kapkomet

I love how everyone thinks that things should have been done a certain way, and what was done is never good enough. That's my point.

QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ Feb 16, 2006 -> 10:46 PM) 10 years ago, I was 18 and more concerned with the latest Britpop CD or catching the Jon Spencer Blues Explosion. Sorry, I wasn't paying more attention - I'll try that the next time a Clinton is in office. Look Rex, it's a mindset. It's a mindset that GWB's s*** HAS to stink worse then Bill Clinton's EVER did - and now, by extention Hillary because of THEIR (yes, THEIR) White House dreams again. At least when BJ Clinton was in office, it was usually a battle of ideas, until the blowjob came along. I've said this a lot on here, that was crap, what the Republicans tried to get him on was baloney and a disgrace. All they had to do was wait and dig a little deeper, as there was refutable proof of some worse doings then Monica (and she was bad), but by then they had burnt so many bridges it didn't matter. Perjury (lying while under oath) is a law that's broken. That's ok. What GWB is doing is saying a mighty "F You" to the Constitution! GET HIM! It's terrible. Partisan bickering is worse and worse and worse, and a lot of it has to do with this thing right here, the (Algore) internet.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Feb 16, 2006 -> 10:36 PM) This is probably a step in the right direction. At least the Administration seems to be working with someone in Congress for this. It's probably going to wind up being worse than I hope, because it looks like the WH only worked it out with 1 Senator, and he's a Republican, which means that just like every other bill the White House decides to shove through Congress, they'll wind up having to slam this through over Democratic opposition which probably could have been avoided had they bothered asking the Democrats what they thought. But that still, of course, doesn't settle the issue of the fact that they seem to have violated the law to run this program before it was legal. And of course, if it truly was legal...why the need to change the law? It's almost as if they don't buy their own B.S. explanations. Because he's trying to reach out to solve the issues and make everyone happy? Oh, but that's not possible. :rolly

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Feb 16, 2006 -> 10:21 PM) Stop it. Seriously. Whenever someone criticizes something anyone anywhere in the current administration does, the GOP'ers here immediately come up with something about a Clinton. It's childish and makes no sense. Are we capable of sticking to an issue here? You know why that happens? Because it was ok for that asshole to do the EXACT same s*** GWB is doing, and it's an OUTRAGE when GWB does something, but the Clintons were "different". It's simply noted to point out the hypocracy of jumping on every negative bandwagon possible about this president. It gets old, and the defense, at least for me, is to point out your own damn party does the same s***. IMO, they're all assholes, current president included. I hate our government as it exists today. I love our country but I hate the political hackery and bulls*** we are subjected to on a daily basis from both sides of the fence. Pick and pick and pick and pick against the current administration, and turn a blind eye to the same bulls*** that was pulled 8-10 years ago, and it's hypocracy at its best. We're just here to remind you that the same crap was pulled - and you all want to change history or forget that any of that happened.

Straight form the "Bush Haters Guide to Bringing Down a White House"... speculate, conspire, keep throwing crap up until something sticks, and then run like hell with it to prove what an evil bunch this White House clan is. That is all.

QUOTE(Felix @ Feb 16, 2006 -> 09:08 PM) I doubt there is something in Texas hunting code, but he's the vice president of the United States. Its not Joe Schmo from around the corner. Anytime something like this happens, its his responsibility to report it right away to the national presses. If he wanted to talk to Whittington's wife and kids first, then thats fine, and he did that. But that doesn't take 18 hours (or however long it was) to do, and it should have been reported to the national press, not just some small newspaper. Why?

QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ Feb 16, 2006 -> 05:08 PM) I feel the same way about Ann Coulter. That's who I was talking about.

QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ Feb 16, 2006 -> 04:49 PM) She's a scream but a flamethrower. Pure and simple. Entertaining though, even though when I listen - I do grimace. I upchuck, but that's ok. I hate that b****.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Feb 16, 2006 -> 02:59 PM) I would second that. Hillary is as far left as her polls tell her to be. There are real honest to goodness liberals in the democrats who actually believe what they say and mean to fight for it, even if it isn't the most popular guy. I have a lot more respect for the Howard Deans of the party, just for that reason. And don't kid yourself, with as far to the right as the White House has been, this is the perfect opportunity for a REAL left wing canditate to emerge from the pack as an alternative. Agreed, and if they stick by their prinicpals and don't go as far left or right as the polls tell them to be, they should get more respect.

I know Ozzie gets ripped for having a big mouth, but you know what? He says it exactly like it is. Ozzie for President.

Happy Birthday to one of the better posters around here...

QUOTE(KipWellsFan @ Feb 15, 2006 -> 11:23 PM) I love the "lets pretend we're angry" machine. Oh my god what Al Gore said is reprehensible!! Wake up people, he didn't say s***! Of course the Wall Street Journal opinion piece didn't include that quote, but of course it included a remarkably credible piece from a blogger named TigerHawk. What the f***. When Bill O'Reilly jumps on something you know it's usually a bunch of crap. The point is any soundbite you use when you talk like this on foreign soil especially will go straight to recruting people to come and kill US. But apparently, it's ok, and he gets a pass. WTF ever.

QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ Feb 15, 2006 -> 09:06 PM) No, but it's no smoking gun either. I don't disagree... but at the same time, it is news to HEAR him say this stuff.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Feb 13, 2006 -> 06:55 PM) There are a few others that no one ever heard of too, that did some really cool stuff. Oh I have. Lord have I... Edit: oh, MC reference forthcoming...

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Feb 15, 2006 -> 09:03 PM) So in other words they're from the mid-90's, when everyone knew that Saddam was hiding things and before the time when we could actually say he was "disarmed"? Yep... dismiss... nothing wrong here... precedence CAN'T be set from past actions... deny deny deny... *sigh*

Wow. Just wow.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Feb 15, 2006 -> 08:11 PM) Would proof of the long-rumored rapes of minors do that? oh come on.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Feb 15, 2006 -> 06:25 PM) See my answer in other said thread. I guess I just refuse to blame the media, who are just doing what all businesses do. I don't blame movie makers for making crappy movies, because people go to them. I don't blame CNN for making Cheney's shooting a top story, because people read it. In fact, on many news sites, that is how stories get listed on the splash page - by number of hits. No it's not... not the only way.

QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ Feb 15, 2006 -> 06:36 PM) Only in this forum can the Vice President shoot a 78 year old man and the media gets blamed. Kap, I know where you are with this, but I can't see why you wouldn't be at least a little concerned that the White House can't see itself fit to notify people when the VP accidentally shoots someone. Sunshine is the best disinfectant. If they'd just said something in the first place - we'd all have laughed and moved on by now. In fact if it wasn't for so many people blasting the media for being upset that they weren't informed about a shooting that didn't even have a police report filed on it for over 24 hours, when it involved the Vice President, we'd have already forgotten about this story. It IS a story, but it's a small story. That's my point. Now that the media is pissed off, it's a HUGE story.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/op-ed/20060...02148-1710r.htm This is absolutely right on the money.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Feb 15, 2006 -> 06:12 PM) Sorry, I thought it was clear why I said most Americans agree. I stated in a different thread (sorry for the confusion) that since people are reading the Cheney articles so avidly, and don't seem to care much about the speech, that people have made a choice. People are eating the Cheney thing up, like it or not. Again, the media services its consumers, like any other business. They publish what will get read. If they don't, they don't survive. Too much competition. And just like I asked in the other thread, who controls what stories people are hearing about? People are spoonfed, boring twits for the most part. The interest generated on the Cheney story is because they are screaming about it the loudest. It's kind of like crying FIRE in a theatre. It gets people's attention, only because they're screaming FIRE the loudest.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Feb 15, 2006 -> 06:08 PM) Anyway, I think the American public has made it a big deal, not the media. The media is just a device. People read what interests them. Obviously, this interests them. Who controls what stories the people hear?

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Feb 15, 2006 -> 05:43 PM) This is about the level of dislike that it takes to make me contribute during a primary battle. Go Cuellar. He's right.

QUOTE(Soxy @ Feb 15, 2006 -> 05:41 PM) I understand that point, and I think it's a good one. I don't think there was anything sinister about not reporting it to the press, but I think it was naive, at best, to think that it wouldn't get picked up. And more than slightly short sighted to think it wouldn't be a big deal when they didn't find out right away. Heck, they could have made some statement up when they did talk about it and say, we didn't release the information out of respect to the victim's family. I would have bought that. Maybe I should get a PR job and quit this grad school nonsense. . . See? We agree! You know they coulda said HIPPA! HIPPA LAWS prevent us from talking about the medical condition of our patient.

QUOTE(AbeFroman @ Feb 15, 2006 -> 05:32 PM) What has made this a big story is the cover-up. Whether you like it or not, many americans (dare I say the majority?) feel that this government is not always forthcoming to the public about its business. Now you can insist that they have always told the truth, but the preponderence of evidence suggests that they have lied about at least some of the issues they have faced during this presidency (plame, wmd, etc.) I also find it interesting that the local sheriff was not allowed to interview Cheney until the following day. Cheney is already not the hallmark of a forthright politician... the whole situation reeks... From what I understand (and this may be wrong) but I think the sheriff's department was ok with interviewing him the next morning because all parties were trying to get the guy (first) stabilized by the medical staff of the VP and then to the hospital. They knew of the facts and basically consented to discuss it the next morning. Again, I don't think there's a story here, no matter how much of one that wants to be made up. That's my point, and the 'media' won't let it go.