Interesting question to Liberals.

[Wildcard Ky]

I got this question from a column I read this morning:

Would you rather have GWB re-elected and Osama Bin Laden captured, or GWB defeated and Bin Laden remain at large?

Here's a link to the entire column. It's not a column that most libs will agree with, but there is a good piece in there about a Medic that saved several lives.

Jack Kelly

 

[Liar]

I'd rather have world peace, free beer and a blowjob from Milla Jovovich.

Seriously, hypothetical either-or questions like that would really get on my tits, if I had any.

#L

 

[shereads]

Since we're asked to make false choices, I'd rather have Saddam Hussein still in power and Osama Bin Laden on trial for the 9/11 attacks.

What makes you think GWB gives half a damn about Osama Bin Laden?

 

[neonlyte]

Strange question.

You didn't really expect an answer, did you?

 

[Guest]

 

[rgraham666]

Why oh why do the 'conservatives' always pose questions in Manichean terms?

I would rather see GWB back in the frat house, drinking beer and puking on the floor. At least he would then be having fun and the rest of us wouldn't have to deal with him anymore.

And I would like to see bin Laden at the receiving end of a Barrett. Not that such an occurence would make much difference. There are plenty of others who would step into his shoes.

Does that answer your question?

 

[Colleen Thomas]

The question would have more meaning if the administration produced Ossama, or preferably his bullet riddled corpse.

Of course even if the administration did produce Ossama, the liberals would all say so what, President Gore would have gotten him faster. That's the way of hypotheticals. They are almost always easily asnswerable with another hypothetical.

-Colly

 

[Pure]

Question for Wildkard:

There is a good argument that Osama wants Bush re elected--after all, recruiting, esp. in Iraq, is going splendidly.

How does sharing Osama's desire(ftsoa) make you feel about your own, to re-elect Bush? Why?

 

[SummerMorning]

Osama is Loneliness.

 

[Mhari]

Why can't I want to see Dubya defeated *and* Bin Laden captured?

What a silly pair of choices.

 

[Pure]

'cuz only GWB has the balls to capture Bin Ladin.

(Ok, ok, so things are taking a little longer than expected...)

 

[Guest]

I'd rather have world peace, free beer and a blowjob from Milla Jovovich.

Seriously, hypothetical either-or questions like that would really get on my tits, if I had any.

#L

im for the free beer.. dont know milla jovovich but does she? do women?

ok.. they can get on my tits, as small as they are... ill shoulder the angst for ya Liar..

ps... you owe me now..

 

[ABSTRUSE]

Why can't I want to see Dubya defeated *and* Bin Laden captured?

What a silly pair of choices.

thats the most logical choice.

 

[CharleyH]

'cuz only GWB has the balls to capture Bin Ladin.

(Ok, ok, so things are taking a little longer than expected...)

What, golf balls? I don't think his drive is THAT good.

 

[Guest]

 

[ABSTRUSE]

More like goofballs (if you look at his cabinet).

I keep liqouer in my cabinets.

 

[Wildcard Ky]

Question for Wildkard:

There is a good argument that Osama wants Bush re elected--after all, recruiting, esp. in Iraq, is going splendidly.

How does sharing Osama's desire(ftsoa) make you feel about your own, to re-elect Bush? Why?

Why is it my own? I've never claimed to be a Republican or a Conservative. I've also never claimed to be a Dem or a Liberal. Why is that everyone must fit into one of those two categories.

I'm an independent moderate. Is that so hard to understand? I have no preconceived loyalties. I judge each candidate on individual issues, not a party affiliation.

 

[Virtual_Burlesque]

Article cited by Wildcard Ky
“Minneapolis Star-Tribune columnist James Lileks asked several liberal friends if they'd rather have Osama bin Laden captured and Bush re-elected, or Bush defeated and Osama still at large. They all said they'd prefer to have Bush defeated. That's a choice many in the news media made long ago.”

Jack Kelly’s column appeared in The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette and The Blade of Toledo under the heading “Opinion.”

Like so many facts ones hears reported these days, there is little documentation to substantiate the conclusions drawn. Mr. Kelly quotes James Lileks about an (apparently unscientific) poll he took among “several liberal friends.” Based upon this, he makes a charge of media bias.

Since we are only dealing in hypothetical choices, I will give you my answer. It is too late for there to be any real choice between your two alternatives.

Had George W. Bush not been selected as president, Osama bin Laden would have merely initiated a devastating attack upon the nation and its people. Had Osama bin Laden not orchestrated the 9/11 attack, George W. Bush’s selection as president would have been merely a nullification of democratic procedures, and a terribly unfortunate choice.

The 9/11 attack after George W. Bush was selected president, allowed his Administration to initiate an illegal war, while revoking a wide range of civil rights from those of habeas corpus to the rules of the Geneva Convention. It was the compounding of these two unfortunate events which led to our present situation.

Footnote to Colly :

I am uncertain whether Al Gore could have been more or less effective at capturing bin Laden. I think it is fair to assume that he would have continued the practices set up by the Clinton Administration which prevented incidents during the millennium crisis. Whether those would have been sufficient prevention against the 9/11 attack is delving far too deeply into the hypothetical.

I do feel more secure in supposing that Al Gore would not have prosecuted a pre-emptive war against Iraq, without the sanction of the United Nations.

 

[Pure]

Originally posted by Pure
Question for Wildkard:

There is a good argument that Osama wants Bush re elected--after all, recruiting, esp. in Iraq, is going splendidly.

How does sharing Osama's desire(ftsoa) make you feel about your own, to re-elect Bush? Why?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Wildkard says, "Why is it my own? I've never claimed to be a Republican or a Conservative. I've also never claimed to be a Dem or a Liberal. Why is that everyone must fit into one of those two categories.

"I'm an independent moderate. Is that so hard to understand? I have no preconceived loyalties. I judge each candidate on individual issues, not a party affiliation."

-------
Yup. Gotcha. (hits forehead with head)

Simple Question: Do you want Bush re-elected? Yes or no?

 

[Pure]

Wildkard
"I'm an independent moderate."

Let me guess:

Unlike those that want the death penalty for all crimes carrying at present a 5 yr or more sentence, and the extremists who want it abolished,

You favor it only for: murder, treason, rape, kidnapping, drug dealing, pimping, third conviction of a felony, and possession of child porn.

Unlike those who favor abortion on demand, and the extremists who would abolish it altogether,

You favor its being allowed in cases of gang rape and incest, where the victim is 14 years or under, and a panel of doctors approves the procedure, having parental consent.

Unlike those who favor anyone owning any weapon, and the extremists who would disarm the citizenry,

You favor a clear federal law against owning ICBMs, hydrogen (not atomic) bombs, and projectile lauching devices (guns, cannons, mortars, RPG launchers, etc.) of over 4 inches in diameter in the bore.

I hope I've got this right, and await any corrections with bated breath.

 

[shereads]

Then judge the candidates on this issue: How should a Commander in Chief react during the first critical minutes of a direct attack on the United States?

(a) He should do nothing. If he excuses himself from the photo op at the elementary school, the children might be upset. His first priority is to keep them calm while he waits for...Waits for what?

(b) He should do something. Maybe other buildings are targeted beside the World Trade Center. Maybe there are other commercial aircraft that have reversed course and are not responding to radio contact. Maybe there's still time to stop one of them from hitting the Pentagon. Maybe the FAA and the FBI and the White House and the Joint Chiefs of Staff are waiting for their boss to tell them what to do - and not the other way around. Maybe running for president of the United States is serious business, and means that 200 million people must count on you to make snap judgements in times of crisis.

If you consider yourself a person of typical or better courage and intelligence, ask yourself what you would have done that day - assuming you had asked for and been given the most powerful job in the world's only remaining superpower. I don't care what you think of Kerry or Clinton or Gore, you have to know that any one of them and most of us would have at least picked up the f**king phone to find out what was happening.

You don't want to see Moore's film, then find another way to watch those 7 minutes that a teacher caught on videotape, of the man you elected as "the lesser of two evils," alone with his thoughts during the first real test of courage in his life. You'll see him looking like what he is: spineless, clueless. Less than nothing.

 

[dr_mabeuse]

The capture of Bin Ladin at this point will have about as much effect on the "War On Terror" as the capture of Saddam had on Iraqi insurgency. All that can happen is that we'll make him a martyr.

Soem people continue to see this as a goodguy/badguy quarrrel, but that's not the way most of the world looks at it. A great part of Islam sees their religion as being under attack by America, and there's no way to convince them otherwise at this point. They'll fight to the death against us just as we would fight to the death if they invaded us. Bin Ladin has nothing to do with it anymore.

---dr.M.

 

[The Mutt]

Greater threat

George W. Bush is a greater threat to the world than Osama Bin Ladin. Both are religious fanatics who don't care how many people they kill so long as they belong to the other religion. The difference is Osama wishes he had nukes, Bush has thousands.

 

[Wildcard Ky]

Wildkard
"I'm an independent moderate."

Let me guess:

Unlike those that want the death penalty for all crimes carrying at present a 5 yr or more sentence, and the extremists who want it abolished,

You favor it only for: murder, treason, rape, kidnapping, drug dealing, pimping, third conviction of a felony, and possession of child porn.

Unlike those who favor abortion on demand, and the extremists who would abolish it altogether,

You favor its being allowed in cases of gang rape and incest, where the victim is 14 years or under, and a panel of doctors approves the procedure, having parental consent.

Unlike those who favor anyone owning any weapon, and the extremists who would disarm the citizenry,

You favor a clear federal law against owning ICBMs, hydrogen (not atomic) bombs, and projectile lauching devices (guns, cannons, mortars, RPG launchers, etc.) of over 4 inches in diameter in the bore.

I hope I've got this right, and await any corrections with bated breath.

I do believe in the death penalty for one that has purposefully killed another. Not for kidnapping, rape, treason or any other reason.

I am in favor of an ADULT woman being allowed to choose. Personally, abortion isn't for me, but I don't have the right to tell someone else how to live their life. I'm iffy on third trimester and partial birth being used as simply birth control. I have no problem with it as a health issue. I am competely opposed to a 14 year old having an abortion without parental consent. If the girl isn't old enough to drink, drive, vote or even get her ears pierced at 14 without parental consent, she sure as hell isn't old enough or mature enough to make the decision on abortion by herself. I have two teenaged girls, so I speak with some experience on these matters.

I'm in favor of law abiding citizens being able to own all guns that are currently legal. I favor instant background checks for all gun purchases. I think the gun show loophole should be closed. I am not in favor of registration. I am in favor of state issued concealed carry permits for those that want one.

Do I want Bush re-elected? I don't know. I don't care much for him at all, but I like him better than Kerry. I was firmly in the Edwards camp until he dropped out.

I like that Bush has gone after the terrorists. I hate that he has made some royal fuck ups along the way. Every president since Carter has failed miserably with terrorists. Bush had the right intention going after them where they live, he's just screwed it up royally ever since going into Iraq.

Bush-------Kerry. To me it's a pick of the lesser of two evils.

Anything else? I'll be happy to state my beliefs on any issue.

 

[Wildcard Ky]

Then judge the candidates on this issue: How should a Commander in Chief react during the first critical minutes of a direct attack on the United States?

(a) He should do nothing. If he excuses himself from the photo op at the elementary school, the children might be upset. His first priority is to keep them calm while he waits for...Waits for what?

(b) He should do something. Maybe other buildings are targeted beside the World Trade Center. Maybe there are other commercial aircraft that have reversed course and are not responding to radio contact. Maybe there's still time to stop one of them from hitting the Pentagon. Maybe the FAA and the FBI and the White House and the Joint Chiefs of Staff are waiting for their boss to tell them what to do - and not the other way around. Maybe running for president of the United States is serious business, and means that 200 million people must count on you to make snap judgements in times of crisis.

If you consider yourself a person of typical or better courage and intelligence, ask yourself what you would have done that day - assuming you had asked for and been given the most powerful job in the world's only remaining superpower. I don't care what you think of Kerry or Clinton or Gore, you have to know that any one of them and most of us would have at least picked up the f**king phone to find out what was happening.

You don't want to see Moore's film, then find another way to watch those 7 minutes that a teacher caught on videotape, of the man you elected as "the lesser of two evils," alone with his thoughts during the first real test of courage in his life. You'll see him looking like what he is: spineless, clueless. Less than nothing.

No, I won't be seeing Moores film. You know how I feel about him, and I won't financially support him by seeing his movie.

I don't know about those 7 minutes. Sitting here now, 7 minutes isn't a long time. What information could be had? He knew that the WTC had been hit. He has an army of people with him at all times that judge the information, and the safety of the President. Not having seen the 7 minutes of tape, all I can say is what I think would have done in the same situation:

Mr. President, a plane has just hit the WTC.

What do we know? Is it an accident, are we under attack?

We're not sure yet sir, information is sketchy at this time.

Get me some information as fast as you can.

7 minutes doesn't seem like much time to try and gather info to me. You say that he should have done something....I ask what should HE have done in those 7 minutes? I'm sure there were many people working on gathering data and information. I'm also sure that there wasn't a perceived threat to him or the Sec Service would have gotten him out pronto. No president can make a decision without information. Agreed?

That's not necessarily a defense of a President that I'm fond of or anything like that, because I'm not fond of him. I would say that about any president in the same situation.

I've spent more than 7 minutes on this one post. That's not a lot of time.