• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Dishonest, Reprehensible, Corrupt ...

scottyz

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
1,575
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Moderate
Dishonest, Reprehensible, Corrupt ...
By Frank Rich
The New York Times
Sunday 27 November 2005


George W. Bush is so desperate for allies that his hapless Asian tour took him to Ulan Bator, a first for an American president, so he could mingle with the yaks and give personal thanks for Mongolia's contribution of some 160 soldiers to "the coalition of the willing." Dick Cheney, whose honest-and-ethical poll number hit 29 percent in Newsweek's latest survey, is so radioactive that he vanished into his bunker for weeks at a time during the storms Katrina and Scootergate.

The whole world can see that both men are on the run. Just how much so became clear in the brace of nasty broadsides each delivered this month about Iraq. Neither man engaged the national debate ignited by John Murtha about how our troops might be best redeployed in a recalibrated battle against Islamic radicalism. Neither offered a plan for "victory." Instead, both impugned their critics' patriotism and retreated into the past to defend the origins of the war. In a seasonally appropriate impersonation of the misanthropic Mr. Potter from "It's a Wonderful Life," the vice president went so far as to label critics of the administration's prewar smoke screen both "dishonest and reprehensible" and "corrupt and shameless." He sounded but one epithet away from a defibrillator.

The Washington line has it that the motivation for the Bush-Cheney rage is the need to push back against opponents who have bloodied the White House in the polls. But, Mr. Murtha notwithstanding, the Democrats are too feeble to merit that strong a response. There is more going on here than politics.

Much more: each day brings slam-dunk evidence that the doomsday threats marshaled by the administration to sell the war weren't, in Cheney-speak, just dishonest and reprehensible but also corrupt and shameless. The more the president and vice president tell us that their mistakes were merely innocent byproducts of the same bad intelligence seen by everyone else in the world, the more we learn that this was not so. The web of half-truths and falsehoods used to sell the war did not happen by accident; it was woven by design and then foisted on the public by a P.R. operation built expressly for that purpose in the White House. The real point of the Bush-Cheney verbal fisticuffs this month, like the earlier campaign to take down Joseph Wilson, is less to smite Democrats than to cover up wrongdoing in the executive branch between 9/11 and shock and awe.

The cover-up is failing, however. No matter how much the president and vice president raise their decibel levels, the truth keeps roaring out. A nearly 7,000-word investigation in last Sunday's Los Angeles Times found that Mr. Bush and his aides had "issued increasingly dire warnings" about Iraq's mobile biological weapons labs long after U.S. intelligence authorities were told by Germany's Federal Intelligence Service that the principal source for these warnings, an Iraqi defector in German custody code-named Curveball, "never claimed to produce germ weapons and never saw anyone else do so." The five senior German intelligence officials who spoke to The Times said they were aghast that such long-discredited misinformation from a suspected fabricator turned up in Colin Powell's presentation to the United Nations and in the president's 2003 State of the Union address (where it shared billing with the equally bogus 16 words about Saddam's fictitious African uranium).
http://select.nytimes.com/gst/tsc.html?URI=http://select.nytimes.com/2005/11/27/opinion/27rich.html&OQ=hp&OP=6612a753Q2FhogrhQ7DWwzzQ7DhSQ5CQ5CDhQ7EQ7EhS.hzsbPbzPhS.wbQ27Q7CxQ7CQ7D-Q5E
 
Joined
Nov 9, 2005
Messages
2,669
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Oh look, another Op/Ed hate piece.
 

Billo_Really

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 6, 2005
Messages
18,930
Reaction score
1,040
Location
HBCA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Originally posted by KCConservative:
Oh look, another Op/Ed hate piece.
So what are you saying? Op/Ed=False? Get real.
 
Joined
Nov 9, 2005
Messages
2,669
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Billo_Really said:
So what are you saying? Op/Ed=False? Get real.
Not at all. And leave it to you to try and put words in my mouth. No, since you weren't able to comprehend it, I'll restate it, just for you.

Oh look, Billo has copied and pasted another OPINION PIECE in hopes of running up his Bush Hate Post Count. Are Op/Ed pieces true? Are they false? It's really just the writers own opinion, isn't it?

Is that better, Williamo? :2wave:

Gee, if I didn't know any better, I'd say Frank Rich has a one sided agenda. DUH!
 

Billo_Really

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 6, 2005
Messages
18,930
Reaction score
1,040
Location
HBCA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Originally posted by KCConservative:
Not at all. And leave it to you to try and put words in my mouth. No, since you weren't able to comprehend it, I'll restate it, just for you.

Oh look, Billo has copied and pasted another OPINION PIECE in hopes of running up his Bush Hate Post Count. Are Op/Ed pieces true? Are they false? It's really just the writers own opinion, isn't it?

Is that better, Williamo?
This is not about being good or bad. But it is wrong to think I am trying to put words in your mouth by my reaction to your curt response. The possibility exists that if I could not comprehend what your point was, maybe you were not as succinct as you could be. You see, your response did not address anything the poster was saying. You just blew it off as just another hate Bush piece. As if that was some kind of logical response. Well, it wasn't. It was very illogical. And irrational I might add. I'm sure the poster didn't say that just because of Bush hate. Maybe there are reasons for hating Bush. Maybe you should listen to them before being so reactionary.
 
Joined
Nov 9, 2005
Messages
2,669
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Billo_Really said:
Maybe there are reasons for hating Bush. Maybe you should listen to them before being so reactionary.
Yeah, because we never hear it here, do we? There isn't nearly enough Bush bashing on this forum. Thank God for Frank Rich. He finally has written a Bush Bashing piece. Gee, what took him so long?
 

Billo_Really

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 6, 2005
Messages
18,930
Reaction score
1,040
Location
HBCA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Originally posted by KCConservative:
Yeah, because we never hear it here, do we? There isn't nearly enough Bush bashing on this forum. Thank God for Frank Rich. He finally has written a Bush Bashing piece. Gee, what took him so long?
Who's Frank Rich?
 
Joined
Nov 9, 2005
Messages
2,669
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Billo_Really said:
No, I haven't.
Then you really don't have any room to debate it, in my opinion. To use your own words: "Maybe there are reasons for hating <Frank Rich>. Maybe you should listen to them before being so reactionary."


Ciao.
 

Billo_Really

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 6, 2005
Messages
18,930
Reaction score
1,040
Location
HBCA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Originally posted by KCConservative:
Then you really don't have any room to debate it, in my opinion. To use your own words: "Maybe there are reasons for hating <Frank Rich>. Maybe you should listen to them before being so reactionary."
We weren't debating the content of the link. We were discussing why you blew it off as just another hate Bush piece. However, if you would like to discuss its contents, I'm ready to go.
 

akyron

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 17, 2004
Messages
10,329
Reaction score
2,432
Location
Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Billo_Really said:
Who's Frank Rich?

Another truthout pimp/pundit trying to make a buck like all the others. Norman Solomon tore him a new one not long ago for the fun of it. He isnt any better.. It hard to wade through their tripe to get to the meat of any matter.


Rich made that leap from the Arts and Leisure section somehow.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Billo_Really

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 6, 2005
Messages
18,930
Reaction score
1,040
Location
HBCA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Originally posted by akyron:
Another truthout pimp/pundit trying to make a buck like all the others. Norman Solomon tore him a new one not long ago for the fun of it. He isnt any better.. It hard to wade through their tripe to get to the meat of any matter.
He doesn't work for truthout.org. He works for the New York Times. And it's not hard to get to the meat at all if you have an open mind and are receptive to the information being presented. Despite what Norman says or the tripe you think it is, it doesn't take away from the facts he is presenting in his Opinion Editorial.
 

wrath

Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2005
Messages
154
Reaction score
0
Location
Alexandria, VA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Why wouldn't someone consider this Frank Rich op/ed just another hate Bush rant? Considering the fact that he's written countless other Bush bashing pieces along with some wife and kids bashing to boot. Unless you can never get enough hate Bush rhetoric in your op/eds (obviously not including rabid leftists here) then this IS Just - Another - Hate - Bush - rant! :rantoff:

Anyone up for some opinion pieces on Frank Rich? THERE IS PLENTY TO READ! :roll:
 

Billo_Really

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 6, 2005
Messages
18,930
Reaction score
1,040
Location
HBCA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Originally posted by Wrath:
Why wouldn't someone consider this Frank Rich op/ed just another hate Bush rant? Considering the fact that he's written countless other Bush bashing pieces along with some wife and kids bashing to boot. Unless you can never get enough hate Bush rhetoric in your op/eds (obviously not including rabid leftists here) then this IS Just - Another - Hate - Bush - rant!
That has nothing to do with what he said. Care to discuss the points he is raising? What are you afraid of?
 

wrath

Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2005
Messages
154
Reaction score
0
Location
Alexandria, VA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Billo_Really said:
That has nothing to do with what he said. Care to discuss the points he is raising? What are you afraid of?
Why would anyone fear opinion? His opinions place no more light on the truth than yours or mine...yes?

He covers the whole spectrum of Hate Bush rhetoric so I'll just pick a few.
- Bush and Cheney are on the run -
Says who? Rich? From what? The World? Pass this off as fact and I'll sell ya some great property in the Arctic Ocean.
- More Bush lied about WMDs rhetoric -
again, PROVE IT and start impeachment proceedings or STFU!
- Bush exaggerates Iraqi troop readiness -
Really? opinion or does he have some inside sources that he's not willing to name or provide us with concrete proof?

Same Ol' $hit! wrapped in another bash Bush op piece. YAWN
 

Billo_Really

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 6, 2005
Messages
18,930
Reaction score
1,040
Location
HBCA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Originally posted by Wrath:
Why would anyone fear opinion? His opinions place no more light on the truth than yours or mine...yes?

He covers the whole spectrum of Hate Bush rhetoric so I'll just pick a few.
- Bush and Cheney are on the run -
Says who? Rich? From what? The World? Pass this off as fact and I'll sell ya some great property in the Arctic Ocean.
- More Bush lied about WMDs rhetoric -
again, PROVE IT and start impeachment proceedings or STFU!
- Bush exaggerates Iraqi troop readiness -
Really? opinion or does he have some inside sources that he's not willing to name or provide us with concrete proof?

Same Ol' $hit! wrapped in another bash Bush op piece. YAWN
When the student is ready, the teacher will appear.
 

wrath

Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2005
Messages
154
Reaction score
0
Location
Alexandria, VA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Billo_Really said:
When the student is ready, the teacher will appear.
Ahh, a typical example of a leftist feeding off his own superiority complex. So comical and yet....so sad.

But please.....spin away!
 

Billo_Really

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 6, 2005
Messages
18,930
Reaction score
1,040
Location
HBCA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Originally posted by wrath:
Ahh, a typical example of a leftist feeding off his own superiority complex. So comical and yet....so sad.

But please.....spin away!
No spin. Just fact. Not superior. I just don't lie to myself as much as you do. Your only going to see what you want to see. You don't have an open mind on this issue. In fact, your mind is already made up and you are not receptive to anything that doesn't agree with your pre-disposition. And that is sad.
 

akyron

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 17, 2004
Messages
10,329
Reaction score
2,432
Location
Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
wrath said:
Why would anyone fear opinion? His opinions place no more light on the truth than yours or mine...yes?

He covers the whole spectrum of Hate Bush rhetoric so I'll just pick a few.
- Bush and Cheney are on the run -
Says who? Rich? From what? The World? Pass this off as fact and I'll sell ya some great property in the Arctic Ocean.
- More Bush lied about WMDs rhetoric -
again, PROVE IT and start impeachment proceedings or STFU!
- Bush exaggerates Iraqi troop readiness -
Really? opinion or does he have some inside sources that he's not willing to name or provide us with concrete proof?

Same Ol' $hit! wrapped in another bash Bush op piece. YAWN



He was better at Arts and Leisure...really.
 

aquapub

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 16, 2005
Messages
7,317
Reaction score
344
Location
America (A.K.A., a red state)
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
When I first saw the thread name I thought this must be a thread about Bill Clinton railroading a retard to execution to look less liberal, raping and sexually harassing interns, using the IRS to retaliate against the ones who testified against him, taking illegal campaign contributions from Communist China, or taking bribes from ADM Milling.

I was wrong, it was just another great example of how absurd and left-wing the New York Times is.


My personal favorite of all the nauseating, mindless personal attacks was this one:

"Neither man engaged the national debate ignited by John Murtha about how our troops might be best redeployed in a recalibrated battle against Islamic radicalism. Neither offered a plan for "victory." Instead, both impugned their critics' patriotism and retreated into the past to defend the origins of the war."


President Bush has had the plan laid out numerous times. Even Democrats should be able to get it by now. We are rebuilding the schools, institutions, reconstructing a functional government and uprooting terrorists. When those jobs are done, we will leave. MURTHA'S suggestion was childish, destructive, and unreasonable. We can't just pull everything out now. Murtha knows this. Murtha was attacking the president, not "engaging in the national debate."

Republicans called him out for advocating the kind of cowardly retreatism that MADE Al Queda what it is-thank You Bill Clinton (this is referring to the retreat from Bin Laden in Somalia and the following eight years of unanswered Al Queda attacks that swelled Bin Laden's ranks).

Democrats like to portray Republicans as villains for questioning their patriotism as they side with every enemy this nation has, time and time again, but it is not about silencing critics. It is about not letting history-ignorant fools, partisan traitors, and visionless cowards (i.e., Democrats) derail critical national security measures with malicious lies and idiotic conspiracy theories.
 

aps

Passionate
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 25, 2005
Messages
15,675
Reaction score
2,979
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
I am a huuuuuge Frank Rich fan. I go onto the NYT website on Saturday nights to see if his Sunday article is there already.

This article was not one of his better ones. Yes, he does tear into Bush like nobody's business, but he does synthesize facts in an interesting way. He brings up past facts as well. Sure he is looking at the evidence in away that is negative towards Bush, but that doesn't make his facts incorrect. He will correct himself when he inaccurately reports facts. Rich may be interpreting the facts differently than a Bush supporter would, but who cares? If you don't like his articles, don't read 'em. It's that simple.

aquapub said:
My personal favorite of all the nauseating, mindless personal attacks was this one:

"Neither man engaged the national debate ignited by John Murtha about how our troops might be best redeployed in a recalibrated battle against Islamic radicalism. Neither offered a plan for "victory." Instead, both impugned their critics' patriotism and retreated into the past to defend the origins of the war."

President Bush has had the plan laid out numerous times. Even Democrats should be able to get it by now. We are rebuilding the schools, institutions, reconstructing a functional government and uprooting terrorists. When those jobs are done, we will leave. MURTHA'S suggestion was childish, destructive, and unreasonable. We can't just pull everything out now. Murtha knows this. Murtha was attacking the president, not "engaging in the national debate."
Really? Bush has laid out a plan? Please provide me evidence of this laid-out plan, and your words are insufficient to substantiate your allegation. NO ONE knows what the plans are.

Murtha attacking the president? Yeah right. Notice that the president and the vice president aren't attacking Murtha because (1) Murtha has way too much credibility to attack him and (2) Murtha wasn't attacking them personally.
 
Last edited:

JustMyPOV

Member
Joined
Sep 5, 2005
Messages
143
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
No Republican with half a brain is taking on Murtha because they know it would backfire on them in a big way. That would explain why so many of the Republicans on this forum are choosing to do so. :2wave:

Murtha has served his country in the Korean War and in Viet Nam. He served both as an enlisted man and as an officer in the Marine Corps. He's been serving further in the Congress for the last 30 years and is widely respected on both sides of the aisle.

So far, he's presented the only coherent exit strategy. Saying that we're going to wait until we've completely eliminated the insurgency is ridiculous, because they're just going to keep pouring over the border from other countries for as long as we're occupying their country.

I have to laugh at those of you who say Bush has laid out his exit strategy. If that's the case, why did the Republican controlled Senate just call for him to lay out an exit strategy? :roll: Watched the news lately?
 
Top Bottom