Reasons why the NeoCons aren't real Republicans

Monk:I've been been sitting back, enjoying this one since it got started. Crash and Holmes and Scraf are doing fine and it's been an enjoyable time so far. However, after your last post I feel I must say at least something.This just cracks me up...I cannot believe you’re serious. The statement by Duck Durbin was in response to an FBI report he read saying that detainees had been chained to the floor during extreme temperatures and denied food and water! You’re ok with that? You think Dick Durbin should be admonished for what he said? He’s a bad man because he opposes such treatment? For Christ sake, what is it with Republicans anyway? I find it nauseating that rather than criticize the administration, you guys jump all over Durbin for pointing out the obvious. Jeez, I guess speaking out such atrocities is a no no according to the Republicans.

I did not say this. Knock it off! Stop putting words into my mouth. It's the typical neoccon response. Grow up and read what I wrote and what Durbin actually said...for once...and then address the real issue.You still don’t get it do you. Durbin DID NOT say we are like the Nazis. He said what was done down in Gitmo was something that might have been done in a Gulag or Concentration camp.AND HES CORRECT! Yes Monk, I agree with what Durbin said.NOT what neocons are accusing him of saying. He said that what occurred to the Detainees at Gitmo was something that very well might have occurred in a Nazi concentration camp or a Gulagand he’s correct. Do you deny what occurred, and/or do you have no problem with what occurred? Please explain why what Durbin really said was so terrible.Now, I could pretend I am a neocon and write how you must think that treating people in the manner to which Durbin made his statement is ok. That you think the Nazis did good things and the Holocaust was ok. But I'm not like that. I truly believe that you think the Nazis where the bad guys and the Concentration camps were a deplorable. But by disagreeing with Durbin...it sure "looks" like you think the chaining people to the floor and denying them food and water is an acceptable form of detention. If this is not your position, then I assume that deep down you know that Durbin was correct, but being a good little Republican, you avoid the issue and vilify the speaker.Notice that in his apology, Durbin stated that historical parallels can be misused and misunderstood. I fail to see how even a neocon can misunderstand what he (Durbin) meantwhich leaves only misuse. What a surpriseand the point I think Schraf, Holmes, and Crash have been trying to make. Namely, that even when something so obviously terrible as chaining people to a floor and denying them food and water occurs by usthe USAthat for a Democrat to make an obvious historical reference, neocons will avoid addressing the actual issue (likeohI don’t knowummmmchaining people to the fucking ground and denying them food and water!!) and instead warp what was said to make it appear that the speaker (almost always a Democrat or Liberal) is as unpatriotic and one can be, and that they hate this Country and all it stands forwhen in actuality, quite often just the opposite is true.

Monk:I’ll try this one more time. The atrocities (to which you supplied the quote) neglected to mention the addition actions of being chained to the floor and being denied food and water. Imagine that...a quote misused...I'm stunned. Are you agreeing that this sort of treatment is ok? Are you saying that this treatment is in keeping with the ideals of this Country? Are you saying that this does not sound like something that may have come out of testimony in regards to a Gulag or Concentration camps? You guys (neocons) are the ones misusing what he (Durbin) meant. You guys (see above) do it almost every time someone criticizes this administration. Why is that?Againthe comparison Durbin made was specifically in reference to the actions he mentionedis that really so difficult for you to figure out? And keep in mind it was based on the words of and FBI agent that went to Gitmo. So you can stop giving me a history lesson, it’s irrelevant to the discussion.

Hi Monk: Ok, I’ll try to keep this brief, so as not to move any further into Durbin territory, but don’t you get itit’s NOT about Durbin. It’s about how neocons will not admit fault or criticize members of their own party. I know that you have some criticisms of the Republican Party in general (I read your post in the Dean thread), but this is more about individuals within the Party and their complacent misuse of Durbins statement(s). Holmes explained a few things that I intentionally avoided explaining, in hopes that you would come to the conclusion, and then actually admit, that Durbin’s comments were being completely misused. For once, I wanted to see a neocon say you’re right; Durbin most certainly did not compare Gitmo to a Nazi concentration camp. Really, that’s all I wantedjust for you to admit that Durbin did not say what you (and many, many others) are accusing him of saying. But, alas, it was not to be sohow surprising.

Sorry...double post...I hate computers... This message has been edited by FliesOnly, 06-23-2005 11:31 AM

Monk: I agree...and if these intelligent people stopped right there, their assumption might be correct. However, an intellectual, or "interested in the truth" sorta person might then proceed to read what else was written... It is about you...and the others within your Party that keep making a comparison they know to be false. I only mentioned the criticisms you wrote about in the other post so that you would NOT respond with something like" Hey, I have criticized my Party, see post whatever". In this particular example I am after an admission that what individuals are attributing to Durbin is not what he implied, based on the entire statement he madenot just selected portions.
Let me try it this waythe last time I checked, the criticisms about Durbin were being put forth by members of the Republican Party...not as a blanket platform of the Republican Party. To criticize the Party is one thing...and admiral thingbut not applicable to what I’m trying to get across. Certainly you're smart enough to know the difference, or is it really that confusing for you? Ummm...well...not quite. You posted the second to last paragraph of a 62 paragraph statement he read on the floor of the Senate. Have you read his entire statement? If so, then you are knowingly being dishonest and deceitful. If you have not, then maybe you shouldand then see if you can honestly reach the same conclusion you currently hold so dear. Duhnogolly geeyou’re soooo smartcould you please explain it to me? And then I’ll explain to you what partial quote out of context, and condescending meanhow would that be?

You are correct, we will never agree. But I have to make at least one more attempt to get you to understand that my complaint was not solely about what Durbin said. It was, and continues to be, the misrepresentation of his ENTIRE speech, based on a selected paragraph. I hate such behavior by anybody, be they Republicans, or Democrats, or Liberals, or Communists, or the Pope, or even my friggen mother! I am not trying to defend what Durbin said so much as I have been trying to get you to admit that his intent (and anyone else’s for that matter) should be based on the entire speech, not selected portions. Why is that so awful? If you read his entire presentation and come to your same conclusion, then so be it, there is obviously no way we will agree.Here’s and idea thoughtry thisread to someone who is unaware of the controversy, the portions of Durbin’s speech that mention the atrocities (and related actions) that he refers to in the quote you keep repeating, and then ask them if they think that such things were more likely to have been committed by Americans or Nazis. Play fair thoughread ALL of the pertinent passages.Ok, now for something that I truly hope we both DO agree upon. Holmes really needs to change that avatar. I get the hee bee gee bees every time I look at it (sorry Holmes, it just creeps me out ).ABE: I'm outa here for the day to attempt to replace numerous parts on my bike (the pedaling kind), so don't expect a reply to anything before tomorrow some time.This message has been edited by FliesOnly, 06-23-2005 04:10 PM

Monk: NO he wasn't. He was saying that if you did not know who had committed these acts, then you would probably guess they were committed by members of some of the worst regimes in history. And, he was reading from a report by an FBI agent that was there...that saw the acts in question. How do you propose we find out if the FBI agent was actually an undercover Liberal Democrat just making these allegations up to make Bush and Company look bad. That's what you think, isn't it? I mean, it's about the only conclusion I can come to based on your posts. And you know it was completely false how exactly? And insulting in what way?