Since when is an opposing opinion un-American?

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi recently mentioned something about the Emperor Bush being �buck neked�. Those weren't Representative Pelosi's exact words; I have translated what she said into my native language of Texan. Here are some of her exact words, sans my translation:
"I believe that the president's leadership in the actions taken in Iraq demonstrates incompetence in terms of knowledge, judgment and experience in making the decisions that would have been necessary to truly accomplish the mission without the deaths to our troops and the cost to our taxpayers."
And here are some exact words from Ms. Pelosi's counterpart in the House of Representatives, Tom Delay, and Majority Leader:
"Nancy Pelosi should apologize for her irresponsible, dangerous rhetoric. She apparently is so caught up in partisan hatred for President Bush that her words are putting American lives at risk."
White House spokesman, Scott McClellan, when asked about Representative Pelosi's remarks about President Bush's incompetence: "I just don't think that such comments are worth dignifying with any response from this podium," he said.
The question for consideration is:
1. Since when is voicing an honest opinion in criticism of a sitting President irresponsible, dangerous, and something to apologize for!
2. Since when are opinions that are radically different from the administration of a sitting President undignified?
3. Since when is this kind of criticism not a part --- an important part --- of the democratic system that the government is supposedly working so hard to protect?
4. Since when is democracy defined as unilateral patriotism? And since when is the only way to support military troops agreeing that the judgment of a naked emperor is sound?
Since when!
Since January 20, 2001!
And I, for one, am grateful to Nancy Pelosi and every other American --- Democrat, Republican, whatever --- who not only values democracy, but who is also willing to speak up and not be intimidated into silence.
adapted from Thom Rutledge
Thom Rutledge is a psychotherapist and speaker who write both self-help material and political commentary. He has been criticized for blending his experience as a psychotherapist with his political views. www.thomrutledge.com...

as quoted by gmcnulty
1. Since when is voicing an honest opinion in criticism.....

Hey gmcnulty, as anyone with a shred of sense knows, politicians are not "honest", and as such, since when do they give "honest" criticism?

Anyhow lets see, first off, she gives no 'specific' areas or clarifications when utilizing the word "incompetent".
Secondly, as all liberals do when bashing, howling, and name calling, they offer no suggestions nor solutions. Please don't give the same spill that Kerry says when he mentions that "he would go to the UN or to foreign capitols", cause thats not a solution.....he's going to do what when he gets there?

As 'horrific' or 'scandelous' or "honest" as her wordings may have been, it is a necessary tactic if one supports Kerry, just as it is for you, gmcnulty, to do as you do.

But seriously, enough from me....I think I'll let Mr. Dennis Hastert pick up where I am going to leave off.
Hastert Defends President Bush, Says Pelosi Comments 'Cross the Line'


seekerof

[edit on 6-6-2004 by Seekerof]

"1. Since when is voicing an honest opinion in criticism of a sitting President irresponsible, dangerous, and something to apologize for!
2. Since when are opinions that are radically different from the administration of a sitting President undignified?
3. Since when is this kind of criticism not a part --- an important part --- of the democratic system that the government is supposedly working so hard to protect?
4. Since when is democracy defined as unilateral patriotism? And since when is the only way to support military troops agreeing that the judgment of a naked emperor is sound?"

I find this to be lucid thinking. Questions that need answers. Good questions.

Are you serious?

So you say:

All politicians are not honest; therefore 'honest' criticism offered by politicians is a contradictions in terms?

Ever take logic in college? Better bone up on your text from Logic 101 before making an argument............

You need a list of "incompetence"? Is there time or room enough here?

As far as Kerry's proposals.........have you noticed Bush has made a smart move while you were not paying attention...........(not as dumb as once thought) .......he adopted them as his own, thank god...............

Don't impune my motives because of who you think I support because the same charge is true of you. Is it not?

Touche' pal.

When you learn and employ some logic ......get back to me.

gmcnulty...
You taken Reading101 in college dude?
Here's what I said:

... politicians are not "honest", and as such, since when do they give "honest" criticism?

I see no contradiction there. Perhaps the contradiction is when you mentioned that she made and gave an "honest" opinionated view?

The "shred of sense" comment must have got to you a bit, eh?

You then spout:

You need a list of "incompetence"? Is there time or room enough here?

gmcnulty, again, do you read?
What did I say, in regards to her?

...she gives no 'specific' areas or clarifications when utilizing the word "incompetent".

Are you "she"? IF I need any type list, all I need to do is do a search on your past postings, and a list will be provided, k?

Then you hilariously mention this:

As far as Kerry's proposals.........have you noticed Bush has made a smart move while you were not paying attention...........(not as dumb as once thought) .......he adopted them as his own, thank god.

Really? I read that it is the other way around gmcnulty, strange.
Btw, would that be the same as when Kerry mentions the vague comment and assertion that "Many US military back him as their commander"?
Many implies what exactly, gmcnulty? Links? Names? Oh wait, would that be those so-called "Band of Brothers" or would that be in reference to Mr. Clark?

Touche' indeed "pal".



seekerof

[edit on 6-6-2004 by Seekerof]

You're silly............

Well gmcnulty, it is the 'pit' after all.
Some sense of humor needs to be interjected from time to time...consider me sometimes as comic relief.



seekerof

[edit on 7-6-2004 by Seekerof]

Be a good boy now or I may give you a time-out......(since you have no ignore button)

Have nice evening...............off to dreamland

'til another day, god willing.

LOL!!! ROFL!!!!

*wipes away tears*

I'm sorry, ut to hear someone who tows the liberal line so effortlessly to be so worried about defending the opposing view, well, it makes me laugh hysterically.

Careful how you respond, conservatives; if you use politically incorrect speech, you will be rebuked, and if you get to close to the truth, you'kk be barrged by liberal-attack name-calling and will be shouted down!

LOL!! This is some really good stuff!

Seekerof, Thomas Crowne,

Maybe you guys should actually answer the question. Your posts have been nothing but pointless drivel aimed at defeating liberals (I expect nothing less out of you two!). Prove the liberals wrong! Prove that you are better than them by answering the questions they pose!

Then again, anyone who calls themselves liberal and conservative will waste precious time driving the other guy to the ground. Sounds just like Red Sox vs. Yankees!

I went to the trouble to write up a history of liberalism and thru out the gauntlet for anyone to take issue with what are truly held liberal beliefs, goals and philosophy as put forth in my little missive...........and not from the blabbering lies as published by the likes of former and recovering "junkie" 'I took the cure' Rush Limbaugh types...........

Lots of noise and posturing but yet....no takers...............is this the empty kettle syndrome?????????? Viral I believe!

I hear it might be going around one more

Any way, what puzzle me is this fight thesed folks have again liberals.......'cause there ain't no more of that type around in American politics anymore..........they all died off............

I must share that idea and my argument in support of it some time..........I must look for it in the clutter of my hard drive some day........

[edit on 7-6-2004 by gmcnulty]

Originally posted by sweatmonicaIdo
Sounds just like Red Sox vs. Yankees!

Oooh....I must know...which one are the liberals and which one is the conservatives?

tell you what...i'll have a stab at these questions...

The question for consideration is:
1. Since when is voicing an honest opinion in criticism of a sitting President irresponsible, dangerous, and something to apologize for!

is there a dishonest opinion? i dont like the wording here but i will answer. voicing an opinion of any kind is never wrong. on the flip it is also never right either. opinions are nothing more than personal thoughts that we express outwardly into the world. nothing more. there is no honesty in them unless you means in terms of what the person truly feels. otherwise there is truth or dishonesty in an opinion.

2. Since when are opinions that are radically different from the administration of a sitting President undignified?

nothing as long as they arent against the president you like. this goes both ways so lets not pretend that this is somehow a new concept. in fact its old hat and boring to me.

3. Since when is this kind of criticism not a part --- an important part --- of the democratic system that the government is supposedly working so hard to protect?

when its senseless mindless mind numbing name calling bashing and "hey bush fell off his bike roofles, i'm kewlies for making fun of him" and people call it mere criticizing him. also when it comes from hate rather from logic.

4. Since when is democracy defined as unilateral patriotism? And since when is the only way to support military troops agreeing that the judgment of a naked emperor is sound?

i think you're confusing "dont bash the guy" for censorship. i see a lot of bashing and all of those who have made logical sound arguments get a nod from me but 99% of the time i see nothing but bush bashing, nothing constructive just venting and ranting. people are confusing one for the other.

i know these arent the answers you're looking for but they're answers. take em or leave just dont bash em.

How can I say this����.

A Boston vs. Yankee�s game is a special contest unlike any other in the history of sports rivalry. Boston has never gotten over the miscue of trading Ruth to the Yankees. January 3, 1920: Harry Frazee, owner of the Boston Red Sox, sells Babe Ruth to the New York Yankees.

The Yankees' Colonel Jacob Ruppert pays $125,000 and a $300,000 loan; Frazee uses the money to produce 'No, No, Nannette' on Broadway and collateral for Fenway Park. Would ya ever?????????????

Since then Boston fans believe they have been cursed. The curse suggests that Babe Ruth wishes the Red Sox bad luck, even though he prospered and was happy as a New York Yankee. The curse is not fully defined and at times is used as an excuse for the some-times bad weather in Boston. Is it that the Red Sox would not win a World Series for an undefined period of time, or is it the endless suffering of coming close and not winning it all?

Lou Gehrig teamed with Babe Ruth to form baseball's most devastating hitting tandem ever. Ruth and Gehrig began dominating the baseball headlines in 1927, in a way two players had never done before. That year Ruth hit 60 homers, breaking his old record of 59, and Gehrig clouted 47, more than anyone other than Ruth had ever hit. As late as August 10th, Gehrig had more homers than the Babe, but Ruth's closing kick was spectacular. Together they out-homered every team in baseball except one.

Attendance today at a Boston vs. Yankees is as a display of feral and flowing testosterone. Few people are aware of it, but the idea for ANIMAL HOUSE was first conceived by James Belushi while in attendance at a Yankee-Red Sox�s game.

All social distinctions � political, social, and economic, etc. - fade away in the presents of this sports contest. Raw, aggressive energy abounds. For example if one as yourself were to attend one of this competition�s, well before you reached your seat, at least 5 men would wink and sway, �Love them hooters, gal.�

It is an experience, to be appreciated, must be experienced first hand.

I would bring the family up to the Stadium, on the No. 5 train, every chance I got when Boston was in town.

One thing I noticed is that our forum conservative-extraordinaires, the majestic Seekerof and the holy and hallowed Thomas Crowne, have accused many liberals on this board of "avoiding the question." Funny, as TC says, because Seekerof and Thomas Crowne have done EXACTLY that: avoid the question.

Yes, LIBERALS on this board avoid questions too. But it shows something if one is hypocritical...

I say we all just shut up about these partisan politics and discuss constructively, since they don't know how to bash each other anyway.

gmcnulty,

The Red Sox-Yankees rivalry is, like you say, a very unique experience. To me, a spectacle unlike any other. Nothing else in the world breeds more hatred in something that's supposed to be fun. It's incredible.

I have never attended a Red Sox-Yankees game, and I hope I never do. After seeing the carnage in Game 3, 2003 ALCS, I can't even imagine what would be worse. A full-scale riot? That would be destructive. These players, managers, fans, HATE each other. If you want pure HATRED, it's Red Sox-Yankees.

But something is different, and that is that the teams are very well-matched now. Both have great pitching, but both have offenses that can spew firepower like anything. For once, the "Evil Empire" has to fight Boston on the same ground.

Anyway, this is what the Political Mudpit is like. Red Sox-Yankees. Those of you that argue on the Political Mudpit don't care how stupid and pathetic you look, you did because you really don't like them liberals or conservatives. And instead of upholding what you claim to believe in and stand for, you just want to destroy everyone else. Yeah, those two things are VERY similar!

I for one am a fan of the Braves-Mets rivalry. It's pure competition, not something where people talk stupid and do stupid things.

�Out, out, brief candle!
Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage
And then is heard no more: it is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.�

As too was my post.
Take no heed of the picture I paint.
T�was but a ruse��.. A subterfuge ��
��.an artful dodge if one should know.

The fair lady�s question along,
With her image so fair,
So upstanding a lass she looked to be���
Firm and so fair her youth did speak
I was strained to devise a plan��.a scheme���..
To so fittingly flatter her majesty.

Yes. But was a ruse��
Pure guile, to let my words give birth,
From another�s coy mouth.

What's the question chiefs. I'll answer it.

Pay attention....................

How ya be?

I thought it was about something other then baseball...........but that's how word association seems to work ..........

You so smart?
You tell us................

Originally posted by gmcnulty
Pay attention....................

How ya be?

I thought it was about something other then baseball...........but that's how word association seems to work ..........

You so smart?

You tell us................

What? I kept reading about how Seek avoided the question, singular. There are a number of questions in this post from you and intrepid.

I just wondered which you wanted an honest answer from a conservative to.

So it would really be, you tell me.