This just in...the mine collapse was Bush's fault, too!!!

[Xequat]

Well, this should come as no surprise, but now it's apparently Bush's fault that the mine collapsed the other day, killing twelve workers. That came from Randi Rhodes, the left's loudmouth equivalent of Rush Limbaugh, on Air America yesterday. According to Rhodes, Bush was in bed with some mining organization, despite the fact that that mine was repeatedly cited for violations. Yep, he's tied up with Big Coal now, too. Boy his buddies in Big Oil are going to be pissed. She had a guest on yesterday that was talking about it and Rhodes kept trying to get the guest to day that the collapse was Bush's fault and the guest kept saying, "well, I wouldn't go that far." If I remember right, it was four different times that they had that exact exchange.

For someone that she repeatedly calls a stupid idiot, moron, etc, she sure accuses him of doing some pretty intelligent things. Funny, I didn't hear anything that stupid from anyone else, including Al Franken, Ed Schultz, or Jerry Springer. I'm sure we all realize that it was just a matter of time anyway. I just thought it would take a little longer. God, I wish I could make up stuff this funny; I'd be making millions.

 

[arnisador]

What a tragedy. Blaming it on Pres. Bush is just looking for attention. It's downright silly. The mine apparently had many safety issues, but the president is not to blame for that.

This story has really caught my attention. What a sad situation.

 

[Andrew Green]

Can we just all agree that both the Republicans and the Democrats are nuts? Maybe its something about the nature of being a politician, doesn't matter what side they are on they on they all smell the same?

There, offended both sides in one post, double points for me

 

[arnisador]

Can we just all agree that both the Republicans and the Democrats are nuts?

That's why I'm none of the above!

 

[Jonathan Randall]

That's why I'm none of the above!

Me neither!

This situation is such a tragedy. I am very sorry for the families of the miners.

 

[Cujo]

Leave it to politicians to use such a tragedy to try to score political points. Prayers for the families.

Pax
Cujo

 

[green meanie]

Leave it to politicians to use such a tragedy to try to score political points. Prayers for the families.

Pax
Cujo

Amen!

 

[michaeledward]

That came from Randi Rhodes, the left's loudmouth equivalent of Rush Limbaugh

Wow, what a compliment.

Randi Rhodes is the equivalent of Rush Limbaugh.

I know I have been accused at times of hyperbole, but I just can't hold a candle to that statement. If only it were true.

I'm wondering Xequat, on what station do you listen to Air America?

 

[Jeff Boler]

I'm wondering Xequat, on what station do you listen to Air America?

A better question would be why were you listening to Air America?

 

[Navarre]

I'm about as far from a Bush fan as it gets but this incident didn't have anything to do with politics. At least, it doesn't in the sense of Democrat vs Republican.

Like all of corporate America, I'm sure there are inside factors that attributed to the mine's collapse. But one could trace a line of "logic" back to anyone they choose.

Living in West Virginia, I'm particularly aware of this tragedy. My friend (and boss) here at work grew up with one of the deceased miners. My hometown is about an hour and a half away from the site.

It is a terrible tragedy, especially considering the trauma caused by the miscommunication to the miners' families. Using this as a launch pad to attack someone not directly involved in the incident is selfish and cruel.

 

[michaeledward]

A better question would be why were you listening to Air America?

Why aren't you listening to Air America?

 

[Jeff Boler]

Why aren't you listening to Air America?

Because it's the same song and dance that the democrats have been coming up with for years. I get tired of hearing how terrible our country is. There's nothing positive in the democrats message right now. Everything is about how we torture prisoners, how we are doing more harm than good to the Iraqis, etc. What kind of message is that?

The Democrats are not interested (right now) in making our country better. They are interested in making it look as bad as it can, so they have an opportunity to get into office the next term. That is their only motivation.

And I have already read through a couple of articles stating that the mine tragedy is Bush's fault.

...grasping at straws...

 

[Xequat]

I know, it's disgraceful, but it was just one individual, too. I'm just hoping she doesn't influence anyone.

"Randi Rhodes is the equivalent of Rush Limbaugh.

I know I have been accused at times of hyperbole, but I just can't hold a candle to that statement. If only it were true. "

That's because either I wasn't clear with the statement or you twisted it. Probably my fault, the way I read it now. I was not really trying to say that she and Limbaugh are equivalent in ratings or influence, just that they are both loudmouth extremists. It would only be exaggeration if I were saying that their ratings were the same or something like that. I was comparing their negative traits, not all of their traits. Not really a compliment, since I don't really like Limbaugh. Hope that's clearer.

I usually listen to her on am1530 out of Cincinnati. She's on when I'm off work, and there's usually a sports show on am700, so I try to hear both sides anyway, and I don't care that much about sports unless an actual NFL game is being played. Probably a small part of the reason I disagree with some of the Republican ideas and ideals. Mike McConnell's the only one, except occasionally Scott Sloan, on 700 that will go after both parties for stupidity. I'll sometimes switch between the two during commercials if the radio's on during the day, so I hear a lot of Jerry Springer, Al Franken, and some Ed Schultz. I like a lot of Springer's social commentaries, when he's talking less about politics, but Franken isn't worth listening to becuase I don't learn anything from his show and he's just there to infuriate the right anyway.

Anyway, enough about Cincinnati radio stations. I just wanted to post that story and see if anyone thinks it's OK, because I think it's disgusting, but kind of funny in a sick way that someone would go that far to express her hatred for the President. There are probably idiots on the right who would have blamed Kerry for it, too, so I'm just pointing out the one individual, not the entire ideology, so don't take it personally...unless you're Randi Rhodes.

I hope all of the affected families are OK and I hope for the best for them, especially following the USA Today piece. I can only imagine what it's like to deal with a disaster like that.

 

[michaeledward]

Well, comparing Rhodes to Limbaugh, I know that the Speaker of the House of Representatives has never made Randi Rhodes an honorary member of that body.

So, are you asking to have a discussion about safety rules for mining? Enforcement of those rules? Changes in legislation concerning mining safety?

And Jeff, does your opinion that the Democrats offer only negativity mean that you support torture and air strikes against Iraqi citizens accused of no wrongdoing?

 

[michaeledward]

And I have already read through a couple of articles stating that the mine tragedy is Bush's fault.

Source ?

 

[Jeff Boler]

And Jeff, does your opinion that the Democrats offer only negativity mean that you support torture and air strikes against Iraqi citizens accused of no wrongdoing?

Hmmm...were the civilians that died in Iraq specifically targeted, or were they in the wrong place at the wrong time? Do I support intentionally targeting civilians? Of course not. But war is hell. Civilians are going to die, and you just have to live with it.

The difference is that Osama's boys SPECIFICALLY targeted civilian lives when they rammed a jetliner into the World Trade Center. That is not what we are doing in Iraq, contrary to the attempts at revisionist history going on by you and your fellow democrats.

As for torture, it's wrong. However, I think the term "torture" needs to be more defined. I do not believe that 'humiliation' tactics equals torture.

Perhaps, since you seem to disagree with me, you could point me to a Democratic plan for Iraq that is better than the one President Bush has come up with. Note..one that doesn't equal retreat, hence, failure. I don't believe any exist....

 

[michaeledward]

Hmmm...were the civilians that died in Iraq specifically targeted, or were they in the wrong place at the wrong time? Do I support intentionally targeting civilians? Of course not. But war is hell. Civilians are going to die, and you just have to live with it.

The difference is that Osama's boys SPECIFICALLY targeted civilian lives when they rammed a jetliner into the World Trade Center. That is not what we are doing in Iraq, contrary to the attempts at revisionist history going on by you and your fellow democrats.

As for torture, it's wrong. However, I think the term "torture" needs to be more defined. I do not believe that 'humiliation' tactics equals torture.

Perhaps, since you seem to disagree with me, you could point me to a Democratic plan for Iraq that is better than the one President Bush has come up with. Note..one that doesn't equal retreat, hence, failure. I don't believe any exist....

By the way, Osama's boys weren't in Iraq.

The people dying in Iraq most recently, were not in the wrong place at the wrong time, our precision guided weapon was either a)targeted at the wrong building, or b) didn't work as advertised.

President Bush has a plan? I don't suppose you could direct me to that? You don't suppose he has anything that we can actually measure our 'progress' against, do you?

I think John McCain defined torture fairly well. I could live with his definition. But, apparently, the President can't. He seems to keep looking for ways to appear like he is agreeing, without actually agreeing.

and ... are you going to source those 'articles' you referenced?

 

[Jeff Boler]

By the way, Osama's boys weren't in Iraq.

Debateable. Besides, my point was to differentiate civilians who were killed intentionally, vs ones who were killed unintentionally.

The people dying in Iraq most recently, were not in the wrong place at the wrong time, our precision guided weapon was either a)targeted at the wrong building, or b) didn't work as advertised.

Either way, it wasn't intentional.

President Bush has a plan? I don't suppose you could direct me to that? You don't suppose he has anything that we can actually measure our 'progress' against, do you?

The President's plan may not be laid out in black and white, but it does not include withdrawl, retreat, and failure.

think John McCain defined torture fairly well. I could live with his definition. But, apparently, the President can't. He seems to keep looking for ways to appear like he is agreeing, without actually agreeing.

The President doesn't have to agree with John McCain.

 

[michaeledward]

OK ... so President Bush, whose military record is dubious, isn't going to unequivically state that torture is wrong and that the United States will not jeopardize American Soldiers and Agents lives by so doing, when a distinguished member of his own Party, who happens to have the unfortuneate benefit of five years first hand experience, and more than 90 other Senators, and many military leaders past and present, can agree how to define torture.

Got it.

No one who maintains any seriousness is debating links or geography of Osama's 'Boys' and Iraq.

The President's Plan is not laid out clearly, so how do we measure if we are succeeding? How many body bags will it take until we can be sure it is not failure? Of course, without goal posts, you can never know.

You aren't going to source those 'articles' that you claim accuse somebody of something.

And you don't want to talk about mining safety, enforcement, and regulation.

 

[mrhnau]

OK ... so President Bush, whose military record is dubious, isn't going to unequivically state that torture is wrong and that the United States will not jeopardize American Soldiers and Agents lives by so doing, when a distinguished member of his own Party, who happens to have the unfortuneate benefit of five years first hand experience, and more than 90 other Senators, and many military leaders past and present, can agree how to define torture.

Got it.

Being tortured makes one an expert? Do you think what (if anything) we were doing would be defined as torture based on McCain's experiences? I need to sit down and read how they are defining torture. Care to share the basics?

And you don't want to talk about mining safety, enforcement, and regulation.

Discuss it. Feel free. Lets see how long it takes you to blame Bush too I don't think its a reason to bash Bush. Lets find where the fault lies and why regulations were clearly not followed. I'm sure its not a huge Bush conspiracy like everything else is.