Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins
Forum Rules and Guidelines

Former GWB Press Sec. Scott McClellan Book: Admin. Controversies (merged x 3--M.E.T.)

JimmyConway

By JimmyConway
in The Tailgate

Recommended Posts

Larry

Larry

Posted
Posted
I recently saw something somewhere that said that 18% of Americans think the sun revolves around the earth. So, you know, whatever.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/3742/New-Poll-Gauges-Americans-General-Knowledge-Levels.aspx

1) Allow me (with all of the respect that's due) to point out that the percentage of people who think W isn't scum are roughly equal to the percentage that believe the Sun orbits the Earth.

2) When actually, the correct statements are:

  • Both the Earth and the Sun revolve around their axises*.
  • The Earth orbits the Sun.
  • (Actually, they both orbit their common center of gravity. But, since the Sun is considerably more massive than the Earth, that center of gravity is very near the center of the Sun.)
  • Any choice of "the center of the Solar System" is actually equally valid (since such a choice is arbitrary.) If you chose to consider the Sun as "the zero point", then the math is quite a bit easier.

:)

*I thought the plural of "axis" was "axies", but that doesn't pass spell check, and it suggests this word. Now cringing from The Revenge of the Spelling Nazis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tulane Skins Fan

Tulane Skins Fan

Posted
Posted
1) Allow me (with all of the respect that's due) to point out that the percentage of people who think W isn't scum are roughly equal to the percentage that believe the Sun orbits the Earth.

2) When actually, the correct statements are:

  • Both the Earth and the Sun revolve around their axises*.
  • The Earth orbits the Sun.
  • (Actually, they both orbit their common center of gravity. But, since the Sun is considerably more massive than the Earth, that center of gravity is very near the center of the Sun.)
  • Any choice of "the center of the Solar System" is actually equally valid (since such a choice is arbitrary.) If you chose to consider the Sun as "the zero point", then the math is quite a bit easier.

:)

*I thought the plural of "axis" was "axies", but that doesn't pass spell check, and it suggests this word. Now cringing from The Revenge of the Spelling Nazis.

Axes. :)

edit: maybe not? :whoknows:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sarge

Sarge

Posted
Posted
Maybe this is a different thread, but why is Soros so evil? What makes him worse than Murdoch, or any group that is dedicated to giving Republican's money?

Seriously asking.

http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=275181103776079

The Left: The smear ad published against Gen. Petraeus has drawn attention to its sponsor, MoveOn.org. But the fingerprints of the group's chief financial backer, George Soros, were all over it. Who is this man and what is he up to?

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

George Soros & MoveOn.org: Exclusive Series

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

To read Soros' own spun story, he's a Jewish survivor of Nazi-occupied Hungary who pulled himself up by his bootstraps, studied economics in England, became a U.S. citizen in 1961 and made a multibillion-dollar fortune as a financier who pioneered hedge funds.

Over the years, Soros has written books giving his philosophical take on global affairs and acquired a reputation as something of a "stateless statesman." He calls himself a philanthropist and has given away $5 billion of his now $8.5 billion fortune through his principal vehicle, the Open Society Institute. The institute, in turn, has passed cash on to far more radical groups, such as MoveOn.org.

But Soros is no hands-off donor. According to the Open Society Institute's Web site: "Despite the breadth of his endeavors, Soros is personally involved in planning and implementing many of the foundation network's projects."

Soros says he gives away about $400 million annually.

It's an admirable picture, but "philanthropy" may be the wrong word. Unlike, say, Bill Gates, who really does put the bulk of his charity into helping the world's poor through medical services, Soros tends to fund pressure groups and foundations he misleadingly characterizes as promoting "civil society" and "democracy."

The image gives him moral cover to manipulate democracies whose voter verdicts he opposes.

Tearing Down America

The first groups Soros supported back in the 1980s did play a role in undercutting the rickety communist regimes of Eastern Europe. But his motives seemed less than idealistic. All Soros groups tend to tear down tyrannies rather than build up democracies.

And since 2003, tearing down what he views as the "fascist" tyranny of the United States, as he has put it, is "the central focus of my life."

Through networks of nongovernmental organizations, Soros intends to ruin the presidency of George W. Bush "by any legal means necessary" and knock America off its global pedestal. "His view of America is so negative," says Sen. Joe Lieberman, who, like Gen. David Petraeus, has been a target of Soros' electoral "philanthropy." "The places he's put his money are . . . so destructive that it unsettles me." Soros' aim seems to be to make the U.S. just another client state easily controlled by the United Nations and other one-world groups where he has lots of friends.

Best known among these groups is MoveOn.org, a previously small fringe-left group to which Soros has given $5 million since 2004. Bulked up by cash, the group now uses professional public relations tactics to undercut the Iraq War effort, with its latest a full-page New York Times ad that branded Gen. Petraeus "General Betray Us."

It ran Sept. 10 in the New York Times, the same day Petraeus delivered his progress report on the surge in Iraq.

MoveOn.org previously put out ads depicting Bush as a Nazi, something that certainly echoes Soros' sentiment.

"We have to go through a certain de-Nazification process," he told this year's Davos conference in Switzerland.

Moving On To The Far Left

MoveOn.org was also pivotal in getting Howard Dean elected chairman of the Democratic Party in a bid to push the party to the far left.

Soros acolyte Arianna Huffington is on record as advocating that outcome. Berating Democrats for their electoral losses in 2004, she wrote: "Have these people learned nothing from 2000, 2002 and 2004? How many more concession speeches do they have to give — from 'the center' — before they realize it's not a very fruitful place?"

Soros also has financed spin outfits such as Media Matters that specialize in providing distorted conservative political statements as grist for leftist politicians and media.

Media Matters (and MoveOn.org) succeeded last year in denying incumbent Lieberman the Democratic nomination for Senate in Connecticut and effectively drove the moderate out of his own party. Net result: Fewer Democrats, including today's crop running for office, are willing to challenge any Soros-financed pressure group.

Money & Elections

Soros' efforts go beyond spin. He has also bankrolled groups involved in the manipulation of elections, an activity that has increased since his money came into the picture. Two groups — Americans Coming Together and the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now — were sanctioned recently by the Federal Election Commission for fraud.

Soros pledged $10 million to ACT, which has since been fined $775,000 for illegally funneling $70 million set aside for voter registrations to Democratic candidates.

He also gave at least $150,000 to ACORN, the left-wing group best known for pushing minimum-wage hikes, marching for illegal-immigrant amnesty and harassing Wal-Mart. ACORN has been accused of voter fraud in 13 states since 2004 and was convicted of falsifying signatures in a voter registration drive last July, drawing a fine of $25,000 in Washington state.

Soros says he has ended funding to voter-drive organizations, but he still heads a secretive rich-man's club called "Democracy Alliance" that has doled out $20 million to activist groups like ACORN.

It's also noteworthy that the Soros-funded MoveOn.org advocates "paper-trail" electronic voting in the U.S., the same kind used in Venezuela, where allegations of electronic fraud and ballot secrecy violations have ended confidence in the system and sealed Chavez's dictatorship.

Terrorist-Friendly Groups

Soros additionally finances groups best described as helpful to terrorists. Since 1998, he has given the American Civil Liberties Union $5 million to empower criminals, including lawsuits on behalf of terrorists' "civil rights."

Soros' Open Society Institute gave $20,000 for the legal defense of radical attorney Lynne Stewart. She was convicted in 2002 of abetting jailed terrorists after the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.

Soros is also involved in the financing of a 9/11 memorial at ground zero, the World Trade Center Memorial Cultural Complex — which critics say blames the U.S. for 9/11.

"Bush says (the terrorists) hate us for what we are, not what we do, and I think that's false," Soros told an audience at UC Berkeley last year.

He has handed $3.1 million to the left-wing Tides Foundation, which funds organizations, such as the Sea Shepherds, Earth First! and the Ruckus Society, that have condoned or engaged in eco-terrorism.

On the international front, Soros-backed groups have undercut important U.S. allies, including Israel and Colombia, which have aligned with the U.S. rather than the U.N.

Both see their sovereignty as non-negotiable, view victory over their enemies as an absolute good and refuse to become failed states — all anathema to the thinking of Soros. His Human Rights Watch repeatedly attempts to portray both nations as pariah states.

One World Government

Soros additionally finances groups supporting the interests of one-world government. While he has criticized the United Nations occasionally, he favors U.N. dominance in world affairs, sees the European Union as a model for "open society" and has called for a global central bank.

Anyone who doesn't agree with this vision, or who doesn't fit cozily into his multilateral model, gets a visit from Soros-backed groups.

MoveOn.org, for example, led the charge to keep John Bolton out of a permanent seat in the U.N., and Bankwatch piled on to topple Paul Wolfowitz at the World Bank.

In fact, pick any cause that seeks to weaken the U.S. and it's hard not to find Soros' name on its list of financial backers. Most of these causes are financed by relatively small amounts, but that's all that's needed to make trouble.

And without the cash, countless bad ideas would have no presence in American political debate at all.

What keeps these groups on cue, and Democrats in line, is the prospect that any funding from Soros can be stepped up to massive levels. It's probably no coincidence that Soros was a big backer of campaign finance reforms that have allowed nominally nonpartisan groups like MoveOn.org to strike with the kinds of tactics they are using.

Soros usually doesn't offer up or endorse specific candidates for office. His chief aim seems to be tearing down Bush, driving the Democrats to the far left and enforcing party discipline through fear. In fact, he seems to like keeping Democrats guessing whether or not he's offended.

The strategy seems to be working. No Democrat had the courage to cross MoveOn.org after its libelous Petraeus ad. On Thursday, a symbolic vote in Congress censuring MoveOn.org for the Petraeus ad passed, but with the notable absence of both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. Election looming, neither wants to cross Soros' MoveOn.org.

Soros himself does not believe in victory in Iraq and wants to keep America from achieving it.

"The war on terror cannot be won," he has said.

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NDZiMjkwMDczZWI5ODdjOWYxZTIzZGIyNzEyMjE0ODI

What if Barack Obama’s most important radical connection has been hiding in plain sight all along? Obama has had an intimate and long-term association with the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (Acorn), the largest radical group in America. If I told you Obama had close ties with MoveOn.org or Code Pink, you’d know what I was talking about. Acorn is at least as radical as these better-known groups, arguably more so. Yet because Acorn works locally, in carefully selected urban areas, its national profile is lower. Acorn likes it that way. And so, I’d wager, does Barack Obama.

This is a story we’ve largely missed. While Obama’s Acorn connection has not gone entirely unreported, its depth, extent, and significance have been poorly understood. Typically, media background pieces note that, on behalf of Acorn, Obama and a team of Chicago attorneys won a 1995 suit forcing the state of Illinois to implement the federal “motor-voter” bill. In fact, Obama’s Acorn connection is far more extensive. In the few stories where Obama’s role as an Acorn “leadership trainer” is noted, or his seats on the boards of foundations that may have supported Acorn are discussed, there is little follow-up. Even these more extensive reports miss many aspects of Obama’s ties to Acorn.

An Anti-Capitalism Agenda

To understand the nature and extent of Acorn’s radicalism, an excellent place to begin is Sol Stern’s 2003 City Journal article, “ACORN’s Nutty Regime for Cities.” (For a shorter but helpful piece, try Steven Malanga’s “Acorn Squash.”)

Sol Stern explains that Acorn is the key modern successor of the radical 1960’s “New Left,” with a “1960’s-bred agenda of anti-capitalism” to match. Acorn, says Stern, grew out of “one of the New Left’s silliest and most destructive groups, the National Welfare Rights Organization.” In the 1960’s, NWRO launched a campaign of sit-ins and disruptions at welfare offices. The goal was to remove eligibility restrictions, and thus effectively flood welfare rolls with so many clients that the system would burst. The theory, explains Stern, was that an impossibly overburdened welfare system would force “a radical reconstruction of America’s unjust capitalist economy.” Instead of a socialist utopia, however, we got the culture of dependency and family breakdown that ate away at America’s inner cities — until welfare reform began to turn the tide.

While Acorn holds to NWRO’s radical economic framework and its confrontational 1960’s-style tactics, the targets and strategy have changed. Acorn prefers to fly under the national radar, organizing locally in liberal urban areas — where, Stern observes, local legislators and reporters are often “slow to grasp how radical Acorn’s positions really are.” Acorn’s new goals are municipal “living wage” laws targeting “big-box” stores like Wal-Mart, rolling back welfare reform, and regulating banks — efforts styled as combating “predatory lending.” Unfortunately, instead of helping workers, Acorn’s living-wage campaigns drive businesses out of the very neighborhoods where jobs are needed most. Acorn’s opposition to welfare reform only threatens to worsen the self-reinforcing cycle of urban poverty and family breakdown. Perhaps most mischievously, says Stern, Acorn uses banking regulations to pressure financial institutions into massive “donations” that it uses to finance supposedly non-partisan voter turn-out drives.

According to Stern, Acorn’s radical agenda sometimes shifts toward “undisguised authoritarian socialism.” Fully aware of its living-wage campaign’s tendency to drive businesses out of cities, Acorn hopes to force companies that want to move to obtain “exit visas.” “How much longer before Acorn calls for exit visas for wealthy or middle-class individuals before they can leave a city?” asks Stern, adding, “This is the road to serfdom indeed.”

In Your Face

Acorn’s tactics are famously “in your face.” Just think of Code Pink’s well-known operations (threatening to occupy congressional offices, interrupting the testimony of General David Petraeus) and you’ll get the idea. Acorn protesters have disrupted Federal Reserve hearings, but mostly deploy their aggressive tactics locally. Chicago is home to one of its strongest chapters, and Acorn has burst into a closed city council meeting there. Acorn protestors in Baltimore disrupted a bankers’ dinner and sent four busloads of profanity-screaming protestors against the mayor’s home, terrifying his wife and kids. Even a Baltimore city council member who generally supports Acorn said their intimidation tactics had crossed the line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sarge

Sarge

Posted
Posted
Sarge, MoveOn.org and Soros - as far as I can tell - haven't done anything "radical" other than be liberal. That alone doesn't mean he's a bad. :2cents:

Noooooooooo

Nothing wrong at all with having someone who wants to have the UN run everything in America and who wants to socialize the entire country

Nothing wrong with that at all :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tulane Skins Fan

Tulane Skins Fan

Posted
Posted
Noooooooooo

Nothing wrong at all with having someone who wants to have the UN run everything in America and who wants to socialize the entire country

Nothing wrong with that at all :rolleyes:

Nothing evil about it. You act as if he's some sort of deceptive individual who can't be trusted, but in reality, he just has a different political view point than you.

Like I said, I don't know much about him, but I haven't heard ANYTHING that makes me think he is anything worse than a really rich liberal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sarge

Sarge

Posted
Posted
Nothing evil about it. You act as if he's some sort of deceptive individual who can't be trusted, but in reality, he just has a different political view point than you.

Like I said, I don't know much about him, but I haven't heard ANYTHING that makes me think he is anything worse than a really rich liberal.

http://www.keshertalk.com/archives/2007/02/who_is_george_s.php

Froma 60 Minutes interview in 98

On December 20, 1998, there appeared this exchange between Soros and Steve Kroft on "60 Minutes":

Kroft: "You're a Hungarian Jew …"

Soros: "Mm-hmm."

Kroft: "... who escaped the Holocaust …"

Soros: "Mm-hmm."

Kroft: "... by posing as a Christian."

Soros: "Right."

Kroft: "And you watched lots of people get shipped off to the death camps."

Soros: "Right. I was 14 years old. And I would say that that's when my character was made."

Kroft: "In what way?"

Soros: "That one should think ahead. One should understand that—and anticipate events and when, when one is threatened. It was a tremendous threat of evil. I mean, it was a—a very personal threat of evil."

Kroft: "My understanding is that you went … went out, in fact, and helped in the confiscation of property from the Jews."

Soros: "Yes, that's right. Yes."

Kroft: "I mean, that's—that sounds like an experience that would send lots of people to the psychiatric couch for many, many years. Was it difficult?"

Soros: "Not, not at all. Not at all. Maybe as a child you don't … you don't see the connection. But it was—it created no—no problem at all."

Kroft: "No feeling of guilt?"

Soros: "No."

Kroft: "For example, that, 'I'm Jewish, and here I am, watching these people go. I could just as easily be these, I should be there.' None of that?"

Soros: "Well, of course, ... I could be on the other side or I could be the one from whom the thing is being taken away. But there was no sense that I shouldn't be there, because that was—well, actually, in a funny way, it's just like in the markets—that is I weren't there—of course, I wasn't doing it, but somebody else would—would—would be taking it away anyhow. And it was the—whether I was there or not, I was only a spectator, the property was being taken away. So the—I had no role in taking away that property. So I had no sense of guilt."

Flash forward a few years

Soros believes a “supremacist ideology” guides this White House. He hears echoes in its rhetoric of his childhood in occupied Hungary. “When I hear Bush say, ‘You’re either with us or against us,’ it reminds me of the Germans.” It conjures up memories, he said, of Nazi slogans on the walls, Der Feind Hort mit (“The enemy is listening”): “My experiences under Nazi and Soviet rule have sensitized me,” he said in a soft Hungarian accent.

Too bad his sorry ass wasn't more sensitive when he was 14

But I guess he knows all about the "with us" thing :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
WVUforREDSKINS

WVUforREDSKINS

Posted
Posted
Noooooooooo

Nothing wrong at all with having someone who wants to have the UN run everything in America and who wants to socialize the entire country

Nothing wrong with that at all :rolleyes:

You are friggin delusional if you think this will ever happen.

The UN is worthless except for giving aid:2cents:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sarge

Sarge

Posted
Posted
You are friggin delusional if you think this will ever happen.

The UN is worthless except for giving aid:2cents:

That's why the one bill with Obama's name on it requiring us to triple our foreign aid also gives control of distributing that aid to the UN, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hooper

Hooper

Posted
Posted

McClellan is just trying to get the stink off the Dubya legacy off of him.

You can pretty much guarantee we'll see the same kind of book from everybody except maybe Cheney in the coming years. Of course, Dubya will then write his own book about Cheney blaming everything on him.

But none of it matters. They'll all be lumped together in the end. And that's the way it should be. They could have spoken up before or resigned, but they didn't.

And because of this, they will forever pay a price in the pages of history.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
dockeryfan

dockeryfan

Posted
Posted
Look it up. I'm tired of doing you alls homework for you

pathetic. Read this thread to see just how much homework he did.

I guess homework in Sarge's mind means get someone else to actually research something so he can understand it.

Sarge is like a toy doll that has recorded messages. Every time you pull the string, you get the same canned response supplied by right wing radio. Only he pulls the string himself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sarge

Sarge

Posted
Posted
pathetic. Read this thread to see just how much homework he did.

I guess homework in Sarge's mind means get someone else to actually research something so he can understand it.

Sarge is like a toy doll that has recorded messages. Every time you pull the string, you get the same canned response supplied by right wing radio. Only he pulls the string himself.

Especially since we alls have this disgusting habit of actually reading what he provides.

:)

And yet you two are some of the biggest ball busters of the intel community for thier failure in 9/11

"Why didn't they connect the dots?" you whined?

Yet here are dots and little lines drawing damn near the whole thing together and you all act like it's some Scooby Doo mystery.

GLad you two don't work in intel

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Larry

Larry

Posted
Posted
And yet you two are some of the biggest ball busters of the intel community for thier failure in 9/11

"Why didn't they connect the dots?" you whined?

Yet here are dots and little lines drawing damn near the whole thing together and you all act like it's some Scooby Doo mystery.

GLad you two don't work in intel

So far all the "dots" you've shown are "Look! I did a Google search, and this book company and George Soros both came up (on separate links)."

And "Look here! George Soros, and a company that has one word in their name that's the same as one word in the book publisher's name, both own stock in some third company".

And "Look! This book company publishes books that were written by liberals (and conservatives)."

(And I've never once criticized the intel community about 9/11. Or, as far as I can remember, for anything else, either. Closest I've ever come to that, that I can recall, was responding to one of the Bushie's claims of "nobody could have thought of somebody flying an airplane into a building" by saying "Tom Clancey did.")

Link to comment
Share on other sites
WVUforREDSKINS

WVUforREDSKINS

Posted
Posted

My feeling about this whole situation is this:

1. He did feel betrayed by the Elite's because he was lied to about the whole CIA leak.

2. He knew this was a great way to make money.

3. It is appalling that Republicans are trying to make excuses for lying to the entire country about something like going to the war. I understand that politicians lie and twist things. But taking advantage of a fearful and paranoid public to have a war with no end is just terrible. The fact that you don't seem to care about this makes me think that you don't care about the soilders that have died on a complete ****ing lie.

On the orders of two draft dodging ******* that you are so fond of.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 2 years later...

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...