BS: Our President

Subject: BS: Our President
From: Mickey191
Date: 08 Sep 07 - 03:01 PM

From Jimmy Kimmel:
GWB MADE A JERK OF HIMSELF AGAIN- SAID HE WAS GLAD TO BE IN AUSTRIA-(HE'S IN AUSTRALIA)

SAID HE WAS GLAD TO BE ATTENDING THE OPEC MEETING. (IT IS THE APEC MEETING)

THEN HE ALMOST FELL OFF THE STAGE. HE'S GOT THE ATTENTION SPAN OF AN UNTRAINED AIREDALE!

Can anyone explain this man's fumbling, mind wandering, dream state when addressing the public? He is the source of humor every single night on Letterman's show. (Has been for well over a year)

Is there a Dr. in the audience?

Subject: RE: BS: Our President
From: Alice
Date: 08 Sep 07 - 03:04 PM

Cocaine and alcohol abuse in his past. It damaged what few brain cells he started with.
When he was a college frat boy, he thought it was cool to "brand" the frat rushes with hot coat hangers.
Wasn't very smart then, either.

Subject: RE: BS: Our President
From: Alice
Date: 08 Sep 07 - 03:34 PM

Bush's College days

Subject: RE: BS: Our President
From: Ebbie
Date: 08 Sep 07 - 03:35 PM

Letterman has this segment that he calls 'Great Moments in Presidential Speeches'. It would be hilarious if only...

Our President? How did it happen?

Subject: RE: BS: Our President
From: Bill D
Date: 08 Sep 07 - 04:14 PM

"How did it happen?".... someone voted. He didn't take over in a coup.

Lies, distortions, scare tactics and special interests gave us this sorry situation.

Subject: RE: BS: Our President
From: GUEST,Don Firth
Date: 08 Sep 07 - 04:31 PM

Now, now! We've all stumbled over words from time to time, haven't we? Even our President:    CLICKY #1.

You see, it's all a foul plot by those evil-doers. For example:    CLICKY #2.

How can this happen to our President? Well, Fox News Service reveals what really happened:    CLICKY #3.

In the interest of full disclosure. . . .

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Our President
From: 3refs
Date: 08 Sep 07 - 04:39 PM

"How did it happen?".... someone voted. He didn't take over in a coup.

Beg yer pardon!!!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Our President
From: Amos
Date: 08 Sep 07 - 04:51 PM

How did it happen? Half the nation's voters fell asleep in kindergarten and have just begun to realize they are living in a bad dream.

The contagion of stupidity through peer pressure and dramatization is really a study, a sort of mass psychosis. It is a national disgrace, and it happened twice.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Our President
From: Barry Finn
Date: 08 Sep 07 - 04:56 PM

Be carefull, very carefull, "with enough spin they may do it again".

Has a nice ring to it, eh? If it weren't so scary.

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: Our President
From: ard mhacha
Date: 08 Sep 07 - 04:59 PM

Barry I have a bet on that they will do it again, being gullible is par for the course.

Subject: RE: BS: Our President
From: Bill D
Date: 08 Sep 07 - 05:00 PM

well, once-and-a-half...one time he didn't even get half the votes.

Subject: RE: BS: Our President
From: Mickey191
Date: 08 Sep 07 - 05:06 PM

Alice, Thanks for your insight & ffor the Yale News piece. Seems he may be a masochist as well. Truly odd person. Saw a newsreel where he was laughing at his crying Father who was lamenting the loss of an election by his other son-Chip or Dip Or Dub-Forgot his name.

THE Greeks and Sigmund Freud had a name for what may ail President George W. Bush: Thanatos. The death wish.Thanatos was the Greek personification of death, which Freud later expanded to describe man's "death instinct," or the unconscious wish to abandon life's struggles and return to a state of quiet repose.

Bill D, We'll never know how many votes were stolen
and changed the course of history.

Subject: RE: BS: Our President
From: Bobert
Date: 08 Sep 07 - 05:14 PM

How did this happen???

Bush v. Gore, fir starters... Bush's dream team of lawyers convinced a Supreme Court (comprosed of 7 Repub appointed justices and 2 Dem appointed justices) 5-4 that if the Florida recount were to continue that "Bush would be harmed"... Now we wouldn't want that, would we??? Not our little cowpoke prezzy... We sho nuff wouldn't want anything to harm him, would we???

(BTW, I don't consider the little creep *my* president, thank you...)

Subject: RE: BS: Our President
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 08 Sep 07 - 05:14 PM

You've seen the stuff about how the Iraqi army wasn't supposed to be abolished, but nobody told him, and the first he knew about it was when he saw it on the news.

Blaming him for what goes wrong is a bit like blaming the Queen of England when the British government screw up. In practice he's just as much a symbolic figurehead as she is.

Subject: RE: BS: Our President
From: Amos
Date: 08 Sep 07 - 05:17 PM

Except, according to Bremer, it was completely briefed uplines; the man behind the curtain was just too dumb to appreciate the consequences of insulting and laying off tens of thousands of trained and armed Iraqis.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Our President
From: Peace
Date: 08 Sep 07 - 05:19 PM

I had a Labrador Retriever that was smarter than that man. Dumbest dog I ever had.

Subject: RE: BS: Our President
From: Mickey191
Date: 08 Sep 07 - 05:19 PM

Sorry Folks, Replace masochist with the proper term:sadist.

I'm just a country girl! Led a sheltered life.

Subject: RE: BS: Our President
From: Peace
Date: 08 Sep 07 - 05:21 PM

Masochist says "Hit me" and the sadist says, No!"

Subject: RE: BS: Our President
From: Teribus
Date: 08 Sep 07 - 05:41 PM

Bobert, simple exercise in truth.

Question:

Who conceded the 2000 Presidential Election?

Nothing whatsoever to do with "Dream Teams" of Lawyers.

Who was it that conceded the 2000 Presidential Election?

Just in case you are in any doubt as to what the term means here's the definition in the context meant:

concede (verb)

"to admit that you have lost in a competition:
He kept on arguing and wouldn't concede defeat.
She conceded even before all the votes had been counted.

OK Bobert tell us all who it was that conceded the 2000 Presidential Election.

Then tell us who won the 2004 Presidential Election.

Don't lie Bobert it is after all a simple matter of record, hard fact, much as though you do disaprove of them.

Subject: RE: BS: Our President
From: gnu
Date: 08 Sep 07 - 06:00 PM

McGrath..."In practice he's just as much a symbolic figurehead as she is."

But, she is "in the open". And, she can speak English, rather well.

Subject: RE: BS: Our President
From: Peace
Date: 08 Sep 07 - 07:32 PM

Bush's problem started when he was five months old.

Subject: RE: BS: Our President
From: Amos
Date: 08 Sep 07 - 07:59 PM

Let's see, T. one of the contestants honored the law, the other went to extremes to circumvent it and did so on meretricious grounds. And your implication is that it was the scuzzball who was honorable in the affair?    Mister Gore did NOT concede the election until he was refused a legal recount, ordered by the State Supreme Court of Florida whose proper jurisdiction it was so to do.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Our President
From: Bobert
Date: 08 Sep 07 - 08:09 PM

I don't need to lie, T-zer...

The facts that I presented are accurate...

The United States Supreme Court stopped the recount of the Florida count as the 700 some vote lead that BHush has was evaporating like ice in a microwave...

Gore, being a mna of honor, as opposed to your little wiezel, recognized that he and the Dems had been out lawyered by Bush and his thugs...

Maybe seein' as you are the qaustioner of all truths you'd like to venture a guess on how much Bush outspent Gore on lawyers??? Better fasten your seatbelts on that one...

BTW, T-Bird, do you think it was right for the Bush team to fly in thugs to intimidate poll workers during the recount??? Like what was that all about...

Tell ya' what, pal... Before suggesting that I'm liein' you better chweck out yer facts first, rather than later...

But just like Iraq, you won't... You'll dwell in yer little world and never see the big picture...

My condolenses to yer wife...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Our President
From: GUEST,Bert on Kelly's machine.
Date: 08 Sep 07 - 08:10 PM

Can anyone explain this man's fumbling, mind wandering, dream state when addressing the public?...

No but it can explain why nobody voted for him.

Subject: RE: BS: Our President
From: Bobert
Date: 08 Sep 07 - 08:19 PM

MSS, Bert...

(What's that, Bobert???)

Simple...Mindless Sheep Syndrome...

BTW, there's a lot of evidence that Bush lost in '04 as well...

Subject: RE: BS: Our President
From: GUEST,Don Firth
Date: 08 Sep 07 - 10:15 PM

In 2004, some 640,000 voters in Ohio were disenfranchised by various bits of hanky-panky, such as not enough voting machines, making some people stand in line for up to eight hours. This was generally in historically predominantly Democratic districts. Similar stunts in a couple of other states, along with some states' first time use of some very questionable (Diebold) touch-screen computers.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Our President
From: Mickey191
Date: 08 Sep 07 - 11:03 PM

Don, Are these "new" voting machines the ones which will be in use in all states for the 2008 Election?

Subject: RE: BS: Our President
From: GUEST,Don Firth
Date: 08 Sep 07 - 11:49 PM

I'm not sure what the situation is on this, Mickey. I do know that several states are balking at using them unless there is a way for them to produce a paper copy so each voter can verify his or her vote, and for an independent recount if deemed necessary. Belt and suspenders, which, in this case, is a good thing.

When the head of Diebold made some comment prior to the 2004 election that he cosidered it his duty to God to make sure that Bush gets re-elected, this raise a few red flags!!

As far as I'm concerned, I feel more secure with the paper ballot I mark as a mail-in voter. I understand that a lot of states are considering going to all mail-in voting, which will render the touch-screen voting computers unnecessary.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Our President
From: TRUBRIT
Date: 08 Sep 07 - 11:55 PM

sad to say--i think if he were legally allowed he would make president again == and when did being illegally stop him????????

Subject: RE: BS: Our President
From: Teribus
Date: 09 Sep 07 - 08:41 AM

Let's see in 2006 Ohio had 8,562,593 people over 18, i.e. voting age.

640,000 people were "disenfranchised by various bits of hanky-panky" - That's 7.5% of the electorate. But total number of votes cast was only 5,627,545 so only 65% of the electorate turned up and voted. Which means that 10% of those wishing to vote were disenfranchised, that's one in ten! And nobody noticed?

If the 640,000 had voted in accordance with the exit polls Bush would have ended up with 328,640 of them compared to Kerry with 320,360. This would have increased Bush's winning margin to 126,879 in the State of Ohio.

Subject: RE: BS: Our President
From: Bobert
Date: 09 Sep 07 - 09:49 AM

More fuzzy math from our resident fuzzy math Bush apologist...

If these 640,000 voters were indeed in districts (think cities here) that traditionally go for Dems then it is reasonable to conclude that the Professor Fuzzy Math is wrong about using a larger pool to this group of folks...

We all remember the stories of folks in the inner cities having to wait for hours... The inner cities are where the Dems get the bulk of their votes... The rural areas, which generally have fewer voters per precinct, and where folks don't have to wait in long line, are where the Repubs get the bulk of their votes... This is where the rub is 'cause it's much easier to vote in rural (Repub) precinct's than in urban (Dem) precincts... I know... I lived and voted in bopth rural and urban precincts... This will always favor the Repubs...

Another piece that Dr. Fuzzy Math may not take into account is that with our elections occuring on a weekday that is not a national holiday, more working class people, who tend to favor Dems, just don't vote because they don't want to loose the $$$... Oh sure, one can say that the polls open early and close late but lots of folks are too buzy with child care issues... But the Rebubs have always resisited changing the election day to a Saturday... Why is that???

Well, it don't take a rocket sergeon to figure that one out...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Our President
From: wysiwyg
Date: 09 Sep 07 - 12:46 PM

Do we gotta call him "our President?" Can't we call him "Our a**hole"?

~S~

Subject: RE: BS: Our President
From: katlaughing
Date: 09 Sep 07 - 12:58 PM

I respectfully suggest the title of this thread should be "Our Idiot," except I, like Bobert, do not claim him as "Our!"

I also do not see him as a figurehead like the Queen. He has much too much power at his fingertips and a lop-sided control of the government through his minions to be as benign as all that. I would suggest reading Charlie Savage's new book, "Takeover:The Return of the Imperial Presidency and the Subversion of American Democracy."

In 1789, the Founding Fathers came up with a system of checks and balances to keep kingly powers out of the hands of American presidents. But in the 1970s and '80s, a faction of Republican loyalists, outraged by the fall of the imperial presidency after Watergate and the Vietnam War, abandoned conservatives' traditional suspicion of concentrated government power. These men hatched a plot that would allow the White House to return to, or even surpass, the virtually unchecked powers that Richard Nixon had briefly tried to wield. Congress would be defanged, and the commander-in-chief would be able to assert a unilateral dominance both at home and abroad.


Today, this plot is coming to fruition. As Takeover reveals, the Bush-Cheney administration has succeeded in seizing vast powers for the presidency by throwing off many of the restraints placed upon it by Congress, the courts, and the Constitution. This timely book unveils the secret machinations behind the headlines, explaining the links between warrantless wiretapping and the President Bush's Supreme Court nominees, between the torture debate and the secrecy surrounding Vice President Cheney's energy task force, and between the "faith-based initiative" and the holding of US citizens without trial as "enemy combatants." It tells, for the first time, the full story of a hidden agenda three decades in the making, laying out how a group of true believers set out to establish monarchical executive powers that, in the words of one conservative critic, "will lie around like a loaded weapon" ready to be picked up by any future president.

Brilliantly reported and deftly told, Takeover is a searing investigation into how the constitutional balance of our democracy is in danger of being permanently altered. For anyone who cares about America 's past, present, and future, it is essential reading.

Savage is the reporter who told us about Bush and his "signing statements." Here's a book review from Publisher's Weekly:

Savage, who won a Pulitzer for his Boston Globe articles about the signing statements George W. Bush used to negate legislation limiting presidential authority, gives that issue a key part in this account of the Bush administration's efforts to increase executive power. Covering constitutional issues as well as the political backgrounds of former White House attorneys like Alberto Gonzales and John Yoo, this detailed report traces their concerted effort, from the moment Bush took office in 2001, to [leave] the presidency in better shape than he [Bush] found it. The authorization to use force against Iraq is only the tip of the iceberg. Bush has already gone so far as to declare himself able to negate treaties with other nations at will, Savage reports. He also demonstrates how many of the administration's most controversial acts have their roots in Dick Cheney's experiences in the Nixon and Ford administrations. This incisive analysis of congressional and judicial efforts to check the administration's power grabs adds up to a searing indictment.

From the interview I heard of Savage, Cheney was the main force in this, starting thirty years ago.

Subject: RE: BS: Our President
From: GUEST,Don Firth
Date: 09 Sep 07 - 01:53 PM

For your enlightenment and edification, Teribus:

I have read various figures on the 2004 disenfranchisement of Ohio voters, from 350,000 up to as many as nearly a million. 640,000 was a figure that I heard repeatedly, albeit that it may not be precise. There is no exact way of getting a count of the number of people who took a look at the length of the lines and just gave up. The following might give you an idea of what was going on in Ohio on election day. CLICKY.

Although it was more blatant there, similar things happened in a number of other states.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Our President
From: kendall
Date: 09 Sep 07 - 07:16 PM

There will be no voting machines in Maine.

Subject: RE: BS: Our President
From: kendall
Date: 09 Sep 07 - 07:19 PM

Teribus, you like questions, here are some for you.

What was the national debt when Carter left office?

What was it when Ronald Raygun left office?

What was it when George Bush the first left?

What was it when Clinton left?

It is now over 9 TRILLION dollars. How did it get there?

Subject: RE: BS: Our President
From: Peace
Date: 09 Sep 07 - 09:12 PM

"It is now over 9 TRILLION dollars. How did it get there?"

Monica's very rich?

Subject: RE: BS: Our President
From: Bee
Date: 09 Sep 07 - 09:21 PM

What I would like to know is why Teribus thinks GWB is a good president? I'll grant, if you were once a Nixon fan, this one makes Nixon look like an only slightly flawed genius...

Subject: RE: BS: Our President
From: Teribus
Date: 09 Sep 07 - 10:41 PM

Bee, a question for you, when have I ever said that I think that GWB is a good President?

I have on the other hand said that I do not believe that it would have made one whit of difference who had been in office the outcome would have been the same.

I can understand that given the circumstances and advice given at the time why certain decisions were taken and have to be followed through to the bitter end.

I have said and drawn attention to the fact that the UN through its own inability to act for the common good has aggrevated the situation and not helped. Examples - What good did they do in Rwanda? What good did they do in the Balkans? What good have they done in Darfur? Compare any of those to Iraq and Iraq pales into insignificance.

Subject: RE: BS: Our President
From: Riginslinger
Date: 09 Sep 07 - 11:10 PM

"Can anyone explain this man's fumbling, mind wandering, dream state when addressing the public?"


                   I think he gets it from his mother. Remember when she went to New Orleans and told the people how lucky they were that her son was in charge of the disaster?

                   As I recall, that was after he told Brownie he was doing a "heck of a job."

Subject: RE: BS: Our President
From: Teribus
Date: 10 Sep 07 - 11:19 AM

" A half-million more Ohioans voted than ever before with fewer errors than four years ago, a sure sign on success by any measure," Statement from the supposed villan of the piece in Ohio from the link supplied by Don Firth for my enlightenment and edification.

Actually it was damn near a million (922,088 to be exact) more voters and all those votes cast with shortages of voting machines and underhand dirty tricks operating full blast - I somehow doubt it, it doesn't stand up to any real examination.

Number of Ohioans who voted in 2004 was 5,627,545, the number who voted in 2000 was 4,705,457. Larger number of candidates in 2000 but the Republican and Democrat front runners scored about the same percentage of the vote (Republican vote up about 1%, Democrat vote up about 3%). Hang on wasn't the point of all those dirty tricks to reduce the Democrat vote? Didn't seem to work then did it.

Subject: RE: BS: Our President
From: Mr Happy
Date: 10 Sep 07 - 12:11 PM

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=whhbPVrb5KM


says it all?

Subject: RE: BS: Our President
From: GUEST,Don Firth
Date: 10 Sep 07 - 01:37 PM

Try to nobble the figures all you want, Teribus, but had it not been for the hanky-panky with the supply of voting machines, even more Democrats would have voted. That would have made the difference.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Our President
From: Bee
Date: 10 Sep 07 - 02:10 PM

So, Teribus, if I interpret you correctly, you don't think Bush Jr. is a good president, Al Gore or John Kerry would have been just as inept, and it's all the UN's fault that the US attacked Iraq anyway? So your main contention is that there was no voter fraud perpetrated?

As far as voter fraud goes, I wouldn't know - there's certainly a lot of circumstantial evidence that suggests there was, but OTOH, Canada voted twice for Brian Mulroney - voters can be misled or stupid.

Subject: RE: BS: Our President
From: Big Phil
Date: 11 Sep 07 - 08:12 AM

It seems odd that a Great Country like the States should have a man like Bush at the helm. I always assumed the States was a great place,good education standards, probably the best in the world, but you have Arnie in Cal-ee-forn -iaaa, and Bush as President, wow what a dynamic duo, what a disgrace. Both men find it imposible to string a few words together.
Then you wonder why the war in Iraq is lost......... with Bush as leader it comes as no surprise.

Subject: RE: BS: Our President
From: Amos
Date: 11 Sep 07 - 09:37 AM

HE;s actually a Court Jester, whose purpose is to distract from the activities of the king.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Our President
From: Barry Finn
Date: 11 Sep 07 - 02:57 PM

Big Phil, you were wrong. Arnie is far more intellegent than Bush but then if you look at his (Bush's) IQ, 92 or 93 I think 8 below his father & half of Bill Clinton's, you'll find that Bush is a bit below average, much like our education system but you are right in that it still is a great place.

You are also right stating "Both men find it imposible to string a few words together." That's because english is not Arnie's 1st language, I don't have an excuse for George.

I don't really care for Arnie as an actor, body builder, which he's best at or as a politcian but he is intellegent & a good business man & deserves credit for that. Again I have no excuses for George.

Bush actually deserves no credit for anthing, he has achived nothing while at any of his posts in life & has accomplished nothing possitive either, he has had no sucess anywhere. He has done unreversable damage to our health, education, social security systems, our ecomony, our foreign policy, our good standing in the world, our peace, divided our nation, prohibited the advancement of most sciences, the enviorment, climate change, global warming & has worstened the waging of the only justifiable wars, those against poverty, homelessness, drugs, crime, varied illnesses, political corruption, monopolies, voting injustices & his seperation of powers has mystified our Founding Fathers with his having partnerships with, of & within the State departments, with the church, big business, foreign governments, espically his seperating the powers of the people have been a disaster. But God love him & all other idiots.

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: Our President
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 11 Sep 07 - 08:28 PM

"- What good did they do in Rwanda? What good did they do in the Balkans? What good have they done in Darfur? Compare any of those to Iraq and Iraq pales into insignificance."

Disingenuous in the extreme, Teribus. In all those conflicts it was, or is the indigenes killing each other.

Iraq, however, is an example of external aggression by your, (and, I'm ashamed to say, my) government.

How many apples make six coconuts? is a question which is unworthy of serious consideration.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Our President
From: Don Firth
Date: 11 Sep 07 - 09:29 PM

Well, now. About Arnie.

When Arnie was elected governor of California, I though, "What the hell are you people doing!??" But since then, Arnie has done a number of things that I think are noteworthy and to his credit.

I can't recall now what the issue was (some California Mudcatter will undoubtedly remember), but Arnie was pushing something. A large number of Californians protested mightily. Arnie took note of this and said, "Well, okay. Scratch that. It's obvious that the people don't want it." And he backed off and dropped the matter.

When has Bush ever listened to anyone other than Karl Rove and Dick Cheney?

Then, Arnie got concerned about environmental issues and tried to stir the federal government into more environmentally friendly policies. No go! So Arnie says, "Okay, if the federal government won't, we certainly can!" and began pushing for more environmentally friendly policies in California.

California could have done a helluva lot worse than Arnie. In fact, they have done a helluva lot worse at times!

Don Firth

Subject: : Our President is
From: Donuel
Date: 11 Sep 07 - 11:06 PM

neither slammin ass, kicking dunk or bringing it on.

Subject: RE: BS: Our President
From: Peace
Date: 11 Sep 07 - 11:38 PM

Arnie has been a political surprise, thrice.

1) He's honest.
2) He's honest.
3) He's honest.

Subject: RE: BS: Our President
From: katlaughing
Date: 12 Sep 07 - 12:53 AM

I have a friend who is involved in health care issues in the state government of Wyoming. She had to go to a meeting in California, concerning healthcare issues and had the honour and pleasure of meeting Arnold. She found him to be a very intelligent and personable gentleman with a definite head on his shoulders and completely honest...with Arnie what you see IS what you get and he's smart enough to LISTEN to the electorate who put him where he is!