"Cliff" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 28 May 2005 16:17:19 GMT, "Jeffrey McCann"
wrote:


"Cliff" wrote in message
news
On Fri, 27 May 2005 06:18:24 GMT, Gunner
wrote:

Its the same tired rhetoric Ive heard before..in the 60s.

You really do miss killing childern in Vietnam.

Children get killed in war, but calling vets "baby killers" or the like,
then or now, without specific individual evidence just marks you as a
first
class jerk.

Missed some posts, did you?
Gunner has repeatedly mentioned some of his actions in Vietnam.
He misses it.

Soldiers are among those least responsible for the ugly
consequences of war, while at the same time paying the highest price for
it.

He's a loony one, all right.

The really
sad part..isthat then, .it was directed against the war because of its
alleged immorality. Today, while lip service is payed to that
convention as a convient cover..its no more and no less a cover to
hide your anti conservative, anti Bush, anti Right bigotry.

Gunner has it backwards. The reality is that most people who are opposed
to
(not "hate" as the NeoCon spin would have it) Bush think that way because
of
his lies leading us into the war, among other good causes. But gullible
fools have been taught by their thought leaders that black is white, and
that because we "hate" Bush, we oppose his policies. By reversing
reality
in this way, they push the debate into the arena of personal attacks,
where
they are more comfortable, instead of having to deal with the fact their
opponents have legitimate objections to their policy. It works for them,
because Bush is a likeable guy personally

I've heard rumors of otherwise ..... snarling temper tantrums, the
need of medications to keep him a bit under control ... and he's not
very bright.

What's bad for the goose is bad for the gander. I wan't taken in by Bush's
sub rosa whispering campaign against McCain, by the laughable ploys of
Bush's paid political operatives in the guise of either "Swiftboat Veterans"
or "outraged Florida voters," or their various other attempted black bag
ops. So I'm disinclined the beleive such about Bush, pending further
evidence.

That being said, he's known to be petty and vindictive, so I don't see
snarling temper tantrums as that much of a stretch. As for medications,
mood stabilizers and SSRIs are probably a good idea for him, and wouldn't
cause any impairment in his ability to do his job. I don't know how bright
he is or isn't, but since he sees everything in stark black and white, he
does display a well known disdain for the those confusing shades of gray
that make up reality, the kind of careful analysis and thoughtful doubt
needed to comprehend them, and those learned individuals who do.

to a lot of people who nonetheless
might not support him if there was a vigorous and open debate about his
policies. This has been the case in, for example, the ongoing debate
over
his proposals to change Social Security.

Jeff

It's just smoke & mirrors.
A distraction, like some of the other ones that have been
planted & hyped. Bait & switch.

Nah. I'm sure Bush and his handlers really would love to dismantle Social
Security because it contradicts the faux social Darwinism and hatred of the
middle class that is central to their creed. You know, his "base", the
"haves and have mores" for whom he will do everything, and everyone else for
whom he will nothing except exploit for the benefit of his base.
Jeff