GW Bush the worst president in US history [Archive]

SDW2001

05-11-2007, 09:16 PM

I was just wondering if this has now been established as unshakable truth and therefore no longer needs to be discussed?

Sorry for the typo in the title...

Actually it should have been:
GW Bish de wurst prisedant in US hisdore

You might think I'd respond with a giant flame thrower, but I won't. I do need to point out what others have though...this thread is redundant. However:

As much as you or anyone disagrees with GWB...as much "damage" as you think he's done...it's not possible to make a historical judgement while the man's in office, nor do I see the reason for attempting to other than to make yourself feel better about your own political views.

I mean, I'm sure it's fun for your side of the stadium to scream "GOOOOAAAALLLL" whenever something bad happens in US political affairs or whenever Bush and company actually do make a bad move, but I beyond the entertainment value I just don't see it.

And objectively, it's a "long tough road to hoe" argument anyway. There are any number of things you can point to and say you disagree with. But there are also any number of things that have gone well during the Bush Presidency, namely the economy and the lack of terror attacks on the United States since 9/11. I'd also think that you could at least acknowledge that many people believe the President's tax cuts were good policy, even if you don't.

The bottom line is that trying to make this case is both impossible at this point and just silly. But enjoy!

jamac

05-12-2007, 11:48 AM

You might think I'd respond with a giant flame thrower, but I won't. I do need to point out what others have though...this thread is redundant. However:

As much as you or anyone disagrees with GWB...as much "damage" as you think he's done...it's not possible to make a historical judgement while the man's in office, nor do I see the reason for attempting to other than to make yourself feel better about your own political views.

I mean, I'm sure it's fun for your side of the stadium to scream "GOOOOAAAALLLL" whenever something bad happens in US political affairs or whenever Bush and company actually do make a bad move, but I beyond the entertainment value I just don't see it.

And objectively, it's a "long tough road to hoe" argument anyway. There are any number of things you can point to and say you disagree with. But there are also any number of things that have gone well during the Bush Presidency, namely the economy and the lack of terror attacks on the United States since 9/11. I'd also think that you could at least acknowledge that many people believe the President's tax cuts were good policy, even if you don't.

The bottom line is that trying to make this case is both impossible at this point and just silly. But enjoy!

Terror:
Airpollution kills 5400 people in LA yearly.
Terror killed 0 people in LA in the last couple of millenia.
Far more people die yearly because they can not afford healthcare than have died in all terror attacks put together in the last several centuries (war is not terror).
Economy:
Record trade deficit, record national debt, record dependence on foreign oil you don't think this will come back to bite us ever?
Education at all time low.
War creates an artificial economic boost for several industries i.e. oil companies, weapons manufacturers. The reason for GWB to be so war happy is that he knows if we stop the war this great war economy will immediately slow down. Clinton's economy was created in peacetime and yielded record surpluses which could have been used to make friends across the globe and promote the US' benevolence.
Terror has increased by 26%, several million people have been displaced and their livelihood destroyed.

We truly have poured a lot of gasoline on fires that could have been put out by pissing on them.

What the hell are you talking about...?

SDW2001

05-12-2007, 01:09 PM

Terror:
Airpollution kills 5400 people in LA yearly.
Terror killed 0 people in LA in the last couple of millenia.
Far more people die yearly because they can not afford healthcare than have died in all terror attacks put together in the last several centuries (war is not terror).
Economy:
Record trade deficit, record national debt, record dependence on foreign oil you don't think this will come back to bite us ever?
Education at all time low.
War creates an artificial economic boost for several industries i.e. oil companies, weapons manufacturers. The reason for GWB to be so war happy is that he knows if we stop the war this great war economy will immediately slow down. Clinton's economy was created in peacetime and yielded record surpluses which could have been used to make friends across the globe and promote the US' benevolence.
Terror has increased by 26%, several million people have been displaced and their livelihood destroyed.

We truly have poured a lot of gasoline on fires that could have been put out by pissing on them.

What the hell are you talking about...?

Provide support for the Air Pollution claim and tell me how such pollution is Bush's fault. Look at the numbers and you'll find air quality is better in the US today than 20 years--or even 10 years ago.

The national debt has been rising for years, but I agree spending is out of control. The deficit itself is not at record levels and is now coming down. The trade deficit is high, but one of the reasons for that is that we are now a service-based ecnonomy, not an industrial one. Specifically, what should any President do to fix it?

"Education at an all time low." Not sure what the hell YOU are talking about or how you are measuring it. The NCLB has its issues, certainly...and I say that as an educator. But funding is 50% higher than it was when Bush took office.

War economy: So the only parts of the economy that have been good in the last six years are weapons manufacture and oil? :lol:

Clinton: I'll ask what I ask all liberals who praise Clinton's economy...what did he do, specifically, to aid it? And you realize unemployment is now within .5% of being as low as it was at it's LOWEST point during the Clinton Presidency? Also...you confuse good economic performance with deficits, which is a common mistake. The deficit in and of itself does not harm the economy in the short and mid term.

Finally, we experienced surpluses due to 1) economic growth that Clinton was fortunate enough to be President during...mostly due to the tech bubble and transition to a service/tech economy....and 2) controls imposed by the Republican Congress.

I'm not saying you have to agree with Bush actions nor I am even trying to pronounce him "better" than Clinton, I'm just saying that saying he's the worst in history at this point is, well, dumb.

jamac

05-12-2007, 02:13 PM

Provide support for the Air Pollution claim and tell me how such pollution is Bush's fault. Look at the numbers and you'll find air quality is better in the US today than 20 years--or even 10 years ago.

Inaction. California is suing EPA over emission control. LA has worst air in since 1970 (LA times articles)

The national debt has been rising for years, but I agree spending is out of control. The deficit itself is not at record levels and is now coming down. The trade deficit is high, but one of the reasons for that is that we are now a service-based ecnonomy, not an industrial one. Specifically, what should any President do to fix it?

Dollar at it's lowest in years, (1Euro = 1.39$ 1Pound = 1.97 $. still we are importing more...this is a sign that there is some major problems. In the past lowering the Dollar has helped exports.

"Education at an all time low." Not sure what the hell YOU are talking about or how you are measuring it. The NCLB has its issues, certainly...and I say that as an educator. But funding is 50% higher than it was when Bush took office.

Evolution. International competition. US education level ranks 57 in industrialized nations only 2 countries below.

War economy: So the only parts of the economy that have been good in the last six years are weapons manufacture and oil? :lol:

Get yourself some history books, European ones about a little country called Germany in the 1930's.

Clinton: I'll ask what I ask all liberals who praise Clinton's economy...what did he do, specifically, to aid it? And you realize unemployment is now within .5% of being as low as it was at it's LOWEST point during the Clinton Presidency? Also...you confuse good economic performance with deficits, which is a common mistake. The deficit in and of itself does not harm the economy in the short and mid term.

Finally, we experienced surpluses due to 1) economic growth that Clinton was fortunate enough to be President during...mostly due to the tech bubble and transition to a service/tech economy....and 2) controls imposed by the Republican Congress.

I'm not saying you have to agree with Bush actions nor I am even trying to pronounce him "better" than Clinton, I'm just saying that saying he's the worst in history at this point is, well, dumb.

I am desperate to find that one thing where I can go, "yeah that really worked" but even with vigilant research it seems impossible. This administration has proven that government is useless. I include all parties in this. Maybe the silver lining is that it will cause the demise of the Grand Old Party as a whole and it is already starting the biggest clean up effort of our environment, a global peace awareness and a reexamination of the US constitution. This is all positive.
GWB may have inadvertently caused the largest revolution and intellectual awakening of all time.

jimmac

05-12-2007, 04:32 PM

Notice that word "still." As in this has been addressed before. About eleventy million times.
At least, unlike many of our enviro-nut politicians, you ARE recycling. ;)

You've discovered fire and want a thread to tell everyone about it.
We've been here since 2003 at least. Welcome to the party, now that it is almost over. :D

As I've told you elsewhere it will all go away once he's gone.

People are totally fed up with that moron.

Why are you surprised this still comes up? He's still in office!

And they don't want another republican even close to him.

Get over it.

Ps. Why are you seeming to support him?

You say you don't like him?

Oh yes it's that 2D thing again.

You right leaning Libertarian you.;)

Jubelum

05-12-2007, 05:40 PM

Oh yes it's that 2D thing again.

Ahhh.. finally.. a breakthrough. Maybe... :\

jimmac

05-13-2007, 12:08 AM

Ahhh.. finally.. a breakthrough. Maybe... :\

Jesus.:no:

SDW2001

05-13-2007, 08:52 AM

Inaction. California is suing EPA over emission control. LA has worst air in since 1970 (LA times articles)

Dollar at it's lowest in years, (1Euro = 1.39$ 1Pound = 1.97 $. still we are importing more...this is a sign that there is some major problems. In the past lowering the Dollar has helped exports.

Evolution. International competition. US education level ranks 57 in industrialized nations only 2 countries below.

Get yourself some history books, European ones about a little country called Germany in the 1930's.

I am desperate to find that one thing where I can go, "yeah that really worked" but even with vigilant research it seems impossible. This administration has proven that government is useless. I include all parties in this. Maybe the silver lining is that it will cause the demise of the Grand Old Party as a whole and it is already starting the biggest clean up effort of our environment, a global peace awareness and a reexamination of the US constitution. This is all positive.
GWB may have inadvertently caused the largest revolution and intellectual awakening of all time.

1. And this is Bush's fault, even if true?

2. It's a sign of a lot of things...mostly not in any President's control. What should he or any President do?

3. Blah. It depends on what you mean by "education system." There are many factors. Our higher ed system draws students worldwide. We're in the top ten as far as adults with degrees. Also, from Wiki:

The United Nations assigned an Education Index of 99.9 to the United States, ranking it number 1 in the world, a position it shares with about 20 other nations.[1] 76.6 million students were enrolled in K16 study. Of these, 72 percent aged 12 to 17 were judged academically "on track" for their age (enrolled in school at or above grade level). Of those enrolled in compulsory education, 5.2 million (10.4 percent) were attending private schools. Among the country's adult population, over 85 percent have completed high school and 27 percent have received a bachelor's degree or higher.

Of course, we do lag in Math and Science understanding. Some of it is the system, but a good portion of it, speaking as a teacher...is our culture. We have lower expectations for students, and more expectations for social life. Our attitude towards learning is different as well, than in say, Japan.

The point is, blaming this on one man is absurd. It's not like the "problem" such at is is new.

4. That doesn't even make sense. You didn't answer my question. You can't posibly believe that the economy only got better because we went to war.

5. :lol: Right, every problem we have is the GOP's fault. Jesus..this is getting comical. And really...of course you can't find something you agree with or that you think worked...you're polarized. Duh.

jimmac

05-13-2007, 09:55 AM

1. And this is Bush's fault, even if true?

2. It's a sign of a lot of things...mostly not in any President's control. What should he or any President do?

3. Blah. It depends on what you mean by "education system." There are many factors. Our higher ed system draws students worldwide. We're in the top ten as far as adults with degrees. Also, from Wiki:

Of course, we do lag in Math and Science understanding. Some of it is the system, but a good portion of it, speaking as a teacher...is our culture. We have lower expectations for students, and more expectations for social life. Our attitude towards learning is different as well, than in say, Japan.

The point is, blaming this on one man is absurd. It's not like the "problem" such at is is new.

4. That doesn't even make sense. You didn't answer my question. You can't posibly believe that the economy only got better because we went to war.

5. :lol: Right, every problem we have is the GOP's fault. Jesus..this is getting comical. And really...of course you can't find something you agree with or that you think worked...you're polarized. Duh.

What you're missing is that it can be their wrong or inaction on these issues also SDW.

jamac

05-13-2007, 11:46 AM

1. And this is Bush's fault, even if true?

2. It's a sign of a lot of things...mostly not in any President's control. What should he or any President do?

3. Blah. It depends on what you mean by "education system." There are many factors. Our higher ed system draws students worldwide. We're in the top ten as far as adults with degrees. Also, from Wiki:

Of course, we do lag in Math and Science understanding. Some of it is the system, but a good portion of it, speaking as a teacher...is our culture. We have lower expectations for students, and more expectations for social life. Our attitude towards learning is different as well, than in say, Japan.

The point is, blaming this on one man is absurd. It's not like the "problem" such at is is new.

4. That doesn't even make sense. You didn't answer my question. You can't posibly believe that the economy only got better because we went to war.

5. :lol: Right, every problem we have is the GOP's fault. Jesus..this is getting comical. And really...of course you can't find something you agree with or that you think worked...you're polarized. Duh.

Try reading. It may expand your mind.
That you are a teacher is what is wrong with the system.

@_@ Artman

05-13-2007, 12:22 PM

War economy: So the only parts of the economy that have been good in the last six years are weapons manufacture and oil? :lol:

Competitive Bidding Falls Off in Bush Years (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/10/AR2007051002390.html)

Friday, May 11, 2007; A17

The value of federal contracts awarded without competitive bidding has soared since President Bush took office in 2000, according to a new study to be released Monday by the Center for American Progress, a liberal think tank.

Federal contracting grew from $203 billion in fiscal 2000 to $377 billion by fiscal 2005. During the same period, the value of federal contracts awarded without competitive bidding more than doubled, from $67 billion to $145 billion, the study found. At the same time, government oversight of contracting has weakened, according to the study's author, Scott Lilly, a senior fellow at the center and a former House Democratic aide.

For example, the Defense Department is responsible for 80 percent of the overall federal contract growth during the five years under study. But the number of federal civilians employed by the department declined by about 2,000 in the same period. As a result, contractors have increasingly stepped in to fill the void -- to help the government decide its needs, draft contracts awarded to other private firms and then monitor their performance, the study found.

Federal contracts are big money -- they represent about 3 percent of U.S. gross domestic product, about the same amount as the automotive industry. And because a growing chunk of that money is being handed to private companies without competitive bidding, it raises questions about whether taxpayers are getting the best deal and whether the contracting process has grown corrupt, Lilly said.

"There are clear indications that serious contract abuse has become a widespread problem affecting programs and agencies across the entire government and involving tens of billions of dollars in federal funds annually," according to the study.

-- Lyndsey Layton

Look, for almost thirty years we've been hearing about how the liberals under our beds were going to steal our money in the night and spend it on social programs!. Creeping communism! Welfare mothers and their crack babies who don't want to work! ...and so on, and on. Well, we were too clever for them...we gave our hundreds of billions to the nice men who hold stock in Halliburton, so they could keep it safe in their offshore bank accounts.

Oh and that oil in Iraq?

Billions in Oil Missing in Iraq, U.S. Study Says (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/12/world/middleeast/12oil.html?ex=1179633600&en=4881a2134cb37032&ei=5065&partner=MYWAY)

"Between 100,000 and 300,000 barrels a day of Iraq's declared oil production over the past four years is unaccounted for and could have been siphoned off through corruption or smuggling, according to a draft American government report,"

I know the financial/energy markets decry infrastructure costs and security risks, but that to be expected. I think that this example fits just as well with everything else we all now know about Iraq, that it was an opportunistic decision of a few businessmen who see only the business side of the whole thing. And when I say businessmen, I don't mean your small business owner.

We're talking about the likes of Enron and WorldCom CEOs.

Running the Country.

Iraq War Will Cost More-than-$2-Trillion (http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article15499.htm)

"Two scholars, one a Nobel Prize winner, revisit their estimate of the true cost of the Iraq war – and find that $2 trillion was too low. They consider not only the current and future budgetary costs, but the economic impact of lives lost, jobs interrupted and oil prices driven higher by political uncertainty in the Middle East."

<sarcasm>Yeah, :lol: , funny.</sarcasm>

jamac

05-20-2007, 12:11 PM

http://www.spokesmanreview.com/ap/story.asp?AP_ID=D8P7MNV80

HMMM, are former presidents reading this forum?:???:

jimmac

05-20-2007, 01:28 PM

http://www.spokesmanreview.com/ap/story.asp?AP_ID=D8P7MNV80

HMMM, are former presidents reading this forum?:???:

It's common knowlege.;)

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/europe/05/19/carter.blair.ap/index.html

sammi jo

05-20-2007, 02:02 PM

Terror:
Airpollution kills 5400 people in LA yearly.

ok....

Terror killed 0 people in LA in the last couple of millenia.

What?? (http://lang.dailynews.com/socal/gangs/articles/ALL_p1side1.asp):wow: :err: :wow:

Gang related killings statistics for LA County (http://www.laalmanac.com/crime/cr03x.htm)

In the City of LA alone, in last 13 years, there have been 4200 killings, 10,000+ attempted killings, 2024 carjackings (hijacking of private vehicles)....

Should my car break down in any unfamiliar urban neighborhood in any US city.. concern for my wellbeing would be far more oriented towards awareness of the local thug element than anything related to Mohammed X, Ahmed Y or Iqbal Z.

Are streetgangs terrorist organisations? (http://www.sandia.gov/ACG/documents/sandreports/SAND2004-1104P.pdf)

Whether the preferred killing method is planting a bomb, or spraying bullets.. its still terrorism. Guns were used in 95% of the killings cited above. Our love affair with the 2nd Amendment should not provide a comfort zone. Maybe we are pretending that the orgy of violence and death in urban America has nothing to do with terrorism because none of the organizations responsible cite "promotion of Islamism" and "jihad" as their raisons d'etre.

Jubelum

05-20-2007, 03:04 PM

Whether the preferred killing method is planting a bomb, or spraying bullets.. its still terrorism. Guns were used in 95% of the killings cited above. Our love affair with the 2nd Amendment should not provide a comfort zone. Maybe we are pretending that the orgy of violence and death in urban America has nothing to do with terrorism because none of the organizations responsible cite "promotion of Islamism" and "jihad" as their raisons d'etre.

The buzzword spin goes on. Its getting into GWB territory, where if you can link anything to "terror" that it might get some attention you think it deserves. Well, as Golda Meir said, "only terrorism is terrorism." And we get your point that we all hate Muslims yadda yadda.

ter·ror·ism
n.
The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons.

Street gangs are not terrorists, inherently. They are members of organized crime. They fight each other, not society at large or the govt, nor do they fight for ideological or political reasons. They fight for money.

dmz

05-20-2007, 03:33 PM

It might be better for everyone to review 'terror' as a political tool. Gangs, auto deaths, deaths from obesity all kill more people a year than the 9/11 attacks, but they are predictable by comparison.

What's at issue is the psychology of being attacked, at any time or in any place without rhyme or reason:

Main Entry: reign of terror Pronunciation Guide
Etymology: from Reign of Terror, a period of the French Revolution between the executions of Louis XVI and Robespierre that was conspicuous for the mass executions of political suspects
1 : a state characterized by conditions (as violence, threats of violence, or actions as injurious as physical violence) that produce terror among the people involved <created a reign of terror throughout ... the state -- American Guide Series: Oregon> <no overt reign of terror among our intellectuals -- W.G.Carleton>
2 : a period of time during which such conditions prevail <gave ordinary prisoners some measures of confidence that the reign of terror ... was finished -- New York Herald Tribune>

Citation format for this entry:

"reign of terror." Webster's Third New International Dictionary, Unabridged. Merriam-Webster, 2002. http://unabridged.merriam-webster.com (20 May 2007).

SDW2001

05-20-2007, 07:07 PM

Try reading. It may expand your mind.
That you are a teacher is what is wrong with the system.

Ooooh...a clever little "you're a dumb teacher" insult coupled with another about not reading enough . Nice. Perhaps you are the epitomy of all examples in regard to our "failing educational system."

SDW2001

05-20-2007, 07:08 PM

Competitive Bidding Falls Off in Bush Years (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/10/AR2007051002390.html)

Friday, May 11, 2007; A17

The value of federal contracts awarded without competitive bidding has soared since President Bush took office in 2000, according to a new study to be released Monday by the Center for American Progress, a liberal think tank.

Federal contracting grew from $203 billion in fiscal 2000 to $377 billion by fiscal 2005. During the same period, the value of federal contracts awarded without competitive bidding more than doubled, from $67 billion to $145 billion, the study found. At the same time, government oversight of contracting has weakened, according to the study's author, Scott Lilly, a senior fellow at the center and a former House Democratic aide.

For example, the Defense Department is responsible for 80 percent of the overall federal contract growth during the five years under study. But the number of federal civilians employed by the department declined by about 2,000 in the same period. As a result, contractors have increasingly stepped in to fill the void -- to help the government decide its needs, draft contracts awarded to other private firms and then monitor their performance, the study found.

Federal contracts are big money -- they represent about 3 percent of U.S. gross domestic product, about the same amount as the automotive industry. And because a growing chunk of that money is being handed to private companies without competitive bidding, it raises questions about whether taxpayers are getting the best deal and whether the contracting process has grown corrupt, Lilly said.

"There are clear indications that serious contract abuse has become a widespread problem affecting programs and agencies across the entire government and involving tens of billions of dollars in federal funds annually," according to the study.

-- Lyndsey Layton

Look, for almost thirty years we've been hearing about how the liberals under our beds were going to steal our money in the night and spend it on social programs!. Creeping communism! Welfare mothers and their crack babies who don't want to work! ...and so on, and on. Well, we were too clever for them...we gave our hundreds of billions to the nice men who hold stock in Halliburton, so they could keep it safe in their offshore bank accounts.

Oh and that oil in Iraq?

Billions in Oil Missing in Iraq, U.S. Study Says (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/12/world/middleeast/12oil.html?ex=1179633600&en=4881a2134cb37032&ei=5065&partner=MYWAY)

"Between 100,000 and 300,000 barrels a day of Iraq's declared oil production over the past four years is unaccounted for and could have been siphoned off through corruption or smuggling, according to a draft American government report,"

I know the financial/energy markets decry infrastructure costs and security risks, but that to be expected. I think that this example fits just as well with everything else we all now know about Iraq, that it was an opportunistic decision of a few businessmen who see only the business side of the whole thing. And when I say businessmen, I don't mean your small business owner.

We're talking about the likes of Enron and WorldCom CEOs.

Running the Country.

Iraq War Will Cost More-than-$2-Trillion (http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article15499.htm)

"Two scholars, one a Nobel Prize winner, revisit their estimate of the true cost of the Iraq war – and find that $2 trillion was too low. They consider not only the current and future budgetary costs, but the economic impact of lives lost, jobs interrupted and oil prices driven higher by political uncertainty in the Middle East."

<sarcasm>Yeah, :lol: , funny.</sarcasm>

Uhh...that's great Artman. Perhaps next time you could respond to the point I was actually making. I'll give you a C+ because you at least did the assignment.

SDW2001

05-20-2007, 07:10 PM

It's common knowlege.;)

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/europe/05/19/carter.blair.ap/index.html

Oh yes, and it's not like it's almost unprecedented for a former President to criticize the current one. Oh...and at least Carter wasn't an abject failure of President in every way imaginable. :\

Jubelum

05-20-2007, 09:18 PM

Oh yes, and it's not like it's almost unprecedented for a former President to criticize the current one. Oh...and at least Carter wasn't an abject failure of President in every way imaginable. :\

I think he wrote the manual on leading a country into the toilet of high gas prices, massive inflation, etc. Bush is doing a terrible job... of leading the country to have a "Carter" economy.

Aries 1B

05-20-2007, 09:19 PM

screener

05-20-2007, 10:43 PM

Oh yes, and it's not like it's almost unprecedented for a former President to criticize the current one. Oh...and at least Carter wasn't an abject failure of President in every way imaginable. :\

Not so great a President, but a great Humanitarian.
A Nobel Peace Prize is not an easy achievement.

I can't imagine what Bush's post Presidency will be like.
He most certainly won't be welcomed around the world which is what Carter's criticism was about.

He is the most arrogant imbecile ever elected President of the United States.

I am now getting Fox News and am amazed at the spin they put on things.
Bush can do no wrong there, comedy gold if it weren't for all the people that died, and continue to die, for basically nothing.

Except for the rich getting a lot richer, appointing inept cronies, people of the right persuasion eg., religion, qualifications not necessary, destroying World opinion, wrecking Iraq and perhaps the whole region, what in your mind makes him better than Carter.

SDW2001

05-22-2007, 11:01 AM

Ahhhh yessssss.

Stagflation.

Desert One.

444 Days.

Bert Lance.

Those were, indeed, the days!

V/R,
Aries 1B

Yeah really. Carter criticizing any President is like Donald Trump saying Bush has bad hair.

Not so great a President, but a great Humanitarian.
A Nobel Peace Prize is not an easy achievement.

I can't imagine what Bush's post Presidency will be like.
He most certainly won't be welcomed around the world which is what Carter's criticism was about.

He is the most arrogant imbecile ever elected President of the United States.

I am now getting Fox News and am amazed at the spin they put on things.
Bush can do no wrong there, comedy gold if it weren't for all the people that died, and continue to die, for basically nothing.

Except for the rich getting a lot richer, appointing inept cronies, people of the right persuasion eg., religion, qualifications not necessary, destroying World opinion, wrecking Iraq and perhaps the whole region, what in your mind makes him better than Carter.

Yes, a great humanitarian. As for a Nobel, he shouldn't have won. He is responsible for a lot of the problems we have in the Mideast today.

We won't agree about Bush. I disagree with him on several issues, but it's too early to tell what his legacy will be.

I have no idea what you're talking about with Fox News. Apprently "doing no wrong" equals "not savaging the man unfairly on everything all the time."

Rich Getting Richer: Stupid rhetoric. Stupid.

Appointing Cronies: Agreed.

World Opinion: OK, but I think we care too much about it. I also think American and Bush-hating is chic right now.

Iraq: It's not in good shape. We wil have to see how it goes in the long term. I disagree that he's destroyed the whole region. The region is a mess and has been since the beginning of time.

What makes him better? How about a better economy? No major terror attacks since 9/11? Record stock market? Home ownership? Minority home and business ownership? Appointing blacks and women and hispanics to high positions within the admin?

@_@ Artman

05-22-2007, 12:15 PM

No major terror attacks since 9/11?

Ok. I'll take a stab at this since I just read an article that wasn't from a moonbat source...

Poll: A quarter of younger Muslim Americans support suicide bombings in some circumstances (http://blogs.usatoday.com/ondeadline/2007/05/poll_a_quarter_.html)

"The Pew Research Center for the People & the Press found in a national survey that nearly 80% of Muslims in the USA say suicide bombings are never justified to 'defend Islam,' but nearly a quarter of those under 30 think such attacks are OK in some circumstances.

'It is a hair-raising number,' Radwa Masmoudi, head of the Center for the Study of Islam and Democracy, tells the AP."

This doesn't surprise me. With tighter restrictions (Patriot Act) and other factors (discrimination) the younger Muslims in the US have much more to deal with. Some take it humorously (http://www.wired.com/techbiz/people/magazine/15-06/ps_transparency), but others will direct the conduct against them with anger and dissent. The most extreme could take it further. But with terrorism, you never know until it happens.

Also, from the far right WorldNetDaily:

Blacks recruited for terror by al-Qaida Pitch to African-Americans invokes 'martyr' Malcolm X (http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55796)

"Al-Qaida is aggressively recruiting black Americans for suicide operations against the homeland, say FBI analysts who have reviewed recent videotaped messages from the terror group's leaders.

A speech released May 5 by Osama bin Laden's deputy confirms earlier fears that African-Americans are the No. 1 recruiting target for the next generation of attacks. Al-Qaida has been trying to lower its Arab profile to reduce the odds that its terror cells will be subjected to security scrutiny."

Well...that's scary. But remember this. The first Muslim terrorist attack on US soil was in 1993. The second in 2001. Eight years apart. For large scale, that is a logical amount of time between planning, training and carrying out something of those scales of attack. Of course if it is all a well-planned sequence of events by a cabal of Neo-Con nut-cases, you'll have to get sammi jo's take on that...;)

Why haven't we had an attack in the States? Why hit here when you can hit us over there (http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/05/20/iraq.main/)?

jamac

05-22-2007, 12:23 PM

Ooooh...a clever little "you're a dumb teacher" insult coupled with another about not reading enough . Nice. Perhaps you are the epitomy of all examples in regard to our "failing educational system."

I was not educated in the US. English is my third language after German and French. I have enjoyed a level of education in "Real Gymnasium" that would be considered university level in the US before I turned 18.
Yet, I love the US as an example of all peoples communing.

Bush is truly and example of a failed educational system without focus on teaching students how to learn and understand.

Jubelum

05-22-2007, 12:47 PM

Bush plays stupid to make you misunderestimate him. And is the product of the School of Elites. Among its alumni:

George H. W. Bush
Bill Clinton
Hillary Clinton
George W. Bush
Dick Cheney
John Kerry
Howard Dean
Arlen Specter
Joe Lieberman.
Gerald Ford
Clarence Thomas
Samuel Alito
Bob Woodward
William Vanderbilt
Paul Wolfowitz
Ed Meese
William F. Buckley
Sayed Rahmatullah Hashemi
Ernesto Zedillo

Stupid like a fox.

Goooooooooo BULLDOGS!

Northgate

05-22-2007, 04:39 PM

Well it looks like Bush got his "blank check" appropriations bill from Congress.

I supose he can't be that bad a President if he he can still bully a Democratically controlled congress into giving him everything he wants, right?

SDW2001

05-22-2007, 05:00 PM

Ok. I'll take a stab at this since I just read an article that wasn't from a moonbat source...

Poll: A quarter of younger Muslim Americans support suicide bombings in some circumstances (http://blogs.usatoday.com/ondeadline/2007/05/poll_a_quarter_.html)

"The Pew Research Center for the People & the Press found in a national survey that nearly 80% of Muslims in the USA say suicide bombings are never justified to 'defend Islam,' but nearly a quarter of those under 30 think such attacks are OK in some circumstances.

'It is a hair-raising number,' Radwa Masmoudi, head of the Center for the Study of Islam and Democracy, tells the AP."

This doesn't surprise me. With tighter restrictions (Patriot Act) and other factors (discrimination) the younger Muslims in the US have much more to deal with. Some take it humorously (http://www.wired.com/techbiz/people/magazine/15-06/ps_transparency), but others will direct the conduct against them with anger and dissent. The most extreme could take it further. But with terrorism, you never know until it happens.

Also, from the far right WorldNetDaily:

Blacks recruited for terror by al-Qaida Pitch to African-Americans invokes 'martyr' Malcolm X (http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55796)

"Al-Qaida is aggressively recruiting black Americans for suicide operations against the homeland, say FBI analysts who have reviewed recent videotaped messages from the terror group's leaders.

A speech released May 5 by Osama bin Laden's deputy confirms earlier fears that African-Americans are the No. 1 recruiting target for the next generation of attacks. Al-Qaida has been trying to lower its Arab profile to reduce the odds that its terror cells will be subjected to security scrutiny."

Well...that's scary. But remember this. The first Muslim terrorist attack on US soil was in 1993. The second in 2001. Eight years apart. For large scale, that is a logical amount of time between planning, training and carrying out something of those scales of attack. Of course if it is all a well-planned sequence of events by a cabal of Neo-Con nut-cases, you'll have to get sammi jo's take on that...;)

Why haven't we had an attack in the States? Why hit here when you can hit us over there (http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/05/20/iraq.main/)?

I gave you a passing grade on the last one. On this one, you've clearly and delibrately gotton off topic. D-.

@_@ Artman

05-22-2007, 05:37 PM

I gave you a passing grade on the last one. On this one, you've clearly and delibrately gotton off topic. D-.

They are both on topic. You're brain is just so impacted with the obvious bullshit that it escapes you to see other avenues to them. Ignorance is bliss I guess.

What's with all your spelling errors lately? Think of your students SDW...

SDW2001's Class of 2008

http://i58.photobucket.com/albums/g255/artman46/scareykids.jpg

Jubelum

05-22-2007, 05:42 PM

I supose he can't be that bad a President if he he can still bully a Democratically controlled congress into giving him everything he wants, right?

As a President in official capacity, (seeing how things he wants can get accomplished by any means necessary) he's a rock star of a President, taken by that definition.

It's just that the means and the goals themselves have gotten seriously out of hand. Who, exactly, is he pushing policy for? Certainly not the Republicans. Certainly not the Democrats. Just the worst of each that lead to more top down control over the rest of us.

@_@ Artman

05-22-2007, 07:21 PM

It's just that the means and the goals themselves have gotten seriously out of hand. Who, exactly, is he pushing policy for? Certainly not the Republicans. Certainly not the Democrats. Just the worst of each that lead to more top down control over the rest of us.

Welcome to the New American Century (http://www.newamericancentury.org/)

The Carlyle Group (http://www.thecarlylegroup.com/eng/index.html)

Halliburton (http://www.halliburton.com/)

Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (http://www.opec.org/home/)

The National Association of Evangelicals (http://www.nae.net/)

I could go on but I think you know where to go, don't you (http://www.theyrule.net/)? ;)

screener

05-23-2007, 10:34 AM

[QUOTE=SDW2001;1084602]Yeah really. Carter criticizing any President is like Donald Trump saying Bush has bad hair.

Yes, a great humanitarian. As for a Nobel, he shouldn't have won. He is responsible for a lot of the problems we have in the Mideast today.
http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2002/press.html
"The Norwegian Nobel Committee has decided to award the Nobel Peace Prize for 2002 to Jimmy Carter, for his decades of untiring effort to find peaceful solutions to international conflicts, to advance democracy and human rights, and to promote economic and social development."

Yeah, it's all Carter's fault. Bush's way is much more appropriate.

We won't agree about Bush. I disagree with him on several issues, but it's too early to tell what his legacy will be.

I personally think he will be the worst President in US history.

I have no idea what you're talking about with Fox News. Apprently "doing no wrong" equals "not savaging the man unfairly on everything all the time."

Fox News never savages him, fairly or unfairly.
They interpret what he says, someone has to I guess, and put it in a positive light.
And not just Bush, anything Republican.
One Fair and Balanced report by Brit Hume has him opining that a Democratic President will cause your economy to tank.

Rich Getting Richer: Stupid rhetoric. Stupid.

From Cavuto on Business, Fox News Channel,
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,274332,00.html
"Ben Stein: Charles is completely right. Compared to previous generations, the wealth of this country is phenomenal, breath-taking, off-the-charts, unbelievable. But, this is really two economies. This is really a very wonderful economy for the rich. But, for the ordinary person, wages peaked in 1973 and have never reached that peak, adjusted for inflation. There are an awful lot of home foreclosures, an awful lot of people in the upper Midwest who are really bleeding as the auto industry hemorrhages. For the rich, though, it's an incredibly great economy. For people who have capital, it's an incredibly great economy"

"Laura Schwartz: Well, right now the top 1 percent of this country averages $44,000 a year because of those tax breaks. The average middle classer? $744"

Appointing Cronies: Agreed.

Inept Cronies.

World Opinion: OK, but I think we care too much about it. I also think American and Bush-hating is chic right now.

Yeah, who cares what the rest of the World thinks about Americans, who needs 'em.
Bush hating is no fad, it's real and by extension, Americans.
Granted, their has always been anti American feelings, but not to the degree you see now.

Iraq: It's not in good shape. We wil have to see how it goes in the long term. I disagree that he's destroyed the whole region. The region is a mess and has been since the beginning of time.

I said PERHAPS destroying the whole region.
And you'all are well on the way to that point.

Since the beginning of time? What happened to the Cradle of Civilization?
And you say you're a teacher?

Arrogance, Ineptness, Cherry Picking what you want to hear, is why Iraq is a mess.

From here,
http://www.cato.org/dailys/11-30-03.html
"President Bush's speech ignored a classified Feb. 26, 2003, State Department report that expressed doubt that installing a new regime in Iraq will foster the spread of democracy in the Middle East. Written by the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research, the report argued that "even if some version of democracy took root ... anti-American sentiment is so pervasive that Iraqi elections in the short term could lead to the rise of Islamic-controlled governments hostile to the United States."

I remember Bush liking to quote Churchill, he never quoted this,

"Bush might also have quoted British Prime Minister Winston Churchill, who declared in his famous 1946 Iron Curtain speech that "we must never cease to proclaim in fearless tones the great principles of freedom and the rights of man," but that "it is not our duty ... to interfere forcibly in the internal affairs of countries."

What makes him better? How about a better economy? No major terror attacks since 9/11? Record stock market? Home ownership? Minority home and business ownership? Appointing blacks and women and hispanics to high positions within the admin?

Better economy for the rich.
The high price of gas, heating oil, doesn't affect them near as much as regular folks.

And the Figurehead, Hero for terrorism, Bin Laden, is still out their.
Instead of killing the leader of your enemy, you empowered him and his followers and by the Iraq fiasco, created a new recruiting ground.
They practice their craft everyday, regrettably, you won't be any safer for a long time because of ineptness, arrogance.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=a8IPzXdjD06o&refer=home
"May 15 (Bloomberg) -- Mortgages in foreclosure rose 62 percent in April and the number of Americans falling behind on home loans will climb this year as home prices fall and lending standards are tightened, RealtyTrac Inc. said."

Appointing blacks and women and hispanics with actual qualifications for the job instead of cronies would make sense.

SDW2001

05-23-2007, 11:11 AM

http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/p...002/press.html
"The Norwegian Nobel Committee has decided to award the Nobel Peace Prize for 2002 to Jimmy Carter, for his decades of untiring effort to find peaceful solutions to international conflicts, to advance democracy and human rights, and to promote economic and social development."

Yeah, it's all Carter's fault. Bush's way is much more appropriate.

Jimmy Carter hasn’t done jack shit for peace. What peace has he brought…anywhere? He totally fucked up the Middle East. He says the word “peace” a lot. That’s about all.

We don’t know if “Bush’s way” will work, whatever that means.

I personally think he will be the worst President in US history.

And I’m saying that’s an absurd prediction. Such a label would likely be subjective and wouldn’t even be possible to “stick on” until at least 20 years from now.

Fox News never savages him, fairly or unfairly.
They interpret what he says, someone has to I guess, and put it in a positive light.
And not just Bush, anything Republican.
One Fair and Balanced report by Brit Hume has him opining that a Democratic President will cause your economy to tank

Savaging a candidate is never appropriate. It just drives you bonkers that FNC is somewhat fair and leans conservative. Then…they have conservative opinion shows. How dare they! We own the media, goddmammit! Bias!

I want a link for your Brit Hume reference.

From Cavuto on Business, Fox News Channel,
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,274332,00.html
"Ben Stein: Charles is completely right. Compared to previous generations, the wealth of this country is phenomenal, breath-taking, off-the-charts, unbelievable. But, this is really two economies. This is really a very wonderful economy for the rich. But, for the ordinary person, wages peaked in 1973 and have never reached that peak, adjusted for inflation. There are an awful lot of home foreclosures, an awful lot of people in the upper Midwest who are really bleeding as the auto industry hemorrhages. For the rich, though, it's an incredibly great economy. For people who have capital, it's an incredibly great economy"

"Laura Schwartz: Well, right now the top 1 percent of this country averages $44,000 a year because of those tax breaks. The average middle classer? $744"

Whatever. More rhetorical crap, especially the last part. OMFG: Rich people get more in terms of a dollar amount in tax breaks. Shocking!

And even assuming Stein is correct: What do you propose we do about it? Limit CEO pay? Raise taxes on the rich? Sounds like someone likes redistributing wealth! 

Yeah, who cares what the rest of the World thinks about Americans, who needs 'em.
Bush hating is no fad, it's real and by extension, Americans.
Granted, their has always been anti American feelings, but not to the degree you see now.

Sure it’s a fad. That’s exactly what it is.

I said PERHAPS destroying the whole region.
And you'all are well on the way to that point.

Since the beginning of time? What happened to the Cradle of Civilization?
And you say you're a teacher?

Arrogance, Ineptness, Cherry Picking what you want to hear, is why Iraq is a mess.

Fuck off. You know exactly what I’m saying.

From here,
http://www.cato.org/dailys/11-30-03.html
"President Bush's speech ignored a classified Feb. 26, 2003, State Department report that expressed doubt that installing a new regime in Iraq will foster the spread of democracy in the Middle East. Written by the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research, the report argued that "even if some version of democracy took root ... anti-American sentiment is so pervasive that Iraqi elections in the short term could lead to the rise of Islamic-controlled governments hostile to the United States."

I remember Bush liking to quote Churchill, he never quoted this,

"Bush might also have quoted British Prime Minister Winston Churchill, who declared in his famous 1946 Iron Curtain speech that "we must never cease to proclaim in fearless tones the great principles of freedom and the rights of man," but that "it is not our duty ... to interfere forcibly in the internal affairs of countries."

Why do you bother? I know where you stand. You oppose the war and feel it was a mistake. Fine. Good for you.

Better economy for the rich.
The high price of gas, heating oil, doesn't affect them near as much as regular folks.

LOL. You sound like you’re quoting from Democratic Talking Points. The RICH! The rrrrrriiich! Oh, and tell me how the price of oil is Bush’s fault. Oh wait, I forgot…he’s in bed with his oil buddies. The bastard.

And the Figurehead, Hero for terrorism, Bin Laden, is still out their.

Well as a teacher, I’ll point out that it’s “there” not “their” in this case. D minus for you.

Instead of killing the leader of your enemy, you empowered him and his followers and by the Iraq fiasco, created a new recruiting ground.
They practice their craft everyday, regrettably, you won't be any safer for a long time because of ineptness, arrogance.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...06o&refer=home
"May 15 (Bloomberg) -- Mortgages in foreclosure rose 62 percent in April and the number of Americans falling behind on home loans will climb this year as home prices fall and lending standards are tightened, RealtyTrac Inc. said."

Appointing blacks and women and hispanics with actual qualifications for the job instead of cronies would make sense.

Screener, meet Organization of Thought. I’m sure you two will get along nicely.

1. Not sure there is a response that needs to be offered to your bin laden comment, other
than I’d like to get him too. I already know where you stand on the issue.

2. Uh, OK. Mortgage foreclosures are up because people over-borrowed and were drawn in by predatory lending practices by high-risk lenders. People treated their homes like ATM machines until the market slowed down. What is your point? How is this “Bush?”

3. Aren’t liberals always screaming for minorities and women to be hired? Bush has hired more minorities and women than perhaps any President, ever. But of course, you disagree with their ideological positions, so they’re incompetent and unqualified. I see. The fact is liberals are all about minorities until it’s a conservative up for something. Then that person is just another Bush crony.

@_@ Artman

05-23-2007, 11:38 AM

SDW, you are certifiably crazy. But you just be who you are, won't amount to nothing in the long run anyway.

And my cynicism has done the worst to myself. I'm tired of arguing to brainwashed chimps like you. I believe that you'd only get a clue to the Bush crimes only if it shat out of Chimpy's ass.

The Story That Should Bring Down the Republican Party (http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/5/22/152031/076)

"The story, of course, is election fraud. Gaming the electoral system from the inside. To unfairly favor republicans. Favors and promotions for those who go along. Demotions, firings and blacklisting of those who don’t. Nonexistent charges of voter fraud and threats or coercion for these charges to be investigated. Illegal redistricting. Petty lawsuits against the Voting Rights Act. Voter ID laws that border on illegal, if not overtly illegal. Conflict of interest between party "reelection officials" and Secretary(ies) of State. Get accustomed to hearing about it, prepare yourself to say it. And not just things that can be dismissed such as exit poll discrepancies or hackable voting machines. The real deal. The whole enchilada."

Sadly, this won't bring anyone down. Why? Because it is not one story.

There are no secret tapes, no bags of cash, no proverbial dead hooker in the trunk. Just a long list of abortions of justice and political skulduggery.

The American people won't become outraged over this because it is way too hard to understand. The nightly news has been covering the Department of Justice scandal for months now. Gonzalez has testified before Congress. The Senate will soon take up a vote of no confidence, for what that's worth.

And all for what? The issues has not gained any traction among the American people (or rock heads like SDW). Hell, it took us almost five years to come to the realization that all was not peachy in Iraq. How long until you think they realize that Karl Rove may not be of impeccable character?

What could make me even more angry/depressed?

It's Official: No Withdrawal Timeline In Congressional Dems' Bill (http://electioncentral.tpmcafe.com/blog/electioncentral/2007/may/22/breaking_no_withdrawal_timeline_in_congressional_d ems_bill)

Sigh...

Jubelum

05-23-2007, 11:47 AM

... brainwashed chimps like you.

Stop using words that hurt. Start using words that heal. "It only takes a minute (http://www.itonlytakesaminute.org/awareness-minute)."

The American people won't become outraged over this because it is way too hard to understand.

We're back to those STUPID Americans who are too STUPID to get it. The ones that re-elected Boosh and Cheney. The same ones that are too stupid to be trusted with their money, or guns, or a lot of things. :no:

@_@ Artman

05-23-2007, 11:51 AM

Stop using words that hurt. Start using words that heal. "It only takes a minute (http://www.itonlytakesaminute.org/awareness-minute)."

Yeah, I shouldn't abuse children now should I?

We're back to those STUPID Americans who are too STUPID to get it. The ones that re-elected Boosh and Cheney. The same ones that are too stupid to be trusted with their money, or guns, or a lot of things. :no:

Study: 38 Percent Of People Not Actually Entitled To Their Opinion (http://www.theonion.com/content/news_briefs/study_38_percent_of_people) ;)

Jubelum

05-23-2007, 12:07 PM

Study: 38 Percent Of People Not Actually Entitled To Their Opinion (http://www.theonion.com/content/news_briefs/study_38_percent_of_people) ;)

:lol:

SDW2001

05-23-2007, 03:41 PM

@_@ Artman

05-23-2007, 03:43 PM

You're polarized and pathetic. At least your world is easy to understand though, black and white. It's the Evil War Mongering Criminal Election-Stealing Republicans vs. the Noble, Fair-minded, Just, Lookin' Out for Ya'll, Two Americas Democrats. Makes things simple at least. Perhaps that's a defense mechanism of your pea sized bird brain.

Last link (http://electioncentral.tpmcafe.com/blog/electioncentral/2007/may/22/breaking_no_withdrawal_timeline_in_congressional_d ems_bill) went right by ya didn't it...:rolleyes:

screener

05-23-2007, 05:57 PM

[QUOTE=SDW2001;1085040]Jimmy Carter hasn’t done jack shit for peace. What peace has he brought…anywhere? He totally fucked up the Middle East. He says the word “peace” a lot. That’s about all.

Don't read much huh?

"his decades of untiring effort to find peaceful solutions to international conflicts"

"Carter's mediation was a vital contribution to the Camp David Accords between Israel and Egypt, in itself a great enough achievement to qualify for the Nobel Peace Prize."

We don’t know if “Bush’s way” will work, whatever that means.

Most of the world except for the far loony left agreed with the action against Afghanistan and the Taliban.
Destroying Iraq, which a lot of smart and not so smart, me, saw as the result of his folly, isn't helping the situation.
From my previous post, which was ignored by you,
"anti-American sentiment is so pervasive that Iraqi elections in the short term could lead to the rise of Islamic-controlled governments hostile to the United States."

Bush's way.

And I’m saying that’s an absurd prediction. Such a label would likely be subjective and wouldn’t even be possible to “stick on” until at least 20 years from now.

I just stuck it on him.

Savaging a candidate is never appropriate. It just drives you bonkers that FNC is somewhat fair and leans conservative. Then…they have conservative opinion shows. How dare they! We own the media, goddmammit! Bias!

First time I've heard anyone on the right admit they lean towards conservatism.
Fair and Balanced indeed.
Ever notice the smirks, chuckles, when they talk about any Democrat? Pelosi and blinking anyone?
Never happens when talking about a Republican that I've seen in the last couple of months I've been watching.

I want a link for your Brit Hume reference.

You can want all you want, it's been excised from the Fox News "Rush Transcript".

Whatever. More rhetorical crap, especially the last part. OMFG: Rich people get more in terms of a dollar amount in tax breaks. Shocking!

And even assuming Stein is correct: What do you propose we do about it? Limit CEO pay? Raise taxes on the rich? Sounds like someone likes redistributing wealth! ?

Redistributing wealth is not the same as a tax cut.
Give more of a tax break to the working class.

Stein is no bleeding heart liberal, but an honest Conservative. Rare I know.

Sure it’s a fad. That’s exactly what it is.

He'll be hated, scorned, for the rest of his cocooned life.

Fuck off. You know exactly what I’m saying.

You said a mess since the beginning of time. You get an "F" from me, a screenprinter.

Why do you bother? I know where you stand. You oppose the war and feel it was a mistake. Fine. Good for you.

I thought it was wrong before they invaded, I thought they fucked up royally by letting the Guard go with their weapons.
And when the looting started and Rumsfeld just let it go on, I knew for certain Iraq was lost.

What were you thinking at the time?

LOL. You sound like you’re quoting from Democratic Talking Points. The RICH! The rrrrrriiich! Oh, and tell me how the price of oil is Bush’s fault. Oh wait, I forgot…he’s in bed with his oil buddies. The bastard.

The same way you blame everything that went wrong in the Carter Administration to Carter.

Well as a teacher, I’ll point out that it’s “there” not “their” in this case. D minus for you.

Just what kind of teacher are you?

Screener, meet Organization of Thought. I’m sure you two will get along nicely.
:???:

1. Not sure there is a response that needs to be offered to your bin laden comment, other
than I’d like to get him too. I already know where you stand on the issue.

2. Uh, OK. Mortgage foreclosures are up because people over-borrowed and were drawn in by predatory lending practices by high-risk lenders. People treated their homes like ATM machines until the market slowed down. What is your point? How is this “Bush?”

3. Aren’t liberals always screaming for minorities and women to be hired? Bush has hired more minorities and women than perhaps any President, ever. But of course, you disagree with their ideological positions, so they’re incompetent and unqualified. I see. The fact is liberals are all about minorities until it’s a conservative up for something. Then that person is just another Bush crony.

1. Just heard on CNN, Bush said Bin Laden laid out plans for Al Qaida to set-up in Iraq to target US soldiers.
Declassified from 2005.
Who wouda thunk it.

2. The same way you lay fault at Carter's feet for everything that went wrong in his Administration.

3. If they are unqualified and get appointed anyway, what does that say about Bush.
He's just paying off loyalty, the public be damned, See Iraq, New Orleans, Gonzales etc.
Carter fired fuckups, Bush, the "Decider" seems blind to ineptness.

Really, what and who do you teach.

SDW2001

05-24-2007, 12:34 AM

screener:

Don't read much huh?

"his decades of untiring effort to find peaceful solutions to international conflicts"

"Carter's mediation was a vital contribution to the Camp David Accords between Israel and Egypt, in itself a great enough achievement to qualify for the Nobel Peace Prize.

The first line is rhetoric. Nothing more. And as for the Camp David Accords, let me ask: How are things going in the Middle East? Seen any...uh...rockets being launched lately in Israel? There is no peace in the ME. Results matter. Rhetoric doesn't.

Most of the world except for the far loony left agreed with the action against Afghanistan and the Taliban.
Destroying Iraq, which a lot of smart and not so smart, me, saw as the result of his folly, isn't helping the situation.
From my previous post, which was ignored by you,
"anti-American sentiment is so pervasive that Iraqi elections in the short term could lead to the rise of Islamic-controlled governments hostile to the United States."

Bush's way.

So your indicting his entire foreign policy based in Iraq? What other complaints do you have? How about the breakthrough with NK's program? That was the epitomy of multilateralism. I see you just ignored that. Bush's way.

Redistributing wealth is not the same as a tax cut.
Give more of a tax break to the working class.

Stein is no bleeding heart liberal, but an honest Conservative. Rare I know.

Um, could you please attempt to read and comprehend posts? I never claimed tax cuts=redistributing wealth. I am saying you clearly favor redistributing the wealth in this nation, because you feel the rich are not taxed fairly and take issue with them getting richer.

Now, you want more of a tax break for the middle class. OK, fine. Totally agree. However, you do realize that the middle class has already gotten huge tax breaks from the Bush cuts, yes? And you realize that the dollar to dollar comparison is useless and rehtorical nonsense, hmm? You have to talk about tax cuts in terms of percentages, not dollars. The rich pay more and therefore get more during a cut. It's simple math, screener. 4th grade math.

I thought it was wrong before they invaded, I thought they fucked up royally by letting the Guard go with their weapons.
And when the looting started and Rumsfeld just let it go on, I knew for certain Iraq was lost.

What were you thinking at the time?

So you thought every major intel agency in the world was wrong? France was wrong? Britain? Russia? You thought Saddam dismantled his program even though he didn't provide evidence of doing so as required under international law? We've seen nations verifiably disarm. Saddam didn't. What made you think they/we were wrong?

I agree that the occupation phase was mismanaged. We didn't have enough troops. The should not have disbanded the Army. Those are all fair criticisms in my book.

The same way you blame everything that went wrong in the Carter Administration to Carter.

No, not the same. I point to specific actions and approaches under Carter.

Just what kind of teacher are you?

One that understands grammar.

1. Just heard on CNN, Bush said Bin Laden laid out plans for Al Qaida to set-up in Iraq to target US soldiers.
Declassified from 2005.
Who wouda thunk it.

2. The same way you lay fault at Carter's feet for everything that went wrong in his Administration.

3. If they are unqualified and get appointed anyway, what does that say about Bush.
He's just paying off loyalty, the public be damned, See Iraq, New Orleans, Gonzales etc.
Carter fired fuckups, Bush, the "Decider" seems blind to ineptness.

Really, what and who do you teach.

1. Point?

2. Uh, you said that already. It's not true. Carter was at fault for the failed hostage rescue attempt. He allowed Iran's government to fall. He did nothing to stimulate the economy. His personal approach was not optimistic, not forward-looking. His ME peace initiatives were utter failures. All of that is Carter's fault.

3. Is Rice unqualified? Was Rod Paige? Margaret Spellings? I know you dislike Gonzales, but my feeling is that is a trumped up scandal. I suppose we can disagree. But I have some more for you to chew on: Carlos Gutierrez? Martinez? He's hired a ton of women and minorities. I guess they are all incompetent though.

I teach music. Not sure why that would be relevant, but I'm sure you'll find some way to pervert it to support your positions.

Jubelum

05-24-2007, 12:39 AM

I teach music. Not sure why that would be relevant, but I'm sure you'll find some way to pervert it to support your positions.

Yea, I mean, WTF can a music teacher know about anything, you foolish, foolish man. Geez. :rolleyes:

giant

05-24-2007, 01:00 AM

Yea, I mean, WTF can a music teacher know about anything
Apparently everything.

iPoster

05-24-2007, 08:36 AM

The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.
~Benjamin Franklin

I've been thinking about this quote lately, and how much it applies to the Bush administration. What amazes me the most is his unwillingness to learn from his mistakes. Most politicians know when to change tactics to 'go with the political flow', but Bush just keeps banging his head into the wall, hoping the wall will move. For example, Afghanistan is still unfinished, over four years of quagmire in Iraq with no clean withdrawal in sight, and now we're rattling sabers at Iran.

SDW2001

05-24-2007, 09:15 AM

Yea, I mean, WTF can a music teacher know about anything, you foolish, foolish man. Geez. :rolleyes:

Toot toot!

SDW2001

05-24-2007, 09:20 AM

I've been thinking about this quote lately, and how much it applies to the Bush administration. What amazes me the most is his unwillingness to learn from his mistakes. Most politicians know when to change tactics to 'go with the political flow', but Bush just keeps banging his head into the wall, hoping the wall will move. For example, Afghanistan is still unfinished, over four years of quagmire in Iraq with no clean withdrawal in sight, and now we're rattling sabers at Iran.

Andn why, pray tell, is "going with the political flow" a good thing? That's exactly what I don't want in a President. Any President.

Now, Afghanistan: Of course it's "unfinished." What else would you expect? It's not a quick thing to turn around an entire country, set up a Democracy, etc.

Iraq? OK, there is no clean withdrawal. But that doesn't fit your overall point, because tactics and strategy are changing. They're just not changing like you want them to.

Iran? You have to be kidding. Rattling sabers? This view astounds me. It's Iran that's being provocative. The admin has stated repeatedly that it wants to solve the issue diplomatically. Iran is the one defying the world, killing US soldiers in Iraq, and generally threatening everyone in the region. But yeah, it's the US. Shit, it's like you live in a bizzaro world.

@_@ Artman

05-24-2007, 10:27 AM

Iran? You have to be kidding. Rattling sabers? This view astounds me. It's Iran that's being provocative. The admin has stated repeatedly that it wants to solve the issue diplomatically. Iran is the one defying the world, killing US soldiers in Iraq, and generally threatening everyone in the region. But yeah, it's the US. Shit, it's like you live in a bizzaro world.

First, I didn't know you were a music teacher SDW. Cool. I will not try to mess with that from now on. But you will have to be a good boy an learn about some lessons that history has tried to warn us about and that this administration (and others 60 years before them (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State-sponsored_terrorism#United_States_of_America)) seems to ignore...

Tell me why Bush and his Saudi friends have lost control of the radical terrorist group they secretly financed in Lebanon to counter Iran? Sound familiar? It happened with Bin Laden in the 80's.

"We're in the business of creating ... sectarian violence." (http://www.icomment.org/index.php/main/video/show?id=4896222&s=100) - Seymour Hersh

Bizzaro World indeed...

http://theages.superman.ws/Encyclopaedia/bizarroStreet.gif

screener

05-24-2007, 10:59 AM

The first line is rhetoric. Nothing more. And as for the Camp David Accords, let me ask: How are things going in the Middle East? Seen any...uh...rockets being launched lately in Israel? There is no peace in the ME. Results matter. Rhetoric doesn't.

Read much?
Camp David Accord, Egypt, Israel, seen any rockets going back and forth between the two?

TRYING to forge Peace agreements is a noble cause, trying to force Democracy on a country militarily is folly.

Especially when you ignore reports that say the situation may backfire on you and you go ahead and do it anyway with insufficient resources.

You could argue that the worsening situation in the Middle East is a result of Bush's policy of ignoring, refusing dialogue, calling some terrorist states, threatening military action.

So your indicting his entire foreign policy based in Iraq? What other complaints do you have? How about the breakthrough with NK's program? That was the epitomy of multilateralism. I see you just ignored that. Bush's way.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,,-6414936,00.html
"Former U.N. Ambassador John Bolton said the agreement rewards North Korea for bad behavior while encouraging Iran to ignore international demands that it roll back its nuclear program and hold out for a better deal.

``I will be the saddest man in Washington'' if Bush goes along with the agreement, Bolton told reporters. ``I think the agreement is fundamentally flawed.''

"Analysts say that at the start of the Bush administration North Korea probably had enough material to build one or two weapons, and now probably could produce at least 10."

Sounds like Clinton's deal, except now they have the nukes.
Maybe you should have ignored this.

Um, could you please attempt to read and comprehend posts? I never claimed tax cuts=redistributing wealth. I am saying you clearly favor redistributing the wealth in this nation, because you feel the rich are not taxed fairly and take issue with them getting richer.

Tax Revenue does redistribute wealth, paying for services, roads, military government, etc.
I don't take issue with the rich getting richer, I take issue with the working class, according to Stein, aren't keeping up.

Now, you want more of a tax break for the middle class. OK, fine. Totally agree. However, you do realize that the middle class has already gotten huge tax breaks from the Bush cuts, yes? And you realize that the dollar to dollar comparison is useless and rehtorical nonsense, hmm? You have to talk about tax cuts in terms of percentages, not dollars. The rich pay more and therefore get more during a cut. It's simple math, screener. 4th grade math.

The dollar to dollar comparison was from the link I provided. From Fox News talking heads.
Give more of a tax cut to the working class that needs it more, and less of one to those that don't.
That's my feeling.

So you thought every major intel agency in the world was wrong? France was wrong? Britain? Russia? You thought Saddam dismantled his program even though he didn't provide evidence of doing so as required under international law? We've seen nations verifiably disarm. Saddam didn't. What made you think they/we were wrong?

Yes I did, Saddam wasn't a threat according to many, even the Intel community which never gave definitive proof, otherwise the weapons inspectors would have found them.
http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/03/21/iraq.weapons/
"I think it's clear that in March, when the invasion took place, the evidence that had been brought forward was rapidly falling apart," Hans Blix, who oversaw the agency's investigation into whether Iraq had chemical and biological weapons, said on CNN's "Late Edition with Wolf Blitzer."

Blix described the evidence Secretary of State Colin Powell presented to the U.N. Security Council in February 2003 as "shaky," and said he related his opinion to U.S. officials, including national security adviser Condoleezza Rice."

I agree that the occupation phase was mismanaged. We didn't have enough troops. The should not have disbanded the Army. Those are all fair criticisms in my book.

And who decided, using the advisors he surrounded himself with, DECIDED.

No, not the same. I point to specific actions and approaches under Carter.

See above.
I never said Carter was a great President, I said Bush is worse and believe he will do nothing worthwhile in his post Presidency.

One that understands grammar.

Back at ya, "Fuck off".

1. Point?

Didn't the Administration and supporters say Bin Laden's capture didn't matter because he's in a cave and isn't a threat?

Here's one,
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2006/6/8/175544.shtml
"It's funny how they [liberals] describe the war on terrorism in the most limited way possible – only as the pursuit of Osama bin Laden. He’s irrelevant now. He’s hiding in a cave. Al-Zarqawi was still killing people.”

http://thinkprogress.org/2006/09/14/barnes-osama/
"Weekly Standard editor Fred Barnes appeared on Fox this morning to discuss his recent meeting with President Bush in the Oval Office. The key takeaway for Barnes was that “bin Laden doesn’t fit with the administration’s strategy for combating terrorism.” Barnes said that Bush told him capturing bin Laden is “not a top priority use of American resources.”

Yet Bush felt the need to bring up Bin Laden's relevancy, why?

2. Uh, you said that already. It's not true. Carter was at fault for the failed hostage rescue attempt. He allowed Iran's government to fall. He did nothing to stimulate the economy. His personal approach was not optimistic, not forward-looking. His ME peace initiatives were utter failures. All of that is Carter's fault.

Yet none of Bush's failings are his fault, truly amazing point of view.

3. Is Rice unqualified? Was Rod Paige? Margaret Spellings? I know you dislike Gonzales, but my feeling is that is a trumped up scandal. I suppose we can disagree. But I have some more for you to chew on: ? Martinez? He's hired a ton of women and minorities. I guess they are all incompetent though.

So what exactly has Rice accomplished, maybe still pondering how planes could be used as missiles.
We could list all that are competent or not, my point is Bush rewards loyalty above all else, competent or not.

I teach music. Not sure why that would be relevant, but I'm sure you'll find some way to pervert it to support your positions.

Just wondering why you feel the need to point out spelling mistakes.
Makes perfect sense now.

jamac

05-24-2007, 11:21 AM

I teach music. Not sure why that would be relevant, but I'm sure you'll find some way to pervert it to support your positions.

Music is the one thing that is common in all cultures. I made the money to buy my windmills and my solar panels in music. Music is known to enhance intelligence and retainment.

Bush therefore must be tone deaf. SDW you should try and teach our president some music. That just might help.

"Freude schoener Goetterfunke, Tochter aus Elysium, wir betreten freudentrunken Himmlische dein Heiligtum...."

SDW is the only republican music person in the country. I mostly hang out with musicians and they are all liberal to the core, maybe there are some drummers...:)

@_@ Artman

05-24-2007, 11:25 AM

"Freude schoener Goetterfunke, Tochter aus Elysium, wir betreten freudentrunken Himmlische dein Heiligtum...."

http://i58.photobucket.com/albums/g255/artman46/adolphbanjo3bizp0.gif

dammit! i told myself i wouldn't make fun of it! sorry...

FormerLurker

05-24-2007, 12:00 PM

I mostly hang out with musicians and they are all liberal to the core, maybe there are some drummers...I hang out with some musicians as well, but wouldn't call SDW a "musician".

Music teachers are NOT musicians. Musicans create music and perform it publically. Music teachers have a bunch of kids as a captive audience.

Remember - those who can't do... teach!

Jubelum

05-24-2007, 02:18 PM

Remember - those who can't do... teach!

Shots! Only 99 cents! Hot Deal! Getcha cheap shots, right here. We got teecha shots, politician shots, shots at cripples and the homeless... buh-lowout prices... Getcha cheap shots... If ya didn't get ya cheap shot from FormerLurker, you paid too much!

8-)

Jubelum

05-24-2007, 02:19 PM

SDW is the only republican music person in the country.

Damn, beat me to it.

Just SDW, Ted Nugent, and the entire CMA, minus the Dixie Wrecks.

screener

05-24-2007, 02:51 PM

Damn, beat me to it.

Just SDW, Ted Nugent, and the entire CMA, minus the Dixie Wrecks.

Ted Nugent is a phsyco.

Proof that the entire CMA backs Bush?
Just being Republican shouldn't count.

Any one of the Dixie Chicks has more talent than Ted "Phsyco" Nugent.
The over reaction by some was just sad.

jamac

05-24-2007, 02:56 PM

Bush: (freely interpreted from just a few minutes ago): "They will come and eat your children, at least the ones left after climate change deprived them of food and water and land to live on, the man in the white house must be idiotic enough to fall for their bait, we have the largest army and the best weapons, but still they will come and win and make you pray and fart into the air, I am the god, the decider, thy shalt not question my moronic thoughts now kneel down and pray to me in fear, my name is Nero, you dumb underling press freak I will have your liver for lunch, fear, fear, fear fear me, oh I meant them....

screener

05-24-2007, 02:58 PM

I hang out with some musicians as well, but wouldn't call SDW a "musician".

Music teachers are NOT musicians. Musicans create music and perform it publically. Music teachers have a bunch of kids as a captive audience.

Remember - those who can't do... teach!

To be fair, my brother has a music school/store and a lot of his teachers are working musicians waiting for their break.

Maybe SDW is, or maybe he's a high school band teacher or both.
As long as you love what you do, the rest doesn't matter.

I just find people that like to correct spelling mistakes and them give them a mark for it on a forum, odd.

Jubelum

05-24-2007, 03:11 PM

Proof that the entire CMA backs Bush?

Proof? <pokes in the chest> Proof! Come on. Proof!

:lol: My goodness things have gotten silly around here. Chill out and don't go looking for a fight where is isn't one.. I'd say the audience backlash against the Dixie Bitches would maybe indicate something... but who really cares?

Just to make you happy and give you something to do...

The Country Music Association voted yesterday at it's national meeting to support the War on Terror and issued a statement endorsing the leadership of President George W. Bush. The finaly vote was 349-3, with the Dixie Chicks casting the lone dissenting votes. Results were taken from over 500 member surveys mailed last month. More more information, visit CMA.ORG.

There you go. Want some "proof" of another off-the-cuff comment? :D

Jubelum

05-24-2007, 03:12 PM

Jubelum

05-24-2007, 03:18 PM

Ted "Phsyco" Nugent.

"P-S-Y-C-H-O"

I would think of all people that YOU would know how to spell it.

Ted Nugent: A great patriot, and an asset to America. One of the finest men on the planet. The anti-PETA. The kill it and grill it lord of the woods. Among the top five metal guitarists of all time. NRA Board Member. All around great human being. The best. Worthy of unwavering support. <sets spring on screener's flame bait>

screener

05-24-2007, 03:30 PM

Proof? <pokes in the chest> Proof! Come on. Proof!

:lol: My goodness things have gotten silly around here. Chill out and don't go looking for a fight where is isn't one.. I'd say the audience backlash against the Dixie Bitches would maybe indicate something... but who really cares?

Just to make you happy and give you something to do...

There you go. Want some "proof" of another off-the-cuff comment? :D

A link would have been good enough.

screener

05-24-2007, 03:36 PM

"P-S-Y-C-H-O"

I would think of all people that YOU would know how to spell it.

Ted Nugent: A great patriot, and an asset to America. One of the finest men on the planet. The anti-PETA. The kill it and grill it lord of the woods. Among the top five metal guitarists of all time. NRA Board Member. All around great human being. The best. Worthy of unwavering support. <sets spring on screener's flame bait>

Another spelling mistake caught by another oddball on a forum.

He's a phsyco.:lol:

@_@ Artman

05-24-2007, 04:15 PM

Ted Nugent: A great patriot, and an asset to America. One of the finest men on the planet. The anti-PETA. The kill it and grill it lord of the woods. Among the top five metal guitarists of all time. NRA Board Member. All around great human being. The best. Worthy of unwavering support. <sets spring on screener's flame bait>

http://www.performancephotography.com/zimg-p6/pf2006q3/060828d1-2112.jpg

I saw Ted Nugent in 1975. Opened for Black Sabbath. I don't care what his politics are, he can still rock. My ears are still ringing from that show.

Play it Ted! "Stranglehold" - 1977(76?) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cYOV8uu17t0)

screener

05-24-2007, 05:03 PM

http://www.performancephotography.com/zimg-p6/pf2006q3/060828d1-2112.jpg

I saw Ted Nugent in 1975. Opened for Black Sabbath. I don't care what his politics are, he can still rock. My ears are still ringing from that show.

Play it Ted! "Stranglehold" - 1977(76?) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cYOV8uu17t0)

When it comes to entertainers, I don't much care what their politics are either.

However when Jubelum says Nugent is an asset to America, one of the finest men on the planet, I figure he must be kidding.

Read this,
http://www.campusprogress.org/tools/253/

Some believe he's just being funny, judge for yourself.
just a bit of it,

"I contribute to the dead of winter and the moans of silence, blood trails are music to my ears …I’m a gut pile addict …The pig didn’t know I was there … it’s my kick …I love shafting animals …it’s rock ‘n’ roll power.” Ted Nugent’s World Bowhunters Magazine, Volume 1/Number 4, May 1990, p.12"

“And if you’re a woman who feels that his lyrics to ditties such as the immortal ‘Wang Dang Sweet Poontang’ are sexist, Nugent says, ‘Fuck you and go to a Garth Brooks show. Kiss my dog’s dead, diseased, rotting ass. If you don’t have a sense of humor, you’re not allowed in Ted’s world. I don’t objectify women. I’d like to think that I’m optimizing their hardware.’” Westword Newspaper, Denver, Colorado, July 27, 1994"

Quite the asset.

@_@ Artman

05-24-2007, 05:26 PM

Quite the asset.

Two (well, three) things to keep in mind.

"It's Only Rock & Roll, But I Like It."

and

1st and 14th Amendment

To paraphrase Ted: "Freedom of speech is a good thing, it lets you hear where the crazy people are too." :smokey:

Jubelum

05-24-2007, 06:01 PM

optimizing their hardware

Coming soon from Symantec... the Ted Nugent Political Defragger and Right Wing Hardware Check! Upgrades from target shooter available!

screener

05-24-2007, 06:46 PM

Two (well, three) things to keep in mind.

"It's Only Rock & Roll, But I Like It."

and

1st and 14th Amendment

To paraphrase Ted: "Freedom of speech is a good thing, it lets you hear where the crazy people are too." :smokey:

Where did I say he didn't have the right to say whatever he wants to?
At least he knows he's a nutbar.

I pointed it out for those here that didn't know what a great asset he was to America.

Hell, Bush should appoint him Ambassador to... Haiti?
Spread goodwill, kill off their wildlife, train their women, etc.

Yeah, that'll work for this Administration.

screener

05-24-2007, 06:54 PM

Coming soon from Symantec... the Ted Nugent Political Defragger and Right Wing Hardware Check! Upgrades from target shooter available!

:) You gotta love right wing comedy, it's so unexpected.
Well, maybe not.

@_@ Artman

05-24-2007, 08:11 PM

Where did I say he didn't have the right to say whatever he wants to?
At least he knows he's a nutbar.

Of course, that's what is so great about those amendments. And no, no attacks here. He is an old fashioned American Redneck. Did I just say that?

I pointed it out for those here that didn't know what a great asset he was to America.

<sports announcer>"Ass" or "asset", you make the call!</sports announcer>

Hell, Bush should appoint him Ambassador to... Haiti?

He could probably do a better job in Detroit...

Spread goodwill, kill off their wildlife,

I don't know if you know this but he hunts on his own land and feeds his family with it. He's a millionaire and could just stock up on Omaha Steaks, but he does what he does. On his own property. If you're a vegan then that's another story...

train their women, etc.

Yeah, he did f*ck every groupie on the planet back in the day. He's married, settled and has kids. Whatever.

Yeah, that'll work for this Administration.

This administration killed over 600,000 Iraqis and made another 9,000 disappear. Ted's got a long way to get to that "score". I'd rather have him blast eardrums with his guitar. Shock and Awe Indeed :smokey:

screener

05-24-2007, 08:39 PM

I don't know if you know this but he hunts on his own land and feeds his family with it. He's a millionaire and could just stock up on Omaha Steaks, but he does what he does. On his own property. If you're a vegan then that's another story...

You didn't read anything from the link I provided,

"An avid hunter, Nugent was a frequent visitor to Canada until the government of Ontario cancelled the spring black bear hunt in 1999. Irate that he wouldn’t get his shot at shooting at a black bear, Nugent vowed to never set foot again in what he described as "an idiotic country."

"The preponderance of South Africa is a different breed of man…They still put bones in their noses, they still walk around naked, they wipe their butts with their hands. And when I kill an antelope for ‘em, their preference is the gut pile. That’s what they fucking want to eat, the intestines. These are different people. You give them toothpaste, they fucking eat it.” Detroit Free Press Magazine, July 15, 1990"

I'm no Vegan, but I don't get a kick out of killing anything.

Yeah, he did f*ck every groupie on the planet back in the day. He's married, settled and has kids. Whatever.

It's the lack of respect he shows for women and just about anyone who doesn't think like he does.

This administration killed over 600,000 Iraqis and made another 9,000 disappear. Ted's got a long way to get to that "score". I'd rather have him blast eardrums with his guitar. Shock and Awe Indeed :smokey:

I hope this never happens,

"He was briefly mentioned as a potential Illinois Senatorial candidate for the Republican Party in 2004. Unfortunately, it never came to fruition: if nothing else, a race between the Nuge and Barack Obama would’ve topped Nugent’s past stunts for sheer spectacle."

But then someone will remember this,

"As patriotic as Uncle Ted claims to be, he pulled a nasty stunt to evade Uncle Sam during the Vietnam War. In a July 15, 1990, Detroit Free Press interview, Nugent crowed about how he managed to dodge the draft. He claims that 30 days before his draft board physical, he disavowed personal hygiene. The last ten days he ingested nothing but junk food and Pepsi, and with a week to go until the physical, he stopped using the bathroom altogether. When the big day came, he had been living in excrement-caked and urine-stained pants. Always the hero, however, Nugent reassured the Free Press, “But if I would have gone over there, I’d have been killed, or I’d have killed all the Hippies in the foxholes. I would have killed everybody."

Would that matter to anyone on the right?

Probably not, he's just a typical redneck.

@_@ Artman

05-24-2007, 09:21 PM

.

You didn't read anything from the link I provided...

...he's just a typical redneck.

Of course he is (I read that sophmorically written article), but please, please don't take everything he says seriously. I don't. His music is entertainment. If you are looking for a message...there isn't one. It's teenage masturbatory rock & roll. That's all.

As far as his dodge of the draft (DRAFT), if the draft returned, do you think that the Bush daughters will line up to serve for their country, on the front lines?

I'm not going to go into the hunting crap, I don't hunt, I like animals. But I have friends who do. I feel that if you are hunting within their element, fine. If you hunt or let others hunt within an environment that merely traps the animal in a fenced in location then that sucks. Ted don't do that. He's an asshole (the manhandling of the protesters and mugging with cops IS uncool), but he's harmless.

And as far as politically correct...he's right. It has gone too far. What Michael Richards did was wrong because it was real hatred. Ted's hatred for Japan is an act. He sells out every show in Japan. Why? Because they know it's an act (OH look at the funny American!). The rest is comedy, he's an entertainer. He knows he has "REDNECK" and "ASSHOLE" stamped on his image, he'll never get rid of it.

I swear, if Lenny Bruce was alive today, he'd be railroaded just as he was in the 60's...you think Bruce could get away with this today?...

“Are there any n*ggers here tonight? I know that one n*gger works here, I see him back there. Oh, there’s two n*ggers… Between those two n*ggers sits one k*ke – man, thank God for the k*ke. Uh, two k*kes. That’s two k*kes and three n*ggers and one sp*c. One sp*c – two, three sp*cs. One m*ck. One m*ck, one sp*c, one h*ck thick funky spunky boogey. …”

“The point? That the word’s suppression gives it the power, the violence, the viciousness. If President Kennedy got on television and said, ‘Tonight I’d like to introduce the n*ggers in my cabinet,’ and he yelled ‘n*ggern*ggern*ggern*ggern*gger’ at every n*gger he saw, ‘boogeyboogeyboogeyboogeyboogey n*ggern*ggern*ggern*gger’ till n*gger didn’t mean anything any more, till n*gger lost its meaning – you'd never make any four-year-old n*gger cry when he came home from school.”

He believed in freedom of speech, whether it came from the good or bad.

"Take away the right to say 'fuck' and you take away the right to say 'fuck the government'."

I'm done with this. I don't want to derail this thread. Bush has created more hatred, fear and death than three million Ted Nugents.

screener

05-24-2007, 09:55 PM

I'm done with this. I don't want to derail this thread. Bush has created more hatred, fear and death than three million Ted Nugents.

The thread is already derailed.

If he's so harmless, would you vote for this Patriotic asset if he came to your hometown, state, whatever and decided to run for office?

He's beyond redneck, debasing himself to get out of the draft is just, well psychotic.
If you try to tell me this is normal redneck behavior, you guys down south of the border are in worse trouble than I thought.

@_@ Artman

05-25-2007, 09:20 AM

The thread is already derailed.

If he's so harmless, would you vote for this Patriotic asset if he came to your hometown, state, whatever and decided to run for office?

He's beyond redneck, debasing himself to get out of the draft is just, well psychotic.
If you try to tell me this is normal redneck behavior, you guys down south of the border are in worse trouble than I thought.

Derailed? Go over to this thread (http://forums.appleinsider.com/showthread.php?t=74718&page=5) and see how DMZ sent it to another galaxy defending of all people, Jerry Falwell. He and his feeder addabox have destroyed it.

Get over Ted. He's fucking harmless.

SDW2001

05-25-2007, 09:41 AM

Music is the one thing that is common in all cultures. I made the money to buy my windmills and my solar panels in music. Music is known to enhance intelligence and retainment.

Bush therefore must be tone deaf. SDW you should try and teach our president some music. That just might help.

"Freude schoener Goetterfunke, Tochter aus Elysium, wir betreten freudentrunken Himmlische dein Heiligtum...."

SDW is the only republican music person in the country. I mostly hang out with musicians and they are all liberal to the core, maybe there are some drummers...:)

:lol: Agreed with that last part. Most are libs, it's true.

screener

05-25-2007, 09:57 AM

Derailed? Go over to this thread (http://forums.appleinsider.com/showthread.php?t=74718&page=5) and see how DMZ sent it to another galaxy defending of all people, Jerry Falwell. He and his feeder addabox have destroyed it.

Get over Ted. He's fucking harmless.

I couldn't let Jubelum's Patriotic American just slide without putting my 2 cents worth in.
That's allowed isn't it?

He may be harmless, but in my mind he is a psycho, and I'm sure, not what you would consider an asset to your country, talent aside.

Patriotic, about the same as the "Swift Boaters" thought about Kerry.

End of Nugent rant, unless Jubelum cares to respond.

dmz

05-25-2007, 10:09 AM

screener

06-01-2007, 01:34 PM

http://www.opinionjournal.com/columnists/pnoonan/

Too Bad
President Bush has torn the conservative coalition asunder.

The White House doesn't need its traditional supporters anymore, because its problems are way beyond being solved by the base. And the people in the administration don't even much like the base. Desperate straits have left them liberated, and they are acting out their disdain. Leading Democrats often think their base is slightly mad but at least their heart is in the right place. This White House thinks its base is stupid and that its heart is in the wrong place.

She used to speak with such affection when talking about GW.

The president has taken to suggesting that opponents of his immigration bill are unpatriotic--they "don't want to do what's right for America."

Wow, now Republicans that question his wisdom are unpatriotic.

Jubelum

06-01-2007, 02:24 PM

Wow, now Republicans that question his wisdom are unpatriotic.

Well, the bullshit that Bush is pulling is "unpatriotic." Bush will not be satisfied until he has single-digit approval numbers and his party is unelectable for a generation. He's not working for democrats, he's not working for republicans... so some of us need to ask WHO he IS working for... the global banking elites. That's the "unpatriotic" part. Pot, meet kettle.

jamac

06-01-2007, 03:36 PM

By Marjorie Cohn, AlterNet. Posted June 1, 2007. Marjorie Cohn is a professor at Thomas Jefferson School of Law, president of the National Lawyers Guild, and the US representative to the executive committee of the American Association of Jurists.
Bush has issued a directive that would place all governmental powers in his hands in the case of a catastrophic emergency. If a terrorist attack happens before the 2008 election, could Bush and Cheney use this to avoid relinquishing power to a successor administration?

As the nation focused on whether Congress would exercise its constitutional duty to cut funding for the war, Bush quietly issued an unconstitutional bombshell that went virtually unnoticed by the corporate media.

The National Security and Homeland Security Presidential Directive, signed on May 9, 2007, would place all governmental power in the hands of the President and effectively abolish the checks and balances in the Constitution.

If a "catastrophic emergency" -- which could include a terrorist attack or a natural disaster -- occurs, Bush's new directive says: "The President shall lead the activities of the Federal Government for ensuring constitutional government."

What about the other two co-equal branches of government? The directive throws them a bone by speaking of a "cooperative effort" among the three branches, "coordinated by the President, as a matter of comity with respect to the legislative and judicial branches and with proper respect for the constitutional separation of powers." The Vice-President would help to implement the plans.

"Comity," however, means courtesy, and the President would decide what kind of respect for the other two branches of government would be "proper." This Presidential Directive is a blatant power grab by Bush to institutionalize "the unitary executive."

A seemingly innocuous phrase, the unitary executive theory actually represents a radical, ultra rightwing interpretation of the powers of the presidency. Championed by the conservative Federalist Society, the unitary executive doctrine gathers all power in the hands of the President and insulates him from any oversight by the congressional or judicial branches.

In a November 2000 speech to the Federalist Society, then Judge Samuel Alito said the Constitution "makes the president the head of the executive branch, but it does more than that. The president has not just some executive powers, but the executive power -- the whole thing."

These "unitarians" claim that all federal agencies, even those constitutionally created by Congress, are beholden to the Chief Executive, that is, the President. This means that Bush could disband agencies like the Federal Communications Commission, the Food and Drug Administration, the Federal Reserve Board, etc., if they weren't to his liking.

Indeed, Bush signed an executive order stating that each federal agency must have a regulatory policy office run by a political appointee. Consumer advocates were concerned that this directive was aimed at weakening the Environmental Protection Agency and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. The unitary executive dogma represents audacious presidential overreaching into the constitutional province of the other two branches of government.

This doctrine took shape within the Bush administration shortly after 9/11. On September 25, 2001, former deputy assistant attorney general John Yoo used the words "unitary executive" in a memo he wrote for the White House: "The centralization of authority in the president alone is particularly crucial in matters of national defense, war, and foreign policy, where a unitary executive can evaluate threats, consider policy choices, and mobilize national resources with a speed and energy that is far superior to any other branch." Six weeks later, Bush began using that phrase in his signing statements.

As of December 22, 2006, Bush had used the words "unitary executive" 145 times in his signing statements and executive orders. Yoo, one of the chief architects of Bush's doctrine of unfettered executive power, wrote memoranda advising Bush that because he was commander in chief, he could make war any time he thought there was a threat, and he didn't have to comply with the Geneva Conventions.

In a 2005 debate with Notre Dame professor Doug Cassel, Yoo argued there is no law that could prevent the President from ordering that a young child of a suspect in custody be tortured, even by crushing the child's testicles.

The unitary executive theory has already cropped up in Supreme Court opinions. In his lone dissent in Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, Justice Clarence Thomas cited "the structural advantages of a unitary Executive." He disagreed with the Court that due process demands an American citizen held in the United States as an enemy combatant be given a meaningful opportunity to contest the factual basis for that detention before a neutral decision maker. Thomas wrote, "Congress, to be sure, has a substantial and essential role in both foreign affairs and national s