Bush Lies
 

Bush is a FUKCTARD! If his mouth is open, he is lying. I despise him. Though I love the scotties Barney and Ms. Beasley!!!!

I mean think about how much uproar Clinton got for lying about getting head from a fat chick. I think W's lies, which resulted in the deaths of tens of thousands, are far severer than an extra marital affair. But, hey, what do I know?

Interestingly, I think the public will support W because I think the majority of Americans want to see all Middle Easterners dead, which is why most Americans do not care about Iraq or what happens to it or why we went there. Yes, they acknowledge the data was false, but they could care a less, which is frightening to me.

For Bush, Iraq Lies May Cloud Iran Truths

Monday , April 17, 2006
By Martin Frost

OAS_AD('Frame1'); on error resume next plugin=(IsObject(CreateObject("ShockwaveFlash.ShockwaveFlash.6")))

Few things are more important to the success of any politician than the perception that his word is good.
During the 26 years that I served as a Congressman from Texas, a number of people supported me even though they did not agree with me on some issues. They would often say they voted for me because my word was good…they knew I was telling them the truth even when we disagreed.
President Bush may well be facing the single most important crisis of his presidency on the issue of potential nuclear weapons for Iran. And he may not enjoy popular support for actions he is considering because many in the public believe his word is not good.
Let’s take a long look at how President Bush has reached this point.
We all know that much of the intelligence he presented to Congress and the country as the rationale for invading Iraq turned out to be false. While this is disturbing to many people, this alone did not put him in his current predicament.
President Bush, in videotaped comments that have been widely broadcast, told the public that we were not spying on Americans without a search warrant. That, of course, turned out to be totally false when the New York Times disclosed that the president had authorized a special program bypassing the law requiring search warrants even in the case of national security.
The president then claimed that such action was justified by his inherent power as commander in chief but the fact remains that he had stated that he was following the Congressional statute when asked specifically about the war on terror.
Then there was the widely publicized presidential statement about the CIA leak investigation when he told the press that he would not tolerate leaking of classified material (the identify of CIA agent Valerie Plame) and would punish anyone found to be involved in such a leak. It turns out that Vice President Cheney and President Bush himself authorized the leaking of previously classified material in an effort to discredit the contention of Plame’s husband former Ambassador Joe Wilson’s that Saddam Hussein had not attempted to buy “yellow cake” from the country of Niger as stated by President Bush.
The Bush administration position was that President Bush specifically declassified portions of a National Intelligent Estimate (NIE) so that Cheney’s former chief of staff could leak the material.
And then there was the report in the April 12 Washington Post that the Bush administration had irrefutable intelligence that Saddam Hussein did not have mobile biological weapons labs two days before the president said in 2003 that we had uncovered proof that such labs existed. The White House claims the President had sufficient intelligence to make this claim which they now admit turned out to be false.
There seems to be a pattern here. President Bush has shaded the truth in a way that makes former President Bill Clinton, who has been criticized by both friends and foes for not always being truthful, seem like the most honest man in town.
Why do I raise these issues of presidential credibility at this particular time? It is not to embarrass the president but rather to raise caution flags about what may happen if the president decides to bomb Iran’s nuclear facilities. Presumably he would seek Congressional concurrence as he and his father both did prior to committing troops against Saddam Hussein. Members of Congress of both parties may be less inclined to accept the president’s word on why such action is necessary given his history of half-truths and misstatements about national security issues in the last five years.
Also, the public may be much more skeptical about what the president says in an effort to justify any potential military action. Polls show that public confidence in the president is at an all-time low and some of this undoubtedly is due to his questionable track record on leveling with the American public.
We want our president to succeed, particularly in matters of national security. A little more truth and a lot less fiction would go a long way toward restoring public confidence that the president’s word is good.

Martin Frost served in Congress from 1979 to 2005, representing a diverse district in the Dallas-Ft. Worth area. He served two terms as chairman of the House Democratic Caucus, the third-ranking leadership position for House Democrats, and two terms as chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. Frost serves as a regular contributor to FOX News Channel and is a scholar in residence at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars in Washington, D.C. He holds a Bachelor of Journalism degree from the University of Missouri and a law degree from the Georgetown Law Center.

http://www.foxnews.com/printer_frien...192069,00.html

Not I
 

I don't want all Middle Easterners dead. Sure, terrorists need to be dealt with, but so do rapists, murderers and child molesters. It's difficult to know that there are people in the world who want to murder as many Americans as humanly possible. :distress:

In the article that Brian posted about the OKC bombing, it said hate groups are rising. That disturbs me because not only do people hate us overseas...we hate our own people. :(

I know this reads silly, but QUIT HATIN'!!!! :mad:

My hope is that the next President will turn things around, but dang, what a job. It will be like someone who works half a day in an office and they totally suck, then, the afternoon person comes in and has to fix everything from the sucky morning person. :rolleyes:

I don't despise him. I am fearful of the fact he's incompetent and relies on his advisors every word. If they told him to nuke North Korea because "they eat small dogs" he would do it. His advisors only look after themselves and the super rich. The average American citizen is not a priority of it's own administration. I think this is one of the main things the United States has in common with Iran, the former regime of Iraq and North Korea too. Bush is weak as a leader and this is why you are seeing so many military situations, his advisors are getting what they want.
And the reason for that is Clinton was a strong leader and the powers that be didn't like it, they wanted to bring him down because he didn't play ball...
Now, now. What were we talking about with "decider" yesterday. W's lies are far more severe..
Most Middle Easteners want to see America fall because of the aggression and oppression the United States has exerted over the region in the 20th Century. The United States created a situation out of it's own greed and capitalism, the Middle East, quite understandably, reacted. With unfortunately 9/11 (arguably) the biggest example of that. The result is American hate of the Middle East which just helps the US administration in its quest to exert more aggression and oppression (with Iran being the focus right now). Is it any wonder Iran wants nuclear weapons? It's scared of being run into the ground and it's natural resources plundered by the world's biggest bully, The US Government.

The comparative of "severe" is "severer," to wit:

Main Entry: se·vere
Pronunciation: s&-'vir
Function: adjective
Inflected Form(s): se·ver·er; -est


http://www.merriamwebster.com/dictionary/severe

If you still do not believe me, type "severer" in WordPerfect, Word, etc. and it will recognize it :cool:

You know, Stalin said if you remove the man you remove the problem.

This certainly worked with JFK. The US launched a full scale assault on Vietnam when LBJ got in, something Kennedy would never have sanctioned. But then again, the Joint Chiefs were the real advisors back then. Their word counted... They got what they wanted, so this remains the same.

But in the modern world, especially in the USA it won't work. Governments don't rely on the call of one man anymore, all they need is his signature. If Bush was stripped of office, assasinated or just came to the end of office it makes no difference. The structure and the people who make the real decisions still remain in power.

I'm not disputing the legitimacy of the word, just the context in which it is used. I think it's just a difference in our interpretation of English. An "Americanism" if you will. :nod: :cool:

I am confused, if I am comparing the severity of W's actions Clinton's actions, wouldn't I use the comparative of severe in that context. I am asking, not being snarky :cool:

No, you are right, it's a perfectly legitimate use of the word "severer". But I would have been given a slap on the wrist and a verbal lecture by my English teacher in school (wayyyyy back :laugh: ) if I had used it in that way.

There's nothing really technically wrong with it. It just doesn't sit very well in that context. I think it's just the way the English language is used in modern society. It's acceptable but the chaps at Oxford and Cambridge might wince a little. :laugh: I remember reading a while back that there are over 400 versions of the English language and a third of them originate in the United States. So you could call "American" a collection of diversified English. :)

I was arguing in front of this Federal Appellate court one time and used "severer" - one of the judges on the panel corrected me. When I replied "the comparative of 'severe' is 'severer'" - he stopped the timing clocks (the red and green lights) and made his clerk haul in the dictionary. Once he looked it up, he said, without comment, please continue counsellor :laugh: I won the case BTW :cool:

Exactly...
 

it is getting worse instead of better.

What isnt suprising me is that Shrub isnt going out of his way of doing anything to help anyone in this country...UNLESS you have oil interests, then you're making a mint! Too bad money will be useless (Except as T.P.) when the nukes start falling out of the sky on us all...At least I will have that to look forward to in the future.

As those Germans in the band Helloween sing, "Save Us"!!!

Ah, so that's why you questioned me! lol.

I wonder whereabouts your judges studied English Language? :lol:

I would have probably let it go without consulting the dictionary. I might have frowned a little though! :laugh:

I would like to go on record that I never stated it was incorrect, merely inappropriate. :blob2: :laugh: :wavey:

p.s. well done on the win! :woohoo:

How true Brian... :nod:

As I said, the more hate the US administration breeds in America, the more it can legitimise it's overseas interests, especially in calling them "the war on terror". The thing a lot of Americans must realise and few do, is that America started the war many years ago, the extremists are just reactionaries in the worst possible way. They fuel the fire that the United States started.

11 years ago...
 

this day, I quit beliving ANYTHING the US government told us...I will never believe anything those sick f**ks in Washington, DC try to hypnotize us into beliving. What's really sick is that people buy into that crap the same way we Fleetwood Mac fans believe that the setlist of a tour will be full of surprises :rolleyes:

Trust me, I am anxiously awaiting the day that Washington DC (And Hollyweird for that matter) get a good ol' tasting of a ICBM w/warhead...But maybe I will luck out an suffer another stroke and bite the dust before then, Saving myself the stress of flicking through the network news asshats who will make Shrub seem like Jesus-Jumped-Up-Christ as he (Once again...BLINDLY I might add) lead us through dark days.

I think you're wrong about this Jason :shrug: people are beginning (finally!) to see just how badly they've been bamboozled. I think we'll see a sea change come November.

Well, I hope so. But, I know so many so called conservatives who despise W., but will never vote for anyone resembling a D, because they think all the D's do is give their tax money to the N word and are weak on defense. Sadly, they may never come around. But, I have changed a few ;)

Also, the polls currently indicate the D's could take the House and the Senate. While I am happy the R's may lose it, I am not really in love with the current state of the D party. But, I'll take the D's in charge anyday :shrug:

are you a barrister or counselor or whatever they call it on YOUR side of the pond?

an enlightened view, you've come a LOOOONG way :laugh: :wavey:
I think its cliche to say only the Dems spend money (or tax) because if you look at (1) Bush's out of control defense spending and (2) Clinton was the only Pres to have a balanced budget (lets not fight about how it came about, the fact remains he is the ONLY President to do it EVER) you begin to see that the old cliches, propaganda if you will, is just not accurate.

As for giving tax $$$ to the minorities.....(which is a misnomer because they are fast becoming majorities!) Its said that the measure of a country is how well it treats its disadvantaged citizens. And most of these programs were designed to help single women with children. Not a bad idea, certainly nothing to be ashamed of.

No. :lol:

Sorry if my post was a bit misleading.. I work in the financial sector these days for a large firm. Actually I might have enjoyed a legal career. There's nothing better than out thinking your opponent and arguing a good case!

But I can be a bit of a political creature at times. I like to watch world affairs and especially at the moment the way the current US administration keeps managing to rule it's own citizens though fear and the lack of understanding (or caring) about interests outside its own country. But I think a lot of people on here have a good grasp of things. :nod:

Thanks for your empathy. I wouldn't have guessed that international folks have sympathy for Americans being lead by the chimp. Thank God it seems a lot of people do not think of him as representative of us! It's 100% true though since he is only representing his base of greedy rich people (no, I'm not saying all rich people are greedy, just the ones who support the shrub) especially those in the oil biz.

My position here has really never changed :shrug:

As for the giving the tax dollars away, I think most people would do so freely if they thought the govt. could stop the abuse. But, they see, as I saw, generations on public assistance and no motivation to get better. Certainly that is not everyone of even the majority on assistance, but that is what people focus on.

Interestingly, if these same so called conservatives would see the vastly more widespread coporate welfare out there, they would be horrified. I mean take a look at your phone bill and the taxes and fees you pay. Mine total almost $20. One of them is so Bellsouth can provide service to rural areas of Georgia. I get that that is a good thing, but the BILLIONS the govt. takes in for that in Georgia alone (not counting the 180 million or so for 911 service, etc. ) is just too much money. Moreover, the govt. goes not subsidize the average store owner when they need to stock their shelves. I realize there has to be a balance and promotion of industgry is a good thing, but this clearly goes way beyond that and it pisses me off.

As I pointed out earlier Suze, I think the perception of the average American has actually gotten better since Bush took office.

I've always worked on the factor that whatever the country is, a person is smart and people, in general, are stupid. Use it with any country and it's always the case. Try it out and you'll see it works.. :laugh:

But I know from talking to others, especially other Brits and Europeans that they in general didn't particularly like Americans. I think there are so many reasons but the main ones being based in three areas 1) America is a very young and new country in historical terms but it has become very prosperous and powerful in a short period of time. 2) There is a perception that America thinks it's the best country in the world and superior to all others i.e. arrogant and "if it's not American or invented in America it ain't ****" 3) Americans are rude and self opinionated (this is mainly a French argument which is hilarious because they invented those characteristics and display them better than anyone!).

My opinion why America is so despised is due to the fact you basically have an Empire right now. It will fall of course, like the Roman and British ones did, and when it does everyone will love you again. Eventually China and maybe India will emerge and take over the throne of most hated country. It's human jealousy really.

BUT, lately the feelings have changed towards Americans for the better and it's thanks to "W". People actually feel sympathy and feel sorry because they can see America is really now a dictatorship run by an uneducated Texan chimp. They take pity on the average American and I've noticed it, especially in London. :)

Ahem :laugh: :laugh:

Actually, I submit even some that voted for W did so not for the tax savings, but because they thought he was better on other issues. Its that whole generalization thing that sets me off ya know :D

We're all lemmings.

in shiny metal boxes

Contestants in a suicidal race.

:cool:

Well...
 

The reason that my a$$ is sitting here in Texas is because of who? That's right...Europeans who came over here from Ireland, Italy, England, Germany, etc. America wouldn't be the prosperous, wealthy, wonderful nation it is...without IMMIGRANTS. It would be a nation made up entirely of Native Americans had nobody come from all over the world.

We *are* the best country. ;) So, is every other country. This world...kinda rules. :) All countries have something great to offer whether it be food, architecture, culture, industry, etc.

Americans are rude. So are the French, English, South Americans, Canadians (Okay, they are rumoured to be the nicest people ever, so...maybe not. :laugh: ), Chinese, Swiss, German, African...etc. We are all human.

I know China is angling for that crown, but neither they nor India are looking at the big picture and they are using what resources they have in a willy nilly way. America exports a lot of raw materials to other industrialized nations including wood to Japan (and I think) steel to China. China in particular is dependent upon our agricultural exports to feed their masses. They cant feed their own population and they are polluting their rivers/skies etc at an astronomical rate. I have a hard time seeing them truly taking over the mantle of Global power, especially if we stopped exporting to them.

I dont know what resources India has, but they are hampered by their cultural beliefs and their population explosion as well. Each of these countries has embraced a Western Lifestyle, but they dont have the proper safeguards in place to ensure a future.

Monkey Boy is singlehandedly trying to dismantle what protections we now have but thank GAWD he only has a short time left. Hopefully the poor sap who has to clean up his messes will be able to undo some of the damage thats been done....

I want examples! Who? ;) What issues was he better on? I can't think of a single one. :shrug:

Im with Suze, I cant think of a SINGLE issue Monkey Boy is better on.....
defense? NO
terror? come ON now!
economics? it is to LAFF!
anything else? pipe dream....

That is not the point and I never asserted W was better on anything. I think many people looked at Kerry and saw a baffoon who bumbled in and out of coherent thought. So, they thought even W is better than that. Also, many people will never vote for a D because they think abortion is the murder of an innocent life and the mother has no right to choose to do that. The correctness of that argument aside, that reason for voting R has nothing to do with greed :shrug:

I maintain to this day that the reason Kerry lost was not because W won - Kerry lost because he had no plan that dramatically differed from W, which BTW makes Kerry only slightly less of a better candidate than W.

Actually...
 

I tend to believe we are all "just bricks in the Wall".

Do you want your pudding now :cool:

I think I would agree that many people wont vote Dem because of the Abortion issue, and that is of course different from greed, but there is a very real argument that a large percentage of the Republican voting base is comprised of business owners and/or investor and/or corporate types who believe the Republican party is sympathetic to their wish of assisting business and NOT social programs geared toward the poor or disadvantaged.

Americans do think America is the best country. Many of us are rude and egocentric. In general, your friends are right. But Americans are spoon fed this propoganda in public school from a young age so you cannot blame us entirely for our point of view. Adults should know better and get their information from various sources before forming an opinion but sadly many do not. Many puppet the voices they hear on Faux news, or some other news source, without thinking critically about policy at all. Also without checking the BBC or another reliable international news source. Why do that when American news is the best and right? I think that is the prevalent albeit false belief.

Anyway, thanks for reminding me of the sympathetic viewpoint that has materialized. :xoxo: I forgot you said that before!

Personally I believe we are a great country with a sh*tty government.

Nope...
 

hate pudding...and I don't care for meat either!

Brian "Mother should I trust the government?" j.

ps-Been on a major Pink Floyd "The Wall" trip the past week or so...Finding a mint copy of the LP Sleeve (Toshiba/EMI Japanese Import) CD version of "The Wall" (Paid $12.99 for it in mint "Sealed" condition, The Toshiba/EMI LP Sleeve versions of "The Wall" usually run upwards of $100.00) has that effect, Love the sleeves for the CD's, Same as the original vinyl sleeve and the CD's look identical to the LP's.

What does this mean? Who else's opinion would someone have? *a real question, not a sarcastic one*

I maintain to this day that Kerry didn't lose. :cool:

And neither did Gore. Ponder for a moment what life would be like if Gore had been elected. :sobs: Amber, get the green issue of Vanity Faire if you can. There is info in there on environmentally friendly companies. Gore has a great essay in there. There's all kinds of eco stuff in it.

:sobs, too:
Really? That sounds good, maybe I will. I don't usually buy VF or the like. I forgot they have articles.

Perhaps not. But, that really is beside the issue here, which is, at least to me, that if W was so bad on the issues, Kerry should have won by a Landslide and that did not happen even if all the voter fraud stuff is true. I think the facts support the election was Kerry's to lose. I get that playing to the middle is how you get the swing votes you need to win. But, I think these swing voters saw no real difference between W and Kerry or at least not enough of one to make a significant difference. Also, Kerry did IMO stupid things like put his war record out there when he knew it was not 100% solid. I get that Kerry went to Nam and W was a pu$$y back at home. But, Kerry got a purple heart for wound that essentially required a band aid for treatment and Rove went to town with that. I think the smarter thing for Kerry to have done was say he served and list his honors and what he got them for rather than asserting a rather W-esq "Mission Accomplished" bravada about it.

I, too, often wonder about Gore. Clinton was not exactly a pioneer in environmental policy, though certainly he was better than W. Would Gore have gone the same route as Clinton - who can say for sure.

Hate to say it...
 

but I hated Al "I created the cheesy-poof, Casual dress Fridays, Mars the planet & winged tampons...Dont forget I created the internet too" Gore, Mainly due to in part to his egomanical wife Tipper, aka "That P.M.R.C. C**t".

"See the building...This album cover says burn building, burn..."-Tipper Gore referring to Def Leppard's "Pyromania" album cover during a congressional meeting over "obscene music lyrics"...Yeah Tipper, what a tool!!!