|
Banned
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by aceventura3
You don't think we are at war, I understand that, but the Administration does think we are at war. The argument they used was on that basis. Those who think Bush violated the law and abused his authority should challenge that in court. Going after the telecoms is a red herring in my view. For some reason Democrats won't challenge Bush on this issue. Us going back and forth is merely an excercise in futility.
Yea, I saw that in a movie about 10 years ago. Think they made any updates ?
Yea, I once did a thought experiment on how my activities could be tracked (i.e. credit cards used, going to gym, using the internet, traffic cameras, etc.) during a one week period. It was amazing to me how easily someone could reconstruct my life that week, I can imagine if "they" actually tried to track me.
Even paranoid people have enemies, I saw something like that on a bumper sticker. "They" are il defined but "they" are real. In fact if you as some - our presence in Iraq caused more of "them" to exist - at least I think that is how the logic goes..
True, I could not of said it better. Problem is that I am usually right. Sorry, my ego again. I think I will do some research on my ego, I bet there is a pattern - a certain time of day or a moon cycle or something when it gets out of control.
Perhaps it is the "police" action philosophy vs. being at war that is the root of our differences. We have clearly been the victim of terrorist, don't you agree?
I think, again, you describe the root of our differences. I do have a better understanding now. We will forever disagree because of our root difference in point of view.
Thanks for adding clarity.
|
ace, if I knew you in the 3D world, I'd be willing to bet....I'd give you 2 to 1 odds, in fact....that the first priority of this administration is to make you think "we are at war!".... lobbyist and McCain campaign aide, Charlie Black, explains why, here:
http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showthr...98#post2473898 ......
Quote:
Last Updated: June 23, 2008: 2:59 PM EDT
....But we were asking McCain to rise above the news and look ahead to the day seven months from now when, he hopes, he'll be sitting in the Oval Office. We wanted to know what single economic threat he perceives above all others.
McCain at first says nothing. He sits in the corner of a sofa, one black, tasseled loafer propped against a coffee table. We're in the presidential suite on the 41st floor of the New York Hilton. McCain has come here - between a major speech on the economy in Washington, D.C., this morning and a fundraiser tonight at the 21 Club - to talk to us and to let us take his picture. He is wearing a dark suit, as he almost always does, with a blue shirt and a wine-colored tie. He's looking not at us but into the void. His eyes are narrowed. Nine seconds of silence, ten seconds, 11. Finally he says, "Well, I would think that the absolute gravest threat is the struggle that we're in against radical Islamic extremism, which can affect, if they prevail, our very existence. Another successful attack on the United States of America could have devastating consequences."
Not America's dependence on foreign oil? Not climate change? Not the crushing cost of health care? Eventually McCain gets around to mentioning all three of those. But he starts by deftly turning the economy into a national security issue - and why not? On national security McCain wins. We saw how that might play out early in the campaign, when one good scare, one timely reminder of the chaos lurking in the world, probably saved McCain in New Hampshire, a state he had to win to save his candidacy - this according to McCain's chief strategist, Charlie Black. The assassination of Benazir Bhutto in December was an "unfortunate event," says Black. "But his knowledge and ability to talk about it reemphasized that this is the guy who's ready to be Commander-in-Chief. And it helped us." As would, Black concedes with startling candor after we raise the issue, another terrorist attack on U.S. soil. "Certainly it would be a big advantage to him," says Black.
Absent that horror, however, the 2008 election will probably be a referendum on two issues that, according to every poll we've seen, trump national security in the minds of voters right now.
|
Last edited by host; 06-23-2008 at 04:55 PM..
|