NationStates Jolt Archive

What are you trying to prove? That you know as much or less than those ranking Congress?

Democrats – some of whom had hoped the now Democrat-led Congress would bring an end to the war in Iraq – expressed overwhelming displeasure with how Congress has handled the war, with 94% giving Congress a negative rating in its handling specifically of that issue.
A letter to the editor in my local paper proves why this is: Americans are fucking stupid. The Democrats can't end the war how they were elected too, despite trying to multiple times, because they don't have a veto overriding majority.

EDIT: All too easy.

Latest Zogby poll says that we're thinking that Bush sucks when it comes to handling the war, but apparently, we think even less of the Congress.

Survey shows just 3% of Americans approve of how Congress is handling the war in Iraq; 24% say the same for the President

A majority of American adults (54%) lack confidence in President Bush’s ability as Commander in Chief of the U.S. military, a new UPI/Zogby Interactive poll shows. A majority (60%) said they do not trust the president’s judgment when it comes to the war, while 38% say they have faith in his military decisions.

Just 24% give the president favorable ratings of his performance in handling the war in Iraq, but confidence in Congress is significantly worse – only 3% give Congress positive marks for how it has handled the war. This lack of confidence in Congress cuts across all ideologies. Democrats – some of whom had hoped the now Democrat-led Congress would bring an end to the war in Iraq – expressed overwhelming displeasure with how Congress has handled the war, with 94% giving Congress a negative rating in its handling specifically of that issue.

Further down in the poll results, it appears that Americans are divided on exactly how to handle the war. Since Bush isn't doing any of the options that cover either side of the split, and since Congress can't make up its mind what to do (probably a function of both parties trying to cover either side of the split), there's a net change of zero, and Americans are pissed off.

Why are you posting this when this is not even news?

No link?

Latest Zogby poll says that we're thinking that Bush sucks when it comes to handling the war, but apparently, we think even less of the Congress.


Is this the third time you've trotted out this shite?

How many times can the same person post the same OP (reworded but same crap) before its considered spam?

Yay. RO is back.

Yay. RO is back.

He left?

What are you trying to prove? That you know as much or less than those ranking Congress?


A letter to the editor in my local paper proves why this is: Americans are fucking stupid. The Democrats can't end the war how they were elected too, despite trying to multiple times, because they don't have a veto overriding majority.

EDIT: All too easy.

Sure they can end the war moron, its call pulling the funding of the war. And you call Americans stupid, why dont you look in the mirror? Personally whether democrat or republican in office or in congress...they have both failed, but its the democrats that failed the most in bashing the war on terror since the beginning, even Afganistan...

And you call Americans stupid, why dont you look in the mirror?.

I think he's American. Which makes that statement hilarious.

And yeah, no offence, but you are pretty dumb. I mean, most Americans can't even find Iraq on a map.

Sure they can end the war moron, its call pulling the funding of the war. And you call Americans stupid, why dont you look in the mirror? Personally whether democrat or republican in office or in congress...they have both failed, but its the democrats that failed the most in bashing the war on terror since the beginning, even Afganistan...

Education time!

First off, don't piss of The Pantless Hero. He's someone who loves to shout down anyone who disagrees with him, no matter what the subject.

Second off, he's right in this case. We Americans on the whole are not understanding why the Democrats have yet to accomplish anything. It's because they lack a supermajority in either House and the Republicans are unifying to stonewall them on everything. The Dems are trying, but they can't succeed if the Republicans don't play along.

Oh, and you're also forgetting the Bush vetoes.

Democrats could probably starve the Iraq war to an end, but it'd probably be a disastrous way to do it. Just keep sending spending bills Shrubya is destined to veto time and again and watch the funding lapse. Sure the Pentagon could juggle funding to keep things going for a while, but eventually they'll run out of cash and have to leave.

I think it'd be an unmitigated disaster in terms of troop moral and Iraq's future though.

Sure they can end the war moron, its call pulling the funding of the war.
Right, let's try that. How will they do that? Hmm. Pass a budget with no money for the war? Oops, that gets vetoed. Let's just override it, oh wait, it didn't pass with enough votes to override the veto in the first place? Well shit.

Veto. Look it up.

He left?

He should post at least once a day. His threads are very popular.

He should post at least once a day. His threads are very popular.
Like a train wreck.

Like a train wreck.

You seem to enjoy them.

Can someone explain the title of this thread to me and its relation to the content of the OP?

You seem to enjoy them.

Thusly...He must enjoy watching train wrecks! :)

You seem to enjoy them.

Says the pot standing next to the kettle watching rescuers sort through the wreckage.

Well, for someone in your position, the war MUST go even worse in order to get the votes you need to get us out of Iraq.

That's a great position to be in - tying your political fortunes to the hope that the US fails, and that a genocide in Iraq takes place.

Or wait until September when the progress report returns crap and watch a bunch of Republicans become disenchanted with this foolhardy endeavor.

Says the pot standing next to the kettle watching rescuers sort through the wreckage.

Well, for someone in your position, the war MUST go even worse in order to get the votes you need to get us out of Iraq.

That's a great position to be in - tying your political fortunes to the hope that the US fails, and that a genocide in Iraq takes place.

Or wait until September when the progress report returns crap and watch a bunch of Republicans become disenchanted with this foolhardy endeavor.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/30/AR2007073001380_pf.html

Many Democrats have anticipated that, at best, Petraeus and U.S. ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker would present a mixed analysis of the success of the current troop surge strategy, given continued violence in Baghdad. But of late there have been signs that the commander of U.S. forces might be preparing something more generally positive. Clyburn said that would be "a real big problem for us."

Keep dreaming. The Democrats are already anticipating that it won't be bad news - certainly not bad enough to get the Blue Dogs to vote with them. And once again, you're hoping (in fact, you're counting on it) that it's bad news.

Once again, great sentiment there - you might as well say that you hope for the worst for the US, and hope that the Iraqis get busy and kill each other so that the report looks like shit. Your plan to get the votes for withdrawal RELY on it.

He can prepare whatever he wants, a pretty coat of paint doesn't a new thing make.

He can prepare whatever he wants, a pretty coat of paint doesn't a new thing make.

Apparently, the Blue Dogs do not agree with you.

well, republicans, and more specifically bush, have had over FIVE YEARS to get the job done, or at the very least, yield some successful, positive results.

and the american people are yet to hear anything positive result from the iraq catastrophe

BUT WAIT

you say that we MAAAAAAAAAY have some good news, only five years AFTER the initial invasion? that we MAY have some SLIGHTLY good news?

WHEW

for a second there I thought this whole campaign was a failure

I mean, over three thousand US soldiers lives later, and HUNDREDS of iraqi civilians lives later, good news everyone, there MAY be a SLIGHTLY OKAY light at the end of the tunnel


what a relief


but then there's people who come along and tell us that they have a GUARANTEED way of fixing the problem, by pulling out

and you shit on the idea, and in it's place, tell us "oh no no no no, we should WAIT IT OUT and do the SAME thing we've been doing for over five years and hope to some god that we'll have an okay report handed to us in September"

well, and i'm only speaking for me on this one, and perhaps the troops who are the ones we've put in harms way, but the democrats guaranteed strategy for success sure beats your "MAYBE slightly okay results"

I think you mean a hundred thousand Iraqi civilian lives.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/30/AR2007073001380_pf.html

Once again, great sentiment there - you might as well say that you hope for the worst for the US, and hope that the Iraqis get busy and kill each other so that the report looks like shit. Your plan to get the votes for withdrawal RELY on it.


well, republicans, and more specifically bush, have had over FIVE YEARS to get the job done, or at the very least, yield some successful, positive results.

and the american people are yet to hear anything positive result from the iraq catastrophe

BUT WAIT

you say that we MAAAAAAAAAY have some good news, only five years AFTER the initial invasion? that we MAY have some SLIGHTLY good news?

WHEW

for a second there I thought this whole campaign was a failure

I mean, over three thousand US soldiers lives later, and HUNDREDS of iraqi civilians lives later, good news everyone, there MAY be a SLIGHTLY OKAY light at the end of the tunnel


what a relief


but then there's people who come along and tell us that they have a GUARANTEED way of fixing the problem, by pulling out

and you shit on the idea, and in it's place, tell us "oh no no no no, we should WAIT IT OUT and do the SAME thing we've been doing for over five years and hope to some god that we'll have an okay report handed to us in September"

well, and i'm only speaking for me on this one, and perhaps the troops who are the ones we've put in harms way, but the democrats guaranteed strategy for success sure beats your "MAYBE slightly okay results" strategy

well, republicans, and more specifically bush, have had over FIVE YEARS to get the job done, or at the very least, yield some successful, positive results.

and the american people are yet to hear anything positive result from the iraq catastrophe

BUT WAIT

you say that we MAAAAAAAAAY have some good news, only five years AFTER the initial invasion? that we MAY have some SLIGHTLY good news?

WHEW

for a second there I thought this whole campaign was a failure

I mean, over three thousand US soldiers lives later, and HUNDREDS of iraqi civilians lives later, good news everyone, there MAY be a SLIGHTLY OKAY light at the end of the tunnel


what a relief


but then there's people who come along and tell us that they have a GUARANTEED way of fixing the problem, by pulling out

and you shit on the idea, and in it's place, tell us "oh no no no no, we should WAIT IT OUT and do the SAME thing we've been doing for over five years and hope to some god that we'll have an okay report handed to us in September"

well, and i'm only speaking for me on this one, and perhaps the troops who are the ones we've put in harms way, but the democrats guaranteed strategy for success sure beats your "MAYBE slightly okay results" strategy

The job here is not to convince me. Read the linked article.

The job here is to convince the Blue Dog Democrats, and some Republicans.

If he comes back with any good news at all, there won't even be a phased withdrawal, regardless of what you think.

I think you mean a hundred thousand Iraqi civilian lives.


i was being extremely conservative on my estimates


the UN's official numbers greatly differs from America's


personally I trust the UN over america, especially when it was the UN that said that Iraq did NOT have any wmds

If he comes back with any good news at all, there won't even be a phased withdrawal, regardless of what you think.


This seems to be the overall attitude of all republicans, and ESPECIALLY the current administration

that is, to be frank:

"Fuck you, what are you gonna do about it?"


you see, you stated that there won't be a withdrawal REGARDLESS of what I think

bush has basically told the american people the same thing

"we're not gonna withdraw from iraq, no matter WHAT the AMERICAN PEOPLE want"

gee, what great democratic principles


i didn't realize we had elected a dictator to office, i thought he was a PUBLIC SERVANT, a mere REPRESENTATIVE of the WILL OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE


guess i'm wrong

Or wait until September when the progress report returns crap and watch a bunch of Republicans become disenchanted with this foolhardy endeavor.

And what would you say if the progress report returns are not crap? Just curiosity.

And what would you say if the progress report returns are not crap? Just curiosity.
I would be interested to know what absurd spin could be put on the reports that make it look like the government of Iraq achieved any of the goals in half a month that they hadn't managed to achieve in nearly a year.

And what would you say if the progress report returns are not crap? Just curiosity.

It doesn't really matter what pantless thinks.

All that matters is what the Blue Dogs and some Republicans think.

If Petraeus brings back a mixed report (very probable), even according to the Democrat's own political strategist, that will make it IMPOSSIBLE to even get the votes for a phased withdrawal.

Not my statement - read the linked article.

Pantless will probably pop a blood vessel.

It doesn't really matter what pantless thinks.

All that matters is what the Blue Dogs and some Republicans think.

If Petraeus brings back a mixed report (very probable), even according to the Democrat's own political strategist, that will make it IMPOSSIBLE to even get the votes for a phased withdrawal.

Not my statement - read the linked article.

Pantless will probably pop a blood vessel.



okay, seriously dude, you need to get off this whole "it doesn't matter what people think"


otherwise, what the hell is the point of this post? people have the right to ask you questions about what you've posted, and reserve the right to voice their dissension

if you disagree, then this isn't a post, it's spam

It doesn't really matter what pantless thinks.

All that matters is what the Blue Dogs and some Republicans think.

If Petraeus brings back a mixed report (very probable), even according to the Democrat's own political strategist, that will make it IMPOSSIBLE to even get the votes for a phased withdrawal.

Not my statement - read the linked article.

Pantless will probably pop a blood vessel.
I seem to recall the reports being on the "achieved goals." None of which they had achieved at last status report, in June or July I believe. I would like to know which ones the Iraqi government have achieved as of September after taking August off - achieving in a month to a month and a half what they couldn't achieve in several.

okay, seriously dude, you need to get off this whole "it doesn't matter what people think"


otherwise, what the hell is the point of this post? people have the right to ask you questions about what you've posted, and reserve the right to voice their dissension

if you disagree, then this isn't a post, it's spam

That just settled every political thread on NSG.

You'll notice that no one was even able to pass the idea of "benchmarks".
What?

You'll notice that no one was even able to pass the idea of "benchmarks".

So full of fail today!

Which is inaccurate for the benchmark legislation did pass and was signed and I believe 8 have been achieved while most have not.

I seem to recall the reports being on the "achieved goals." None of which they had achieved at last status report, in June or July I believe. I would like to know which ones the Iraqi government have achieved as of September after taking August off - achieving in a month to a month and a half what they couldn't achieve in several.

You'll notice that no one was even able to pass the idea of "benchmarks".

So full of fail today!

I would like to point out that in Remote's post, there are no statements by Petraeus about the possible results, it is just idle speculation by the Democrats.

Also, I see your Blue Dog caucus and raise you Sen. Warner (http://news.yahoo.com/s/bloomberg/20070802/pl_bloomberg/ae7vdrhpfmle;_ylt=AtRwcqSph.Vvg5oRfPe.1pOog9IF)

That just settled every political thread on NSG.

i'm talking about if he disagrees about people's right to voice their opinions and to question his post


that's fundamental in all posts, if i understand the principle correctly

if he posts a controversial topic, he must be prepared to BACK IT UP

otherwise he's just simply wishing to propagate his biased information without any discussion on it

thus, spam

i'm talking about if he disagrees about people's right to voice their opinions and to question his post

I take it you have not been in many political threads on NSG!

that's fundamental in all posts, if i understand the principle correctly

It is but when it comes to politics, both sides shout down the other when they disagree and ignore eachother's points because they are from one side or the other. Hence, that sums up the political threads on NSG.

if he posts a controversial topic, he must be prepared to BACK IT UP

I agree entirely.

otherwise he's just simply wishing to propagate his biased information without any discussion on it

thus, spam

Which again sums up most of the hot button issues (including politics) of NSG.

You'll note that it's the Democratic strategist who is saying that if Petraeus comes back with mixed results (and he thinks it likely), they won't pass shit.
I don't think you read your own source.

Senator Warner is one guy.
And I know you didn't read mine.

I would like to point out that in Remote's post, there are no statements by Petraeus about the possible results, it is just idle speculation by the Democrats.

Also, I see your Blue Dog caucus and raise you Sen. Warner (http://news.yahoo.com/s/bloomberg/20070802/pl_bloomberg/ae7vdrhpfmle;_ylt=AtRwcqSph.Vvg5oRfPe.1pOog9IF)

You'll note that it's the Democratic strategist who is saying that if Petraeus comes back with mixed results (and he thinks it likely), they won't pass shit.

Senator Warner is one guy.

Given that the death rate for US troops is way down, despite the fact that they're spending far more time outside the wire, I'd say that Petraeus probably has some mixed news for us.

As I said before, for you to "win" on this, you have to be praying for bad news.

That's a great way to live - pray that other people fail, pray that a country descends into chaos, anarchy, and genocide, and pray that we fail at stopping that.

You actually sound worse than me...

I take it you have not been in many political threads on NSG!



It is but when it comes to politics, both sides shout down the other when they disagree and ignore eachother's points because they are from one side or the other. Hence, that sums up the political threads on NSG.



I agree entirely.



Which again sums up most of the hot button issues (including politics) of NSG.


hmmmm, i think i see your point


oh well, more endless unresolvable debate! :p

You'll note that it's the Democratic strategist who is saying that if Petraeus comes back with mixed results (and he thinks it likely), they won't pass shit.

Senator Warner is one guy.

Given that the death rate for US troops is way down, despite the fact that they're spending far more time outside the wire, I'd say that Petraeus probably has some mixed news for us.

As I said before, for you to "win" on this, you have to be praying for bad news.

That's a great way to live - pray that other people fail, pray that a country descends into chaos, anarchy, and genocide, and pray that we fail at stopping that.

You actually sound worse than me...


i'm sure republicans said the very same thing about Vietnam in response to those damn liberal muckrackers......

i guess the real question here is how many more americans have to die AFTER the president declared "mission accomplished" before we send our troops home?

i'm open to suggestions


oh yeah, and this is from the SAME president who, when asked in 2003 what the american military's plans were for any potential attacks from terrorists and militia forces, answered "bring it on"

i guess the real question here is how many more americans have to die AFTER the president declared "mission accomplished" before we send our troops home?

i'm open to suggestions

Don't ask me - ask the Democratic strategist.

Don't ask me - ask the Democratic strategist.

so you have no actual opinions yourself, you just parrot what other people say and claim it your own?


how uniquely american

hmmmm, i think i see your point


oh well, more endless unresolvable debate! :p

Hear Hear!!!

so you have no actual opinions yourself, you just parrot what other people say and claim it your own?

how uniquely american

No, you'll notice that I'm not claiming it as my own.

I have my own opinions - but what does that matter? I'm not the President, a Senator, or a Congressman.

I was talking about Senators and Congressmen - what they believe in this matter is what is important.

it matters because you posted this forum, therefore your opinions are on trial


if any of the congressmen wish to join this forum, they're welcome to


but until then, YOU will be held accountable for the information that YOU post

it matters because you posted this forum, therefore your opinions are on trial


if any of the congressmen wish to join this forum, they're welcome to


but until then, YOU will be held accountable for the information that YOU post

No he's not.

No he's not.

explain please

so you have no actual opinions yourself, you just parrot what other people say and claim it your own?
He has literally been doing that for months.

He has literally been doing that for months.

i'm beginning to see the pattern too


i was hoping for an intellectually stimulating debate


instead, well, you know where i'm going on this