T1B

mvscal wrote:

Mike the Lab Rat wrote:

mvscal wrote:Deferments are not draft dodging. Try again.

They certainly are when they're carefully timed.

No, they're not.

Yes, they are. We can do this all frigging day, but the bottom line is that Cheney deliberately used the system to get out of having to do his military service. To claim otherwise is disingenuous or just fucking credulous on your part.

mvscal wrote:

Mike the Lab Rat wrote:Yeah, well, so did a hell of a lot of kids who he helped send to Iraq.

Every last one of them is a volunteer, you fucking idiot.

They sure as hell didn't think that they'd be used like fucking chess pieces in a pointless quagmire.

It takes a true "patriot" to break the law(in regards to national security, no less), then have his lapdogs try and cover his ass, and take a guilty-verdict for him.


What a "good guy." Good guys always toss others under the bus to cover up their criminal wrongdoing.

Don't worry, dins, I'm sure that Dumbya will stay true to his minions' minions and pardon Libby.

Hell, the Bush defenders at National Review Online are ALREADY demanding a pardon for Libby.

Apparently, democracy is only for when your side wins.

Mike the Lab Rat wrote: Cheney was one of the biggest frigging cheerleaders for attacking Iraq. To dismiss his influence on a bumbling doofus of a CIC like Bush would be a mistake. Cheney and Rumsfeld have a history of manipulating folks going as far back as the Ford administration. Hell, he's STILL cheerleading that things are just ducky in Iraq.

"Cheerleaders". ?

Who have they been manipulating and why have they been manipulating them ? Huh ?

Mike the Lab Rat wrote:
BTW, how the hell is tossing up FDR's name in any way, shape, or form, comparable to Rolling Stone's article?

That little editorial quip about a previous president from Texas engaging in an unwinnable war. So I matched bullshit with bullshit.

Mike the Lab Rat wrote:
I would have thought one of you defenders of Cheney would have gone to the "Clinton as a draft dodger" card by now.

Why ? Clinton went to school and wrote letters to get legal deferrments. He loathed the military, if his administration showed us anything, it showed us that.

Mike the Lab Rat wrote:Don't worry, dins, I'm sure that Dumbya will stay true to his minions' minions and pardon Libby.

GEE, YA'THINK?????

Mike the Lab Rat wrote:Don't worry, dins, I'm sure that Dumbya will stay true to his minions' minions and pardon Libby.

Hell, the Bush defenders at National Review Online are ALREADY demanding a pardon for Libby.

Apparently, democracy is only for when your side wins.

Well now wait a minute. Is Dumbya a subordinate puppet being told what to do or is he large and in charge doling out favors to "minions".

Apparently pardons are only for terrorists, when you're a democract.

mvscal wrote: They aren't getting paid to think. They're getting paid to fight. Oh and you can knock off the "duped pawns" bullshit. Just about every single enlisted soldier, sailor, airman and Marine in the armed forces has either enlisted or reenlisted since the war began.

They know the score better than you and the idiots informing your opinion ever will.

Fuckin RACK.


VVVVVVVV

mvscal wrote:
Libby was found guilty of perjury, dumbshit.

Stemming from what?


Dumbshit.

Dinsdale wrote:

mvscal wrote:
Libby was found guilty of perjury, dumbshit.

Stemming from what?

According to him, a piss poor memory.

mvscal wrote: They know the score better than you and the idiots informing your opinion ever will.

Actually, since I have a nephew and a former student who both are currently serving and agree with me (as does my dad, who is a retired Marine), I'm not speaking from complete ignorance.

But feel free to make more half-assed assumptions and keep defending the morally indefensible scumbag who is currently VP.

Tom wrote:Well now wait a minute. Is Dumbya a subordinate puppet being told what to do or is he large and in charge doling out favors to "minions".

Why are those mutually exclusive? Dumbya is the one who can dole out pardons, so Cheney makes it clear that it must be done. Bush does it. Simple enough for you?

Tom wrote:Apparently pardons are only for terrorists, when you're a democract.

At no point have I supported that position, nor am I a Democrat or supporter of Clinton.

Straw man much?

Mike the Lab Rat wrote:.... so Cheney makes it clear that it must be done. Bush does it. Simple enough for you?

Then that would make Bush a minion of Cheney. Just splitting hairs with you.

mvscal wrote:

Mike the Lib Rat wrote: Dumbya is the one who can dole out pardons, so Cheney makes it clear that it must be done. Bush does it. Simple enough for you?

Link?

I'm sorry, since Bush has yet to issue the pardon and my TARDIS is broken, that won't be possible just yet.

NOW who's the clueless dumbfuck?

Mike the Lab Rat wrote:

mvscal wrote: They know the score better than you and the idiots informing your opinion ever will.

Actually, since I have a nephew and a former student who both are currently serving and agree with me (as does my dad, who is a retired Marine), I'm not speaking from complete ignorance.

Nice appeal to authority.

So nobody else has any loved ones or friends 'over there'. Or could it be they're not going to exploit that fact to make a point on an internet message board.

WTF.


Do these guys and their opinion count ?

VVVVVVVV
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=2203f11597

Tom In VA wrote:

Mike the Lab Rat wrote:

mvscal wrote: They know the score better than you and the idiots informing your opinion ever will.

Actually, since I have a nephew and a former student who both are currently serving and agree with me (as does my dad, who is a retired Marine), I'm not speaking from complete ignorance.

Nice appeal to authority.

What's sauce for the mvscal is sauce for the LabRat. Appealing to authority was OK (and racked by you) when your buddy did it, but not when it was tossed back at him?

Boy, you are bad at this.

Tom In VA wrote:So nobody else has any loved ones or friends 'over there'. Or could it be they're not going to exploit that fact to make a point on an internet message board.

WTF.


Do these guys and their opinion count ?

They all count. And, contrary to anyone's assertions, they are NOT all in lockstep agreement with the Bush administrations way of seeing things.

Mike the Lab Rat wrote:
Boy, you are bad at this.

No, I can admit when I'm wrong, prof. I was racking mvscal's statement about whether or not these men are duped pawns or brave volunteers. He has served with them before so I did figure he knew. The ones I know aren't playing the victim card. But I suppose that means you're calling your nephew and former student, duped pawns then.

Mike the Lab Rat wrote: They all count. And, contrary to anyone's assertions, they are NOT all in lockstep agreement with the Bush administrations way of seeing things.

Nobody said they were yet there's a double standard when it comes to being "okay" to trot them out for talking points now isn't there.


I haven't served in Iraq. Therefore I have no fucking right or any authority at all to call it a quagmire or that it's pointless. That's my take. You won't find me quoting my friends and family that have served at all. They've earned the right to their opinion.

mvscal wrote:

Mike the Lab Rat wrote:

mvscal wrote: Link?

I'm sorry, since Bush has yet to issue the pardon and my TARDIS is broken, that won't be possible just yet.

NOW who's the clueless dumbfuck?

That would be you seeing as how you are the one making confident assertions about an event that hasn't happened and of which you will never have any personal knowledge.

Actually, the "clueless dumbfuck" ball is still squarely in your court, since all I was doing was explaining to Tom HOW Cheney could be part of the pardon process (He asked:"Well now wait a minute. Is Dumbya a subordinate puppet being told what to do or is he large and in charge doling out favors to "minions"...I explained how the two are not mutually exclusive).

If you're going to take part, please pay attention.

Tom In VA wrote:I haven't served in Iraq. Therefore I have no fucking right or any authority at all to call it a quagmire or that it's pointless. That's my take. You won't find me quoting my friends and family that have served at all. They've earned the right to their opinion.

This is one area in which we fundamentally disagree. The military serves the United States and is, rightfully, under civilian control. Since the military serves MY government and my government's purpose is to SERVE me and my fellow citizens, I believe that I have an absolute right and responsibility to speak out when the government that is supposed to serve me is, IMNSHO, fucking up, including in military matters. I don't buy -for a second- that just because someone did a stint in the military, that they have more rights than me or have more of a right to speak out than me. One person, one fucking vote, all the same size.

mvscal wrote:Looks like a "confident assertion about an event that hasn't happened and of which you will never have any personal knowledge" to me.

But you're still a dumbfuck for asking for a link for a future event.

And if you go here you can read the whining of conservatives about the "travesty" and how Bush should pardon Libby.

Mike the Lab Rat wrote:

Tom In VA wrote:I haven't served in Iraq. Therefore I have no fucking right or any authority at all to call it a quagmire or that it's pointless. That's my take. You won't find me quoting my friends and family that have served at all. They've earned the right to their opinion.

This is one area in which we fundamentally disagree. The military serves the United States and is, rightfully, under civilian control. Since the military serves MY government and my government's purpose is to SERVE me and my fellow citizens, I believe that I have an absolute right and responsibility to speak out when the government that is supposed to serve me is, IMNSHO, fucking up, including in military matters. I don't buy -for a second- that just because someone did a stint in the military, that they have more rights than me or have more of a right to speak out than me. One person, one fucking vote, all the same size.

I'm talking about drawing a qualitative conclusion as to the status of the military situation in a given deployment not oversight and logisitical control. Moreso, I'm talking about telling these men and women they've wasted their hearts, lives, and time. I don't believe that for a second.

mvscal wrote:

Mike the Lab Rat wrote: I don't buy -for a second- that just because someone did a stint in the military, that they have more rights than me or have more of a right to speak out than me.

But if they didn't do a stint in the military they are a "draft dodging scumbags" and are awfully "cavalier about sending other people's kids into war."

Taking my words out of context to twist 'em?

That's beneath you.

No...wait....it's not.

mvscal wrote: But if they didn't do a stint in the military they are a "draft dodging scumbags"

Just like Clinton, riiiiight?

mvscal wrote:

Mike the Lab Rat wrote:

mvscal wrote:Looks like a "confident assertion about an event that hasn't happened and of which you will never have any personal knowledge" to me.

But you're still a dumbfuck for asking for a link for a future event.

Just wondering where you came by this certain knowledge that Cheney will manipulate Bush into pardoning Libby.

And still waiting for it, by the way.

Since that's not what I originally claimed, keep waiting.

I said I was sure that Bush would pardon his minion's minions.

Hell, do you think that Bush will ignore the cries of his faithful?

What the hell would make you think he WON'T pardon Libby?

Justa Heel wrote:

mvscal wrote: But if they didn't do a stint in the military they are a "draft dodging scumbags"

Just like Clinton, riiiiight?

Exactly.

Like I didn't call this one earlier in the thread? Thanks for playing...

Mike the Lab Rat wrote:

Justa Heel wrote:

mvscal wrote: But if they didn't do a stint in the military they are a "draft dodging scumbags"

Just like Clinton, riiiiight?

Exactly.

Like I didn't call this one earlier in the thread? Thanks for playing...

I think Justa Heel was actually echoing the very same sentiment you were, he's one of you only with more references to semen and stuff.

Actually, I consider Clinton a draft dodger also.

Never voted for him, never going to vote for his wife.

Mike the Lab Rat wrote:Actually, I consider Clinton a draft dodger also.

Never voted for him, never going to vote for his wife.

I meant "one of you" in terms of anxiously awaiting someone to drop the "Clinton dodged the draft" card to defend Cheney. Personally, it's all splitting hairs to me. Both men, legally, opted to not serve in the military.

Had Clinton been allowed back into the states because of a pardon by Jimmy Carter, speaking of pardons, then I might take issue with him but he did it legally. It was his curious "loathing" of the military statements that concerned most people I know. That and folks I've heard that served under the Clinton Administration say it showed. Not just logistically but culturally. The notion of stealing the Rangers' black beret for instance was viewed as a spit in the eye (not saying that was Clinton's doing perse, but it happened under him).

mvscal wrote: Then you are an idiot. Draft dodging is a criminal act. Obtaining a deferment is not a criminal act.

Obtaining a deferment under false pretenses as Clinton did, could be considered a criminal act. He was certainly no stranger to perjury in any event.

Clinton is a war criminal. Let's just agree that he deserves a life sentence and call it a day.

Martyred wrote:

mvscal wrote: Then you are an idiot. Draft dodging is a criminal act. Obtaining a deferment is not a criminal act.

Obtaining a deferment under false pretenses as Clinton did, could be considered a criminal act. He was certainly no stranger to perjury in any event.

Clinton is a war criminal. Let's just agree that he deserves a life sentence and call it a day.

Oh.....you think every American president is a war criminal. Get outta here ya crazy nut!

Tom In VA wrote:Nope B, I did. It's cool, you're entitled. I'm just shocked that so many of our own would hold this man with more contempt than they do the people who actually seek(sought) to do our country harm.

Suffice it to say, the man has done more for more people in this country than me, therefore I at least respect him for that. My contributions are miniscule in comparison. While I might question his methods and such, I don't wish him ill.

Hey, carry on. I'm not a real big believer in karma either.

I don't wish death on the man, but truthfully he's done more harm to this country than any score of "the people who actually seek to do our country harm".

sayin'

Bizzarofelice wrote:

Tom In VA wrote:Nope B, I did. It's cool, you're entitled. I'm just shocked that so many of our own would hold this man with more contempt than they do the people who actually seek(sought) to do our country harm.

His subsequent actions were worse for this country than 20 Saddams.

How about Hitler? Is he worse than that?

How about the world? (Think)

How would 20 Saddams be better than old Dick Cheney?

trev wrote:How would 20 Saddams be better than old Dick Cheney?

Because Saddam was in Iraq, and Cheney affected Americans.

mvscal wrote:

Mike the Lab Rat wrote:Hell, do you think that Bush will ignore the cries of his faithful?

The next time Dubya makes a policy decision based on the whims of pundits of any political persuasion will be the first.

Yeah, I'm guessing that his keen, incisive mind, the one that looked into Putin's eyes and "got a sense of his soul" is far, FAR too bright to care what any of his whining supporters think. He's not the sharpest tool in the Nerf factory.

Mike the Lab Rat wrote:What the hell would make you think he WON'T pardon Libby?

Maybe he will...maybe he won't. I don't know/care. I doubt Dubya himself knows yet either.

Frankly, I doubt Dumbya knows when Daylight Saving Time starts or would do well on that "50 states in 10 minutes" test.

But, he's got nothing to lose by pardoning Libby...it's not like he can run again. He's already got low approval ratings, his party has lost control of Congress, so how much worse could it possibly get if he bows to political partisanship and pardons an administration minion?

Mikey wrote:

Tom In VA wrote:Nope B, I did. It's cool, you're entitled. I'm just shocked that so many of our own would hold this man with more contempt than they do the people who actually seek(sought) to do our country harm.

Suffice it to say, the man has done more for more people in this country than me, therefore I at least respect him for that. My contributions are miniscule in comparison. While I might question his methods and such, I don't wish him ill.

Hey, carry on. I'm not a real big believer in karma either.

I don't wish death on the man, but truthfully he's done more harm to this country than any score of "the people who actually seek to do our country harm".

sayin'

I'm going to assume you mean he's put our country in a strategically disadvantageous position, by making people hate us AND creating more terrorists because of same.

Accurate ?

trev wrote:

Bizzarofelice wrote:

Tom In VA wrote:Nope B, I did. It's cool, you're entitled. I'm just shocked that so many of our own would hold this man with more contempt than they do the people who actually seek(sought) to do our country harm.

His subsequent actions were worse for this country than 20 Saddams.

How about Hitler? Is he worse than that?

How about the world? (Think)

How would 20 Saddams be better than old Dick Cheney?

Are we talking mini-Saddams or the full size Saddam?

mvscal wrote:

Mike the Lab Rat wrote:Yeah, I'm guessing that his keen, incisive mind, the one that looked into Putin's eyes and "got a sense of his soul" is far, FAR too bright to care what any of his whining supporters think. He's not the sharpest tool in the Nerf factory.

I didn't say he wasn't an idiot. I said he is insensible to media hand wringing.

OK - that made me laugh.

Bizzarofelice wrote:

trev wrote:How would 20 Saddams be better than old Dick Cheney?

Because Saddam was in Iraq, and Cheney affected Americans.

So? The Jews, gypsys and disabled were in Europe. Do we just sit back and let a tyrant torture and kill them?

trev wrote:

Bizzarofelice wrote:

trev wrote:How would 20 Saddams be better than old Dick Cheney?

Because Saddam was in Iraq, and Cheney affected Americans.

So? The Jews, gypsys and disabled were in Europe. Do we just sit back and let a tyrant torture and kill them?

We do in most parts of the world without oil you dumb fat bitch. In fact, in many places, we support it and teach the locals how to do it. These are things you won't learn though from Sean Hannity, Pat Robertson, or the Hostess Ho-Ho wrappers scattered around your couch.

Justa Heel wrote: In fact, in many places, we support it and teach the locals how to do it.

I call bullshit on that one. We might benefit from it but it was going on long before we got there. Take central america for instance. Those fuckers torture and kill people on both sides long before uncle sam got there. Now when we arrived, we didn't do much to stop it, but we didn't initiate it.

It's a trick we learned from the Brits. Exploit the existing factions and indigenous rivalries to our own benefit. But "we didn't start the fire".

Mike the Lab Rat wrote:

trev wrote:

Bizzarofelice wrote: His subsequent actions were worse for this country than 20 Saddams.

How about Hitler? Is he worse than that?

How about the world? (Think)

How would 20 Saddams be better than old Dick Cheney?

Are we talking mini-Saddams or the full size Saddam?

Ah Bob, that would be the full size Saddams.

sin

Tom In VA wrote:...we didn't do much to stop it, but we didn't initiate it.

The 80's...AKA "Tom's Long Nap".

The horrors you Yanks visited on Central America may be long forgotten by fat, comfortable dullards such as yourself,
but I assure you, they remember.