So what's the channel for smart guys like you? CNN? MSNBC? Come on, educate us!<quoted text>
That's the channel for dummies, you know you can't put stock into anything they spew.
They're dysfunctional cluelessness.
#1708 Apr 25, 2013
#1709 Apr 26, 2013
"Barack Obama was elected president in 2008 because he was not George W. Bush. In fact, he was elected because he was the farthest thing possible from Mr. Bush. On some level he knew this, which is why every time he got in trouble he'd say Bush's name. It's all his fault, you have no idea the mess I inherited. As long as Mr. Bush's memory was hovering like Boo Radley in the shadows, Mr. Obama would be OK."
"This week something changed. George W. Bush is back, for the unveiling of his presidential library. His numbers are dramatically up. You know why? Because he's the farthest thing from Barack Obama."
"Obama fatigue has opened the way to Bush affection."
#1710 Apr 26, 2013
"Shortly after Barack Obama was elected in 2008, a fellow reporter whod covered President George W. Bush all eight years told me shed had enough of the travel and stress and strain of the White House beat, that she was moving on."
"We reminisced about all the places wed been, all the crazy days and wild nights, all the history wed seen first hand. Just before we said our goodbyes, I asked her if shed miss covering President Obama."
'Not at all. Hes an inch deep. Bush is a bottomless chasm, a deep, mysterious, emotional, profound man. Obama is all surface shallow, obvious, robotic, and, frankly, not nearly as smart as he thinks. Bush was the one.'
"Her words, so succinct, have stuck with me ever since. By the way, shes a hardcore Democrat."
#1711 Apr 27, 2013
An Ode to Bush
Of Thursday's dedication of the George W. Bush presidential library, NPR headlines an article that details how President "Obama's Bush Library Speech Leaves Iraq And More Unspoken."
Most Americans of both parties have, over the years, appeared to have adopted the attitude that the stolen election of 2000 is something the nation has gotten over. But it's hard not to underscore that the George W. Bush presidential library is really a fraud.
After all, Bush was never elected president. On the 10th anniversary of his anointment by the Supreme Court, and particularly by the stay of the Florida state-mandated recount by Antonin Scalia a long-time buddy of Dick Cheney and rabid right wing partisan. In 2010, Eric Alterman recounted just some of the machinations that led to an election that was stolen even before the votes were cast (which was done with a number of voter suppression strategies, including the purging of tens of thousands of largely minority voters in Florida done by a firm called ChoicePoint) on the tenth anniversary of the legalized putsch.
The coup was openly revealed in Scalia's infamous stay of a state-mandated recount (Bush, by the way, as governor of Texas signed a bill that would have made a recount in Florida automatic if the vote were as close in Texas as it officially was in the Sunshine State) when he stated that a recount "threatens irreperable harm to [Bush] and to the country, by casting a cloud upon what he claims to be the legitimacy of his election." In short, Scalia is saying that if Bush lost after a recount it would hurt his reputation as president since the Supreme Court would install him in the White House no matter what the voters decided in Florida.(Remember that Al Gore won the national popular vote by more than 540,000 votes.)
#1712 Apr 27, 2013
An Ode to Bush
WHAT IF...Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld had done nothing, and allowed Richard Clarke & Company to continue their pursuit of Osama bin Laden? What if Bush had paid attention to those warnings (as Clinton did)? 9-11 might well have been averted.
WHAT IF...Bush had valued what he inherited -- a balanced budget -- and DONE NOTHING. No massive tax cuts benefiting the top 1/10th of 1 percent. No massive deficits. 8 years -- budget still balanced, instead of trillions in new debt and a tax code designed to make the government untenable without savaging the social safety net.
WHAT IF...Bush had treated FEMA as a serious agency with a vital role to play in national emergencies? What if he'd appointed a serious administrator, instead of an incompetent crony bent on looting the agency and wrecking its ability to function properly? Katrina might have turned out quite differently.
WHAT IF...Bush had hadn't worked overtime to destroy the regulation of financial markets? What if he'd DONE NOTHING, and let regulatory agencies do their proper work? The financial crash of 2007-8 might never have happened.
WHAT IF...most importantly...Bush/Cheney/Rums feld hadn't conjured stove-piped "intel" to stampede us into war after 9-11? No trillion dollar wars, shoveled onto the spiraling national debt...no thousands of American soldiers killed...no hundreds of thousands of Iraqis killed...no Abu Ghraib...no disillusionment of the American public in our ability to fight and win wars...
#1713 Apr 27, 2013
An Ode to Bush
It is a well-known syndrome in alcoholic and/or abusive families that the child runs to the abusive parent, and makes excuses for him or her. In fact there are a whole set of syndromes afflicting the poor adults who lived through that horror as children.
The fawning interviews attending the opening of the George W. Bush presidential library, for the least bookish of all our presidents, struck me as having a lot of resemblance to those syndromes. America has a problem holding its high elected officials to account. A republic as the founding generation envisaged it is a collective of equals. We have no king, no one who is above the law. Some of us serve the public through elective office for a while. If we do it honorably we get thanks. If we do it dishonorably, we should be tried for our crimes or at the very least suffer opprobrium in polite society. The emergence of the imperial presidency in the twentieth century and until now is an affront to those republican values, a descent into empire and monarchy and lack of accountability. For ex-presidents everything is forgiven over time. We named the airport in our national capital for a man who sold weapons stolen from Pentagon warehouses to Ayatollah Khomeini at at time the latter was on a terror watch list, and used the black money thus gained to support right wing death squads in Central America. We let a war criminal pronounce himself comfortable with his crimes against humanity.
1. Adult constituents of abusive ex-presidents lie when it would be just as easy to tell the truth. They have to constantly make excuses for the criminal behavior of their ex-president. For instance, it is often alleged that all international intelligence agencies agreed with the Bush administration that Iraq had weapons mass destruction. But the French did not, and the Germans had serious questions. It is not true, just a lie that we are forced to tell in order to protect an war-addicted president. Likewise, they often maintain that WMD actually was found in Iraq (wrong) or that it was moved to Syria (not true) or that Saddam Hussein was tied to al-Qaeda (false). Or they may downplay the number of Iraqis killed as a result of the illegal US invasion.
#1715 May 2, 2013
An Ode to Bush.
George W. Bush presided over an international network of torture chambers and, with the help of a compliant Congress and press, launched a war of aggression that killed hundreds of thousands of men, women and children. However, instead of the bloody details of his time in office being recounted at a war crimes tribunal, the former president has been able to bank on his imperial privilege and a network of rich corporate donors that he made richer while in office to tell his version of history at a library in Texas being opened in his name.
Kill a few, they call you a murderer. Kill tens of thousands, they give you $500 million for a granite vanity project and a glossy 30-page supplement in the local paper.
Before getting into that, some facts. According to the US government, more than 100,000 people died following the 2003 invasion of Iraq; of that number, 4,486 were members of the US military. So far, the wars started by Bush and continued by his heir, Barack Obama, have cost upwards of $3.1 trillion. Thats money that could have been spent saving lives and building things, not ending and destroying them.
But thats not going to be the narrative at the George W. Bush Presidential Library, opening this week in Dallas, Texas. No, thats going to be: 9/11, 9/11, 9/11 (see also: 9/11).
Called the "Day of Fire," a main attraction at the new library will be a display on the events of September 11, 2001, where "video images from the attacks flash around a twisted metal beam recovered from the wreckage of the World Trade Center," according to the Associated Press.
"It's very emotional and very profound," Bush explained in an interview. "One of the reasons it has to be is because memories are fading rapidly and the profound impact of that attack is becoming dim with time." That is to say, the former president has a keen interest in fanning the embers of outrage over the killing of nearly 3,000 Americans more than a decade ago lest the world view him poorly for the dozens of 9/11s he perpetrated not just on Iraq, but Afghanistan. Never forget the harm done to us or you just might remember the harm we inflicted on others.
The corporate media doesn't want you to remember those depressing and damning details either. In a supplement that reads as a paid advertisement, The Dallas Morning News calls Bush's new library, "A place to learn," featuring a silky soft interview with the former first lady, Laura Bush, and an editorial that states that her husband "stands out as a leader whose convictions guided him."
#1716 May 2, 2013
Yet the NY Times and other liberal papers (who certainly weren't fans of Bush or the Republicans) conducted an exhaustive investigation after the election, and found that Bush won legitimately anyway, despite all the distraction about the court rulings. Look it up yourself, if you dare,
#1717 May 8, 2013
An Ode to Bush.....
What do these numbers and countries mean?
In 2002 Karachi, Pakistan; 2004, Uzbekistan; 2004, Saudi Arabia; 2006, Syria; 2007, Athens; 2008, Serbia; 2008, Yemen.
No, it's not a puzzle, but given the current nature of our political discourse, the story behind it will no doubt puzzle you.
Listed above are the years and countries where United States' Embassies were attacked under our previous commander-in-chief, George W. Bush. I found this to be quite revealing given the all out "hair on fire" witch hunt that is currently taking place amongst conservative pundits and Republicans in Congress over the embassy attack in Benghazi, Libya last year. Now, I will be the first to say that even one person killed in an attack on our embassies is too many, but the fact that seven (count 'em SEVEN!) embassies were attacked and many people killed under the previous Republican administration and we heard nary a word of dismay is more than puzzling, it's downright unbelievable!
Now where does the Republican hero of heroes stand on the attack meter? There were three embassy attacks during Ronald Reagan's presidency, two in 1983 - Beirut (more than 60 killed including 17 Americans) and Kuwait - and one in 1987 in Italy.
In fact, history shows that each of the presidents of the past few decades have had to deal with embassy attacks and bombings. For some reason, I don't ever recall there being so much unrest following an attack as there is now under President Obama.
I guess what really sent me reeling was today when I read about Mike Huckabee's well-crafted remarks on the radio that "Benghazi will be Obama's Watergate" and "this President will not fill out his full term". Excuse me? Let me get this straight. Not only did 9/11 happen on Bush's watch, but seven embassy attacks and Obama is the one that will be ousted? Huckabee claimed that the so-called Benghazi "cover-up" was worse than Watergate "because no one died." Well, I have one question for Mr. Huckabee: How many people died because of the Iraq War "weapons of mass destruction" cover-up? How many American soldiers gave their lives for a war of choice built on exaggeration, manipulation and outright lies? Is that worse than Watergate?
But see, we can't mention that because Bush "kept us safe" remember? Sorry, but if you think that's safe then I have a bridge in San Francisco I want to sell you.
I agree that there may still be some questions that need to be answered regarding the attacks in Benghazi and the families of those who died who have questions deserve to have their questions answered. However, the level of vitriol that is coming out of the Right because of these attacks is undeniably partisan and disgusting.
What's even more outrageous is that absolutely no one is discussing the fact that it was the House Republicans who cut $300 million from the Obama administration's US embassy security budget not long before the embassy attack in Benghazi took place. Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-UT), who is one of the Republicans bravely leading the Benghazi charge, didn't seem too concerned about the embassy in Libya last year when he made the following statement on CNN in an interview with Soledad O'Brien.
#1718 May 9, 2013
How many of those previous attacks occurred over a period of 9 hours, in which calls for help were ignored by the Administration? Most of them were hit and run bombings and shootings, which were over in minutes. You're comparing apples and oranges.
#1719 May 9, 2013
You're comparing apples and oranges. Those previous attacks were hit and run bombings and shootings, which were over in minutes. Benghazi involved attacks over 9 hours, on a facility that was the subject of previous warnings about it's vulnerability, and where urgent calls for help were ignored.
#1720 May 9, 2013
#1721 May 9, 2013
Once again, Excellent post.
#1722 May 9, 2013
Maybe some of the problems facing the country today wouldn't have taken place.
#1724 May 18, 2013
AN ODE TO BUSH
Georgetown University professor and MSNBC contributor Michael Eric Dyson revealed on MSNBCs Now on Wednesday that he has been the target of political intimidation by the Internal Revenue Service during the administration of President George W. Bush. Dyson claimed that, after criticizing Bush on television for his governments response to Hurricane Katrina, he was audited for five consecutive years by the IRS.
In a discussion about the unfolding scandal in which IRS agents are implicated in forcing conservative groups to undergo more scrutiny in requests for tax-exempt status than liberal groups, the MSNBC panel agreed that added scrutiny across the board would be welcome.
The conversation shifted to the scandal surrounding the Justice Departments unilateral seizure of telephone records from the Associated Press.
#1725 May 20, 2013
Ahhhhh, the hypocrisy of those silly Republicans.
You didn't hear a peep out of those fruit loops when the NAACP was audited from 2004 - 2006 after then NAACP President, Julian Bond criticized GWB for getting American into an unjust war with Iraq based on lies of Iraq having WMD's.
The Republicans are hypocrites and two bit phonies because they have nothing to run on in the mid term elections of 2014.
#1726 May 20, 2013
Can I ask you something Sandy ? You've been acting psychotically latey. What the hell....why ?
#1727 May 20, 2013
You're acting very stupid lately..........Why?
What's your major malfunction?
Can't get a date?
People think you're silly?
Whatever it is, you need to address it ASAP.
#1728 May 21, 2013
An Ode to BUSH
There have been nine public hearings and countless hours of commentary about the so-called Benghazi cover-up really some bureaucratic back-and-forth about talking points for a second-tier officials appearance on TV. But none of the outraged members of Congress or the news media seems to have any idea what a real cover-up looks like.
In 2011, I gained access to files at the George H.W. Bush library in College Station, Texas, showing how Bushs White House reacted to allegations in 1991 that he had joined in an operation in 1980 to sabotage President Jimmy Carters negotiations to free 52 American hostages then held in Iran.
What those files revealed was how to run a cover-up! Its framework was set on Nov. 6, 1991, by White House Counsel C. Boyden Gray, who explained to an inter-agency strategy session how to contain and frustrate a congressional investigation into the so-called October Surprise case. The explicit goal was to insure the scandal would not hurt President Bushs reelection hopes in 1992.
Grays strategy session followed by two days the White House receiving evidence from the State Department that a key fact in the October Surprise allegations had been verified. Ronald Reagans 1980 campaign director, William Casey, indeed had traveled on a mysterious trip to Madrid, just as one of the central witnesses had claimed.
The confirmation was passed along by State Department legal adviser Edwin D. Williamson, who said that among the State Department material potentially relevant to the October Surprise allegations [was] a cable from the Madrid embassy indicating that Bill Casey was in town, for purposes unknown. Associate White House counsel Chester Paul Beach Jr. Beach noted Williamsons information in a memorandum for record dated Nov. 4, 1991.
#1729 Jun 1, 2013
An Ode to Bush
Fox News had a gotcha moment go wrong, when Sen. Dick Durbin explained why Karl Rove deserves to be investigated by the IRS.
Transcript via Fox News Sunday:
WALLACE: Senator Durbin, I want to pick up on this culture. Starting in 2010, a number of Democratic senators Democrat senators sent letters to the IRS asking them to investigate various groups that they said were seeking tax-exempt status, but were improperly involved in politics. Now, in October 2010, you sent a letter to the IRS in which you talked about going after groups.
But you only mentioned one specifically by name and I want to put this up from the October 2010 letter that you wrote to the IRS,One organization whose activities appear to be inconsistent with the tax status is Crossroads GPS. That, of course, a group co-founded by Karl Rove.
Question, Senator why single out Crossroads when you did not mention one single liberal group, and there were a bunch that were applying for that exempt-status exactly that point, with the name progress in their names?
DURBIN: I can just tell you flat out why I did it, because that Crossroads organization was boasting about the money they were raising as a 501(c)(4).
Lets get back to the basics. Citizens United really unleashed hundreds, if not thousands, of organizations seeking tax-exempt statuses to play in political campaigns. The law we wrote as Congress said that they had to exclusively be engaged in social welfare and not politics and campaigning.
And so, here is the IRS trying to decide whether or not these organizations really comply with the law. Crossroads was exhibit A. They were boastful about how much the money they were going to raise and beat Democrats.
Add your comments below
|Mets talkback (Dec '07)||1 min||met fan||40,972|
|Tim Kaine is boring in two languages||4 min||El Padre||1|
|Clinton vs Trump: battle of the New Yorkers||23 min||WasteWater||78|
|Trump Surges||43 min||Demxit 2016||12|
|The United Hates of America (Sep '10)||50 min||De Oppresso Liber||2,550|
|Yankee talk back 4, or is it 5 (Aug '08)||51 min||jimi-yank||330,777|
|Bloomberg: Trump "risky, reckless and radical"||1 hr||okimar||11|
|HILLARY will be THE BEST PRESIDENT EVER (Dec '14)||5 hr||no friend of bene...||11,363|
|Topix Human Sexuality Forum Discontinued||16 hr||Hamburglar||33|
Find what you want!
Search New York Forum Now
Copyright © 2016 Topix LLC