Well, come on, I mean, a cyst sounds much better than owning phony log books, imaginary snaps of you in front of an F-106, and alleged service in the Air Guard, right?

I'm not sure why a legitimate, documented medical condition that precludes one from military service bothers liberals more than say, the deceitful tactic of lying to a Colonel by promising to enter ROTC at the University of Arkansas to avoid being drafted, only to run like a coward to England. Seems that in addition to getting priorities mixed, liberals also love to compare apples and oranges, re: the Bush statement as governor regarding troops in Kosovo and his later statement as president regarding a time table for withdrawal in Iraq...for the uneducated, unwashed turd blossoms, allow me to enlighten you - the president has and continues to have an existing timetable for withdrawing troops from Iraq - it includes the following conditions:

1. The Iraqis need to have a stable, elected government. (check)
2. The Iraqis need to have a sufficient number of security and military forces trained and able to defend the country from outside threats. (progress, but not there yet)
3. The security conditions on the ground need to satisfy our military commanders. (progress, but not there yet)

The timetables Bush says he will NOT adhere to are the artificial, condition-less timetables that democrats (who first supported but now oppose the war) want, which essentially amount to surrender.

Then-governor Bush's comments on Kosovo, once seen in full context, paint an entirely different picture than the one intimated - here's what preceded the full quote, providing, what's that word? Oh yeah, context:

Bush, in Austin, criticized President Clinton's administration for not doing enough to enunciate a goal for the Kosovo military action and indicated the bombing campaign might not be a tough enough response.

What else did Bush say about Kosovo? Stuff like this:

April 6, 1999: "If the mission is to win, all options ought to be available to military planners."

April 7, 1999: "Now that we're in it, we ought to plan to win, even if that means ground troops."

April 8, 1999: "It's important for the United States to be slow to engage the military, but once the military is engaged, it must be engaged with one thing in mind, and that is victory.

Gee. I mean, double-gee. It's amazing how when one actually bothers to do research, rather than cherry-pick quotes from lefty blogs like Think Progress, President Bush sounds remarkably consistent when speaking about both Kosovo AND Iraq.

Cheers.

RE: the bush quotes at the bottom....

The second one obviously relates to Iraq. Can you please explain the background of the first quote he gave in '99? Kosovo I'm guessing, but I'd appreciate if you could outline why comparing Iraq to Kosovo is not apples to oranges.

BMJ

Eh nevermind. DaveATX just gave me all the info I need. Might even go so far as to say you just got pwned.

BMJ

Oh my God! Lee, that is incoherent drivel, riddled with misquotes, poor grammar, a complete lack of logic or discernible train of thought. That GED didn't quite cut it! Your commentary is so poorly written, it's impossible to detect a point. I can merely gather that you simply throw random thoughts together then proceed on a comical rant. The only constant is a sense of misery and hate, hate for yourself, disdain for logic and an inability to think for yourself. You, Lee Russ, are a shining, cretinous example of why Rush Limbaugh eats guys like you for lunch and is one of the most brilliant minds this country has to offer. You're just like most other liberal robots, like little children in the school yard who have nothing to say except: "No you!"

Rush Rules!!!!!

Liberals don't mind discussing issues completely out of context, so long as it serves the purpose of painting an incriminating picture of their opponents. The senate attacking Rush is a prime example...and this Lee Russ character is doing the same thing. If he couldn't just make stuff up he'd have nothing to say. Just another empty suit!

And evidently an intellectual coward.... Nary a response to any of us. Shameful. Maybe he's busy working for the greater good though. Lets give him the benefit of the doubt.

Well of all those fine, rational and sincere comments the only substantive one was from daveatx. The later quotes from Bush r.e. Kosovo don't ameliorate the contradiction between his two contradictory statements about timetables. Nor do the considerable differences betwen Kosovo and Iraq lessen the contradiction between the two statements.

I'm just proud to be consisdered "a shining, cretinous example of why Rush Limbaugh eats guys like [me] for lunch" by anyone who thinks that Rush Limbaugh is one of the most brilliant minds this country has to offer.

Enjoy your descendency my fellow citizens.

The only kind of "descendancy", Lee, which may occur is the kind which liberals are pursuing with great enthusiasm. Their quest to make the United States a socialist country, their quest to make the country dependent on liberal politicians with the promise of exorbitant social programs which they can NEVER realistically accomplish (a bribe for votes by the way), their quest to obliterate the creative genius of the individual in favor of some state-run-kumbaya-we're-all-equal-so-nobody-better-excel mentality, which will leave us as a nation in the same misery as EVERY other failed socialist nation with high taxes, high unemployment, crappy medical care....the list goes on (as did this sentence)! Lee, show me just ONE example of a socialist society, a system of government you so admire, which has thrived more and has done more good for the WORLD and its own people than our REPUBLIC, our United States of America! Just ONE Lee...can you do it? Come on, just try.....

...he cannot do it!

"The later quotes from Bush r.e. Kosovo don't ameliorate the contradiction between his two contradictory statements about timetables. Nor do the considerable differences betwen Kosovo and Iraq lessen the contradiction between the two statements."

That's where you're wrong bubba. At least you got to use "ameliorate" though. Well played.

BMJ

Lee,

I was in a bit of a hurry when I posted my initial response, so maybe I didn't spell it out clearly enough....my point is that you CHERRY PICKED PART OF A QUOTE from Bush, and didn't include the ENTIRE quote which would have provided context and meaning...here, let me do it again to those who may have missed it the first time - here is what YOU quoted:

"I think it's also important for the president to lay out a timetable as to how long they will be involved and when they will be withdrawn." George W. Bush, then Texas Governor, on 2/9/99.

Here's the WHOLE THING from the Houson Chronicle:

Bush, in Austin, criticized President Clinton's administration for not doing enough to enunciate a goal for the Kosovo military action and indicated the bombing campaign might not be a tough enough response. "I think it's also important for the president to lay out a timetable as to how long they will be involved and when they will be withdrawn." George W. Bush, then Texas Governor.

OK, now that we've established context, what was governor Bush saying in 1999 about Kosovo? He was saying there needs to be a GOAL established for the military that defines victory, and this goal must be achieved before withdrawing troops; He was saying that when the United States enters into a conflict, it must be prepared to win; He was saying that anything less than victory is unacceptable.

Again, these sentiments dovetail very close to president Bush's attitude and comments about the current conflict in Iraq - he has set goals, he believes we must win, and he thinks anything less than victory is unacceptable.

Bush in 1999 about Kosovo:
Establish goals, achieve said goals, win the war, return home victorious.

Bush currently about Iraq:
Establish goals, achieve said goals, win the war, return home victorious.

Lee, it would seem the facts and the printed record of FULL quotes, in context, completely dispute your contention that Bush "had a dispute with himself." Unless you've got something else to offer up to support your original assertion, it would appear you've been, as the kids say today, "pwned."

Cheers.

D'oh! Pwned again. Thanks for the nod to my youth DAVEATX ;)

BMJ

Daveatx:

How in the world does this:

Bush, in Austin, criticized President Clinton's administration for not doing enough to enunciate a goal for the Kosovo military action and indicated the bombing campaign might not be a tough enough response. "I think it's also important for the president to lay out a timetable as to how long they will be involved and when they will be withdrawn." George W. Bush, then Texas Governor.

supposedly translate into this:

what was governor Bush saying in 1999 about Kosovo? He was saying there needs to be a GOAL established for the military that defines victory, and this goal must be achieved before withdrawing troops; He was saying that when the United States enters into a conflict, it must be prepared to win; He was saying that anything less than victory is unacceptable

You read funny. Your interpretation of what he was saying conveniently leaves out the meaning of the very phrase I quoted. The statement r.e. a timetable "as to how long they will be involved and when they will be withdrawn" means exactly what it says.

You can believe any interpretation that you want, but don't try to convince me that the statement I quoted smply means that Bush wanted a Kosovo goal and the meeting of that goal before withdrawal. The plain, rdinary meaning of the language he used simply doesn't support that.

BushCo planned Iraq to fail deliberately. By not ensuring an adequate amount of troops going in, not supplying them with the equipment they need to do the job, by not having enuff interpretors, by doling out hundreds of no bid, no accountability cost plus contracts to corporate cronies who have largely taken the money and run he has proved himself an inadequate and one might say criminal leader of the war effort. This assinine notion that supporting the troops neccessarily means supporting the mission or the president is all too prevelant a sound byte coming from the right these days. Rush is by no stretch of the imagination "one of the most brilliant minds in the country" he's an out and out fool. A hypocritical, self aggrandising, disinformation agent and a known liar. His overly simplistic grasp of the factors in play in Iraq and indeed the entire ME in conjunction with his belief that he has a clue what he's talking about and the size of his audience make him a very dangerous man indeed. Bush being all for goals (aka benchmarks) and a timetable in Kosovo while denouncing both for Iraq does make him out to be a hypocrite and a fool of the highest magnitude. Dissent is the highest form of patriotism and blind compliance out of fear of consequences is one of the worst forms of cowardice. Rush dismisses the former out of hand and promotes the latter. Iraq represents the lowest point in US history with the torture scandals, domestic spying scandals, the sobversion of the DOJ, billions of dollars funnelled off by corrupt corporate cronies, indiscriminate use of DU munitions and clusterbombs, suspension of habeus corpus, etc etc ad nauseum. It's clear to anyone who exist outside of the self referential media cocoon of the US that the leadership of the US do not deserve the effusive praise lavished on them by toadying lickspittles like Rush. They need to be brought to justice. They deserve neither their jobs nor their freedom. History will never judge the actions of this cabal kindly despite continual rhetoric to this effect from the principles involved. BTW, loving the handle "No to Socialism". It implies that there is actually some left left in modern American politics. That level of naiveity is charming to the spuddish one. Ta fer the LolZ.
Be Well.