PDA

View Full Version : Losing America: Reckless and Arrogant Presidency



imported_Steven Bauer
09-22-2004, 08:21 PM
Did anyone hear Robert Byrd today speaking to the Cambridge Forum? If you want to hear it go here. (http://forum.wgbh.org/wgbh/forum.php?lecture_id=1542) .

"As the third-longest serving Member of Congress in America's history, Senator Robert C. Byrd has an unparalleled knowledge of the inner-workings of the United States government. In his new book, Losing America: Confronting A Reckless and Arrogant Presidency, Byrd uses his lifetime of experience to sound a stunning wake-up call to the American people, the media, and his fellow legislators to halt the erosion of Constitutional principles that he sees at work in the government today.

From the White House wall of secrecy to the campaign to authorize the use of force in Iraq to the massive expansion of military budgets and the Secretary of Defense's authority, Senator Byrd offers his perspective on some of the most critical issues facing Americans today. Calling on Congress to reaffirm the checks and balances established in the Constitution by the Founding Fathers, the media to reassume the responsibilities of the Fourth Estate, and the American people to become engaged in the political process and let their voices be heard, Byrd lives up to Abraham Lincoln's challenge to "the better angels of our nature" and vividly demonstrates why his colleagues call him "the conscience of the Senate."

For many years, Byrd served as third-in-line to the Presidency of the United States. Among his legislative responsibilities, he is the top Democratic member of the Senate Appropriations Committee, the top Democratic member of that panel's Homeland Security Subcommittee, a senior member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, and co-chairman of the Senate National Security Working Group. Byrd's previous books include the four-volume history of the Senate entitled, The Senate: 1789-1989, the first volume of which won the Henry Adams Prize of the Society for History in the Federal Government as "an outstanding contribution to research in the history of the Federal Government." "

alteran
09-22-2004, 08:27 PM
"Byrd lives up to Abraham Lincoln's challenge to "the better angels of our nature" and vividly demonstrates why his colleagues call him "the conscience of the Senate."

---------------------

Are you speaking of the Robert "KKK" Byrd former leader of the Ku Kluxers?

His past, even his recent past, is not something anyone would want to be bragging about.

[ 09-22-2004, 09:34 PM: Message edited by: alteran ]

Billy Bones
09-22-2004, 08:37 PM
You must be kidding. Pandering old fart is more like it. He has been good for the people of WVA to be sure but a statesman he ain't.

LeeG
09-22-2004, 08:39 PM
yeah,,he's just a bowl of sour grapes. It took big brass balls to do what Cheney did.

Peter Malcolm Jardine
09-22-2004, 08:48 PM
I don't know who this person is, but let me get this straight. He win's awards in your country, has held significant positions of power in congress, and is well thought of by his peers.

This combination gives him zero credibility on any issue he might speak on. :confused: :confused: :confused:

LeeG
09-22-2004, 08:54 PM
the righteousness of power cannot tolerate dissent.

alteran
09-22-2004, 09:23 PM
Originally posted by Peter Malcolm Jardine:
I don't know who this person is, but let me get this straight. He win's awards in your country, has held significant positions of power in congress, and is well thought of by his peers.

This combination gives him zero credibility on any issue he might speak on. :confused: :confused: :confused: A used car salesman questioning a polititians credibility.

He he he.......

Whats next? A whore vouching for Bill Clintons marital fidelity?

Peter Malcolm Jardine
09-22-2004, 09:38 PM
Actually, I was confused about others questioning his credibility. I don't know anything about Robert Byrd.

As for work, at the moment I am doing some technical writing on the revitalization of small dowtowns.

[ 09-22-2004, 10:39 PM: Message edited by: Peter Malcolm Jardine ]

alteran
09-22-2004, 09:54 PM
Originally posted by Peter Malcolm Jardine:
Actually, I was confused about others questioning his credibility. I don't know anything about Robert Byrd.
As for work, at the moment I am doing some technical writing on the revitalization of small dowtowns.Used car salesmen are noted for backpeddling well when the veracity of their claims are challenged. You learned your craft well and should be a fine writer. Your talents will be well suited to political speachwriting and writing grant proposals where verbosity trumps veracity every time.

Good luck in your new carreer!

Peter Malcolm Jardine
09-22-2004, 10:07 PM
That would be "speechwriter" ;)

I already write very well, having done some technical writing in a number of environmental and municipal projects over the years. The work I am doing now has nothing to do with grants. It is a series of data collection exercises designed to help municipal planning departments and small business owners revitalize older commercial districts. It is, in essence, a community based project. Thanks for asking. I have only sold cars (new) for a total of about 3.5 years, so it really isn't something I have had a lot of experience doing.

[ 09-22-2004, 11:08 PM: Message edited by: Peter Malcolm Jardine ]

Jim H
09-22-2004, 10:25 PM
Byrd uses his lifetime of experience So? What's he going to do, burn a cross on the White House lawn? Lynch Colin Powell and Condi Rice? To quote him, Byrd is Wrong, Wrong, Wrong!

Billy Bones
09-22-2004, 10:28 PM
If you're referring to me, I wasn't disagreeing with what he said at all. On many days I feel similarly. But when Robert Byrd makes a speech it is always about pandering to the opposition, no matter who they are. He feeds, and feeds on, public angst. If he spoke in support of a blue sky I'd go to the window to check.

And being respected by democratic peers in the senate is, just now anyway, sort of damming with faint praise.

2

alteran
09-22-2004, 10:41 PM
Originally posted by Jim H:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Byrd uses his lifetime of experience So? What's he going to do, burn a cross on the White House lawn? Lynch Colin Powell and Condi Rice? To quote him, Byrd is Wrong, Wrong, Wrong!</font>[/QUOTE]PRETTY PRETTY PRETTY! as he said on the floor of the senate not so long ago. About some women in the gallery or his office.... ?

Don't recall who the women were but it was not appropriate for a Senator to say.

Sad.....

Nightmoves
09-23-2004, 05:29 AM
In the Byrd household the only voice of reason is Billy. (his dog) :D

Keith Wilson
09-23-2004, 08:40 AM
Gentlemen, we have a pattern here:

1. Someone criticizes the divinely ordained actions of the current administration.

2. Because these actions are divinely ordained, he who criticizes them must be on the other side.

3. Because the person in question is in league with the Devil, he or she must have all sorts of horrible personal qualitites.

4. The faithful rush gleefully to expose these faults, and to launch ad hominem attacks on the one who has the temerity to criticize the divinely ordained actions of the current administration.

:mad: :mad: FOR GOD'S SAKE, CONSIDER THAT THERE MAY BE SOME HONORABLE AND DECENT PEOPLE WHO DISAGREE WITH GEORGE W. BUSH!!! :mad: :mad:

[ 09-23-2004, 09:43 AM: Message edited by: Keith Wilson ]

km gresham
09-23-2004, 08:46 AM
Byrd held significant positions within the KKK as well as in Congress.

alteran
09-23-2004, 08:46 AM
Originally posted by Keith Wilson:
FOR GOD'S SAKE, CONSIDER THAT THERE MAY BE SOME HONORABLE AND DECENT PEOPLE WHO DISAGREE WITH GEORGE W. BUSH!!! :mad: :mad: Yes there may be Kieth, but it isn't Robert Byrd.

Alan D. Hyde
09-23-2004, 08:51 AM
Byrd is also one of the MAJOR pork hounds in Congress.

As a Senator, he likes to exercise power without responsibility.

The traditional province of the courtesan...

Alan

Keith Wilson
09-23-2004, 08:58 AM
Logical Fallacies: (http://www.datanation.com/fallacies/attack.htm)

Attacking the Person
(argumentum ad hominem)

------------------------------
Definition:
The person presenting an argument is attacked instead of the argument itself. This takes many forms. For example, the person's character, nationality or religion may be attacked. Alternatively, it may be pointed out that a person stands to gain from a favourable outcome. Or, finally, a person may be attacked by association, or by the company he keeps.

There are three major forms of Argumentum ad Hominem:

(1) ad hominem (abusive): instead of attacking an assertion, the argument attacks the person who made the assertion.

(2) ad hominem (circumstantial): instead of attacking an assertion the author points to the relationship between the person making the assertion and the person's circumstances.

(3) ad hominem (tu quoque): this form of attack on the person notes that a person does not practise what he preaches.

Examples:

(i) You may argue that God doesn't exist, but you are just following a fad. (ad hominem abusive)

(ii) We should discount what Premier Klein says about taxation because he won't be hurt by the increase. (ad hominem circumstantial)

(iii) We should disregard Share B.C.'s argument because they are being funded by the logging industry. (ad hominem circumstantial)

(iv) You say I shouldn't drink, but you haven't been sober for more than a year. (ad hominem tu quoque)

[ 09-23-2004, 09:59 AM: Message edited by: Keith Wilson ]

High C
09-23-2004, 09:10 AM
It's illogical to attack Senator Byrd's record?

LeeG
09-23-2004, 09:17 AM
Originally posted by Alan D. Hyde:
Byrd is also one of the MAJOR pork hounds in Congress.

As a Senator, he likes to exercise power without responsibility.

The traditional province of the courtesan...

Alanspeaking of exercising power without responsibility....
What happened between the Powell Doctrine and the Rumsfield/Wolfowitz doctrine?

what did Rumsfield/Wolfowitz not learn from Vietnam?

Alan D. Hyde
09-23-2004, 09:22 AM
Keith, a pretended argument from authority was made (Byrd's long service, alleged outstanding record, statesmanship, etc.).

I disputed its validity by attacking the actual authority (and ethos) of the speaker.

This is entirely proper. See Aristotle's Rhetoric.

Alan

[ 09-23-2004, 10:23 AM: Message edited by: Alan D. Hyde ]

Keith Wilson
09-23-2004, 09:25 AM
It's illogical to attack Senator Byrd's record? Not if you're running against him for the Senate. However, the truth or falsehood of what he says in his book (which none of us have read, I believe), is quite independant of his record. He may be the Devil's right-hand man, but what he says can still be true.

And part of the argument from authority is entirely valid. (You will note that I'm not defending his record.) He's been around Washington a long time, and has no doubt seen a few things.

[ 09-23-2004, 10:29 AM: Message edited by: Keith Wilson ]

NormMessinger
09-23-2004, 09:34 AM
Interesting. All of the vitriol directed at Byrd and little or none at what he said. Now that is suggestive.

[ 09-23-2004, 10:35 AM: Message edited by: NormMessinger ]

High C
09-23-2004, 10:03 AM
Originally posted by NormMessinger:
Interesting. All of the vitriol directed at Byrd and little or none at what he said. Now that is suggestive.Perhaps it says that nobody gives a damn what a scoundrel has to say.

Alan D. Hyde
09-23-2004, 10:07 AM
Norm, I've got a dog who's defecated on the lawn for sixteen years now.

That's almost unparalleled experience in his field.

BUT, I don't consider him an expert on agriculture. :D

Alan

LeeG
09-23-2004, 10:09 AM
Originally posted by High C:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by NormMessinger:
Interesting. All of the vitriol directed at Byrd and little or none at what he said. Now that is suggestive.Perhaps it says that nobody gives a damn what a scoundrel has to say.</font>[/QUOTE](1) ad hominem (abusive): instead of attacking an assertion, the argument attacks the person who made the assertion.

or

(2) ad hominem (circumstantial): instead of attacking an assertion the author points to the relationship between the person making the assertion and the person's circumstances.

[ 09-23-2004, 11:10 AM: Message edited by: LeeG ]

Keith Wilson
09-23-2004, 10:10 AM
Norm, it's more than suggestive; see the pattern above. There's been absolutely nothing but ad hominem attacks.

High C
09-23-2004, 10:13 AM
Originally posted by Keith Wilson:
Norm, it's more than suggestive; see the pattern above. There's been absolutely nothing but ad hominem attacks.Then I expect we won't hear you say anything unpleasant about the likes of Sadam Hussein, or Adolf Hitler. Just focus on their words, not who they are.

This is absurd.

Peter Malcolm Jardine
09-23-2004, 11:04 AM
Byrd held significant positions within the KKK as well as in Congress. What significant positions have you held KM Gresham?

Alan D. Hyde
09-23-2004, 11:40 AM
The part played by a "wife and mother" like Karen can turn the lives of her children for the better or for the worse more than just about any other single factor in their lives.

Nothing is more important to our society than good mothers, Peter.

Or do you disagree?

Alan

[ 09-23-2004, 12:41 PM: Message edited by: Alan D. Hyde ]

Billy Bones
09-23-2004, 11:52 AM
So what, it's okay to attack Karen for whatever reason you want, but woe-betide the person who casts a light on Byrd by virtue of his record? Grow up, folks, and stop eating our own.

Byrd has a long history of deceit and that is what is being referred to here. Interestingly, all he has to do to deftly parry the ad hominem crowd is tell them what they want to hear.

Some times this place is like a kindergarten for weasels.

Peter Malcolm Jardine
09-23-2004, 11:56 AM
Alan, It appears that Robert Byrd has held significant positions of power in your country, by way of elected office. Again, I am not familiar with him, or his record.

I think it's fair, if someone's credibility is attacked, that the person attacking him show some background which gives those attacks credibility. I am asking KM Gresham for her cirriculum vitae in this area. I am not trying to be personally insulting. If it appears that way, I apologize.

Peter Malcolm Jardine
09-23-2004, 12:03 PM
So what, it's okay to attack Karen for whatever reason you want, but woe-betide the person who casts a light on Byrd by virtue of his record? Grow up, folks, and stop eating our own.

If you could point out any insulting or personal attacks on this thread that I have posted, I would be happy to apologize.

Billy Bones
09-23-2004, 12:13 PM
Originally posted by Peter Malcolm Jardine:
[QUOTE]What significant positions have you held KM Gresham?If I may presume to answer for Karen, how about US Citizen, for a start. And you?

km gresham
09-23-2004, 12:16 PM
I'm happy to say I have not held nor have I sought any significant positions outside wife and mother, and I imagine the significance of those positions is subjective. smile.gif

[ 09-23-2004, 01:17 PM: Message edited by: km gresham ]

Peter Malcolm Jardine
09-23-2004, 12:20 PM
Hmm... let's see

Canadian Citizen
Father
Writer
City Councillor
Conservation Authority Chair
United Way Chair/Boardmember
Economic development Corporation board member
Environmentalist/writer at Federal Level
Retail manager
Salesman
mechanic
carpenter
Social Planning Council member

And last but not least... WOODEN BOAT OWNER :D

It's not much, but it's who I am smile.gif

[ 09-23-2004, 01:25 PM: Message edited by: Peter Malcolm Jardine ]

Peter Malcolm Jardine
09-23-2004, 12:23 PM
Ok, then what's the background for your attack on Allawi's credibility? You think that Kerry knows the situation in Iraq better than Allawi and Bush, and that they're simply posturing for the election...background? There are a number of credible news sources throughout the world that would refute both the President and Mr Allawi's perspective on the Iraq war. I did not attack Mr Allawi's words, in fact I mentioned that they were good words. Let me say now that they were hopeful words as well.

Billy Bones
09-23-2004, 12:37 PM
Magnificent credentials, sir! I'd be proud to call you my neighbor.

But there's nothing there to justify your support of Byrd, to the standard that you suggest we need 'authority' to decry him based on his record.

Because he brings Huge amounts of pork to West Virginia, his home state, he gets consistently re-elected by his constituents. But his actions in the national arena are pretty flimsy. He speaks often, in very amateur theatrical style, on whatever subject will get him noticed...as I said above he likes to tell folks what they want to hear. Dutch or someone was making fun of Zell Miller's accent the other day, and with that topic still in mind I gotta admit that listening to Byrd's voice makes me think of a good ol' fashioned lynching.

If you want proof, find it yourself. Spending 25 years in the Washington DC area in a gov't service oriented family, (when we weren't in Geneva while dad negotiated arms control treaties) I'm comfortable with my conclusion. You can believe me, or you can try some research to prove me wrong, which you might find enlightening. Who knows, maybe I would too.

Peter Malcolm Jardine
09-23-2004, 12:46 PM
As usual Donn, there are no sources more credible and right than yours. I have desire to argue about the credibility of the world's largest news reporting agencies. If they have no credibility with you, that's fine.

KM Gresham consistently name calls and degrades the positions of people whose view she does not share. To my knowledge, she has never actively participated in government affairs (other than to vote of course) never held an elected position, or even volunteered in any significant role. This apparently gives her the right to name call and jeer at people who give a lot of their time to government. I find that childish, and impolite.

I have refrained, and will continue to refrain from name calling or personally insulting people on this forum. While I have engaged in similiar behaviour to those people who do, which includes you on more than one occasion, I have apologized for that, and do not wish to return to what I find childish and reprehensible behaviour. Do what you will, say what you will. I will neither stand by and observe it without commenting, or participate in what sometimes is nothing more than childish tranrums and rhetoric.

Keith Wilson
09-23-2004, 12:51 PM
Hoooooo boy, I go away for a little while, and look what happens!

I will in no way defend Robert Byrd, paricularly since High C thinks he resembles Saddam Hussein and Adoph Hitler, who I also will not defend (and if that ain't an ad hominem attack, I'm a buzzard). However, he has been in Washington a long time, has seen quite a few presidents come and go, and might possibly have something intresting to say, although I haven't read the book. Books by knowledgeable scoundrels (if he is one) are sometimes at least as interesting and informative as those by honorable men, and their opinions may very well have more validity than the opinions of the ignorant and virtuous.

The pattern I described above still holds true 100%. A kindergaren for weasels indeed! :rolleyes:

And the fact that neither Karen nor I have been a senator for many years in no way changes the truth or falsehood of what we say here. She's still usually wrong. ;)

[ 09-23-2004, 01:54 PM: Message edited by: Keith Wilson ]

Peter Malcolm Jardine
09-23-2004, 12:56 PM
That was my opinion, but to my knowledge, I did not name call.

Billy Bones
09-23-2004, 01:20 PM
If I'd read that sort of thing by Karen or anyone else I wouldn't defend them. Guess I missed that. I'm pretty selective about my Miscnonboat.

But you have to be careful, too, about what you see in the news.

For example, journalism should be separate from editorial, and yet it no longer is, EVER. For example, do you notice that reporters never interview experts anymore? They always exclusively interview other reporters. And how many people do we know who go into journalism without an axe to grind? None here.

To get back at Bush for his dismissal of the press, some wag started calling the Iraq war, 'the occupation of Iraq' instead of the liberation of it. Al Jazeera has been all over that, and because of a petty gripe the whole purpose of the liberation of that country has been skewed, even screwed, by the petty feifdom called the fourth estate.

Humph.

LeeG
09-23-2004, 01:43 PM
speaking of great big hunks of pork,,anyone follow the expense/performance of the $12Billion ABM system being installed right now?
Should be able to take out a shipping crate of utility knives,,,if they're in the right size/color of container,,sent with an invitation announcing time of delivery.

High C
09-23-2004, 02:17 PM
Originally posted by Keith Wilson:
...High C thinks he resembles Saddam Hussein and Adoph Hitler...Nuhh, uhh, uhh, I said no such thing. I think you've stepped into a trap of your own making.

I'm simply pointing out that the standard you suggest, that ones background is not relevant when considering how seriously to take someone in the present, is not a realistic standard.

Is there no one you can think of whose past record is so stained that you find yourself distrustful of, or disinterested in, his current proclamations?

If I'm lied to, over and over, by a neighbor who denies that his dog has repeatedly crapped in my yard, I just might come to distrust anything the man has to say. I'll likely not offer him the benefit of the doubt, and a clean slate in the future.

Something about Charlie Brown and a football comes to mind. ;)

[ 09-23-2004, 03:25 PM: Message edited by: High C ]

True Love
09-23-2004, 04:37 PM
FOR GOD'S SAKE, CONSIDER THAT THERE MAY BE SOME HONORABLE AND DECENT PEOPLE WHO DISAGREE WITH GEORGE W. BUSH!!!

There may be, but none of them are on this forum. You lefties constantly have your knickers in a twist, and the way your cadaverous candidate is going, I can see why. Cheers!

Dave Williams
09-24-2004, 07:24 PM
HiC said.

" Is there no one you can think of whose past record is so stained that you find yourself distrustful of, or disinterested in, his current proclamations".

Well yes there is and w is right at the top of that list!

Ian McColgin
09-27-2004, 08:31 AM
Politics have have come to a sorry pass indeed when the True Love claims that there are no decent and honorable people on this forum who disagree with President Bush.

Pity.

rbgarr
09-27-2004, 08:42 AM
Pity, indeed, Ian. I was interested in Truelove's contributions to the forum until that comment. My respect for her has evaporated now, not that that would matter to her I suppose.

'Cheers' she says, as though such an insult is something one just tosses off.

[ 09-27-2004, 09:43 AM: Message edited by: rbgarr ]