Tuesday, September 12, 2006

From Neal Boortz-The "Unified after 9/11" myth


Going all the way back to the 2004 presidential campaign between The Poodle and the president, we have often heard repeated the line that America was unified after 9/11 and Bush squandered all that goodwill. Bill Clinton repeated the line yesterday, saying "We had an astonishing moment of unity" after 9/11. It's a nice idea, but it never happened.

Oh sure...members of Congress from both parties stood on the Capitol steps and sang "God Bless America" and it made for a nice photo op. But just because politicians came out as a single force on that one day, it doesn't mean differences magically disappeared. In fact, those differences only became stronger.

Myth #1: Americans and politicians from both political parties were 100% behind President Bush in everything he did immediately after 9/11. The fact is this isn't true. While many did come together, there were differences about what we should do in response to 9/11 and whether or not the Bush Administration was to blame. There were still those who wanted to follow the Clinton approach of treating Islamic fascism as a law enforcement problem.

Myth #2: There was universal support for the invasion of Afghanistan. The facts say otherwise. There were plenty that were opposed. There were protests even as the invasion was being planned.

Myth #3: George Bush squandered all of the public and the world's goodwill by invading Iraq. This is also untrue. The invasion of Iraq was popular at the time it took place, with the public and most Democrats strongly behind the president. The idea that somehow Operation Iraqi Freedom was responsible for busting up the mythical 9/11 unification is just a fantasy.

Democratic and Republican differences didn't disappear just because of 9/11. Once the dust settled, just as many Democrats wanted to treat Islamic terrorism as a law enforcement problem as before. Many blamed Bush for the attacks and did not favor going to war. We just went back to business as usual, just like we were always going to. If there was any supposed unification, it lasted just a few days.

Because at the end of the day, Democrats believe what they believe and Republicans have their beliefs.

I would bet real American greenbacks that the Clintonistas started making a list of what they needed to cover up before noon that day.

Be sure to scroll to the bottom of Nealz Nuze. He posts a series of articles each day and even though he's no Andy he does a decent job.


I got one of those too. Since most people have been told by the AJC to use a fake email address we may be the only ones getting the message. It's certainly not hacking to post from a saved or open page.

Rush also said today that the idea that we were unified after 9/11 was BS.

RE the AJC is it only "hacking" if it's a new cartoon that has not ever been open to comments? I changed to a fake address awhile ago just in case I went to a different blog which flashed it to the world and I didn't notice.
Buy Danish,

It's not hacking really anyway. Source code is open so you can customize the way a site appears to you personally. Hacking is when you change or block the site to everyone else.

I would say as a general rule you probably shouldn't go post on a new cartoon before it has ever been open, but I'm not sure how they want to stop after hours posting. (BTW, my response to Andy is from his comment on the tribute post below this one. I just didn't want a conversation on access to the AJC on that post)

I told Lea that many people save websites in folders and they will innocently see the comment section working when they open it no matter when it is. I also told her how silly it was to close the blog since they have the character limits now. The only times that blog was civil was at night and on weekends from the start.
It sounds like somebody was resentful and complained. Resentful of what? Your intelligence. Something they're lacking?

Notice ^^^ I didn't include myself in the CIA (Computer Intelligence Association) group.

I have a new one on order. Set to arrive this week. I have to wait on my "slim little black monitor though."

RW: I'm sending E-Mail. Can you take a minute to enlighten me. It's something I've been watching and wondering about.

Why certainly I'll do what I can with your email. Should it get priority over all the people that want to meet me for a quickie, are concerned about the size of certain parts of my anatomy, want me to have a 1% mortgage, or help me set up an online casino?
Well no RW. No priority here. Just when you can find a moment among your other numerous "exhibitions" and "demands."

Should I be asking for your autograph? I wouldn't want to miss out in the event you become famous.

Boork wants me to do my homework? He would like me. That's what I always do. Leaves me little time for comment though.

Wouldn't the liberals have loved for Bush to act on vague intelligence. Like finch said, "Cons can't have it both ways." That's reserved for liberals only. It's their "Mother of Invention."

Actually I moved you to the front of the line and already responded. I'm not sure I responded to the right part though.
Thank you for the "source" clue; I just about got it figured out now.

The thing I find interesting in my research of the AJC scripts is their constant and numerous queries for your cookies.

I wonder if these cartoon boy pinkos, the ones wailing about their privacy rights being violated, even realize how much the Urinal gets into their business, without them even knowing about it?

Gosh, I wonder if I should tell them??

Don't you realize it's the solemn duty of the libs to watch your every step and tell you what parts you can keep private?*


*Or something weird like that. I can't keep up with their twisting and spinning from one second to the next.
Good evening, RW -- hope you had a nice day. My only comments are (and these are very stong words):

I absolutely detest Jim Wooten and everything he stands for – he’s a racist, bigoted, white supremacist jerk who is permitted to spread his venom under the protection of the AJC and First Amendment. Why is he never taken to task on his views, and those of his ignorant bloggers, by the AJC board and gatekeeper?

Why is he allowed to continue spewing hatred day after day after day and inciting like minded racists to spew their ignorance on an AJC-sponsored public forum? Not only is this permissible, Jim actually strokes these folks via comments of his own, encouraging further vitriol.

Yet Andy and you receive warnings for posting at MLs after 7:00 p.m.? Posts that do not harm anyone and are only sources of great reading material or opinions? And they call it spam? After-hours commenting is not permitted, but degrading a whole race of people from eight to five is journalistic integrity?

This whole freaking world has gone mad.

It appears that you are going to make go read Wooten's blog because I don't have a clue what you're talking about. I've never known Jim to be that way.

How's everything else going?
RW -- You can't just start today to read Wooten; you would have had to follow him consistently -- especially when the AJC awarded him a blog -- to fully understand what I'm talking about. I've nick-named it rolling racism. Pick a current topic, and let's see how Jim has spun it into a minority's fault.

Other than that, I'm just fine and I thank you for asking. I know it's not like me to really vent, but I've had it with the AJC's double-standard.

I've read Jim's column for years and I've read his blog several times. I've never seen anything that remotely fits your description.

I'm not saying that you are wrong because I haven't read the blog often enough to know, but my gut says you are either taking things somewhat out of context or expecting some political correctness that he isn't going to give you.

He does ramble to get to his point and I've seen him try to play amateur psychologist very poorly when trying to assess posters on his blog, or maybe he's a racist when I'm not looking. :-)
You know, RW -- I really am one of those rare folks who reads everything. . .no matter how much I might disagree. My opinion has been changed greatly, for example, by participating here at your place.

But I don't think I'm imagining this -- I'm not a dreamer (usually) and do have a rather thick skin. To me, his racism is so blatant. It just really gets to me. Perhaps I should simply eliminate him from my reading list and these types of outbursts would cease? :-)

Do me a favor and point me to some examples in the future. I'll look at them with an open mind and perhaps a different perspective, then I can either confirm your feelings or show where you are wrong.

Eliminating him from your reading list would solve the problem you have with him, but if you are right it should be solved for everyone. That means you have an obligation to keep reading and pointing it out. Have you seen those commercials where lots of people stand around talking about a situation and someone steps in to take action? We should really strive to be the one that takes action.

(It's a pretty bad ad campaign though, because I can vividly recall the commercials and don't have the slightest clue who they are for)
I will, RW -- and I'll even show you in his column -- not in the posts he receives.

Is it the commercial where the three guyz are eating Doritos and the girl's sitting at the computer then she solves the problem and they all gather around and say yay, team??!!!!!! hahahahahahahah Oh, it's not? Sorry tee hee hee

I actually have some time starting Thursday through next Monday and here's what I'm going to do -- I'll go back and read each of Wooten's column's going back 30 days. I will point you to a slur in at least every other one of them (he gives it a rest sometimes.) Then by all means you can tell me if I've mis-read or I haven't.

And I will not stop reading him. . .I was just being hateful -- sorry :-)
Actually I'm thinking more about the commercial where a guy is choking to death and the people at his table are babbling about how they've seen how to do something for that. A guy walks by, does the Heimlich (sp?) and they all say "yeah, that was it" or something like that.
Oh, that's the Hamlish Remover (SNL) hehehehe

Seriously, haven't seen the commercial you refer to, but your point is well taken.

Thanks as always for your kind advice. I've again kept you up past your bedtime. Have a good night. . .talk to you Thursday.

How do you know what my bedtime is? I'm much more likely to be up at all hours of the night than in the morning.

Sorry!!! Usually when we're talking this late, you always say see ya about this time.

I was just on the panda cam at the ATL Zoo -- too cute! Why does such a big creature have such a small baby????
Andy made mention of this a few days ago. Since a panda has such a tough time getting aroused, a tougher time conceiving, and then gives birth to such tiny fragile babies, why haven't they been evolved out of existence?

Could it be the Darwiniacs are full of crap?

I have been working a lot lately so I've been using normal human hours, but now that we've devolved into panda procreation habits I think I'll force myself to go to bed.
Story of my life -- I can put the best of 'em to sleep...

Goodnight, friend!

And yes, God made the pandas. I think the Darwiniacs dreamt up Darwin. . .bye!

I posted after hours last nite, but I opened the comment box a bit before 7:00. Maybe that is only a misdemeanor.

Meanwhile I see that the threatening 11:49 post still stands, and it looks like Getalife plaigiarised someones' treatise which would in addition to being illegal is also against AJC rules (either that or he has miraculously learned to write more than one sentence at a time).
Buy Danish,

I guess we will all be banned from the cesspool also known as ml's soon.

Speaking of cesspools we have a real dumbass posting right here.
Buy Danish,

I don't see any late post from you over there. Did they remove it and ban you?
My blog provides you with your regular dose of celebrity juice. So what exactly is your blog providing for ME?
A new perspective perhaps. Some friendly banter maybe. But mostly it gets you hits to your blog when you show your charm and personality here.

Just catching up on posts. I don't know what honu is talking about in Jim Wooten's blog. It seems pretty mild to me after reading mls. And rolling racism by Jim? Don't see that. I will be interested to know what honu is referring to.

I'm interested in seeing that too, because I was shocked to hear anyone thinking that about Jim.
Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?