11/4/2006
IMPORTANT: Here’s what’s at stake
by Shane Mason on 12:35 am.
We are all sharing an important moment here. Montana has the power to make a change, a real change. This opportunity doesn’t come to Montana that often, so we should seize the day. We have a real opportunity here and we must not squander it.
Conrad Burns has claimed a number of times that he has faith in President Bush’s war strategy. He praised this ’secret’ strategy to stay the course in the Billings debate, and every other debate before and after. Though a dozen retired generals have called for Rumsfeld’s resignation, George Bush and Conrad Burns say that we should stay the course. The Army Times, The Marine Corps Times, The Air Force Times and the The Navy Times announced that they would call for Rumsfeld’s resignation on Monday. President Bush made a statement on the campaign trail last week that Donald Rumsfeld was his guy and would have his position for the remainder of the Bush administration. President Bush will stay the course in Iraq and Conrad Burns will provide his lockstep support of the failed policy in Iraq if is re-elected.
So, what’s at stake here? What are the real consequences? Are there any? I will put it below the fold out of respect for the gentle souls among us, but you should look because it is very real.
This isn’t old news, this is today. This is what we can expect to continue. I am not claiming that a Democratic congress will be a silver bullet with an instant solution. It will take a while to right the wrongs that have been wrought by the incompetency of the Bush administration. Inserting some intelligent thought into the situation will go a long way towards making it better.
Find 5 people that would not have voted otherwise and get them down to the polls on Tuesday. Remember, even if they are not registered that they can vote at the courthouse. This isn’t a game people, it is serious stuff.
| | Permanent Link | Categories: '06, elections, political |
Yep. This pisses me off. To use this as some kind of emotional argument to push for the Democratic Congress who pledges to continue the bloodshed.
Bullshit. Shameless bullshit. The bloodshed will continue.
OK Steve, how would you have it, seeing as how you aren’t in line to become supreme king? You want more of the same? This IS an emotional appeal becuase this is a very real issue buddy. All I have ever heard you do is critique, whine and moan about how nothing will ever get any better. What is your solution? Just give up? That is all I have ever heard from you and quiet frankly I am NOT impressed.
Luckily, I could give a damn less about what pisses you off. I am going for attainable change here and there is no basis for your claim that
Democratic Congress who pledges to continue the bloodshed
on the terms of Jon Tester or Monica Lindeen. As I said: am not claiming that a Democratic congress will be a silver bullet with an instant solution. It will take a while to right the wrongs that have been wrought by the incompetency of the Bush administration. Inserting some intelligent thought into the situation will go a long way towards making it better.
Now, for the imagery, would you have me hide the flag draped coffins?
OK Steve. We can use only words and intellectual assertions and arguments in the world, but this is very easy to forget that this is a real situation that is happening to real people. Those very real people get lost behind the words.
What is it that you are doing that is so much better than what I have done to try to find an end the bloodshed? Who is it that you are supporting for congress that will be so much better than Jon Tester and Monica Lindeen. Real answers here Steve, not just some rhetoric about how we should not make emotional pleas. What is your plan?
If you woulf like, back up your claim about this democratic congress that has vowed to continue the bloodshed. You see, I am not voting for the democratic party. I am voting for Jon Tester and Monica Lindeen. I have this on record from them:
How are these not desirable to the ’stay the course’ mentality that we have now? Why would you not want this over what we have now? What we have now has brought us the kind of situations that we have in that picture. Why should I not show this to people to remind them of how important this election is?
Shane - what seems to bypass your thought process is that the Democrats supported this war from the beginning, and have turned away at every opportunity to withdraw or even contemplate withdrawing. The Democratic campaign committees deliberately sought out pro-war candidates, and mostly got them (22 of 23 new candidates will support Bush.) Now you’re telling us that the mere replacement of Republicans with Democrats, by some sort of osmosis, will make the situation better.
Iraq was illegal, a major crime- the kind of thing for which people were hung at Nuremburg. Hundreds of thousands have died. Withdrawal of foreign troops would calm the situation, then we could possibly talk about reparations. All we lack are leaders who will use the anti-war energy of the American people (especially Democratic voters) to force the situation to a head. But the Democratic leadership is doing what it’s always done, offering covert support for the Republicans while hinting to voters that they are somehow going to fix the situation.
You’re a rah-rah Democrat - you see only what you see. Steve hit it dead on.
What would you have us do, marky, all vote for Ralphy boy again? Too funny! But hey, you, like Corny, have a secret plan. IT’S CALLED CYNICISM! I’ll cast my lot with the Dems ANY day! See many John Kerrys or Chalie Rangels in the Rethug party do ya?
Ah, the love affair between Republicans and Greens continues. And you call Dems the GOP’s best buddies? Look in the irror.
T’would be nice if we could get even half a loaf. When I look in the irror, I see only honesty. When I simply say what is true, I am called a cynic.
Mark.
Again, you did the same as Steve, compain how nothing is going to ever get better. Provide a workable alternative. I support both of my candidates positions on Iraq. I think that they are the best solutions.
No, Steve didn’t hit anything dead on the head. He busts in here and shows his condescending indignation, implying that his world-view is so far superior to mine. Yet, you and he both have failed to even hint at a workable solution? Again, I am not impressed at all.
Solutions lay outside the parties. There’s plenty of activity out there, but what happens in this country is that all of that good energy gets absorbed by the Democratic Party and crushed. But cynics like you who think we have no other alternative. Open your eyes, see what is right in front of you - a Democratic party that has supported this war at every turn. Then tell me why I’m wrong not to beleive that party will make change. They never have before, and are not likely to start now.
There are reasons to support Democrats - for better judges and abortion rights and (possibly) saner environmental policies. But the Iraq war is not one of them. They are not on our side on that one.
Actually my first thought when looking at the picture was whether or not barrells of wine had been broken on that street before the war started.
THEN I got pissed off.
Shane,
Even the neocon base is telling the Bush administration that Iraq is a disaster.
“Richard Perle, who chaired a committee of Pentagon policy advisers early in the Bush administration, said had he seen at the start of the war in 2003 where it would go, he probably would not have advocated an invasion to depose Saddam Hussein. Perle was an assistant secretary of defense under President Reagan.
“I probably would have said, ‘Let’s consider other strategies for dealing with the thing that concerns us most, which is Saddam supplying weapons of mass destruction to terrorists,’” he told Vanity Fair magazine in its upcoming January issue.”
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/11 /03/iraq.critics.ap/index.html
How convienent. Richard perle is absolving himself of guilt. That works pretty damn nice. Course we ALL know who’s fault it really is, and yet he can’t be faulted because he’s an IDIOT! Bush.
Perle’s still lying about the weapons, I see.
I see by the Trib this a.m. that the Rethuglies are bringing in hundreds of “volunteers” from outta state to canvass these last couple of days. Wow! Think about this for a moment. THEY HAVE TO BRING IN PEOPLE FROM OUTTA STATE! Couple this with the fact that they plan to have TONS of “pollwatchers” at the polls to check for irregularities! IRREGULARITIES! What the hell ARE we here, a third world country?!! These are intimidation tactics, pure and simple! This is what goes on in Latin America all the time! How DARE that little puke chunky dinkoweh bring this to Montana! The Dems need to be out in force. Why should we here in Montana have to run a gawdamned gauntlet of rightwing thugs just to get to the polling places?! This is a tried and true Rethugly practice. In places like California with large Hispanic populations, the Rethuglies used to hire rent-a-cops in uniform to stand outside polling places in order to intimidate Latinos! Again, the Dems need to get out in force! I really resent little puke Dinkoweh bringing these intimidation tactics to Montana! Who in the hell does he think he’s dealing with here?! I wonder, do you think that Dinkoweh will hire some rent-a-cops in full uniform too????? These are some sick people. The union boys better be out there making sure nuthin’ goes wrong. Hell, as Scweitzer said (and I believe’im!), “I’ll fight for you, but you’ve gotta fight for me to give me the opportunity”! And he’s right@
Shane-
I’m voting for Tester. I’m voting for Lindeen. I find myself getting more emotionally involved in this election than I’d like, mostly because every time I see Conrad Burns my stomach turns. In other words, I do want to see change in this country, and I think in a way the Democrats will help produce it on some fronts. For instance,they’ve pledged to raise the minimum wage, and I think they’ll at least have some self-awareness when it comes to issues of corruption. These are positive things, and there are others.
But here’s the thing: the war is a major issue in this election only inasumuch as people are worried about it. We are not being given the choice of whether or not we want to stay or go. For you to use a blood-soaked street as some kind of appeal to people’s emotions is absolute nonsense. Jon Tester’s position on the war sounds exactly like the Democratic talking points. He’s not saying we should withdraw, he’s saying we should conduct the war in a smarter way, and end up withdrawing at some undetermined point. (psst… that’s the position of most Republicans too…)
My main point is that if you’re going to offer emotional appeals to get people to vote for Democrats, don’t use the blood of the Iraqi people who most democrats couldn’t give two shits about. They’re too busy trying to look “tough” on defense. That’s why they voted for this war, and that’s why they’ve supported it every step of the way.
The bloodshed will continue. For you to blame it all on the Republicans shows an attention span the size of a pinhead.
Did you see me blame it all on Republicans Steve? Why are you making up things about my argument? I made the point that things would head in a better direction when we send Lindeen and Tester to Washington. I made the point that Rusmfeld and Bush were incompetent to run any war. I stand behind that.
Please, you have still not shared your grand solution with us.
HA! You’re telling me to offer a solution when the best reason that you can come up with to vote for the Democrats is that they’ll take us in a “better direction” in Iraq. That means jack-shit an you know it.
How’s this for a solution? Get the hell out of there. We’re going to run out of there with our tail between our legs sooner or later, and I prefer that it be sooner.
In any case, my only point was that if you’re looking for solutions to this war, the Democrats are only offering us “stay the course” in a differeng package. If you’re going to vote D, you’d better find other reasons to do so, like I have.
Your point with this post was to pretend that we are being given choices on this war. We are not. The bloodshed will continue, and we’ll just have new people to blame.
No Steve,
There is a fundamental difference in the views of Tester and Burns. I can not help it if you can’t see that. You are a smart guy and ought to know better.
Yeah. Burns has a secret plan!
Shane-
“There is a fundamental difference in the views of Tester and Burns. I can not help it if you can’t see that. You are a smart guy and ought to know better”
I think I would describe your response as ‘floundering.’ For some reason, that’s the first word that comes to mind.
Have I mentioned that the bloodshed will continue? You are so woefully unaware of this that it’s almost adorable. You’re just gonna wave your magic wand in the voting booth this Tuesday and we’re never gonna see pictures like this again, right Shane?
That’s “what’s at stake.” Right Shane?
A Democratic House or Senate would, at the very very least, provide some measure of accountability to the crowd who is running things. There has been virtually none the last three years, and that has certainly made things way more of a disaster than they needed to be. Even if the only difference Dems have from GOPers on Iraq is a willingness to question the Bush administration about strategy and tactics (and that is not the only thing), this country, Iraq, and the world will be better off for it.
No Steve, Shane is right. The Democrats want to run out of Iraq and everywhere else where we are killing terrorists. They want to return the troops to Okinawa where they belong. You never know when those pesky Japanese are going to rise again.
You see Democrats don’t want to win the war, they would rather loose it and surrender to terrorist thugs. Democrats think we should coddle terrorists and feed them pudding and crapes. Clearly Democrats have plan to win the war on terrorism.
President wants Rumsfeld, Cheney to stay till term ends…
President Bush said Wednesday he wants Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Vice President Dick Che…
Shane-
“There is a fundamental difference in the views of Tester and Burns. I can not help it if you can’t see that. You are a smart guy and ought to know betterâ€
I think I would describe your response as ‘floundering.’ For some reason, that’s the first word that comes to mind.
Have I mentioned that the bloodshed will continue? You are so woefully unaware of this that it’s almost adorable. You’re just gonna wave your magic wand in the voting booth this Tuesday and we’re never gonna see pictures like this again, right Shane?
That’s “what’s at stake.†Right Shane?
Steve, are you really that dense? I have said 50 times that I know that this is not the magic bullet. Sometimes I think that you are no smarter than Jake or OBrien, for cripes sake.
No matter who is elected the bloodshed will continue because THERE IS A FUCKING CIVIL WAR GOING ON! THERE WILL STILL BE A FUCKING CIVIL WAR AFTER TUESDAY. THERE WAS ALWAYS GOING TO BE A CIVIL WAR IN THE POWER VACUUM AFTER SADAM WAS REMOVED FROM POWER. THE FACT IS, WE NEED TO FIX AS MANY OF OUR OWN MESSES AND GET THE FUCK OUT OF THERE. DO YOU THINK THAT WILL HAPPEN UNDER BUSH/BURNS STAY THE COURSE MENTALITY OR JON TESTER AND MONICA LINDEEN?
Yeah, that’s what is at stake. I am sick and tired of your name calling aspesion casting. You are a defeatist who sees no possibility of change or progress, and it makes me a little sad for you.
Perhaps we will just leave it at that.
Sounds good.
I live in Georgia but have been watching the Tester-Burns debate closely. Seems like Tester has some advantage from this neck of the woods (resulting from Bush negatives). Burns is part of the problem in this country–at least his narrow mentality. The reality is even when the Democrats take over, we still will have the shit sandwich to eat, left over by the policies of the Christian right (aka Republicans). I’ve travelled the world with the US government and I can say it will take our country YEARS to earn our good name back. The invasion of Iraq was based on a false premise and we were always going to stay there as a garrison replacement for the troops we had in Saudi. Best thing is to admit the mistake and go on. Meanwhile, the larger problem is resolving the middle east peace issue. The arabs see us as their enemy because we support Israel unilaterally. It’s a mess….People like Burns are never going to get us out of this mess…
Cocaine with codeine….
Codeine us pharmacy. Robitusin with codeine. Promethazine with codeine. Codeine….