Armed Polite Society
October 24, 2020, 11:50:47 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: R.I.P. Scout26
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register  
Pages: 1 [2]
  Print  
Author Topic: Bush The Patsy: Part III  (Read 20310 times)
The Rabbi
friend
Senior Member
***
Posts: 4,435


"Ahh, Jeez. Not this sh*t again!"


« Reply #25 on: September 18, 2007, 12:42:06 PM »

There is only one political reality when it comes to fighting for your survival: the necessity of winning.  I don't think Bush is really fighting to win.  Maybe he's too busy celebrating Ramadan with friends of the Bush family.
So you would support Bush for President For Life with dictatorial powers so he can win, right?
Report to moderator   Logged

Fight state-sponsored Islamic terrorism: Bomb France now!

Vote Libertarian: It Not Like It Matters Anyway.
longeyes
friend
Senior Member
***
Posts: 5,405



« Reply #26 on: September 18, 2007, 05:28:15 PM »

The Dems have been trampling Bush for six years.  Bush doesn't have the stomach to bring it to them politically.  They're even holding him up on the AG nomination now.  He has needed to play hardball with the Dems the way the Clintons do.  For whatever reason he can't do it, he can't make the Dems afraid of him.  Is there no pressure he can bring to bear on the chief villains of the Opposition?  Something's very odd here, and it isn't because Bush is such a noble fellow, such a nice guy.  Spare me.

And that's exactly what I see in his conduct of the war across two theaters.  He hasn't made the enemy afraid of us.  Why I'll leave to your surmises.

Bush for Life?  You jest, senor.
Report to moderator   Logged

"Domari nolo."

Thug: What you lookin' at old man?
Walt Kowalski: Ever notice how you come across somebody once in a while you shouldn't have messed with? That's me.

Molon Labe.
The Rabbi
friend
Senior Member
***
Posts: 4,435


"Ahh, Jeez. Not this sh*t again!"


« Reply #27 on: September 18, 2007, 10:40:14 PM »

The Dems have been trampling Bush for six years.  Bush doesn't have the stomach to bring it to them politically.  They're even holding him up on the AG nomination now.  He has needed to play hardball with the Dems the way the Clintons do.  For whatever reason he can't do it, he can't make the Dems afraid of him.  Is there no pressure he can bring to bear on the chief villains of the Opposition?  Something's very odd here, and it isn't because Bush is such a noble fellow, such a nice guy.  Spare me.

And that's exactly what I see in his conduct of the war across two theaters.  He hasn't made the enemy afraid of us.  Why I'll leave to your surmises.

Bush for Life?  You jest, senor.

Except for the second paragraph I agree with everything you've written.
Report to moderator   Logged

Fight state-sponsored Islamic terrorism: Bomb France now!

Vote Libertarian: It Not Like It Matters Anyway.
roo_ster
Kakistocracy--It's What's For Dinner.
friend
Senior Member
***
Posts: 21,225


Hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats


« Reply #28 on: September 18, 2007, 11:00:45 PM »

If GWB had made the enemy fear our wrath, we would not have Iran & Syria actively and pretty much openly sticking it to us in Iraq.  The Norks would be much more amenable to reason, as well.

For a small moment in 2003, there was fear, as shown by Kadafi losing his nerve & taste for WMD.  After that, not so much.

longeye's second paragraph naturally follows the first.  Not being able to go after domestic political opponents hammer & tongs (politically speaking) has led to external, existential enemies not fearing us.
Report to moderator   Logged

Regards,

roo_ster

“Fallacies do not cease to be fallacies because they become fashions.”
----G.K. Chesterton
The Rabbi
friend
Senior Member
***
Posts: 4,435


"Ahh, Jeez. Not this sh*t again!"


« Reply #29 on: September 18, 2007, 11:37:57 PM »

Bush is constrained by Congress and a host of other factors from just doing whatever he wants.  I think Kennedy called the presidency a weak office.  Bush Sr. is often criticized for not going on to Baghdad during Desert Storm but he pointed out his authority for war only allowed him to drive Iraq out of Kuwait, not invade Iraq.
That said, his downfall has been trying to work with Congress and the Dems rather than just confront them.  They take this as a sign of weakness and exploit it.  Kind of like the terrorists do.
Report to moderator   Logged

Fight state-sponsored Islamic terrorism: Bomb France now!

Vote Libertarian: It Not Like It Matters Anyway.
roo_ster
Kakistocracy--It's What's For Dinner.
friend
Senior Member
***
Posts: 21,225


Hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats


« Reply #30 on: September 19, 2007, 01:57:11 AM »

TR:

I agree with ya on all that. 

If GWB would have gone after Congress and made a big pitch to the American people, I think Congress & the terrorists would have feared him and the American people would have respected him more and been more accepting of bumps in the road.
Report to moderator   Logged

Regards,

roo_ster

“Fallacies do not cease to be fallacies because they become fashions.”
----G.K. Chesterton
Ron
Guest
« Reply #31 on: September 19, 2007, 02:40:44 AM »

Quote
That said, his downfall has been trying to work with Congress and the Dems rather than just confront them.  They take this as a sign of weakness and exploit it.

That is what Reagan avoided successfully.

He went past congress straight to the American people and congress was often playing catch up on the issues.

Reagan led.
Report to moderator   Logged
Joe Demko
friend
Member
***
Posts: 385


Marko Kloos was right about you.


« Reply #32 on: September 19, 2007, 03:22:50 AM »

Bush is constrained by Congress and a host of other factors from just doing whatever he wants.  I think Kennedy called the presidency a weak office.  Bush Sr. is often criticized for not going on to Baghdad during Desert Storm but he pointed out his authority for war only allowed him to drive Iraq out of Kuwait, not invade Iraq.
That said, his downfall has been trying to work with Congress and the Dems rather than just confront them.  They take this as a sign of weakness and exploit it.  Kind of like the terrorists do.

I was with you until the gratuitous reference to terrorists.
Report to moderator   Logged

That's right... I'm a Jackbooted Thug AND a Juvenile Indoctrination Technician.  Deal with it.
The Rabbi
friend
Senior Member
***
Posts: 4,435


"Ahh, Jeez. Not this sh*t again!"


« Reply #33 on: September 19, 2007, 05:23:18 AM »

Bush is constrained by Congress and a host of other factors from just doing whatever he wants.  I think Kennedy called the presidency a weak office.  Bush Sr. is often criticized for not going on to Baghdad during Desert Storm but he pointed out his authority for war only allowed him to drive Iraq out of Kuwait, not invade Iraq.
That said, his downfall has been trying to work with Congress and the Dems rather than just confront them.  They take this as a sign of weakness and exploit it.  Kind of like the terrorists do.

I was with you until the gratuitous reference to terrorists.
You think terrorists don't take overtures of conciliation as a sign of weakness and then exploit them?
Or do you think there is some difference between the tactics of terrorists and that of the Democratic leadership in Congress?
Report to moderator   Logged

Fight state-sponsored Islamic terrorism: Bomb France now!

Vote Libertarian: It Not Like It Matters Anyway.
Joe Demko
friend
Member
***
Posts: 385


Marko Kloos was right about you.


« Reply #34 on: September 19, 2007, 06:06:45 AM »

I think it was needlessly inflammatory rhetoric on your part.  Though you will, no doubt, deny that you are likening Democrats to terrorists that is what you are doing.  If both terrorists and Democrats can take advantage of the same shortcomings in Bush's character, that doesn't mean terrorists = Democrats.
Report to moderator   Logged

That's right... I'm a Jackbooted Thug AND a Juvenile Indoctrination Technician.  Deal with it.
The Rabbi
friend
Senior Member
***
Posts: 4,435


"Ahh, Jeez. Not this sh*t again!"


« Reply #35 on: September 19, 2007, 07:01:05 AM »

I think it was needlessly inflammatory rhetoric on your part.  Though you will, no doubt, deny that you are likening Democrats to terrorists that is what you are doing.  If both terrorists and Democrats can take advantage of the same shortcomings in Bush's character, that doesn't mean terrorists = Democrats.

No, there are significant differences between them.  They dress differently, for example.  Skin color tends to be different.  There are more women in the Democratic caucus.  The terrorists don't hate guns.  Terrorists will fight back when challenged.  I could sit here and do this all day...
Report to moderator   Logged

Fight state-sponsored Islamic terrorism: Bomb France now!

Vote Libertarian: It Not Like It Matters Anyway.
Joe Demko
friend
Member
***
Posts: 385


Marko Kloos was right about you.


« Reply #36 on: September 19, 2007, 07:12:50 AM »

No, there are significant differences between them.  They dress differently, for example.  Skin color tends to be different.  There are more women in the Democratic caucus.  The terrorists don't hate guns.  Terrorists will fight back when challenged.  I could sit here and do this all day...

Yep, and you frequently do; thereby undermining the valid points that you do make.  But hey, whatever amuses you and doesn't cost me anything is fine with me.
Report to moderator   Logged

That's right... I'm a Jackbooted Thug AND a Juvenile Indoctrination Technician.  Deal with it.
Paddy
Guest
« Reply #37 on: September 20, 2007, 01:39:59 PM »

HTH do we get from criticizing Bush for his AG nomination to Dems are terrorists?
Report to moderator   Logged
Len Budney
Senior Member
**
Posts: 1,023


« Reply #38 on: September 20, 2007, 02:09:50 PM »

HTH do we get from criticizing Bush for his AG nomination to Dems are terrorists?

Would it help to turn the tables? Strictly speaking, it's the Repubs who constantly try to make us as afraid as possible. Technically, by the definition of "terrorist," they come closer. Their motives are very different, of course. Terrorists want us afraid so we'll withdraw from Muslim territories, especially Saudi Arabia. Republicans want us afraid so we'll support the invasion of Iraq and, of course, vote Republican.

And remember! "The Transportation Safety Administration has elevated the threat level to: or'nge. Please watch your luggage, quiver in fear, and remember to pull the (R) lever in November. Thank you." Has the threat level been anything other than "or'nge" in like three years now?

--Len.
Report to moderator   Logged

In a cannibal society, vegetarians arouse suspicion.
fistful
Lifestyle Editor: Gorilla Channel
friend
Senior Member
***
Posts: 55,709


Unsightly Primate Head


« Reply #39 on: September 20, 2007, 03:29:28 PM »

"There may be a terrorist attack" = fearmongering

"Bush is taking away all of our rights" = concerned citizenship


 rolleyes
Report to moderator   Logged

Republican: Woke since 1854
Len Budney
Senior Member
**
Posts: 1,023


« Reply #40 on: September 20, 2007, 10:38:43 PM »

"There may be a terrorist attack" = fearmongering

They say a good deal more than that.

Quote
"Bush is taking away all of our rights" = concerned citizenship

He has taken away habeas corpus; it's in the public record. That's a fact--there's no "might" or "maybe" about it. Habeas corpus is gone. Yeah, I'd say taking note of the fact is "concerned citizenship." If "the price of freedom is eternal vigilance," we're doomed: what kind of "vigilance" watches them take away a core right, dating back to the magna carta, and says, "Nothing to see here!"?

--Len.
Report to moderator   Logged

In a cannibal society, vegetarians arouse suspicion.
The Rabbi
friend
Senior Member
***
Posts: 4,435


"Ahh, Jeez. Not this sh*t again!"


« Reply #41 on: September 20, 2007, 10:41:29 PM »

"There may be a terrorist attack" = fearmongering

"Bush is taking away all of our rights" = concerned citizenship


 rolleyes

Remember, Bush is the font of all evil.  He is the Satan, the Seducer.
Or else he's a grinning idiot.
But it's one of those two, I'm sure of it.
Report to moderator   Logged

Fight state-sponsored Islamic terrorism: Bomb France now!

Vote Libertarian: It Not Like It Matters Anyway.
Paddy
Guest
« Reply #42 on: September 21, 2007, 02:53:12 AM »

HTH do we get from criticizing Bush for his AG nomination to Dems are terrorists?

Would it help to turn the tables? Strictly speaking, it's the Repubs who constantly try to make us as afraid as possible. Technically, by the definition of "terrorist," they come closer. Their motives are very different, of course. Terrorists want us afraid so we'll withdraw from Muslim territories, especially Saudi Arabia. Republicans want us afraid so we'll support the invasion of Iraq and, of course, vote Republican.

And remember! "The Transportation Safety Administration has elevated the threat level to: or'nge. Please watch your luggage, quiver in fear, and remember to pull the (R) lever in November. Thank you." Has the threat level been anything other than "or'nge" in like three years now?

--Len.

Yikes! I actually agree with Len Budney.  The end must be near.
Report to moderator   Logged
Pages: 1 [2]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!