Memories of Bush

Comments (23)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

1. Von Cracker says:

   January 14, 2009 at 11:52 pm

   Looks like Bob Newhart in drag.

2. Unstable Isotope says:

   January 15, 2009 at 6:34 am

   She’d probably be better than Alito.

3. Mike Protack says:

   January 15, 2009 at 8:33 am

   Remember when FDR interred thousands of Americans of Japanese origin in a racist act?

   Remember when JFK wiretapped civil rights leader MLK?

   Remember when LBJ lept a war going in Viet Nam with no strategy to win and basing it on a fraudulent Gulf Of Tonkin incident?

   Remember when Carter botched the Iranian rescue mission?

   Need more?

4. Dorian Gray says:

   January 15, 2009 at 8:40 am

   Mike – These are bad acts, clearly. But #1 torture is the worst of the worst. You are really going to compare the Carter thing or the MLK wiretap to state sponsored torture. You are a despicable apologist. Like someone else’s bad acts excuse your’s. Nice argument…

   Additionally, in regards to FDR and Lincoln (which you didn’t mention), they actually faced real existential threats to the Union – unlike the spurious beliefs of Bush & Co.

5. RSmitty says:

   January 15, 2009 at 8:53 am

   Re #3
   Hmm…that isn’t going to win ’em over. The door of response was just swung so wide-open, I think the hinges just popped off.

   They-did-it-worse-than-us or we’re-less-bad-than-they-are, etc. are rarely winning arguments. Success comes from one’s own (or the collective’s own) product of effort, not a degrading comparison of the opposition.

   This should become a fun thread as the day proceeds.

6. Dorian Gray says:

   January 15, 2009 at 9:23 am

   It is in the same league as the “we haven’t had a terrorist attack inside the US since 9/11” effort. Wow, considering everything else that’s happened I am underwhelmed.

   Think of it this way, on 11 Sept AQ pulled of a near once-in-a-lifetime deal and got 3,000 people. Is the potential for another one a real threat to me… nope. That bullshit works on scared weak people.

7. anon says:

   January 15, 2009 at 9:24 am

   Remember when Carter botched the Iranian rescue mission?

   You are ignoring that the Iran hostage crisis occurred during the Cold War in a country that bordered the Soviet Union. The Soviet generals would have been most unhappy with a larger or longer US military committment in Iran.

   The rescue was botched because there were not enough forces committed. But if Carter had committed more forces in a full invasion or massive air campaign, he could have damn well gotten us all killed. And he knew it. It was not wimpy-ness or lack of military chops on Carter’s part – it was a very rational and proper choice. That is why he held off so long on a military option. You are a dope for not understanding that.

8. RSmitty says:

   January 15, 2009 at 11:22 am

   The rescue was botched because there were not enough forces committed.

   I am no Carter defender, but there was also that little issue of the massive and rare-for-the-time-of-year sand/dust storms that overtook the mission and the ill-fated decision to move forward, despite the terrible conditions. That was a field call…if my history recall is working properly. Those storms actually gave the fundamentalist whack jobs over there reason to believe it was a holy intervention that saved them and far more fuel to their already raging fire that they were defeating the “Western Infidels.”

9. Unstable Isotope says:

   January 15, 2009 at 11:26 am

   Also, Reagan made a secret deal with the Iranians to let the hostages go after his inauguration. That whole “arms for hostages” thing.

10. Sharon says:

    January 15, 2009 at 11:28 am

    I love the excuses for Dem presidents. “They didn’t torture.” Really? Are you sure we didn’t use a little coercion in World War II or Vietnam? Since the definition of torture now includes wearing a bra, I’d suggest that you don’t have a clue about what you speak.

    BTW, the argument about 9/11 is more than just the fact we haven’t had 3,000 people killed in a single hit since 2001. It’s that there haven’t been any attacks on Americans since. You can’t say that about any president in the last 35 years.

11. cassandra_m says:

    January 15, 2009 at 11:34 am

    Guess you missed the anthrax business.

    And you missed the many thousands of attacks on Americans in Iraq.

    You can’t say that about any president in the last 35 years.

    You can also say that no president in the last 35 years presided over the biggest attack on Americans that he had warning of.

    You can also say that you are among people who remember that the Global War on Terror wasn’t just about protecting Americans –and given that the number of terrorist attacks have gone up since 9/11, you could also say that BushCo pretty much has ceded the field on GWOT.

12. jason330 says:

    January 15, 2009 at 11:36 am

    Since the definition of torture now includes wearing a bra,

    1) You’ve got issues. 2) Your 9/11 comments make no sense what-so-ever. 3) Take a hike loser. 4) I mean it. Take a hike you nit wit.

13. Dorian Gray says:

    January 15, 2009 at 12:04 pm

    Sharon, what an ignorant cunt you are! What “little coercion” was used in WWII. We now have the Bush admin on the record. What evidence would you like to share?

    No attacks on Americans, eh? Anywhere? I guess Iraqi IEDs don’t count.

    And the point, you fucking nit wit, is that the methods used weren’t worth the ends. The threat of another 9/11 is minuscule in the extreme in comparison to unremorseful torture. Moreover, how exactly does the past excuse it? Nice argument. Just admit you are a scared weak little pussy… We should be fighting on our terms, not theirs. Using our values, not AQ’s.

    “Live free or die!” Liberty or death.

14. Von Cracker says:

    January 15, 2009 at 12:07 pm

    ROTFL! Don’t call her ignorant!

    c u next tuesday, DG!

15. pandora says:

    January 15, 2009 at 12:38 pm

    DG, I really worry about the way you keep your thoughts bottled up inside. 😉

16. Sharon says:

    January 16, 2009 at 11:15 am

    Cassandra,
    I guess you missed the fact that Iraq was a war zone. Kinda different from guys going to work in an office building or tourists on airplanes.

    And you really need to get over this “he knew 9/11 was gonna happen” crap. A vaguely worded memo does not equate to actual warning of a imminent threat.

    Jason,
    1) You must not read your own site or you would know what the reference to wearing a bra was about; 2) You have reading comprehension problems; 3) It’s always fun when you don’t have an argument; 4) Why don’t you figure out how to debate issues as opposed to juvenile taunts. Geez, my grandma had better combacks than you.

    Dorian,

    You have real issues with women, obviously. Could be you can’t get laid, but who knows? Again, attacks against American soldiers in war zones does not equal kidnapping tourists, bombing civilian facilities, attacking Americans going to work. You do understand the difference, right? Probably not.

    But yes, the ends were, in fact, worth the means. No more attacks here since 9/11. And waterboarding? Does this mean we torture our own soldiers?

17. Donhusseinsquishviti says:

    January 16, 2009 at 11:18 am

    sharon,

    I guess you miss the fact that Iraq was a “war zone” deemed so by bush. It was a place occupied by Americans in the middle of a Sunni Shia Civil War.

    you are sad and the fact that you are a lawyer is sadder. Boy, I though you really pushed disbelief to the side, but now knowing your profession, the mental leaps you have to take to buy this bullshit further astound me…..

    you are sad sharon and America is weaker because of people like you.

18. Dorian Gray says:

    January 16, 2009 at 12:47 pm

    HA! You’re a fucking cunt so I can’t get sex. That’s funny in so many ways.

19. cassandra_m says:

    January 16, 2009 at 1:04 pm

    She also needs to learn to read — again:
    And you really need to get over this “he knew 9/11 was gonna happen” crap. A vaguely worded memo does not equate to actual warning of a imminent threat.

    Doesn’t get anywhere near anything I actually wrote. But the knee-jerk defensive posture on this is noted.

    And BTW — even the 9/11 Commission did not understand why BushCo didn’t at least notify the FAA of this vague threat. Airport security was notified of vague threats all of the time and local airports ratcheted up security routinely.

20. jason330 says:

    January 16, 2009 at 1:13 pm

    “Bin Laden Determined to Attack Within The United States” was the headline of the April PDB that Bush ignored (being a good Chinese deep cover sleeper agent)

    Sharon, The question is why do you hate America?

    Also – why is your grandma such a fucking bitch-ass loser?

21. Sharon says:

    January 16, 2009 at 4:30 pm

    I guess you miss the fact that Iraq was a “war zone” deemed so by bush. It was a place occupied by Americans in the middle of a Sunni Shia Civil War.

    It’s a war zone because we’re in a war there. I know, I know. The concept that your soldiers die in war and that that’s not the same as blowing up civilians going to work are different things must be hard to understand but most normal people get the difference.

    you are sad and the fact that you are a lawyer is sadder.

    When did I say I was a lawyer? Nope. Not a lawyer.

    you are sad sharon and America is weaker because of people like you.

    Least I’m employed.

    HA! You’re a fucking cunt so I can’t get sex. That’s funny in so many ways.

    No, my point is that you have huge problems with women who are smarter than you are, since this was your idea of a comeback. Maybe you can get sex…somewhere…

    Doesn’t get anywhere near anything I actually wrote. But the knee-jerk defensive posture on this is noted.

    Oh, but it does.

    And BTW — even the 9/11 Commission did not understand why BushCo didn’t at least notify the FAA of this vague threat. Airport security was notified of vague threats all of the time and local airports ratcheted up security routinely.

    Because hindsight is always 20/20 and we know Al Gore would have jumped all over this. I know! I know!

    “Bin Laden Determined to Attack Within The United States” was the headline of the April PDB that Bush ignored (being a good Chinese deep cover sleeper agent)

    Did that give a date? A time? A year? Why is the argument, as always, that George W. Bush should have leaped to prevent 9/11 at a time when very few people considered flying airplanes into buildings likely? I’m not really surprised that you’re still fighting 2001, but, really. Bill Clinton did nothing to prevent 9/11 and he had a helluva lot more time to do it. But go on arguing how George Bush should have rushed to change all the regulations, the intelligence services, the airline industry, etc. to prevent 9/11. Because he had a memo that said Bin Laden wanted to attack America.

    Sharon, The question is why do you hate America?

    Why is that the question? Because you have the maturity of a 10-year-old?

22. Sharon says:

    January 16, 2009 at 4:31 pm

    Well, I suppose it’s an improvement from wanting to shoot people you disagree with.

23. Von Cracker says:

    January 16, 2009 at 4:32 pm

    Apologist.

    DG – Who’s gonna git some in Munich and Amsterdam? We are!!!

    Who’s not? Sharon!

    Yes, funny in so many ways is correct!