Bush on the lack of WMDs- "what's the difference?" NSR

[ak_powder_monkey]

the difference is 80 billion dollars

[splat]

Originally posted by slim
/hijack

slim- I love how the backing out of the Kyoto treaty is widely regarded as a conservative effort. The U.S. Senate voted against it 99-0-1. It doesn't get more unanimous than that. Furthermore, to discount the validity of scientific data and the effect that it would have on the U.S. simply to make nice with other countries is absurd.

splat- [hijack on] But a vote by representatives in Congress is not based in scientific fact, morality, common sense, or a profound care about American citizens. It's based on favors,cash, corporate influence, and the all-important re-election to office of the politician. I don't care what party he/she represents. They're all crooks in a system designed to be crooked and serve the unseen/unknown pullers of the strings[/hijack off]

slim- The thing so many people fail to realize about the U.S. is that while we are the greatest producer of green house gases in the world, the U.S. has by far the most stringent emissions regulations. The quantity of green house gases produced by the U.S. is a matter of economies of scale. We have the industrial output greater than all of Europe combined. To say that the U.S. pollutes more than Germany or England or France, is to say that the collective U.S. pollutes more than the state of Wisconsin or California or New Jersey.

splat- [hijack on] After spending ten years on the energy efficiency side of utilities and a bit of time in Europe, I can say with complete conviction that 1) we could power this nation with half the coal fire plants currently in use, and 2) we could all be driving cars that get 60 miles per gallon that perform as well as the ones we have now. The reason we haven't cut pollution is that it would cut the profits of the corporations selling fuels - the same corporations that contribute to the elections of the crooks in office who voted against the Kyoto treaty. Why the fuck don't Americans get it?????????????? American Corporations are the best PR generators in the world because people think info like the opinion slim laid down here is truth and fact. Why? Because it's subliminal brainwashing exquisitely inserted into every bit of news the media dishes out. And people were trained to trust the news in Amerika. Ever notice who advertises on the national news?[/hijack off]

slim- It's comparing apples and oranges.

splat- kinda like the matrix and reality?

[SledNeck]

He will likely be re-elected, no legal action will be taken against him, and many ill-informed voters consider his actions heroic.

Just a dumb inbred redneck here, ill-informed , I will gladly vote for GW.

And to think that almost 60% of Americans support Bush, my backwoods redneck logic tells me that 60% of us Americans must be dumb ass ill-informed rednecks......

Guess that makes the other 40% or so, informed of course, becuse they can parrot everything they hear superstars say.

Polly want a cracker....

[milkman]

"Just a dumb inbred redneck here, ill-informed , I will gladly vote for GW.

And to think that almost 60% of Americans support Bush, my backwoods redneck logic tells me that 60% of us Americans must be dumb ass ill-informed rednecks...... "

That pretty much sums it up.....

[Ireallyliketoski2]

If you're not outraged, you're not paying attention.

[Over-Exposure]

Originally posted by milkman
"Just a dumb inbred redneck here, ill-informed , I will gladly vote for GW.

And to think that almost 60% of Americans support Bush, my backwoods redneck logic tells me that 60% of us Americans must be dumb ass ill-informed rednecks...... "

That pretty much sums it up.....

No one ever said the majority of Americans were either informed or intelligent. The Republican Party is banking on that!

[milkman]

Originally posted by Over-Exposure
No one ever said the majority of Americans were either informed or intelligent. The Republican Party is banking on that!

Exactly. BTW, I was just quoting sledneck....

[Ferniefreeheels]

Originally posted by Ireallyliketoski
and to think that there is a good chance that this IDIOT is going to re-elected. I'm moving to Canada.

If good ol' boy Geo W. Bush is re-elected do you think moving here will help. He'll probably launch an attack on us too, stating that his 'intelligence' sources tell him that Canada is harbouring terrorists or some other equally absurd bullshit. (Don't forget Canada has lots of oil too)

If that rednecked, cowboy, motherf###er gets re-elected GOD HELP US ALL!

[Tippster]

Originally posted by SledNeck
Just a dumb inbred redneck here, ill-informed , I will gladly vote for GW.

And to think that almost 60% of Americans support Bush, my backwoods redneck logic tells me that 60% of us Americans must be dumb ass ill-informed rednecks...

Your words, my friend, not mine. I never equated "Ill-informed" with either stupidity or "redneck-ism." You did. Congratulations. Now please return your head to the sand.

[Skidawg]

This is a great thread full of individuals that have a keen understanding of what's going on here. An overwhelming majority of American's are minions and clones - basing their entire opinions on what they see on television, delivered my GW or the Tom Brokaw types.

Just remember sled-neck that the so called "majority" of American's actually wanted someone other than GW for President. GW was elected fair and square, and according to the rules of the game so I'm not diving into that debate at all.

Tippster's thoughts from page 1 are a straight forward example of the differences between an impeached President, and this one.

Last election I voted my conscience, this one I'm not.

[Big E]

Originally posted by Tippster Please, which is the worse lie:

This is part of the problem. The President of the country should not lie. Period. Not about WMD, not about sex w/ interns, not about forgetting to brush his teeth. The President should lead by example, first and foremost.

[Twoplanker]

Originally posted by Big E
This is part of the problem. The President of the country should not lie. Period. Not about WMD, not about sex w/ interns, not about forgetting to brush his teeth. The President should lead by example, first and foremost.

Gimme a break. No where in the Constitution does it say that the President is supposed to be your Boy Scout leader or a role model.

[cj001f]

Originally posted by Tippster
Hmm.. Clinton lied about something that was:

1. a private matter
2. perfectly legal
3. physically, mentally, and fiscally harmed no one involved.

I may take this juncture to point out that what Clinton(Monica?) did is illegal in a number of states, including Virginia. How's that for screwy?

[dipstik]

Never realized we had so many leftist types here

Look, the main problem with Americans is that they blame the president for EVERYTHING. If they dont have a job, its the presidents fault, if they dont have enough money, its the presidents fault, if their kid is stupid, its the presidents fault. The president is just a poster boy for the American people. Who we should all really be mad at is Congress, for they are the ones that make the real decisions. They have the power to pass bills into laws, even without the presidents approval. They have the power of the purse, so if they didn't like this war, they didn't have to fund it in the first place. Most importantly, they have the power to impeach the president if they dont like what he is doing. The president has hundreds of people helping him out and numerous advisors that know way, WAY more about what is going on than anyone else, and you can't argue that. He didn't just wake up one day and decide to go to war. You can't do that in our country, thats what makes it so great. He has to pass it through congress first. I haven't seen one person blame George Allen, or Craig Thomas for this mess. You know why? Because nobody knows who the fuck they are! But you know what? They voted to pass the bill to let Bush go to war. So shouldn't we be mad at them? I guess not, but maybe I'm just misinformed, after all I do watch the same news as you

What gets me heated is that everyone is so quick to jump down Bush's throat. Everyone assumes he's stupid, but they don't know why. Maybe because he made a few slip-ups in his speeches. Big woop. He want to Yale, and I don't care if he got C's, he still went there. I see a lot of people here saying that they supported the war at first, but now they dont. Well what the hell is that? Bush supported the war at first, and now maybe he realized that it was a bad idea, but he can't just back out of it. The critics would have a field day. We can't just back out of Iraq now either, we have to stay in there until the job is done. Thats what anyone with a backbone would do. If were going to have to be in there, it would make sense that Bush stands by his cause until it's over.

[Ireallyliketoski2]

Originally posted by dipstik
Never realized we had so many leftist types here

Look, the main problem with Americans is that they blame the president for EVERYTHING. If they dont have a job, its the presidents fault, if they dont have enough money, its the presidents fault, if their kid is stupid, its the presidents fault. The president is just a poster boy for the American people. Who we should all really be mad at is Congress, for they are the ones that make the real decisions. They have the power to pass bills into laws, even without the presidents approval. They have the power of the purse, so if they didn't like this war, they didn't have to fund it in the first place. Most importantly, they have the power to impeach the president if they dont like what he is doing. The president has hundreds of people helping him out and numerous advisors that know way, WAY more about what is going on than anyone else, and you can't argue that. He didn't just wake up one day and decide to go to war. You can't do that in our country, thats what makes it so great. He has to pass it through congress first. I haven't seen one person blame George Allen, or Craig Thomas for this mess. You know why? Because nobody knows who the fuck they are! But you know what? They voted to pass the bill to let Bush go to war. So shouldn't we be mad at them? I guess not, but maybe I'm just misinformed, after all I do watch the same news as you

Those are all good points, but there is no questioning the influence that the president has over legislation and policies. The president's influence on Congress is huge, everyone wants to be on board with the Pres, that's where it's happening. Congress can't not vote for approval of the war funds, those who do would be seen as unpatriotic, and those who don't are in the vast minority, more power to them. Change has to start somewhere.

Even war, which the original constitution stated could only be declared by congress, was usurped by the War Powers Act of 1973, which says that the President need only consult with congress. There was a lot of talk about this before the war, and many thought that Bush would have gone at it without Congress's approval. I think the GW Jr. was taking the Iraq situation very personally as many saw Sr.'s failure to remove Saddam from power as a big blunder.

Passed by Congress over President Nixon's veto, the War Powers Act of 1973 requires the president to "consult" with Congress before "introducing United States Armed Forces into hostilities or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances," and to notify Congress within 48 hours of any U.S. troop commitment or deployment.

[milkman]

I've always blamed the Bush administration. Personally I think Bush is a puppet. The real power in this administration are people like Cheney, Wolfowitz and Rumsfeld. Bush is simply a rich daddy's boy (how he got into Yale) who doesn't know his ass from his face. He's an embearassing statesman and is mocked by diplomats all over the world for his lack of understanding of all things political. He's a simple man with a simple mind who should not be head of state.

[PlayHarder]

I kinda agree with milkman here, I actually even feel a little sorry for George W. You can tell watching and listening to him that he believes with all his heart that he is doing the right thing for the people of the US and the rest of the world. Unfortunately, he's not smart enough to realize that a lot of the people close to him are using his power for their own gains. It's pretty easy to sit and hash this out over the internet with hindsight to guide us, but I don't think the whole situation was/is that easy to figure out for a guy like dubya because of the people "guiding" him. As quite a few people have pointed out, what's really scary is the other stuff that his gov't is pushing through while everyones eyes are on Iraq.

[mr_gyptian]

Milk, print this out and carry it with you at all times:


What To Say If:

Saddam refuses to co-operate with his interrogators.

The arrest of this man is a sideshow. He clearly knows nothing about the current state of resistance and has played no role in the planning of insurgency. His trial will simply be an exercise in vengeance with no constructive outcome for Iraq.

Saddam sings like a canary, identifying the perpetrators of insurgency.

Saddam is obviously being tortured by his American captors. Or else, they are lying about his testimony and justifying their own persecution of innocent Iraqis on the basis of his alleged "confession". (Note to broadcasters: these hypotheses need not be stated baldly. They can simply be hinted at or implied by leading questions and incredulous facial expressions.)

Saddam admits to having had weapons of mass destruction all along and gives a detailed account of a) where they can be found, b) how and when he destroyed them.

If a) then switch the focus immediately to the role that America (with particular reference to Donald Rumsfeld personally) played in the past in allowing Saddam to develop these arms. Avoid if possible any tactless references to the much more recent contributions of our European partners in building Saddam's armoury. If b), float the idea that Saddam is lying - simply telling his captors what it would suit their political purposes to hear, in the hopes of cutting a deal for himself.

If Saddam's trial is conducted by Iraq without outside interference.

This is nothing more than a kangaroo court: a lynch mob bent on tribal vendetta, licensed and abetted by America, which has, typically, waged an irresponsible war and then walked away, washing its hands of the consequences.

If Saddam's trial is conducted under American and British supervision.

This makes a mockery of the hope that Iraq is becoming a self-determining democracy. It is now nothing more than a neo-colonial satellite of American imperialism. The United States has, typically, set up a puppet government in Iraq in order to establish control over the region.

If Saddam's trial, by whatever agency, produces previously unknown evidence of crimes against his own people that is so horrific that it shames those who resisted his forcible removal.

No one (certainly not you) ever said they thought Saddam was a hero, or that they wanted him restored to power. They just wanted international law to be permitted to take its own good time to decide how and when he should be stopped.

If the arrest, trial and possible execution of Saddam results in a free and democratic Iraq.

This is irrelevant to the War on Terror. Iraq had no links with al-Qa'eda. Bush and Blair will never defeat terrorism until they catch Osama bin Laden.

.

[Blurred Elevens]

Sometimes you have to read in-between the lines.

Saddam kicked out weapons inspectors...If OR if not he had WMD's, what a dumb fucking move! What'd he expect??! That's an admission of guilt right there. They had plenty of time to hide that shit, but there was a greater goal at hand here anyhow. If you can't read in-between the lines, you've been left out in the cold, and you simply don't understand.

Everyone bangs on Bush for being "stupid". Frankly, it's impossible to be elected Governor, and then President, if you are "stupid".

My biggest question to the left is: What are you going to do when and IF WMD's ARE found??!! Start inventing conspiracy theories that the US Military planted them there to save face? Give me a break, your arguement last week was "we haven't even found Osama or Saddam"....pulease..

The GOTCHA thread was much better than this one, I think we boiled everything down to whether Bush is true to his morals, and/or whether he's been used by Cheney and company for financial gain. Bush is much more intelligent than he's given credit for, he's just not a good actor like those in the past. I'd rather have an honest christian in office than a good actor.

[Dromond]

[i]...Maybe because he made a few slip-ups in his speeches. Big woop. He want to Yale, and I don't care if he got C's, he still went there... [/B]

Perhaps you're forgetting that he's the son of an oil tycoon!

[milkman]

Mr Gyptian:

Check out this post iraq war quiz and see how you do:

http://www.zmag.org/shalomquizi.htm

For the record, I'm no lover of Saddam. The Iraqi people will be better off without him. I really hope the US doen't fuk this up, but given it's track record, it probably will. If the US really did this because of WMD and helping the Iraqi people by disposing of a ruthless dictator, there are a lot of other countries the US should be invading soon. Frankly, the US has a MUCH better track record in creating dictators (the Shah of Iran, Somoza of Nicaragua, Pinochet of Chile to name a few) than they do disposing of them.

[Ireallyliketoski2]

Originally posted by Blurred Elevens


Everyone bangs on Bush for being "stupid". Frankly, it's impossible to be elected Governor, and then President, if you are "stupid".

Current events would suggest otherwise.

[irul&ublo]

Originally posted by dipstik
Never realized we had so many leftist types here

Look, the main problem with Americans is that they blame the president for EVERYTHING. If they dont have a job, its the presidents fault, if they dont have enough money, its the presidents fault, if their kid is stupid, its the presidents fault. The president is just a poster boy for the American people. Who we should all really be mad at is Congress, for they are the ones that make the real decisions. They have the power to pass bills into laws, even without the presidents approval. They have the power of the purse, so if they didn't like this war, they didn't have to fund it in the first place. Most importantly, they have the power to impeach the president if they dont like what he is doing. The president has hundreds of people helping him out and numerous advisors that know way, WAY more about what is going on than anyone else, and you can't argue that. He didn't just wake up one day and decide to go to war. You can't do that in our country, thats what makes it so great. He has to pass it through congress first. I haven't seen one person blame George Allen, or Craig Thomas for this mess. You know why? Because nobody knows who the fuck they are! But you know what? They voted to pass the bill to let Bush go to war. So shouldn't we be mad at them? I guess not, but maybe I'm just misinformed, after all I do watch the same news as you

What gets me heated is that everyone is so quick to jump down Bush's throat. Everyone assumes he's stupid, but they don't know why. Maybe because he made a few slip-ups in his speeches. Big woop. He want to Yale, and I don't care if he got C's, he still went there. I see a lot of people here saying that they supported the war at first, but now they dont. Well what the hell is that? Bush supported the war at first, and now maybe he realized that it was a bad idea, but he can't just back out of it. The critics would have a field day. We can't just back out of Iraq now either, we have to stay in there until the job is done. Thats what anyone with a backbone would do. If were going to have to be in there, it would make sense that Bush stands by his cause until it's over.

Dipstick will now lead us all in the singing of "Stand By Your Man".

[splat]

Originally posted by irul&ublo
Dipstick will now lead us all in the singing of "Stand By Your Man".

If Bush went on TV and said, "All Americans will now get gas at twenty five cents a gallon, at least $80 billion dollars worth," I bet the chorus would be deafening. Instead the lyrics are more like "Cheney's the man...He's gonna take your money...Even if you don't understaaaaaaaaand...Cheeeeneeeys yooooou'rrrre maaaaan"

[Telephil]

Even though I earlier said I'm not sure of the motives for this war, I do agree with dipstik. If not Bush, or not the war argument, there would be another president with another argument against him. He has definitely backed everything he said which is respectable.

Prior to now there were two arguments, finding Saddam and finding WMD. Now that Saddam has been found, what's going to happen if WMD are found, then what are people going to attack.