NationStates Jolt Archive

...

.

:confused:

Actually the name is Rather not Blather.

Blather?

Actually the name is Rather not Blather.

I'm aware of that. I call him Dan Blather, though. Likewise, I call Walter Cronkite Walter Krankheit (krankheit, pronounced the same way, is German for disease). :D

I'm aware of that. I call him Dan Blather, though. Likewise, I call Walter Cronkite Walter Krankheit (krankheit, pronounced the same way, is German for disease). :D

Ohhhh

kind of like Roach-Buggers ;)

Ohhhh

kind of like Roach-Buggers ;)

Lol :p

I voted other. Specifically, Dan Rather is...

...a talking hairpiece. :)

who the hell is he?

who the hell is he?

The CBS News anchor

I voted other. Specifically, Dan Rather is...

...a talking hairpiece. :)


ohhh I would have voted for that one!

What city do you live in, UpwardThrust?

I picked number 3.

Do you know what Josh calls him? Grandma-Man.

Damn, I would have voted for "talking hairpeice" as well.

What city do you live in, UpwardThrust?
St. Cloud

He used to be a respectable journalist but now I hate him

He used to be a respectable journalist but now I hate him

Over one incident he apologized for on national TV? Harsh, perhaps?

Over one incident he apologized for on national TV? Harsh, perhaps?

I can't speak for others, but my disdain for 'The Hairpiece' started almost ten years ago when he decided to just walk away from the live camera because he got a bug up his butt about something. What an asshole.

He's an anchorman. I have no opinion of him.

Of course he's the target #1 by Republicans now, so they probably compare him to the anti-christ.

He's an anchorman. I have no opinion of him.

Of course he's the target #1 by Republicans now, so they probably compare him to the anti-christ.

No, thats al franken and J. Garafolo.

No, thats al franken and J. Garafolo.

And Michael Moore is Lucifer! ;)

And Michael Moore is Lucifer! ;)

damn, I knew I forgot someone.

who the hell is he?

He's the dickweed anchor that was in Tianemen in '89, spouting, "I'm an American journalist, you can't order me to turn off my cameras!"

I almost wish the Chinese would have shot him, so I wouldn't have to look at that hair....ugh. May have taught a few others that we Americans lose all our rights the minute we leave our borders.

I think he overall is pretty respectable, but at times his judgement can become clouded. I voted "somewhere in the middle."

I voted for "overrated, laughable fraud." Although with the ratings CBS gets, I don't think you can really refer to him as "overrated." :D

Now, now, not all Republicans are extremist christians.
. . .but Michael Moore is still the anti-christ. :p

bump

I wonder if they people here that hate him would defend him if the story would have been about Kerry?

I wonder if they people here that hate him would defend him if the story would have been about Kerry?

I've despised Blather long before last week's incident. And no, I don't like Bush, either.

And in case anyone's wondering, I'd dislike Blather no matter what.

Yawn.

Let's see...

He took information that was unsupported and as it now turns out highly suspect, probably because it supported his own preconceived beliefs about the truth. Without verifying the information or looking into the possiblity of its refutation he presented it to the american people, only to see it subsequently refuted rather effectively, resulting in a massive loss of credibility for himself, his organization, and american institutions in general.

Yes, George W. Bush should definitely resign.

Now... who is this "Dan Blather" person?

Dan Rather made similar mistakes, and apologized for them. Would that Bush were capable of admitting his own errors, much less apologizing for them.

...1097 dead and counting... and that's just American troops.

Let's see...

He took information that was unsupported and as it now turns out highly suspect, probably because it supported his own preconceived beliefs about the truth. Without verifying the information or looking into the possiblity of its refutation he presented it to the american people, only to see it subsequently refuted rather effectively, resulting in a massive loss of credibility for himself, his organization, and american institutions in general.

Yes, George W. Bush should definitely resign.

Now... who is this "Dan Blather" person?

Dan Rather made similar mistakes, and apologized for them. Would that Bush were capable of admitting his own errors, much less apologizing for them.

...1097 dead and counting... and that's just American troops.

Actually, GWB did express the possibility of the information not being correct.
And about your nice death count, do you realize we lost more of our own people on 9-11 than we have lost in Iraq. 2x as many, actually. Have you watched the beheadings? I have. Perhaps if you see them, you will see the enemy that we are fighting against. Until then, you have no right to make a joke of those who died defending your freedom.

Actually, GWB did express the possibility of the information not being correct.

That's a long way from apology.

And about your nice death count, do you realize we lost more of our own people on 9-11 than we have lost in Iraq. 2x as many, actually.

None of them killed by any Iraqi. All of their killings masterminded by Bin Ladin, a man who George Bush "really doesn't think about much these days". OWTTE.

Have you watched the beheadings? I have. Perhaps if you see them, you will see the enemy that we are fighting against.

Yes I have. You might notice that I said "and that's just american troops". I am certainly aware that non-combatants have been killed, including 1000s of "liberated" Iraqis. Have you seen their mangled bodies? Have you seen their mourners? These people were not our enemies. Many of them are now.

Until then, you have no right to make a joke of those who died defending your freedom.

The really funny thing is that you think I'm making a joke. Is it just incapable of dawning on you that the man is incompenent? Al Quieda attacked us on 9/11 and he has us fighting a war that he created, creating more and more enemies to fill the power vacuum left by a government that had no connection to 9/11... and you know what? We're losing. We're losing their hearts and minds and if we ever do pull out they will be more or less as bad off as the were under Saddam.

I don't joke about things like this. I just wish you could see how serious this really is, and let the scales fall from your eyes so that you can see just how bad a leader Bush is.

bump

That's a long way from apology.


I don't really see how he owes any apology for that issue.



None of them killed by any Iraqi. All of their killings masterminded by Bin Ladin, a man who George Bush "really doesn't think about much these days". OWTTE.



Oh really? And you have proof of this? Given the number of terrorists in Iraq, it would not supprise me in the slightest if there were Iraqi hijackers.


Yes I have. You might notice that I said "and that's just american troops". I am certainly aware that non-combatants have been killed, including 1000s of "liberated" Iraqis. Have you seen their mangled bodies? Have you seen their mourners? These people were not our enemies. Many of them are now.


I have seen them. The thing is, most of them have been killed deliberatly (spelling?) by the "insurgents", (I prefer "enemy scum") many more were murdered my Saddam, and even more would have been murdered if the United States hadn't stepped in. Also, I believe that his regime was harboring terrorists. We can't afford to wait for another 9-11 before we act. Also, I have spoken with families of our lost soldiers. Many of them are actually in support of the war, a few are not. However, many of those that are not now, were not before they lost a familly member. The thing is, the only mourners that you see are the ones that our friendly liberal media shows us. IOW, the ones that do not approve the war. I have seen what our enemy is capable of, and that is why we need to stay our course.


The really funny thing is that you think I'm making a joke. Is it just incapable of dawning on you that the man is incompenent? Al Quieda attacked us on 9/11 and he has us fighting a war that he created, creating more and more enemies to fill the power vacuum left by a government that had no connection to 9/11... and you know what? We're losing. We're losing their hearts and minds and if we ever do pull out they will be more or less as bad off as the were under Saddam.


I didn't meen that you were making an actual joke. (as in "ha ha") Your words did not do our troops justice my any meens. GWB is not incompetent, he may not be the smartest president we have ever had, but he is not stupid and is more than capable of doing his job. He did what he thought was right, what he thought was best for the safety of our nation. Just because it didn't turn out to be as easy as you want it to be, does not meen that it was the wrong choice. When FDR declared war on Japan, no one thought that it would be easy. The war that we are fighting now will be no easier, or any less honorable. Our enemy is just as evil, and capable of just as much damage. But, how can you say we are losing, just because it is not easy. How do we win the same hearts and minds as belong to those animals who would but the head of another human being as he begged for his life; those who gave praise to Allah their victim's blood was spurting out? We are winning the hearts and minds of many Iraqi's, our media just does not show that part. But they are not the ones who are attacking us anyways. The ones who are attacking us cannot be negotiated with.



I don't joke about things like this. I just wish you could see how serious this really is, and let the scales fall from your eyes so that you can see just how bad a leader Bush is.

Oh, I know very well how serious this is. I know that Bush is a weak president. However, he is not afraid to do what he feels is best for the American people, even if everyone does not agree with it. Also, I do not want an anti-war protester as a president during times of war and uncertainty.
Has it ever occured to you, that since 9-11, there havn't been any attacks on the United States homeland? That is because we are not backing down. If we leave Iraq now, that would show the world that we give in when the going gets tough, and we would be more vulnerable than ever.

Wow, I woulda thought this thread'd be dead by now.

I don't really see how he owes any apology for that issue.

If he doesn't owe anybody an apology for starting a war based on false information that has gotten 1000s killed, then certainly Rather didn't owe anybody an apology for airing a story based on false information that has led to zero deaths.

Oh really? And you have proof of this? Given the number of terrorists in Iraq, it would not supprise me in the slightest if there were Iraqi hijackers.

Oh, that's evidence! :rolleyes:

Do I have proof? 15 of the 19 9/11 hijackers were of our friends, the Saudis. How many were iraqi? Zero... unless you have evidence otherwise?

How many known Iraqi terrorists were there prior to the Iraq war? None that I have ever heard of. Link to evidence if you know of any? But since the war began iraqi terrorist recruitment is higher than it has ever been. Good job, George.

I have seen them. The thing is, most of them have been killed deliberatly (spelling?) by the "insurgents", (I prefer "enemy scum") many more were murdered my Saddam, and even more would have been murdered if the United States hadn't stepped in. Also, I believe that his regime was harboring terrorists. We can't afford to wait for another 9-11 before we act. Also, I have spoken with families of our lost soldiers. Many of them are actually in support of the war, a few are not. However, many of those that are not now, were not before they lost a familly member. The thing is, the only mourners that you see are the ones that our friendly liberal media shows us. IOW, the ones that do not approve the war. I have seen what our enemy is capable of, and that is why we need to stay our course.

("deliberately")

No, most iraqi casualties result from american bombings. As far as many more being killed by Saddam... newsflash: Saddam is gone. Another newsflash: the death rate from the war is many times higher than the death rate from Saddam's oppression.

So now that Bush's little adventure has killed off their kids, your friends are in support of a war that was based entirely on lies? Well grief does strange things to people. I bet they support his reelection too? Strange that they should support the man whose incomptence got their kids killed.

I didn't meen that you were making an actual joke. (as in "ha ha") Your words did not do our troops justice my any meens.

Yours do them justice? You rationalize the travesty that led us into this quagmire, while I think it's simply a crime that our soldiers are dying for what was a non-issue while Bin Ladin sits in his cave and laughs.

GWB is not incompetent, he may not be the smartest president we have ever had, but he is not stupid and is more than capable of doing his job.

Wrong. He is a classic garden variety fucktard and he has totally fucked up his job. His job was to catch Bin Ladin and put an end to Al Queida. Instead he has got us into a nation building war in a new Viet Nam, in the one arab nation that hated Bin Ladin as much as we did, and he did so by lying to everybody.

He did what he thought was right, what he thought was best for the safety of our nation. Just because it didn't turn out to be as easy as you want it to be, does not meen that it was the wrong choice.

No, here is why it was the wrong choice:

1) there were no WMDs in Iraq;
2) there was no real connection between Iraq and Al Quieda (the same cannot be said of our "allies", Saudi and Pakistan);
3) there were no terrorist bases in Iraq (there are now);
4) we had real problems to deal with, i.e.: Al Quieda, without making up lies to make a non-problem look like a problem;
5) we are not any safer now than we were then, except for the fact that any air traveller who stands up and starts making threats will be ripped to shreds by passengers who would rather die as heros than sheep. Bush did nothing to bring this about, other than ignoring the warnings of the actions that brought this state about.. Oh, and when we fly we won't have to worry about unsightly nail clippings.

When FDR declared war on Japan, no one thought that it would be easy.

If FDR had declared war on China right after Pearl, we would have thought he had lost his mind. Apparently in the past 60 years or so about half the country has lost the capacity for critical thought.

The war that we are fighting now will be no easier, or any less honorable. Our enemy is just as evil, and capable of just as much damage.

Which war, and which enemy? Al Quieda, or Iraq? He has made our actions far less easy and far less honourable than they already were. Like Hitler, he has started an "Eastern Front" when we were still fighting those who attacked us. At least, unlike Hitler, he has waged his new war on a weakling nation, so maybe we will survive.

But, how can you say we are losing, just because it is not easy. How do we win the same hearts and minds as belong to those animals who would but the head of another human being as he begged for his life; those who gave praise to Allah their victim's blood was spurting out? We are winning the hearts and minds of many Iraqi's, our media just does not show that part.

Perhaps you will realize that we have been losing when and if we finally do pull out, and our hand-picked puppet government is dragged bloody through the streets to the headsman's axe to be replaced by a new incarnation of the Taliban? For "many" you would have been more accurate saying "a few", and...

But they are not the ones who are attacking us anyways.

...more and more, those who were glad to see us arrive are being converted to the supporters of those who are attacking us. Oh, but the "Liberal (Zionist?) Media Conspiracy" has been lying to us, right? The rose petals are there, they're just not filming them, right?

The ones who are attacking us cannot be negotiated with.

So kill them. But don't pretend that the situation that we must now resolve was one that we needed to deal with, was in any way a pressing matter of national security, or was any justification for the war that is now killing your neighbours' children as well as 1000s of Iraqis.

And in case you didn't hear: they were not THERE before we attacked! The Baathists have been replaced by the Jyhadists, who were outlawed under Saddam. And they will be still there when we leave.

Oh, I know very well how serious this is. I know that Bush is a weak president. However, he is not afraid to do what he feels is best for the American people, even if everyone does not agree with it. Also, I do not want an anti-war protester as a president during times of war and uncertainty.
Has it ever occured to you, that since 9-11, there havn't been any attacks on the United States homeland? That is because we are not backing down. If we leave Iraq now, that would show the world that we give in when the going gets tough, and we would be more vulnerable than ever.

So if he thought that nuking Iraq was the right thing to do, if "God" told him to, you would respect him for that too I bet.

How many attacks on the homeland were there before 9/11? Other than terroristic tax protestors, postal workers gone wild, etc., just the earlier WTC attack years ago. And is there any evidence that reationalizes your implied assertion that we would still have homeland attacks under President Gore?

Also, WTF are you talking about? Is there an anti-war protestor running for president, one that has a credible chance of winning? Maybe the "Liberal Media Conspiracy" has been keeping me from hearing about him? I would rather have a COMBAT VETEREN making these calls, rather than a Daddy's-Little-Guardsman who thinks he's a fucking cowboy!

Meanwhile today's National Guard is all over the globe, not here, GUARDING US! In that respect we are more vulnerable than ever!

The 19 hijackers on 9/11 were "12 Saudis, 1 Egyptian, 1 United Arab Emirates, 1 Lebanese, and 4 Unknown nationalities".

http://hackenbush.org/hackenblog/blogives/00000044.htm

Yes its a blog. I am sure if you look you will find something better, and it will probably verify the blog.

We are in a war on terror, Sadaam was funding Hamas suicide bombers, Hamas is a terrorist group am I right or am I wrong?

How many known Iraqi terrorists were there prior to the Iraq war? None that I have ever heard of. Link to evidence if you know of any? But since the war began iraqi terrorist recruitment is higher than it has ever been. Good job, George.

So you actually buy into the liberal propaganda enough to believe that there were no terrorists in Iraq before the war? Are you saying that we should leave because "iraqi terrorist recruitment is higher than it has ever been"? So you want to back down to terrorism?


("deliberately")



No, most iraqi casualties result from american bombings. As far as many more being killed by Saddam... newsflash: Saddam is gone. Another newsflash: the death rate from the war is many times higher than the death rate from Saddam's oppression.


That information is not accurate unless you are counting Iraqi combatants. But the fact is, we are recording every single casulty in Iraq from both sides. Saddam wasn't nice enough to keep a list of all the people he murdered. There are probobly still mass graves in Iraq that we havn't found yet. (Hmm, mass graves, sounds a bit like the Nazis. . .)


So now that Bush's little adventure has killed off their kids, your friends are in support of a war that was based entirely on lies? Well grief does strange things to people. I bet they support his reelection too? Strange that they should support the man whose incomptence got their kids killed.


Not everyone blames the president for their problems. The people I have talked to are strong and realize that their loved ones died defending their country and way of life.


Yours do them justice? You rationalize the travesty that led us into this quagmire, while I think it's simply a crime that our soldiers are dying for what was a non-issue while Bin Ladin sits in his cave and laughs.


I guess this depends on one's point of view. I believe that Saddam and his regime posed a threat to our security. In fact, it would not supprise me if they shipped their WMD's off the Syria. The way I look at it is tha Bin Ladin has lost almost all of his power, while Saddam and the terrorists in Iraq had more resorces and capabilities at the time. Plus, more terrorists are flocking to Iraq to be shot. And added bonus. :D



Wrong. He is a classic garden variety fucktard and he has totally fucked up his job.


Wow, that made you sound intelligent. . .


His job was to catch Bin Ladin and put an end to Al Queida. Instead he has got us into a nation building war in a new Viet Nam, in the one arab nation that hated Bin Ladin as much as we did, and he did so by lying to everybody.


New Vietnam? Lets see, no draft, and probobly wont be. . . There goes that analogy.


No, here is why it was the wrong choice:

1) there were no WMDs in Iraq;
2) there was no real connection between Iraq and Al Quieda (the same cannot be said of our "allies", Saudi and Pakistan);
3) there were no terrorist bases in Iraq (there are now);
4) we had real problems to deal with, i.e.: Al Quieda, without making up lies to make a non-problem look like a problem;
5) we are not any safer now than we were then, except for the fact that any air traveller who stands up and starts making threats will be ripped to shreds by passengers who would rather die as heros than sheep. Bush did nothing to bring this about, other than ignoring the warnings of the actions that brought this state about.. Oh, and when we fly we won't have to worry about unsightly nail clippings.


1, 2, and 3: There is not proof of your claims. Granted, there is no proof that they are not correct. But at least I make it clear what is oppinion and what is fact. The liberals should learn to do that.

4. Again, based on your point of view. You have no right to tell me what I should view as a threat.

5.) Use you common sense. If Bush is getting harped on so much now, imagine if he came on a month or two prior to 9-11 and claimed that terrorists were going to attack us with aircraft. No one would take him seriously. They would all say "Republican publicity conspiracy." This would have been amplified when the terrorists involved decided not to attack now that we were "ready" for it. Your oppinion of Bush would be even worse than it is now.


If FDR had declared war on China right after Pearl, we would have thought he had lost his mind. Apparently in the past 60 years or so about half the country has lost the capacity for critical thought.


That would be a good analogy if Iraq was:
1. being attacked by Al quieda
2. activly waging war on terrorism as well

Oh look, neither of these was the case.


Which war, and which enemy? Al Quieda, or Iraq? He has made our actions far less easy and far less honourable than they already were. Like Hitler, he has started an "Eastern Front" when we were still fighting those who attacked us. At least, unlike Hitler, he has waged his new war on a weakling nation, so maybe we will survive.

Oh, I forgot. Bush is Hitler. You make me want to vomit.


Perhaps you will realize that we have been losing when and if we finally do pull out, and our hand-picked puppet government is dragged bloody through the streets to the headsman's axe to be replaced by a new incarnation of the Taliban? For "many" you would have been more accurate saying "a few", and...



...more and more, those who were glad to see us arrive are being converted to the supporters of those who are attacking us. Oh, but the "Liberal (Zionist?) Media Conspiracy" has been lying to us, right? The rose petals are there, they're just not filming them, right?



Don't get me started on Conspiracy theory. Lol. Of course there are no rose petals, because those who openly support us are being persecuted. But yes, there are better sides of Iraq that the media isn't showing.


So kill them. But don't pretend that the situation that we must now resolve was one that we needed to deal with, was in any way a pressing matter of national security


Again, all from your own point of view.


So if he thought that nuking Iraq was the right thing to do, if "God" told him to, you would respect him for that too I bet.

Nope. I am not religious. Personally, I think we should nuke Iraq anyways.


How many attacks on the homeland were there before 9/11? Other than terroristic tax protestors, postal workers gone wild, etc., just the earlier WTC attack years ago. And is there any evidence that reationalizes your implied assertion that we would still have homeland attacks under President Gore?

So you think that there wouldn't have been a 9-11 under Gore? That is ridiculous.


Also, WTF are you talking about? Is there an anti-war protestor running for president, one that has a credible chance of winning? Maybe the "Liberal Media Conspiracy" has been keeping me from hearing about him? I would rather have a COMBAT VETEREN making these calls, rather than a Daddy's-Little-Guardsman who thinks he's a fucking cowboy!


Wow, you are even more uninformed than I thought. When Kerry got back from Vietnam, he stabbed our troops in the back, accusing them of war crimes while leaving out the true nature of the war. He was one of the most controversial anti-war protesters of the decade.


Meanwhile today's National Guard is all over the globe, not here, GUARDING US! In that respect we are more vulnerable than ever!

Innaccurate. The national gaurd isn't responsible for stopping homeland terrorism.

yawn

yawn

Oh did someone say something worth responding to? :confused: I'll check it out and get back to you.

Oh did someone say something worth responding to? :confused: I'll check it out and get back to you.

No, I just like to say "yawn" instead of "bump" sometimes.

And guys, please don't hijack the thread. This thread is supposed to be about Blather, not Bush.

No, I just like to say "yawn" instead of "bump" sometimes.

What are you doing, hanging over this page and refreshing every minute?

What are you doing, hanging over this page and refreshing every minute?

No, not every minute, just occasionally. ;)