BUSH SUCKS

“Washington Post Hawk Editorial



Dateline: July 2, 1999

That is how the Clinton administration defines the Iraqi regime of Saddam Hussein: "dangerous, unreconstructed and defiant." So A. Elizabeth Jones, principal deputy assistant secretary of state for Near Eastern affairs, told Congress last week. As analysis, her description is refreshingly candid and accurate. As an evaluation of U.S. policy, it is close to an admission of failure. Although the administration no longer speaks about it much, Saddam Hussein remains most dangerous as a potential wielder of biological, chemical or nuclear weapons.

Nearly a year has passed since United Nations arms inspectors were even partially free to operate inside Iraq. More than a half-year has passed since those inspectors and monitors were booted out altogether. That milestone is chilling, because it was commonly said that Saddam Hussein could reconstitute some measure of biological weapons capability if left unmonitored for six months.

"We have come to the conclusion," Beth Jones said, that Saddam Hussein "will never relinquish what remains of his WMD [weapons of mass destruction] arsenal." President Clinton's policy in response to that threat, through most of his time in office, was to insist on intrusive U.N. disarmament efforts. Now that the U.N. program has broken down, the administration says it is putting its faith in "containment," in working to relieve the suffering of the Iraqi people and in attempting to "change the regime in Iraq."

But these policies, at least as carried out currently, offer little reassurance with regard to weapons of mass destruction. "Containment" seems to have two aspects: economic sanctions on the one hand and Air Force policing of no-fly zones on the other. The former can help impede a major weapons buildup, and the latter reduces Iraq's ability to threaten its neighbors. But neither can stop Saddam Hussein from reviving his biological weapons program.

That explains, at least in theory, the change-of-regime plank of U.S. policy: Only removing Saddam Hussein can ultimately remove the danger he presents. But the administration's seriousness in this regard remains in doubt. Despite a $ 97 million appropriation from Congress to aid the Iraqi opposition, officials say it would be "premature" to offer military assistance. So the United States is providing instead "equipment for the infrastructure vital for the effectiveness of an international political advocacy movement," according to Martin Indyk, assistant secretary of state. Whatever that may mean, it sounds short of what would persuade Saddam Hussein to shut his anthrax labs.”

“Frankly, Saddam, I Don't Give a Damn,

But We Have Evidence Tying Iraq to Al-Qaeda

August 29, 2002



n November 11 of last year, the London Observer ran an amazing article headlined: "The Terrorism Crisis, the Iraqi Connection." Investigative reporter David Rose documents the links so many on the left deny exist, so they can continue appeasing this monster as their ilk appeased Hitler. Rose tells us of connections between the 9/11 hijackers and not just Iraq, but with Saddam Hussein personally.



Frankly, I don't give a damn if we have the evidence or not, but here's more evidence if you want it - and from a noteworthy source. The Observer is part of the Guardian newspaper chain in the UK - no conservative bunch. With that said, it's even more unbelievable that this story somehow remains sequestered. It's amazing that this story didn't get picked up by the U.S. press. It would silence liberals who are demanding the president show a "link" between 9/11 and Saddam.

The paper reports that the CIA and FBI know all about this, which is interesting since both agencies claim they don't. Rose reports on the meeting between that leading Iraqi colonel who Mohammed Atta flew halfway across the world to meet in Prague in April 2001, and writes, "Evidence is mounting that this meeting was not an isolated event." Evidence was mounting last November, so imagine how much we have now. The Observer reports that Atta's meetings were "only one of several apparent links between Iraq, the September 11th hijackers and Al-Qaeda."

Rose further reports about training camps in Iraq and eastern Turkey – specifically the 707 fuselage where Saddam trains Al-Qaeda hijackers. Rose has three independent sources for these reports. An UNSCOM member is quoted as saying that Iraq "presents a long time strategic threat," but that the U.S. is bad at recognizing those. This information is all out there. You appeasers can either have the guts to admit what you're seeing, or you can turn away as you did in the 1930s – and wait for the bodies to pile up.”

“Dear Dewd,

What Rush spouts is not a viewpoint; it's a screed.

I asked a conservative friend of mine about Rush a few years ago during his heyday, and he replied that he didn't listen to Rush because, as he listened, he would flash back on that scene in the computer core in "2001"...

Daisey, Daisey
Give me your answer do
I'm half crazy,
All for the love of you...

slower and SLOWER and S L O W E R . . .

He said that it was quite an unpleasant experience. It was as if he was being regressed into a small child, then a jellyfish, then an amoeba, then...

Well, you get the picture.

I hear Hannity and Jesse Helms got their starts the same way: no education to speak of, just lots of air time. They had to fill dead air in-between commercials and whatnot with Something... and radio audiences don't care What they listen to, whether it's true or not... so what the heck. It gets the rank and file to buy the sponsor's toilet paper instead of the other guy's.

Did you ever read "All The King's Men"? You should at least rent the video. It's a great primer on how these guys operate. "Red Meat for the Masses," doncha know.”

“maybe it'll come true someday. i don't blame ya, it's about you got to cling to.












DENAIL AINT JUST A RIVAH IN EGYPT....”

“da... nail?

What pennyweight would that be?


Rent that movie --- it's a hoot.”

“my dixlecia is flarin up.

i have seen the movie, i liked it actually. pretty good for crap, lol.”

“Gee, why don't you simply copy&paste Limbaugh's Entire Freakin' Site into these threads? I'm sure Matt would LOVE that, LOL

Wait... you already did.”

“you don't really wanna find what's goin on


you don't really wanna just how far it's gone


just leave well enough alone


keep your dirty laundry...”

“When the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem begins to look like da-nail?

(sorry about that, Maslow...)


There are so many proponents of conservative thought ('thought' being the operative word), I don't understand why anyone in their right mind (ha-ha) would latch onto Limbaugh.”

“good pun....



poor response.....”

“Limbaugh is an entertainer, Alan Keys is a conservative.”

“keys rocks!”

“I rather liked Bush 41's comment: "Saddam has a lot of problems, but immortality isn't one of them."

The only question is how to make that happen with the least amount of cost.”

“Keys is certainly a charismatic, but when he ran he seemed somewhat unidimensional.”

“which uni would that be tilted one?”

“This is like listening to drunks argue.








And Bush does suck!”

“That is 'Scrub not Bush'.”

“So the dewd can play the guitar.......but can he backpack?”

“"Limbaugh is an entertainer, Alan Keys is a conservative."
Birch

Having watched the 2000 New Hampshire primary, I'd have to agree. Keys showed a consistency, coherence, intelligence and integrity that deserved (and still deserves) to be taken seriously. I voted for one of his primary opponents, and disagreed with many of his positions - but you don't have to agree with someone to respect them (or to appeciate their consistency).”

“keys is da $h!t!”

“A new kind of U.S. foreign policy
A reckless, hateful, ineffective approach

Molly Ivins
Creators Syndicate


No. This is not acceptable. This is not the country we want to be. This is not the world we want to make.

The United States of America is still run by its citizens. The government works for us. Rank imperialism and warmongering are not American traditions or values. We do not need to dominate the world. We want and need to work with other nations. We want to find solutions other than killing people. Not in our name, not with our money, not with our children's blood.

I rarely use the word we because it's so arrogant for one citizen to presume to speak for all of us -- and besides, Americans famously can't agree on the time of day. But on this one, I know we want to find a way so that killing is the last resort, not the first. We would rather put our time, energy, money and even blood into making peace than making war.

"The National Security Strategy of the United States -- 2002" is repellent, unnecessary and, above all, impractical. Americans are famous for pragmatism, and we need a good dose of common sense right now. This Will Not Work.

All the experts tell us that anti-Americanism thrives on the perception that we are arrogant, that we care nothing for what the rest of the world thinks. Even our innocent mistakes are often blamed on obnoxious triumphalism. The announced plan of this administration for world domination reinforces every paranoid, anti-American prejudice on this earth. This plan is guaranteed to produce more terrorists.

Even if this country were to become some insane, 21st-century version of Sparta -- armed to the teeth, guards on every foot of our borders -- we would still not be safe. Have the Israelis been able to stop terrorism with their tactics?

Not only would we not be safe -- we would not have a nickel left for schools or health care or roads or parks or zoos or gardens or universities or mass transit or senior centers or the arts or anything resembling civilization. This is nuts.

This creepy, un-American document has a pedigree going back to Bush I, when -- surprise! -- Dick Cheney and Paul Wolfowitz were at the Department of Defense and both were such geniuses that they not only didn't see the collapse of the Soviet Union coming, but they didn't believe it after they saw it.

In those days, this plan for permanent imperial adventurism was called "Defense Strategy for the 1990s" and was supposed to be a definitive response to the Soviet threat. Then the Soviet threat disappeared, and the same plan re-emerged as a response to the post-Soviet world.

It was roundly criticized at the time, its manifest weaknesses attacked by both right and left. Now it is back yet again as the answer to post-Sept. 11. Sort of like the selling of the Bush tax cut -- needed in surplus, needed in deficit, needed for rain and shine -- the plan exists apart from rationale. As Frances Fitzgerald points out in the Sept. 26 New York Review of Books, its most curious feature is the combination of triumphalism and almost unmitigated pessimism.

Until Friday, when the thing was re-released in its new incarnation, it contained no positive goals for American foreign policy -- not one. Now the plan is tricked out with rhetoric like earrings on a pig about extending freedom, democracy and prosperity to the world. But as The New York Times said, "It sounds more like a pronouncement that the Roman Empire or Napoleon might have produced."

In what is indeed a dangerous and uncertain world, we need the cooperation of other nations as never before. Under this doctrine, we claim the right to first-strike use of nuclear weapons and "unannounced pre-emptive strikes." That means surprise attacks.

There is a better way. Foreign policy experts polled at the end of the 20th century agreed that the great triumph of the past 100 years in foreign policy was the Marshall Plan. We can use our strength to promote our interests through diplomacy, economic diplomacy, multilateral institutions (which we dominate anyway) and free trade conditioned to benefit all.

None of this will make the al Qaeda folks love us, but it will make it a lot more likely that whoever finds them will hand them over.

This reckless, hateful and ineffective approach to the rest of the world has glaring weaknesses. It announces that we intend to go in and take out everybody else's nukes (27 countries have them) whenever we feel like it. Meanwhile, we're doing virtually nothing to stop their spread.

Last month, Ted Turner's Nuclear Threat Initiative had to pony up $5 million to get poorly secured, weapons-grade uranium out of Belgrade. Privatizing disarmament -- why didn't we think of that before?

The final absurdity is that the plan is supposed to Stop Change. Does no one in the administration read history?


http://www.dfw.com/mld/startelegram/news/columnists/molly_ivins/4154450.htm”

“I disagree.”

“most americans support the war i guess they dont want to see more innocent americans killed by terrorist.”

“There is an obvious reason why you are unaccompanied...”

“or nuts with nucleur capabilities”

“SPOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOCKKKKKK...”

“wee willlll we willlllll rock you!”

“back to the top”

“back to the top”

“back to the top”

“what are you trying to say tilt? lol!”

“I like this article, LOL”

“Now THIS is related to backpacking...I guess because Algore had to take a hike, LOL!!!”

“lmfao tilt you are the ma'am”

“now THAT'S funny! ! ! !”

“LINK
font size=5 face=georgia>SPACE ALIEN RATES GEORGE W. BUSH: 'HE STINKS!'

WASHINGTON -- The mysterious space alien whose endorsement of George W. Bush helped him win the election has issued a candid assessment of Bush... -- and he gives our new commander in chief a humiliating D-minus!

The E.T. says that President Bush has already made a series of catastrophic blunders that "threaten the long-term survival of the human species" and warns that if he keeps going the way he has been, his presidency will spell disaster for "not only the United States and the planet Earth, but possibly the entire galaxy as well."

The extraterrestrial made the blistering comments in a six-page communique sent to the White House, according to Dr. Phil Braton, a D.C.-based UFO researcher who claims he obtained a copy from an unnamed National Security Agency source.

"The alien and his people are disappointed with the job President Bush has done so far," said Dr. Braton. "Their chief complaint is his handling of environmental issues -- they feel he's made decisions that will turn Earth into an uninhabitable wasteland.

"In fact, in the communique the alien pointedly says of Mr. Bush: 'He stinks!' "

The strange visitor from space first made headlines in 1992 when a startling photograph surfaced of him holding a top-secret meeting with Bush's father, who was then President. But later, in a surprising reversal, he ended up endorsing Democrat rival Bill Clinton in the '92 presidential election.

Last year, the E.T. stunned political pundits again when he backed George W. Bush over Al Gore. While the endorsement probably changed only a few thousand votes, experts say that was all Bush needed to win Florida and the White House.

The E.T. says these are the seven humanity-endangering goofs Bush has made:

1) Flip-flopping on his campaign pledge to cut pollution -- One of the main reasons the alien backed Bush was his vow to require mandatory reductions in carbon-dioxide emissions from power plants. By reversing his position once in office, Bush has put the world at risk, according to the E.T., who says, "Your planet is choking on these fumes."

2)Rejecting the international Kyoto treaty to limit greenhouse gasses -- "Global warming is a very serious threat to your planet," warns the alien. "If you don't stop it now, you soon face a worldwide environmental catastrophe of biblical proportions."

3)Boosting the level of arsenic allowed in the drinking water -- "We have seen this happen on other planets, where millions of people, including small, helpless children, have died excruciating deaths from polluted water," the alien writes.

4) Reviving "Star Wars" -- Bush's decision to toss out the decades-old ABM treaty and to deploy a space-based missile-defense system is "dangerously misguided," says the E.T. "Spreading your arms race into space will not only lead to the destruction of the human race, it also threatens other planets where such weapons are unknown."

5) Promising to open Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and other protected lands to oil drilling -- "We cannot tell you how many planets there are which have become barren pits with no natural beauty because of this kind of folly," the E.T. says.

6)Cutting the budget for research into renewable energy and conservation by $200 million -- "You simply cannot keep plundering the Earth's natural resources," the E.T. says. "Renewable sources of energy are your only hope for survival."

7)Proposing we build more nuclear power plants -- "Radioactive waste remains deadly for 10,000 years," the alien warns. "The disaster at Chernobyl is nothing compared to what awaits future generations of mankind if you build more of these monstrosities." The White House has not issued any public comment on the alien's thumbs-down rating, but privately, aides concede, President Bush feels betrayed by the fickle E.T.

According to an administration insider, the President said, "First this guy stabs my dad in the back, now he's doing the same thing to me." ”

“Hey - don't look at me.

It was Nigal's idea.”

“Once again, Violin provides intellectual, stimulating news...”

“The crying never ends does it?”

“Where ARE those WMD's?”

“shrub”

“LONDON, England (AP) -- Many people in Britain believe the international standing of the United States has suffered under President George W. Bush and dislike his handling of the situation in Iraq, according to an opinion poll published in London's Times newspaper.

Bush and his wife, Laura, will make a three-day state visit to Britain next week and will be the guests of Queen Elizabeth II at Buckingham Palace. Prime Minister Tony Blair has been Washington's closest ally in the war on terror and its main coalition partner in Iraq, but many Britons opposed the war to dislodge Saddam Hussein and have criticized Blair's strong relationship with Bush.

In a poll published in The Times Tuesday, 59 percent of respondents said America's standing in the world has diminished under Bush's presidency, while 60 percent disapproved of his handling of the situation in Iraq.

Forty-seven percent said Bush didn't seem up to the job of being U.S. President, while 40 percent believed Britain benefits from the close relationship between Bush and Blair.

Regarding the war in Iraq, 49 percent believed that military action was the wrong thing to do, while 37 percent believed the opposite.

http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/europe/11/11/britain.bush.poll.ap/index.html”

“U suck!”

“YEAH what ups said.....”

“Like a jet engine,you suck and you blow!”

“i hope all those Brits get out to the polls and actually VOTE in next year's election! with the British vote against him, Bush is sure to lose!”

“He will win! No worries tarbubble!”

“I hope not. I liked it when I had a job, had money in my pocket, our national debt was not an all time high, the EPA job was to protect the enviroment, woman had more choice and we were not facing another Vietnam.”

“Sing it, Big Poppa! Right on!”

“Make brownies NOT WAR!!”