Would those polls be like the ones that claimed Kerry was going to win the election? Liberals just love poll numbers. Unfortunately, they love them too much, to the point of blocking out reality......but but but the POLLS say that ...(latest topic du jour). Point being I don't put a lot of faith into random poll numbers. Depending who is polled, what questions are asked, and other variables, I could take a poll that would result in showing 90% of Americans believe that the Sta-Puff Marshmallow Man masterminded the attacks on 9/11.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by roachboy
well, it seems to me that if you find no evidence that the premises for bushwar were problematic, then you simply are not looking.
there is an enormous amount. thread after thread here on the matter too. maybe do a search?
because i agree with you that the entire debate hinges on your relation to that information. if you know about it, and find it compelling, then the question of whether something should happen to bushco. because of it becomes important--even if you end up having to conclude that for political reasons--and political reasons alone--nothing will happen. at least not in the short run. i imagine that you will find this whole period being radically criticized once the histories of it start to come out.
|
Being radically crticized is not the same as impeached. This is the detachment from reality I'm talking about with the fringe element yelling for impeachment. This fringe is screaming of war crimes, and illegal invasions, etc etc ad nauseam. Then, when called on it, they say, "well there are lots and lots of problems! Bush does bad bad things!! Look at this memo!!" That may be, but I have yet to see any evidence of illegalities that would actually warrant impeachment. Neither has anyone else. You might be right, maybe history will not be kind to this Administration, and maybe rightfully so. But flip that around, are willing to concede that perhaps history will view this Administration favorably? Somehow I doubt it.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by roachboy
but judging from your recycle of the tired rightwing cliche about "bushbashing" above, the sole function of which is to create the grounds for dismissing unpleasant facts that come from a reality that the right cannot comprehend much less shape or control, i doubt that you would read such histories.
|
I'm not dismissing unpleasant information. I see the memos, the articles. But I keep hearing you guys talk about impeachment. I don't see anything in those memos that rises to the level that would call for impeachment. Show me something illegal, then we'll talk about impeachment. I am not recycling tired cliches about "bushbashing", host opened this thread with a question that called the war illegal. I called him out on it and asked for him (or anyone) to prove the war is illegal. You can't prove it, or provide evidence to back up that assertion, yet you and your ilk will continue to talk about the "illegal war". And somehow I'm the one slinging tired cliches?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by roachboy
you seem to have a strange relation to the ny times--something of a conservative caricature that would have us believe that the nyt is some kind of radical oppositional outlet--which leads to the question of whether you actually read the paper. i cannot see how, if you actually read the times, that you can see it in these terms. like most media outlets, the nyt is necessarily legitimist--its coverage presupposes the legitimacy of the regime, its ability to speak to an audience rests on its ability to get and retain access--you do not see many reporters from the workers world with anything like this type of access, anything like this type of diverse information. i see the ny times as being slightly left of center--but if you view the world from a vantagepoint that would enable you to see a leftist in bill clinton, then i suspect you would also be able to fit the times into that fantasy grid.
|
Ok, let's see.......32 consecutive front page stories on Abu Ghraib prison scandal........
April 29: TREATMENT OF PRISONERS; G.I.'s Are Accused of Abusing Iraqi Captives <
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstrac...AD0894DC404482 >
May 1: CAPTIVES; Bush Voices 'Disgust' at Abuse of Iraqi Prisoners <
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstrac...AC0894DC404482 >
May 2: DETAINEES; OFFICER SUGGESTS IRAQI JAIL ABUSE WAS ENCOURAGED <
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstrac...AC0894DC404482 >
May 3: PRISONERS; COMMAND ERRORS AIDED IRAQ ABUSE, ARMY HAS FOUND <
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstrac...AC0894DC404482 >
May 4: PUNISHMENT; ARMY PUNISHES 7 WITH REPRIMANDS FOR PRISON ABUSE <
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstrac...AC0894DC404482 >
May 5: INMATE; Iraqi Recounts Hours of Abuse By U.S. Troops <
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstrac...AC0894DC404482 >
May 6: THE PRISON GUARDS; Abuse Charges Bring Anguish In Unit's Home <
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstrac...AC0894DC404482 >
May 7: THE SOLDIER; From Picture of Pride to Symbol of Abuse <
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstrac...AC0894DC404482 >
May 8: COMBAT; G.I.'S KILL SCORES OF MILITIA FORCES IN 3 IRAQI CITIES <
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstrac...AC0894DC404482 >
[NOTE: Abu Ghraib mentioned in first paragraph ]
May 9: THE MILITARY; In Abuse, a Portrayal of Ill-Prepared, Overwhelmed G.I.'s <
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstrac...AC0894DC404482 >
May 10: PROSECUTION; FIRST TRIAL SET TO BEGIN MAY 19 IN ABUSE IN IRAQ <
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstrac...AC0894DC404482 >
May 11: THE REPORT; Head of Inquiry On Iraq Abuses Now in Spotlight <
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstrac...AC0894DC404482 >
May 12: Afghan Gives Own Account Of U.S. Abuse <
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstrac...AC0894DC404482 >
May 13: PRISON POLICIES; General Took Guantánamo Rules To Iraq for Handling of Prisoners <
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstrac...AC0894DC404482 >
May 14: THE WHISTLE-BLOWER; Accused Soldier Paints Scene of Eager Mayhem <
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstrac...AC0894DC404482 >
May 15: MISTREATMENT; Earlier Jail Seen as Incubator for Abuses in Iraq <
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstrac...AC0894DC404482 >
May 16: THE COURTS-MARTIAL; ACCUSED G.I.'S TRY TO SHIFT BLAME IN PRISON ABUSE <
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstrac...AC0894DC404482 >
May 17: PRISONERS; SOME IRAQIS HELD OUTSIDE CONTROL OF TOP GENERAL <
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstrac...AC0894DC404482 >
May 18: INTERROGATIONS; M.P.'s Received Orders to Strip Iraqi Detainees <
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstrac...AC0894DC404482 >
May 19: ABU GHRAIB; Officer Says Army Tried to Curb Red Cross Visits to Prison in Iraq <
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstrac...AC0894DC404482 >
May 20: THE COURT-MARTIAL; G.I. PLEADS GUILTY IN COURT-MARTIAL FOR IRAQIS' ABUSE <
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstrac...AC0894DC404482 >
May 21: THE INTERROGATORS; Afghan Policies On Questioning Landed in Iraq <
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstrac...AC0894DC404482 >
May 22: THE WITNESSES; Only a Few Spoke Up on Abuse As Many Soldiers Stayed Silent <
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstrac...AC0894DC404482 >
May 23: SUSPECT; Translator Questioned By Army In Iraq Abuse <
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstrac...AC0894DC404482 >[Page 12]
May 24: ABUSE; Afghan Deaths Linked to Unit At Iraq Prison <
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstrac...AC0894DC404482 >
May 25: ARMY SHIFTS; No. 2 Army General to Move In As Top U.S. Commander in Iraq <
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstrac...AC0894DC404482 >
May 26: INVESTIGATION; ABUSE OF CAPTIVES MORE WIDESPREAD, SAYS ARMY SURVEY <
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstrac...AC0894DC404482 >
May 27: Three Accused Soldiers Had Records of Unruliness That Went Unpunished <
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/27/politics/27PUNI.html >
May 28: U.S. Releases More Prisoners From Abu Ghraib <
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/28/in...8CND-PRIS.html >
May 29: Cuba Base Sent Its Interrogators to Iraqi Prison <
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/29/in...st/29ABUS.html >
May 30:Scant Evidence Cited in Long Detention of Iraqis <
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/30/in...st/30ABUS.html >
May 31: Army Is Investigating Reports of Assaults and Thefts by G.I.'s Against Iraqi Civilians <
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/31/in...st/31ABUS.html >
[NYT Memorial Day Special]
June 1: Searing Uncertainty for Iraqis Missing Loved Ones <
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/01/in...st/01PRIS.html >
June 2: Afghan Prison Review <
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/02/in...ia/02afgh.html >
Nope, no slanted reporting there.