bush Really Is Crazy...

he's a raving nutter. and worse, he's been raping the constitution for 8 years.

he'll be out soon, and then we'll have to clean up his mess. but what really bothers me is that everyone is going to stupidly vote for someone that takes the last 8 years lightly. criticism of injustice is GOOD, but it's not good enough. most politicians are making NO promises to clean up bush's mess, you know why?

because they think they can get elected without bringing it up, let alone promising to fix it. so basically, the majority of the country is insane too- even if they elect a so-called democrat.

as long as the patriot act and these illegal wars (which the democrats are stupidly supporting) keep getting voted for by both parties, bush doesn't really matter anymore, not by comparison. an entire nation- whether mostly democrat, or mostly republican, are just going to sit on his bloody legacy as if it never happened. that- that's what's insane. wait and see, and prove me wrong- little would thrill me more than that.

I was thinking about that the other day when I noticed hundreds of Ron Paul signs had appeared around town. He and John Edwards are the only ones that I have heard say anything about undoing the Bush assault on liberties and the Constitution.

No one else has, that I've heard. And, I don't expect them to. Then again, I'm one of those nuts that isn't so sure we'll have a next president despite Bush saying today that at the end of the next 18 months we'll find him in Crawford. Hard for me to trust that they are going to fight for all of this power and then hand it over to another party.

(Maybe he's having the White House moved?)

From this week's Time, Joe Klein on Merle Haggard's decision to support Hillary Clinton.


http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1670184,00.html

It would seem to be a sickness shared by his fellow republicans
GOP hopefuls take a hard line on Tehran
By Stephen Dinan
October 17, 2007





--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The top Republican presidential candidates yesterday repeatedly threatened attacks on Iran if it pursues nuclear weapons, drawing lines between themselves and the Democratic candidates on what's likely to be the major foreign-policy issue of the next presidency.



Speaking to the Republican Jewish Coalition, former New York Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani said the U.S. should enter negotiations only after letting enemies know that America is prepared to attack and said Iran must know attacks are possible. Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney went further, saying Iran must know attacks are imminent.



"Iran has to understand that not only is the military on the table, it is in our hand," he said, adding that the point is to let the rogue nation know that "this is not just some far-flung idea that we might act militarily, but instead we are poised and ready to act."



They and the other top Republicans assured the 250 Jewish Republicans gathered in a hotel ballroom in Washington that they will defend Israel, and they criticized the ongoing Middle East peace process for finding moral equivalence between Israel and the Palestinians, terrorists and other rogue nations.



"We really can't in any way accommodate any effort which would reduce Israel's security, and the thousand-plus rockets that have been launched from the Gaza Strip show that the best of intentions can result in something far less positive than is often anticipated," Mr. Romney said.



Former Democratic Rep. Tom Andrews, who now runs Win Without War, an organization opposed to the war in Iraq, said Republicans' tough talk is a mistake.



"Look at where saber-rattling and pre-emptive attacks have gotten us in Iraq," he said. "We don't need another reckless war. If we are genuinely worried about Iran obtaining nuclear weapons, we should engage in real talks."



The Democratic field has been reluctant to take a hard line on Iran. Sen. Barack Obama has said he would enter into no-preconditions negotiations with the nation's president, and former Sen. John Edwards said the U.S. should be reluctant to attack Iran.



Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton has taken stances that appear to put her on both sides of the question, but in a new article in Foreign Affairs magazine, she leans toward the firmer side, saying that "all options must remain on the table" if Iran doesn't comply with international obligations.



Mr. Obama has defended his negotiations stance by pointing to President Reagan's negotiations with Soviet leaders during the Cold War. But Mr. Giuliani yesterday said the senator from Illinois misunderstands history.



"I say this most respectfully ?- you're not Ronald Reagan," he said. "Here's what Ronald Reagan did before he negotiated with the communists: First, he called them the 'Evil Empire.' Then he took missiles ... he put them in European cities, and he pointed the missiles at Russian cities with names on them. And then he said, in his very nice way, 'Let's negotiate,' "



Sen. John McCain said some straight talk is also needed today with Russian President Vladimir Putin.



"It's time we got a little tough," Mr. McCain said, taking a swipe at President Bush, who has invited the Russian leader, a former Soviet spy, to his Crawford, Texas, ranch and said he had looked into Mr. Putin's eye, taken his measure and found him to be trustworthy.



"I looked into Putin's eyes and I saw three letters ?- a 'K,' a 'G' and a 'B,' " Mr. McCain said, adding, "I don't think I'd invite him to Sedona."



Sen. Sam Brownback, another Republican presidential candidate, won cheers for rejecting Mr. Bush's current peace "road map" policy for the Middle East, saying the region has veered "significantly off it."



In his speech, former Sen. Fred Thompson said radical Islam poses a challenge to moderate Muslims as well.



"We need the active involvement of moderate Muslims and religious leaders to wrest back their faith, and indeed their peoples, from this cult of death," he said.



But the audience belonged to Mr. Giuliani, who won strong applause when he retold the story of having tossed Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat out of a United Nations' concert in New York.



"I didn't hesitate like Hillary Clinton hesitates to answer questions on what she's going to do about Iran. I didn't seek to negotiate with him, like Barack Obama would do or says he'd do with these people," he said.



"I just made a decision. See, I lead. That's what a leader is about."

yes indeed. He leads. The Pied Piper was a leader....

this is the number one story on hardball right now..... let's see what this is about...besides the fact that bush is crazy as a shithouse rat of course....I truly believe that it is bushs' intention and desire to lead us into the final war...

my god he's dangerous.....boxer and matthews almost said out loud the thing everyone's afraid to say... bush is crazy and getting crazier....

"bush Really Is Crazy..."

He's not crazy. Psychosis means the absence of neurotic defenses. Bush is extremely neurotic, and his defenses include making war on a country that posed no danger to us. I believe that his neurosis is so complex and extensive that there is no hope of any psychological or spiritual redemption for him. A serial killer or mass murderer who has killed ten or a hundred could have a possible redemption in prison, but a person with Bush's power who is responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people and the displacement and destruction of the lives of millions, who could ever deal with that?

That's why his press conference are so vapid. He is on guard constantly against honesty and truth; they are his enemies.

To us he appears crazy. The Iraq mess, which I was against from the get go, the suspension of various aspect of our civil liberties, the refusal to even consider some control on his actions from the Congress, all these things have lead me to believe he is a bit of a fanatic. (See below for my thoughts on fanatics.)

Now he's "breaking bad" on Iran, to boot! He IS crazy.

Well, since he is beginning to pay some lip service to the global warming concern.... perhaps, in his warped mind, the answer might be "Nuclear Winter"!

Along with that observation, I am expected to "buy into" the theory that the next President of the United States, selected from that marvelously performing segment of our Government, the Congress (with 11% approval), is going to make things "all better". In a pig's butt!

A pox on both your houses!

Halfback

If he is crazy. What does that say about those who voted for his second term?

stupid sheep....or equally crazy.... or both.

Neither, just voting for the lesser of two perceived evils. That has been a much repeated theme for Presidential Elections for a very long time now.

Halfback

perception is a real bitch and stupid perception has dire consequences....

I have no respect for the man--Bush--at all and find it difficult to sit through one of his press conferences. His smirk seems to express a disinterest or a need to be honest with the American people. Everything he says in response to questions reeks with the equivocal as if the public is so far below him that they don't deserve a straight response.

I think he holds a special contempt for the very people who voted for him because they were so easily cajoled by a few prevarications, catch phrases, and simple-minded attacks on the opponent. World citizens outside the U.S. must be baffled by not only the election but the re-election of this person.

I am haunted by the phrase he uttered after meeting with Vladimir Putin, " I looked into his eyes and saw his soul." It sounded like he fell in love with Putin, but I think he only fell in love with Putin's power and seeing himself reflected in the man's eyes tried to gain that type of power himself. I always thought Bush as more appropriately a dictator of a small country that a president of a great country.