The random political thoughts thread (Part Deux)

[scaeagles]

Originally Posted by innerSpaceman

Can the Republicans among us please just man-up and stop casting blame where none lies?

All I've said is "if". I have not claimed a vast left-wing conspiracy. I will again point out that I am the one who brought this up and was beyond angry about it. I have calmed down a bit, obviously.

I will point out, though it doesn't really metter, that quoting from Time to me is like me quoting from Fox News to you.

[Nephythys]

Remove the plank from your own eye before complaining about the splinter in your brothers eye.

If the dems had ever been a party who owned up to things- I might be willing to take this castigation seriously. But come on- they are as inclined to blame anyone but themselves for their failings and scandals.

"It's a right wing conspiracy"

"it was a stolen election" (the dem answer when they lose)

etc etc.....

Might not be dirty tricks- but I don't believe for a MOMENT that ranking dems did not know. It's ridiculous to think that they were clueless-

[Strangler Lewis]

Originally Posted by Nephythys

"it was a stolen election" (the dem answer when they lose)

But . . . but . . . but it was a stolen election. They both were. Of course, if Ohio had somehow been given to Kerry, it would have been worse than 2000 in terms of the popular vote winner losing the electoral college.

And the Democrats probably stole 1960.

Election day is coming up. Vote early and often.

[Alex]

The great thing about the political game is that both sides label the other as hypocrites. Then use that hypocrisy in the other side as excuse for their own hypocrisy. And then when power flips between parties on many issues both sides simultaneously flip positions while calling the other side hypocrites for doing so.

It's the way the game is played. It, to a large extent, is the way the game has always been played. I suspect that in five thousand years, assuming republican democtratic (small r, small d, not the parties) politics still exists it will be much the same.

I have no idea who was behind it, but the blog that sparked this whole thing was obviously an attempt to get this story broken. Whether that was an angry page, a disgruntled Republican, or a Georg Soros lackey, I have no idea.

Nor is it important. Don't do stupid ****, and you won't get in trouble for it.

[Motorboat Cruiser]

Originally Posted by Nephythys

Might not be dirty tricks- but I don't believe for a MOMENT that ranking dems did not know. It's ridiculous to think that they were clueless-

I'm surprised that you would find it ridiculous to think that the dems were clueless. Isn't that a standard talking point?

[wendybeth]

Originally Posted by Motorboat Cruiser

I'm surprised that you would find it ridiculous to think that the dems were clueless. Isn't that a standard talking point?

You must spread some Mojo around before giving it to Motorboat Cruiser again.

[scaeagles]

Originally Posted by Motorboat Cruiser

I'm surprised that you would find it ridiculous to think that the dems were clueless. Isn't that a standard talking point?

Clueless in knowledge, no. Clueless in application of knowledge, yes.

[SacTown Chronic]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

Clueless in knowledge, no. Clueless in application of knowledge, yes.

Perhaps, but the dems aren't so clueless as to invade Peter because they know Paul attacked America.

[Gemini Cricket]

A controversial new study contends nearly 655,000 Iraqis have died because of the war, suggesting a far higher death toll than other estimates.
The timing of the survey's release, just a few weeks before the U.S. congressional elections, led one expert to call it "politics."

Source

For Leo:

A controversial new study contends nearly 655,000 Iraqis have died because of the war, suggesting a far higher death toll than other estimates.
The timing of the survey's release, just a few weeks before the U.S. congressional elections, led one expert to call it "politics."

Source
Bold emphasis is done by Fox"News".

[Alex]

Whoa, deja vu. (In the sense of a high death toll number, that time in relation to the sanctions following the first Gulf War gets the press while the more legitimate methodologies don't get much play.)

I know counting the excess dead is hard to do, but I find it hard to believe that the organizations that actually try to count bodies are missing 13 out of 14 of them.

And there are obvious methodolical concerns with establishing how many people have died based solely on interviews rather than hard counts so I'd be interested in seeing the nitty gritty details on their methodologies.

And if, as the CNN version says, the study authors in a previous version admitted to doing it with specific political goals, then they aren't doing research, they are engaging in activism which should rightly cast a pall over their result.