He is to blame for Gore's condition of screaming and contorting his face like a maniacal Gladiator:
DelGaudio
Jun 24, 04 5:38 pm
Bush, Cheney and Runsfeld all need to be voted out this fall. I'm ashamed Dubya represents our country. We're better than the lies he's come to stands for. The man can hardly speak and has made us the laughing stock of the world. I'm convinced Dick runs the White House. Dubya is just as puppet for Dick (yes, a dick puppet) and is interested in nothing more than corporate interests.
Manteno_Montenegro
Jun 24, 04 6:01 pm
It's amazing just how absurd Bush as made government, isn't it? He's put a target on all of our heads and there has never, never been a bigger imbicle in the White House.
norm
Jun 25, 04 5:37 pm
THIS IS FROM A NYT ARTICLE ABOUT CAMPAIGNING IN OHIO - A SWING STATE. YOU CAN'T MAKE THIS STUFF UP.
"Democrats have held up Timken, owned by a major supporter of Bush, as a prime example of their claims about the president's economic record.
Bush visited the company last year to plug the recuperative effects of his tax cuts. But in May, Timken announced it would close three Canton-area bearing plants over the next three years, wiping out 1,300 jobs, unless the union agreed to renegotiate its contract."
Not really him, but his team's management. Honestly, I thought it looked like a pep rally for the Democrats, until the end. Keep in mind I've had a few beers, though.
Disturbing, to say the least. I really wonder what the hell they are thinking ('cause I know Bush ain't thinking!). If he gets elected again, there will be severe problems in our country.
mbr
Jun 25, 04 8:56 pm
Oh, yeah, watch the video.
CREAM
Jun 25, 04 11:02 pm
good. lord.
A
Jun 26, 04 11:35 am
Norm, The TIMKEN example has very little to do with the politics of the current CEO of that company. My father spent 30+ years working in the bearing business and is very aware of the declines they have suffered very much like the Detriot auto industry has. Cheaper foreign bearings is what is putting the squeeze on that industry. That puts us into a free trade discussion where President Bush and Senator Kerry have very little differences. I welcome a discussion about protective tariffs anytime.
Helsinki
Jun 26, 04 1:35 pm
Is Bush talking to god. really? reallyreally?
-
that's the most atrocious ad I've ever seen... Is there people in the US that buy that kind of shit?
mbr
Jun 27, 04 11:13 am
Yup, 48% of the population favors Little Bush for his 'Integrity and Morals'.
It makes the rest of us pretty nauseous, too....and is getting us pretty angry!
norm
Jun 27, 04 11:35 am
a -
the point is not the politics of the ceo of the company. the point is the irony of a company that is held up as an example of the successes of bush's economic policies -"...the recuperative effects of his tax cuts" - then turns around and lays of well over a thousand workers. the tax cuts are billed as a way to put more money in the pockets of employers which would create more jobs. this is a crystal clear example of the fallacies of trickle down economics. the only thing that trickles down is crap.
A
Jun 27, 04 12:29 pm
Norm -
I'm not completely aware of how the president has used Timken as an example of his tax cuts and I'm willing to agree that it might not be the best example. All I am trying to say is that there are other factors at work that is causing the domestic bearing, drives & power transmission business to go under. I agree that it's unfortunate that 1,300 people will be laid off. Then again the days of blue collar labor working an entire lifetime at one plant are long gone. We can argue the merits of trickle down economic effects but I hope we can both agree that the American worker is one of the most adaptive in the world. People always find a new way to survive and I don't think it's necessarily good or bad that Timken is making corporate changes. That is just they way free markets work.
Helsinki
Jun 28, 04 1:52 am
The only thing that can adapt inexhaustibly is the cockroach.
BOTS
Jun 28, 04 8:44 am
this is outrageous.
Hitler row engulfs Republicans
To describe it as crass would be an understatement.
'This is not a time for pessimism and rage ...' opens the latest George Bush campaign video. It's an extraordinary, ear-bashing piece of work which splices clips of John Kerry, Michael Moore and Al Gore speaking with footage of Hitler addressing a Nazi rally. Moore and Soros, say the Republicans, have both compared Bush to Hitler.
But their own anti-Bush hectoring makes them sound more like the Nazi dictator. The core message: Democrats preach a message of pessimism and hate. 'Disgusting,' ripostes the Kerry team: 'The fact that George Bush thinks it's appropriate to use images of Adolf Hitler in his campaign raises serious questions about his fitness to spend another four years in the White House.'
· Jane Perrone
Worst president in history?
(The following appeared in the Durham, NC local paper as a letter to the editor.)
Please forward to all on your list so as to put things in perspective.
Liberals claim President Bush shouldn't have started this war.
They complain about his mismanagement of it.
One liberal recently claimed Bush was the worst president in U.S. history.
Let's clear up one point:
President Bush didn't start the war on terror.
Try to remember, it was started by terrorists BEFORE 9/11.
OK, let's look at the "worst" president nominees and "mismanagement"claims.
FDR led us into World War II.
Germany never attacked us, Japan did.
From 1941-1945, 450,000 lives were lost,
an average of 112,500 per year.
Truman finished that war and started one in Korea.
North Korea never attacked us.
From 1950-1953, 55,000 lives were lost,
an average of 18,333 per year.
John F. Kennedy started the Vietnam conflict in 1962.
Vietnam never attacked us.
Johnson turned Vietnam into a quagmire.
From 1965-1975, 58,000 lives were lost,
an average of 5,800 per year.
Clinton went to war in Bosnia without UN or French consent.
Bosnia never attacked us.
Clinton was offered Osama bin Laden's head on a platter three times by Sudan and he did nothing.
Osama has attacked us on multiple occasions.
Over 2,900 lives were lost on 9/11.
In the two years since terrorists attacked us,
President Bush has
liberated two countries,
rushed the Taliban,
crippled al-Qaida,
put nuclear inspectors in Lybia, Iran, and North Korea
without firing a shot, and captured a terrorist
who slaughtered 300,000 of his own people.
We have lost 600 soldiers, an average of 300 a year.
Bush did all this abroad while not allowing another terrorist attack at home.
Worst president in history?
Sure doesn't appear to be Bush!
The Democrats are complaining about how long the war is taking, but...
It took less time to take Iraq
than it took Janet Reno to take the Branch Davidian compound.
That was a 51 day operation.
We've been looking for evidence of chemical weapons
in Iraq for less time
than it took Hillary Clinton to find
the Rose Law Firm billing records.
It took less time for the 3rd Infantry Division and the Marines to destroy the Medina Republican Guard
than it took Teddy Kennedy to call the police after his Oldsmobile sank at Chappaquiddick.
It took less time to take Iraq
than it took to count the votes in Florida!!!!
Our military is GREAT!
jhopkins
Jun 28, 04 3:05 pm
and that is an objective analysis?
A
Jun 28, 04 3:25 pm
kudos to ArchAngel for thowing that one out. Objective, well, those are all facts that can be confirmed or contested. Feel free to cite the proof they are not true.
I myself had misgivings about going into Iraq in the first place. Even as a more right of center thinker I believe the WMD argument was more an excuse for a higher purpose. Still, for what has been changed in the world, right or wrong, it has been very lightly felt by the American people and economy. Now I"m not positive but I'd venture a guess that the billions spent on Iraq are less a % of GDP than was spent on Vietnam. Certinaly less casualities.
If one is going to take Bush apart I think your time would be much better spent on domestic issues, where I'd have a tendancy to agree that Bush hasn't done well, although my take is probably much different than the norm on Archinect. I just find it amazing that what has got people so worked up about the president is the Iraq issue and how short the attention span is of the average American. The war on terrorism is very un-invasive into our lives and has done much more than other post WWII conflicts.
jhopkins
Jun 28, 04 3:51 pm
i wasn't contesting those facts, just challenging the bravado with which archangel lumped WW2 in with our current situation in Iraq. the objectivity statement was his citing liberal whipping boys such as reno, hillary, and kennedy as folly without once mentioning reagan, iran/contra, lebanon, and the US-led decimation of southern and central america.
jhopkins
Jun 28, 04 4:27 pm
since archangel's statement, or i should say cut-and-paste-job, is so arrogant, i guess i will play ball on just a few of these points:
1.) WW2 was a traditional conflict with unspeakable attrocities. the battlefield was clear as it involved the hostile occupation of one country over another. to assert this is the same as our current situation is just narrow.
2.) Although both assumed a territorial theater, korea and vietnam were fought under the Domino Theory of the spread of communism. i think any fair assessment of these conflicts would show that these were not strategically advantageuous to the united states. the domestic policy of communist witch hunts and mccarthy hearings can only be seen as a scare tactic to rally support. you may recall the unpopularity of the vietnam war eventually led to watergate and the resignation of a president. incidently, the same mode of operation was used in cuba, central and southern amerca, except we adopted some the nazi techniques (and depending on who you talk to, nazi generals) of propaganda and terror.
3.) The war in bosnia was not a US led war. NATO was front-and-center the entire campaign. you noticeably left out the casualty count on that conflict.
and the constant evocation of 9/11/2001 as justification for all this military mobilization is both opportunistic and shallow, and in my opinion, claiming ownership of a national tragedy in the most despicable way possible. demagogue.
ArchAngel
Jun 28, 04 4:56 pm
Is it safe to say then, that in the minds of the fanatical Islamist Extremist constituency, an anti-american sentiment might have a similar Domino Effect as you stated of the Communism in the far east? Potentially. Is it not the case that Iraq with it's central location,Baathist Party, and disenfranchised population more closely resembles Hitler's Germany in the mid/late 1930's?
Doing nothing would be self-destructive.
Helsinki
Jun 29, 04 4:50 am
Iraq was a secular state. The Domino theory was a theory, nothing more. Hitler's Germany was a VERY powerful and advanced state. Iraq was/is not. Doing nothing is one thing, invading a secular country to turn it into a recruiting point for terrorists and other soldiers of anti-american sentiments, is another. The security of the world has been weakened and the terrorists have been strenghtened by the war in Iraq.
a-f
Jun 29, 04 6:12 am
Of course ArchAngel, you also forget that before the US acted in World War II, Germany had already attacked or taken Czechoslovakia, Poland, Denmark, Norway, France, Belgium, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, the Soviet Union, Britain, Greece, Yugoslavia etc. Basically the whole of Europe. It's unbelievable how some people even can think of comparing World War II to the invasion of Iraq. There are so few historical similarities that the obvious subjectivity of the choice of comparison, in order to justify the invasion of course, comes across as mere stupidity.
ArchAngel
Jun 29, 04 9:53 am
We should have invaded Germany sooner, and learned from our mistakes. Could have saved 4 million people if we excercisedthe same proactive measures. Good Job Bush!
Helsinki
Jun 29, 04 10:32 am
You can't be serious. The atrocities of Hussein were mainly done with help of the US or without intervention by US. The attack on iraq wasn't about safety, but global politics conducted by a group and ideology that takes the animosity and hostility of the world for granted and by it's own actions create these conditions.
Now the possible shattering of Iraq will create at least one more extreme islamist state, and a chain of wars in the middle-east. Recommended reading would be the article by Seymor Hersch in the latest New Yorker concerning Israeli activities in ensuring it's foothold in post-war Iraq and kurdistan. A perfect example how the neat calculations of neo-con intelligentsia go haywire when face to face with the messy reality of the world.
norm
Jun 29, 04 11:03 am
Archangel - please get back on your meds.
In order to impeach that letter you need look no further than the primary position taken...
"Let's clear up one point:
President Bush didn't start the war on terror.
Try to remember, it was started by terrorists BEFORE 9/11."
Al-Queda did indeed declare war on the US - before 9.11. Simply put - an organization declared war on a sovereign nation. A concrete entity declared war on a concrete entity. However the position of the US (the previous administration) was that it was primarily a law enforcment issue. After 9.11 George Bush declared war on terrorism. Simply put - a sovereign nation declared war on a tactic. A concrete entity declared war on an abstraction. The letter then implies - as Bush and his cronies do at every opportunity - that Iraq is part of that war on an abstract concept. But the fact is that there is no tangible connection between al queda - an organization that declared war on us - and iraq - a sovereign nation that posed no credible threat to the US.
Make no mistake - Bush declared war on Iraq. He had no credible justification, and he did not have authorization from any international body - and as such he and Cheney and Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz and Perle and Scooter Libby and Douglas Feith and the rest should be tried as a war criminals.
ArchAngel
Jun 29, 04 12:17 pm
Your message, simply put, can best be characterized with a disatisfaction with reality. No solutions, no facts, no obvious connection with what's really happening, only your opinion. Blah blah blah - typical Liberal, pessimistic crap is all I ever hear from any of you. If only Neocons were as verbose as the liberals......The loudest ten percent of the population is all we ever hear.
You have a problem with government period, and this whole Iraq thing gives you fuel to complain about a government working for you...unless your not from the U.S......The only comparison I can make is to those who contemplate the outcome of a footbal game, then talk about it afterwards as if they were somehow involved. You don't have a clue, or an effect on anything - but you certainly have the right to try - through your political views. Your not on the Team, that's all. The winning team....just watching.
a-f
Jun 29, 04 12:47 pm
Sorry, we're all involved in this problem. Maybe there's a cause for our dissatisfaction? The unilateralism of the US/British administration is problematic for the internal politics of the European Union, the conflict is globalized through the networking of Al-Qaeda (remember Madrid and Istanbul?), and with the paradoxal strategies of the US in the Middle East, the message of polarization of east vs. west is spreading to immigrants everywhere. To see politics as unimportant for your everyday life is just plain laziness.
Your message, on the other hand, seems to be: "Support the war, it's more fun to say YES!"
Helsinki
Jun 29, 04 1:12 pm
true, most of us are concerned with "terrorism" as a real threat, and that's partly why there's such an outrage against a government that creates hate and severe disruptions, doing destructive political moves (for us all, not just you) instead of working within the international framework of laws and agreements (at least seemingly).
It's not a game. Everybody's involved.
norm
Jun 29, 04 3:32 pm
archangel -
you are correct i am dissatisfied with reality. at the same time your posts show that you are detached from reality. you are not interested in facts even when they are layed out for you. but i do have a solution - vote dubya and the rest of his incompetent administration out of office.
a-f -
I think the more proper quote would be "Support the war, it's easier to say YES than to think for yourself!"
larslarson
Jun 29, 04 5:05 pm
archangel-
i'm not a political animal...i'm not on any side...
which i'm sure you'll posit as being wishy washy or the like.
but to state that you're on 'the winning side' or anything of that
nature is infantile. to think that there's any winner here is ludicrous.
maybe iraq one could say since they're 'liberated' from a dictator..
but, why did we choose iraq? why don't we oust any dictator that
exists..and then force our form of government down there throats.
why does iraq want democracy?...why not any other form of
government...?
and what have you posted in the way of facts?...why are the number
of casualties at all relevant. and how do the relatively low numbers
relate in any way to him being a 'good' president. the fact is that wars,
especially those in which the u.s. are involved, are not going to be
fought on the ground. u.s. citizens are no longer willing to put up
with high casualty rates and long drawn out contests. war and our
military are more about precision..my theory is that the number of
casualties relates more to advances in technology and a fairly weak
opponent than anything that the president did or that his forebears
didn't do.
i'm an american citizen that is concerned that we've entered iraq under
a false premise to extract a dictator, who's atrocities have been well
documented, but have also been taking place for more than 25 years.
i think the timing is questionable. i also think that attacking iraq
before finishing operations in afghanistan has sidelined the true intent
of this 'war on terror'. i can agree that removing sadam hussein is a
good thing, but i also see the history of iraq and can't see how a
government set up by a country that is not well liked in the region is
going to stand for any period of time. the structure of iraq is not set
up to support democracy.
also, to your contention that the 'loudest 10%' makes the most noise.
who's the one with -'no obvious connection with what's really happening, only your opinion'- i think you need to add about 30 or
40 percent at least, but then maybe that's just my opinion.
jbresner
Jun 30, 04 2:31 pm
The problem I have with the Bush administration is this: you had the entire administration constantly try to sell to the American people that Iraq was an imminent threat because of its weapons of mass destruction.
Powell, Rice, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Bush...the whole crew knew that the facts weren't there but pushed there political agenda anyway.
This was the only reason the Bush administration was pushing for a war against Iraq and as of today, it continues to be a false assumption.
The hyprocrisy that continues drives me crazy. If we're so concerned with WMD being passed on to terrorists, then Pakistan, North Korea, and China will be next on are lists. But that will never happen. Bush asserting that the war was to remove a ruthless dictator and install a more democratic government also are a joke. Again, the administration has no problem dealing with China, a country that is most likely as brutal if not more so to its own people.
To archangel, you don't seem to grasp the bigger picture....Bush is inept. Any short-term positive things coming out of this war on terror (of which I see none so far) will have much greater negative impact on US international policy. We've now set the precedent that the US is willing to start wars (e.g. in Iraq) against potential threats -- and Iraq was barely that.
Bush may not have started the war on terror but his colleagues certainly helped create the stars such as Hussein and bin Laden. Read up on your history to see how the US aided these people even though they were dangerous and certainly not promoters of human rights or democracy. The US seems to take the shortest-term easiest road to obtain its goals without looking at long-term consequences.
Hopefully, it will be a moot point after this upcoming election and bush will be like daddy -- a one-term failure.
jbresner
Jun 30, 04 2:52 pm
And how about that economy? Bush is doing a whiz-bang job of making things worse off for the long-term. Trade deficits increasing. Budget deficit increasing (nearly $500 billion for the upcoming fiscal year), which translates into increased federal debt interest payments....
And it's not liberal expressing concern, it's Alan Greenspan (not exactly a neophyte when it comes to understanding long-term fiscal policy). Republican members of Congress also are having second thoughts on Bush's economic policies.
not a penny from me.
first he has to understand bible, quran and torah.
"thy shall not kill"
bRink
Jul 2, 04 2:30 pm
George Bush needs to have his brain checked for putting up ridiculous ads like the one on his website...
But then again, the sad part of it is, the republican ads are not really geared towards anybody who really wants to think for themselves, but people who are already stubbornly pro-bush, defensive, and just looking for a "I know you are but what am I?" response to democrat criticisms... The truth is, the Bush Cheney campaign has no other virtue to support them except that they have alot of money (and not much brains)... :p
Manteno_Montenegro
Jul 2, 04 3:02 pm
There's a great quote on the Bush reelection web site:
"Our great challenge is to protect the American people.
Our great opportunity is to advance the cause of human dignity and freedom all across the world."
Human dignity, what is that? Does he mean like forcing sex on prisoners and having them attacked by dogs and forcing them to masturbate and be humiliated? That's what that is, right?
archit84
Jul 2, 04 3:29 pm
yeah bush ordered them to do that
actually better yet bush himself flew to iraq and did those things to the prisoners himself
i'm just waiting for those pics to surface
you know the ones with bush standing next to naked prisoners pointing and laughing
waiting.............
archit84
Jul 2, 04 3:30 pm
yeah bush ordered them to do that
actually better yet bush himself flew to iraq and did those things to the prisoners himself
i'm just waiting for those pics to surface
you know the ones with bush standing next to naked prisoners pointing and laughing
waiting.............
bRink
Jul 2, 04 4:47 pm
"Our great challenge is to protect the American people."
Ya, what makes it more of a "challenge" for them is that their administration is so mentally challenged... :p
"Our great opportunity is to advance the cause of human dignity and freedom all across the world."
How can human dignity and freedom be won without cooperation with other nations? How can it be human dignity and freedom if it involves blind unilateral action to enforce a particular world view? If their aim is to advance freedom all across the world, how can they do so with a foreign policy of oppressive "shock and awe" force that leaves all people in its path alienated?
The Bush administration is completely incapable of meeting that "challenge of protecting the American people" precisely because they are so focused on their own moralistic and imperialistic agendas...
archit84
Jul 2, 04 5:13 pm
i agree but the UN is a freaking joke
the un was the one hope for the world
iraq failed to meet so many terms of the golf war yet the un did nothing at all
the UN needs to be reinvented so that it means something
oe
Jul 2, 04 7:20 pm
Suggestions for dear Mr. Bush/future fake presidents of the the usa holy shiny land of nascar and bowling:
1. abolish democracy/talking
2. put all the white people/stuff on trains/boats back to where they belong - da continent (preferably england, which is not da continent): following that breathtaking and lovely trip, they will be slaughtered on their arrival (at the beach) by belgian and polish vikings, the few remaing women and children will be painfully raped - their children will be eaten by the pigs. some men will be kept alive to do the laundry and for the sake of laundry.
3. give the country back to: indians, bizons and some people as well.
4.abolish males - & think beyond democracy (cf. plato and his friends - system) - + make a lesbian indian the first lesbian indian american president
5. burn all books & abolish the alphebticonorum - undo habit, undo custom, undo tradition, undo genetically modified stupidity
5. abolish language and haloekie lalapoen
6. yes abolish everything else as well
7. "degenerate" ("evolution") - back to the monkey business = EVOLUTION, undo the degeneration, viz. back to the sea, back to goddy and his garden glory haleluja amen.
Cio e un inizio,
Helsinki
Jul 3, 04 3:51 am
The UN is a joke because the US veto-possibility... The international intitutions can't be just the powertools of the rich&powerful, they'll never have wide acceptance or approval if the marching order continues like this.
sucks
werd.
He is to blame for Gore's condition of screaming and contorting his face like a maniacal Gladiator:
Bush, Cheney and Runsfeld all need to be voted out this fall. I'm ashamed Dubya represents our country. We're better than the lies he's come to stands for. The man can hardly speak and has made us the laughing stock of the world. I'm convinced Dick runs the White House. Dubya is just as puppet for Dick (yes, a dick puppet) and is interested in nothing more than corporate interests.
It's amazing just how absurd Bush as made government, isn't it? He's put a target on all of our heads and there has never, never been a bigger imbicle in the White House.
THIS IS FROM A NYT ARTICLE ABOUT CAMPAIGNING IN OHIO - A SWING STATE. YOU CAN'T MAKE THIS STUFF UP.
"Democrats have held up Timken, owned by a major supporter of Bush, as a prime example of their claims about the president's economic record.
Bush visited the company last year to plug the recuperative effects of his tax cuts. But in May, Timken announced it would close three Canton-area bearing plants over the next three years, wiping out 1,300 jobs, unless the union agreed to renegotiate its contract."
Not really him, but his team's management. Honestly, I thought it looked like a pep rally for the Democrats, until the end. Keep in mind I've had a few beers, though.
Disturbing, to say the least. I really wonder what the hell they are thinking ('cause I know Bush ain't thinking!). If he gets elected again, there will be severe problems in our country.
Oh, yeah, watch the video.
good. lord.
Norm, The TIMKEN example has very little to do with the politics of the current CEO of that company. My father spent 30+ years working in the bearing business and is very aware of the declines they have suffered very much like the Detriot auto industry has. Cheaper foreign bearings is what is putting the squeeze on that industry. That puts us into a free trade discussion where President Bush and Senator Kerry have very little differences. I welcome a discussion about protective tariffs anytime.
Is Bush talking to god. really? reallyreally?
-
that's the most atrocious ad I've ever seen... Is there people in the US that buy that kind of shit?
Yup, 48% of the population favors Little Bush for his 'Integrity and Morals'.
It makes the rest of us pretty nauseous, too....and is getting us pretty angry!
a -
the point is not the politics of the ceo of the company. the point is the irony of a company that is held up as an example of the successes of bush's economic policies -"...the recuperative effects of his tax cuts" - then turns around and lays of well over a thousand workers. the tax cuts are billed as a way to put more money in the pockets of employers which would create more jobs. this is a crystal clear example of the fallacies of trickle down economics. the only thing that trickles down is crap.
Norm -
I'm not completely aware of how the president has used Timken as an example of his tax cuts and I'm willing to agree that it might not be the best example. All I am trying to say is that there are other factors at work that is causing the domestic bearing, drives & power transmission business to go under. I agree that it's unfortunate that 1,300 people will be laid off. Then again the days of blue collar labor working an entire lifetime at one plant are long gone. We can argue the merits of trickle down economic effects but I hope we can both agree that the American worker is one of the most adaptive in the world. People always find a new way to survive and I don't think it's necessarily good or bad that Timken is making corporate changes. That is just they way free markets work.
The only thing that can adapt inexhaustibly is the cockroach.
this is outrageous.
Hitler row engulfs Republicans
To describe it as crass would be an understatement.
'This is not a time for pessimism and rage ...' opens the latest George Bush campaign video. It's an extraordinary, ear-bashing piece of work which splices clips of John Kerry, Michael Moore and Al Gore speaking with footage of Hitler addressing a Nazi rally. Moore and Soros, say the Republicans, have both compared Bush to Hitler.
But their own anti-Bush hectoring makes them sound more like the Nazi dictator. The core message: Democrats preach a message of pessimism and hate. 'Disgusting,' ripostes the Kerry team: 'The fact that George Bush thinks it's appropriate to use images of Adolf Hitler in his campaign raises serious questions about his fitness to spend another four years in the White House.'
· Jane Perrone
http://www.guardian.co.uk/weblog/usa/0,13960,1057810,00.html
Worst president in history?
(The following appeared in the Durham, NC local paper as a letter to the editor.)
Please forward to all on your list so as to put things in perspective.
Liberals claim President Bush shouldn't have started this war.
They complain about his mismanagement of it.
One liberal recently claimed Bush was the worst president in U.S. history.
Let's clear up one point:
President Bush didn't start the war on terror.
Try to remember, it was started by terrorists BEFORE 9/11.
OK, let's look at the "worst" president nominees and "mismanagement"claims.
FDR led us into World War II.
Germany never attacked us, Japan did.
From 1941-1945, 450,000 lives were lost,
an average of 112,500 per year.
Truman finished that war and started one in Korea.
North Korea never attacked us.
From 1950-1953, 55,000 lives were lost,
an average of 18,333 per year.
John F. Kennedy started the Vietnam conflict in 1962.
Vietnam never attacked us.
Johnson turned Vietnam into a quagmire.
From 1965-1975, 58,000 lives were lost,
an average of 5,800 per year.
Clinton went to war in Bosnia without UN or French consent.
Bosnia never attacked us.
Clinton was offered Osama bin Laden's head on a platter three times by Sudan and he did nothing.
Osama has attacked us on multiple occasions.
Over 2,900 lives were lost on 9/11.
In the two years since terrorists attacked us,
President Bush has
liberated two countries,
rushed the Taliban,
crippled al-Qaida,
put nuclear inspectors in Lybia, Iran, and North Korea
without firing a shot, and captured a terrorist
who slaughtered 300,000 of his own people.
We have lost 600 soldiers, an average of 300 a year.
Bush did all this abroad while not allowing another terrorist attack at home.
Worst president in history?
Sure doesn't appear to be Bush!
The Democrats are complaining about how long the war is taking, but...
It took less time to take Iraq
than it took Janet Reno to take the Branch Davidian compound.
That was a 51 day operation.
We've been looking for evidence of chemical weapons
in Iraq for less time
than it took Hillary Clinton to find
the Rose Law Firm billing records.
It took less time for the 3rd Infantry Division and the Marines to destroy the Medina Republican Guard
than it took Teddy Kennedy to call the police after his Oldsmobile sank at Chappaquiddick.
It took less time to take Iraq
than it took to count the votes in Florida!!!!
Our military is GREAT!
and that is an objective analysis?
kudos to ArchAngel for thowing that one out. Objective, well, those are all facts that can be confirmed or contested. Feel free to cite the proof they are not true.
I myself had misgivings about going into Iraq in the first place. Even as a more right of center thinker I believe the WMD argument was more an excuse for a higher purpose. Still, for what has been changed in the world, right or wrong, it has been very lightly felt by the American people and economy. Now I"m not positive but I'd venture a guess that the billions spent on Iraq are less a % of GDP than was spent on Vietnam. Certinaly less casualities.
If one is going to take Bush apart I think your time would be much better spent on domestic issues, where I'd have a tendancy to agree that Bush hasn't done well, although my take is probably much different than the norm on Archinect. I just find it amazing that what has got people so worked up about the president is the Iraq issue and how short the attention span is of the average American. The war on terrorism is very un-invasive into our lives and has done much more than other post WWII conflicts.
i wasn't contesting those facts, just challenging the bravado with which archangel lumped WW2 in with our current situation in Iraq. the objectivity statement was his citing liberal whipping boys such as reno, hillary, and kennedy as folly without once mentioning reagan, iran/contra, lebanon, and the US-led decimation of southern and central america.
since archangel's statement, or i should say cut-and-paste-job, is so arrogant, i guess i will play ball on just a few of these points:
1.) WW2 was a traditional conflict with unspeakable attrocities. the battlefield was clear as it involved the hostile occupation of one country over another. to assert this is the same as our current situation is just narrow.
2.) Although both assumed a territorial theater, korea and vietnam were fought under the Domino Theory of the spread of communism. i think any fair assessment of these conflicts would show that these were not strategically advantageuous to the united states. the domestic policy of communist witch hunts and mccarthy hearings can only be seen as a scare tactic to rally support. you may recall the unpopularity of the vietnam war eventually led to watergate and the resignation of a president. incidently, the same mode of operation was used in cuba, central and southern amerca, except we adopted some the nazi techniques (and depending on who you talk to, nazi generals) of propaganda and terror.
3.) The war in bosnia was not a US led war. NATO was front-and-center the entire campaign. you noticeably left out the casualty count on that conflict.
and the constant evocation of 9/11/2001 as justification for all this military mobilization is both opportunistic and shallow, and in my opinion, claiming ownership of a national tragedy in the most despicable way possible. demagogue.
Is it safe to say then, that in the minds of the fanatical Islamist Extremist constituency, an anti-american sentiment might have a similar Domino Effect as you stated of the Communism in the far east? Potentially. Is it not the case that Iraq with it's central location,Baathist Party, and disenfranchised population more closely resembles Hitler's Germany in the mid/late 1930's?
Doing nothing would be self-destructive.
Iraq was a secular state. The Domino theory was a theory, nothing more. Hitler's Germany was a VERY powerful and advanced state. Iraq was/is not. Doing nothing is one thing, invading a secular country to turn it into a recruiting point for terrorists and other soldiers of anti-american sentiments, is another. The security of the world has been weakened and the terrorists have been strenghtened by the war in Iraq.
Of course ArchAngel, you also forget that before the US acted in World War II, Germany had already attacked or taken Czechoslovakia, Poland, Denmark, Norway, France, Belgium, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, the Soviet Union, Britain, Greece, Yugoslavia etc. Basically the whole of Europe. It's unbelievable how some people even can think of comparing World War II to the invasion of Iraq. There are so few historical similarities that the obvious subjectivity of the choice of comparison, in order to justify the invasion of course, comes across as mere stupidity.
We should have invaded Germany sooner, and learned from our mistakes. Could have saved 4 million people if we excercisedthe same proactive measures. Good Job Bush!
You can't be serious. The atrocities of Hussein were mainly done with help of the US or without intervention by US. The attack on iraq wasn't about safety, but global politics conducted by a group and ideology that takes the animosity and hostility of the world for granted and by it's own actions create these conditions.
Now the possible shattering of Iraq will create at least one more extreme islamist state, and a chain of wars in the middle-east. Recommended reading would be the article by Seymor Hersch in the latest New Yorker concerning Israeli activities in ensuring it's foothold in post-war Iraq and kurdistan. A perfect example how the neat calculations of neo-con intelligentsia go haywire when face to face with the messy reality of the world.
Archangel - please get back on your meds.
In order to impeach that letter you need look no further than the primary position taken...
"Let's clear up one point:
President Bush didn't start the war on terror.
Try to remember, it was started by terrorists BEFORE 9/11."
Al-Queda did indeed declare war on the US - before 9.11. Simply put - an organization declared war on a sovereign nation. A concrete entity declared war on a concrete entity. However the position of the US (the previous administration) was that it was primarily a law enforcment issue. After 9.11 George Bush declared war on terrorism. Simply put - a sovereign nation declared war on a tactic. A concrete entity declared war on an abstraction. The letter then implies - as Bush and his cronies do at every opportunity - that Iraq is part of that war on an abstract concept. But the fact is that there is no tangible connection between al queda - an organization that declared war on us - and iraq - a sovereign nation that posed no credible threat to the US.
Make no mistake - Bush declared war on Iraq. He had no credible justification, and he did not have authorization from any international body - and as such he and Cheney and Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz and Perle and Scooter Libby and Douglas Feith and the rest should be tried as a war criminals.
Your message, simply put, can best be characterized with a disatisfaction with reality. No solutions, no facts, no obvious connection with what's really happening, only your opinion. Blah blah blah - typical Liberal, pessimistic crap is all I ever hear from any of you. If only Neocons were as verbose as the liberals......The loudest ten percent of the population is all we ever hear.
You have a problem with government period, and this whole Iraq thing gives you fuel to complain about a government working for you...unless your not from the U.S......The only comparison I can make is to those who contemplate the outcome of a footbal game, then talk about it afterwards as if they were somehow involved. You don't have a clue, or an effect on anything - but you certainly have the right to try - through your political views. Your not on the Team, that's all. The winning team....just watching.
Sorry, we're all involved in this problem. Maybe there's a cause for our dissatisfaction? The unilateralism of the US/British administration is problematic for the internal politics of the European Union, the conflict is globalized through the networking of Al-Qaeda (remember Madrid and Istanbul?), and with the paradoxal strategies of the US in the Middle East, the message of polarization of east vs. west is spreading to immigrants everywhere. To see politics as unimportant for your everyday life is just plain laziness.
Your message, on the other hand, seems to be: "Support the war, it's more fun to say YES!"
true, most of us are concerned with "terrorism" as a real threat, and that's partly why there's such an outrage against a government that creates hate and severe disruptions, doing destructive political moves (for us all, not just you) instead of working within the international framework of laws and agreements (at least seemingly).
It's not a game. Everybody's involved.
archangel -
you are correct i am dissatisfied with reality. at the same time your posts show that you are detached from reality. you are not interested in facts even when they are layed out for you. but i do have a solution - vote dubya and the rest of his incompetent administration out of office.
a-f -
I think the more proper quote would be "Support the war, it's easier to say YES than to think for yourself!"
archangel-
i'm not a political animal...i'm not on any side...
which i'm sure you'll posit as being wishy washy or the like.
but to state that you're on 'the winning side' or anything of that
nature is infantile. to think that there's any winner here is ludicrous.
maybe iraq one could say since they're 'liberated' from a dictator..
but, why did we choose iraq? why don't we oust any dictator that
exists..and then force our form of government down there throats.
why does iraq want democracy?...why not any other form of
government...?
and what have you posted in the way of facts?...why are the number
of casualties at all relevant. and how do the relatively low numbers
relate in any way to him being a 'good' president. the fact is that wars,
especially those in which the u.s. are involved, are not going to be
fought on the ground. u.s. citizens are no longer willing to put up
with high casualty rates and long drawn out contests. war and our
military are more about precision..my theory is that the number of
casualties relates more to advances in technology and a fairly weak
opponent than anything that the president did or that his forebears
didn't do.
i'm an american citizen that is concerned that we've entered iraq under
a false premise to extract a dictator, who's atrocities have been well
documented, but have also been taking place for more than 25 years.
i think the timing is questionable. i also think that attacking iraq
before finishing operations in afghanistan has sidelined the true intent
of this 'war on terror'. i can agree that removing sadam hussein is a
good thing, but i also see the history of iraq and can't see how a
government set up by a country that is not well liked in the region is
going to stand for any period of time. the structure of iraq is not set
up to support democracy.
also, to your contention that the 'loudest 10%' makes the most noise.
who's the one with -'no obvious connection with what's really happening, only your opinion'- i think you need to add about 30 or
40 percent at least, but then maybe that's just my opinion.
The problem I have with the Bush administration is this: you had the entire administration constantly try to sell to the American people that Iraq was an imminent threat because of its weapons of mass destruction.
Powell, Rice, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Bush...the whole crew knew that the facts weren't there but pushed there political agenda anyway.
This was the only reason the Bush administration was pushing for a war against Iraq and as of today, it continues to be a false assumption.
The hyprocrisy that continues drives me crazy. If we're so concerned with WMD being passed on to terrorists, then Pakistan, North Korea, and China will be next on are lists. But that will never happen. Bush asserting that the war was to remove a ruthless dictator and install a more democratic government also are a joke. Again, the administration has no problem dealing with China, a country that is most likely as brutal if not more so to its own people.
To archangel, you don't seem to grasp the bigger picture....Bush is inept. Any short-term positive things coming out of this war on terror (of which I see none so far) will have much greater negative impact on US international policy. We've now set the precedent that the US is willing to start wars (e.g. in Iraq) against potential threats -- and Iraq was barely that.
Bush may not have started the war on terror but his colleagues certainly helped create the stars such as Hussein and bin Laden. Read up on your history to see how the US aided these people even though they were dangerous and certainly not promoters of human rights or democracy. The US seems to take the shortest-term easiest road to obtain its goals without looking at long-term consequences.
Hopefully, it will be a moot point after this upcoming election and bush will be like daddy -- a one-term failure.
And how about that economy? Bush is doing a whiz-bang job of making things worse off for the long-term. Trade deficits increasing. Budget deficit increasing (nearly $500 billion for the upcoming fiscal year), which translates into increased federal debt interest payments....
And it's not liberal expressing concern, it's Alan Greenspan (not exactly a neophyte when it comes to understanding long-term fiscal policy). Republican members of Congress also are having second thoughts on Bush's economic policies.
And how about that environment policy?
http://www.environment2004.org/br_home.php
highlights found at:
http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRelease.asp?id=110-06282004
Bush needs to read up on what seperation of church and state means:
http://news.myway.com/top/article/id/37773|top|...
bush can't read.
not a penny from me.
first he has to understand bible, quran and torah.
"thy shall not kill"
George Bush needs to have his brain checked for putting up ridiculous ads like the one on his website...
But then again, the sad part of it is, the republican ads are not really geared towards anybody who really wants to think for themselves, but people who are already stubbornly pro-bush, defensive, and just looking for a "I know you are but what am I?" response to democrat criticisms... The truth is, the Bush Cheney campaign has no other virtue to support them except that they have alot of money (and not much brains)... :p
There's a great quote on the Bush reelection web site:
"Our great challenge is to protect the American people.
Our great opportunity is to advance the cause of human dignity and freedom all across the world."
Human dignity, what is that? Does he mean like forcing sex on prisoners and having them attacked by dogs and forcing them to masturbate and be humiliated? That's what that is, right?
yeah bush ordered them to do that
actually better yet bush himself flew to iraq and did those things to the prisoners himself
i'm just waiting for those pics to surface
you know the ones with bush standing next to naked prisoners pointing and laughing
waiting.............
yeah bush ordered them to do that
actually better yet bush himself flew to iraq and did those things to the prisoners himself
i'm just waiting for those pics to surface
you know the ones with bush standing next to naked prisoners pointing and laughing
waiting.............
"Our great challenge is to protect the American people."
Ya, what makes it more of a "challenge" for them is that their administration is so mentally challenged... :p
"Our great opportunity is to advance the cause of human dignity and freedom all across the world."
How can human dignity and freedom be won without cooperation with other nations? How can it be human dignity and freedom if it involves blind unilateral action to enforce a particular world view? If their aim is to advance freedom all across the world, how can they do so with a foreign policy of oppressive "shock and awe" force that leaves all people in its path alienated?
The Bush administration is completely incapable of meeting that "challenge of protecting the American people" precisely because they are so focused on their own moralistic and imperialistic agendas...
i agree but the UN is a freaking joke
the un was the one hope for the world
iraq failed to meet so many terms of the golf war yet the un did nothing at all
the UN needs to be reinvented so that it means something
Suggestions for dear Mr. Bush/future fake presidents of the the usa holy shiny land of nascar and bowling:
1. abolish democracy/talking
2. put all the white people/stuff on trains/boats back to where they belong - da continent (preferably england, which is not da continent): following that breathtaking and lovely trip, they will be slaughtered on their arrival (at the beach) by belgian and polish vikings, the few remaing women and children will be painfully raped - their children will be eaten by the pigs. some men will be kept alive to do the laundry and for the sake of laundry.
3. give the country back to: indians, bizons and some people as well.
4.abolish males - & think beyond democracy (cf. plato and his friends - system) - + make a lesbian indian the first lesbian indian american president
5. burn all books & abolish the alphebticonorum - undo habit, undo custom, undo tradition, undo genetically modified stupidity
5. abolish language and haloekie lalapoen
6. yes abolish everything else as well
7. "degenerate" ("evolution") - back to the monkey business = EVOLUTION, undo the degeneration, viz. back to the sea, back to goddy and his garden glory haleluja amen.
Cio e un inizio,
The UN is a joke because the US veto-possibility... The international intitutions can't be just the powertools of the rich&powerful, they'll never have wide acceptance or approval if the marching order continues like this.
yeah pretty much
miss ya, oe!
We sure did cry wolf on that one.