|
Post by Brian on Jan 22, 2006 3:55:32 GMT -5
Slinker.......you you had any smarts at all....you stop making up therios you see fit to insert in your respons.NOTHING if what you stated is a KNOWN fact that you can back up ...its all speculation on your part to what you THINK happened or would have done differently necause you don/t like the WAY its being don....Now I'll only point out 1 of the many MISTAKES you made in your reply......The soldier that bombed the federal bldg in oklahoma is a known fact that I did't see neccesary to re say....Tmmothy McVeiy has to be branded into everyone mind if they keep up on any current events.......But if you go back and read it again.....don't matter what color or nationality or what work expieriencewether you ever served in the military or NOT.......HE WAS ANS D IS STIL CONSIDERED A "TERRORIST" for the reason he did what he did.................now pay attention....its really very simple......This is the greatest country in the world...BECAUSE of what our CHEIFS have done in the past 200 plus years to lead us to where we are today ....the most respected. feared and " the" strongest nation in the WORLD Think of the U S as a police Department for the whole world...to keep ALL countries and nations to dothe right thing....we have to make it our concern ...BECAUSE.......that OTHER nation is on the same planet as us.
|
|
|
Post by Brian on Jan 22, 2006 4:55:34 GMT -5
The 2008 presidential election still is more than 33 months away, but the campaign to succeed President Bush started in earnest this week.
ADVERTISEMENT Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., seeking an almost certain re-election to that seat this year but with both eyes on her party's presidential nomination in two years, charged that the Bush administration "will go down in history as one of the worst that has ever governed our country."
She's wrong. As a serious student of politics and history in high school and college and a close observer as a journalist for more than a half-century, these presidents were the five "worst" in my book:
• Andrew Jackson, (D) 1829-37
• James Buchanan, (D) 1857-61
• Ulysses S. Grant, (R) 1869-77
• Herbert Hoover, (R) 1929-33
• Richard Nixon, (R) 1969-74
It's very unlikely Bush can crack that list in his remaining three years in office.
His tragic "pre-emptive" war against Iraq may well go down as the biggest foreign policy blunder ever, especially if he "stays the course" and the unconscionable cost in lives and dollars goes on.
But domestically, except for the foul-up of the follow-up to Hurricane Katrina, Bush has done reasonably well. His leadership helped rally the country after 9/11. The economy is not great, but OK. In the areas of health care and education, he gets pretty good grades.
Hillary's crusty comments set the tune for 2008. Democrats will paint Bush with a brush that makes him look worse than he was (is). Some Republicans will run scared and run away from some of what he did. So, even though he won't be on the ballot, he'll be the battle cry.
Fortunately, as usual, political independents will issue the final report card.
|
|
|
Post by Brian on Jan 22, 2006 16:20:08 GMT -5
We're on this Earth together, And if we would be brothers.... Fight not just on your own behalf But for the sake of others.
Praise the Lord and Pass the Antibiotics
|
|
|
Post by Brian on Jan 31, 2006 18:35:23 GMT -5
Standard fare in the mainstream media as well as in both Left and Libertarian blogs, web sites and magazines, is that the Democrats are spineless. But this view simply does not fit the facts, and it is dangerous to boot, because it leads us to underestimate one of our most sinister and cynical pro-war adversaries, the Democratic Party establishment. For, if left to their own devices, the Dems will do what Kucinich warned of and substitute a Democratic for a Republican version of the war on Iraq.
The conventional wisdom is that the Dems are afraid to stand up to Bush's war, because they fear the accusation of being "soft on terrorism" or downright treasonous. And, we are told by the liberal punditocracy, this sort of charge will prevent our poor Dems from winning elections and ending the war which, deep down, they really oppose. So what's a poor Dem to do? Obviously call for "staying the course." This analysis is ever so convenient for the Dems. It gets the likes of Kerry, H. Clinton, Dean, Biden, Cleland and the rest, marvelously off the hook, bringing them the support of the anti-war forces. These are good men and women, we are told, just trying to win elections in the face of the ignorance of the benighted masses so as to bring us peace! Thus are hawks transmogrifed into doves, even as they cry out for more bloodshed, more troops and more death and destruction.
This whole whacko analysis cannot stand up to reality. First, the country, by a significant majority according to the polls, is against the war and long has been even before the last presidential election. Now 60% want some or all troops withdrawn at once. The least popular option, the one favored by leading Democrats, is to send more troops, an option that draws the support of less than 10%, with 57%, saying they would be "upset" at such a move. Why would anyone wanting to win an election champion a view which hardly anyone favors and is even less popular than Bush's? Second, take as an example a senator like California's Diane Feinstein who is not planning to run for president and comes from a solidly anti-war state, so an anti-war position is no danger for her. And yet she calls for "staying the course."
No, the idea of the spineless but virtuous Democrat does not hold up. The real reason has to be that the Dems do not give a damn about the electorate. The Dem establishment must in fact favor the war. And the reason is not hard to find. They play to the same real but hidden constituencies as the Republicans the oil tycoons, AIPAC, the barons of the military industrial complex and those who make their fortunes from empire, ranging from the banks to Bechtel. This is their class and if one of the pols dares play traitor to his class, he or she will soon be an outcast. Ask Ted Kennedy. When Kennedy called for immediate withdrawal from Iraq last January, he was virtually denounced by the rest of the Dem leadership. And although the media is afflicted with many and mortal problems, do not tell me that the media makes it impossible for the Dems to take a strong anti-war position. When Kennedy did so, it was all over the media from the front pages of the dailies to the Sunday morning TV talk shows.
The Dems know full well there is an enormous anti-war constituency out there. If they used their considerable resources to organize it and give voice to it, then it would quickly prevail. A sorry example is Cindy Sheehan's effort. Not a single major Democrat has shown up at Camp Casey. They are blowing off Sheehan just like Bush.
In fact far from being cowardly, the Dems are showing considerable spine in standing up to the anti-war constituency that routinely does the leg work and contributes the dollars to elect them. Here their courage and resolve befit heroes of Homeric proportions. In the face of powerful anti-war sentiment from their loyalists, the Dems resolutely call for "staying the course" in the war for which they voted. Now there is spine. There is fortitude, both testicular and ovarian.
But the Dems have now been exposed and about the last excuse they have for "staying the course" is to "help" the Iraqis. Of course they uttered no such sentiment when Clinton was imposing sanctions that resulted in the deaths of tens of thousands of Iraqi kids, a price Madeline Albright famously said was worth it to pressure Saddam Hussein. So the Dems either cry crocodile tears over the fate of the Iraqis, or avoid all mention of the war or else, like Russ Feingold, call for endless discussions of "exit strategies." I prefer the sentiment splashed across the cover of the paleocon American Conservative which proclaimed: "We do not need an exit strategy. We need an exit."
So next time you hear that the problem with the Dems is their spinelessness, do not believe a word of it. They are quite courageous in facing down their voting base to peddle death and destruction. To view them otherwise is to underestimate a potent, treacherous and insidious adversary of the anti-war movement.
|
|
|
Post by slinker on Feb 2, 2006 12:59:20 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by slinker on Feb 2, 2006 13:03:59 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by slinker on Feb 9, 2006 21:08:47 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by liz on Apr 4, 2007 8:14:25 GMT -5
Jeff Beck is a right wing nut job...even he bush bashs...
|
|
|
Post by liz on Apr 4, 2007 23:38:02 GMT -5
Dah! he didn't win against Gore..he cheated...should have never got the chance to run against Kerry...Dah!
|
|
|
Post by janedough on Apr 14, 2007 20:28:30 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by betsy on May 19, 2007 1:42:14 GMT -5
Page 1 of post- Southerndrawl-
The FACTS certainly do speak. Thanks for the post. Betsy
|
|
|
Post by slinker on May 21, 2007 23:32:52 GMT -5
3 of 10 Americans approve of and support Bush. So, 7 of 10 think he sucks. There are 200 million Americans as of 2006. That means that 140 million Americans think Bush is a bad president and 60 million think he's swell. Oh, if only those people knew in 2000 or 2004 what they know today...
|
|
|
Post by janedough on Jul 30, 2007 14:18:47 GMT -5
Voter caging is illegal when done against a specific race. Everyone read how the Bush/Rovebots stole the election in 2000, 2004 and will again in 2008. Wake up. Greg Palast has all those missing emails from Rove that had been "deleted" . He wrote a book about how and why. It is called ARMED MADHOUSE He is a reporter for the BBC. It is ALL OVER the news around the world. Just not as big as Lindsay Lohan here. For GOD's sake, wake up. Inform yourselves.
|
|
|
Post by liz on Jul 30, 2007 23:28:31 GMT -5
Bush won because he cheated...Gore should have been our pres and maybe we would not be in this mess! and over 3,000 and counting young man and many innocents caught in the crossfire would not be dead! geez wake the f--k up and read! and no I feel less unsafe from a terror attack as we have outraged the radicals now in every country not to mention outrage the normal citizins of every country.including our own!.WORST PRES AND CABINET IN HISTORY!
|
|