An Apology Owed

But considering who owes it, it's virtually certain not to come:

_________________________________

Lucky

Wed Jan-05-05 12:01 AM

Charter member

5127 posts

#11793, "RE: Bush Losing Ground"

In response to Reply # 0

Intersting, of course, that the groundwork is clearly being laid to postpone the elections in Iraq. Anyone want to bet on it?

__________________________________

This happens over and over here. People come and make the most extreme and absurd accusations about George Bush - that he's going to cause a terrorist attack in the U.S. before the election to ensure that he wins; that he's going to force Cheney off the ticket to appoint someone more popular; that he would declare a State of National Emergency and martial law and cancel the U.S. elections, etc. etc.

And then when it doesn't happen, the hysterical, vicious predictors just slink away, never ackonwledging the error and baselessness of their accusations, instead just moving onto the next one.

That's what Lucky is about to do. But his accusation here - made a mere 3 weeks ago - was so flatly and undeniably wrong that it served nicely to illustrate this behavior.

I say its time for an apology. Its time for the chickenhawks to apologize to the soldiers and their families. The soldiers who they sent to die and to be maimed for them.

RE: Bush Apologists

Apologize to whom? You and your little parrot?

And, for what? Do you seriously think that the Pentagon didn't make contingency plans to postpone the election? Just because it happened doesn't mean they only prepared for one course.

>...People come and make the most extreme and absurd accusations about George Bush - that he's going to cause a terrorist attack in the U.S. before the election to ensure that he wins; that he's going to force Cheney off the ticket to appoint someone more popular; that he would declare a State of National Emergency and martial law and cancel the U.S. elections, etc. etc.

Although you have never asked me for an apology, I will admit to being one of those people that discussed the possibility of Cheney being replaced. I also thought terrorist attacks may disrupt our elections. Although I don't recall talking on this board about a national state of emergency, I will admit I wouldn't have been surprised if Bush had done it.

I openly admit that some of my statements have been proved wrong. Thank goodness we didn't experience terrorism with our elections. I very happy that Bush didn't suspend or postpone our voting.

But, should I apologize for discussing my feelings and beliefs? Hell No!! If discussions are done in a civil manner and don't include name-calling and personal attacks, then people have nothing to apologize for - especially to you (unless you really "W" hiding behind your handle).

I'll admit I was wrong but I do not apologize for being involved in democracy!

RE: Returned Item

You would know something about chickenhawks, wouldn't you?

>I say its time for an apology. Its time for the chickenhawks

>to apologize to the soldiers and their families. The soldiers

>who they sent to die and to be maimed for them.

So is it also time for Franklin Roosevelt to apologize to the soliders who he sent to die and be maimed in World War 2?

And is it also time for Woodrow Wilson to apologize to the soliders who he sent to die and be maimed in World War 1?

And is it also time for Abraham Lincoln to apologize to the soliders who he sent to die and be maimed in the Civil War?

And is it also time for Bill Clinton to apologize to the soliders who he sent to die and be maimed in Somolia and the Balkans?

And how funny that people like you think that you are standing up for soliders when you attack George Bush, even though the military and their families overwhelmingly supported George Bush - in two straight elections. Doesn't the irony of that disturb you?

>Although you have never asked me for an apology, I will admit

>to being one of those people that discussed the possibility of

>Cheney being replaced.

I recall people here - and lots of other places - not merely "discussing the possibility" of Cheney being replaced - I recall people proclaiming that it would happen - just like they proclaimed Bush would launch a pre-election terrorist attack on the U.S. and/or declare martial law and cancel the election.

There is a big difference between "discussing the possibility" that something will happen, as you so neutrally phrase it, and accusing someone of being so evil that they will engage in nefarious and morally indefenisble acts. I suppose you're to be commended for admitting that you did the former, but I'd like to know how come we never hear from the people who do the latter and then turn out to be so wrong.

>I openly admit that some of my statements have been proved

>wrong.

There - that's not so hard, was it? Too bad so few people here are capable of doing that, including Lucky, as you see from his rationalizations in this thread (he was only saying that the Pentagon had "contigency plans" to cancel the elections - not that they would! LOL!!)

Thank goodness we didn't experience terrorism with our

>elections. I very happy that Bush didn't suspend or postpone

>our voting.

And the fact that you've been wrong so many times in making accusations against Bush - doesn't that give you pause the next time you to go make them?

>But, should I apologize for discussing my feelings and

>beliefs? Hell No!! If discussions are done in a civil

>manner and don't include name-calling and personal attacks,

>then people have nothing to apologize for - especially to you

>(unless you really "W" hiding behind your handle).

Maybe we were just raised differently. I was taught that if you run around publicly accusing someone of doing evil and destructive things, and it turns out that you're wrong, then you owe that person an apology.

>Maybe we were just raised differently. I was taught that if you run around publicly accusing someone of doing evil and destructive things, and it turns out that you're wrong, then you owe that person an apology.

If I had accused someone of doing evil and destructive things then I should apologize. But I merely participated in a discussion - a logical, level-headed discussion.

Perhaps that's something you should try also. ;-)

I have nothing to apologize for.

RE: Returned Item

Et tu, Lucke? Et tu?

Dubya's Zippity Do-Dah Day

Dubya's Zippity Do-Dah Day

Posted by James Wolcott

At NRO's Corner, Kathryn Jean Lopez is impressed by the endorphin surge President Bush displayed during his press conference today.

"I only saw parts of it so I'm not going to be particularly helpful in relaying specifics--but, wow was he in a good mood. You almost get the impression he enjoys doing these now.

Posted at 11:14 AM"

"31 DIE [KJL]

in a Marine helicopter crash in Iraq.

Posted at 09:43 AM

"FYI [KJL]

W is holding a press conference at 10 a.m.

Posted at 09:39 AM"

Ponder that a moment. The White House announces a press conference in the morning. After the announcement comes the news that 31 Americans died in a chopper crash in Iraq (6 others died today in seperate incidents). The president takes the podium fresh with the knowledge of that tragedy--and radiates a cheerful disposition bantering with the press about senior citizens and their faulty memories. She can't see something scarily wrong with that? She doesn't spot some sort of emotional disturbance or disconnect? Imagine if Bill Clinton had been chirpy and chipper having just received the news of 31 soldiers dying in the theater of combat--Rush Limbaugh would have devoted three hours to it, and Fox News would have dragged Dick Morris out of the all-you-can-eat buffet for his "expert analysis."

When Bush did address the soldiers' deaths, he said that we "weep and mourn" when Americans die, but as he was saying it his hand was flatly smacking downwards for emphasis, as if he were pounding the table during the business meeting, refusing to pay a lot for a muffler. The steady beat of his hand was at odds with the sentiments he was expressing--he didn't look or sound the least bit mournful or sombre. And why should he? Death doesn't seem to be a bringdown for him. There isn't the slightest evidence that he experiences the anguish LBJ did as casualties mounted in Vietnam. His record as chief executioner in Texas is of a man for whom the death of another is an administrative detail, a power exercise. As Sister Helen Prejean wrote in The New York Review of Books:

"As governor, Bush certainly did not stand apart in his routine refusal to deny clemency to death row petitioners, but what does set him apart is the sheer number of executions over which he...presided. Callous indifference to human suffering may also set Bush apart. He may be the only government official to mock a condemned person's plea for mercy [Karla Faye Tucker's], then lie about it afterward, claiming humane feelings he never felt. On the contrary, it seems that Bush is comfortable with using violent solutions to solve troublesome social and political realities."

Comfortable, hell, he's downright enthusiastic about it. He's so cocky now that he can't even fake a semblance of sorrow after hearing news that would have made most presidents turn ashen.

01.26.05 6:13PM

http://jameswolcott.com/archives/2005/01/dubyas_zippity.php

Why would one owe an apology in this case? There was nothing unreasonable about suggesting that the elections might be delayed. Nothing sinister in it either. If security could not be maintained, then it would make sense not to subject Iraqis to slaughter at the hand of terrorists. OBVIOUSLY, they were able to maintain a decent amount of security so that the election could take place. One might owe some money for being on the wrong side of a bet, but an apology? Nah. Doug is as delusional as his Commander-in-Chimp.

>I was taught that if

>you run around publicly accusing someone

Doug, how come, in your world, everyone is constantly "running around" doing things? Do you never see people walking?

I have to say, Doug69, what has happened in Iraq is a miracle! Millions turned out to vote, no matter what the possible threat might've been. Although you'd like to give Bush the kudos, I think it's the Iraqi people that deserve congratulations. Despite the Hell they've been put through, they are eager to exercise their new found rights to vote.

And, if they happen to vote for a pro-American government, I don't think it's Bush that deserves the praise. I think it's the American soldier who shared his food and medical supplies with needy Iraqis, the worker who brought electricity to a war-wrecked town that deserves the attention. John and Jane Omaha strike again.

It was a rash and questionable invasion, and the outcome of our action is not decided with this election.

It may take a few years to see what really happens in Iraq. It probably won't all come up roses, but, it may not all turn to shit either.

Word has it that Bush has Iran on his agenda next. Liberation? Invasion? Only history will tell (and sometimes even history lies.).

Trix

>Word has it that Bush has Iran on his agenda next. Liberation? Invasion? Only history will tell (and sometimes even history lies).

Trix,

Great observation, a reasonable statement and a fair question. I sincerely feel we have enough on our plate with Iraq and would only be spread more thin if we take on Iran.

>Doug, how come, in your world, everyone is constantly "running

>around" doing things? Do you never see people walking?

With the histrionics contained in everyone's responses to Doug, I can't imagine any of you walking, let alone trotting or cantering.

Later.

Hit twice. Oh well. With my morning coffee, I'm sprinting a bit myself.

Later.

Very funny, trav. I have decided that I will apologize, but only to you, and, of course, if a Latin guy comes with it!

L-Man

Since your post was in the politics section and you didn't jump up and down and hold your breath, allow me a gift:

http://www.ericblumrich.com/ihr.html

Later.

PS. Latins are always part of the package. Josue is on the agenda soon, and I'll let you know; but each time I think of his name, I think of a sneeze, which makes me think of a head cold, which makes me think of sinusitis, which makes me think of bumps. Hmmmm, maybe he's pnp.

Indeed a special gift. It is perhaps one of the greatest songs/videos of all time! The only thing it lacked was naked Latins, but hey, they will include that in the movie version. At least I hope so...

God bless you Josue!

>... people like you think that you are standing up for soliders when you attack George Bush, even though the military and their families overwhelmingly supported George Bush - in two straight elections<

What other kind of elections are there ? Accept maybe the ones for drag queen of the year :-)

And I agree with Doug about this running about !!! After all what did what did Bush say when ask how he got re-elected ? He said, "I ran"

Yo, I just made that one up...I am a funny fucker, but I lack political savvy thus I cant hang in this conversation. But it does help to edumicate me :-)