Stay the course?

Heist

Moderator
Bush said:
"A free Iraq will mean a peaceful world. And it's very important for us to stay the course, and we will stay the course."

What kind of leftist/terrorist-lover would NOT agree with those words?

Can I get an Amen and an Oo-rah from every forum poster who will stand with Our President in his firm will to stay the course and finish the job?

Wait, this just in:

Bush said:
We've never been stay the course.

Tony Snow said:
we went back and looked today and could only find eight times where he [Bush] ever used the phrase stay the course.

Bush: We will stay the course.

Apparently Emmanuel Goldstein has doctored footage of Bush's speeches and changed them to suit his LYING ends! Truly his cronies are everywhere!
 
Even George would be confused by this war. Good luck making sense of anything... I keep expecting Tony Snow to start jabbering in doubleplusgood Newspeak. That guy cracks me up.
orwell.jpg
 
As much as we're all (including myself) sick of the same slogan-type responses... it's important to realize the same questions are being asked over and over again.

If the press were mic'd, I suspect we could make a funny video about their monotony as well.
 
Beginning to feel a lot like Vietnam felt to me. I don't see a good end to it, and I don't think any actions in Iraq will stop those who hate us from attacking us again. Sure glad we don't have a draft. I'd hate to think that any of my kids were in Iraq right now!

Having said all that, I'd still never vote for a Dem for Prez.
 
"Stay the course" is newspeak.

President draft dodger, vice president draft dodger and attorney general draft dodger don't have the guts to clear their wrongs and do what's right. But they don't have to pay...

I'll bet captured soldiers in this war wish they could get an upgrade to the service at the Hanoi Hilton.

Do you know what vivisection is?
 
"Stay the course" implies there was a course. I believe what has happened is they realized the ship of fools has no compass.
 
There used to be dozens of people on this board paraphrasing that as a mantra, along with "You should be tried for treason if you give aid and comfort to the enemy by criticizing our government."

They seem to be curiously silent in this thread.
 
Yeah, some folks tend to only pay attention to the things he says that they want to hear. I like how no mention was made of his press conference the other day in which he very clearly stated "we did not find weapons of mass destruction".

and wildcard, why is it when someone critizes something about this administration the previous one must be brought up?
 
and wildcard, why is it when someone critizes something about this administration the previous one must be brought up?

Well, Clinton was a draft dodger, for one. Clinton did next to nothing to combat Terror, nothing. He had several chances to kill Osama, nothing. He paid NK to stop building/researching nukes, our tax dollars at work there, and look, NK has and is still researching nukes. I disagree with a lot of the Bush Admin's handling of things, but calling the current folks in charge draft dodgers, and implying that they are doing nothing, well, it just the pot calling the kettle black. This problem of combating terror is older than both the Bush and Clinton admin's.
 
Every administration

gets critisized, frequently for good reason. I'm not real fond of Pres. Bush's administration, but everybody screaming "he lied, he lied" has turned into beating a dead horse, at least to me.

On a personal level, the previous administration had more of a negative impact on my life than this one has. Lots more.

The people we out to be upset with isn't so much the administration as it is CONGRESS. These highly educated, and generally wealthy individuals that WE elected gave Bush a blank check. And signed it. And now they are whining about how he spends it. But we (through them) gave him the authority to do nearly anything. After 9/11 they couldn't seem to do it fast enough. Why are we always in such a hurry to do something, but not the best thing.

You can't go to war on terror. But our Congress gave Bush the ok to do it. You can go to war against a nation state. You can go to war against a people. You can even go to war against a disease. But not an idea.

You can fight an idea, but military action is not a good method. Unless you are prepared to be very patient and accepting of the cost, or very ruthless and uncaring of the consequences. It appears that a lot of people today are neither one.
 
Heist...

There used to be dozens of people on this board paraphrasing that as a mantra, along with "You should be tried for treason if you give aid and comfort to the enemy by criticizing our government."

They seem to be curiously silent in this thread.

Ironic isn't it? Those very people who think that are very much being un-American, and are totally missing the point of our Constitution. They fail to understand that one can be all about fighting terrorism, and at the same time criticize the government for doing a terrible job of it. (Which the government has.) Iraq is now a breeding ground for terrorists because of the instability, and at least with Saddam the area had more stability because he didn't want to share power. (Oh yeah, weapons of mASS destruction what a joke. We gave Saddam those weapons back a long time ago, and then we come to realize he wasted them.) Leave it to big business and seedy officials to set up regimes just to continue perpetuating wars every few years. Orwell was right, and we are the sheeple.


Epyon
 
Back
Top