Korean Job Discussion Forums

Privateer · Joined: 31 Aug 2005 Location: Easy Street.

I agree Congress should grow a pair and use 'clear-message legislative action'. However, Bush has been reserving the right to ignore legislation as and when he sees fit:

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1149361,00.html

Nowhere Man · Joined: 08 Feb 2004

Gopher · Joined: 04 Jun 2005

Gopher · Joined: 04 Jun 2005

fiveeagles · Joined: 19 May 2005 Location: Vancouver

Did Al Gore invent the internet? I wonder what else he likes to invent?

Kuros · Joined: 27 Apr 2004

Gopher · Joined: 04 Jun 2005

I knew that Gore invented the internet. What is news to me is that he moonlighted as Commander Riker.

EFLtrainer · Joined: 04 May 2005

The problem with the independent counsel is not the law, but its misuse. That ought to be able to be handled rather easily by stating what types of infractions it can be used for.

Your alternative suggestions, as you have claimed about calling out Bush at all, is that they are totally unrealistic. That being the case, they come off as mere apologistic poop for ol' Dumbya.

Nowhere Man · Joined: 08 Feb 2004

OK, Goph, I think you've made it clear.

You call people out on this forum for criticizing Bush, but post Gore's "helluva speech" in which you say he is calling for Bush "persecution".

You suggest that posters on this forum are wrong to call for more investigations and possible impeachment of Bush because they're following some tit-for-tat, 2-wrongs-don't-make-a-right flawed logic.

However, when a Bush-appointed crony (Michael Braun) horrifically fumbles the worst natural disaster in modern US history, you are quick to point out JFK appointing Bobby Kennedy to handle the Bay of Pigs.

That is a blatant contradiction.

You speak of some posters' intolerance of your position, but you are consistently intolerant of those left of yours, as if you occupy some definitive position of what proper liberal attitudes should be when, in fact, you say very little about your position that can de definitively defined as liberal, other than that you don't want to be a Republican.

In support of this:
-you spend far more time attacking liberals on this board than you do conservatives

-you spend far more time defending Bush than criticizing him

-you've taken up the stance that critics of the war in Iraq don't spend enough time condemning terrorists rather than the Bush administration. Where are your anti-terrorist posts? Or is this just a silly proposition to start with? You spend more time assailing Canada than you do Iraqi insurgents or Al Quaeda.

-then you entertain us by stating that you're going to vote for McCain/Powell if liberals don't give up their "hysteria"

Here's an idea: Give up the ghost. You're a moderate Republican.

Threatening to vote against liberals unless they adopt your mindset is a baby game.

What I'm saying is go ahead and vote your mind. I really don't care if I'm a minority and you think I'm an extremist. "Extremist" is your word.
My word for you is "flaccid". Perhaps we're both guilty of labeling, but I don't see any evidence that your label is "righter" than mine (although there might be a pun in there).

What I heard in Al Gore's speech was spine. It's interesting that you can be amazed by this speech when its main drive was for Bush to ultimately be impeached while you go on to label it persecution.

No, it doesn't really make a lot of sense.

Yes, that is very interesting.