0
   

Let's talk about replacing GWBush in 2004.

 
 
BillW
 
  1  
Reply Mon 25 Aug, 2003 02:26 pm
Wow, I knew we could finally find someone that was before your time Mr. c.i. if we kept trying Smile Still doesn't diminish my faith in you Cool
0 Replies
 
PDiddie
 
  1  
Reply Fri 29 Aug, 2003 01:55 am
Wednesday, August 26, the President traveled to Minnesota for a $2,000-a-head campaign fundraiser in downtown St. Paul. Then he flew to St. Louis to address the American Legion national convention. (Combining an "official" function with a fundraiser makes it possible for the Bushies to take Air Force One to campaign stops on the taxpayers' dime. If you follow Shrub's schedule you'll see they do this a lot.)

Here's the text of the President's speech. What follows are excerpts. I will provide commentary.

Quote:
On Memorial Day last year, I visited the military cemetery at Normandy, and saw the grave of one of the founders of the American Legion, Brigadier General Theodore Roosevelt, Jr. When Roosevelt landed with the first wave of his unit on D-Day, he and his men found themselves in a different part of Utah Beach from the point they expected. Roosevelt quickly sized up the situation and called in a whole division to the new sector. Turning a challenge into an advantage, he declared: we'll start the war from here.

Well, a great challenge came to America on September the 11th, 2001. Enemies who plotted for years in secret, carried out missions of murder on our own soil. It was a day of suffering and sorrow. It was also a day of decision for our country. As a united and resolute people, America declared: we'll start the war from here.


Such monumental sham. What war is he talking about? Can't be his little adventure in Iraq, because Iraq had no connection to September 11.

Quote:
On a single day last week we saw the true nature of the terrorists once again. In Baghdad they attacked a symbol of the civilized world - the United Nations Headquarters - and killed men and women who were there to bring humanitarian help to the Iraqi people. They killed a respected U.N. Special Representative, Sergio Vieira de Mello, from Brazil.


None of which would have happened if Whistle Ass hadn't ordered the invasion of Iraq, of course. I'll come back to this in a minute, but for now let's go on...

Quote:
The terrorists' aim is to spread chaos and fear by killing on an ever-widening scale. They serve their cause by sacrificing the innocent. They celebrate the murder of women and children. They attacked the civilized world because they bear a deep hatred for the values of the civilized world.


Please note that the President is describing radical Muslim terrorists here, not Donald Rumsfeld and his clique of neocons in the Pentagon. It's confusing, I know.

Quote:
They hate freedom and religious tolerance and democracy and equality for women.


Sounds like Alabama.

Quote:
They hate Christians and Jews and every Muslim who does not share their narrow and violent vision.


Who? Ann Coulter?

Quote:
No nation can be neutral in the struggle between civilization and chaos. Every nation that stands on the side of freedom and the value of human life must condemn terrorism and act against the few who would destroy the hopes of the many.


Help! Help! Anybody! Save us from the Neocons and Freepers!

Quote:
Because America stands for freedom and tolerance and the rights of all, the terrorists have targeted our country. During the last few decades the terrorists grew bolder, believing if they hit America hard, America would retreat and back down.


Let's think about this for a moment. We're over here in America, minding our own business, enjoying our freedom and tolerance and rights, and terrorists hate us. But as we're over here minding our own business, how exactly will we "retreat" and "back down"? Retreat from where? Back down from what?

These platitudes about how "they hate us for our freedoms" isn't helping anyone understand the real reasons we are hated, which are much more complicated than this. And understanding the real reasons is essential if we're going to come up with real solutions, as opposed to just bombing everybody who looks suspicious.

The terrorists have not seen America retreating, they've seen America marching. They've seen conquering armies. They have seen the armies of liberation marching into Kabul and Baghdad.

Didn't slow the terrorists down any, did it? They went right ahead and massacred those UN workers.

Everybody knows what effect the liberation of Iraq really had on the terrorists:

Daniel Benjamin and Steven Simon from Time magazine wrote:
"In Iraq the old regime wanted to avoid military retaliation or invasion, so it made sense to shun collaboration with Osama bin Laden's maximal terrorists. But since Saddam and his loyalists have lost their state, the prudence that deterred them from working with the jihadists is gone. Together or alone, the radicals must strike in Iraq, the newest 'field of jihad.'"

--"The Real Worry," Time, September 1, 2003, p. 35

In other words, Iraq was not a hotbed of anti-American terrorism until we invaded it. Way to go, Shrub!

Quote:
Afghanistan today is a friend of the United States of America. Because we acted, that country is not a haven for terrorists, and the people of America are safer from attack.


From the headlines, today: "Taliban Takes Responsibility for Attacks in Afghanistan"; "How the Taliban Builds Its Army." Oh, wait a minute; Dubya does seem to know what's going on:

Quote:
Terrorist networks are still finding recruits and still plotting attacks, and still intending to strike our country. Yet, our resolve is firm, and it is clear: no matter how long it takes, we will bring to justice those who plot against America.


Bush's making enemies faster than we can shoot 'em. At this rate we'll never finish.

Quote:
We've also pursued the war on terror in Iraq. America and our coalition removed a regime that built, possessed and used weapons of mass destruction, a regime that sponsored terror and a regime that persecuted its people.


There he goes with the weapons of mass destruction again. Talk about beating a dead horse...

Quote:
They know that a democratic Iraq in the heart of the Middle East would be a further defeat for their ideology of terror. They know that the spread of peace and hope in the Middle East would undermine the appeal of bitterness, resentment, and violence. And the more progress we make in Iraq, the more desperate the terrorists will become. Freedom is a threat to their way of life.


In which case the terrorists have nothing to worry about, do they? Oh, but here's the best part:

Quote:
Our military is confronting terrorists in Iraq and Afghanistan and in other places so our people will not have to confront terrorist violence in New York, or St. Louis, or Los Angeles.


It's the "flypaper" offense!

In Vietnam, and Korea, they called it the domino theory.

There's a lot more, but I have to rest now. By all accounts, the American Legion vets loved the speech.

And in the real world ...

There are a couple more guys who won't be attending American Legion conventions: Staff Sergeant Brian Hellerman, 35, of Freeport, MN, and Specialist Jonathan Barnes, 21, of Anderson, MO.

They died August 6 and July 26, respectively, in Iraq.
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Fri 29 Aug, 2003 09:39 am
That's a really warped perspective Pdiddie. I refuse to even read your posts any longer.
0 Replies
 
Tartarin
 
  1  
Reply Fri 29 Aug, 2003 10:11 am
Gee, PDiddie, you just lost an important, intelligent reader there.

On the other hand, that's one of your best posts. Keep up the good work.

There are more and more of us who listen to Bush's speeches (only when we have to, but...) and who add the same skeptical commentary, even as he speaks. It would be touching if Bush were simply a naive fantasist. But he's not. He's a grim, cynical, unforgiveable power grabber.

Not a single saving grace I can think of, can you?
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Fri 29 Aug, 2003 10:18 am
Tartar, I agree: whenever he opens his mouth, I wonder what the twist will eventually be. Here's one example: when he was on that aircraft carrier to talk to the marines and sailors, it was a photo op that cost taxpayers millions, but on the other side of the coin, he's taken away benefits from veterans. He's lost 100 percent of my trust, and I keep wondering why so many Americans continue to support this dangerous idiot. c.i.
0 Replies
 
Tartarin
 
  1  
Reply Fri 29 Aug, 2003 10:25 am
CI -- I'm getting more and more fascinated by the stuff which is coming out about What Halliburton Failed To DO (even as they've been paid exorbitant amounts). I like the story about the mother who sent her son in Iraq an air conditioner because Halliburton failed to provide. (I guess Halliburton just couldn't afford it...)

It's about time Halliburton, Bush, Cheney, Rummy and Co. were forced to spend a summer in Iraq without AC. An apt punishment, or at least a beginning...
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Fri 29 Aug, 2003 10:28 am
Tartar, I'm thinking of a much hotter place than Iraq for those criminals of mankind. c.i.
0 Replies
 
mamajuana
 
  1  
Reply Fri 29 Aug, 2003 10:42 am
Just a footnote, PD, to a good report. I watched him deliver that speech on tv. The group was mostly older vets in their caps, some in uniforms. There was scattered, tepid applause, and, when you watched the audience, not everybody bothered to applaud. There were also significant small pauses in the speech, obviously written in to allow for applause, which didn't come. But Bush stood there, smiling and waiting. Yet the written reports I saw made it seem different. Small crowds, too.

There is no perspective anymore. Just a hanging on for dear life, spending money furiously in hopes to keep American thinking channeled along the lines. Things are getting worse. Where we've been - Afghanistan and Iraq - we now have a form of anarchy. Today a mosque in Iraq was blown up, killing at least 75. Who did it? Does it matter? Old scores are being settled, territorial affirmatives are being established - all this without the existence of American troops being necessary. So our role now is policing, securing the area for American business interests. Nothing's working.
0 Replies
 
Tartarin
 
  1  
Reply Fri 29 Aug, 2003 01:16 pm
I heard some gloomy commentaries on how we're handling NKorea this morning -- radio on while driving, don't ask for sources, please!! China and Japan seem to have a much better handle on the situation and should perhaps take the lead. NK takes pleasure in piquing Bush, teasing him. His original comments about that country were really stupid, really vile. He can take much of the blame for what's happening there. You can't start tossing around derogatory phrases about paranoid countries without expecting a stink in return. The question is (as always with the Bush admin), to what extent was Bush's provocation intentional?
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Fri 29 Aug, 2003 01:47 pm
It's not a matter of this administration not having a foreign policy. It's all about the stupid things they do all by themselves to always succeed in making things worse for everybody in this world. c.i.
0 Replies
 
BillW
 
  1  
Reply Fri 29 Aug, 2003 01:49 pm
I think they have a foreign policy, just that in writing by the light of day it even looks daffy to them!!!!
0 Replies
 
Tartarin
 
  1  
Reply Fri 29 Aug, 2003 08:19 pm
Quote:
..In arguing that his office had intervened only in the packaging of the dossier and had left a senior intelligence adviser, John Scarlett, in charge of all substantive intelligence findings, Mr. Blair claimed an implausibly superfluous role for a leader preparing to take his nation to war. An e-mail note from Mr. Blair's chief of staff, Jonathan Powell, reported that the dossier had gone through a "substantial rewrite" to address points Mr. Blair had personally raised. Mr. Powell earlier told the inquiry that in mid-September last year he had warned Mr. Blair that it would be inaccurate to claim that Iraq posed an imminent threat. Yet one week later, in presenting the dossier to Parliament, Mr. Blair implied just that by saying Mr. Hussein's unconventional weapons programs were "up and running."

The widespread belief in Britain that the government was deliberately misleading about the Iraqi threat explains Mr. Blair's recent downward plunge in the polls. Most Britons now say they no longer trust him to tell the truth. Regaining their trust will not be easy.
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/08/29/opinion/29FRI2.html


Hmm. Sounds familiar.


And now a brief word from our Mr. Krugman:

Quote:
Someday, when the grown-ups are back in charge, they'll have quite a mess to clean up. http://www.nytimes.com/2003/08/29/opinion/29KRUG.html
0 Replies
 
hobitbob
 
  1  
Reply Fri 29 Aug, 2003 08:50 pm
re: Bush's speech:
Watch his gestures and mannerisms, do they remind anyone of a certain Austrian with a comb-over and a Charlie Chaplain moustache? Shocked
0 Replies
 
BillW
 
  1  
Reply Fri 29 Aug, 2003 09:42 pm
The Politics certainly do..............
0 Replies
 
PDiddie
 
  1  
Reply Mon 1 Sep, 2003 11:32 am
As a small-business person who employs a handful of people, I am appalled at this legislation.

This will be his downfall.

Bush is screwing over the little guy right and left. Far enough in advance of the election for them to get it, and get him out.

Quote:
In celebration of the working person's holiday, Secretary of Labor Elaine Chao has announced the Bush Administration's plan to end the 60-year-old law which requires employers to pay time-and-a-half for overtime.

I'm sure you already knew that -- if you happened to have run across page 15,576 of the Federal Register.

According to the Register, where the Bush Administration likes to place its little gifts to major campaign donors, 2.7 million workers will lose their overtime pay for a "benefit" of $1.53 billion. I put "benefit" in quotes because, in the official cost-benefit analysis issued by Bush's Labor Department, the amount employers will now be able to slice out of workers' pockets is tallied on the plus side of the rules change.

Nevertheless, workers getting their pay snipped shouldn't complain, because they will all be receiving promotions. These employees will be re-classified as managers exempt from the law. The change is promoted by the National Council of Chain Restaurants. You've met these 'managers' - they're the ones in the beanies and aprons whose management decisions are, "Hold the lettuce on that."

My favorite of Chao's little amendments would re-classify as "exempt professionals" anyone who learned their skill in the military. In other words, thousands of veterans will now lose overtime pay. I just can't understand why Bush didn't announce that one when he landed on the aircraft carrier.


The Grinch That Stole Labor Day
0 Replies
 
hobitbob
 
  1  
Reply Mon 1 Sep, 2003 11:41 am
Shocked
0 Replies
 
Tartarin
 
  1  
Reply Mon 1 Sep, 2003 11:55 am
What a bastard the guy is that 45% of voters voted for. They have a lot to answer for -- and should answer for.
0 Replies
 
wolf
 
  1  
Reply Mon 1 Sep, 2003 12:19 pm
From now on, it's impossible to trust any voting results anywhere in the world.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 1 Sep, 2003 12:28 pm
Tartar, I dare say that those same 45 percent that voted for Bush doesn't understand that they've been stabbed in the back.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 1 Sep, 2003 12:29 pm
We all see the knife, but they still haven't felt the pain.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.14 seconds on 11/16/2024 at 03:31:01