The Presidents Speech

[amicus]

About forty years ago there was an anti Vietnam march around a park in Honolulu with several thousand people carrying signs and shouting slogans.

I managed to get my picture in the Honolulu Advertiser by being the only one marching in the opposite direction, carrying an American flag and a sign, 'Nuke Hanoi'.

By containing the Communists in North Korea and South Vietnam who were being supplied by the USSR and Communist China, the United States finally put an end to the global menace of International Communism.

The costs were high in both 'Police Actions' and those who lost sons and fathers, suffered the ultimate price and pain of defending freedom around the world.

I considered Jane Fonda and the left wing protestors as traitors to the cause of freedom.

I consider those same left-wingers who are anti war in the Middle East to be traitors also.

Global terrorism will be contained. Perhaps the people in the entire Persian Gulf region will one day enjoy the fruits of human liberty.

That will be the legacy of the Bush administration, even if he does say nucular instead of nuclear.


(selected excerpts)

"...The troops here and across the world are fighting a global war on terror. This war reached our shores on September 11, 2001. The terrorists who attacked us — and the terrorists we face — murder in the name of a totalitarian ideology that hates freedom, rejects tolerance, and despises all dissent. Their aim is to remake the Middle East in their own grim image of tyranny and oppression — by toppling governments, driving us out of the region, and exporting terror.

To achieve these aims, they have continued to kill — in Madrid, Istanbul, Jakarta, Casablanca, Riyadh, Bali, and elsewhere. The terrorists believe that free societies are essentially corrupt and decadent, and with a few hard blows they can force us to retreat. They are mistaken. After September 11, I made a commitment to the American people: This Nation will not wait to be attacked again. We will take the fight to the enemy. We will defend our freedom.

In January 2005, more than eight million Iraqi men and women voted in elections that were free and fair — and took place on time.

We continue our efforts to help them rebuild their country. Rebuilding a country after three decades of tyranny is hard — and rebuilding while at war is even harder. Our progress has been uneven — but progress is being made. We are improving roads, and schools, and health clinics … and working to improve basic services like sanitation, electricity, and water. And together with our allies, we will help the new Iraqi government deliver a better life for its citizens.

In the past year, the international community has stepped forward with vital assistance. Some thirty nations have troops in Iraq, and many others are contributing non-military assistance. The United Nations is in Iraq to help Iraqis write a constitution and conduct their next elections. Thus far, some 40 countries and three international organizations have pledged about 34 billion dollars in assistance for Iraqi reconstruction. More than 80 countries and international organizations recently came together in Brussels to coordinate their efforts to help Iraqis provide for their security and rebuild their country. And next month, donor countries will meet in Jordan to support Iraqi reconstruction. Whatever our differences in the past, the world understands that success in Iraq is critical to the security of all our nations. As German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder said at the White House yesterday, "There can be no question a stable and democratic Iraq is in the vested interest of not just Germany, but also Europe."

As Iraqis make progress toward a free society, the effects are being felt beyond Iraq's borders. Before our Coalition liberated Iraq, Libya was secretly pursuing nuclear weapons. Today the leader of Libya has given up his chemical and nuclear weapons programs. Across the broader Middle East, people are claiming their freedom. In the last few months, we have witnessed elections in the Palestinian Territories and Lebanon. These elections are inspiring democratic reformers in places like Egypt and Saudi Arabia. Our strategy to defend ourselves and spread freedom is working. The rise of freedom in this vital region will eliminate the conditions that feed radicalism and ideologies of murder — and make our Nation safer...."




I served eight years in the US Military and I have a son in law who is a Marine Sergeant.

I offer a public note of gratitude for the men and women serving this nation and to the Bush Administration for defending our freedoms and for liberating the people of Afghanistan and Iraq.

amicus

 

[LadyJeanne]

By containing the Communists in North Korea and South Vietnam who were being supplied by the USSR and Communist China, the United States finally put an end to the global menace of International Communism.

And here I thought it was Levi's, McDonald's, sattelite TV and films, and Perestroika that finally put an end to Communism. I stand corrected.

I considered Jane Fonda and the left wing protestors as traitors to the cause of freedom.

I consider those same left-wingers who are anti war in the Middle East to be traitors also.

Sorry, ami, the traitor label doesn't stick. The US Constitutions says those of who wish to express our beliefs and opinions are free to do so.

Global terrorism will be contained. Perhaps the people in the entire Persian Gulf region will one day enjoy the fruits of human liberty.

That will be the legacy of the Bush administration, even if he does say nucular instead of nuclear.

Along with the biggest deficit in the history of the United States which future generations will have to pay for and a distrust of our free and 'fair' election process and vote counting methodology.

 

[amicus]

This vote counting conspiracy created by the left is just the abject whining of liberals who just refuse to believe that the left wing political philosophy is bankrupt.

But thanks for reading and commenting...

amicus...

 

[Boota]

The vote counting issue is a big deal. The CEO of the Diebold company, who made the voting machines, guaranteed a Republican victory in every state they were used in. Then he laughed, as if he were joking. The appearance and evidence of impropriety abounds. Katherine Harris, in charge of the election in Florida in 2000, just happened to be the Bush/Cheney campaign director for the state. It seems a bit disingenuous, at best, to allow the head of one sides campaign to be in charge of the election. Everywhere that something like this was addressed there were massive irregularities. To me that doesn't sound like a conspiracy theory. It sounds like a crime. An investigation would be nice, but the people who would lead the investigation would be the ones the investigation sought to prove criminal acts against. It's like the police in my hometown trying to "solve" some of the crimes they themselves committed.

Now about the traitors...

Exercising our rights as free Americans is treasonous? How does that work? Someone disagrees with you and you consider that treason? That seems really un-American to me. It seems diametrically opposed to what this country was founded on. Liberal principles by liberal people. Liberal - liberty; I see a connection. Liberal is not a bad word no matter how many neo-cons say it is.

 

[Wildcard Ky]

I supported invading Iraq, and I still do. Saddam had to go, but that's another topic.

The right to protest is one of our most valuable rights. No one should ever be denied the right to protest, regardless of what their view is. That's part of living in a free country.

Jane Fonda had the right to do what she did. The people that still protest her actions back then have just as much right. She's reaped what she sowed. Personally I think she's an idiot, and I love it everytime someone mentions what she did. However, I would never want her right to do it taken away.

I don't consider simple protesting against the government to be treasonous. There are things about this government that I protest. Protest is healthy. It's part of the checks and balances of those in power. Because I don't like a certain aspect of what's going on doesn't mean I'm a traitor, disloyal or unpatriotic. Anyone that knows me would never call me any of those things. I've served and fought for this country, and would do it again.

Part of what I served for was to ensure things like freedom of speech would endure. Seeing people protest without fear lets me know that me and all of the other people that served have done our job. We protected our most precious right.

 

[CharleyH]

The costs were high in both 'Police Actions' and those who lost sons and fathers, suffered the ultimate price and pain of defending freedom around the world.

I considered Jane Fonda and the left wing protestors as traitors to the cause of freedom.

I consider those same left-wingers who are anti war in the Middle East to be traitors also.

Global terrorism will be contained. Perhaps the people in the entire Persian Gulf region will one day enjoy the fruits of human liberty.

That will be the legacy of the Bush administration, even if he does say nucular instead of nuclear.

Jane Fonda never needed to apologise. She represented freedom and friendship. Is freedom acclaimed by war? I doubt it. Terorism has been around a long - long time, and perhaps the US should stop doing it.

 

[amicus]

To those of you jumping up and down screaming the right to protest....


"About forty years ago there was an anti Vietnam march around a park in Honolulu with several thousand people carrying signs and shouting slogans.

I managed to get my picture in the Honolulu Advertiser by being the only one marching in the opposite direction, carrying an American flag and a sign, 'Nuke Hanoi'...."

I also paraded in front of city hall in Honolulu when 'Medicare' was passed in Congress....therefore I myself was a 'protestor'


"...I considered Jane Fonda and the left wing protestors as traitors to the cause of freedom...."

You will note the distinction between traitor to a nation and 'traitors to the cause of freedom...' One is a political thing, the other is a philosophical statement.

Boota....If you will recall, the 2000 Florida election underwent a recount, at the request, legal request of the Democrats. The recount was performed and Bush was still the winner.

The Democrats, still whining, took the issue to the activist, left wing, Supreme Court of Florida.

The 2004 election was the most intensely watched and observed of all elections, anywhere at any time. Democrats flew in lawyers by the bushel from all over the country, had paid poll watchers in every precinct and most of the liberal media eagle eyed for any inconsistencies.

Grow up! Face it! The damned democrats lost, fair and square, quit whining for crying out loud.

And yes, liberal, with a small l, is not a bad word, nor is 'gay' a bad word. But as I said before, both words have been kidnapped and are used to mean something other than the original definition.

Left wingers have abducted the word Liberal because it suits their purposes to pretend they still claim to abide by liberalism, which they do not. Modern left wing liberals are Herman Milquetoast socialists who simply do not have the intestinal fortitude to embrace out and out socialism in America.

Democrats cannot even present a party platform as it would clarify for one and all, that they have over the years sunk to a level of European social democracies, with emphasis on 'social'.


CharlieH....you said: "...Jane Fonda never needed to apologise. She represented freedom and friendship. Is freedom acclaimed by war? I doubt it. Terorism has been around a long - long time, and perhaps the US should stop doing it..."

That is your opinion and you are welcome to it. I listened to former prisoners of war in Vietnam state unequivocably that Fonda's visit, her criticism of America and the war, gave aid and comfort to the enemy.

Now you define that any way you wish.

And to accuse the United States of terrorism is ludicrous. And yes, freedom is accompanied by war, it is usually through war, such as the American Revolution, that produces freedom.

It still like to watch Fonda in Barbarella and I still enjoy the first album of Barbra Streisand, but I would not spend a single penny that would benefit either.

Howard Dean won't apologize either and even if he did he would still be an asshole.


Lady Jeanne....ah, the deficit...I am sure you are aware that nearly 60 percent of the Federal Budget goes to 'entitlements'? Those are the social welfare programs the left wing liberal democrats passed into law during their 40 year majorities in Congress.

Aside from the tremendous financial blow suffered from the terrorist attack on American soil, the US economy has recovered and is stronger than ever.

As you well know and criticize regularly, Republicans are tradionally conservative in federal spending and Bush, like Reagan before him, reduced the tax burden on the American people.

You may get off on it if the United States is attacked again, we prefer to fight you fuckers on foreign soil and not here.

amicus...


__________________

 

[LadyJeanne]

Lady Jeanne....ah, the deficit...I am sure you are aware that nearly 60 percent of the Federal Budget goes to 'entitlements'? Those are the social welfare programs the left wing liberal democrats passed into law during their 40 year majorities in Congress.

Aside from the tremendous financial blow suffered from the terrorist attack on American soil, the US economy has recovered and is stronger than ever.

As you well know and criticize regularly, Republicans are tradionally conservative in federal spending and Bush, like Reagan before him, reduced the tax burden on the American people.

You may get off on it if the United States is attacked again, we prefer to fight you fuckers on foreign soil and not here.

amicus...

I am aware of the entitlements. That's not why we have this astonishing deficit. That would be the result of the tax cuts you are so proud of, plus the spending on the wars.

And I see that you've bought into the 'fight terrorists there rather than here' spiel. I don't see why another 9/11 couldn't happen today. Osama and friends are still living free and easy. The 9/11 terrorists were primarily Saudi, and Bush & Co. have no intention of going after them. We're no safer and a lot poorer.

 

[Halo_n_horns]

If Bush were killing our men and women over there for any truer reason than money and oil, and oil and money, this thread could be taken pretty seriously. Sadly, he's not doing this for any other reason. Not sincerely anyway.

They have to get their constitution in place so that Bush/Cheney-connected capitalism can become a regular fixture of the middle east. Our men and women are dying for the benefit of pocketbooks and little else.

The sooner BTB (Bible-Thumping-Bush) is out of office, the better ... depending, of course, on who is up for the next election. We could always go from bad to worse.

 

[CharleyH]

CharlieH....you said: "...Jane Fonda never needed to apologise. She represented freedom and friendship. Is freedom acclaimed by war? I doubt it. Terorism has been around a long - long time, and perhaps the US should stop doing it..."

That is your opinion and you are welcome to it. I listened to former prisoners of war in Vietnam state unequivocably that Fonda's visit, her criticism of America and the war, gave aid and comfort to the enemy.

Now you define that any way you wish.

We talk of freedoms, Amicus. If Fonda cannot be who she is as an American than the constitution fails for everyone. Its the same argument always. For and against. I am willing to BET Fonda was not there SPITTING in the soldiers when they returned, like the American public. I am willing to bet she understood much more.

Former POWs? Shall we talk American POWs? Shall we talk Abu, or even WW2?

Are you not all going to a state of prisoner now, and under the guise of 911? It is is so obvious to me, and apparently the world. Your "Pride in a country", mentality is not unlike Germany in the 40's. You allow it to happen slowly, incrimentally? As is is in recent laws, regulaitions and legislations developing in that vain. Are you so blind not to see you are prisoners of your own philosophies and constitutions because of false pride and hope in your country?

Eerily familiar, Amicus. Is that who you are?

 

[Wildcard Ky]

The sooner BTB (Bible-Thumping-Bush) is out of office, the better ... depending, of course, on who is up for the next election. We could always go from bad to worse.

You got that right. Bush is by no means a good president, but it could be a helluva lot worse. 08 should be the most interesting election of my lifetime.

 

[CharleyH]

You got that right. Bush is by no means a good president, but it could be a helluva lot worse.

When in history?

 

[Wildcard Ky]

When in history?

Jimmy Carter. Economy, embargoes, inflation, the list goes on. He couldn't handle 52 hostages being taken effectively. Can you imagine him trying to handle Terrorists, Somalia, Yugoslavia and what to do after 9-11?

 

[CharleyH]

Jimmy Carter. Economy, embargoes, inflation, the list goes on. He couldn't handle 52 hostages being taken effectively. Can you imagine him trying to handle Terrorists, Somalia, Yugoslavia and what to do after 9-11?

I hardly recall him doing damage to the US, like Bush does now. The canucks helped. And Billy Beer with peanuts does not make me think anything more than a bar Bush is much more scary. At least Carter could pull the press agents words and articulate them semi-intelligently.

 

[LadyJeanne]

I hardly recall him doing damage to the US, like Bush does now. The canucks helped. And Billy Beer with peanuts does not make me think anything more than a bar Bush is much more scary. At least Carter could pull the press agents words and articulate them semi-intelligently.

And as I recall, there was a whole Reagan, hostages, arms sales to Iran (proceeds which were diverted to the Nicaraguan Contras) deal in the works that delayed the release of the hostages until the day Reagan took office...

 

[amicus]

Actually, Bush got better grades in college than Kerry did. Perhaps he mispronounces nuclear on purpose just to piss off the pointy headed liberals?

Oh, that fellow who wants to use eminent domain on Judge Souter, defined liberals as those who are against liberty; rather fitting doncha think?

lovable amicus....

 

[Guest]

I served eight years in the US Military and I have a son in law who is a Marine Sergeant.

I offer a public note of gratitude for the men and women serving this nation and to the Bush Administration for defending our freedoms and for liberating the people of Afghanistan and Iraq.

As do I.

I'm an Air Force brat; my dad retired after 22 years, my brother put in 10 as a survival trainer.

But that was then.

Today, military recruitment is down and troop morale is heartwrenchingly low.

Did you see the faces of those young men last evening? Sad and oh-so-quiet.

Oh, I know today that Steve Doocy and David Frum, Bush speechwriters, are attempting to put the spin on matters - what did they say? They agreed that the "lack of applause during the speech at Fort Bragg was arranged in advance to create a solemn atmosphere. And that it worked for the president."

Baloney.

Only one bit of applause during the entire speech? The news stations were warning everyone beforehand that the speech would go long because of the applause breaks. This "solemn" nonsense was a surprise to everyone.

And if it was true, it was a bad idea. Bush needed a cheering throng, not sad boys in uniform.

And they looked pretty miserable to me.

Bless them. I hope many more don't have to die.

 

[amicus]

I think perhaps your recollection is in error. The hostages were released the day Reagan was first inaugurated. They were released because they knew the the Reagan administration would come after the hostages using whatever force was necessary.

Carter was and is, a pussy.


amicus...you are what you eat...ahem....

 

[CharleyH]

Actually, Bush got better grades in college than Kerry did. Perhaps he mispronounces nuclear on purpose just to piss off the pointy headed liberals?

Oh, that fellow who wants to use eminent domain on Judge Souter, defined liberals as those who are against liberty; rather fitting doncha think?

lovable amicus....

Bush was a Skull He had to to get elected You are lazy tonight

 

[amicus]

Sweetsubsarah...yes the lack of applause surprised me also.

Only Army quota's were below target the past four months, but for June they exceed the target level. All the other services met their quota's.

If the terrorists and insurgents would just stop fighting, we would lose no more lives. If Iraq had not invaded Kuwait, we would not have been there then.

If there were no 9/11, we would not be in Iraq today. I think it is shortsighted to place the cause of the war on terrorism on our shoulders, we did not start it.

It is a magnificent quest the United States has taken to seek out terrorists all over the world and attempt to leave democracies in the wake of the aftermath.

It may be a hundred year war, but then Rome was not built in a day.


amicus...

 

[Guest]

Sweetsubsarah...yes the lack of applause surprised me also.

Only Army quota's were below target the past four months, but for June they exceed the target level. All the other services met their quota's.

If the terrorists and insurgents would just stop fighting, we would lose no more lives. If Iraq had not invaded Kuwait, we would not have been there then.

If there were no 9/11, we would not be in Iraq today. I think it is shortsighted to place the cause of the war on terrorism on our shoulders, we did not start it.

It is a magnificent quest the United States has taken to seek out terrorists all over the world and attempt to leave democracies in the wake of the aftermath.

It may be a hundred year war, but then Rome was not built in a day.

amicus...

We cannot build it ourselves, and we cannot build it without a plan.

Otherwise we continue to sentence many more young men and women to senseless deaths.

 

[LadyJeanne]

I think perhaps your recollection is in error. The hostages were released the day Reagan was first inaugurated. They were released because they knew the the Reagan administration would come after the hostages using whatever force was necessary.

Carter was and is, a pussy.


amicus...you are what you eat...ahem....

Rewriting history now, are you?

The hostages were released the day Reagan took office. 20 minutes after he was inaugurated. Iran had influence with the Lebanese. They used that influence in exchange for US weapons which they needed for their war with Iraq. We sold those arms and diverted the money to fund the Contras.

Just because Carter didn't orchestrate such a deal doesn't mean he's a pussy.

 

[CharleyH]

Actually, Bush got better grades in college than Kerry did. Perhaps he mispronounces nuclear on purpose just to piss off the pointy headed liberals?

Oh, that fellow who wants to use eminent domain on Judge Souter, defined liberals as those who are against liberty; rather fitting doncha think?

lovable amicus....

He had help, its a PR move, and you are getting stupid, Say SOMEthing I can attack

 

[Pure]

Dreams of Amicus and Rush

Am: It is a magnificent quest the United States has taken to seek out terrorists all over the world and attempt to leave democracies in the wake of the aftermath.

I was unaware of such a quest. Did I miss something in this morning's paper? the new Bush speech?

Amicus has trouble with words vs. reality, for there is certainly (mostly Republican) TALK of such a quest.

Any successes to date in this 'magnificent quest'? (assuming for the moment that it exists). Please cite evidence.

 

[Pure]

Fantasies, facts.

Ami can generate more fantasy in one typing session than an army of fact finders can counter. But, here is one case (I can't get more recent figures). I'm sure the June figure will appear shortly, if Cheney/Rumsfeld see fit to release them

Am: Only Army quota's were below target the past four months, but for June they exceed the target level. All the other services met their quota's.[sic]

http://fairborndailyherald.1upsoftware.com/main.asp?SectionID=2&SubSectionID=4&ArticleID=115954

Fairborn, Ohio-- Fairborn Daily Herald


Thursday, June 09, 2005

US Army misses recruiting quotas


By ROBERT BURNS



WASHINGTON – The Army appears likely to fall short of its full-year recruiting goal for the first time since 1999, raising longer-term questions about a military embroiled in its first protracted wars since switching from the draft to a volunteer force 32 years ago.

Many young people and their parents have grown more wary of Army service because of the likelihood of being dispatched on combat tours to Iraq or Afghanistan, opinion polls show. U.S. troops are dying at a rate of two a day in Iraq, more than two years after President Bush declared that major combat operations had ended.

The Army says today's economy offers attractive alternatives to many high school and college graduates.

The recruiting statistics appear to bear that out. Officials said Wednesday that although the Army will not release its numbers until Friday, it fell about 25 percent short of its target of signing up 6,700 recruits in May. The gap would have been even wider but for the fact that the target was lowered by 1,350.

The Army said it lowered the May target to "adjust for changing market conditions," knowing that the difference will have to be made up in the months ahead.

The Army also missed its monthly targets in April, March and February _ each month worse than the one before. In February it fell 27 percent short; in March the gap was 31 percent, and in April it was 42 percent.

"It's like having a persistent drought," said Daniel Goure, a military analyst at the private Lexington Institute. "At some point when you have drought conditions you have to institute water rationing, and that's what you potentially face in the military if it goes on long enough. You would get to a stage where you don't have enough people to staff your organizations."

Prior to February, the last time the Army had missed a monthly recruiting goal was May 2000.

The Army National Guard and Army Reserve are even farther behind in recruiting this year.

The shortfalls have led to speculation that the government might be forced to reinstitute the draft. There is little support for that in Congress, and Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld has ruled it out, saying the all-volunteer force has proven the wisdom of discontinuing the draft in 1973.

Lt. Col. Bryan Hilferty, spokesman for the Army's chief of personnel, said in an interview that despite the recent setbacks the Army remains cautiously optimistic that it will make up the lost ground this summer _ traditionally the most fruitful period of the year for recruiters _ and reach the full-year goal of 80,000 enlistees.

"One number matters: 80,000," Hilferty said. "The Army's fiscal 2005 goal was, is and remains 80,000 recruits."

Others, speaking privately, said the official optimism is sagging rapidly. They note that with only four months left in the budget year, the Army is at barely 50 percent of its goal. Recruiters would have to land more than 9,760 young men and women a month, on average, to reach the 80,000 target by the end of September.

In other words, they would have to far exceed their official targets, which range from 5,650 to 9,250 a month.

With the summer recruiting season in mind, the Army has added hundreds of extra recruiters, raised the enlistment bonus for four-year commitments to $20,000, and targeted more advertising at parents. Hilferty says the extra recruiters are being counted on to produce big results between now and September.

"They're better now than they were last month," he said. "Experience counts."

Goure said the prospect of reaching 80,000 is grim.

"I don't see them making it," he said.

If the slump ended next year the impact might not be great. But if it continues, as many expect, the consequences could be large.

The problem, if it lasts, would be particularly acute for the Army because it is in the midst of a major expansion of its ranks _ from about 482,000 soldiers in the active force to 512,000 _ in order to complete a top-to-bottom redesign of its 10 combat divisions. That redesign is central to the Army's "transformation" plan to become more agile and mobile _ and to have more units available for duty in Iraq.

The Marine Corps also has missed monthly recruiting targets lately, but only by small margins. The Air Force and the Navy, in contrast, are easily meeting their goals, in part because they play much smaller and less publicized roles in Iraq and Afghanistan. The Navy is actually trying to shed thousands from its ranks.

Beyond the statistical comparisons, the military as a whole may be entering a period in which new approaches are needed to fill its ranks.

Charles Moskos, a sociology professor and expert on military personnel issues at Northwestern University, has said the Army's recruiting woes are likely to persist until the children of upper-class America begin to enlist more readily. He also sees a possibility of the services relying more on non-Americans to sign up.

Moskos said in an interview Wednesday that of the 750 males in his graduating class at Princeton University in 1956, more than 400 went on to serve in the military. Of the 1,100 males and females in last year's Princeton class, eight joined.

"That's the difference," he said.