I've been very clear about what I dislike about Dubya and I refer to the acts specifically. That isn't hate. I was actually fairly neutral on him when he first took office, since I had a low opinion of Gore. Dubya has had his shot and I'm not impressed by the results. Some think he's done great, but he's failed on most measures I have. If his policies were actually successful at fulfilling their objectives I wouldn't be so down on him.Originally Posted by Gawain of Orkeny
You said in the other thread that Clinton had supported AQ etc. by supporting Kosovo. It makes no more sense than the Afghan arguments where again our support was being used against the Soviet occupation. There is no conflict in the two objectives, since both were intended to stop an aggressor. Now you are throwing in the recent Afghan invasion, which is not relevant. We weren't supporting terror in Kosovo, we were stopping genocide. I find that far easier to defend than the Iraq War which while I feel was justified for other reasons, was certainly not justified for the reasons given by the commander in chief.
As for being a "Master Debator." I'm not here to win points for a debate squad. If I wanted to do that I could go play bounce the ball with Pindar in that other thread that is going on forever. I leave a thread when I feel it is stale (and this one was headed there in hurry.) I don't ever expect to get in the last word with our resident right wing, nor do I feel I have some obligation to respond to every single question or comment posed. I do however have a huge problem with the absolute spew coming from the conservative side of the political world at the moment, and I'll call it as I see it. Not that yellow journalism doesn't come from the other side, I dismiss it just as readily. However, the net is just swimming with silly conservative propaganda anymore and usually I turn up more of that than the other extreme when I'm doing searches. It is annoying trying to find something neutral wading through that flotsam.
Bookmarks