Iraq, Bush, Congress and USA

I am going to pretend that there are no sniping Democrats who are only interested in scoring political points in the best possible light in order to get elected, with no interest whatsoever in what actually happens in Iraq. I am going to pretend that Democrats are not a corrupt party themselves and their attempts to subpoena and investigate are an honest desire to see the truth behind the Bush administration's actions. I am going to pretend that our country is not in danger, if the Democrats are elected, of censoring the media of the conservative point of view, of attacking the wealthy and the productive and the other movers and shakers who truly make this country run. I am also going to pretend to be an independent objective observer, albeit a right wing one, with only agenda being the presentation of the true state of our Country's affairs, the War in Iraq, and President Bush Administration's actions.

As an aside, in reality I hate the Democratic Party, and am terribly afraid of what they will inflict on our country if they gain full control of our government. Therefor I will continue voting against that party at every single opportunity.

This administration sucks. Bush is a blundering moron of the epic proportions. He's assembled the most pathetic bunch of yes-men and women to do his bidding and we are seeing how well that worked out when one has no vision whatsoever. We've got a "Conservative" government that has not behaved anything remotely like a "Conservative" government should behave. The president is compassionate towards spending a lot of money, sticking with a losing strategy in a major war to prove "principles", and folding on anything remotely related to small government fiscal conservatism. The congressional republicans are compassionate towards spending even more money, supporting a losing strategy in a major war because of complete lack of principles and courage, and being corrupt and arrogant assh***s without an ounce of leadership qualities.

I don't see a single serious reason why any true conservative would support this horrid bunch of miserable monkeys who would apparently not only follow anyone with an (R) off the cliff but also manage to fail the most basic understanding of what their ideology actually means.

We're spending over $500 billion on an adventure that was obviously conceived long before moron Bush became president which I would be fine with if it actually accomplished something positive (economically and security-wise) for US, but no it has only weakened our military, showed the sad state of affairs to the increasingly emboldened enemy, and has prevented us from seriously concentrating on the actually serious and true threats to our Nation. Now there is no great way to get the hell out of that dumpster and conservatives are stuck pretending like Iraq is some great battlefield in the War against Terror (yeah with their dozens of Al Qaeda guys engaging our 150,000...). Why are we still pretending that it was every a great battlefield in the GWOT??? Why was I still pretending. It is a joke. Yeah, it would be better if Iraq was stable than if it became a hellhole full of terrorists and a Civil war, but how much longer are we going to try to stabilize that country chok full of people with no idea about freedom or democracy, who just want to have some food on their table and to kill their sunni/shiite/kurd neighbor. Jeez.

Our spending has gone up at a higher clip than under a Democrat right before this dimwit of a president... Ok... What the hell is that? I am not even talking about Defense spending which is understandable (aside from Iraq) after 9/11. Fine. But everything else? Is that because Bush is compassionate? Is it compassionate to increase our domestic spending at a higher rate than a Democrat? I guess when you insert compassionate into an ideology, the ideology gets inverted and perverted. And then all those Republicans who got elected without claiming to be "compassionate" support it? What's up with that? We have a huge debt and deficit you corrupt bastards. Get serious about governing and actually adhering to the platform you were elected on instead of defending everything our joke of a president is letting through. Good lord almighty. Do you actually think your gay marriage vote is going to excuse the sorry last 6 years? Idiots.

And then when you get Partial Birth Abortions finally outlawed with the support of the US Supreme Court you scream and yell that this finally justifies everything and just on its own makes electing George Bush and GOP Congress worthwhile... What? Have you looked at what the f*** is going in the world lately? Outlawing one of the rarest forms of abortion that is probably still going to be performed 99% of the time because it is usually either necessary for mother's health or because the baby is braindead is worth being stuck in hellholes, wasting trillions of dollars, being investigated left and right for being stupid and corrupt sons of b****es, following a complete moron to the wasteland of minority status (probably for a long time), and completely abandoning your original ideology in favor of some fantasy land promises and fear mongering? Yeah it was all worth it to ban those 10 abortions. It excuses the last 6 years. Get the hell outta here.

I could say a lot more but I'll stop here.

Anyways, I am back from a weekend away. Rant off. Enough pretending and back to our regularly scheduled Republican programming.

Comments :

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

and

again sorry I was away this weekend and no one did an open thread...

"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR

…………

Wow Ender

Nice rant.
Who the hell did you drink with over the weekend???

Sic semper tyrannis

………… parent

hehe

I got back from my girl's place and wanted to say some stuff :) I didn't think of politics the whole weekend though nor did I drink.

"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR

………… parent

Welcome back

The OT is not your fault (well, not only your fault), since there are three other people that also have the obligation.

Thanks for responding to my suggestion on Friday's OT. Missliberties is kind for mentioning me, but I sleep-in too much on the weekends. :)

We are all mediators, translators. - Derrida
http://signicide.blogspot.com/

………… parent

thanks :)

I'll mention it to the other guys.

"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR

………… parent

CheneysLoveChild:

You better not let Ender know that you got the password to his account, and perhaps you should erase this before he gets back. He might not think it's as funny as the rest of us.

Seriously, I am glad that you can see things with a semi-objective eye. Now convince some of your brethren of your remarks in order to get your party back.

Why don't you vote for an independent/third party this election to send your party a message? Libertarian or Constitution Party perhaps?

(Edit): P.S. I took a snapshot of this page in case you get a little edit happy when you sober up. :)

We are all mediators, translators. - Derrida
http://signicide.blogspot.com/

…………

I can see things somewhat objectively

Though I am rarely in the mood to express it, or bash the people who are supposed to be on my team (or am I supposed to be on their team?).

The election is too far away and I like some of the GOP candidates/potential candidates already... I can't imagine throwing my vote away, when I can vote against the party I dislike most :)

Right now it is really a bad case of voting for the lesser evil, but if the election was held today, it would leave a very bad taste in my mouth to vote Republican.

"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR

………… parent

By the way...

you have basically said here that you are rarely objective, and that when you are objective, you sound like vaguely like a Democrat...

Just the same, you'd better not let these flashes of objectivity happen too often if you want to be a part of my Republican Party... we require loyalty, not objectivity. Toe the f***ing line or else you're not invited to play golf with us real Republicans.

………… parent

Well at least your... er, our guys...

...passed Medicare Part D... their signature victory :-P

…………

yeah, sorry I didn't mention

that momentous victory... Thanks for the reminder :)

"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR

………… parent

That rant would get you banned at RedState

It is sad really that Bush admin made conservatism synonymous to cronyism, and corruption.

Conservatives are noisy when tax money goes to the poor but keep quiet when tax money is wasted by big corporations such as Halliburton, Katrina reconstruction--Carnivale cruise ships, trailers that are left to rot, pharmaceatical and HMOs benefitted in Medicare D w/out negotiations, Iraq War waste, etc.

In fact for me the real conservatives were Clinton, Gov Dean as Vermont governor, Mark Warner as gov of VA, Bloomberg in NY, Swarzenegger in CA, etc. These people are competent administrators--that for me should be the meaning of conservatism.

Conservatism should mean competence in governing and spending money wisely. Sometimes it may be a liberal policy or a conservative policy but it should be a policy that works. And for the last few cycles-looks like there are more competent people in the Democratic party.

…………

no

competency is not equivalent to conservatism. There is a lot more to each ideology than just being a competent administrators. The people you listed are nowhere near being conservative. They might be decent governors but that's about it.

Anyone can be competent whether conservative or liberal or in between. It's not about something just working but more about accomplishing certain goals to bring our society to a certain definite stage.

"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR

………… parent

Well, Ender, does this mean

that you regret your votes for Bush?

I am sure you have many problems with the idea of John Kerry as president, but surely you must admit that Kerry would have been an improvement over the three-ring circus we have now.

qui tacet consentire

…………

no

I don't regret my votes but it's very probable that the outcome would've been better without him as president and with Dem president vs GOP congress.

Without an Iraq war, things might've been better and it is almost certain our domestic spending wouldn't have been as high with Dems in the white house.

"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR

………… parent

Wow, You should cross post that rant

At Red state, CQ and Town Hall (under a new fake name of course) and see how fast the name got banned.

It might surprise you, or perhaps not, that certainly the straw dogs you see as Democrats, and many of the real problems you see are equally opposed by most Liberals in the Democratic party.

I rant about the Gang Of Pirates, but the DLC seems to be their second string. The Corporate conquest, and destruction of America seems to be the one thing both agree on. Hillary seems to be seen as too far left by all on the right and too far right by all on the left, how she manages to be a front runner in such a situation is a mystery. Wes Clark consistently polls high when included but is nowhere on any MSM list.

In the early days of the Perot movement, there was a broad swath of both left and right that opposed them, I know because I was there. As things got bizzare, the left was shoved out, and the rest is history.

But if there is a breakthrough, and we can agree that Pirates are a bad thing, but people who actually produce wealth deserve to get a fair share of it, then the discussion can move to a much simpler basis.

If anyone with power deserves all they can force into their pockets, then the GOP are the ultimate expression of that, and the cop arresting the looters is needless government interference. If there is to be restraint then somebody needs to be the cop, and somebody needs to guard the guard. Who does what and how could make a very interesting discussion.

The flip side of that is how stakeholders without power are treated. If they deserve a share equal to their contribution, how can it be theft from anyone bet a pirate to give it to them?

There is much more to say but it is way late and I will have to add more or another post later.

The Self Made Man is just not admitting where he got all the parts.

…………

yeah

somehow I don't think it would be a very good idea to crosspost a rant like this :)

Corporate related issues are not high on the list of problems on the right. Neither is the "destruction of America". Most conservatives are annoyed by the lack of "conservatism" from our party and corruption/incompetence but there is general optimism about our country on the right.

That is a huge difference. I am very optimistic and see no serious problems that we can't overcome in a very short time, while the left sees much more serious problems for whatever reasons. I do not see much agreement possible there.

"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR

………… parent

Nice rant!!

Gosh, I think I heard many of those lines in the speeches at the California Democratic Convention this weekend :-)

I appreciate your ability to speak the truth, even if it means exposing the ridiculousness of your own party. Blind loyalty is just so freaking scary to me. Of course I am sorry that you still hate the Democrats, but I respect that. I think it is time for true conservatives like you to work to change your party. Karl Rove has GOT to go!

…………

well honestly

I only hate many of the elected Democrats. I don't like most of the Dem agenda and the underlying ideology is obviously very far from my ideology so that's not going to get better.

I am frustrated because I don't see how the GOP can get better. It's still stuck with most of the same cowards who have no idea what is right.

"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR

………… parent

Neoconservative Robert Kagan

has written an article praising Barack Obama for his view that the US should be the true moral leader of the free world and increase the size of it's military.

Article Here.

………… parent

that's all nice and good but

like Kagan says in his last paragraph:

Of course, it's just a speech. At the Democrats' debate on Thursday, when asked how he would respond to another terrorist attack on the United States, Obama at first did not say a word about military action. So maybe his speech only reflects what he and his advisers think Americans want to hear. But that is revealing, too. When it comes to America's role in the world, apparently they don't think there's much of an argument.

I think it is just a speech. What he said sounded nice but I am not sure if he believes a word of it.

"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR

………… parent

Of course Kagan was lying as per usual

The speech noted was from 2005, not last week. It was responding to the GOP talking pints that anything but blind support for slaughter without end, was an instant abandonment "cut-and-run" position. The situation was less dismal than it is presently.

His primary talking point was that foreign policy aught to be based on reality, effectiveness, and matching means to goals, not stupidity, matching ignorance to ideology. In a normal world this would be seen as hopelessly obvious and pedantic, it is only in the backdrop of th GOP that it looks intelligent and thoughtful though not brilliant

The Self Made Man is just not admitting where he got all the parts.

………… parent

Good catch!

I LOVE your passion here and the words you chose.

Nothing will change, until someone learns how to rebutt these ridiculous talking points that work sway the over a population that doesn't have time to pay attention.

It just boogles the mind how smart people can swallow this crap.

It kills me that what "wins" is word play. Bush people and bumper sticker slogans. Your IQ can be 314, and you get sucker punched slogans.

We got to fight em over there so we don't have to fight em here.

I think it is the other way around.

………… parent

Indeed

We got to fight em over there so we don't have to fight em here.

I think it is the other way around.

We have to fight them over here so we don't have to fight them over there.

Great jujitsu
roflol

Btw you cannot imagine how good your words make me feel, I was beginning to think I was too harsh, thankyou

The Self Made Man is just not admitting where he got all the parts.

………… parent

I want to start my own party

because at this time I do not want to belong to the GOP...

"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR

…………

Wow

Corruption sucks, doesn't it. The price of freedom is eternal vigilance, or something like that. . . .

I am also going to pretend to be an independent objective observer, albeit a right wing one, with only agenda being the presentation of the true state of our Country's affairs . . .

Nice to hear, but it would be more helpful if you could do this in the voting booth too.

Rudy appears to be as corrupt as the current occupant. Just sayin'

"The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire."  --R. Heinlein

…………

I don't see that

I think Rudy is a very strong and very competent leader. Unlike Bush, Rudy radiates competency... and strength... and leadership.

I want it.

"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR

………… parent

Based on....?

Radiating competency is nice, but are there any actual accomplishments that suggest he really is competent?

I came. I saw. I posted.
Veni, Vidi, Bitchy.

………… parent

considering

I worked and lived in NYC for some time during his administration I can say that NYC was a dirty dump before he was elected. As soon as he was elected he went to work on it, cleaned it up, reduced crime by a huge amount, revived business and hugely increased tax base, made it safe for tourists and residents alike, and was reelected by a 20% margin in a city with over 80% registered Democrats because he was so incredibly competent.

I saw the transformation of our great city under his mayorship and he had to do it fighting tooth and nail with the liberal dominated City Council that wouldn't know what to do if the solution sat on their dimwitted socialist heads.

"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR

………… parent

How did he do that?

Oh yeah, through 'socialist' regulations that limited freedom of business. Hypocrisy?

We are all mediators, translators. - Derrida
http://signicide.blogspot.com/

………… parent

he cleaned up the city

reduced crime and improved the business atmosphere by offering incredible tax incentives all through "socialist" regulations? Really?

"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR

………… parent

He banned porno shops in the city.

You don't call that infringing on business? What kind of capitalist are you?

How Giulliani cleaned up NYC :

Under the ordinance, which the City Council approved by a 41-9 vote in October 1995, adult entertainment establishments are largely banished to outer boroughs, waterfronts, and commercial zones. They are not allowed to operate within 500 feet of each other or within 500 feet of schools, places of worship, or residential areas. The city predicts that fewer than 30 of 177 known sexual entertainment outlets in New York will be permitted to remain at their current locations. That means closing or moving more than 80 percent of the businesses.

In other words, outlawing and regulating business practices while infringing on the free-market.

Again, hypocrisy?

Castro improved the health of his citizens, lowered crime, and cleaned up Cuba through the same means as Giulliani.

We are all mediators, translators. - Derrida
http://signicide.blogspot.com/

………… parent

that's some rather mild stuff

in order to make the city much more presentable to the tourists and families and just in general. There are some regulations almost everywhere on "adult entertainment".

"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR

………… parent

Why does Guiliani assoc w/ Kerik

And even recommended corrupt Kerik for top post in Homeland Security.

The saying--Birds of the same feather flock together.

………… parent

no idea

but I am sure he'll have time to answer all those questions.

"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR

………… parent

Guiliani and Foreign policy

Also Guiliani is weak on FP

http://njdc.typepad.com/njdcs_blog/2007/04/giuliani_misund.html

“At a house party in New Hampshire, Mr. Giuliani suggested that it was unclear which was further along, Iran or North Korea, in the development of a nuclear weapons program,” reported the New York Times. The Times article went on to say that Giuliani then suggested a link between Iran and the September 11 attacks with no substantive evidence other than “they have a similar objective … in their anger at the modern world.” [New York Times, 3/7/07]

The editors of Foreign Policy offer this rebuttal to Giuliani: “For the record, North Korea tested a nuclear device on October 9, 2006, while the Iranians have yet to do so. The U.S. intelligence community believes Iran could have a nuclear weapon as early as 2010, but most likely in the time frame of 2012-2015.” [Foreign Policy Blog, 4/9/07]

………… parent

You seek that which does not exist

Maybe you think Rudy is all these things because you desperately want to believe that there is some "strong man" out there who can save the world. If only we had a strong leader, everything would be OK again. If only someone showed leadership and took care of all this for us, then we'd be back to normal.

Reminds me of Mexico and Santa Ana.

Or Russia and Putin.

Can you not see where the last six years of "I know what to do, you must trust me" has led us? Where such dependence always leads?

"The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire."  --R. Heinlein

………… parent

the point behind is that

Bush is incompetent and both he and other elected republicans are too damn liberal. Everyone forgot what conservatism means.

"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR

…………

The other elected Repubs are not liberal--just corrupt

Lobbyists got to them.

Even Norquist--top conservative GOP--couldnt say no to lobbyist.

That for me means conservatism--private sector corporate friends, GOP contributors get a piece of the tax pie. (No bid contracts Medicare D--pharmaceatical and insurance firms, Defense industry-for Iraq).

Taxes not to the poor or the public (No Welfare, Social Security, entitlements) but waste taxes to their cronies and contributors.

They even now want Social Security contributions to go to Wall Street --so called privatization. Or tax money to chartered private schools. ( dont understand that--everyone is free to go to a private school now why do you need to subsidize private schools)

………… parent