« Bush Inauguration Protest 2005: Thousands Will Rally on Jan. 20 to Protest Against the Presidential Inauguration. | Main | Syria and George Bush »
February 03, 2005
United States Federal Budget Deficit dollar is up on GW Bush Speech
US BUDGET DEFICIT - Oil, the dollar and President Bush
The dollar has been going straight down ever since Bush got us in the hot seat with the rest of the world. Today, the dollar rallied against the euro and the yen after President Bush reiterated his resolve to halve the U.S. budget deficit by 2009.
In Bush's State of the Union address our president said that he will send Congress a fiscal 2006 budget that holds discretionary spending growth below inflation, makes his first-term tax cuts permanent, and remains on track to cut the deficit "in half" by 2009.
We hope that happens, but the greenback's strength is also related to negative comments on the Japanese economy from Bank of Japan Governor, Toshihiko Fukui, according to Paul Mendelsohn, chief investment strategist, at Windham Financial Services.
Oil futures meanwhile moved lower in New York trading after falling under $47 a barrel for the first time in three weeks in the prior session. Crude for March delivery was last down 59 cents at $46.15 a barrel in electronic trading.
In the latest OPEC meeting member countries now feel the former $22 to $28 per barrel is not a realistic target and want to keep oil prices right here in the 40's for now. So, get used to over $2 per gallon at the pump. And things might get worse before they get better.
Saudi Arabia who export millions of barrels a day of Oil are now making twice as much surplus due to the higher prices. And to account for the glut in Oil they now are exporting over 5 million barrels a day. This translates to almost $200 million per day in profit for that country coming directly out of...........Guess which country's wealth?
Posted by Tuck at February 3, 2005 10:20 AM
Comments
-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Byron [mailto:mpbyron1@cox.net]
Sent: Sunday, February 13, 2005 11:50
To: Mike Byron
Subject: Nothing to Fear But Bush Himself
http://www.counterpunch.org/roberts02122005.html
This from a REPUBLICAN member of Ronald Reagan’s Cabinet!
As Things Fall Apart, Lie and Lie Again
Nothing to Fear But Bush Himself
By PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS
Suppose you are the party responsible for invading a country under
totally false pretenses. Suppose you had totally unrealistic
expectations about the consequences of your gratuitous aggression.
What do you do when, instead of being greeted with flowers, you find
your army is tied down by insurgents and you have no face-saving way to
get out of the morass? If you are the moronic Bush administration, you
blame someone else.
Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Rice, Cheney and Bush blame Syria and Iran for the
troubles that they brought upon themselves. The Iraqi insurgency, say
the Five Morons, is the fault of Syria and Iran.
Here is Rumsfeld excusing himself for his dismal failures in Iraq:
"Partly it's [the insurgency] a function of what the Syrians and the
Iranians are doing."
You see, the facts that the US invaded Iraq on false pretenses, killed
and maimed tens of thousands of Iraqis, shot down women and children in
the streets, blew up Iraqis' homes, hospitals and mosques, cut Iraqis
off from vital services such as water and electricity, destroyed the
institutions of civil society, left half the population without means
of livelihood, filled up prisons with people picked up off the streets
and then tortured and humiliated them for fun and games are not facts
that explain why there is an insurgency. These facts are just
descriptions of collateral damage associated with America "bringing
democracy to Iraq."
The insurgency, according to the Five Morons, is because Iraq and Iran
won't close their borders, thus letting in "terrorists" who are
responsible for the insurgency. Some might think that this accusation
is an example of the pot calling the kettle black coming as it does
from the US, a country that has not only proven itself incapable of
closing its own borders but also has demonstrated no respect whatsoever
for the borders of other countries.
The Bush administration, which already held the world record as the
most deluded government in history, has now taken denial to
unprecedented highs by blaming Syria and Iran for its "Iraqi problem."
Why didn't Americans realize that it is dangerous to put a buffoon in
charge of the US government who hasn't a clue about the world around
him, what he is doing or the consequences of his actions?
Why is Secretary of State Rice trying to set Iran up for UN
sanctions--which the US can manipulate to justify invading another
Muslim country--when the US has proven to the world that it cannot
occupy Baghdad, much less Iraq?
Are Iran and Syria going to quake in their boots after witnessing the
success of a few thousand insurgents in tying down 8 US divisions? The
bulk of the US force in Iraq is engaged in protecting its own bases and
supply lines. It was all the generals could do to scrape up 10,000
Marines for their pointless assault on Fallujah.
What is the point of the Bush administration's bellicosity when it has
been conclusively demonstrated that the US has insufficient troops to
successfully occupy Iraq, much less Syria and Iran? The American people
should be scared to death that they have put in power such deluded
people.
Are Americans going to fall for the same set of WMD lies a second time?
Are Americans going to deliver up their sons, and perhaps daughters as
well, to be drafted and sent to the Middle East to be killed and maimed
for no American cause?
The US Treasury is empty. The once "almighty" dollar is tottering. The
US military is stretched to the breaking point. Former allies look
askance at America. Hatred of America has reached an all time high.
The Bush administration must bring its policies in line with its means
before it leads our country into greater disaster. The Bush
administration and its deluded sycophants must stop poking fun at
"reality-based" experts and listen to a reality-based message.
There is no possibility of the US imposing its will on the Muslim
world. By its behavior the Bush administration is confirming Osama bin
Laden's propaganda and breeding more terrorists. Much better to address
the causes of Muslim discontent--America's enabling of the Israeli
government's mistreatment and dispossession of the Palestinians, and
America's export of "culture" that glorifies the sexual promiscuity of
women.
It does not serve America for Bush to impose Ariel Sharon's agenda on
the Middle East. Bush's insane policy is producing rising anger that
endangers Israel and America's puppet governments in Egypt, Jordan, and
Pakistan along with the Saudi regime. Ironically, this is recognized by
Egypt's Mubarak and Jordan's King Abdullah, who was unable to refrain
from pointing out that Bush has managed to create a Shi'ite crescent
from Iran to Lebanon.
What, King Abdullah wonders, will be the next unintended consequence of
the moronic administration that the American people in their superior
wisdom and virtue have seen fit to empower in Washington. "If our aim
is to win against terrorism, we can't afford more instability in the
area," warned the king prior to the ill-fated US invasion of Iraq.
"It's the potential Armageddon of Iraq that worries all of us."
It should worry Americans, too.
Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the
Reagan administration. He was Associate Editor of the Wall Street
Journal editorial page and Contributing Editor of National Review. He
is coauthor of The Tyranny of Good Intentions.He can be reached at:
pcroberts@postmark.net
Posted by: Abel P. Ochoa at February 14, 2005 03:21 PM
Abel,
Stop being such a sore loser and tell us who the democrats have that will make a difference.
Kennedy?
Kerry?
Clinton?
Clinton?
Dean?
All losers in any upcoming national election.
Stop whining and help to fix your pathetic party.
Posted by: Wayne at March 13, 2005 09:43 AM
Wayne,
Who's whining? Oh, I forgot, you still haven't learned to read. Thanks for giving me credit but I didn't write the article you tried to read--it was written by Paul Craig Roberts who was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan administration. Did you get that? Roberts worked for President Reagan. Let me repeat myself--Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan administration. He was also an Associate Editor for the Wall Street Journal editorial page and Contributing Editor of National Review. He is coauthor of The Tyranny of Good Intentions. Paul Craig Roberts can be reached at:
pcroberts@postmark.net
Once again, your ignorant POST follows:
"Abel, Stop being such a sore loser and tell us who the democrats have that will make a difference.
Kennedy?
Kerry?
Clinton?
Clinton?
Dean?
All losers in any upcoming national election.
Stop whining and help to fix your pathetic party."
Posted by: Wayne at March 13, 2005 09:43 AM
Posted by: Abel P. Ochoa at May 4, 2005 10:09 PM
Abel,
You are a left wing hack.
Let me ask you something, do you think everyone should have a chance with a private SS accoount? Or just certain teachers?
I already know what your answer will be.
Posted by: Wayne at May 5, 2005 10:37 PM
Wayne,
Smart Americans do have private investment accounts and I encourage that. I wish that more Americans would take advantage of this important opportunity but our country shouldn't add on this kind of responsibilty. Our country's only responsibilty should be to implement and manage the SS insurance that it currently provides the American people and we really shouldn't allow our government to lie in order to modify or weaken Social Security.
Your POST follows:
"Abel, You are a left wing hack.
Let me ask you something, do you think everyone should have a chance with a private SS accoount? Or just certain teachers?
I already know what your answer will be."
Posted by: Wayne at May 5, 2005 10:37 PM
Posted by: Abel P. Ochoa at May 12, 2005 01:49 AM
I POST the following article without any comment. Visit http://www.lewrockwell.com/roberts/roberts101.html if you wish to see the original. --Abel
A Reputation in Tatters
by Paul Craig Roberts
George W. Bush and his gang of neocon warmongers have destroyed America’s reputation. It is likely to stay destroyed, because at this point the only way to restore America’s reputation would be to impeach and convict President Bush for intentionally deceiving Congress and the American people in order to start a war of aggression against a country that posed no threat to the US. America can redeem itself only by holding Bush accountable.
As intent as Republicans were to impeach President Clinton for lying about a sexual affair, they have a blind eye for President Bush’s far more serious lies. Bush’s lies have caused the deaths of tens of thousands of people, injured and maimed tens of thousands more, devastated a country, destroyed America’s reputation, caused one billion Muslims to hate America, ruined our alliances with Europe, created a police state at home, and squandered $300 billion dollars and counting.
America’s reputation is so damaged that not even our puppets can stand the heat. Anti-American riots, which have left Afghan cities and towns in flames and hospitals overflowing with casualties, have forced Bush’s Afghan puppet, "president" Hamid Karzai, to assert his independence from his US overlords. In a belated act of sovereignty, Karzai asserted authority over heavy-handed US troops whose brutal and stupid ways sparked the devastating riots. Karzai demanded control of US military activities in Afghanistan and called for the return of the Afghan detainees who are being held at the US prison in Guantanamo Bay in Cuba.
Abundant evidence now exists in the public domain to convict George W. Bush of the crime of the century. The secret British government memo (dated July 23, 2002), leaked to the Sunday Times (May 1, 2005), reports that Bush wanted "to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy. . . . But the case was thin. Saddam was not threatening his neighbours, and his WMD capability was less than that of Libya, North Korea or Iran. . . . The [UK] Attorney-General said that the desire for regime change was not a legal base for military action. There were three possible legal bases: self-defence, humanitarian intervention, or UNSC authorization. The first and second could not be the base in this case. Relying on UNSCR 1205 of three years ago would be difficult."
This memo is the mother of all smoking guns.
Why isn’t Bush in the dock?
Has American democracy failed at home?
May 17, 2005
Dr. Roberts [send him mail] is John M. Olin Fellow at the Institute for Political Economy and Research Fellow at the Independent Institute. He is a former associate editor of the Wall Street Journal, former contributing editor for National Review, and a former assistant secretary of the U.S. Treasury. He is the co-author of The Tyranny of Good Intentions.
Copyright © 2005 Creators Syndicate
Paul Craig Roberts Archives
Posted by: Abel P. Ochoa at May 17, 2005 12:56 PM
To All:
Some Bushite Republicans still refuse to admit the truth--that George W. Bush has been lying and continuous to lie to the American people. Well, visit the following web site and read the "TOP SECRET" information regarding Iraq and learn the truth.
--Abel
Read the rest by visiting
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1593607,00.html
The Sunday Times - Britain
May 01, 2005
The secret Downing Street memo
SECRET AND STRICTLY PERSONAL - UK EYES ONLY
DAVID MANNING
From: Matthew Rycroft
Date: 23 July 2002
S 195 /02
cc: Defence Secretary, Foreign Secretary, Attorney-General, Sir Richard Wilson, John Scarlett, Francis Richards, CDS, C, Jonathan Powell, Sally Morgan, Alastair Campbell
IRAQ: PRIME MINISTER'S MEETING, 23 JULY
Copy addressees and you met the Prime Minister on 23 July to discuss Iraq.
This record is extremely sensitive. No further copies should be made. It should be shown only to those with a genuine need to know its contents.
Read the rest by visiting
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1593607,00.html
Posted by: Abel P. Ochoa at May 21, 2005 01:33 PM
Six months of a new Bush term. I am sure glad that I didn't vote for him.
Posted by: JM at May 25, 2005 06:30 PM
Time for an Iraq Accounting
By Jim Hoagland
Sunday, May 29, 2005; Page B07
American troops in Iraq and Afghanistan deserve the nation's thanks and respect this Memorial Day. But they deserve more. They deserve a clearer, more realistic explanation from President Bush of their strategic mission, and they deserve directives that show them precisely how to accomplish it. The American public also needs explanations and, yes, directives. The White House seems to underestimate the fraying of national support that is occurring for the U.S. military presence in Iraq and, to a lesser extent, in Afghanistan. Freedom may be on the march, but Americans need to be told more specifically and persuasively how U.S. and allied combat deaths abroad advance that march now, not years from now.
A similar initiative is needed on homeland defense. Confusion and drift mark public understanding of how individuals, communities and the nation as a whole should respond to terrorist strikes on U.S. soil. Citizens can learn more about how cities would be evacuated or other responses to a future Sept. 11-type event from watching doomsday television dramas such as "24" than from the administration.
A refocusing of the war against terrorism needs to come in several forms, from high-profile presidential speeches to secret strategy documents that will shape campaign orders to troops in the fields.
The effort should start with Bush's public declarations during this year's commemoration of American valor on the battlefield. His visionary rhetoric about freedom and American values helped rally the nation during the shocks of the past four years. The reassuring approach, he can argue, has kept public anxiety to a minimum.
But the time for reassurance alone is over. It is time for details, for a sense of a blueprint, for a progress report that goes beyond listing what has happened to the top nine or 15 or 25 al Qaeda leaders targeted for capture or elimination. That simple, clear report should trace as well where the United States stands in fighting the Salafi extremist networks that intend to rule or destroy Muslim lands.
There is, in fact, progress to report. Middle Eastern and European governments increasingly understand that they, too, are targets of al Qaeda or its associates. This leads them to provide Americans with counterterrorism help denied in the past.
There is also a spreading awareness of -- or perhaps a spreading willingness to talk about -- the disastrous global consequences that an abrupt American retreat from Iraq would bring, even as ideas of retreat become more seductive here. One example: Islamic nations are renewing conversations among themselves about a possible peacekeeping force to help in Iraq, Arab diplomats report.
Despite the bloodshed and horror there, Iraq also records progress. Elected Kurdish and Shiite leaders practice democratic and responsible politics and reach out to the Sunni community to join the process. U.S. forces are increasingly confident in the ability of newly formed Iraqi battalions to handle security duties, and the Americans will soon demonstrate that confidence by increasing Iraqi command responsibilities in joint Iraqi-U.S. units.
These are elements on which the administration can build a bridge out of Iraq for American combat units before the end of Bush's second term. Any discussion of timelines and adding Islamic or other peacekeepers must be carefully handled, but Bush needs to do and say more to establish that U.S. control in Iraq is not only finite but is urgently dispersing.
That would also help the White House's effort to redefine American strategy in the global war on extremism to be contained in a new national security presidential directive. A revised strategy should emphasize the use of special operations units on tightly targeted missions rather than deployment of conventional forces to large bases.
The United States fights a movement as well as individual terrorist chiefs such as Osama bin Laden or Abu Musab Zarqawi. The diffuse nature of the enemy requires greater international cooperation to clamp down on transfers of money and terrorists across borders. It also requires effective counter-ideology efforts to discredit and disgrace the jihadists in Muslim opinion.
The need for a public accounting from the president is also made urgent by the revulsion that many Americans and others feel over the confirmed abuse, torture or, in a very few cases, executions of prisoners by American forces.
It is not enough to say these incidents are isolated and are being investigated and to leave it at that. They will undermine cohesion at home and falsely symbolize American values abroad as long as the broader context of the struggle is not explained by the nation's leaders and in more direct and compelling terms.
_________________________________________________
I couldn't agree with this more.
_________________________________________________
Posted by: JM at May 30, 2005 10:55 AM
Hey, everyone!
I just got back from a trip to France and England. It was absolutely beautiful, and I would very much love to live in France now (:
I hope everyone is doing well!
Peace,
Flaming Liberal
Posted by: FlamingLiberal at June 14, 2005 09:22 AM
Hi FL,
I'm glad you liked France and England. They're both wonderful places to visit. I think London is much more beautiful than Paris, but that's just me.
Sadly, I will never go back to France again after finding out that they sponsored terrorism through their Oil for Food scam, causing millions to die of starvation as well as all the innocents that died under Saddam's torture and rape rooms. The pictures of those mass graves bring tears to my eyes and I can never look at France and not see the millions they caused to die. It's not the people's fault, but their corrupt government. Still, I don't want any of my money going to such corrupt and destructive regimes.
But anyway, did you see the Louvre? As an artist, I always enjoy art museums.
The other day I watched a really funny movie called "Team America: World Police." It was hilarious. I don't want to give away too much, but something happens to the Louvre in the movie.
Welcome back to the good ole USA. There's no place like home...there's no place like home...
Posted by: Amber at June 18, 2005 11:32 AM
Well, the Downing Street memo has turned out to be another Rather-gate or Newsweek-gate propaganda attempt. All lies, as we all knew.
They can't even produce the memo now, saying someone typed it up and then threw it away. They admitted that they may have made some "typos" & "mistakes" when they retyped it to another document. What a joke. Do they really think the American people are dumb enough to believe that hogwash?? (Oh wait, I can think of at least one person on this blog who's dumb enough to believe it, but he's senile.)
Just like the negative stuff on G'itmo. They still believe if you say it enough times everyone will take it as fact. Too bad they can't figure out that they no longer own the monopoly on the press. We know the truth and we're pretty tired of all the lies from Dick "Naziboy" Durbin, Harry "Senile as Carter" Reid, Nancy " I hate men" Pelosi, John "Low IQ" Kerry, Robert "KKK" Byrd, Teddy "I got away with murder" Kennedy, John "I'm the biggest hypocrite" McCain and others like them.
And some try to say Bush lied, but no one as yet has been able to come up with one REAL piece of evidence to that accusation.
The truth is that the terrorist prisoners at G'itmo get gourmet meals, which means they get better food than our troops. Also the get air conditioning, free Koran's, 5 prayer times a day and basically better living conditions than before they were captured.
When our troops and even innocent civilians are captured by the terrorists, they don't have to worry about feeding them because they cut off their heads. The innocents are slaughtered by these terrorists and you never hear any complaints from the left-wing side of the media.
I know we shouldn't treat the terrorists the way they treat us, but giving them better conditions than our troops is an outrage. The only torture they get at G'itmo is having bottles of water poured on their heads. I bet our troops would call that refreshing out in the desert in Iraq. It's all so backwards. I get to where whenever I hear anything said by a Democrat, I immediately question it, since they haven't told us the truth in decades.
When will the Democrats ever start supporting our troops, who risk their lives for our freedoms? That's what I'd like to know.
Posted by: Fred at June 20, 2005 01:26 PM
Flaming Liberal, I'm sure you can go live in France if you want to. Maybe you can talk your parents into moving there soon.
Ever since we found out France was integral to the Oil for Food scandal, 75% of this country believes France is too crooked a country to visit or eveb buy products from, so you shouldn't have much trouble getting a flight to such a place. Maybe you can get some real bargains on tickets.
Bon Voyage', and write us when you get established there. All I hear is complaints from people who live in socialist countries. Maybe you can give us a better account once you're living there.
Posted by: Eve at June 20, 2005 01:36 PM
The US went to war in Iraq because we were atacked, President Bush said.
Will somebody PLEASE tell this guy that we were attacked by Al Qaeda and not Iraq? No wonder he's oblivious to reality, he's misguided. He went for Saddam Hussein instead when we really should be after OBL. Talk about incompetence.
Posted by: Henry at June 21, 2005 12:21 PM
I'm surprised at you, Eve. I once said that you were smart. I take that back after reading your offensive reponse to FL. Now I know you're very immature. Who cares if somebody likes France or not? I certainly don't but I would not insult someone who does.
Posted by: Henry at June 21, 2005 03:09 PM
Hey Fred, don't worry, we're all much too smart these days to believe the lies the Democrats constantly say. No one can prove Bush lied about anything, but if anyone asked us to list the Democrats who continue to lie to us every day, this site would blow its bandwidth.
And besides, I thought the Dems loved liars. Bill and Hillary were the biggest liars in our history and everyone loved it when those hillbillies were in the Whitehouse.
I have to admit, I really enjoyed having Bubba as "the prez." He was hilarious, always grabbing women's asses and dropping his pants all the time. Hillary, on the other hand, is scary in that anyone who tries to tell the truth about her either disappears or gets vilified by the left-wing press. I guess having to ride the coat-tails of your husband all the time would make you a bitter person. Even people who work for her are scared all the time. Remember she almost killed Stephanopolous with an ashtray once.
But despite that fact that they were an embarrassment to our nation, they were kinda fun. Even when they tried to get our of the tangled webs they created with their lies it was entertaining. Who can forget Bill saying "it depends on what the word 'is' means." What a joke !! That guy was truly an embarrassment, but we all enjoyed making fun of his ineptness. It was like having that "Hey Vern" guy as president. I wonder... did Bill Clinton have the lowest IQ of any president? I forgot. Maybe it was Gore I'm thinking of. Remember, he flunked out of divinity school. Talk about dumb !! Let's see, maybe Carter was the stupidest. He was definitely the worst leader ever, but he may not have been a total dolt like Kerry was. When I found out Kerry had a lower IQ than Bush I laughed out loud. I knew it !!
But, back to the Clampetts, I mean Clintons. You have to admit, those 8 years were by far the most entertaining ever. I know we lost a lot of credibility and respect around the world thanks to their stupidity, but it was a fun ride, and who cares what the rest of the world thinks anyway?
Now with Bush & Cheney it's like having the adults come back and clean up the mess left by the children. Not quite as fun, but necessary every once in a while.
It might take more than 8 yrs to clean up the mess the Clinton children caused. :)
Enjoy !!!
Posted by: Art at June 21, 2005 04:17 PM
Hey Fred, I did some more research. You're right that Democrats don't tell the truth. Republicans don't tell the truth either. Bush told us that there were wmd's in Iraq. He didn't lie but was it the truth? No. And remember when Bush's dad said "Read my lips no new taxes"? That turned out to be a lie because he raised taxes a few years later. And what about Richard Nixon, huh? That Republican turned out to be a crook because of Watergate. Stop saying that only Dems lie because some Republicans do it too. You should question what any politician says, don't assume it's fact just because he's a member of your political party.
Posted by: Henry at June 21, 2005 04:48 PM
Hey Art, I bet Dubya got better grades than Kerry only because Dubya bribed someone to take his tests for him. If he's so smart, he wouldn't have gotten us into this Iraq mess. Lol.
Posted by: Henry at June 21, 2005 06:15 PM
I totally agree with Fred regarding Guantanamo. Amnesty International is just a far-left organization run by a bunch of liberal sissies who hate America. All we're doing is locking up cold-blooded terrorists and all of a sudden we are the bad guys? That does not make any sense to me.
I read in a newspaper (forgot which one) that the Gitmo prisoners THEMSELVES were intentionally destroying Qurans so they could accuse Americans of desecrating their sacred text. So you see? The prisoners just want to frame the US so it would seem like we have no respect for Islam. No surprise that the liberal-controlled media never mentioned this story.
Posted by: Henry at June 22, 2005 11:37 AM
Hey Henry, it's not as much the lie as to how much harm it causes. Bush didn't lie about WMD's and we all know that from the 911 hearings, but Dick Durbin just made up a bunch of lies about G'itmo and that causes more hatred from the terrorists. I know, I know, they've hated us for decades, but to deliberately lie in order to make them hate us more and thus jeopardize our war efforts is despicable.
And now Durbin is making some half-assed apology that isn't really an apology at all. Hell, he means it !! He probably thinks we deserved 911. He should be thrown our of office for his treasonous words on the Senate floor.
Both parties lie, Henry, but the lies coming from the left are neverending and they are hurting our soldiers as well as innocent citizens. To call our soldiers Nazis is outrageous. And don't forget that the constant lies from the left-wing senate are amplified by the left-leaning mainstream press.
Posted by: Art at June 22, 2005 05:04 PM
Hey Henry, good one. Another myth bites the dust.
On the other hand, it's entirely possible that the reason Dubya has a higher IQ score and got better grades than Kerry may just be because Dubya is smarter than Kerry. To tell that truth that wouldn't be much of a stretch. Neither is much of an intellectual, but remember during his speeches, Kerry had trouble remembering which lies he told each day. Most Americans when polled had to agree that he seemed confused most of the time. But we all have agree he's good at marrying rich widows who inherit money from men who know how to make their own money.
But don't worry about it, he was smarter than Gore. (of course Gore's IQ was the same as his belt size, and that increased quite a bit after he lost in 2000. ha ha !!)
Gore and Kerry have one thing in common: they're both losers. :-)
Posted by: Art at June 24, 2005 12:17 AM
Hey Art, Bush may have been a good student, but he has poor grammar skills. How does a guy who got A's in college not able to speak English properly? I mean, come on, words like "misunderestimated" and "strategery"? Sounds like the words of a little child.
"I know the human being and fish can coexist peacefully." - George W. Bush, Saginaw, Mich., Sept. 29, 2000
"I will have a foreign-handed foreign policy." —George W. Bush, Redwood, Calif., Sept. 27, 2000
"Too many good docs are getting out of the business. Too many OB-GYNs aren't able to practice their love with women all across this country." — George W. Bush, Poplar Bluff, Mo., Sept. 6, 2004
What the hell do these mean? Do these stupid remarks make any sense to you? Every president said something stupid, but Bush made the most ridiculous quotes. I used to admire Dubya but now I lost my respect for him because of his stubborness and this never-ending quagmire in Iraq. If things continue as they are, thank God he's out of office by January 2009. This is just my opinion and I have no problem if other people in this blog disagree with me.
I'm aware of Dick Durbin's atrocious comments. I'm glad he's not my senator. He apologized sincerely but I would not vote for him if I were from Illinois. I would vote for John McCain though. He is a well-known moderate and he served in a North Vietnamese prison camp for several years. At least McCain never joined the anti-war movement like Kerry did. I enjoy talking to you, Art. You're a nice and smart guy. Talk to you soon.
Posted by: Henry at June 24, 2005 08:28 PM
Bulletin:
In another stunning move by ultra-liberal Supreme court judges, power has been given to local government to seize land from the poorer of our population so that it can be sold to rich companies that pay a lot of taxes.
This is outrageous, and could never be accomplished through our democratic system of voting except that those far left judges are appointed and we can't get rid of them.
It's common knowledge now that since the liberals can't win through the system of voting they are getting their agenda of socialism put into place the only way they can, through the courts.
This is a growing problem for our democracy. If they can continue to get their socialist agenda in place without the agreement of the people then we really are doomed to be a totalitarian system government, ruled by the rich and a bunch of crazy left-wing judges.
If you don't know what I'm talking about, search on "Eminent Domain" or "New London" where it happened, or click on the link on my name.
This is more proof that the liberals care more about money, government and socialism than they do for the people of this country. This liberal land-grab especially affects the poor and middle class as usual.
Posted by: Eve at June 24, 2005 10:07 PM
If you ever thought Hillary would be a scary president, consider the power she already has to suppress freedom of speech, and she's only a junior senator right now.
Quoting on the release of Ed Klein's book on Hillary Clinton:
"In what may be an unprecedented act of media censorship, several major TV and cable networks - including NBC, ABC, CBS, MSNBC, Fox and CNN - have cancelled planned appearances of the author of the new, red hot book on Hillary Clinton."
Isn't it funny that when someone like Kitty Kelly writes negative biographes on Republicans she gets invited to Good Morning America 2 or 3 times and appears on every talk show on TV, but Ed Klein can barely get on radio and all the TV stations are cancelling his scheduled appearances.
Tell me there isn't a double standard.
Losing elections doesn't stop the far left from getting their agenda across. Did anyone see how the liberal leaning Supreme Court has okayed having the local government take your land away in order to increase the revenue and power of government?
Remember this day in history. One giant step towards the complete takeover of our freedoms by the socialist/communist party. They said they'd take us over and they did it without us even being able to vote on it. Even some of the Democrats didn't see the ultra-liberals doing such a thing to our freedoms. It's time the Democrats took back their party from the elite leftists, but they won't since that's where all the money is.
And since we know Hillary admires Karl Marx, somehow it all fits together. If I close my eyes I can see our new leader "HITLERY" making us all goose step and holding up her Nazi "Seige Heil" as we all turn over our property rights to the Clinton Empire.
How do we stop this kind of thing from happening? I guess it's time we stood up for our rights.
I'll bet you that more people in this sadly ignorant country know who won American Idol than realize that a new ruling in the Supreme Court gives the government the rights to take their home away from them.
Typical.
Posted by: Fred at June 27, 2005 12:39 PM
Fred, that new book on Hillary is total garbage. Even Bill O'Reilly says it's just character assassination and called for a boycott of the book. She's suppressing freedom of speech? What are you talking about? She's not suppressing anything and she's not a Marxist like you think she is. Only the right-wing Howard Deans and the conservative Michael Moores believe that trash. The liberal media made the decision to cancel those interviews, not Clinton.
If Ed Klein slandered any other liberal in Congress, the left-wing media would still censor him. Since President Bush now currently has the lowest approval ratings and dropping of any second term president, Hillary might even be more popular than Dubya. But I don't think she's as popular as John McCain.
Posted by: Henry at June 27, 2005 03:27 PM
Eve, we already live in a country where the rich control almost everything. America has the longest gap between rich and poor than anywhere else in the world. No wonder because we all know our current president gives more tax cuts to the rich than to the middle-class.
That certainly is a scary ruling. We could lose our homes to the local governments in the name of economic development. But what does liberalism have to do with it?
Eve, some conservatives erroneously think that liberalism and socialism are synonymous. Liberalism does NOT equal socialism. They're two different ideologies of the left-wing just like conservatism and fascism are two different ideologies of the right-wing. Liberals believe in freedom like conservatives do but liberals place more emphasis on civil rights while conservatives stress economic rights. We live in a liberal democracy which is a form of representative democracy. We elect our representatives who are moderated by a written constitution that protects our individual liberties and minority rights in society such as freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, etc. Therefore, liberalism is in stark contrast to totalitarianism. Liberals favor constitutional government, representative democracy and the rule of law. Liberals at various times have embraced both constitutional monarchy and republican government.
Socialism, on the other hand, is based on the belief that democratic means should be used to distribute wealth evenly throughout a society. Although socialist nations may be democracies, socialism requires a high degree of central planning to achieve economic equality. American liberals, although they believe that government should be responsible for education and health, agree that there should be a far smaller role for the government in domestic affairs than socialists. Socialists support much more active government intervention than liberals.
I know all this because I studied political science.
Posted by: Henry at June 27, 2005 04:53 PM
Henry, maybe I'm a dumb guy, but I think I know what he was talking about in all those statements. I know I say a lot of stupid things myself. I'm just glad there's not someone standing around recording every word I say. Just because what a leader says isn't as articulate as you would like it to be doesn't mean they're dumb. I'm not going to argue about intelligence in politics since that's pretty much an oxymoron. To tell the truth, I don't think we've ever had an extremely intelligent president in our history, but we've had some very good leaders and I think Bush is an example of one. He puts very smart people around him, and that shows confidence as well. And he's got a lot of courage to put up with the mainstream media constantly lying. I wouldn't want his job for anything. I don't know where you work, but you may notice that the best managers, VP's, CEO's etc don't micromanage. They hire smart people for each department and let them do their job.
You can find stupid things that everyone on this planet have said at one time or another. Just recently we have Democrats on the Senate floor saying the stupidest things I've ever heard. And their stupid statements are causing more of our military to die. That's not only stupid, but very harmful to our national security. And when given a chance to apologize, they twist it around so the apology is not an apology. Did you hear how Durbin 'apologized'? Maybe you didn't see through it, but most of us did.
I noticed you used the term 'quagmire.' I can tell you listen to Teddy Kennedy. He likes to use that word. Did you know that he's one of the few of our politicians to have never visited Iraq? Did you know that 'quagmire' was first used to describe his brother, JFK's Vietnam situation? Later the term was used to describe Clinton's war in the Balkans. It's taken years, but that area is finally showing some stability. Next, 'quagmire' was used to describe the war in Afghanistan, just two weeks before we defeated the Taliban there. They like to use that word because it paints a vivid picture.
In reality, there is no 'quagmire' in Iraq, and if you believe that then you are either misinformed or just plain uninformed. Or maybe you don't want to believe the truth. Saying that we'll leave there in 2009 when Bush is out of office shows you don't know much about history. Did you know we're still in Europe and the war there has been over for 50 years? Did you know it took 2 years for the insurgency to calm down in that area after the war? Did you know that the "insurgents" in Iraq are coming from Iran and Syria? Did you know that the liberal media has emboldened the enemy and has caused more deaths? Did you know that it is to the benefit of the Democrats for us to lose the war on terror? You need to get with the program. The Democrats are taking away our freedoms very quickly and they want us to lose to the terrorists. If you are against the war, that's fine, but that would mean you think Saddam should still be in power. And if you care about the safety of our country you would support the war in Iraq and anywhere else where terrorism is rampant. We'll win this war, but not with your support, or the support of all the Democrats who care more about votes than the safety and security of America.
Mark my words, when we get attacked again by the terrorists, and we will, that blood will be on the hands of irresponsible Democrats like Kennedy, Byrd, Pelosi, Boxer, Reid and Durbin. Oh, and don't forget that loser McCain. I know you like him, but everything he's done in politics has backfired. The McCain-Feinhold bill is a joke and lately he came up with a ridiculous filibuster rule that caused even more gridlock in congress. I predict McCain gets voted out in Arizona next year because people are sick of his hypocracy and stupidity. He and Hillary should run together, they've got the ignorant Americans believing everything they say.
Just so you know where I'm coming from, I'm not Republican, I just hate most of the Democrats in office (and a few of the Republicans too), but I think going into Iraq was an excellent decision and I think Bush has done a great job to fix a bad economy and fight terrorism. Now if we could just get him to fix SS and continue with Tort reform we'd be in good shape. Oh and to let us continue making refineries so we can be less dependant on foreign oil would be nice too.
I swear I don't know how he can get anything done with the negative power of the media constantly lying to us and undermining the efforts to improve things here and abroad.
It's no wonder the elite media is panicking. They no longer have such a strong propaganda machine anymore. It's still there, we just don't fall for it like we used to.
Posted by: Art at June 28, 2005 11:31 AM
Now you may remember "Talking Points" saying on June 17th that the president better start defining Iraq or he was going to lose the country. Latest polls have support for the Iraq war below 40 percent, which is a disaster.
Nobody but President Bush can make the case. And so today, he will give a speech at Fort Bragg designed to persuade you that the sacrifice America is making in Iraq is worth it.
President Bush has now reached critical mass. And if he doesn't turn public opinion around soon, his second term could become a failure. About 75 percent of the national media is anti-Bush. And those people are pounding the president. If he doesn't respond effectively, he will be damaged, which is exactly what happened to Lyndon Johnson in the mid 1960s.
In addition to Iraq, the president has two other huge problems — rising oil prices and the chaotic southern border. Working Americans are getting badly hurt at the pump. Gas prices for regular unleaded gasoline are up 67 cents a gallon in four years. There's a variety of reasons for that, but they don't matter. If gas prices continue to rise, the economy will totter, and if that happens, you can say hello to President Hillary Clinton in 2008.
President Bush must know he has lost momentum. And even many Republicans are losing patience. His Social Security reforms are going nowhere. And he's backed off tax reform this year.
The president must begin to assert himself and speak directly to you. He also must stop ignoring problems that are getting worse, i.e: gasoline and the border.
It may not be fair, but President Bush will be judged by what he accomplishes in his second term. His administration is not off to a good start. His approval rating is down almost 20 percent in two years. And he's on the defensive.
Posted by: Henry at June 28, 2005 02:50 PM
"In reality, there is no 'quagmire' in Iraq, and if you believe that then you are either misinformed or just plain uninformed. Or maybe you don't want to believe the truth. Saying that we'll leave there in 2009 when Bush is out of office shows you don't know much about history." - Art
Excuse me, Art, I am indeed informed. I wake up every morning hearing about 20 or 30 people getting killed in Baghdad and I am sick of it. So yes, Iraq IS a quagmire and I'm sure others would agree with me. Bush is not telling the truth to us regarding Iraq because he's always giving us this rosy picture of the situation but we all know that lots of people are still getting blown up each day over there. I understand why he does this because he doesn't want to alarm the American public. So YOU need to get with the program.
You misread my post. I never said "get the troops out in 2009." Our troops have to stay in Iraq until the country is stabilized so we can’t bring them home just like that. I said quite explicitly and clearly "thank God Bush is out of office in 2009." I think Dubya is a very lousy president. He doesn't know what he's doing in Iraq, he doesn't know how to fix Social Security, and he doesn't know how to bring the price of gasoline down. What I meant by “his stubbornness” is his insistence to privatize Social Security when clearly the American public is against that proposal. Recently, Bush finally approved of a Republican plan to fix SS without private accounts. The only great moment of him I could think of is his leadership in the wake of the 9/11 tragedy. Did you also know that fewer and fewer people are joining the military because of Iraq? If this keeps up, they might have to reinstate the military draft. And where is Osama bin Laden? Saddam Hussein wasn’t the one who knocked down the Twin Towers and damaged the Pentagon. The president apparently focused on the wrong enemy.
How are the Democrats taking away our freedoms, huh? Another lie from the radical right. You may not be a Republican, but it sounds like you listen to too much of their spin. According to the left-wing media, it’s Bush’s Patriot Act that curtails our freedoms. I don’t believe that baloney because the Patriot Act has helped nab terrorists before they could carry out their evil plans. The mainstream media spews out much more spin in favor of Democrats. That's why I'm not a member of either the GOP or the Democratic Party.
Posted by: Henry at June 28, 2005 10:09 PM
Just in case I get blasted by Bush supporters because of my most recent comments, this is update on what I learned in current events. Recently I said the following:
"Did you also know that fewer and fewer people are joining the military because of Iraq? If this keeps up, they might have to reinstate the military draft.'
Today, the US military reported that it actually exceeded its recruitment goal for the month of June. Let's hope it stays that way so the draft does not come back.
Gas prices also lowered by about one dollar but they are still too high. Other than that, the economy is doing fine. Maybe I was a little too harsh in criticizing Dubya, so I will cut him some slack.
Posted by: Henry at June 29, 2005 11:41 PM
God Bless London.
Posted by: FlamingLiberal at July 7, 2005 11:33 AM
