| We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| George W Bush; On the right side of History? | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Jan 20 2005, 10:58 PM (846 Views) | |
| cptjeff | Jan 22 2005, 08:03 PM Post #46 |
|
Captain of the Enterprise-J
|
and the true bottom line is, it's a word. not more, not less. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Dandandat | Jan 22 2005, 08:08 PM Post #47 |
|
Time to put something here
|
Edited by dandandat, the point of this post was to get an immediate response but Cptjeff logged off before reading this, this post lost its meaning as time went on and will no longer have the desired effect. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Minuet | Jan 23 2005, 10:44 AM Post #48 |
|
Fleet Admiral Assistant wRench, Chief Supper Officer
|
Not to start any trouble or anything - but I have never seen you challenge anyone who has said this about Clinton in the manner that you are challenging those who say it about Bush. That is why I found your comments somewhat hypocritical. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Wichita | Jan 23 2005, 10:55 AM Post #49 |
|
The Adminstrator wRench
|
^^^ Personal Response With all due respect, Minuet, he just did whether or not he did so before. He said his words were directed at both and, historically, we have defended people's right to be the interpreters of what they "mean". End of Personal Response |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Minuet | Jan 23 2005, 11:54 AM Post #50 |
|
Fleet Admiral Assistant wRench, Chief Supper Officer
|
I wasn't telling him he didn't mean what he said he meant. I simply pointed out an inconsistency in his application of his words. This is not the first time he has gone after those who do not like Bush. That is his right. But I found his words inconsistent with his action in that he has not gone after those who said the same about Clinton. Edit - I want to add that this observation is personal - not administrative. After all the poster in question has administrative powers far above those of mere mortals
|
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Wichita | Jan 23 2005, 12:32 PM Post #51 |
|
The Adminstrator wRench
|
Personal Response Well, I haven't read every word that Dandandat has written so I can't say one way or the other .... I just don't want what he is saying now to get sidetracked without it being discussed. I think that he has made an excellent point. I have a hard time with the level of criticism of Bush, not that he is criticized. Heck, even Dwayne and Bill have criticized Bush's policies. No one should be immune. Several of us on the right have said that we would have thought twice about our vote had the choice been Lieberman instead of Kerry. Even if Paula Jones or Monica Lewinsky had never encountered Bill Clinton, I would not have been impressed by his record as President. I think the man had extraordinary gifts of communication and intelligence, but I think they were largely wasted by his need for a "legacy" in office. If I am angry, it is at the waste of abilities - not at the man. I certainly never thought of him as Satan or some such thing. What I don't see is the Bush=Hitler or the references to Nazism (Goebbels, etc.) used in reference to his Administration. Invariably when they are used, my response is to think the person using the reference knows very little about Hitler or about Nazism in general and, as a result, it lessens their credibility with me as to the objectivity of their evaluation of Bush. He isn't the Anti-Christ. I don't care if people like or dislike him or his Presidency, but let's keep things in perspective. Even the comment that Jeff made about the "fake photo op in uniform" struck me as odd. We have heard endlessly about Bush appearing on the deck of the Abraham Lincoln wearing a flight suit .... In the last month a photo was taken of Dan Rather on the deck of the Abraham Lincoln. What was he wearing? A flight suit. Is it just possible that a flight suit might be the sensible thing to wear in that circumstance? Regardless of what Bush said Thursday, he is in his second term. He realistically doesn't have 4 years to get something new accomplished - more like 2 years. Now is the time to set the strategy for the future - who and what we want to see in 2008. It could be a transformational election .... If I truly didn't like Bush, that is where I would be focusing my attention - creating a third alternative to "Bush's Way" and "Oppose Bush's Way". End of Personal Response |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Minuet | Jan 23 2005, 01:48 PM Post #52 |
|
Fleet Admiral Assistant wRench, Chief Supper Officer
|
I agree with the sentiments expressed about some of the stronger words that many apply to President Bush. I myself have expressed my distaste at the use of words like Nazi. One should understand the words they use and have proof that it applies. The same goes for those who throw around the words "leftist", "socialist", and "communist" However, I would not like to see discussion on this board taken to the point where a word like "loathe" or "disturbing" cannot be used. Loathe means a strong dislike and I think people are entitled to that sentiment. People can also feel disturbed, even if it does not make sense to others. I would say the difference is between labling someone in a way that has historical significance as opposed to using a word that describes a personal feeling. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| cptjeff | Jan 23 2005, 01:57 PM Post #53 |
|
Captain of the Enterprise-J
|
There was no "in" in that comment. I was trying to make a pun about people saying that they respect the Uniform, if not the man, and I was referencing that. (and bush has worn other uniforms before for photo ops... Army, marine.... If theat comment offended anyone, I would like to state that it was a pun. no more, no less. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Dandandat | Jan 23 2005, 03:08 PM Post #54 |
|
Time to put something here
|
I agree, my comment was not to say those words should not be used. People have the right to use any words they want. My point was to say that I don’t understand their use and that I find it funny and sad that they are used. But again people can do as they please. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Wichita | Jan 23 2005, 03:23 PM Post #55 |
|
The Adminstrator wRench
|
Personal Response Ummmmmmm..... What the heck are you talking about? When has Bush worn uniforms from various branches of the service for photo ops? End of Personal Response |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| ANOVA | Jan 23 2005, 03:38 PM Post #56 |
|
Vice Admiral
|
^^^ He did wear a naval flightsuit for the "mission accomplished" speech I believe he was wearing a blue button up and tie under it (not a military uniform) Other than that, I can't think of a Time when Bush has worn a uniform (excluding NG service). And wearing a USMC uniform, I think I would have registered my distaste for that the day it happened. I earned the right to wear such a uniform and I think I would be a little cranky over a civilian, even the COC wearing it. ANOVA |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| cptjeff | Jan 23 2005, 04:24 PM Post #57 |
|
Captain of the Enterprise-J
|
pre (/11, he visited an army base in army uniform. he posed in a mock battle scenario looking through binoculars... (the reason I know this is because I saw a spoof of that particular one- lenscaps on while he's looking) Anyway, the ones I'm referring to are pretty much forgotten. them might be on the internet somwhere, but it would take hours or days to find them. and technically, he does hold the rank of lieutenent. So he can wear a uniform of that level from the air force at the very least. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| CV6 Enterprise | Jan 23 2005, 04:29 PM Post #58 |
![]()
Captain
|
Technechly, he holds the rank of Commander in Chief. He is no longer a liuetenant, he resigned from the Air National Gaurd. He also isn't in a reserve unit. You said you saw a spoof of the first picture. It was a spoof, it doesn't mean that he was in another uniform. Try backing up what you say. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Dwayne | Jan 23 2005, 04:36 PM Post #59 |
|
Profanity deleted by Hoss
|
And this shows why, not only your memory, but your opinion ought to be suspect. ![]() As anyone can see, Mr. Bush is not in a uniform. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| CV6 Enterprise | Jan 23 2005, 04:36 PM Post #60 |
![]()
Captain
|
Is this the picture you were talking about? ![]() If it is, it only took about minute minute and a half to find it. He's not in uniform.. He is wearing a camoflaged jacket so he blends in and doesn't get shot. He is wearing his suit undernieth it. He'd stick out too much if he was wearing his suit And about the covers being on the binoculers, haven't you ever put them up to your eyes to look through them and realize you forgot to take the caps off? the photographer quickly grabed a picture before the president could take them off so the photograher could make the president look bad. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Politics and World Events Forum · Next Topic » |






9:47 AM Jul 11