Bush Cracks Jokes, Dems Not Amused

[Cleon]

A. Believe WMD were the only reason we went to Iraq
B. The president (probably knowingly) misled us into the war based on the ficititious WMD

Sorry, I forgot, we went to Iraq to "liberate the Iraqi people." After all, that's what Our Fearless Leader kept talking about prior to the invasion. He kept harping on the need to liberate Iraq, he didn't even mention the idea that Iraq had WMD or might've posed a threat to the US.

 

[hgc]

Personally I'm not offended. I'm just happy that this'll knock a few more undecideds over to Kerry. And that this goes to show that the vaunted Rove-team are incredibly out of touch. I mean Dole-out-of-touch. They're toast!

 

[TillEulenspiegel]

I figured out why this is so offensive to some people. You have to realize there are certain political woo-woos who:

A. Believe WMD were the only reason we went to Iraq
B. The president (probably knowingly) misled us into the war based on the ficititious WMD

edited post

The only reason ( with mayo on the side ) given by President Bush was the Immediate/gathering/imminent/etc. Threat from Iraq .

He did site background violations of the cease fire agreement , but the presentation by the administration was WMD.
I would be surprised in fact to find many people who DO believe that the WMD argument was correct, most assign it to it's putrid grave of political spin.

The president DID in fact give false reasons, knowingly, for the war. You are one of the few unfortunate souls..umm believers in GII, who think other wise.

You remind me of all people who's position will not be derailed by fact. You might as well be a creationist or a religious zealot or a fan of cold fusion. You continually try to deflect fact by the embrace of your political position.

You are not a skeptic , nor are you open to learning. Perhaps You should join a right wing political board and revel in the adoration of Your fellows as to their assent to Your position.

 

[corplinx]

You remind me of all people who's position will not be derailed by fact. You might as well be a creationist or a religious zealot or a fan of cold fusion. You continually try to deflect fact by the embrace of your political position.

You are not a skeptic , nor are you open to learning. Perhaps You should join a right wing political board and revel in the adoration of Your fellows as to their assent to Your position.

You remind me of all people who's position will not be derailed by fact. You might as well be a creationist or a religious zealot or a fan of cold fusion. You continually try to deflect fact by the embrace of your political position.

You are not a skeptic , nor are you open to learning. Perhaps You should join a left wing political board and revel in the adoration of Your fellows as to their assent to Your position.

There, that was easy wasn't it. A good thoughtless way to reply. If you have something of substance to post, please do, but don't waste my time playing the "your not a skeptic, im not wearing blinders but you are" game.

Grow up man.

 

[Silicon]

There, that was easy wasn't it. A good thoughtless way to reply. If you have something of substance to post, please do, but don't waste my time playing the "your not a skeptic, im not wearing blinders but you are" game.

Hmm, it seems you didn't respond to the first part of his post, the one where he actually did post something of substance.

The only reason ( with mayo on the side ) given by President Bush was the Immediate/gathering/imminent/etc. Threat from Iraq .

He did site background violations of the cease fire agreement , but the presentation by the administration was WMD.

And it was you who first stated that basically everyone who didn't agree with you is a left-leaning woo-woo when you posted:

I figured out why this is so offensive to some people. You have to realize there are certain political woo-woos who:

A. Believe WMD were the only reason we went to Iraq
B. The president (probably knowingly) misled us into the war based on the ficititious WMD

Who's a worse player of the "I'm unbiased, you're a woo-woo/non-skeptic" game? Between the two of you, I can't tell.

 

[Theodore Kurita]

You remind me of all people who's position will not be derailed by fact. You might as well be a creationist or a religious zealot or a fan of cold fusion. You continually try to deflect fact by the embrace of your political position.

You are not a skeptic , nor are you open to learning. Perhaps You should join a left wing political board and revel in the adoration of Your fellows as to their assent to Your position.

There, that was easy wasn't it. A good thoughtless way to reply. If you have something of substance to post, please do, but don't waste my time playing the "your not a skeptic, im not wearing blinders but you are" game.

Grow up man.

Here is a hint corplinx...

You are NOT addressing what TillEulenspiegel says in the begenning of his comments.


In other words, you are pulling and ad hominem.


Nice job wise@ss.

 

[corplinx]

Here is a hint corplinx...

You are NOT addressing what TillEulenspiegel says in the begenning of his comments.

All he did was state an opinion. Then he launched ad hominems at me.


I'll address his claims and even concede his point with proper evidence. For evidence, if he presents a statistic by a reliable research group showing the amount of various arguements then that is good evidence. Showing a list of moveon.org or salon compiled quotes is not evidence.

As for me saying that people who think Bush deliberately misled the public are woo-woos, I will stand by it since it is up to them to provide evidence. They are as much woo-woos as republicans who claimed Clinton timed military endeavors to deflect scandals.

While both claims might be true, there is simply no evidence. Therefore it not a skeptical point view to buy these points of view.

The fact that I am being ganged up on by three of you in this thread doesn't make me feel any less right about demanding evidence to support your claims.

 

[Troll]

hgc said it would kick some undecideds to Kerry. I wouldn't bet on that. Around these parts many were talking about how the man had a sense of humor about himself and how it was a breath of fresh air.

To freak out about this joke about himself is really just a display of how small some people can be. I'm ashamed to know anyone that would cast a vote for anyone that would make a huge deal of this. Seriously, even if the person is of the same party and feels it could cause an issue for Bush.

I don't want any more petty politicians. I want real people with a real life and a sense of priorities and a true feeling for the job, not just a desire for the job. This is petty.

And on a personal note? I laughed my ass off at that particular joke. and only an utter fool is going to come in here and say something moronic like "So you laugh at the death of soldiers" or "that I take death lightly" because I laughed at the joke.

 

[tamiO]

Better to have someone else make that joke, and have the president politely laugh, if you ask me.

Exactly. I laughed occasionally; but really, it seems that Republicans aren't as quick witted as Democrats.

 

[TillEulenspiegel]

Corpslinx:"

A. Believe WMD were the only reason we went to Iraq
B. The president (probably knowingly) misled us into the war based on the ficititious WMD"

Me: "The president DID in fact give false reasons, knowingly, for the war. You are one of the few unfortunate souls..umm believers in GII, who think other wise."

I will not repeat here the copious evidence that the reasons given were based of false and pruned evidence that has been shown on so many threads and boards that only a naive or deluded individual would think otherwise.

Corpslinx : "As for me saying that people who think Bush deliberately misled the public are woo-woos, I will stand by it since it is up to them to provide evidence. They are as much woo-woos as republicans who claimed Clinton timed military endeavors to deflect scandals."

Actually thats not how argument works. If you make a statement , You are responcible to prove the case, not others to dis-prove Your thesis.

"While both claims might be true, there is simply no evidence. Therefore it not a skeptical point view to buy these points of view. "

I beg to differ . There is a world of evidence that G.Bush engaged in obfuscation and that public spectacle has been ongoing since before the war. You are a parrot, a mimic of people who craft and spin specious argument to present the best and most benign case to the gullible public with carefully crafted language and reinforcing metaphors of G.Bush's benevolent policies.

A skeptic takes claims presented and subjects them to harsh scrutiny, not one who has a position and daily regurgitates the standard line.

One only has to look to Your past posts to get a sense of Your espoused political detachment.
I Stand by my analysis.

 

[billydkid]

I'm not

My thoughts:

1. I'm pretty left leaning, and my reaction was that he gets a pass on this. An unscientific poll of my co-workers suggests they think otherwise, including those who gave me funny looks for saying it was a bad idea to invade Iraq. But geez, it's the Press Club dinner, which has a certain history and....

2. Hmmm. The Press Club dinner. What goes there, stays there. Kinda like Vegas. Or, if you prefer, kind of like White House background press briefings.

3. Imagine. Just imagine, if Clinton had made this joke.

I'm not left leaning at all and I thought Bushes "joke" was sickening. I think he is a sickening person. He is absolutely representative of everything about America that the rest of the world hates.





I still say it's no big deal. I'm perfectly comfortable attacking Bush on his policies, rather than his comedy.

 

[Crossbow]

Anyone remember some months and a couple hundred dead American soldiers ago when Bush told the world to "Bring it on!"?

Up until now, I thought that was about the most irresponsible thing he ever said.

 

[Roadtoad]

My son was in the Gulf.

I have friends in the Gulf.

I have friends who are going to the Gulf.

I have friends who are back from the Gulf.

I have friends who died in the Gulf.

This is not funny. It will NEVER be funny.

And it was a damned irresponsible thing for Bush to pull.

I never thought I would say this about any sitting president, but he's a fumb duck.

 

[Troll]

My son was in the Gulf.

I have friends in the Gulf.

I have friends who are going to the Gulf.

I have friends who are back from the Gulf.

I have friends who died in the Gulf.

This is not funny. It will NEVER be funny.

And it was a damned irresponsible thing for Bush to pull.

I never thought I would say this about any sitting president, but he's a fumb duck.

I have no son but a few cousins are there.

For the rest of your supposed reasons for validating your dislike, "ditto". And you know what? I still think it was a funny joke. And I went to the first war there and I had friends die there and I had to help with the identification and moving of some of the dead and we still had a sense of humor.

 

[Troll]

3. Imagine. Just imagine, if Clinton had made this joke.

I admit, I would have been shocked if Clinton had made the joke. For one it would have meant the guy was capable of laughing at himself and not the people that bought his normal crap. The other reason would have been because he had us spread thin enough already and to have had Kerry and others allow him to have us in Iraq as well would have surprised the hell out me.

 

[demon]

Wonder if that "Little Ali" guy who lost both his arms and his family because of the WMD lies would see the funny side of the champagne bomber`s humour.

 

[Mr Manifesto]

Wonder if that "Little Ali" guy who lost both his arms and his family because of the WMD lies would see the funny side of the champagne bomber`s humour.

Maybe not, but if OBL is still alive he may well be rolling in a cave laughing his @$$ off.

 

[Troll]

Wonder if that "Little Ali" guy who lost both his arms and his family because of the WMD lies would see the funny side of the champagne bomber`s humour.

don't know. I don't speak for him either. do I have sympathy for him? Yes. does that mean I therefore must dislike certain types of jokes or humor? Hardly.

There's sympathy and remorse and then there's just pathetic.

 

[Roadtoad]

I have no son but a few cousins are there.

For the rest of your supposed reasons for validating your dislike, "ditto". And you know what? I still think it was a funny joke. And I went to the first war there and I had friends die there and I had to help with the identification and moving of some of the dead and we still had a sense of humor.

First of all, thank you for your service to the Nation. I respect and admire that, and thank you for it.

But, I still don't find it funny. There are other ways for the President to have gotten a laugh involving the search for WMDs.

I understand gallows humor. My son tells me a lot about this sort of thing, as does my younger son who's training to become a firefighter. (I've got four altogether.) Believe me, when you're trying to keep a fellow driver who's been injured on the job awake and aware of what's going on around him so the paramedics can help him, you can come up with some genuinely twisted jokes. It breaks the tension, and makes things a little more bearable.

This wasn't what it was about. I'm sorry, Troll, but I guess we can agree to disagree.

 

[demon]

Troll:
"There's sympathy and remorse and then there's just pathetic."

I don`t get your meaning here...I`d like to if you care to elaborate.