for these types of things.
i am not a traitor, i read, i am a realist.
The idea of being uniters instead of dividers sounds nice in theory but the practical application is another matter. If we were all united would we all be in the same party and have the same ideas? Realistically how can the two parties reach across the aisle when they have completely different ideas about how the war in Iraq should be managed? Those Democrats that argue for better leadership in the war on terror need to think about the trap they have fallen into. The current war on terrorism is an act of terrorism itself. Killing and wounding hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians in the name of fighting terrorism can only be seen as an act of terrorism in and of itself. Those that think the war should be managed differently will perpetuate those acts of terrorism that kill so many innocent civilians. Democrats need to think about the reasons for going to war. There never were any weapons of mass destruction. There are no links between Al-Qaeda and the Taliban. The only way to manage this war is to get out. Otherwise, we risk demonstrating further acts of terrorism. We need to stop sending bombs and start sending food. Progressive politicians need to become more aggressive in their fight for truth, protecting fundamental human rights, and ending the neo-cowboy psychological warfare being used to instill fear in all US citizens. Progressive politicians have got to stop being scared of calling this President exactly what he and his administration are: Terrorists.
If we were all united would we all be in the same party and have the same ideas?
No. We would work together and have honest debates on what is best for America. My wife and I don’t always have the same ideas about what is best for our kids and family, but we work together on it. We don’t make allegations that questions the others devotion to our families best interests.
Democrats need to think about the reasons for going to war.
Agreed. However, I do subscribe to the ‘you -broke-it-you-fix-it school of thought. Its true that there is no magic bullet and there is no easy way out of the mess that this [vice]president has gotten us in. However, we will have to work to fin a way.
We would work together and have honest debates on what is best for America.
I agreee that we should talk and have dialogue; however it seems we differ on what we should be debating. I’m not sure we should be debating what is best for America. If you subscribe to the you broke it you fix it school of thought then shouldn’t we be debating what is best for the countries we have destroyed and put US interests askance? That is where one of my fundamental problems lies with the U.S. We are always looking out for number one and have virtually no regard for anyone else. Did we really go to war for democracy or was it other, more selfish reasons. Even if it was for democracy isn’t it selfish to impose our political system on a country whose entire culture has systematically rejected it? We are blind to culture differences and it is coming back to bite us.
On another note, shouldn’t we try to fix our own democracy before we export the defunct one we currently have? After all, just because you can vote doesn’t mean you are free. Maybe that is why only a fraction of the people in the U.S. who can vote do. I’m not saying we shouldn’t vote, but am I the only one more than just a little disillusioned by the idea of mega-corporations financing candidates?
Why do the Dems hate America?
Nothing gets my blood boiling faster that that used up and simply stupid rhetoric of the Hammonds and Coobs…
Pathetic and I simply have never stood for it. I would hope to Dog that one of these cretins would actually say this in person to me.
Coobs wouldnt pull over after being spotted in Billings, quite the “little man”….uh Eric? My new truck is red….maybe.
You have to consider the nature of these two. Both only echo the rhetoric and talking points that they are fed by Rush and don’t understand the real-world implications of their talking points.
I’m pretty sure Shrub has his fingers crossed when he does this little stump speech, so it doesn’t really count.
Tony if you really want a beating, and have somebody to drive you home, stop by anytime.
Shane - I’ve compared you to Bob Lyons, a Billings ga-ga Democrat who supported every Democrat who ever ran for office, no matter what. If Hitler would have had a donkey lapel pin,Bob woudl have raised his arm in salute.
As my fine and upstanding son has pointed out over at our blog , 22 of 23 new Democratic candidates are pro-war. Even if the Democrats win, Name which is unlikely, policy will not change. My advice to you is to remove the rose-colored Democratic glasses, and take a look at real politics, how it is really being done in American, how you are being co-opted into supporting policies you are against.
Zoloft sexual….
Zoloft 100mg overdose. Zoloft. Zoloft side affects. Progesterone in zoloft….
Ritalin obsessive compulsive symtpoms….
Ritalin. Online pharmacy ritalin. 2006 articles in medical journals about ritalin. Pro and cons on ritalin. Ritalin vs. concerta….
Mexican valium….
Valium online. How long does valium stay….