No thanks...why bother? Pearls to swine. Besides, any poly sci student would know my political beliefs and philosophy anyway without me having to post anything.

[edit--typos/clarity]

No Offense Robert but your description sounds like a clone to me.

---

I don't understand what you are referring to. My rant was against the pessimistic and constantly negative approaches in this thread. I'm not sure what you refer to but am open to hearing it! As a matter of fact your posts were actually interesting compared to the otheres... :-)

---

Founder of BOINC team Objectivists. Oh the humanity! Rational people crunching data!
I did NOT authorize this belly writing!

No thanks...why bother? Pearls to swine. Besides, any poly sci student would know my political beliefs and philosophy anyway without me having to post anything.

Then let me throw you some pearls your way. You sound like an effete borish troll to me, therefore your opinions will be treated accordingly. Welcome to the plonk list.

---

Account frozen...

effete? Ok, then. I think you may have proven my point here with that comment.

---

Founder of BOINC team Objectivists. Oh the humanity! Rational people crunching data!
I did NOT authorize this belly writing!

U.S. plan to pull forces out of Iceland causing tension

[..] Officials in the United States and Iceland said they are unsure what the continued defense of Iceland would look like, though they hinted that NATO could have a presence.

Norway is a NATO allied. And people on Iceland originally came from Norway. So maybe it's time we did something for the alliance - and Iceland - and established a military base there. And while we're at it, let's build ourselves one of those nifty and handy aircraft carriers! :)

---

Account frozen...

Just a quick question from a person outside America.

Why hasnt Bush be impeached yet.

I mean surely with all the election tampering and the liying about WMD's there has to be enough lack of confidence to vote him out in congress.

i just dont see why it hasnt happened yet?

---

Memory leak error... Blue screen of death imminent... reboot is needed.

Just a quick question from a person outside America.

Why hasnt Bush be impeached yet.

I mean surely with all the election tampering and the liying about WMD's there has to be enough lack of confidence to vote him out in congress.

i just dont see why it hasnt happened yet?

He is a member of the party which controls both houses of congress.

---

PROUD TO BE TFFE!

Just a quick question from a person outside America.

Why hasnt Bush be impeached yet.

I mean surely with all the election tampering and the liying about WMD's there has to be enough lack of confidence to vote him out in congress.

i just dont see why it hasnt happened yet?

He was properly elected (twice); and though he was mistaken about the presence of WMD in Iraq, it was not a lie; and it was a legal, legitimate prosecution of military power. Now, if you have evidence otherwise, I would like to hear it--as would many of his detractors (most of whom do no more than you, tossing insults at the man without any substance).

Just a quick question from a person outside America.

Why hasnt Bush be impeached yet.

I mean surely with all the election tampering and the liying about WMD's there has to be enough lack of confidence to vote him out in congress.

i just dont see why it hasnt happened yet?

He was properly elected (twice); and though he was mistaken about the presence of WMD in Iraq, it was not a lie; and it was a legal, legitimate prosecution of military power. Now, if you have evidence otherwise, I would like to hear it--as would many of his detractors (most of whom do no more than you, tossing insults at the man without any substance).

You obviously havent seen fahrenhiet 911 or you would not believe that properly elected BS.

And as for WMD's since this lie "and yes without proof it was a lie" was used to incite a war this comes under the breach of the peace law of the united nations.
or at the very least the fact is he swore to the world that they existed without proof isnt that considerd slander?

---

P.S. at the very least his familys business involvemnet with the bin laden family should incite a vote of no confidence.

---

You obviously havent seen fahrenhiet 911 or you would not believe that properly elected BS.

You obviously shouldn't watch such socialisping movies, because you're far to easy to influence.

You obviously havent seen fahrenhiet 911 or you would not believe that properly elected BS.

You obviously shouldn't watch such socialisping movies, because you're far to easy to influence.

Hahaha now i know i am right the fools of the establisment always attack personaly when they cannot argue the facts.

---

Just a quick question from a person outside America.

Why hasnt Bush be impeached yet.

I mean surely with all the election tampering and the liying about WMD's there has to be enough lack of confidence to vote him out in congress.

i just dont see why it hasnt happened yet?

---

Just a quick question from a person outside America.

Why hasnt Bush be impeached yet.

I mean surely with all the election tampering and the liying about WMD's there has to be enough lack of confidence to vote him out in congress.

i just dont see why it hasnt happened yet?

In one statement you ass ume your speaking as fact... first of all.. what election tampering? what lack of confidence? And what is going on in your country I wonder..... All the above perhaps?????

---

Just a quick question from a person outside America.

Why hasnt Bush be impeached yet.

I mean surely with all the election tampering and the liying about WMD's there has to be enough lack of confidence to vote him out in congress.

i just dont see why it hasnt happened yet?

A couple points of terminology:

The United States Constitution does not allow for votes of no-confidence. This was a deliberate move away from the British system that the US's founders wanted to avoid, since it permits the president to make unpopular decisions in the best interests of the country. The US Constitution allows for impeachment, but only in very specific circumstances that have never really materialized. There have been two cases when the Congress hated the president enough to bring articles of impeachment anyway, and both times the president was exonerated. As long as the same party controls the Congress and the presidency, impeachment won't happen. In the unlikely event that the opposition party gains control of Congress in 2006, that party does hate President Bush enough that articles of impeachment are likely, but not a conviction.

There is a difference between being wrong and lying. Only a complete moron would invade a country on a given public justification if he knew the story would fall apart right after the invasion. Even if you believe that President Bush is an idiot, the people who work for him are not. This is quite a different issue that the question "Is the public justification the real reason the US invaded Iraq?" and the answer is no. The US invaded Iraq because (1) it borders almost all of the radical Islamist regimes in the world, (2) its dictator was the poster child for world scorn, and (3) it publically picked the wrong side after 9/11. With the US's level of tolerance for risk altered by 9/11, the WMD issue was by itself legal justification for war... but the US had other reasons for actually going in.

Fahrenhiet 911 was not a documentary; it was a work of propaganda engineered to influence an election. In this it failed. By the way, the gross receipts of Fahrenhiet 911 exceed the gross receipts of all of the Haliburton contracts in Iraq. In other words, Moore made more money from the Iraq invasion than the much-maligned Haliburton.

The US presidential elections in 2000 and 2004 were the most scrutinized in the history of democratic elections. Although there are serious flaws in the whole process (not the least of which is the lack of consistent election proceedures from state to state and county to county), no one has found any level of election tampering that actually impacted the outcome. The Florida ballots of 2000 have been recounted by numerous agencies and press groups, and every time the count came out in favor of President Bush. Although there was an unusually high level of election-related violence (for a US election), most of the violence was from the opposition party and most of that was directed at property instead of people. For example, slashing the tires of people who'd volunteered to drive elderly Republicans to their polling places. The worst US election violence pales in comparrison to what Iraqis braved to vote in their own elections.

---

No animals were harmed in the making of the above post... much.

Just a quick question from a person outside America.

Why hasnt Bush be impeached yet.

I mean surely with all the election tampering and the liying about WMD's there has to be enough lack of confidence to vote him out in congress.

i just dont see why it hasnt happened yet?

He was properly elected (twice); and though he was mistaken about the presence of WMD in Iraq, it was not a lie; and it was a legal, legitimate prosecution of military power. Now, if you have evidence otherwise, I would like to hear it--as would many of his detractors (most of whom do no more than you, tossing insults at the man without any substance).

You obviously havent seen fahrenhiet 911 or you would not believe that properly elected BS.

And as for WMD's since this lie "and yes without proof it was a lie" was used to incite a war this comes under the breach of the peace law of the united nations.
or at the very least the fact is he swore to the world that they existed without proof isnt that considerd slander?

I once thought you capable of reasoned discussion, but if you have to cite to "Fahrenheit 911" as your source, I may have to re-think that. From what dictionary did you get your quote about no proof being a lie? The definition of the word "lie" or "to lie" has nothing at all to do with a failure of proof, it has everything to do with intentional statement of false information, like for example, the statement, "I did not have sexual relations with that woman . . ." is a lie.

Even your comment about swearing "to the world" is way off the mark. Now, after the fact, you can say he was wrong but at the time he gave the reasons for military action, no legitimate agency, including the UN inspectors, thought he was wrong. In fact, all evidence before the war (prior use of WMD, restricting and kicking out UN inspectors, information from defectors, etc.) pointed to the quite logical conclusion that WMD did exist--all you can point to is that after the fact no WMD have been found.

It needs repeating here, for the umteenth time (because no one has ever disputed it), that the present action in Iraq was perfectly justified as enforcement of the cease-fire agreement Saddam entered into after the Kuwait liberation war. So, you call for impeachment? For what? Because you don't like him? It doesn't work that way in this country, or yours.

You obviously havent seen fahrenhiet 911 or you would not believe that properly elected BS.

Oh that docudrama, I can't believe any sane person would think that a credible source. I don't think even PZ would touch that one.

---