See other 4play Articles
Title: Bush Propaganda Live Thread
Source:
n/a
URL Source: http://n/a
Published: Jun 28, 2005
Author: n/a
Post Date: 2005-06-28 19:58:55 by christine
Keywords: Propaganda, Thread, Bush
Views: 1471
Comments: 209
It's show time!!
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-169) not displayed.
.
.
.
#170. To: justlurking, christine (#164)
It's the old routine -- Laurel and Hardy, Abbot and Costello, Lewis and Martin, the Bowery Boys, etc. -- where the smart guy tries to talk the dumb guy into being the one to do the dangerous thing by praising him and telling him how brave he is.
The President spoke tonight???? Sorry I missed that. (sarcasm) I was glued to ESPN watching the NBA Draft. I had to see where the kids in Baby Blue (UNC Tar Heels) went this evening. Scooter is going to have to reconsidet watching NBA games now that two of UNC's finest are now Charlotte Bobcats. What did I miss? (more sarcasm) I understand the terrorists are in their last throes. That we are progressing in Iraq daily. This war is important. Our cause is just. Afterall, we were attacked on 9/11 because of hatred for our precious freedoms and we can no longer sit idly by as terrorist regimes plot their next move in Iraq or any other place harboring terrorism. I am so relieved we have a great man of faith in the White House in W. I am honored he stands tall for America and does not lower himself to the vicious and venomous assaults and insults hurled at him by the America-hating left. (heavy, dripping sarcasm)
That pretty much sums it up in a nutshell. Very Good ;)
Of course it hurts, You're getting screwed by an elephant
uh huh..that's pretty much what i said to historian1944, though not so eloquently, on another thread. ;) i bet few tuned in.
"I have sworn on the altar of Almighty God, eternal hostility to every form of tyranny over the mind of man". - Thomas Jefferson
Of course, the US has some experience in that area, having worked with the Iraqis in the Iran-Iraq war to provide them with targeting information for poison gas operations against the Iranians.
I am especially fond of this sentence. I worked hard attempting to combine as many of the talking points as possible in one complete, coherrent statement.
hey, maybe that was scooter and not rove. ;)
"I have sworn on the altar of Almighty God, eternal hostility to every form of tyranny over the mind of man". - Thomas Jefferson
Maybe we are one and the same. :>) Ha!!!!!
Or Cheney, who had "other priorities than military service." All I could think of during the entire thing.. "And this guy hid in Alabama.. "
"And this guy hid in Alabama.. " I suspect more than a few of those troops were thinking the same thing.
Of course it hurts, You're getting screwed by an elephant
[bright red face] I love my wife very much.
I don't know if they know about it.. I don't think I've heard it mentioned a dozen times, anywhere in the MSM in the last 5 years.
For those who may have missed it on the tube. Of course it hurts, You're getting screwed by an elephant
Please. Bush as Churchill? "We shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender."
It still blows my mind that Bush said that the terrorists wanted to take away our freedom. And then a few short months later he took away some of our freedoms with The Patriot Act and by establishing the precedent that a US citizen could be held without charges in an unknown location indefinitely with no access to legal counsel. Then more by setting up the DHS, passing what is generally called Patriot II, hiring Primakov to set up national ID, etc.
uh oh..maybe you better tell me? i may have inadvertently insulted you?
"I have sworn on the altar of Almighty God, eternal hostility to every form of tyranny over the mind of man". - Thomas Jefferson
Speaking of Cheney, let's not forget the rest of the neocon chickenhawks. I saw a list of the neocons who dodged Vietnam in one way or another and it was extensive- none of the nationally known neocons served.
who's we?
"I have sworn on the altar of Almighty God, eternal hostility to every form of tyranny over the mind of man". - Thomas Jefferson
Rummy was flight instructor on a boat for like 2 years.. Amazing.. Now he's sec def.
I'll leave it to you to parse that. Put your mind in the gutter! I am almost ashamed to say mine was there for a second. Think Gannon/Guckert and all the Rove rumors going around. It wasn't until I saw Rack's "peeking behind the podium" and "leaving (us) to parse that", that I understood the hidden meaning!
My mind is in a silly, sarcastic place this evening. It is one of the ways I cope with what is going on. We are a witness to one of, if not the, most destructive Presidencies in the history of this great country. What is worse in many ways, is that this White House and this complacent Congress have opened the door for so much destruction of rights and liberties of the American people for years to come. We should have taken note that almost every head of corporation George Bush has been in, he has left in worse shape, often disastorous shape than prior to his leadership. For me, it began with CFR. His breaking of his campaign promise. That was an eyeopener for this man who voted for President Bush in 2000. Then the Education Bill. No Child Left Behind. The refusal to at least "examine" offenses of the Clinton Administration. The Farm Bill. As we now know, a reduced priority in tracking terrorism. And it has ballooned from there. The White House response to the Supreme Court vs New London was that "we respect the Court's decision" or words to that effect. The Rush Limbaugh's and the Jim Robinson's of this world have pleaded for Republican Leadership in all levels of the Federal Government. They promised us we would see the wave of government encroachment of power in every facet of our lives beaten back. After little more than 4 years, we have a Federal Government in size, scope and power far greater than anything in our history. I could go on from there. This great country is being destroyed. Alex Jones is looking smarter every day when he asserts "America is being destroyed by design".
I think in Rummy's time and before, service in the military was seen as the foundation of a successful political career. Vietnam really changed that, and men with political ambitions even dodged the draft rather than die for the cause that was Vietnam. After Vietnam, the idea of service in the military as a foundation of a pol career ended. In today's Congress, very few have served. And the number of their children serving now is close to zero, IIRC. This says alot about the wars since WWII- the ruling classes have not believed in them enough to involve their loved ones.
I agree.. Perhaps it's now so widespread that no one wants to risk political blowback by pointing this out? It's rank hypocrisy, but.. somehow it just never got the attention it deserved.
Buy The Subhumans, Pissed Off With Good Reason. This is the Canadian Subumans, not the mediocre brit Subhumanz. They put it down exactly right back in 80. The xtian nut jobs would kill us (Firing Squad) and the Factory Is Out to Get Me. They had it exactly right. Of course, they broke up when the bass player blew up a nuke plant and went to jail. Gotta give them credit, They Meant It Maaaaaaan
Just this evening? I'm there nightly, lol. Poll appears to reflect partisan viewing Wait for it....wait....wait....here comes the sarcasm.....I find that shocking!! ;) 46 percent of speech watchers choose 'very positive' response "Many Americans did not watch the speech. Those who did were 2-to-1 Republican, so most were arguably already in the president's camp." Arguably? Is there nothing we can agree on? I would like to see a poll to find out why many Americans did not watch it. I didn't. I could only stomach a few sentences at most. I would love for that to be one of the options if someone polls me, lol. The percentage of those with a "very positive" reaction was down from the 60 percent expressing the same sentiment in a similar poll taken immediately after Bush's State of the Union speech in February. The figure also was down from the 67 percent in a similar poll who responded that way to the president's "mission accomplished" speech May 1, 2003 -- two months after the war began. That was the speech -- delivered under a banner reading "Mission Accomplished" on the deck of the aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln -- in which Bush declared, "Major combat operations in Iraq have ended." Looks to me like he needed a banner over his head during the speech tonight. Perhaps, "Mission Complicated". I might have tuned in for that, lol.
When prosperity comes, do not use all of it. - Confucious And there were plenty of fools who bought into the idea that the republocraps would incrementally turn big government back! I wrote an editorial once about about how the right is NEVER able to win the battle of incrementalism..............and the bots called me everything but white.
Actually TROTSKYITE. All of this "Neo Conservatism" crap that Shrub and the rest of his ilk promote is basically Trotskyite Communism mixed with Fascism to draw the Corporations to it.
I couldn't agree more. I don't take Bush seriously anymore in some ways- and it frees me to look deeper into what he is doing. I didn't watch the speech- I have seen enough of bush that watching a speech won't tell me anything new. Here are some of the problems I have with Bush: I am convinced Bush is pushing an aggressive ideology of collectivism, and Americans are so conditioned by collectivism advocates in the US that we cannot even see it. Bush has presided over the Rep party as it has officially adopted collectivism as it's official ideology. The attack on individual rights Bush has conducted with the support of Congress is part of the collectivist strategy. No one except a collectivist would seek to destroy individual rights and promote group rights as Bush and Congress have. Bush's whole approach to the illegal alien crisis has been textbook Marxist. The recurring theme presented by his admin is the idea of the noble, worthy illegals and their near natural right to share in the wealth of Americans. Every Mexican is portrayed as having all positive attributes. The caricature of the hard working Mexican, working hard to support children, is religious (believes in Jesus), thankfully doing the jobs we won't do, dedicated to family values, etc. Every single negative is ignored in an attempt to con Americans into not taking their own interests into consideration when deciding whether or not to agree with the govt and their plans regarding illegals. Bush is such a Marxist that he is on the record as saying that the border should not stop a Mexican family or anyone in need from receiving required assistance from the US. We have a DUTY to share. By we I generally mean the middle class, who largely bears the brunt of illegal immigration. Again, when you look at Bush, you pick up recurring themes that belie the philosophy of the admin. By thinking thru Bush's positions on illegals, you quickly come to the conclusion that Bush violates his oath by not protecting US sov, and worse, doesn't believe in US sov at all and therefore holds the Constit in contemp and wants it scrapped ASAP. Ditto for Congress. Knowing this, Bush's other actions make sense. He even said in his speech tonight that he was protecting the minority in Iraq. This comment can be taken in a few diff ways, but knowing Bush I can tell you one of them- it's another comment supportive of collectivist ideology- the majority is, in fact, who Bush must please in Iraq if peace has any hope, yet tonight he does not say this- h goes out of his way to say the US govt specifically will protect minorities. This is a rather small issue, I admit. But I think, after watching the Bush admin and its surprisingly collectivist ideology, it is significant. It is about govt favoring groups not in the majority and ignoring the majority. If its a coincidence, it's a big one, in that it just happens to be rooted in Marxist ideology. About Bush's portrayal of the Mexs- I've been studying the Marxists- this is SOP- create a caricature of goodness for the lower class and eliminate the perception of any negatives in order to assign rights to that group which would otherwise be properly perceived by the majority as unfair and even outrageous. I have watched Bush in photo ops pushing caricatures of mexicans and ignoring all negatives to skew perception of them. Does anyone doubt that this is Marxist on it's face? And why can't we all see it for what it is? He also plays another Marxist card- a negative stance on the middle class (outsourcing, as an example)- when it comes to illegals, the welfare of the majority never enters the discussion. No one in the majority is ever portrayed as in need of anything- the assumption is always the the middle class has all it needs. Images in the media are carefully controlled. Look for this and you will notice it. Notice how the welfare of the majority NEVER enters the Bush equation? Or any of the DC crowd's equation? Notice how everything you hear in DC is about this group and that group? It's because this admin is outwardly collectivist and so is Congress. Bush's ideology of foreign revolutions to spread his groups ideology is also collectivist, it's most famous proponent being Trotsky. Bush has surrounded himself with men who idolize a communist. One could argue that a neocon coup, of sorts, has taken place under Bush. I haven't heard a better reason as to why Bush has gone collectivist on all fronts. The neocons openly venerate Trotsky and communism to this day. And they are not called on it. Since Bush has become a hard core neocon, it is reasonable to assume he has accepted at least a portion of the communist collectivist ideology. I have yet to hear any of the neos deny their commie roots. And what of the role of the media in the ascent of the neocons. From day one, the media has called the openly communist neocons "conservatives!" "For me, it began with CFR. His breaking of his campaign promise. That was an eyeopener for this man who voted for President Bush in 2000. Then the Education Bill. No Child Left Behind." CFR is typical of Bush in that it takes away power from the people and gives power to DC incumbants, who are like the elite ruling class these days. When Bush got away with the CFR lie, I knew we were in trouble. No CLB is typical of Bush collectivism I spoke of earlier. Central control of local matters, the idea that people can't solve problems in their own communities. a DC beaurocrat with pol ties is better suited to the task. NCLB was also an example of how out of control his spending would become. I disagree with you on pursuing Clinton. Enough is enough with Clinton. Part of the Clinton legacy left to us by Reps is that a BJ is criminal, yet treason is not. "They promised us we would see the wave of government encroachment of power in every facet of our lives beaten back. After little more than 4 years, we have a Federal Government in size, scope and power far greater than anything in our history" They abandoned that line years ago. Supporting Reps was made into a lesser of 2 evils game, in which supporting Reps regarding anything was good, because the Dems were more evil on every issue universally. Truly a masterful deception by the Rep party and their propagandists. By thoroughly casting the 'libruls' as evil, the enemy , and dangerous and the Reps as their diametric opposite, good, many BOTS were sworn to loyalty. But the lesser of 2 evils was brilliant in that it provided a framework in which Reps could totally screw the constituents and yet maintain viability, because no matter what, the Reps were better than the Dems. Social issues were used brilliantly in this regard, convincing voters that the Reps positions on social issues were what was really important, and the political positions and actions were less important- and no matter what should be ignored to support Rep representatives with the correct positions on social issues. Meanwhile, they all didn't even realize that politicians do not really support social, they say and support only that which advances their power. Pretty dumb group of Reps that make up the party. A group of men who surrendered all conserv principles and adopted an ideology near the opposite of conservatism... because they were told to. "Alex Jones is looking smarter every day when he asserts "America is being destroyed by design"." It all depends what you mean by destroyed. In my studies, the one consistent thing I see is the advancement of collectivist ideology and the scrapping of individualism and rights. The neocons are the collectivists that literally took over the party and now are imposing collectivism on the people in the US that have always been opposed to it, and still are. We see this domestically and foreign policy wise. Plus the individual is under assault. We haven't built a police state dwarfing that of the USSR in a few years because a few Arabs flew planes into buildings 4 years ago. Instead of destroyed, I see it as more of a coup. By a group with a collectivist ideology that knows very well how to impose their ideology to achieve the number one goal of collectivism- to allow a small group the leverage necessary to achieve a revolution of sorts and seize power- and then to dominate the majority- its what I believe is happening now, orchestrated by the neocons. The Dem collectivists, the stereotypical liberals of yesteryear, were never able to achieve what the neocons have- eliminating the resistance to collectivism known as Conservatism and Libertarianism by force. There is reason to be concerned about the future of the US because the US is officially collectivist- both collectivist parties sharing 100% power. It requires no conspiracy, just corruption of traditional American ideology over time. We have a tendency to view all revolution as violent- but that's not the way it goes. People have a hard time viewing what the neocons have accomplished as a revolution. But it is one nevertheless. The majority no longer rules. The most powerful minority does. Politician after politician for decades sold out traditional American govt. In a collectivist system, the majority is continually attacked. In the US, the majority will be attacked continually- as it has been. So we will all be out here on the internet complaining for some time. I think the idea of collectivist ideology eclipsing that exemplified by the founding principles is the most important issue today. Over the last few months I studied the history of collectivism and what groups have traditionally used it. I studied the actual nature of it, and found it was one of the root causes of our probs in the US. I recommend that everyone carefully study collectivism and then look at the current situation in the US. Doing this allowed me to identify collectivism as a common cause of many of our problems. To understand why the founding principles are being trashed, study collectivism. When collectivism is the prevailing ideology, as in the US today, there is constant pressure against individual rights, sovereignty and freedom. We must all find out why it is happening before solutions can be proposed and action taken.
I think we are way beyond politicians being asked why their kids aren't enlisted. We're an Empire now, and we are seriously considering the use of mercenaries in our military. Actually, In Iraq, over 10,000 'contractors' are being employed. Many providing services that were traditionally provided by the military. I was shocked to hear in 2003 that private contractors were guarding military bases in Iraq. That was quite a surprise. The old scenario of troops guarding fellow troops in shifts was core to my conception of the military. The question to me then became, if troops are not doing what troops 'do' any longer, then what are they doing? Perhaps our troops no longer functioning as troops is a sign that the military is being used for the wrong reasons. Definitely a sign of empire. The idea of the US govt hiring mercenaries was brought up a few weeks ago, and didn't cause much of a stir.
Yes, they really hate those "freedoms" of ours to have our guns grabbed, our homes grabbed, our computers run on Micro$oft monopolyware ONLY (The SCO suits), to be forced onto taking a national ID card as a "driver's license" and have our kids psychologically "screened" and doped up with meds that would put an Aussie IINLAND TAIPAN to shame. Yes, they hate us for our "freedom".
Arguably? Is there nothing we can agree on? I would like to see a poll to find out why many Americans did not watch it. That is an interesting point. It seems that doing a pseudo analysis of 'those who watched it' is considered important. And so is ignoring the group that chose not to watch it and thus avoiding the dreaded concept of REAL OPPOSITION to the PTB. The real opposition to the PTB is always hidden so that it cannot grow and present a problem. For example, regarding the war, opponents were presented as Dems who would have gotten France on board or would have gotten UN approval. Who would have planned for the aftermath. Real opposition from the principled left and right were kept from the MSM. Allowable dissent on the war issue was generally portrayed as the range of opinions of the two parties taken collectively. When the media 'analyzes' the people that are supposedly interested in a debate as important as tonight's was portrayed, we must realize that the media serves the interests of the 2 pol parties, which together control just below 100% of all pol power in DC, first and foremost. In doing so, the media has shown a tendency to support the collective power of the parties as a sort of golden rule. Which makes sense since 2 parties wield all the power in the nation and have huge offices to deal with the media. The media will not cover an issue in a way that supports true opposition to the parties taken collectively. So, the media would not be inclined to do a real analysis of those who chose not to watch Bush for principled reasons. Plus, these people have been demonized as K0oks and extremists- dangerous liberals and militia members, repectively. LOL No, the media covered it in a 'safe' way, by quickly writing of those who would not watch it as irrelevant. Which is true in a way- in the 2 party dichotomy- in our system, you choose A, the opp of B... or you choose B, the opp of A. If you refuse, you are excluded from the pol process. I try to ignore most polling in general, because it is done mainly to influence opinion and perhaps to even control individuals. Polling encourages men to not think rationally as individuals about issues that affect them, but rather to go with herds. Many people who are leaning a certain way but have not thought about an issue can be effectively convinced to stop thinking and just go in the direction he was leaning, or the direction which propaganda was leading him to adopt. A great example of how polls can be used against Americans can be found in the last election. All of the polls involved a limited range of pol thought, which was basically approved by both parties, encompassing the sum of their positions. This served to control voters to stay within limits regarding their positions- approved of by the 2 parties. More insidiously, the constant polling daily regarding only the D and R candidates, reinforced the idea to Americans that there were only 2 choices for President. D or R. The power of this could be seen on FR, LP and DU type sites, where almost every poster would rant endlessly that there were only 2 choices in the election. Part of their conviction comes from the media, and polls, which constantly portray the entire range of pol thought as the combo of D and R party positions. In the minds of MSM viewers, parties like the Con Party and the Libs might as well not have existed. They were almost eliminated from viewer consciousness. Polls are also dangerous because they turn issues into games involving numbers. The importance of an issue become what % it garners or doesn't. There is a dangerous equivalence drawn- by design- the most important issues to the country and the least are both portrayed as equal, being just a matter of %'s. Americans see important issues blown off using polls and think they have been addressed- after all, the polling involves peoples' opinions. Polls simulate a free exchange of ideas on an issue, but are, in fact, tightly controlled. The outcomes used to control individuals. It is no coincidence that as our system becomes less free, polls are increasingly used and portrayed as free people freely making decisions on subjects.
Bottom line is that these men are collectivists, and have had the US system in their sights for years. The Rep party all but announced it had changed ideologies to communism- thru their actions domestically and FP wise, rhetoric and positioning of Trotsky-ites as the party leaders who set the agenda for the party- and thru puppet Bush the agenda of the nation. They even declared that those who identified as real conservatives were not welcome and were k0oks. They seized control of the Rep party and the fed govt itself directly. Whereas the Dem communists had tried indirect methods that failed over the years. I have to admire how bold these men were. When I heard they identified as communist revolutionaries, I assumed they were some egghead libs from the college scene of the 70's. But they were very serious in their plans for revolution and were serious collectivists in that they were a small group that leveraged power to gain effective control of the majority- or IOW, they staged nothing less than a revolution, of sorts, in Am politics.
This is how serious the situation is. These people are seeking to basically enslave Americans as individuals. They are collectivists. It's what they do. I watch in awe as the situation continues to worsen, and no one is speaking up about what is going on. The collectivist ideology has replaced the founding principles. The Con is truly dead. The Rep party adopted collectivism as its official ideology a few years ago, joining the Dem. The US version of Socialist Democracy is under construction. Both Dems and Reps have effectively trashed our Con. As I pointed out in an earlier post, both parties support collectivism in every way I could discern. I knew it was all over for individual rights and freedom (the era of the individual) when the Rep Party adopted PC, cultural Marxism, as their official policy- traditionally Libertarian positions on the individual that did not recognize 'group rights' were no longer acceptable. They started playing the race card- Great example- Hannity- uses the race card all the time as though it was not considered anti freedom just a few short years ago by Rep Party. The Rep party also adopted multiculturalism and diversity, more or less officially. These philopophies have 1 thing in common- they are collectivist and attack the majority to benefit minority groups given special status and treatment by govt.
I wrote an editorial once about about how the right is NEVER able to win the battle of incrementalism..............and the bots called me everything but white. Both parties seem to believe in a State as large as possible. it's not about how much taxpayer money they can come up with anymore, its about that plus how much they can get away with borrowing. Most of the BOTS dropped the argument that Reps would roll back the size of govt, but unbelievably, despite all the evidence provided by the admin during the 1st term and the fact that the RNC had not made a single statement about cutting the size of govt, some BOTS insisted that Bush was actually biding his time, and would make a big move to cut govt when he had sufficient power to do so in his 2nd term. LOL The Reps went to a lesser of 2 evils argument at this time, convincing voters that no matter what, the Dems would be worse. All the BOTS fell into line- instead of holding politicians responsible and demanding smaller govt- or else they would not be reelcted. Americans have such low expectations about politicians that, to Rep constituents, holding the pols responsible and threatening them to do the right thing was sadly not even considered to be an option. They bought into the RNC generated lesser of 2 evils argument, which stated that voters had to vote against Dems and 4 Reps. 3rd party was the same choice as dems. The Reps drew on their propaganda delivered over the last 4 years to close the deal with voters. Propagandists like Hannity and Lush had portrayed the libs as nothing short of evil, and had nothing good to say about the Reps, so just portrayed them as the opposite of the evil libs- just good. I'll never forget the whackjob true believers on LP like Mark Felton, raving about the importance of selecting good and stopping evil from destroying the US. Funny stuff. I think the incrementalism argument had some merit in the 80's and early 90's, but definitely not since then. As we have seen with the Bush admin, the Rep Party is as collectivist as the Dems, even moreso when comparing Clinton to Bush.
When choosing between two evils, I always like to try the one I've never tried before. - Mae West It didn't work. We're stuck with the same one, lol.
When prosperity comes, do not use all of it. - Confucious That argument was made to the BOTS at the time. It was proven to them that voting for Bush and other Reps would result in the same situation... best case scenario. On the other hand, Bush could be even more dangerous as a lame duck not beholden to voters. After watching him in his 1st term, when he acted as the anticonservative after campaigning in 2000 as more or less a conservative, anything seemed possible. But the BOTS could not be swayed that the only choice was to oppose Bush, because voting for Bush guaranteed more evil. They compared Bush against their perception of kerry and liberals in general, that was more a product of Lush/Hannity propaganda and demonization than it was reality. The dichotomy factor was in full efect, where they were convinced that Reps are good, Dems are evil, and the situation is desperate- only voting for Bush can save us. I still laugh when I look back at how ridiculous their fear of 'libruls' was. Dupes, one and all. The Reps convinced the dupes that they had no choice to change anything. Pressuring Rep pols to change policies so that they were more conservative was never even consisidered by the dupes. Instead, they begged for more of the same as if they were gaining something by the Reps not changing at all and being reelected regardless. The Republican leadership has truly been brilliant when it comes to using constituents without doing anything in return. They play their people like violins. Light years ahead of the Dems.
I wanted to watch it last night but something was wrong with either my cable or the tuner on my TV. I couldn't find the speech because for some odd reason "The Animal Planet" came on about 15 channels at once which is very unusual. It was something about Chimpanzies at the Washington Zoo and it didn't interest me so I watched the Yankees vs Orioles ball game. At least the announcer and commentator could speak coherent English.
Press 1 for English---Press 2 for Jibberish
I didn't see his speech, either. I did see some reporting about a blond American girl missing in Jamacia or somewhere. Anyway and from what I've read, Bush's speech was the same one he gave three years ago. Nothing new.
If you love America, you'll hate Israel.
I listen on KNX radio on the way home. Although slightly distracted by driving, I believe I heard only ONE applause, towards the end, and it was rather weak.
“We’re making enemies faster than we can kill them.”
Let's not forget Rush (I got a boil on my ass) or Newt, etc etc etc
Just ask the Axis, he knows everything.
#171. To: christine (#0)
#172. To: scooter (#171)
I understand the terrorists are in their last throes. That we are progressing in Iraq daily. This war is important. Our cause is just. Afterall, we were attacked on 9/11 because of hatred for our precious freedoms and we can no longer sit idly by as terrorist regimes plot their next move in Iraq or any other place harboring terrorism. I am so relieved we have a great man of faith in the White House in W. I am honored he stands tall for America and does not lower himself to the vicious and venomous assaults and insults hurled at him by the America-hating left. (heavy, dripping sarcasm)
#173. To: orangedog (#167)
It would also seem that this little dog and pony show of his this evening met with the same enthusiasm people would have for discovering a turd in a swimming pool.
#174. To: christine (#78)
Third, we are working with the Iraqi Ministries of Interior and Defense to improve their capabilities to coordinate anti-terrorist operations.
Just ask the Axis, he knows everything.
#175. To: justlurking (#172)
Afterall, we were attacked on 9/11 because of hatred for our precious freedoms and we can no longer sit idly by as terrorist regimes plot their next move in Iraq or any other place harboring terrorism.
#176. To: scooter, rack42 (#171)
#177. To: christine, rack42 (#176)
hey, maybe that was scooter and not rove. ;)
#178. To: MUDDOG (#163)
It sure didn't look that way to Bush in 1968, when he was graduating from Yale and facing the prospect of being classified 1-A for the Vietnam draft.
#179. To: Jhoffa_ (#178)
All I could think of during the entire thing..
#180. To: christine, rack42 (#177)
Ah.... er.... Rack42, I just "got" your statement. Ah.... well....
#181. To: justlurking (#179)
#182. To: Jhoffa_, All (#181)
#183. To: christine (#78)
So we will fight them there ... we will fight them across the world - and we will stay in the fight until the fight is won.
Just ask the Axis, he knows everything.
#184. To: scooter (#171)
Afterall, we were attacked on 9/11 because of hatred for our precious freedoms
#185. To: scooter (#180)
[bright red face] Ah.... er.... Rack42, I just "got" your statement. Ah.... well....
#186. To: Jhoffa_ (#178)
#187. To: MUDDOG (#183)
#188. To: Bayonne (#186)
#189. To: christine, Rack42 (#185)
I could be mistaken, but I thought that I saw Rove peeking behind the podium.
#190. To: Bayonne (#184)
#191. To: Jhoffa_ (#188)
#192. To: Bayonne (#191)
This says alot about the wars since WWII- the ruling classes have not believed in them enough to involve their loved ones.
#193. To: Bayonne (#191)
#194. To: scooter, Bayonne, christine, Rack42, Jhoffa_, justlurking, MUDDOG, Mekons4, Arete (#190)
My mind is in a silly, sarcastic place this evening. It is one of the ways I cope with what is going on.
The nation is prosperous on the whole, but how much prosperity is there in a hole? - Will Rogers
#195. To: scooter (#190)
#196. To: Bayonne (#154)
Elapidae, Micrurus fulvius 
#197. To: scooter (#190)
#198. To: Jhoffa_ (#192)
#199. To: scooter (#171)
Elapidae, Micrurus fulvius
#200. To: markm0722 (#194)
"Many Americans did not watch the speech. Those who did were 2-to-1 Republican, so most were arguably already in the president's camp."
#201. To: Coral Snake (#196)
Actually TROTSKYITE. All of this "Neo Conservatism" crap that Shrub and the rest of his ilk promote is basically Trotskyite Communism mixed with Fascism to draw the Corporations to it.
#202. To: Coral Snake (#199)
Yes, they really hate those "freedoms" of ours to have our guns grabbed, our homes grabbed, our computers run on Micro$oft monopolyware ONLY (The SCO suits), to be forced onto taking a national ID card as a "driver's license" and have our kids psychologically "screened" and doped up with meds that would put an Aussie IINLAND TAIPAN to shame.
#203. To: rowdee (#195)
And there were plenty of fools who bought into the idea that the republocraps would incrementally turn big government back!
#204. To: Bayonne (#203)
The Reps went to a lesser of 2 evils argument at this time, convincing voters that no matter what, the Dems would be worse.
The nation is prosperous on the whole, but how much prosperity is there in a hole? - Will Rogers
#205. To: markm0722 (#204)
It didn't work. We're stuck with the same one, lol.
#206. To: Bayonne, robin (#205)
Fake applause? Fox News..DU.
Mundus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur.
#207. To: christine, all (#0)
#208. To: Grumble Jones (#207)
I wanted to watch it last night but something was wrong with either my cable or the tuner on my TV.
#209. To: Eoghan (#206)
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest