 thorswitch says: Just how stupid is Trent Lott? Seriously! Apparently, there has been recent intelligence indicating that there *may* be an attack planned on DC between now and September 11th. As the former chief of the Capitol Police notes, however, *we're* the one's with the hang up on dates and anniversaries - terrorists don't focus on those nearly as much. But even going beyond that, Lott is telling people that it would be a good idea stay out of town until September 12th - as if the terrorists are going to keep their plan (if there is one) the same even though they know we're aware of the possibility? What makes him think that the terrorists won't just change their plans and attack on, say, the 13th, after everyone who followed Lott's advice and left will have returned? Yeesh! And of course, everyone caved and Bush got the bill he wanted. I wonder if Trent thinks everyone there will be safe now? Maybe Lott overheard something in the dunny and decided to share it. Maybe this will be added to the list of ponderings as to 9/11 being an inside job. You sound surprised that people like Lott are so stupid. He qualifies readily as a politician. Politicians: Rule 1. Must have failed at everything remotely resembling work. I love the way people say he /she must be ok for politics. She/he is a Lawyer. I add "failed" to lawyer because in most cases they can't exist in the real world. And the Congress gave in...so much for the Democrats. They investigate but do not impeach, the protest but they cave in. I wonder if they think they can win the next election and what would the Republicans think when the shoes on the other foot and those powers begin to be used against Women's Clinic bombers and the KKK? Ruby Ridge anyone? Tabsey - not so much surprised as just... distressed and amazed that such stupidity in someone who is chosen to help run our government is apparently considered acceptable by a large enough portion of the population that the idiots can keep getting elected. I mean, I know that's how things seem to work, but I'm not so willing to accept it that when such an extreme example of it is on display, I don't feel a need to point it out, you know? Ratilfar - oh, it'll be just like it has been with the filibuster. The Repubs spent HOW many years screaming about how unfair it was for the Dems to refuse to give Bush's judicial (and other) nominees a "straight up or down vote" on the Senate floor? Th... The essential problem here is that once those powers are given it is almost impossible to take them away, especially if they are made retroactively legal. Only the strongest leader gives up power willingly, and those are few indeed, the rest horde power believing themselves to be enlightened and righteous and almost always end up abusing it. And if they think their guns are going to keep them free, think again, the feds have tanks and fighter bombers, didn't work for the guys in Mt. Carmel, I doubt it will work for anyone else. I currently fear the terrorists that r currently in control of most of the worlds weapons of mass destruction. But lifecyce1898, aren't we - the Americans - the ones who have the most weapons of mass destruction? I mean, we've still got a lot of nukes and Bush wants to build even more - and whether they want to admit it or not, you can be pretty damned sure that our military is working with chemical and biological agents that - and should the situation call for it (though I don't even want to hazard a guess at what kind of a situation that would be) they almost certainly could be weaponized in a hurry. |
View the Top Clips from August 4, 2007
Embed This Clip In Your Site...
|
||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
New from the makers of Clipmarks: Amplify.com - Don't just share the news...Amplify it!
|
|||||||||||||
