Fifty-seven-years ago, Harvard expelled Ted Kennedy for paying a friend to take a Spanish exam. Yesterday, Harvard awarded him an honorary degree.

When I got baughk, Mary Jo and the caugh weahr gaughn.

Like all of the untalented members of the Kennedy family, Ted K. has gotten a lot of mileage out of that last name.

Soooo...honorary degree for what? Giving away other people's money?! Oh how the elites love to pat themselves on the back.

Hi Dan:

I believe that during his debate with Ed McCormack who was the then Attorney General of Mass. that he was told by McCormack that if his name was Edward Moore he would not even be there. How prophetic of McCormack.

They(the Kennedys) are the entitled ones who could best be described as "carpetbaggers". Keep up the good work. By the way they were both competing for the Senatorial seat held by JFK buddy Ben Smith when
JFK became President, Smith was appointed for the remainder of his term. The year was 1962.

"Oh how the elites love to pat themselves on the back."

Like 'Mission Accomplished' on 5/2/2003.

p.s.
I love this cover from American Conservative magazine.
http://unreasonablefaith.com/2008/11/17/george-w-bushs-missions-accomplished/

Yes. That would apply to ALL elites, would it not?

He must deserve the honorary degree, my poli. sci. professor told me he will go down as one of the greatest senators of our country's history.

For doing what? Carrying on the alleged Kennedy legacy? Girl sandwiching? Speed chugging a bottle of Chivas? Being a Democrat and getting elected ad infinitum in a predominantly Democrat/Moonbat State?

That’s the same mentality that has him over at his Alma Mater collecting a bogus degree.

The mission was accomplished. Saddam's regime had been taken down. That was the mission. Willful, or ignorant, misunderstanding of the context isn't any way to make a point.

The occasional elite squadron is trained in house-to-house combat and sweeps, mainly to support a strategic effort of conventional warfare in a larger theater of war. But in Iraq, sweeps were a policing action, and the goal themselves.

Also, he was on an aircraft carrier. If you think air-support helps in house-to-house actions, then I can see where you don't get how accomplished the air force's mission was.

If you can show me, in a clear context, just what "Mission Accomplished" was supposed to mean, then I'll agree with this mantra that it meant that everything was done and we could just about go home.

[This is again illustrative of the general lack of subtlety or any room given for nuance, in the everyday liberal patter.]

I agree King. And it didn't hurt moral or the effort for him to say what he said, to the disdain of those on the left.

My point was that anytime the elites (i.e. Kennedy, Bush) get into self-congratulatory mode, it makes me wince.

However, it could easily be argued that Bush has done a hell of lot more than than Scuba Ted.

Sea King,

I think it is your willful, or ignorant, misunderstanding of the context that is failing to make a valid point.

Try and read this website and try and tell me the real 'mission'.
http://www.tafinn.com/andyfinn-us/bush_league/bush-admin-original-intent.htm

There was certainly no link with 9/11, al qaeda, Bin Laden, or any of that relevant contextual information even though in his victory speech he said "The Battle of Iraq is one victory in a war on terror that began on September the 11th, 2001". As for what the 'mission' was, taken from his speech it is apparent that it was that "Major combat operations in Iraq have ended." even though we would see the bloodiest days 18 months later in Faluja. The 'mission accomplished' banner was meant to pull the wool over everyone's eyes to present the illusion that they actually knew what they were doing.

Horse
Please continue arguing things that happened many years ago and that you really don't understand. It makes you look really smart. (that was sarcasm)

"Please continue arguing things that happened many years ago and that you really don't understand."

The conversation started by talking about things in the 70's, so 5 years ago seems recent. Second, does it really appear that ASDF knows what he is talking about when he says, "However, it could easily be argued that Bush has done a hell of lot more than than Scuba Ted."

And, please, tell me what I don't understand about

Intelligence “@nalysts never said there was an imminent threat" from Iraq before the war. (CIA Director George Tenet, speech, Feb. 5, 2004)

I don't think they [WMD] existed. What everyone was talking about is stockpiles produced after the end of the last [1991] Gulf War, and I don't think there was a large-scale production program in the '90s. (David Kay, former chief weapons inspector of the UN Special Commission on Iraq, Reuters, Jan. 24, 2004)

Rumsfeld was saying that we needed to bomb Iraq," Clarke said. "And we all said ... no, no. Al-Qaeda is in Afghanistan. We need to bomb Afghanistan. And Rumsfeld said there aren't any good targets in Afghanistan. And there are lots of good targets in Iraq. I said, 'Well, there are lots of good targets in lots of places, but Iraq had nothing to do with it.' (Richard Clarke, in Against All Enemies: Inside America’s War on Terror)

hummm... Seems pretty simple to an idiot like me. It is statements like this that just don't have any weight to them: Also, he was on an aircraft carrier. If you think air-support helps in house-to-house actions, then I can see where you don't get how accomplished the air force's mission was.

For one, there was no 'house-to-house' action while fighting the Iraq army. Second, the Air Force doesn't have carriers. It was all just a show and Bush was the puppet.

The 'mission accomplished' banner was meant to pull the wool over everyone's eyes to present the illusion that they actually knew what they were doing.

This understanding of "mission accomplished" almost certainly correlates with the understanding that Bush stole the 2000 election.

no, I still believe that the supreme court gave it to him. He didn't need to steal it.

"hummm... Seems pretty simple to an idiot like me."
Then why are you almost always wrong?

And with "almost always" I was being generous.

Come on Webster. Now you sound like Al 'Green' Gore. Stole the election? You mean after the circuit courts in Florida and supreme court said he didn't?

And let's not forget how they found ballots for Gore all over the place and ballots for Bush in dumpsters. Not to mention military ballots predominantly for Bush that were not counted.

It all evens out though doesn't it? Obama stole the $hit our of this last election.

We don't need no stieenking rules or standards anymore in this country. Right?

asdf,
just in case you're joshing me and I'm too bleary eyed to get it, I essentially said that those who believe that mission accomplished was a cynical ploy to take our attention away from what idiots Bush and Cheney are also believe that Bush stole the election (okay, Horse, had it stolen for him). I don't believe either.

Like I said, I just woke up and may be missing something.

Back at you Webster, I was posting late and was a wee bit bleary eyed as well. Misunderstood your meaning.

Think this going to bed at midnight and getting up before dawn is getting to me. ;-\

I feel relatively certain, the honorary degree had much to do with the aid and assistance Teddy gave the Marxists, which happen to be the role models or heros of a vast number of the Harvard faculty.
No one was a better friend to the left's motherland, the old USSR, than Teddy.
Millions killed and only at Harvard does that make you a role model.
The academic quality, at once elite universities, is circling the drain and doing so in a rapid manner.

These 60's era losers are like a nightmare or a plague, they just keep returning like cockroaches.

Hey horse- why in the hell do you and your kind, refuse to mention this one minor detail that lead to the Iraq war, that being Saddam Hussien giving the UN or international community, the finger for eleven years? They were only in material breach of 17 UN resolutions or put another way, your beloved "international law". Why didn't the all important western Europeans have the will to enforce the resolutions? If the resolutions weren't enforced,doesn't that prove the UN to be a worthless,corrupt organization, that is completely irrelevant?
Of course it does and that's why the left purposely leave that fact out of every debate about the Iraq war. Guess what, you can't have it both ways, you either enforce UN security resolutions of you bulldoze the building.
The mistake Blair and Bush made were having the guts to enforce "interbational law". Looking back at events, I wish they would have done nothing, then the US could have eliminated that abortion of an organization, the UN.

Even that infamous plagurist,Joe Biden, was bright enough to realize what was a stake, that being the relevance of the UN.

P.S. I am convinced Botox causes permanent brain damage, my proof, Biden,Pelosi,and the airheads in Hollywood.

Gosh, Horse, it's amazing that I missed that Bush said that the war was over, I just don't know what to do with this site, saying:

"But while he described the war in Iraq as 'one victory in the war on terror which began on September the 11th 2001' he also stressed that war was not over."

http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2003/s845976.htm

Also, from the CNN transcript, Bush said "Our mission continues. Al Qaida is wounded, not destroyed." So the one time he mentions "mission" he says it continues.

Here's a little nuance for you, Horse: Not everything that goes into this, is necessarily crafted from one viewpoint. Some things are contributions from other parties, that may be on the same "side", but represent different viewpoints. The view of a mission accomplished could have come from the military and represented their view that the military mission was over. It might have been unobjectionable, because giving soldiers a feeling that they had won, was just a natural expectation.

It's ambiguous at best what "Mission Accomplished" applies to. Also, I'm quite sure they needed air-support in the initial phases of the war.

Also house-to-house fighting is different in times of war and in times where you are policing. You'd clear the neighborhoods of non-combatants in times of war, where that's precisely not the idea in a police action. And as I said house-to-house is not exactly not done, but it's not the main objective, but supports actions in a theater.

my argument was about his saying that major combat opperations were over in Iraq (as taken from his carrier speech), which was clearly false. I think he knew he was wrong, which made it a lie.

And mike, you're a dick, fall back into your rank and file and shut up.

"I think he knew he was wrong"

Ah, I never tire of the psychic liberal act.