Today on Blogcritics
Home » 9/11 Commission Gives Bush Administration Dismal Grades On Homeland Security

9/11 Commission Gives Bush Administration Dismal Grades On Homeland Security

Please Share...Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Facebook0Share on Google+0Share on LinkedIn0Pin on Pinterest0Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

The now-concluded Sept. 11 Commission gave dismal grades today to the federal government’s efforts to shore up national security and prevent another terror attack on the United States.

Meeting for the last time since being appointed by Congress in 2002, commission members gave the government “more Fs than As” among the 41 grades measuring progress on security recommendations they issued last year.

“We shouldn’t need another wake-up call,” said former commission chairman Thomas Kean, a Republican and former New Jersey governor. “We believe that the terrorists will strike again, so does every responsible expert that we have talked to. And if they do, and these reforms that might have prevented such an attack have not been implemented, what will our excuse be?”

***

Should we be surprised?

The Bush Administration is blaming Congress – spokesman Dan Bartlett was very visible on this morning’s talk shows – in another display of the buck stops anywhere but at the White House.

Bush has had the rare fortune of having Republican majorities in both the House and Senate. A majority of Americans didn’t blame his administration for the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, and until very recently, that same majority felt that he and his fellow Republicans would be better able to defend the homeland than the Democrats.

And what has that faith gotten them? A president who was against the formation of the 9/11 commission, and who (along with the vice president) wouldn’t testify under oath to that commission. A president who was against creating a Department of Homeland Security. A president who stood on the rubble of the World Trade Center in the days after the attack and implied he would bring Al Qaeda to justice, and then launched a war against Iraq – which the 9/11 Commission concluded had no role in the terrorist attacks. A president who has not captured Osama Bin Laden, nor dismantled or even slowed Al Qaeda, and turned Iraq into the terrorist haven that he and his administration falsely suggested it was when trying to convince the American people of the urgent need to go to war. A president who silently approved the Republican leadership in Congress rejecting Democratic proposals to spend Homeland Security dollars to protect chemical and nuclear plants, and airports, sea ports and train stations.

But the administration is good at pointing fingers.

According to an Oct. 30 Associated Press report, the administration far too often has failed to meet Homeland Security deadlines. And rather than admit this shortcoming, the administration instead has offered excuses.

Is the administration doing “everything we can?” Apparently not. Let’s remember, in most cases, the Republican-led Congress set the deadlines. Anyone who spins this into a partisan battle isn’t paying attention to their dance card.

And the deadlines missed weren’t for minor issues, the AP reports.

For example:

— A Homeland Security study on the cost of giving anti-terrorism training to federal law enforcement officers is three years overdue. Its plan to defend ships and ports from attack is six months late. Its rules to protect air cargo from infiltration by terrorists are two months late.

— A Coast Guard report on cargo container security is eight months overdue. A national security plan for marine transportation is well past its April 1 due date.

— The Transportation Security Administration missed a March 17 deadline for a plan to deploy bomb-detection machines at airports.

Why are so many deadlines being missed? Amazingly, the official excuse is that there are too many deadlines.

Homeland Security spokesman Russ Knocke told the AP that the department goes to great lengths to work with Congress. But, he said, “there is an extraordinarily high number of reporting requirements.”

***

So it shouldn’t be that much of a surprise that the Bush Administration and the Republican-led Congress got failing grades from the 9/11 Commission. The only thing they’ve mastered is excuses.

Asked about the panel’s final report, White House spokesman Scott McClellan said, “It’s important to look at some of what they’re talking about.”

Yes, Scott. Look at some of the report – the one A and 12 Bs. Don’t look at the nine Cs, 12 Ds, five Fs and two incompletes. Isn’t that how George W. did it at Yale?

Maybe that’s a cheap shot, but we’re talking about homeland security, one of two defining subject areas for this administration.

When not suggesting that the administration will look at some of the report, McClellan then offered the same empty conservative spin that has been the hallmark of the administration’s politicization of the Sept. 11 tragedy.

He related the commission’s findings to the administration’s campaign in Iraq. “By taking the fight to the enemy abroad, and by doing so, that is keeping them from plotting and planning to attack inside America,” McClellan said.

Because when the administration is caught failing to follow through on its promises, all that it is left with is empty spin.

Powered by

About David R. Mark

  • http://biggesttent.blogspot.com/ Silas Kain

    The Bush Administration is blaming Congress —

    That’s fair. Congress shoulders a great deal of the blame. There’s no pork available when it comes to National Security.

    …that same majority felt that he and his fellow Republicans would be better able to defend the homeland than the Democrats.

    Well, that’s a Democrat problem. The Democrats have consistently been weak in foreign policy. In matters of National Security, the GOP has always been light years ahead in rhetoric. The bottom line is that neither party has done anything proactive.

    Why are so many deadlines being missed? Amazingly, the official excuse is that there are too many deadlines.

    And this is a surprise? Is America really getting the quality government is pays for? Again, this is not a partisan thing. At least there were qualified people in place in the Clinton Administration. I’ve little faith in the people this President has appointed.

    Look at some of the report — the one “A” and 12 “Bs.” Don’t look at the nine “Cs,” 12 “Ds,” five “Fs” and two incompletes. Isn’t that how George W. did it at Yale?

    What do you want? We have lower expectations of our President than Presidents past. He’s lowered the bar, made a mockery out of the Oval Office and while the message he’s trying to convey is rather good, he’s a complete and utter failure on follow through. This man has changed so many horses in midstream that the National Equestrian Association is filing a complaint with the ASPCA.

    Because when the administration is caught failing to follow through on its promises, all that it is left with is empty spin.

    Can’t pin it all on the Federal government, Mr. Mark. State and local officials need to be proactive. Again, the lessons from Katrina prove that there must be better communications between all levels of government. They are all in a turf war, worrying about giving up some power. Has it dawned on anyone that this is America’s turf war? Unless people come out of their homes and get proactive in their neighborhoods, the same drivel will be spewed forth by McClellan and his successors.

    It’s easy for us to point fingers when we’re outside of the Beltway and not actively involved in the process. Judging by the turnout of the electorate I give the American people an “F” for actually caring about how we’re governed. Imagine, it took weeks for the Israelis to form a third political party with balls. Can you see Americans forming a third party which could stand up to the status quo and make a difference? Let’s stop pointing fingers at George W. Bush and Congress. Let’s start by going to local town meetings and talking to each other. Get involved damn it!

  • http://www.suddennothing.net Alisha Karabinus

    Silas Kain for President. Damn.

    Silas, that is an excellent point about the third party issues. All WE do is sit around and point fingers about everyone else pointing fingers — we don’t do anything about it. We didn’t vote Bush out, but it was no great secret that he wasn’t shaping up to be the best President every, war or no war. We haven’t done anything.

    But then again, who can we elect? Very few of our politicians seem to have any balls at all.

  • gonzo marx

    oh my stars and garters….where to begin?

    i can easily agree there are plenty of places where this whole Issue can spew “blame”

    i can also Agree with Silas that a big part of what needs to be done is required of the Citizens…being Informed, getting off their asses and making a shitstorm to demonstrate their displeasure

    however..the Responsibility for the ENTIRE range of fuck ups that our elected representatives and the Agencies they run in OUR fucking Names belongs directly in the lap of the totalitarian GOP controlled government

    lesser Responsibility to those state Administrations that have spent money earmarked for defense and security on bullshit pork

    and a special Ring of Hell is reserved for the Profiteers…eternal vivisections with a rusty spork would be far too merciful for the traitorous swine who exploit decent Intent for the False Profit of $

    i would love to see a viable third Party show up…but i ani’t holding my breath…i had hoped for the Bull Moose Party to rise again in 2000 with McCain…but the olde Soldier bent over and took one for the Gipper’s Ghost dressed in the NeoCon’s “noble lie”

    what to do?

    good fucking Question….

    me?..i’ll be working/hoping/begging JuJu, (may his tusks always glow with the LIght of Reason), for complete Gridlock come ’06…as long as the opposing gang(read:political Party), holds either House or Senate…the sheer possibility of supeona powered Investigations is usually enough to keep all of the miserable pigfuckers from stealing TOO much

    and until another Way of political Thinking steps into the limelight…one that puts the well being of the People … rather than the money and Lobbyists… as the Most Important Priority, comes along ….

    well..then this rambling Fool will be happy just for some quiet and Gridlock

    we have seen just how fucking abysmally unfettered Power has been handled by the GOP

    where’s Vito Corleone when we need him? at least he would have gotten shit taken care of

    your mileage may vary

    Excelsior!

  • http://biggesttent.blogspot.com/ Silas Kain

    If Vito Corleone were running the Executive branch you can bet your buttocks that there’d be efficiency or there would be mass executions on Capitol Hill.

  • G. Oren

    Good posts all – Gonzo has me laughing out loud. Bring on gridlock, at least then someone might actually care about homeland security.

  • Dave Nalle

    I have to point out – having now read the report – that the Bush administration isn’t blaming Congress, the commission is blaming congress, specifically in the areas of homeland security funding and reforming the FBI. They also put some blame on local jurisdictions and a certain amount on the administration. I’d hardly say they singled out the administration for the lion’s share. Good lord, they even blamed citizens for not pressuring government enough to implement their suggestions.

    Dave

  • http://biggesttent.blogspot.com/ Silas Kain

    Oh my God, they blamed citizens. It’s about friggin’ time! We’re so busy blaming the government that we’ve forgotten that we ARE the government. We can make or break any politican if we choose. It’s no wonder Jesse Ventura is a cynic. When I look at the talent that comes here to BC it makes my blood boil to know that this talent could be put to great use in government. But why should any of us try? Running for office means selling your soul to the highest bidder. Your entire life is placed under a microscope. The only “G” word we care about in this country is GOSSIP.

  • http://jabbs.blogspot.com david r. mark

    Dave, how is it you are so consistently fact-challenged???

    DAVID R. MARK: “The Bush Administration is blaming Congress — spokesman Dan Bartlett was very visible on this morning’s talk shows — in another display of the buck stops anywhere but at the White House.”

    DAVE NALLE: “The Bush administration isn’t blaming Congress.”

    THE FACTS SHOWING THAT DAVE NALLE IS WRONG:

    From PBS Online Newshour, Dec. 5:

    DAN BARTLETT: They are funding things based on old models, pre-9/11 models. We think it’s important that homeland security dollars go to where the threats are. And that’s something that we’ll be constantly pushing the Congress to change.

    From the New York Sun, Dec. 5:

    A White House counselor, Dan Bartlett, said the Bush administration wants to base funding on threat but is frustrated by the way Congress spends homeland security funding.

    “They are funding things based on old models, pre-9/11 models. We think it’s important that homeland security dollars go to where the threats are,” Mr. Bartlett said yesterday on ABC’s “Good Morning America.”

    From Fox News, Dec. 5:

    “Congress has more work to do in the way that they fund certain grants and projects at the local level for homeland security fundin,” White House Communications Director Dan Bartlett told FOX News.

  • http://www.futonreport.net/ Matthew T. Sussman

    DRM, from the quotes you lay out, I don’t see any sign or mention of blame. I see a drive to change something, but I don’t see declarations of “Look what you did! Bad boy!” and then they rub their noses in it.

    That’s just what I see, though.

  • david r. mark

    All I see is Bartlett making the rounds and talking about how Congress is using an old model to fund Homeland Security, frustrating the White House. He said the same thing over and over on all the morning talk shows.

    Speaking about the White House, Bartlett and McClellan each said that progress has been made, but more has to be done.

    Take those two thoughts side by side. Which one sounds negative, and which one sounds positive?

    Bartlett may be trying to change something, but to promote the need for change, he’s suggesting that there’s something wrong — and that something is Congress.

  • Nancy

    Gonzo, good rant, as always.

    I would ask, Silas, how the American public can be responsible for anything, when in fact they can’t even be trusted to be responsible for themselves, witness getting to safety before H. Katrina? They possess no common sense, no ability to think logically or rationally, Madison Ave has seen to that. From birth, 99% of the population of this country has been conditioned, like Pavlov’s dogs, to react on command to whatever sound bites are played loudest & most insistently. They respond to fearmongering & glib lies, not facts or presentations requiring them to weigh all angles and judge accordingly. Whatever is packaged slickest & marketed most aggressively, wins, as we have seen in the last two elections. They have become in fact as well as theory, the embodiment of Kornbluth’s “Marching Morons”. The 1% who can & do think & judge rationally & logically, cannot possibly hope to stem the tide against such an army of zombified consumers of dumbed-down pap. It would be like blaming sheep for being preyed on by wolves, which is essentially the situation we have here. Consider: 30, 40 years ago, people could be counted on to rise up in outrage & demonstrate against what they considered to be evil, misgovernment, wrong. Today? You can’t get them worked up unless you’re marketing the latest electronic toy like the Xbox. We are, as the title of another article says, a nation of morons, idiots, and fools, bred & carefully educated to respond only to advertising & 15-second sound bites.

  • http://www.futonreport.net/ Matthew T. Sussman

    Positive or negative? Who cares?

    For high-paid officials, politicians sure are whiny babies when it comes to “bad words.”

    What to do about Homeland Security is another example of an issue that everyone in the nation’s capital agrees on and cares not to admit it until someone on “the other side” decides to “take the heat.”

  • Nancy

    Homeland Insecurity. I can tell you where the HS money is, as can anyone else who volunteers for a fire or rescue dept.: it ain’t here in the community where it’s supposed to be, fer sure.

    I volunteer at a fire dept. not too far from DC. There’s lots of money around here, and plenty of pols living in the area, too, so you’d think we’d have plenty of FEMA funds & the HS equipment we were promised 4 years ago to protect their sorry spoiled butts? Hah. We scrape & scrounge for every nickel & set of PBI gloves. So where IS the money? I can tell you: some months ago, the WP ran a story about the executive chef at the HS HQ, and also the really nifty designer private dining room for the upper crust HS personnel, and the really, really nifty leather-upholstered, museum-quality art decorated, Chinese silk rugs on the floor, fine-china & real sterling silver furnished, super private dining room for his nibs the HS Secretary & his cronies. No SCBA gear; no HAZMAT equipment or training; but the BushCo HS Secretary gets to eat in style.

    Your tax dollars at work.

  • Dave Nalle

    Sorry David, make that ‘the Bush administration wasn’t first in blaming congress – the commission put the blame there first’. Now go peddle your bigotry somewhere else.

    Dave

  • Dave Nalle

    DRM, from the quotes you lay out, I don’t see any sign or mention of blame. I see a drive to change something, but I don’t see declarations of “Look what you did! Bad boy!” and then they rub their noses in it.

    That’s just what I see, though.

    Suss, that’s because when you see statements from administrative representatives you take them on their merits like a sensible person. When David sees them he assumes they’re part of a vast conspiracy that exists entirely in his head.

    Dave

  • gonzo marx

    ok…wait a second…

    Mr Nalle sez…
    *Suss, that’s because when you see statements from administrative representatives you take them on their merits like a sensible person.*

    the Variable here is “on their merits”….Apologists for the Administration tend to see those statements via the rose tint of their personal sympathies for the Bush ideology

    those that hate the Admin see just the opposite

    but let us take a look at the Objective fucking Reality here…

    THIS Administration has been in charge, with complete control of all assets and aspects of not opnly the problem, but the money and the ability to shape Policy for the Soloution

    have they done a good job? have they lived up to THEIR OWN FUCKING TIMETABLE for accomplishing their OWN goals as set out by themselves?

    the Answer, gentle Readers, is a resounding FUCK NO!!!!

    no matter how you try and spin it, no matter how you attemnpt to shift the blame, no matter which way you attempt semantic tricks or distractions….the final, completely Objective conclusion based solely on the policies/goals provided by the Administration itself show an abysmal fucking Failure

    now, i know some folks have wanted to place a chunk of this at the feet of the American Public…that IS where the ultimate Responsibility lies, because we ARE a government by and of the People…

    however…once in office, and when a single Party controls every branch of Government so not only the People but the Opposition Party cannot effectively pursue investigatory checks and balances….then the SOLE Responsibility lies in the hands of the “ruling Party”…Q.E.D.

    to top it all off, the Administration’s hand picked Commission on these matters not only made reccomendations that the WH said they would follow…but has now given failing “grades” when it comes to many “key” areas…

    where are the Priorities? apparently NOT with making our Nation more secure against this threat than we were over 4 years ago…at least not according to the 9/11 Commission

    so where the fuck is all this money going? what the fuck is the newest,largest governmental Agency, the Dept of Homeland Security, actually DOING?

    distract, distort, deny and destroy…the tactics of this Administration when dealing with bad news or criticism….

    fuck that

    get the job done…period

    our Responsibility, as Citizens lies in tossing out the bastards that are NOT doing their jobs comes 2006…and between now and then, letting the bums know we are Watching, and we are pissed off

    so those who can’t accept the objective realities of the situation…on EITHER side… do us all a Favor…shut the fuck up

    yer not helping

    nuff said?

    Excelsior!

  • http://www.diablog.us Dave Nalle

    Yes, Gonzo. But the fact remains that being half-incompetent, venal and feckless doesn’t make them evil as DRM would have you believe. Sure, they’ve fucked up here and there, but that doesn’t mean that their every statement needs to be spun into some sort of lie or conspiracy or that their motives are evil and inhumane.

    Dave

  • david r. mark

    Dave Nalle: “(T)he Bush administration isn’t blaming Congress”

    Dave Nalle: “(M)ake that ‘the Bush administration wasn’t first in blaming congress – the commission put the blame there first’

    So once again, Dave Nalle agrees with me. But since he can’t admit that, he has to immediately turn around and smear me. Hence …

    Dave Nalle: “When David sees them he assumes they’re part of a vast conspiracy that exists entirely in his head.”

    What conspiracy? I said very simply:

    “The Bush Administration is blaming Congress — spokesman Dan Bartlett was very visible on this morning’s talk shows”

    Then I backed that up with direct quotes from Bartlett in which he criticizes Congress, says how Congress has frustrated the administration, and how the administration is making progress, but could make more, if not for Congress.

    How much more straightforward can you get?

    But Dave Nalle knows that if he can steer the conversation to this minor point, maybe people will stop paying attention to the larger point — the Republican failure to follow through on Homeland Security promises — or maybe they’ll stop reading the thread altogether.

    Dave Nalle has learned well from the myriad of conservative guests populating the television and radio talk shows. When the information — even from non-partisan or bipartisan sources — is anti-Bush, they start flailing their arms, trying to change the subject and create a lot of white noise, to confuse the audience or to turn them off altogether. Bravo, Dave, you would make Ken Mehlman proud.

    Dave (to steal a line from the recent movie, “Mean Girls”), just because you call me stupid doesn’t make you smart. Every time that you smear me or resort to name-calling, I’ll just respond by showing BC readers the facts. You aren’t going to prevent me from continuing to use facts as the basis for my articles — even if those facts don’t please true believers like you.

  • david r. mark

    Dave Nalle: “But the fact remains that being half-incompetent, venal and feckless doesn’t make them evil as DRM would have you believe.”

    I never said evil. I’ve said the Bush Administration has misled the nation. I’ve said their priorities are wrong. I’ve said they’ve flip-flopped. I’ve said they failed to follow through on promises. And I’ve defended each of those statements by attributing facts from mainstream media sources, the GAO, congressional testimony, and their own words. I’ve never used the word “evil,” or any synonym, to describe the Bush Administration or its supporters.

    But hey, keep smearing me, Dave. When you’re fact-challenged, I guess that’s all you have left.

  • Dave Nalle

    David, I’ve laid out more facts than you can shake a stick at and pointed out flaw after flaw in your own finely spun factoids. Keep denying all you like, but the truth is obvious.

    As for your unreasoning hatred, I assumed it was because you think Bush is evil. Maybe you hate him for more personal reasons. That might be even worse.

    Dave

  • http://www.futonreport.net/ Matthew T. Sussman

    Personally I don’t care what someone thinks of somebody. Like Dave N. said about my feelings in Comment 9, I place value in words, not meta-feelings behind them, because I can’t prove they exist. Even if I could, nothing profitable result from it.

    The argument occurs outside the arguer, so who gives a damn what’s inside?

    Now, Dave R.M. makes a good point now and then, and if nothing else he’s a good news gatherer, but some of them — like the one about Michael Brown eating at a nice restaurant and getting a dogsitter — make no sense to me.

    But as long as I’m on the topic, I’ve never been a fan of a piece which puts emphasis on certain phrases, which David R.M. As a reader, I’ll be the judge of what sticks out in my head. Bold tags are only good for formatting and subheading.

  • david r. mark

    As for your unreasoning hatred, I assumed it was because you think Bush is evil. Maybe you hate him for more personal reasons. That might be even worse. >> Dave Nalle

    You’re really just a broken record, aren’t you?

    I don’t hate the president. I don’t think he’s evil. If I did, I would say so.

    I’m disappointed with the president. I’m frustrated by him. I don’t understand many of the decisions he makes. I don’t agree with his priorities.

    But please, Dave, keep smearing. You have nothing else to offer, apparently.

  • david r. mark

    Matthew, I wasn’t offering “meta feelings.” I offered in the original article that Bartlett was blaming Congress. If you prefer, I could have said he was criticizing Congress.

    The quotes I offered Dave Nalle I think show pretty clearly that Bartlett went onto all the morning shows and, each time, made sure to criticize Congress.

    To me, that’s classic spin. The 9/11 Commission blamed the White House and Congress. Bartlett goes on to defend the White House, and to say that Congress has work to do.

    Again, I didn’t think I was going out on a limb by stating this. But certainly you are entitled to interpret Bartlett’s quotes differently. I can accept that a lot more than Dave Nalle denying the quotes were made, then changing his mind and saying that the quotes were only restating what the commission said, and then changing his mind again and smearing me.

  • http://www.futonreport.net/ Matthew T. Sussman

    Exactly. And again, I don’t care what a writer thinks. I care what a writer writes. Maybe it’s my inability to read people’s minds, but I leave that for Miss Cleo and Deanna Troi.

    But the way you two Daves get into it is so hideous, I’d rather watch Star Jones on her wedding night.

  • david r. mark

    Matthew, I hope you recognize that this is exactly what Dave Nalle wants. He wants people to be turned off, so that no real discussion can occur.

    What would you like me to do, allow Dave to smear me, claim I’m lying or misleading or hateful or whatever bullying he comes up with? Then it’s left hanging that I’m wrong and Dave is right. Is that better?

    I’ve begged Dave to stick to discussing the issues, rather than resort to name calling and smearing. But he refuses to do it, and BC apparently doesn’t care.

    I’m open to suggestions, though. How does one defend one’s work against a bully?

  • http://www.futonreport.net/ Matthew T. Sussman

    If someone’s bothering me, I ignore it. On the Internet that’s pretty easy to do.

  • david r. mark

    True, but on BC, if you write something, and then someone loudly calls you a liar and ridicules your points, do you just take it?

    Isn’t that the problem with cable news chats like Hardball? If one side is telling the truth, and the other side says the first side is lying, what’s the viewer to believe?

  • http://www.futonreport.net/ Matthew T. Sussman

    Cable news is different, because it’s live and facial reactions say it all.

    It’s the Internet. You can stop moving your fingers around and nothing is said. You can run away from the computer and nobody will know. You can cry under your desk and nobody will hear it.

    Just keep writing. The reader will/should respond to the piece based on its individual merit, like I did with that one guy’s quotes earlier.

    Typically Nalle’s posts remarks are more factual and spot on but they seem to get messy when he enters your posts. It’s probably bad blood that’s brewed for a while that just can’t get patched up, but there’s 1,000 of us, even more who just comment, and there’s bound to be people who can’t play nice.

    If I may speak as an editor, the bold tags put the story a bit on the sensational side, whereas the text alone has a more stern tone I think you’re going for, which separates you from other political writers on your side of the spectrum that … aren’t … so … mature (Leaves out names).

  • gonzo marx

    David has nailed it right there…far too much of the GOP machine is geared towards, as i stated before…distract,distort,deny and destroy…

    in a recent Interview a senior writer for the Weekly Standard, Matt Labash, opened the door and let some of the “sunlight” in for us all to see….

    *JournalismJobs.com: Why have conservative media outlets like the Weekly Standard and Fox News Channel become more popular in the past few years?

    Matt Labash: Because they feed the rage. We bring the pain to the liberal media. I say that mockingly, but it’s true somewhat. We come with a strong point of view and people like point-of-view journalism. While all these hand-wringing Freedom Forum types talk about objectivity, the conservative media likes to rap the liberal media on the knuckles for not being objective. We’ve created this cottage industry in which it pays to be un-objective. It pays to be subjective as much as possible. It’s a great way to have your cake and eat it too. Criticize other people for not being objective. Be as subjective as you want. It’s a great little racket. I’m glad we found it, actually.*

    so..self admittedly by a writer for the Weekly Standard, we see that Objective reporting is NOT what they have in mind..instead it is all pure Propaganda…writing for furtherance of a political goal…Truth is not required…

    now, remember that folks like Bill Kristol, Krauthammer and many other of these “pundits” who do the news circuits and/or write for Weekly Standard or National Review are card carrying NeoCons…Apostles and Disciples of Strauss and his “noble Lie” that needs to be fed to the public so that they can carry out their Agenda

    what Agenda?…check the PNAC website…look at the folks that have signed on…then count how many have been in the Administration…even better, check who laid out much of the Iraq policy

    folks like Perle and Wolfowitz…and Wolfowitz’s Disciple who had been his student in college…Scooter Libby

    nice bunch of folks , eh?

    note the SAME tactics David speaks about used by ALL of these miserable pigfuckers on the TV news channels…

    a common tactic for them to use on the television is the “fillibuster”….they will ramble and rant for as long as possible, knowing the segment is finite and that every second they talk is one less for the opponents view, or even the Interviewer/moderator

    if you watched the Rice confirmation hearings…or really any of the Administration’s tough appointees that needed Senate confirmation you will see two things..

    one…contrary to normal, they all had literal time limits on how long the hearings could take

    two…the subject of the hearings rambled on , repeating themselves, going off on tangents…ANYTHING to kill time

    next time you see one of the news shows where there are both sides there…break out your stop watch….i have

    then go and re-read what i have Quoted above

    i could not make this shit up, kiddies

    woe is U.S.

    Excelsior!

  • david r. mark

    I use the bold tags because my pieces tend to be longer, and I want to highlight key words or quotes. I’m banking on the idea that many readers skim — the bold words give them a reason potentially to slow down and focus.

    It’s not so much for sensationalism, but to highlight.

    The publication that I work for bolds names (individuals and companies) for a similar reason. Maybe that’s how I got the idea.

    Appreciate your thoughts, Matthew.

  • G. Oren

    David R. – I thought your piece was pretty tight and to the point, but, I’m not expecting you to heap praise on the administration. This is an important topic and the administration and congress have performed poorly because they don’t take it seriously enough.

    Gonzo has hit on something with his quotes from Mr. Labash, and this dove-tails with your previous post David R. about conservative media. IMO the “conservative media” started running off the rails early in the Clinton administration. They went to so much effort to demonize the man for all his assorted peccadilloes, and were largely succesful with the portion of the voting populace they care about, that the echo chamber effect of shouting louder and blaming someone else has overwhelmed logical thinking. For many of my fellow conservatives and Republicans, support for Bush is a glandular function.

    This is not to say that dems like Howard Dean are not just as prone to emotional error – the dems so succesfully demonized Nixon thirty years ago that they brainwashed themselves into thinking the country agreed with them on the liberal agenda. It took them nearly two decades to realize that they had won only one presidential election since 1968 and that they needed to change their tune. “Ideas have consequences” – Richard Weaver.

    Gonzo – I’m still laughing out loud!

  • http://www.fifthdentist.blogspot.com The Fifth Dentist

    Was Nero really responsible for the burning of Rome? He didn’t start the fire? What was he supposed to do about it anyway? He was only the emperor, not a god. And I understand that he was in the middle of reading “My Pet Goat” in the original latin when the the smoke was first discovered. I’m sure there was plenty of blame to go around. I just hope that our beloved leader isn’t treated so unfairly by future historians.

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    To me, that’s classic spin. The 9/11 Commission blamed the White House and Congress. Bartlett goes on to defend the White House, and to say that Congress has work to do.

    Are you naive or just pretending to be totally clueless? That’s his job. Why don’t you mention Pelosi and Reid gloating and blaming the White House?

    Dave

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    David has nailed it right there…far too much of the GOP machine is geared towards, as i stated before…distract,distort,deny and destroy…

    And there’s the heart of my problem with David and all of his postings. He’s part of the equivalent machine for the other side. From Dean down they are spinning, skewing, slanting and shirking responsibility just as much and just as hard as the GOP is distracting, distorting and denying.

    David has a point – one point he hits over and over again – but he never admits that it’s a spectrum-wide problem, not one limited to the GOP, or that he’s signed on to be part of the problem.

    And 5D, technically Nero WAS a God.

    Dave

  • http://www.fifthdentist.blogspot.com The Fifth Dentist

    Nalle: “And 5D, technically Nero WAS a God.”

    Typically, only after death:

    From the Wikipedia: “Generally Roman emperors avoided claiming the status of a deity in their own lives, even if some critiques insisted they should, and not doing so would be considered a sign of weakness. Other Romans would ridicule the notion that a Roman emperor was to be considered a living god, or would even make fun of the deification of an emperor after his death. Most often, deceased emperors were the subject of worship during this period — at least, the ones who did not become so unpopular with their subjects that the populace considered their assasination a relief. Most emperors benefited from a speedy deification of their predecessor: if that predecessor was a close relative (even if only by adoption), that meant that the new emperor could count on a “near to deified” status of being a divi filius, without needing to be too presumptuous regarding his own godhead status.”

    I think President Bush should follow the Roman example and not proclaim himself a god while still in office.

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    A lot of scholars, especially historians of the early Christian church maintain that Nero claimed to be a god while he was alive, based on the fact that he was the son of Claudius who was a god, thus drawing a parallell to Jesus. Early Christians apparently used this as the basis of their belief that Nero was an antichrist.

    Dave

  • http://www.fifthdentist.blogspot.com The Fifth Dentist

    Alright, I stand corrected. Since you’re a scholar of ancient history, riddle me this, switching from rome to greece, do you think Bush could have learned anything valuable from studying the peloponnesian war? In my view, the self-destruction of Athens during that period closely parallels the present fiasco. Do you see any parallels?

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    Thucydides – ewww!

    But no, I don’t see that many parallels. The big difference is the Athens overextended itself enormously more economically in the peloponesian war than it’s possible for the US to do. They may have been the first among the city states, but they weren’t economically and technologically as far ahead of their neighbors as the US is ahead of Iraq or most of the rest of the world. You might have a point on the overly ambitious leadership, though.

    Dave

  • http://jabbs.blogspot.com david r. mark

    To me, that’s classic spin. The 9/11 Commission blamed the White House and Congress. Bartlett goes on to defend the White House, and to say that Congress has work to do. >> David R. Mark

    Are you naive or just pretending to be totally clueless? That’s his job. Why don’t you mention Pelosi and Reid gloating and blaming the White House? >> Dave Nalle

    So, to review:

    1) Dave Nalle calls me a liar and says the White House didn’t blame Congress.

    2) Dave Nalle calls me a liar and says that the White House wasn’t the first to blame Congress.

    3) Dave Nalle calls me naive for pointing out that the White House blamed Congress.

    Do you see any inconsistency with Dave Nalle’s arguments?

  • http://alienboysworld.blogspot.com Christopher Rose

    Dave Nalle: Re your #34, there is actually rather a key difference between DRM and you:-

    He is criticising the government that acts in his name, the people in power and their policies. You are criticising the currently losing team for apeing the people in power.

    I would have thought it made more sense to worry a little more about the guys with the big sticks rather than the wannabees, but that’s just me.

    Gotta say, the more the Reps and the Dems slug it out, from the outside it’s becoming increasingly more difficult to tell them apart. That’s got to benefit the incumbents more, right?

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    ave Nalle: Re your #34, there is actually rather a key difference between DRM and you:-

    He is criticising the government that acts in his name, the people in power and their policies. You are criticising the currently losing team for apeing the people in power.

    I’m just going after the people I see as most dangerous to the country on the issues that really matter. I tend to agree with the Democrats on the minor issues like abortion, but if they ever reassert themselves we really are up a creek in so many important ways that it’s not worth cutting them any slack.

    I would have thought it made more sense to worry a little more about the guys with the big sticks rather than the wannabees, but that’s just me.

    As I see it the GOP can be influenced in positive ways while they are in power with a certain amount of encouragement. Their hearts are in the right place on the most important issues, and frankly it’s the democrats who have created an atmosphere where those issues have all been overshadowed and back-burnered by the Iraq war. Bush had clearly been planning to do great things for the people of the US in his second term, and I blame the left for stopping him.

    Gotta say, the more the Reps and the Dems slug it out, from the outside it’s becoming increasingly more difficult to tell them apart. That’s got to benefit the incumbents more, right?

    Actually, I think it would go the other way. If everyone is hateful, don’t you stand a better chance with a fresh face than with those who are already in positions of power and doing a bad job? It might just help challengers in both parties – which sounds great to me.

    Dave

  • Nancy

    I have a question I’d like all of you to answer, not because I’m trying to put you on the spot, but because I am genuinely perplexed.

    If someone deliberately distorts information, and uses it to deliberately mislead others, especially into something that will cost others their lives, such as a war, why is that person NOT “evil” in your opinion(s)? Why (or how) can you consider them merely feckless & venal when their avowed methodologies are “distract, deny, distort, & destroy”? It seems to me there’s a huge element of deliberate maliciousness in that 4-D objective that certainly qualifies persons who practice or advocate such, to be evil. What about it?

  • david r. mark

    I don’t see the value in personal attacks. I’d rather just stick to the facts.

    If I point out a flip-flop or a distortion or an effort to mislead by someone in the administration, then the reader can decide how they feel about that person.

    In other words, my name-calling won’t likely persuade or dissuade.

  • gonzo marx

    and here we have the “nut” of most political problems facing the Nation today…

    Mr Nalle sez…
    *I’m just going after the people I see as most dangerous to the country on the issues that really matter. I tend to agree with the Democrats on the minor issues like abortion, but if they ever reassert themselves we really are up a creek in so many important ways that it’s not worth cutting them any slack.*

    now..i’m not picking on Mr Nalle here…just using this Quote to show a severe problem in American politics at this point in our history

    far too much, we have folks who have pre-judged ANYTHING based solely on bullshit sterotypical, broad brush and factually inaccurate views of one political “gang” and so they stay with the one they have felt comfortable with…EVEN when they totally disagree with certani individuals or policies

    i mean, folks who don’t look at the actual fucking Issue involved, but who go…”well, they are FOR it, so i am AGAINST it” before they even know what the fuck the actual Issue is, or how it will affect the Nation one way or the other

    not only does this false binary approach shut down actual communication…but it stops ANY kind of discourse as to what the “other” options may be on an Issue…changing it into some kind of monolithic “us versus them” bullshit without examination, analysis or even listening to the objective facts involved

    so on one side you have folks like Mr Nalle here in his quote above, that doesn’t care about anything else but keeping one “gang” out…no matter how rotten the gang that is “in” are…or what the Opponents are actually saying, who they really are or what they are trying to do

    there are PLENTY of folks on the Dem side who do the same fucking thing…

    why do i harp on the GOP ones so much?….various reasons of my own….but the big one is that THEY are fucking RUNNING the ENTIRE federal govrnment right now, and have been for a few years…and thus i hold THEM accountable for what i perceive as fuck ups AFTER i look around at it

    would i get as harsh at the dems…bet yer ass i would…

    but this rant is to be harsh at the closed minded sheeple that blindly follow the Lie of an Ideology NEITHER “party” adheres to, rather than look at what the REAL issues and problems are…much less trying to fix the ACTUAL problems we face

    instead, year after year, we are treated to the same old “god, guns, gays and abortion” mantras

    and there is SO much more that is imperative in our Nation…so much that is crucial to our country’s well being…that has NOTHING to do with the steaming piles of fecal matter tossed in our faces by the “strategists” who deal more in Madison avenue hype on a political campaign than they do with trying to solve the actual problems of the People

    too busy stocking the warchest with the special interest money and bending over for K street

    IMO…fuck the political “gangs” and their self serving bullshit…pay attention to the real Issues, NOT the gangs who lie to you

    yes, many times it comes down to a “lesser of two evils” kind of Hobson’s choice…my advice…choose Gridlock…

    but keep informed, keep an open mind…and NEVER let yourself become a stooge, even inadvertantly, for the “gangs” that rape our Nation after being elected to protect it

    nuff said?

    Excelsior!

  • Bliffle

    Gonzo is right. The absolutist view that Nalle expressed is simple bigotry.

  • Nancy

    Good rant on that last point of Gonzo’s on another piece on BC, about Morons: that we are all idiots to blindly follow the red herrings thrown to us by the political parties while ignoring the REAL issues that actually matter.

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    Gonzo, the rant you went off on is at best tangentially related to anything I said and even less related to reality. Speaking as someone who has pretty much had it with the democrats, I have to enlighten you. It’s not because of their promises or their ‘philosophy’, such as it is, but because of the groups they associate with and who drive their activism and the agenda which those groups are pushing.

    My negative reaction to the democrats is exactly like many peoples suspicion of the Republicans because of their association with fundamentalist religious groups and their agendas. The democrats are associated with people who are equally fanatical and crazed on the other end of the spectrum.

    The key difference between the two parties is what issues their fanatics are crazed about, and the positions of the democrat associated extremists are more dangerous to my welfare and the welfare of my family and friends and the nation as a whole than the beliefs of extremists in the Republican camp.

    If all we had to deal with are the moderates of the two parties things would be a lot less serious. But our choice isn’t between Lieberman and McCain, it’s between the American Family Association and Moveon.org, because we always have to be prepared for the possibility that these extreme groups will get a real voice in the running of their chosen party.

    Dave

  • gonzo marx

    Mr Nalle…we will just have to agre to disagree

    i understand that your own perceptions are colored by the baseline postulates of your Thought…as are mine …as are everytone’s

    a big part of my point was that i look for the EFFORT of at least attempting an objective view on a Subject before making up one’s mind

    and that far too many i see/hear/read don’t even bother

    hope that helps

    Excelsior!

  • http://alienboysworld.blogspot.com/ Christopher Rose

    DAVE: The only reason you’ve “pretty much had it with the democrats” is that you are experiencing the slow drift to the right that happens to many in your stage of life.

    I always swore I would never let that happen to me and like to hope that it never will.

    To take the attitude you do is simply buying into the political debate of the establishment. The reality is that both of the main US political parties are useless and not even trying to deal with any of the major issues of the day.

    Picking one party over the other is part of the problem not the solution.

  • Bliffle

    If all we have to choose between are extremists of different stripes then we are indeed doomed. I suppose the extremists are attractive because of their apparent commitment to belief, but, you know, moderates must be brave also and not just cede vigor and strength and courage to the extremes.

  • http://www.volkskrant.com/weblog/pub/blogs/blog.php?uid=1507 Grozdan Popov

    Terrorists and all sorts of extremists may be revoltingly mean and all that but they are not dumb. Attack the US again? They will seed havoc and expect to get an upper hand in small, poor countries run by incompetent, corrupt politicians. There the extremists might, just might, stand some chance to actually impose their rule of terror under whatever populist slogan they decide will give them some support. Democracy, transparency, clean hands, legality need be supported in those countries so that the springs of terrorism be dried out.

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    a big part of my point was that i look for the EFFORT of at least attempting an objective view on a Subject before making up one’s mind

    Gonzo, I can be objective on a subject when it’s considered in and of itself. No problem. What I can’t be objective about is those people who want to drag our nation into a morass of negativism and self-destructive policies.

    Dave

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    DAVE: The only reason you’ve “pretty much had it with the democrats” is that you are experiencing the slow drift to the right that happens to many in your stage of life.

    A believable scenario, except that I’m far more moderate today than I was 20 or 25 years ago when I was a practicing anti-government activist on the extreme libertarian right. I think that as people age they probably move more towards the middle rather than more towards the right, but to many on the left considering their compatriots in despair, that looks like a shift to the right.

    Dave

  • gonzo marx

    Mr Nalle sez…
    *What I can’t be objective about is those people who want to drag our nation into a morass of negativism and self-destructive policies.*

    and there’s the rub…i see the GOP as the “moral relativists”, many greedheads, pawns of K street, whose policies over the last five years have harmed this nation in more ways than i care to contemplate…

    and i can list them and cite the examples…we may not agree on them all, and some of what i see as harm, you do not…and probably vice versa

    that is the decent Point of discussion

    however…from all accounts, by my observations of your positions and writings here on BC…i have my doubts as to our agreement on what is an “objective viewpoint”…especially since it appears to me that you spend much effort in actively acting as an Apologist for the Administration

    ah well…

    Excelsior!

  • http://www.diablog.us Dave Nalle

    and there’s the rub…i see the GOP as the “moral relativists”,

    What’s wrong with moral relativism? You prefer moralistic absolutism? Moral relativism is the moderate position. You know what right and wrong are and you know when you have to do a little wrong to make things right.

    many greedheads,

    Greed is good. It’s the one pure motivation you can always trust.

    however…from all accounts, by my observations of your positions and writings here on BC…i have my doubts as to our agreement on what is an “objective viewpoint”…especially since it appears to me that you spend much effort in actively acting as an Apologist for the Administration

    That’s the position you and others put me in. You create an environment where defending the administration is the only
    right thing to do because they are constantly under biased attack. When Clinton was in power and Republicans went after him unfairly I defended him. I’m naturally inclined to come to the aid of whoever is getting piled on at the time.

    Dave

  • G. Oren

    Dave:

    Your odyssey is similar to mine, and I think you make a good point about the unreasoning elements of both parties. As to “moral relativism” and greed, Gonzo (I think) prefers justice, maybe even egalitariansim, you’re maintaining a more libertarian stance. And I don’t mean to offend either of you by butting into your converation. We need to consider the philosophical underpinnings of what we think.

  • http://alienboysworld.blogspot.com/ Christopher Rose

    DAVE NALLE: “That’s the position you and others put me in.” Now that is the biggest BS you have EVER written.

    There are people on here who are justifiably questioning the actions of their own government, the very process of democracy in action. You, however, feel you have to defend the people in power regardless.

    And your justification for this? “I’m naturally inclined to come to the aid of whoever is getting piled on at the time.” Now that’s funny! Alas, it’s also completely wrong.

    You have recently admitted that you are seriously prejudiced against the Democrats (and no, I ain’t going looking for the quote) – and now this!

    Keep wearing those tinted lenses Dave, they’re really helping that psycho-astigmatism thing you have going on…

  • troll

    GO – how can you establish a just society without acknowledging that people are free actors – the basic libertarian tenet…every action a matter of choice

    libertarians rule – ! (which has nothing to do with party or platform…nor the absurd Randian emotionalism)

    IMO – the critical difference between our jousters is the ‘ends justify means’ argument and questions concerning what constitutes an ethical choice

    troll

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    Your odyssey is similar to mine, and I think you make a good point about the unreasoning elements of both parties. As to “moral relativism” and greed, Gonzo (I think) prefers justice, maybe even egalitariansim, you’re maintaining a more libertarian stance. And I don’t mean to offend either of you by butting into your converation. We need to consider the philosophical underpinnings of what we think.

    Sounds about right to me, Oren. I believe in equality of opportunity, but not the equality that comes from a government handout or out of the barrel of a gun – meaning any use of government force to ‘equalize’ people. Right now the Republican party is doing an awful lot of things wrong and has some rotten people in it, but the one thing it is not doing is trying to equalize people by reducing everyone to the level of the poorest in society. That policy is embraced by only one major party in this nation and it’s a recipe for disaster.

    Dave

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    DAVE NALLE: “That’s the position you and others put me in.” Now that is the biggest BS you have EVER written.

    Shall we say, then, that that’s the position that others make it appropriate for me to take?

    There are people on here who are justifiably questioning the actions of their own government, the very process of democracy in action. You, however, feel you have to defend the people in power regardless.

    Not exactly. I have no problem with questioning government, with dissent, or even with a bit of mud slinging. What I object to is organized campaigns of lies and deception, and that’s what I see directed at the government day in and day out. Not that they aren’t guilty of the same kind of thing when given the opportunity, but their motives are generally to implement policy by whatever means are effective, while the motives of the liemongering opposition is to merely tear down, sow chaos and breed rancor and division. That serves no constructive purpose.

    And your justification for this? “I’m naturally inclined to come to the aid of whoever is getting piled on at the time.” Now that’s funny! Alas, it’s also completely wrong.

    I’m not at all sure you’re qualified to make that assessment.

    You have recently admitted that you are seriously prejudiced against the Democrats (and no, I ain’t going looking for the quote) – and now this!

    I’m not prejudiced against them merely because they’re democrats. At least a couple of my favorite presidents and my parents are democrats. What I’m prejudiced against is the basic philosophy which currently dominates the democratic party. They have built thier power base on the politics of division and strife – on racial resentment, on class resentment and on the exploitation of their own supporters to the disadvantage of those supporters. As a political organization they are as parasitic as the Republicans are indifferent and callous. But the difference is that Republican parties tend to benefit everyone by default, while the policies supported by the Democrats are ultimately only going to bring harm to everyone whether they support or oppose them.

    And as for Bill Clinton, I liked him as president because he wasn’t totally tied up in the culture of exploitation which dominates his party. He was willing to govern on his own terms and innovate and think outside the box a bit. That redeemed him a great deal for me. He tended to think pragmatically rather than thinking of party interests first.

    Dave

  • http://jabbs.blogspot.com david r. mark

    What I object to is organized campaigns of lies and deception, and that’s what I see directed at the government day in and day out. >> Dave Nalle

    The problem is that, in spite of that sweeping statement, Dave has a hard time actually showing why various posts are lying or deceptive.

    It’s an easy accusation to make, and one that conservatives often turn to. When in doubt, smear your opponent.

    But after Dave says such and such is wrong, or such and such is an urban myth, I find that it’s easy enough to just present fact upon fact to support a given article.

    On-lookers then have a choice.

    a) Accept the facts and the interpretation presented;

    b) Disagree with the interpretation in a reasoned way;

    c) Provide additional facts to counter the arguemnt;

    d) Smear the author with something akin to “you’re wrong because I say you’re wrong.” or “you’re wrong because you hate Bush.”

    Too often, Dave chooses option D.

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    David, I realize you have a great deal of resentment bubbling up inside you, but your accusation of smears here is just as weak as your ongoing campaign against the administration. The facts speak for themselves, and your efforts are so transparent and so blatant that you don’t have much legitimacy left to make accusations with.

    Dave

  • http://www.markiscranky.org Mark Saleski

    david is not smearing at all. he’s presenting fact, as his characterization of the way you operate hits the mark.

    and i’ll note that he’s not the first person to say this.

  • Bliffle

    “Greed is good. It’s the one pure motivation you can always trust.”

    Maybe YOU trust the greedy, but I don’t. Just when I thought I had Bill Gates figured as the greediest man alive he goes and starts a multibillion dollar worldwide program to cure malaria! Damned untrustworthy turncoat!

    “That’s the position you and others put me in. You create an environment where defending the administration is the only
    right thing to do because they are constantly under biased attack.”

    Huh? You mean the facts are unimportant? That the justice of those attacks is unimportant? That it is unimportant that the administration has been successful in spreading propaganda thru the MSM ala Judy Miller, Bob Woodward and others? That the ONLY importance is to defend the administration? What a strange idea that this administration, the most powerful and singleminded in history, is somehow a poor beleagured underdog.

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    Mark, there’s a huge difference between the mere presentation of objective fact and the presentation of selected fact accompanied by interpretation which twists the facts to serve a particular propagandistic purpose. David does use facts, but he uses them in service of distortion and misrepresentation by suggesting that the facts support conclusions which may be related in some way to the facts, but are mostly suppositional rather than directly deduced from the facts. It’s a lot more subtle than just lying so he gets away with it, but the truth is that what he’s doing is pure propaganda. He has his conclusion and then goes shopping facts to support it, rather than looking at facts and drawing conclusions based solely on the facts. He can certainly do that, but I don’t have to like it or put up with it.

    Dave

  • http://www.markiscranky.org Mark Saleski

    right, the problem is that you do the very same thing and are apparently blind to it.

  • http://jabbs.blogspot.com david r. mark

    Dave Nalle’s problem is that he doesn’t accept my having opinions about the Bush Administration.

    He calls it propaganda. But I’m just presenting my opinion. I state facts that I can attribute, and then I interpret them.

    If I present something that I perceive as spin, I support that assertion by showing an alternate fact that counters something the administration claims to be true.

    Dave resutes this by calling me a liar, questioning my integrity, saying I hate Bush, saying that I’m repeating urban legends, etc.

    Often, his opinion is based solely on his opinion. He doesn’t provide alternate facts for consideration. Occasionally, he offers alternative explanation for the facts I’ve presented. But too often, he makes factual erros that he won’t own up to.

    And of course, amid his fact-challenged retorts is the constant bullying.

    The question is, does BC really want Dave Nalle ot be a top contributor to this site? Or would it be better to have more serious fact-based discussions?

  • MCH

    Dittos, Mark. Nalle’s attack on David could easily be mirrored back to himself.

  • gonzo marx

    oh boy..here we go…

    Mr Nalle sez…
    *What’s wrong with moral relativism? You prefer moralistic absolutism? Moral relativism is the moderate position. You know what right and wrong are and you know when you have to do a little wrong to make things right.*

    and here’s where we separate….note the last line…classic “the ends justify the means” thinking…which i NEVER accept, and refute from an Ethical standpoint, but which many folks , including Mr Nalle and the current Administration take as an acceptable baseline for their behavioral standards…hence much of my disagreement

    Mr Nalle goes on to say…
    *But the difference is that Republican parties tend to benefit everyone by default, while the policies supported by the Democrats are ultimately only going to bring harm to everyone whether they support or oppose them.*

    now…here is the broad brush shit i was talking about before, and the primary bone of contention

    i disagree with the Postulate he states in hat Quote..as do some others, while some folks agree with him…

    this takes us back full circle to my bit about saying fuck the “gangs”…and look at each Issue on it’s own merits, without the prejudice exhibited by some of Mr Nalle’s statements here(as an example, BOTH sides do it)made BEFORE the facts are in or despite the individual merits of the Issue

    G. Oren sez…
    *As to “moral relativism” and greed, Gonzo (I think) prefers justice, maybe even egalitariansim, you’re maintaining a more libertarian stance. *

    i am taking no offense here, G

    but let me clarify..you hit the nail with the Justice bit….and i do require it to be “blind” and the same for ALL people

    that being said, i tend to go with the “libertarian” idea that the Rights of the Individual come FIRST…with Society being next(or trumping the Individual for public safety and such)…and i hold no truck with the concept of private “collective rights” that seem to be applied to corporations, lobbyists, foreign governments etc…which in my opinion, the GOP values more than the Individual

    hope that clarifies a bit

    i DO take exception to what i perceive as a false viewpoint espoused by Mr Nalle and others that the Dems are inherently “evil” or wrong…or many of the other assertations….the same as i do when talking in such broad brush strokes about the GOP

    bottom line…to me , the GOP have been running EVERYTHING for the last 5 years…they have tio take the Responsibility

    anything said about the Dems policies etc as they currently stand is bullshit speculation with no possible basis in any sort of Fact (show me i am wrong here if you have the facts) since they have NO policy track record on the national level for the last 5 years…whereas we DO have a complete record for the Agenda of the Administration, the NeoCons running most of it as well as Senate and Congressional GOP contingents…

    Excelsior!

  • troll

    *The question is, does BC really want Dave Nalle ot be a top contributor to this site?*

    even if he is (imo) a madman the answer is ‘yes’ –

    to anyone who wants to censure ideas arguments or argument styles I offer a cold cup of cut your bitching … get on with the dialogue

    troll

  • gonzo marx

    i have to /agree with troll here 100%

    tho Mr Nalle and i have gotten into some serious spewfests, i would NEVER want him, or any other contributers to be censored or edited in any way

    free speech and all that

    besides, as Sun Tzu and Zach de la Rocha have stated…”know your enemy”

    nuff said?

    Excelsior!

  • Chief Wiggum

    Gonzo says that the administration is in charge of everythign and they are to blame for everything. So I’d like to ask Gonzo a question?

    Why haven’t we had another terroists attack on American soil Gonzo? Do you think the terrorists have stopped hating us and stopped trying?

    If the administration is doing such a bad job we surely would hav had another attack since 911 right Gonzo? After all they are the ones in charge as you have pointed out. You want to blame them when we ‘re attacked but not give them credit when we’re not? Who is responsible for not having any attacks since 911 Gonzo?

    Blah blah blah I hate Bush……

    Blah blah Bush this, Bush that……

    You sound like a broekn record Gonzo.

  • gonzo marx

    Wiggum asks…
    *Why haven’t we had another terroists attack on American soil Gonzo? Do you think the terrorists have stopped hating us and stopped trying?*

    i don’t have enough facts to make an intelligent answer…but i do think it has something to do with the Afghanistan bases of al Qaeda being mostly gone, and the fact that bin Laden takes years between his attacks to maximize both planning and media impact

    for Wiggum’s second paragraph i refer you all to the 9/11 Commision report , and this weeks report card issued by the Commision…those FACTS can stand on their own…

    now…here is where we see a true disciple of the Rovian school..”distort,distract,deny and destroy”

    if you look..i said this Administration holds full Responsibility…NEVER did i say anything about “blame”…so youur statements are factually innacurate

    also..you cannot find a place where i have said anything about “hating Bush”…i have ALWAYS delineated that i despise the NeoCon Agenda, and have often voiced my thoughts on the policies enacted by this WH and the GOP in the last five years…again, you are factually innacurate…

    so, cast whatever aspersion you like at me..i will stick to discussing Facts and Policy…and leave it to the gentle Readers to decide which of us more closely embodies Reality

    thanks for the ad hominem attempt, i’m flattered

    Excelsior!

  • http://alienboysworld.blogspot.com/ Christopher Rose

    CHIEF: I didn’t know you were intimate with Al Qaeda et al. 9/11 was a one off event and who knows if there have been any other attempts?

    I suspect that the USA is STILL completely vulnerable to attack in more different ways than I could count.

    Your argument is akin to those of faithists, requiring the belief in something despite any proof for it’s existence.

  • http://alienboysworld.blogspot.com/ Christopher Rose

    Dave, c’mon man, you can do better than this! You’re really undermining your remaining credibility now – and yes, I am qualified to make that judgement, it’s called having an opinion.

    You are rapidly casting yourself as a man of prejudice not bias, despite all your false protestations to the contrary.

    Go on, write something relevant, focussed and critical of the current government, if indeed you really are not a fellow traveller…

  • http://alienboysworld.blogspot.com/ Christopher Rose

    DRM: BlogCritics is a non-partisan site. Whether people agree with Dave Nalle’s point of view or not has no bearing on that.

    ANY Blogger who can adapt to the modest formatting requirements of the site and write in coherent English is able to write articles about almost anything that interests them.

    Everybody on the planet is free to comment on those articles as they see fit, provided that those remarks conform to the modest standards of BlogCritics’ Official Comments Policy.

    I hope that answers your question at the end of your #67…

  • Chief Wiggum

    Chris… that was my point…..

    If there were other attempts obviously they did not succeed why is that?

    Did homeland security prevent them?

    Gonzo said “but i do think it has something to do with the Afghanistan bases of al Qaeda being mostly gone, ”

    Going into Afghanistan was done under the current admin so that’s at least one thing they did right huh Gonzo?

    You never explicitly said you hate Bush but it is obvious. Every other word on your mouth is an attack on him.

    You hate the neocons?

    So what do you stand for? What politicians represnt your beliefs and values?

  • gonzo marx

    Wiggum…as for Afghanistan..yes..it is the last thing i was with this Admin on…as was almost the entire world, my bitch at them came from not finishing the task there before pulling money and troops away from Afghanistan and tossing them at Iraq

    as for “did homeland security prevent them”…as i said, not enough facts…but see the 9/11 Commision report card…i give them credit for the good, and hold them Responsible for the bad…fair enough?

    NO words coming from me are an attack on Bush…but many ARE an assault on their Policies, behaviors and ethical lapses…see the difference?

    i don’t know the Man, so i have no opinion on him…i DO know what they have done, their Policies, their HIstory, and where the Policies come from…

    THAT is what i speak out about and against…

    as for what represents my policies and Ideals…i do…my mad scribblings here represent that…ask me a specific Question and i will Answer

    NOBODY speaks for me but me

    nuff said?

    Excelsior!

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    Dave Nalle’s problem is that he doesn’t accept my having opinions about the Bush Administration.

    Oh, I accept that you have your opinions. I merely object to the fact that you only have ONE opinion and that it is that Bush is your enemy and you’ll go to any lengths to make him look bad. I’d love to see you express some opinion that makes sense on some subject other than the evils of the Bush administration. Not having a broader base of opinion basically makes you look like a paid-off attack hack. Do you get Soros money? You ought to apply for some if not.

    If I present something that I perceive as spin, I support that assertion by showing an alternate fact that counters something the administration claims to be true.

    But you never present the other side of the argument or the facts that don’t support your position. That’s my objection. You claim to be a ‘journalist’, but your interest in the much vaunted objectivism of journalism is nil.

    Dave resutes this by calling me a liar, questioning my integrity, saying I hate Bush, saying that I’m repeating urban legends, etc.

    Only in those cases where it’s true, and like you I’ve backed my statements up with fact. I’m just trying to provide the other side of the story you only present one side of.

    Often, his opinion is based solely on his opinion. He doesn’t provide alternate facts for consideration. Occasionally, he offers alternative explanation for the facts I’ve presented. But too often, he makes factual erros that he won’t own up to.

    This is, of course, not true. You’re defensive about my responses so you choose to misrepresent them.

    And of course, amid his fact-challenged retorts is the constant bullying.

    I see it as standing up to bullying, because there’s no other way to characterize your posts.

    The question is, does BC really want Dave Nalle ot be a top contributor to this site? Or would it be better to have more serious fact-based discussions?

    And there it is. The classic response of the left. Silence the critics because we are right, they are evil, and we don’t want to hear anything contradictory to our view of the world. Thanks David, you just proved everything I’ve said about you and more.

    Dave

  • gonzo marx

    Mr Nalle sez…
    *Not having a broader base of opinion basically makes you look like a paid-off attack hack. Do you get Soros money? You ought to apply for some if not.*

    change Soros for Rove and the EXACT same could be said about you, Mr Nalle…not by me(i still cling to the hope that you are merely misguided…call me silly)…but some viewing your writing could easily think so

    and then…
    *But you never present the other side of the argument or the facts that don’t support your position. That’s my objection. You claim to be a ‘journalist’, but your interest in the much vaunted objectivism of journalism is nil.*

    pot…meet kettle

    on and on through the rest of the Comment

    how about everyone…and i mean everyone…step away for a second, and try and discuss the actual Facts…NOT some broad brush attack on what you THINK dems or the GOP are doing…but actual shit itself

    now, i don’t always agree with David…but he does seem to present facts and links to substantiate the content of what he writes about…and then often sets his Opinion in there…

    far different than the broad brush “I don’t trust the democrats”….or the “I hate Bush” kind of shit we see too much of

    just a Thought

    Excelsior!

  • Chief Wiggum

    Yeah the left does seem to have a passion for silencing anyone who disagrees with them all the while proclaiming themselves as “champions of free speech” Dave.

    I remember when the swiftboat book about Kerry came out last year. I remember all the liberals screaming for it to be banned and pulled from the shelves despite the hundreds of books out there depicting Bush in a negative light.

    I’ve never heard of a single conservative however asking for an anti Bush book to be banned or removed from the shelves.

    Hypocrisy and liberals go to gather like peanut butter and Jelly Dave.

  • gonzo marx

    once again…ad hominem, factually challenged bullshit along the lines of “distract, distort, deny and destroy”

    note the broad brush and lack of actual instances or links

    can we at least TRY and deal with the facts and issues…fuck even mentioning the political “gangs”…”left” or “right”..or any of the other bullshit, artificial, binary, exclusionary, sterotypes and propaganda?

    facts…policy….discuss

    give it a shot..ya might like it!

    Excelsior!

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    and here’s where we separate….note the last line…classic “the ends justify the means” thinking…which i NEVER accept, and refute from an Ethical standpoint, but which many folks , including Mr Nalle and the current Administration take as an acceptable baseline for their behavioral standards…hence much of my disagreement

    I understand your position, Gonzo. I shared it for many years. Then I realized that rather than sit in my ivory tower and talk about the theory of politics I’d like to actually see our government changed and improved and moved forward with implementing some of the ideas we both believe in.

    Mr Nalle goes on to say…
    *But the difference is that Republican parties tend to benefit everyone by default, while the policies supported by the Democrats are ultimately only going to bring harm to everyone whether they support or oppose them.*

    now…here is the broad brush shit i was talking about before, and the primary bone of contention

    Do you want me to go point by point through the democrat agenda and point out the negatives and the damage their ideas would do if they were implemented? I could certainly do that, but since that’s not the topic at hand I merely summarized. It’s not a broad brush, it’s just a blurry photo of the last stroke of a vast canvas.

    this takes us back full circle to my bit about saying fuck the “gangs”…and look at each Issue on it’s own merits, without the prejudice exhibited by some of Mr Nalle’s statements here(as an example, BOTH sides do it)made BEFORE the facts are in or despite the individual merits of the Issue

    I know that there are many individual democrats and even groups within the party who are praiseworthy and full only of good intentions and who I even agree with on a lot of subjects. But just as you single out the Neocons for attack, I have to point out the fact that the good people in the party are not the ones controlling it or setting the agenda. I think that it is possible
    to point out the flaws of a party while still respecting many of
    the individuals in that party. They’re in the same position which
    I find myself in within the Republican party.

    that being said, i tend to go with the “libertarian” idea that the Rights of the Individual come FIRST…with Society being next(or trumping the Individual for public safety and such)…and i hold no truck with the concept of private “collective rights” that seem to be applied to corporations, lobbyists, foreign governments etc…which in my opinion, the GOP values more than the Individual

    We both agree that the rights of the individual should come first. So setting that aside, which do you think has more validity the idea of paternalistic public welfare and intrusive government nannyism, or the idea of letting individuals engaged in business have the same rights in business that they have in their private affairs?

    i DO take exception to what i perceive as a false viewpoint espoused by Mr Nalle and others that the Dems are inherently “evil” or wrong…or many of the other assertations….the same as i do when talking in such broad brush strokes about the GOP

    As I said above, I don’t think that individual democrats are evil or wrong. It’s just the policies of the party which are inimical to the best interests of the people and nation we live in. When a party’s policy place the rights of individuals as secondary to the rights of groups then that party is no longer serving the best interests of anyone.

    anything said about the Dems policies etc as they currently stand is bullshit speculation with no possible basis in any sort of Fact (show me i am wrong here if you have the facts) since they have NO policy track record on the national level for the last 5 years…whereas we DO have a complete record for the Agenda of the Administration, the NeoCons running most of it as well as Senate and Congressional GOP contingents..

    You actually believe that if the democrats get into power they will no longer be the party of Franklin Roosevelt, Lyndon Johnson and (pre-posturing) Hillary Clinton? Do you really think that the many voices on the left espousing a Chomskyite view of America are not going to have any sway in how the party operates once it gets into office?

    Want to be that 5 years from now you’re screaming as hard about the Democrats as you are about the GOP now?

    besides, as Sun Tzu and Zach de la Rocha have stated…”know your enemy”

    Ah, but Gonzo, I’m not your enemy. We agree on most basic issues of principle. We only disagree on some trivial things like the nature of reality.

    Dave

  • Chief Wiggum

    Gonzo

    I know that liberals were whining en masse for the book to be banned. I don’t need to post links. If you or anyone else on here choose not to believe it even though it is the truth….. who cares

    If someone posts something on here that I find interesting but was unaware/unsure of I will do the research myself to see what the truth is. I don’t whine about the lack of links or call the argument bullshit.

    As for using a broad brush….well I do that based on my interactions with liberals. The vast majority of liberals I have encountered, (and being fromt he Northeast I have encountered a lot) have suffered from varying degrees of delusion and hypocrisy with regard to just about every topic discussed on BC.

    factually challenged bullshit along the lines of “distract, distort, deny and destroy”

    OOOOOOOHHHH…….. where are the links that show what I said was “factually challenged?”

    Why don’t you hold yourself to the same standards you have set for others?

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    Go on, write something relevant, focussed and critical of the current government, if indeed you really are not a fellow traveller…

    Chris, the key thing is that I have and regularly do write pieces critical of the current government, of the republican party and of republicans in congress. I can’t include all of the links in a comment, but you know how to find them. Here are just a couple: Your Papers Please and Send for the Ethics Czar. In addition I’ve written many articles which are non-political in nature.

    Now go to the archive of David Mark’s articles. I was able to find only 1 out of 176 which couldn’t be taken as some sort of attack on the administration or the GOP, and that’s even a stretch. He clearly only views BC as a platform for promoting his agenda. He’s rather like that Real Estate guy, except that he’s selling anti-Bush propaganda rather than houses in Florida.

    Dave

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    change Soros for Rove and the EXACT same could be said about you, Mr Nalle…not by me(i still cling to the hope that you are merely misguided…call me silly)…but some viewing your writing could easily think so

    See my previous comment, Gonzo. I’m not a one-trick pony. Where I see something wrong I comment on it, and that includes criticizing the administration. There’s no way Rove would pay me for the kinds of things I say, sadly.

    and then…
    *But you never present the other side of the argument or the facts that don’t support your position. That’s my objection. You claim to be a ‘journalist’, but your interest in the much vaunted objectivism of journalism is nil.*

    pot…meet kettle

    You live too much in the moment, Gonzo. I regularly present both sides of the argument in articles, even if not in comments so much.

    on and on through the rest of the Comment

    far different than the broad brush “I don’t trust the democrats”….or the “I hate Bush” kind of shit we see too much of

    Ah, but I at least DO trust the Democrats. I know what they believe and I trust them to act on those beliefs. That’s why I’m concerned about what might happen if they take power.

    Dave

  • Temple Stark

    gonzo – you a silly.

  • gonzo marx

    Mr Nalle sez…
    *I know what they believe and I trust them to act on those beliefs.*

    you can read minds?….and not just one, but the political consensus of an entire sub-set of america who doesn’t even nkow Itself what it’s policies etc are on a consistent and across the platform basis?

    wow…and here my impression was that the Dems were fractious (not the difference between, oh…let’s say Lieberman and Murtha)…and that, as a Party…they had NO single, coherent policy

    that’s what the GOP have been saying for the last 5 years

    and where i DO hear/read what some individuals within the Party are up to…i am aware of NO comprehensive plan or policy from the Dems at this time

    the GOP however, have stood united for 5 years now…only recently has there been any splintering or dissent publicly voiced from within the GOP itself…

    now, since they DO control House, Senate and White House…i can ignore what they SAY, and concentrate on what they have actually DONE with the unhindered totalitarian power of an unfettered majority to implement their Agenda

    and those very Observations, the history of the last 5 years…drive me to speak out AGAINST what they have done…on a case by case, person by person, policy by policy, bill by law, basis…

    the only time i tend to “lump” folks together is when it comes to the card carrying, PNAC signing , NeoCons and their professed Agenda

    as for the bit on “know your enemy”…read up on your Sun Tzu…you will find that, logically, due to our opposition in the silly little thing you refer to so accurately as “view of reality”…i am forced to conclude that either you are a willing part of what i am writing against…OR you have been duped by the NeoCons and that your innate hatred and distrust for anything even remotely labelled “democrat” has caused you to knee jerk react and use the same kind of prejudicial thought processes and tactics that the Jim Crowe adherents used to use against certain segments of the population…

    try it…go and replace the word “democrat” for any kind of “minority” in what you have typed in this thread…if you don’t see it, then i can’t help, because we cannot meaningfully communicate past your emotional blockages…

    Excelsior!

  • http://jabbs.blogspot.com david r. mark

    Chris, Dave and others:

    I’m not suggesting in #67 that we should silence anyone. Freedom of speech is a hallmark of our nation.

    My point is about the bullying. Should BC allow bullies? The answer from high-up is yes.

    I just think that we’d all do better if we avoided the hyperbole, the name-calling, the bullying, etc., and discussed the issues.

    To me, Dave Nalle’s first course of action is to try to discredit me, and I think that’s awful weak.

  • http://jabbs.blogspot.com david r. mark

    Silence the critics because we are right, they are evil, and we don’t want to hear anything contradictory to our view of the world. >> Dave Nalle.

    Wrong, as usual.

    Again, I don’t want to silence anyone. And I am happy to hear people disagree with me. In fact, I often ask that you Dave, back up your points with facts, rather than attack me personally.

    I would love nothing more than to have an open, factually honest debate about the issues at hand. I question a lot of the decisions made by the Bush Administration, and I have a big problem with their constant use of spin to (I believe) mislead the nation.

    I would love to have honest conservatives and moderates argue against my articles by offering addtional facts that counter my arguments, by asking whether a given point I make could be interpreted a different way, etc.

    What I don’t like, and have made that painfully clear, is the bullying, the smearing, the name-calling. Mark the Sane & Sensible did this, and everyone agreed he was a bully.

    Dave Nalle, you do the same. You may not want to admit it, but several people have offered the same opinion. Rather than try to legitimately argue against me, you attack me personally.

    And the whole idea, Dave, that I’m doing something wrong because I consistently write against the Bush Administration is ludicrous. There are columnists all over the country who do it, just like there are columnists all over the country who write against the Democrats.

    When you show me proof that you have contacted Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, the people at freerepublic or town hall, or any number of other conservative commenters, and asked them to be more even-handed in their criticism, then you’ll have an ounce of credibility in my eyes.

    You get personally offended that I’m so tough on the Bush Administration. Rather than admit the facts are the facts, you suggest that I twist them into propaganda. I do no such thing. You suggest that I repeat urban legends, but when I offer you first-hand accounts from legitimate sources, you say you’re not convinced. You accuse me of lying, you question my integrity, over and over all you try to do is put doubt in other readers’ eyes with your smears.

  • Dave Nalle

    you can read minds?….and not just one, but the political consensus of an entire sub-set of america who doesn’t even nkow Itself what it’s policies etc are on a consistent and across the platform basis?

    I don’t need to read minds. I can read what they write and hear what they say in public. It’s all on record.

    wow…and here my impression was that the Dems were fractious (not the difference between, oh…let’s say Lieberman and Murtha)…and that, as a Party…they had NO single, coherent policy

    I already addressed this. Just like in the GOP there are individuals who are out of step, but there are still many who hold to the core beliefs of the party, and they’re where the problem lies.

    and where i DO hear/read what some individuals within the Party are up to…i am aware of NO comprehensive plan or policy from the Dems at this time

    Then you’re not paying any attention at all. This post is part of one of their plans – the relentless attack and machine which is doing everything it can to spin every administration action into a negative.

    the GOP however, have stood united for 5 years now…only recently has there been any splintering or dissent publicly voiced from within the GOP itself…

    Then you aren’t listening in the right places. There has been strong and vocal dissent from the moderates and the factions on the extreme right since before 2000.

    and those very Observations, the history of the last 5 years…drive me to speak out AGAINST what they have done…on a case by case, person by person, policy by policy, bill by law, basis…

    What they have done is actually very, very little, considering their consolidation of power. I plan to speak out not against what they’ve done, but about all the things they promised by haven’t done.

    the only time i tend to “lump” folks together is when it comes to the card carrying, PNAC signing , NeoCons and their professed Agenda

    Who are different from moveon.org bots in what way?

    as for the bit on “know your enemy”…read up on your Sun Tzu…you will find that, logically, due to our opposition in the silly little thing you refer to so accurately as “view of reality”…i am forced to conclude that either you are a willing part of what i am writing against…OR you have been duped by the NeoCons and that your innate hatred and distrust for anything even remotely labelled “democrat” has caused you to knee jerk react and use the same kind of prejudicial thought processes and tactics that the Jim Crowe adherents used to use against certain segments of the population..

    Then your conclusions are very poorly informed.

    try it…go and replace the word “democrat” for any kind of “minority” in what you have typed in this thread…if you don’t see it, then i can’t help, because we cannot meaningfully communicate past your emotional blockages…

    Sorry Gonzo. It doesn’t work. Other minorities are not trying to do the things that Democrats are. Some of them may have groups leading them which have agendas, but the agendas are different so the criticism would not be the same.

    Dave

  • gonzo marx

    geeeEEEEEeeezZZZZzzz…

    one thing at a time i guess…

    Mr Nalle sez…
    *I don’t need to read minds. I can read what they write and hear what they say in public. It’s all on record.*

    link please…otherwise it’s sophistry

    and again…
    *This post is part of one of their plans – the relentless attack and machine which is doing everything it can to spin every administration action into a negative.*

    as opposed to the GOP, Fox news, AM hate radio, blogbursts as “productions”

    take a step away, look at it all from the outside, if you can seriously say that the Dems are organized into an attack, but the GOP aren’t 10 years ahead and twice as viscious at it…well, again we hit a point where we cannot effectively communicate…

    but you very statement there makes my Points for me…

    your attempt to equate the NeoCons and moveon.org is completely fallacious

    why?..here’s why…moveon.org is a website with NO temporal power besides ad dollars…the NeoCons…and most especially those that signed the PNAC Agenda( see their website) have been serving/running this Administration for the last 5 years…and been inside EVERY GOP administration since 1980…actually making US policy decisions and weilding very real Power…power enough to drag our Nation into a pre-emptive and elective war in Iraq…NO comparison to moveon.org and their attempt at political spin

    to even suggest such indicates either severe delusion, deliberate misinformation or a severe lack of logic and intellectual insight(the last is hardly an option when dealing with you)

    again…
    *Other minorities are not trying to do the things that Democrats are.*

    again…completely wrong..i did NOT state that any minority was trying to do what the Dems do..i clearly stated that your tactic in attacking and denigrating the Dems as a while was analagous to a Jim Crowe adherent denigrating aminorities in history …..ie:”i know plenty of black folk that are good…but black in general are….”…or to show what i meant above i will take a quote from you, and do the substitution ….

    “As I said above, I don’t think that individual democrats(black,hispanics,women,chinese) are evil or wrong.”

    see it now?

    all in all, i guess we will just have to agree to disagree

    but THE most Important thing here..is the basic Subject of this Post, in a way

    are you “happy” with the recent report card given out by the 9/11 commission?

    who do you hold Responsible?

    who should be fixxing it?

    can we agree that the items spoken about there rise above the bullshit of inside the Bletway politics..and that we, as a Nation, should be REALLY pissed that our money and security has been pissed on by those we elect to Represent us?

    can we agree that the large chunk of the Responsibility for the abysmal job done in our names, by spending our money, goes to the Party in the majority?

    outside of that…the rest is moot

    can we , at least, agree on that Reality?

    Excelsior!

  • gonzo marx

    oh yes..lest i forget…to Wiggum

    clue incoming…the factually challenged bit i referred to involved you stating i said “blame” not “Responsibility”

    as well as some other things, clearly outlined in my coments that were entirely referential to my own comments in this Thread an your misrepresentation of them in your commentary

    might i suggest you work on your reading skills and put down the doughnuts…stop chasing Bart around and work on this…..k?…tnx

    Excelsior!

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    Again, I don’t want to silence anyone. And I am happy to hear people disagree with me. In fact, I often ask that you Dave, back up your points with facts, rather than attack me personally.

    Your earlier statement speaks for itself despite your backpedaling in face of the negative reaction. And I’m not sure you understand what a personal attack is. A personal attack is when I say something about YOU which is not in the context of what you post here on BC. If I call you a name or suggest that you have filthy personal habits, that’s a personal attack. If I criticize your posts or the agenda they represent, that’s just normal disagreement – nothing personal to it.

    Dave

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    Mr Nalle sez…
    *I don’t need to read minds. I can read what they write and hear what they say in public. It’s all on record.*

    link please…otherwise it’s sophistry

    Oh come on, gonzo. Surely you don’t need to be led by the hand. You can start with the democratic party platform which wants to preserve all of the current administration’s bad ideas and raise taxes and expand social welfare as well. And then on that same site, since she’s their point-woman, how about reading up a bit on the beliefs of Hillary Clinton. And while you’re at it look around that same site for ratings on major democrats on key issues. Look at the numbers they are given by groups like the NTU and some of the citizens groups. It’s not a pretty picture and there’s plenty of consistency.

    Here are the highlights. As a group they:

    1. Support the war on drugs.
    2. Oppose tax reduction.
    3. Oppose school choice.
    4. Oppose social security reform.
    5. Never vote to cut spending.
    6. Support the Patriot Act
    7. Support Gun control.

    With those 7 positions how on earth could I not oppose them?

    as opposed to the GOP, Fox news, AM hate radio, blogbursts as “productions”

    Most AM radio is not ‘hate’ radio – there’s a hell of a lot more on the air than Limbaugh and Hannity. And anyway, how does the fact that there’s conservative media and conservative punditry negate my opposition to the same thing from the left, where IMO it is more virulent and in aid of a more undesirable cause?

    take a step away, look at it all from the outside, if you can seriously say that the Dems are organized into an attack, but the GOP aren’t 10 years ahead and twice as viscious at it…well, again we hit a point where we cannot effectively communicate…

    I have never said that the GOP doesn’t have organized propaganda and media spokespeople, but the fact that one side has them doesn’t lessen the impact of the other side having their equivalents.

    your attempt to equate the NeoCons and moveon.org is completely fallacious

    Quite right. It was an inappropriate comparison, like apples and oranges. moveon.org is equivalent to freerepublic.com. The PNAC is more aptly compared to DSUSA, which counts as members all the most radical democrats in office.

    I mentioned moveon.org mainly because it is the spearhead of the whole Soros organization, which includes a great deal of fundraising and campaign support apparatus, but while it is certainly an issue for concern with the democratic party, it’s the money and propaganda wing, not the ideology mill represented by DSUSA.

    “As I said above, I don’t think that individual democrats(black,hispanics,women,chinese) are evil or wrong.”

    see it now?

    No. The fact that a similar statement can be made about other minorities and be incorrect does not change the accuracy of the statement when made about democrats. The difference here is that members of minority groups have no choice but to be in those groups. Democrats are what they are by choice.

    are you “happy” with the recent report card given out by the 9/11 commission?

    who do you hold Responsible?

    who should be fixxing it?

    Oh, how tedious. You want to get back on topic.

    Of course I’m not happy with the 9/11 report card, but I also READ it and realize that, contrary to what David Mark wrote above, the report card singles out Congress for as much or more criticism than it lays on the administration. It also highlights the indifference of the American people.

    As for fixing it, the answer is for the administration to be more effective in implementing its policies and for congress to stop being obstructionist on general principle and limit its obstructionism to those issues it actually cares about rather than anything and everything the administration does. That’s all pretty obvious.

    can we agree that the items spoken about there rise above the bullshit of inside the Bletway politics..and that we, as a Nation, should be REALLY pissed that our money and security has been pissed on by those we elect to Represent us?

    And when has this NOT been the case? I’ll be pissed at the administration if you and David take a moment to be pissed at the democrat obstructionists in congress.

    can we agree that the large chunk of the Responsibility for the abysmal job done in our names, by spending our money, goes to the Party in the majority?

    Yes, except that they are actually trying – if incompetently and sometimes wrongheadedly – to solve these problems, and that earns them big points in comparison to those who just want to deny the problems or blame them on others.

    Dave

  • Eric Olsen

    guys, this is all lively and whatnot and everyone is a strong, manly personality, so no need to worry about that – perhaps we tone down the arguing about the way we argue? It’s rather insular

  • gonzo marx

    why thanks Dave…

    yes i said it… /grins

    i will read up on what you offered, and touch base with the points you laid out

    ya see, part of my mad Plan to become Galactic Overlord involves showing folks perusing this Thread that a calm discourse on a semi-rational level from two Opposed Viewpoints can be accomplished via an example….

    to wit…or half that…on your seven points

    *1. Support the war on drugs.*
    here i will clearly state my opposition to the position…the same as the GOP…there DOES need to be something done about this silly Prohibition…i have always advocated decriminalization for what grows, and harsh penalties for substances chemically altered/processed…so the pot and mushrooms/peyote are in…coke,smack,meth are fucking OUT
    2. Oppose tax reduction.
    this one is kind of tricky to read, my take has been the goal of removing some of the recent tax cuts for higher incomes, as well as some of the obvious lobbyist gimmes…but, case by case…we NEED to fucking balance the budget
    3. Oppose school choice.
    as do i…hear me out: i have NO problem with a Parent opting out from public school, nor do i have ANY problem with folks wanting the portion of their property taxes used for the local school be refunded for use in another school…..the Trick here is that is NOT what so called “school choice” is about…what is wanted by advocates is the ENTIRE “budget” for that child….and there’s the greedy bullshit…i have no kids..i pay about $1200 a year in local property tax, of which about $600 goes towards local schools….but the budget for a child in our district is a HUGE multiple of my mere $600 bucks…so what i Object too are folks wanting OTHER taxpayers money for their kids OUTSIDE of the public school that serves the public good
    4. Oppose social security reform.
    well now..if Congress paid back to the Trust fund all that it has raided over the last , what…25 years now at least? we would not be in quite the mess…ever since the Trust Fund was violated and the inevitable demographics of the baby boomers reared it’s greying head….we’ve been in deep shit…but the Bush “plan” is MUCH worse than the status quo…so until another comes along…”do no harm”
    5. Never vote to cut spending.
    bullshit…compare the gridlocked Clinton/Congress budgets that actually developed a surplus…and now compare that to the totalitarian rubber stamp porkfests that have us in record Debt AND Defecit
    6. Support the Patriot Act
    not entirely true nor false…look at the recent “compromise” that came from Arlen Spector yesterday….and watch who votes for what…no matter the outcome…many of the P.A.’s parts are double plus ungood for Civil Liberties…we will see how the ush picks on the Supreme Court deal with the obvious tramplings…
    7. Support Gun control.
    well…gun control means using two hands…and i support that too!!
    actually…i would let anyone with a drivers liscense( over 21) and NO criminal record (internet computer check, easy to implement…should be part of Homeland Security and almost instant)…then i would regulate the fucking bullets

    there…that finally show i am no Democrat?

    and Bog knows i ain’t a member of the G.O.P.

    from above…
    *As for fixing it, the answer is for the administration to be more effective in implementing its policies and for congress to stop being obstructionist*

    and
    *I’ll be pissed at the administration if you and David take a moment to be pissed at the democrat obstructionists in congress.*

    now here i must call bullshit..and i’m tempted to go back to calling you “Mr.”….

    care to explain how the fucking Minority Party..who cannot even bring a motion up on the floor of either House nor Senate, or control a single Committee, can possibly “obstruct” the current totalitarian control excercised by the GOP?

    i just don’t see it, nor do i buy it for a second

    even if so..can we agree that the fault and Responsibility is proportionate(ie:more GOP than Dems) based on the actual votes?….that’s fair and seems accurate and i can easily agree…

    that’s the crux of it for me, Dave…i consider, after all the info i have available…that the GOP bear the VAST majority for what has gone on and gone wrong as per our Government for the last five years

    and it pisses me off, becuase i don’t like things fucking up in my Name

    your mileage may vary

    Excelsior!

  • Bliffle

    This president has unprecedented power: the senate, house and supreme court are in his pocket. He has the astounding power of the Patriot Act and he seems to be willing to use the IRS against enemies. He’s deployed the army against another nation. For the president to shun responsibility under these circumstances, and try to blame other people is not only ungracious but cowardly.