BS: Bush is NOT Incompetent (?)

Subject: BS: Bush is NOT Incompetent (?)
From: GUEST, Ebbie
Date: 26 Jun 06 - 07:02 PM

Here is a scary analysis of the Bush doctrine.

The writers' premise is that Bush is following the conservative agenda and has had many successes. Just about all the policies that he has implemented that so alarm us fit neatly into the agenda as outlined in the Project. Read it - and tell me what you think...

Brrrrrrr

Subject: RE: BS: Bush is NOT Incompetent (?)
From: Don Firth
Date: 26 Jun 06 - 07:26 PM

I can think of a few national leaders in the not too far distant past who where this "imcompentent." The world still hasn't fully recovered from them.

Pretty creepy!

Neo-conservatives? No. Neo-feudalists!

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Bush is NOT Incompetent (?)
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 26 Jun 06 - 07:34 PM

I agree with that, Don.....It's bloody terrifying.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush is NOT Incompetent (?)
From: DougR
Date: 26 Jun 06 - 08:17 PM

Ebbie: "Truthout" Editorial? A truly neutral bi-partisan blogger I assume, right?

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Bush is NOT Incompetent (?)
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 26 Jun 06 - 08:25 PM

A PC warning:

If you load the "printer friendly" version of the editorial, and do a copy all and paste (or paste special formatted) into a Word document, you will find a "bookmark" at the top of the file in the first character space. A bookmark in the first character space triggers a known bug in some older versions of Word that may mangle your document when you reopen it. Either delete the bookmark before saving, or simply don't copy the first line, unless you're using a quite recent version of Word.


As to the article, I'm glad to see someone finally agree with me, and it's quite well put. I've read, saved, and likely will reread with check references at hand.

It does, IMO, gloss over the manipulation of Religious Conservatives to get the vote, and the imperative that the Conservative Agenda will be forced to give them some additional tidbits - not really core parts of the Agenda - to keep them voting as they've done; but a single article would be hard-put to cover all the damage that appears on the near horizon, if current Conservative politics are not restrained.

John

Subject: RE: BS: Bush is NOT Incompetent (?)
From: Bill D
Date: 26 Jun 06 - 08:26 PM

what does 'neutral' have to do with 'truth' in extreme cases like this? If a liberal Democrat was making stupid decisions and mucking things up, I'd say equally stern things about him!... Gerald Ford didn't do every thing to suit me, but he was a rational, decent man who had a good grasp of reality....currently, however, I can't say that about THIS guy.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush is NOT Incompetent (?)
From: Bobert
Date: 26 Jun 06 - 08:35 PM

Well, there's not doubt that Bush is doing what his daddy and his daddy's friends have always wanted done... Bankrupt the governemnt so it can throw up it's hands and say, "Sorry, we're broke"... And since we are broke we're callin' off the New Deal...

Yazzir, the monied class is still pissed off about the labor movement in the 20's and the New Deal of the 30's... Might of fact, trutyh be known, they're probably pudy pissed off about the Emmancipation Proclamation... Well, they are sho nuff pissed off about Brown v. Topeka Board of Education 'causs lettin' black folk into public schooles would mean that black folk would start gettin' educated and thet would mean that black folk would want, ahhhhh, mo money...

This thing is all about money but let not give Bush all this credit...

This goes back to Goldwater who planted the seeds and Nixon who nudged it a little... Then came Reagan who carried the ball down within the 10 yard line... Then came ther best Republican that America has ever seen in Bill Clinton who got it right down to the 1 inch line and then comes "Bush also" who is good for about 1 inch and no more... But "Bush also" had problems even gettin' into the game and had to have his daddy's lawyers come in a steal the 2000 election just to get him into the game with the ball on the 1 inch line...

But give credit where credit is due... Looks as if he might have gotten it down to the 1/2 inch line with 2 stolen elections!!! Heck, he might have scored the fatal hit on the US governement... We won't know fir a few years if he's killed it but I think it's a tad too early for him to take a victory lap...

The American people startin' to get real pissed off at his policies so remains to be seen if the wounds he has inflicted are fatal...

One thing is fir sure, he has not been able to "frame" these policies long e3nough for folks to not see thru them and that's a good sign...

Now if God would just fire a thunder bolt at Karl Rove, the dirty trickster of all time, then maybe, just maybe the ball will stay on the 1/2 inch line and allow the country to survive the assault of the neo-cons...

If not, study Germany in the 20's and 30's for it's future....

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Bush is NOT Incompetent (?)
From: Susu's Hubby
Date: 26 Jun 06 - 08:38 PM

Gee....

Isn't truthout.org the same site that said Rove was going to be indicted a few weeks ago?


So much for "truth".

Or do we have to pick and choose what the truth is from these people?



Hubby

Subject: RE: BS: Bush is NOT Incompetent (?)
From: Little Hawk
Date: 26 Jun 06 - 08:42 PM

The article is correct. Incompetence in high office is not the problem. Neo-conservative theory and policy put into effect very competently is the problem. Neo-conservative theory is based on incompetent ideals all right, not to mention extremely immoral ideals...but it has indeed been put into effect quite competently by those who espouse those ideals.

One could have said exactly the same thing about Hitler and the Nazis from 1933-41. Then the madness of their very competently engineered gameplan began to unravel...as will the madness of the neo-conservative agenda as well, given enough time.

Despots do not win in the end.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush is NOT Incompetent (?)
From: Don Firth
Date: 26 Jun 06 - 09:05 PM

Notice that two of our conservative stalwarts have had nothing to say about the accuracy of the article. The only thing they've found to quibble about is the source.

Once again, that's the argumentum ad hominem:   attacking the source of the assertion rather than trying to refute the assertion itself. Sorry, guys. Even if you "kill the messenger," that doesn't make the message any less true.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Bush is NOT Incompetent (?)
From: 282RA
Date: 26 Jun 06 - 09:55 PM

I am also quite angry about the "Bush acted on bad intelligence" ploy. He must not be allowed to get away with that. He deliberately ignored pre-war intelligence that was far from bad--it was on the money.

Once again, if we say Iraq plays right into the conservative agenda then what do we conclude about 9-11? Seems to me like the best thing that could have happened for the conservative agenda of this country.

I think Bush is a stupid fool but I also believe these moves are not his. He's just a figurehead, a screen behind which others act. It's his moronic nature along with the Bush name that made him the perfect vessel for them to ride into the White House.

And they have indeed achieved their goals. They frightened this nation of unforgiveable cowards with BS about terrorism and then began eroding away our freedoms and the stupid cum-drips I'm ashamed to have to call my fellow Americans--and whom I am increasingly angry at myself for defending for 6 years because they didn't deserve that chunk of my life--are letting it happen because they believe we have too many freedoms.

Now we find out that Bush has been examining everybody's financial records, I can definitely state that it doesn't bother most Americans. It is utterly maddening at how the domestic spying thing doesn't bother most people. They don't see the danger that the Bush administration is opening doors for a future republican dictatorship. It will be smashingly successful if a pub candidate gets into office in 2008 and it's looking to me like that is what might just happen. The American people have yet to let me down with their incredibly dense stupidity and short-sightedness, their unacceptable willingness to punch that republican ticket every single time no matter who the candidate is--as long as he's republican.

God help us.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush is NOT Incompetent (?)
From: katlaughing
Date: 26 Jun 06 - 11:08 PM

What JohninKS said, with emphasis on what Charley Noble's neice termed Christian Nationalists. They started out with an extreme, but very canny, agenda many years ago, starting out small by going after positions on school boards, town councils, etc. They continued on, hand in hand with the likes of Cheney, Rove, et al and have achieved one of their ultimate goals by placing the puppet shrub in the White House.

I find that to be one of best analysis I've read in his six years in office. Another interesting read might be the first few "Bushwhacked" threads, right here,where many predicted, accurately it seems, that we would come to such as now, esp. in regards to Iraq.

I think our main hope lies in how the people feel/percieve Iraq. Folks are not happy about it. It is the top thing folks say they are concerned about and Congresss is not listening. A couple of weeks ago they wasted time on the gay marriage dead horse; today they debated flag-burning. May the god/goddess/reason/consciousness/etc. of each person's heart bring them to realise the importance of doing all they can to effect a change, before it comes to a revolution.DUMP THE RED HERRING CONGRESS!

Thanks, Ebbie,

kat

Subject: RE: BS: Bush is NOT Incompetent (?)
From: Little Hawk
Date: 26 Jun 06 - 11:26 PM

Couldn't agree with you more, 282RA. As a Canadian sitting nervously right next door to the developing fascist Amerika regime I can tell you...it doesn't feel good.

It isn't George Bush who worries me. He's just a figurehead. It's the people behind him who put him in office who worry me...the planners of the New American Century (aka New World Order). And do I think they had something to do with helping set up 911? You betcha. Too convenient by half.

The Oklahoma bombing didn't scare the general American public enough to bamboozle them into giving away their freedoms...so something bigger had to be arranged. Much bigger. Something that would televise live before their horrified eyes. Something that would provide an excuse for war abroad and the establishment of a civil dictatorship at home. Call it "the crime of the century", and you probably wouldn't be far off.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush is NOT Incompetent (?)
From: Ebbie
Date: 26 Jun 06 - 11:27 PM

Doug R, here's a compliment for you: I think you are a decent man. Don't ruin my opinion of you by repeating someone else's drivel Read the bloody thing. I can tell that you have not.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush is NOT Incompetent (?)
From: Barry Finn
Date: 27 Jun 06 - 01:42 AM

I like that Kat - a "RED HERRING CONGRESS" & it does need to be dumped, along with the cabinet.

I still think Bush is not only incompetent but the dumb ass deosn't even know he's being set up as historys' fall guy by those around him.After all he got exactually halk the IQ of Clinton & his daddy is almost as stupid for not realizing & helping his son wear the dunces' crown. It his backers that are ones that are "NOT Incopetent". They've been on track for years floating in & out of key positions. Georgie's just been an "Incompetent Governor". Historicly he's the bigest idiot yet.

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: Bush is NOT Incompetent (?)
From: freda underhill
Date: 27 Jun 06 - 01:55 AM

very interesting article Ebbie - yes, even conservatives are calling Dubya inept. The article points out that he has been determinedly following a conservative agenda - and that the effects - Katrina, the centralisation of power, the Patriot Act,the Iraq War, Cutting taxes during wartime, the budget deficit - are the natural, inevitable result of the conservative governing philosophy.

It is dangerous to scapegoat George as the problem - the problem is not him, it's what he and his governing party are doing. As the article comments:

As should be painfully clear, the Bush administration has been overwhelmingly competent in advancing its conservative vision. It has been all too effective in achieving its goals by determinedly pursuing a conservative philosophy.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush is NOT Incompetent (?)
From: Greg F.
Date: 27 Jun 06 - 08:58 AM

Dumbya is clever in the way Ken Lay is clever, and has the same moral compass; Lay still doesn't think he did anything wrong.

****
Doug R, here's a compliment for you: I think you are a decent man.

Perhaps its time to think again- how much smug, self-satisfied ignorant puerile drivel does he have to post to cause you to modify that opinion?

Subject: RE: BS: Bush is NOT Incompetent (?)
From: katlaughing
Date: 27 Jun 06 - 09:43 AM

Thanks, Barry. I am thinking of making a bumper sticker to that effect!

Subject: RE: BS: Bush is NOT Incompetent (?)
From: Susu's Hubby
Date: 27 Jun 06 - 09:53 AM

Ok...

First it was "Bush is incompetent".

Now, "Bush isn't incompetent" but it's all a massive conspiracy on the part of the "conservative movement".



Then at the start of the Iraq war it was "Let's go get the WMD's".

Then a few months later it was "Where are the WMD's?"

Then a few months later it was "There are no WMD's."

And then yet a few months later was "Bush lied about WMD's."

And just here recently, according to declassified defense department documents, we have "WMD's found in Iraq."




(The next ones are a compilation of your core beliefs)

Next we have "Outlaw the death penalty!"

Then we have "Save the starving children."

Then we have "Save the environment".

Then we have "Save the whales"

Then we have "Save the spotted owl"

Then we have "Stop global warming" and along with that we're being preached at about "We're contributing to our own demise!"

But yet you still insist on keeping the murder of an average of 1.3 million unborn children a year a legal activity and hide it behind "A woman's right to choose."


Give me a break.


See, I can find articles too!

But I'm sure you'll find ways to say that the article is inaccurate because it's from a "conservative site".



Hubby

Subject: RE: BS: Bush is NOT Incompetent (?)
From: pdq
Date: 27 Jun 06 - 10:04 AM

...from Hubs' blue clicky article above:

"Even the broadest classifications of voter types do not find a majority supporting any single one. Political scientist par excellence, Aaron Wildavsky, identified four very broad political types: so called individualists, deferentials, egalitarians and fatalists. Based upon the Time Warner data, the first (which corresponds to economic conservatives) represented 34 percent of the population, the second (social conservatives) equaled 22 percent, egalitarians (liberals) were 27 percent and fatalists 17 percent. On the basis of this division, Wildavsky concluded that all politics must be coalition politics, with no single one able to mold a reliable majority."

Subject: RE: BS: Bush is NOT Incompetent (?)
From: Greg F.
Date: 27 Jun 06 - 11:57 AM

And then, Bubby, we have a blatherskite gobshite.

Give US a break, hey?

Subject: RE: BS: Bush is NOT Incompetent (?)
From: Amos
Date: 27 Jun 06 - 12:10 PM

S.H.:

In order to defend that rather scurrilous accusation, you have to defend the notion that individual lifetimes are identical with protoplasm, that every sperm is sacred, and that two cells, or 2^10 cells, are the same thing as a living individual human. These are very shakey propositions.

In the final analysis, you would like to impose moral constraints on other people's lives which are born actually from opinions, not from facts. This is directly contrary to the spirit of common tolerance and common good which informs the core values of our constitution and our bill of rights.

I know that some people believe their moral opinions are MUCH more important than some old piece of paper like the United States Constitution, but the paper is not the issue. What is at issue is that you do not have the right under the principles of the Constitution to force your moral opinions onto other people, even if in your own fevered mind you can convince yourself that abortion is the "same thing" as murder. For the same reason, Mister Bush has no right to use the Constitution as a vehicle for imposing a narrow moral constraint about what constitutes marriage, just because he wants to cater to one group's opinions. To do so is a violation of his own oath. But, he has frequently demonstrated that he does not understand his oath or what it entails, so we should not pretend to be surprised by this evidence of his obstinate ignorance-based approach.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Bush is NOT Incompetent (?)
From: CarolC
Date: 27 Jun 06 - 01:36 PM

Bush is NOT Incompetent

And he's not a conservative, either. And neither are any of his supporters, including the ones who have posted to this thread. Not even according the definitions given in the article posted by the Hubster.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush is NOT Incompetent (?)
From: Alaska Mike
Date: 27 Jun 06 - 05:05 PM

With the huge tax deficits brought on by Bush's welfare for the rich, the addition of thousands of newly appointed neo-conservative federal judges, the evisceration of environmental laws, the movement of manufacturing jobs overseas and the rise in power of the religious right, our once-great country is in for a long struggle to try and regain the "American Dream" which has been so badly eroded.

Our children will have trouble finding decent jobs that pay enough to purchase housing, higher education will become too expensive for the majority of young folks, and our health and well being will be destroyed by the continued rape of out natural resources and the pollution that goes along with it. Even if this "conservative" juggernaut is stopped and turned back with the coming fall elections, it will be decades before the damage can be repaired (if ever). It saddens my heart.

Mike

Subject: RE: BS: Bush is NOT Incompetent (?)
From: GUEST
Date: 28 Jun 06 - 02:05 AM

GWBush's job is to act as "incompetent" puppet while the people running his show destroy America. He IS personally incompetent, but that doesn't matter because the media doesn't report on it adequately. He could take a dump in the Rose Garden and you wouldn't hear about it on the networks.

Pelosi. The other head of the two-headed party in America. The Clintons are lieutenants in the Bush Crime Family. The Bushes stole the White House for GW, and they're going to steal it for Hillary, then for Jeb, etc. That's our monarchy.

Bush has achieved a great deal for his globalist backers. The Anglo-American alliance is about to trigger either a World War or a global economic collapse, and the U.N. will then "save us." That was the job of the Bush family, to bring us to this point. Bush # 1 put the truck into gear, his hand-picked successor Bill Clinton stepped on the gas, and GW is now careening down the mountain with his eyes closed.

But it's Hillary that will deliver the coup de grace. She'll be inserted into either the White House, same as GW was, or be named Homeland Security Czar, and then she'll live up to the "ideals" she laid out in her book "It Takes a Village." Just like Hitler and Mein Kampf. Hillary's going to merge the US with a global govt (the village) and kill a hell of a lot of Americans while she's doing it. What, after she had that warm and fuzzy sounding book ghost-written for her? And she's a woman, she wouldn't do that, would she?

Incompetence is not a factor in the current political equation, so you'd better get ready -- when Hillary takes the wheel, the brick wall won't be far ahead.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush is NOT Incompetent (?)
From: Don Firth
Date: 28 Jun 06 - 01:22 PM

Well, GUEST, other than the fact that you obviously hate the Clintons, particularly Hillary, do you have any data to back up what you say?

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Bush is NOT Incompetent (?)
From: Little Hawk
Date: 28 Jun 06 - 10:44 PM

I think there's at least a fighting chance that Guest, whoever Guest is, is basically right, Don. There is a behind-the-scenes cabal of very rich corporate industrialists and international bankers who run the USA, and they control both parties. Got that? Both of them. The Democrats and Republicans are owned by the same people...although they necessarily will present themselves differently, cutting a different PR style...that's necessary in order to create the illusion that when you have an American election, there's actually something to vote for! A choice. Well, there is no real choice. The game is...the $ySStem uses the Democrats to advance the agenda when the public has lost all faith in the Republicans...and uses the Republicans to advance the agenda when the reverse is true. It's like a soap opera or a cop show, and don't think that it hasn't been planned by the same kind of minds that do marketing surveys and write TV scripts and sell consumer products. It's media manipulation from the highest levels. The parties are rubber stamps for corporate policy. The President is a chosen "face" for the public to fixate on, while the real backers who are never named run the show.

Bush the Elder was in their pocket. Bill Clinton (though I rather like the man personally) was equally in their pocket. Bush Jr is in their pocket. Hillary...or whoever else they choose ahead of time to govern you poor souls will also be in their pocket.

It's all been planned well ahead of time...just like the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq were, long before 911. 911 was just the surprisingly convenient "provocation" that miraculously occurred at the perfect time to put the American public on a war footing, that's all. And the whole story of 911? I very much doubt that it will ever be told. Those stories never are. And Osama Bin Laden? Well, they don't really seem to need him all that much anymore, do they? Just like they don't really need Saddam anymore. A new "arch-fiend" will be found soon. Wait and see. Just in time for a new war. I wonder who it will be? I wonder if the poor bastard knows what's in store for him yet? Probably not.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush is NOT Incompetent (?)
From: CarolC
Date: 29 Jun 06 - 10:26 AM

Oh, they still need Osama, LH. They still pull him out from under our collective bed from time to time and put him on display for a while to put the fear back in us when we start to become less afraid.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush is NOT Incompetent (?)
From: Greg F.
Date: 29 Jun 06 - 11:47 AM

No, no NO! Its COMMIES who are under the bed, not Towelheads. Oh, for the good old days of the Red Scares.

Osama and his minions- like the christian god (or the bogeyman)- are omnipresent.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush is NOT Incompetent (?)
From: GUEST
Date: 29 Jun 06 - 12:05 PM

Bush isn't smart enough to be incompetent -

Subject: RE: BS: Bush is NOT Incompetent (?)
From: Little Hawk
Date: 29 Jun 06 - 01:28 PM

Yes, Carol, Osama still functions to some extent as a re-playable boogeyman to scare the American public...no doubt of that...but he got upstaged bigtime by Saddam...long enough to play out the great Iraq invasion TV miniseries. Saddam is now like Manuel Noriega and Milosevich and other such former heavies in the ongoing drama...a hasbeen. Now I suspect that someone else will soon be starring in a riveting new sequel ("War in---?---"), but Osama will still get to play a bit part now and then, just as you said. He's still useful in that respect.

Bush probably is pretty incompetent, judging by his personal history, but Bush is not the real problem. The people who put him in office are the real problem (and I don't mean...the voters!).

Subject: RE: BS: Bush is NOT Incompetent (?)
From: Ron Davies
Date: 29 Jun 06 - 11:56 PM

At work I have a great cartoon taped up that addresses Carol's point.

Rather discouraged "Typical Viewer" ( I suppose) listens to the White House spokesman.

"You can run but you can't hide...........OK, you can hide but we'll find you...........Well, maybe we won't find you but we'll keep looking.............OK, we won't keep looking but we'll use you as a threat to boost our poll numbers."

Subject: RE: BS: Bush is NOT Incompetent (?)
From: GUEST
Date: 30 Jun 06 - 01:48 PM

With respect Little Hawk, us poor souls in the US know a villain when we see one. You respect Bill Clinton? Have you ever read about this?

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=14746

Just type Clinton, aids, blood, Canada into any search engine for hundreds of stories on this. That's just one of Clinton's contributions to Canada. He's a ghoul. Down there in the lower rings with the Bushes.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush is NOT Incompetent (?)
From: robomatic
Date: 30 Jun 06 - 03:07 PM

I think it's a well written and well argued editorial which could be a focal point for a Democratic opposition argument in the coming elections. Too bad the Democrats under their current leaders ARE incompetent and disorganized.

When put at its most basic, the Reps versus the Dems are the evil versus the cowardly, and Americans will go for evil over cowardly every time.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush is NOT Incompetent (?)
From: Little Hawk
Date: 30 Jun 06 - 03:20 PM

Oh, I never said I respected him, Guest. I know he's part of the New World Order. I just said that I find him somewhat likeable (his surface personality, I mean, as it comes across generally). More likeable than Mr Bush, for example. Villains can sometimes be somewhat likeable in various respects even though they are villains.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush is NOT Incompetent (?)
From: Little Hawk
Date: 30 Jun 06 - 04:21 PM

I read the article, Guest. Interesting. It would not surprise me a bit if it were true. It took a very long time to load onscreen for some reason, but it finally did.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush is NOT Incompetent (?)
From: Arne
Date: 30 Jun 06 - 04:36 PM

LittleHawk:

It would not surprise me a bit if it were true.

Ummm, you'll find this site (WhirledNutzDaily) is also of the opinion that Clinton is a serial rapist and actually offed some fifty or so people. They're part of the RW Mighty Wurlitzer that was keeping the "Clinton body count" and such. This is just one more -- ummm, "blood libel" from the folks that really hated Clinton. See Lyons's and Conason's book "The Hunting of the President" for what such folks are like....

Do consider the source.

Cheers,

Subject: RE: BS: Bush is NOT Incompetent (?)
From: Little Hawk
Date: 30 Jun 06 - 05:55 PM

"whirled Nutz"?????? Well, that makes one wonder, doesn't it? ;-)

Not to worry. I don't necessarily believe everything I read...I just may consider it as a possibility while I'm reading it, that's all.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush is NOT Incompetent (?)
From: GUEST
Date: 30 Jun 06 - 09:00 PM

This is why I suggested you type in the combination of words yourself. Hundreds of hemopheliacs in Canada have filed a class action lawsuit against Clinton. They got AIDS through the tainted blood. Reuters reported on it, AP, UPI, etc. But not too loudly. Do the search and pick your source, the story's the thing. Clinton murdered thousands with AIDS tainted blood, and he didn't do it for money. His star was rising, he was on the way to the White House, etc. He's just stone-cold evil. Just like GW. This cabal is the nastiest group of humans I've ever come across in my readings. Clinton doing this blood thing just for a lark...how evil IS that?

Subject: RE: BS: Bush is NOT Incompetent (?)
From: Don Firth
Date: 30 Jun 06 - 09:43 PM

I did that, GUEST, but the problem was that I just kept coming up with the usual suspects.

Next, the Right-wing-nuts will be accusing Clinton of summoning the asteroid that killed off the dinosaurs.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Bush is NOT Incompetent (?)
From: Ebbie
Date: 30 Jun 06 - 10:33 PM

It is sad that some human beings would rather believe in nonsensical theories and charges without ever applying common sense. As Snopes.com says (paraphrased), You're saying that though Clinton couldn't even get get away with his trysts with Monica he has somehow been able to go gaily around offing people, enlisting the help of myriads of complicit people and it is still not public?

Nah.   (And I'm being VERY mild here.)

Subject: RE: BS: Bush is NOT Incompetent (?)
From: Little Hawk
Date: 30 Jun 06 - 10:51 PM

Hmm. Yeah, I've heard about this contaminated blood business in Canada before...a long time back. Had forgotten that it emanated from the Arkansas prison system.

Consider this: the ever-expanding prison system in the USA is now being run as a profit-making enterprise! Does that not suggest some extraordinarily nasty possibilities? Is it surprising that prisoners would be used as "blood cows", and the blood sold to the highest bidder? Not to me, it isn't. There is usually a shortage of blood available to hospitals, and there's money to be made selling it.

Prisoners are people with no voice and no rights and no way of defending themselves against the most grotesque forms of exploitation.

Rather like those at Guantanamo.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush is NOT Incompetent (?)
From: Ebbie
Date: 30 Jun 06 - 11:20 PM

(By the way, I was not referring to you, Little Hawk. )

I will need to read more about the alleged tainted blood before I know anything concrete.

Even in that article they say they don't know if any deaths can be ascribed to it. And that article does not speak in measured tones.

It is facile to say otherwise.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush is NOT Incompetent (?)
From: Little Hawk
Date: 30 Jun 06 - 11:28 PM

Yeah, I know you weren't, Ebbie. ;-) No problem.