Bashing republican\democrats thread
- Thread starter ElectricFetus
- Start date
More of Kerry's nonsense
"First, the president must secure international support. Second, we must commit to a serious effort to train Iraqi security forces. Third, we must carry out a reconstruction plan that brings benefits to the Iraqi people, and fourth, we must take the necessary steps to hold elections next year."
Is this not what Bush is trying to do? Why the hell would one want a continuance of a failed policy?
The bottom line is... THE IRAQI'S DO NOT WANT ANYONE TO RUN THEIR COUNTRY. OR TELL THEM HOW IT SHOULD BE DONE! OR WHAT FORM OF GOVT THEY MUST HAVE!
Get out while you still can.
"First, the president must secure international support. Second, we must commit to a serious effort to train Iraqi security forces. Third, we must carry out a reconstruction plan that brings benefits to the Iraqi people, and fourth, we must take the necessary steps to hold elections next year."
Is this not what Bush is trying to do? Why the hell would one want a continuance of a failed policy?
The bottom line is... THE IRAQI'S DO NOT WANT ANYONE TO RUN THEIR COUNTRY. OR TELL THEM HOW IT SHOULD BE DONE! OR WHAT FORM OF GOVT THEY MUST HAVE!
Get out while you still can.
Gustav -
I wish your standard had been around when I was in school.
Think of Bush's disrespect to the UN: the United Nations, once the illegal invasion was complete, would have moved to fulfill its usual role in a war zone, except the Bush administration didn't want that. The Bush administration sought the UN's cooperation in the form of lackeys and rubber stamps.
It would be morbidly intersting to see what happened if we packed up and disappeared ASAFP. Since we don't get any do-overs, though, the grand-prize question is whether or not that even looks like a good idea. Could I wave my magic wand and make it all go away, I would. But I can't, and the reality is that George W. Bush has irresponsibly and deceptively engaged the United States in a new paradigm of imperial warfare. We have a war on the ground in Iraq that is, according to policy architects, about oil. That war is costing American lives, international lives, and also scads of Iraqi civilian lives.
If you can't see the difference between "Wid us or agin' us" and "We're a world community, so we have to figure this out", I'm not sure what to tell you. The difference seems pretty obvious.
I wish your standard had been around when I was in school.
"Did you get your homework done?"
--A student must first assess the homework, then determine the weight of priority of each section, and then complete them in appropriate order.
Unfortunately, such answers don't work. The next question, of course, is, "When will it be done?" or "Why aren't you doing that now?"--A student must first assess the homework, then determine the weight of priority of each section, and then complete them in appropriate order.
Think of Bush's disrespect to the UN: the United Nations, once the illegal invasion was complete, would have moved to fulfill its usual role in a war zone, except the Bush administration didn't want that. The Bush administration sought the UN's cooperation in the form of lackeys and rubber stamps.
It would be morbidly intersting to see what happened if we packed up and disappeared ASAFP. Since we don't get any do-overs, though, the grand-prize question is whether or not that even looks like a good idea. Could I wave my magic wand and make it all go away, I would. But I can't, and the reality is that George W. Bush has irresponsibly and deceptively engaged the United States in a new paradigm of imperial warfare. We have a war on the ground in Iraq that is, according to policy architects, about oil. That war is costing American lives, international lives, and also scads of Iraqi civilian lives.
If you can't see the difference between "Wid us or agin' us" and "We're a world community, so we have to figure this out", I'm not sure what to tell you. The difference seems pretty obvious.
Economist on economy and elections
Source: The Economist
Link: http://economist.com/world/na/displayStory.cfm?story_id=3262965
Title: "The dismal science bites back"
Date: October 7, 2004
The Economist surveyed 56 academic economists in September, 2004.
(To download a pdf of basic poll results, click here.)
Comment:
I highly recommend this article from across the pond, though it should be noted that the economists surveyed come from the American Economic Review.
I mean, there's more to think about in this one article than in a month's worth of campaigning by the candidates, their parties, and their gaggles of supporters.
In the meantime, globalization is the only plus in this survey for the Bush administration.
_____________________
• The Economist. "The dismal science bites back". October 7, 2004. See http://economist.com/world/na/displayStory.cfm?story_id=3262965
Source: The Economist
Link: http://economist.com/world/na/displayStory.cfm?story_id=3262965
Title: "The dismal science bites back"
Date: October 7, 2004
The Economist surveyed 56 academic economists in September, 2004.
(To download a pdf of basic poll results, click here.)
Comment:
I highly recommend this article from across the pond, though it should be noted that the economists surveyed come from the American Economic Review.
I mean, there's more to think about in this one article than in a month's worth of campaigning by the candidates, their parties, and their gaggles of supporters.
In the meantime, globalization is the only plus in this survey for the Bush administration.
_____________________
• The Economist. "The dismal science bites back". October 7, 2004. See http://economist.com/world/na/displayStory.cfm?story_id=3262965
Last edited:
tiassa fawned:
None of us is its voting citizen.
If you want to be a citizen of the UN, move to the UN and register to vote.
Right. As if that's possible.
Oh, and don't forget to pay your share of the rent.
Yeah! We're UN citizens. We rule!!
Sounds nice, but does the UN actually possess the capability to rend the land on which it sits from the US, and also prevent its legal repossession?
What the heck. Give it a try.
Prove the UN's muscle.
Send Viagra.
The UN is not a sovereign entity.
None of us is its voting citizen.
If you want to be a citizen of the UN, move to the UN and register to vote.
Right. As if that's possible.
Oh, and don't forget to pay your share of the rent.
Yeah! We're UN citizens. We rule!!
Sounds nice, but does the UN actually possess the capability to rend the land on which it sits from the US, and also prevent its legal repossession?
What the heck. Give it a try.
Prove the UN's muscle.
Send Viagra.
The US rules ? In your opinion... In fact, a lot of the world would disagree with that finding in recent years.... Anti Amercan sentiment has increased remarkably since George W. Bush has been in power.
If you don't believe me, travel to any other country and ask them what they think about America at the moment...
I used to feel highly about the U.S. when President Clinton was in power. Now I feel that it is becoming reckless.
Very dangerous to have George W. in power another few years. It can only lead to an increase in terrorism. I'd say that the bigger danger is that the people in power inappropriately handle the situation in North Korea. It will be very easy to spark a very nasty war with Bush in power.
Vote for the guy who you think would most sensibly handle the situation.
If you don't believe me, travel to any other country and ask them what they think about America at the moment...
I used to feel highly about the U.S. when President Clinton was in power. Now I feel that it is becoming reckless.
Very dangerous to have George W. in power another few years. It can only lead to an increase in terrorism. I'd say that the bigger danger is that the people in power inappropriately handle the situation in North Korea. It will be very easy to spark a very nasty war with Bush in power.
Vote for the guy who you think would most sensibly handle the situation.
BushCo? Kerry? SUV gluttony? Your last orgasm? All flashes in the geological pan, baby. Don't forget
It's so easy to get all caught up in the everyday spit and hiss and noise and blank presidential smirks. Isn't it?
It is, after all, incredibly easy to get stuck in the white-hot moment, all screaming elections and bland debates and counterfeit terrorism fears and ugly obesity epidemics and Atkins-approved bubble gum and air/water pollution like an afterthought, all commingling with the mad melodrama of your last bad haircut and the scratch on your precious bumper to the point where we forget the scope of it all, the scale, the macro and the micro and the ebb and flow and the imminent flip of the cosmic switch.
This is how we are wired. This is only what we see. The long view is clearly not our forte, a sense of the celestial a concept we just can't quite taste. We forget, for example, how relatively quickly regimes rise and neoconservative empires fall and populations overturn and how nearly every single human biped now alive and walking and spitting and parallel parking and consuming Big Macs and not watching ABC sitcoms on the planet today will be very much completely dead within a short 100 years, if not sooner.
Pause here. Think about that. A hundred years, everyone now alive, dead. Everyone. You. Me. Bush. Your kids. All dead. Guaranteed ....
(click HERE to read the rest)
By Mark Morford
It's so easy to get all caught up in the everyday spit and hiss and noise and blank presidential smirks. Isn't it?
It is, after all, incredibly easy to get stuck in the white-hot moment, all screaming elections and bland debates and counterfeit terrorism fears and ugly obesity epidemics and Atkins-approved bubble gum and air/water pollution like an afterthought, all commingling with the mad melodrama of your last bad haircut and the scratch on your precious bumper to the point where we forget the scope of it all, the scale, the macro and the micro and the ebb and flow and the imminent flip of the cosmic switch.
This is how we are wired. This is only what we see. The long view is clearly not our forte, a sense of the celestial a concept we just can't quite taste. We forget, for example, how relatively quickly regimes rise and neoconservative empires fall and populations overturn and how nearly every single human biped now alive and walking and spitting and parallel parking and consuming Big Macs and not watching ABC sitcoms on the planet today will be very much completely dead within a short 100 years, if not sooner.
Pause here. Think about that. A hundred years, everyone now alive, dead. Everyone. You. Me. Bush. Your kids. All dead. Guaranteed ....
(click HERE to read the rest)
By Mark Morford
Gustav said:
Should I trust the "Noble Iraqi Insurgent" to actually be fighting for a respectable freedom, I would prefer we quit the country and leave it to them. However, the "Noble Iraqi Insurgent" ... no.
I mean, yes it was a bad idea to gather a bunch of children in the street and give them candy in the middle of a freaking war, but the "Noble Iraqi Insurgent" had to choose to bomb them.
Freedom, baby.
Freedom, baby.
By any means necessary. (glad you see it my way)
Jokes aside. tiassa, who do you trust? I am sure the un has had its share of screw ups. I do not see how the Kerry admin can guarantee the safety of anyone in Iraq. Civilians will continue be to be written off as collateral damage. The insurgents will follow suit.
I personally condemn the slaughter of innocents. However the CANDY INCIDENT was brilliant. Insurgent objectives were met.
Besides, it is parenting problem
The kids mothers should have told them..."never accept candy from strangers"
By any means necessary. (glad you see it my way)
Jokes aside. tiassa, who do you trust? I am sure the un has had its share of screw ups. I do not see how the Kerry admin can guarantee the safety of anyone in Iraq. Civilians will continue be to be written off as collateral damage. The insurgents will follow suit.
I personally condemn the slaughter of innocents. However the CANDY INCIDENT was brilliant. Insurgent objectives were met.
Besides, it is parenting problem
The kids mothers should have told them..."never accept candy from strangers"
The Complete Bushisms
Updated frequently.
By Jacob Weisberg
Updated Monday, Oct. 11, 2004, at 11:49 AM PT
Second Debate Special
"The truth of that matter is, if you listen carefully, Saddam would still be in power if [Kerry] were the president of the United States, and the world would be a lot better off."—St. Louis, Mo., Oct. 8, 2004. (Thanks to Ed Mielnicki.)
"I hear there's rumors on the Internets that we're going to have a draft."—Ibid.
"We all thought there was weapons there, Robin. My opponent thought there was weapons there."—Ibid.
"And what my worry is is that, you know, it [a reimported drug] looks like it's from Canada, and it might be from a third world."—Ibid.
Updated frequently.
By Jacob Weisberg
Updated Monday, Oct. 11, 2004, at 11:49 AM PT
Second Debate Special
"The truth of that matter is, if you listen carefully, Saddam would still be in power if [Kerry] were the president of the United States, and the world would be a lot better off."—St. Louis, Mo., Oct. 8, 2004. (Thanks to Ed Mielnicki.)
"I hear there's rumors on the Internets that we're going to have a draft."—Ibid.
"We all thought there was weapons there, Robin. My opponent thought there was weapons there."—Ibid.
"And what my worry is is that, you know, it [a reimported drug] looks like it's from Canada, and it might be from a third world."—Ibid.
Here is something to think about. Kerry was bashing Bush about supporting outsourcing, but here is a nice fact to remember.
According to the Wall Street Journal, the Kerrys own 32 factories
in Europe and 18 in Asia and the Pacific. In addition, their
company, the Heinz Company, leases four factories in Europe and four in Asia.
Also, they own 27 factories in North America, some of which are in
Mexico and the Caribbean.
According to the Wall Street Journal, the Kerrys own 32 factories
in Europe and 18 in Asia and the Pacific. In addition, their
company, the Heinz Company, leases four factories in Europe and four in Asia.
Also, they own 27 factories in North America, some of which are in
Mexico and the Caribbean.
Yeah, thats the family he married into. I'll bet you that neither Kerry nor his wife set up that situation. I'll bet their foreign factories were in place long before the hemorrhage of jobs/talent from America was even on the horizen. When our economy seemed bulletproof and nobody knew any better. Now, these scumbags KNOW full and well what is happening - but don't give a shit about the future because it will make *their* immediate bottom line better.
Anyways, the fact that your enemy might be guilty of a crime as well - doesn't suddenly make the crime ''ok''.
Anyways, the fact that your enemy might be guilty of a crime as well - doesn't suddenly make the crime ''ok''.
I never said outsourcing was a crime. To be honest, neither you or I know when each factory was set up, so we can't really speculate on the when which may or may not be important, but the fact remains, that they exist and Kerry has a direct payday because of it. Hell, maybe even part of his political funds came because of the cheaper labor.
Maybe I am reading to much into it, but you insinuate that Bush is guilty of a crime.
Actually that was a bit of poetic passion on my part, actually I don't really think that Bush is necessarily guilty of a crime. He is *certainly* guilty of being a moron-boy who makes a good puppet for the intelligent but legitimately evil men behind him, but ''crime''? - maybe not.
Here is a list of the factories with the dates of establishment.
Kerry/Factories including establishment date
Kerry/Factories including establishment date
dixonmassey
Valued Senior Member
Mental health of president questioned
The as-yet unspoken, but pivotal issue to be taken up in the Presidential campaign debates is the mental illnesses from which President Bush suffers. The most concise and frank, yet compassionate account of George W. Bush's multiple mental disorders can be found in the 2004 book-length study by Dr. Justin Frank, Bush on the Couch: Inside the Mind of the President (New York: HarperCollins, 2004). Dr. Frank is a leading psychoanalyst who teaches at George Washington University Medical Center. His professional credentials are impressive, and his in-depth study of the President, based on massive amounts of public documentation—autobiographical and biographical accounts, countless hours of video footage of the President, statements by close associates and relatives, spanning nearly the entirety of George W. Bush's lifetime—presents a compelling case that Mr. Bush is in need of medical assistance.
In his 219-page clinical diagnosis of the President's mental condition, Dr. Frank concluded that Mr. Bush suffers from a range of serious, albeit curable conditions. These include: Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD); untreated and uncured alcoholism (what is frequently referred to in lay terms as "dry drunk"); an omnipotence complex; paranoia; an Oedipal Complex; sadism; a mild form of Tourette's Syndrome; and a diminished capacity to distinguish between reality and fantasy. Those responsible for the upcoming Presidential debates, including the candidates themselves, should accept the fact that no serious policy dialogue can take place, until this issue has been addressed, squarely and publicly. The American people have the right to know that the incumbent President, seeking re-election, is plagued by a number of debilitating mental disorders that have already impacted, gravely, on American national security, and have severely damaged some of our most important international partnerships.
The absurd conditions which U.S. President George W. Bush's representatives have imposed upon rival Presidential candidate Senator John Kerry, is typical of evidence which indicates that the incumbent President's mental health is in a very poor condition. For example, under the Bush team's terms of the agreement for the debate, the two candidates are each forbidden to address questions to one another, or extract pledges from the other. Such terms are not only without precedent in U.S. history of leading political debates since Lincoln-Douglas; they include conditions which imply that, in the opinion of President Bush's handlers, that the President is so near the cracking-point, that any direct exchange between him and the Senator might produce a Bush W. crack-up now, this time before the television screens of the world.
The worst side of this is that Doctor Frank points to an included streak of megalomania among the numerous pathological traits of the President. This suggests an historic parallel to the Goering-Hitler connection in the puppeteer-Cheney relationship to the infinitely mean-spirited, carpet-chewing puppet Bush. The difference is, that the evil Adolf Hitler knew what he was doing, whereas there is evidence from his own published patter which prompts one to wonder whether, or not that W, is now in a mental state like that of a driver drunken with his own delusions, who no longer has a grip on even simple sensual reality. With such a President on stage, it is civilization as a whole which is in danger as long as W's looney finger is in the vicinity of the celebrated "button." If that President could not take the pressure of even a direct statement to him from Senator Kerry, is that Bush a man for which any sane American could actually vote in good conscience, under today's skyrocketting economic and strategic crises?
The as-yet unspoken, but pivotal issue to be taken up in the Presidential campaign debates is the mental illnesses from which President Bush suffers. The most concise and frank, yet compassionate account of George W. Bush's multiple mental disorders can be found in the 2004 book-length study by Dr. Justin Frank, Bush on the Couch: Inside the Mind of the President (New York: HarperCollins, 2004). Dr. Frank is a leading psychoanalyst who teaches at George Washington University Medical Center. His professional credentials are impressive, and his in-depth study of the President, based on massive amounts of public documentation—autobiographical and biographical accounts, countless hours of video footage of the President, statements by close associates and relatives, spanning nearly the entirety of George W. Bush's lifetime—presents a compelling case that Mr. Bush is in need of medical assistance.
In his 219-page clinical diagnosis of the President's mental condition, Dr. Frank concluded that Mr. Bush suffers from a range of serious, albeit curable conditions. These include: Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD); untreated and uncured alcoholism (what is frequently referred to in lay terms as "dry drunk"); an omnipotence complex; paranoia; an Oedipal Complex; sadism; a mild form of Tourette's Syndrome; and a diminished capacity to distinguish between reality and fantasy. Those responsible for the upcoming Presidential debates, including the candidates themselves, should accept the fact that no serious policy dialogue can take place, until this issue has been addressed, squarely and publicly. The American people have the right to know that the incumbent President, seeking re-election, is plagued by a number of debilitating mental disorders that have already impacted, gravely, on American national security, and have severely damaged some of our most important international partnerships.
The absurd conditions which U.S. President George W. Bush's representatives have imposed upon rival Presidential candidate Senator John Kerry, is typical of evidence which indicates that the incumbent President's mental health is in a very poor condition. For example, under the Bush team's terms of the agreement for the debate, the two candidates are each forbidden to address questions to one another, or extract pledges from the other. Such terms are not only without precedent in U.S. history of leading political debates since Lincoln-Douglas; they include conditions which imply that, in the opinion of President Bush's handlers, that the President is so near the cracking-point, that any direct exchange between him and the Senator might produce a Bush W. crack-up now, this time before the television screens of the world.
The worst side of this is that Doctor Frank points to an included streak of megalomania among the numerous pathological traits of the President. This suggests an historic parallel to the Goering-Hitler connection in the puppeteer-Cheney relationship to the infinitely mean-spirited, carpet-chewing puppet Bush. The difference is, that the evil Adolf Hitler knew what he was doing, whereas there is evidence from his own published patter which prompts one to wonder whether, or not that W, is now in a mental state like that of a driver drunken with his own delusions, who no longer has a grip on even simple sensual reality. With such a President on stage, it is civilization as a whole which is in danger as long as W's looney finger is in the vicinity of the celebrated "button." If that President could not take the pressure of even a direct statement to him from Senator Kerry, is that Bush a man for which any sane American could actually vote in good conscience, under today's skyrocketting economic and strategic crises?