Thread: Wyman is a Fraud

Note by NIK: This post appears to have been taken from J.B. Williams' Website. You can find the rest of the post here. Having looked at his site, I'd encourage folks to visit. Williams seems to have quite a lot of interesting and thought-provoking commentary.

Posters, please refrain from posting copyrighted material unless you -- at least -- also credit the source.

Political pundits, AKA armchair quarterbacks, hindsight visionaries, political junkies, would be know-it-alls, people like me, who get a rush out of pointing out how screwed up our country is in the hands of politicians from every political party. Is there a purpose to it all, or did it just replace baseball as our new national pastime?

Most of us frustration-addicted political writers like to think that there is a purpose to what we do. We like to think we can somehow spark change by speaking past the politicians and their minions in the propaganda machine known as the press corp. We hope to move average people just like us into action through repeated attempts to flood the hearts and minds of a beleaguered voting population with anti-venom, intended to offset the poison mainlined into our minds daily by the press who can no longer be trusted even as much as the average politician, who can’t be trusted at all.

But does it work?

More.....

Several more posts deleted.

Folks, it's right in our terms of service that this forum will not allow attacking other posters.

As to our other, more responsible members... please don't feed the trolls.

Thanks,

NIK

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Note by NIK: This post appears to have been taken from J.B. Williams' Website. You can find the rest of the post here. Having looked at his site, I'd encourage folks to visit. Williams seems to have quite a lot of interesting and thought-provoking commentary.

Posters, please refrain from posting copyrighted material unless you -- at least -- also credit the source.




More.....

So, this is some kind of indictment of what I do, or supporting my action... I can't really tell.

Originally Posted by LookOutKokomo

My posting here didnt occur until late into Bush's second term, but I can assure you that I did in fact criticize his spending, particularly in terms of the bailouts at the end and in the prescription drug benefit. He also allowed a ton of pork to go through... I always assumed that Bush was giving away the farm on spending and domestic issues in order to prosecute the war.

As for the war, I am still a supporter. I think it is a strategic move that will pay dividends in the not so long term... allow me to explain:

Bush went to Iraq with a list of 15 or so reasons that he explained. When asked what was the worst thing that could happen as a result of disregarding the situation, he obviously said WMD. The media ran with that.

At that time, Hussein couldn't account for all the WMD he had previously declared in his inventory. Knowing that fact, anyone would agree that one of the following was true:

1. SH had either shared his weapons with other nations or terror groups
2. He had used them on his own people
3. They had been stolen because he couldn't protect them
4. He had lost them
5. He never had them, but was using an empty threat of WMD on his neighbors.

In any of these cases, I agree with Bush that it is in America's best interest to remove that regime.

But aside from the WMD thing, there were plenty of other reasons to remove him... such as his claims to have spend 30 million making payments to families of terrorists etc...

Now... to the real reason why I still support the war. It has placed us exactly where we need to be... troops on both sides of Iran while they threaten the world with nuclear proliferation. It is a strategic placement of troops. Nothing less. As a matter of fact, I'd imagine that it was the prime motivator for the Bush administration, even though they couldn't market it as such.


you seem to peg me as a GOP lackey... That, I am not. I am indeed looking issue by issue at the proposals coming down the pipe. It just happens that a bunch of socialists control the pipe right now, and they are proposing socialist ideas. I think they will hurt our country, so I've written against them.

I'll continue to do so.

Perhaps one day I'll find the time to write a hit piece on GWB, perhaps that will satisfy you... right now though, there are bigger things popping that will ultimately challenge my freedom.

So while we went after WMD's to surround Iran who is developing nukes, we let North Korea develop a nuke. Who dropped the ball on that one?

Originally Posted by Unregistered

So while we went after WMD's to surround Iran who is developing nukes, we let North Korea develop a nuke. Who dropped the ball on that one?

You are oversimplifying the situation.

With N.Korea, Clinton and company allowed nuclear proliferation in exchange for assurances that the technology would only be used for energy.

Of course, you and I know... never trust a commie.

So that mess was in play, plus we had to tippy-toe around the Chinese, who are the major player in North Korea's geographical area. World politics basically dictated that we handle that situation differently than we did in Iran.

Bush never made the mistake in trusting the North Koreans to keep their promise of peaceful usage of nuclear technology. Clinton holds that bag. Here's the news coverage of it.

However, Obama seems perfectly happy to repeat Clinton's mistake in his current handling of Iran's nuclear ambitions.

Originally Posted by LookOutKokomo

You are oversimplifying the situation.

With N.Korea, Clinton and company allowed nuclear proliferation in exchange for assurances that the technology would only be used for energy.

Of course, you and I know... never trust a commie.

So that mess was in play, plus we had to tippy-toe around the Chinese, who are the major player in North Korea's geographical area. World politics basically dictated that we handle that situation differently than we did in Iran.

Bush never made the mistake in trusting the North Koreans to keep their promise of peaceful usage of nuclear technology. Clinton holds that bag. Here's the news coverage of it.

However, Obama seems perfectly happy to repeat Clinton's mistake in his current handling of Iran's nuclear ambitions.

But it happened on Bush's watch. When the history books are written, that is what it will say.

Look at this financial mess it is in. It is not entirely Bush's fault since it was in the works from years past, but it happened on his watch so he takes the blame. That is the risk of being President, you take the fall no matter whose policies started it.

Originally Posted by LookOutKokomo

You are oversimplifying the situation.

With N.Korea, Clinton and company allowed nuclear proliferation in exchange for assurances that the technology would only be used for energy.

Of course, you and I know... never trust a commie.

So that mess was in play, plus we had to tippy-toe around the Chinese, who are the major player in North Korea's geographical area. World politics basically dictated that we handle that situation differently than we did in Iran.

Bush never made the mistake in trusting the North Koreans to keep their promise of peaceful usage of nuclear technology. Clinton holds that bag. Here's the news coverage of it.

However, Obama seems perfectly happy to repeat Clinton's mistake in his current handling of Iran's nuclear ambitions.

Oversimplifying? The simpliest answer is usually the most correct.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Oversimplifying? The simpliest answer is usually the most correct.

Or at least the easiest for you to understand. I'll slow down for you.

Originally Posted by LookOutKokomo

Or at least the easiest for you to understand. I'll slow down for you.

maybe i should watch hannity so he can tell me the truth