REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

An experiment on partisanship

POSTED BY: KPO
UPDATED: Saturday, June 22, 2013 05:55
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 2237
PAGE 1 of 1

Monday, June 17, 2013 9:38 AM

KPO

Anti-Russia before it was cool.


Who's ready for a fun new experiment? It's meant to measure how partisan you are, and how ready you are to understand the positions of the other side.

The challenge is:

If you are liberal, to write a short essay arguing why Bush 43 was a good president.

If you are conservative, to write a short essay arguing why Obama has been a good president.

Obviously you don't have to believe your arguments, and you can refute your own essays later. But the challenge is to write something that somebody from the other side would read and enthusiastically agree with, and someone neutral might read and find convincing.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, June 17, 2013 10:42 AM

BYTEMITE


Quote:

If you are liberal, to write a short essay arguing why Bush 43 was a good president.

If you are conservative, to write a short essay arguing why Obama has been a good president.



O.O

Ow my head

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, June 17, 2013 10:51 AM

KPO

Anti-Russia before it was cool.


Byte you get to do it for both presidents. Yay!

It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, June 17, 2013 12:03 PM

BYTEMITE


NooooOOOOooooo Melting melting whatta world

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, June 17, 2013 12:13 PM

PENGUIN


Mama taught me not to lie.





King of the Mythical Land that is Iowa

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, June 17, 2013 12:24 PM

BYTEMITE


...They... They didn't kill everyone on earth. Yet. Despite laying the groundwork for it. Murders were kept to a minimum of targets that their propaganda machines insisted deserved it - such as wedding parties and among cultures considered undesirable.

They're both very good liars and manipulators, and their lackeys managed to maintain the appearance of deference to the rule of law despite flouting the spirit of the law at every opportunity. The American public even voted for them both twice, which as we all know, popularity as determined by vote is a sacred trust that is never rigged and is an entirely valid measure of successful policies.

And... they... said in their state of the union addresses that they would put money into researching AIDS and cancer, even though they later totally looted those funds for some ill-advised wars.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, June 17, 2013 12:30 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Obama. Drones r a good thing. Fin.


Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

Resident USA Freedom Fundie

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, June 17, 2013 12:32 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


Byte

I have to say that was an admirable little essay.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, June 17, 2013 12:52 PM

KPO

Anti-Russia before it was cool.


Good effort Byte, but I don't think you swayed many neutrals... in the right direction.

Auraptor, you're using this as an opportunity to say there's only thing about Obama's presidency that you can approve of. That's fine.

Does anyone want to have a real go at the challenge? It's like debate class, where you have to take a position that you don't necessarily agree with?

It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, June 17, 2013 1:17 PM

BYTEMITE


...Right direction...?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, June 17, 2013 2:19 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


"It's like debate class, where you have to take a position that you don't necessarily agree with?"

Well ... if it were just a matter of opinion then it would be easy. The problem is there are pesky facts.

Security? Hmmm ... after blowing off warnings he presided over one of the biggest failures in US security on 9/11. And then there was the anthrax attack as icing on the cake.

Foreign diplomacy? Got us embroiled in two foreign wars that he financed by putting them under 'emergency spending' to keep them out of the budget, using money borrowed from the Chinese.

He floated the economy on a housing bubble by forbidding states attorneys general from investigating and prosecuting fraudulent loans, which all came crashing down and is still reverberating today. BTW, you Europeans didn't help with your Basel II agreement.

Gave out tax breaks that didn't 'grow the economy'.

Between the tax breaks, the unfinanced wars, and the blown-up economy, he turned the country around from low unemployment to high and from a federal surplus to a deficit.

Allowed illegal (at the time) trap-and-trace on ALL AT&T phone calls.

Health aid to Africa came with the 'no discussion of birth control' string attached, leading to the African baby boom we're seeing today. http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2009/12/13/80331/bush-birth-control-policie
s-helped.html


There was the debacle of the Federal response to Katrina.

And so on.

I would happily argue why he was a great, or just a good, or at least an all right president. But I honestly can't think of a single thing he did that turned out well under his direction. And a lot of what he did was a disaster.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, June 17, 2013 4:25 PM

KPO

Anti-Russia before it was cool.


Quote:

Originally posted by BYTEMITE:
...Right direction...?


Hehe. Right in this context means the direction you were supposed to be swaying people according to the task of the experiment.

It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, June 17, 2013 4:33 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Quote:

Originally posted by kpo:

Auraptor, you're using this as an opportunity to say there's only thing about Obama's presidency that you can approve of. That's fine.





Yep.

Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

Resident USA Freedom Fundie

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, June 17, 2013 4:52 PM

FREMDFIRMA



Asking an Anarchist not to be partisan, well that's... amusing.

While they oppose existing systems in fact and deed, on the average you don't wind up a declared Anarchist unless yer kinda rabidly partisan in that direction to begin with, which means not many of em would ever have a kind word to say about most so-called-leaders anyways, as the very nature of the power they wield is anathema to them.

-F

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, June 17, 2013 5:07 PM

MAL4PREZ


Yeah, I could put together a love-of-Bush post, but it would be completely without facts and would in fact add up to nothing but mocking of the right wings support of an idiot and his Darth Vader VP.

I'm not going to bother with the effort.

I say this as someone who was not at all interested in politics until Bush jr came along. In 1999 I was quite willing to be swayed by either side. I listened with open ears, and now I cannot for the life of me come up with anything realistically compelling to support W.

I can come up with a number of things I don't like about Obama, the NSA spying being #1 at the moment. I'm as close to my 1999 state of mind as I've been since... well, since 1999. Because O screwed the pooch on this one. But this is no way an argument for the right. As wrong as Obama may be, the right is 1000 times worse. They loved this shit when W did it. They have no principles at all.

So there. You proved your point. I cannot leave my partisanship behind as long as one side is so horribly horribly out there. Man do we need a right wing that isn't 100% crazy batshit nuts!

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, June 17, 2013 5:14 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Quote:

Originally posted by MAL4PREZ:

Man do we need a right wing that isn't 100% crazy batshit nuts!




We just need passionate, patriotic conservatives. That's all.

Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

Resident USA Freedom Fundie

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, June 17, 2013 5:28 PM

MAL4PREZ


Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:
Quote:

Originally posted by MAL4PREZ:

Man do we need a right wing that isn't 100% crazy batshit nuts!




We just need passionate, patriotic conservatives.



...who are capable of fact-based logic. Not much of that around here, and certainly there's none of it from you.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, June 17, 2013 5:28 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


So you want this to be sincere? Or should I just repeat the rightwing talking points?

Seriously, let me know!

Quote:

...who are capable of fact-based logic. Not much of that around here, and certainly there's none of it from you.
You owe me a keyboard! AND a monitor!

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, June 17, 2013 5:31 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Quote:

Originally posted by MAL4PREZ:
Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:
Quote:

Originally posted by MAL4PREZ:

Man do we need a right wing that isn't 100% crazy batshit nuts!




We just need passionate, patriotic conservatives.



...who are capable of fact-based logic. Not much of that around here, and certainly there's none of it from you.



Oh yeah, like those 'truth-some ' Lefties, huh?

Please.

Done w/ the thread jack now. I've said my piece here.

Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

Resident USA Freedom Fundie

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, June 17, 2013 5:34 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

Done w/ the thread jack now. I've said my piece here.
Oh, cuttin' and runnin' again?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, June 17, 2013 5:38 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Quote:

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Quote:

Done w/ the thread jack now. I've said my piece here.
Oh, cuttin' and runnin' again?



Reading comprehension 101


I addressed the issue brought up in the OP.

Feel no need to devolve the thread into a whizzing contest.

Start up another thread, if the topic so moves you. I'll gladly reply there.

Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

Resident USA Freedom Fundie

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, June 17, 2013 5:59 PM

MAL4PREZ


Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:
I addressed the issue brought up in the OP.



Oh, you mean you wrote a post expanding on the strengths of the Obama presidency?


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, June 17, 2013 7:06 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


HEY KPO! I gotta question!
Quote:

So you want this to be sincere? Or should I just repeat the rightwing talking points?
'Cause I could do either.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, June 18, 2013 12:02 AM

MAGONSDAUGHTER


They both could have been a lot worse?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, June 18, 2013 2:59 AM

KPO

Anti-Russia before it was cool.


Quote:

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
HEY KPO! I gotta question!
Quote:

So you want this to be sincere? Or should I just repeat the rightwing talking points?
'Cause I could do either.



It doesn't have to be heartfelt, but it shouldn't be sarcastic. George Bush is on trial, you're his lawyer; make the best case that you can that he was a good president. Talking points is fine, any sincerity you can add to it the better.

It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, June 18, 2013 4:44 AM

BYTEMITE


Quote:

George Bush is on trial, you're his lawyer; make the best case that you can that he was a good president.


no please his dog would miss him and he has a wife and children or something

Instead of an overt death sentence, send them to colonize ehhhhhh maybe Australia/Antartica/the Atlantic Abyssal Plain/Whatever.

Hey Magons, you guys want an Obama or a Bush 43? I can guarantee freshness! I'll even poke airholes in the box!

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, June 18, 2013 6:12 AM

SIMONWHO


To try the original post's challenge:

George W Bush was elected as a caretaker President - Clinton's Presidency delivered prosperity but the sleeze factor drove enough voters towards Bush rather than Gore. Bush clearly envisaged himself as a hands-off President but one single day forced the most dramatic shift required of a President in decades: 9/11. For the past fifty years, the almost absurd level of American defence spending projected an almost untouchable status on the United States and in little over an hour, that invincibility was shattered.

Suddenly a do-nothing President had to do something and despite a shaky start, the new coalition of the willing took Afghanistan in a matter of weeks. This however presented Bush with a new problem - simply conquering a tinpot nation like Afghanistan didn't offer nearly enough catharsis to the American people. So a new target had to be found and it also offered Bush the opportunity to right a previous wrong - the removal of Saddam Hussein. There's little doubt that Hussein was a truly evil man and in many ways, the war in Iraq was a good choice.

Bush had to entrust the war to his generals and advisers but he was misled in many ways - the idea that all Iraqis would greet US troops as liberators was absurdly optimistic and the hope that the Taliban could be defeated quickly soon disappeared. Bush was now trapped in two wars, draining the country's resources and continually dragging away his focus from domestic policies.

So before you hate Bush, pity him. He was the wrong man, in the wrong job, in the wrong circumstances - his best wasn't good enough but very few Presidents would have been able to play the hand he was dealt.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, June 18, 2013 7:02 AM

BYTEMITE


Quote:

So before you hate Bush, pity him. He was the wrong man, in the wrong job, in the wrong circumstances - his best wasn't good enough but very few Presidents would have been able to play the hand he was dealt.


Good thing he never had to go it alone! :D

#oops #lolnope #hatersgonnahate

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, June 18, 2013 12:38 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Quote:

Originally posted by MAL4PREZ:
Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:
I addressed the issue brought up in the OP.



Oh, you mean you wrote a post expanding on the strengths of the Obama presidency?




" If you are conservative, to write a short essay arguing why Obama has been a good president . "



Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

Resident USA Freedom Fundie

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, June 18, 2013 2:16 PM

NEWOLDBROWNCOAT


Good job Simon. I've always used the old cliche: "Some men are born great. Some men achieve greatness. Some have greatness thrust upon them." Bush 43 is category 3, and in my opinion-- well, that would be partisan.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, June 18, 2013 8:26 PM

MAGONSDAUGHTER


Bush - not as bad as Hitler or Stalin

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, June 19, 2013 1:49 AM

KPO

Anti-Russia before it was cool.


OK let's have a go at this...

Why Bush was a good president:

Let's start with the Bush tax cuts. These put more money in the pockets of all tax paying Americans, and spurred the economy to growth and job creation for several years (until the financial crisis - that can be traced back to financial de-regulation that started under Clinton). The drop in government revenue also should have acted as a reminder to the government not to overspend; unfortunately what followed was the war on terror, and the election of a wasteful Democrat - both of which precipitated extra spending that Bush couldn't have anticipated.

Now let's move onto foreign policy. Bush campaigned on a foreign policy of avoiding foreign interventions, but when 9-11 happened that policy had to be revisited. Bush began the process of getting Al Qaeda on the run in Afghanistan, and while the cost of the Iraq war is judged too high by most, it shouldn't be forgotten that he removed the tyrant Sadaam and took the fight to our enemies there, fighting extremism abroad so that Americans wouldn't have to face it at home. Then there was The Surge, a decision of courage and foresight that went against public opinion, but turned the situation in Iraq around, and gave the Iraqis a shot, at least, of getting their democracy working. This strong, principled steadfastness sent the message to America's allies that she could be counted on, and to her enemies, that she should not be crossed. Bush never apologised for America; that didn't always win him friends abroad, but neither did it embolden our enemies, and invite them to attack.

Finally Bush showed with his AIDS and No Child Left Behind programs that he was a genuinely caring president, and someone who was willing to work with the other side.

It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, June 20, 2013 6:14 AM

KPO

Anti-Russia before it was cool.


By the by here's an article explaining the study that performed this experiment, on conservatives and liberals: http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2013/06/study-conservatives-more-likel
y-liberals-avoid-cognitive-dissonance


It was an investigation into cognitive dissonance - the sensation you get when you stare in the face arguments/evidence that contradict your own views.

When given the choice, all the conservatives refused to do the exercise, whereas 20 out of 71 liberals agreed to. The researchers posited that the conservative mind may be more prone to dissonance avoidance, and that's why they are less willing to think positively about their political foes.


It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, June 20, 2013 6:46 AM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Quote:

Originally posted by BYTEMITE:
Quote:

George Bush is on trial, you're his lawyer; make the best case that you can that he was a good president.


no please his dog would miss him and he has a wife and children or something

Instead of an overt death sentence, send them to colonize ehhhhhh maybe Australia/Antartica/the Atlantic Abyssal Plain/Whatever.

Hey Magons, you guys want an Obama or a Bush 43? I can guarantee freshness! I'll even poke airholes in the box!




But will you use a katana to poke those airholes? And will you make sure they poke all the way through?





"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero

"I was wrong" - Hero, 2012

Mitt Romney, introducing his running mate: "Join me in welcoming the next President of the United States, Paul Ryan!"

Rappy's response? "You're lying, gullible ( believing in some BS you heard on msnbc ) or hard of hearing."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, June 20, 2013 6:56 AM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Meanwhile, I'll play.

"President Bush declared three vast new marine national monuments in the Pacific Ocean, protecting an area larger than California.

These preserves are designed to conserve areas that are unspoiled — and largely unvisited — by human beings, including the deepest canyon on earth, the Mariana Trench.

Bush has declared much of the Mariana Trench — some 36,000 feet below the surface of the Pacific — and waters around some nearby islands as a marine national monument. He's also declared as monuments the area around Rose Atoll, part of the Territory of American Samoa, and the seas surrounding seven islands that are U.S. territories scattered in the Pacific."


Love him or hate him, he did that.

He also increased AIDS funding to Africa, more than doubling it. You might not like the strings he attached to it, but he loosened the purse strings and came up with the money, and that's not nothin'.


I'd still like to see him stand trial for war crimes, but he'll have my gratitude for at least those two actions.

And speaking of war crimes, allow me to play from the anti-Obama side as well. I think I'll let writer Michael Ventura speak for me:

Quote:

Let us confront the fact – or, if you like, the possibility – that we live in a rogue nation.
A definition is needed: For our purposes, "rogue nation" means a nation that purposefully, continually, and systematically defies the international laws and treaties that govern civilized behavior – treaties that said rogue nation had previously promised to abide by and enforce.
To demonstrate that the United States has gone rogue, we'll detour from examining our Constitution to look at two foundational documents of international law, instigated by and signed by the U.S.: the International Bill of Human Rights and the Geneva Conventions.
In 1945, President Truman appointed Eleanor Roosevelt as one of the first U.S. delegates to the United Nations. As chairperson of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights, the former First Lady was a key player in drafting the International Bill of Human Rights, which the U.N. voted into international law unanimously on December 10, 1948. (There were eight abstentions: the Soviet Bloc, apartheid South Africa, and Saudi Arabia.)
Article 1: "All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights." No exceptions.
Article 2: (italics added): "Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty."
"Without distinction of any kind" – distinctions, for instance, like "enemy combatant." "Or other opinion," like jihadists. "Regardless of jurisdictional or international status ... whether it be ... non-self-governing," so stateless persons and places are included. "Or under any other limitation of sovereignty" – such as failed states.
Article 5: "No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment." No one. Ever.
Article 6: "Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law." Everyone means everyone, and everywhere means everywhere, including Guantánamo Bay, Cuba.
Article 9: "No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile." Again, no one means no one. "Shall be" means ever.
Article 10: "Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal ... [regarding] any criminal charge against him." Any means any, including terrorism.
Let's turn now to the Geneva Conventions, a body of international law that covers countries at war. Here is what the Geneva Conventions consider "grave breaches" (as listed in Wikipedia):
1) "Willful killing, torture or inhumane treatment."
2) "Willfully causing great suffering or serious injury to body or health."
4) "Willfully depriving someone of the right to a fair trial if accused of a war crime" (my italics). Nazis who killed millions were given fair trials. That's the standard.
"Also considered grave breaches are ... unlawful deportation, transfer, or confinement."
Finally, "those provisions are considered customary international law, allowing war crimes prosecution by the United Nations and its International Court of Justice over groups that have signed and have not signed the Geneva Conventions" (my italics). Even "groups" are entitled to fair treatment, like the groups that attack and are attacked by the United States.
In his foreign policy speech of May 23, President Obama said, "America's actions are legal. ... Under domestic law and international law the United States is at war."
His statement is intended to create the impression that we're in compliance with international law, though it is glaringly obvious that we are not. With almost admirable audacity, after implying that we're in compliance, Obama admitted that "we are force-feeding detainees ... on a hunger strike," as though that's just fine.
"The U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights has called force-feeding a violation of international law, and the World Medical Association, of which the U.S. is a member, declared in 1991 that the practice is 'never ethically acceptable' unless a prisoner consents or is unable to make a rational choice" (Time, May 30).
"The lawyers representing the detainees would like to file a motion in federal court to stop the force-feeding, but there is a Catch-22. They can't go to court without the consent of their clients – and thanks to another set of harsh, new [Obama administration] protocols, including ... genital and anal searches ... most clients are now refusing to talk to their lawyers. ... The United Nations Office of the Commissioner for Human Rights released a statement in early May calling the continued detention in Guantánamo a 'flagrant violation of international human rights law' and categorizing the force-feeding at the prison as 'cruel, inhuman and degrading'" (The New York Times, May 31).
To be in violation of so many aspects of international law, on such a scale and for so many years, is to be rogue.
Congress and the White House have passed new laws to institute and codify our outlaw behavior, but internationally this makes us no less rogue.
Democrats and Republicans are equally culpable. Check vote counts for the Patriot Act, the Military Commissions Act, the National Defense Authorization Act, etc., or count votes for Senate bills to forbid releasing Gitmo detainees. George W. Bush and Barack Obama share equal responsibility for backing and signing such bills. Our violation of international law is a thoroughly bipartisan affair.
I feel like the kid in the back row of the classroom raising his hand to ask if statutes passed by Congress and signed by the president are actually legal when they blatantly violate treaties and agreements signed and ratified by the United States. But that kind of back-row kid can raise his hand all day and the question will not be answered.
You perhaps noticed that during the 2012 presidential election, international law and the Constitution were nonissues. Liberals were as happy as conservatives about that. A vigorous public and journalistic defense of the Constitution and of international law would have damaged the electability of either party's candidate.
So it's not only the government that's gone rogue. With the consent of the governed, both explicit and tacit, the country has gone rogue.
The ability and willingness to commit violence anywhere in the world; the ability and willingness to ignore our commitments to international agreements; the ability and willingness to say with a smile that we are not doing what everyone else knows we are doing; and, above all, the ability to get away with it – these (and a large, restless economy) make the United States the world's most powerful, or most muscular, nation.
The Framers felt this truth to be self-evident:
Law that fails to bind the strongest as well as the weakest is not law.
With 12 consecutive years of rogue behavior, the United States has, in essence, ended international law. All that's left is a pile of old documents that America has proved impotent.



http://www.austinchronicle.com/columns/2013-06-14/letters-at-3am-an-ar
bitrary-nation-part-4
/



War crimes. The whole fucking lot of 'em, from Bush and his whole crew to Obama and his administration.


Of course, that will never happen. For people like Rappy to give up the idiotic bullshit like Benghazi and IRS-gate and focus on the REAL crimes, they'd have to admit that their messiah, George Dubya Bush, is every bit as guilty as the man they hate so much, Barack Obama. And they are simply incapable of doing so.



"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero

"I was wrong" - Hero, 2012

Mitt Romney, introducing his running mate: "Join me in welcoming the next President of the United States, Paul Ryan!"

Rappy's response? "You're lying, gullible ( believing in some BS you heard on msnbc ) or hard of hearing."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, June 22, 2013 5:55 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Been real busy, but glad I could get back to this.

Why Bush was a good President. (Do I have to say "great", or can I leave it at "good?")


Whether by accident, on purpose, or by conspiracy, Bush was surrounded at the Cabinet- and VP-level by people of consistent and unwavering ideology and purpose. Rice, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Gonzales, Paulson, Ashcroft, Gonzales, and Chertoff - and indeed all of his Cabinet members, and Cheney- were dedicated on-message staff. The Bush administration had two unwavering purposes: (1) cut taxes for the wealthy and corporations, and (2) take war to the Middle East.

Unlike Clinton, who cooed sweet nothings into liberal ears while signing the DMCA, NAFTA and DOMA; and Obama- who promised the sun, the moon and the stars while keeping tabs on everyone with an electronic communications device- you knew where Bush stood. Love him or hate him... in fact, it was allowed to hate Bush and Cheney. They didn't change much, even in the face of being despised. Although their overall effects on many aspects of the USA were devastating, they served as sterling examples of the philosophy they believed in so vigorously, and deserve in many ways to be held as examples of a strangely honest administration.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
Some Covid-19 thoughts
Thu, April 2, 2020 21:23 - 158 posts
The (Political) Science Behind Trump's Approval Bump
Thu, April 2, 2020 18:57 - 3 posts
new deadly human-to-human-transmissible coronavirus emerges out of China
Thu, April 2, 2020 18:55 - 1060 posts
If Covid-19 comes back as expected this fall...
Thu, April 2, 2020 18:30 - 9 posts
Canada's outlandish hair freezing contest
Thu, April 2, 2020 18:25 - 3 posts
Elections 2020
Thu, April 2, 2020 13:40 - 377 posts
In the garden, and RAIN!!!!
Thu, April 2, 2020 03:35 - 4227 posts
Chump was warned in 2017 a pandemic was likely and now 200k or more people are likely to die.
Thu, April 2, 2020 01:25 - 3 posts
Quote of the day
Wed, April 1, 2020 22:26 - 44 posts
Who, What is Zero Hedge
Wed, April 1, 2020 15:40 - 49 posts
Coronavirus- Damn Commies are gonna get us all killed!
Wed, April 1, 2020 14:41 - 326 posts
Countdown Clock, Trumps Removal 'Starts'
Wed, April 1, 2020 10:57 - 300 posts

FFF.NET SOCIAL