tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1883838569462983439.post8551833464296257465..comments2024-03-18T15:03:58.758-04:00Comments on Progressive Eruptions: BIG DICK CHENEY CHOOSES LIMBAUGH OVER COLIN POWELLShaw Kenawehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08637273000409613497noreply@blogger.comBlogger93125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1883838569462983439.post-63339331197804348602009-05-14T05:41:00.000-04:002009-05-14T05:41:00.000-04:00OK. So Powell is a racist pushing a racist policy ...OK. So Powell is a racist pushing a racist policy (affirmative action). Only a racist would want race as <I>any</I> factor "among many" (or even among any) when it came to judging human beings. There are far worse types of racism than this, but it's still racist.dmarkshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07269773990064736457noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1883838569462983439.post-49296871407432234112009-05-13T15:53:00.000-04:002009-05-13T15:53:00.000-04:00Enough.
Colin Powell isn't a racist pushing Jim C...Enough.<br /><br />Colin Powell isn't a racist pushing Jim Crow. You should be a little more careful on how you use the term.<br /><br />Affirmative action isn't racist.<br /><br />And, for good measure, atheism isn't a religion.<br /><br />Cheers!Arthurstonehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01083956773592540646noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1883838569462983439.post-68110411436197762582009-05-13T15:12:00.000-04:002009-05-13T15:12:00.000-04:00Arthurstone: "I guess you have a difficult time wi...Arthurstone: "I guess you have a difficult time with the 'one factor among many' concept."<br /><br />One racist factor among other factors is still one racist factor. Get rid of the racist factor, and take care of the problem.<br /><br />"Racial discrimination continues to this day and remedies are necessary."<br /><br />We are discussing an example of racial discrimination, and you are on the side supporting it. <br /><br />A policy which blindly injects more racial discrimination is not a remedy. If you want to work toward a remedy, why not focus on individuals who practice or are victimized by actual discrimination?<br /><br />"We as a people have decided to end racial discrimination and affirmative action is a tool (and certainly not the only one) to achieve that end."<br /><br />How can it be a tool to achieve the end when it adds more racial discrimination?<br /><br />As for "We as a people", some states are voting in favor of Civil Rights Initiatives to protect equal rights and reduce racism. Blue states, not red states.<br /><br />"And you should leave phrases like 'Jim Crow' out of this discussion."<br /><br />They belong in the discussion. It is quite appropriate to compare Jm Crow to affirmative action: both are explicit policies of discrimination.<br /><br />"Accusing Colin Powell of being a racist and particularly a segregationist is preposterous."<br /><br />Well, you do have a point there. Affirmative action shares in common with Jim Crow the racism against indivuduals, but AA does not include the segregation aspect. About Powell, it is not a false accusation to point out his racist views. His own words supporting punishing/rewarding people based on their skin color make him racist.<br /><br /><br />James said: "Those attacks on us were AFTER we began our attack on them."<br /><br />The cease-fire terms allowed the no-fly zone patrols. Saddam did not have a right to engage in aggression against them. The attacks and other aggressive acts (flagrant cease-fire violations) were the actions of Saddam Hussein.<br /><br />"We struck first. We officially invaded in March '03, but we started bombing Iraq in June '02."<br /><br />Actually, we had been forced to bomb at other times, as well, during the Clinton years. All in response to Saddam's previous cease-fire violations.<br /><br />"As for funding and hosting terrorists, that was Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan, not Iraq."<br /><br />Sadsam Hussein was funding and hosting several terrorist groups, aside from Al-Qaeda (which he did have positive ties with). The cease-fire terms prohibited any involvement by Saddam with terrorism, at all. <br /><br />"But it wasn't "Clinton" it was NATO and the international community, excluding those with ties to Yugoslavia. "<br /><br />Were you even around then? It was Clinton all the way. who pushed and cajoled the other NATO countries, who resisted the idea.<br /><br />And, unlike Iraq, Serbia had not attacked us or our allies, and unlike Iraq, was not killing Americans through terrorist proxies. The war on Serbia did not fit any of your "planks" of the Bush Doctrine either, but it is the most recent example of the US attacking a country that never attacked it or its allies.<br /><br />"The Bush doctrine is comprised of many parts"<br /><br />None of which mention specificaly fighting back against countries which have attacked us (Iraq and Afghanistan).<br />"neo-conservatism, which pushes for unilateral military responses globablly to protect the United States' interests, including pre-emption."<br /><br />Well, since that did not happen during the Bush years (large alliances fighting back against attackers precludes "unilateral" and "pre-emptive", it is some evidence of how powerless Neoconservatives are and were.dmarkshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07269773990064736457noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1883838569462983439.post-74598035214915590242009-05-13T12:52:00.000-04:002009-05-13T12:52:00.000-04:00James: Pre-emption did not occur during the Bush a...<I>James: Pre-emption did not occur during the Bush administration. In the period leading up to the large-scale retalation in 2003, Saddam had ordered many attacks on US and UK patrols in the no-fly zones. He was also funding, hosting, and encouraging terrorists which were killing Americans, and also Israelis. So, historical fact, did "attack us" and at least two allies.</I>Those attacks on us were AFTER we began our attack on them. We struck first. We officially invaded in March '03, but we started bombing Iraq in June '02.<br />As for funding and hosting terrorists, that was Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan, not Iraq. The last time Iraq was an actual threat to us was during the Persian Gulf War during the first Bush administration.<br /><br /><I>The most recent example of the "Bush Doctrine" as you describe it (attacking a country that did not attack us) occured during the Clinton Administration, when Bill Clinton ordered us to war against Serbia. Serbia had not attacked the US in any way, nor was it attacking any of our allies, nor was it killing Americans by proxy through its support of terrorist organizations.</I>1st of all: Serbia was already in a civil war, between the Serbs and the KLA. This was much more like the Persian Gulf, where we intervened in an existing conflict. But it wasn't "Clinton" it was NATO and the international community, excluding those with ties to Yugoslavia. <br /><br />2nd: The Bush doctrine is comprised of many parts:<br />I) The US can attack countries that harbor terrorists. (Afghanistan)<br />II) The US can depose regimes that pose a potential future risk to the US or its allies.<br />(Iraq).<br />III) The US can install democracy around the world to combat terrorism. (Iraq).<br /><br />From September 17, 2002, in the <I>National Security Strategy of the United States</I> :<br /><br />"The security environment confronting the United States today is radically different from what we have faced before. Yet the first duty of the United States Government remains what it always has been: to protect the American people and American interests. It is an enduring American principle that this duty obligates the government to <B>anticipate</B> and counter threats, using all elements of national power, before the threats can do grave damage. The greater the threat, the greater is the risk of inaction – and the more compelling the case for taking anticipatory action to defend ourselves, <B>even if uncertainty remains as to the time and place of the enemy’s attack. </B> There are few greater threats than a terrorist attack with WMD.<br /><br />To forestall or prevent such hostile acts by our adversaries, the United States will, if necessary, <B>act preemptively</B> in exercising our inherent right of self-defense. The United States will not resort to force in all cases to preempt emerging threats. Our preference is that nonmilitary actions succeed. And no country should ever use preemption as a pretext for aggression."<br /><br />On June 1, 2002, addressing West Point Military Academy, George W. Bush said<br /><br />"We cannot defend America and our friends by hoping for the best. We cannot put our faith in the word of tyrants, who solemnly sign non-proliferation treaties, and then systemically break them. If we wait for threats to fully materialize, we will have waited too long — Our security will require transforming the military you will lead — a military that must be ready to strike at a moment's notice in any dark corner of the world. And our security will require all Americans to be forward-looking and resolute, to be ready for <B>preemptive action </B> when necessary to defend our liberty and to defend our lives."<br /><br /><I>As for "paleoconservatives", I am not sure who counts as one at this time, but last time I heard Pat Buchanan was a major leader of the movement. Buchanan is the type of guy who would not retaliate against either Iraq nor Afghanistan, but attack Israel just because there are Jews there.</I> <br /><br />Paleo-conservatism is a synonyme for traditional conservatism as a response to neo-conservatism, which pushes for unilateral military responses globablly to protect the United States' interests, including pre-emption.James' Musehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15575769532441311670noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1883838569462983439.post-84943814258320330002009-05-13T12:48:00.000-04:002009-05-13T12:48:00.000-04:00dmarks-
I guess you have a difficult time with th...dmarks-<br /><br />I guess you have a difficult time with the 'one factor among many' concept. Racial discrimination continues to this day and remedies are necessary. We as a people have decided to end racial discrimination and affirmative action is a tool (and certainly not the only one) to achieve that end.<br /><br />And you should leave phrases like 'Jim Crow' out of this discussion. Accusing Colin Powell of being a racist and particularly a segregationist is preposterous.Arthurstonehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01083956773592540646noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1883838569462983439.post-86510746854518977172009-05-13T07:14:00.000-04:002009-05-13T07:14:00.000-04:00Arthur: I guess I am not seeing where it is moral ...Arthur: I guess I am not seeing where it is moral and right to discriminate based on skin color.<br /><br />--------------<br /><br />James: Pre-emption did not occur during the Bush administration. In the period leading up to the large-scale retalation in 2003, Saddam had ordered many attacks on US and UK patrols in the no-fly zones. He was also funding, hosting, and encouraging terrorists which were killing Americans, and also Israelis. So, historical fact, did "attack us" and at least two allies.<br /><br />The most recent example of the "Bush Doctrine" as you describe it (attacking a country that did not attack us) occured during the Clinton Administration, when Bill Clinton ordered us to war against Serbia. Serbia had not attacked the US in any way, nor was it attacking any of our allies, nor was it killing Americans by proxy through its support of terrorist organizations.<br /><br />As for "paleoconservatives", I am not sure who counts as one at this time, but last time I heard Pat Buchanan was a major leader of the movement. Buchanan is the type of guy who would not retaliate against either Iraq nor Afghanistan, but attack Israel just because there are Jews there.dmarkshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07269773990064736457noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1883838569462983439.post-64532678656597981372009-05-13T02:36:00.000-04:002009-05-13T02:36:00.000-04:00Dmarks:
Neo-conservatism DOES exist. Pre-emption D...Dmarks:<br />Neo-conservatism DOES exist. Pre-emption DID occur. The whole Iraq war was pre-emption. The Bush Doctrine was a prime example of neo-conservatism. Iraq did not attack us nor did they attack any of our allies. Thats Neo-Conservatism. Paleo-conservatism's response would have been to not invade Iraq and concentrate instead on Afghanistan.James' Musehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15575769532441311670noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1883838569462983439.post-61247681458726321572009-05-12T22:35:00.000-04:002009-05-12T22:35:00.000-04:00Nope.
Affirmative action is the right thing to do...Nope.<br /><br />Affirmative action is the right thing to do. Morally and legally.<br /><br />Here's a very good discussion of the issue.<br /><br />http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/affirmative-action/Arthurstonehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01083956773592540646noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1883838569462983439.post-58560977528867363882009-05-12T22:09:00.000-04:002009-05-12T22:09:00.000-04:00No quotes needed on racist. He supports admission/...No quotes needed on racist. He supports admission/etc policies which punish and reward people based on something as irrelevant as <I>skin color</I>. That's racist. As opposed to fair treatment of all, regardless of color. <br /><br /><A HREF="http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/01/19/powell.race/index.html" REL="nofollow">This CNN</A> interview contains him being outspoken in favor of racism.<br /><br />"I believe race should be a factor among many other factors in determining the makeup of a student body of a university.", he says, as he opposes making matters "Race neutral".<br /><br />In Colin Powell's preferred Jim Crow world of college admissions, people CAN be made to sit in certain sections of the bus just because of skin color.<br /><br />It's clearly racist. Especially compared to the alternative, which is college admissions policies which treat all fairly, all the same, regardless of their race.dmarkshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07269773990064736457noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1883838569462983439.post-66389825193101668622009-05-12T21:26:00.000-04:002009-05-12T21:26:00.000-04:00Colin Powell is not a racist nor has he supported ...Colin Powell is not a racist nor has he supported 'racist' policies.Arthurstonehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01083956773592540646noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1883838569462983439.post-65123765649342955292009-05-12T20:05:00.000-04:002009-05-12T20:05:00.000-04:00James: I wonder what you have been reading, with n...James: I wonder what you have been reading, with neo-cons (who have been rare with little influence and pre-emptive (which never did occur) and all that. Paranoia about "neocons".<br /><br />As for Powell vs Limbaugh, you mentioned Limbaugh's racism. Powell is racist too, but his racism goes as far as urging policy (as opposed to Limbaugh's several racists gaffes). Years ago, Powell came out in favor of quotas (and thus against equal opportunity). And there are a lot of former drug addicts out there. Obama himself has admitted to abusing illegal drugs in the past.<br /><br />If he had run instead of McCain, we'd have had Democrat vs Democrat. <br /><br />I don't label Powell a turncoat. Nor is his change anything to do with anything "wrong" with the Republican side. He's just going home to the party he has long tended to line up with. It is kind of similar to what happened with Arlen Specter. Except, Arlen Specter is a turncoat who has turned his coat once before this. It his previous "from Dem to GOP" turning that completes the case of how shifty Specter is.dmarkshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07269773990064736457noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1883838569462983439.post-48212634249134323752009-05-12T17:35:00.000-04:002009-05-12T17:35:00.000-04:00Dmarks: I'm not a democrat. I've been a Republican...Dmarks: I'm not a democrat. I've been a Republican since I registered at age 18 (and was unofficially much earlier)...I've been fed up for a few years with the "pre-emptive" strategy (a page directly out of the neo-conservative book)...so yeah, I'm a fan of Colin Powell. I wish he had run for President. If he had run in McCain's place, and against Obama, I would have voted for Powell. <br /><br />Conservative: Your ignorance regarding Haliburton is profound. <br /><br />Its strange that when Powell, a longtime Republican says he'd rather vote for Obama instead of McCain that people label him a turncoat instead of seeing that something is wrong with their side.<br /><br />Its also strange that conservatives would rather have Rush Limbaugh, an entertainer and former drug addict, not to mention a racist, sexist inciter, over Colin Powell, a proven leader.James' Musehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15575769532441311670noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1883838569462983439.post-56660995591347263612009-05-12T17:10:00.000-04:002009-05-12T17:10:00.000-04:00Anon said: "The President is SUPPOSED to represent...Anon said: "The President is SUPPOSED to represent our highest standards, but instead he's just another clown from the "Hood" Like Chris Rock, P. Diddy. Snoop Doogie, and 50 cents. He fits in perfectly with the rest of them!!"<br /><br />I'm surprised that the N-word did not slip in there. Since you were posting as Anonymous, you might have been able to get away with it here.<br /><br />So, what is the common denominator between the 5 men of varying backgrounds and demeanors that you named?dmarkshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07269773990064736457noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1883838569462983439.post-39757731263253694982009-05-12T17:05:00.000-04:002009-05-12T17:05:00.000-04:00James said: "Colin Powell, and others like him, ar...James said: "Colin Powell, and others like him, are the future of a successful Republican Party."<br /><br />Of course, someone of the Democratic Party pursuasion would think that the future of the Republicans lies with Democrats.<br /><br />JanJan: Obams's joke bashing Special Olympians was pretty bad, but it was a while ago and he did apologize. I was one of those who raised a stink about it here, but have dropped it. It's now history, but I will be sure to remember it if/when he makes similar jokes in the future.dmarkshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07269773990064736457noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1883838569462983439.post-17686888142849192252009-05-12T16:47:00.000-04:002009-05-12T16:47:00.000-04:00While a great many conservatives are wetting thems...While a great many conservatives are wetting themselves over Wanda Sykes (torture is not a problem but bad jokes send staunch 'real Americans' into a swoon) comedy routine her best bit has seemingly gone unnoticed.<br /><br /> “Sean Hannity said that he was going to get waterboarded for charity for our armed forces. He hasn’t done it yet I see. Talking about he can take a waterboarding, please,ok you might be able to get waterboarded by somebody he knows and trusts, but let somebody from Pakistan waterboard him, or let Keith Olbermann waterboard him. He can’t take a waterboarding. I can break Sean Hannity by giving him a middle seat in coach.”<br /><br />Now that's funny. She has that particularly 'fearless', American flag pinned keyboard warrior dialed in.Arthurstonehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01083956773592540646noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1883838569462983439.post-36542214151665332742009-05-12T16:05:00.000-04:002009-05-12T16:05:00.000-04:00Conservative wondered:
'What about haliburton? '
...Conservative wondered:<br /><br />'What about haliburton? '<br /><br />For one thing clearly they are war profiteers. Likewise the engage in cronyism, fraud and bribery on a massive scale. <br /><br />Oh and the former vice president (and former Haliburton CEO) personally has involved Haliburton and various subsidiaries (KBR) in helping to set government policy trough the VP's Energy Taskforce. <br /><br />http://www.halliburtonwatch.org/Arthurstonehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01083956773592540646noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1883838569462983439.post-40283480132366830342009-05-12T15:06:00.000-04:002009-05-12T15:06:00.000-04:00James' Muse said...
"Back to the topic of this pos...James' Muse said...<br />"Back to the topic of this post:<br /><br /> Colin Powell is a leader most would follow. Dick Cheney is a joke, and one of the WORST vice presidents we have ever had. He shot someone in the face! Not to mention haliburton, etc"<br /><br />What a stupid thing to say. What about haliburton? What exactly was the problem with haliburton, and why did your pretty boy Bill Clinton chose to use haliburton?<br />You know why? Because it's the best in the business!! <br /><br />As for What Colin Powell needs to do is close the loop and become a Democrat instead of claiming to be a Republican interested in reforming the Republican Party, because everybody knows he's full of crap. <br />I have lost all respect for this turncoat. Enjoy your liberal love fest with him...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1883838569462983439.post-54269765475304451352009-05-12T14:54:00.000-04:002009-05-12T14:54:00.000-04:00Back to the topic of this post:
Colin Powell is a...Back to the topic of this post:<br /><br />Colin Powell is a leader most would follow. Dick Cheney is a joke, and one of the WORST vice presidents we have ever had. He shot someone in the face! Not to mention haliburton, etc...<br /><br />Colin Powell, and others like him, are the future of a successful Republican Party. If the hard-right wingers want him out for making a stand and trying to help the Republican Party survive Rush Limbaugh's poisoning. If the Republican party wants to "purify itself" and get rid of those who are trying to help it survive, then the Republican party will go the way of the Whigs and Federalist parties, and a new party will come, made up of true leaders, like Colin Powell.James' Musehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15575769532441311670noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1883838569462983439.post-300054866105296612009-05-12T14:25:00.000-04:002009-05-12T14:25:00.000-04:00Obama thinks Special Olympics are a joke. He makes...Obama thinks Special Olympics are a joke. He makes lipstick on a pig jokes, flips people the bird ala MIB, was in stiches over Wanda Sykes' non-jokes. <br />The man has a twisted and sick sense of humor.janjannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1883838569462983439.post-27853750128810123712009-05-12T13:23:00.000-04:002009-05-12T13:23:00.000-04:00Not so much a joke, as a suggestion to employ Limb...Not so much a joke, as a suggestion to employ Limbaugh's style against him. For example:<br /><br />Sykes suggests Rush is the 20th hijacker. All she did was suggest it. That's her opinion, and she has a right in this country to express that opinion. After all, can we really prove that Rush wasn't the 20th hijacker? I'm not saying he was, mind you, but merely asking a question, as is my responsibility to public discourse to do so. Now, bear in mind, I have yet to see anyone step forward and provide evidence that Rush wasn't the 20th hijacker, so I don't see how Wanda Sykes should be viewed as crossing the line for pointing out what her opinion on the matter is. It isn't the responsibility of Wanda Sykes to prove Rush is innocent. No, my faithful listeners, it is the responsibility of Rush himself to prove that he isn't the 20th hijacker. And you know what? So far I haven't heard a peep from the man... So what should we make of that?Uncle Swopesnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1883838569462983439.post-45527568430953637052009-05-12T12:28:00.000-04:002009-05-12T12:28:00.000-04:00Shaw Kenawe said...
enlighten us, please, as to w...Shaw Kenawe said...<br /> enlighten us, please, as to what Beth said. She has an annoying habit of posting her comments and then erasing them. She does this all over the blogsphere. No one knows why.<br /><br /><br /><br />I also saw it, Can't exactly remember what she said, but it was a long rantAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1883838569462983439.post-55808184743889743842009-05-12T12:23:00.000-04:002009-05-12T12:23:00.000-04:00Have you seen the one where Stephen Colbert comes ...Have you seen the one where Stephen Colbert comes to the Correspondants dinner, and Bush is there, and Colbert just reams everyone in the entire administration in the same fashion? Bush was laughing right along with it for much of the roast, while he makes fun of just about everyone in the administration.<br /><br />Where was your indignation then? The president laughed at inappropriate jokes! OMG!James' Musehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15575769532441311670noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1883838569462983439.post-83547069072779609712009-05-12T11:25:00.000-04:002009-05-12T11:25:00.000-04:00Shaw Kenawe said...
To the highly indignant "Anon...Shaw Kenawe said...<br /><br />To the highly indignant "Anonymous:"<br />The president had nothing to do with Sykes' invitation to speak at the Correspondents' Dinner. It was THAT organization that invited her to come, not Mr. Obama or the WH<br /><br />___________________________________<br /><br />Can you also justify why "The President"<br />found that trash to be so funny that he was hysterical over it?<br /><br />I didn't find his actions so presidential, did you?janjannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1883838569462983439.post-8431997028400195642009-05-12T10:45:00.000-04:002009-05-12T10:45:00.000-04:00Debras Page, enlighten us, please, as to what Beth...Debras Page, enlighten us, please, as to what Beth said. She has an annoying habit of posting her comments and then erasing them. She does this all over the blogsphere. No one knows why.Shaw Kenawehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08637273000409613497noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1883838569462983439.post-17306835264632515542009-05-12T10:43:00.000-04:002009-05-12T10:43:00.000-04:00Cheney's approval numbers: 18%
Limbaugh's app...Cheney's approval numbers: 18% <br />Limbaugh's approval numbers: 26% <br />Powell's approval numbers: 80% (Rasmussen), or, 54% (CBS/NY Times).<br /><br />Either way you slice it, Colin Powell is more popular than Cheney and Limbaugh combinedThayer Nutzhttp://www.nutsonline.com/jerichonoreply@blogger.com