Politics As Usual

[Not Me]

Originally posted by Say_hello_for_me
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...q_insurgency_2

I call bullshit on the analysis in this article. They attribute suicide bombers to secularists who are fighting for more power in a post-SH Iraq but not jihadist? Sorry. Secularists wanting power don't kill themselves to get it. Religious nut cases do.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Atticus Grinch

• Q Does the President feel that he had enough information about weapons to take this nation to war?
  
  MR. McCLELLAN: Well, I think you heard directly from the President earlier today in the Oval Office, following his meeting with Prime Minister Oddsson. The President talked about how Saddam Hussein was a threat. It was a threat that was real --
  
  Q -- was a threat how?
  
  MR. McCLELLAN: Well, we have learned since going into Iraq and removing that regime from power that the regime certainly had the intent and capability when it comes to weapons of mass destruction --
  
  Q What do you mean by intent?
  
  MR. McCLELLAN: Well, the Iraq Survey Group, that was previously headed by David Kay and is now headed by Charles Duelfer, has looked into the issues and showed that Saddam Hussein was in serious and clear violation of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1441. That resolution, you'll recall, called for serious consequences if Saddam Hussein --
  
  Q It didn't call for war.
  
  MR. McCLELLAN: It gave him one final opportunity to comply, or face serious consequences if he continued to defy the international community. And the world is better off without Saddam Hussein in power.
  
  Q Do you know how vague you sound on that?
  
  MR. McCLELLAN: And you heard that directly from the President of the United States earlier today.

Cite.

Does McClellan have a speed setting other than "The President has spoken very clearly on this subject in the past, and I believe his vague generalities and platitudes are the best response for me to refer to rather than respond to your specific, probing questions. Next?"

is this just google, or do you understand it enough for questions? If you are willing to take questtions, will your answers be substantive, or sidd like screeds about how stupid the questioner is?

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by Atticus Grinch [list]
Does McClellan have a speed setting other than "The President has spoken very clearly on this subject in the past, and I believe his vague generalities and platitudes are the best response for me to refer to rather than respond to your specific, probing questions. Next?"

McClellan is an idiot. Bring back Ari I say. Or recruit McCurry - now that guy was smooth as silk.

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by Not Me
Your 1st amendment analysis is off. If federal employees wears a T-shirt that is considered disruptive, the employee can be told to remove it or leave and thus be restricted in his or her expression by the government and it is not a violation of the first amendment. The issue is whether the forum is a public or designated public forum.

I don't think that under the cases interpreting the 1st amendment that event qualifies as a public forum or even a designated public forum. If it is not a public forum or a designated public forum, it doesn't matter that the action was by a government actor (see my hypo above about the federal employees right to wear a T-shirt to work.)

Why is the gov't being charged for a private campaign event?


Attendees at an event are not in the same position as at-will employees, so the employment comparison is a wee bit off.

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by Not Me
I call bullshit on the analysis in this article. They attribute suicide bombers to secularists who are fighting for more power in a post-SH Iraq but not jihadist? Sorry. Secularists wanting power don't kill themselves to get it. Religious nut cases do.

That would be a good point if the claim that these are all "foreign fighters" had not been debunked.

[Atticus Grinch]

• Q Scott, a report coming out of Congress tomorrow will say that the reported meeting between Mohammed Atta and a top Iraqi official in Prague likely never took place. That's been one of the underpinnings of the administration's contentions that there were high-level contacts between Iraq and al Qaeda. Particularly, Vice President Cheney has said this repeatedly. Given that --
  
  MR. McCLELLAN: I think you should look at what he said most recently. In terms of the report, look, let's --
  
  Q Given that conclusion --
  
  MR. McCLELLAN: -- we look forward to seeing the report. We haven't seen it at this point. It hasn't been released publicly. I understand there are --
  
  Q Senator Levin is putting this out today, so -- but anyway --
  
  MR. McCLELLAN: I find -- Dick, I find it interesting that some members are talking about this report publicly, before it's released. I think that says something right there. I recognize this is an election year, as well, but I think it says something when members are talking about it prior to its release in this manner.
  
  Q Well, the question is, given that conclusion by this bipartisan panel, will the administration continue to talk about these high-level contacts, of which this has always been one piece of the evidence.
  
  MR. McCLELLAN: And you should look back at what the Vice President said most recently on that, because I think you didn't characterize his most recent comments accurately --
  
  Q What did he say?
  
  MR. McCLELLAN: But in terms of the contacts, we've -- all you need to do is go back and look at what Secretary Powell outlined before the United Nations and the Commission pointed out those same high-level contacts, going back over the last decade.

Cite.

Hank: I remain at your disposal to respond to any questions you may have by making vague references to having responded to it in the past.

44-7.

[Gattigap]

Originally posted by captain marvelous
hey facists repukelicans, check this out, a page from bush/cheney handbooks on how to govern:

"It is always a simple matter to drag people along whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. This is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in every country."

sounds about right or does it?

in reality it's a quote from one of the neo-cons ideological predecessors, hermann goering. you sick fuckers deserve each other and your fourth reichh.

Hey, it's the Michael Moore of the PB. The Anti-Penske.

[The Larry Davis Experience]

Originally posted by Say_hello_for_me
Hey, that was the one I was talking about yesterday on CNN.

You were on CNN yesterday?

[SlaveNoMore]

y Atticus Grinch
US President George W. Bush (news - web sites) walks away from a briefing with the media, refusing to answer questions after he was asked about Enron and the reported indictment of former CEO Kenneth Lay, who was a close adviser and fund-raiser for Bush and his father, earning him the presidential nickname of 'Kenny Boy.'(AFP/Paul J. Richards)

Wake me up if he pardons him a la Marc Rich.

Until then....ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

[Gattigap]

Originally posted by Atticus Grinch
Cite.

Hank: I remain at your disposal to respond to any questions you may have by making vague references to having responded to it in the past.

44-7.

Funny as that may be, Atticus, I feel it unfair to ascribe McClellan's performance to Hank, or to the denziens of this board.

Sure, he's the public face of this Administration, ostensibly the best that Bush has to offer, but it's becoming clear that the man can't find a rational argument with a map and a flashlight. At this rate, by October he'll respond to questions by drooling and pulling at his hair.

Gattigap

[The Larry Davis Experience]

Originally posted by sgtclub
McClellan is an idiot. Bring back Ari I say.

For once we agree. Back when he was still around I never thought I'd be saying this, but I miss Ari.

[SlaveNoMore]

Sidd Finch
That would be a good point if the claim that these are all "foreign fighters" had not been debunked.

Debunked by an article in USA today?

Ok then. Contra Gee, look at all those Iranians caught fighting on film the other day.

[Atticus Grinch]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
I meant "thinks he's a chick."
Atticus, in perhaps the funniest post ever, said "pretending to be."
I believe tis is the more standard school of thought.

This one? Huh. Personally, I'm partial to this one just a few pages later.

[Say_hello_for_me]

Originally posted by The Larry Davis Experience
You were on CNN yesterday?

The guy who wrote for Time was on CNN last weekend, and the article on his experiences was on the front page of CNN dot com yesterday (finally). I'm not him. Its fascinating material to me. His Time cover was about being in Fallujah with numerous foreign fighers from places like Saudi Arabia, combined with all sorts of Iraqis, including Islamists, Baathists, nationalists etc....

There have been numerous fascinating articles on Fallujah in the last 10 days.

Hell(but I've been quoted anonymously in the media numerous times in the past life)o

[Not Me]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
By your reasoning, if you are riding BART wearing a pro-Bush shirt, BART police can make you cover it up since BART is not a public forum.

Read the cases. BART would be a public forum just like an airport. That is the Hari Krishna case. A state university auditorium would be a designated public forum. A military base is a publicly owned, non-public forum. The FDA building is a publicly owned, non-public forum. The government can impose content-based restrictions in publicly-owned, non-public forums. That is why federal employees can be barred by the government from engaging in political activities at their workplace, which is publicly owned.

Was your article even discussing a publicly owned building or was the building privately owned and rented with government funds for a particular purpose? That changes the situation even more.