Bush's Stupid Off Topic Unintelligible Address

[coyote]

JohnnyB,

 

Principled opposition includes understanding that your opponent sometimes accomplishes things of value, even while on a fundamentally (and morally) flawed course of action.

 

When all you do is demonize someone, you are playing the cult of personality instead of rationally and intelligently arguing politics & policy. Those who rant and rave as you do are usually dismissed as insane at best, and generally as irrelevant a$$hole or worse.

[Dogfur]

Originally posted by Mats Olsson.:

The House of Bush

NOTE: I did not post this to start another mud-slinging contest. Please behave, I just want to hear your comments!

 

/Mats[/QB]

 

Mats:

 

Thanks for the link and an interesting article from yet another Republican insider. The article hits on several key themes that seem to be ignored by pundits and ideologues alike. It will be interesting to see the responses of those with opposing opinions to quotes from an insider like this:

 

"I'm not talking about ordinary lack of business ethics or financial corruption," says Phillips, who recently registered as an Independent for the first time. "Four generations of building toward dynasty have infused the Bush family's hunger for power and practices of crony capitalism with a moral arrogance and backstage disregard of the democratic and republican traditions of the U.S. government." As a result, he says, "deceit and disinformation have become Bush political hallmarks."

 

(swaggers to pulpit, takes a big breath)

 

Concerning the SOTU speech, it was again like watching a pee-wee football game, but with mammothly high stakes. I felt Karl Rove's points were about as predictable and lowball as it gets with this administration, simple pandering to special interests with references to the ridiculous legislation that has been allowed to pass during this abhorent term. It pretty much outlined the true disgust the political system has for the American people, and the endless fabrications they will go to achieving their true goal, control of resources in an upcoming world without carbon based fuels, and the economy that goes with it.

 

(another deep breath, duck and crawl out of room)

 

Best to all,

 

Dogfur

[Saint Johnny B]

Dog, right on!

 

Ok, I've been called an "insane asshole" by some of the peanut gallery types, but you know what? I'm not killing people, I did not lie to the American public, I am not grabbing big government contracts, and I have not stolen all of your money in the US Treasury, plus, I did not steal your credit card from under your nose and run up a 23,000-dollar debt on your account, but Bush did.

 

Oh, and I did not promote corporate policies and subsidise them to move all of those blue and white collar jobs overseas and run up a huge trade deficit and cause mass unemployment, but Bush did.

 

So if anyone wants to know why normal, law-abidding, Americans are disguted and damm angry with Bush, my return question is: Who likes a thief who robs you and is also a big liar?

[Hendmik]

Yo FunkJazz! Bush is not in touch anymore? Huh? That makes no sense. If his little rant about steriods didn't speak to every American, then you're just some pinko commie whose life doesn't revolve around professional athletes.

 

http://www.bluefudge.com/wilsonsalmanac/images/bush_nosepick.gif

 

In 2002, we got the Axis of Evil, in 2003, we got Iraq mongering. This year, Bush wants to bomb the Rose Bowl. Great. I was almost sure we'd get another war this year. What a let down.

[GZsound]

So from reading the comments here it appears that not one of you thought the speech had any merit whatsoever. Correct?

 

Of course this is just another of Johnny's typical passive agressive anti Bush posts, but it appears these rants actually get a majority of forum members to agree with them.

 

So rather than a continued "he sucks" mantra..how about a couple of ideas?

 

He devoted a lot of time explaining that the former administration strategy of treating the terrorists as criminals did not work.

 

It appears a lot of you do not think we are in any danger at all from further terrorist actions, so what do you suggest? Pull out of Iraq? Let the UN protect us? Let France or Germany protect us? Or just go back to doing what Mr. Bill did..basically nothing. Concentrate on the economy and forget about national security?

 

Johnny, just once I would love to hear a solution from you other than "jail Bush", "Impeach Bush", etc.

 

Do you ever have any actual intelligent ideas?

 

Solutions folks..real solutions.. how about it?

 

If Kerry or Edwards get elected, we will most likely find out what it's like to have wealth redistributed, our security diminished, military cut, national health care programs, forced attendance at public schools only, mandatory union membership as a condition of getting a job, etc. So it will be nice to see if some of these things actually work instead of just hoping they will.

 

Sort of like here in Oregon. We are voting on the largest tax increase in Oregon history this week. It will be nice to see if we can maintain the highest unemployment in the nation for another three years. So far 58% of our private small business have said they will move out of the state if it gets any worse.

 

I hope the tax passes. I would like to see the state collapse from within. I know of no other way to show how these liberal agenda programs just will not work.

 

So I hope Kerry or Edwards gets elected in November. I think the term is "Be careful what you wish for".

[Salyphus]

Originally posted by GZsound:

So from reading the comments here it appears that not one of you thought the speech had any merit whatsoever. Correct?

I think it had a lot of merit in demonstrating to the American people what a cynical charlatan he and his handlers are. Those that bothered to watch that is. Apparently more people chose to watch some updated version of the Gong Show instead

 

Originally posted by GZsound:

If Kerry or Edwards get elected, we will most likely find out what it's like to have wealth redistributed, our security diminished, military cut, national health care programs, forced attendance at public schools only, mandatory union membership as a condition of getting a job, etc. So it will be nice to see if some of these things actually work instead of just hoping they will.

Interesting that you don't think most of these things are happening already?

[offramp]

Originally posted by GZsound:

So from reading the comments here it appears that not one of you thought the speech had any merit whatsoever.

Kinda like you with Democrats, or anyone who presents an alternate viewpoint to yours.

[Dogfur]

Originally posted by GZsound:

So from reading the comments here it appears that not one of you thought the speech had any merit whatsoever. Correct?

 

Well, I said it showcased the political systems contempt for the electorate. Perhaps you think this is meritorious in some way.

 

Of course this is just another of Johnny's typical passive agressive anti Bush posts, but it appears these rants actually get a majority of forum members to agree with them.

 

Actually Johnny B asked for comments about the SOTU, to which I responded. I also thanked Mats for his link and commented on it. I invite your views on the article.

 

So rather than a continued "he sucks" mantra..how about a couple of ideas?

 

Alright, I'll throw a couple out in a second.

 

He devoted a lot of time explaining that the former administration strategy of treating the terrorists as criminals did not work.

 

A usual Bu$hista tactic, blame Clinton. In this matter I'll simply say that it is a matter of record that Clinton jailed the culprit from the WTC bombings, Bu$h has not been as successful at catching his 'terrist' perpatrator. I will give it up that Slick Willy wasn't as on the ball as he could have been concerning this issue, but all evidence indicates GWB killed the investigations into Bin Laden, Clinton just failed to act. Perhaps this is the criminal vs. unjustified warfare difference Bush was addressing.

 

It appears a lot of you do not think we are in any danger at all from further terrorist actions, so what do you suggest? Pull out of Iraq? Let the UN protect us? Let France or Germany protect us? Or just go back to doing what Mr. Bill did..basically nothing. Concentrate on the economy and forget about national security?

 

No, I feel our country is at great risk from terrorists, both foreign and domestic. Again, I'll give you a couple suggestions in a second - your probably not going to like them, but thats OK.

 

Johnny, just once I would love to hear a solution from you other than "jail Bush", "Impeach Bush", etc.

 

Do you ever have any actual intelligent ideas?

 

Solutions folks..real solutions.. how about it?

 

Alright - here's some suggestions.

 

1) Full investigation into Saudi Arabian activity with emphasis on terrorist finances, without "executive" interruption. This would include testimony from the Bush family, as well as other familiar names like Cheney, Baker, etc...Despite the majority of hijackers on 9-11 being Saudis we have yet to achieve this basic goal. All findings must be made public. Our most serious national security issues are from within, that excuse to cover up embarassing dirt can no longer stand.

 

2) Release all known information concerning 9-11 and offer immunity to below-executive level employees for their testimony. Obviously this is going to involve a special prosecutor, appointed from a newly revised commission, chaired and overseen by families of the victims of the WTC,Pentagon,

and Pennsylvania tragedies.

 

3) Redirect funding for alternative energy programs in a serious manner.

 

4) Work with other nations to address the horrific problems we will assuredly see with the dwindling of fossil-based energy supplies. This lone issue is really what all the fuss is about anyway.

 

5)Enact all pending campaign finance reform legislation, and further strengthen it in a timely fashion to simply make all contributions available to a general fund that all candidates draw from.

 

6) Term limits - one office, one time...Thats it. Maybe after we clean up the mess we can re-visit that, but it is the only way I can think of right now to get things back on track.

 

If Kerry or Edwards get elected, we will most likely find out what it's like to have wealth redistributed, our security diminished, military cut, national health care programs, forced attendance at public schools only, mandatory union membership as a condition of getting a job, etc. So it will be nice to see if some of these things actually work instead of just hoping they will.

 

Please see above post - it doesn't really matter who is in office, although I would prefer an executive level of government that deals with the problem in a more globally acceptable way. The only other alternative is more 'terrists' as we starve the rest of the world, and probably a good portion of ourselves within this country as well.

 

Sort of like here in Oregon. We are voting on the largest tax increase in Oregon history this week. It will be nice to see if we can maintain the highest unemployment in the nation for another three years. So far 58% of our private small business have said they will move out of the state if it gets any worse.

 

I spent alot of time in Oregon this year - I wish you the best with your struggles.

 

I hope the tax passes. I would like to see the state collapse from within. I know of no other way to show how these liberal agenda programs just will not work.

 

So I hope Kerry or Edwards gets elected in November. I think the term is "Be careful what you wish for".

 

I hope you are not always this cynical, but I enjoy your posts anyway.

 

Best to all,

 

Dogfur

[Alndln]

Originally posted by GZsound:

it appears that not one of you thought the speech had any merit whatsoever. Correct?

Maybe if you percieve "comedy" as merit.The part about "paying down the defecit" had me in stiches.

[Chuck Moore]

here's a couple links for electoral college info.

 

this one is a rundown of the 2000 map

http://www.sptimes.com/election2000/map.shtml

 

this one is a calculator for the states

 

http://www.grayraven.com/ec/

[Bunny,]

Originally posted by Alndln FX-51:

Originally posted by GZsound:

it appears that not one of you thought the speech had any merit whatsoever. Correct?

Maybe if you percieve "comedy" as merit.The part about "paying down the defecit" had me in stiches.

That makes two of us!

[GZsound]

Well, well, actually some good ideas posted.

 

I understand the new budget will grow at less than inflation. The president is going to cap spending and only allow 1% growth. That should help stop the bleeding.

 

Anybody got any thoughts on getting out of NAFTA and WTO? Kucinich had some good ideas about the problems those organizations have caused in sucking jobs out of America.

 

And for those of you who didn't like the SOTU speech.. I remember somebody adding up the money Bill Clinton promised to spend in one of his SOTU speeches and it was more than the entire budget of the United States..

 

I agree we should find out what the Saudi's know about 9/11. However, they are also the target of Al Queda terrorist attacks so I'm not sure what we will find out.

 

And hey, I'm glad to see the government is finally cracking down on steroids...wha? Without steroids we wouldn't have Arnold as governator..

[JimmieWannaB]

I understand the new budget will grow at less than inflation. The president is going to cap spending and only allow 1% growth. That should help stop the bleeding.

It's been pointed out in the press that GW neglected to mention that the funds for Iraq and Homeland Security weren't included in those numbers. Given what he's gotten so far for Iraq, once they're factored in, I don't think we'll be staying below inflation.

 

Even if he kept the increase below inflation, last year gave us the biggest deficit in our nation's history. Unless he drastically cuts the budget, the deficit will just grow beyond its current obscene amount.

 

Forget our kids paying for GW's budget. It's beginning to look like they, our grandchildren and our great-grandchildren will be paying this tab.

[Mats Olsson.]

So lets hypothetically say that the budget is 1% below inflation.

 

But what about the intrest rate on the debt?

Looks to me like you will owe even more money one year from now.

 

It does not look good, or does it?

 

/Mats

[Alndln]

Originally posted by GZsound:

Anybody got any thoughts on getting out of NAFTA?

The last 4 administrations pushed hard to get that through(Regan/Bush/Clinton/Bush)unfortunately.It needs to be revamped though and re-thought.For example,when a 3rd world country can export and sell vegtables here and undercut our own prices by more than half because of questionable labor practices,not to mention using pestacides that were banned by most countries over 20 years ago,some rules need to be put into play.I'm all for open markets and even competition within our country,but not a free for all where anyone can change the goal posts.

[coyote]

Looking at government fiscal policies over the past 7 years, you'd never guess that less than a decade ago the GOP was busily accusing the Dems of profligate spending, and proposing a Balanced Budget Amendment to counter that perception. You'd also never guess that, just a few years prior to that, the GrammRudmanHollings spending controls also emerged from the Grand Ol' Party....

 

Originally posted by GZsound:

Well, well, actually some good ideas posted.

 

I understand the new budget will grow at less than inflation. The president is going to cap spending and only allow 1% growth. That should help stop the bleeding.

..

[Griffinator]

Originally posted by GZsound:

Anybody got any thoughts on getting out of NAFTA and WTO? Kucinich had some good ideas about the problems those organizations have caused in sucking jobs out of America.

 

Funny, I remember being diametrically opposed to that legislation when it first dropped. Jello Biafra did a long dissertation about it (on the Beyond the Valley of the Dream Police spoken word album) back in '92 that was incredibly insightful and, in retrospect, was dead straight accurate, as was old Ross Perot's assessment of the idea. Unfortunately, the power brokers in Washington on both sides of the aisle (Bush Sr. was peddling the plan all the way up to Clinton's inauguration - and Bill then signed it) all decided that it was a good idea for their wallets, which were being greased heavily by a lot of corporations who desired to take advantage of cheap south-of-the-border labor...

 

It's simple. Forget the UN - we need to get the US out of the WTO!

 

And for those of you who didn't like the SOTU speech.. I remember somebody adding up the money Bill Clinton promised to spend in one of his SOTU speeches and it was more than the entire budget of the United States..

 

Mark, I am so goddamned sick of you talking about Clinton. I hated Clinton too - just not nearly as much as I despise your boy Dubya. Get over Bill. He's not running the country anymore, dude. We have to worry about the guy that is running it - before he runs it into the ground for the last time.

 

I agree we should find out what the Saudi's know about 9/11. However, they are also the target of Al Queda terrorist attacks so I'm not sure what we will find out.

 

Hell, I can already show you documentation that connects Al Q to the Saudi royalty. I can also show you a hotbed of terrorist activity inside of SA. It's just a matter of making it public, so the electorate can actually make an informed choice about whether they want to be represented by someone who has long-standing connections with such unsavory characters.

 

And hey, I'm glad to see the government is finally cracking down on steroids...wha? Without steroids we wouldn't have Arnold as governator..[/QB]

LOL! That, my friend, was just one more of Bush's distraction techniques. The deficit is completely out of control right now - so let's talk about Steroids!

[Lee Flier]

Originally posted by GZsound:

I hope the tax passes. I would like to see the state collapse from within. I know of no other way to show how these liberal agenda programs just will not work.

 

So I hope Kerry or Edwards gets elected in November. I think the term is "Be careful what you wish for".

This is funny considering how many times I've heard you rant how other people's hatred of Bush is so strong that they wish for the country to fail so they can prove their point (even though I've not seen any such thing on these forum). So I guess it's "un-American" to wish it on the Bush administration but it's OK to want a liberal administration to fail so you can prove YOUR point?

[Franknputer]

You were expecting all this blather to make sense?

[Anderton]

That's enough Bush for now, it's closing time