"I don't think it was by accident that al-Qaeda decided to test the new prime minister. They watch our elections as closely as we do, maybe more closely than some of our fellows citizens do. Let's not forget you're hiring a president not just to do what a candidate says during the election, you want a president to be there when the chips are down."
to some classic Cheney Co:
"If we make the wrong choice, then the danger is that we'll get hit again -- that we'll be hit in a way that will be devastating from the standpoint of the United States." -Vice President Dick Cheney, 9/07/04
and
"Whoever is elected in November faces the prospect of another terrorist attack. The question is whether or not we have the right policies in place to best protect our country. That's what the vice president said." -Cheney spokeswoman Anne Womack "clarifying" the vice president's fearmongering
I don't know, I wouldn't say that was "fearmongering" of her. What she said was true as far as I can see. Except if they're going to strike us after the election I doubt it'll matter who's in office.
ReplyDeleteoh fuck, you're right, Tom. These statements are totally implying different things. The wording is just so different, silly me. Totally, totally sorry about the last two posts. Won't let it happen again. i'll just line up for Bill Clinton's third term with you. Or wait, is it Ron Paul you think i should support? Just let me know so i can start printing up some "MLK is a gay Pedophile" pamphlets if need be.
ReplyDeleteChill. I didn't say anything about the differing comments. I just don't think it's realistic to really lump her in with Cheney. could not care less about a 3rd clinton term. Just because I'm questioning some of the piling on doesn't make me your enemy. geez... i thought we were in the midst of the politics of hope.
ReplyDeleteI'm on your side. I posted last week saying I'm near ready to declare myself his supporter. I said the other day I think Edwards is the only thing blocking his nomination. I just don't see what's to gain by attacking the only other plausible choice besides Obama to keep a rightwing whack like guiliani, mccain, etc... out of the white house. i just think your time would be better served speaking out against the real enemy. that's all. Last week you begged on this site for HRC not to go negative. Really though, i'm sorry for pissing you off so much.i thought maybe we could argue without cussing each other out or implying because i agree with ron paul's foreign policy that i think MLK was into little kids. You will hear nothing more from me about any of this as i care far more about having you as a friend than i do about whichever person gets more delegates.
ReplyDeletelater.
Cussing out? You sissy, that was no cussing out, you dog licking mother fuc.. just kidding. Obviously, I’m way too wrapped up in this stuff, but I was in no way implying that you think MLK was a pedophile, just that Ron Paul (or someone who writes his newsletter under his name) does or did that particular month. Sorry, if it came off that way. I also in no way thought this was affecting our friendship. Sorry, if I’ve been too harsh. Two weeks ago I thought Hillary was a fine candidate, I’m not sure I feel that way anymore. I believe the Clintons have gone well below the incredibly low standard of political ethics for campaigning (which was very disappointing for me) and only being rewarded for it. I at one time held Bill in very high regard. I obviously hold Obama in a higher regard now. And perhaps my greatest worry (and sometimes a seeming inevitability for him to win) is that Obama will go just as dirty. Come the election, yeah, I probably will vote for her if she is the candidate, but I won’t feel good about it. At this point I couldn’t imagine feeling anything other than guilt when I vote for her. So again I apologize, Tom, I in no way meant anything as a personal attack on you, it’s really just me trying to come to terms with my frustration and my inevitable decline and you, as always, playing the part of antagonist (to every non-photo post I’ve made)..
ReplyDeleteAntagonist always? I concurred on the greatness of the Daniel Johnston quote. i'm not always the devil's advocate.
ReplyDeleteJust as an aside-I always base my vote on a candidate's views of MLK's sexual proclivities. I'd always heard he was a womanizer myself but if ron paul's newsletter says differently then maybe i need to do more research. this is a pressing issue for the electorate to consider. i'm glad the media looks carefully at his 1983 newsletters but ignores his critique of the US economy.