Enron Tapes!!!

[dissention]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

Please show me how I am trying to justify W's behavior. I am not. I have repeatedly said W is guilty of just about everything asserted. I am just pointing out that to put all of the blame on him is wrong. How is that excusing W?

It's called E-N-A-B-L-I-N-G.

I was in the Gap the other day and saw a woman rip the tag off of a hot jacket for no reason. Then she went to the counter to pay for her clothes. While she held the sole cashiers attention, I slipped that jacket under my shirt and waltzed out of the store with it. Hey, it's not my fault, I didn't take the tag off.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by dissention

OF COURSE YOU ARE!!!!!!! JEEZUM CROW, WHAT DO YOU EAT?!

The entire crux of your arguments is that Bush wouldn't be bad if the Democrats didn't enable him. I;ve seen it post after post, I don't understand how you can't, AND YOU'RE THE ONE WHO WRITES THEM! You're simply taking Bush's f*ck ups and putting them on the shoulders of the Democrats instead of on his shoulders. It's the Democrats fault that Bush had no coalition in going to war? It's their fault for everything in your book. Clinton did this, Clinton did that, if he didn't, Bush wouldn't be bad. Blah blah blah. Stop with the scapegoating, man.

You know I love ya, Jason, but my word.

No I am not. I am just saying he was not alone in them. Why is it so hard for you all to assign blame to a D. I have no problem assigning blame to both.

[dissention]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

FOUL - and you know it I have never once said all of the things I hold him accountable for are not totally his fault. Again, although I think he went to war with Iraq with the full support of Kerry and Clinton, I think they had no part in his lying about the exigency of the threat. W ALONE is guilty for that. Similarly, as Gov. of Texas, he allowed Enron to get away with fraud. He alone is guilty of that. I cannot find anywhere where i have said differently. So, I do not see how you think i am enabling W. I think you all are just pissed (in a friendly way ) that I can call BS on all people involved and not just W.

Like Rummy, I guess you don't know the meaning of the phrase "The buck stops here."

He can have all the support he wants, he makes the decisions. If he decides to invade a country with no exit strategy, no ground plan, no coalition, it's on his sorry ass.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by dissention

It's called E-N-A-B-L-I-N-G.

I was in the Gap the other day and saw a woman rip the tag off of a hot jacket for no reason. Then she went to the counter to pay for her clothes. While she held the sole cashiers attention, I slipped that jacket under my shirt and waltzed out of the store with it. Hey, it's not my fault, I didn't take the tag off.

Again, please specific examples of where I have said "it is not W's fault." I know you cannot because I never said it, with the sole exception of the economy, which was faltering when W took office. Could W have done something to stop the faltering economy? Well, he treid with the tax cuts. Have they worked? Well, the economy is currently moving on full steam ahead. AND - 9/11 certainly did not help things and most economist are unsure how to factor that event into the economic recovery equation. What W did that was bad, was he consciously lied about the recovery more than once. AND - he did that all on his little ole own

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by dissention

Like Rummy, I guess you don't know the meaning of the phrase "The buck stops here."

He can have all the support he wants, he makes the decisions. If he decides to invade a country with no exit strategy, no ground plan, no coalition, it's on his sorry ass.

Bless your heart, then and again, why did Kerry want to do the same thing in 98 and why has Kerry not said invading Iraq in and of itself was morally wrong. He has not and instead said he would have invaded Iraq, but done it diffrerenty. But, you are right, W made the decision to invade Iraq and his admin. has made a HUGE mess due to their ignorant miscalculations and their fevered rush to get there - ALL of that is on W's shoulders alone - he alone it to blame - blame no one else but W I am just saying that if you villify W for it, them you must villify Kerry because he said he would have invaded Iraq as well and indeed he called for Clinton to do it in 98. How is that excusing W. It is not.

[dissention]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

Could W have done something to stop the faltering economy? Well, he treid with the tax cuts. Have they worked? Well, the economy is currently moving on full steam ahead.

Voodoo economics do not work, IMO. But, to be fair and because I have a soft spot for ya, there are no conclusive studies that prove they do or they don't. For every study or analysis that says it does, there's another out there that says it doesn't.

Next.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by dissention

Voodoo economics do not work, IMO. But, to be fair and because I have a soft spot for ya, there are no conclusive studies that prove they do or they don't. For every study or analysis that says it does, there's another out there that says it doesn't.

Next.

Well, something is working because the economy is getting better

Interestingly, I think larger tax cuts in the middle and lower classes are more effective because these people spend more money as a whole, etc. I do think, however that some tax relief for the wealthy ($200,000 or more per year) is warranted because, moral considerations aside, these people spend money as well, just not as much on the whole as those making less. In other words if you are really rich and pay only 8 million instead of 10 million in tazes, odds are you are not going to spend that extra 2 million in staple goods (cars, food, home addition, etc.) than the people in the middle and lower classes. These staple goods are the backbone of the economy.

[dissention]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

Bless your heart, then and again, why did Kerry want to do the same thing in 98 and why has Kerry not said invading Iraq in and of itself was morally wrong. He has not and instead said he would have invaded Iraq, but done it diffrerenty. But, you are right, W made the decision to invade Iraq and that is on his shoulders. I am just saying that if you villify W for it, them you must villify Kerry because he said he would have invaded Iraq as well and indeed he called for Clinton to do it in 98. How is that excusing W. It is not.

No, I don't have to villify Kerry or Clinton, that's where we're hitting the speed bump.

For all I know, Kerry thinks it was a moral thing to invade Iraq. While I wholeheartedly disagree, he doesn't shape foreign policy and he doesn't make the decision to invade another country. Yeah, he has a say, but he doesn't make the final decision. Maybe he believed the bogus intel that I haven't believed for ten years, who knows? He only voiced his support for this war, he wasn't the one to kill women and children and innocent soldiers by actually sending them. And if you think that for one minute a liberal from MA who just became President would ever make the mistake of being the one to initiate an invasion of another that hasn't done anyhting to us, lord help ya.

[The Tower]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

I am just saying that if you villify W for it, them you must villify Kerry because he said he would have invaded Iraq as well and indeed he called for Clinton to do it in 98. How is that excusing W. It is not.

Kerry cannot be blamed for the current situation in Iraq. Kerry (like the rest of the world) was LIED TO about Iraq. Kerry based his decisions on LIES from the Bush administration.

What Kerry supported did not happen. Bush LIED to get the country to support his aggression and then pulled the old "bait and switch". You cannot hold Kerry responsible for any of it.

I don't think you're excusing Dubya, I just think you're trying to dilute the blame to include others. However, this whole Iraq thing started, debuted, and acted all because of the Bush admin. It would have never even happened except for the fact that he stole the election.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by dissention

No, I don't have to villify Kerry or Clinton, that's where we're hitting the speed bump.

For all I know, Kerry thinks it was a moral thing to invade Iraq. While I wholeheartedly disagree, he doesn't shape foreign policy and he doesn't make the decision to invade another country. Yeah, he has a say, but he doesn't make the final decision. Maybe he believed the bogus intel that I haven't believed for ten years, who knows? He only voiced his support for this war, he wasn't the one to kill women and children and innocent soldiers by actually sending them. And if you think that for one minute a liberal from MA who just became President would ever make the mistake of being the one to initiate an invasion of another that hasn't done anyhting to us, lord help ya.

Agreed that any discussion of Kerry's wrongs is not relevant to W's bad acts. I think I have said that at least ten times I am in no way, shape, or form trying to let W off of the hook. I am just saying that W could not have sent those troops (at least in theory) without Kerry's support and the support of others. So, yes, some of the blame must fall on Kerry. How could it not

[dissention]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

Agreed that any discussion of Kerry's wrongs is not relevant to W's bad acts. I think I have said that at least ten times I am in no way, shape, or form trying to let W off of the hook. I am just saying that W could not have sent those troops (at least in theory) without Kerry's support and the support of others. So, yes, some of the blame must fall on Kerry. How could it not

Once again, I don't see it that way.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by The Tower

Kerry cannot be blamed for the current situation in Iraq. Kerry (like the rest of the world) was LIED TO about Iraq. Kerry based his decisions on LIES from the Bush administration.

What Kerry supported did not happen. Bush LIED to get the country to support his aggression and then pulled the old "bait and switch". You cannot hold Kerry responsible for any of it.

I don't think you're excusing Dubya, I just think you're trying to dilute the blame to include others. However, this whole Iraq thing started, debuted, and acted all because of the Bush admin. It would have never even happened except for the fact that he stole the election.

So, in 1998, when Kerry supported a bill that called for Clinton to use force against Iraq to force SH to comply with the UN inspectors and to prove that he had destroyed his WMD that was all the fault of W, then the Gov. of Texas. Then, on his website, Kerry says he did not object to the war, just the W did it - primarily not gettting the entire world on our side (he does not explain how he would have done this mind you). So, you excuse the fact that Kerry via his vote allowed W to go to war. I mean should we excuse Kerry for that just because he is a Democrat. Because if we do that, then we have to excuse the Republican Congressmen and women who did the same I mean why does the exoneration apply only to Kerry. I just do not get it.

[dissention]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

So, in 1998, when Kerry supported a bill that called for Clinton to use force against Iraq to force SH to comply with the UN inspectors and to prove that he had destroyed his WMD that was all the fault of W, then the Gov. of Texas.

No, of course not. Shrub was too busy mocking death row inmates, refuting the facts about the level of poverty in his own state, and reading the philosophy of a certain Jesus Christ.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by dissention

Once again, I don't see it that way.

So, you excuse Kerry for voting to allow W to go to war and Kerry's 1998 call for Clinton to go to war. With all due respect - foul

I mean at least I am willing to say, Kerry did what he had to to survive politically and who cares. He is still better than Bush and the Christian Coalition any day. I know my excusing Kerry is hypoctitical. But, I am one for it and I do not care who knows it Moreover, I will vote for the warmongering Kerry because he at least in theory is not trying to establish a Theocracy.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by dissention

No, of course not. Shrub was too busy mocking death row inmates, refuting the facts about the level of poverty in his own state, and reading the philosophy of a certain Jesus Christ.

Agreed, but that is rank SPIN so - I cry FOUL and state please driectly address the point!!!!