Skip to main content

View Diary: Shia Government Orders Iraqi Policewomen to Turn in Guns (101 comments)

Comment Preferences

      •  I see these two pictures of him and think "how (7+ / 0-)

        can we have entrusted the caretaking of a good chunk of the world to this man?  How the hell did anyone let this happen?"  What the Supreme Court did in 2000 was like putting a baby wearing protective clothing in a room full of glass, and walking away.  What gave them the right to decide that it was okay for this baby to break everything he crawled over?

        •  The Supreme Court thought it (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          antirove, empathy, anotherdemocrat

          would be better for the country to have a President than not to have a President.  There wasn't time to address the fact that there was no established procedure for sorting out a disputed election.  Seven years and lots of hand-wringing later there still isn't.
          It didn't occur to people that crooks could be elected to office.  They were, again, and it still hasn't registered with a lot of people.

          On the other hand, Bush/Cheney aren't all that different.  Elected officials have been supervising the transfer of public assets into private wealth for a long time.  The reason it's so obvious now is because the public assets have been whittled down to next to nothing.

          What's the goal in Iraq?  That public officials should hand over "oil leases" and "basing rights" to international corporations, including the United States.  How is that different from extorting mineral rights from the American Indian Nations?  How is it different from forcing them to relinquish rights of way for power transmission lines and cell towers?

          •  The Constitution provides guidance... (4+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            concernedamerican, TexDem, jrooth, figleef

            ...on dealing with electoral disputes.  The majority on the Supreme Court simply felt that deferring to the Constitution might not yield the results they wanted.

          •  That's a crock -- all of it (7+ / 0-)
            There was a procedure and it was underway: recount the votes. The Republicans were trying every move in the book -- including rioting by organized outside agitators -- to shut it down. If the recount had continued, Gore would be president.

            Of course, it "occurred" to everyone with a trace of memory that "crooks" could be elected to office. Name 'Nixon" ring any bells?

            And yes, Bush and Cheney are different in terms of both the "what" and the "how much." People who dismiss the actions of elected officials with that "they're all the same" line are among the ones I consider most responsible for the pickle we're in. Considering that no one -- absolutely no one -- is perfect, this is the perfect way to cynically damn everyone and walk away from responsibility to try to do anything. I've been particularly sensitive to this cheap lie since the 2000 election when I got so sick of hearing that there was no difference between Bush and Gore and it was a choice between the classic "lesser of two evils." This is why I adamantly refuse to jump on the idiotic "draft Gore" bandwagon. If he was "evil" then, I guess he's still "evil" now, eh? Of course, I was one who didn't beieve he was "evil" then.

            It's human nature for people to want to enrich themselves. I don't believe it's necessarily human nature to want to strip everyone else and the entire country of all its resources, and I do NOT believe this is what most Democrats want. If you do, I wonder why you are here, since the goal of this site is to elect Democrats.

            I'm surprised that you think anyone here whole-heartedly supports turning over oil rights to private companies. That may be part of the administration's goal but it's certainly not what our young men and WOMEN are dying over there for.

            We're retiring Steve LaTourette (R-Family Values for You But Not for Me) and sending Judge Bill O'Neill to Congress from Ohio-14:

            by anastasia p on Wed Dec 12, 2007 at 06:00:29 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  nice thinking by Sandra Day O'Connor (8+ / 0-)
            She thought the country wanted a prompt resolution, rather than an accurate count of the votes. Surely she was not swayed by having been Barbara Bush's tennis partner and watching Dubya grow up.

            Edwards '08 -6.88/-5.54

            by DrReason on Wed Dec 12, 2007 at 07:06:29 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

      •  W has the right to bare fingers at the MSM (0+ / 0-)

        and our sisters in Iraq have no 2nd Amendment rights...not like here where your right to hold a gun is defended by millions.  

        Wait...that's it!  Form NRA chapters in Iraq with home defense and personal safety courses!  Why oh why haven't the yellow elephant rightwringer gun slingers jumped on this opportunity?  

        Another option!  Since the women have been trained by the police academy we helped set up, perhaps our Embassy could hire them in place of the trigger-happy Blackwater dudes.  Show them some US solidarity for their being treated as equal citizens.

        When life gives you wingnuts, make wingnut butter!

        by antirove on Wed Dec 12, 2007 at 08:09:22 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site