Go back
I don't know what to think.

I don't know what to think.

Debates

l

Joined
18 Aug 06
Moves
43663
Clock
15 Aug 07
Vote Up
Vote Down

What do you guys think about US democrats saying that good news in Iraq is bad for them? How can we expect progress in the US congress, where power is all that matters, if it means that one party must lose face over good outcomes?

F

Joined
28 Oct 05
Moves
34587
Clock
17 Aug 07
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by lepomis
What do you guys think about US democrats saying that good news in Iraq is bad for them? How can we expect progress in the US congress, where power is all that matters, if it means that one party must lose face over good outcomes?
I don't know what to think either. But if I did, I am sure it would be about something other than what you have suggested above.

AThousandYoung
1st Dan TKD Kukkiwon

tinyurl.com/2te6yzdu

Joined
23 Aug 04
Moves
26756
Clock
17 Aug 07
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by lepomis
What do you guys think about US democrats saying that good news in Iraq is bad for them? How can we expect progress in the US congress, where power is all that matters, if it means that one party must lose face over good outcomes?
Got a link?

dsR

Big D

Joined
13 Dec 05
Moves
26380
Clock
17 Aug 07
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by lepomis
What do you guys think about US democrats saying that good news in Iraq is bad for them? How can we expect progress in the US congress, where power is all that matters, if it means that one party must lose face over good outcomes?
It's really pretty simple: The Democrats are the party that advocates surrender and the Republicans are the party that wants to win in Iraq. In the old days, many in the Democratic leadership, as well as Sean Penn, would have been tried and hung for sedition. For the life of me, I don't understand why President Bush uses kid gloves on the enemies of the United States. These are dangerous people that need a very big book thrown at them.

F

Joined
28 Oct 05
Moves
34587
Clock
17 Aug 07
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by der schwarze Ritter
It's really pretty simple: The Democrats are the party that advocates surrender and the Republicans are the party that wants to win in Iraq. In the old days, many in the Democratic leadership, as well as Sean Penn, would have been tried and hung for sedition. For the life of me, I don't understand why President Bush uses kid gloves on the enemies of the United States. These are dangerous people that need a very big book thrown at them.
What is the point of a post like this? Are you some kind of clumsy satirist, ridiculing the views you espouse?

dsR

Big D

Joined
13 Dec 05
Moves
26380
Clock
17 Aug 07
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by FMF
What is the point of a post like this? Are you some kind of clumsy satirist, ridiculing the views you espouse?
No. However, I suspect that for all your traipsing around the world, you remain very ignorant of the laws, history and culture of the United States. Everything I said is true – the Democrats are the party of surrender while the Republicans want to win in Iraq. What's more, people like Nancy Pelosi, the highest ranking Democrat, is guilty of sedition. When she visited Syria to conduct her own foreign diplomacy, she violated many of our laws. Even worse, she sent our enemies the mixed message that there are two foreign policies: one for the President and one for the Democrats. The president would have been fully justified in having her brought up on charges of sedition.

AThousandYoung
1st Dan TKD Kukkiwon

tinyurl.com/2te6yzdu

Joined
23 Aug 04
Moves
26756
Clock
17 Aug 07
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by der schwarze Ritter
It's really pretty simple: The Democrats are the party that advocates surrender and the Republicans are the party that wants to win in Iraq. In the old days, many in the Democratic leadership, as well as Sean Penn, would have been tried and hung for sedition. For the life of me, I don't understand why President Bush uses kid gloves on the enemies of the United States. These are dangerous people that need a very big book thrown at them.
Surrender of what? To who?

We don't own Iraq, so we can't surrender it. We have no enemy who can surrender; we just have harassment from irregulars.

u
The So Fist

Voice of Reason

Joined
28 Mar 06
Moves
9908
Clock
17 Aug 07
2 edits
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by lepomis
What do you guys think about US democrats saying that good news in Iraq is bad for them? How can we expect progress in the US congress, where power is all that matters, if it means that one party must lose face over good outcomes?
The point, Mr. Pyle, is that the American voter is thought of, both within US political circles and by the rest of the world in general, as idiots.

The thinking goes that the typical American voter only looks at outcomes of decisions rather than the relative merit of the decision itself.

Americans will judge Iraq by how many of your troops are killed rather than by whether or not going there in the first place was the right thing to do. Americans tend to take a wait and see approach to decisions made by their leaders before they make up their mind. In essence, the outcome of the event makes it easy for Americans to make up their mind so they don't have to think too hard.

"Thousands of troop deaths? No end in sight? More terrorists now than before? Ok, uh bad decision then!"

"Violence starting to end? Troops coming home? No more terrorists? Ok, uh good decision then!"

Americans can't seem to judge a decision at the beginning to figure out if it was the right thing to do even if it turned out badly, or if it was the wrong thing to do even if it turned out ok.

For Americans, the ends justify the means but for most of the rest of the western world the Means justify the Ends....

So if the war goes well, Americans vote Republican...if the war goes badly, Americans vote Democrat next time.

AThousandYoung
1st Dan TKD Kukkiwon

tinyurl.com/2te6yzdu

Joined
23 Aug 04
Moves
26756
Clock
17 Aug 07
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by lepomis
What do you guys think about US democrats saying that good news in Iraq is bad for them? How can we expect progress in the US congress, where power is all that matters, if it means that one party must lose face over good outcomes?
I suspect slander. I've seen no evidence that that comment was ever made.

M
Steamin transies

Joined
22 Nov 06
Moves
3265
Clock
17 Aug 07
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
I suspect slander. I've seen no evidence that that comment was ever made.
It's not slander. It's out there. Seek and ye shall find.

u
The So Fist

Voice of Reason

Joined
28 Mar 06
Moves
9908
Clock
17 Aug 07
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
I suspect slander. I've seen no evidence that that comment was ever made.
It's true and it's not a bad thing. It's just stating the obvious. Read my previous post for the explanation.

AThousandYoung
1st Dan TKD Kukkiwon

tinyurl.com/2te6yzdu

Joined
23 Aug 04
Moves
26756
Clock
17 Aug 07
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by uzless
It's true and it's not a bad thing. It's just stating the obvious. Read my previous post for the explanation.
I'd rather read the original comment first.

u
The So Fist

Voice of Reason

Joined
28 Mar 06
Moves
9908
Clock
17 Aug 07
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
I'd rather read the original comment first.
It's a behind closed doors thing..."worst kept secret in washington" type thing. Be hard pressed to hear a politician actually say it but you might hear a TV talking head throw it out there.

AThousandYoung
1st Dan TKD Kukkiwon

tinyurl.com/2te6yzdu

Joined
23 Aug 04
Moves
26756
Clock
17 Aug 07
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by uzless
It's a behind closed doors thing..."worst kept secret in washington" type thing. Be hard pressed to hear a politician actually say it but you might hear a TV talking head throw it out there.
So this accusation cannot be supported with fact?

Slander.

u
The So Fist

Voice of Reason

Joined
28 Mar 06
Moves
9908
Clock
17 Aug 07
2 edits
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
So this accusation cannot be supported with fact?

Slander.
come on man, it's same as when a sitting president who has a low approval rating and all the TV pundits start musing about a potential war on a country to raise his approval rating.

They all said the same thing when Bush was thinking of attacking Iraq. You'd never hear a politician say war was good for their party but you def hear the TV guys talk about it.

I'd be surprised if a Democrat actually said it, and it'd be interesting to see if lepomis can actually post it because I doubt anyone did. But it doesn't take away from the fact that both Dems and Rep's know it to be true because it is true!

I'd actually give the Dems some credit for saying it because it's only stating the obvious....although it's not politically wise to admit such a thing in the US.

The yanks seem to be "shocked, SHOCKED by the obviousness of the truth in that statement" 😉

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.