It is nice to see people are finally starting to stand up to these idiots that are running the country right now. Too bad they waited until they got elected for that second term.
Sites and Videos like these make me feel that perhaps people are starting to come out of their stupor.
Timeline of goverment reaction
The Daily Show came back from vacation on Tuesday and I truly think that on Tuesday’s show Jon was so mad that he could hardly do the show.
BushCo is trying to push it off that people are attacking them because they are trying to “play politics” or “play the blame game”, does it seem impossible that people are attacking him because he fucked up? I can’t believe how fast he and his crew are out there with their talking points. Do they even try to act like they are speaking of their own mind?
Arrrghh!!! There is soooo much information showing that these guys are just fucking stupid and I wanted to write it all down, but I just can’t process it all and it seems dumb to take the time to write it all down because I am soooo freaking mad over it. I just hope finally… finally… maybe some of these people that have their heads up their asses about how dumb BushCo is and how sure they were that he was the better of the two for the job will pull out a little. I mean can anyone seriously think that Gore would have stayed on vacation for three days after this happened? Do you really think the person that everyone called the worlds oldest boyscout would be unprepared for something like this?
The US elected a Drunk, retarded, cowboy, oil baron, who ran all his companies into the ground and look what we have now: Record high gas prices, two wars, terrorist attacks, people dying because of pitiful response to a disaster, poor funding to programs that were doing well in 2000, more national debt, countless times catching these people lying, countless times of them astroturfing the media to make people forget they screwed up and lied… the list is endless. I wonder if it would be possible impeach these people on just pure incompetence.
AND!!! Now he is calling for a national day of prayer. Well lets forget the fact that prayer isn’t going to help these people eat, drink, live and recover their possesions. How about seperation of church and state? How does the president calling for the nation to take a day and pray fall under that?
ARRRRRRGGHHHH!!!!!!!
Yes, we have high gas prices. Which translates into higher stock prices for energy companies. Since free-market economics allows all of us to purchase said stock (something that I have been doing without cease for months), I’m of the opinion that this is actually a good thing. Bring on the H3 and its friends!
Also I find it interesting that the people that buy the biggest trucks and SUV’s (or gas guzzling sports cars) and cite the weather and the desire to go off-roading and tow boats and whatever else are the ones that also bitch about the gas prices.
Yes, we have two wars. Wait… the war on Iraq and the war on terror? Because I’m guessing that the war on Afghanistan is pretty much defunct, and the war on drugs has always been a joke.
That said, I have no problem with said wars. As I’ve said in the past, the wars have improved the economy. It may be morally reprehensible to pay for economic progress in blood, but I’m not arguing morality.
Yes, we have terrorist attacks. It was bound to happen eventually, regardless of who was president. There have been ample studies AND it stands to reason that Al-Qaeda wasn’t formed in 2000 and attacked in 2001. They were around during the Clinton years marshalling their resources. That would have been the time to put a stop to it. So while BushCo has certainly stoked up the hornets’ nest, I’d argue that previous administrations are equally to blame for the terrorist attacks against the US.
And let us face facts. After 9/11, we have had virtually no terror attacks inside the US. Against US military in Iraq, yes – but not within the country.
I think that assuming either Kerry or Gore would have done ‘something better’ is a fallacious argument at best, and hyperbole at worst. How can we possibly know what someone ‘might’ have done? Because they say so now? Both Kerry and Gore are spent forces in politics, so any comment they make now is an empty shell that doesn’t need to be backed up with action. Kind of like grandpa saying “…in my day…” and inserting some opinion that both of you know he won’t have to live up to.
I completely agree with you on the lies, the media and the prayer/church-state thing… but I have to disagree on the economics of your argument. There is no doubt in my mind that economics have improved under BushCo – maybe not for everyone but I’m not a socialist or a liberal, and so… fuck ’em.
Yes, BushCo are a bunch of inept fucks. They are also evil, and money-grubbers, and crony-capitalists. They are certainly screwing up the country for the rest of us.
Now here is the caveat: the beauty of capitalism is that it encourages profiteers. There is still money to be made, as long as you know where to look or are willing to consider the side effects of these evil/inept/whatever actions.
I am sure the our soldiers that are getting killed in Afghanistan wouldn’t agree with you about that war being defunct. Just because the other one takes up more news time doesn’t mean that the first one is gone.
War on terror… shit, there have been more terror attacks per year SINCE BushCo started their war on terror than before they started it. Recent polls show less people feel safe since he started it, so doesn’t that mean they are terrorized? Of course keeping people scared is how BushCo keeps people in line, so I don’t know if that is a good measurement of what the “WoT” is actually accomplishing or not.
My comment about the war in Afghanistan being defunct was about how we could give a shit about the outcome of that conflict. They have rocks and dirt and other than the photo ops with Bush and the Afghan president, no one gives a crap. I’m sure there are soldiers dying there – and when they signed up for those freebie benefits, they should have realized it says in fine print: “signing this might literally sign your life away”. Sorry, but you won’t get any sympathy from me on this point. We have a -volunteer- army. People volunteer, knowing fully well that the way the chain of command works, they could be ordered to lay down their lives with no rationale whatsoever. Don’t like it? Get a civilian job, and pay for your perks like the rest of us.
How do you figure there have been more terror attacks per year? And where? Like I said – in the USA, there have been -less- attacks. Are we suddenly responsible for the UK, Spain, Indonesia, Australia and everyone else? Make up your mind – either we are the world’s police, or we are not. If we’re not (as I believe) then we have no reason to be taking statistics from other countries into account. The attacks in London and Spain and Bali are all horrible events – but I don’t think we should be castigating BushCo (or ourselves) for them. The fact is that the terrorists are scumbags who will stop at nothing. So are BushCo. Makes them birds of a feather.
The comment about people feeling less safe implying them being terrorized… thats a stretch. I don’t feel any less safe. Do you? I don’t understand what the stupid color coded system is supposed to mean, and I have been to high-risk sites like the Hoover Dam and NYC and DC and all of these places, not to mention a few dozen airplane trips – since 9/11. Anyone that feels less safe is either watching too much TV, or is just plain paranoid. Or it could be that they just hate BushCo.
None of these things imply people that are ‘terrorized’.
We are responsible for those terrorist attacks. The terrorist name us, and Bush’s “let go plan in the sand and kill brown people” war as the reason they are making those attacks.
I never said it is or isn’t our job to police the world. Bush did. He stated that he was going to hunt down all the terrorist wherever they might be. That means anywhere in the world. Since then he has started a war that did nothing to STOP terror and even now is actually CREATING more terrorists.
Polls show that people are afraid of terrorist attacks more so than before. That means they are afraid of terrorists. That is almost the very definition of the motive for terror attacks.
It is also nice to hear now that BushCo, passed on their ideals to the interm Iraq goverment. Right now their think there is over 2.5 Billion dollars missing for the various budgets, with the former Minister of Defense having stolen 1 Billion himself. Under the watchful gaze of Bush’s trusted cronies.
Oh get out of here with your apologist nonsense. We are not -responsible- for those terroristic attacks. The people perpetrating the attacks (falsely) in the name of Islam -are-. Just because the terrorists say “hey, here is why we did this” doesn’t mean it is automatically true. Hold the terrorists to the same scrutiny/accountability as you do BushCo – if BushCo has spin doctors, so do the terrorists, who understand very well the value of media coverage. I believe Machiavelli said it best – “turn the dogs against each other, lest the whole pack fall on you” – and this is exactly what the terrorists are doing; with great effect as well, I might add.
The logic that somehow war is creating terrorists is flawed in many ways. Most of these terrorists are idelogically motivated, and not Joe Q. Onlooker whose house got bombed by the USA and he is now out for revenge. While there are certainly -some- of the latter, it is not the vast majority of organized terrorists who are planning strategic attacks against the US and friends.
Who are these people who are ‘afraid’ of terror attacks? It stands to reason that if >50% of the population is in this boat, that I would be able to count off half my friends and acquaintances as being ‘afraid of terror attacks’. Last I checked, they were all just going about their lives and more interested in the season premiere of ABC’s Lost. I wouldn’t believe the bullshit polls.
“The logic that somehow war is creating terrorists is flawed in many ways. Most of these terrorists are idelogically motivated, and not Joe Q. Onlooker whose house got bombed by the USA and he is now out for revenge. While there are certainly -some- of the latter, it is not the vast majority of organized terrorists who are planning strategic attacks against the US and friends.”
That frankly is bullshit. The vast majority of the people fighting us in Iraq are people who don’t want us in Iraq. They are people that lived in Iraq and think what we did there is wrong. Just because no one here reports that side of the story and continues to call them “Terrorists” and “Insurgents” doesn’t change who they really are. Listen to something like NPR sometime. Something that has reporters that tell the other side of the story. The winners write history. I am sure the people in Russia could have told you how we were no good dirty rotten bastards during the cold war, because that is what they were being told and honestly who is to say they are wrong? Look at what we are doing to the world from their point of view and it is a hard argument to work with.
The same is happening here and in our “coalition of the willing” countries (I wonder if Poland was really happy for Bush to keep bring them up). We are attacking a country FOR NO REASON and people are attempting to retaliate against us. Just because they don’t have smart missles, stealth bombers, and M1 tanks, doesn’t mean that they don’t have a valid reason for attacking. Their targets are also wrong, but that still doesn’t mean their reasons are. There are people that are using that hate and focusing it for their own motives, but the people that are at the bottom of the pile are attacking us, because they think what we are doing is wrong.
Why would you not believe the polls? They seem to be right about everything else. Most people think Bush fucked up the disaster relief. Check. They beleive that he has screwed up the economy. Check. They think he is a bad president. All signs point to yes there. Oh yeah and they also think that we are more likely to get attacked by terrorist than before Bush invaded Iraq and you are of the opinion that is false? I don’t even see the logic in that, since it has been decided by the congress and their investigation that Iraq had nothing to do with terrorists here, but now they are all over Iraq, so how is it that you think we are feeling safer?
“Why would you not believe the polls? They seem to be right about everything else.”
Because I (just like my best friend) believe that most people are worthless sheep. Therefore if the polls say ‘most people believe…” I automatically take that with a -massive- dose of salt. “Most People” also believe that God’s relatives walked amongst us, Aliens have indeed landed on earth, and that Britney Spears is a musician! So yeah… if you have recently changed your position on “Most People”, then I have nothing to say to this line of … um… logic?
“Most People” were pretty unhappy with Roosevelt’s decision to go to WW2. They also believed that the USA should stay in ‘isolationist mode’.
“Most People” were also pretty sure that Saddam had WMD’s. They also believed that we should fight to bring democracy to the world.
Sorry man… “Most People” are idiots.
Besides- lets get it right: I didn’t say “We Are Feeling Safer” (your last line). I said “None of these things imply people that are ‘terrorized’”. There’s a world of difference between people feeling safe and feeling terrorized. My point is that the average joe is -neither- terrorized -nor- feeling safer; they are just plain apathetic.
“We are attacking a country FOR NO REASON”
False. We’re attacking them for economic reasons. Our economic reasons.
“The vast majority of the people fighting us in Iraq are people who don’t want us in Iraq.”
Thats obvious. I really don’t think the people who -want- us there would choose to express that sentiment by blowing up our people and stuff.
But the statement is vague. Yes, the organized terrorists (Zarqawi’s people, the people that kidnap anyone they think has economic value, the ex-Baath’ists that realize they will have no power in a new Iraq, the profiteers and mercenaries that flock to these conflicts) do -not- want us there. No points for getting that right, as it is obvious. But it is nonsense to say that their reasons are somehow -correct- and our reasons are -not-. They want the same thing we do – power, economics, control. We do it with tanks, they do it with home-made explosives and guerilla warfare.
The difference is that we have a slightly more noble goal, and I’d guess that we benefit slightly more people. Maybe not much on either count, but even -one- is better than nothing.
“False. We’re attacking them for economic reasons. Our economic reasons.”
Which is the same reason Saddam took over Kuwait and how did WE feel about that and we didn’t even live there
Actually, I didn’t feel too badly about Saddam taking over Kuwait. I doubt you did either.
Saddam took over Kuwait and the gas prices in the west skyrocketed as a result, so suddenly he realized that his imperialistic ambitions came into unpleasant contact with the US/EU desire to keep getting cheap fuel.
Besides, I have never once said I believe that we are in the middle east because of democracy or to liberate people or whatever the latest bleeding-heart bullshit says. We’re there for economic reasons, and I happen to be completely okay with that. Can’t make an omlette without breaking eggs.
And however shocking, unpleasant, unfeeling or immoral that opinion might be, it is at least the truth. As opposed to the vast majority of people ‘opposed’ to the war or BushCo, who live the dream of capitalism every single day while turning their heads away from the more unpleasant aspects of it. Life is messy, and life under capitalism infinitely more so. We should all either get used to that reality, or move to Sweden.
I just dont get people who dont see and support what we are doing over in the middle east. Their logic is so screwed up. Do you know how i explain the difference between one political party and another to my wife and to my son and nieces?
Republicans want to kill the worst criminals and save unborn babies.
Democrats want to kill unborn babies and save the worst criminals.
Replace the words “unborn babies” with “The United States” and “worst criminals” with “Terrorists”, and you get the same thing.
I know there are variations on each side, but those are the people that go above and beyond the normal opportunistic politician and will jump on whatever ship seems popular at the time to get them elected.
I would comment on this, but then I remembered the, “Don’t feed the trolls.” sign I have on my desktop.