He Walks on Political Water

lavender

Cautiously Optimistic
Joined
Apr 6, 2001
Posts
25,108
You would assume a man with the following credentials would be unpopular in America:

  • Net loss of 3 million jobs, including 2.7 million in industrial sectors

    Source:

    http://www.jsonline.com/bym/news/aug03/165529.asp
  • Fiscal policies are the "worst in over 200 years" and would mean a 10-year deficit of over $6 trillion
    - statement by Nobel Prize-winning economist George Akerlofof the University of California at Los Angeles

    Source: same as above
  • Cutting key sections of the Clean Water and Clean Air Acts; Crippling the Superfund program, Opening millions of acres of wilderness -- including some of the nation's most environmentally sensitive public lands -- to logging, mining and oil and gas drilling

    Source:

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/w...node=&contentId=A45700-2003Sep8&notFound=true

And these aren't even including the mission in Iraq. We now know there are no WMDs, the intelligence was faulty, and there was pressure on the intelligence community to provide this faulty intelligence so they could convince Americans that it was the thing to do. But even if it wasn't for WMDs, it was because of links to Al Qaeda, but if you look at it closely you will realize that as a secularist Hussein and Bin Laden hated each other. There were no ties between bin Laden and Iraq at least none that posed any imminent threat to the United States.

Source for ties to bin Laden:

Wednesday, January 7, 2004 by the Madison Capital Times (Wisconsin)

But, wait a minute, even if we didn't go in because of an imminent threat to national security and even if there are no WMDs and even though there were no ties to terrorism, then we were there to "free" and "liberate" the Iraqi people.

Well that theory is a bit iffy considering our version of free speech in Iraq - let's analyze how we are dealing with media structures there. It's rather oppressive. In fact it seems downright authoritarian and more like a communist regime than one that truly promotes freedom and democracy.

Check out what we are now calling "Information Dominance."

Source: Published on Thursday, January 8, 2004 by the Guardian/UK

http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0108-09.htm

But, even if you say that the media needs a little bit less freedom right now because we want our troops to be safe, let's analyze what we are doing regarding liberty in other areas.

A few weeks ago, 60 Minutes did a wonderful little piece. They interviewed a Shia exile who had been in the United States. After the fall of the regime he went back to Karbollah (sp?) which is considered a Shia stronghold. In this city, the town had elected a town council and had tried to create their own democracy because that is what they felt "democracy" meant. They thought Americans would be proud of them. And even though Paul Bremer said that none of the Ba'athists of any rank would hold power in the new regime, the police chief in Karbollah is now, yup, you got it, a high ranking police chief under Saddam.

The United States and the Ba'athist police chief disbanded the democratically elected town council. And the Ba'athist chief even had many of the elected town council members arrested.

But of course they must have been arrested for good cause, right? Sure. When the 60 Minutes reporters went to the camp where some of the former town council members were alleged to be, the head of the camp met with 60 Minutes reporters. She informed them that there was no way this town councilman had been there for about 6 weeks without charges being brought because the policy was to definitely bring charges within 24 hours. If you couldn't bring charges within this time you released the men. Additionally, the director of the camp said there was no way that family members hadn't been able to visit because they were allowed within 72 hours (or something) of charges being filed.

So the 60 Minutes reporters went in to see the records about this man that was supposedly captured and jailed. And guess what, he had been there for the entire time, no charges had been filed, and no family visits were arranged.

And the director of the camp asked 60 Minutes to turn off the camera.

Shocker.

More to come.
 
So, we've got damaging to the environment, a joblessness problem, an impending national debt crisis, and a war in which over 350 soldiers have died I believe since the close of combat. And this war was brought about by faulty intelligence.

Well there can't be more bad, can there?

  • A newly unveiled proposal to try and get illegal immigrants legal status within the United States
  • A medicare drug benefit plan available in 2006 where "less than half of actual drug costs for most participants will be covered. And seniors will get only one chance to decide whether to opt for the (inadequate) Medicare program or to stay with (increasingly unregulated) private drug insurance coverage that could deteriorate over time."

    Published on Wednesday, January 7, 2004 by the Boston Globe
  • And the IMF has even said that the United States' budget deficits/national debt could cripple the global economy if they continue at projected estimates.

    Source: Published on Thursday, January 8, 2004 by the New York Times

But at this time, it's all ok. Because we have backlogged big-time tax breaks for the rich about to come in effect. While we are escalating military spending at an alarming rate. The "surplus" is not only gone, but has plummeted into deficit (just like many who opposed the stimulus package said), our trade deficit is ever-increasing.

But this fucking asshole, who has allowed the NY State Attorney General to be the true spokesman on corporate crime, who hasn't tried to do much in the way of SEC reforms to deal with companies like Enron, MCI Worldcom, and the mutual fund industry, because he has done nothing to punish the handful of rich bastards who profitted at the expense of $1 trillion dollars in retirement benefits/401K losses to your regular average joe.

This fucking asshole is going to be reelected.

And interesting article called this the S Factor - S for Stupid.

Published on Monday, January 5, 2004 by the Seattle Post-Intelligencer
The S Factor Explains Bush's Popularity
by Neal Starkman

http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0107-08.htm
 
so why is he able to walk on water ?

is it a failing of the democrats to expose bush's weaknesses

or is the bush administration just able to put good spin on media stories to their benefit
 
sexy-girl said:
so why is he able to walk on water ?

is it a failing of the democrats to expose bush's weaknesses

or is the bush administration just able to put good spin on media stories to their benefit
The media ripped H. Dubya Sr. to shreds for way far less than this.
 
sexy-girl said:
so why is he able to walk on water ?

is it a failing of the democrats to expose bush's weaknesses

or is the bush administration just able to put good spin on media stories to their benefit

Follow rhe money all the way to the top.

The media and polititians all work for the same handfull of corporations.
 
Last edited:
i cant bare to watch cnn ... but how bad can it be even if bush had some influence on the media ... why cant the democrats do more to expose bush for what he is ... surely they would have to see it as a major failing if they can't use some of what lavender has posted against him


or is the media really that bad ?
 
sexy-girl said:
so why is he able to walk on water ?

is it a failing of the democrats to expose bush's weaknesses

or is the bush administration just able to put good spin on media stories to their benefit

Because over half of the citizens in this country are brain dead enough to believe Hussein and the events of Sept 11th are directly linked. (Gallup poll December 19-21)

Darryl Worley should be pleased as punch.
 
Let's see. If Al Gore had been elected:

Aside from Afghanistan there would have been no effort to eradicate the animals who are determined to kill Americans for no ther reason than to kill Americans. Gore would have done nothing. The torure chambers of Iraq would still be there. Children would still be mutilated. People would still be murdered.
Politcal correctness, not common sense, would be the order of the day.

The recession (which according to Clinton's own economic advisers actually started near the end of his administration) would have been fueled even more by liberal class envy, higher taxes, and Gore's milquetoast leadership skills.

I'm no fan of GWB. But one thing is for sure: Gore would have been an unmitigated disaster.

Your post is intellectually dishonest. Liberals hate the truth. If Bush is so stupid, why haven't there been more terrorist attacks on US soil and why is the economy recovering?

Your transparent hatred of Bush is almost laughable in its absurdity.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Abe Lincoln lost 40% of the Union and he got re-elected.

Maybe your standards are too high.
 
sexy-girl said:
i cant bare to watch cnn ... but how bad can it be even if bush had some influence on the media ... why cant the democrats do more to expose bush for what he is ... surely they would have to see it as a major failing if they can't use some of what lavender has posted against him


or is the media really that bad ?

Most of the Democrats are intertwined with the same big business and media corporations as the Republicans. It's like whistleblowing another employee in your own company. If the company goes down, they all go down. There's only about 5 major owners who account for nearly all mainstream media. That's what keeps the news consistent.

It's not like there's one person at the top giving orders, but more like they're all driven not to alienate the owners/advertisers/stockholders.
If you follow the money, it goes back to the top.
 
miles said:
Let's see. If Al Gore had been elected:

Aside from Afghanistan there would have been no effort to eradicate the animals who are determined to kill Americans for no ther reason than to kill Americans. Gore would have done nothing. The torure chambers of Iraq would still be there. Children would still be mutilated. People would still be murdered.
Politcal correctness, not common sense, would be the order of the day.

The recession (which according to Clinton's own economic advisers actually started near the end of his administration) would have been fueled even more by liberal class envy, higher taxes, and Gore's milquetoast leadership skills.

I'm no fan of GWB. But one thing is for sure: Gore would have been an unmitigated disaster.

Your post is intellectually dishonest. Liberals hate the truth. If Bush is so stupid, why haven't there been more terrorist attacks on US soil and why is the economy recovering?

Your transparent hatred of Bush is almost laughable in its absurdity.

Conjecture and sweeping generalizations, the hallmark of a "Miles" post. :rolleyes:
 
miles

That is your opinion. You can offer no proof whatsoever that Gore would have or wouldn't have done this or that.

When I see actual job and wage gains that affect those around me I will believe the economy is improving. Increasing stock prices aren't a true indicator of economic health. Stock price is largeley based on speculation and opinion (of the buyer and seller)

How much time passed between the first WTC bombing and Sept 11th?

If Al Quaeda is anything it is patient.

Saying the actions in Afghanistan and Iraq have eliminated the terrorist threat is like standing on the street corner spraying flying pig repellent is effective because there are no flying pigs.

We may have disrupted some of their organization but we have also galvanized many more to their cause.
 
It's important to remember that this has taken a long time to get to this point.

This is not the fault of the current administration.

A lot of the damage was done in the mid to late nineties under Clinton, and is growing bigger through this admin.

There were some changes in the FCC in that time that eliminated the Fairness Doctrine which kind of established equal time for opposing viewpoints and really loosened up ownership rules.

Clear Channel Radio is an example of the quick growth through the buying of stations that reduced local content and spoke throughout all of their stations with one voice.
 
ruminator said:
It's not like there's one person at the top giving orders, but more like they're all driven not to alienate the owners/advertisers/stockholders.
If you follow the money, it goes back to the top.
Oligopoly.
 
Re: miles

Thumper said:
That is your opinion. You can offer no proof whatsoever that Gore would have or wouldn't have done this or that.

When I see actual job and wage gains that affect those around me I will believe the economy is improving. Increasing stock prices aren't a true indicator of economic health. Stock price is largeley based on speculation and opinion (of the buyer and seller)

How much time passed between the first WTC bombing and Sept 11th?

If Al Quaeda is anything it is patient.

Saying the actions in Afghanistan and Iraq have eliminated the terrorist threat is like standing on the street corner spraying flying pig repellent is effective because there are no flying pigs.

We may have disrupted some of their organization but we have also galvanized many more to their cause.

Fact: The economy is improving. Job gains are always the last phase of economic recovery.

Fact: There have been zero attacks on US soil since 9/11.

Fact: Gore has criticized Bush's economic plan as well as the war on terror. What's wrong with this picture?

You guys are eaten up with hating Bush and can't admit it.
 
miles said:
Let's see. If Al Gore had been elected:

Aside from Afghanistan there would have been no effort to eradicate the animals who are determined to kill Americans for no ther reason than to kill Americans. Gore would have done nothing. The torure chambers of Iraq would still be there. Children would still be mutilated. People would still be murdered.
Politcal correctness, not common sense, would be the order of the day.

The recession (which according to Clinton's own economic advisers actually started near the end of his administration) would have been fueled even more by liberal class envy, higher taxes, and Gore's milquetoast leadership skills.

I'm no fan of GWB. But one thing is for sure: Gore would have been an unmitigated disaster.

Your post is intellectually dishonest. Liberals hate the truth. If Bush is so stupid, why haven't there been more terrorist attacks on US soil and why is the economy recovering?

Your transparent hatred of Bush is almost laughable in its absurdity.


Sorry miles, but this is like arguing that you're happy you have dysentery because you could have gotten malaria. But you're not sure you would have gotten malaria.

Or even sick.
 
3 million jobs down.

We're miles <-- heheh away from anything resembling a recovery.

Bush is the first president in decades to have negative job growth. The very first.

Debunk that meathead.
 
Problem Child said:
Sorry miles, but this is like arguing that you're happy you have dysentery because you could have gotten malaria. But you're not sure you would have gotten malaria.

Or even sick.

That's great, but we aren't talking about malaria, are we?

Lavy's post was about all the horrible things Bush has done. It reeks of pure hate.

Liberal hate. Kind of oxymoronic, wouldn't you say?
 
Just one man's opinion here, and no accusations anywhere.

If everything else remained the same we have to remember that Lieberman is a neoconservative supporter. He has strong ties and is liked by many in both parties. With all of the corporate interest in politics, I think a lot of things wouldn't be completely different.

That's where the personal character of GWB and this administration really begin to carry the weight of their decisions.
 
Back
Top