It's official: Bush sewage plant on the ballot

Man, where to start with this post. *takes deep breath*

I excused Bush's lying? Putting the discussion of incompetence vs willful deception aside for the moment, I did nothing of the sort. I provided an example of one thing that he did that I felt was an accomplishment. Sad? What's sad is that you either cannot discern the difference between listing an accomplishment vs glossing over his pitfalls, or you willfully use such hostile language as a cheap debate tactic.

Again, your assumptions are based on your views of who you think I am rather than the content of my posts. What is disturbing, though, is your black-and-white viewpoint and harsh cracking judgments. These are the raw materials of which religious extremists and political radicals are crafted.

Are you sure? Was this the war agenda as approved by Congress or is this just your Christmas war wish list? What about the goal of removing the Taliban from power? Destroy Al Qaeda? You would be the first to admit you cannot destroy an movement or idea with military power. You can, however, remove them from power as the rulers of Afghanistan, which we did.

This is complete and utter BS. No sign of accomplishment. Not one? You are so full of partisan hatred that you are blinded to reality.

Fair enough. Let's see how the next President does. Like I said in another post, I've yet to see real suggestions from the candidates that will accomplish said goals.

We should do something about this. Agreed. However, the opium problem in the region was not caused by our intervention. It is a difficult balancing act. How to stop the opium trade without disaffecting the same farmers and people of Afghanistan that we want to win over. Doing something about world drug addiction would be a good start. This is hardly GWB's direct fault.

So you're a glass half-empty kind of a person. I see that now. I just love to see partisan politics get in the way of reality.

Another discussion in and of itself, however, we can fret about GWB's f-ups with regard to Iraq or we can focus on getting it right. You seem more interested in losing to prove a political point. Would you have rather had no surge and seen the car bombings continue and the Iraqi government fall apart? Do you want to say to the Iraqi people, "Yeah, sorry we made such a mess of things, but since it's all GWB's fault, we're leaving now. Good luck to ya!"

What's MY excuse for all that you say? Again, stop confusing me with other people you hate.

Again. Stop confusing me with other people you hate.

No, Ferris, YOU'RE my hero.

 

I never credited Clinton for the prosperity of the 90s - he happened to be at the right place at the right time. However, he did the smart thing and stepped to one side, leaving the economy alone. Unlike another President after him I could name who said, "Oh boy! A surplus? PARTY TIME!"

As for Reagan, the Soviet economy (thus their whole system) was going to collapse soon anyway; it just happened to do it on his watch.

 

Maybe. Maybe not. We'll never know without a sci-fi alternate timeline. All I said was that he helped, which I believe he did. If nothing else, he spent them into the abyss with the arms race.

 

There was no maybe about the Soviet collapse, it was already in the process, otherwise they would not have elected a progressive like Gorby. The Soviet Union was already falling apart in all areas, Poland, East Germany, and the Baltics, it was just a matter of time, the only way Reagan pushed it was in his speeches, his massive debt spending was un-necessary.

 

The same is also currently true in Iran. All this bluster is BS. If we just wait a few years they will be broke, and broken. If we "invade" or "attack" all bets are off.

Problem is no one in the current administration is listening to the people who really know. Once again,,,it doesn't fit their world view.

Icarus

 

I believe this is a perfect summary
every fact mentioned on GBII and his people display that their concept is to force fit the world and the domestic US into the personally held views of the people in power...rather than dealing with reality. Combined with greed this has been destructive.
Froley

 

I read the following passage in a book by Kenneth Deffeyes: "Stephen Kotin points out that the Soviet Union, up to 1985, was exporting two million barrels of oil per day. .... At that time, Soviet oil production was larger than Saudi production by a factor of three, but Saudi Aramaco had much lower production costs. Saudi Aramaco resorted to a familiar tactic: a price war. They flooded the world with oil and drove the world price of crude below the Soviet cost of production and transportation. .....After six years without hard currency, the Soviet Union collapsed."

I learned a lot by reading this.

 

Great idea to get rid of Saddam. Bad idea to stay at the party for too long. The drinks were not free.

 

Would have been better if we had planned for the aftermath,,,at least a little bit!

Icarus

 

Your understatement would be funny if were not so true and the results so tragic, both for our troops and the people of Iraq. A lot of needless deaths because of the assumption that this would be a Desert Storm cakewalk.

 

Funded by the sale of Iraqi oil. That "plan" just goes to show that the administration really had no clue what they were getting into.

 

You can't make a statement or argue your points when partisanship is so rampant by the Moveon and radical left leaning folks. They would rather see a socialist type government where the government has more control in our own life. I see big changes coming, but what they are going to be, I don't know. The big change candidate has never really said what he will change, other than he is the candidate for chg. Will it be good or bad, I don't know. I even heard that some Dems are coming over to the popular public opinion that we should start drilling for oil now while alternatives are researched. I bet this is stomach wrenching for the partisan left, agreeing with Bush that we should drill. I'm not partisan at all and will vote for the person that I think is best for the country at the time. If I could look in the future, that may change.

 

What was that line?,,,something like "If it won't play in Peoria, it won't play!" I guess reality isn't a big seller in Peoria.

I don't know who you are accusing of being a "move on, leftist, socialist who would rather have government have more control in their lives". I would be happier if there were some, I say SOME competence in government.

As has been stated elsewhere in this thread, the litany of gross incompetence of the current administration is legion. The lack of planning is not only self evident, but is breathtaking in it's incompetence, by almost ANY measure. Even James Wyatt, who appears to be no flaming liberal, agrees.

I think you should take a deep breath, cast aside YOUR preconceived notions, and open your eyes and your mind, and perhaps you will see that the world isn't always as you see it.

Icarus

 

Well, many posts that I have read have come straight from the talking points of the very far left including the vicious hate and name calling for Bush. I will assume that there are many moderates with the same beliefs. I have had 2 nephews serve in Iraq and didn't like the idea that they had to go there. I still feel we did the right thing (again at the time) and it seems that the congress and Senate agreed at that time. It was screwed up in the aftermath, but who among us would have forseen what could have happen in the future? Many people still think that Gore actually won an they can't seem to get over this. Bush will be gone soon and then we will have someone new to either praise or castigate. Bush is blamed for everything, but it seems that the Dems that were voted into Congress have done nothing. Their rating is even lower than Bush's. Again, too much partisanship on both sides. I do consider myself to be an independant and will vote for the person rather than the party.

 

Abu, there are many conservatives here in the Houston area who are disappointed with the lack of action for six years of Republican control of both houses and the presidency. If anyone was afraid of the Republicans running away with their so-called conservative agenda, those fears were not realized. Of course, Texans knew because he was governor here first, that W was no conservative. Just less liberal. Under his watch here in Texas, we actually had a law passed that forced school lunchrooms to stop frying food. For six years ('01 to '07), we got small and temporary (!) tax relief, and no federal reduction in size or spending.

Two years ago, when both houses went from Republican by a narrow margin to Democrat by a narrow margin, I predicted not much change, and so far I believe I have been correct. Unfortunately the one big agenda item the Republicans WERE able to stop in the last two years (the comprehensive immigration reform bill, dubbed the amnesty bill) has a better chance of getting through in the future, since McCain wrote it, and both major parties seem to be OK with no border enforcement.

If you're interested in sharing, did your nephews return home with positive ideas about the work we're doing over there?

 

They really never said much about it politically other than it is a hell hole. One of them volunteered for Afganistan and will be going there soon. At the time, they got shot at or were dodging RPG's everyday when on patrol. One of them was saved by his chest armor and ended up unconscious for awhile. By the way, I'm not for amnesty and the current law should at least be enforced, but both partys have let this go on for too long to have any affect. Sanctuary cities have really disappointed me.

 

I am also a political moderate (somewhere between Al Franken and Michael Moore), so let's address your points one at a time:

Anyone who read an independent news source instead of the Conservative "mainstream media" would have. Are you really saying "Three tribes that can't stand each other fighting with each other? Who would have thunk?" Are you saying getting rid of the one man who was keeping the Taliban and friends out of Iraq was a good idea?

I entire agree. But again, that's because our Conservative "mainstream media" was playing 24/7 talking heads who asked anyone who questioned the war "Why do you hate America?" - the real question is why do Conservatives hate America? If we listened to moderates like the folks at Mother Jones, we would have saved thousands of lives and billions (soon to be trillions?) of taxpayer dollars.

Bzzt, irrelevant. Congress, as a whole, always has a lower rating than the President. When people talk about term limits for Congress, they really mean "Get rid of all those other bums but keep our guy who we want to keep voting in year after year."

 

AbuGarcia:

"Bush is blamed for everything, but it seems that the Dems that were voted into Congress have done nothing."

Can you spell fillibuster? Do you know what it means?
Do a bit of research!

Icarus

 

Yes, I know what it means, but apparently many people expecting immediate chg didn't know what it means. I really wasn't expecting any changes except for the fact that there will be even more partisanship. Pelosi and Reid are alienating the independants as their agenda is way too left. We should have term limits for all of them in office. When the Repubs went after Clinton, I swore I would never vote Repub again, but then I saw that both sides are just as bad as the other. Once a person is elected, we do not have any idea what they will do. They can say one thing to get elected and then change their minds immediately.

 

Quite the contrary,

While you may think that mainstream Democrats agenda is "too far left",
in fact, MOST Americans as evidenced by MANY polls, reflect that MOST American agree with the Dems more than the Reps if you take away the party label.

The war, the deficit, tax policy that favors the well to do, poor education, same sex benefits, a woman's right to choose, regulation of critical functions, ie fda, faa, fema, etc., good energy policy and on and on and on.

Be thankful that we still have the electoral college system. It provides some protection for the majority, even though people don't like it. Be careful what you wish for with the idea of term limits. The law of unforeseen consiquences will arise.

The fact that little changed after the Dems took control of congress, and indeed lead to increased partisanship, is a result (partly) to the single mindedness of both the Administration, as well as the GOP in congress. The shear number of bills that get voted on with nearly 100% republican support as opposed to the number of Democrats who vote against party lines is eye opening.

As I said before, look and read and study a bit deeper. Your superficial viewing of politics leads to conclusion that are shallow at best, IMHO.

Icarus