Ornery.org
  Front Page   |   About Ornery.org   |   World Watch   |   Guest Essays   |   Contact Us

The Ornery American Forum Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» The Ornery American Forum » General Comments » Vote for Iraq Troop Pullout Tonight? (Page 2)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!   This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2   
Author Topic: Vote for Iraq Troop Pullout Tonight?
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by TCB:
quote:
Pretending their honor has been attacked whenever someone disagrees with them. This is cowardice, but not the military kind. It's intellectual cowardice. Cowering behind cultural sensitivity and refusing to deal with their oponent's practical arguments.
I agree Pete, but some hawks likewise refuse to engage in intellectual debate by dismissing advocates of withdrawal as cowards rather than addressing their arguments. Neither side is exhibiting the level of debate we deserve from our representatives. Even if they can't rise above it in DC, it would be nice if we could in our little corner of the internet.

I don't see the big deal here. So Schmidt implied that people who want to "cut-and-run" are cowards. Let her talk. Murtha knows he's not a coward. People advocating for withdrawal know they're not cowards. Getting outraged over this kind of thing just lends credibility to childishness.

My point is that when we're fighting a war on terror, that APPEARING to be a coward is more deadly than walking into Fallujah bareassed.

And it's fundamentally dishonest for David and other pseudointellectuals to pretend that this argument is equivalent to accusing those wanting to retreat of cowardice. They are refusing to discuss the issue.

Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
The Drake
Member
Member # 2128

 - posted      Profile for The Drake   Email The Drake   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Wow. I'm going to wait for the full text from the floor, and see exactly the context in which this was offered. I fully expect to see equally scathing rhetoric from Murtha that prompted the scalding rebuttal.

This is my prediction, mark it.

Posts: 7707 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Heh. For all David's temper tantrums and whining, it looks like we might BOTH be wrong.

quote:
Originally posted by David Ricardo:

She said she was relaying a phone call that she had received from a Marine, not a letter.
---------------
Ms. Schmidt: Yesterday I stood at Arlington National Cemetery attending the funeral of a young marine in my district. He believed in what we were doing is the right thing and had the courage to lay his life on the line to do it. A few minutes ago I received a call from Colonel Danny Bop, Ohio Representative from the 88th district in the House of Representatives. He asked me to send Congress a message: Stay the course. He also asked me to send Congressman Murtha a message, that cowards cut and run, Marines never do.
-------
[David rants on, oblivious to the fact that he's committing the same mistake that I'd made] You're misleading the rest of us when you pretend that she was "reading a letter" on the floor of the U.S. Congress. Please stop making lies out of whole cloth and use some more imaginative personal attacks against me, okay?

I'll have to take a raincheck on your invitation to insult you imaginatively, OK, David? Thanks. I'll try not to dissapoint you.

Since 2005, the 88th District is represented by Danny R. Bubp West Union, Adams 2005-

He served in Iraq in 2003 and currently is still in the marine RESERVE, but it's not clear whether he's currently in Iraq as both of us assumed. He is currently a member of the House of Representatives. The constitution as I understand would preclude his being on active duty while being a member of Congress, but I may be mistaken about that.

Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Wow. This is one manipulative Murtha-fragger.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1646261,00.html
quote:
Mr Murtha hit out at Mr Cheney, deriding his hardline stance on the war and pointing out that the vice-president had avoided military service at the time of the Vietnam conflict.

"I like guys who got five deferments and [have] never been there and send people to war, and then don't like to hear suggestions about what needs to be done," said Mr Murtha.

Most mainstream Democrats do not back Mr Murtha's bill calling for a rapid withdrawal over six months, but they have called for a timetable for bringing US troops home .

He distorts what people say to pretend they are calling him a coward, and then he makes personal attacks on them based on their service record, to justify his insane and reckless retreat?

[ November 19, 2005, 02:54 AM: Message edited by: Pete at Home ]

Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
David Ricardo
Member
Member # 1678

 - posted      Profile for David Ricardo     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Peta at Home said:

quote:
Heh. For all David's temper tantrums and whining, it looks like we might BOTH be wrong.
Pete, I never said the Marine was calling her from Iraq. YOU just assumed that. Stop making up more lies by pretending that I was also wrong on that count. I simply didn't make the same stupid assumption that you did. Just admit you were wrong, apologize for continuing with another lie, and then make a relevant point.

Check each post on this thread, and you'll notice that I never said that she was quoting a Marine from Iraq. I just said she was quoting a Marine.

So, again, no more bald-faced lying and just make a more imaginative point.

[ November 19, 2005, 03:36 AM: Message edited by: David Ricardo ]

Posts: 1429 | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Those arguments sound unusually shrill and impotent, even for you, David. You sound like a man that just caught his wife in bed with Inspector Gadget. How helplessly inadequate you must feel.


[Smile] Thanks for offering to allow me to insult you imaginatively. I'd hate to be stuck with dull unimaginative fastidious insults, like "ew, stop lying." [Roll Eyes] When you want to retract your kind offer, just cry "uncle" or ask someone else to complain to the monitor on your poor little behalf.

[ November 19, 2005, 05:01 AM: Message edited by: Pete at Home ]

Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Everard:
" They could just calmly vote down the proposal, and call it reckless, which it surely would have been."

And, politically, what do you think would happen to a democrat who does this? He'd be branded a "war supporter," and get seriously damanged in the next election by republicans calling him either a flip flopper, hypocrit, or some other nonsense.

Gee, poor little guys. You mean they aren't allowed to scream and rant about the evil Republicans running the war, while silently voting to support it? You mean they have to put up or shut up? You mean they can't eat their cake and have it too?
Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by JoshuaD:
Alright, I hate on the liberals screwing up good war efforts as much as the next conservative, but lets be reasonable.

The last war we were really united behind was WWII. The good old days of war. Do you know why we were all united in that effort? Because Hitler was an undeniably evil mother****er.

There were some (Joe Kennedy) who denied that, Josh.

And Stalin and Mao were every bit as evil, and yet others managed to deny it.

quote:
My point is, the enemy of your enemy is your friend. EVERYONE hated Hitler in America, it was easy for us to unite behind that war.
Because FDR had a tight grip on the media, Josh. There's no way in hell FDR'd have won the war against Hitler if we'd had cable and internet for news. The country would have split at the seams.
How many body bags on Omaha beach?

Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
RickyB
Member
Member # 1464

 - posted      Profile for RickyB   Email RickyB   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"seemingly long time", Redskull?

I call bullshyt on that.

Nixon was elected in '68 with promises of a secret plan. By 1971 the reading classes of the American public learned that the Pentagon itself was viewing the war as lost.

And you say that by 1973 it was too early to demand some concrete plan?

I also love how the regime (various sucessive regimes) in South Vietnam are touted as some shining land of rights and justice.

Posts: 19145 | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Digger
Member
Member # 2341

 - posted      Profile for Digger   Email Digger   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
There was at least one very significant difference between Vietnam and Iraq. In Vietnam our military policy was significantly constrained by Cold War policy. The USSR and China were actively supporting the NV government and military, and we didn't want to escalate the conflict and risk a direct confrontation with either China or the Soviets.

In Iraq, there is no comperable Cold War opponent and if we do eventually take the same road as we did in Vietnam, it's going to be for no other reason than we talked ourselves into it..


Edited to add: I see the Democrats made the best of the vote situation by forming a united front, voting against the pullout, meanwhile calling the vote a political stunt and attempting to eviscerate the meaning of their votes. Think the base will buy it?

Edited further: Okay, not completely unified. Here's the three that voted in favor: McKinney, Serrano, Wexler.

It's amazing how much mileage I can get out of McKinney (my Representative for those who don't know). Are Serrano and Wexler equally looney tunes?

[ November 19, 2005, 09:56 AM: Message edited by: Digger ]

Posts: 1317 | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
flydye45
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
David, I am happy that you are a born again convert against accusations of talking points.

flydye45, the Republican talking points monkey.

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
flydye45
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Yes, Wexler is a looney tune. Since Trafficant got indicted, he might be the loopiest rep out there.
IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TS Elliot
Member
Member # 736

 - posted      Profile for TS Elliot   Email TS Elliot   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Okay, about the Pete-smear-David-lie-nolie thing

Fact1: Pete calls DR a liar on the smear thing.
quote:
Originally posted by Pete at Home:


Note that David misleadingly claims that Representative Schmidt had "smeared" Murtha. Read more carefully. She read a LETTER from a marine in the FIELD. A letter that the marine had personally ASKED her to read to Congress, about his own feelings about pulling out.

Fact 2:
Schmidt DOES smear Murtha, even if Pete denies this in apologist/revisionist fashion ("But she didn't SAY Murtha you're a coward', so she didn't smear him." Yeah RRRRIGHT!) Pete even quotes her doing it in the same post pete says she didn't smear ....


Pete quotes Schmidt:
“He asked me to send Congress a message — stay the course. He also asked me to send Congressman Murtha a message — that cowards cut and run, Marines never do,” Schmidt said.

"Lefties are lying about the issues on the table here."
No, no, pete, you're the one who's lying.

"It's intellectual cowardice."
To be so sloppy that you mistake a phonecall for a Letter IN THE SAME POST YOU QUOTE YOURSELF is surely anything but intellectual. Luckily you've never claimed any intelligence.

Conclusion:
Pete is lying on this one. And not a smart one at that. Such sloppiness in reading your OWN posts leads us to believe that you're equally sloppy in in your powers of logic.

You lied. Suck it up.

Just because it's so eloquent:
This is the Republican Party of today -- a bunch of chickenhawks who took as many deferments as possible to escape from serving our country in Vietnam, yet they malign true American heroes who have already bled for this country back when those chickenhawks were too scared to do so. Pathetic.

Posts: 793 | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
flydye45
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Hmm. Chickenhawk. I suppose it's better to have someone who is willing to support their country at least verbally then to have some deny even that scintilla for some bogus utopian America that never existed.

I also love how those who served militarily are above reproach or criticism, provided they are saying the proper Lefty crud. Cut and run Murtha, good. Swift Boaters, bad. Atrocity Kerry, good. Actual marine writing a letter, bad.

It's all so clear to me now...

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Richard Dey
Member
Member # 1727

 - posted      Profile for Richard Dey   Email Richard Dey   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Not to interrupt this firefight in the planned withdrawal, but could we discuss Gen Odom's rationales for withdrawing from Iraq in http://www.niemanwatchdog.org/ ?
Posts: 7866 | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
FIJC
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
This whole thing just makes me sick. Everyone here already knows my opinion, so there's no need to re-state it.

I hated to hear that Duncan Hunter was taken off the floor yesterday...he is a good and honorable man, who, like Murtha, also served in Vietnam and is a decorated combat veteran. Rep. Hunter has a son who served two tours of duty in Iraq and I think, always has the best interests of the troops at heart. He does not agree with Murtha.

[ November 19, 2005, 02:42 PM: Message edited by: FIJC ]

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
David Ricardo
Member
Member # 1678

 - posted      Profile for David Ricardo     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
flydye said:

quote:
I also love how those who served militarily are above reproach or criticism, provided they are saying the proper Lefty crud. Cut and run Murtha, good. Swift Boaters, bad. Atrocity Kerry, good. Actual marine writing a letter, bad. Actual marine writing a letter, bad.
More lies on the "actual marine writing a letter" propaganda front. Remember there was no such letter.

Did you and Pete at Home read the same excerpt from the same Talking Points memo or something?

Or are you both just equally shameless in your blatant lies?

[ November 19, 2005, 02:33 PM: Message edited by: David Ricardo ]

Posts: 1429 | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
foliated
Member
Member # 2041

 - posted      Profile for foliated   Email foliated   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Those arguments sound unusually shrill and impotent, even for you, David. You sound like a man that just caught his wife in bed with Inspector Gadget. How helplessly inadequate you must feel.


Hm. Not sure about that "inadequacy" thing. Given the tendency for Inspector Gadget's gadgets to go awry upon operation, maybe it's much more likely that such a man would feel like a widower?
Posts: 123 | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
flydye45
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I would take the time to find links to a dozen military blogs which speak of hope, advancement and success in Iraq if I thought there was a micron's chance for you to have an open mind on the issue. Lacking such faith, and knowing they've been posted here before, I'll save myself the trouble and allow you to wallow in your self rightousness and schadenfreude.
IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by David Ricardo:
flydye said:

quote:
I also love how those who served militarily are above reproach or criticism, provided they are saying the proper Lefty crud. Cut and run Murtha, good. Swift Boaters, bad. Atrocity Kerry, good. Actual marine writing a letter, bad. Actual marine writing a letter, bad.
More lies on the "actual marine writing a letter" propaganda front. Remember there was no such letter.

Did you and Pete at Home read the same excerpt from the same Talking Points memo or something?

Or are you both just equally shameless in your blatant lies?

David, you poor poor flatulosaur. I bet every time you close your eyes, you can see that vibrating absent-minded cyborg. [Eek!] Have you talked to your therapist, or is he doing her too?
Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Sorry, Tissy. Unlike psycho Dave here, you didn't have the guts beg me to insult you imaginatively, so you don't get any. [Razz] Go fish.


I have to say, that Dave's got more guts than the other pussies that twist facts to call me a liar, since Dave at least gives me permission to fight him back. [Cool]

[ November 19, 2005, 07:14 PM: Message edited by: Pete at Home ]

Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by FIJC:
This whole thing just makes me sick. Everyone here already knows my opinion, so there's no need to re-state it.

I hated to hear that Duncan Hunter was taken off the floor yesterday...he is a good and honorable man, who, like Murtha, also served in Vietnam and is a decorated combat veteran. Rep. Hunter has a son who served two tours of duty in Iraq and I think, always has the best interests of the troops at heart. He does not agree with Murtha.

Taken off the floor for what?
Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
flydye45
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Has anyone questioned if Murtha actually thinks this, or is he a point man who is the Democratic rarity of being beyond reproach militarily?

If Nancy Pelosi said this crud, she'd have zero cred. What's to say they hadn't combed their ranks to find their spokesman? I am also curious if he's running again next year...

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
The Drake
Member
Member # 2128

 - posted      Profile for The Drake   Email The Drake   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
To immediately redeploy U.S. troops consistent with the safety of U.S. forces.
To create a quick reaction force in the region.
To create an over- the- horizon presence of Marines.
To diplomatically pursue security and stability in Iraq

Now, how is this inconsistent with the Republican:

"It is the sense of the House of Representatives that the deployment of United States forces in Iraq be terminated immediately.”

It seems to me that nothing in this statement precludes the above, and that they both encapsulate the same idea. Both call for immediate redeployment.

The first statement adds plans for maintaining regional presence. But isn't that just a smokescreen? If you've already left Iraq, what good is a rapid deployment force? It's not like you're going to redeploy back into Iraq!

Thoughts?

Posts: 7707 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
David Ricardo
Member
Member # 1678

 - posted      Profile for David Ricardo     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Turns out that Colonel Bubp, Marine reservist and Republican member of the Ohio House of Representatives, has denied both mentioning Jack Murtha by name and intentionally disparaging Jack Murtha as a coward.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/22/politics/22murtha.html?pagewanted=all

quote:
Colonel Denies Disparaging Murtha

By The New York Times

WASHINGTON, Nov. 21 - A colonel in the Marine reserves has taken issue with how his views were represented in a Republican attack last week on Representative Murtha.

Speaking on the House floor on Friday, Representative Jean Schmidt, Republican of Ohio, asserted that the colonel had "asked me to send Congressman Murtha a message: that cowards cut and run, marines never do."

But a spokeswoman for the colonel, Danny R. Bubp, said Ms. Schmidt had misconstrued their conversation.

While Mr. Bubp, a Republican member of the Ohio House of Representatives, opposes a quick withdrawal for forces, "he did not mention Congressman Murtha by name nor did he mean to disparage Congressman Murtha," said Karen Tabor, his spokeswoman. "He feels as though the words that Congresswoman Schmidt chose did not represent their conversation."

Asked to respond on Monday, the congresswoman's office said only, "Mrs. Schmidt's statement was never meant to disparage Congressman Murtha."

So, when Jean Schmidt took to the floor of the U.S. Congress to relay a "message" to Congress and Jack Murtha, she was just using a word-twisting trick to call Jack Murtha a coward on the floor of the U.S. Congress.

At least, however, this pathetic excuse for a Republican Congresswoman has the full support of the usual suspects like Daruma, flydye, and Pete at Home -- even if the "Marine" that she was quoting denies ever calling Murtha a coward by name in his call with the repugnant Jean Schmidt.

Sidenote: if Jean Schmidt wanted to call Jack Murtha a coward to his face on the floor of the U.S. Congress, she should have had the courage to do so on her own -- without falsely twisting the words of someone else and lying about what someone else supposedly said about Jack Murtha being a coward.

But the thing is...she was too much of a coward herself to do so.

[ November 22, 2005, 11:25 AM: Message edited by: David Ricardo ]

Posts: 1429 | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
javelin
Member
Member # 1284

 - posted      Profile for javelin   Email javelin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
And what, exactly, did Jean Schmidt say?
Posts: 8614 | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
  This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
UBB Code™ Images not permitted.
Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Ornery.org Front Page

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.1