1. Attachments are working again! Check out this thread for more details and to report any other bugs.

More radical politicalization from the bushies

Discussion in 'Fred's House of Pancakes' started by EricGo, Jun 23, 2007.

  1. EricGo

    EricGo New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2005
    1,805
    0
    0
    Location:
    Albuquerque, NM (SouthWest US)
    Reported by Time Magazine:

    The Inter-American Telecommunication Commission meets three times a year in various cities across the Americas to discuss such dry but important issues as telecommunications standards and spectrum regulations. But for this week's meeting in Guatemala City, politics has barged onto the agenda. At least four of the two dozen or so U.S. delegates selected for the meeting, sources tell TIME, have been bumped by the White House because they supported John Kerry's 2004 campaign.

    -----

    An informative discussion on the topic from Slashdot.
    IMO, this is just strong arming corporations to not support the Democratic party, and industry expertise be damned. From the party that purportedly supports american industry.
     
  2. Godiva

    Godiva AmeriKan Citizen

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2005
    10,339
    14
    0
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    Vehicle:
    2005 Prius
    "Only after the start of Bush's second term did a political litmus test emerge, industry sources say."

    Now tell us again how politics had nothing to do with those Attorney's General getting fired in the middle of their terms.

    "One nixed participant, who has been to many of these telecom meetings and who wants to remain anonymous, gave just $250 to the Democratic Party. Says Nokia vice president Bill Plummer: "We do not view sending experts to international meetings on telecom issues to be a partisan matter. We would welcome clarification from the White House.""

    Good luck on that one.
     
  3. rudiger

    rudiger Active Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2006
    696
    45
    0
    Location:
    Cincinnati, OH
    Vehicle:
    2013 Prius
    Model:
    Two
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Godiva @ Jun 23 2007, 10:38 PM) [snapback]467089[/snapback]</div>
    If they respond at all, it will most likely be a 'non-clarification clarification' (to paraphrase a Watergate-era term).
     
  4. daronspicher

    daronspicher Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2005
    1,208
    0
    0
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Godiva @ Jun 23 2007, 09:38 PM) [snapback]467089[/snapback]</div>
    If Billary or Hussein gets elected in 2008, do you expect the AG's to all be kept on staff?

    I still don't get what's the scandal here. These guys don't adequately support the presidents AG agenda so they get fired. boooo hoooo...
     
  5. EricGo

    EricGo New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2005
    1,805
    0
    0
    Location:
    Albuquerque, NM (SouthWest US)
    Let me help you understand.

    The president's AG agenda is to use those offices as an arm of political gain and GOP enforcement, not for justice which is why they exist.
     
  6. daronspicher

    daronspicher Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2005
    1,208
    0
    0
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(EricGo @ Jun 25 2007, 10:02 AM) [snapback]467574[/snapback]</div>
    Is this new to the current administration? No...

    The administration and AG are supposed to spend their time enforcing the laws. As it turns out, we have more idiots in this country than we have idiot patrols, so someone needs to decide which idiots we want to reign in first.

    Apparently in the Clinton era, the corruption in corporate America was not important and left to rampant illegal accounting and inflated fake prosperity that was cut down by the enforcement agenda of the current administration. Once companies had to actually obey the law and report actual earnings, it took us a while to get through that correction period in the economy. That's just one example of how nonfocus or focus of the AG office and officers can make a difference.

    Once we elect Billary or Hussein, we can focus the AG on prosecuting people who oppose abortion or something very useful that the current administration is not focused on.

    Thanks for helping me understand.
     
  7. EricGo

    EricGo New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2005
    1,805
    0
    0
    Location:
    Albuquerque, NM (SouthWest US)
    Ah yes, the ever predictable high pitched whine of the republican apologist "But they do it too !!!

    So let me ask you: why do you let your party turn into the democratic party you despise ?
    Are these your ethics, christian guy ? If you have an ethical standard that requires honesty and justice, why will you not fight for them ?
    The republicans came to power promising less corruption in government. How are they doing ?

    As for your straw man arguments and historical rewritings:
    The bushie agenda is not choosing one bad guy over another to pursue; it is subverting the AG's job from prosecution of criminals, to GOP thug. If you cannot see the difference between a police force that protects, from one that runs a protections racket, you are one sick puppie.

    Enron is all bushie. Check out who wrote energy policy for this administration, and had bushie's ear in the form of being one his inner group of advisors.
    Find me examples of Federal Democratic administrations that en-masse dumped AG's due to 'wrong' political witch hunting.

    Find me examples of this latest transgression of bushie politicalization form Democratic eras.

    You are blowing hypocritical smoke, laced with lies and fancy.
     
  8. Godiva

    Godiva AmeriKan Citizen

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2005
    10,339
    14
    0
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    Vehicle:
    2005 Prius
    What gets me is the namecalling. I guess I must have missed where on this board the Democrats are making up derogatory nicknames for the Republican candidates. I guess it's because the Democrats are judging the Republican candidates based on their platforms and job performance and the Republicans are basing their judgement on how derogatory a name they can create and how often it gets used. Of course, I haven't read any Democrats referring to Republicans in an equivalent manner as the Republicans do when they use "Demoncrat".

    That and the juvenile "Everybody does it" defense. When was the last time anyone over the age of 12 used this?

    I guess I have a new parameter for my ignore list.

    The problem with Fascists is they don't recognize themselves as such. That's because in a Fascist society you can only see it from the bottom. The priviledged top of the heap don't see it because they have democracy. It's the rest of us that live in a Fascist state.

    1. Powerful and continuing expressions of nationalism.
    2. Disdain for the importance of human rights.
    3. Identification of enemies/scapegoats as a unifying cause.
    4. The supremacy of the military/avid militarism.
    5. Rampant sexism.
    6. A controlled mass media.
    7. Obsession with national security.
    8. Religion and ruling elite tied together.
    9. Power of corporations protected.
    10. Power of labor suppressed or eliminated.
    11. Disdain and suppression of intellectuals and the arts.
    12. Obsession with crime and punishment.
    13. Rampant cronyism and corruption.
    14. Fraudulent elections.

    ***********************
    1. Instability of capitalist relationships or markets

    2. The existence of considerable declassed social elements

    3. The stripping of rights and wealth focused upon a specific segment of the population, specifically the middle class and intellectuals within urban areas as this is the group with the means, intelligence and ability to stop fascism if given the opportunity.

    4. Discontent among the rural lower middle class (clerks, secretaries, white collar labor). Consistent discontent among the general middle and lower middle classes against the oppressing upper-classes (haves vs have-nots).

    5. Hate: Pronounced, perpetuated and accepted public disdain of a specific group defined by race, origin, theology or association. (How often have you heard the words "Homo", "Gay" or "Liberal" used in such a manner?)

    6. Greed: The motivator of fascism, which is generally associated with land, space or scarce resources in the possession of those being oppressed.

    7. Organized Propaganda:

    a. The creation of social mythology that venerates (creates saints of) one element of society while concurrently vilifying (dehumanizing) another element of the population through misinformation, misdirection and the obscuring of factual matter through removal, destruction or social humiliation, (name-calling, false accusations, belittling and threats).
    Homosexuals
    Liberals

    b. The squelching of public debate not agreeing with the popular agenda via slander, libel, threats, theft, destruction, historical revisionism and social humiliation. Journalists in particular are terrorized if they attempt to publish stories contrary to the agenda.