Bush sets record-longest vacation in recent history

Status
Not open for further replies.
Charade said:
Didn't we have help during the revolution? Perhaps those people were disappointed with the government we chose and felt like they wasted lives for it.
There is a difference between helping and doing it all yourself. Besides, this war wasn't sold to the American public, congress, and the rest of the world as "assisting the Iraqis in their struggle for freedom." It was sold as a necessary step to protect this country. Spinning it otherwise is nothing more than a blatant lie that is used to divert attention from the fact that we either a) were lied to, or b) massively screwed up.
 
Tigger_Magic said:
Asked and answered, counselor. Next question?

When it comes to Bizarro world answers, I like to make sure it's clear what the person is saying.

So, then your answer is "Yes, if the US imposes basic human rights on the Iraqis, we're no better than Saddam Hussein".
 
Tigger_Magic said:
At least I'm not implying or stating that the lives lost to secure freedom for the people of Iraq are "wasted" or "senseless." If that's something one can be proud of saying or writing, then so be it. Everyone's entitled to their opinion, even ones like these.

I'm neither proud nor ashamed of stating the naked truth. I am ashamed that this travesty has happened in my name, as an American citizen. I am saddened that the young men and women who have died over there have likely died in vain. I am sad that experts are starting to say that the war in Iraq will actually make us less safe, rather than more.

But ashamed of stating the truth ? Only if I hadn't seen it before and had actually voted for the moron that launched this war in the first place. That is certainly something I would be ashamed of.
 
Charade said:
Didn't we have help during the revolution? Perhaps those people were disappointed with the government we chose and felt like they wasted lives for it.
Yes, it is kinda sad. I guess GW and company really mucked up big time. They should have asked England and France and Spain what to do in creating a new government. After all, they should have had some right or say in determining what government we designed/developed.

It seems that some here think that the rights most Americans enjoy today were fait accompli when Cornwallis surrendered to Washington. Sadly, women had to wait for many, many decades to get the same rights as men and it was barely 40 years ago that blacks achieved some level of basic civil rights in this country. Even today, as the bastion of freedom, the US is hardly a perfect role model of freedom. We didn't start out guaranteeing freedom to everyone and somehow we managed to survive.

If Iraq doesn't get it right on the first attempt, they can try again. Look how many times our Constitution has been amended and we've not achieve the guarantee of full freedom for everyone. If after over 225 years we don't have it completely right yet, how can we expect Iraq to do it perfectly on the first attempt?
 

ThAnswr said:
When it comes to Bizarro world answers, I like to make sure it's clear what the person is saying.

So, then your answer is "Yes, if the US imposes basic human rights on the Iraqis, we're no better than Saddam Hussein".
Speaking from ignorance is a dangerous activity, but one you seem to enjoy practicing. I've clearly stated my opinion, which you've chosen to ignore. I see no reason to continue to play parry and thrust with someone who is unwilling to practice what they preach.

That said, my apologies to the CB for helping drag this thread way off-topic. I will bow out of this diversion on this thread, but would happily participate if someone chooses to start it as the topic of a new thread. This one is about President Bush and vacations. Again, sorry for pursuing this interesting, but off-topic diversion.
 
ThAnswr said:
So, then your answer is "Yes, if the US imposes basic human
rights on the Iraqis, we're no better than Saddam Hussein".

I would say yes because there is a difference between people deciding on their own how they want to live and someone else (a dictator like SH) deciding.

You and I may not like it if Iraq turns into a Theocracy but if they decide to, that's their decision. I would be extremely disappointed. I don't like the fact that some people allow themselves (or willingly participate) to be treated in such ways but I don't think that just because we ousted a dictator like SH gives us the right to now force them to have to live a certain way. Hopefully they will ultimately decide that basic human rights transcend religious doctrine.
 
Tigger_Magic said:
Speaking from ignorance is a dangerous activity, but one you seem to enjoy practicing. I've clearly stated my opinion, which you've chosen to ignore. I see no reason to continue to play parry and thrust with someone who is unwilling to practice what they preach.

Just can't bring yourself to give a simple yes or no answer.

I'm done here. I know exactly what you said. I just couldn't believe it.
 
Charade said:
I would say yes because there is a difference between people deciding on their own how they want to live and someone else (a dictator like SH) deciding.

You and I may not like it if Iraq turns into a Theocracy but if they decide to, that's their decision. I would be extremely disappointed. I don't like the fact that some people allow themselves (or willingly participate) to be treated in such ways but I don't think that just because we ousted a dictator like SH gives us the right to now force them to have to live a certain way. Hopefully they will ultimately decide that basic human rights transcend religious doctrine.

I take my hat off to you, John. At least you can answer with a simple yes or no.

So if the ultimate result is going to be whatever the Iraqis decide, including a possible Shiite religious theocracy, why continue in Iraq? Why waste anymore lives? Why not just walk away now with a hearty "it's been nice knowing you, now fight it out among yourselves"?
 
ThAnswr said:
Just can't bring yourself to give a simple yes or no answer.

I'm done here. I know exactly what you said. I just couldn't believe it.
Please see the 2nd paragraph of post #325.
 
auntpolly said:
You don't understand someone trying to make something positive out of a personal tragedy? To use a great sorrow and loss to affect change - so that others might not suffer as she has. It's exactly what I'd do, and what you'd do too -- if it were a cause you believed in.

(hi, I'm back)

I guess it's as simple as that, I don't believe in her cause - the cause being that this war was based on lies and deception, etc, and Bush has killed all those men & women KIAs. I honestly do not think I would politicize my child's death if the circumstances were the same, but still I was very reluctant to criticize her for doing so until, upon further reading I see she's parroting the same stuff the insurgents would as they're killing more troops. How bizarre is that - not just "bring the boys home" but shame on us for destroying Iraq's infrastructure, shame on our moronic foreign policy and our middle east imperialism, and so forth. Eww. That lots of people believe this and speak out publicly about it, doesn't make it right.

ThAnswr said:
You're right and freedom isn't taking women's rights away from them and forcing them back to the middle ages, while at the same time, claiming your're there to liberate them and create a democratic Iraq.

The Shiites cannot choose to impose a theocracy of their own making in Iraq. The political process has gone too far already for that, they have no mechanism for it and would have to impose it by force. Just as we cannot impose a complete set of Western values on an Islamic country. Speaking as someone who finds women wearing hefty bags offensive in any country, I could never prove that following customs (willingly) due to their beliefs is "undemocratic." The fact that it's being debated publicly is a plus.
 
Here is some more on how that piece of slime, Drudge, took some of Cindy Sheehan's comments out of context. Drudge Can't Figure It-Journalist takes aim at Cindy Sheehan instead of U.S. President, Congress
Drudge quotes Sheehan out of context in an obvious attack on her credibility. Readers get the impression that Drudge can't quite figure why Sheehan might be inclined to change her opinion about the president.

Well, for starters, when Sheehan met with Bush in June 2004, she was obviously still in shock from having recently learned of the death of her son. Frankly, that's reason enough for me. But Drudge probably doesn't know what it's like to lose a child—one you have carried inside your body for 9 months—and so maybe he needs another reason.

Bush lied.

Since meeting with president Bush in Seattle, Washington along with the families of around 15 other dead soldiers, Sheehan and the rest of the world learned that the Bush administration lied to us about the reasons for going to war. We have learned that the "facts were being fixed around the policy" thanks to the release of the so-called Downing Street memo—actually minutes of a meeting in which UK officials discussed how the Bush administration was intent on going to war and were fabricating (they used the word "fixed") evidence to support their illegal actions.

The question isn't why did Sheehan's opinion change, if indeed it actually did (and I don't believe it did), but rather, why hasn't everyone's opinion changed? Another question: Why hasn't Congress acted? Why do they cotninue to rubber stamp funding for an illegal war, faced with irrefutable evidence that the Bush administration lied and continues to lie to this day?

That's the question the Drudge Report should be asking.
The fact that the Downing Street Minutes have demonstrated that Bush lied about the reasons for the war in Iraq and fixed the facts and intelligence to justify this war is enough to cause any mother of a fallen solider to become angry. Bush lied and thousands have died as a result of these lies.
 
Charade said:
You and I may not like it if Iraq turns into a Theocracy but if they decide to, that's their decision. I would be extremely disappointed. I don't like the fact that some people allow themselves (or willingly participate) to be treated in such ways but I don't think that just because we ousted a dictator like SH gives us the right to now force them to have to live a certain way. Hopefully they will ultimately decide that basic human rights transcend religious doctrine.
Unbelievable!!! Just what we need...another Iran! You'll have to excuse me for not celebrating, but I'm happy that you're prepared to accept this kind of end to our fight for democracy. What about our planned domino effect of all other regional Arab nations overthrowing their respective governments for democratic governments? Theocracy...let freedom ring!!!!! To be honest, pitifully, I'd rather had Saddam over some sort of Theocracy. At least he kept these religious zealots off the back of Iraqi women.
 
Professor Mouse said:
Here is some more on how that piece of slime, Drudge, took some of Cindy Sheehan's comments out of context. Drudge Can't Figure It-Journalist takes aim at Cindy Sheehan instead of U.S. President, Congress .


Posted a few pages back...

From Drudge and the original story from a year ago.... I report, you decide. :teeth:

PROTESTING SOLDIER MOM CHANGED STORY ON BUSH
Mon Aug 08 2005 10:11:07 ET

The mother of a fallen U.S. soldier who is holding a roadside peace vigil near President Bush's ranch -- has dramatically changed her account about what happened when she met the commander-in-chief last summer!

Cindy Sheehan, 48, of Vacaville, Calif., who last year praised Bush for bringing her family the "gift of happiness," took to the nation's TV outlets this weekend to declare how Bush "killed an indispensable part of our family and humanity."

CINDY 2004

THE REPORTER of Vacaville, CA published an account of Cindy Sheehan's visit with the president at Fort Lewis near Seattle on June 24, 2004:

"'I now know he's sincere about wanting freedom for the Iraqis,' Cindy said after their meeting. 'I know he's sorry and feels some pain for our loss. And I know he's a man of faith.'

"The meeting didn't last long, but in their time with Bush, Cindy spoke about Casey and asked the president to make her son's sacrifice count for something. They also spoke of their faith.

"The trip had one benefit that none of the Sheehans expected.

"For a moment, life returned to the way it was before Casey died. They laughed, joked and bickered playfully as they briefly toured Seattle.

For the first time in 11 weeks, they felt whole again.

"'That was the gift the president gave us, the gift of happiness, of being together,' Cindy said."

CINDY 2005

Sheehan's current comments are a striking departure.

She vowed on Sunday to continue her protest until she can personally ask Bush: "Why did you kill my son?"

In an interview on CNN, she claimed Bush "acted like it was party" when she met him last year.

"It was -- you know, there was a lot of things said. We wanted to use the time for him to know that he killed an indispensable part of our family and humanity. And we wanted him to look at the pictures of Casey.

"He wouldn't look at the pictures of Casey. He didn't even know Casey's name. He came in the room and the very first thing he said is, 'So who are we honoring here?' He didn't even know Casey's name. He didn't want to hear it. He didn't want to hear anything about Casey. He wouldn't even call him 'him' or 'he.' He called him 'your loved one.'

Every time we tried to talk about Casey and how much we missed him, he would change the subject. And he acted like it was a party.

BLITZER: Like a party? I mean...

SHEEHAN: Yes, he came in very jovial, and like we should be happy that he, our son, died for his misguided policies. He didn't even pretend like somebody...

END

On her current media tour, Sheehan has not been asked to explain her twist on Bush; from praise to damnation!

Developing...

Bush, Sheehans share moments
By David Henson/Staff Writer



Since learning in April that their son, Army Spc. Casey Sheehan, had been killed in Iraq, life has been everything but normal for the Sheehan family of Vacaville.
Casey's parents, Cindy and Patrick, as well as their three children, have attended event after event honoring the soldier both locally and abroad, received countless letters of support and fielded questions from reporters across the country.

"That's the way our whole lives have been since April 4," Patrick said. "It's been surreal."

But none of that prepared the family for the message left on their answering machine last week, inviting them to have a face-to-face meeting with President George W. Bush at Fort Lewis near Seattle.

Surreal soon seemed like an understatement, as the Sheehans - one of 17 families who met Thursday with Bush - were whisked in a matter of days to the Army post and given the VIP treatment from the military. But as their meeting with the president approached, the family was faced with a dilemma as to what to say when faced with Casey's commander-in-chief.

"We haven't been happy with the way the war has been handled," Cindy said. "The president has changed his reasons for being over there every time a reason is proven false or an objective reached."

The 10 minutes of face time with the president could have given the family a chance to vent their frustrations or ask Bush some of the difficult questions they have been asking themselves, such as whether Casey's sacrifice would make the world a safer place.

But in the end, the family decided against such talk, deferring to how they believed Casey would have wanted them to act. In addition, Pat noted that Bush wasn't stumping for votes or trying to gain a political edge for the upcoming election.

"We have a lot of respect for the office of the president, and I have a new respect for him because he was sincere and he didn't have to take the time to meet with us," Pat said.

Sincerity was something Cindy had hoped to find in the meeting. Shortly after Casey died, Bush sent the family a form letter expressing his condolences, and Cindy said she felt it was an impersonal gesture.

"I now know he's sincere about wanting freedom for the Iraqis," Cindy said after their meeting. "I know he's sorry and feels some pain for our loss. And I know he's a man of faith."

The meeting didn't last long, but in their time with Bush, Cindy spoke about Casey and asked the president to make her son's sacrifice count for something. They also spoke of their faith.

While meeting with Bush, as well as Sen. John McCain, R-Arizona, was an honor, it was almost a tangent benefit of the trip. The Sheehans said they enjoyed meeting the other families of fallen soldiers, sharing stories, contact information, grief and support.

For some, grief was still visceral and raw, while for others it had melted into the background of their lives, the pain as common as breathing. Cindy said she saw her reflection in the troubled eyes of each.

"It's hard to lose a son," she said. "But we (all) lost a son in the Iraqi war."

The trip had one benefit that none of the Sheehans expected.

For a moment, life returned to the way it was before Casey died. They laughed, joked and bickered playfully as they briefly toured Seattle.

For the first time in 11 weeks, they felt whole again.

"That was the gift the president gave us, the gift of happiness, of being together," Cindy said.

David Henson can be reached at schools@thereporter.com.

Doesn't seem to be too far off to me.
 
Laugh O. Grams said:
Unbelievable!!! Just what we need...another Iran! You'll have to excuse me for not celebrating, but I'm happy that you're prepared to accept this kind of end to our fight for democracy. What about our planned domino effect of all other regional Arab nations overthrowing their respective governments for democratic governments? Theocracy...let freedom ring!!!!! To be honest, pitifully, I'd rather had Saddam over some sort of Theocracy. At least he kept these religious zealots off the back of Iraqi women.

Isn't Iran (despite them messing with nukes) having it's own internal struggle to become more democratic?

So killing thousands and thousands and thousands of his own people is better than women having to wear a scarf?
 
Now that was weird. When I went to post my reply to LOG, I got a dialog box asking to log into www.wdwinfo.com.
 
Charade said:
Isn't Iran (despite them messing with nukes) having it's own internal struggle to become more democratic?

So killing thousands and thousands and thousands of his own people is better than women having to wear a scarf?

Just wearing a scarf?
 
Charade said:
Isn't Iran (despite them messing with nukes) having it's own internal struggle to become more democratic?

So killing thousands and thousands and thousands of his own people is better than women having to wear a scarf?
Make that "was" having an internal struggle until we invaded Iraq, and suddenly, all Iranians lined up behind the far right religious zealots! Nothing like being called one of the axis of evil and then, seeing your next door neighbor being occupied by a group that your country considers infidels to rally the troops.

If you think that the only hazard to women living in such countries as Iran is wearing a scarf, I don't know were to begin. Here's a start: How about women being raped and then, being beheaded for tempting the men who assaulted them? America...bringing theocracy to Middle Eastern counties everywhere...wait, you've already got it...nevermind.
 
Charade said:
But the term "vacation" has a different meaning when it comes to being President. That has been stated over and over again. Do you really think he has removed himself completely from the 24/7 requirement of being President for an entire 5 weeks? If he did that, *I* wouldn't want him to be President anymore. I think he does a great job leading by example. He has spent many many hours with the troops at various locations including Iraq. But alas, according to some, all that is probably only for a photo op. Fake turkey and all.

You'll notice I said working vacation in my quote. Again though the point is that our troops can't come home at night and kiss their kids heads or their wife's cheek at the end of the day. They are at work 24/7 for 12 months and then get 2 weeks leave. I'm not going to feel bad for the President because he may have to work a bit on a 5 week vacation.

~Amanda
 
Status
Not open for further replies.















Receive up to $1,000 in Onboard Credit and a Gift Basket!
That’s right — when you book your Disney Cruise with Dreams Unlimited Travel, you’ll receive incredible shipboard credits to spend during your vacation!
CLICK HERE







New Posts







DIS Facebook DIS youtube DIS Instagram DIS Pinterest DIS Tiktok DIS Twitter

Back
Top