AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › GW Bush the worst president in US history
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

GW Bush the worst president in US history - Page 10  

post #361 of 455
7/3/07 at 3:17pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by screener View Post

This is what you said,



I gave 2 links that undeniably showed proof that the Administration knew what could happen and yet they gambled with the lives of troops and civilians.

You don't gamble in war unless you're desperate, like now.

Remember John Wayne's rallying cry, "some of us are gonna die" in some movie I forgot the name of.
What did you guys get, Cheney's, we'll be greeted as liberators.

Even if, as you claim, that it was a theory, they should have been prepared for anything, which anyone going into any situation, being war or climbing a mountain and having half a brain would do.

And when the trouble started, they still did nothing and still didn't see how it could escalate.

Stupid is as stupid does.

Yeah, just like I know that I could get in a car accident. I guess that means I'm stupid to get in a car. The administration didn't know what would happen. Sure, there were various people presenting various warnings of every type. In the end the administration made judgments, some of which turned out to be incorrect. Portraying it any other way is just dishonest.

I don't disagree they didn't respond fast enough to the changing conditions on the ground. Bush didn't first Rumsfeld fast enough either. But none of this makes anyone stupid.
To save time, assume I know everything.
To save time, assume I know everything.
post #362 of 455
7/3/07 at 7:34pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Yeah, just like I know that I could get in a car accident. I guess that means I'm stupid to get in a car. The administration didn't know what would happen. Sure, there were various people presenting various warnings of every type. In the end the administration made judgments, some of which turned out to be incorrect. Portraying it any other way is just dishonest.

I don't disagree they didn't respond fast enough to the changing conditions on the ground. Bush didn't first Rumsfeld fast enough either. But none of this makes anyone stupid.

Dumb analogy, but yeah, you are stupid if you don't buckle up yourself and the kids.

So your argument now is the Administration didn't know what would happen. Wow.
How dishonest of you.

If they didn't know, then why ignore those whose job it was to know?
That would be stupid.

They chose to ignore the "various people", and gamble lives because they thought they new better than the professionals.
Stupid.

Granted, some of these professionals were wrong about WMD's, but the Bush Administration didn't know that at the time, ....did they?

They had no plan to stop an insurgency if the warnings turned out to true.
How stupid.

Bush's rallying cry, "Fight them over there instead of here" and taking 4 years to come up with the "Surge".
Stupid for being to late.

Seems to me, the Administration's "judgments" were mostly if not all wrong.
How stupid can you get.

Portraying it any other way is just dishonest.
post #363 of 455
7/5/07 at 1:05pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by screener View Post

Dumb analogy, but yeah, you are stupid if you don't buckle up yourself and the kids.

So your argument now is the Administration didn't know what would happen. Wow.
How dishonest of you.

No, and either did you. Or anyone else.

Quote:
If they didn't know, then why ignore those whose job it was to know?
That would be stupid.

Who knew? Really, I'm listening.

Quote:

They chose to ignore the "various people", and gamble lives because they thought they new better than the professionals.
Stupid.

You're assuming there was unanimous agreement. And there wasn't.

Quote:

Granted, some of these professionals were wrong about WMD's, but the Bush Administration didn't know that at the time, ....did they?

I don't see your point. No, they didn't know they were wrong at the time.

Quote:
They had no plan to stop an insurgency if the warnings turned out to true.
How stupid.

I think the insurgency developed gradually and the judgement was that we were doing what was needed to deal with it. As it went on it become clear that wasn't true.

Bush's rallying cry, "Fight them over there instead of here" and taking 4 years to come up with the "Surge".
Stupid for being to late.[/quote]

One part of your statement is not related to the other. Its clear that Iraq has become a rallying ground for terrorists, and in some ways that does support the :over there, no her" argument. I agree that admin was too slow to respond to events over the past four years.

Quote:
Seems to me, the Administration's "judgments" were mostly if not all wrong.
How stupid can you get.

Portraying it any other way is just dishonest.

Some were wrong, some weren't. That's all. And I certainly didn't hear alternatives to fighting the insurgency other than "PULLOUT! PULLOUT! WE LOSE!" from the left. Hmmm?
To save time, assume I know everything.
To save time, assume I know everything.
post #364 of 455
7/5/07 at 1:11pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Some were wrong, some weren't. That's all. And I certainly didn't hear alternatives to fighting the insurgency other than "PULLOUT! PULLOUT! WE LOSE!" from the left. Hmmm?

That's patently untrue because many 'on the left' are allegedly quite happy for the US to be bogged down there.

Certainly I would not subscribe to the 'WE' in 'We lose' as I think the US should lose...so should anyone who illegally instutes a land-grab, lies to the public and massacres civilians after deposing their heads of State.

I'm sure that many people, like me, don't care whether the US pull out or stay and suffer humiilating defeat...either is ok as long as they are taught a lesson and prevented from rabidly running amok elsewhere in the region.

If it is a legitimate resistance that does this then so much the better....
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
post #365 of 455
7/5/07 at 1:15pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

No, and either did you. Or anyone else.



Who knew? Really, I'm listening.



You're assuming there was unanimous agreement. And there wasn't.



I don't see your point. No, they didn't know they were wrong at the time.



I think the insurgency developed gradually and the judgement was that we were doing what was needed to deal with it. As it went on it become clear that wasn't true.

Bush's rallying cry, "Fight them over there instead of here" and taking 4 years to come up with the "Surge".
Stupid for being to late.

One part of your statement is not related to the other. Its clear that Iraq has become a rallying ground for terrorists, and in some ways that does support the :over there, no her" argument. I agree that admin was too slow to respond to events over the past four years.



Some were wrong, some weren't. That's all. And I certainly didn't hear alternatives to fighting the insurgency other than "PULLOUT! PULLOUT! WE LOSE!" from the left. Hmmm?[/QUOTE]


Oh come on SDW! It's pretty ovbious when you're selling something!
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
post #366 of 455
7/5/07 at 5:52pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

"PULLOUT! PULLOUT! WE LOSE!"

There were plenty of alternatives offered. You simply chose not to listen or consider ANY of them.

Oh, and I can't find a single record of a Democrat or a liberal saying "We lose!" There's plenty of evidence of liberals saying, "George Bush fucked up and lost the war." But the meaning of that statement is completely different than this picture of a white flag you guys love to use all the time.

It's also inconvenient for your political arguments when Republicans like Domenici, and Voinovich, and Salazar, and several others are saying the same goddamn thing, "It's time to leave."

Are you willing to call those guys Surrender Monkeys too? Somehow I doubt it.
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
post #367 of 455
7/5/07 at 9:32pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Northgate View Post

There were plenty of alternatives offered. You simply chose not to listen or consider ANY of them.

Oh, and I can't find a single record of a Democrat or a liberal saying "We lose!" There's plenty of evidence of liberals saying, "George Bush fucked up and lost the war." But the meaning of that statement is completely different than this picture of a white flag you guys love to use all the time.

It's also inconvenient for your political arguments when Republicans like Domenici, and Voinovich, and Salazar, and several others are saying the same goddamn thing, "It's time to leave."

Are you willing to call those guys Surrender Monkeys too? Somehow I doubt it.

Good point.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
post #368 of 455
7/6/07 at 6:09am
The pressure just went up on Bush again......


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19621681/



" Key GOP senator splits with Bush on Iraq policy "
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
post #369 of 455
7/6/07 at 6:12am
He's not an American. He's against the troops. He favors undermining our security state... er... state security.




The dominoes are beginning to fall...

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

post #370 of 455
7/6/07 at 10:14am
Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

That's patently untrue because many 'on the left' are allegedly quite happy for the US to be bogged down there.

Certainly I would not subscribe to the 'WE' in 'We lose' as I think the US should lose...so should anyone who illegally instutes a land-grab, lies to the public and massacres civilians after deposing their heads of State.

I'm sure that many people, like me, don't care whether the US pull out or stay and suffer humiilating defeat...either is ok as long as they are taught a lesson and prevented from rabidly running amok elsewhere in the region.

If it is a legitimate resistance that does this then so much the better....

Wow. That is an amazing viewpoint you have. In order to "teach the big bad US a lesson," you're willing to pullout abruptly...I mean...screw those civilians!

As for a "land grab," that is one of the most ridiculous arguments I've ever heard. Yeah seg, we went there to CONQUER them under Emperor Bush. Jesus.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Northgate View Post

There were plenty of alternatives offered. You simply chose not to listen or consider ANY of them.

Name one that didn't involve pulling out.

Quote:

Oh, and I can't find a single record of a Democrat or a liberal saying "We lose!" There's plenty of evidence of liberals saying, "George Bush fucked up and lost the war." But the meaning of that statement is completely different than this picture of a white flag you guys love to use all the time.

You're such a whore. It's not different at all. "We lose!" is the same as "we lost because..."

Quote:
It's also inconvenient for your political arguments when Republicans like Domenici, and Voinovich, and Salazar, and several others are saying the same goddamn thing, "It's time to leave."

Are you willing to call those guys Surrender Monkeys too? Somehow I doubt it.

Yes, I think they are wrong to make those statements now. They are somewhat different in that they have at least refrained from personally attacking the President. Our boy Joey Biden called him brain dead again yesterday. Nice. But again, I do think they are exceptionally misguided and possibly contributing to the death of more troops. I do give them credit for being a bit more measured in their rhetoric. But not much credit.
To save time, assume I know everything.
To save time, assume I know everything.
post #371 of 455
7/6/07 at 10:56am
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Our boy Joey Biden called him brain dead again yesterday. Nice. But again, I do think they are exceptionally misguided and possibly contributing to the death of more troops. I do give them credit for being a bit more measured in their rhetoric. But not much credit.

The Brain Dead one is contributing much more to troop, and civilian deaths than any rhetoric from Biden.

He is the self proclaimed Decider who put the troops in harms way on a "whim and a Prayer" after all.
post #372 of 455
7/6/07 at 11:30am
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Wow. That is an amazing viewpoint you have. In order to "teach the big bad US a lesson," you're willing to pullout abruptly...I mean...screw those civilians!

As for a "land grab," that is one of the most ridiculous arguments I've ever heard. Yeah seg, we went there to CONQUER them under Emperor Bush. Jesus.




Name one that didn't involve pulling out.



You're such a whore. It's not different at all. "We lose!" is the same as "we lost because..."



Yes, I think they are wrong to make those statements now. They are somewhat different in that they have at least refrained from personally attacking the President. Our boy Joey Biden called him brain dead again yesterday. Nice. But again, I do think they are exceptionally misguided and possibly contributing to the death of more troops. I do give them credit for being a bit more measured in their rhetoric. But not much credit.


We've already screwed those civilians.


It's been obvious from the start this war was about something other than the president was telling us.

Everything else but pulling out has been tried.

Sorry if you have a problem with the president making a stupid mistake for us all and now we've not only lost this conflict we've lost the respect of alot of other countries around the world.


The only thing that is contributing to the death of our troops is continuing to stay there.

SDW it must be super obvious to you where this is ALL going by now.

And I did tell you so a long time ago.

Sorry you have a problem with it but as I've said the inevitable has been set in motion and it will happen with or without your admission of error or Bush's.

Oh well! Yet another study ( much like Vietnam ) in trying to drive a square peg into a round hole.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
post #373 of 455
7/7/07 at 6:04am
Here's an interesting poll about possible ( or likely ) replacements for Mr. Bush in 2008.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19623085/site/newsweek/


" Americans appear prepared to elect either a black or a female president. But experience trumps both factorsand in a two-way race, Hillary Clinton leads Barack Obama by more than 20 points.
 "
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
post #374 of 455
7/7/07 at 7:00am
Quote:
As this long and difficult war ends, I would like to address a few special words to the American people: Your steadfastness in supporting our insistence on peace with honor has made peace with honor possible.

Quote:
Let us understand: [Iraq] cannot defeat or humiliate the United States. Only Americans can do that.

Quote:
Today, America can regain the sense of pride that existed before [Iraq]. These events, tragic as they are, portend neither the end of the world nor of America's leadership in the world.

Guess it's true, history does repeat itself...
You need skeptics, especially when the science gets very big and monolithic. -James Lovelock
The Story of Stuff
You need skeptics, especially when the science gets very big and monolithic. -James Lovelock
The Story of Stuff
post #375 of 455
7/7/07 at 7:52am
It wasn't me.... He did it!

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070707/...A88Wham9ys0NUE

Typical Bush... again he does not understand the reality around him.

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

post #376 of 455
7/7/07 at 8:51am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bergermeister View Post

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070707/...A88Wham9ys0NUE

Quote:
"Democrats have a chance to prove they are for open and transparent government..."

Bush as the temerity to talk about "open and transparent government"!? How about they start their proof by impeaching your ass to force some transparency out from behind your endless stonewalling claims of "executive privilege"?
We were once so close to heaven
Peter came out and gave us medals
Declaring us the nicest of the damned -- They Might Be Giants          See the stars at skyviewcafe.com
We were once so close to heaven
Peter came out and gave us medals
Declaring us the nicest of the damned -- They Might Be Giants          See the stars at skyviewcafe.com
post #377 of 455
7/7/07 at 8:54am
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Name one that didn't involve pulling out.

Please stop being so obtuse. Read ANY of Hillary Clinton's proposals. They ALL keep troops and bases in Iraq. Forever.
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
post #378 of 455
7/7/07 at 8:56am
Quote:
Originally Posted by shetline View Post

Bush as the temerity to talk about "open and transparent government"!? How about they start their proof by impeaching your ass to force some transparency out from behind your endless stonewalling claims of "executive privilege"?

Here here!
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
post #379 of 455
7/7/07 at 10:07am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bergermeister View Post

It wasn't me.... He did it!

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070707/...A88Wham9ys0NUE

Typical Bush... again he does not understand the reality around him.

Unfortunately, we have to live in Mr. Bush's reality but he does not have to live in ours. He is indeed the most powerful individual on earth, a god, above all reproach. All the people who put him there are responsible for this stain.
post #380 of 455
7/7/07 at 10:24am
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamac View Post

Unfortunately, we have to live in Mr. Bush's reality but he does not have to live in ours. He is indeed the most powerful individual on earth, a god, above all reproach. All the people who put him there are responsible for this stain.



post #381 of 455
7/7/07 at 1:27pm
1) Right click
2) Save Image As...
3) ROFL

What I can't wait to see is what the history texts in the future say about this administration. At least Nixion and McNamara will have some company in the bottom of the barrel...
You need skeptics, especially when the science gets very big and monolithic. -James Lovelock
The Story of Stuff
You need skeptics, especially when the science gets very big and monolithic. -James Lovelock
The Story of Stuff
post #382 of 455
7/7/07 at 1:55pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by iPoster View Post

1) Right click

post #383 of 455
7/7/07 at 6:43pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamac View Post


OK, CTRL - click then. Not ever Mac user has a one button mouse, you know!
You need skeptics, especially when the science gets very big and monolithic. -James Lovelock
The Story of Stuff
You need skeptics, especially when the science gets very big and monolithic. -James Lovelock
The Story of Stuff
post #384 of 455
7/8/07 at 8:45pm
Quote:
SDW2001;1108015]No, and either did you. Or anyone else.
Who knew? Really, I'm listening.

You said the administration didn't know what would happen.
Bush and Cheney, if you choose to believe it, said Saddam was harboring terrorists, what did they think was going to happen?

Apparently not much, they didn't have a plan to deal with it.
Who knew the enemy would protest the US trying to put them out of business.

Colin Powell, who should have had the balls to speak up sooner, now says he spent 2 and a half hours trying to talk the "Decider" out of going into Iraq.

I tried to avoid this war, Powell said at the Aspen Ideas Festival in Colorado. I took him through the consequences of going into an Arab country and becoming the occupiers.

No plan to deal with the terrorists should they retaliate.

Result, a couple of thousand dead soldiers and estimates of hundreds of thousands dead Iraqis.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle2042072.ece

Quote:
You're assuming there was unanimous agreement. And there wasn't.

Going to war is not like deciding to take an umbrella with you if there is a chance of rain.
Going to war where lives are at stake is serious business, something Bush obviously didn't understand.
You seem to give Bush a pass for not knowing what could happen.
He was told, and decided to gamble with lives.

Unanimous decisions are fine, as long as you take into account everything.
Bush didn't, he ignored history, understanding other cultures, and having a plan to deal with things fucking up.
Arrogant and stupid are a deadly combination.

Quote:
I don't see your point. No, they didn't know they were wrong at the time.

There are some that think Bush knew the reasons for invading were wrong but went in anyway.
Personally, I think he didn't care.

Quote:
I think the insurgency developed gradually and the judgement was that we were doing what was needed to deal with it. As it went on it become clear that wasn't true.

This goes to the Administration's saying Saddam was harboring terrorists.
Not recognizing the animosity, hatred, between Sunnis and Shia.
No plan to deal with this?

Letting the Guard disappear with their weapons?
Leaving munitions unguarded?

The worlds greatest superpower couldn't see this happening?

Bush's legacy, "Who knew".

Quote:
Bush's rallying cry, "Fight them over there instead of here" and taking 4 years to come up with the "Surge".
Stupid for being to late.

One part of your statement is not related to the other. Its clear that Iraq has become a rallying ground for terrorists, and in some ways that does support the :over there, no her" argument. I agree that admin was too slow to respond to events over the past four years.

Saddam harboring terrorists and now becoming a rallying ground for terrorists.
Who new we would need a plan to deal with this?


Quote:
Some were wrong, some weren't. That's all. And I certainly didn't hear alternatives to fighting the insurgency other than "PULLOUT! PULLOUT! WE LOSE!" from the left. Hmmm?

If the decider and his yes men took into account the havoc that would be created, maybe things would be different.

Remember this from the Weekly Standard,

Quote:
When a high-ranking French leader suggested in a private meeting that President George W. Bush consider Algeria as a model for a staged disengagement from Iraq, the president reportedly listened, no doubt with that dazed attention span of a windshield wiper. Bush was said to have assured his European petitioner that he just happened to be finishing a book on the Algerian War.
Quote:
The Algerian War took the lives of at least a million Muslims, uprooted French settler-colonists, known as pieds-noirs, and, according to Horne, collapsed the Fourth Republic and wrecked six French governments. Finally, President Charles de Gaulle took the bold stance of ordering a French withdrawal from Algeria.

The lesson Bush apparently draws from Horne's exhaustive study, according to Irwin Stelzer of the Weekly Standard, is that despite the price in blood and treasure, France didn't stay the course long enough in Algeria. This is not exactly what the high-ranking French official had in mind when offering up Algeria as a model for America's disengagement from Iraq.

GW Bush, the worst President in history, period.
post #385 of 455
7/8/07 at 10:23pm
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
post #386 of 455
7/8/07 at 11:01pm
Catch the new thriller-horror movie of the century!

The World According to George.



You might not live to talk about it, but hey, neither will a potential terrorist.

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

post #387 of 455
7/10/07 at 5:03pm
This guy just doesn't know when to give up!


( Slaps forehead! )


http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/07/...raq/index.html

" Bush: Commanders trump politicians on war strategy "


I'm begining to think that impeachment is a real possiblilty.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
post #388 of 455
7/11/07 at 12:53am
Gotta keep the sheep scared: terrorist attack possible this summer (according to the gubbernment).

Chertoff has a "gut feeling".

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070711/..._LrM8mH_ms0NUE

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

post #389 of 455
7/11/07 at 9:43am
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post


" Bush: Commanders trump politicians on war strategy "


I'm begining to think that impeachment is a real possiblilty.

It always amazes me when Bush says stupid shit like this. Bush isn't a politician? The entire government apparatus isn't run by politicians?

It's just so...rich.
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
post #390 of 455
7/11/07 at 10:05am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bergermeister View Post

Gotta keep the sheep scared: terrorist attack possible this summer (according to the gubbernment).
Chertoff has a "gut feeling".
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070711/..._LrM8mH_ms0NUE

There they go again, ruining a perfectly good Devo song.

Also...Homeland security chair responds to Chertoff's 'gut'

Quote:
"What cities should be asking their law enforcement to work double shifts because of your gut feeling? Are the American people supposed to purchase duct tape and plastic sheeting because of your 'gut feeling?'"

The whole letter is here...
post #391 of 455
7/11/07 at 2:03pm
Looks like the President has no problem preventing former WH counsels from being compelled to testify before Congressional committees: (bold by poster)

Complete story.

Quote:
WASHINGTON - President Bush ordered his former White House counsel, Harriet Miers, to defy a congressional subpoena and refuse to testify Thursday before a House panel investigating U.S. attorney firings.

"Ms. Miers has absolute immunity from compelled congressional testimony as to matters occurring while she was a senior adviser to the president," White House Counsel Fred Fielding wrote in a letter to Miers' lawyer, George T. Manning.

Manning, in turn, notified committee chairman John Conyers, D-Mich., that Miers would not show up Thursday to answer questions about the White House role in the firings of eight federal prosecutors over the winter.



Republican Senators call for change in Iraq 'strategy':

Quote:
WASHINGTON - Several Republican senators told President Bush's top national security aide privately Wednesday that they did not want Bush to wait until September to change course in Iraq.

The meeting that lawmakers had with national security adviser Stephen Hadley came as GOP Sens. Olympia Snowe and Chuck Hagel announced they would back Democratic legislation ordering combat to end next spring.

Republican support for the war has steadily eroded in recent weeks as the White House prepared an interim progress report that found that the U.S.-backed government in Baghdad has made little progress in meeting major targets of reform.

Of the GOP lawmakers who say the U.S. should reduce its military role in Iraq, nearly all are up for re-election in 2008.

I find it utterly baffling that even a small percentage of the people still support this Administration...
You need skeptics, especially when the science gets very big and monolithic. -James Lovelock
The Story of Stuff
You need skeptics, especially when the science gets very big and monolithic. -James Lovelock
The Story of Stuff
post #392 of 455
7/11/07 at 3:02pm
Thread Starter 
Let's not forget that because of the Iraq invasion over 2 million Iraqis are misplaced and have lost everything they had under Saddam. 1.3 MIllion of them now live in Syria. They are being exploited by the Syrians and degraded. Pretty much all of them passionately HATE the US. Many of them can be turned into terrorists with $5.- and Lollipop. This is a great achievement of Mr. Bush. His actions will keep killing Americans many years after he has left office.
His policy is based on 2 principles: HATE and FEAR.
post #393 of 455
7/11/07 at 3:04pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by iPoster View Post




I find it utterly baffling that even a small percentage of the people still support this Administration...

Retardation must be more widespread than we thought.
post #394 of 455
7/11/07 at 3:52pm
I posted recently a link that said 1 in 5 Amerikans thought the sun circled the earth...

What is GW's approval rating? Getting closer...

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

post #395 of 455
7/11/07 at 4:36pm
Hmmm?

" Bush orders ex-counsel to defy congressional subpoena "


http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/07/...rs.ap/index.ht
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
post #396 of 455
7/11/07 at 8:01pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Hmmm?

" Bush orders ex-counsel to defy congressional subpoena "


http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/07/...rs.ap/index.ht

This works better:

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/07/....ap/index.html
eye
bee
BEE
eye
bee
BEE
post #397 of 455
7/12/07 at 5:57am
Quote:
Originally Posted by FormerLurker View Post

This works better:

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/07/....ap/index.html


Oops! Sorry.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
post #398 of 455
7/12/07 at 6:25am
Even if Congress gets pissed and presses charges (if they could... just a thought here), GW would pardon her immediately in order to keep her quiet.

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

post #399 of 455
7/12/07 at 11:49am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bergermeister View Post

Even if Congress gets pissed and presses charges (if they could... just a thought here), GW would pardon her immediately in order to keep her quiet.

Looks like we may just find out:

Quote:
WASHINGTON - A House panel cleared the way Thursday for contempt proceedings against former White House counsel Harriet Miers after she obeyed President Bush and skipped a hearing on the firings of federal prosecutors.

Addressing the empty chair where Miers had been subpoenaed to testify, Rep. Linda Sanchez ruled out of order Bush's executive privilege claim that his former advisers are immune from being summoned before Congress.

The House Judiciary subcommittee that Sanchez chairs voted 7-5 to sustain her ruling. If an agreement with the White House is not reached, the full Judiciary Committee could convene hearings and vote on whether to hold Miers, Bush's longtime friend and former Supreme Court nominee, in contempt. Ultimately, the full House would have to vote on any contempt citation.

It might be a moot point now, anyway:

Quote:
Bush seeks to put Libby issue to rest

WASHINGTON - President Bush on Thursday sought to put to rest the controversy over his decision to spare a top former White House official from going to jail, saying it was time to move on. He also called on the nation and skeptical lawmakers to stand with him on Iraq, despite a new report showing only mixed progress.

"There's war fatigue in America. It's affecting our psychology. I understand that. It's an ugly war," Bush said.

The president also said that, while al-Qaida remains a threat to the United States, it has been hurt by his war on terrorism and is "weaker today than they would have been" otherwise. He spoke as a new U.S. threat assessment found that al Qaida had rebuilt its capability to mount attacks to levels not seen since 2001.

At a news conference lasting over an hour that was dominated by questions on Iraq, Bush was asked about his decision ten days ago to commute the 30-month prison sentence of I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, the former chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney.

Libby was convicted of lying and obstruction of justice in the investigation of the outing of an undercover CIA official, Valerie Plame, whose husband Joseph Wilson was a vocal anti-war critic.

Bush acknowledged publicly for the first time that someone in his administration leaked her name to the news media. "And, you know, I've often thought about what would have happened had that person come forth and said, `I did it.' Would we have had this, you know, endless hours of investigation and a lot of money being spent on this matter?"
You need skeptics, especially when the science gets very big and monolithic. -James Lovelock
The Story of Stuff
You need skeptics, especially when the science gets very big and monolithic. -James Lovelock
The Story of Stuff
post #400 of 455
7/12/07 at 4:44pm
The pressure keeps going up!


http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/07/...ote/index.html


" House passes bill to bring troops home in '08 "



I wonder if Mr. Bush can see the writing on the wall?


Then there's this :


http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/07/...raq/index.html
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
This thread is locked  
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › GW Bush the worst president in US history