December 2014

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31      
Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 08/2003

« They Didn't Use Their Turn Signal, Either | Main | Just For The Record »

October 28, 2003


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

"You've got to learn to show respect for those in charge and not disrespect him/her just because you didn't vote for them."
That would be like calling the President of AoA a moron because you are unhappy with his good fortune when the candidate you voted for didn't get the job. Also, it would be disrespectful to all of those who support his Presidency position. Naming him a moron would be implicating those who gave him their vote are of moron status as well.
To call anyone a moron is disrespectful but... when you categorize the commander and chief (United States) as a moron simply because your opinion was derived from hear-say it gives me the impression that you are a sheep,
You know.. Follow the leader, let someone else tell me what I should believe and say. Bah, Bah!

You could have at least, given a supporting statement that would give your comment some legitimacy. I would love to hear any presidential blunders that brought you to conclude Bush is a moron. Is Bush a moron because he went to war, or because he didn't bow his knee to popular opinion? Maybe he is a moron because he is from Texas? Who knows.

Now I would like to clarify something.. I have called President Bill Clinton a few expletives in the past, but here were my reasons,
1. Having sex with an intern in the White House, in the oval office. That alone is a gross misuse of influential power he held as the leader of the free world.
What it boils down to is Bill Clinton used the office of Presidency to enable him to gain sexual favors. Bill used his position for personal gain. That's criminal.
Why didn't Bill reject temptation, and be a man of character.. Easy.....Simply because he is not a man of character. He is a self-seeking womanizer and he brought shame on our entire nation in front of the entire world. He used America's capital as his personal whorehouse. I believe I've called him an idiot on several occasions. If he were not an idiot, then we would have never heard the name Monica Lewenski, Jennifer Flowers, White Water, Linda Tripp, on and on and on.

Bill Clinton not only committed adultery, he also tarnished the relationship Presidents have had with Interns in the past. It is suppose to be a real honor to intern in the White House and work with and around the President and his staff. Thanks to Bill, nobody even wants to say President and Intern in the same sentence.

Bill Clinton the sex predator?
Sad actually, because he fooled everyone, America voted an evil man into office twice, based not on character but on popularity and prosperity.
I heard tons of people say... well why should his sex life be of any importance to anyone. All I care about is if he is doing a good job and the economy is good. The answer to that is, the Presidency is not a man,
The Presidency is an INSTITUTION. An institution created by our founding fathers that must be honored and protected. It's not Bill's to wield as he sees fits, he swore to serve that office with integrity and honor. Whoops, I guess you can't squeeze honor and integrity out of just anybody.

Intern: : an advanced student or graduate usually in a professional field (as medicine or teaching) gaining supervised practical experience (as in a hospital or classroom) The bottom of the ladder.
There are laws that prevent employers from using promotions or special treatment in exchange for sexual favors. Think about it...

Another moment was when Bill started cutting back our military funding, and downsized the size and effectiveness of our military. Of course Bill was arm in arm with Hillary as they championed Hillary's gay/lesbian agenda into the heart of those he was commander and chief over. Odd thing, Bill never served, he dodged the draft, then ended up commanding our armed forces never seeing even one day of boot camp. Both Bill and Hillary used their position and platform to encourage tolerance of gays in the military, the don't ask, don't tell policy. The first thing I thought was, "Oh joy, an army of queers, promoted and indorsed by our beloved Commander and Chief. Bill was successful in overturning a military standard that goes back to the days of minute men preparing to war against the British.. Men in the military are there to prepare for the occasion of war and defend our country even to the death, fags and fighting have never been accepted, or allowed. It is a simple matter of principle. They are there to fight not make man love".

I came to these judgements because I took the time to rightly divided truth from fiction. I didn't just jump on the bandwagon with all the other republicans just because I vote republican too. I read the articles, weighed the facts, and came to a conclusion on my own. This brought me to realize that Bill was a borderline idiot, that barley escaped the White House with his hide enticed, leaving a trail of controversy and shady dealings rolling behind him all the way back to Arkansas. Remember the extremely questionable presidential pardon Bill handed over to a man convicted in tax evasion and fraud? He had fled the country trying to avoid prosecution, then eventually caught and brought to justice ten years after the fact. His brother had a connection to the President that suggested some questionable money exchanges that possibly influenced those pardons. The best justice money can buy. If you had money you could buy our last President. He could rent yourself a room in the White House, just put it on the credit card, or travelers checks, as long as its no less then 10 thousand per night (includes dinner). Also, if you had money to pay, it didn't even matter if you weren't American. Money is color blind, or at least Al Gore and Bill Clinton didn't discriminate. The huge illegal campaign scandal given by influential Non-Americans. The reason it was illegal is because we don't think it's a good idea, to allow other nations to influence our policies with cash payoffs. It falls under the shadow of national security. Don't even get me started about the items him and Hillary sold from the White House as they left.
As for the mainstream media and the liberal's Bush bashing on TV and print, let me break it down.

You don't call your president a neo Hitler or a dictator on television, right in the middle of a war. Especially, if you are a political figure of influence (house, senate). There has to be a responsibility to the self-preservation of our nation on a global scale. Comments of this nature are a misuse of influence for personal political gain. That is exactly what these 9 democrat presidential nominees are doing, and they seem to be targeting the hard left for campaign contributions. They are making defamatory claims against Bush simply because they don't stand for anything on their own. The democrats have been losing seats of power in the senate, the house, governor ships, and now even in the supreme courts if they are not careful. I believe they have become the minority because the majority of Americans have seen passed the smoke and mirrors and have had enough. Theses presidential wannabe's have chosen the art of spin because they don't stand for America first, they stand for their party and its influential power first, and spin is all they have left in their arsenal.

Remember this....?? "We need a regime change in America.."
??? Wow!!!, that statement implies that Bush is on the same level as Saddam. So if their comparing Bush to Saddam then they are saying that Bush is what Saddam is?

Well, lets look at what Saddam is...

Saddam: Evil DictatorThe last Iraq election, Saddam got 100% of the vote. That happened because he killed, imprisioned, and tortured all of those that opposed him. Saddam was the only one that ran for office of ruler, there wasn't even another candidate to choose from.

Umm......, who do you want as the ruler of Iraq?.... 1.Saddam oooor choice number 2.Saddam
And remember every vote is read, so if you don't vote for Saddam, then we will rape the women in your family, throw your children into prison, or gas your entire community. Thanks for shopping, your vote for Saddam is a vote for your next breath.

Bush: Elected OfficialEven though the election came to a photo finish, Al Gore was able to exercise his freedoms and challenge the election in the highest court in the land. We had three choices for President. Even right now, the Democrats have 9 potential hopefulls to run for President on the Dem. ticket.

Saddam: Mass murderer There are mass graves in Iraq just like those in Nazi Germany. Documented Iraqi testimony telling of whole families being mangled till they were dead in a industrial plastic chippers. The lucky ones were thrown in head first. If you lost at the Olympics, you would be tortured and possibly killed.

Bush: Defender to those oppressed and murdered He made the decision to war with Iraq and any others that attempted to use mass murder on Americans. He came to the defense of the lives and happiness of his people.

Saddam:Supporter of terrorist factions To say "Bush is a warmonger that invaded Iraq and now is unable to prove Saddams terrorist ties, or find these WMD that he used as a justification for going to war" is ludicrous... Saddam IS a terrorist, why in the world wouldn't he support others that are just like him in ideology and religious commonality? Why would we think that Saddam didn't have any WMD when we already know he used WMD on his own people, killing thousands, women, children, livestock. They died because they wanted to rule themselves.

So... we go to the UN and draft yet another resolution...The UN proved itself to be a Tiger with no teeth. They never backed up the resolutions issued to Saddam. The UN is a good example of allowing terror to rule by always trying to solve the problem by talking, or drawing up another agreement, in hopes that this next resolution will be the answer. Each time, they would threaten Saddam in a resolution format, he would comply just enough which allowed him to continue to play his little game. It would be like the police telling you to freeze, then you realize his doesn't have a gun, he is just pointing his finger at you hoping you will comply. Saddam never complied to any of the UN resolutions and there were 10 or more, still Bush gave him one more chance to comply. Bush took the issue before the UN, which took weeks. Bush carried the full support of the British Prime Minister and many other countries. However, Saddam began his standard responses and replies to the UN and to the demands of the United States. He was the master of stalling. He stalled for over 14 years before his bluff was called. Saddam continued to pull out his entire political bag of tricks, as he readied his armaments to defend against a possible American invasion. Part of the requirements issued to Saddam was the declaration of all illegal weapons, which never fully was accomplished. The United States began to strengthen the threat of invasion if the deadline wasn't met.
The official position of the Iraq government stayed constant in stating that all the unlawful weapons had been destroyed. Pressure continued to build as the Americas pulled into striking position. This is when Saddam suddenly found the Asmoud missiles and began to destroy them as a last ditch effort to avoid war. He did this as a way of appeasement and a way to buy time.
I tell you the truth if it had been Clinton, we could have expected him to a handful of missiles into Baghdad, and that would have been it. If Clinton thought that his approval rating would be damaged he would have just stopped at Afghanistan, with the declaration. "Mission accomplished."
Remember the first WTC bombing, well who was the President then? Why weren't things considered serious enough at that point. They arrested the cell group in NY I believe, some old ass blind dude and a couple of his henchmen. We knew at that time, that Islamic Militants has already declared a war of terror on us, yet oddly enough, we allowed it to grow and 911 was the result. I honestly hold the Clinton administration responsible for 911, if Bill hadn't been in a legal quagmire over, whitewater, Monica, Jennifer Flowers, the list goes on and on and on and on. Vincent Fosters suicide right before he was suppose to turn over information in the whitewater investigation, also, a State Patrol officer murdered that knew too much about Bills indiscretion in the governor ship of Arkansas. If Bill hadn't had all that baggage then he may have been able to concentrate on the job he was sworn into do.

Bush: Supporter of peace He has rallied the leaders of the World to join him as he readied to fight those that hate peace and love terror. Then when faced with a veto threat from France and Russia, it didn't matter that America had enough countries to get the passing vote deciding that the use of force would be used if Saddam didn't meet the deadline, and they had all the votes they needed to proceed. France forced Bush's hand and Bush never backed down from those words he told Saddam. "Either comply or be removed".
Man, Bush must really love peace allot, he has been willing to lay his reputation and career on the line if that was the cost of keeping America safe.

Bringing stability to the Middle East is the key to Homeland security. Go deal with the problem at its source. Our military position in Iraq is one of strategy, and purposeful intent. We are not on the outside looking in anymore. We have successfully taken an offensive position in the heart of the terrorist's stomping grounds. This enabled us to monitor and influence, with the threat of force, terrorist activity in Saudi and in Iran. Iran has developed nukes possibly. We have more of a chance to take swift action, even more then ever before in the Middle East. Its like this, keep your allies close but keep your enemies closer. We now hold the ability to maneuver an attack anywhere in the Middle East. We don't have to wait for Turkey to call for 3 different votes in parliament, ending in denied access anyway. The conquest of Iraq allows us to deal with the terrorist at their front door. Its called tactical positioning.

Saddam: More concerned about his national image and control over the country then the economic stability of his people.
Bush: More concerned about stopping the threat of terror even if it ruined his public image, and while under political attacks left and right he managed to take some large steps to stimulate our economy. I like what Bush said, about his tax cuts and early refunds. In short, "I have faith and trust in the American people to know how to invest their own money apart from another government run plan". He passed his tax relief plan, cut taxes, lowered the fed rate, and amazingly enough his faith in "We the People" paid off.

Saddam: More concerned about his path and security, instead of securing those lives he governs and should be serving and protecting. The liberals are screaming about "Bushes reconstruction plan for Iraq being a failure because it is taking too long and costing more then originally estimated."
Small statement... The oil refineries in Iraq were in such deplorable conditions because of Saddams and his rule of terror. The pipelines were falling to pieces. The power grids used to power the city were outdated, damaged, and blackouts were just as regular as Sienfield or Friends. The money needed for updating equipment was being crammed into Saddams bank account. The Saddam boys, before they were run out, they took the time to raid the banks taking millions.

Bush: He is willing to take the hit if that is the cost for protecting those he was elected to serve. Those that hate freedom hate America and that can't be worked out simply by signing a peace treaty and a photo opt with the President.
*Remembers Clinton shaking hands with Israel and Palestine, this is an excellent example of "The appearance of progress minus any results".
Palestinians are more willing to kill themselves then talk about peace. The way of peace is not found in civil communication with these people of the sand. Their goal is the elimination of Israel. This is one huge reason America is hated and despised. They want to kill the Jews but America stands in the way.
Important Statement, write this down..."Even if you disagree with Bush and his polices, the terrorist still hate you"the infidel" and are preparing to kill you even now."

Its extremely important that the Democrats challenge Bush in 2004 with actual counter solutions to current government polices and programs. What current message are we saying to the world and more importantly the message being sent to the Islamic extremist, as the Democrats keep hammering away over the War. To say that Bush's decision to go to war is unpopular sends a message to the world saying that the United States is not unified. American politicians calling for regime change empowers the terrorist to see if we stand fast or crumble.

If I were a terrorist, I would be a jumping for joy to see that the current American President's decision to go to war with Iraq so widely unpopular. That would mean that it is widely unpopular to kill me the terrorist. It means that America is divided and I stand a chance of survival long enough to kill the infidels.

It would give me hope that those not willing to stop me and take away my ability to hurt America will be the next elected officials.

I would be thrilled to hear on CNN about protest against the war, people pouring into the streets because American soldiers are dying. Hell, I would start to see the hope of a possible victory if all I have to do to remove Bush is make sure that American soldiers die every day. I would kill them, as the blame is passed along to Bush.

The American media could be a possible weapon to aid the terrorist movement. A terrorist by definition lives to create terror. The people that are screaming that Bush is a dictator and going on and on and on about Bush being responsible for American lives lost in Iraq are sensationalizing terror via our mainstream press. They are bringing focus on the cost of being at war instead of the benefit for being at war.

During World War II we were losing an average of 360 troops a day. We were fighting to save Europe from an evil dictator, and stop him from eventually becoming a treat to the U.S. Back home in the states the front-page news said things like... "Victory at hand" , "Down with communism".
Can you imagine if everyday the paper said.. 360 men were slain on the beach, daily? How do you think that would have affected our resolve to fight until we achieve victory? Think of all the family members and mothers knowing their sons were at a statistical disadvantage. Why would you want to give families a daily reminder that their sons are dying in mass everyday? People had more sense back then, with a stronger sense of national pride. The media unified with the war effort. The media used its influence to boost moral and bring hope to those families waiting for their boys to return home. The government made sure that the media did not undermine nor compromise America's ability to defeat Hitler and the Nazis. My question is what in the hell happened to our collective common sense?
Answer... it was thrown out the window in order to bolster a political take over by the liberals, and it's been discarded by the media conglomerates as they battle everyday to out do each other as they compete for ratings.
Rating equals profit, and profit equals power, and power equals influence.

To quote the Bible..."the love of money is the root of all evil". Those that have the money rule, those that have no money don't. Greed vs. America's long term security. Who do you think is going to win?

Remember that quote? "United we stand, divided we fall."?

Well its true, the Democrats knew they didn't have any legitimate counter positions to defeat Bush in the 2004 elections coming up that would be big enough to beat a president in the middle of war time with a republican majority behind him. Bush has the chips stacked in his favor, because of the war. So the democrats decided that their main strategy was to make the president look bad.

Basically put..."You should vote for us, because Bush sucks".
The correct attitude should be, "You should vote for us, because "this is our vision for helping the economy, this is our vision for social security, our method will be more productive, because we can fix the failures of the current systems in place". I think they aren't going the route "our way is better" because the economy is growing at an unprecedented rate, jobs are coming back, Bush's approval rating over the war is rising.

The only smart democrat politician right now, I would say is Hillary. She went to afghan and Iraq and had this to say

Hillary to the troops,
"I agree that we need to be here, terrorism is an enemy we have to destroy before they destroy us, but... I disagree with the way the White House administration is going about it. We need more troops, we need better tactics in Iraq, that are more productive allowing us to leave Iraq in a stable position quickly." Note: The condition of our military is largely a reflection of the previous White House administration (Bill Clinton)that made major cuts to our military size and the amount of pay they receive. The Clinton's are the ones that downsized our military and softened our ability to handle this type of situation without logistical problems.

Hillary seems like the only one smart enough to see that the war is necessary, or at least it is necessary that she show her support to try to win the hearts of the American people. However, it was said that the military staff assigned to her, had a difficult time finding troops that were willing to eat Thanksgiving dinner with her. Bush totally upstaged Hillary with his counter appearance in Baghdad.

Our influence in the Middle East is vital. And the majorities of Americans have recognized the threat and do support our President, and government officials to know and act in our best interest. But the reason Hillary is taking this supportive approach is purely for political reasons. The Clinton's know how to read the populous feeling and make sure they say and do what is necessary to get the vote.

Now, I would like to make another point, the Clinton's are good at knowing what to say and keeping their popularity high, but they lacked the one thing that Bush has without a doubt

Personal conviction that demands you follow what's right, even if it cost you your popularity, or cost you the next Presidential election, or causes other nations to officially criticize you. Intestinal fortitude even in the face of adversity.

Last but not least... I want to leave you with this thought.

Love desires to give even at the expense of itself.
Lust desires to get even at the expense of everyone else.

sno-man, I can't believe that you took so much time to piece together that crap! You've got to stop listening to rush and watching only Fox (propoganda) news station.

This current president is a complete bozo and there is nothing wrong with calling a bozo by his proper title! He likes to use the word 'sacrifice' alot but he doesn't practice what he preaches because he's been busy fattening his doners and his own bank account ever since 9/11! He has put this country at much greater risk to terrorism by allowing Osama (who?) to continue running around, thumbing his nose at us and inspiring tens of thousands of Islamic youth in the war against the 'evil' United States! He is putting our children at risk by implementing horrendous environmental policies which have greatly increased the amount of toxins going into the air, ground and water. His policies of raping and pillaging our childrens future with huge borrowing to pass tax give-aways, taxcuts for the wealthy and tax-breaks for his corporate donars is disgusting and nothing short of treason!

Yes, bozo is the right tag for this guy and if history is written accurately he will go down as the lousiest president that we've ever had in this country!

Suck my cock you red diaper doper baby. You want ad hominum attacks? Well here it is rump ranger. I've shit bigger turds than you and wouldn't even strain a hair to get you out of my ass you smegma infested vaginal blood fart.

Fvck off and get your crack whore momma off the streets.


It's scary to think that someone with your ability to embrace twisted propaganda and ignore facts is willing to spend the time to write that ridiculous manifesto.

It's even more scary to think that you actually have a vote. Alas ... democracy's only flaw. You only need a body, not a brain to practice.

Well "Can Think", I'd like to see you explain your vote.

Forget that Bush's economy stimulus plan is Working, forget that 23,000,000 people can now live in religeous and political freedom, let's just forget the actual Facts and keep on whining shall we ?

Silver Pheonix ... it's pretty easy to get an economy rolling when the dollar is devalued. They do that in developing countries all the time to kick-start a third world economy into the world economic stage.

The US dollar is in the dumpster against all major currency in the world. Down significantly against the Euro, the British pound, the Japanese yen, the Canadian dollar.. the list goes on. (On the bright side, it's holding fairly steady against the Mexican peso ... give you a clue to our rightful place in world economics?) You never hear about that "little" detail in the number-cooking game do you?

The individual debt for every American family is staggering and instead of getting better, we're getting drowned more every day. You think the Bush economic policies are working? That's ignorance made public. What's working, as it has from day one, is the propaganda machine. That's the one bit I will award to this government. Never has an administration buried the population so deep in rhetoric and crap, and had nearly half the country fail to even notice. That's amazing. America, home of the best marketing team in the world.

What occupying force in history has not claimed the people were better off? No different here. And pretty obvious the Iraqi's are not exactly filled with love and warmth for their "liberators." Duh! We're not liberators, folks. That was an invasion. Period. No legal/moral reason to be there, and no apology for it. WMD issue dead and gone. Thousands dead, and the "evil one" still floating around the world with billions of dollars at his disposal and a real bee up his butt. Osama still floating around the world. What exactly has been accomplished? You have to be totally removed from even one sense cell to believe we are safer than we were. Now, if you want to talk about who's getting the money, and pure old-fashioned revenge ... that's a subject with a future even when the brain is kicked into gear.

As long as you guys keep standing there with your mouths open and you eyes shut, Rush is going to keep shitting down your throats and getting filthy rich while he's doing it! It's really quite comical except for the fact that idiot sheep who have been programmed by that fat druggie amount to a pretty large voting block, which goes to show just how long natural selection has been kept from doing it's job and the end result is getting people like the bozo in the white house and Newt inflicted on the rest of us!

You poor, laughable examples of the sad state of liberalism today. You kept on sipping your lattes while Clinton was in charge. In fact you thought he was kind of cute. He had that Rock Star persona going on, just like the groups you pumped your fists to as you rocked out to back in the day. And who cares about his ambiguity and his sordid affairs. That kind of summed up the way you all turned out anyway. Everything's cool. Everything's relative. You listen to the growing banality of your kid's music, but that's okay, everyone's got their own thing. You see them all tattoed and dressed in black with trench coats, but hey, everyone is allowed to express themselves. And if they go out and lob a few pipe bombs or bust a few caps at school because your distance and self-absorbtion cripples them, hey, just blame it on the lack of gun control They're exposed to all kinds of crap from corporations trying to sell them something. Their ears are filled with lyrics that degrade and demean, from degenerates posing as artists. They're pumped full of pornographic sensuality from every media outlet available, but that too is no problem. But yet, you all raise your heads from the trough, eye's fierce and fangs dripping by god, if you catch a whiff that someone at their school prayed in their direction. Yep, everything is cool for you, no problem man, laidback, chillin, live and let live. Totally in the zone. You only rise up when the bogey man from your drug addled youth rears it's head - "The Conservative". Got to go and dust off those protest signs. Maybe fire one up for old time's sake. "You know man (cough, cough, inhale) we've got to end the war, stop those Republican dudes in power. Cause they're like...bad dude, for the environment (exhale) and all that other stuff, and they're like Christian too, with all that morality bullshit.." Isn't it funny that your party is the party of vacancy? The party that does best when it's out of power and can criticize, yet offers nothing of substance from itself?

In reference to the following comment "You've got to learn to show respect for those in charge and not disrespect him/herjust because you didn't vote for them."

C'mon, his being a failure has nothing to do with who did or did not for him. Have you looked at the size of the defecit lately?

George W. Bush? The guy who got into Princeton (the lowest Ivy League school) only because his father and grandfather attended and managed a C average only because he had intensive tutoring? (The more you read of his history, the less qualified of a president he seems.) The one who took something necessary like liberating Iraq and managed to make half the world hate the U.S. even more along the way?

Seriously, if Bush didn't want to be bashed, he should've become president of some other country. It comes with the territory no matter what side you're on. Deal with it.

ok, so you can list 3 paragraphs on why a man who lies about sex ought to be impeached, but ignore the 54 - that's right, 54 - public lies the Bush administration gave as reasons for war.
The miserable failure will get re-elected thanks to politically aware individuals such as yourself. I fear this article is dead on...

I guess it just depends on what your definition of freedom is and what your knowledge of history is. Sex is human and there's nothing wrong about it. Oligarchy on the other hand is simply pure evil.

If you need so many words to defend someone who is characterised so brilliantly in only two words, you are defending the indefensable.



So it looks like you're the only person who's done any research. I guess everyone who disagrees with you is a moron who hasn't done any research. Same mentality as the administration and party you support. See, the thing about America is, we are all entitled to our opinion, whether you like it or not. You can believe Bush is really running the country, and I can believe he's a murdered out for personal and political gain. That's why I love America; FREEDOM! Looks like you'd rather live in a place where only one opinion can be expressed. Well, there are plenty of country's left in the world with "evil dictators" that haven't been "invaded" by this country, many of which are supported by this country, that have more you're style government. Why don't you move to one and be happier?

At least, whether you like them or not, Clinton was "really" making the decisions as president. Even all you right wingers will agree to that. It's painfully obvious that "W." is just a mouthpiece for Cheney, Rumsfeld and the republican party. The retort to that is "he surrounds himself with smart people," which is saying he's a puppet. Apparently, since "W.'s" slipped into office, a puppet president is a "positive" thing! You people are using the same pathetic argument in California regarding the new governor there. Every Bush speech is a jingoistic pep-rally, filled with repetitive words like "terrorist," "sacrifice," "defense," and "our troops," designed to mislead and stroke the collective ego of the American people. The sad thing is, it's working!

Its perfectly alright to call somebody a moron if, by their actions they prove that they are.

Bush is a _moron_

-posted on behalf of the rest of the word-

I write from the UK. Whatever you hear, not all people over here think that George W Bush is a bad person. Some people think he is an Evil Idiot. Here is why I agree:

A) Talk about using political power for personal gain: time and time again, he is pushing policies which benefit him and those around him, especially his friends in the energy industry, and which happen to further the degradation of the world's environment (and this is something that affects us ALL, so don't give me no "you are not American, you have no right to give an oppinion". US contributes to a third of all global pollution, so it does concern the rest of us)

B) He has abrogated for himself the title of "leader of the free world". Well thank you very much. It's good to know that the leader of the free world doesn't think that the oppinion of other democratically elected governments count at all. France and Germany
say no to war and all they get are insults.
So what, the world is free, but only to obey
Mr Bush? Someone please explain that.

C) Freeing Irak. Ok, so the war was all about 'freeing' the Iraqi people. Again, please someone explain how dropping 30000 bombs on a country in which 50% of the population are under 15 years of age, which has no sizeable army, thus destroying its basic infrastructures, can be called "delivering freedom". More like delivering death to me. What happened to the good old assasinations? Come on, it's cheaper!

D) Why 'free Irak' and not, say, Saudi Arabia? The Saudi regime is far more brutal than the Iraki regime. The Saudi monarchy impose the Shi'a (Islamic law) from a Wahsbbist lecture of the Koran. That means,
among other niceties: stoning by death for adulterers, chopping off of limbs for petty thieves, beheading for critics of the regime or Islam. Why not bomb the hell out of the Saudi's? After all, most of the highjackers on the eleventh of September were Saudi's, right? Could it POSSIBLY be that they do not do so because the Saudis are allies of the US, and that the members of the monarchy are in business deals with the Bush family? Off course not, that's just conspiracy theory, isn't it?

E) "Hey man, but Saddam Hussein had links with Al Qaeda". Wrong again. Time and time again, Bin Laden has promulgated Fatwas calling on the muslim nation to overthrow the 'infidel' governments in the Arab world.
And this includes Saddam BIG TIME. Haven't you seen the images of Saddam celebrating Christmas on TV? What do you think Bin Laden
thinks about that? By overthrowing Saddam, Bush could well have done Ossama a HUGE favour. Just look at what's happening now in Iraq. The current attacks are all designed to undermine all foreign presence in the region and hence open the way for the creation of an Islamic republic controlled by hardliners. A bit what happened in Iran.
Now, imagine this happens. The Shia faction
get their way, unite with Iran, and you have a super-state which is fertile ground for the propaganda of Bin Laden and other hard-liners within the Muslim world. Hmm... suddenly it seems a good idea to let Saddam be. At least the Irakis had gotten used to living with him in power. Now they face uncertainty, lack of water, electricity, basic health services, education, infrastructures, terrorism against anyone who cooperates with the US, and the prospect of a Iran/Saudi hard-line in goverment somewhere down the road. NOT A PRETTY SIGHT. So much for freedom.

And I could go on and on and on and on and on.

The facts are there, and this is what people
outside the US know.

With kind regards,


And a little extra:

Angeles Times - Article - 2003-12-05
''As President Bush, with much fanfare, signed legislation Wednesday aimed at speeding fire-prevention efforts in federal forests, his administration quietly adopted a rule that would expedite timber-thinning projects by removing a safeguard for endangered species''

Press - Article - 2003-12-04
''- The Bush administration is proposing to abandon the idea of treating mercury as a toxic substance requiring maximum pollution controls''

Article - 2003-11-24
''President George Bush has brought the international treaty aimed at repairing the Earth's vital ozone layer close to breakdown, risking millions of cancers, to benefit strawberry and tomato growers in the electorally critical state of Florida, The Independent on Sunday can reveal.''

Rolling Stone Magazine - Article - 2003-11-22
''Bush is sabotaging the laws that have protected America's environment for more than thirty years''

Los Angeles Times - Article - 2003-11-18
IMTV - This news is a week old, but I missed something crucial the first time around - ''In a show of support for an administration at war, the House overwhelmingly approved a bill yesterday that would grant the Pentagon exemptions to environmental laws, authorize a major overhaul of the civilian defense bureaucracy and lift a decade-old ban on government research into 'low-yield' nuclear weapons.''

''Critics said exempting the Pentagon from the environmental laws would allow the military to disturb (DISTURB?? S/B: KILL) whales and dolphins with sonar and underwater explosives and encroach on lands that are habitat for endangered birds and mammals. The new exemptions follow congressional action last year to allow the military to bypass provisions of laws protecting migratory birds.''

New York Times - Article - 2003-11-10
''...when the Environmental Protection Agency decided (NOT DECIDED, ORDERED BY THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION) to drop investigations into more than 140 power plants, refineries and other industrial sites suspected of violating the Clean Air Act. The winner is industry; the loser, the public.''

Guardian, The - Article - 2003-10-31
''White House officials have undermined their own government scientists' research into climate change to play down the impact of global warming...Symons left the EPA in April 2001 and now works for the National Wildlife Federation as head of its climate change programme. The Bush administration's attitude was clear from the beginning, he said, and a lot of people were working to ensure that the President did nothing to address global warming.''

Environmental News Network - Article - 2003-10-23
The Bush administration is telling us with a straight face that the best way to protect endangered species in poor countries is to allow those species to be hunted or captured, then sold in the United States...The administration assures us that proceeds from these sales will help the poor countries protect their remaining endangered wildlife...Poaching for conservation? It's a bit like drinking for sobriety.''

Please, PLEASE vote for him again. I hate all that fresh air and those pesky animals that keep on soiling this land God has given to us to conquer. PLEASE!!!!!!

And some more!!!! (I said I could go on and on and on...)

Jobs are being lost by the millions each year. Current statistics show that over 3 million jobs have been lost in the United States since Bush took office and bushwhacked American jobs. His tax cut to "create 1.4 million jobs" last spring was a miserable failure for everyone except the rich, who got richer.

Trade agreements, which "bushwhack" pushed through 2 (Chile & Singapore), will kill American jobs by allowing more foreign national to take jobs from American by working cheaper. These people enter the U.S. under temporary viss (H-1B & L1) which are non-immigrant visas. These are NOT permanent visas so these people are here just to work and not become citizens. Non-immigrant visa holders are hired because they work for less than the prevailing labor rates of U.S. citizens.

Meanwhile, statistics show that 540,000 high tech jobs (obviously Elizabeth Beach is NOT in this group) were lost in the U.S. in 2002, and over 235,000 already in 2003. Currently over 1,000,000 H-1B visa holders and over 300,000 L1 visa holders are in the U.S. taking jobs from Americans. NIV's are hired because they work for less than the prevailing labor rates of U.S. citizens.

MultiNational corporations are outsourcing jobs (using cheaper labor overseas) with total recklessness. Meanwhile chain stores purchase cheaper products from China. Trade agreements are pushed at Americans as a benefit by providing cheaper goods, but only working people can afford any type of goods no matter how cheap.

Less and less goods are manufactured in the U.S. Not surprisingly, the number of manufacturing jobs decreases at an alarming rate. All the while, white collar jobs are under constant attack by corporations.

Non-immigrant visa holders are brought in for cheap labor as was the case of Siemans in Florida, now infamous, and Americans not only were laid off but had to train their replacements.

Replacing Americans with cheaper foreign labor is called "INSOURCING". Replacing Americans with cheaper foreign labor by sending jobs overseas is called "INSOURCING".

Jobs being lost.
War in Iraq based upon deception of WMD.
Prescription drug plan with the "donut hole" (no actual coverage) that is a scam.
Overtime law that prevents millions of Americans from receiving overtime pay - scam.
Environment under attack including national forests.
NO CHILD LEFT ACT a mandate without funding - scam.
Veterans loosing benefits and funding.
Failed promises.
Deception and Lies.
Miserable Failure.

In addition to the overwhelming evidence posted above that George W. Bush *IS* a moron, I'd like to mention that it's always easy to defend the "war on terrorism" by saying "they did something bad so we bomb certain countries, at least we're doing something now and they deserve it" and hence insinuating this unfounded link between repressing a country and preventing terrorism. Whereas when you look at it with a realistic view, repression is the cause, not the solution. The more the US represses Islamic countries, the more they will feed extremism. Every act of "war on terrorism" has been used as proof for Islamic extremists that they are doing the right thing.

In response to the WTC attacks, Afghanistan was bombed, to "cripple Bin Laden's network". Hail to Bush, the man of solutions. Now (supposedly) the same network is responsible for the terrorist attacks in Iraq. How can that be, I thought that problem was "solved"? And why are there still warnings about coming attacks on the US? Weren't there enough bombs on Afghanistan to solve the problem? Or.. wasn't it a solution after all?

Bush just makes the same mistake as his enemies over and over again; it's this weird logic: "We will never give in to violence, but violence will convince THEM.". As long as they all keep saying that, we'll never get anywhere. While claiming to "fight terrorism", Bush just makes more enemies.

Oh yes and one more thing.. it's becoming more and more clear that the 9-11 attacks could have easily been prevented if American local intelligence divisions had worked better and more coordinated. There was a lot of evidence that something huge was going to happen for a long time. However, on the morning of the 10th of September, one day before the attacks, Bush had threatened to use his veto to prevent budget from his stupid anti-missile shield to be spent on.. better intelligence to prevent terrorism.

Of course that would have been too late to prevent the 9-11 attacks, but it does show Bush is not so much the great terrorist-fighter nor the great visionairy some people think he is. He's just chasing facts (and throwing bombs at them for lack of a better solution).

A missile-shield in space btw is as much use against terrorists as bombing a country.



dont blame Bush for all thats happening!! After all the poor guy doesnt have the brains to think of the things that USA is doing right now.

The clever guy who is behind all this is none other than DICK CHENEY. That guy is smart, i must admit. I dont see him hogging the limelight like Bush does but he makes all the important decisions leaving Bush to speak of them from prepared texts giving the impression that Bush is a decision-maker. At the end of the day Bush gets the blame while Cheney is nowhere to be seen. DICKY BOY!! You deserve an award for your cunning.

If Bush had the choice of choosing people to surround him he would definitely choose a chimpanzee cause they share such a likeness with him. I pity the man and ask that he be surgically fitted with a bigger brain (when that becomes possible).

All you people who think that Clinton was a terrible president in comparison to Bush need to see a psychiatrist. The man is a Rhodes scholar(not an easy scholarship to get by any means) and so well informed on political matters unlike his successor who doesnt bother bcoz he leaves it to his group of experts. (in a way you cant blame him. too much load for his brain) Why did Bush become president then instead of the advisor?

A man's sex life is his own. No one has a right to interfere in it. Clinton made a mistake by having a quickie with Lewinsky but the dirt that republicans threw at him because their efforts to prevent him from getting a second term went in vain. Sheer desperation on behalf of the Republicans. They talk about morals and here they are gossiping!!!

When Arnold Schwarznegger was accused of sexual misconduct on the eve of his winning elections it was all brushed aside. So much for morals. And all those morons who voted for Bush are kindly asked to visit the nearest psychiatrist to get a dose of reality.


Some will certainly be proven right by history, others wrong. That's not up to me.
I just know what I feel today, and that feeling tells me Bush is a miserable failure.

Despite what you may think about Bush or Clinton, The fact the this country has lost it's way is evident. It's not bushes fault, It's not Clintons fault. It's yours,and it's mine, and it's everybodies who sits back and lets the government take away the the one thing that can keep this nation strong. The one thing that this nation was founded on. The one thing the constitution, our laws were founded on. And that's God. The more he dwindles from our lives and our government, the more this country will fall. From guns and death in our schools, to the destruction of our enviroment. NO President is perfect, by any means. And it's not just the president. You got the Senate and the HOR. And not to mention a million other polititions out there pushing there own policies and selfish desires on the people. And we sit back and let them. And not to mention we pay them for it. NO NO it's not Bush, It's the UNITED STATES OF SODDAM AND GAMORA. We as a nation have fallen. Fallen a way from God and every thing Holy and Right. We peddle Porn on the internet, we curse god right on national tv, we walk by the homeless man on the street and pretend that we didn't see him. We allow Facist Dictators to kill and rape there people, and destroy there country for profit. We persecute Christians for trying to bring peace and joy back into the lives of people. Bin Laden was quoted to hate this country because it was a christian nation, But he is totaly wrong. The Christians in this country are being drowned out by the Whore and Money Mongers. By the people who would rather shoot you than love you. That would rather reduce you to homeless status just so they can buy the Cadilac Escalade rather than the Ford Explorer. So don't say it's all Bushes fault. Because we have been steadily degrading this nation for years by ourselves. And there will come a day when this nation will fall and bow down to Evil, Willingly. And then who will you blame. Will you look back and say it was all Bushes fault, or maybe the next President's fault. No, you better look at yourself. Cause while you were in forums complaining to each other about our problems, you did nothing to fix them.

Bush has put America in danger by placing a wedge between our once closest allies. Bush has made a fool of himself by ignoring the U.N. and later asking for thier help.
Under Bush we have had the highest number of homeless since 1930. Under Bush we have expirienced the highest deficit in our nations history.
Under Bush he have had to endure countless lies for his personal vendetta masked as a war for freedom.
Under Bush we have watched our basic freedoms chipped away under the guise of a Patriot Act.
No matter how you slice it Bush looks to be the perfect plant for terrorism.


Random Thoughts**

*In less than three years Bush has turned America into the theocracy the founding fathers tried so hard to prevent.

*"Follow the money", they always say. Well has anybody done any research on where Dubya got the money to start an oil company - from Bin Laden's family. Do the research, it's not hard to find.

*I think it's very interesting that Republicans are taking propaganda lessons from the German Nazi Party of the 1930's/40's. During the nuremburg trials all the Nazis were asked "How did you guys pull it off" the answer was, "Simple, whenever someone criticizes you turn around and acuse them of being unpatriotic". Look it up.

Hey, you know that turkey that Bush posed with during his trip to Iraq? Well, it was fake! Another successful PR move by the Karl Rove machine. It's fitting though, don't you all think? One phony turkey deserves another.

I didn't read all of this. i think it's stupid. However, I think you saying that we should respect our leaders is the dumbest shit thing I ever heard. We shouldn't respect our leaders just because they won a goddamn vote, they have to earn our respect. And by the fucking economy, the conditions in Iraq, and words from the mouth of the big cheese himself...

Fuck respecting that asshole.

And on a note of respecting our leaders asshole,
Did George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and John Adams respect their leaders?!

So shut the hell up before you make another dumbass comment.

A simple question for the anti-Bush crowd... if absolutely everything he does is wrong, why does he still have the support of the majority of the nation and why is the Democratic party (it should be in an easy position, after all, with the 'worst President in American history' as the incumbant) having so much trouble trying to organize itself and come up with any respectable candidate for 2004? It would probably do all of you a little good to do something a little more productive than repeat the slander from ABC and CBS (they're just as far left as Fox is far right.)

As for the war, maybe it wasn't the best way of handling things, it should have been finished in 1991, but anyone who things there are no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq is a fool. If they can bury a fleet of fighter jets under the desert sands, hiding enough chemical or biological weapons to kill the population of a major city under the sand would be child's play.

Oracle, I fail to see how the United States in 2003 is a theocracy. The country (Government included) is FAR less religious, and more religiously diverse, than 100 years ago or 227 years ago when it was founded.

You obviously are as moronic as Bush.

Having read all or part of most of the posts on this page it seems clear to me that both sides appear to be ignoring facts. Yes Bush has a horrible record on the environment, but if you want strong environmental laws, don't be surprised to see manufacturing jobs move to countries that don't require the "environmental investment". The recovery is coming much to the dismay of Democrats, but it will have a cost both environmentally and with the deficit.

And as long as we are on the subject, anyone who thinks the woes of the economy are due to the current administration is sadly misstaken. You can't actually believe that something as large as our economy can be turned in a matter of months. Much of the legislation and policies of the first year were Clinton era remnants. The simple truth is that the economy corrected itself as part of a natural cycle.

Governance is about compromise, and some will obviously never get that. You can't have high wages, strong environmental protection, small military, passive foreign policy without excepting the cost.

Jobs will move to places with cheap labor, saving the environment costs (break out the bicycle and get ready for $600 electric bills), if you have a weak military you will not have influence in the world (France, enough said).

Should you rally behind a shoot first, revive the economy at all cost so I can get reelected president? Hell I don't have a clue. But until the Democrats start laying down solid plans to improve things and stop trying to burn Bush you don't have very many enticing prospects.

Not only is Bush a miserable failure, he is an asshole. Bush et. al. will burn in HELL.



The capital letters were necessary because it's clear that some people's heads are too thick to get them to read any other way. Hell, I'd like to see the "INVENTOR OF THE INTERNET" run our government. Let's have Ralph Nader come in with his Communism and we'll see how you like it then.

Get a life.

I don't agree with everything on this site, but I do LOVE that someone takes the time to form well thought-out ideas and explain opinions. Thanks for proving that there *is* intelligent life out there.

I was brought here by the whole George W. Bush is a miserable failure phenomenon, by the way. It was refreshing to see an entry that wasn't completely one-sided.

I am so sorry that you have a moron president... knownig nothing that goes around the world and making United States look like (a respectful country once) an asshole country from far away where i watch you guys... I did like the american way when you have democratic leaders..

I tell you what I see from here, you are looking like Germany in the WW2 but with a stupid Hitler, working with the wise guys running in the background, but in a little more sempathical way as Bush and his friends hold the major media channels in the global grounds.. please send your anti-democratic president to hell, they don't fit with the American Way... you are not barbarians...


President Bush yesterday deployed his budget director to write an op-ed
claiming "We can cut the deficit in half". It was a direct attempt to regain
his status as a supposed "fiscal conservative." The problem is that it is
just one in a long line of empty reassurances and dishonest statements on
the deficit issue.

In 2001, when he was pitching his tax cut, the President reassured the
country that, "we can proceed with tax relief without fear of budget
deficits, even if the economy softens." After his tax cuts passed and a
deficit ensued, he promised, "Our budget will run a deficit that will be
small and short-term." When that proved not to be the case, he said "I
remember campaigning in Chicago and one of the reporters said, 'Would you
ever deficit spend?' I said, 'Only - only - in times of war, in times of
economic insecurity as a result of a recession or in times of national
emergency.' Never did I dream we'd have a trifecta." Even this statement
proved to be a flat out lie: two days later on Meet the Press, Tim Russert
said "We have checked everywhere and we've even called the White House as to
when the president said [the trifecta caveat] when he was campaigning in
Chicago, and it didn't happen."

Bush then tried to shift the blame for the deficit, saying, "This nation has
got a deficit because we have been through a war." While that sounded good,
he was contradicting his own budget director, who admitted just a few months
before that "Even if we had never been attacked, and incurred no costs of
war or recovery from September 11th...we still would have gone into deficit."

Because the President has decided to focus on dishonest rhetoric - instead
of action - the deficit now sits at $374 billion - the highest in history.

One of the biggest failures our country has ever had. This man is out of control we need to get rid of him!!! Now!

To the unknown person who responded to my theocracy comment,

Don’t worry about it. I won’t hold it against you, I am sure you fail to see a lot of things.

Let me splain.

*The day the government directs public money allocated to social services to “faith based organizations” forcing millions of citizens to have to go to a church to get help
*The day the President declares he patterns himself after Jesus and answers all questions based on his interpretation of “what would Jesus do”
*The day the President actually believes that Jesus, not flawed human logic/character, guides his thoughts and conscience
*The day the President appoints a religious extremist as Attorney General to ensure that religion is brought back or kept into civil law
*The day the President tells his citizens whenever there is a crisis to pray for guidance and salvation completely ignoring the millions of citizens who are atheists/agnostics thereby showing a complete ignorance of the diversity of the country
*The day the President actually thinks prayer pulled a dozen or so miners out of a collapsed mine shaft
*The day a high ranking General makes the public comment that he believes God, through divine intervention, placed the President in the White House
*The day that same General also states he wasn’t afraid of the enemy in Iraq because he knew his God was more powerful than theirs
*The day that same General isn’t called to task by the administration for the extremely offensive comments he made
*The day the press is afraid to challenge such comments for fear of religious backlash and boycott
*The day the Supreme Court becomes one more extreme conservative away from having the power to revoke all previous decisions where individual rights were granted based on the secular not religious/social conservative interpretation of the Constitution
*The day the President wants to create laws to suppress the intent and purpose of the Constitution in an ever-evolving society
*The day judges are openly attacked and painted as leftists whenever they make a decision based on the letter of the law and not the bible
*The day when, in the name of religious principles, laws are being passed to suppress the progress of scientific innovation and research that could benefit all human kind,
*The day the President declares that all of us are sinners because of his belief that religious law is the law that all humans are bound by
*The day when a person doesn’t have a hope in hell of getting elected unless they can show the public that they participate in organized religion
*The day all this comes to pass is the day you will find yourself living in a theocracy.

Congratulations, you are now living in a theocracy!

Yes, I could of gone on and on but I was getting tired of typing. Anybody, feel free to continue on where I left off.

So, do have any thoughts on the other two points of mine, Dumb-Ass?

Bush is a "miserable failure"? He doesn't seem that miserable to me. But who is the REAL failure? A dose of reality:

In 1993, the Democrats had control of the Senate, the House of Reps, the White House, and the Governorships.

Today, the Democrats have lost the Senate, the House of Reps, the White House, the Governorships, even California! And in every poll it shows Bush at least 20 points ahead of front-runner Howard Dean, even in New Hampshire. And you Democrats have more seats up for reelection in Congress. We whipped you in the off-year, you can be 90% sure of the results in the on-year.

The term "miserable failure" fits well with the Clintons and Terry McCauliffe in light of this, since they have been running your party.

Look, it's no secret I am a partisan Republican, and I'm proud of being a member of the party of Abraham Lincoln and Ronald Reagan, and I certainly hope the Democrats keep their brilliant losing streak.

With that said, let me give you Democrats a nickel's worth of free advice: stop calling others names like "miserable failure" when the term can easily be applied to you,and some, like me, ARE applying it to you. You're not gaining any votes with a message of hate.

Of course you won't take my advice because I'm just a dumb slack jawed yokel Republican with a low IQ. But you'd better do something fast besides calling names.

Your party may actually collapse in 2004. We haven't seen the collapse of a major political party in this country since the Federalist Party, but we will see one next year, as of now.

And it won't be nice when the Google search pf "miserable failure" brings up the fallen image of a jack ass which represented the former Democrat Party.


Just curious why the White House official web page feels the need to remind us - apparently a message from the President himself - that we are called to be 'citizens, not subjects'. That is something I already knew. Maybe that was a lesson meant for the people of Iraq?

Just so all of you right-wing Bush supporters know - I'm a democrat, and my vote counts just as much as yours. Just think of it as a balance... you vote for Bush, I vote for Dean, and it's like you never voted to begin with!

Bush is a disgrace to all that is American.

His reaction to 9/11 was assanine. "We don't know who did it, but let's go kill someone fast so we can feel better about ourselves!"

Drilling in the ANWR? Alaska isn't Texas, Mr. Bush.

Tax breaks for people who buy large SUVs? Thanks boss, I'll remember who to thank next time I get a sunburn (republicans can search "greenhouse effect" for more information).

Who needs trees in national forests, anyway? At least once the trees are removed it will be easier to drill for oil.

And why even deal with the UN? After all Mr. Bush, you are the leader of the free world... who needs to listen to those non-believers?

I hate Christianity... I must be a terrorist! At least un-American by your standards, Mr. President. Sorry that I forgot to pray for all the brainwashed "soldiers" that you sent to Vietnam... oops I mean Iraq.

Budget defecit? Of course I'll trade long term debt for short term prosperity, especially right before election time! Thanks for getting me a job, Mr. President - that 12 cents extra I'm going to get in my tax return next spring will really go a long way!

Oh, and I love the taste of MTBE in my drinking water, Mr. G.W. Thank you for lowering environmental standards (and eliminating testing altogether). Oh, and kudos on a great decision to throw out those lawsuits involving the petroleum/energy superpowers! You're the best, Fuhrer Bush!

On a side note, whoever made the "even in New Hampshire" comment above regarding Dean V. Bush is an idiot.... of course Bush is going to be leading the polls in NH.... not that NH is traditionally a republican state with a republican governor and republican senators or anything. The Old Man may have fallen, but the face of NH politics hasn't changed.

Hile Bush! Ich bein ein American!

I have to say a few things:

I am terribly sorry for anyone who was forced to go through the horror of the Holocaust.

I am also terribly sorry that people trivialize the Holocaust by comparing Hitler and the Fascists with present day Bush and the Republican Party. Are American people being herded by the millions into internment camps? Gassed? Starved? I think not. I think people who want to make a comparision between Hitler and Bush should consider the idiocy of what they are saying before they open their mouths.

Oracle, I see how your arguments are against having a President who has faith in a higher power, but do they prove that the US is now a Theocracy? Hardly. The president prays for soldiers, and thinks that prayer makes a difference.. Yeah, that's really unusual among American Presidents. George Washington himself prayed for victory over the British - I'll bet he didn't know what the founding fathers had in mind.

As for Boykin's comments, the President publicly stated that the General's comments didn't reflect either the Government's or his own personal opinions. How you can say the media was afraid to make a story of it, I can't even fathom. Stories ran in every major newspaper in the nation. If your'e saying they didn't all immediately personally attack him, then all they are guilty of is reporting the news as it happened rather than how it made them feel and how they would personally react to it.

If this is a theocracy, tell me how I am a Christian, dating a Jewish girl, attending a school populated by people who consider themselves Jewish, Christian, Muslim, Athiest, Agnostic, Buddhist and more and no government official has any problem with any of it?

Those are just vestiges of the great American heritage. If the Miserable Failure has his way and steals the election once again, you can kiss those liberties goodbye. You wait and watch the next nation our so-called christian "leader" turns on. Then tell me this is not a theocracy. Lebanon just received its formal warning, or weren't you paying attention?

Make that Syria.

Let's face it, BUSH IS A MORON!!!

George W. Bush said he was being guided by the hand of God.
Osama bin Ladin said he was being guided by the hand of God.
Some things need no explanation.

Well, I looked and I looked but I couldn’t find the part where I talked about how Bush was rounding up people and sending them to concentration camps. You want to know why? Simple, because nowhere in the message I posted did I say anything like that.

You see Mr. Delorenzo what you did was give what I refer to as the “out of context, over the top” political response. We see it every day in political debating circles. Someone like you will retort a statement like mine by going way beyond what the statement actually said. It is done by first putting words in the mouth of the statement’s originator and then by going into some diatribe about the words/ideas that were never actually said (or posted, in this case).

The words and ideas you are trying to put in my mouth are that I am comparing Bush’s presidency to the Holocaust. Well, I am sorry but who is being the idiot here? You’re the one who elevated a simple statement like mine into something as totally preposterous as your inference. To bridge my statement to the one you claim I made is the equivalency of building a bridge from Los Angeles to Tokyo. Theoretically it’s impressive but impossible none the less.

My statement is very clear in that I am referring to the current administration and its supporters use of the kind of propaganda techniques that was perfected by the Nazi’s and helped them solidify and then maintain their grip on Germany in the 30’s and early 40’s. “If someone criticizes you, turn around and accuse them of being unpatriotic”. It’s plain and simple to anyone possessing minimal critical thought capabilities that the current administration and its supporters are using those techniques.

Making sure every speech/public appearance is full of American symbolism by standing in front of huge American flags or in front of military troops dressed in their class A’s is another propaganda technique perfected by the Nazis that is currently being used by the Bush administration. You can’t deny that those are textbook Nazi propaganda techniques. The Nazis were propaganda geniuses and you won’t find one historian out there that would disagree with that premise.

Now, have those techniques been used by previous administrations? Of course, but over the course of the current administration’s tenure I can confidently say that I have never seen it used to the extent that we are currently witnessing. If you don’t believe me, then scroll up this web page and see for yourself. This page is full of statements that suggest it is unpatriotic to criticize the President during this time of national crisis.

Statements that accuse the President’s critics of being unpatriotic are a danger to freedom, politically immature and extremely unpatriotic because that is the job of every patriotic citizen, to question authority and hold them to account. That is why we get to vote. If we shouldn’t be allowed or are pressured by the extreme right wing not to question this administration and their policies then why vote at all?

And now back to the Theocracy comment. Well I guess you got me, I mean if I can’t point for point compare The USA to, lets say, our great allies like Saudi Arabia then my statement must be wrong. Well I’ll just say a few more things about that.

If someone chooses to believe in a higher power that’s there freedom but when you set public policy based on your religious beliefs then you’ve crossed the line from secular government to theocracy. He is everybody’s President not just the President of Christians and like-minded Jews. And that my friend is offensive to people who don’t belong to organized religion. It is dangerous to promote that kind of mindset on the people of a supposedly free and secular nation.

My point about a candidate having to show that they participate in organized religion to get elected President is infallible. I’ll go one step further, not only do you have to show you are a person of faith it better be the right faith or you could be in trouble. Look at how Kennedy was attacked by the Protestants during the 1960 campaign. How many times did Kennedy have to say, “I strongly believe in the separation of church and state” during that campaign. Yes he got elected anyway, despite the best efforts of xenophobic Protestants, but in a country that proudly claims to have a separation of church and state should that have been an issue at all? Yes Virginia, it was the Republicans that attacked Kennedy for not being of the same religious faith as the majority of Americans.

Now do me a favor Mr. Delorenza. Ask your Jewish girlfriend if she thinks Gore lost any votes in 2000 because he chose a Jew as a running mate. If she answers no, then she is as naïve as you about this so-called harmonious multicultural mosaic you claim America to be. “There is no way I’d ever vote for a Jew”, was probably said in a lot of back room redneck/racists circles during the 2000 election. To deny that would be complete idiocy.

Now in regards to Boykin’s statements, let me get this right, you are suggesting a simple one line comment from the President saying Boykin’s statements do not reflect the views of the current administration is enough. I hardly think so; he should have been relieved of his duties immediately. Those were extremely offensive comments and I resent the fact that a high-ranking member of the military would publicly suggest I voted against God in the last election.

Generals are required to be very careful when making public statements especially when the statements are of their own personal views. Precedence was set on this a long time ago, look what happened to Patton and MacAuthur when they started making unauthorized public statements about WW2 and Korea. They were forced out of the military and rightly so. Both of them almost started World War 3 when they started freelancing with their mouths.

Well, Boykin’s statements were just as dangerous as Patton’s and MacAuthur’s. Is he trying to start a holy war with the rest of the Muslim world? Those kinds of statements carry those kinds of implications. They are as bad as Bush’s “crusade” comment after 9/11. How fast did Bush retract that statement after his handlers made him realize the dangerous historical reference he had just made and what kind of implications a word like that can mean to the Muslim world.

And as for your, “the press was just reporting facts”, statement. When is the last time the press, whether they favor Democrats or Republicans, have been unbiased regarding the stories they put out? Give me a break, the news is full of spin regardless of who is reporting it.

Mainstream media is being very careful not to be perceived as too anti-Bush and are keeping comments in check for fear of backlash and boycott from the extreme right wing. You can’t deny that there are hundreds of well organized pro-Bush and Christian groups out there ready to stage mass protests and boycotts against anybody or corporation that they perceive as being anti-Bush. How many people have these overzealous groups already victimized? Is this what makes a free society?

Sure, some will say these groups are only exercising their right to free speech. Was that the true intention of free speech the founding fathers envisioned? I don’t think so. The greatest perversion of free speech is when it is used to suppress the free speech of others. That is exactly what is happening here.

So, Christian groups are using the right to free speech and consumer power to suppress the free speech of others with opposing views. Well, all that I can say is “NEXT STOP – THEOCRACY”.

Can I get an Amen on that people? It seems pretty clear to me that the upswing in religeous fervor that has occured over the last decade or so is a major threat to our personal freedoms.

Hey Oracle, what religion do you practice? Does anyone stop you? Are you not free to practice or not practice as you please? Is there a state sanctioned faith? Does the church have any power other than the power of persuasion? Do priests, rabbis, pastors or bishops make laws? HELL no, the Catholic Church can't even get their own members to stop fornicating for reasons other than procreation. Case Closed.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Support This Blog

Philadelphia Bloggers