Bush's Farewell Fabrication

Wow, it turns out that George Bush was a really great president.

"America is safer."

Freedom is on the march.

"Decisive measures" have been taken "to safeguard our economy."

Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts, Associate Justice Samuel Alito, and the more than one-third of all active Federal judges he appointed, are models of judicial integrity.

Schools are better, even the ones that got whacked by Hurricane Katrina.

Drug addicts and alcoholics are being saved.

Faith-based programs are working.

"Good and evil are present in this world" and his policies were good while the victims of those policies were evil.

Who says?

Er, George Bush.

The soon-to-be (but not soon enough) former president devoted his final address to the country to telling the people that the vast majority of them were wrong.

Three quarters of Americans may disapprove of how he led the United States. But Bush said in his 13-minute address to the nation that he did just fine.

Predictably, Bush focused on the events of his first year in the White House. Or, to be more precise, on the events of one day: September 11, 2001.

"This evening, my thoughts return to the first night I addressed you from this house--September 11, 2001," the president began.

Reading the talking points of the Bush Legacy Project, which is being managed by former White House political czar, the outgoing president reprised the Orwellian themes of his tenure: freedom promoted at the point of a gun, occupations framed as "liberations," fearmongering and a cowboy's claim of victory in a "war on terror" that still has no direction, no endgame, no capture of Osama bin Laden.

"I vowed to do everything in my power to keep us safe," announced Bush, before proceeding once more to make a link that never existed between 9/11, national security and the attack on Iraq.

"Over the past seven years, a new Department of Homeland Security has been created. The military, the intelligence community, and the FBI have been transformed. Our Nation is equipped with new tools to monitor the terrorists' movements, freeze their finances, and break up their plots," the president chirped. "And with strong allies at our side, we have taken the fight to the terrorists and those who support them. Afghanistan has gone from a nation where the Taliban harbored al Qaeda and stoned women in the streets to a young democracy that is fighting terror and encouraging girls to go to school. Iraq has gone from a brutal dictatorship and a sworn enemy of America to an Arab democracy at the heart of the Middle East and a friend of the United States."

Dishonest to the finish, Bush ended his presidency as it began: with a lie.

The man who lost the 2000 election to Al Gore by more than 500,000 votes and then, boosted by the Supreme Court, staked his dubious claim on the Oval Office left his country weaker, poorer and more dysfunctional than he found it.

But if the country changed, George Bush did not.

The president's farewell address revealed him to be the man he had always been: An unprepared son of privilege unduly confident about ill-conceived decisions, and unapologetic about their consequences.

That said, Bush did include an applause line.

It went like this: "And so, my fellow Americans, for the final time: Good night."

Comments (155)

1. May the Nation say good night to him too. Let's move onto a new administration, one that even if it is merely mediocre will be infinitely better than the one led by the worst president in history.

   Posted by urmygyro at 01/15/2009 @ 9:20pm

2. Bring on the Special Prosecutor.

   Posted by b_kool_66 at 01/15/2009 @ 9:21pm

3. He's got to (A) begin the history revisionism...

   and (B) throw some red meat to the 28% Club.

   Posted by Mask at 01/15/2009 @ 9:22pm

4. Good riddance to this piece of human garbage.

   May he and all of his lackeys simultaneously commit suicide Jim Jones style.

   Also, I'll wager $50 all the talk of special prosecutors will end up meaning nothing. These people are as likely to pay for their wrongdoings as any other outgoing administration.

   Posted by TexasFlood at 01/15/2009 @ 9:32pm

5. Instead of flinging shoes at him when he leaves DC we should use pretzels, they may have a better chance at getting rid of him once and for all, and he couldn't possible misunderstand, or misunderestimate, the intentions!

   For Cheney, we could just leave a shotgun and a few lawyers around. He'll know what to do. There would be no witnesses! None willing to speak anyway.

   Posted by squidboy6 at 01/15/2009 @ 9:45pm

6. TexasFlood - that's my point when I keep posting asking the nation to move on from W. It's all sound and fury signifying nothing - and giving Bush more time in the spot light. No need for that.

   Posted by urmygyro at 01/15/2009 @ 9:46pm

7. Are we actually finished with hearing about Democracy and Freedom, God, I have been so sick of hearing that for the past 8 years? He is still in denial and thinks he has done 'one heck of a job brownie" in his administration, the man is totally delusional and obviously on another planet from most of us. Adios George, not sorry to see you go.

   Posted by Caj at 01/15/2009 @ 9:47pm

8. succeeded wildly on national security?

   that's not even close to reality. 9/11 happened during his watch.

   the world trade center was attacked at the beginning of clinton's first term. no other foreign terrorists attacked our soil during his administration.

   what, W. didn't have the heads up from '93 that middle easteners wanted to attack the u.s.?

   Posted by urmygyro at 01/15/2009 @ 9:49pm

9. My father would have called him a horse's ass. Goodby, W, and good riddance. Bring on that Special Prosecutor!

   Posted by mimsky at 01/15/2009 @ 9:52pm

10. A POTUS's Number 1, 2 & 3 Job is the security of this country....with `Stimulus' pretty far down in my book. Posted by HAPPYLonghorn at 01/15/2009 @ 9:43pm | ignore this person | warn this person

    ---------------

    Sure we all want the government to keep us safe, but if you consult the Constitution, the President's number 1 job is to defend and uphold the Constitution. It's part of the President's oath. There's nothing stated about the prez maintaining the security of this country.

    Just saying....

    Posted by Citizen54 at 01/15/2009 @ 9:57pm

11. American presidents customarily lie to the nation in their State of Union addresses and farewell speeches; however, Bush's farewell speech tonight has set a record.

    Here is a man who reached the presidency despite losing the popular vote, thanks to his brother and his ideologue friends in the Supreme Court. His arrogance and lack of intellect have contributed to the darkest periods of this nation's history. His war on Iraq was based on premeditated lies and calculated deception. His disregard for the principles of the Constitution of the United States has eroded our civil liberty. His mishandling of Hurricane Katrina has clearly exposed the depth of his hypocrisy and undermined the credibility of his so-called war on terror. His foreign policy alienated America's friends and emboldened its foes. His disastrous economic policies have raised the specter of a great depression and hurt millions. A man with such load of misdeeds should have been impeached and put behind bars long time ago. Yet, he dared look us in eyes tonight and boldly lies to us about the debt of gratitude we and America owe him. If Bush does not Pardon himself and his criminal friends, and I think he will, a warrant for his arrest should be issued at 12.01 PM on January 20. He should be arrested, and forget about all his high crimes and misdemeanors, for shamelessly lying to us tonight.

    Posted by CripThink at 01/15/2009 @ 9:57pm

12. FLING THE SHOES!

    Posted by frosty zoom at 01/15/2009 @ 9:58pm

13. Also, I'll wager $50 all the talk of special prosecutors will end up meaning nothing.

    ~Stevie Ray

    For one thing, a Special Prosecutor doesn't automatically mean that Dubya and Dick are in the star chamber per se --although that's what should happen if justice were served of course.

    But in the chiseled words of Chalmers Johnson in reference to Pelosi a couple of years back, "If impeachment is off the table, then so is the Republic".

    Those are the stakes if justice is not pursued in the case of torture and warrantless wiretaps. If our new "Constitutional scholar" POTUS decides to duck the big one, we can pretty much collectively take it in the posterior region so to speak.

    If I were in Vegas attempting to place a bet on what Obama's going to do I'd have to hold my money. I can't bet on a bad outcome to make a short term profit --one good reason to avoid working as a Wall Street slut.

    So let's just hope Barack has some audacity in him.

    Why am I not feeling encouraged?

    Posted by b_kool_66 at 01/15/2009 @ 10:01pm

14. John Nichols says:

    ==============

    Wow, it turns out that George Bush was a really great president.

    "America is safer."

    Freedom is one the march.

    "Decisive measures" have been taken "to safeguard our economy."

    Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts, Associate Justice Samuel Alito, and the more than one-third of all active Federal judges he appointed, are models of judicial integrity.

    Schools are better, even the ones that got whacked by Hurricane Katrina.

    Drug addicts and alcoholics are being saved.

    Faith-based programs are working.

    "Good and evil are present in this world" and his policies were good while the victims of those policies were evil.

    ============

    Up to that point, Mr. Nichols' commentary is pretty good - he was trying to be sarcastic but wound up posting the truth. But then Mr. Nichols starts cranking up the lib spin machine.

    He asks next " Who says? Er, George Bush.

    Don't forget - me too, Mr. Nichols.

    Mr. Nichols then says "The soon-to-be former president devoted his final address to the country to telling the people that the vast majority of them were wrong. "

    This is true, for sure on The Nation website. On this, what Mr. Nichols says is Mr. Nichols' take on it, because President Bush is too polite to tell somebody they are wrong, even when they are.

    Posted by sjchermak at 01/15/2009 @ 10:06pm

15. The best way to get beyond the terrible presidency of GWB is for the Obama administration to break with and where possible reverse GWB's policies. Yet, what is Obama planning to do in regard to Afghanistan, Iraq, Palestine/Israel, the Patriot Act, FISA, military spending, illegal immigration, NAFTA, Wall Street criminals, multi-billion dollar bailouts, and so forth? Basically carrying on the disastrous, unjust policies of Bush, albeit with a hint of "change" at the margins--just enough "change" to make the peanut gallery swoon but not enough to make a real "difference" or to usher in any genuine "justice" or "morality."

    Posted by feinfein at 01/15/2009 @ 10:15pm

16. i refused to trash my brain by watching it. i played a video game. i won!!!

    Posted by ibbleblibble at 01/15/2009 @ 10:16pm

17. I am grateful....we have prospered, even factoring the stock drops of these past 7 months! Posted by HAPPYLonghorn at 01/15/2009 @ 10:07pm

    HAPPYLonghorn,

    Let me take a crack at how you prospered under Bush; working with Bernie Maddoff.

    Posted by CripThink at 01/15/2009 @ 10:21pm

18. Posted by sjchermak at 01/15/2009 @ 10:06pm

    And 28% of America agrees with you.

    Congrats.

    Posted by Mask at 01/15/2009 @ 10:22pm

19. "A POTUS's Number 1, 2 & 3 Job is the security of this country....with `Stimulus' pretty far down in my book. Bush 43's presidency is forever linked to 9/11 and, knocking on wood here, IF he leaves office w/no further attacks, he will have succeed wildly."

    Hmmm...I missed that job description in the Constitution. You should read it sometime.

    No further attacks? Jesus H. Christ, what type of person is happy about that? How about "no attacks." That would be nice. Or is this one of those alternate realities where George W. Bush became President on September 12, 2001.

    Posted by onthehelm at 01/15/2009 @ 10:25pm

20. Bring on the Special Prosecutor. Posted by b_kool_66 at 01/15/2009 @ 9:21pm

    Yes.

    But that would entail genuine change in substance, while Obama has said & signaled that's not about to happen.

    We'll have to be satisfied, so the message is, with the change in style/demeanor. Congratulate ourselves for having at least that much, and move on with pretty much the same substance at home & abroad.

    Perpetual war. The imperial project. And all the "sacrifices" this requires at home.

    Posted by sloper at 01/15/2009 @ 10:30pm

21. Posted by feinfein at 01/15/2009 @ 10:15pm | ignore this person | warn this person

    and how long has this Obama been in power?

    Posted by emile duBois at 01/15/2009 @ 10:34pm

22. HappyLonghorn,

    You must be the lonely soul in praising the crook Madoff; the settlement-building fund of your Israeli friends was cleaned out by Bernie.

    Posted by CripThink at 01/15/2009 @ 10:35pm

23. I am grateful....we have prospered, even factoring the stock drops of these past 7 months! Posted by HAPPYLonghorn at 01/15/2009 @ 10:07pm

    this guy is a delusional wannabe. he is not a captain of finance.the merde has hit the fan and he's covered in shit.

    Posted by emile duBois at 01/15/2009 @ 10:47pm

24. Posted by emile duBois at 01/15/2009 @ 10:47pm

    Essentially right. HAPP's fortunes (political and portfolio) have taken a monstrous hit.

    Likely just another day trader, he bet the farm of Jim Glassman's "Dow 36,000" and all the "5 chickens in every pot, 2 Humvees in every garage" happy talk from the Right-wing Radio guys, as well as the pre-2006 Karl Rove talk of "permanent majorities" and "Nobody will ever elect a black guy AND a liberal President"...and lost his shirt on both.

    Now, picking up the pieces of both a devastated ideological as well as financial holding....he's floundering around, half-heartedly regurgitating Limbaugh talking points (atleast SJCHER puts some energy into it) and desperating trying to rationalize how it's "GOT to be the Democrats' fault...just GOT to be!"

    Posted by Mask at 01/15/2009 @ 11:02pm

25. Posted by sloper at 01/15/2009 @ 10:30pm

    Actually more irritating and useless is THIS guy.

    Whining "Han Solo" is replacing "Darth Vader" and not "Yoda" after the fall of the Galactic Empire.

    Obama could solve world peace and cure AIDS and the Right says "He only did it to stop the War on Terror and help his fag friends!"....while sloper would just say "Not good enough!" Which is worse.

    Posted by Mask at 01/15/2009 @ 11:06pm

26. He wasn't perfect by any means. He had a tough job and made a lot of mistakes. Of course, his critics and pundits have bitter angry words for this president because he chose to fight and not run. He wasn't into negotiating away the sovereignty of this nation to a bunch hacks. And he didn't take the path of least resistence like weaker men would have done.

    I wish him a long, full and prosperous life after he leaves the WH.

    Posted by ACook at 01/15/2009 @ 11:07pm

27. I wish him a long, full and prosperous life after he leaves the WH.

    Posted by ACook at 01/15/2009 @ 11:07pm

    while forgiveness is a noble sentiment,

    i fear mr. karma might have his eyes on mr. bush.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 01/15/2009 @ 11:34pm

28. I wish him a long, full and prosperous life after he leaves the WH. Posted by ACook at 01/15/2009 @ 11:07pm

    ACook,

    You must still have A job!

    Posted by CripThink at 01/15/2009 @ 11:41pm

29. The worst thing Bush did was spend like a bunch of democrats and in the process helped kill off any conservatives in govt. The second failure was not establishing an American Border.

    He did a great job keeping us from being attacked again and he did decimate AQ. He is responsible for ruining the free market system by not challenging Frank and the congress when they forced the system I make bad loans.

    I remember when he was vilified for making his oil buddies get rich , but I guess that does hold up either, especially at today oil prices.

    History will treat Bush better than most think but his economic swing to the left will hurt him. It ushered in the socialists and the big spender crowd.

    I believe ATLAS SHRUGGED is here.

    Posted by YourJomamma at 01/16/2009 @ 12:15am

30. Sounded like the sociopath that he is.

    Posted by masussman at 01/16/2009 @ 12:19am

31. Watching the speech provides a strong sense that a C average guy got caught in an incredibly tough job he was not suited for. His intimations of self pity might move one to empathy had he not made such an ugly mess. In our impoverished and disempowered state, I guess karmic retribution is all we can hope for. Sure looking forward to January 20th...

    Posted by forbesfam at 01/16/2009 @ 12:29am

32. Is it Tuesday January 20 yet? I can't wait for a leader and president that can deal with reality. We've had 3 decades of Republican utopian fantasy land and it has been more like a nightmare for the majority of us. All I can say to "W" is good riddance and don't let the shoe or the door hit you on the way out.

    Posted by lltrix at 01/16/2009 @ 12:47am

33. here's david corn's list of things bush forgot to mention:

    * Climate change * China * Russia * North Korea * Iran * Pakistan * Osama bin Laden * Nuclear weapons * Poverty * Health insurance * Foreclosures * Housing * Guantanamo * National debt * Budget deficit * Trade deficit * Wall Street * Financial regulation * Dow Jones * Retirement security * Social Security * Medicaid * Energy * Immigration * Automobile industry * Housing * Subprime credit * Wages * Jobs * FEMA

    Posted by frosty zoom at 01/16/2009 @ 12:48am

34. 4 DAYS 11 Hrs 6 Min 58.1 Sec

    Posted by frosty zoom at 01/16/2009 @ 12:53am

35. What a self-serving load of poop. If he was so great, why all the speeches trying to prop up his reputation.

    "America is safer."

    What about Americans....

    4,200+ Americans that W sent to their deaths in Iraq.

    Also, do not overlook the 3,000+ that died on 9/11/01. Somehow, Bush doesn't consider this his failure.

    What about the citizens of New Orleans who died in the street waiting for help. CNN got people there but the Govt. couldn't.

    And then there's the "No attacks since 9/11 bullsh*t...

    There have been a number of massacres in these United States in the past 8 years....Va Tech students, Amish schoolchildren, Christmas Eve party attacked by Santa with guns etc...multitudes of Americans are dead from violence.

    Don't forget the millions of Americans who are endangered because they can't afford to go to the doctor. And the millions more joining their ranks because of unemployment.

    What about the safety of American's retirment savings. Plus, don't forget, Bush wanted to put Social Security accounts into the market as well.

    History will view W favorably... What a Goddamn joke

    Posted by koroviev at 01/16/2009 @ 01:15am

36. Why did not Bush know what would happen to our economy?Bill O'Rielly asks this question.Bush must have known that home price gains were unsustainable,but he probably hoped prices would be fairly stable until MacCain won and he enabled that goal.Just as he hoped WMD would exist in Iraq.Too much risk taking.Hundreds of thousands of poor loans were granted in 2007 and 2008.Store front mortgage scammers were busy.Fannie and Freddie have one half the default rates compared to private label loans.

    Posted by worker-bee at 01/16/2009 @ 02:50am

37. Majority of the defaults were on loans made by private banks that weren't subject to the CRA.

    Posted by koroviev at 01/16/2009 @ 04:12am

38. I actually watched 13 minutes of gut wrenching B.S. that made me want to puke. I tossed all the soft shoes I could find at the tube. But I had to watch it. Because I have been waiting for it for 8 years. I even sang the "Witch is Dead" from the Wizard of OZ.

    But it is no time for celebration. That will have to wait in my hope that this criminal administration will be prosecuted. I may be waiting for a long time.. For now it's just "Good Riddance" you bastard. May you rot in Hell!

    Posted by chaoszen at 01/16/2009 @ 04:24am

39. Posted by comanchenation at 01/16/2009 @ 03:20am

    To be honest, I wouldn't even know where to start with that moronic post. And I would be wasting my time if I did. I'm just glad people like you are marginalized, meaningless and irrelevant at this point. If I believed in some fairy tale omniscient God, I would thank him/her/it for that.

    Posted by chaoszen at 01/16/2009 @ 04:38am

40. "They don't like me anymore, Dick. And they didn't believe a thing I said", said the soon to be ex-president George Bush. He sighed deeply, then took a long swig out of a can of Lone Star beer.

    "They never liked you at ANY point," said Cheney, "and, as for me, I never liked you even when we were friends." He laughed. "But those bloggers at the Nation, some of those guys could be your new base! You've got a future with them! they believe EVERYTHING you say. You could go into the 'Whack -a-Mole' business, just like you wanted, and they'd follow you around like stink on..."

    "DICK! Dammit, I'm serious. I didn't mean to lead this country into the crapper, but that's just where it is. And I'm gonna spend the rest of my goddamn life blaming it on Obama and Clinton, you just watch! Now where are my pretzels? Laura! Bring the phone. I'll bet that Comanche-what-his name dude would be the perfect Whack -a-Mole guy! We need to tell him to bring his own shovel! Just to deal with all the crap he keeps spouting!" They both laughed.

    Posted by ficheye at 01/16/2009 @ 04:54am

41. Posted by ficheye at 01/16/2009 @ 04:54am

    ROFLMAO!

    Posted by chaoszen at 01/16/2009 @ 05:38am

42. Interesting. You state "Dishonest to the finish, Bush ended his presidency as it began: with a lie."

    Then you state "The man who lost the 2000 election to Al Gore by more than 500,000 votes . . . " which is a lie.

    Same old tired argument proven wrong again and again; just check all of the articles written about every recount possible, all showing Bush winning.

    Not much credibility can be given to someone who bases their writings on simple ignorance of the facts.

    Posted by Biggeorge at 01/16/2009 @ 08:25am

43. He had a tough job and made a lot of mistakes. Of course, his critics and pundits have bitter angry words for this president because he chose to fight and not run. He wasn't into negotiating away the sovereignty of this nation to a bunch hacks. And he didn't take the path of least resistence like weaker men would have done.

    I wish him a long, full and prosperous life after he leaves the WH.

    Posted by ACook at 01/15/2009 @ 11:07pm |

    ok, annie, lets break this down...

    1. "He wasn't perfect by any means."

    most definately...

    2. "Of course, his critics and pundits have bitter angry words for this president because he chose to fight and not run."

    not really. its where and how he chose to fight, like in a country that did not attack us and half ass in the one that kind of did attack us... no argument here...

    3. "He wasn't into negotiating away the sovereignty of this nation to a bunch hacks."

    wasn't really into much negotiating at all. negotiating is hard and subtle. his head is hard, but not very subtle. who would these hacks have been? his appointees?

    4. "And he didn't take the path of least resistence like weaker men would have done."

    no, he consistently chose to reach around his head to pick his noe and consistantly failed in the effort. substitute "smarter" or "wiser" for "weaker" and we approach the truth (the closest HE ever came in so many areas to the concept)...

    Posted by ibbleblibble at 01/16/2009 @ 08:29am

44. can we have our country back now?

    Posted by emile duBois at 01/16/2009 @ 08:50am

45. Posted by Biggeorge at 01/16/2009 @ 08:25am

    So you'd have no problem if Mr Nichols had said "The man who lost the 2000 election popular vote to Al Gore by more than 500,000 votes", right?

    Posted by Mask at 01/16/2009 @ 08:58am

46. And then there's the "No attacks since 9/11 bullsh*t...

    There have been a number of massacres in these United States in the past 8 years....Va Tech students, Amish schoolchildren, Christmas Eve party attacked by Santa with guns etc...multitudes of Americans are dead from violence.

    Posted by koroviev at 01/16/2009 @ 01:15am

    THANK YOU!

    i keep trying to tell these folks that the real danger comes from within, from a nihilistic jihad launched by a combination of easy weapons and violence as "entertainment".

    13,000 murders a year and we worry about people in caves.......

    Posted by frosty zoom at 01/16/2009 @ 10:02am

47. not launched, "facilitated".

    anyhoo,

    4 DAYS 1 Hr 56 Min 13.0 Sec

    Posted by frosty zoom at 01/16/2009 @ 10:04am

48. can we have our country back now?

    Posted by emile duBois at 01/16/2009 @ 08:50am

    i really don't think it has ever been yours.

    it belongs to a "select" few......

    Posted by frosty zoom at 01/16/2009 @ 10:07am

49. gov't for the rich and by the rich shall not perish,...

    Posted by emile duBois at 01/16/2009 @ 10:21am

50. Mask,

    You have to remember, that since the winner of the election of President of the United States is determined by the electoral college, any discussion of popular vote count is totally irrelevant.

    The only relevance popular vote count would have is if a constitutional amendment were proposed and then passed by enough states to be put in the Constitution to change the method of how a President is elected.

    Then it would have relvance, obviously, in future elections.

    But for any past elections (which does include the 2000 election, Mask) it is just a statistic, no more than that.

    Posted by sjchermak at 01/16/2009 @ 10:26am

51. Ministries of Oceania

    Oceania's four ministries are housed in huge pyramidal structures, each roughly 930 feet high and visible throughout London, displaying the three slogans of the party on their façades. The ministries' names are ironic antonyms of the true nature of their actions.

    Ministry of Peace (Newspeak: Minipax)

    Conducts Oceania's perpetual war: Bush's GWOT and Department of Defense

    Ministry of Plenty (Newspeak: Miniplenty)

    Responsible for rationing and controlling food and goods, along with all production of all domestic goods. The Ministry of Plenty declares false claims to have increased the standard of living every time by a considerable amount, when in fact the ministry counteracts its own claims. Bush's Treasury, Federal Reserve, and economic growth based on paper profit ponzi schemes and massive debt.

    Ministry of Truth (Newspeak: Minitrue)

    The propaganda arm of Oceania's regime, controlling information: news, entertainment, education, and the fine arts. Winston Smith works for the Records Department (RecDep) of Minitrue, "rectifying" historical records and newspaper articles to make them conform to Big Brother's most recent pronouncements, thus making everything that the Party says 'true'. Bush's Kevin Martin in charge of FCC, Press Corp, MSM complicity, and Legacy Project

    Ministry of Love (Newspeak: Miniluv)

    The agency is responsible for the identification, monitoring, arrest and torture of dissidents, real or imagined. Bush's Homeland Security, NSA, CIA, DOD, etc.

    It's been been lovely Mr. President. Goodbye George and hello George if you know what I mean.

    Posted by OneVote at 01/16/2009 @ 10:47am

52. Posted by sjchermak at 01/16/2009 @ 10:26am

    It may be irrelevant given our Electoral College system, but it IS factual is it not, that a majority of Americans voted for Al Gore over George W. Bush in 2000.

    Posted by Mask at 01/16/2009 @ 11:01am

53. "Posted by comanchenation at 01/16/2009 @ 03:20am

    To be honest, I wouldn't even know where to start with that moronic post. And I would be wasting my time if I did. I'm just glad people like you are marginalized, meaningless and irrelevant at this point. If I believed in some fairy tale omniscient God, I would thank him/her/it for that.

    Posted by chaoszen at 01/16/2009 @ 04:38am"

    CHAO,

    It is even worse than you suppose with regard to COMMANCHENATION.

    I mean, it is one thing to be stupid and COMMANCHE defines stupidity to an infinite degree. It's also acceptable to be a redneck hillbilly since many things in life are a lottery that's pretty unfair. There are countless good-hearted people who cannot do enough for others although they have not had the faintest shadow of the privlige of, say, uber-elitist, politically connnected, multi-millionaire's hellspawn GEORGE W LOSER.

    But COMMANCHENATION is not that good-hearted figure. He's a real sicko, the kind who needs to be socially vacummed up becuase there is good reason to believe that he is unfit to mix among the mainstream of normal society.

    Test it out yourself. Ask COMMANCHE whether he believes that WARREN JEFFS is (A) a rightwing religionist freak polygmist child molesting felon. Or whether JEFFS is (B) a guy whom the feds should just leave alone, get off his back, and for whom the situation demands a "FREE WARREN JEFFS" movement to let him go back to running his compound. For the kids's sake.

    "A" or "B". Ask COMMANCHE. Ask him. See what the sickly, disgusting bastard has to say.

    Posted by PhilMcCrevice at 01/16/2009 @ 11:01am

54. http://www.juancole.com/2009/01/ws-twilight-man-of-feeble-temper.html

    must read summary of bush's foibles.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 01/16/2009 @ 11:03am

55. Posted by OneVote at 01/16/2009 @ 10:47am

    Don't forget the great precept of "doublethink", such as...

    "A tax cut for just the middle class is welfare, as the rich pay most of the taxes!"

    AND "A tax hike on the wealthy means EVERYBODY's taxes goes up!"

    or "The invasion of Iraq was not pre-determined and inevitable, that's just conspiracy theories of the Left. Saddam was given plenty of chances by Bush and he still forced us to invade!" AND

    "We HAD to invade Iraq because Saddam had WMDs and had ties to Al Qaeda. It would be too dangerous if we had left him in power! President Bush wasn't going to allow that to happen!"

    or "Barney Frank stopped President Bush and the GOP Congress from enacting the Fannie and Freddie reforms they wanted!"

    AND "The Dems hated Bush because he outfoxed them at every turn and got his agenda enacted over their whiney objections!" (Or the basic fact that somehow Frank was able to stop the "strong desire" of Bush and the GOP to enact housing reform....but couldn't stop the Iraq War, the tax cuts, the Patriot Act, etc., etc., etc.

    "Oceania has always been at war with Eurasia" and "2 + 2 = 5"

    Posted by Mask at 01/16/2009 @ 11:10am

56. Posted by Mask at 01/16/2009 @ 11:01am

    MASK,

    In a related vein, SJ "BLACKS DON'T WANT TO VOTE ANYWAY" CHERMAK has also insisted up and down that the Bush v. Gore SCOTUS case was a simple application of the "equal protection" principle.

    Yet, when asked, this self-nominated "sophisticate" cannot explain just H-O-W that principle applied to the case before the court (to wit, "Equal protection of ... who?"). This is undoubtably because in trowelling through the collected wisdom of Scaife-Ruddy NewsMax, NRO, Townhall.com and other stinking garbage pits, SJ has not found some deranged rightwing pundit to pull an absurd 14th ammendment psuedo-slogan from his or her ass to haphazardly slap over the Bush v. Gore case.

    SJ might do better in affirming Scalia's "cat out of the bag" commment at the time that there really is not right to vote. Scalia ditto-headism would be in perfect alignment with SJ's deadly dull combo of rightwing relativism and hard-line statism.

    Finally, perhaps Gore should consider himself fortunate he did not get the Siegelmann treatment whereby one's political candidicy is criminalized throught the type of Soviet-style process of which SJ undoubtably approves rapturously.

    Posted by PhilMcCrevice at 01/16/2009 @ 11:16am

57. Posted by PhilMcCrevice at 01/16/2009 @ 11:01am | ignore this person | warn this person

    yeah Phil.

    it's not a bar room brawl, it is more like the dozens, or that Inuit thing where they sing at each other, insultingly.

    Posted by emile duBois at 01/16/2009 @ 11:21am

58. "The second failure was not establishing an American Border.

    He did a great job keeping us from being attacked again and he did decimate AQ. "-JOMAMMA

    Last I checked the borders were set, actually quite a long time ago. Where have you been since 1959?

    He did the same job as Bill CLinton, except he was attacked after having been warned, and Bill caught, prosecuted and jailed the perp that attacked us. HE caused Americans to be sent into harms way, leading to the deaths of thousands of Americans and DAILY attacks on Americans and American outposts and equipment. I guess soldiers are not Americans to you

    AQ is larger and more spread out than ever before. in 2006 there were more terrorist attacks than had ever been tracked. The State Dept of Chimpy tried to cover this up, maybe that is why you are so damn confused?

    Take some time out of your busy day to look up the groups now affiliated with AQ, then get back to us about the success of the GWOt Re: AQ.

    It still amazes me how often you can be wrong, yet still be so pompous and arrogant.

    Posted by crabwalk at 01/16/2009 @ 11:23am

59. I repeat, yeah, Phil.

    Posted by emile duBois at 01/16/2009 @ 11:35am

60. EMILE,

    "The dozens"? Whassat...?

    Posted by PhilMcCrevice at 01/16/2009 @ 11:36am

61. Arab Shack Media, one dudes opinion based on knowledge of the region, not propaganda put out by government agencies:

    "The fact is, Sunni and Shia radical groups, with the help of US wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Palestine (by way of Israel) have become much stronger in the seven years since 9/11.

    The key aspect that many analysts are overlooking is the enormously unfair and unjust social and economic conditions in the Arab world, which are playing right into Al-Qaeda's hands. Previously, AQ was relatively elitist. For example, all but one of the 19 9/11 hijackers had a university degree. Now this is changing. The discovery of recent cells in Algeria, Morocco, Lebanon and Gaza suggests that Al-Qaeda recruits are increasingly coming from poor backgrounds. The grossly unjust socio-economic conditions in the Arab world are perfect for radical groups such as Al-Qaeda. In each country, unprecedented amounts of money is being accumulated by a group that does not exceed one percent of society, while the overwhelming majority exists on less than two dollars per day. On one hand, you have elitist millionaires, while conditions are so bad for so many youth, that they try to raft their way to Europe, often drowning and "becoming fish food."

    http://arabicsource.wordpress.com/2008/06

    /28/its-the-economy-stupid-analysis-of-al-qaeda/

    The cons won't like to read that, it borders on leftist dogma that a poor person would be willing to kill for political beliefs. Meanwhile the self described wealthy cons here ask for that to happen daily.

    Posted by crabwalk at 01/16/2009 @ 11:38am

62. Posted by Mask at 01/16/2009 @ 11:10am | ignore this person | warn this person

    And truth is 'stranger' than fiction.

    Posted by OneVote at 01/16/2009 @ 11:38am

63. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_dozens

    Posted by emile duBois at 01/16/2009 @ 11:40am

64. PhilMcCrevice,

    You could try explaining (you can't) how it is that Democrats think recounts are supposed to just keep going on and on and on as long as Democrats want, according to Democrat terms, despite what election law says regarding time limits for recounting, and despite the intitial determination by Florida legal authorities that the Gore team did not justify in court their petitions for manual recounting after the first recount, an automatic recount, was completed.

    You could also try and prove (you can't) the claims of disenfranchisement.

    You could try explaining, too, what the chads were doing on the floor of one of the places where ballots were being reviewed AFTER the election. Ballots were being reviewed with both Republican and Democrat election officials present. Republicans noticed chads on the floor.

    One might wonder, what were chads doing on the floor, since they would only come out during voting. Or perhaps, was additional after election voting for Gore occurring?

    Now I get it. Gore wanted recounts so the NEW votes for Gore could be included!!!

    You certainly know about this and have read about this, because this is discussed in the SCOTT MCCLELLAN book which you on the left tout so highly as the "expose" of the Bush Administration.

    Posted by sjchermak at 01/16/2009 @ 11:47am

65. "The dozens"? Whassat...?

    Posted by PhilMcCrevice at 01/16/2009 @ 11:36am |

    It starts by saying "YO Momma....

    Hmmm, that rings a bell....

    maybe some lessons in playing the game, along with a tutorial on the status of AQ...

    Posted by crabwalk at 01/16/2009 @ 11:56am

66. It is truly amazing that so many supposedly bright people can't see the forest for the trees here. Bush, and Clinton before him, have simply been the point men for wealthy, powerful forces that have benefited hugely over the past 16 years. And, they have continued to benefit even after the Democrats took majority control of Congress after the 2006 elections. Now,"progressives" waste untold hours and unsparing effort condemning the Bush administration and demanding prosecutions, the rich and powerful behind them are laughing all the way to the bank. Think about this, somebody made a bundle on those ill-advised mortgage loans. Construction companies raked in untold billions constructing mini-mansions people couldn't afford. Retailers made immense sums selling unnecessary products to people who charged them on credit cards that charge interest rates that would have been criminal a few years ago. Those folks are the miscreants. But, so what? Its easier to blame one or two politicians than really attack the root of problems. And now we have Barack Obama who is going to change it all. I'll believe it when I see it.

    Posted by jsens at 01/16/2009 @ 11:57am

67. You could also try and prove (you can't) the claims of disenfranchisement. "-SJ

    ------

    countless voters were denied the opportunity to vote because their names did not appear on the lists of registered voters.[2] When poll workers attempted to call the supervisors of elections offices to verify voter registration status, they were often met with continuous busy signals or no answer.[3] In accordance with their training, most poll workers refused to permit persons to vote whose names did not appear on the rolls at their precinct.

    Cathy Jackson, an African American woman, has been a registered voter in Broward County since 1996. Upon registering in Broward County, Ms. Jackson was told that if she ever experienced a problem with her voter registration card, she would be allowed to vote if she could produce a valid driver's license. Ms. Jackson voted in Broward without any incident using her driver's license since 1996. However, when she went to her polling place, Precinct 52Z, on November 7, 2000, she was told that her name was not on the list. The poll workers suggested that she travel back to her old precinct in Miami-Dade County to vote. Ms. Jackson did as she was advised even though she had voted in Broward County since she moved from Miami-Dade County in 1996. After waiting 45 minutes at her old precinct, the poll workers in Miami-Dade told Ms. Jackson that her name was not on the rolls and referred her back to Broward to vote.

    ----

    continued : http://www.usccr.gov/pubs/vote2000/report/ch2.htm

    Posted by crabwalk at 01/16/2009 @ 12:02pm

68. Poll Workers Confirm Widespread Voter Disenfranchisement

    The experiences of these Floridians who were denied their opportunity to vote were corroborated by poll workers who testified at the Commission hearing in Miami. Many poll workers attempted to follow the procedures they had been taught in their training, such as verifying voter registration with the supervisor of elections, but their efforts were largely futile because of the inadequacies and obstacles they faced throughout the voting system.

    Marilyn Nelson, a poll worker with 15 years of experience in Miami-Dade County, testified, "By far this was the worst election I have ever experienced. After that election I decided I didn't want to work as a clerk anymore."

    POLLING PLACES CLOSED OR EARLY OR MOVED WITHOUT NOTICE

    Many Floridians experienced extreme frustration on November 7 when they reported to the precincts where they had been voting regularly, in some cases for many years, and discovered that their precincts were no longer being used or had moved to another location without notice from the county supervisor of elections.[15] In other instances, some voters who had been standing in line to vote at their precincts prior to 7 p.m. were told that they could not vote because the poll was closed.[16] Under these circumstances, the patience of many Floridians was exhausted.

    Posted by crabwalk at 01/16/2009 @ 12:05pm

69. Mask at 01/16/2009 @ 11:10am...

    Thanks! I'll have a dozen more posts from you... just like that one!

    Posted by ttr at 01/16/2009 @ 12:09pm

70. Posted by OneVote at 01/16/2009 @ 11:38am

    SJCHER didn't need "Room 101" though...he already willing to put the rats on Julia (volunteered to help attach the cage) and believes all he hears from Big Brother on the telescreen (via AM radio 12-3pm EST).

    Posted by Mask at 01/16/2009 @ 12:12pm

71. Posted by jsens at 01/16/2009 @ 11:57am | ignore this person | warn this person

    so what do you suggest?

    Posted by emile duBois at 01/16/2009 @ 12:15pm

72. CRABWALK has already done stalwart work on the disenfranchisment question, thus demonstrating why SJ is known as SJ "BLACKS DON'T WANT TO VOTE ANYWAY" CHERMAK.

    As for the big picture, it goes like this. When the votes are counted the Dem wins. When they are not counted, the Repugnant wins. At least in the cases of Gore and Franken.

    At issue in FL'00 was whether to procede with a hand recount after the mandated machine recount. As Daly in UPI observes below, a certain TX guv signed hand recounts into law 4 TX; but through the magic of rightwing PARTY-1st relativism REJECTED hand recounts in FL...

    "TALLAHASSEE, FL (UPI). The George W. Bush campaign said Saturday it was seeking a federal injunction against manual recounts in as many as four Florida counties, however the Democrats called on the GOP to withdraw the suit. Former Secretary of State Jim Baker, who is monitoring the Florida recount on behalf of Bush, said a manual recount would be no more accurate than a machine count and might be subject to mischief and mistakes -- either intentional or unintentional.

    "This morning we have asked that the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida preserve the integrity and the consistency and the equality and the finality of the most important civic action that American citizens take -- their vote in an election for president of the United States. We feel we have no other choice," Baker said. Gore campaign manager William Daley said hand counts have been done in the past in Florida and that the suit had no merit. "This procedure is provided by Florida law, Texas law and the laws of many other states," Daley said. "We call upon the Bush campaign to withdraw the action today and allow a full and accurate count in the state of Florida.""

    Posted by PhilMcCrevice at 01/16/2009 @ 12:30pm

73. Let's see

    The republicans keep saying they lost 2 branches of guvt because they stopped following core republican values. Who was leading the republicans for the last 8 years?

    He "kept us safe" by creating the TSA, a unionized group the cons hate, and by creating a huge security bureaucracy

    He created a new drug benefit, for drug companies, by being "democratic"?

    He leaves office with 2 wars still ongoing with no real end in sight, all of which was "off budget". This is not even similar to any other complaint one could have about other issues, it is huge, huge, huge. Neither war has accomplished the (often changing) goals other than toppling weak regimes but leaving dangerous vacuums.

    2nd worst disapproval ratings of any president in modern times. Or is it worse than Nixon now?

    Therefore; using neo-con logic (2+2= what we want)

    Mission Accomplished

    Posted by crabwalk at 01/16/2009 @ 12:36pm

74. Phil,

    crabwalk didn't do any "stalwart work", just simply copied and pasted a report supporting the view of libs..... would an internet search find something to refute some or all of this? It could.

    I could declare your source invalid. It is the U.S. commission on Civil Rights, a government agency, but is all the testimony accurate? crabwalk just assumes it is.

    Maybe it is and maybe it isn't. I know that I automatically get condemned every which way but sideways by libs if I even suggest it may be invalid.

    But some of the data and testimony could be invalid, driven by agendas. Those do creep up in government.

    And what seems like a mountain of data could be only a small sample, if you take the whole population in Florida elegible to vote.

    Thus crabwalk has only presented something supporting the lib claims, i.e., one side of the story, but of course it is declared absolute proof.

    And Phil, when you get into the subject of hand recounting, you didn't seem to mention that the Gore team only wanted it in limited areas, not statewide.

    Thus, the subject at hand was the merits of whether a limited hand recount of ballots was justified based on the cicumstance there at that time and not based on what is done elsewhere, regardless of what state or who is governor.

    It seems the criteria for how the Florida 2000 election debacle should have proceeded is as follows: Do whatever Democrats want, for as long as they want.

    I seemed to have missed the law that was passed that require people (ordinary citizens, state/local/federal officials, the judiciary, law enforcement, military) to do whatever Democrats or other Libs to the left of Democrat want, whenever they want, for as long as they want.

    Posted by sjchermak at 01/16/2009 @ 12:57pm

75. Nixon should have been tried, or impeached. Reagan should have been impeached. Clinton should not have been impeached. W.Bush should have been impeached. rule of law? don't make me laugh.

    Posted by emile duBois at 01/16/2009 @ 12:58pm

76. how many americans? 303,824,640

    how many disapprove of Bush? 70%

    210 million americans can't be wrong, to misquote an old song.

    they are trying to get you to believe the contrary. don't

    Posted by emile duBois at 01/16/2009 @ 1:12pm

77. "And Phil, when you get into the subject of hand recounting, you didn't seem to mention that the Gore team only wanted it in limited areas, not statewide."

    Absolutely right here, Gore's campaign only petitioned for four counties to perform the hand recounts that are widely regarded as the most accurate reading of the balloting.

    So the Florida Supreme Court ruled that hand recounts would go forward in all 67 counties as the fairest remedy and most accurate canvass to decide the election for the whole state, correcting the Gore campaign's self-serving move.

    And then, tell us what happened, SJ? What entity, egged on by a lawsuit by LOSER's teeming array of lawyers who had been airdropped into the post-election environment en masse, made its FEDERAL intervention in a STATE matter with a EQUAL PROTECTION ruling of a sort that, in case after case after case, it never otherwise accepted? And all the while members of this same entity in John Ellis-style, had wives and sons insitutionally tied up with LOSER's campaign and Ted Olson's law firm, but refused to recuse themelves to perserve that wafer-thin 5-4 count? And, like detached bureaucratic hacks, insisted on doing this to a sped-up time table to meet largely arbitrary safe harbor dates designed for advisory purposes in the 18th century as a priority over accurately gauging the DECISION of WE, THE PEOPLE?

    What was that entity -- that trampled on state's rights, precedent, local preference, and then un-conservatively cabined the decision as a "one-off" not to be referred to again for the purposes of precedent -- what was it called again???

    Posted by PhilMcCrevice at 01/16/2009 @ 1:15pm

78. the rush to complete matters in 2000 seemed entirely misplaced to me. after all the new pres used to take office in march, as Mask has pointed out.

    Posted by emile duBois at 01/16/2009 @ 1:25pm

79. SJCHERMAK's obviously half-hearted efforts to "debunk" CRABWALK are half-assed hand-waving, which is SJ's calling card. But they are also as half-hearted as they are unconvincing, even to SJ himself, as he goes through the motions, zombie-like and with great verbosity, but noticably scant conviction.

    But let me point to the kind of technicalities that delivered the Oval Office to the undeserving, losing loser candidate in 2000.

    Early in the campaign, Cheney was required to change his legal address from TX to WY although he really did not live in WY anymore. (Who fucking would want to live in WY? All rednecks sucking the federal tit for subsidy, true "welfare wranglers"). Anyway, Cheney did this to satisfy an obscure law, long on the books, that the POTUS and VPOTUS candidates have to be from different states.

    In a parallel Star Trek universe, an undeserving SoreLoserman "won" the 2000 US election because that techanicality had not been fulfilled by the opposing party. In this dubious way, the parallel psuedo-"President" Gore strong-armed into office to preside over security failures, strategically beyond stupid and failed foreign occupations, economic meltdown, blown away "Cities of Sin" and the whole grim and dreary roster of miserable, JOMAMMAesque failure that has been the indelible birthmark of W LOSERISM.

    However, instead of the psuedo SoreLoserman "presidency", in this universe in which we in fact live, W LOSER was handed an office that he did not earn through much the same half-assed sophistry and hyper-technical lawyerism that furiously spins away from the essential question: Who in reality won the election by the rules concering the 50 state electoral college that were understood to be ground rules on 7 November 2000?

    Answer: Al Gore, Jr.

    Posted by PhilMcCrevice at 01/16/2009 @ 1:39pm

80. Posted by PhilMcCrevice at 01/16/2009 @ 1:39pm | ignore this person | warn this person

    yer ona roll, pal

    Posted by emile duBois at 01/16/2009 @ 1:43pm

81. What LVLIBERTY really means:

    "Yes like the Orwellian theme of freeing Europe at the point of a gun FROM SADDAM HUSSEIN WHO PERSONALLY SUPERVISED 9-11, IN FACT HE FLEW THE PLANES HIMSELF, freeing Japan at the point of a gun FROM SADDAM HUSSEIN WHO PERSONALLY SUPERVISED, 9-11 IN FACT HE FLEW THE PLANES HIMSELF, freeing South Korea from the Chinese and North Koreans at the point of a gun FROM SADDAM HUSSEIN WHO PERSONALLY SUPERVISED 9-11, IN FACT HE FLEW THE PLANES HIMSELF, freeing ourselves from England at the point of a gun AND ALSO FROM SADDAM HUSSEIN WHO PERSONALLY SUPERVISED 9-11, IN FACT HE FLEW THE PLANES HIMSELF."

    The history "lesson" is all clear now.

    Posted by PhilMcCrevice at 01/16/2009 @ 1:46pm

82. Posted by emile duBois at 01/16/2009 @ 1:43pm

    Happy to deliver, EMILE!

    Posted by PhilMcCrevice at 01/16/2009 @ 1:49pm

83. emile,

    You said (about Phil) " yer ona roll, pal "

    Actually, he is not on a roll, just off of his meds again.

    Posted by sjchermak at 01/16/2009 @ 1:52pm

84. LUVVIE imitates the party line with the conviction of a guy who just rapped with Jesus the Christ in his garden: Iraq "became the first Arab nation to hold free and fair elections."

    Institute for Policy Studies, Phyllis Bennis and Erik Leaver: "President Bush had one thing right when he said in March 2005: 'All [foreign] military forces and intelligence personnel must withdraw before the elections for those elections to be free and fair.' He was talking about Syrian troops in Lebanon; the same claim should be made about U.S. troops in Iraq. Elections are often important indices and instruments of democracy, but elections held under conditions of military occupation are not legitimate."

    As usual, rightwingers set exceedingly low standards for themeslves and for airy things like fairness, justice and democracy. Then they fail miserably in meeting even their own obviously degraded standards with the bar set a millimeter or 2 off the ground.

    It defines the rightwing way.

    Posted by PhilMcCrevice at 01/16/2009 @ 1:57pm

85. Phil,

    You forgot to include how the Florida Supreme Court was engaging in judicial activism, making law from the bench and on the fly, by "allowing" hand recounts - past the point when the election was legally over and certified.

    You forgot that the rule of law and election law matters, except when libs do not like the outcome and want it changed on the fly. If you can't win the first time, change the rules retroactively.

    Since the action by the Florida Supreme Court was judicial activism, and making law, the U.S. Supreme Court stepped in and stopped that and overturned that.

    You seem to have forgotten that there are two law making branches of government in this country, the executive and the legislative.

    In the system of checks and balances and the separation of powers as stipulated by the U.S. Constitution (the U.S., not Algore's Living Breathing) the Judicial branch is not a law making branch, just interprets the actions of the other 2 branches to determine if they are legal and/or constitutional.

    So in a matter as important as this was, it certainly was appropriate for the Supreme Court to step and and reverse judicial activism and law-making from the bench, and by a branch of government that does not have the charter to make law.

    You have time in the sanitorium, instead of basket weaving you ought to take classes in civics.

    Posted by sjchermak at 01/16/2009 @ 1:59pm

86. Notice that SJ "BLACKS DON'T REALLY WANT TO VOTE" CHERMAK (1:59) provides an almost perfect echo of rightwing talking points, trashing a couple centuries of cornerstone concepts like judicial review as he cuts and pastes from the standard slogans and bumper sticker wisdoms.

    Questions for SJ:

    1. What specific "law" did the FSC enact?

    2. Explain the Equal Protection angle here (I've now asked a half dozen times) as this is supposedly the lynchpin of the judgment.

    3. Do you agree with Scalia's extreme rightwing grunting that there really is no right to vote in USA?

    4a and 4b. If "no" (above, 3), do you believe it is then necessary to make the good faith effort to the sovereign public to count the ballots that machine counts clearly do not tabulate with 100% accuracy (as GW LOSER clearly assumed when signing the TX law on hand recounts)? Or do you find it preferable in a republic for a candidate to strong-arm his or way to office by actively supressing the count of legal votes, in this case abetted by a court that is corrupted enough to back its hoary, illiberal arguments (see question 2 again) with plainly disengenious sophistry?

    Posted by PhilMcCrevice at 01/16/2009 @ 2:12pm

87. free and fair elections in which the opposition refuses to participate. sure.

    it is puppet gov't in Iraq, no more.

    Posted by emile duBois at 01/16/2009 @ 2:13pm

88. free and fair elections, like those in Poland and Czechoslovakia after the war.

    Posted by emile duBois at 01/16/2009 @ 2:15pm

89. Bush Administration are related to the Klingons: Check out for yourself at blackcoptermedia.com. I guess the right wingers are right lefties do not like to support causes, like blackcoptermedia. Left wingers talk a good game but when its time to pony up they get alligator arms.

    Posted by thesid at 01/16/2009 @ 2:17pm

90. SJCHER didn't need "Room 101" though...he already willing to put the rats on Julia (volunteered to help attach the cage) and believes all he hears from Big Brother on the telescreen (via AM radio 12-3pm EST).

    Posted by Mask at 01/16/2009 @ 12:12pm | ignore this person | warn this person

    Sjcher - a dutiful acolyte of The Thought Police or its victim? Big Brother on AM radio - you never see him, but he is all around you, and ever present. Purveyor of what always was, and always will be - Heritage.Org whose dire warnings "The Left is on the March. Heritage has the Answers" invokes fear and yet solace - Big Brother's solace - Goodthink.

    Posted by OneVote at 01/16/2009 @ 2:18pm

91. Bush Administration are related to the Klingons: Check out for yourself at blackcoptermedia.com. I guess the right wingers are right lefties do not like to support causes, like blackcoptermedia. Left wingers talk a good game but when its time to pony up they get alligator arms.

    Posted by thesid at 01/16/2009 @ 2:20pm

92. Posted by thesid at 01/16/2009 @ 2:20pm | ignore this person | warn this person

    ok, you can stop flogging that site now.

    Posted by emile duBois at 01/16/2009 @ 2:28pm

93. Well, SJ, I cannot do any more than provide sworn testimony from an agency of Gerge Bush's government. I guess the "right-center" country has just allowed the "liberal agenda" to creep into all halls of power, even though the "far left" is a micro amount of "real Americans".

    I though you admired his governance? Which is it?

    The people running the election said there was disenfranchisement. The US govt said so.

    I guess in addition to your avowed support for helping AQ kill American soldiers, you hate the federal government run by the guy you voted for, twice.

    How do I debate someone that hates America so much? Someone that derides judges, then swoons over judicial appointments?

    Posted by crabwalk at 01/16/2009 @ 2:40pm

94. Posted by OneVote at 01/16/2009 @ 2:18pm

    Got to go for now.

    But right you are, OneV. Somewhere in North Korea, SJ's soulmate/genetic twin is braying loud orthodoxies about the spiteful "enemies" of The Maximum Maximum Leader, Kim Il Sung. We must hate before The Maximum Maximum Leader's enemies hate us (!!!!), which starts with spouting half-assed and incoherant slogans from NewsMaximumMaximumLeader about the gravity of it all. Blah blah blah.

    These ultra-black boot SJ types are profoundly boring, especially to themselves, even as they exact incalculable costs to the societies that they are foam-at-the-mouth eager to ruin under the threadbare pretext of "saving" in their own hienous image.

    Posted by PhilMcCrevice at 01/16/2009 @ 2:44pm

95. I hope that on Tuesday, we are not ONLY celebrating the victory of Barack Obama. In a sense, we should be celebrating the END of one of the worst presidents in history (at least, the worst since Herbert Hoover).

    To a degree, WHO replaces him is secondary! The point is, the BUSH PRESIDENCY WILL BE OVER!

    That is something I have been waiting to be able to say for 8 years.

    We will all be able to say at that point (when Barack is sworn in): "our long national nightmare is over."

    Posted by FDR43 at 01/16/2009 @ 3:00pm

96. and now we can wake up to the uncomfortable truths.

    Posted by emile duBois at 01/16/2009 @ 3:02pm

97. SJ logic:

    A CIA agent is outed

    The CIA, run by republican appointee, ask the DoJ, run by a republican appointee, to investigate the outing of a covert agent.

    The CIA and the DoJ say she was covert.

    The press secretary of the president says she was covert.

    Judges are activist.

    Libbys defense attorney never asked the judge to rule on the status, accepting the employment status submitted by the republican appointed prosecutor.

    Therefore: The agent was not covert because no judge ruled on her status.

    Logic II:

    no proof exists for disenfranchisement of Florida voters in 2000. There is a report from the US govt, run by a republican, that says there was voter disenfranchisement in Florida in 2000, supplying testimony from citizens that were denied access to a voting booth, and poll workers that witnessed malfeasance and ineptitude on the part of state level voting agencies.

    therefore: The testimony must be from citizens that have "an agenda", other than to get to vote.

    I ask once again, expecting silence, what are these sources that we are missing out on? Sources that SJ would believe? Can it only be found on AM radio from 12-3 as has been posited?

    Has our long lost Pontificus ever driven across middel America and tuned in his AM dial? Rush replayed from 6-9 on one station, 7-10 another, live 12-3, Savage from 6-8, all replayed on various staion throughout the day, 4 country, 6 Christian stations. One Oldies rock, 2 classical, and not much else. Could it be "indoctrination"? Nahh.

    Posted by crabwalk at 01/16/2009 @ 3:02pm

98. and now we can wake up to the uncomfortable truths.

    Posted by emile duBois at 01/16/2009 @ 3:02pm

    Emile what do you mean? You mean some further stuff will come out? We already KNOW a lot - the cluntry knows now how bad he was, and many of the bad things he did. The consensus is he was a terrible president.

    Posted by FDR43 at 01/16/2009 @ 3:06pm

99. The Us treasury sec, appointed by Bush, will loan Chrysler/Cerebus, lead by Bush's former treasury sec.

    Who helped garner this socialist money? Dan Quayle,

    Thanks SJ. Heckuva job.

    Oooh, sorry, this is the Obama recession!

    Posted by crabwalk at 01/16/2009 @ 3:07pm

100. country - not "cluntry"

     Posted by FDR43 at 01/16/2009 @ 3:07pm

101. In the system of checks and balances and the separation of powers as stipulated by the U.S. Constitution (the U.S., not Algore's Living Breathing) the Judicial branch is not a law making branch, just interprets the actions of the other 2 branches to determine if they are legal and/or constitutional.

     Posted by sjchermak at 01/16/2009 @ 1:59pm

     Nice civics lesson. What is the reality?

     Appointments by executive branch, confirmations by legislative branch. You don't think strict construction is subject to political, social and economic ideology and belief of judges? What was that case again where conservative judges (including Bush appointees) in dissent stated that EPA had no right to regulate car exhaust as air pollution? See Massachusetts v. EPA ---

     For instance, Scalia's dissent - using Chevron deference "reasoning" basically allowing executive branch to interpret law as they see fit. Executive branch is supposed to administer the law, not interpret it politically. It would seem that our conservative judges believe that they should abdicate they authority to "interpet" the law to Bush. Please - be real.

     Posted by OneVote at 01/16/2009 @ 3:07pm

102. These ultra-black boot SJ types are profoundly boring, especially to themselves, even as they exact incalculable costs to the societies that they are foam-at-the-mouth eager to ruin under the threadbare pretext of "saving" in their own hienous image.

     Posted by PhilMcCrevice at 01/16/2009 @ 2:44pm | ignore this person | warn this person

     You must know your enemy before you can defeat him.

     Well said Phil.

     Posted by OneVote at 01/16/2009 @ 3:13pm

103. Posted by FDR43 at 01/16/2009 @ 3:06pm | ignore this person | warn this person

     I am referring to the economy. the world economy.

     I am personally affected by the downturn, if that word is not too weak.

     I am a free lance, so I cannot be fired from my job. I have to be fired a lot. yet, my services are a shade less than essential. when my clients get a cold, I start to sneeze.

     Posted by emile duBois at 01/16/2009 @ 3:14pm

104. Posted by OneVote at 01/16/2009 @ 2:18pm

     "The chocorat (chocolate ration) has been reduced to 10 grams, due to Goldstein counter-revolutionaries!"

     "The economy's in a recession because of Barney Frank and Chris Dodd and Jimmy Carter!"

     "IngSoc forces have taken Nairobi"....(week later) "IngSoc forces are poised to take Nairobi from Eurasia!"..(week later)..."Ing Soc generals say a push to take Nairobi days away!"...(week later)...."Our IngSoc forces have taken Nairobi from Eurasia"....(week later)..."IngSoc troops standing by for invasion of Nairobi!"...

     or

     "We've won in Iraq, but we can't leave, or we'll lose in Iraq!"

     Posted by Mask at 01/16/2009 @ 3:54pm

105. Or

     " unemployment of 4.9% is no accident" due to Bush economic policies, but 6.9% with 10% projected is not the result of Bush policies.

     Take down them goalposts and squire 'em out to the merry-go-round.

     Posted by crabwalk at 01/16/2009 @ 4:23pm

106. Here is an article with which I don't agree 100% but it comes out of Germany and though I'm not sure about Keller, Dustin Dehez is a German national.

     (This article was published in Weekly Standard which I tend to take with about the same amount of salt as I do the Nation's articles but it's source and somewhat different approach, makes it an interesting read).

     Bush Got The Big Things Right

     By: Patrick Keller and Dustin Dehez.

     Dr. Patrick Keller is the Coordinator of Foreign and Security Policy at the Konrad Adenauer Stiftung in Berlin, Germany. Dustin Dehez is a historian and Lecturer in International Relations at the Freie Universität Berlin, Germany.

     http://tinyurl.com/8re45e

     Posted by lrjones4 at 01/16/2009 @ 4:48pm

107. "We've won in Iraq, but we can't leave, or we'll lose in Iraq!"

     Posted by Mask at 01/16/2009 @ 3:54pm | ignore this person | warn this person

     Let see....kind of meets that definition of "doublethink" don't ya think?

     simultaneous holding of two contradictory or conflicting views....hehehehehe

     You've nailed it big time. Man...these guys are muy malo.

     Posted by OneVote at 01/16/2009 @ 4:51pm

108. Doublethink:

     "To know and not to know, to be conscious of complete truthfulness while telling carefully constructed lies, to hold simultaneously two opinions which canceled out, knowing them to be contradictory and believing in both of them, to use logic against logic, to repudiate morality while laying claim to it, to believe that democracy was impossible and that the Party was the guardian of democracy, to forget, whatever it was necessary to forget, then to draw it back into memory again at the moment when it was needed, and then promptly to forget it again, and above all, to apply the same process to the process itself -- that was the ultimate subtlety; consciously to induce unconsciousness, and then, once again, to become unconscious of the act of hypnosis you had just performed. Even to understand the word 'doublethink' involved the use of doublethink."

     1984 - George Orwell

     Posted by OneVote at 01/16/2009 @ 5:02pm

109. We will all be able to say at that point (when Barack is sworn in): "our long national nightmare is over."

     Posted by FDR43 at 01/16/2009 @ 3:00pm

     Yes, isn't that the truth and what a long long 8 years it has been!

     Posted by Caj at 01/16/2009 @ 6:12pm

110. Posted by lrjones4 at 01/16/2009 @ 4:48pm Re: http://tinyurl.com/8re45e

     Here's the part that really made you tear up and do a couple of calculations on your slide rule...

     ...Moreover, Bush strengthened ties with Australia which as a principal ally in the war on terror became a more important actor in the Pacific sphere. .........................

     John Howard and our soon to be ex president call go-a-waltzing matilda into the sunset, and what the world can express is great, great relief. Whenever I am tricked into reading supposed 'documentation' posted by conservatives it seems to always be a little like Anne Coulter reading Gullivers Travels to a bunch of people who can't understand english. I'd have to say that, in general, lrjones makes a lot more sense than any other conservative poster here. He clearly understands language and logic, though I don't always agree with him. Strangely, I don't always disagree with him either.

     Posted by ficheye at 01/16/2009 @ 7:58pm

111. Keyboard malfunction...

     that's "... can go a-waltzing Matilda into the sunset".

     Piece of crap Apple keyboard.

     Posted by ficheye at 01/16/2009 @ 8:03pm

112. Congressman John Conyers sums up the horrors of the Bush era pretty well in today's WaPo:

     "As this report documents, there was the administration's contrived drive to a needless war of aggression with Iraq, based on manipulated intelligence and facts that were "fixed around the policy." There was its politicization of the Justice Department; unconscionable and possibly illegal policies on detention, interrogation and extraordinary rendition; warrantless wiretaps of American citizens; the ravaging of our regulatory system and the use of signing statements to override the laws of the land; and the intimidation and silencing of critics and whistle-blowers who dared to tell fellow citizens what was being done in their name. And all of this was hidden behind an unprecedented veil of secrecy and outlandish claims of privilege."

     He goes on to make a subtle case for investigation (read prosecution).

     At least someone is awake up on the Hill, and not afraid to raise the issue.

     But for all the carping about Bush, the real culprit--times ten-- is Dick Cheney. Will Justice go after him in the next year? I certainly hope so.

     Stay tuned.

     Posted by jackwells at 01/16/2009 @ 8:36pm

113. Posted by OneVote at 01/16/2009

     OV I think this quote was directed against what Orwell calls" perversions" in Communism and Nazism. Knowing you have an ever so slight bias against GW one can only assume you think that he and the Neo-cons also share the same perversion. Some may share them, but my reading of Bush is that he is either a very poor communicator or/and couldn't care less what Americans think of him.

     That seems to be the consensus of commentators, who support aspects of of his foreign policy initiatives. ie pathetic communicator. That is what Obama is superb at so it will take a bit longer to discern whether he is making things better or worse in things like economic and foreign policy.

     Here's the Orwell (which of course, in true Ministry of Truth style, was not his given name) quote:

     Orwell stated the following: "My recent novel [1984] is NOT intended as an attack on Socialism or on the British Labour Party (of which I am a supporter) but as a show-up of the perversions ... which have already been partly realized in Communism and Fascism. ...The scene of the book is laid in Britain in order to emphasize that the English-speaking races are not innately better than anyone else and that totalitarianism, if not fought against, could triumph anywhere."[8] In his 1946 essay, "Why I Write", Orwell described himself as a Democratic Socialist.[9]

     ( My guess is that Orwell may have found more Winston Smith potential in, say the contributors to this illustrious magazine or perhaps your favourite right-wing publication).

     Posted by lrjones4 at 01/16/2009 @ 8:54pm

114. Posted by lrjones4 at 01/16/2009 @ 8:54pm

     And how would you answer by "doublethink" ideas from the Right that I posted at Posted by Mask at 01/16/2009 @ 11:10am, jones?

     For example...was the invasion of Iraq inevitable?

     A neo-con would say "No", to avoid the appearance that Bush never had any intentions of "giving Saddam a chance" and was set on invading regardless of what Hussein did or the inspectors revealed.

     But he would ALSO say things like "Saddam couldn't be left in power"..."He posed a great threat"..."Bush HAD to take him out!", when questions on the necessity of invasion come up and the call for a longer sanction regime or a desire to wait for more intelligence.

     Which is it? It works if you use "doublethink"...it doesn't if you just "think".

     Posted by Mask at 01/16/2009 @ 10:39pm

115. George W. Bush should be forced to walk back to Texas, barefoot.

     Posted by unnaked at 01/16/2009 @ 11:32pm

116. George W. Bush should be forced to walk back to Texas, barefoot.

     Posted by unnaked at 01/16/2009 @ 11:32pm

     i think he should spend the rest of his days making shoes for the poor.

     Posted by frosty zoom at 01/17/2009 @ 12:21am

117. I love reading The Nation but stopped reading the comments months ago because I tired of the quasi-ignorant frothings of posters like happylonghorn and lvliberty and sjchermak. I thought I'd take a quick check tonight. Ugh. You're still here. Well, it's a free country (no thanks to Dumbya and Cheney) so enjoy yourselves. When it comes to the neo-con Nation posters, I'm going back to bliss ignorance. See ya in July.

     Posted by guanabana at 01/17/2009 @ 01:15am

118. I love reading The Nation but stopped reading the comments months ago because I tired of the quasi-ignorant frothings of posters like happylonghorn and lvliberty and sjchermak. I thought I'd take a quick check tonight. Ugh. You're still here. Well, it's a free country (no thanks to Dumbya and Cheney) so enjoy yourselves. When it comes to the neo-con Nation posters, I'm going back to bliss ignorance. See ya in July.

     Posted by guanabana at 01/17/2009 @ 01:15am

119. Posted by guanabana at 01/17/2009 @ 01:15am |

     well,

     it's kinda like listening to nickelback or bon jovi.

     makes you appreciate coltrane and ravel even more.

     Posted by frosty zoom at 01/17/2009 @ 01:36am

120. Which is it? It works if you use "doublethink"...it doesn't if you just "think". Posted by Mask at 01/16/2009 @ 10:39pm

     Right on, Mask. I had mentioned to Mr. Jones in an earlier post that his libertarian shuffle and mind numbing research presented lots of information, but allowed him to commit to no real opinion.

     Smart fellow, though. A true politician in his thinking. Standing on both sides of the fence, ready to dive. And he'll go a waltzing Matilda with ye....

     Posted by ficheye at 01/17/2009 @ 01:38am

121. makes you appreciate coltrane and ravel even more. Posted by frosty zoom at 01/17/2009 @ 01:36am

     I heard that Bill Evans called Tony Bennett just before Bill passed away. He said "Remember truth and beauty...forget the rest"

     Posted by ficheye at 01/17/2009 @ 01:46am

122. Posted by lvliberty1 at 01/16/2009 @ 7:18pm

     OK, Larry, here we go:

     "Thank you President Bush for the past 8 years of dedicated service to your country."

     Wich country was that, Larry? Because it sure as hell was not the United States to whom your boy Bush was dedicated. Perhaps Saudi Arabia?

     "You got some of the biggest things right; like Iraq, Afghanistan, the war on terror;"

     You do like mass murder, don't you? And, of course, a theocrat like you can only have contempt for constitutional government.

     "you at least slowed the attempt to create a Supreme Court that was inventing laws and rights out of thin air and escalating the move to socialism."

     Ah, the socialist under every bed terror - Christ, Larry, give that one a rest.

     "You did cut taxes at least a little bit"

     And there it is - the great rightie wet dream.

     "You fought a fairly strong fight to keep the govt from financing infanticide"

     Coming from someone who glories in the murder of Iraqi infants. Larry, you've been supporting infanticide for at least 8 years now.

     "You refused to let the whiners and haters, the leftwing quitters dictate your resolve."

     Projection, Larry - look it up.

     "You were not perfect"

     Actually, Larry, Bush was, and remains a perfect asshole. A liar, a thug, a thief, an anti-intellectual, authoritarian lowlife presiding over a like-minded bunch of criminals. But he was smart enough to bribe the clerics, wasn't he?

     Posted by jmusolino at 01/17/2009 @ 03:10am

123. Look momma, Look momma, see what the silly monkey is doing! How come they are so dirty momma? Its okay honey thats all they know. Posted by comanchenation at 01/17/2009 @ 02:25am

     No signs of intelligent life here.

     Posted by ficheye at 01/17/2009 @ 03:11am

124. Even if all the policies would had been just about right, the secrecy and malice of how the President and his staff decided over and over again to fool the people into a war, fabricate 'proofs', use the Justice Dpt. for political advantage ...and counting so many more things when the public was denied the truth...Frankly, it was an attempt to take over all the institutions, a coup of businessmen and the right wing over the people of the USA and their democracy. I think is about time to re-strengthen the overseeing powers of Congress.

     Posted by Frank42 at 01/17/2009 @ 03:18am

125. For example...was the invasion of Iraq inevitable?

     A neo-con would say "No", to avoid the appearance that Bush never had any intentions of "giving Saddam a chance" and was set on invading regardless of what Hussein did or the inspectors revealed.

     "He posed a great threat"..."Bush HAD to take him out!",

     Which is it? It works if you use "doublethink"...it doesn't if you just "think".

     Posted by Mask at 01/16/2009 @ 10:39pm

     "The Ministry of Truth is where the main character of the book Nineteen Eighty-Four, Winston Smith, works.[1]..... On the outside wall are the three slogans of the Party: "War is Peace," "Freedom is Slavery," "Ignorance is Strength." There is also a large part underground, probably containing huge incinerators where documents are destroyed after they are put down memory holes...."

     If you examine the three slogans you will notice they purport to be synonyms but if we consult a dictionary we discover that in fact they are antonyms.

     Do you notice where the documents probably ended up? Now you can do a bit of work on this yourself. Where do you think dictionaries would have ended up? Or to put it another way could those slogans have endured the light of a dictionary?

     Lets see have a look at the meaning of the word inevitable:

     in⋅ev⋅i⋅ta⋅ble 1. unable to be avoided, evaded, or escaped; certain; necessary: an inevitable conclusion.

     2. sure to occur, happen, or come; unalterable: The inevitable end of human life is death.

     Inevitable is evitable may be OK on the wall of The Ministry of Truth but it leads us to a consideration of 2 different categories viz necessary and contingent.

     In the cases you alluded to these are really not inevitable (necessary) but contingent. That's where a dictionary helps. We often use inevitable inaccurately.

     Posted by lrjones4 at 01/17/2009 @ 05:56am

126. Where we say such and such an outcome is (almost) inevitable; a contradiction. In the case of WMD there are two parts to the contingency. The need to have proof Saddam was in fact disarmed and a time frame after which there was a certainty of outcome promised, which in turn depended on Bush not wavering from his contingent threat. That though not categorized, as a necessity was a sure outcome given those contingencies were met.

     Then there is the other aspect that has to do with Saddam's gross human rights abuses and belligerence toward his neighbours. But it was not inevitable in the necessary sense but only the contingent sense. There were two contingencies one implicit and the other explicit. viz (i) Change your ways with respect to Iraqi governance. (ii) Resign from government and leave the country (Who knows what would have happened has Saddam done just that?).

     Now we may loosely say there was certain inevitability about the final outcome but only in the sense that the invasion was certain to happen on contingent rather than necessary grounds. So given the contingencies to be met it would have been safer to say at most that there was a high likelihood of the war occurring. What in fact you are implicitly acquiescing to is pure doublethink, if you please.

     Posted by lrjones4 at 01/17/2009 @ 05:59am

127. Here's the good oil on GW's presidency from the big O himself:

     President-elect Barack Obama said Friday President George W. Bush was a "good guy" who loved his country, but warned he would leave the United States struggling with the result of "bad choices."

     When he is sworn in on Tuesday, Obama will inherit two foreign wars and the worst economy since the 1930s Great Depression with the budget deficit forecast to hit more than a trillion dollars this year.

     "If you look at my statements throughout the campaign, I always thought he was a good guy," Democrat Obama said, when asked in a CNN interview whether he still stood by his campaign trail criticisms of the Republican president.

     "I think personally he is a good man who loves his family and loves his country and I think he made the best decisions that he could at times under some very difficult circumstances.

     "It does not detract from my assessment that over the last several years we have made a series of bad choices and we are now going to be inheriting the consequences of a lot of those bad choices."

     Obama however praised his predecessor and his White House staff for presiding over what many observers say is the smoothest transition of power in recent history.

     On the campaign trail before his historic November election victory, Obama flayed Bush over the Iraq war, accused him of taking his eye off the ball in Afghanistan and accused him of favoring the rich and ruining the US economy.

     Posted by lrjones4 at 01/17/2009 @ 06:30am

128. "You got some of the biggest things right; like Iraq, Afghanistan, the war on terror; "

     --All unfinished and Iraq and Afghanistan are a fucking mess, while their are more terrorist attacks than before the so called GWOT.

     "you at least slowed the attempt to create a Supreme Court that was inventing laws and rights out of thin air and escalating the move to socialism. "

     -After creating a president with a ruling that was not precedent, but I guess that is not "thin air".

     "The course of this conflict is not known, yet its outcome is certain. Freedom and fear, justice and cruelty, have always been at war, and we know that God is not neutral between them.

     Fellow citizens, we'll meet violence with patient justice, assured of the rightness of our cause and confident of the victories to come. "

     -- but, he created a war based on fear, he has given few freedom, he kidnapped people and held them for years without justice while doling out cruelty upon them . Which victories are we still waiting on? see above comment on Chimpies 2 failed wars.

     ahhh, faith over reason, yet somehow it is "the left" that is accused of seeking utopia. Go pray to your invisible friend, leave politics to those of us that live in the real world.

     Posted by crabwalk at 01/17/2009 @ 07:59am

129. JM, did someone move your rock and let you out again?

     Posted by lvliberty1 at 01/17/2009 @ 03:22am

     He was in there 3 days, I thought that was the time limit on moving rocks to let him arise?

     Posted by crabwalk at 01/17/2009 @ 08:05am

130. JM, did someone move your rock and let you out again?

     Posted by lvliberty1 at 01/17/2009 @ 03:22am

     He was in there 3 days, I thought that was the time limit on moving rocks to let him arise?

     Posted by crabwalk at 01/17/2009 @ 08:06am

131. "The president's farewell address revealed him to be the man he had always been: An unprepared son of privilege unduly confident about ill-conceived decisions, & unapologetic about their consequences."

     We surely didn't expect anything different though did we? He was a guy who acted like the 'average Joe' when he was not. Vacationing on a ranch and clearing deadwood doesn't make you a rancher, it makes you a hobbyist. His ability to speak & convey complexities was never above average either. He did not display any innovative or new ideas & regurgitated (as did the GOP in-general) old concepts and tried to pass them off as solutions. He is a fundamentalist who didn't care that religion & state were being mixed (and his affront to the separation of church & state, that faith based nonsense will continue with Obama who wants to maintain good relations with the fundies). He ignored public opinion & world opinion & acted like they were on his side! His inner circle put him in a cocoon & he was always happy to talk to the media via his bully pulpit of Faux 'News'. And ya know what? He was really a repeat of Ronald Raygun only without the speaking ability. Same below average intellect, same recycled ideology and a preference for violence as a 1st resort. Which is why I would not be surprised if a Sarah Palin administration is in our future. She's just as uninformed as Bush & speaks with the same silly nod to 'average' people (a group she doesn't belong to) & is part of a conservative movement that supports the dumbest rich people they can find to wave a flag at every problem & talk as if they have a hotline to some deity & in the same breath act like the Muslim fundies are nuts for thinking their god wants them to act this way (same Abrahamic God by the way).

     Posted by nukemind at 01/17/2009 @ 11:29am

132. Stalwart posters CRABBY and J-MUSO have performed their usual high-quality analyses of the intellectually/morally inferior waste products excreted by the dismal LVLIBERTY. Their efforts stand on their own as monuments to perceptive, informed commentary.

     Since LVLIBERTY's corrupted charades have already been subjected to the ridicule that they richly deserve -- nay, demand -- I only seek to add a couple of observations about reading (between winces) LUVVIE's embarrassing teen-type love letter to the Texan Poet-Warrior; a poet warrior who decades ago endowed HO CHI MINH with aid and comfort by hiding in the Champaign Unit during 'Nam and scoffing at the very idea of service to the nation that gave him soooo much in that age's leading crusade.

     The thing that stands out is how rancidly embittered the love letter actually is. Even as he pants for the Maximum Cheer Leader, GEORGE W LOSER, LVLIBERTY is compusivley unable to stop himself from getting into a truly embarrassing aside about "haters". In trying to evoke these un-named back-stabbers, the implication is that LOSER's unbroken record of shitbum failure and abuse of office have been faults to be deposited at the feet of *others*. It is a typical rightwing ass-covering maneuver. Hold yourself to absurdly low standards even when you hold every advantage in the world; fail miserably in meeting the lowest standards; bitterly blame other people while pretending that you are an upstanding buck-stops-here guy.

     Of course, 9-11 gets play in LUVVIE's letter as if it was -- get this -- an accomplishment. Strange people, these rightwing creeps and cranks. But, in that case, maybe LUVVIE should have panted, "With designer blood & beautifully cultivated stuble, you emerged from the 9-11 rubble and smoke. Made me...hard."

     Posted by PhilMcCrevice at 01/17/2009 @ 11:35am

133. OV I think this quote was directed against what Orwell calls" perversions" in Communism and Nazism. Knowing you have an ever so slight bias against GW one can only assume you think that he and the Neo-cons also share the same perversion. Some may share them, but my reading of Bush is that he is either a very poor communicator or/and couldn't care less what Americans think of him.

     Posted by lrjones4 at 01/16/2009 @ 8:54pm

     A "deliciously" poor communicator. A Big Brother proud communicator. Ambiguity and oversimplification - useful tools. An authoritarian speaking to fearful children. Hitler and Stalin used the "cloak" of differing idealogies, but methodology and practice was remarkably similar.

     "If this were a dictatorship, it would be a heck of a lot easier," Bush said, pausing and then joking, "just so long as I'm the dictator."

     Topeka Capital-Journal

     Posted by OneVote at 01/17/2009 @ 11:45am

134. SJ's pompous civics lesson:"system of checks and balances and the separation of powers as stipulated by the US Constitution"

     BOSTON GLOBE, 4-30-06: "...Bush has issued signing statements on more than 750 new laws, declaring that he has the power to set aside the laws when they conflict with HIS legal interpretation of the Constitution. The federal govt is instructed to follow the statements when it enforces the laws...Examples and the dates Bush signed them:

     3-9-06: Justice Dept officials must give reports to Congress by certain dates on how the FBI is using the USA Patriot Act to search homes and secretly seize papers. Bush's statement: The president can order Justice Department officials to withhold any information from Congress if he decides it could impair national security or executive branch operations.

     12-30-05: US interrogators cannot torture prisoners or otherwise subject them to cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment. Bush's statement: The president, as CiC, can waive the torture ban if he decides that harsh interrogation techniques will assist in preventing terrorist attacks.

     12-30: When requested, scientific information "prepared by govt researchers and scientists shall be transmitted [to Congress] uncensored and without delay." Bush's statement: The pres' can tell researchers to withhold any information from Congress if he decides its disclosure could impair foreign relations, national security, or the workings of the executive branch.

     8-8: The Dept of Energy, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and its contractors may not fire or otherwise punish an employee whistle-blower who tells Congress about possible wrongdoing. Bush's statement: The pres' or his appointees will determine whether employees of the DoE & NRC can give info to Congress."

     Posted by PhilMcCrevice at 01/17/2009 @ 11:56am

135. Posted by lrjones4 at 01/17/2009 @ 05:56am

     You mean "it depends on what 'is' is?"

     Posted by Mask at 01/17/2009 @ 2:29pm

136. Nixon should have been tried, or impeached. Reagan should have been impeached. Clinton should not have been impeached. W.Bush should have been impeached. rule of law? don't make me laugh. ---Posted by emile duBois

     And who's fault is it that Reagan and W. weren't impeached?

     As far as W. goes, all the holier-than-thou dems who ran on an anti-W platform dropped the ball the last two years.

     Blame the democrats, those sniveling piss ants who only want to protect their incumbency. Cowards.

     Posted by urmygyro at 01/17/2009 @ 3:19pm

137. w and the klingons are at blackcoptermedia.com, progressives donate to keep something real and unique alive!

     Posted by thesid at 01/17/2009 @ 3:21pm

138. You mean "it depends on what 'is' is?"

     Posted by Mask at 01/17/2009 @ 2:29pm

     It depends on what inevitable means.

     By the way Mask I've been looking at some of Obama's very recent comments and cannot help noticing the contrast between this mature dignified man and the naive , small minded, vindictive , anti- Bush warriors here. Here one sees the worst in the American character and is thankful that you (not solely but as part of an almost rabid group) are an irrelevant fringe group that is unlikely to impact much on what makes America great. You cannot expunge McCarthyism by using the same technique. You merely entrench its left wing counterpart.

     In Obama one sees a warm, forgiving, generous spirited man that augers well, not only for his presidency, but for America as a nation.

     In the end what makes a nation great is much more than the integrity of its constitution and legal system. It gets down to the character of its people and generosity of spirit is a vital component of that.

     Posted by lrjones4 at 01/17/2009 @ 4:45pm

139. I heard that Bill Evans called Tony Bennett just before Bill passed away. He said "Remember truth and beauty...forget the rest"

     Posted by ficheye at 01/17/2009 @ 01:46am

     oh, man! i get chills just thinking about those albums:

     http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9C-Q16yTNu8&fmt=18

     that's the only one i could find. there's clips of them together from the tonight show but i couldn't find them.

     Posted by frosty zoom at 01/17/2009 @ 5:50pm

140. In the end what makes a nation great is much more than the integrity of its constitution and legal system. It gets down to the character of its people and generosity of spirit is a vital component of that.

     Posted by lrjones4 at 01/17/2009 @ 4:45pm

     well, mr. bush et al. sure have been generous with the blood of iraqis.

     Posted by frosty zoom at 01/17/2009 @ 6:55pm

141. BTW, jones, I admire greatly your writing style....can't imagine what your SAT score could've been on the language arts!

     Posted by HAPPYLonghorn at 01/17/2009 @ 6:03pm

     Hi Happy, When I did uni entrance it was called matriculation (12th grade) now called VCE. I come from a family of mathematicians and engineers so never had much trouble with maths and physics. Over here we had English Expression and English Literature. You had to do the first to get into uni to do an engineering degree. Being a bit of a bullshit artist I was in the top 5% in the state that year but never had much use for it thereafter except in writing up technical reports.

     BTW it doesn't win you any friends to talk or write flash over here so I generally slip into the favoured vernacular to win intellectual arguments. Such as: If you don't shut up and pull your head in I'll come around to your place and rip your bloody arms off. That usually does the trick (as long as it is not a potential customer).

     Posted by lrjones4 at 01/17/2009 @ 7:19pm

142. Anyone else a little weirded out by seeing Ann Coulter's mug on an ad for her free column? Ordinarily that would be a great price, but in her case, I do believe payment from her would be required.

     Posted by nukemind at 01/17/2009 @ 7:23pm

143. at least i'm not seeing the "flatstomachblubber ad" anymore....

     Posted by frosty zoom at 01/17/2009 @ 7:56pm

144. well, mr. bush et al. sure have been generous with the blood of iraqis.

     Posted by frosty zoom at 01/17/2009 @ 6:55pm

     You can add to that the many thousands of Iraqi soldiers who have willingly spilled their blood for the future of their nation. Then there are the American soldiers who have given their blood in the same cause.

     These former gave their lives for what they believed in. How different that is from the days when Iraqis had their lives snatched from them by a man whose only cause was himself and his absolute sovereignty.

     Posted by lrjones4 at 01/17/2009 @ 9:31pm

145. These former gave their lives for what they believed in. How different that is from the days when Iraqis had their lives snatched from them by a man whose only cause was himself and his absolute sovereignty.

     Posted by lrjones4 at 01/17/2009 @ 9:31pm

     there's lunatic dictators all over the world, lrj.

     this is about oil and power.

     Posted by frosty zoom at 01/17/2009 @ 10:30pm

146. These former gave their lives for what they believed in. How different that is from the days when Iraqis had their lives snatched from them by a man whose only cause was himself and his absolute sovereignty.

     Posted by lrjones4 at 01/17/2009 @ 9:31pm

     in fact, i would say that the former lost their lives because they needed to feed their families and the military was their only choice.

     the latter lost their lives because they were mislead.

     Posted by frosty zoom at 01/17/2009 @ 10:32pm

147. the latter lost their lives because they were mislead.

     Posted by frosty zoom at 01/17/2009 @ 10:32pm

     You are a funny man FZ but could we expect anything different from you? Or more to the point do you expect to ever have a more substantial thought about living other than for your own welfare?

     I'm pretty sure you have never ever considered joining up in any army and yet you seem to be an expert on the reasons for Iraqis joining their army? Many who died were officers and would have had other options than the army. Maybe there are a few dispassionate FZ type slackers in the ranks but we can be pretty sure that most are motivated by a desire for a better Iraq for their families.

     I did think of the Salvation Army for you FZ but self sacrifice is required there also.

     I had in mind those who refused to be led by Saddam and were butchered but I take it you were referring to the Iran and Kuwait wars. That's interesting because they did fight and die as Iraq nationals though they were drawn from the different religious sects and were able to put country before, in many cases, their hatred of Saddam. Which sort of shows you know nothing about nationalism and self-sacrifice.

     Ho, hum back to the crisps and slander for you FZ.

     Posted by lrjones4 at 01/17/2009 @ 11:33pm

148. no, lrj.

     i'm just not that stupid.

     i'm moving to vulcan. you humans make me ill.

     Posted by frosty zoom at 01/18/2009 @ 02:15am

149. Lrjones called the meeting to order. A dozen people sat in plastic chairs surrounding a podium. They met on a cold and blustery day in the local armory.

     "Welcome fellow bloggers! Todays business concerns the ever variable complexities of dual rationalization and our efforts, therefore, to minimize our profligate and bombastic rhetoric in order to further condense and clarify the perceived gestalt of our own philosophical mindset concerning the zeitgeist of the passing regime! Refer to the supplied document please, and give special attention to the various footnotes and supportive data."

     "Just what did he say?", said sjchermak, flipping through the thick brochure. "I know what he said", responded lvliberty, "but you have to figure it out for yourself! I'm going to walk with Jesus now." He stalked off, a long trail of toilet paper attached to his foot.

     Jones continued: "The focus here is to embrace chaos, thereby seeking to lessen the vagaries of our collective mindset, create an overall unity of thought and thereby effectively subsume the errant and irrational swerving to the left and right of our socio-political conveyance into a singular and glorious obfuscation of fact and fiction! At least, I think we do." He looked down at the podium, flipping quickly through a well worn thesaurus. (And etcetera). ................................................

     An engineer, mathematician, and a jolly jumbuck. I realized that, on the whole, and verbose as he may be, Mr. Jones says even less than most of those he accuses of having no point. Is it worse to reach your letter limit and say nothing, or just use one sentence to do the same? Oddly, I don't always disagree with him. I love the occasional waffle myself.

     Self sacrifice is on the table now. Is he a military man?

     Posted by ficheye at 01/18/2009 @ 04:05am

150. Posted by ficheye at 01/18/2009 @ 04:05am

     A classic! Or, just plain hilarious ...

     Posted by PhilMcCrevice at 01/18/2009 @ 10:50am

151. the decider decided that its never his fault

     Posted by KatrinaJim at 01/18/2009 @ 1:08pm

152. Self sacrifice is on the table now. Is he a military man?

     Posted by ficheye at 01/18/2009 @ 04:05am | ignore this person | warn this person

     Well done! The Happy - Jones lovefest needs some Black Flag Extra Strength. Dr. Strangelove weird.

     Posted by OneVote at 01/18/2009 @ 2:22pm

153. (ref) Lord of the Rings:

     re: Gandalf, deep in the halls of Moria...

     ...."they are coming!!!"

     Posted by ficheye at 01/18/2009 @ 6:33pm

154. So, two lines in this discourse that I wanted to single out:

     <i>Posted by crabwalk at 01/17/2009 @ 08:05am</i>

     This may be a little too late to be a response to Crab, but...nicely played.

     <i>Posted by PhilMcCrevice at 01/18/2009 @ 10:50am </i>

     I think it's a bit of an unfair caricature...but it's still pretty hilarious. :D

     Posted by Thrawn at 01/19/2009 @ 12:57am

155. I think it's a bit of an unfair caricature...but it's still pretty hilarious. :D Posted by Thrawn at 01/19/2009 @ 12:57am

     Just thought it was time to point out how conservatives are running roughshod over everyone on this blogsphere. I was gracious enough to point out that I don't always disagree with all that these folks have to say... but most of the time I do.

     No one like linguistic obfuscation and history lessons, though. Unless you can do it with a link or just a few sentences you open yourself up to being labeled a pedant.

     Posted by ficheye at 01/19/2009 @ 8:40pm