You basturd....

 

Quit beating around the bush, say what you really mean!

 

Because I knew of Mr. Bush LONG before he became President of the United States. He was my Governor here in TX fo ryears before that. Not that I had anything against; nor do I now- but, I do feel that he got where he is not because he's smart, not because he's earned it, not because he was the best choice- but- because his name was George Bush.

I think he is where he is because of Name Recognition. I hate to dumb American's down to that level- but I told my wife in 1998 that since he was already a governor, the next step for him was Presidency- and that he'd make it, if on nothing else- he'd get there on name recognition.

I was right.
---------------------------

It is for this exact same reason that I'll make this statement today- We'll dig this post up in 2008 and see if I am right.

IF JEB BUSH DECIDES TO RUN FOR PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, HE WILL GET THE REPUBLICAN NOMINATION, AND HE WILL WIN THE PRESIDENCY BASED SOLELY ON NAME-RECOGNITION. MANY EASILY-LED AMERICANS WILL VOTE FOR HIM, SIMPLY BECAUSE THEY ARE USED TO A "BUSH" BEING THE PRESIDENT. PLUS, THERE ARE NO REAL LEADERS IN THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY OR IN THE REST OF THE US CAPABLE OF BREAKING THIS CYCLE SHOULD IT REAR IT'S UGLY HEAD

I mean come on- when was the last time you've ever seen a US President as inarticulate as President Bush? If he's speaking from a prepared statement he is just as good as any other President. But, in a town-hall setting where he has to answer tough questions- he is easily rattled; he'll never be as polished (No pun intended) as Clinton was.

Not only that, but it just sat wrong with me that as soon as Bush got on board- all of a sudden we had beef with Iraq again; just like we did when Cheney was affiliated closely with the white house from 1988 - 1992. It just didn't seem random, that we ended up picking that sword up again.

I'll always support the troops because I used to be one. I've served in Desert Storm under Bush 1, and I have friends over there in harms way right now; deep down, I wish I still was one. Again, I'm not anti-Bush- we're all in the same car (Conservatives, Moderates, Care-Lessers & Liberals) I just don't believe Bush is the one behind the wheel.

 

CIA, that is what makes him believeable and sets him apart from the polished politician. He is just himself.

 

Clinton studied all his life to do one thing, become a politician. Nothing more. Not a businessman, just a weasley politician.

 

What the hell is wrong with bush? I like bush, I thought most men liked, or loved bush? Sure, some bush is not really a bush at all but it was a bush, it's naturally suppose to be a bush but got trimmed...

Come on men, give the bush, or bushless, a break...

 

We've got bush!

 

Really? Interesting revisionist history. It was PNAC that spent a lot of time trying to convince Clinton to invade Iraq. Clinton chose isolation, not invasion. "Regime change" has been around for a long time, it was promoted in regards to Iraq by PNAC, again. You know PNAC, the guys behind Bush, the guys he has appointed nearly everywhere.


Exactly like Reagan.


Only by the narrow minded buddy. Let go of your hate.

 

Which "facts" have been incorrect? If we can't learn a little something, what's the point of having the conversation? It's not like anyone is changing their mind

Nice truck by the way. I hate people that don't have to put up with winter

 

You gotta play fair here...

Reagan never lied about anything. If you "recall" Reagan could not "recall" at the time and never could "recall" again...

Clinton could "recall" he just couldn't "inhale" or "insert"...

 

A bit of a cop out, but that is what is on the records. Also "fact" is that Reagan had Iraq removed from the list of "States That Sponsor Terrorism" so he could "do business" with them (go ahead, look it up, the lists are still available). He also "covertly" provided assistance to the Contras starting in 1981 (I'm sure his memory was still intact then). When that activity was made illegal in 1982 by the Boland Amendment (you have to wonder why it was done covertly if it was not illegal) Reagan found ways around it. Even though it was illegal for any part of the federal government to be involved, the Reagan administration did it anyway. While Reagan had all of his facilities.

So yes, play fair. You evangilize Reagan while demonizing Clinton for a BJ. While Clinton certainly lacked morality when it came to his marriage, he possesed a lot of it when it came to social issues, and had more compassion for people than most presidents. Neither one of them were saints, but both were the best available at the time, and both did a lot of good.

"Reagan never lied about anything." Never? He NEVER lied? Surely you didn't mean that!

 

Libel....it's print; slander is verbal.

 

I don't know but he blew the *hit out of an asprin factory and killed a few people all over a BJ, that's compassion?

 

 

Maybe GWB is just smarter than most give him credit for. I've always had a feeling that he's intentionally played up his "folksy charm" routine to make himself stand out among the other politicians. Don't kid yourself; GWB is as slimy as anyone who becomes president. Sleazing your way in is pretty much a pre-requisite. I think the man is an extremely skilled politician.

Momalle, interesting how we used to argue during the election about the merits of Bush and Kerry and now were on the same side. Just goes to show that it's the moderates against the extremes and the difference between all of us reasonable people in the middle is really very small indeed.


Then again, I'm probably just a liberal in denial b/c I won't demonize Clinton and polish Bush's ****. I'll tell you who is in denial, it’s the guys who say "I don't blindly support everything bush does!" and then jump on any opposing viewpoint like a fat guy on a donut (and trust me that's pretty fast, I should know). That’s denial of being just another unthinking puppet of the Republican machine. Maybe you want to go and hang with the stooges that drink the lefty kool aid; you've actually got lots in common after you get past the politics. Think about it, self righteousness, arrogance, a fair amount of ignorance, little tolerance, no objectivity, limited vision, delusional thinking and denial of reality. Should be a great party.

OK, I'll be back tomorrow night as I have no computer access tomorrow at work. I'm sure I'll be roasted pretty well by then.

Now back to our regularly scheduled pointless bickering.