I don't believe it

[SmokinDVM]

Do I think alternative plans should not be discussed? Of course not. That’s an insulting question designed to belittle me and make me look like an inflexible fool, and it does not lend itself to promoting intelligent discussion. And, in fact, it is a great lead in to what I am about to say. The “plans” that have been presented have been done in the context of a 20 minute diatribe of telling the “President” (i.e., listen to us, citizens of the US) that he is a liar, a criminal and a buffoon, and ending with “we have a better plan. Why aren’t you smart enough to listen to us?” Is this the way any sane person would start a negotiation? Remember your definition of insanity. You know, doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results? They aren’t saying a damn thing about a plan, nor are they trying to talk about alternatives. If they were so damn worried about discussion and negotiation of their plan, they would change their approach. Their agenda is only to paint the current administration in a bad light, and they have no interest in presenting a “better plan.” They have to have something, so they keep getting together and coming up with inane statements on pieces of paper that, by their own admission, aren’t fully thought out yet. “But it’s gotta be better than Bush’s plan.” As I said, it is a necessary piece in a game of chess, nothing more. And the public keeps buying it.

You do realize that NOTHING gets brought up for discussion, no less a vote, without the neocons approval? The Democrats, at present, have absolutely zero ability to force a vote on anything. So, whose agenda is being served by bypassing discussion, and forcing a vote, on any bill? Hmmm, let me see, maybe the NEOCONS.
Feigning injury doesn’t promote intelligent discussion either. I was making a point that the neocons, and you per this entire discussion, aren’t offering up any alternate plans, or any plans at all. Do all of you think that everything is running along just peachy, like the asshole-in-chief does? Stay the course, is all that’s heard from all the neocons. Do they really think it’s the best course possible, or do they just like the catchy three word phrases, and are afraid to depart from them and actually think?

Am I looking for warm fuzzies? No. There are no warm fuzzies available in a war. It was a figure of speech. No one wants war but when the other fellow hits you, you can either hit back, or stand there telling him that wasn’t nice while he proceeds to kill you.

Sure, but if the guy sitting to your left at the bar, pushes you on purpose and makes you spill your beer, do you punch the guy sitting six stools to your right, who was just sitting there drinking and not really bothering anyone?

Bush didn’t refuse to believe experts. You have decided he didn’t listen to “your” experts after the fact, but as I stated in a previous post, he had full support of the democrats and the rest of the world going in as evidenced by congressional votes and UN resolutions. To say now that he made the decision to go into Iraq all by himself is nothing more than revisionist history.

No, it isn’t revisionist history. Dumbya and his cronies knowingly promoted specious evidence as to Iraqs military capability, possession of WMD’s, and involvement in any terrorist activities. And, the continued coverup, and stonewalling of investigations into the pre-war intelligence and dumbya’s handling of it, should completely outrage everyone in this Country.
BTW, the facts were purposefully ignored BEFORE the war. Did you know that immediately post 9/11 dumbya ordered that ALL intelligence gathered by the Central Intelligence Agency, Department of Defense, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the State Department, and his cabinet members was restricted to viewing by only 8 members of Congress? All of that information is still being protected by the neocons. What is dumbya afraid of? I have to assume he’s afraid of getting caught lying, and will do whatever is necessary to delay that discovery until after the 2006 elections, and longer if possible.

So what is the purpose of the democratic resistance to what is going on? In my estimation it is political posturing and spin for no other reason than to gain power. There are 2 ways to improve a position. One is to make yourself better; the other is to try to make your opponent worse. The democrats aren’t making themselves better. They don’t have unity, nor do they have any viable or well thought out ideas, so they have to try to win by belittling republicans. And, I’ll have to give it to them, they’re good at it.

How about we apply a little neocon, and others, “logic” to this situation? Well, the neocons continuously say that all of the rights the “patriot” act has taken away, the illegal phone taps, collection of bank records, and searches without a warrant, shouldn’t bother anyone if they don’t have anything to hide. So, why do the neocons continue to block access to pre-war intelligence, oversight of the phone tapping, and energy policy meeting participants etc., etc.? If they aren’t guilty of any wrongdoing, then they shouldn’t have anything to worry about.

As for republican and democratic “talking points”… You seem to imply that democratic talking points are valid and republican talking points are invalid. You accuse me of referencing republican talking points, and seem to expect that would make them automatically invalid. You have referenced many ideas that I consider to be democratic talking points, but I have never assumed that you were echoing them. Sometimes talking points actually make sense and sometimes they don’t. That goes equally for democrats or republicans.

I would have to agree, that as a general rule, neocon talking points ARE invalid, and Democratic talking points are valid. As we all should know, rules always have their exceptions. I just haven't seen too many lately.

These are my views. They are thought out, not echoed. I am still interested in discussion, but let’s try to keep it on a logical, thinking level.

I have presented all of my views in as simple and logical a format as possible. You can lead a horse to water…