What is an objective review of BUSH? Or can there be one?

hobit, you do realize you just insulted yourself, don't you?

I see where this is going, and to continue to remain civil, I should probably let you play with your friend here, and find some better intellectual challenges.

Thanks for the insights H. Always appreciated they are.

0 Replies

I never said I was a sweetheart. I call it like I see it. America NEEDS a nice big dose of HARSHNESS so that they might shake the fairy dust out of their eyes. Things are getting worse you know. How long can things spiral out of control before the whole thing really does bottom out? And being nice and civil is going to put a stop to all the many problems exactly how?

I love my country, and I am fiercely proud to be an American. I enjoy great freedoms and liberties, and it is absolutely horrifying to me to see so many of my fellow Americans so utterly oblivious to the destruction going on all around them. Sit back and do nothing, but don't complain when it all bites the dust, because all of you sitting around taking pride and good times for granted are the reason why everything is tanking.

I really wish you all would wake up now, not later. There is much work to be done to fix things, but if we are going to stay polarized and bogged down in details that solve nothing, well.....it's getting harder to remain perfectly civil.

0 Replies

Umbagog wrote:

Yup, husker is a political hack trying to blame all the wars on the democrats. It isn't true, not by a long shot.

Iraq is a quagmire as much as Vietnam was. Bush is doing EXACTLY what Johnson did....tried to win through incrementalism of the conflict so as to avoid political fallout at home. Bombs and more bombs, and a filtering in of more troops instead of an all out bombing campaign and massive frontal attack. Johnson, like Bush, was/is afraid people will turn against the war if it escalates too rapidly, but the only wars that get won are the massive victories early on. Bush should have kept bombing, and then poured troops into Iraq. Too late now. Bush is going to suffer the same fate as Johnson for trying to politicize war.

Husker claims to be objective, but he is as slanted as they get, if his first post here is any indication of his character. Allowing people their delusions is not wise, in any venue.

Lighten up man - I leave for a few minutes and you go on a rampage.
Be constructive, not destructive. Have you really read the posts - you will find that 1 - it's not my original work and 2 it's be discussed elsewhere where and had I really been aware of that I may not have started this topic, but I've been away for awhile. Really need to work on your persona.
Cheers!

0 Replies

deleted - system duplicate

0 Replies

hobitbob wrote:

Umby, Husker has been here far longer than you, and is always polite and reasonable, unlike you STOP SCORING POINTS FOR THE FAR RIGHT!

Thanks for your kind words. Smile

0 Replies

Husker, you may be a demented, delusional right wing sheep, but you are our demented delusional right wing sheep! Very Happy

0 Replies

hobitbob wrote (to Umbagog):

Quote:

Any valid points you make are often invalidated by your very obstreperousness.

Whoa. Obsteperousness? I had to look that one up. In spite of the slight spelling error, I am more than a little awed by your vocabulary, hobitbob. A tip of the cap to you.

0 Replies

hobitbob did have it spelled correctly and I don't believe the calendars which give one a new word each day would misspell it either. Kidding! LOL

It's one thing to attack a country because one believes they can do some good and another to do it on the basis of a contrived fear that is foisted off on an unsuspecting public (which is the Mencken mantra of not underestimating the intelligence of the American public again). If establishing a quasi-democratic theocracy is curing the problem, we will only be able to judge by the ultimate outcome. Alas, only future history will tell the tale as characterized by historians who are, unfortunately, more likely adept at a biased editing of events. It is true that Eisenhower made the initial committment in Vietnam and Kennedy continued to provide Green Beret "advisors" for the South Vietnamese Army. Then the fear of the domino effect was sold to the American public by Johnson and Company but not any better than the reason for going into Iraq was sold. These politicians are lousy salespeople -- the number one criteria of good sales is to sell oneself. The Bushites now embarking on a political advertising campaign that looks more like the ad campaign for the Corvair. Bush's bum may be what ends up on fire.

0 Replies

Ah! The Corvair, now that was a sweet little car. Mine was a 62.

0 Replies

bm

0 Replies

Oh, to be truly, truly wise, and know how and when to compromise:
BoGoWo.

and yes, Mr. Wizard. Eisenhower did commit us to VietNam...and he openly admitted that it was for Tungsten.

Watch out for the hobit. He's a Karate expert and his hands are lethal weapons.

Goodnight, from Florida.

0 Replies

SCoates, Would you care to expand on that? Very Happy

0 Replies

Ah, yes, my "B" stood for "Book," and my "M" stood for "Mark." I guess the entirety of my point was "Bookmark," but you can read more into it if you like. Smile

Actually, I was just wanting to read everyone's opinions if it got heated, but it hasn't really.

0 Replies

Letty wrote:

Watch out for the hobit. He's a Karate expert and his hands are lethal weapons.