and a maven of malapropism. I can think of nothing more fitting for his reign of mendacity and legerdemain to fall effete and hopefully dead silent while we work to rebuild our self respect and former reverence from the rest of the industrialized world.
He intends to become just as idle and boring after his job as he was before it, except that he's looking forward to those lucrative speaking engagements. Why do I think he's going to be terribly disappointed with that expected income?
Did somebody really nominate this guy? Did people re-elect him? Did the Supreme Court think it was a good idea to install him?
I hope so much that we're through with our experiment in idiocracy.
"Why do I think he's going to be terribly disappointed with that expected income?"
Answer-- because you're an idiot. He'll make a fortune because there are people out there whose job it is to take care of former Presidents...They bought Reagan a house and millions in speaking fees--- Clinton was homeless and owed millions when he left office, not anymore. GB is no different. The big boys take care of their own- that's the American way.
"Did somebody really nominate this guy?"
Answer-- Yes.
"Did people re-elect him?"
Answer-- Yes.
"Did the Supreme Court think it was a good idea to install him?"
Answer-- install is such an ugly word. How about validated his election.
"I hope so much that we're through with our experiment in idiocracy."
Answer-- well, considering that Hillary and Obama are the current favorites, idiocracy looms right around the corner. Enjoy...
excited about a BJ from a gal with baby fat, than the problem of a moron in the White House.
You may think that a moron would do less damage, but it sure doesn't look that way.
The 2000 election was a mathematical dead heat, that is, the margin of error was incredibly larger than the actual differences that were counted.
What disturbed me about it was (a) FL state disenrolling voters without notice or opportunity to respond before the election, and (b) the Supremes holding that an injunction was justified because one man's interest in his reputation was more important than the nation's right to the best possible count. Any lawyer can rant about that particular injunction, and note that the Supremes specifically refused to designate it as precedent, despite the fact that there was never anything like it before.
IMHO, there should have been no lawsuits. The parties should have recognized it's a dead heat, and the Supreme Court should have stayed the fuck out of it. They should have taken the opportunity to negotiate a govt like grownups do in France all the time.
The problem is that too many Americans see politics as jamming something down another person's throat, because they aren't used to working with the sort of ongoing relations that many businesses, eg construction contracting, requires. It's too much scoring from assholes like Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter, and not enough working together, as you find in most businesses on a daily basis.
Dear Jack,
Couldn't agree more.
And since we're at it, IMHO the US ought to do away with the Presidency. Way too much power concentrated in the hands of one person. Too many people in the US treat the President as if he were some kind of god.
America should switch to British parliamentary democracy like the Canucks and Aussies and Kiwis. In that system, prime ministers have a limited amount of power, and they can be chucked out at any moment if a "No Confidence" vote succeeds. Having to go through the incredibly laborious process of impeachment is what is preventing Bush from being forced to vacate now. So we're stuck with him for another 16 months. Considering how much damage he's done already, he could still do a lot more.
A trillion of our bucks for an unnecessary war! Now THAT'S criminal. And the US's reputation ruined globally. And us poor saps could wind up with LE just for wanting a little pleasure in life.
Also, I have to add that if Congress would have the huevos to stick by the fact that only it can declare war, instead of the examples we've seen over the last 50 years where the President calls the shot and Congress falls in line saying "Yes sir, Massa' Boss, yes sir." then it's highly likely neither of the catastrophes in Vietnam or Iraq would have happened.
He might be taken care of like a "big boy" as he always has (you betray some irony there) but speaking engagements are a completely different story. Bush is a terrible speaker and has no credibility. Few are going to pay to hear what he has to say. If anything, after buying him a house et. al, he is going to be paid not to speak. He has no contact with reality when he says he's going to get a lot of speaking engagements.
As it is, he has taken care of his cronies so well, they will put him up anyway. Though when he gets bored, he will probably go back to the bottle. Compared to that, getting blow jobs from interns would be better.
I think you'll lose your respect for him a few months after he's out of the White House. He will be out of style quickly. Like disco.
You should be happy for your cause that your party nominated and INSTALLED Bush (there were no election results to validate at that time. It might help to read the decision). He has ruined the Republicans for decades. Actually, be proud, they've ruined themselves with Bush.
If Clinton and Obama lead in the polls, it's because of Bush's performance. He screwed you over. Enjoy your lifetime of the Bush legacy.
"He has no contact with reality". This is a humorous statement coming from a guy who publicly stated he was moving to Canada because he felt liberals all over the country were going to be rounded up and tortured. How are those moving plans going? You're a certified wacko! (You should really go back and delete that)
Bush got over 60 million votes last election. I think he'll be able to put the asses in the seats if that is what he chooses to do. Your patriarch, William Jefferson Clinton, never even got a majority. He rode the 43% wave into the White House. If you made any money (you don't even hobby- what the hell are you even doing here?) I would bet you Hillary is going to lose BAD!!! Another Democrat "hold your nose and vote" candidate. They never win. The Democrat controlled congress is polling in ther low 20s. They are once again reminding America what Democrats are capable of...nothing!!!
even from the most spastic, clumsy-assed hitter and runner to come down the pike in, well, a week at least.
Your underlying fallacy is that the stupidity of one party proves the smartness of the other. It's a said fucking day in America when the Democrats are the party of responsibility.
As for going to Canada, the outcome of the last election was highly doubtful, especially with some mendacious vote suppression by Republicans. And getting out while the getting is good is still advisable, IMHO. I'm not here because I still want to be; I'm not leaving because I can't. Which do you find wacko? That I want to leave this soon-to-be 3rd-rate power, or that I can't? The middle-class is shrinking. I'm middle class. It's in my Republican selfish economic interest to go someplace with a future.
You're talking about an election where 58 million voted for Kerry-- yes, they all just loved a speech by John Kerry.
Bush is a guy who needs an audience just to help him look interesting. It stands to reason that when he gives a speech, he should be paying them. Oh, a few might pay at first. He's not going to put any butts in seats, especially as Iraq continues to fester-- which it likely will no matter who is in office.
If you ask me, few things are more wacko than calling YOURSELF a Silent Majority. Or stupider. Like you can't stand by your own opinion?
You have it completely wrong. People vote for Bush because he has an AGENDA that he openly discussed. The guy stands for something and publicly says what it is and then stands behind it. People voted FOR George W. Bush; not against somebody else. Kerry and the rest of the democrats stand for nothing except hating Bush. They were the minority and did nothing but complain about Bush and now they are the majority and do nothing but complain about Bush. They have no agenda at all. I know a lot of democrats and NONE of them liked Kerry. Guess what? None of them like Hillary either.
And you are a wacko. You didn't mention economics with your big move announcement. You mentioned the potential of being tortured. BTW, there is no other country with the economic opportunity of this country. I fully recommend Canada if you plan to be homeless, otherwise I suggest you do your homework before muttering more nonsense about Canada being superior to the USA in any way at all. Their beer is overrated as well.
You or your friends over on the right collect guns just in case the government goes Stalin on your ass, that's sane; you know it could happen. But when I when I say that I feel I should get to Canada for the same reason, I'm a wacko because you know it could never happen.
You might say one doesn't sound particularly honorable to you, but they are both equally sane and based on the same set of premises. At the very least, when people are collecting guns like crazy, and a high percentage of them are collected purportedly as protection against the government, isn't it just a little smart to get out before the shooting starts?
Yes, I said I wanted to go to Canada due to fear about being tortured, I felt it acutely before the election, I absolutely meant it and still stand by it. I'm not alarmed now, but it still has a good possibility of still happening in my lifetime. If I said I feared the government would go after dissenters, not necessarily myself, and not want to leave, wouldn't you then say I was being phoney?
As for not mentioning economic reasons, no not in those particular posts, I didn't. But I have said it in other posts pretty clearly. (Unfortunately, a problem is Canada doesn't want me.)
No matter how the US economy looks at this moment, it can't be maintained for much longer. It's fundamentals are terrible. We have high debt in all sectors. Consumer debt per household now exceeds household income. That's incredible! Debt is now acting as a price support for the consumer economy. Our major industries, the auto industry for one, is its death-throes. It's hard to see how anybody, government, people anybody, are going to repay this debt.
We have a totally unhealthy population, overweight and getting older. That's the energy that should drive this economy and it can't. Our education system has been the shame of the world for 50 years.
That's only some of the problems; they are overwhelming now.
So, Bush has an agenda and he stands for something. Apparently the agenda didn't involve the agendas you attack. Health care? Oh, shoot that one down as "no agenda." Balancing the budget? Too boring, that's not an agenda for you. Housing the homeless? That's an evil agenda because it taxes you to help those people. Policing for terrorists here at home rather than training them in Iraq? No, it's a more exciting agenda to be at war.
So, after you've shot down every good agenda the government could have, now you're morally bankrupt and you need an agenda. So he sells you a twisted one: underfund stem cell research, attack all those cushy civil liberties, declare us at perpetual war with terrorism, and go to war in Iraq.
Wow! An agenda! I'll take it. And that tax-cut too. Besides the tax cut, did it even match the agenda you had? Could the problem have been that you didn't have one?
Bush has a discredited, bankrupt agenda, like say the Confederacy was. Everybody can see it but those who need it most. In 60 years, when there's five hundred thousand people left in Iraq, and peace is finally declared, then you'll call it a success, and you'll say Bush was right all along.
-- Modified on 9/4/2007 10:05:22 PM
Yeah, Bush stands for record deficits, unnecessary wars, cronyism and incompetence, and destruction of the Constitution. It'll be fun to watch Republicans run on that platform next year.
and a maven of malapropism. I can think of nothing more fitting for his reign of mendacity and legerdemain to fall effete and hopefully dead silent while we work to rebuild our self respect and former reverence from the rest of the industrialized world.
is thinking of doing speaking engagements.
That's like taking ethics lessons from the former POTUS.
Yeah, George HW Bush was a pretty corrupt son of a bitch.
now who's being the partisan hack?