bush's Army

[BOSSHOG]

Thanks to a failed foreign policy and the lack of patriotism amongst christian conservatives who cheer for a war and yet don't have the spine to sign up and fight for it, the Army has had to make a few changes to keep their numbers up.

They are now retaining Soldiers with drinking or drug problems, those who are overweight, or those who are performing unsatisfactorily. Field Commanders are just thrilled by this new policy, read all about it. http://slate.msn.com/id/2120146/nav/ais/

You can thank george w. bush for this lunacy, although as you well know, he will claim it is all someone else's fault; let's say President Clinton. In that vein, I will post soon about Clinton's military.

[wakeme2008]

1. But if you are Gay .... they toss you

Mmmmmm.... maybe a could more months of missing quotas will change this.

[Asgaya Dihi]

2. Partisan morals

You're right about the army, but I don't know that it'll translate into anything for the Democrats. I had come to this site hoping to find something I could find hope in and support, and I sit here now more disappointed than ever. I'll try to explain why.

I used to consider myself a Republican, decided that back in the late 70's or early 80's. The type of Conservative I was said things like "I may not agree with what you say, but I'd fight to the death to defend your right to say it". We knew the First Amendment was the first for a reason, even above the second. It was a statement. When that changed I stopped caring about titles much and just voted on the merits.

These days it seems we have to take sides though, and I can't find a thing to respect about either. The problem is that both sit and call each other names, both are sure they are right and pure and the other abusive, and neither seems willing to actually ASK what people on the other side stands for rather than to tell them.

We all know about the problems the Republicans have these days, but let me explain something that may not have occurred to you. As a former conservative myself I'd normally have a little room to shift their views, but you guys made that hard. Now I not only have to prove that Bush DID lie about something, but if you ever do convince a partisan that he did they then get to tell us "So what, Clinton did too".

A blowjob didn't matter, a lie in itself was just a lie maybe, but he stood up in front of the nation and committed perjury. Under oath. When he got away with that the recent precedent was set, a lie was no longer just a lie but was more a matter of opinion and degree. You allowed your morals to become debatable rather than firm, and thus forfeited them. A case of felony perjury does matter, it doesn't matter if it's a matter of national security or a discussion on the local dog catcher. It's a felony.

Just because a consequence is unintended, that doesn't make it any less real. You armed the enemy.

But when we get down to it, the main thing that bothers me is the drug war. Too much to go into right here unless you want, but I did make two posts detailing some issues in the thread "What are our winning issues in 2006 again?" http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=1824875&mesg_id=1824875 which can detail what I see as the major failings of both parties. There's a massive abuse taking place right now that both parties are aware of, and neither cares about. It's just the poor and drug users, who really cares about them? Prison, death, it's all the same. Even to the Democrats. Show real concern for human rights and honesty instead of putting on a show, and then you might get somewhere.

[Asgaya Dihi]

3. :(

Now this is why I believe that no matter how horrible and corrupt the Republicans are, the Democrats will never defeat them. The party, and its supporters, need to take a real hard look at themselves.

The single most imprisoned nation on the face of the earth, bar none. With a higher crime rate and a higher drug use rate than any comparable nation in terms of economics and living standards. With drug use all but unchanged through the war on drugs, a total policy so abject in its failure that we can't even keep the stuff out of our own prisons, let alone off the streets.

We've declared war on our own people and ignored the facts for decades on end, both parties. Clinton handed us three consecutive years of record marijuana arrests and expanded police powers, remember?

Nobody can even say the facts are wrong, because the facts referred to in the post I linked above are drawn from the US Governments OWN records.

The Democratic party will fail for the very simple reason that it seems incapable of self criticism or improvement. A thread that discusses the problems with the Republicans and offers the chance to attack will be topped and commented on again and again, but a real human abuse of our own people for no reason that anyone can justify which both parties are a part of draws no response at all. If all you can do is to take down the other side rather than to fix or even discuss problems in your own party, you're doing exactly what they do. It's not about right and wrong, it's about the lack of courage to face a 30 second tough on crime commercial. Arguments of simple convenience rather than of substance.

Do you really stand for anything or not?

[Toots]

4. It is a matter of Credibility

"A blowjob didn't matter, a lie in itself was just a lie maybe, but he stood up in front of the nation and committed perjury. Under oath."
Your statement is just not true. He did not stand up in front of the nation "under oath" and commit perjury. If you want to come here and tell us how bad we are at least use facts instead of right-wing talking points that have no basis in fact. Clinton was never accused of Perjury. Not a single charge against him was perjury. When he went on TV "in front of the nation" he was not under oath but he did lie. He admitted as much and he also admitted to being evasive with the Grand Jury for which he lost his license to practice law for five years. But being evasive and out and out lying are to seperate things. Under oath he was evasive and on TV he lied (kind of). According to the IC oral sex was not considered to be actual sex. So by the legal definition given to him by the Independent Council he did not lie. He did not have sexual relations with that woman Ms. Lewinski. As long as every one skirts the truth ,and it happens on both sides, no one will listen to the other side.

[Asgaya Dihi]

5. Finally

Some kind of a response is better than none I guess.

Come here and tell you how bad you are? How and when? Try being a little less defensive and actually LOOK at what's being said, ok? I came here looking for hope, and found none. If you don't care why, then how do you ever plan to build a party?

Now I won't debate if it was "perjury" or not, as President he wouldn't be charged as if it was a civil crime anyway. The point wasn't the qualification of the lie itself, it was the fact that it provided your enemy with all the excuse they needed to just ignore any accusation of a lie of their side. You armed the enemy, intentionally or not. If we'd just had the honesty to say he shouldn't have done that instead of defending it we might have had an easier time dealing with them now, it wouldn't be as convenient to just ignore us.

Now past that, I never came here to discuss any of that at all, it wasn't till I got frustrated with the lack of response to the drug war issue that the rest even came up. I want to SOLVE problems, and can't for the life of me figure out why the people who claim they'd care about the poor, the minorities, and abuse by the system can't be bothered to even discuss how we managed to make ourselves in terms of our own people the most imprisoned nation on the face of the earth, going from average to horrendous in just a few decades of this drug war.

And nobody even wants to look. How can you wonder how someone could be frustrated with that? Look at the posts I linked, take the time to fact check and think about them, then tell me how and why the heck do we ignore this one?

[Toots]

6. Who do you know on the left that defended Clinton's actions?

I know of no one. I don't defend Clinton's actions I just don't believe they were impeachable and in fact should never have been brought up in the first place. Why do you say we opened the door to allowing them to lie without recourse? Clinton Lied. We all know it yet some recognize the circumstances behind the lie and for that reason a pass can be given. Clinton can not be defended for his lies but not all lies are equal. Lying about sex does not reach the same magnatude that lying about matters of life and death do. That is the number one difference between Liberals and Conservatives. Liberals believe there are shades of grey and Conservatives have absolutes. either Black or white no in between. If you insist on absolutes then you will find no hope here I'm afraid.

[Asgaya Dihi]

7. Credibility

BTW, since you brought up the idea of credibility, here's a thought.

http://slate.msn.com/id/1002007/

Seems it's not that clear cut, the article lays out both sides in a decent manner.

And how in the world do you take a statement that you provided them with an excuse and read it as you justified them? Justified? When did I EVER even imply that they even might be right?

I said you provided them with the excuse to say "so what?" That's pretty obvious. Stop trying to turn it into something it's not, and try reading the actual concerns.

[Asgaya Dihi]

8. Well?

Come on, you accused me of a lack of credibility, made the statements that he wasn't even under oath and was never accused of perjury. Well, I posted an article that titled "What Is Clinton's Perjury Defense?" that shows he was not only under oath but that perjury was the major issue, laid out both the accusations and defenses. I always look at both sides. Credibility?

About time to look at what I said before too maybe. I fact checked it too. I don't care if we agree or not in the end about what to do with the problem, but it's very real, and most aren't even aware of it.