Memo to Straights: You're Next

["Sixhits"]

Anyone here know who Andrew Sullivan is?

Dude's a gay man and one time Bush appologist. Indeed, he was one of the most amazingly pro-Bushie Bushites.

And with the whole Hate Amendment thing he's been feeling really betrayed.

Us Straights laugh, do we? I did. "Oh, foolish gay man, you voted for who?"

Well, he's posted a letter from a lawyer buddy of his. Here's a key gaff:

>>>
By including a provision regulating the most intimate of relationships into the Constitution, the traditional analysis that the (Supreme) court has used to limit government power will be fundamentally changed and the right to privacy, if it is not destroyed completely, will be severely curtailed. As a result, decisions like Roe v. Wade, (Abortion), Griswold v. Connecticut (Birth Control), Lawrence v. Texas (Private Sexual Acts), will all be fair game for re-analysis under this new jurisprudential regime as the Constitutional foundation for those decisions will have been altered. A brilliant strategy really, with one amendment the religious right could wipe out access to birth control, abortion, and even non-procreative sex.
<<<

http://www.andrewsullivan.com/index.php?dish_inc=archives/2004_02_22_dish_archive.html#107783629136536853

Of course this is a far-fetched point of view.

But then again, most American's really believed Saddam had WMDs.


[There is a url tag that you can use for links. Bring this post up for editing and you will see how I did it. Ace]

["Sixhits"]

I'm in an Andrew Sullivan mood today. And considering all the trouble I got about my multipostings...

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1101040308-596140,00.html

(btw, Ace, how do I add web-link tags?)

This is an article on the Bush/Churchill comparisions and how it may be more apt than one thinks.

Key gaff:

>>>
(Churhill) lost the postwar election. Even more striking, he lost it in one of the biggest landslides in Britain's parliamentary history. He wasn't just defeated. He was buried.

I wonder if the lesson of Churchill now haunts the office of Bush political strategist Karl Rove. For something not completely dissimilar seems to be happening to George W. Bush. Since just after the capture of Saddam, Bush's ratings have been slumping. And this is less surprising than it appears. The paradox of the war against terrorism is that the more the President succeeds, the more politically vulnerable he gets. The fewer the terrorist incidents, the more remote the fear, the less necessary the war seems and the more dispensable the war President appears. If he responds to this by insisting that the enemy is still powerful and dangerous, he runs the risk of seeming to concede that he hasn't managed to curtail the threat. Or, worse perhaps, it seems as if he's whipping up fear and panic for his own electoral advantage. And after the failures of intelligence with respect to weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, Bush's credibility on unknown threats is already eroded.
<<<

I had fun reading this.

[Cutter]

But then again, most American's really believed Saddam had WMDs.

no they didn't believe he had them, they knew he had them. so did the kurds, the iranians, the U.N., the U.N. security council, so did bill clinton, al gore, john kerry, the french, the british, the australians, the israelis, etc.

the question was never did he have them. the question was what was he going to do with them, and what should be done about it. to say there never was any WMD is seriously stupid. we know he had them because we have the reciept and the kurds and the iranians bear the horrible proof.

[BTs_Mysterio]

But then again, most American's really believed Saddam had WMDs.

no they didn't believe he had them, they knew he had them. so did the kurds, the iranians, the U.N., the U.N. security council, so did bill clinton, al gore, john kerry, the french, the british, the australians, the israelis, etc.

the question was never did he have them. the question was what was he going to do with them, and what should be done about it. to say there never was any WMD is seriously stupid. we know he had them because we have the reciept and the kurds and the iranians bear the horrible proof.

No he didn't have WMD during this Bush's era. You need to open your eyes cutt, there's more to the world than what politicians tell you.

[Cutter]

myst, do you admit that he DID have them? and if so how do YOU know when he either destroyed them or moved them? and how do you have this information? and why are you holding it till election time?

YOU need to open your eyes myst, he DID have them. nobody knows at this point exactly what happened to them, but there is no doubt that he did posses them and tried his hardest to hide them from the inspectors for years. the democrats and republicans all agreed on that point before the war, the only arguement was...is it worth going into war for, or do we continue the sanctions, no fly zones and the random strikes that seemed to do nothing.

["Sixhits"]

But then again, most American's really believed Saddam had WMDs.

no they didn't believe he had them, they knew he had them.

Wrong.

>>>
UNITED NATIONS ? A report from U.N. weapons inspectors to be released today says they now believe there were no weapons of mass destruction of any significance in Iraq after 1994, according to two U.N. diplomats who have seen the document.

The historical review of inspections in Iraq is the first outside study to confirm the recent conclusion by David Kay, the former U.S. chief inspector, that Iraq had no banned weapons before last year's U.S-led invasion. It also goes further than prewar U.N. reports, which said no weapons had been found but noted that Iraq had not fully accounted for weapons it was known to have had at the end of the Gulf War in 1991.
<<<

http://usatoday.printthis.clickability.com/pt/cpt?action=cpt&title=USATODAY.com+-+U.N.%3A+Iraq+had+no+WMD+after+1994&expire=&urlID=9464809&fb=Y&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.usatoday.com%2Fnews%2Fworld%2Firaq%2F2004-03-02-un-wmd_x.htm&partnerID=1660

["Sixhits"]

but there is no doubt that he did posses them and tried his hardest to hide them from the inspectors for years.

Passed tense. Did. Like back in '91.

This whole issue reminds me of fundamentalist biblical teaching. That you're a sinner if you even think about fucking your neighbor's wife. So, under those sort of stringent interpretations Saddam wanting a nuke was as bad as nuking NYC. Please.

There are differences between a dream, an idea, a plan, and a bomb.

[Cutter]

Kay reported in October that his team found "dozens of WMD-related program activities" that Iraq was required to reveal to U.N. inspectors but did not. However, he said he found no actual WMDs.

....so your a known drug dealer, been busted before. the cops bust down your door on a tip, find a meth lab, scales, empty baggies, all the tools necessary for the job. but can't seem to find the meth itself. mb you dumped it down the toilet, gave it to a friend to hold till things look clear, or buried in the backyard right before the cops busted down the door because you knew they were coming. you may make think you outsmarted the cops, but eventually they'll find the shit.

the backyard in this case is a country that one man had complete control over for 30 years. and the tip he had was 150,000 american and british soldiers building up for months on his borders. and the investigation and search has only been going on for less than a year.

["Sixhits"]

It's really comparing apples to oranges. But I aplaud the attempt.

Saddam was know for having used chemical weapons in the early eighties.

Saddam's nuclear reactor was blown up by the Isreali's in the eighties.

He had chemical and bio weps, but did not use them, during the 1st Gulf War.

His stocks were eleminated by the mid 90's. The last of his production abilities were destroyed in one of Clinton's Monica bombing runs (tho, I think it's unfair of me to characterize it as such).

At that point WMDs were a glimmer in Saddam's eye.

Bush, knowing full well their were no WMDs in Iraq, "kicked the door down".

He was not "tipped off" - There was never evidence, as we can see as more and more truth leaks out of the sinking ship of illogic that is Bush's grounds for war. He was, in fact, going against the opinion of the world organization who's declaration he was professing to uphold. The head of the CIA has stated that there never was an imminent threat.

Dozens of WMD related programs? Huh? Show me. What Kay refers to are hand drawn skematics, expected updates to missiles, and a lot of desire. As we say in Hollywood, all sizzle no steak.

No tip, no evidence, no "meth lab, scales, and empty baggies". The last series of Clinton's air raids pretty much cleared that shit out.

Saddam has been America's politician's go-to man for awhile now. He's naughty. He's harry and scary. But he was all hot air. So too is our president.


Once again read that USA article.


The golden bullet that puts this one to rest is that Iraq had no WMDs. Period. There is no more debate. There is no denying it. That's why the administration's rhetoric has been scaled back, that's why Bush stresses that he once said Saddam was a grave and gathering threat, that's why Chalabi is offering to take the fall on the no WMD issue, that's why ... ah but what's the point going on?

[BFG]

Funny u mention israel sixhits.... People don't mention the fact that israel has a massive secret WMD programme, that they have an immense stockpile of WMD's etc...

[Cutter]

on the subject of israel i heard a great quote once that i found coudn't be more true.  "if the palestinians lay down their arms there would be peace. if the israelis lay down their arms there would be no more israel."

[cO.gabe]

on the subject of israel i heard a great quote once that i found coudn't be more true.  "if the palestinians lay down their arms there would be peace. if the israelis lay down their arms there would be no more israel."

And its so true cutter.  Don't even get me started on the subject of Israel.

["Sixhits"]

I didn't know where to put this so I put this here. Andrew Sullivan would enjoy iy for sure.

http://goodforthejews.com/kerryshlong.htm

It's funny and non-political...

[Cutter]

haha i bet that would come in handy during international negotiations.

["Sixhits"]

Yah. Kerry whips out his uncut penis and the Arabs cry havoc!