RE: must agree on maher (no Who - in other words POLITICS!)

["O'Neal, Kevin W." <Kevin.ONeal@vtmednet.org>]

>From: Crouching Intern Stolen Sofa <emerald.eyes@rcn.com>
>Subject: Re: must agree on maher (no Who - in other words POLITICS!) 
>
>To be perfectly honest, I don't give a crap what "motivated" them.
>They nearly killed me and almost destroyed my home, so I have no
>intention of validating their atrocities by pondering what compelled
>them to do so.

Like I said, you're not the only one hurting here, and trying to understand
where this deep hatred is coming from is in no way validating this atrocity.
But, if we perhaps want to consider avoiding similar hatred in the future,
don't you think it's important to analyze what started this?

>Not really. Suicide isn't uncommon.

And each one takes courage.
And each one has a reason.
Consider for a moment the amount of suicide attempts vs. successes.

>That last statement is what really gets to me -- that we're somehow
>responsible for what happened that morning. 

It could be argued that had the Bush Administration not retreated
politically from involvement in that "region", and had continued to try and
lead this region to peace, that the need for such a devastating action would
not have been necessary.
These people didn't want to be ignored.  We're not ignoring them now, are
we?

>As far as I'm concerned,
>once a group engages in this type of activity, their agenda is taken
>off the table and not even looked at for decades to come. 

Seems like what you feel isn't shared by Bush.
Sorry, but I can't keep track of what his agenda is these days.  First kill
all terrorists, then negotiate with them.
Crazy.

>To turn around after the attacks and start "considering their
>motivations" just tells them that massacring us gets results that they
>want.

Hmmmmmmmm, Powell meeting with Arafat.....
Need I say more?

>That's it's not a particularly brave death, what the hijackers did.
>It's over in an instant. No suffering, no agonizing.

Yet dropping bombs from aircraft miles away is?
Don't look now, but the Bush Administration today admitted screwing up by
not engaging humans into the Tora Borra region earlier.  The result?  The
probable escape of Bin Laden.

Please don't get me wrong....I support the war.  But, I also was pissed that
we were doing it all from a safe and cozy distance.  Where was our bravery?
We talked big, yet didn't act that way.

>On the bright side, I'm acquiring lots and lots of stuff in
>trades that I never would have otherwise gotten. :-)

Isn't that more fun than this stressful political shite.

>I just haven't thought of a new handle yet, and I don't want to change
>too often and piss off the people who have me killfiled. :-D  But I am
>open to suggestions and am considering some Who-related ones.

Sorry, can't help you there.
I find a persons name to be the best "handle".
Why hide?
A personalized license plate would be much better!  :-)
How about "who betty"?

>>Never crossed my mind.  Are the text of the speeches written in advance?
>
>Yes. And usually rehearsed, as well.

I was being facetious.
All that rehearsal, and he still ef's them up that badly.
tisk-tisk.

>I wouldn't bother with you if I thought you're stupid.

Sorry to be such a "bother".

>Yes, but it was very publicized at the time, and since then too.

Not publicized by the administration until forced by the press.

>Yes. And I don't think that that ability is the most important thing.

To a laborer perhaps not.  But if you want to be taken seriously in this
world, you better be able to speak publicly.

>And I don't place all that high of a priority on it.

You don't place a high priority with being comfortable with the country's
business?
Ummm, you do realize we're are still talking about the President of the US,
right?
Come on.  What then is an important criteria for being President?

To me, mastery of *all* the issues is what is desirable.
Oh yeah, and agreeing with my take and stance on them.  ;-)
 
>Really? But they seem to like and trust him a great deal.

I think that's a stretch.
Like? Perhaps.  I wouldn't mind snorting a line or two with the guy.
Trust?  Got to wonder about that.  Enron will be the tell-tale.
Think he's doing a good job?  Please, please keep in mind that war-time
approval ratings are a far different creature from peace-time approval
ratings.
Care to guess what Georgie-boys approval rating was on 9/10 ?
Come on, take a stab.

>My diehard Republican dad is too pissed off at him these days.

Let me guess, cause of his flip-flop with policy toward terrorists?

>Like all Presidents, he has significant input regarding what goes into
>his speeches and can take out anything he wishes. 
>He gives the speech writers the basic ideas he wants to get across,
>they write up drafts, he goes over them to point out what he likes and
>what has to go. He adds notes and suggestions, and eventually they all
>come up with a speech that he likes.

Come one. This is nothing new. 
What is new is that the President then can't deliver the speech he was so
involved with *unless he's very familiar and comfortable with the contents*.


>Or just very tongue-tied. That sometimes happens with people who think
>much faster than they speak.

Saying the US and Japan have had a century and a half of cooperation (or
however that quote 
went) is not an example of being tongue-tied.  Making goofs like not knowing
the Mid-East is a region in and of itself is not being tongue-tied.
I hear coke makes you think faster than you can speak.  ;-)

>I see no reason to get all hysterical over not inserting some gaffes
>or "ums and uhs" into the text of a speech. Like I said, newspapers do
>it every day.

Your characterization of "hysterical" isn't being appreciated by me.
But, altering historical records to cover W's obvious inability's is.

>Then you should be pretty distraught about the 41 previous
>administrations that undoubtedly did the same thing.

Clinton Administration didn't.
Can't speak for the others.

>Because it's a standard practice that far pre-dates him.

If you're comfortable with that rationalization, I give up.

>And I wasn't a liberal then. :-D

You're a liberal now???  ;-)

>Name one administration that altered prepared texts to show "ums" and
>"uhs" and gaffes, to present as some sort of official record.

You are making the assumption that these records are based on texts.
They're not.
They are recorded records that are transcribed to text.  The Bush
Administration is deleting parts that they don't like.  Period.

>Many times, prepared text is handed out to the media *before* speeches
>are even made.

News flash!

>>>Please don't ask me to defend Clinton and the whole Monica-scank debacle.
>>
>>I didn't ask you to defend it.
>
>Did I say you did??
>

>You brought it up...

I know you are but what am I?

>Yeah, but they're *below* my name. Since yours was above your name, I
>thought it was part of your response.

Sorry for *your* confusion.  Guess I'm not up on the latest type setting
rules regarding signatures.

>If I wanted to use the word "uncomfortable," I would have used it. :-)

I don't think you would have.
Hey, you're the one who is arguing that Bush is "uncomfortable" giving
speeches in front of a large audience.
But you used the word "glib".  Glib does not equate to stupid.

>Why not talk about The Who Leslie?

>I have before, and will again. I just don't know as much about them as
>most others here do, so I tend to sit back and read.

until the opportunity presents itself to preach your republican agenda?

>Unless, of
>course, you want to start a Who-related topic.

I'm sure everyone would agree that I've started *more* than my share of Who
topics over the years.  It's your turn.
I *promiss* it will be better received than political discussions.

>Leslie
>
>
>- --
>"Every one of the innocents who died on Sept. 11 was the most important
person on earth to >somebody. 
>Every death extinguished a world." -- President George W. Bush, 12/11/2001
>
>www.hillary-watch.org

Alert!!!  Too many spaces between your name and quote!!!!!
;-)

"The senator has got to understand if he's going to have-he can't have it
both ways. He can't take the high horse and then claim the low road."-To
reporters in Florence, S.C., Feb. 17, 2000
George "boy genius" Bush
Kevin in VT