Donkeys and Elephants and Delegates,oh my!
Check out the most popular
Bush: Critics Of Gitmo & Abu Ghraib are 'Slandering America'
thinkprogress.org — During an interview with President Bush on Britain ’s Sky News yesterday, Sky political editor Adam Boulton noted that ” there are many who say that some of the Bush administration’s torture and detention policies represent “the complete opposite of freedom.” But Bush quickly snapped back, saying those criticizing his policies are slandering America
MakiMaki- 1306 diggs
- digg it
- neognostic, on 06/16/2008, -12/+221Bush, we are not slandering America, we are standing up for justice and the rights of all people. Nice try with the "If you ain't with us, you are against us" diatribe. STFU you ass.
- Stemnin, on 06/17/2008, -6/+28Only a sith deals in absolutes!
- Loonacy, on 06/17/2008, -17/+5ONLY a sith? Sounds like you're dealing in absolutes yourself.
- suckanucka, on 06/17/2008, -6/+12Lame, stfu thx.
- Loonacy, on 06/17/2008, -17/+5ONLY a sith? Sounds like you're dealing in absolutes yourself.
- durazine, on 06/17/2008, -38/+4The terrorist are not Americans, they don't have our rights.
- growler1, on 06/17/2008, -1/+24America wasn't started with the notion that only certain groups of people have rights.
See "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness."
That's by a guy named Thomas Jefferson. President Bush should look into him sometime.- HanFastolfe, on 06/17/2008, -3/+4"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness."
Which is not Law. It's a wonderful mission statement to justify rebellion against ones King.
"America wasn't started with the notion that only certain groups of people have rights."
As a matter of fact it was. When those same people sat down to codify the nation slavery was written right in. Other (sate) laws disenfranchised women. While at the same time Native Americans were distinctly separated from their land, and US law. - SpeedSteamBoat, on 06/17/2008, -1/+3In all fairness, America WAS started with the notion that only certain groups of people have rights. Slavery found its way into the original constitution, only land owning white males could vote, etc, etc.
However, you are exactly right in principle. It is my belief that the above seeming inconsistencies are merely the symptoms of the imperfect nature of democracy. Many opposed them, but compromises had to be made in order to move forward with forming a union. The founding fathers meant what they wrote in the Declaration of Independence, and we can only hope today to live up to such high ideals which was not possible in their time. - growler1, on 06/18/2008, -0/+1Due respect, the declaration of independence is not just a "mission statement."
- HanFastolfe, on 06/17/2008, -3/+4"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness."
- AnarkeIncarnate, on 06/17/2008, -1/+25You mean Human Rights? Those? Oh yeah, why should we treat people like humans?
If I make an enemy my friend, have I not destroyed my enemy? (A quote by Abraham Lincoln).
Douchebags like you are the ass pimples of society. - RAGEdemon, on 06/17/2008, -2/+18STFU racist redneck scum.
Ever heard the concept of "innocent till proven gulty?" Guatmo is a detention center mostly for those who have little or no evidence against them and have no access to a fair civilian trial - they suffer torture and are detained indefinitely. It's not about American and non American. It's about basic human rights!
This is not the way to curb terrorism. The only meaningful way is to stop invading their countries and killing 100,000 civilians for THEIR oil.
I'm not condoning terrorism, but if a man's children and wife are killed by invaders, would you blame him if he wants to get revenge any way he can? Would you not do the same in his position?
The poster above is quite correct: there are no absolutes. Everyone is in the wrong.
"An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind" -- Mahatma Gandhi
And indeed how blind we all seem to be...- durazine, on 06/17/2008, -13/+5"This is not the way to curb terrorism. The only meaningful way is to stop invading their countries and killing 100,000 civilians for THEIR oil."
It's been 7 years, where's my free oil that we stole from them? My hummer is getting a little low. - RAGEdemon, on 06/17/2008, -2/+7Quite so matey,
Perhaps we should ask the oil companies who have made the highest profits EVER. It is they who can now set a high price, blame it on the war and get even higher profits while getting even cheaper oil from Iraq.
You know, the same people who lobbied bush and got him into office. They didn't do it out fo the kindness of their hearts now did they :)
Legal Bribary... they call it "lobbying" ;-)
I saw this coming years ago and converted my car to run on gas, as did many others. - SpeedSteamBoat, on 06/17/2008, -1/+9@durazine: The oil is making rich people richer as was always the intention. It never had anything to do with you or me or prices at the pump. They could care less about all that.
The irony of course is that the reality of what spawns terrorism is actually much worse than even what ragedemon describes. The U.S. has a long and shameful history of stirring up violence and bloodshed in the middle east when it is convenient for us, and then leaving those nations shattered by the weapons we sold them without offering so much as a dime to help them put it all back together. Watch the movie Charlie Wilson's War for a perfect example. That incident is just one in a long chain spanning several decades. I don't condone the actions of terrorists, but at least I've taken a moment to realize they aren't wrong to hate what our government has done to them. - HanFastolfe, on 06/17/2008, -6/+1Ever heard the concept of "innocent till proven guilty?"
Ever dealt with the I.R.S.? I have. You go ahead and take that tact with them, let me know how that works out for you. I might be more generous with a non-citizen enemy combatants "presumption of innocents", if, I, as natural born US citizen had the same thing in all instances.
- durazine, on 06/17/2008, -13/+5"This is not the way to curb terrorism. The only meaningful way is to stop invading their countries and killing 100,000 civilians for THEIR oil."
- bradanomics, on 06/17/2008, -0/+5This is assuming that only non-Americans are being accused of terrorist activities. What about those that are American? Timothy McVey was American. So was Eric Rudolph. All people should be able to defend themselves against what they are being accused of. This is not a new concept, been seeing it for the past 800 years.
- SpudgeBoy, on 06/17/2008, -2/+5"The terrorist are not Americans, they don't have our rights."
The US Supreme Court does not agree with you traitor. - CryRightardCry, on 06/17/2008, -1/+3Ah the typical rightard moron response of "they ain't Amurican!".
Is there anything more revolting than some ***** who thinks the geographical location of his birth assigns him more "rights" than other people?
Is that not the OPPOSITE of what Christ taught us?
As a matter of fact it IS. Only the right wing feels that THEY are somehow superior to other people, just because they were born here.
Personally I feel anyone who thinks they have rights others do not are selfish ***** pieces of *****.- life036, on 06/17/2008, -1/+2A-*****-men.
You Christian pieces of ***** can't worship Christ, and then turn around do the opposite of what he would do.
- life036, on 06/17/2008, -1/+2A-*****-men.
- growler1, on 06/17/2008, -1/+24America wasn't started with the notion that only certain groups of people have rights.
- Stormwern, on 06/17/2008, -2/+14Will someone read Bush The Emperor's New Clothes, this is embarassing.
- 471776, on 06/17/2008, -3/+29Bush is slandering America.
- KnightWhoSaysNi, on 06/17/2008, -12/+1You're a towel!
- damonic, on 06/17/2008, -2/+28I think that Hitler had the same opinion about his foreign policy...
- dougmc, on 06/17/2008, -4/+2Wow, that didn't take long at all.
- BlacklabelSAR, on 06/17/2008, -0/+4So you are unaware of the parallels?
- dougmc, on 06/17/2008, -4/+2Wow, that didn't take long at all.
- tj111, on 06/17/2008, -2/+20The fact that there are people out there that and somehow agree with him, and criticize free-thinking people as anti-American, makes me nervous about the future of this country.
- laserblazer, on 06/17/2008, -1/+14They're called traitors and they will sip from the cup of woe.
- supaklaw, on 06/17/2008, -1/+4Crucified on the Tree of Woe?
- harveywalbanger, on 06/17/2008, -1/+9The day we start getting cash rewards from the government for turning in our neighbors, is the day I move to ***** Switzerland.
IMPEACH BUSH!!!
- laserblazer, on 06/17/2008, -1/+14They're called traitors and they will sip from the cup of woe.
- RRJackson, on 06/17/2008, -20/+2Bush is right. Some of you are desperate for a chance to do as much damage as possible to your country. You cheer every time the courts find one of our practices unconstitutional. "Serves you right, America!" Meanwhile the enemies of this nation aren't abiding by any laws...
- apothekari, on 06/17/2008, -2/+15We managed to defeat everything that came at us for 200 hundred years, but suddenly it's all gonna fall because of 20 ***** with utility blades???!!!
If our country is soooooooo weak that we have to violate every sacred law to prosecute this war on terrorism what the hell is the point?!
This idea that submitting these folks to a trial somehow rips down the American system and destroys it utterly is stupid and bizarre.
For example look at the 93 WTC bomber and Cleric we prosecuted that with out the US falling to pieces.
Look at your arguments instability this is how the argument progresses.
1.We MUST do this or America is destroyed!
2.Reasoned facts and rebuttals are made by opposition using 200 years of law and the constitution.
3.YOU SUPPORT TERRORISM!! YOU CHEER AT THE DEATH OF AMERICANS!!!
4.....*sigh*
Listen, do you realize you sound EXACTLY like the unreasoning terrorists you are supposedly fighting?
If we win it will be because our cause is just and true and because our system is BETTER.
And then If by some miracle we don't win then at the very least we will be buried in hallowed ground. - SpeedSteamBoat, on 06/17/2008, -1/+7So we're wrong to cheer when the constitution, a document which outlines the most fundamental laws representing our most basic ideals and values, is upheld? Believing America should remain true to itself instead of continuing it's downward spiral into imperialist fascism is suddenly unamerican? I don't follow your logic.
- RRJackson, on 06/17/2008, -5/+2We've *always* skirted the Constitution when it served our needs. Lincoln suspended habeas corpus and still ended up on our currency. We overthrew the sovereign monarchy of Hawaii for pretty much no reason whatsoever. We embraced Manifest Destiny until we got to the Pacific Ocean and as soon as we realized there wasn't anything left to steal we denounced the concept. We've got a long history of ignoring the Constitution and once we get what we want we apologize or issue reparations or something. Except now we have a population who are chomping at the bit to hamstring their own nation.
- Delphium226, on 06/17/2008, -1/+8@RRJackson
You make a fair point, however in the situation where elements of the constitution are suspended, there should always be vigorous public debate over the issue without words like 'traitor' being thrown around. Vigorous public debate is a sign of a healthy democracy, words like 'traitor' are signs of that democracies potential succumbing to the darker forces of ultra-nationalism and fascism. Ask Saddam.
In this case however, where the war has been proven to be a foolish and mismanaged enterprise with no end in sight, one has to fight even harder to ensure that the constitution, that which makes the USA great, is restored completely, quickly. - RRJackson, on 06/17/2008, -2/+1The war *has* been mismanaged, but it was never intended to end. People need to stop focusing on the duration of this war because we're not ever leaving Iraq. We've needed a strategic outpost in the middle east for decades, but we were too preoccupied with the Soviets and the Cold War to do anything about it. Over and over our embassies have been attacked over the years and the only answer we had was to withdraw. They killed our people in Beirut and Damascus and Tripoli and we just had to deal with it. When 9/11 happened the main reason given was our proximity to Mecca because of our air base in Saudi Arabia so we closed that. We grabbed Iraq because it was prime real estate and we built an embassy in Baghdad the size of Vatican CIty and then ringed the country with permanent military installations. We're not going anywhere. Ever. Yes, we invaded under false pretenses. You can't go on national TV and say, "Uh, we've found some real estate we really like and we're going to go ahead and grab it." You've gotta set it up for Ma and Pa Kettle as a battle between Good and Evil. Like pro wrestling.
- mikeyeah, on 06/17/2008, -1/+4Quick piece of advice... When arguing, never compare anything to "pro wrestling."
- Fordi, on 06/17/2008, -1/+2America to Bush: We don't feel slandered. You, on the other hand, may feel free to do so - but only so far as you're willing to ignore your own *****.
- RRJackson, on 06/17/2008, -1/+1@mikeyeah - But it *is* like pro wrestling. We sell these concepts to the American people as an "epic struggle between good and evil" and they buy it. They don't want to hear a nuanced discussion about geopolitical strategy. They want to hear about the "evildoers" we're out to "punish."
- jvittetoe, on 06/17/2008, -1/+4Bro, all empire fall, not from an external threat, but from within.
- RonBurgundy76, on 06/17/2008, -1/+6This country isn't mine or yours any longer. We sold it a long time ago.
- DuggDowner, on 06/17/2008, -1/+1Just like RR doesn't abide by laws against pedophilia?
- RRJackson, on 06/17/2008, -0/+1More libelous comments by my anonymous stalker. Reported.
- DuggDowner, on 06/18/2008, -0/+0It's not libel when it's true. Notice how he's not denying anything. Now go cry to your mommy you fat bitch.
- apothekari, on 06/17/2008, -2/+15We managed to defeat everything that came at us for 200 hundred years, but suddenly it's all gonna fall because of 20 ***** with utility blades???!!!
- ClosedCaption, on 06/17/2008, -1/+19When did critisizing Bush become slandering America? I dont remember Bush BECOMING America.
- Fordi, on 06/17/2008, -0/+3I Am America, and So Can You!
- harveywalbanger, on 06/17/2008, -2/+14Bush and his entire family have been stealing from America since the Bay of Pigs in Cuba when the US used Bush Senior's oil drilling platforms in the Gulf of Mexico to launch the failed invasion (Bush Sr was head of the CIA for years before becoming president people! The entire family is corrupt with a sense of entitlement that would make Paris Hilton blush).
IMPEACH BUSH!!!!! He's a ***** tool.- InfamousAtheist, on 06/17/2008, -0/+11The Bush family's war profiteering and illegal dealings with enemy nations goes back to pre-WWII. Corruption is in their genes.
- didiman, on 06/17/2008, -10/+1lol at least you diggers are good for something...a good laugh
- harveywalbanger, on 06/17/2008, -1/+4didiman - for a right wing, child *****, country raping ***** stick, you sure do spend a lot of time on Digg posting your idiotic rants about blind partisan politics.
here's one for you. Obama is going to be the next president, and then you can move to Nazi Germany and raise your sick little racist whelps. - didiman, on 06/17/2008, -4/+1harvey I really hope that you're on meds.
- netant, on 06/17/2008, -1/+3@harveywallbanger
Didiman can't move to Nazi Germany, it doesn't exist anymore. In fact, you can go to prison for "denying" the Holocaust in Germany. He can move to Uruguay or Paraguay. What a coincidence, I think Bush or Cheney owns a ranch in that country. - graphictruth, on 07/04/2008, -0/+1It's only prudent - extradition and all that.
- zer0nix, on 06/17/2008, -0/+3a tool is a mindless thing that serves others. by definition, bush is not a tool. he IS however, a treasonous ***** and we would be well served not electing another bush into the white house for the next 800 years, should this country survive so long.
- harveywalbanger, on 06/17/2008, -0/+1LOL to the 10th power. That's funny! Good stuff zer0nix!
- mikeyeah, on 06/17/2008, -1/+1Are you implying that Bush is going to live for 800 years? Science, help us!
- BionicAntboy, on 06/26/2008, -0/+2Not to nitpick, but isn't Bush Dick "The Dick" Cheney's tool?
- InfamousAtheist, on 06/17/2008, -0/+11The Bush family's war profiteering and illegal dealings with enemy nations goes back to pre-WWII. Corruption is in their genes.
- Stemnin, on 06/17/2008, -6/+28Only a sith deals in absolutes!
- toddcat, on 06/16/2008, -5/+87Oooh..the mental midget's upset. Waaaaaaaa...
- plimpton777, on 06/17/2008, -0/+9"Everybody wants to live in a free society." Yeah, the 79% of Americans who disapprove of you definitely do.
- Bulletbillx, on 06/17/2008, -0/+3Someone call the WHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAAMMMMMMMMMMBULANCE!
- rawg, on 06/16/2008, -6/+125Typical ad hominem attack. Can't respond to the argument so attack the person making it.
Adam Boulton: ”there are many who say that some of the Bush administration’s torture and detention policies represent “the complete opposite of freedom.”
Bush: "Oh yeah. Well, you're the complete opposite of freedom. You can't criticize me, I'm the President... of America... and you're just a stupid reporter."
I wouldn't trust Bush to water my plants. How did he become President of the USA?- alanocu, on 06/16/2008, -13/+22How did he become President of the USA? The U.S. elected him - not once, but twice.
- craighoxton, on 06/17/2008, -2/+39Elect me once, shame on you. Elect me twice...I won't get fooled again
- normalkid0615, on 06/17/2008, -0/+8i hate you
- papipablo, on 06/17/2008, -2/+27Technically we only elected him once. . .
- ender7074, on 06/17/2008, -26/+4Nope he was elected twice. Get over your little whinefest. He won 2 elections and the liberal clowns that were running lost. For "progressives" you guys sure like to live in the past.
- SpeedSteamBoat, on 06/17/2008, -3/+10Actually, losing the popular vote is by very diffenition losing an "election." Don't take my word for it. Look up definition of the word election.
Skirting the system and taking the presidency on technical terms has very little to do with votes and a lot to do with political clout provided by your fathers name. - buddhistMonkey, on 06/17/2008, -2/+8Actually, if you examine all of the corruption and mass-disenfranchisement which occurred in Ohio in 2004, there's a better-than-average chance that Bush wasn't elected either time.
Ohio Secretary of State Confirms 2004 Election Could Have Been Stolen:
http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/?q=node/29380
- VitriolAndAngst, on 06/17/2008, -2/+17I think the purple fingers in Iraq were a better system to verify the vote there than the election we had.
But, 45% of the voters were happy with it, and thought that somehow they were the majority of votes. Strange that MOST voters thought something was fishy. - Ebonsteel, on 06/17/2008, -3/+29*****. He stole both elections.
- nycmac247, on 06/17/2008, -1/+3http://www.blackboxvoting.org/
- MrErr, on 06/17/2008, -1/+6Because the majority of us are dumb. Kidding aside, it is amazing that he got elected a second time. It proves that we are dumb and that politics is just so screwed up. But honestly in 2004 when the democrats put up Kerry as their representative instead of Dean, that is when i knew that we were screwed.
- Pittance, on 06/17/2008, -5/+3Exactly. In 2004, the fact that the Democrats couldn't find someone to beat Bush was just pathetic. I even voted for bush that year (wince) because kerry was such a godawful candidate. If the whole world didnt freak out that Dean got a little excited, he would have won by a landslide.
- SpudgeBoy, on 06/17/2008, -1/+3Nobody freaked out. That was manufactured by the MSM and the spineless democrats ran away with their tail between their legs.
- exomni, on 06/18/2008, -1/+2That's actually not true. The majority of the US voted for Gore. Bush was appointed to the presidency by a few Supreme Court justices who themselves were appointed by a Republican president.
- craighoxton, on 06/17/2008, -2/+39Elect me once, shame on you. Elect me twice...I won't get fooled again
- WNW3, on 06/17/2008, -1/+23I would trust him to water my plants...or clear brush. He seems to do that pretty good back on the ranch.
- SpudgeBoy, on 06/17/2008, -0/+6Actually, he isn't good at that either. You do remember the battle he had with that cedar, which he later compared to the injuries our troops had at Walter Reed.
- WNW3, on 06/20/2008, -0/+1Wow...that's awful. Okay, I guess I'd let him bartend then...
- SpudgeBoy, on 06/17/2008, -0/+6Actually, he isn't good at that either. You do remember the battle he had with that cedar, which he later compared to the injuries our troops had at Walter Reed.
- normalkid0615, on 06/17/2008, -2/+8Bush would launch an investigation trying to find out who is stealing all of the water ala ADAM WEST... in fact, maybe thats why we are in Iraq
- Zipko, on 06/17/2008, -0/+2http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/images/blb ...
- jsmith39, on 06/17/2008, -1/+8my guess is because only 50% of the country voted and 26% of them were retarded.
- SpudgeBoy, on 06/17/2008, -0/+3Only 100 million voted. That is only one third. half of that would mean that 1/6th of this country voted for Bush.
- exomni, on 06/18/2008, -1/+2He was made President by a few Supreme Court justices nominated by a Republican president.
The American people did not vote for Bush. The majority of America voted for Gore. - look4alec, on 06/18/2008, -0/+1No, you're a towel
- alanocu, on 06/16/2008, -13/+22How did he become President of the USA? The U.S. elected him - not once, but twice.
- Insightful, on 06/16/2008, -4/+69So we will all be deemed domestic enemy combatants and thus habeas corpus and Constitution will not apply.
- Waiting2awake, on 06/17/2008, -2/+27Now you are starting to see....all the pieces fall in place...
Man America - wouldn't it be good if you dealt with these guys when the worst they did was steal an election? - Sairynn, on 06/17/2008, -4/+13Habeas corpus will apply, the Supreme Court said so the other day.
- pintomp3, on 06/17/2008, -1/+14since when did this administration listen to the other branches? checks and balances broke a long time ago.
- Waiting2awake, on 06/17/2008, -2/+27Now you are starting to see....all the pieces fall in place...
- hawkeye17, on 06/16/2008, -7/+133Bush is basically a Fascist but he's too stupid to know it. History will not be kind.
- CoolHandLuke70, on 06/17/2008, -1/+29Oh, Bush knows it --- he is just a bad actor! He knows that he has to say something other than "ya, we are secretly replacing your Bill of Rights with a heaping pile of cow dung"! And don't get me wrong, I do not think that he is super intelligent, but he is intelligent enough to know what he is doing! AND, he is receiving orders NOT giving them!
- zer0nix, on 06/17/2008, -1/+5so ***** dugg.
- papipablo, on 06/17/2008, -2/+17Oh that's ridiculous. Fascists accomplish things.
- SpeedSteamBoat, on 06/17/2008, -0/+12What do you mean? I think Bush has accomplished a lot. I mean, the original drug prohibitionists would blush at his ability to not only stomp on civil liberties and constitutional law with such zeal but to convince a fair portion of the American people that it's the right, American thing to do!
Honestly, he's done a lot:
-Violated constitutional and international law again and again without repercussion (Iraq war, Patriot Act, Gitmo [suspension of habeas corpus, torture], Illegal domestic wire tapping, etc)
-Inflated the national debt to heights once considered unthinkable.
-Avoided impeachment despite obvious crimes.
-Successfully misled the United States into a war.
-Began one of the few "wars" ever waged against an idea by a nation (War on 'Terror').
-Started his own agency (Homeland Security) to essentially dodge the high moral standards of other agencies that otherwise serve the same purpose (CIA, FBI, NSA)
-Politicized US Attorneys in an attempt to help win re-election.
-Did all of this and more while rarely being called out by the media.
-Garnered the lowest public approval rating of any president since approval ratings came to exist and shrugged it off.
-Never apologized
I mean, this is just a partial list coming off the top of my head. Say what you will about Bushes failings, but don't deny him his right to credit. He has clearly done many things no man before him dared to do. Even if it's simply because they knew better. - bono4u, on 06/17/2008, -1/+1How many lands and life's did it take to wrestle Germany in WWII down? And there is no land were they are not waiting to take their chances.
- SpudgeBoy, on 06/17/2008, -0/+6You are right, the Nazis are still trying to take their chances. That is why Bush is president.
- RonBurgundy76, on 06/17/2008, -0/+5Just because the things Bush has done aren't good things, doesn't mean that they weren't 'accomplishments'...
- SpeedSteamBoat, on 06/17/2008, -0/+12What do you mean? I think Bush has accomplished a lot. I mean, the original drug prohibitionists would blush at his ability to not only stomp on civil liberties and constitutional law with such zeal but to convince a fair portion of the American people that it's the right, American thing to do!
- Stavrosian, on 06/17/2008, -0/+12I was kind of hoping that the present would not have been so kind, to be honest.
- duncanm, on 06/17/2008, -0/+10I really don't care if history is kind to him or not. What I REALLY care about is whether the people of the USA have the moral fiber and determination required to hold him accountable and punish him in ***exactly the same*** way as they would punish any other foreign world leader that committed equivalent crimes. They hung Hussein and, honestly, I just don't see how G.W. Bush and other administration officials irresponsible actions were any different or purer than that of Saddam Hussein. I don't care if you Digg me down. The fact is that thousands of innocent Iraqi and American people have perished, suffered terrible malformations (e.g. loss of limbs, etc.) and experienced other tremendous hardships all because of some stupid leader's self righteousness and self serving mindset that compelled them to do it while finding their (perverted) "moral" means of justifying it.
- jaymzdean, on 06/17/2008, -4/+2I had to bury you for further propagandizing that Bush is stupid. He may very well have some cognitive deficits but how many actual morons do you know who can get up and speak to the world on television?
He is a frontman, the schmoozer who's been assigned to the press and the American people. He doesn't make any foreign policy decisions. That's all done by PNAC and AIPAC. And they are two very intelligent, if diabolical groups.
By falsely concluding that Bush is stupid, you, in effect, turn his crimes into mistakes, and mistakes will go unpunished.
Stop underestimating your enemy.- SpudgeBoy, on 06/17/2008, -0/+7You are right on the money. people fail to remember that Bush spoke fine English and didn't do all of this goofy ***** when he was Governor of Texas. This act started when he became president.
- jaymzdean, on 06/17/2008, -4/+2I had to bury you for further propagandizing that Bush is stupid. He may very well have some cognitive deficits but how many actual morons do you know who can get up and speak to the world on television?
- CoolHandLuke70, on 06/17/2008, -1/+29Oh, Bush knows it --- he is just a bad actor! He knows that he has to say something other than "ya, we are secretly replacing your Bill of Rights with a heaping pile of cow dung"! And don't get me wrong, I do not think that he is super intelligent, but he is intelligent enough to know what he is doing! AND, he is receiving orders NOT giving them!
- gypsi, on 06/16/2008, -6/+117bush is a traitor to the ideals of the founding fathers
- Brownds, on 06/17/2008, -26/+4Weren’t our founding fathers slave owning bigots? I think we have come a long way since then.
- jsmith39, on 06/17/2008, -1/+15actually no, most of them were neither bigots or slave owners. That said.. yes we have come along way since then, and in the last 7 years we've fallen back a long ways too.
- harveywalbanger, on 06/17/2008, -0/+6BUSH IS THE TRAITOR!
If our founding fathers could see what the Bush family has turned America into, they would string the entire clan up by their necks for being traitors.
IMPEACH BUSH!
- Brownds, on 06/17/2008, -26/+4Weren’t our founding fathers slave owning bigots? I think we have come a long way since then.
- thepoliticalcat, on 06/16/2008, -7/+66Who even listens to this traitorous idiot any more? He has sold the country piecemeal to the rich and to foreigners.
- orientis, on 06/17/2008, -7/+22I would suggest, for your viewpoint to make any logical sense in the coming decades, that you come to view "poor foreigners" as 'the same' as yourself. The real problem with the US politically has been the history of hundreds of years of rule by rich white elites. As the global community' becomes less of a hype word and more of a reality, you can either switch your viewpoint to a global scale or keep thinking parochially.
I can't believe people still use the word 'foreigner'. How such a Christian nation became so bigoted I'll never know.- SpeedSteamBoat, on 06/17/2008, -0/+3Well, to be honest with ourselves we should probably start by recognizing that Christian and bigoted are traditionally not wholly removed from each other. In fact, the situation has often been quite the opposite despite the teachings of Christ.
- orientis, on 06/17/2008, -0/+2That's true, I just keep fooling myself that people are generally smarter these days. The contrary truth is a constant shattering revelation.
- SpeedSteamBoat, on 06/17/2008, -0/+3Well, to be honest with ourselves we should probably start by recognizing that Christian and bigoted are traditionally not wholly removed from each other. In fact, the situation has often been quite the opposite despite the teachings of Christ.
- Pittance, on 06/17/2008, -1/+10christian nation is where you fail to see. christianity is incredibly bigoted. Remember the Crusades and the Inquisition? Oh, and what about every branch of christianity that wasn't catholic back in the day? This country could do with a lot fewer christians.
- SSUK, on 06/17/2008, -1/+2Britain is 57% atheist... It's not doing much better...
- orientis, on 06/17/2008, -7/+22I would suggest, for your viewpoint to make any logical sense in the coming decades, that you come to view "poor foreigners" as 'the same' as yourself. The real problem with the US politically has been the history of hundreds of years of rule by rich white elites. As the global community' becomes less of a hype word and more of a reality, you can either switch your viewpoint to a global scale or keep thinking parochially.
- InvisibleInk, on 06/17/2008, -5/+31So sue me, George. I'll see you in court!
- Waiting2awake, on 06/17/2008, -4/+7That sounds like a fight - ain't no way he'll show up.... But he'll send in the marines...to attack your neighbour.
- sfacets, on 06/17/2008, -2/+8...but first he'll need a pretext. Say... isn't your neighbour a 'foreign type'?
- Caffeinate, on 06/19/2008, -0/+1I heard his neighbor got some aluminum tubes. I think he's in cohoots with turrists. That plumber act didn't fool me one bit.
- sfacets, on 06/17/2008, -2/+8...but first he'll need a pretext. Say... isn't your neighbour a 'foreign type'?
- Waiting2awake, on 06/17/2008, -4/+7That sounds like a fight - ain't no way he'll show up.... But he'll send in the marines...to attack your neighbour.
- chicofaraby, on 06/17/2008, -5/+100It's not slander if it's true.
- bosssmiley, on 06/17/2008, -22/+1It doesn't have to be true, it only has to be defamatory.
- bosssmiley, on 06/17/2008, -4/+5Ooops, mixed up slander and libel.
Let the burying continue...- Pittance, on 06/17/2008, -0/+7You mixed them all up. Slander is speaking false, defamatory things about someone. Libel is the same, but written.
- bosssmiley, on 06/17/2008, -4/+5Ooops, mixed up slander and libel.
- ChristPissed, on 06/17/2008, -2/+15Correct, chicofaraby.
For those to lazy to consult a dictionary:
"slan·der –noun, a malicious, false, and defamatory statement or report: a slander against his good name."
"Oral communication of false statements injurious to a person's reputation"
"A false and malicious statement or report about someone."
(disclaimer-IANAL).
Idiot George doesn't know you can't slander a country, only a person
Only a person can be slandered with false and misleading statements.
Therefore the statement "Idiot George" is not slander.
The statement "torture is the opposite of freedom" is not slander as it is not false, and it is not about a person.
Now Idiot George accusing us of slander, well that is slander. - brjohnson789, on 06/17/2008, -1/+8Since George is 'the decider', I think that means he gets to rewrite dictionaries too. He certainly can rewrite any laws he wants with one of them fancy signing statements.
"When words lose their meaning, people lose their liberty" - Confucius- RonBurgundy76, on 06/17/2008, -0/+2Forgive me if I fail to learn Newspeak when it arrives.
- bosssmiley, on 06/17/2008, -22/+1It doesn't have to be true, it only has to be defamatory.
- HuskyPuzzle, on 06/17/2008, -4/+45It doesn't matter anymore what Bush says or thinks. He's going down as the worst president in American history and he'll probably retire on the ranch and become steadily more senile every single day.
- Waiting2awake, on 06/17/2008, -3/+21I hope not - if he is anywhere other than in a cell, America has tougher times coming. Without accountability - whats to stop the next president? Their word?
- ender7074, on 06/17/2008, -9/+2Really? Why wasnt Kennedy or Johnson put into a cell? *****, FDR is a mass murdering pile of ***** by the system of judgment here. Why dont we hear about smearing their legacy or how senile they were? Guess its ok to have a war as long as theres a lib in the driver seat right? Oh and for those that dont want to believe it, you can bet your ass that FDR wanted to attack Germany and he also withheld information that our navy could have used to properly have Pearl Harbor ready for attack instead of letting thousands of American sailors get slaughtered. But thats ok right?
- jsmith39, on 06/17/2008, -1/+3Time to get some more tinfoil, your hat is wearing thin and the signals are getting through again.
- SpeedSteamBoat, on 06/17/2008, -0/+5This ***** pisses me off. If you picked up a singal history book or documentary not created by "Joe Blogger" you'd understand why you sound like such an incredible *****.
WWII was an obviously justified conflict, and what's more it was one that followed the usual (ie, LEGAL) course of wars what with actually being declared by congress and all.
Furthermore, FDR absolutely did not let Pearl Harbor happen or have an active role in making it happen. To suggest so is a disgusting perversion of history. It is true that he wanted to go to war with Germany, but only because understood the extreme dangers presented by letting them win. He knew how dangerous Hitler was, and that he would not stop at the Atlantic. Yes, he wanted to go to war, but unlike other presidents he had solid reasons for that desire and even then did not resort to lies and distortion to make it happen outside the will of the people.
That said, are you suggesting would should have let the Axis win WWII? Are you saying that America should have never been involved in any war ever or else all of them are fine? Your logical is flawed and idiotic. To suggest that all wars are directly comparable is a show of grave and simplistic misunderstanding of the nature of wars. Wars are complicated, terrible, and costly things in which no two are alike. Sometimes it is necessary and other times it can be avoided, but always is it painful.
In short, you're a blind fool if you believe half what you posted here. - RetlawST, on 06/17/2008, -0/+3To give ender a little leeway, FDR did set up the detention camps which was a huge violation of civil rights. Just saying.
- ender7074, on 06/17/2008, -3/+0@SpeedSteamBoat
You really should study some history moron. I was going to correct all your glaring errors but arguing with a liberal idiot is just like arguing with a wall only less intelligent. What we did deterime, though, is that you feel that a Democrat gunning for a war is ok while a Republican sending our troops in to enforce UN resolutions is wrong. Nice.
- RonBurgundy76, on 06/17/2008, -0/+4A cell is too comfy. Swinging from a rope or facing a firing squad would be more appropriate.
- Caffeinate, on 06/19/2008, -0/+1We could do both, if only for the satisfaction of it.
- ender7074, on 06/17/2008, -9/+2Really? Why wasnt Kennedy or Johnson put into a cell? *****, FDR is a mass murdering pile of ***** by the system of judgment here. Why dont we hear about smearing their legacy or how senile they were? Guess its ok to have a war as long as theres a lib in the driver seat right? Oh and for those that dont want to believe it, you can bet your ass that FDR wanted to attack Germany and he also withheld information that our navy could have used to properly have Pearl Harbor ready for attack instead of letting thousands of American sailors get slaughtered. But thats ok right?
- VitriolAndAngst, on 06/17/2008, -1/+9Unfortunately, it does matter what Bush does and thinks. That's why impeachment is vital.
- jsmith39, on 06/17/2008, -1/+7It does matter because he has about 6 months left and some strange-ass 'God is speaking directly to me' complex which is apparently telling him to bomb the ***** out of Iran before handing over the reigns.
- Waiting2awake, on 06/17/2008, -3/+21I hope not - if he is anywhere other than in a cell, America has tougher times coming. Without accountability - whats to stop the next president? Their word?
- bigp3rm, on 06/17/2008, -3/+44***** you man. SO sick of you. Just go away already.
- CoolHandLuke70, on 06/17/2008, -8/+29If you guys want to have a preview of what the celebrations will be like when Bush leaves office, just fast forward to the end of The Return of the Jedi!
I still cannot rid myself of the suspicion that the Bush admin. will create a false flag terror attack that will lead to W implementing martial law and that nifty new 'Continuity of Government' plan that his administration wrote and denied Congress from viewing by saying that it is too radical for them to peruse! Of course, I expect W to use this as an excuse to suspend elections or just plain remain in office!
But folks, if McClone or the Obama Kid make it to office, don't expect much change from the current general status quo, it will not happen!- blinkatron, on 06/17/2008, -2/+3yub yub... nub yub...
- Depthfunction, on 06/17/2008, -1/+1"just fast forward to the end of The Return of the Jedi!"
Oh crap, you mean there will be Ewoks?! Well *****, maybe a third Bush term isn't so bad after all.- CoolHandLuke70, on 06/17/2008, -0/+2I personally would prefer the Ewoks by a longshot!
- Caffeinate, on 06/19/2008, -1/+1Judging from the fact that neither McClone nor Obama have said nothing regarding prosecuting or even investigating the criminals in the White House and the evidence mountain that grows larger every day, I'd say if they are this complacent now, it will be worse when elected.
- chicofaraby, on 06/17/2008, -5/+57Why isn't the American corporate media asking these questions? Because they are part of the problem.
- Stavrosian, on 06/17/2008, -0/+25I really wish I had saved a video I saw some time ago of a British journalist interviewing then defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld. The journalist was questioning him about his use of the term "so-called occupied territory" with regard to Palestine, and Rumsfeld flat-out denied ever having said it and started talking about something else.
At this point, the journalist presented him with the minutes from the meeting where he had said it. ***** guy didn't know what to do, actually facing a journalist who stood up to him without fear of being denied access to the White House. To my recollection, he just sat there stunned for a few seconds and then sheepishly apologized. It would be nice to see more of these people actually called out by the media.- spawnfree, on 06/17/2008, -0/+6it really would.
are these people living in a dream world or something?
the sad truth about rummy is he would have been hurting from that encounter and he would simply think up a better line to trot out next time.
like many ex friends of mine; standing up to them only makes them better liars. its like their heads are on backwards and they know it, they want to twist us all up so they can feel normal. - homercles337, on 06/17/2008, -0/+4The corporate media has a new boss. It used to be the people, but now its their corporate overlords that dictate what gets covered and what questions get asked. Upset them and youre out of a job.
- ghuytro, on 06/17/2008, -0/+2It's like when Austin Powers was presented with the receipt for his purchase and then the book he authored on the Swedish Penis Enlarger pump.
- Caffeinate, on 06/19/2008, -0/+1And the book was entitled "Swedish Penis Enlarger pumps: It's my bag, Baby!"
- spawnfree, on 06/17/2008, -0/+6it really would.
- ender7074, on 06/17/2008, -14/+0Because this is nothing more than a liberal website taking some words and blowing them out of proportion to satisfy their hyper left user base. There's little to no real information on this site, the huffington post, or thinkprogress. Oh and maybe one of you libs can answer this for me. If you are so progressive, then why do you all insist we revert (that means go backwards) to a system of government that has failed time and time again? Real progressive there....
- Stavrosian, on 06/17/2008, -0/+11This comment is further evidence of the remarkable political skill of Bush and his allies in making everything into a "with us or against us" situation. It creates people who will back him to the hilt no matter what, and who will assume that anybody criticizing him must be an evil "liberal" of some sort, as if the very idea of being politically left-leaning was somehow anti-American in itself.
- jaymzdean, on 06/17/2008, -0/+6The comment also assumes anyone who is against Bush Co.'s foreign policy is liberal, which is far, far from the truth.
- KennMac, on 06/17/2008, -0/+11Did you WATCH that video? No interpretation needed.
You call yourself an American? You really advocate changing the structure of our government which was carefully designed by our forefathers? The only "failures" have been a result of a blatant failure to uphold the constitution. - Phearce, on 06/17/2008, -0/+4What? "A system of government that has failed time and time again"? Please clarify: are you talking about America and the Constitution?
- herbertstrasse, on 06/17/2008, -0/+3I think he's running the usual "communist pinko liberal hippies" routine, because that must be who you are for disliking Bush.
I just don't get how you can revert to a form of government more recent than ours.
- herbertstrasse, on 06/17/2008, -0/+3I think he's running the usual "communist pinko liberal hippies" routine, because that must be who you are for disliking Bush.
- blinkatron, on 06/17/2008, -0/+5when will you morons learn, the term liberal means a federalist capitalist. idiot.
- chicofaraby, on 06/17/2008, -1/+5I'm a socialist. I'm happy to point out that the system that fails EVERY time it's tried is laissez faire capitalism. Socialism works all over the planet. Check out the nations with the highest ratings, most are socialist.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Development_Ind ... - archiesteel, on 06/17/2008, -0/+4"Oh and maybe one of you libs can answer this for me. If you are so progressive, then why do you all insist we revert (that means go backwards) to a system of government that has failed time and time again?"
And what system of government would that be? A government of the people, by the people, for the people? Or a powerless, barely democratic shell wingnuts can use as scapegoat/whipping boy while more and more power is transferred in the hands of private enterprises, upon which citizens have no control?
- Stavrosian, on 06/17/2008, -0/+11This comment is further evidence of the remarkable political skill of Bush and his allies in making everything into a "with us or against us" situation. It creates people who will back him to the hilt no matter what, and who will assume that anybody criticizing him must be an evil "liberal" of some sort, as if the very idea of being politically left-leaning was somehow anti-American in itself.
- Phearce, on 06/17/2008, -0/+5@chico: Show a little compasion. It's not easy trying to make a living as a journalist while America is going through a fascist shift.
- ciaran036, on 06/17/2008, -0/+2Sky News is owned by Rupert Murdoch though (NewsCorp: Fox News etc.)
- Stavrosian, on 06/17/2008, -0/+25I really wish I had saved a video I saw some time ago of a British journalist interviewing then defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld. The journalist was questioning him about his use of the term "so-called occupied territory" with regard to Palestine, and Rumsfeld flat-out denied ever having said it and started talking about something else.
- dizilbdog, on 06/17/2008, -4/+3Ya think
- tdishman, on 06/17/2008, -7/+6And why exactly would we expect other countries to like us?
- jsmith39, on 06/17/2008, -1/+6I'll agree that most people confuse diplomacy between countries as something on par with diplomacy between co-workers. All countries are looking out for 'number one' and they should be, and there is a lot more duplicity in geopolitics than in your average office. People who think countries can/should behave with one voice and one ideal are a bit naive at best, however...
Think of 'like us' as positive diplomatic presence. Like it or not we need other countries to work with us favorably, more so after 7 years of corruption and economic stagnation. If we antagonize other countries they won't 'like us' and they won't work with us, listen to us, sign favorable treaties with us. Antagonize too many of them too hard and we get to find out how good our military really is. I hate using WWII analogies but in this case it fits, if we ever hit that line where we have too many countries afraid of us we will end up being a lot like Germany in that no matter how strong we are we won't be strong enough to stop everyone from hitting us at once. - archiesteel, on 06/17/2008, -1/+4I'm Canadian. People in other countries generally like me and respect me - and by "other countries", I don't mean Iran or Syria, I mean France, Germany, Holland, the UK...you know, western democracies.
My country didn't compromise on any values, human rights, etc., *and* it's an ally an economic partner of the US, and still people like me and respect me. This is possible for you guys to. Get out of the "if they hate us, then we must be doing something right" mindset. It's immature, and wrong.
People used to like the US, and respect them. It can happen again, and you will not have lost anything in the process, except some kind of alpha-male, jingoistic, warmongering mentality that has done you no good at all.- graphictruth, on 07/04/2008, -0/+1Speaking as a dual citizen - amen!
By the by, was it just me, or did the usual excesses of the Fourth of July seem to be somewhat muted?
- graphictruth, on 07/04/2008, -0/+1Speaking as a dual citizen - amen!
- jsmith39, on 06/17/2008, -1/+6I'll agree that most people confuse diplomacy between countries as something on par with diplomacy between co-workers. All countries are looking out for 'number one' and they should be, and there is a lot more duplicity in geopolitics than in your average office. People who think countries can/should behave with one voice and one ideal are a bit naive at best, however...
- VitriolAndAngst, on 06/17/2008, -3/+41Hey Bush -- YOU are not actually America, the flag, apple pie, the troops or some divinity. The "slander" as you call it is towards you, your corruption, and the cronies you put in place to embezzle.
-- I hope I cleared that up for you. - FearFactory, on 06/17/2008, -3/+32Spoken like a true chimp.
- supaklaw, on 06/17/2008, -0/+5More of a feces-throwing orangutan really
- stretch611, on 06/17/2008, -0/+4...and a slow learner even among that species.
- chicoer2001, on 06/17/2008, -3/+24I wonder what Bush would think if Blackwaters men where held by the Taliban without any trials for years. After all, they could be seen as enemy combatants.
- ender7074, on 06/17/2008, -16/+4Why dont you ask Ron Perl? He was kidnapped and beheaded. Guess thats ok though right? Hell he was just a reporter. It never ceaces to amaze me how the liberal left sides with tinpot dictators (Sadam), mass murdering thugs (Che), and terrorsit groups against their own country.
- chicoer2001, on 06/17/2008, -2/+15Ron Perl was a journalist. He wasnt fighting against anyone.
- jsmith39, on 06/17/2008, -3/+16and it never ceases to amaze me when
a) you presume anyone who disagrees with Bush is a leftest liberal and
b) how all you 'right-wing neocons' overlook/twist what is being said. No one is excusing what happened to Perl, they're stating that there is no excuse for lowering our ideals. - Phearce, on 06/17/2008, -2/+11As an American, I oppose tryanny -- especially when it is directed at me by the Chief Executive.
- herbertstrasse, on 06/17/2008, -2/+9You may want to look into how Saddam (it has two d's, silly)rose to power in the first place before you start throwing out the "***** liberals" generalizations.
- RRJackson, on 06/17/2008, -6/+2Are you talking about Daniel Pearl? He was a moron. A Jewish man with a pregnant wife went to Pakistan to infiltrate a group of Islamic extremists and got his head cut off. That's about like a black man trying to infiltrate the KKK. His wife should have tasered him in the eye for even suggesting such a thing. Now his kid gets to grow up never having met his father because his father was an imbecile.
- DuggDowner, on 06/17/2008, -2/+1Move out of your mother's house before you criticize real men.
- RRJackson, on 06/17/2008, -0/+1Ah, another of my stalker's identities.
I just moved into my mother's house, actually. I'd love to move out, but since her husband died in February she's unable to care for herself. I'm sure a "real man" like you would just put your mother in a nursing home, but I just don't have the heart. I've gotta go back to California next month and see to packing up the house and having the stuff moved into storage here.
If Daniel Pearl had been a "real man" he'd have taken time to think about the well-being of his loved ones, too. Instead his wife was pregnant and sitting by the phone when his head was cut off.
- orangefly, on 06/17/2008, -1/+9justifying doing what they do, because they do it, is as unamerican as you can get....
i'd like to go back to being the country that at least tries to be better than the terrorists.... - archiesteel, on 06/17/2008, -1/+1ender7074, Che was not a mass murdering thug anymore than Dubya is. Che oversaw trials and executions of war criminals after the Cuban Revolution. This is not sensibly different from the 152 criminals executed in Texas while George W. Bush was governor.
Oh, and it's not "Ron Perl", you nitwit, it's "Daniel Pearl." If you're going to shamelessly use someone's death to score cheap debating points, try to get their name right...- 140Suffolk, on 06/18/2008, -0/+2Che oversaw the firing squad executions of Cuban farmers who declined to give up their farms.
The same thing happened after the Russian Revolution. The Communists want to take over farms "for the people". The farmer refuses. And the Communists label him a "kulak" or a counter-revolutionary. And kill him.
Something similar is happening in Zimbabwe.
- 140Suffolk, on 06/18/2008, -0/+2Che oversaw the firing squad executions of Cuban farmers who declined to give up their farms.
- macrhino, on 06/17/2008, -0/+2ender7074, Ron Pearl was kidnapped by the Taliban? Where did that come from? Do you have some special knowledge? Are you just speaking out of your butt? How does anything written have to do with anybody being with Saddam? The pictures I see show "liberal" Don Rumsfeld meeting with Saddam. Who are the liberals you are talking about ? Perhaps the administration is filled with people who have as much knowledge as you do. Maybe that is why they can't accomplish anything?
Khalid Sheikh Mohammad has confessed to Pearl's murder; he was a member of Al-Qaeda.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khalid_Sheikh_Mohamme ...
"Mohammed wished to retain some degree of autonomy as a mujahid. His continuing relationship with Sayyaf (a warlord in the anti-Taliban Northern Alliance) had to be kept hidden from bin Laden and the rest of Al Qaeda, as full disclosure would have been problematic."
- solstice21, on 06/17/2008, -1/+3LOL
Like he'll give a ***** about his underlings in Blackwater.
I think he only pretends to give a ***** about the men and women in the United States Armed Forces because of PR and obligation.
- ender7074, on 06/17/2008, -16/+4Why dont you ask Ron Perl? He was kidnapped and beheaded. Guess thats ok though right? Hell he was just a reporter. It never ceaces to amaze me how the liberal left sides with tinpot dictators (Sadam), mass murdering thugs (Che), and terrorsit groups against their own country.
- Thrilltone, on 06/17/2008, -6/+23If Britain & France had any balls, instead of kissing W's ass,
they would have been honest, like the Dixie Chicks were and noted what a disgrace and embarassment and severe danger the creep is.- Stavrosian, on 06/17/2008, -1/+16It has been embarrassing to see my own nation's government follow that idiot's lead every step of the way. Tony Blair might be even worse than Dubya, because maybe he actually had the intelligence to see the stupidity of what he doing, but went ahead and did it anyway.
- SuperVepr308, on 06/17/2008, -5/+3It is a well known fact that the French have no balls. The Brits, on the other hand, do.
Thanks!- RetlawST, on 06/17/2008, -1/+3While I'm all for a little culture bashing here and there, this French bashing has gotten real old. It's like you guys kept repeating, "The French are frogs, the French are frogs..." so much that you now actually believe they're amphibians.
- SuperVepr308, on 06/17/2008, -1/+2French-bashing has a certain lasting charm for alot of us. My favorite has to be the French tank. It has one forward gear and thirteen for reverse. HAHA!
- graphictruth, on 07/04/2008, -0/+1The French have had far, far too many examples of the cost of allowing testosterone poisoning to go untreated. In fact, just about every time in history a Frenchman gets up on a high horse For The Honor of France, the French get reamed - although in all fairness, sometimes the implementation of said reaming took a century or so.
So, SuperVepr308, perhaps we should seriously consider implementing a widespread Luperon protocol at puberty for all US males. A little "personality improvement" seems in order.
- RetlawST, on 06/17/2008, -1/+3While I'm all for a little culture bashing here and there, this French bashing has gotten real old. It's like you guys kept repeating, "The French are frogs, the French are frogs..." so much that you now actually believe they're amphibians.
- monoa, on 06/17/2008, -0/+1Other countries were sold the lie of WMD. They didn't vote Bush in - twice... although the Brits have something to answer for with Blair, but he is a far more persuasive liar.
- BobScratchit, on 06/17/2008, -2/+27Slamming torture is slamming America? That's what the headline seems to convey.
- Stavrosian, on 06/17/2008, -1/+17It's a remarkable PR job done by Bush and his party over the last few years. Every time anybody attacks them personally, they have successfully managed to fool people into thinking that the criticism was actually an attack on the principles of the USA. An attack on democracy itself, even.
Whatever else may be true of these people, let it never be said that they are not remarkable politicians in that regard. The deception they have managed to spin so easily, in the face of so much evidence, through this tactic is nothing short of astounding.- jaymzdean, on 06/17/2008, -0/+5It's not that hard to do with a complicit media. Without that, they couldn't pull it off.
- Stavrosian, on 06/17/2008, -1/+17It's a remarkable PR job done by Bush and his party over the last few years. Every time anybody attacks them personally, they have successfully managed to fool people into thinking that the criticism was actually an attack on the principles of the USA. An attack on democracy itself, even.
- duder83, on 06/17/2008, -17/+3If you hate bush, give this comment a thumbs up!
- jsmith39, on 06/17/2008, -1/+11Decided to bury it because I hate you more.
- atomicrobot, on 06/17/2008, -1/+33***** George Bush.
Seriously, this immoral sociopath took a great country and pissed all over everything that was good about it. He has turned the USA into a detestable bullying, saber-rattling *****-in-a-camaro superpower. Shame on you, George. I hope you choke on a pretzel.- texpundit, on 06/17/2008, -0/+7This has been going on longer than just GWB...he's just the latest and has upped the ante higher than any of his predecessors.
- SuperVepr308, on 06/17/2008, -5/+1"*****-in-a-camaro superpower". Did you get beat up alot as a kid? I am getting that vibe...
- graphictruth, on 07/04/2008, -0/+1And I'm getting the vibe that you have totaled YOUR Camero several times while cutting off people in "foreign cars" trying to merge onto the freeway.
"***** in a Camero Superpower." Goddess, that is so ***** succinct.
- papipablo, on 06/17/2008, -8/+12Where's Lee Harvey Oswald Jr. when you need him?
- thegools, on 06/17/2008, -2/+8Oh God no, don't make him a martyr! People quickly forget all the bad ***** you did and in no time you're canonized.
I'd rather see him humiliated in court by the mountain of evidence and sentenced to rot in prison, but since the dems are a bunch of power hungry pussies (Kucinich excluded), that will never happen.- spawnfree, on 06/17/2008, -0/+4I hope George slips up and starts blabbing about the continuity of government program (backup government) that was overtaken by private interests back in Eisenhower's day (including bush's grand-pappy who is alleged to have been planning a military coup in America decades ago but trusted the wrong people) and has been growing in wealth and slowly infiltrating the real government with paid off agents and like-minded psycho bigot generals.
but they probably haven't told him much about that.
- spawnfree, on 06/17/2008, -0/+4I hope George slips up and starts blabbing about the continuity of government program (backup government) that was overtaken by private interests back in Eisenhower's day (including bush's grand-pappy who is alleged to have been planning a military coup in America decades ago but trusted the wrong people) and has been growing in wealth and slowly infiltrating the real government with paid off agents and like-minded psycho bigot generals.
- Yeyui, on 06/17/2008, -1/+3Don't that! If he's dead, we can't get away with publicly criticizing him anymore due to the deeply ingrained tradition of not speaking ill of the dead (at least until they have been dead for a good while).
Besides -- an assassination of a sitting president will be seen (rightly) as an attack on the office of president, not (only) on the person of the president.- exomni, on 06/18/2008, -0/+1Yeah, everybody totally tip-toes around Hitler ever since he killed himself.
- graphictruth, on 07/04/2008, -0/+1...but what if he stands up?
But serously, worst idea concevable. To the extent that if it happens, I would INDEED suspect that it WAS intended as a "second 9/11" intended to put Cheney in power. Strike "suspect." I would prudently assume that - while making travel preparations.
- roflbrothel, on 06/17/2008, -0/+4Are you retarded?
President Cheney?
Think about that for a second.
- thegools, on 06/17/2008, -2/+8Oh God no, don't make him a martyr! People quickly forget all the bad ***** you did and in no time you're canonized.
- ender7074, on 06/17/2008, -27/+3Ahhh more 100% bias crap from another liberal bs website. Glad we get news with no spin around here!
- an0nymous, on 06/17/2008, -2/+17You do know they posted the whole interview directly from SkyNews, right? As well as as directly transcribing his words? What spin are you seeing?
...- RonBurgundy76, on 06/17/2008, -0/+5That spin he's feeling is GW's red, white, and blue dildo.
- jsmith39, on 06/17/2008, -2/+11So it's cool to lock people up and waterboard them on suspicion as long as they're not Americans? Because lets face it, they're all dirty Muslims making bio weapons in their basements right?
- pagno, on 06/17/2008, -0/+6Hey, *****. Not everything is Left v. Right. Sometimes its just Us, and were all in the same sinking ship. So, do Us all a favor, and shut your Goddamn mouth.
- InfamousAtheist, on 06/17/2008, -0/+5Congratulations. You are a product, designed and marketed by the Republican party. You are an example of their plan becoming successful. You are supporting traitors and think that you're a patriot.
The Republican marketing machine is ***** amazing. It's truly sad that so many Americans enable the traitor's success by refusing to use their brains. - BionicAntboy, on 06/26/2008, -0/+1LOL @ "biased liberal bs website". That's so 2002. Are you that firmly ensconced in party politics that you'll support every word out of the guys mouth?
- an0nymous, on 06/17/2008, -2/+17You do know they posted the whole interview directly from SkyNews, right? As well as as directly transcribing his words? What spin are you seeing?
- sfacets, on 06/17/2008, -3/+33If anyone is slandering America, George W. Bush is.
- Brownds, on 06/17/2008, -3/+12I am not saying everyone in Gitmo needs to be let out, but I wonder how many people being held there know why they are there in the first place. I know if I saw a bunch of troops rushing my village and did not understand why then I might fight back thinking I was defending myself. I can't believe we are holding so many people without due process.
- Abomonog, on 06/18/2008, -0/+1Lets just say this. Out of all the prisoners that Bush has had thrown into Gitmo, only 5 are known to have been involved in combat.
- 140Suffolk, on 06/18/2008, -0/+1Cite source please.
- Abomonog, on 06/18/2008, -0/+1Lets just say this. Out of all the prisoners that Bush has had thrown into Gitmo, only 5 are known to have been involved in combat.
- notSLICK, on 06/17/2008, -3/+21 when GWB eventualy passes away. i am gonna celebrate that day every year until i pass away too.
- sanosuke001, on 06/17/2008, -3/+1No, he'll get you killed long before he gets himself killed.
- harveywalbanger, on 06/17/2008, -0/+5I agree. Hurry up and die Bush, so we can sneak into the graveyard at night on your birthday and ***** on your grave.
HA HA HA HA
- sandersdamnit, on 06/17/2008, -3/+19This is the kinda ***** you get when you back a ***** into a corner.
- rameshpreddy, on 06/17/2008, -1/+1Dugg - for Adam Boulton red socks :-)
- markgl, on 06/17/2008, -7/+1They are! The people who were responsible for what happened at abu ghraib were dealt with, and who knows what happens at gitmo.
- SpeedSteamBoat, on 06/17/2008, -0/+4I think you mean the scape goats at abu ghraib were dealt with. Bush likes to pass that off as "just some soldiers" which is completely ***** move since things like that can't really happen outside the knowledge of some higher levels of command than "some soldiers."
But really, put a magnet on your car and "Support our troops!"- graphictruth, on 07/04/2008, -0/+1If by "dealt with," you mean "Promoted," yes, they were.
- SpeedSteamBoat, on 06/17/2008, -0/+4I think you mean the scape goats at abu ghraib were dealt with. Bush likes to pass that off as "just some soldiers" which is completely ***** move since things like that can't really happen outside the knowledge of some higher levels of command than "some soldiers."
- Stallionism, on 06/17/2008, -14/+3Here is the facts:
http://www.conservatipedia.com/2008/01/best-presid ...- bsmang, on 06/17/2008, -0/+4That's just wrong. Not even a good joke.
- BothBarsOn, on 06/17/2008, -0/+4Is that site a joke? I can't even tell any more ...
- spawnfree, on 06/17/2008, -0/+6Defying The Liberal Bias Of The Internet
lol
supporting the sociopathic agenda sounds more accurate. - pagno, on 06/17/2008, -0/+6I, uh. I dont think its a joke. These ***** retards that make everything a Left v. Right issue are just as much a problem as Bush himself. "Its us against them, and if you aint with us, youre with them." IMPEACH BUSH!
- VitriolAndAngst, on 06/17/2008, -0/+4I was actually hoping for a Rick Roll.
- InfamousAtheist, on 06/17/2008, -0/+2I see you're about as intelligent as your name implies.
Horse logic... yeah that's about right. - graphictruth, on 07/04/2008, -0/+1"Conservapedia: Making it too embarrassing to be Conservative in public since 2008."
- graphictruth, on 07/04/2008, -0/+1...and I THINK that may be the point. Satire is a walk upon the razor's edge, and I think this is where he fell off, in his shwag store. I checked it out and was laughing so hard at Teh Stupid that it took me a couple moments to become suspicious. "Best President Ever" was so well done that I completely missed it, and I'm going to go now and check the links to see what conservative bloggers fell for it.
BTW, I'm very, very tempted to play along in my blog....
- graphictruth, on 07/04/2008, -0/+1...and I THINK that may be the point. Satire is a walk upon the razor's edge, and I think this is where he fell off, in his shwag store. I checked it out and was laughing so hard at Teh Stupid that it took me a couple moments to become suspicious. "Best President Ever" was so well done that I completely missed it, and I'm going to go now and check the links to see what conservative bloggers fell for it.
- BillE3, on 06/17/2008, -20/+2A year from now a new president is sitting in the oval office and car bombs start going off maybe even some sort of nuke at a couple ports like Oakland and NY city. You gonna blame Bush for those too? All I know is that for the last 7 or so years, we have not had a radical islamic homicide event on American soil and not at any American installation. World wide homicide attacks killing thousands were aimed at people and governments not closely politicaly aligned to America. I am not real happy with Bush either, but at least he kept radical islam at bay. I guess because he gave them their own country, Kosovo. But Bill Clinton started that process.
- orangefly, on 06/17/2008, -0/+10i have a magic tiger rock....it keeps tigers away....want to buy it....???....
how do i know it works....???....
do you see any tigers around....???.... - SuperVepr308, on 06/17/2008, -4/+1Hush that truth ***** up! Are you crazy?
- spawnfree, on 06/17/2008, -0/+6if radical islam was really out for you then there would be all manner of small attacks across America.
but enough about that, i dont want to start giving the NSA any ideas. - SpeedSteamBoat, on 06/17/2008, -0/+5I don't give bush credit for stopping anything. There was nearly 10 years between the first WTC bombing and 9/11. Does that mean Bill Clinton did a great job keeping terrorism at bay? Probably not, no. How you can claim the guy who was in charge while the most devastating terrorist attack in history was carried out is so great at fighting terrorism is beyond me. If anything he has displayed consistently ***** foresight as he ignored all the warnings about Bin Laden pre-9/11 and then all the warnings about insurgents in a post war Iraq. Maybe our law enforcement agencies have prevented terrorist events since 9/11 but that is to their own credits not Bush's.
- normlsparky, on 06/18/2008, -0/+1your "fox news" mentality is showing. hurry up and change the channel. it will do wonders for your IQ.
- orangefly, on 06/17/2008, -0/+10i have a magic tiger rock....it keeps tigers away....want to buy it....???....
- angusm, on 06/17/2008, -3/+17Mr Bush seems to be having a dose of the Louis XIV's: "L'etat c'est moi". ('I am the state'). It may be time to remind him that he is _not_ the United States, and if he is - temporarily - its figurehead, well, that was a mistake that is now regretted by a large majority of the population.
- bsmang, on 06/17/2008, -2/+13I slander Bush and his policies all the time, but that is far from slandering America.
- RRJackson, on 06/17/2008, -7/+1So you like to think.
- RonBurgundy76, on 06/17/2008, -1/+5Shoot yourself. Really. I'm not kidding.
- RRJackson, on 06/17/2008, -4/+1Ladies first.
- RonBurgundy76, on 06/17/2008, -1/+5Anyone that is as scared as you are of the truth = pussy.
So, as you said: Ladies first.
We're waiting. - DuggDowner, on 06/17/2008, -1/+5Well said. RR Jackson is a little bitch.
- RRJackson, on 06/17/2008, -1/+1No fear of the truth. I just recognize the roots of sedition.
- RonBurgundy76, on 06/18/2008, -1/+2Maybe we need a little sedition from time to time.
As Jefferson said, "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." - Caffeinate, on 06/19/2008, -2/+2Our founding fathers advocated freedom of speech and telling the truth, thus those became fundamentals of our Constitution, became the cornerstones of our justice system, and were what our nation espoused as ideals.
Our nation was not founded on ignoring corruption, misrepresentation and secrecy; our nation was founded on respect for the truth and for our fellow man.
RRJackson, you support covering up the truth when you shun searching for it, therefore you do not support the truth. RRJackson, you do not advocate freedom of speech when you imply those who express their opinions of government unfavorably are being traitorous. RRJackson, you do not promote justice when you advocate the good of the governing body over the good of those who are governed.
RRJackson, you are part of the problem every time you endorse ideas that directly conflict with the ideals our nation was founded upon. Sedition is as sedition does.
- bsmang, on 06/18/2008, -2/+2Well I don't know what to tell you. Bush is an evil baboon stricken with severe mental retardation. He's not good enough for my spit to land on. That's just the way it is. Not my fault. Nothing I can do about it other than be vocal. I would love to see his worthless ass get impeached, but the congress appears to be even less competent than the president, if that's even possible. The only consolation is in knowing that he doesn't have much time left before Barack takes the reigns and begins to guide the country and the world back onto the right path again.
- RRJackson, on 06/18/2008, -2/+1And yet he's arguably been more powerful than any president since Lincoln. His presidency has been above most checks and balances. How do you explain that? Dumb luck?
- bsmang, on 06/18/2008, -2/+1First of all, that's a very bad thing. The presidential power grab has thrown a wrench into the gears of this government and constitution. Checks and balances in government are the only thing standing between us and all-out dictatorship. (Especially with the wannabe-dictator who's in office now.) That said, it certainly has nothing to do with Bush being a capable person. The people around him are very much smarter than he... Cheney and Rice could run mental circles around him with their eyes shut. His legal advisers and other cabinet people generally aren't dumb. Unfortunately though, the people he has surrounded himself with are no better than he is in terms of civility and moral fortitude.
- RRJackson, on 06/19/2008, -2/+1Good thing? Bad thing? He's the guy with the gun. Figuratively speaking, of course.
- RonBurgundy76, on 06/17/2008, -1/+5Shoot yourself. Really. I'm not kidding.
- RRJackson, on 06/17/2008, -7/+1So you like to think.
- kid1a, on 06/17/2008, -3/+14"You got a bunch of people sqwaking about the price of gasoline" Classy George, real classy you dumb *****.
- GordonClass, on 06/17/2008, -2/+6We are America IDIOT!!!!!!
- plhofmei, on 06/17/2008, -4/+41According to Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hermann_Goering) -- Hermann Goering, one of the top leaders of the Third Reich, once said (back in the 40's):
"Naturally, the common people don't want war; neither in Russia nor in England nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship. ...voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. A ll you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country"
Does this sound familiar to anyone?- herbertstrasse, on 06/17/2008, -1/+16Honestly, it's like the Bush administration took the Nazi playbook and just ran with it.
I'm not going to make the contrived Bush/Hitler comparison, but the propagandist techniques employed by both regimes are remarkably similar.
I recommend reading "The End of America" by Naomi Wolf for a true glimpse into the extent of these comparisons. - HanFastolfe, on 06/17/2008, -13/+1"Does this sound familiar to anyone?"
The tone of the intellectually weak Godwin is always noticeable.
"Hermann Goering, one of the top leaders of the Third Reich, once said (back in the 40's):"
One of the top leaders? You have to preface who Goering is, before spoon feeding the masses? If someone doesn't know who Goering was to begin with, then need to log off and spend sometime in those large buildings with rows of books before attempting an intelligent discourse with adults.
To get to your quote: Well Goering liked to drink, so did Stalin, and Churchill. Please see: Reductio ad Hitlerum
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_Hitlerum- webcrumb, on 06/17/2008, -1/+13So what you're saying is that pulling a country to war by telling them they are under attack and if they don't support it they are being unpatriotic doesn't have strong parallels?
There is no reductio ad Hitlerium here. The argument isn't "The Nazis did it therefore it's wrong." To quote from the article you referenced:
"A common example of the fallacy in action is, "The Nazis favored eugenics, therefore eugenics is wrong."[2][4] But the ethical debate over eugenics has nothing to do with Hitler or the Nazis in particular; both eugenics and criticism of it considerably pre-date Nazism, and have gone well beyond it, into concerns about modern genetic engineering, unknown to Hitler."
Lying to your population to get support for war pre-dates Hitler. The use of "bad intelligence" have gone well beyond this, into realms unknown by Hitler. It is wrong; are you suggesting that because the Nazis also did it the argument is invalid? If the argument that lying is wrong is invalid, does that make it right?
Come on. Please.- RonBurgundy76, on 06/17/2008, -1/+4owned. Good job, and thanks.
- HanFastolfe, on 06/17/2008, -0/+2"There is no reductio ad Hitlerium here."
Really, the OP referenced Goering and the Third Reich to draw his conclusion.
"The fallacy most often assumes the form of "Hitler (or the Nazis) supported X, therefore X must be evil/undesirable/bad"
If such a thing is bad, it should be so on the basis of it's own merits. That or, in good from, other historical context can be applied.
"So what you're saying is that pulling a country to war by telling them they are under attack and if they don't support it they are being unpatriotic doesn't have strong parallels?"
We were told that Pearl Harbor was under attack. We were told the Imperial Germany was a threat to us. We were told the Ft. Sumter had been fired upon. In these instances we accepted the story, and acted accordingly. Patriotism was in full vogue on Dec 8th 1941. Sometimes such positions, could, be true. Telling us we're under attack/threatened doesn't make it not true.
"Lying to your population to get support for war pre-dates Hitler. "
True.
"The use of "bad intelligence" have gone well beyond this, into realms unknown by Hitler."
Not true. `He who must not be named', used deception to invade for the purpose to genocide the inhabitants (and get some turf). If, we wanted to kill all the Arabs, of Afghanis, there wouldn't be any of them left (and we certainly don't want their land, oil maybe, not the land). We don't need to go to all the fuss of ovens. Nuclear weapons would do. I'm not advocating the `glass parking lot', just demonstrating the marked differences of will.
"It is wrong; are you suggesting that because the Nazis also did it the argument is invalid?"
I barely commented on the OP statements. More to intellectual weakness of the OP himself. Most particularly the immediate jumping to a Reductio ad Hitlerum.
"If the argument that lying is wrong is invalid, does that make it right?"
Deliberately stating as fact something one knows to be untrue to cause deception (lying) is wrong. Using a Nazi reference to compare someone to Hitler/Nazis is wrong as well in most instances. What does one do when the Nazis were right? The Nazis opposed communism, that was right (are the opponents of communism Nazis?). Using them as a go between only has the effect of set a certain tone to prejudice an audience. It's tired, it's thin, it's waaaaaay overused to the point where it risks losing any meaning.
I'm not even attempting to invalidate the point Goering was making. His point is valid. Prefacing who Goering was, so that the masses are damn well sure he was Nazi says more about the OP's laziness. Goering was a thug, and a member of the Nazi party, but he didn't really care about the idealogical implementation of National Socialism, he was a criminal opportunist (and a decent pilot....oh dear what does that say about pilots?)
"Come on. Please."
I see where you're coming from, and am closer to it then you might think. But I have learned that the first one mad loses, and the first one to mention Hitler/Nazis also loses. Maybe I'm a wonkish purist, but I can't stand such laziness as to drag Hitler/Nazis into everything in round one. - webcrumb, on 06/17/2008, -0/+3"I'm not advocating the `glass parking lot', just demonstrating the marked differences of will. "
Is it a difference of will ( fighting against opinion/odds/historical failure ) or a difference of intent? Land is a resource, and was gained by killing people and installing a new government. Energy sources are a resource, and have been gained by killing (fewer?) people and installing a new government. Not that this has anything to do with the OP.
"I barely commented on the OP statements. More to intellectual weakness of the OP himself. Most particularly the immediate jumping to a Reductio ad Hitlerum."
Granted. I think I jumped; I'm used to seeing pure noise-makers on here now, it's refreshing to find someone who (seems to :P) have a brain and is able to make some decent points for a change.
"I can't stand such laziness as to drag Hitler/Nazis into everything in round one."
I agree. Although; it might be used to demonstrate intellectual laziness, but it doesn't make the point (in this case) any less valid. :) - HanFastolfe, on 06/17/2008, -0/+1@webcrumb
"Is it a difference of will ( fighting against opinion/odds/historical failure ) or a difference of intent? Land is a resource, and was gained by killing people and installing a new government."
It's for sale sometimes too. Louisiana purchase, Alaska, Gadsden purchase.
"Energy sources are a resource, and have been gained by killing (fewer?) people and installing a new government. Not that this has anything to do with the OP."
Agreed, another topic, another time.
"Granted. I think I jumped; I'm used to seeing pure noise-makers on here now, it's refreshing to find someone who (seems to :P) have a brain and is able to make some decent points for a change."
Thank you for the consideration of the point (I dugg up your last reply). I had a pretty good idea what would happen. The comprehension level on digg, and by extension the intert00bz is sadly predictable. We don't have to agree, but at least you're not one of the poo flingers. Thanks.
"I agree. Although; it might be used to demonstrate intellectual laziness, but it doesn't make the point (in this case) any less valid. :)"
I affirmed the validity of the point Goering was making. What the OP was doing was something else entirely. - Caffeinate, on 06/19/2008, -1/+1Way to completely divert the original topic into something you could "win" as opposed to actually discussing the topic at hand. HanFastolfe, you tried to make yourself somehow more credible by "exposing" plhofmei's metaphors as less than 100% apt, thus attempting to discredit him rather than his argument.
Ignoring the similarities and focusing on your tangential "rightness" may have won you points in your own mind, but I don't buy it, and neither do other intelligent debaters. We've had 7 long years of Bush PR shills using this tactic every single time a valid criticism is made against this administration, and frankly, you are going to have to do better.
Please address ONE portion one tiny aspect of the topic of discussion, rather than offhandedly saying "Oh, we are closer in agreement than you might think". We don't know what you think yet about the current topic, because all you want to do is be "right" about something that has ***** all to do with what we are discussing. If you aren't inclined to do that, then please join a debate forum, learn some new techniques and then come back and join us because your present work is amateur at best.
- kemp34, on 06/17/2008, -1/+5Han you FAIL.
- BlacklabelSAR, on 06/17/2008, -1/+2Ah so because of some stupid pointless "Godwin's law'" comparisons of like things cannot be made. Godwin's Law does not apply to valid comparisons. No Sale.
- HanFastolfe, on 06/17/2008, -1/+1I didn't cite Godwins law. I cited Reductio ad Hitlerum.
"Godwin's Law does not apply to valid comparisons"
But Reductio ad Hitlerum does. Maybe this whole logic thing isn't for you. - Caffeinate, on 06/19/2008, -1/+2Hi pot, er Han, the kettle is not available, but I'll be glad to give him your message when he returns.
- HanFastolfe, on 06/17/2008, -1/+1I didn't cite Godwins law. I cited Reductio ad Hitlerum.
- webcrumb, on 06/17/2008, -1/+13So what you're saying is that pulling a country to war by telling them they are under attack and if they don't support it they are being unpatriotic doesn't have strong parallels?
- supaklaw, on 06/17/2008, -3/+2Hogan!
- herbertstrasse, on 06/17/2008, -1/+16Honestly, it's like the Bush administration took the Nazi playbook and just ran with it.
- voteforblank, on 06/17/2008, -3/+13The ONLY conclusion I can come to after watching this is... George W Bush is ***** CRAZY and should have been locked up in a psych ward along time ago.
- GorfTron, on 06/17/2008, -2/+11It pains me to even listen to this stupid man. I predict mass partying when he leaves office.
- freezeout, on 06/17/2008, -1/+10well he is an expert on the subject
who knows more about destroying America's reputation than this guy?- harveywalbanger, on 06/17/2008, -0/+3Everything this idiot touches turns to *****! GW Bush is King *****!
- Infowarmachine, on 06/17/2008, -1/+10hes embarrassing America
actually its far past that
disgracing?
ruining?
plundering?- bcamp1973, on 06/17/2008, -0/+2sodomizing?
destroying?
humiliating?
...will someone just grab a thesaurus and finish this off?- stretch611, on 06/17/2008, -0/+1demoralizing?
- RonBurgundy76, on 06/17/2008, -0/+2...slandering?
- stretch611, on 06/17/2008, -0/+1demoralizing?
- bcamp1973, on 06/17/2008, -0/+2sodomizing?
- pkarpenko, on 06/17/2008, -2/+8You know, I'm reminded of Chris Matthews' ownage of Kevin James with the simplest of questions. In interviewing Bush, it would be interesting if reporters just stepped back a bit and asked him something like "how many branches of government do we have?" or "how many amendments are in the Bill of Rights and can you name them?" -- I'd buy tickets to see that.
- harveywalbanger, on 06/17/2008, -0/+8Or have him explain the meaning of the word Democracy. I bet he ***** himself stamming to cough up some ***** cowboy remark.
IMPEACH BUSH!- pkarpenko, on 06/17/2008, -0/+2I'll save you the trouble:
"Democracy is .. uh .. freed'm. That is .. the freed'm to live de-mo-cratically *smirk*. Democracy and freed'm are the same thing is what I mean." - girwen, on 06/18/2008, -0/+1It always gets to me when somebody calls him a cowboy. He's not a cowboy. Cowboys were hard working men who helped to build America into the great country it was. bush is a repugnant gunslinger who has taken this nation from something the world looked up to to because of our freedom to one that is despised because of the way we trample on individual rights and the international rule of law.
- pkarpenko, on 06/17/2008, -0/+2I'll save you the trouble:
- harveywalbanger, on 06/17/2008, -0/+8Or have him explain the meaning of the word Democracy. I bet he ***** himself stamming to cough up some ***** cowboy remark.
- jstohler, on 06/17/2008, -3/+9***** you, go to hell, and enjoy obscurity as the worst president ever.
- stretch611, on 06/17/2008, -0/+3Actually that title would keep him (in)famous. However, I can live with that if he ever realizes just how bad the people feel about him.
- Izult, on 06/17/2008, -0/+1being spit on many times as he walks down the street might clue him in.
- stretch611, on 06/17/2008, -0/+3Actually that title would keep him (in)famous. However, I can live with that if he ever realizes just how bad the people feel about him.
- teebird, on 06/17/2008, -2/+9This is further proof...as if any more were needed...that Bush has completely jumped the rails. He's dragged this country through five years of lies, bungling, and failed policies and he persists in acting as if everything is OK and it's all the rest of us who are out of our minds.
- bcamp1973, on 06/17/2008, -1/+15Every time that moronic ***** opens his mouth I hate him more...
- DryMaltExtract, on 06/17/2008, -0/+10It's not slander when it's true.
- thebigbradwolf, on 06/17/2008, -0/+3It's not slander when it's libel, it's not libel when it's true.
- plhofmei, on 06/17/2008, -0/+2The correct URL does not have a ) on the end, it's http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hermann_Goering
- dmark77, on 06/17/2008, -0/+5George Bush should sue.
Oh wait, that would involve actually doing something through the courts.
***** moron. - tufftugg, on 06/17/2008, -1/+9 Why are American's upset by this statement? This is how the U.S. attitude is viewed in the World. I think the Ho-rah America, we can't do no wrong, or we are never wrong, is the baseline programming they go through. American has invaded more countries than the evil Communist have in the last 50 years.
- Nosferotu, on 06/17/2008, -0/+2We're upset by it because we ***** hate Bush. His approval rating is floating somewhere around 28%. Nearly 3 out of every 4 Americans hate the guy, and pretty much everything he does. We are, you may be surprised to find, a much varied population of a few hundred million, and somehow the stupidest one of us got elected president. You can thank the lower 40some% of us for that. We're trying our best to get rid of him though, so just bear with us for a couple more months, okay?
- amightywind, on 06/17/2008, -22/+3Good for President Bush. He does not defend himself vigorously against slanderous attacks. He has done enormous good for the world. I would like to see him and the Whitehouse information machine go on the offensive and trash the careers of a few of his opponents. It has been my pleasure to bury the vast majority of moronic comments on this story. This liberal circle jerk is getting to be too much.
- bbqsalad, on 06/17/2008, -1/+7you forgot the /sarcasm tag. Or perhaps you are just an idiot.
- SilasTomorrow, on 06/17/2008, -1/+7I'm not liberal, and I gotta say... Bush is a stain on the American character. The man has a skewed view on the world, and uses 'patriotic' bravado to justify treating the world like a chessboard. Our Founding Fathers would've had this guy ousted (Constitutionally) along time ago. We, as a nation, will be better off when his regime ends. Good riddance, Georgie.
- RonBurgundy76, on 06/17/2008, -0/+3Our Founding Fathers would have probably killed him.
- Nosferotu, on 06/17/2008, -0/+2I think it would be the happiest day of my life if I got to see footage of a zombie Thomas Jefferson strangling the life out of George Bush.
- RonBurgundy76, on 06/17/2008, -0/+3Our Founding Fathers would have probably killed him.
- Bushlied, on 06/17/2008, -1/+4 Check your character guy. Its stinks. Any men willing to stroke this ***** of a President can sink with him to.
- freedomwv, on 06/17/2008, -1/+1I feel sorry for you.
- BlacklabelSAR, on 06/17/2008, -1/+1http://katysconservativecorner.typepad.com/photos/ ...
-
Show 51 - 88 of 88 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2008 —
Content posted by
