The weasels in Bush's cabal make Nixon look like Mary Poppins. There's no need to apologize for the truth. Hell, just watch the way their lies about Kerry are parroted by the white-cap college republicans who reply to this.
only after you apologize for wrongfully calling him a liar...
lie
n.
1) A false statement deliberately presented as being true; a falsehood.
2) Something meant to deceive or give a wrong impression.
So where exactly are the WMDs? Did Iraq try to buy yellow cake from Niger? Did Iraq sponsor the 9-11 attacks? How long did he fly jets in the National Guard? Does John McCain really have a hidden black love child? Did Cheney not let energy companies write federal policy? Did the vast majority of the tax cuts not go to those making more than $250,000 per year? Did he not commit securities fraud when he sold his Harken stock?
It's harder to find a truthful statement by Bush than it is to find him lying through his pointy teeth.
Channel 5, during a preview for the 11:00pm news, said, "Find out what shocking thing Presidential candidate John Kerry said about President Bush, tonight at 11!" or something like that.
Shocking?
SHOCKING??
What would have been shocking is if Kerry had said Bush was an honest, fair President. Now THAT would have shocking.
Not because he said it, but because it's so far from the truth as to be risible.
We may be seeing a level of corruption that surpasses Reagan and even Nixon here, folks. Kerry should not only not apologize, he should go on TV and say, "Not only did I say those things, I stand behind them. And here's more proof."
WF
"lie
n.
1) A false statement deliberately presented as being true; a falsehood.
2) Something meant to deceive or give a wrong impression."
Now following the above definitions you gave...prove President Bush lied! Did he deliberately present falsities, or was he presenting the "facts" that were presented to him? President Bush's statements on Iraq's WMD was not given deceitfully or falsely. EVERYONE, yes even John Frickin Kerry, believed that Iraq possessed those weapons. And the quotes have been posted here before to support that. Should it turn out that Iraq had no WMD, does that mean President Bush willfully and knowingly misled the country? NO. It means that we had insufficient, even faulty, intelligence. Does a $1.2 billion cut in intelligence spening around '95 sound familiar?
Just a little ranting from one of your "white-cap" college Republicans, as you put it.
Todd, I refer you to Brian's posting (below) on the DOD's Office of Special Plans. We may have had bad intelligence, but all the Democrats you mention DIDN'T TAKE US TO WAR OVER IT.
How many times do we have to keep saying that? Jesus H. Smack-Flappity Tap-Dancing CHRIST.
WF
I do agree that this is totally blown out of porportion...but Bush never lied about any of those things. If those above the 250,000 level have the heaviest (by far tax burder) then of course they will get more back from an accross the board cut. My very working class family got a lot back too and they aren't complaining...perhaps you overlook the impact of a few grand on us lowly citizens. It was accross the board not directed only on the wealthy.
I'm pretty sure folks who support Kerry, or the Democratic party in general, are in agreement with him. Who cares that he said it? It's true. Plenty of Repooplicans are lining up against Resident Bush too.
The citizens of Nazi Germany didn't see or have a clue what their never-failing, never-wrong, "great" government did to them. Just as the majority of Americans don't see what the future holds for us.
Bush will be re-elected. Things we think are bad today are nothing compared to what will happen between 2004-2008.
You all compare him to Regan or Nixon, he isn't even in the same league. Hitler is more like it.
We've got a whole new style of McCarthyism, a new style of moral and ethnic cleansing, a fresh bold new look on limiting freedoms, false patriotism by guilt and fear, the list goes on and on.
How bout some fun quotes from Bush himself:
"There ought to be limits on freedom." (this is a big one and yes, he's limiting them alright)
"The year 2000 will be a turning point for the New World Order."
(sure you don't think it exists, keep dreaming)
"I've been to war. I've raised twins. If I had a choice, I'd rather go to war."
(Hahha, he said he went to war)
"God told me to strike at al Qaida and I struck them, and then he instructed me to strike at Saddam, which I did, and now I am determined to solve the problem in the Middle East."
(don't we call these holy wars and/or put people in straight jackets for saying things like this?)
"I didn't -- I swear I didn't -- get into politics to feather my nest or feather my friends' nests."
(riiiiiiiiiiight)
"For states that support terror, it is not enough that the consequences be costly-they must be devastating" (Unless they are Saudi Arabia that provides us with oil and tons of money in our economy.)
This man is running our country into the ground. But, he will win the election. Be it, fixed voting, passing FCC legislation in the name of "indecency" to silence people (and kill free speech), pulling Bin Laden out of a hat like a rabbit at a magic show a month or two before election, or to continue to himself terrorize the American people with smoking mirrors and straight up bullshit...regardless he will win.
Nathan, I DID pay less taxes this year.
You know why?
Because, in these times, I can't find a full-time job in my field. State universities/community colleges are cutting positions right and left, and private colleges are losing endowment funds. But hey, that $300 I got way back in 2001 kept nastiness at bay for, what, 10 days to 2 weeks?
So yeah, I've paid less taxes under Bush.
BECAUSE I CAN'T GET A FREAKIN' JOB.
WF
So cutting taxes just to look good to the American people but then borrow and steal from Social Security to make up for that money is ok? Every dollar they gave back to the American people they got back and then some.
Then with Homeland Security being forced on States and lack of education funding, states are forced to up sales tax, up property tax, etc. The $300 that most average Americans saw means nothing. I've gone through my accounts and maybe I saved $300 from his tax cuts, but I've paid nearly $600-800 more so far in property and sales taxes. Sure these are State issues but FORCED by current federal regulations. States have no other choice.
I am a former white cap college grad whose cap is more gray right now. Not only did I get an education out of my own investment of money and time, I got lots of long-life experience. Sometimes that converts to wisdom. My wisdom says George Bush is a good person and doesn't lie. Like a good leader he acts on the best information available to him. Dick Cheney has a distinquished career in government and business. He is a good man, and he doesn't lie. What we have is a conservative vs a liberal alternative. Do we want a government who believes that citizens can't take care of themselves, that opportunity doesn't exists for people who are willing to take risk and work hard, that achievers need to be penalized for their efforts, that the best way to protect ourselves from competition is by isolation, and that to protect ourselves from terrorists threats we should delegate to an ineffective committee. If so, pick John Kerry and get Ted Kennedy as a bonus. Otherwise pick Bush and Cheney. If you don't like either, pick Nader. If he wins, we are all "doomed". Meanwhile, this older wise man suggests we stick to the real issues and thoughtfully examine the alternatives being proposed by these these candidates. Oh, and we should really try hard to get off the propaganda statements, political innuendos, and developing art that says "If you can't deal with the facts, call 'em names!
They all lie, if you think otherwise, you're extremely jaded.
Cute, Jack. The man in the race who has killed face-to-face in war becomes your ineffectual committee. The two guys who got wealthy running their companies into the ground before getting bailed out by defrauding the government through crony-capitalism become "good honest businessmen."
And they're running our Country into the ground just like they have done with former businesses.
Meanwhile, our rights are being stripped from us like candy from a baby. The religious right is smiling. Still even as they smile, it's still not enough. They are voting on a FCC bill today that got pushed through in the name of decency. Up to a 500K fine for anything indencent times the number of stations broadcasting it, TV, Radio, etc...web? Also, these fines will be placed on individuals vs. the stations.
Will free speech survive? I think not.
Powell Jr. was strategically placed in that position of power for a reason.
People wake up!
On the good side, look at the constitution that was signed in Iraq. It's everything Bush supporters hate about America.
http://balkin.blogspot.com/
2004_...078930006007010
Maybe universities are cutting positions because they went hog-wild creating positions during the good times??
That refund that you got back was the democrats idea as it makes very little actual economic snese. Refunds have little effect on the economy. Have some pity for the working man Wes.
Covington, perhaps you could enlighten us as to how Bush and Cheney defrauded the government to get rich...?
And yes all this FCC crap is basically the same as Nazi Germany...indecency hearings=killing millions of jews...
anonymous you might consider staying as such...
Its people like you and arguments presented like these that will win Bush reeletion. You can really turn someone like me who really doesn't like Bush all that much into a fervent supporter just by your rhetoric.
There was never a year under Cheney's leadership that Halliburton was not fined for fraud on government contracts. Even more serious was that under Cheney's leadership they circumvented the Iraq sanctions to make underhanded deals with Saddam. And even more serious than that was that under Cheney's leadership Halliburton was caught and fined for selling nuclear triggers to Libya.
Bush defrauded the tax payers of Texas with massive land fraud during the building of the Rangers stadium. Then with Harkin Energy he dumped stock using insider information illegally.
There are volumes of other examples. But clearly reality isn't going to affect the opinion of anyone who still at this late hour thinks Bush is an honest leader.
I never said it's the same as Nazi Germany. I said German citizens had not clue what they were being led into, just like Americans now. Germany was pursuaded by fear and patriotism. German citizens very much like Americans today were extremely manipulated. I'm talking pre-holocaust, you know, when people loved their leader, Hitler.
Also, you mean win the election, not re-election...he was never elected in the first place. I too made the mistake of saying re-election above. I apologize.
There's another connection to the Nazis... both Bush and Sharon seem to believe it's legitimate for a nation to sieze lebensraum.
Of course I meant, "had no clue" above not "have not clue". Damn fat fingers.
Italy under Mussolini is far closer to Bush's ideal... "Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini
The free market is one of the most democratic and powerful inventions in history. Corporatism is the attempt to destroy the free market in favor of trusts and monopoloies benefiting only crony-capitalists.
Saving the free market from being destroyed by America-hating Bush supporters is one of the most important goals of this election.
Covington,
Perhaps I was too cute. The ineffective committe I was referring to was the UN!
Powell Jr was put in place buy Clinton,
Your tinfoil hat is slipping
Nope. Powell was on the commission since November 1997 as one of the republican members, but was nominated by Bush to chair it on 1-22-01.
Um, going hogwild creating positions, Nathan?
Parents demand a low student-faculty ratio.
Universities try to run themselves like a business (that in itself is a huge mistake), so they hire more faculty to keep up with demand. It's the capitalist way, after all!
And don't tell me about "pity for the working man." I saw Reagan's economic policies (a harbinger of present-day ones) destroy my dad's tractor dealership as well as our farm. WE'VE NEVER RECOVERED FROM THAT.
Is this personal? HELL YES. I've made it my mission to take supply-side economics, ground it into the dust, and plow it with salt.
WF
erm, grind it into the dust.
I'm really a calm, rational person. Ask Brian!
WF
(taking deep breaths)
Lemme continue, more calmly.
My working-class (hell, damn near working-poor - you live on a farm these days) family didn't really get much back from the tax cuts, and it was immediately swooped up by previously outstanding debt (which we are stuck with almost in perpetuity due to the policies of the 1980s).
Jobs are not being created, at least not in this country; even the GOP is outsourcing its phone-fundraising efforts to India. This can't be good for our economy.
Tax cuts primarily aimed at the upper brackets have not led to job creation. Yes, I got my $300, and was happy to get it, but it didn't do a lot of good in the long run. And even that, a short term thing, I only got because the Democrats put it in there (as Nathan pointed out, ironically). Otherwise, the much-vaunted Bush Tax Cuts would have given me exactly the cost of one meal at McDonald's per month.
And that's assuming I didn't supersize.
What would I do? A couple of things:
(1) Immediately roll back taxes to 2000 levels, and almost immediately give the middle/working class/working poor a tax cut based on those.
(2) Close every single tax loophole.
(3) Immediately launch a full-scale audit into any company that fled to the Cayman Islands to avoid taxes, and make sure they never get government contracts again. EVER.
(4) Ditto for those that asked for tax breaks from state, local, and federal sources, then downsized or shipped jobs overseas.
(5) (and this is the most radical one) Either through the courts or through an Amendment , overturn the Santa Clara decisions of 1881.
WF
Lemme continue, more calmly.
My working-class (hell, damn near working-poor - you live on a farm these days) family didn't really get much back from the tax cuts, and it was immediately swooped up by previously outstanding debt (which we are stuck with almost in perpetuity due to the policies of the 1980s).
Jobs are not being created, at least not in this country; even the GOP is outsourcing its phone-fundraising efforts to India. This can't be good for our economy.
Tax cuts primarily aimed at the upper brackets have not led to job creation. Yes, I got my $300, and was happy to get it, but it didn't do a lot of good in the long run. And even that, a short term thing, I only got because the Democrats put it in there (as Nathan pointed out, ironically). Otherwise, the much-vaunted Bush Tax Cuts would have given me exactly the cost of one meal at McDonald's per month.
And that's assuming I didn't supersize.
What would I do? A couple of things:
(1) Immediately roll back taxes to 2000 levels, and almost immediately give the middle/working class/working poor a tax cut based on those.
(2) Close every single tax loophole.
(3) Immediately launch a full-scale audit into any company that fled to the Cayman Islands to avoid taxes, and make sure they never get government contracts again. EVER.
(4) Ditto for those that asked for tax breaks from state, local, and federal sources, then downsized or shipped jobs overseas.
(5) (and this is the most radical one) Either through the courts or through an Amendment , overturn the Santa Clara decisions of 1881.
WF
Michael K. Powell is Chairman of the Federal Communications Commission. He was sworn in as a member of the Commission on November 3, 1997. He was designated Chairman by President Bush on January 22, 2001.
Speaking of the Cayman Islands. Check all the subsidiaries of Halliburton. Sorry no tin hat here, I get data from valid sources, from the looks of it, unlike, Mick. Hehe.
This particular link is from LexisNexis.
http://www.gseis.ucla.edu/
course...alliburton.html
Kind of in a rush so don't have time to respond to much...but I don't think hitler ever gardnered more than 40% of the vote in Germany...not exactly popular.
Not sure about your exact numbers, but Bush wasn't "popular" either.
Neither Bush or Hitler were elected by the popular vote.
Hitler was appointed Chancellor by President Hindenburg. The highest percentage of the popular vote that the Nazis ever received in a free election was 37.3 percent.
So the only difference on how they got elected, or better word, appointed...bush had a few more poplular votes. 
Thanks Nathan for pointing that out.
Don't neglect to mention the important details of how Hitler came to power... the center-left coalition collapsed when the communists decided to go their own way. Economic catastrophe, followed by the Reichstag fire that Hitler blamed on "terrorism"... every step of the way seeming to be just a small logical step in isolation, then they realized they wanted the resources of their neighbors.
To me it seems Bush idolizes Hitler's "successes". Or, maybe he was just brought up on stories pasted down from his Grandpa and his "dealings" with Hitler and the Nazis. Prolly a fun topic when the Bush's get together. They invite Karl Rove over the next thing you know it's a Nazi convention. Of course I'm being sarcastic, or am I?
What liberals had to say about Bush's supporting the Taliban in May, 2001:
http://www.robertscheer.com/1_na...umns/
052201.htm
Enslave your girls and women, harbor anti-U.S. terrorists, destroy every vestige of civilization in your homeland, and the Bush administration will embrace you. All that matters is that you line up as an ally in the drug war, the only international cause that this nation still takes seriously.
That's the message sent with the recent gift of $43 million to the Taliban rulers of Afghanistan, the most virulent anti-American violators of human rights in the world today. The gift, announced last Thursday by Secretary of State Colin Powell, in addition to other recent aid, makes the U.S. the main sponsor of the Taliban and rewards that "rogue regime" for declaring that opium growing is against the will of God. So, too, by the Taliban's estimation, are most human activities, but it's the ban on drugs that catches this administration's attention.
Never mind that Osama bin Laden still operates the leading anti-American terror operation from his base in Afghanistan, from which, among other crimes, he launched two bloody attacks on American embassies in Africa in 1998.
Sadly, the Bush administration is cozying up to the Taliban regime at a time when the United Nations, at U.S. insistence, imposes sanctions on Afghanistan because the Kabul government will not turn over Bin Laden.
43 Million is chump change. Do some searching on how much money Saudi Arabian Royal Family has given the Taliban over the years and even months before 9/11.
Certainly. Especially the Saudi Bush family friends he had spirited out of the country to evade FBI interviews while the rest of the nation was grounded from flying.
Anonymous and Covington,
Hitler and Nazis and Mussolini, oh my! Hitler and Nazis and Mussolini oh my! You are going to need a bigger Wizard to solve that one. Please think facts and get rational. How do you sleep at night!
Wes,
Last time we raised taxes when the economy was as difficult as you describe, we helped turn a recession into a depression. Is the current liberal direction a fan of the Herbert Hoover and the 1928-32 Republican philosophy? That combination would make strange bedfellows. Specifically, how did Reagan's economic policies destroy your Dad's tractor dealership? A very broad collection of manufacturing and distribution businesses and jobs did very well in the mid to late 80's (I was there) after Reagan implemented the tax cuts and the exhorbitant interest rates started dropping (remember Jimmy, an honest, ineffective President with a great smile). Except for the military, Reagan expected Congress to control spending since he gave the money back to those paying taxes. We spent ours joyfully but Congress did too (even though they didn't have it). If you want one last "wisdom" based fact(in fact whether you want it or not) - You got to limit how much money they have to spend to help "us". Otherwise, they will help "us" in ways we could never or want to dream of.
Where haven't I stated a fact?
As Jack said:
"You got to limit how much money they have to spend to help "us". Otherwise, they will help "us" in ways we could never or want to dream of."
This coming from a guy that supports the massive amount of money Bush is spending to help "us" now along with the limits on borrowing. We have limits in place, Bush just raises the limits.
I think today is a living example of how they will "help us" in ways we could never or want to dream of.
I'd say something, but I just can't take a comment thread where so much time is spent comparing President Bush to Hitler seriously.
This is the 44th comment in the thread.
As opposed to what, Rob? Rep. Tom Cole of Oklahoma saying a vote against Bush is a vote for Osama?
Spare me your moralizing.
WF
And how is closing loopholes raising taxes? It's their fair share, Jack. I'm not even espousing huge increases. Hell, I would settle for keeping the Bush Tax Shifts as is (at least to their point of expiration, but no more and no extensions) if you got rid of ALL loopholes and refused to grant ANY tax breaks to companies that laid off or outsourced.
Fair share, man. I'd accept that.
But it won't happen.
WF
Yeah, because somebody in the same party as me said something I'm not allowed to disagree with dispicable, ad hominem attacks with no base in reality. Yeah, that makes sense.
Time for a Beer!
I am obviously not from the Gen X group, so I like harder stuff. I am having a scotch - on the rocks! Besides that, the good news is . . . this article sure generated many and exciting comments.
It certainly did. Cheers.
Alcohol? Bah, I've got some fresh Afgan heroin I'm shooting!!! Hahah.
Brian, the beer was good (I met some friends at Jimmy D's in Montgomery after the CT walk).
Hmm...so Rob is pissed that I'm tying in one Republican with another? I guess that almost makes up for the thousands of times that I've been told I'm (a) going to hell, (b) turning this into a socialist nation, (c) immoral because I occasionally agree with the Democratic Party.
I refer you to the case of pot v. kettle.
And cheers to all involved indeed! This is comment number fifty-two!
WF
Yes, now 53! The ladies were sure looking good at MLT.
Nothing to add. Just bumping this up to 54.
"I am having a scotch - on the rocks!"
Jack, please don't dilute your Scotch.
I can't drive 55. So I'll give you 56.
Jack, you should talk to a friend of mine who's a member of the Single Malt Scotch Club. He can hook you up phat.
WF
Nicholsons, downtown. The best whiskey selection I've seen outside Atlanta or Phoenix.
Single malts for the flavor, definitely, but a nice blend on the rocks for a cocktail...Johnny Walker Black on the rocks - mmm mmm good...
59. Get a life.
Nicholson's does a great job buying up all the good stuff from all the liquor stores.
I'm saving a bottle of Springbank's 125th anniversary offering. Only 12,000 bottles made. I'll pop that one open on my birthday. L'chaim.
Commenting by HaloScan
