their learning is a very slow process.
I for one am not holding my breath.
david williams
![]() | Thank you for being a valued part of the CNET community. As of December 1, 2020, the forums are in read-only format. In early 2021, CNET Forums will no longer be available. We are grateful for the participation and advice you have provided to one another over the years. Thanks, CNET Support |
Discussion is locked
their learning is a very slow process.
I for one am not holding my breath.
david williams
ed im supprised at you as if charlie would ever see anything good from the usa being right![]()
now if it were the yellow french/germans he would be here with bells on
and the same pretty much applies to France.
Both peoples have long proven themselves as worthy opponents or allies but their leadership has often let them down. (So has ours every once in a while--look at Clinton for example.)
Hi, Ed.
And, of course, the fact that keane is a Republican is irrelevant according to you. Note that while the Dems "didn't contradict" him, they didn't agree either, and those quoted sounded like there was "interesting" information in the papers. (BTW, this is my first time online today since early morning -- tough day at the office!)
-- Dave K, Speakeasy Moderator
click here to email semods4@yahoo.com
The opinions expressed above are my own,
and do not necessarily reflect those of CNET!
And if he had been a Democrat and felt the opposite, do you suppose no one have made the same insinuation that his party determined his findings regardless of what was found?
that any finding will be disbelieved by one side or the other, especially if the finding happens to be what the other side would expect from the chairman's party line.
Is there anyone that could chair and be believed to be honest by a majority? in the Congress and public? and the national party committees?
Sigh, I'm of the opinion that even if there were enough people to staff the committee that most in Congress would believe were sincere, that both sides would still spin the answer to be political and use such spin for political campaigning rather than fixing anything.
And we the public are just as bad. Polarization to the point of calling anything that isn't what we already believe a lie and politically motivated coverups, scams, and irrelavent. And it doesn't matter how true or false the news is, the results is the same, bickering and name calling.
roger
It is very educational to see first hand how extreme things have become. It seems not to long ago that the suggestion of a 'cultural war' was scoffed at.
The left complains the right wants to micromanage their private and personal lives and ignore the needy for the sake of big business.
The right complains the left wants to take it all away from honest hardworking people and give it away to those that feed at the public trough.
And no one wants to admit that both views have some facts.
Sometimes I wonder if the US is too large and diverse politically and geographically to maintain as a cohesive whole.
I've said at work that the left takes my money and gives away in social programs, the right takes it and gives to the rich, but they both just keep taking my money in taxes for something that I see less and less benefit.
Now tell me that ain't the truth.
roger
actually reading the words of the report and not adding words that were not in the report Roger.
Both Conservatives and Liberals on the panel seem to say pretty much the same thing long as one doesn't see what isn't there.
both sides political leaders will try to spin during an election year to favor them and discredit the other.
No matter if they actually read it and understand, there will be attempts to make hay out of it, even if means taking one line out of the entire report and building a house of cards thereon.
I expect no better from either side's political managers and spin masters.
roger
they wouldn't be doing their job if they didn't.
That doesn't relieve the reader/listener from actually reading and understanding rendered reports although some highly educated persons here are apparently doing just that out of choice.
Hi, Roger.
And at this stage of the proceedings, any pronouncement IS political. The benefit of a bipartisan committee only comes if there's truly a bipartisan consensus among the members.
-- Dave K.
Speakeasy Moderator
click here to email semods4@yahoo.com
The opinions expressed above are my own,
and do not necessarily reflect those of CNET!
realize you may have made this reply before you read the next post.
No matter how bipartisan or fair a finding is, I don't believe the members of both parties jointly in Congress as a whole will accept it as such. Which either side likes the report will slant it so it reads even more to support their agenda. The other side will dismiss the entire report as a polictial hatchet job.
And the spinning wheel spins on. I honestly don't believe that one tenth of people in Congress are doing any more than attempting to perpetuate and increase their own power stance.
roger
aw sheesh Dave.
and we were all waiting for you to post.
or at least Charlie.
maybe he too had a rough day in the office.
rofl.
<^_^>
david williams
If it says he did the right thing, the Dems and Libs will scream WHITEWASH! If there is the slightest criticism, the Dems and Libs will scream MELTDOWN or TRAITOR or the equivalent.
You can't communicate the truth to those who refuse to listen. However, the Dems and Libs are sure setting up the next Democrat President for one rough ride. Will they be satisfied before or after the country is destroyed?
as Ben-Vineste said pretty much the same (which does sound more like agreement than disagreement by the way):
Richard Ben-Veniste - "I'm not going to characterize the report,' said Richard Ben-Veniste, the former Watergate prosecutor who is a Democratic member of the panel. Mr. Ben-Veniste said the report had "important new information that will require us to reinterview a number of people."
Thomas H. Kean - "We very much got a flavor of what kind of information was coming to both President Clinton and President Bush," Mr. Kean said, adding that the reports "raise questions that have to be answered that were not there before, and we are going to have to call back some witnesses. But is there a smoking gun? No."
This also sounds more like agreement than disagreement - Commission officials said that a vote on a subpoena was taken in a private meeting of the commission on Tuesday and that the motion failed, with a bipartisan majority opposed.
You seem to read a lot that wasn't printed and missed a lot that was. ![]()