Oprano Adult Industry Forums - View Single Post

PornoDoggy · 08-11-2003

I think I can safely say I am not the first person board readers around here are going to think of as a GW defender. That being said, talking about impeaching GW because of his "lies" is almost as "whacked out on crack" an idea as Buff's post. You want to talk about putting him out of work next year - I'm very, very down for that. But getting your panties in a knot while talking about impeaching him is pointless, and not really much smarter than the logic that his lies don't matter.

With the possible exception of WWII, America has NEVER been 100% behind a war. In spite of the myths taught in schools, barely half the country was in favor of the damned Revolution itself. Opposition to the War of 1812 was profound and vocal, particularly in New England. Abraham Lincoln was a congressional leader in the opposition to the Mexican War. American entry in WWI was viewed with great suspicion by a great number of people, and there was organized resistance and draft evasion that was brutally put down by Wilson's Attorney General Palmer. Korea was the source of bitter controversies, although not to the extent that Vietnam was.

And even the possible exception - WWII - is an odd case. The political ancestors of the present unilateral interventionists were the WWII isolationists. While they didn't have the stones to oppose the war, they did accuse Roosevelt of variously allowing Pearl Harbor to happen, deliberately provoking the Axis powers, and of being responsible for us being unprepared for war in 1941. The latter is the most laughable, because they had fought him tooth and nail on every possible move to rearmament. They battled him on things like efforts to rebuild the Navy in the late 1930s right up to opposing conscription in 1940) in the naive hope that it would allow us to sit out the war (or the more sinister hope for an Axis victory). Pat Buchannan is still pushing this bullshit idea.

So what Bush did ain't much different than what any President has done when we've gotten ourselves into a war. Do I think that the weapons of mass destruction are the same things to George Bush as the mystery torpedo boats were to LBJ or the Maine to McKinley? You bet your ass I do.

Do I think he did anything that could get him impeached or jailed? Nope. Enough to earn him a one-way ticket back to Kennebunkport, Texas, perhaps.

08-11-2003	#5
PornoDoggy Cramming 3 people in a Room to Attend Show Want to see your own Advertising Here! Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Amid the Cornfields of Illinois Posts: 5,366	I think I can safely say I am not the first person board readers around here are going to think of as a GW defender. That being said, talking about impeaching GW because of his "lies" is *almost* as "whacked out on crack" an idea as Buff's post. You want to talk about putting him out of work next year - I'm very, very down for that. But getting your panties in a knot while talking about impeaching him is pointless, and not really much smarter than the logic that his lies don't matter. With the possible exception of WWII, America has NEVER been 100% behind a war. In spite of the myths taught in schools, barely half the country was in favor of the damned Revolution itself. Opposition to the War of 1812 was profound and vocal, particularly in New England. Abraham Lincoln was a congressional leader in the opposition to the Mexican War. American entry in WWI was viewed with great suspicion by a great number of people, and there was organized resistance and draft evasion that was brutally put down by Wilson's Attorney General Palmer. Korea was the source of bitter controversies, although not to the extent that Vietnam was. And even the possible exception - WWII - is an odd case. The political ancestors of the present unilateral interventionists were the WWII isolationists. While they didn't have the stones to oppose the war, they did accuse Roosevelt of variously allowing Pearl Harbor to happen, deliberately provoking the Axis powers, and of being responsible for us being unprepared for war in 1941. The latter is the most laughable, because they had fought him tooth and nail on every possible move to rearmament. They battled him on things like efforts to rebuild the Navy in the late 1930s right up to opposing conscription in 1940) in the naive hope that it would allow us to sit out the war (or the more sinister hope for an Axis victory). Pat Buchannan is still pushing this bullshit idea. So what Bush did ain't much different than what any President has done when we've gotten ourselves into a war. Do I think that the weapons of mass destruction are the same things to George Bush as the mystery torpedo boats were to LBJ or the Maine to McKinley? You bet your ass I do. Do I think he did anything that could get him impeached or jailed? Nope. Enough to earn him a one-way ticket back to Kennebunkport, Texas, perhaps. __________________ SEX STORY TEXT Exotic Material for Adult Websites Available for part time (project or ongoing) work ...