Good riddance, President Bush!

[Dave B]

I'm just listening to George W. Bush's incoherent ranting and mumbling (no seriously, it's scary to think he was ever in charge) during his final ever press conference as President, and remembering just how disasterous his time in office has been.

His handling of the economy, his response to Katrina, Guantanamo Bay and the allegations of torture, his inability to master public speaking, his denial of climate change, his vetoing of funding stem cell research, and most of all his religious crusades dressed up as a war on trrrrr.

Will anybody miss him when he's gone? Has anybody got a good word to say about him?

[Dave B]

PS, I thought his public appearances were bad when he had a speechwriter and an autocue, but this performance is plain embarrassing :eek:

[steve_spackman]

I'm just listening to George W. Bush's incoherent ranting and mumbling (no seriously, it's scary to think he was ever in charge) during his final ever press conference as President, and remembering just how disasterous his time in office has been.

His handling of the economy, his response to Katrina, Guantanamo Bay and the allegations of torture, his inability to master public speaking, his denial of climate change, his vetoing of funding stem cell research, and most of all his religious crusades dressed up as a war on trrrrr.

Will anybody miss him when he's gone? Has anybody got a good word to say about him?

from william rivers pitt

To: George W. Bush
From: Your biggest fan
Re: Your imminent unemployment

Greetings, Mr. Bush. I was sorry to hear about the passing of your cat, India. Eighteen years is a long time for a cat - my mother has one that's 20 and still going strong, if you can believe it - and I'm sure India had a comfortable, caring life with your family.
I got to spend part of last weekend with an old friend of mine. He's a bit older than 18, and he's also a troop who recently rotated back from a tour in Falluja. He just had a baby daughter, and he will be sent to Afghanistan before too much longer. He did his duty in Iraq, dealt his share of death and saw his friends die or be ripped to shreds right in front of him.
He was hollow in a lot of places that had been full before he went to Iraq. He was not the same man we'd said farewell to. But he was alive, and if he survives his upcoming Afghanistan tour, maybe he will get the chance to have a long, comfortable, caring life with his family, just like little India.
At present, my friend's life is the polar opposite of comfortable, and he still has Kabul waiting for him just over the horizon. His life is the way it is because of you, Mr. Bush. You have been the single greatest influence upon his time in this world; you put him over there and hollowed him out, and because of you, it's about to happen again. You were the single biggest influence upon the lives of every person he knew over there, every person he saw over there, and every person he killed over there.
It's funny. I was thinking the other day about when I marched in one of the first large-scale post-inauguration protests against you in Washington, DC. It was May of 2001, it was The Voter's Rights March to Restore Democracy, and it was a few thousand people shouting down the unutterably ruinous Supreme Court decision which unleashed, just as we then feared, everything that has since come to pass. "Not my president!" we bellowed. "Not my president!"
It's funny because that memory seems so very quaint to me now. A stolen election? Pfff. To paraphrase a different president, Americans get scarier stuff than that free with their breakfast cereal nowadays. Thanks to you, governor.
My All-Time-Grand-Prize-Bull-Goose-Gold-Medal-Winning Top Five list of what you've done, in no particular order, and in my own humble opinion:

1. You were warned by the outgoing administration when you first took office. You were warned by the Russians. You were warned by the Israelis. You were warned by the Germans. You were warned in a memo given to you by your own National Security Adviser. You were warned by men like Richard Clarke. You were warned all those times that Osama bin Laden intended to strike the United States, and still the Towers came down.
(All those people working on that Legacy Project of yours should go back to bed, by the way; they are trying to salvage the unsalvageable. You protected us, they claim? Ha. You're 0-1 on terrorism and 0-2 on war)

2. Less than a month after those Towers came down, a reporter asked what you thought we should do. "We need to counter the shockwave of the evildoer," you replied, "by having individual rate cuts accelerated and by thinking about tax rebates." I happened to be watching television and heard you say that live into a camera. The only reason I didn't throw up on myself is because my teeth were clenched too tightly for the vomit to pass my lips. I swallowed hard, grabbed a pen, and wrote down what you said and when you said it. It was October 4, 2001, just after nine in the morning. You'd like people to remember you standing on that pile of rubble in Manhattan, you with the bullhorn and the heroic pose. I, however, will always remember you pitching tax cuts to a devastated nation while a pall of poison smoke still hung in the air over Ground Zero.

3. A few years later, you wanted hundreds of billions of dollars diverted from other areas of the federal budget and into your war in Iraq. You took more than $70 billion out of the budget used by the Army Corps of Engineers in Louisiana to fund the repair and maintenance of the New Orleans levee system. Katrina struck not long after you took that money and poured it into the sand, and the levees failed for lack of funded upkeep. Through this, along with your disinterested disinclination to help your own countrymen in their hour of darkest need, you played the very last note for that old, sad, lost American city. Reflected in those actions are the same budgetary priorities that motivated you to turn Walter Reed Army Medical Center, the hospital where I was born, into an abattoir of suffering and neglect for the wounded soldiers you tore apart for a lie.

4. You let Dick "Crazy-Eyes" Cheney do whatever the hell he wanted to whomever he wanted whenever and wherever he wanted, and be damned to the damned old Constitution anyway. Cheney once said the vice president's office was not part of the same branch of government as the president's office, and he said it with his bare face hanging out the whole time. Why? He didn't want to give any of his official papers over to the National Archives, as mandated by at least two federal laws. Nope, he said, my office is in Congress today, sorry about that, but be sure to come on back after you drop dead. Or words to that effect. That's about one zillionth of a percent of what he did, because you let him pick himself to be your boss.

5. On July 19, 2006, you vetoed H.R. 810. On June 20, 2007, you vetoed S. 5. Both vetoes killed legislation aimed at funding and vastly enhancing the reach and scope of stem cell research in America. The father of someone I know died of bone marrow cancer just after that first veto; he was adopted, no family could be located, so no donor match for a bone marrow transplant could be found. With stem cell therapy, doctors could have taken his own marrow and grown enough healthy, matching marrow to save his life. Two other people I know have diabetes, like millions of Americans. Stem cell research could offer them a cure. Someone else I know has multiple sclerosis, and stem cell research could very well help her, too. She'd write you a thank-you note for those vetoes, but her right hand doesn't work so well anymore. She's getting better with her left hand, so maybe that note can get written next year.
Also, you defied lawfully issued subpoenas and potentially set a precedent that could shatter the separation of powers. You told the American people Iraq was in possession of 26,000 liters of anthrax, 38,000 liters of botulinum toxin, 500 tons - which is one million pounds - of sarin, mustard and VX nerve agent, 30,000 missiles to deliver the stuff, mobile biological weapons labs, al-Qaeda connections and uranium from Niger for use in a robust nuclear weapons program, even though all of that was a lie. You made a joking video about not being able to find any of it. You outed a deep-cover CIA agent who was running a network designed to keep weapons of mass destruction out of the hands of terrorists, and you did so because her ambassador husband told the truth about you in the public prints.
You gave away our right to privacy by sending the NSA to spy on us. You turned us all into torturers and butchers in the eyes of the world with your decision to use Abu Ghraib prison the same way Saddam Hussein once did. You tried to appoint Henry Kissinger to lead the investigation into 9/11. You turned the entire Justice Department into a carnival of political hackery. You championed the economic policies and deregulation fantasies that have left the financial stability of millions in ashes. You used the threat of terrorism against your own people in order to give yourself political cover. You killed hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of people who did you nor us no harm.
You did all this, and so much more.

[steve_spackman]

From a certain perspective, one could argue that you have been the most successful president the country has ever seen. Think about it, because according to your definition of "success," it's true. You came into office looking to make your friends richer, and to fulfill as best you could your most overriding personal belief: that government is the problem, so government must be damaged and denuded to the point of impotence. Through your tax cuts and your two vastly expensive boondoggle wars, you made your friends rich. By unleashing Mr. Cheney and your other minions, you tore the Constitution to shreds and tatters. You have achieved both goals in smashing style, so from that certain perspective, you have triumphed. Could you also, from the proper perspective, be considered our greatest president?
Perhaps, someday, if we make it so.
It will be in the best interests of many powerful people if we as a nation simply dismiss you and forget you ever happened. A lot of news media people want us to forget you, because in forgetting you, we would forget the media's vast complicity in your actions and misdeeds. A lot of rich people making new fortunes from war profiteering and defense contracts want us to forget they and you even exist, as it would make it possible for them to do it all again someday. A lot of politicians who stapled themselves to you would simply adore it if we forgot about you. The Republican Party would be forever in our debt if we forgot about you.
No. We will not forget you. We will remember.
We the people are going to save you from ignominious oblivion. We will remember. You could be the president who doomed America, the worst president of all time, but we must not, will not let that happen. You will be remembered differently, because we will hold the memory of you high, and behold you, and say, "Never, never, never again." We have tasted the soot and smelled the blood on the wind; we have seen how fragile our way of government is when placed in the hands of low men such as you, and because of that, you will be remembered for all time.
Your greatness will be defined by how we rise to overcome and undo what you have done. Your greatness will stand forever if we never, ever forget the hard, bitter lessons you taught us. We are responsible for this republic, for our Constitution, and for each other. We are our brother's keeper. You taught us that by becoming our Cain. You nearly slew us, but here we stand, and we defy the place in history you would relegate us to. We defy you, and by doing so, we rise.
Something like you must never again be allowed to happen to this country, and if we save ourselves by preventing you from ever happening again, your greatness is assured. You are the tallest of all possible warnings, and a promise all of us must solemnly and stalwartly keep. If we can damn you to the past, we will save our own future.
May you live forever, you son of a bitch.

[christophulus]

Will anybody miss him when he's gone? Has anybody got a good word to say about him?

I was going to mention that I'll miss the numerous opportunities that satirists get to make fun of him, which is pretty much all he's good for, but Steve's post overshadows that a bit :s

[Firstgear]

A good word........I liked his "cheese-eating-surrender-monkeys" line.

[Eki]

A good word...He showed he has good reflexes when he ducked a shoe, not only once but twice.

[tolis]

Βye bye George!!!!
ouou...

[Hazell B]

.... this performance is plain embarrassing :eek:

".... and sometimes you misunderestimated me ...."

No George, we always knew you were one brick short of a White House :mark:

[Hondo]

It's gratifying to read the constructive criticisms of those that have achieved perfection not only within their personal lives, but also in the governance of their own localities and economies.

How many Katrina bashers have lived in Louisiana? How many were here for Katrina? How many know that corruption at the state and local levels for decades along with modifications by the Corp of Engineers that allowed silt and sand deposits to wash away and a godawful big storm was the root cause of the levee failures? How many know that the FEMA and the Feds were ready to go, waiting for the ok from the govenor, who decides whats needed, where to stage, and where to begin? Not only was this information not forthcoming from the governor's office, but the state police were stopping FEMA relief convoys on the order of the govenor. People were told to evacuate before the flooding. The mayor did little beforehand and did little afterwards beyond crying on TV about what a slaughterhouse the Superdome had become. It hadn't. The mayor could have appropriated every school bus in the city (yes, the same buses you saw under water in the photos) to move people out of there, but he didn't. Most of the victims you saw on the news never did anything positive for themselves in their entire sorry lives and continued that tradition before, during, and after the storm. Once they finally had a green light, FEMA moved in and did a pretty good job, all things considered.

Hurricanes are a fact of life on the gulf coast and after long periods of not being hit, or being hit but suffering nothing more than some minor flooding and wind damage, you become complacent and hurricanes are viewed as an inconvience. Finally a real storm hits and all hell breaks loose, like Galveston-Houston last year. Oddly enough, there was a forced evacuation of New Orleans last year ahead of a storm and the same people that were bitching about nobody coming to get them after Katrina, were bitching that they were being forced to leave this time.

[Mark in Oshawa]

It's funny. Fiero's post is the only one on the thread not ripping Bush apart. Kicking a man when he is down is the surest sign that maybe they just didn't like the man because he didn't jive with their libreal notions.

And they say us conservative's are nasty? Last time I posted on Obama, I was willing to praise his good points while pointing out he wont be walking on water. I have also been critical of Bush at times also. I very much find this constant Bush bashing of the last 4 years rather silly but hey, that's me. He did nothing but wish Obama well and praised his ability to communicate. I think George was a guy thrust into a unique place in history and he came up wanting. That's fine...he never gave up....as for most of the criticisms of what he did or didn't do, much of it is hyperbole and politically motivated and I think Bush wont be the worst president in history. 29 years after Jimmy Carter left office, he still holds that record. IF it wasn't for catching Lighting in a Bottle with the Camp David accords, he would be a complete zero.
It's gratifying to read the constructive criticisms of those that have achieved perfection not only within their personal lives, but also in the governance of their own localities and economies.

How many Katrina bashers have lived in Louisiana? How many were here for Katrina? How many know that corruption at the state and local levels for decades along with modifications by the Corp of Engineers that allowed silt and sand deposits to wash away and a godawful big storm was the root cause of the levee failures? How many know that the FEMA and the Feds were ready to go, waiting for the ok from the govenor, who decides whats needed, where to stage, and where to begin? Not only was this information not forthcoming from the governor's office, but the state police were stopping FEMA relief convoys on the order of the govenor. People were told to evacuate before the flooding. The mayor did little beforehand and did little afterwards beyond crying on TV about what a slaughterhouse the Superdome had become. It hadn't. The mayor could have appropriated every school bus in the city (yes, the same buses you saw under water in the photos) to move people out of there, but he didn't. Most of the victims you saw on the news never did anything positive for themselves in their entire sorry lives and continued that tradition before, during, and after the storm. Once they finally had a green light, FEMA moved in and did a pretty good job, all things considered.

Hurricanes are a fact of life on the gulf coast and after long periods of not being hit, or being hit but suffering nothing more than some minor flooding and wind damage, you become complacent and hurricanes are viewed as an inconvience. Finally a real storm hits and all hell breaks loose, like Galveston-Houston last year. Oddly enough, there was a forced evacuation of New Orleans last year ahead of a storm and the same people that were bitching about nobody coming to get them after Katrina, were bitching that they were being forced to leave this time.

Funny how Alabama and Mississippi on the Gulf Coast took a worse hit and the whole city of Gulfport was made into rubble...and that part of the country got back on its feet? mmmm could it have something to do with the ineptitude of City and State politicians? Just a thought eh?

For all you people in Europe...if you knew what New Orleans and Louisana were like before Katrina, and how badly the city and state were ran then...you would heistate to dump all of THAT on Bush. As weak as he looked on this mess....there is a lot of blame to be shared.

[Hondo]

It's funny. Fiero's post is the only one on the thread not ripping Bush apart. Kicking a man when he is down is the surest sign that maybe they just didn't like the man because he didn't jive with their libreal notions.

And they say us conservative's are nasty? Last time I posted on Obama, I was willing to praise his good points while pointing out he wont be walking on water. I have also been critical of Bush at times also. I very much find this constant Bush bashing of the last 4 years rather silly but hey, that's me. He did nothing but wish Obama well and praised his ability to communicate. I think George was a guy thrust into a unique place in history and he came up wanting. That's fine...he never gave up....as for most of the criticisms of what he did or didn't do, much of it is hyperbole and politically motivated and I think Bush wont be the worst president in history. 29 years after Jimmy Carter left office, he still holds that record. IF it wasn't for catching Lighting in a Bottle with the Camp David accords, he would be a complete zero.

Funny how Alabama and Mississippi on the Gulf Coast took a worse hit and the whole city of Gulfport was made into rubble...and that part of the country got back on its feet? mmmm could it have something to do with the ineptitude of City and State politicians? Just a thought eh?

For all you people in Europe...if you knew what New Orleans and Louisana were like before Katrina, and how badly the city and state were ran then...you would heistate to dump all of THAT on Bush. As weak as he looked on this mess....there is a lot of blame to be shared.

A fair amount of Katrina refugees got evacuated to states with better welfare benefits and decided, much to the dismay of their hosts, to stay there. In addition to the ineptitude of local government, the locals didn't want jobs so the contractors had to bring people in from other parts of the country with bonuses and other incentives. I know people that went down there and made piles of money. Although it's still a high crime area with a high murder rate, these guys weren't the kind to be intimidated by gangsta acting punks. Ultimately, these refugees defrauded FEMA for millions.

[ioan]

It's gratifying to read the constructive criticisms of those that have achieved perfection not only within their personal lives, but also in the governance of their own localities and economies.

How many Katrina bashers have lived in Louisiana? How many were here for Katrina? How many know that corruption at the state and local levels for decades along with modifications by the Corp of Engineers that allowed silt and sand deposits to wash away and a godawful big storm was the root cause of the levee failures? How many know that the FEMA and the Feds were ready to go, waiting for the ok from the govenor, who decides whats needed, where to stage, and where to begin? Not only was this information not forthcoming from the governor's office, but the state police were stopping FEMA relief convoys on the order of the govenor. People were told to evacuate before the flooding. The mayor did little beforehand and did little afterwards beyond crying on TV about what a slaughterhouse the Superdome had become. It hadn't. The mayor could have appropriated every school bus in the city (yes, the same buses you saw under water in the photos) to move people out of there, but he didn't. Most of the victims you saw on the news never did anything positive for themselves in their entire sorry lives and continued that tradition before, during, and after the storm. Once they finally had a green light, FEMA moved in and did a pretty good job, all things considered.

Hurricanes are a fact of life on the gulf coast and after long periods of not being hit, or being hit but suffering nothing more than some minor flooding and wind damage, you become complacent and hurricanes are viewed as an inconvience. Finally a real storm hits and all hell breaks loose, like Galveston-Houston last year. Oddly enough, there was a forced evacuation of New Orleans last year ahead of a storm and the same people that were bitching about nobody coming to get them after Katrina, were bitching that they were being forced to leave this time.

:up:


As for the losers who are on continuously attacking J.W.Bush, you better talk when you get at least to the level of president of your backyard garbage dump. :rolleyes:

[anthonyvop]

I am not optimistic for my country's future.
I fear Obama's term as President will make Jimmy Carter's look good.

After 8 years of what will go down in history as one of the greatest presidencies in U.S. history Obama's pacifist and socialist ideals do not bode well.

[Hondo]

Dear President Bush,

I too, didn't agree with everything you did either. However, a man in your position will never be able to please everybody.

You catch a lot of heat for your "war on terror". People forget that war on terror also required the approval of the Congress and the Senate, many of whom now can't seem to remember voting for it. I know that from the time a herd of thugs stole 4 airplanes and crashed 3 of them into buildings and you started the second war on terror, no more major attacks have occurred on our soil. I'm sorry but I can't give you credit for starting the war on terror. The Americans on that fourth aircraft that tried to retake the plane and ultimately thwarted the attack on the last target, dying in the process, actually started the war on terror. I know that you walk freely, in the light of day, keeping scheduled appointments while Mr. Bin Laden skulks in caves and the leader of Hamas who declares loudly they won't be cowed by Israel in Gaza, hides in Damascus.

I wasn't for the invasion of Iraq either but here again, people forget that the Congress and Senate had to sign off on that one too. In fact, invading Iraq was approved by a wider margin than your father got to throw Saddam out of Kuwait. I think most of us in the western world thought the liberation of Iraq would mirror the liberation of Paris in WW II. Who would have thought they would run wild like a bunch of children at a day care center when the adults leave the room. I've talked to the sons of co-workers that had been to Iraq. They tell me the Iraqis were happy about Saddam being gone and laugh about all the Iraqi babies being named "George". They tell me about how most of the "insurgents" are from out of town and not Iraqi at all. They wonder why the media doesn't report that side of it.

While your tax cuts may have helped your "rich buddies", they also helped me. The many good years of the economy allowed my investments to grow to the point I was able to pull enough out to buy my house and land, free and clear. I don't mind your friends being rich, the fact that they are allowed to be rich means that I, with a lot of effort and some good luck, may become rich someday also. It's a good thing to have wealthy people and companies because I've never been offered a job by a poor man.

It's a shame that folks don't understand about Gitmo. I know your first choice was to use hoods to hide our faces, saw their heads off with a knife, and upload the videos to YouTube. When you found out that had already been done, Gitmo was the best you could come up with on short notice. By now, your replacement knows exactly whats at Gitmo and you can bet he won't be closing it down too soon either. He also knows there are some that you are willing to turn loose but because their own countries don't want them back, they have nowhere to go.

Anyway, thanks for the good things you've done.

[Roamy]

very well said Fiero - I will be honored to sign this with you!!

[Mark in Oshawa]

Ioan...I don't think you have to be a successfully elected politician to have opinion on Bush...but it has to be the most scrutinized and unloved position on the planet. The heat Obama is going to face in the next 4 years will change him in ways no one can guess.

[Mark in Oshawa]

Dear President Bush,

I too, didn't agree with everything you did either. However, a man in your position will never be able to please everybody.

You catch a lot of heat for your "war on terror". People forget that war on terror also required the approval of the Congress and the Senate, many of whom now can't seem to remember voting for it. I know that from the time a herd of thugs stole 4 airplanes and crashed 3 of them into buildings and you started the second war on terror, no more major attacks have occurred on our soil. I'm sorry but I can't give you credit for starting the war on terror. The Americans on that fourth aircraft that tried to retake the plane and ultimately thwarted the attack on the last target, dying in the process, actually started the war on terror. I know that you walk freely, in the light of day, keeping scheduled appointments while Mr. Bin Laden skulks in caves and the leader of Hamas who declares loudly they won't be cowed by Israel in Gaza, hides in Damascus.

I wasn't for the invasion of Iraq either but here again, people forget that the Congress and Senate had to sign off on that one too. In fact, invading Iraq was approved by a wider margin than your father got to throw Saddam out of Kuwait. I think most of us in the western world thought the liberation of Iraq would mirror the liberation of Paris in WW II. Who would have thought they would run wild like a bunch of children at a day care center when the adults leave the room. I've talked to the sons of co-workers that had been to Iraq. They tell me the Iraqis were happy about Saddam being gone and laugh about all the Iraqi babies being named "George". They tell me about how most of the "insurgents" are from out of town and not Iraqi at all. They wonder why the media doesn't report that side of it.

While your tax cuts may have helped your "rich buddies", they also helped me. The many good years of the economy allowed my investments to grow to the point I was able to pull enough out to buy my house and land, free and clear. I don't mind your friends being rich, the fact that they are allowed to be rich means that I, with a lot of effort and some good luck, may become rich someday also. It's a good thing to have wealthy people and companies because I've never been offered a job by a poor man.

It's a shame that folks don't understand about Gitmo. I know your first choice was to use hoods to hide our faces, saw their heads off with a knife, and upload the videos to YouTube. When you found out that had already been done, Gitmo was the best you could come up with on short notice. By now, your replacement knows exactly whats at Gitmo and you can bet he won't be closing it down too soon either. He also knows there are some that you are willing to turn loose but because their own countries don't want them back, they have nowhere to go.

Anyway, thanks for the good things you've done.

The only thing I would add is Dubya...if you only communicated your ideas with a little more style, panache and coherence, you may not have made any more friends..but you certainly would not be getting kicked by people who had no idea of what choices that you were being asked to consider on a daily basis.

I am not an American...no plan on being one...but I do have to think being President is the toughest political position in the world and it will be interesting to see how Obama follows far more of your template than your critics believe.

Don't be falling off the mountain bike now ya hear?

[Rudy Tamasz]

Before badmouthing Dubya most non-American folks should look at their own countries and fix the mess they are in.

From my point of view, he wasn't the best American president but he wasn't the worst either. He lacked intellectual firepower but he had a pretty good political instinct. He was quite honest for a politician and wasn't afraid of doing things when he believed that was right for his country. He may not have addressed economic issues very well and wasted tons of money but some of that can be attributed to the fact that he had to sit on a huge bubble inflated by Bubba Clintn and other hippies and was unlucky to see it burst under him.

[Eki]

Before badmouthing Dubya most non-American folks should look at their own countries and fix the mess they are in.

Like Americans looked at their own country and fixed their own messes before badmouthing Iraq, Iran, North Korea etc.?

[Rudy Tamasz]

Like Americans looked at their own country and fixed their own messes before badmouthing Iraq, Iran, North Korea etc.?

I don't see too many threads round here focused on interdenominational violence in Iraq, public executions in Iran and famine in NK, initiated by Americans or anybody else.

[BDunnell]

Before badmouthing Dubya most non-American folks should look at their own countries and fix the mess they are in.

Why?

[Dave B]

As for the losers who are on continuously attacking J.W.Bush, you better talk when you get at least to the level of president of your backyard garbage dump. :rolleyes:
Does this mean that in future - to avoid accusations of hypocrisy - you'll refrain from criticizing any F1 drivers until you too have won a motorsport championship of some kind? ;)


Dear President Bush,
I know that you walk freely, in the light of day, keeping scheduled appointments while Mr. Bin Laden skulks in caves and the leader of Hamas who declares loudly they won't be cowed by Israel in Gaza, hides in Damascus.
There's a passage in Stephen Fry's excellent recent book on America in which he describes how, in an everyday sense, Al Qaeda have already won. One day of attacks has forced the USA to spend billions on security and has turned the country from the land of the free to the land of the paranoid. Your borders are more heavily patrolled and defended than ever before, your airports are hell on earth for foreign visitors, and if your president wishes to "walk freely in the light of day" he'd better make sure he's accompanied by a huge amount of special forces.


It's a shame that folks don't understand about Gitmo.
You're right: folks don't understand. So I'd be most grateful if you could explain how holding people prisoner for years without charge (let alone trial!) is in any way fitting behaviour for a country which claims to be the champion of freedom and democracy.

[Rudy Tamasz]

Why?

Let me answer you in this way. There's a section in my company physically located in a different building and therefore detached from the rest of the staff. People from that section are the perennial topic of all rumors and gossip at the watrecooler and during the lunch in the cafeteria. They have a reputation of being unprofessional, unloyal, arrogant, stupid and many other things. The reputation is so established that I would have believed it had I not worked in the same section for four years before moving on. Now eveybody tells me: 'Wow, you're normal. How could you work with those types for so long?' And the truth is, they are no worse than all other staff members. They are only detached geographically and you call them names behind their backs without risking anything. And some less than perfect people from this building use them as a soft target for badmouthing just to divert everybody's attention from their own shortcomings.

Same thing about Dubya and Americans. Why bother fixing your problems, if you can just point your finger and say: 'You think I'm bad? Look, Dubya misunderpronounced yet another word and Condy slammed another innocent country in her interview'.

That said, everybody's free to express his/her opinion. But in the words of the immortal Nigel Tufnel (or was it David St. Hubbins?), there's such a fine line between clever and stupid.

[ShiftingGears]

Good riddance.

[Eki]

I don't see too many threads round here focused on interdenominational violence in Iraq, public executions in Iran and famine in NK, initiated by Americans or anybody else.The US has been badmouthing them even before the Iraq war, calling them among other things "the Axis of Evil" and their leaders "madmen", and slinging unsubstantiated accusations at least towards Iraq (where are the WMDs?)

[Eki]

You're right: folks don't understand. So I'd be most grateful if you could explain how holding people prisoner for years without charge (let alone trial!) is in any way fitting behaviour for a country which claims to be the champion of freedom and democracy.
Yes, and now they are releasing at least some of them and ask other countries (including Finland) to take care of them. They say they are not terrorists or dangerous. If they are not terrorists or dangerous, what the heck were they doing in Gitmo? I don't mind Finland taking them, but the US should at least pay for their living here.

[Hondo]

Does this mean that in future - to avoid accusations of hypocrisy - you'll refrain from criticizing any F1 drivers until you too have won a motorsport championship of some kind? ;)


There's a passage in Stephen Fry's excellent recent book on America in which he describes how, in an everyday sense, Al Qaeda have already won. One day of attacks has forced the USA to spend billions on security and has turned the country from the land of the free to the land of the paranoid. Your borders are more heavily patrolled and defended than ever before, your airports are hell on earth for foreign visitors, and if your president wishes to "walk freely in the light of day" he'd better make sure he's accompanied by a huge amount of special forces.

The President does walk freely in the light of day and his schedule of public appearances is no secret. He has the normal Secret Service security detail with him whether he wants them or not. There would be nothing especially difficult for an aspiring martyr-to-be to take him out. It only becomes difficult if you want to make a clean getaway.

[ioan]

Ioan...I don't think you have to be a successfully elected politician to have opinion on Bush...but it has to be the most scrutinized and unloved position on the planet. The heat Obama is going to face in the next 4 years will change him in ways no one can guess.

Hey, I was rather implying having responsibilities of any level (thus the use of "garbage dump").

What is laughable is that people who never made it further as highschool calling dumb someone who has far more and higher education and who managed to become the president of the most powerful country in the world.

[ioan]

Why?

Why not?

[Hondo]

You're right: folks don't understand. So I'd be most grateful if you could explain how holding people prisoner for years without charge (let alone trial!) is in any way fitting behaviour for a country which claims to be the champion of freedom and democracy.

Thats why they are held at Gitmo, to avoid all of that. Their status as prisoners is one of a military nature, not that of one arrested by civilian police. Nothing terribly out of the ordinary for this type of conflict. Perhaps you could write the State Department and offer to put them up at your house.

[Hondo]

Yes, and now they are releasing at least some of them and ask other countries (including Finland) to take care of them. They say they are not terrorists or dangerous. If they are not terrorists or dangerous, what the heck were they doing in Gitmo? I don't mind Finland taking them, but the US should at least pay for their living here.

Their own countries don't want them back. That alone should give one pause for thought. If Finland doesn't want to pay for the poor dears, don't take them. Maybe you could take one and the both of you could spend nights in front of the fire, laughing about what a schmuck GW is.

Most of the ones they are willing to release were wannabe, in-training terrorists that rolled over and told all they knew about their buddies and their organizations. The fact that they were picked up in the training camps in the first place is why their own countries don't want them back.

[steve_spackman]

Hey, I was rather implying having responsibilities of any level (thus the use of "garbage dump").

What is laughable is that people who never made it further as highschool calling dumb someone who has far more and higher education and who managed to become the president of the most powerful country in the world.

i didnt realise Bush went to school..could of fooled me..he cant even string one sentence together

most powerful country in the world?? in what sense is the US the most powerful country in the world.

[Hondo]

By the way Mr. President, have you noticed how many folks blamed you for oil prices rising and how few are blaming you for oil prices falling?

[steve_spackman]

By the way Mr. President, have you noticed how many folks blamed you for oil prices rising and how few are blaming you for oil prices falling?

so Bush made the oil prices fall did he?

[Hondo]

i didnt realise Bush went to school..could of fooled me..he cant even string one sentence together

most powerful country in the world?? in what sense is the US the most powerful country in the world.

Sure he went to school. Thats where he learned to start a sentence with an uppercase letter and end it with some form of punctuation mark.

No need to worry about the USA, it's power, or lack thereof, although it must have some power since we get the blame for all the problems in the world. We get blamed if we meddle, we get criticised for not meddling, raked over the coals for supporting, castigated for not supporting, blasted for attacking, blasted for defending, hung out to dry for being there in the first place, and scorned for leaving too soon.

Soon you'll need fret no more. CIC Obama will be bringing his troops home, from everywhere, to conquer, occupy, and colonize the USA. The world will be safe from our meddling while Obama and his Demoractic Posse break the country to the benign fist of full blown socialism. It will be interesting to see if we will go bleating willingly into the sheep pens for voluntary emasculation as have our British and European brothers or will disobedience be afoot?

Putin will be smiling.

[Hondo]

so Bush made the oil prices fall did he?

I don't know if he did or didn't, just like I don't know if he made them rise or not. I know nobody is blaming him for the falling prices.

[SOD]

"recession at home, ridicule abroad"

sums it up, perfectly.

[steve_spackman]

Sure he went to school. Thats where he learned to start a sentence with an uppercase letter and end it with some form of punctuation mark.

No need to worry about the USA, it's power, or lack thereof, although it must have some power since we get the blame for all the problems in the world. We get blamed if we meddle, we get criticised for not meddling, raked over the coals for supporting, castigated for not supporting, blasted for attacking, blasted for defending, hung out to dry for being there in the first place, and scorned for leaving too soon.

Soon you'll need fret no more. CIC Obama will be bringing his troops home, from everywhere, to conquer, occupy, and colonize the USA. The world will be safe from our meddling while Obama and his Demoractic Posse break the country to the benign fist of full blown socialism. It will be interesting to see if we will go bleating willingly into the sheep pens for voluntary emasculation as have our British and European brothers or will disobedience be afoot?

Putin will be smiling.

sounds like Paranoia to me!!

The main impediment is the archaic myth that( along with the American Dream..they need to wake up and see things for what they really are) the US is best in everything. This myth has been carefully cultivated by the US media and by Hollywood. Looking at the USSR we used to call it brainwashing. US brainwashing has been infinitely more sophisticated and effective.

What amazes me is that Clinton was impeached for sexual misconduct that, overall, had nothing to do with anything except bad behaviour of two adults. Bush and Cheney, plus a host of neocons, screw up most of the modern world -- socially and economically -- and also "out" spies and gets thousdands of people killed, but in the end hardly anyone demands public repentence. The lesson: do anything, but don't get caught in sexual misconduct. Ridiculous!

[Hondo]

That wasn't paranoia, that was distaste for a system that discourges individual effort.

And your definition of the American Dream is?

[steve_spackman]

That wasn't paranoia, that was distaste for a system that discourges individual effort.

And your definition of the American Dream is?

i dont have a 'american dream'

whats your definition?

[Hondo]

I had a goal, which has largely been met. I don't know what the official "American Dream" is either. I know what my American Reality has been and it has been good, for the most part. The only "archaic myth" I've seen is government's belief that throwing money at a problem is the only way to solve it. I've watched the government throw huge amounts of money at "social problems" since President Johnson's administration and the only thing that came of it was a larger problem and more government, requiring more money.

[Mark in Oshawa]

The US has been badmouthing them even before the Iraq war, calling them among other things "the Axis of Evil" and their leaders "madmen", and slinging unsubstantiated accusations at least towards Iraq (where are the WMDs?)

Oh right...Iran Iraq and North Korea before Bush started badmouthing them were tourist paradises and on top of the Amnesty International list of countries you must see for progressive thought...

Bush was badmouthing their human rights abuses because they are guilty of a lot of stuff the Yank's couldn't even dream of.

It is funny Eki...I don't even have to work hard to see how silly your complaints are...

[Mark in Oshawa]

The American Dream is anything you want it to be in America for the most part. Most Americans if they have the right idea and work hard enough can find a way to the top. There is no one telling them they have the wrong friends or are in the wrong class, and the government so far hasn't figured a way to make life so tough that they feel they need to emigrate. America takes in Immigrants...not many people leave America...so they cant be THAT stupid...

[anthonyvop]

most powerful country in the world?? in what sense is the US the most powerful country in the world.
Piss us off and find out.

Economically the US is the most powerful country in the world.
Militarily as well.
Influence, Science, Culture......All the US dominates.

[steve_spackman]

Piss us off and find out.

Economically the US is the most powerful country in the world.
Militarily as well.
Influence, Science, Culture......All the US dominates.

well saddam pissed you off and look where it got you..no where.

The most economically drained country in the world.

Science?? Not too sure on that one

Culture..give you that one

Influence..was and now the laughing stock of the world..no offense

[Tomi]

The American Dream is anything you want it to be in America for the most part. Most Americans if they have the right idea and work hard enough can find a way to the top. There is no one telling them they have the wrong friends or are in the wrong class, and the government so far hasn't figured a way to make life so tough that they feel they need to emigrate. America takes in Immigrants...not many people leave America...so they cant be THAT stupid...

And how does this differ from ex. the canadian dream or what ever countries dream?

[Hondo]

well saddam pissed you off and look where it got you..no where.

The most economically drained country in the world.

Science?? Not too sure on that one

Culture..give you that one

Influence..was and now the laughing stock of the world..no offense

Influence...laughing stock? Then why should you or anyone else be worried about what we do or don't do, as long as we don't do it to you. Have we done done something evil to Britain?

[Mark in Oshawa]

And how does this differ from ex. the canadian dream or what ever countries dream?

Tomi...it isn't for the most part. That said most people traditionally came to America to start afresh with no burdens, no oppression, freedom of thought and religion. The phrase "American Dream" was given by those coming to America with nothing and building a life greater than what they would have had in the old country. Most of those people did in the end. It isn't quite the same now since most nations have reached some sort of economic stability and the populations have stablized but in the late 19th century Europe was crowded and opportunities were few. You had a class system, no land available, ethnic strife and the never ending threat of a war over the horizon to make you want to live elsewhere. Hence the American dream......

It is still alive in the US in ways it isn't elsewhere however. Just ask someone like a Mark Burnett who was an ex British serviceman who emigrated to Los Angeles for a job that didn't come off, sold T-shirts on the beach and 10 years later was the biggest producer on TV.....

[Mark in Oshawa]

Tomi...if you want to see the difference in Americans and Say Brits...watch how restaurant owners in the US on Ramsay's Nightmares fight with him until they are shown how wrong they are and then they buy in. The Brits often are cowed and refuse to fight..the Yanks are always willing to fight....and it is part of the culture. Americans have never been conquered and come from generations of go-getters and people seeking adventure..staying safe isn't part of the American DNA....or Canadian really for that matter. Aussies are much the same....their ancestors were the ones willing to gamble their lives...

[ioan]

i didnt realise Bush went to school..could of fooled me..he cant even string one sentence together

Look who's talking. You could start your sentences with capital letters, not to mention that you use the wrong case for the word "I". :rolleyes:



most powerful country in the world?? in what sense is the US the most powerful country in the world.

In any sense you wish, Spanky.

[ioan]

so Bush made the oil prices fall did he?

Sure if he made them rise than he made them fall too, after all he is guilty for anything happening on Earth, according to some.

[ioan]

i dont have a 'american dream'

I doubt you have anything but an internet connection to talk rubbish.
Are you related to Eki by chance? :rolleyes:

[ioan]

Science?? Not too sure on that one

It's time for you to go to school and learn something about the world outside your apartment.

[Easy Drifter]

This is an most unusual day.
First Eki admits Hamas have been attacking Israel and now I agree with Ioan.

Admittitly it isn't on F1. :D

[ioan]

This is an most unusual day.
First Eki admits Hamas have been attacking Israel and now I agree with Ioan.

Admittitly it isn't on F1. :D

:D :rotflmao: :)

[steve_spackman]

It's time for you to go to school and learn something about the world outside your apartment.

your funny

[steve_spackman]

Look who's talking. You could start your sentences with capital letters, not to mention that you use the wrong case for the word "I". :rolleyes:



In any sense you wish, Spanky.

so you have nothing decent to say i see...

[ioan]

so you have nothing decent to say i see...

Teaching you to write a sentence is decent enough IMO, even if it's more difficult than teaching a primate to eat a banana, the proof being your replies.

[ioan]

your funny

You're not. An now I know for sure that you're not entitled to criticize GWB's intellectual level.

[steve_spackman]

Teaching you to write a sentence is decent enough IMO, even if it's more difficult than teaching a primate to eat a banana, the proof being your replies.

and tell me oh wise one...whats wrong with the way i write???

[steve_spackman]

You're not. An now I know for sure that you're not entitled to criticize GWB's intellectual level.

if you have nothing decent to say...dont bother..

[ioan]

and tell me oh wise one...whats wrong with the way i write???

:rolleyes: :s

[ioan]

if you have nothing decent to say...dont bother..

:laugh:

PS: Almost forgot, Mozilla Firefox has a built in spell check, I never understood why, until today!

[steve_spackman]

It's time for you to go to school and learn something about the world outside your apartment.

dont have a apartment..i do however have a very nice 5 bedroom house just outside London....wanna come over for the weekend

[BDunnell]

Piss us off and find out.

Economically the US is the most powerful country in the world.
Militarily as well.
Influence, Science, Culture......All the US dominates.

I find the idea of cultural 'domination' rather disturbing, to be honest.

[BDunnell]

By the way, I think some of the lazier comments in this thread are starting to verge on the offensive towards Americans, not all of whom conform to the popular stereotype, and not all of whom stand up for for the worst actions of its governments. I would have thought the different types of American whose contributions we see on these forums prove this.

[ioan]

dont have a apartment..i do however have a very nice 5 bedroom house just outside London....wanna come over for the weekend

Thanks but no thanks, I pretty much like going skiing in the winter week ends.

[Easy Drifter]

It will be years before history decides wether George W. Bush was a good, mediocre, poor or terrible President. Calls during or shortly after any political figure leaves office often turn out to be incorrect as history judges things.
JFK was considered great while in office. Today most historians have the opposite opinion. Maybe not the general public but the historians.
Regan was despised by many before he even took office yet today is generally regarded as one of the best.
Not everybody agrees in either case.
In Canada, Trudeau was considered almost god like by many but today most (not all) historians consider that he was not a good PM. and that he in fact created many of the problems we face today.
Mulroney, who was the most despised PM of all when he left office is now often looked at in a very different light, despite the fact he destroyed the PC party federally. The jury is really still out on him.
Almost everyone thought Paul Martin would be a great PM but he turned out to be Mr. 'Dithers' who couldn't make up his mind on anything.
I am not taking a position on GWB but think it will be history who decides on whether he was good or not.

[Tomi]

It will be years before history decides wether George W. Bush was a good, mediocre, poor or terrible President.

Certain people think hitler was good too, the same day serious historicans think he was good maybe they think the same about bush as well.

[TOgoFASTER]

By the way, I think some of the lazier comments in this thread are starting to verge on the offensive towards Americans, not all of whom conform to the popular stereotype, and not all of whom stand up for for the worst actions of its governments. I would have thought the different types of American whose contributions we see on these forums prove this.


Those "different types" of Americans are in far more greater numbers than the few that show their ugly sometimes openly bigoted short sighted extremist mentality here daily. A number of them do it for the pure effect and expected response much like a cretin such as Rush Limbaugh does daily. Much of what maybe "lazier comments" are mostly the responses one would expect in sight of such ugliness. I'm sure not many Americans of "different types" otherwise take offense as they can simply rationalize who/whom is the selected target from the general "us".

General figures show up to 75% cannot wait for W and crew to go away.

Most see and think far better than: control by fear of fear, hate of those that don't agree 100% in pure black and white... or the questioning of ones patriotism that followed, a sad outdated idealogy running the government, the love of diplomacy by armed reckless excursions by it's own or by proxies, the love of out of control greed and the padding of the pockets of a very few including friends and business partners tied to the bait of the trickle down on a scale never seen, the disrespect of basic human rights by it's own or by proxies, the disrespect/disregard of the roots of the republic such as the constitution/bill of rights, the arrogant immature narcissistic nationalistic bullyism pushed on all like friday night high school football blind cheerleading, the very thought that might is right without substance or common sense, nor George's totally chilling denal of reality.

They had their eight year run and the mass majority are much more than elated the shameful neoconned manifest destiny nightmare is coming to an end.
Never again.
The great experiment has overcome in the past and will overcome this tragic mistake.

[Mark in Oshawa]

Certain people think hitler was good too, the same day serious historicans think he was good maybe they think the same about bush as well.
Tomi..read what Drifter said. He said he didn't have a bad or good opinion. Also..the certain people that find Hitler good in retrospect are people with brown shirts or anti Semites to start with. Heck..I keep thinking one or two them could be posting on the Gaza thread right now......

[Mark in Oshawa]

By the way, I think some of the lazier comments in this thread are starting to verge on the offensive towards Americans, not all of whom conform to the popular stereotype, and not all of whom stand up for for the worst actions of its governments. I would have thought the different types of American whose contributions we see on these forums prove this.


I have often thought many of the anti-Bush and anti-American sentiment on here was often unfounded and kneejerk. Not from yourself. You and I may be opposites politically on a lot of things but I have great respect for your consistency and respect for the human race as a whole. That said, I have always leaned to wanting to defend America as a reaction to my being there most of my working weeks (not this one apparnetly...truck issues have me at home yet another day). America is not as simple or as dumb as many in Europe would make it out to be.

Their cars are slagged, their culture is slagged, Bush is SLAGGED ( ok..he maybe earns some of that..but not as much as he gets either IMO) and all in all America takes a beating on these forms. Your point is WELL made. A lot of the intellectual energy used in these attacks on all things America is lazy and not backed up by any form of reality and is just knee jerk reactions that are often spouted by the libreal pundits we see on TV.

I have always thought there is a lot of gray areas in a lot of what goes on and try to find the pluses and minuses in most issues.

[Hondo]

dont have a apartment..i do however have a very nice 5 bedroom house just outside London....wanna come over for the weekend

Maybe you could get a loan against the house and use the money for your sister-in-law's heart monitor.

[airshifter]

By the way, I think some of the lazier comments in this thread are starting to verge on the offensive towards Americans, not all of whom conform to the popular stereotype, and not all of whom stand up for for the worst actions of its governments. I would have thought the different types of American whose contributions we see on these forums prove this.

No need to be concerned BDunnell. Just as you don't lump all Americans in one grouped sterotype, we don't attach all the nonsense statements about Americans as the opinion of the rest of the world.

I think Steve is just hoping to get a rise out of those that beat him at his own game on the Israel/Hamas thread by forcing him to actually answer a question, and eventually admit there is fault on both sides of the conflict.

[Hazell B]

Before badmouthing Dubya most non-American folks should look at their own countries and fix the mess they are in.



Rubbish - we all have a perfect right to say what we think, no matter which country. Or is free thinking banned in the US? :p :

[Hondo]

Rubbish - we all have a perfect right to say what we think, no matter which country. Or is free thinking banned in the US? :p :

Not at all dear lady! In fact, you can contact ACORN and vote in the next election if you want!

[Eki]

Tomi..read what Drifter said. He said he didn't have a bad or good opinion. Also..the certain people that find Hitler good in retrospect are people with brown shirts or anti Semites to start with. Heck..I keep thinking one or two them could be posting on the Gaza thread right now......
You're so traumatized by the Nazis and other anti-Semites it prohibits you from thinking straight and objectively. Get over it.

I am not taking a position on GWB but think it will be history who decides on whether he was good or not.

I agree. Not because I think he was good (I don't, I don't personally agree with his policies, his methods or his aims) but because it is impossible to judge until the full effects of his presidential actions have run their course.

And even then, events can unfold that change perspectives.

There was a time when Bismarck was considered an exceptional statesman, the builder of a modern nation.....but then it became apparent that, had it not been for the rise of Imperial Germany there would not have come about the rise to power of the National Socialist party.

You could argue fairly legitimately that Bismarck was the father of the Nazi's, even though he did not share their political doctrine.

Such is how history judges....it never actually comes to a definitive conclusion because it never stops evolving and growing.

[rah]

The Bush years have been a bad IMHO. He has shown no respect for the people that he served or the people that served under him.

I agree, good riddance.

[TOgoFASTER]

Or is free thinking banned in the US? :p :


Over recent years it has been heavily frowned upon by a few.

[TOgoFASTER]

Bush leaves with an exit approval rating only higher than Richard Nixon.
Nixon being at the bottom of the bottom.

[BDunnell]

Rubbish - we all have a perfect right to say what we think, no matter which country. :p :

:up:

I find it hard to believe that those who make such comments as 'Before badmouthing Dubya most non-American folks should look at their own countries and fix the mess they are in' have never done anything equivalent themselves.

[Dave B]

What's disappointing is that some people don't seem able to differentiate between criticism of Bush and criticism of America herself which, for the most part, is a fine country full of mainly good people.

You deserve so much better.

[janvanvurpa]

Before badmouthing Dubya most non-American folks should look at their own countries and fix the mess they are in.

From my point of view, he wasn't the best American president but he wasn't the worst either. He lacked intellectual firepower but he had a pretty good political instinct. He was quite honest for a politician and wasn't afraid of doing things when he believed that was right for his country. He may not have addressed economic issues very well and wasted tons of money but some of that can be attributed to the fact that he had to sit on a huge bubble inflated by Bubba Clintn and other hippies and was unlucky to see it burst under him.

What silly tripe you write.
Bush was and is a dangerous idiot.
I'll give you one quote that even you sdhould be able tosee how it sums up his political instinct "I looked in his soul and I saw a mani can trust"

Said about his staring in the eyes of Putin.

Get serious.
And don't talk nonsense.

[janvanvurpa]

Bush leaves with an exit approval rating only higher than Richard Nixon.
Nixon being at the bottom of the bottom.

Not surprising since they were both obviously nearly insane criminals and as spoon-fed lies and as distracted as the American public undoubtedly is, there are only so many delusional fools here and fortunately the vast majority live where it's always hot.

[janvanvurpa]

The American Dream is anything you want it to be in America for the most part. Most Americans if they have the right idea and work hard enough can find a way to the top. There is no one telling them they have the wrong friends or are in the wrong class, and the government so far hasn't figured a way to make life so tough that they feel they need to emigrate. America takes in Immigrants...not many people leave America...so they cant be THAT stupid...


You know, your "I cannot find a single thing ever at all amiss, astray, or needing correction" gig is risible.
Seems you never tire of platitude after platitude.

Knowing the extreme Americo-centric, extremely superficial, extremely rudimentary view that most Americans have of the details of actual working life, it is not surprising that so few leave.
Further, the negative personal savings rate of the typical American works against spending money to move, most are chained down by mountains of self imposed debt.

You may not be a "United Statesian" but you do a pretty passable cliched version of one narrow segement of the population.

[BDunnell]

What's disappointing is that some people don't seem able to differentiate between criticism of Bush and criticism of America herself which, for the most part, is a fine country full of mainly good people.

You deserve so much better.

A key point, in my opinion. Again, I fear that it goes over the heads of those at whom it is directed.

[Rudy Tamasz]

:up:

I find it hard to believe that those who make such comments as 'Before badmouthing Dubya most non-American folks should look at their own countries and fix the mess they are in' have never done anything equivalent themselves.

For some reason we didn't discuss Mr. Blaire when he was leaving his office. Nor we see much interest in Messrs. Castro and Kim Chen Ill who will be leaving their offices soon.

I do not mind discussing any political figure, but I just don't get why people who emphasize their free thinking are so obsessed with one country and its president.

[Camelopard]

For some reason we didn't discuss Mr. Blaire when he was leaving his office. Nor we see much interest in Messrs. Castro and Kim Chen Ill who will be leaving their offices soon.

I do not mind discussing any political figure, but I just don't get why people who emphasize their free thinking are so obsessed with one country and its president.

I didn't notice you showing much interest in Blair when he left office!

It is, after all up to you to post whatever criticism you want, be it against Blair, Castro, Howard or whatever. I believe that this is what is good about 'free speech'!

It still boils down to the fact that whether rightly or wrongly the US president is the most important politician on this earth (at the moment) and what he says or does affects us all.

[BDunnell]

I didn't notice you showing much interest in Blair when he left office!

It is, after all up to you to post whatever criticism you want, be it against Blair, Castro, Howard or whatever. I believe that this is what is good about 'free speech'!

It still boils down to the fact that whether rightly or wrongly the US president is the most important politician on this earth (at the moment) and what he says or does affects us all.

My thoughts exactly.

[Rudy Tamasz]

It is, after all up to you to post whatever criticism you want, be it against Blair, Castro, Howard or whatever. I believe that this is what is good about 'free speech'!



I guess I just have not been articulate enough in conveying my thoughts. I do not mind at all discussing public figures at all, if it is done in a reasonable way. In my initial post I offered my opinion on Bush, which was not all that complimentary. What I really dislike is a stupid trashing of somebody just because of idleness. Most people on this forum are not Americans, have no stakes in American politics and economy and lost nothing in the invasions to Iraq and Afghanistan. Those Bush critics most often than not demonstrate unmotivated and rarely justified hatred explaining it by their free thinking. To me this is not free thinking. This is celeb culture inside out when you feel obliged to trash a celeb. You guys been watching too much TV lately.

My freedom not about being obsessed with one person, even a very powerful one. My freedom (and responsibility, too) is about focusing my life on things that really concern me and really matter; my family, my job, my research, my fun etc. When you guys get a life and have no more red mist in your eyes, we'll be back to normal discussions.

[Dave B]

Most people on this forum are not Americans, have no stakes in American politics and economy and lost nothing in the invasions to Iraq and Afghanistan.
So would you also recommend that we stop discussing Zimbabwe, or Israel, or even Manchester City unless we have a personal stake?

It would be a pretty dull forum if we only discussed matters which have a direct influence on us as individuals.

[Rudy Tamasz]

Sometimes I get ignited, too about things very distantly relevant to my life. I'm just a man, y'know. Once I wouldn't talk to my mom for a couple of days because my footy team lost and she poked fun at me.

But I still fail to understand the disproportionate amount of hate towards the pres of a foreign country. Do those haters secretly fancy him like others fancy Paris or britney and use every opportunity to talk about him?

[chuck34]

There are a few things that I find pretty interesting on this thread right now.

Number 1 is all the people saying that we have no freedom of speach in the US, or at least it is "frowned upon". Really? Is that really what you think? Just look at our media. Pretty much every media outlet is bashing Bush at every turn, the guy can do nothing right. If GWB would have landed that plane on the Hudson yesterday, the media would have blamed him for flying into a flock of birds. No freedom of speach, give me a break!

And number 2 is that everyone seems to want to call him some sort of war criminal for doing what the UN voted on and said he could (again no freedom of speach, right?). Please put yourselves in his shoes for a minute. It's 2002, you are recieving an ever increasing number of reports from an ever increasing number of intelligence agencies (both domestic, and international) that are telling you that Saddam has WMD's. Sure there are a few conflicting reports out there, but the vast majority are telling you that he has them. What do you do at that point? Do you ignore the majority and believe the minority report? If you go with the minority, and then you turn out to be wrong, Americans/Saudis/Israelies die in an attack from Iraq. Then you really are a War Criminal. So ask yourself honestly, what would you do in that situation??

But please criticise away, the American KGB are on their way to get you.

[Hondo]

I don't mind people picking on Bush, I mind people insinuating that everything is and was Bush's fault. Like the Katrina situation, it's not always as cut and dried as the press presents the story. Anybody that looked beyond what the mainstream press chose to report about the Exalted Transparent One's run for election knows how overwhelming the media bias was in favor of the ETO.

That being said, neither Bush Sr. or Bush Jr. have ever seemed to have a clue about what life was like for the middle class on down and neither were strong on economic policy. I think Iraq or something similar had to happen to set the stage for what will come next.

There will not be another Bush in the office of President for as long as voters remember Bush Sr. and Bush Jr.

[Tomi]

There will not be another Bush in the office of President for as long as voters remember Bush Sr. and Bush Jr.

One thing i dont understand is how could a guy like that be elected twice, first time maybe was a misstake but the second?

[Eki]

Bush leaves with an exit approval rating only higher than Richard Nixon.
Nixon being at the bottom of the bottom.

Why has Nixon so low rating? Didn't he at least end the Vietnam war?

[Rudy Tamasz]

One thing i dont understand is how could a guy like that be elected twice, first time maybe was a misstake but the second?

I actually know a person who knows him. She's female and black so most probably there is no bias here. In her view he's no intellectual, but he's a statesman, whatever it means.

I tend to agree with that. He ran the state of Texas pretty decently, but on the national level he's probably reached his level of incompetency, although his record is mixed and he wasn't a total failure. Then again, he had to cope with the Clintonian legacy, which looked nice outside but was totally rotten inside.

[555-04Q2]

And number 2 is that everyone seems to want to call him some sort of war criminal for doing what the UN voted on and said he could (again no freedom of speach, right?). Please put yourselves in his shoes for a minute. It's 2002, you are recieving an ever increasing number of reports from an ever increasing number of intelligence agencies (both domestic, and international) that are telling you that Saddam has WMD's. Sure there are a few conflicting reports out there, but the vast majority are telling you that he has them. What do you do at that point? Do you ignore the majority and believe the minority report? If you go with the minority, and then you turn out to be wrong, Americans/Saudis/Israelies die in an attack from Iraq. Then you really are a War Criminal. So ask yourself honestly, what would you do in that situation??

Intelligence agencies :?: Dont make me laugh :laugh: They couldnt find their backsides in a dark toilet :down: No WMD were found in Iraq before the West invaded.

[chuck34]

Intelligence agencies :?: Dont make me laugh :laugh: They couldnt find their backsides in a dark toilet :down: No WMD were found in Iraq before the West invaded.

Ok so you don't like intelligence agencies, fine. Who would you use to collect information about other countries?

No WMD, what do you call the 500 tonnes of yellow cake Uranium that was very quietly removed from Iraq and shipped to Canada last summer?

[Eki]

Do you ignore the majority and believe the minority report? If you go with the minority, and then you turn out to be wrong, Americans/Saudis/Israelies die in an attack from Iraq. Then you really are a War Criminal. So ask yourself honestly, what would you do in that situation??


Why do you think that Iraqis deserve to die more than Americans/Saudis/Israelis?

If you decide to invade a country, you can be sure someone will die. If you decide not to invade, there's also the chance that nobody is going to die.

[chuck34]

Why do you think that Iraqis deserve to die more than Americans/Saudis/Israelis?

Did I say the Iraqis deserved to die? No. But Saddam did. And don't give me the standard line about how the US set Saddam up to begin with, so we got what we deserved. Yes we did set him up, but it was a mistake then, and we corrected it.

If you can honestly defend the things that Saddam did then you seriously have a screw loose.

[555-04Q2]

Ok so you don't like intelligence agencies, fine. Who would you use to collect information about other countries?

No WMD, what do you call the 500 tonnes of yellow cake Uranium that was very quietly removed from Iraq and shipped to Canada last summer?

I said, no WMD were discovered by the UN, USA, Britain etc etc BEFORE the West invaded. They were going to invade Iraq no matter the findings. And so what if Iraq had WMD, The West has more WMD than they could ever need, what makes them so special that they can have them but not another country?

[chuck34]

Why do you think that Iraqis deserve to die more than Americans/Saudis/Israelis?

If you decide to invade a country, you can be sure someone will die. If you decide not to invade, there's also the chance that nobody is going to die.

You added that last part after I quoted you before.

Sure there is a chance that nobody is going to die if you don't invade a country. But you know what there is also a chance they will die, maybe more. That is the risk assessment that had to be done. Maybe you don't agree with the decision now with the hindsight of knowing that their WMD program was not as far along as we thought. All I am saying is that at the time it looked probable that Saddam had WMD's and was going to use them (remember he was even telling his Generals this). So if we had done nothing and Saddam wasn't lying, GWB would look more like an idoit than he does now. He was in a no win situation. I just happen to think that he made the correct decision, and you don't. That's fine, I'm only asking you to look at this from both sides.

[chuck34]

I said, no WMD were discovered by the UN, USA, Britain etc etc BEFORE the West invaded. They were going to invade Iraq no matter the findings. And so what if Iraq had WMD, The West has more WMD than they could ever need, what makes them so special that they can have them but not another country?

The UN knew about the Uranium BEFORE the war started, we (the UN) just were not allowed to look for it when and where we wanted.

Remember that Saddam was telling anyone and everone that would listen that he either had or was close to having WMD and was going to use them, and he had in the past. The difference between that and West should be obvious, but I'll let you in on the secret. We are not telling people that we are going to use them, and we have not gassed our own people. That is what makes the West so special.

[555-04Q2]

Did I say the Iraqis deserved to die? No. But Saddam did. And don't give me the standard line about how the US set Saddam up to begin with, so we got what we deserved. Yes we did set him up, but it was a mistake then, and we corrected it.

If you can honestly defend the things that Saddam did then you seriously have a screw loose.

Bush is also a mistake, of your voting publics own doing, so why dont you fix him the way you fixed Saddam :?: If Saddam "deserved" to die then Bush also deserves to die for all the widows and orphans he has created in Iraq.

[555-04Q2]

The UN knew about the Uranium BEFORE the war started, we (the UN) just were not allowed to look for it when and where we wanted.

Remember that Saddam was telling anyone and everone that would listen that he either had or was close to having WMD and was going to use them, and he had in the past. The difference between that and West should be obvious, but I'll let you in on the secret. We are not telling people that we are going to use them, and we have not gassed our own people. That is what makes the West so special.

I'll say it again. No WMD were found before the West invaded. uranium is not a WMD it is a raw material.

And what you say is a bit rich coming from the only country that has dropped nukes on another country :s tareup:

[555-04Q2]

P.S. I'm going to go and have a couple of beers round the pool now with some mates. Chat to u soon :)

[chuck34]

Bush is also a mistake, of your voting publics own doing, so why dont you fix him the way you fixed Saddam :?: If Saddam "deserved" to die then Bush also deserves to die for all the widows and orphans he has created in Iraq.

And the Iraqis didn't create any American widows and orphans?

Tell you what, go to the UN and get a resolution to attack the US, and we'll see what happens.

[Tomi]

And the Iraqis didn't create any American widows and orphans?

Tell you what, go to the UN and get a resolution to attack the US, and we'll see what happens.

when has iraqis create american widows and orphans in usa?

[chuck34]

I'll say it again. No WMD were found before the West invaded. uranium is not a WMD it is a raw material.

And what you say is a bit rich coming from the only country that has dropped nukes on another country :s tareup:

So you are in the camp that thinks dropping the bombs on Japan didn't save any lives, US and Japaneese?

[Eki]

And the Iraqis didn't create any American widows and orphans?

Those Americans who have died wouldn't have been in Iraq without Bush and would still be alive.

[chuck34]

Those Americans who have died wouldn't have been in Iraq without Bush and would still be alive.

Or if Saddam had just cooperated with the UN inspectors, no Americans or Iraqis would have died.

But it has to be Bush's fault, I forgot that he is "The Great Satan".

[Eki]

All I am saying is that at the time it looked probable that Saddam had WMD's and was going to use them (remember he was even telling his Generals this). .
Not to me it didn't. I never believed in the WMDs, let alone Iraq would use them after the beating they got in the early 1990s.

[chuck34]

Not to me it didn't. I never believed in the WMDs, let alone Iraq would use them after the beating they got in the early 1990s.

So you have completely forgotten about the gassing of the Kurds after the first Gulf War, or shooting at planes that were patroling the no-fly-zones? I must be making that up because Saddam was a model citizen.

And it isn't for you to believe the intelligence reports or not. Unless you had actually seen them at the time, you have no idea what you really thought. The president and members of Congress (even those that now say they are against the war), all were saying that WMD's were there and something had to be done about them

[Eki]

So you have completely forgotten about the gassing of the Kurds after the first Gulf War, or shooting at planes that were patroling the no-fly-zones? I must be making that up because Saddam was a model citizen.

The Kurds were gassed before the first Gulf War, not after. That's why they got their own area protected by the US and the UK. Iraq hadn't killed a Kurd for over 10 years before the invasion. And they never shot at any planes, but the Allies destroyed their anti-aircraft few times when they locked their radars at the planes. Locking the radar isn't the same as shooting. Didn't you know that, or have you forgotten?

[Tomi]

Or if Saddam had just cooperated with the UN inspectors, no Americans or Iraqis would have died.

But it has to be Bush's fault, I forgot that he is "The Great Satan".
Maybe you should read the book Disarming Iraq, written by Hans Blix your picture of what actually did happen would be quite different, kind of more real.

[steve_spackman]

The UN knew about the Uranium BEFORE the war started, we (the UN) just were not allowed to look for it when and where we wanted.

Remember that Saddam was telling anyone and everone that would listen that he either had or was close to having WMD and was going to use them, and he had in the past. The difference between that and West should be obvious, but I'll let you in on the secret. We are not telling people that we are going to use them, and we have not gassed our own people. That is what makes the West so special.

YOU my friend are special...

you have no clue what you are on about..

[BDunnell]

So you have completely forgotten about the gassing of the Kurds after the first Gulf War, or shooting at planes that were patroling the no-fly-zones? I must be making that up because Saddam was a model citizen.

Well, a Republican administration was still in place when those Kurds were being gassed, and did nothing about it then. Why did the sudden enthusiasm for 'human rights' amongst the neo-cons suddenly develop over a decade later, after a period in which Saddam's regime had effectively been emasculated for several years?

[chuck34]

Well, a Republican administration was still in place when those Kurds were being gassed, and did nothing about it then. Why did the sudden enthusiasm for 'human rights' amongst the neo-cons suddenly develop over a decade later, after a period in which Saddam's regime had effectively been emasculated for several years?

I thought that something should have been done then. So for me an enthusiasm for human rights did not just suddenly develop.

[Eki]

The US news media must be different from the Finnish one. The Finnish media never mentioned that Saddam had admitted that he has WMDs and said he's going to use them. They only mentioned that the US claimed Saddam had WMDs and might use them, and I don't have a reason to trust the Americans more than I trust the Iraqis.

[steve_spackman]

the last speech from our beloved G W BUSH

it was a ridiculous speech. Preposterous. The worst one of all, and boy howdy, that is saying something. This, after all, was the man who gave us "Bring it on" and "Mission Accomplished," and who once was unable to think of any mistakes he might have made. Each of these was a legitimate phenomenon in every respect, to be sure, but the spectacle on Thursday night bent the definition of "absurd" into bold new shapes. Let's take it from the top.
Fellow citizens: For eight years, it has been my honor to serve as your president. The first decade of this new century has been a period of consequence - a time set apart. Tonight, with a thankful heart, I have asked for a final opportunity to share some thoughts on the journey we have traveled together and the future of our nation.
Translation: I like turtles.
This evening, my thoughts return to the first night I addressed you from this house - September 11, 2001.
For the record, he went through exactly 240 words before bringing up 9/11.
Over the past seven years, a new Department of Homeland Security [DHS] has been created. The military, the intelligence community and the FBI have been transformed. Our nation is equipped with new tools to monitor the terrorists' movements, freeze their finances and break up their plots. And with strong allies at our side, we have taken the fight to the terrorists and those who support them.
Where to begin?
The DHS is a hopelessly scrambled and hyper-politicized debacle. The military has been transformed into a shadow of its former self. The intelligence community is battered and discombobulated. The FBI works for a Justice Department that belongs in the script for a screwball comedy. The new tools include torture and indefinite detention, which don't work and are against the law. The only real ally we have left is Saudi Arabia, birthing bed of al-Qaeda-style Wahabbist terrorism. File this whole paragraph under "FAIL."
Afghanistan has gone from a nation where the Taliban harbored al-Qaeda and stoned women in the streets to a young democracy that is fighting terror and encouraging girls to go to school. Iraq has gone from a brutal dictatorship and a sworn enemy of America to an Arab democracy at the heart of the Middle East and a friend of the United States.
Afghanistan is a disaster we are about to pour even more troops into. The Taliban is umbilically connected to officials in Pakistan and can roam freely across the border. Casualty rates among US soldiers have nearly doubled in the last two years, and the poppy fields are doing just fine, thank you. As for that last bit, it kind of fits perfectly; after all, what would a massive, catastrophic economic downturn be without lots of really good smack?
As for Iraq, well, enough has been written about that galloping calamity to blow the roof off the Library of Congress. Let's just say the "Arab democracy" he boasted of is being run by the same two groups that killed 241 American service members when they bombed the marine barracks in Beirut in 1983. These two groups, Dawa and SCIRI, by the by, are both part of the Iranian power structure. Essentially, Tehran now owns Iraq, and that's a good thing ... right?
This next bit might be the best part:
There is legitimate debate about many of these decisions. But there can be little debate about the results.
The mind simply boggles.
I have confidence in the promise of America because I know the character of our people. This is a Nation that inspires immigrants to risk everything for the dream of freedom. This is a Nation where citizens show calm in times of danger and compassion in the face of suffering. We see examples of America's character all around us. And Laura and I have invited some of them to join us in the White House this evening.
Can you believe it? The man could not face his final audience with the American people on his own two feet, needing once again to use people as props to hold himself up and hide himself behind. He actually used the "Distinguished Guests" trick that has become a common occurrence at State of the Union addresses.
Bush had the gall to smile down on a man from New Orleans, who had heroically worked to dig out from his city-annihilating failures during Katrina. He had the gall to smile down on a soldier, who suffered the torments of Iraq duty because of him. He had the gall to smile down on a man whose son was killed in Iraq. He had the gall. It was astonishing.
And so, my fellow Americans, for the final time: Good night. May God bless this house and our next president. And may God bless you and our wonderful country.
Sentiment expressed in one form or another by almost every American at the end of this last sentence: Don't let the door hit ya where the good Lord split ya.
It's over. It really is over.
Almost.

[chuck34]

The US news media must be different from the Finnish one. The Finnish media never mentioned that Saddam had admitted that he has WMDs and said he's going to use them. They only mentioned that the US claimed Saddam had WMDs and might use them, and I don't have a reason to trust the Americans more than I trust the Iraqis.

The Finnish media is not reporting it, what a surprise, that might make the US not look quite so bad.

Saddam told the US after he was captured that he purposly fed his Generals and anyone else who would listen that he had WMD, and wasn't afraid to use them. This was done so that he would appear powerful to his neighbors.

[Hondo]

One thing i dont understand is how could a guy like that be elected twice, first time maybe was a misstake but the second?


The USA tends to keep their war time Presidents in office while the conflict continues. Truman replaced FDR because of FDR's death. Prior to that, FDR served for almost 3 terms of office. Nixon replaced Johnson during the Viet Nam war because Johnson chose not to run again.

[Tomi]

The Finnish media is not reporting it, what a surprise, that might make the US not look quite so bad.
Thats propably because the news had no credible sourse, Finnish media is very reliable.

[schmenke]

...And it isn't for you to believe the intelligence reports or not. Unless you had actually seen them at the time, you have no idea what you really thought. The president and members of Congress (even those that now say they are against the war), all were saying that WMD's were there and something had to be done about them

Um, no chuck. Quite the contrary; the intelligence estimates stated that no concrete evidence of WMD could be found, and that in many cases, the information was based on questionable third-party sources. Some estimates went so far to suggest that the intelligence reports not be used for decision-making purposes. Bush and the U.S. adminstration were aware of these suggestions but withheld them from congress and openly lied to the public.

[Hondo]

Why has Nixon so low rating? Didn't he at least end the Vietnam war?

Nixon got a low rating mainly for getting caught doing the same stuff everybody else did, without getting caught. It wasn't that he was a bad President, he was dumb enough to get caught. Thats all.

[Eki]

The Finnish media is not reporting it, what a surprise, that might make the US not look quite so bad.

Saddam told the US after he was captured that he purposly fed his Generals and anyone else who would listen that he had WMD, and wasn't afraid to use them. This was done so that he would appear powerful to his neighbors.
He told it to the US AFTER the invasion, not BEFORE it. There's a difference. And his generals weren't the world.

You questioned the Finnish media. I wonder why they rank so much higher in the freedom of the press than the US:

http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=11715

1 Denmark 0,50
- Finland 0,50
- Iceland 0,50
- Ireland 0,50
- Netherlands 0,50
- Norway 0,50
- Slovakia 0,50
- Switzerland 0,50
9 New Zealand 0,67
10 Latvia 1,00
11 Estonia 2,00
- Germany 2,00
- Sweden 2,00
- Trinidad and Tobago 2,00
15 Slovenia 2,25
16 Lithuania 3,00
17 Austria 3,25
18 Canada 3,33
19 Czech Republic 3,50
- France 3,50
21 Bosnia and Herzegovina 3,67
22 Belgium 4,00
- United States of America (American territory) 4,00
24 Jamaica 4,17
25 Portugal 4,50
26 South Africa 5,00
27 Benin 5,50
28 El Salvador 6,00
- Hungary 6,00
- United Kingdom 6,00
31 Dominican Republic 6,75
32 Poland 6,83
33 Greece 7,00
34 Hong-Kong 7,50
35 Costa Rica 7,63
36 Bulgaria 8,00
- Israel (Israeli territory) 8,00
38 Cape Verde 8,75
39 Italy 9,00
- Spain 9,00
41 Australia 9,50
42 Chile 10,00
- Japan 10,00
- Namibia 10,00
- Uruguay 10,00
46 Mauritius 10,50
- Paraguay 10,50
48 South Korea 11,13
49 Macedonia 11,25
50 Albania 11,50
- Botswana 11,50
52 Nicaragua 11,67
53 Honduras 11,75
54 Croatia 11,83
55 Grenade 12,00
56 Mali 12,83
57 Ghana 13,50
- Timor-Leste 13,50
59 Thailand 14,00
60 Taiwan 14,25
61 Panama 14,50
- Tanzania 14,50
63 Fiji 16,00
64 Burkina Faso 16,25
- Mozambique 16,25
66 Brazil 16,50
- Ecuador 16,50
- Guatemala 16,50
69 Congo 17,50
70 Romania 17,83
71 Niger 18,33
72 Madagascar 18,50
73 Burundi 19,00
- Mongolia 19,00
75 Togo 19,50
76 Bolivia 20,00
77 Serbia and Montenegro 20,13
78 Moldova 20,50
79 Argentina 21,33
80 Senegal 21,50
81 Cyprus (North) 22,00
82 Kenya 22,25
83 Armenia 23,50
- Guinea-Bissau 23,50
- Seychelles 23,50
86 Uganda 24,00
87 Lebanon 24,38
88 Guinea 24,50
- Sierra Leone 24,50
90 Venezuela 24,63
91 Angola 26,50
- Comoros 26,50
93 Cameroon 27,00
94 Georgia 27,50
95 Tajikistan 27,75
96 Mexico 27,83
97 Afghanistan 28,25
98 Gambia 29,50
- Lesotho 29,50
100 Zambia 29,75
101 Malawi 31,00
- Swaziland 31,00
103 Kuwait 31,67
104 Central African Republic 32,50
- Qatar 32,50
106 Chad 33,25
107 Kyrgyzstan 35,25
108 United States of America (in Iraq) 36,00

[Hondo]

Those Americans who have died wouldn't have been in Iraq without Bush and would still be alive.


Here again, the Congress and the Senate both could've prevented the Iraq invasion, but didn't. Bush was the cheerleader, but it wan't all Bush.

[Roamy]

It is pretty amazing that of all the available people not only the US but worldwide come up with some really sh!t leaders. I doubt at the end of the day that Bush will rate lower than Carter or Johnson (let the welfare checks rain upon the earth - I' m going to a barbeque)

[Hondo]

Or if Saddam had just cooperated with the UN inspectors, no Americans or Iraqis would have died.

But it has to be Bush's fault, I forgot that he is "The Great Satan".

Iraq was going to happen, one way or another.

[Roamy]

Here again, the Congress and the Senate both could've prevented the Iraq invasion, but didn't. Bush was the cheerleader, but it wan't all Bush.

Fiero - I don't think these Euro's get the way government works over here. They must be used to dictators running their countries. When they lay out the things that have happen to Freddie and Fannie by the dems everyone just ignores it. Pretty amazing.

Also Saddam was offered billions to just leave. WOW what part of that offer was bad?

[TOgoFASTER]

Well, a Republican administration was still in place when those Kurds were being gassed, and did nothing about it then. Why did the sudden enthusiasm for 'human rights' amongst the neo-cons suddenly develop over a decade later, after a period in which Saddam's regime had effectively been emasculated for several years?

Many forget the "rise up" Shia and Kurds we will support you crap right after the official Gulf war was over by Bush #1. No support in the area of arms nor other military supplies came in any helpful numbers, if at all. They did rise up and were crushed. I sure do remember well the 'it's an internal matter of the Iraqi nation' statements as the slaughter was taking place.
Remember Iraq was allowed to fly helicopters wherever they liked until it was discovered they were not playing so nice. As an after thought by the sharp military minds of the day the no fly zones came to include helicopters.

Still doesn't seem to matter where they got the gas or the know how to use it, even with the very long standing international bans on the use of such WMDs, as that was to be used in the eight year war against another nation that had just overthrown a US puppet that didn't believe in human rights either. The fact that remaining gas shell/delivery device stockpiles found after the latest Gulf War were of the vintage from that previous timeframe should tell a story.
The US wasn't the only country responsibility for the introduction of the gas but as the self proclaimed beacon for freedom and human rights it should never have gone there. Supplying both sides with military goods (Iran Contra) in that conflict also is just a bit of hipocrisy at best. A very self serving and a short sighted world view that came back to bite when looking at the current state.
Then there is Afghanistan...

Reagan, Bush and Bush.

I guess all that one can say is oops or pretty amazing.

[Eki]

Also Saddam was offered billions to just leave. WOW what part of that offer was bad?
Do you think Bush would have left if a foreign government, like Russia or China, had offered him billions to just leave? Is treason a treason only when the pay/bribe is too low?

[chuck34]

He told it to the US AFTER the invasion, not BEFORE it. There's a difference. And his generals weren't the world.

You questioned the Finnish media. I wonder why they rank so much higher in the freedom of the press than the US:

http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=11715



As for your list. I don't really care where someone lists "freedom of press". It's a very subjective thing to be measuring.

Besides, this came directly from the mouth of the CIA or FBI (sorry I don't remember which) agent who was in charge of de-briefing Saddam. But I suppose that you thing that person is lying.

And I don't know what the heck you're talking about. What does it matter when he told the US what he actually did? Pre-War he was telling people that he had WMD specifically for the purpose of fooling the outside world, especially other Arab nations, into thinking he had them. And if he had told the US exactly what he was doing before the war, maybe this whole thing would have been stopped.

[Eki]

And I don't know what the heck you're talking about. What does it matter when he told the US what he actually did? Pre-War he was telling people that he had WMD specifically for the purpose of fooling the outside world, especially other Arab nations, into thinking he had them. And if he had told the US exactly what he was doing before the war, maybe this whole thing would have been stopped.
He was telling his generals, not the US or the world. There are things called military secrets. Besides, the way I remember it was that the CIA told after interrogating Saddam that Saddam had actually believed he had WMDs, because his generals told him so or at least hadn't corrected his misconception. It makes sense that his generals knew better what was going on in the field than Saddam in his palace. Saddam got his information from his generals, not the other way around.

[TOgoFASTER]

Nixon got a low rating mainly for getting caught doing the same stuff everybody else did, without getting caught. It wasn't that he was a bad President, he was dumb enough to get caught. Thats all.

Really he was quite an intelligent man. His deep paranoia coupled with his I am the absolute king and above the law mentality brought him down and into a well deserved, well earned disrespect.
Another who made some 'mistakes' without ever seeing his own disrespect of a nation from his own actions.

[Roamy]

Do you think Bush would have left if a foreign government, like Russia or China, had offered him billions to just leave? Is treason a treason only when the pay/bribe is too low?

well maybe we should put the full offer out.
billions or death to you and your family plus a full pardon
based on that even george would leave because christians value life.

[Daniel]

Thats propably because the news had no credible sourse, Finnish media is very reliable.

Norwegian media is also very reliable. They're reporting that heard George Bush is going to be in a Punto S2000 next year :D

[steve_spackman]

well maybe we should put the full offer out.
billions or death to you and your family plus a full pardon
based on that even george would leave because christians value life.

yes George is a christain..a christain soldier..a bazzooka in one and and a bible in the other

[TOgoFASTER]

YOU my friend are special...

you have no clue what you are on about..

Indeed.

[TOgoFASTER]

yes George is a christain..a christain soldier..a bazzooka in one and and a bible in the other

That great ole Middle East troika of love thing again. All three have the same root cause and effect, none of it ever being good.
Values life... LOL

[chuck34]

He was telling his generals, not the US or the world. There are things called military secrets. Besides, the way I remember it was that the CIA told after interrogating Saddam that Saddam had actually believed he had WMDs, because his generals told him so or at least hadn't corrected his misconception. It makes sense that his generals knew better what was going on in the field than Saddam in his palace. Saddam got his information from his generals, not the other way around.

He told his Generals and other Ministers because he knew some of them were agents for other countries, specfically France. Because of that he knew the world would "find out" that he "had" WMD.

I have it the right way around, you are backwards.

http://www.fbi.gov/page2/jan08/piro012808.html
Among Saddam’s revelations:

Saddam misled the world into believing that he had weapons of mass destruction in the months leading up to the war because he feared another invasion by Iran, but he did fully intend to rebuild his WMD program

But I'm sure that it's all just a pack of lies because it didn't come from the Finns.

Do a search for George Piro and see what you come up with.

[chuck34]

He told it to the US AFTER the invasion, not BEFORE it. There's a difference. And his generals weren't the world.

You questioned the Finnish media. I wonder why they rank so much higher in the freedom of the press than the US:

http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=11715



Two little tid-bits from your link there.

1) it's from 2004.

2) "The index should in no way be taken as an indication of the quality of the press in the countries concerned."

[steve_spackman]

He told his Generals and other Ministers because he knew some of them were agents for other countries, specfically France. Because of that he knew the world would "find out" that he "had" WMD.

I have it the right way around, you are backwards.

http://www.fbi.gov/page2/jan08/piro012808.html
Among Saddam’s revelations:

Saddam misled the world into believing that he had weapons of mass destruction in the months leading up to the war because he feared another invasion by Iran, but he did fully intend to rebuild his WMD program

But I'm sure that it's all just a pack of lies because it didn't come from the Finns.

Do a search for George Piro and see what you come up with.

Piro told 60 Minutes that Saddam considered Usama bin Laden “a fanatic” and a threat who couldn’t be trusted.

So we have Saddam saying bin laden could not be trusted, yet your president said that saddam was linked to him..

Your president misled the world

your president chuck34 is a man who could not be trusted, yet you did. He is a man that sent over 4000 US soldiers to their deaths on a pack of lies.

Your president killed and aided the killing of thousands of Iraqi people based on a pack of lies

What gave your president the right to invade another country (based on a pack of lies) and do what he did??

your president is a dictator whom should be treated the same as saddam..tried for war crimes and given the same verdict.

your president did this not for the good of the world, but for the good of his and his pals own selfish goals

[janvanvurpa]

Why has Nixon so low rating? Didn't he at least end the Vietnam war?
Aside from the entire secret government run out of his office, he didn't end the war, he removed US troops after 5 years of dishonest "negotiating", and thousands more US and hundreds of thousand more Vietnamese lives wated for his and Kissinger's power politics.

He and nearly all of his staff and much of his Cabinet were criminals, and dozens were indicted for a huge array of crimes, and a lot went to jail.

In other words, typical Republicans.

[Eki]

, he removed US troops after 5 years of dishonest "negotiating",

But didn't that end the war? He could have kept the troops there longer. He didn't at least start the Vietnam war like Bush started the Iraq war, so I think he should rank higher than Bush.

[Hondo]

chuck34, you ought to give it up. 10 years ago I scoffed at people that talked of New World Orders, Global Economies, and One World Governments. But it's coming, if not already in the front yard. The biggest draw back to it's implementation are superpowers. All industrial countries, regardless of size, need to be on the same basic footing.

Prior to WW II, a country's naval power determined where it fell in the global power chart. The countries involved with the Washington Naval Treaty before the war represented the superpowers of the time. They were the USA, the UK, Japan, France, and Italy. Germany was still largely beaten down by WW I and was already restricted by the Treaty of Versailles. China and Russia were jokes. Most if not all of the countries had extended territories or colonies at the time. By the end of WW II, most had lost or were in the process of losing their colonies and the USA and Russia emerged as the two most powerful countries. China was trying to come on, but ever so slowly. All they had plenty of was uneducated manpower. In addition to the reductions of their empires, the European governments began to sink into the equality of socialism along with it's lowered standards. The US economy boomed and gave rise to an incredible standard of living for it's citizens. The USA and the Soviet Union became space travelling superpowers with the attending arrogance of the position. Viet Nam settled us down a little and the Afghanistan thing did the same to the Soviets. Then the Soviet Union came apart and was no longer a superpower. That left us as the one and only superpower and the stellar performance of our military and weapon systems during Desert Storm kicked our arrogance over the top.

The invasion of Iraq has done much to take the fight out of both the people and the politicians again. The economy is falling apart and the worthless, armed with full voting rights, continue to elect their nannie politicians.

You see chuck34, our former European buddies will never again attain the status of a superpower they once enjoyed. They have voluntarily submitted to emasculation and the nannie state. The cries for fair and equal are normal and as it's too difficult to raise yourself up, you seek to bring those above you down to your level so you can all be equal in the same sheep pen.

So this had to happen, Iraq, the economy, and the whole herd of wannabe nannies soon to take office. It's all part of the Global Plan.

It remains to be seen if we will submit.

[steve_spackman]

chuck34, you ought to give it up. 10 years ago I scoffed at people that talked of New World Orders, Global Economies, and One World Governments. But it's coming, if not already in the front yard. The biggest draw back to it's implementation are superpowers. All industrial countries, regardless of size, need to be on the same basic footing.

Prior to WW II, a country's naval power determined where it fell in the global power chart. The countries involved with the Washington Naval Treaty before the war represented the superpowers of the time. They were the USA, the UK, Japan, France, and Italy. Germany was still largely beaten down by WW I and was already restricted by the Treaty of Versailles. China and Russia were jokes. Most if not all of the countries had extended territories or colonies at the time. By the end of WW II, most had lost or were in the process of losing their colonies and the USA and Russia emerged as the two most powerful countries. China was trying to come on, but ever so slowly. All they had plenty of was uneducated manpower. In addition to the reductions of their empires, the European governments began to sink into the equality of socialism along with it's lowered standards. The US economy boomed and gave rise to an incredible standard of living for it's citizens. The USA and the Soviet Union became space travelling superpowers with the attending arrogance of the position. Viet Nam settled us down a little and the Afghanistan thing did the same to the Soviets. Then the Soviet Union came apart and was no longer a superpower. That left us as the one and only superpower and the stellar performance of our military and weapon systems during Desert Storm kicked our arrogance over the top.

The invasion of Iraq has done much to take the fight out of both the people and the politicians again. The economy is falling apart and the worthless, armed with full voting rights, continue to elect their nannie politicians.

You see chuck34, our former European buddies will never again attain the status of a superpower they once enjoyed. They have voluntarily submitted to emasculation and the nannie state. The cries for fair and equal are normal and as it's too difficult to raise yourself up, you seek to bring those above you down to your level so you can all be equal in the same sheep pen.

So this had to happen, Iraq, the economy, and the whole herd of wannabe nannies soon to take office. It's all part of the Global Plan.

It remains to be seen if we will submit.

go get a re-fill on your medication mate ;)

[BDunnell]

You see chuck34, our former European buddies will never again attain the status of a superpower they once enjoyed. They have voluntarily submitted to emasculation and the nannie state. The cries for fair and equal are normal and as it's too difficult to raise yourself up, you seek to bring those above you down to your level so you can all be equal in the same sheep pen.

This is the sort of thing I would expect to read from fousto, albeit in rather more simplistic language, instead of you. Why should European nations seek to attain superpower status again? I do not believe that this should be the aim of all nations. The notion that European countries are somehow being 'dragged down' in any way is, quite simply, nonsensical and actually quite insulting. Each still has its own distinct character; some are more successful than others, just as has always been the case. And notions of the 'nanny state' are simply misguided; largely an invention of the right-wing press. Those examples of the 'nanny state' that are real often stem from the culture of litigation that many consider to be an American invention, though in fact there was quite a culture of litigation in existence in Victorian England.

With respect, I think your statement is as lazy and inaccurate as any of the alleged 'anti-American' statements that one reads.

[Daniel]

This is the sort of thing I would expect to read from fousto, albeit in rather more simplistic language, instead of you. Why should European nations seek to attain superpower status again? I do not believe that this should be the aim of all nations. The notion that European countries are somehow being 'dragged down' in any way is, quite simply, nonsensical and actually quite insulting. Each still has its own distinct character; some are more successful than others, just as has always been the case. And notions of the 'nanny state' are simply misguided; largely an invention of the right-wing press. Those examples of the 'nanny state' that are real often stem from the culture of litigation that many consider to be an American invention, though in fact there was quite a culture of litigation in existence in Victorian England.

With respect, I think your statement is as lazy and inaccurate as any of the alleged 'anti-American' statements that one reads.
That sounds like Anti-American talk to me.....

[Camelopard]

Ok so you don't like intelligence agencies, fine. Who would you use to collect information about other countries?

No WMD, what do you call the 500 tonnes of yellow cake Uranium that was very quietly removed from Iraq and shipped to Canada last summer?

Source of information about the yellowcake?

So you don't like the fact that some of the advise is saying that there are no WMDs. What do you do? You out a CIA agent!

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=1108

"Special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald is trying to determine whether Vice President Dick Cheney had a role in the outing of covert CIA operative Valerie Plame-Wilson, individuals close to Fitzgerald say. Plame’s husband was a vocal critic of prewar intelligence used by President George W. Bush to build support for the Iraq war."

[anthonyvop]

In other words, typical Republicans.
Not counting Nagin or Jefferson from New Orleans
or Blago', Daley, Jackson and the rest of the Chicago Mafia
or Mark Rich
or Timothy Geithner
or Gary Becker
or Bill Clinton
or Bill Richardson
or Charles Rangle
or Sheila Dixon
or Jim McGreevey
or Eliot Spitzer
or....Shall I continue?

[TOgoFASTER]

Aside from the entire secret government run out of his office, he didn't end the war, he removed US troops after 5 years of dishonest "negotiating", and thousands more US and hundreds of thousand more Vietnamese lives wated for his and Kissinger's power politics.

He and nearly all of his staff and much of his Cabinet were criminals, and dozens were indicted for a huge array of crimes, and a lot went to jail.

In other words, typical Republicans.


Well said.
But hey G Gordon Liddy is a hero and was just falsely imprisioned. LOL

[Mark in Oshawa]

The thing that always gets me is this hatred Bush has engendered. I don't HATE Tony Blair or Gordon Brown. I have never hated any European politicians other than maybe Putin, and I have my reasons on that score. That said...I don't spend my waking hours HATING a politician of another nation. Heck...I don't even hate the leader of the Bloq Quebecois in Canada who wants to rip my country in half for his own selfish socialistic goals.

So when I read how "Bush is a Nazi, Bush is a genocidal maniac, Bush is this...." well you get the idea...when I read that, I look for proof or any reasons to believe them.

I don't. No where have I seen PROOF. Irrefutable PROOF that Bush was anything but inept. I can buy that one. He was inept in how he got everyone into the war and how he prosecuted that. I get that...I guess he isn't good at this foreign invasion thing. Lucky for you guys I guess.....

But there is no proof he was anything than a rather clumsy politician. Most of you who hate Bush think Obama is the solution and from what I am hearing on my surfing the talk stations in the US, you are all in for a rude awakening.

First off..while Obama wants to close Gitmo and has said he will...watch the time line. 4 years from now it may not have a resolution. He wont be pulling anyone out of Iraq any faster than Dubya did. He will be adding troops to Afghanistan but George started that already. The tax increases may be there but I don't think he will be going the cap and trade thing or full medical coverage any time soon.

WHY?? He was running to get elected the leader of the left of center party in the USA and the hardcore lefties like to hear all that stuff, but as Bill Clinton discovered...America isn't gonna go along with half of this program and any president has to govern from the center. Heck..conservatives hated half of what Bush did because he wasn't RIGHT WING enough......

So laugh it up..kick ole George when he is leaving...but remember, be careful for what you wish for. Because Obama likely wont be doing half of it. People will spend a lot of time telling him what his limitations are just like they told every other idealistic numbnut that walked into that oval office....

[Easy Drifter]

Those in th UK should remember the TV shows 'Yes Minister' and 'Yes Prime Minister'. There is more than a grain of truth in those shows.
It is often the beauacrats who really run things no matter what the politicians want. I have seen way too many examples of that.
There are politicians who can get done most of what they want but they are few and far between.
Obama is already finding this out and his own party in Congress has already served notice that he is not going to get his way all the time and he isn't even in office yet.

[BDunnell]

The thing that always gets me is this hatred Bush has engendered. I don't HATE Tony Blair or Gordon Brown. I have never hated any European politicians other than maybe Putin, and I have my reasons on that score. That said...I don't spend my waking hours HATING a politician of another nation. Heck...I don't even hate the leader of the Bloq Quebecois in Canada who wants to rip my country in half for his own selfish socialistic goals.

So when I read how "Bush is a Nazi, Bush is a genocidal maniac, Bush is this...." well you get the idea...when I read that, I look for proof or any reasons to believe them.

I don't. No where have I seen PROOF. Irrefutable PROOF that Bush was anything but inept. I can buy that one. He was inept in how he got everyone into the war and how he prosecuted that. I get that...I guess he isn't good at this foreign invasion thing. Lucky for you guys I guess.....

But there is no proof he was anything than a rather clumsy politician.

I think a lot of the hatred he engendered overseas is down to such an outwardly stupid, bumbling figure — he didn't become a figure of fun for nothing — taking actions with the potential for major repercussions around the world. Some may say that it doesn't matter or that they don't care, but surely it would have been better for the US to have been led by a man who was not a global embarrassment? He was exactly that, and he brought it all on himself.

[Mark in Oshawa]

Is he outwardly stupid because you dont' like what he says or is he that because he gives a lousy speech? You likely dislike him for the former than the latter....

Ya he comes off stupid...but he isn't stupid and just because you don't always like what he says or does, he is someone who has done a lot before he became president in his life...

Dubya isn't going to be the best president ever..but if he was a Libreal and a buffoon in interviews, I am sure you would be thinking he was a great fellow who just got nervous.

[Daniel]

Is he outwardly stupid because you dont' like what he says or is he that because he gives a lousy speech? You likely dislike him for the former than the latter....

Ya he comes off stupid...but he isn't stupid and just because you don't always like what he says or does, he is someone who has done a lot before he became president in his life...

Dubya isn't going to be the best president ever..but if he was a Libreal and a buffoon in interviews, I am sure you would be thinking he was a great fellow who just got nervous.

A fool is a fool :) Regardless for instance if they are a McLaren zealot or a Ferrari zealot. You seem to think we dislike people purely based on what party they're in and that couldn't be further from the truth...

[Camelopard]

A fool is a fool :) Regardless for instance if they are a McLaren zealot or a Ferrari zealot. You seem to think we dislike people purely based on what party they're in and that couldn't be further from the truth...

Or on just where they come from.............

[Mark in Oshawa]

A fool is a fool :) Regardless for instance if they are a McLaren zealot or a Ferrari zealot. You seem to think we dislike people purely based on what party they're in and that couldn't be further from the truth...


Daniel, I wouldn't put you in that category. I however do think many of the people who have a visceral HATE on for Bush due to his politics without really looking long and hard on whether the fool is occasionally right. He is wrong on Iraq no doubt, but that is in hindsight. Tony Blair bought into Bush's arguments, and Tony on many levels was more enthusiastic. You are not going to tell me surely that Tony was hated all along up to the point the Iraq war started? He was re-elected was he not?

My point has always been that Bush isn't the buffoon most want him to be, nor is he the genius some would have him be. He is in the middle...middling..like a lot of us. Just he was able to get himself elected.

[BDunnell]

Is he outwardly stupid because you dont' like what he says or is he that because he gives a lousy speech? You likely dislike him for the former than the latter....

Both. As I said, people didn't just find GWB embarrassing because the 'liberal media' told them to. They were clever enough to make up their own minds.



Ya he comes off stupid...but he isn't stupid and just because you don't always like what he says or does, he is someone who has done a lot before he became president in his life...

So what? Everyone who has become President has 'done a lot before he became president'. This does not mark GWB out. Sadly, saying that he knows the human being and fish can co-exist peacefully does.



Dubya isn't going to be the best president ever..but if he was a Libreal and a buffoon in interviews, I am sure you would be thinking he was a great fellow who just got nervous.

That is rubbish, and I hope you will apologise to me for saying that. If he had been a liberal buffoon and made exactly the same comments, I would have been equally scathing. I don't care which party a buffoon comes from — they are still a buffoon.

[Mark in Oshawa]

Both. As I said, people didn't just find GWB embarrassing because the 'liberal media' told them to. They were clever enough to make up their own minds..

If you are not a libreal, that doesn't automatically mean you think all Leftwing politicians are idiots. I have to say I rarely do. It seems tho there isn't a libreal alive who doesn't think most right wing politicians are off their rocker Sorry...just something I have noticed over the years....



So what? Everyone who has become President has 'done a lot before he became president'. This does not mark GWB out. Sadly, saying that he knows the human being and fish can co-exist peacefully does..

I don't get what you meant by that but that's fine, you can dismiss the man convincing a country to elect him TWICE to President as a dolt but look at the supposed "genius" that he defeated. Everyone kept saying how smart Gore and Kerry were yet they couldn't beat him ( don't even start the fiction Gore ever won a recount either...that one is just lame ). This same electorate by the way voted for Obama, who hasn't actually been the administrator of one thing since he graduated law school but he is seen as smart. He may be that, but he hasn't actually been in charge....


That is rubbish, and I hope you will apologise to me for saying that. If he had been a liberal buffoon and made exactly the same comments, I would have been equally scathing. I don't care which party a buffoon comes from — they are still a buffoon.

I wont apologize for that at all. I wasn't saying you in particular. Secondly you have been scathing of a lot of people you don't agree with but I keep waiting for a left of center poltician to say something you would find stupid. I would love you to enlighten me. I have knocked Bush enough for most of you to pick up on I don't think he is a genius. Just don't be so damned dismissive of any politician you dont' like. Life and politics make any leader's words and deeds much more nuanced at times then you would like and sometimes in the desire to be "bold" they say some dumb things and do even dumber things. That said...Bush wasn't out there by himself. He has lots of company from other parts of the world....and they all cannot be idiots....

[BDunnell]

I wont apologize for that at all. I wasn't saying you in particular. Secondly you have been scathing of a lot of people you don't agree with but I keep waiting for a left of center poltician to say something you would find stupid. I would love you to enlighten me. I have knocked Bush enough for most of you to pick up on I don't think he is a genius. Just don't be so damned dismissive of any politician you dont' like. Life and politics make any leader's words and deeds much more nuanced at times then you would like and sometimes in the desire to be "bold" they say some dumb things and do even dumber things. That said...Bush wasn't out there by himself. He has lots of company from other parts of the world....and they all cannot be idiots....

I can think of many left-of-centre politicians I think are buffoons and idiots. Neil Kinnock is a good example; I also have no time for Tony Blair and most of the people who have served in his Cabinets, as I would have thought is perfectly clear from many comments I have made. And I am perfectly within my rights to be 'so damned dismissive' of politicians I don't like, because, having worked in the political arena, I have strong opinions on the subject and feel that they are justified.

[SOD]

in 8 years:

US pension holders have seen their net worth fall.

Bush sent fine young men and women off to kill a million or so around the world.

Thousands of wounded veterans return home from the Bush doctrine adventures to live homeless on the downtown streets of the big US cities. These vets dont qualify for benefits because they have not completed a tour of duty.

Many more thousands of returned veterans are dying due to exposure to chemicals.

FEMA couldn't save the people of new orleans in the aftermath of hurricane Katrina.

Three years after the disaster of new orleans, many thousands still living in tent cities

Three years after the disater of new orleans, many thosands get displaced in galveston, texas. The new imroved FEMA cannot provide for them. The president with a base in taxas, doesn't actually care about Texas, afterall he is a NorthEastern Elitist like all those you [i]hate[i].

the USA is bankrupt, the tab is left to hardworking Americans to pick up the tab.

[chuck34]

in 8 years:

US pension holders have seen their net worth fall.

Bush sent fine young men and women off to kill a million or so around the world.

Thousands of wounded veterans return home from the Bush doctrine adventures to live homeless on the downtown streets of the big US cities. These vets dont qualify for benefits because they have not completed a tour of duty.

Many more thousands of returned veterans are dying due to exposure to chemicals.

FEMA couldn't save the people of new orleans in the aftermath of hurricane Katrina.

Three years after the disaster of new orleans, many thousands still living in tent cities

Three years after the disater of new orleans, many thosands get displaced in galveston, texas. The new imroved FEMA cannot provide for them. The president with a base in taxas, doesn't actually care about Texas, afterall he is a NorthEastern Elitist like all those you [i]hate[i].

the USA is bankrupt, the tab is left to hardworking Americans to pick up the tab.

Show me all these homeless veterans, and exactly how GWB is keeping them out of homes.

Show me these veterans dying of chemical exposure, and that that is GWB's fault.

Where are these tent cities you speak of?

Name one person from New Orleans that left, and has been prevented from going back.

Tell me how Katrina was GWB's fault.

Tell me why it is that Mississippi got hit much worse by Katrina and they don't have half the problems of New Orleans.

Tell me how GWB prevented Mayor Ray Nagen from putting people on busses (that ended up underwater btw.)

[chuck34]

Source of information about the yellowcake?

So you don't like the fact that some of the advise is saying that there are no WMDs. What do you do? You out a CIA agent!

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=1108

"Special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald is trying to determine whether Vice President Dick Cheney had a role in the outing of covert CIA operative Valerie Plame-Wilson, individuals close to Fitzgerald say. Plame’s husband was a vocal critic of prewar intelligence used by President George W. Bush to build support for the Iraq war."


Here you go http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25546334/

And as for "outing a CIA agent" Scooter Libby and Dick Cheney did not do that Richard Armitage (I can't spell, sorry) did. Why he's not in jail, I can't figure out.

[Garry Walker]

dont have a apartment..i do however have a very nice 5 bedroom house just outside London....wanna come over for the weekend
When will you move out of your parents house?


One thing i dont understand is how could a guy like that be elected twice, first time maybe was a misstake but the second?

Because his main opponent was John Kerry.


Bush is also a mistake, of your voting publics own doing, so why dont you fix him the way you fixed Saddam :?: If Saddam "deserved" to die then Bush also deserves to die for all the widows and orphans he has created in Iraq.
What about the people he has saved from being killed under the friendly Saddam regime? Or is the hatred for America so great, that any objectivity stops when it comes to him?

[Mark in Oshawa]

in 8 years:

US pension holders have seen their net worth fall..

Yes...funny, the opposition in Canada blames it all on Prime Minister Harper. Maybe it is the fault of greedy bankers and investment counsellors who manipulated both parties into not making stricter laws. Not all Bush's fault although he will wear this for ever.


Bush sent fine young men and women off to kill a million or so around the world.. Million? Iraq was killing 20000 a year when Saddam was alive. Not that many have been killed there since...utter nonsense. Bush didn't handle the occupation too well...I guess he isn't as efficient at quelling guerillas as Hitler and the SS would be.


Thousands of wounded veterans return home from the Bush doctrine adventures to live homeless on the downtown streets of the big US cities. These vets dont qualify for benefits because they have not completed a tour of duty..
Utter crap. If this was the situation you think some congressman or Senator wouldn't be raising royal hell about that?

Many more thousands of returned veterans are dying due to exposure to chemicals..Proof again...left wing talking points are not proof.

FEMA couldn't save the people of new orleans in the aftermath of hurricane Katrina..
FEMA botched the PR war in New Orleans. Did they botch the restoration? New Orleans is a mess before the hurricane hit. As Chuck points out, Mississippi took a greater hit and no one is having issues there. Bush isn't trying to screw over New Orleans, just there were greater systemic issues with the state and city governments there. That's ok..you keep up your fiction that Bush hates New Orleans, just no one in Louisana bought it. They put Bobby Jindal in office, a Republican. If people there thought Bush was screwing them, that dingbat who was governor before still would be there...

Three years after the disaster of new orleans, many thousands still living in tent cities.
No tent cities. Most didn't go back because they didn't have house insurance and some had policies that wouldn't cover them for flood. Silly thing to have in New Orleans but insurance companies play these games everywhere..not just New Orleans. New Orleans doesn't have any jobs to spare right now either...might be a reason many don't go home.

Three years after the disater of new orleans, many thosands get displaced in galveston, texas. The new imroved FEMA cannot provide for them. The president with a base in taxas, doesn't actually care about Texas, afterall he is a NorthEastern Elitist like all those you [i]hate[i]. . He cares about Texas, he lives there. People in Texas don't think he is an elitist. You been to Galveston lately? Maybe you should provide proof? Maybe the State of Texas has things under control? I don't recall the media pointing out the mess FEMA made there and they would if if there was one believe me.

the USA is bankrupt, the tab is left to hardworking Americans to pick up the tab. The Debt load carried by the US gov. is no worse than the debt load caused by WW2 and Truman was in the black by the end of his term despite fighting the Korean war. That's ok...show me a major democracy that isn't in the red at some point or another. The key is what you do to grow the economy to get out of it. The socialist crap you subscribe to wouldn't do much except allow a government to spend more money...

[Daniel]

Yes...funny, the opposition in Canada blames it all on Prime Minister Harper.

Typical opposition...... given the choice of blaming private enterprise for being greedy as well as the public for being just as greedy by buying into the property bubble or blaming the current administration they'll always blame the government because you can't score political points and gain support by blaming your voters or private enterprise :laugh:

[steve_spackman]

Daniel, I wouldn't put you in that category. I however do think many of the people who have a visceral HATE on for Bush due to his politics without really looking long and hard on whether the fool is occasionally right. He is wrong on Iraq no doubt, but that is in hindsight. Tony Blair bought into Bush's arguments, and Tony on many levels was more enthusiastic. You are not going to tell me surely that Tony was hated all along up to the point the Iraq war started? He was re-elected was he not?

My point has always been that Bush isn't the buffoon most want him to be, nor is he the genius some would have him be. He is in the middle...middling..like a lot of us. Just he was able to get himself elected.

us brits were not too keen on Blair when he was for the war in Iraq...

the only reason why he was elected twice was because the conservatives had their heads up eachothers arse.

Bush had the rep of a buffon from people all across the world..

[BDunnell]

us brits were not too keen on Blair when he was for the war in Iraq...

the only reason why he was elected twice was because the conservatives had their heads up eachothers arse.

Yes, it is worth pointing out that the Conservatives were completely unelectable at that time.

[Daniel]

Yes, it is worth pointing out that the Conservatives were completely unelectable at that time.

I know Brown is hardly the people's most popular choice for PM but is Webcameron any better? All said and done I think Boris is the only logical choice because although the country will still go to hell economically you'll at least be able to have a laugh about it.

[Mark in Oshawa]

It is what I thought about British politics. The Conservatives in Britain won with someone who was strong and principled and maybe a little overboard but she had personality. Now all the leaders they seem to be electing ( and this is from what I can gather from news that crosses the Atlantic ) are Labourite lite Tories.....

You have to give voters a valid choice....

[steve_spackman]

Yes, it is worth pointing out that the Conservatives were completely unelectable at that time.

and now we have Tony's sidekick Gorden Brown in office..

Hopefully the conservatives will take advantage of this and get themselves sorted out..THIS TIME!!!

[steve_spackman]

It is what I thought about British politics. The Conservatives in Britain won with someone who was strong and principled and maybe a little overboard but she had personality.

The 'Iron Lady'

[Mark in Oshawa]

She didn't always go for the popular route, but when the "Iron Lady" was challenged, she rose to it. She wasn't always right but she had her principles. She wasn't some human weathervane like the likes of Bill Clinton.

[BDunnell]

It is what I thought about British politics. The Conservatives in Britain won with someone who was strong and principled and maybe a little overboard but she had personality. Now all the leaders they seem to be electing ( and this is from what I can gather from news that crosses the Atlantic ) are Labourite lite Tories.....

You have to give voters a valid choice....

Here is my (possibly rather rambling) theory as to why it is now a very difficult time for politicians in general. People now have such a wealth of choice in every area of their life, in a way that simply wasn't the case before. Personally, I think there is too much choice in some cases, with little or no benefit being derived, but that's another issue. I believe this means that a lot of people are now becoming increasingly irritated by those areas of life in which it is not possible to tailor things to meet their exact desires. Taxation is a good example. People have always moaned about it, but I think the sort of view one hears along the lines of 'Why should I pay the bit of my taxes that goes towards immigrants?' is quite a recent development. To me, it's not a positive one, because the expectation is unrealistic.

What I'm getting at is that political parties are affected by exactly the same thing. One often hears the view that politicians are increasingly 'out of touch'; in the UK, the opinion is voiced that they spend too much time isolated in the 'Westminster village'. In fact, based on personal experience, I don't feel that politicians of today are any more out of touch than they have ever been. What has changed, in my opinion, is that a lot of people have the unrealistic expectation that they ought to be able to find a political party or a politician that reflects their views exactly. The fact that, naturally, they cannot increases their criticism of politicians.

I feel this is a primary reason why we now see political parties trying — and failing — to be 'all things to all men'. In the UK, Labour managed this successfully enough to win the 1997 election, helped of course by the increasing perception of incompetence surrounding the Tories at the time. However, as I see it, it soon became clear that it was impossible for them to meet the expectations of their traditional supporters and their new-found ones. The Tories ensured that this didn't really matter electorally by being in disarray and choosing unelectable leaders between 1997 and the arrival of David Cameron in 2005, hence Labour's three successive victories. If the Tories get in next time, they will be in the same position — trying to satisfy their traditional constituency of supporters and those who will come to them anew. It will be impossible.

Personally, I find the overriding lack of distinctive policies on the part of the three main parties (with the odd exception, such as the Tories' opposition to the third runway at Heathrow airport) very depressing. There are all sorts of reasons for this, amongst them the factors I have described.

[Easy Drifter]

The 'Iron Lady' and some 2 bit grade B movie actor, as he was described by the chattering classes before he took office, did more to preserve the western way of life than any other leaders since WW2.

[BDunnell]

The 'Iron Lady' and some 2 bit grade B movie actor, as he was described by the chattering classes before he took office, did more to preserve the western way of life than any other leaders since WW2.

On what grounds? I can understand why this might be thought about Reagan, but Thatcher? I do not think her contribution to the end of the Cold War was any greater than that of any of her predecessors.

[Mark in Oshawa]

Here is my (possibly rather rambling) theory as to why it is now a very difficult time for politicians in general. People now have such a wealth of choice in every area of their life, in a way that simply wasn't the case before. Personally, I think there is too much choice in some cases, with little or no benefit being derived, but that's another issue. I believe this means that a lot of people are now becoming increasingly irritated by those areas of life in which it is not possible to tailor things to meet their exact desires. Taxation is a good example. People have always moaned about it, but I think the sort of view one hears along the lines of 'Why should I pay the bit of my taxes that goes towards immigrants?' is quite a recent development. To me, it's not a positive one, because the expectation is unrealistic.

What I'm getting at is that political parties are affected by exactly the same thing. One often hears the view that politicians are increasingly 'out of touch'; in the UK, the opinion is voiced that they spend too much time isolated in the 'Westminster village'. In fact, based on personal experience, I don't feel that politicians of today are any more out of touch than they have ever been. What has changed, in my opinion, is that a lot of people have the unrealistic expectation that they ought to be able to find a political party or a politician that reflects their views exactly. The fact that, naturally, they cannot increases their criticism of politicians.

I feel this is a primary reason why we now see political parties trying — and failing — to be 'all things to all men'. In the UK, Labour managed this successfully enough to win the 1997 election, helped of course by the increasing perception of incompetence surrounding the Tories at the time. However, as I see it, it soon became clear that it was impossible for them to meet the expectations of their traditional supporters and their new-found ones. The Tories ensured that this didn't really matter electorally by being in disarray and choosing unelectable leaders between 1997 and the arrival of David Cameron in 2005, hence Labour's three successive victories. If the Tories get in next time, they will be in the same position — trying to satisfy their traditional constituency of supporters and those who will come to them anew. It will be impossible.

Personally, I find the overriding lack of distinctive policies on the part of the three main parties (with the odd exception, such as the Tories' opposition to the third runway at Heathrow airport) very depressing. There are all sorts of reasons for this, amongst them the factors I have described.

Excellent post. I think getting elected matters more than actually standing for something. All the parties tend to steal policy from each other trying to dominate the center in a Westminister style parliament. Canada is pretty much the same, except for one left wing party (NDP) and a separtist rump from Quebec that are also quite left of center.

That said..the parties that win espouse certain "Values" and then govern from the center. The Conservatives in Canada have been in a minority for two governments now and are of course trying to govern with the views of the opposition being co-opted at times to stay in power.

One thing about Thatcher. She was what she was and stood by what she wanted. Reagan was much the same, and that is why they are being remembered as two of the most powerful leaders in Western history.

As for Thatcher's role in ending the cold war, it is important to remember that the power of the US Presidency has a lot more gravitas if the UK's PM supports the view of that office on world affairs. Thatcher was the one who really gave Reagan the encouragement to really strive towards putting pressure on the USSR. The Reagan administration likely may not have been as vocal to go after the USSR if not for Maggie's support....

[SOD]

The 'Iron Lady' and some 2 bit grade B movie actor, as he was described by the chattering classes before he took office, did more to preserve the western way of life than any other leaders since WW2.

LMAO


The iron lady who won a war against Argentina, and Raygun who hightailed it out of beirut to bomb grenada.

[harsha]

one more day to go

[SOD]

I bet that'll throw a hissy fit today that he never did get to set off the nucular weapons. He'll have to be happy with all that depleted uranium he dumped on the Iraqis.

Have fun with the the other mass murderers throughout history!

[steve_spackman]

http://www.truthout.org/011809Z

[donKey jote]

As for Thatcher's role in ending the cold war, it is important to remember that the power of the US Presidency has a lot more gravitas if the UK's PM supports the view of that office on world affairs. Thatcher was the one who really gave Reagan the encouragement to really strive towards putting pressure on the USSR. The Reagan administration likely may not have been as vocal to go after the USSR if not for Maggie's support....
hmmm... the beacon of World Order, Right and Freedom has a lot more gravitas if it has a lapdog in the UK ?

History will only tell who the best pair was, Reagan+Thatcher or Bush (W) + Blair :dozey:

[AAReagles]

I'm just listening to George W. Bush's incoherent ranting and mumbling.... Has anybody got a good word to say about him?

Actually yes. If there is any purposeful thing that he managed to accomplish it would have to be that he presented an exact blue-print of what this country (much less the world) doesn't need for leadership on such a large scale.


Like some other folks here, I was amused with his incredible perceptions about himself and how he was reluctant to acknowledge (perhaps the truth of as well) the condemnation of his precious legacy.

Now he's all jovial about "retiring" while the rest of the country (much less global economy) has collapsed.

So while he's dancing away to the tune of "So long, farewell, aufwiedersein, good-bye....", I can only offer him "Sayonara Mutha F@*#er."


Additional note: any taxpayer funds utilized for the probable presidential library to be constructed in recognition of Bush, should be regarded as misappropriation of funds.

[steve_spackman]

Actually yes. If there is any purposeful thing that he managed to accomplish it would have to be that he presented an exact blue-print of what this country (much less the world) doesn't need for leadership on such a large scale.


Like some other folks here, I was amused with his incredible perceptions about himself and how he was reluctant to acknowledge (perhaps the truth of as well) the condemnation of his precious legacy.

Now he's all jovial about "retiring" while the rest of the country (much less global economy) has collapsed.

So while he's dancing away to the tune of "So long, farewell, aufwiedersein, good-bye....", I can only offer him "Sayonara Mutha F@*#er."


Additional note: any taxpayer funds utilized for the probable presidential library to be constructed in recognition of Bush, should be regarded as misappropriation of funds.

VERY WELL SAID

[BDunnell]

Like some other folks here, I was amused with his incredible perceptions about himself and how he was reluctant to acknowledge (perhaps the truth of as well) the condemnation of his precious legacy.

Now he's all jovial about "retiring" while the rest of the country (much less global economy) has collapsed.

I agree. His folksy tone, yet again, was extremely distasteful.

[TOgoFASTER]

Inspector Clouseau was benevolent.

[Dave B]

I agree. His folksy tone, yet again, was extremely distasteful.

+1. And if McCain had won, we'd have Palin giving out more of the same.

The press conference to which I referred in my opening post was a disgrage. I can only assume that Bush was unaware it was being broadcast, unless he somehow thought that presenting such a shambolic image was in some way a good thing.

A little more contrition wouldn't go amiss.

[555-04Q2]

Also Saddam was offered billions to just leave. WOW what part of that offer was bad?

fousto, thats just another typical American philosophy to fixing a problem... throw more money at it :down:

[Daniel]

fousto, thats just another typical American philosophy to fixing a problem... throw more money at it :down:

Typical South African using his brain :rolleyes: :p

[555-04Q2]

What about the people he has saved from being killed under the friendly Saddam regime? Or is the hatred for America so great, that any objectivity stops when it comes to him?

You are joking, right :?: Bush had no right sending Americans to Iraq to die themselves and kill Iraqi's, it is not his country, nor mine nor yours. Bush spread bullsh!t to achieve his personal goals and to show his daddy that he could at least do it.

And no, I dont hate America or Americans. In fact I love the American way of life and Capitalism. I hate Bush and the bullsh!t he spreads and the people he murdered. Good riddance to the worst American president of all time.

[555-04Q2]

Typical South African using his brain :rolleyes: :p

:erm: My wife would argue that point with you :p :

[Dave B]

Happy days: Bush has just left the White House for the final time.

[chuck34]

Happy days: Bush has just left the White House for the final time.

Oh, thank God. Now there will be no more war, poverty, anger, or global warming. It truly is a great day.

Seriously, it is amazing that the most powerful job in the world can be handed over so peacefully. I just think the expectations for "the big O" are a bit over-blown.

[airshifter]

You are joking, right :?: Bush had no right sending Americans to Iraq to die themselves and kill Iraqi's, it is not his country, nor mine nor yours. Bush spread bullsh!t to achieve his personal goals and to show his daddy that he could at least do it.

And no, I dont hate America or Americans. In fact I love the American way of life and Capitalism. I hate Bush and the bullsh!t he spreads and the people he murdered. Good riddance to the worst American president of all time.

Actually, according to the UN, Bush or any other member state did have the right to go into Iraq. And if you ever bothered to actually read the UN weapons reports, you would find that much of the "bs" he spread was proven fact.

Dislike him or anyone else all you want, but don't do it out of ignorance of the facts.

[steve_spackman]

Oh, thank God. Now there will be no more war, poverty, anger, or global warming. It truly is a great day.

Seriously, it is amazing that the most powerful job in the world can be handed over so peacefully. I just think the expectations for "the big O" are a bit over-blown.

most powerful job in the world???? oh how the ignorance flows

[steve_spackman]

Actually, according to the UN, Bush or any other member state did have the right to go into Iraq. And if you ever bothered to actually read the UN weapons reports, you would find that much of the "bs" he spread was proven fact.

Dislike him or anyone else all you want, but don't do it out of ignorance of the facts.

Iraq never had WMDs....

[Roamy]

Great Post Air - you are right on !!

[steve_spackman]

Great Post Air - you are right on !!

well considering that most of the people posting on certain threads are from the US of course they will be 'spot on' :rolleyes:

[Camelopard]

Actually, according to the UN, Bush or any other member state did have the right to go into Iraq. And if you ever bothered to actually read the UN weapons reports, you would find that much of the "bs" he spread was proven fact.



Can we have some more detail please, in particular the "bs" part?

[Camelopard]

Great Post Air - you are right on !!

Fousto, you still here? I thought you would hiding out with your buddies in underground bunkers waiting for the day you can become a hero like:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy_McVeigh

[airshifter]

Iraq never had WMDs....

Iraq had chemical weapons found during inspections, chemical warheads, and ongoing chemical programs with information found to include nuclear programs. Learn to read facts before you keep spouting your endless misinformed anti US crap.

And if you were half informed, you would understand that just the removal of the inspectors was legal cause for the US or any other member nation to enter Iraq, without further resolution from the UN. These and many other provisions were dictated as part of the cease fire agreement after the Gulf War. It didn't even matter if any evidence or trace of WMD programs was found, it would have still been legal.



For someone often claiming the "yanks" are ignorant, you're making quite a case for yourself. It's a shame you've never bothered yourself with facts made public information by the UN since their original reporting.

[chuck34]

Iraq had chemical weapons found during inspections, chemical warheads, and ongoing chemical programs with information found to include nuclear programs. Learn to read facts before you keep spouting your endless misinformed anti US crap.

And if you were half informed, you would understand that just the removal of the inspectors was legal cause for the US or any other member nation to enter Iraq, without further resolution from the UN. These and many other provisions were dictated as part of the cease fire agreement after the Gulf War. It didn't even matter if any evidence or trace of WMD programs was found, it would have still been legal.



For someone often claiming the "yanks" are ignorant, you're making quite a case for yourself. It's a shame you've never bothered yourself with facts made public information by the UN since their original reporting.


Give up Air. For you and I will never be right, just because we are American.

Shouldn't that have all changed once "the intelligent one" became president at about noon today? Funny how when things change they tend to stay the same.

[TOgoFASTER]

LOL

[555-04Q2]

Actually, according to the UN, Bush or any other member state did have the right to go into Iraq. And if you ever bothered to actually read the UN weapons reports, you would find that much of the "bs" he spread was proven fact.

Dislike him or anyone else all you want, but don't do it out of ignorance of the facts.

No one had the "right" just as I dont have the right to come into your house uninvited. Its called double standards air. How can any country that has tens of thousands of "WMD" say to another country you cant have any and if you do have we are going to take you out :?: Just look at the Iran situation. They have as much right as anyone else to develope their nuclear capabilities, Iraq was included in that book. The West (USA, Europe etc) has bullied smaller and third world civilisations for their own gain, nothing else. You cant beat your kids and then tell your neighbour he's an idiot when he beats his. Double standards.

[Roamy]

He who has double the power get another standard. However the Islamic Republic of Europe is trying to give one back. This may in turn sever your lifeline unless of course you are a black south african.

[Camelopard]

However the Islamic Republic of Europe is trying to give one back.

This one is getting boring Timothy, about time you changed the record.....

Maybe you should be listening to mariachi music now.......

[airshifter]

No one had the "right" just as I dont have the right to come into your house uninvited. Its called double standards air. How can any country that has tens of thousands of "WMD" say to another country you cant have any and if you do have we are going to take you out :?: Just look at the Iran situation. They have as much right as anyone else to develope their nuclear capabilities, Iraq was included in that book. The West (USA, Europe etc) has bullied smaller and third world civilisations for their own gain, nothing else. You cant beat your kids and then tell your neighbour he's an idiot when he beats his. Double standards.

The cease fire agreement says you're wrong, like it or not. Had he not shown his intentions to use his weapons to invade other countries, he could have continued to develop them.

Most countries face arms limits after losing a war which they started. There is no double standard involved.

[TOgoFASTER]

This one is getting boring Timothy, about time you changed the record.....

Maybe you should be listening to mariachi music now.......

LOL

[Roamy]

This one is getting boring Timothy, about time you changed the record.....

Maybe you should be listening to mariachi music now.......

truth is alarming I take it - and it should be!!

[555-04Q2]

He who has double the power get another standard. However the Islamic Republic of Europe is trying to give one back. This may in turn sever your lifeline unless of course you are a black south african.

Dude, I'm "white".

[555-04Q2]

The cease fire agreement says you're wrong, like it or not. Had he not shown his intentions to use his weapons to invade other countries, he could have continued to develop them.

Most countries face arms limits after losing a war which they started. There is no double standard involved.

I didnt see any missiles flying into Bush's neck of the woods. And as for "intentions", think Nagasaki & Hiroshima...

[F1boat]

fousto, I assure you that there is no danger of Europe becoming an Islamic republic, not even if the EU accepts Turkey. We keep religion away from politics. Which I am not sure that the GOP does.

[Jag_Warrior]

I wonder if McCain is (really) thinking of going for an ear, a kidney punch or if his knee is about to swing up?

http://3bluedudes.com/hug.jpg

[Roamy]

Fousto, you still here? I thought you would hiding out with your buddies in underground bunkers waiting for the day you can become a hero like:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy_McVeigh

Cameltoe - My sh!t is all out in the open!! No need to hide from anything!!

[steve_spackman]

Cameltoe - My sh!t is all out in the open!! No need to hide from anything!!

wanna be careful what you say..you may have the FBI knocking at your door and arresting you for your views..in the land of the free...

[Jag_Warrior]

wanna be careful what you say..you may have the FBI knocking at your door and arresting you for your views..in the land of the free...

It's more likely that some nice lad from MI6 will put a hood over your head and toss you in a padded room somewhere.

And tell the Queen that Gomer says, "Hey!"

[steve_spackman]

It's more likely that some nice lad from MI6 will put a hood over your head and toss you in a padded room somewhere.

And tell the Queen that Gomer says, "Hey!"

tell the queen yourself..im sure she would enjoy your company

[Jag_Warrior]

I'm sure she would. I'll bring some grits for breakfast. :)

[Easy Drifter]

Steve reminds me of a character from the defunct Cdn. comedy show The Royal Canadian Air Farce. The Bitter Clown.

[steve_spackman]

Steve reminds me of a character from the defunct Cdn. comedy show The Royal Canadian Air Farce. The Bitter Clown.

thanks. glad to know you are thinking of me mate :kiss:

[AAReagles]

... Seriously, it is amazing that the most powerful job in the world can be handed over so peacefully. I just think the expectations for "the big O" are a bit over-blown.

I agree. Whether people realize it or not, it's going to be a long process to recover. Folks are going to have to be patient.