OT: Election 2004

[tesco samoa]

Renegade 13. by the def'n of evil in this thread.

USA is evil . The war of ideology / economy cost millions of peoples lives, proped up dictators, overthrown popular movements.

Look at the actions over the Last 50 years.

P.S. Hitler was the lesser of the two evils in the 30's and 40's. He just moved first and the third french-german war was under way under 100 years.

[Master Belisarius]

Originally posted by geoschmo:
Unfortunatly Master B it's true. It was in very poor taste, and it will very likely hurt him politically. There will be those that attempt to defend the comments as being in the tradition of these press dinners. They will mention that previous presidents have made similerly outrageous jokes. They will point to among other things former President Clintons press dinner comments during the Monica Lewinsky debacle.

IMHO they will be wrong to attempt to do so because there is a major difference.

Clinton could make fun of his sexual dalliances and everyone could laugh. This was because for those that opposed him it at worst it reaffirmed their own already negative image of him, and at best could have cast him in a better light as someone that could make fun of himself. And those that suppoorted him felt the whole situation was stupid anyway and needed to be ridiculed.

On the other hand Bush making fun of not finding WMD's is a lose-lose. Those that oppose him are not going to be impressed by his akward attempt at self-depreciating humor. They will say the issue is too serious to joke about, and they will be right. On the other hand those that support the President will be unable to honestly defend these comments because they don't consider the situation to be one that is appropriate to ridicule.

Thanks for your answer Geo. And by the way, I agree with your view.

[Lord Chane]

Originally posted by Randallw:
The Treaty of Versailles could be said to have created more problems than it finished. It completely blamed the Germans for the war even though really Austria could be said to have started it. It punished the Germans severely, such as taking away a lot of its territory, it forced them to pay massive reperations and the germans did not have a say in what would happen. Basically the allies got so carried away with their victory they decided to make the Germans pay. I apologise that I can't find my textbook with the actual cartoon, but there exists an editorial cartoon drawn shortly after the Treaty where the writers of the treaty, such as the prime ministers of the UK and France and the president of the US are walking out of the hall and there is a small child labelled the "class of 39" weeping to one side of the door. The Prime minister of the UK says "can I hear crying?". Even in 1919 people knew the treaty was going to cause trouble and this is 10 years before anyone outside of Germany had heard of Hitler. If anything Hitler was allowed to get away with his demands because allied governments knew they had been too harsh and the German people deserved things back. [/QB]

You're absolutely correct in your analysis. I wasn't supporting the treaty or saying that it was a good thing. My point was that good or bad the treaty was a legal document and when Hitler decided to break it the allies did have the force of law on their side had they elected to enforce it. Yes, the treaty was a mistake and fortunately we learned from it and we didn't repeat the mistake at the end of WW-II.

[tesco samoa]

Truefully I think Bush and his administration did what they thought was best. Your country will decide if this was the right path on the election.

[Atrocities]

Originally posted by tesco samoa:
Truefully I think Bush and his administration did what they thought was best. Your country will decide if this was the right path on the election.

Well said and thank you.

[Atrocities]

On the other hand Bush making fun of not finding WMD's is a lose-lose. Those that oppose him are not going to be impressed by his akward attempt at self-depreciating humor. They will say the issue is too serious to joke about, and they will be right. On the other hand those that support the President will be unable to honestly defend these comments because they don't consider the situation to be one that is appropriate to ridicule.

Can someone fill me in on the joke?

[AMF]

Go here:

http://makeashorterlink.com/?N2A262BD7

Originally posted by Atrocities:

quote:

---

On the other hand Bush making fun of not finding WMD's is a lose-lose. Those that oppose him are not going to be impressed by his akward attempt at self-depreciating humor. They will say the issue is too serious to joke about, and they will be right. On the other hand those that support the President will be unable to honestly defend these comments because they don't consider the situation to be one that is appropriate to ridicule.

Can someone fill me in on the joke?

---

[AMF]

It is traditional at this dinner (I think it's annual) for president's to poke fun at themselves. Everyone does it, it's what they do at it.

While I may feel it is in poor taste, the fact that it happened doesn't surprise me.

It's hard to joke about things like that - usually, IIRC, the prez pokes fun at his foibles and problems, but I am not sure if war was ever a topic of jokes at this event in the past.

Adn I;ve had too many beers to do the research at the moment...

thanks,

alarik

Originally posted by Atrocities:

quote:

---

On the other hand Bush making fun of not finding WMD's is a lose-lose. Those that oppose him are not going to be impressed by his akward attempt at self-depreciating humor. They will say the issue is too serious to joke about, and they will be right. On the other hand those that support the President will be unable to honestly defend these comments because they don't consider the situation to be one that is appropriate to ridicule.

Can someone fill me in on the joke?

---