Why doesn't the electorate hate Bush? - Page 5 - Mercedes-Benz Forum

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #41 of 50 (permalink) Old 09-20-2004, 08:37 PM
BenzWorld Member
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: '98 E300 Turbodiesel
Location: Lillywhiterichredneckcrackertown
Posts: 55
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
RE: Why doesn't the electorate hate Bush?

Quote:
koop - 9/20/2004 9:54 PM
My point was that GWB has never achieved anything.
He can scratch that "I'm gonna be president someday" comment we all made when we were five off his list.
Uniwhale is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #42 of 50 (permalink) Old 09-20-2004, 08:39 PM
BenzWorld Member
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 1986 300SDL
Location: Boston
Posts: 383
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
RE: Why doesn't the electorate hate Bush?

Quote:
GermanStar - 9/20/2004 10:29 PM

Quote:
LK ONE - 9/20/2004 7:12 PM

Two counties separated by a common language.
[:D] Damn! I laughed so hard I almost hurt myself.....
Sorry. BTW, did you hear when Prince William gets married he's going to go somewhere a Brit has never gone before?















The dentist!

Thanks folks, I'm appearing here all week............
LK ONE is offline  
post #43 of 50 (permalink) Old 09-20-2004, 09:57 PM
Cruise Control
 
Zeitgeist's Avatar
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: '87 300TD/'90 300D/'94 Quattro/'89 Vanagon TDI/'01 EV Weekender VR6
Location: Cascadia
Posts: 51,730
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Quoted: 1428 Post(s)
Lifetime Premium Member
ad hominy and grits

Quote:
Uniwhale - 9/22/2004 9:35 PM
...uh, my comment was about the good ole boy system in general, Zit. Doesn't take a dedicated public policy student to read the Bush bio.
...well, ain't you just the friendliest cracker around.
Zeitgeist is offline  
post #44 of 50 (permalink) Old 09-20-2004, 10:14 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
FeelTheLove's Avatar
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 83 Astral Silver 280 SL
Location: Planet Houston
Posts: 28,829
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
RE: Why doesn't the electorate hate Bush?

please don't insult him like that. Insult him like this: lily white lawn-jockey-polishing chicken and biscuit eating tractor riding redneck cracker
FeelTheLove is offline  
post #45 of 50 (permalink) Old 09-21-2004, 11:47 AM
Cruise Control
 
Zeitgeist's Avatar
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: '87 300TD/'90 300D/'94 Quattro/'89 Vanagon TDI/'01 EV Weekender VR6
Location: Cascadia
Posts: 51,730
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Quoted: 1428 Post(s)
Lifetime Premium Member
Why not go with the war-monger ya know?

Published on Tuesday, September 21, 2004 by CommonDreams.org
Kerry Offers "Four More Years" of War
by Ira Chernus

"Four more years." That’s not just the Bush campaign slogan any more. It is now John Kerry’s campaign promise: four more years of war in Iraq. In his first major speech on Iraq, Kerry presented a plan “to bring all our troops home within the next four years.�

Only four more years of American young people killing Iraqis and being killed by Iraqis. Hardly a cheery prospect. I’ll vote for John Kerry and urge everyone I know to vote for him. He is certainly better than the alternative. But let us have no illusion about what we are choosing this Election Day.

And you have to wonder whether Kerry’s plan can really end the war, even in four years. He rightly criticized Bush for giving us the prospect of war without end. But when he outlined his own proposals, it sure looked like more of the same.

If a president “would bring in more help from other countries,� Kerry said, “train the Iraqis to provide their own security …develop a reconstruction plan that brings real benefits to the Iraqi people … and take the steps necessary to hold credible elections next year … we could begin to withdraw U.S. forces starting next summer and realistically aim to bring all our troops home within the next four years.�

Yes, Kerry would make some compromises to keep allies on board. And he would spend a bit more money on “high visibility, quick impact� reconstruction projects in Iraq. In other words, he has a better feel for PR than Bush. But the fundamental strategy of a Kerry administration would remain just the same as the incumbent’s (as Bush was quick to point out). No matter who wins on Nov. 2, the war and the killing will go on with no end in sight.

And the rate of killing will escalate, quite soon. The day before Kerry’s speech, the New York Times reported that the U.S. plans to regain control of Falluja and other Iraqi cities by year’s end, using whatever force it takes. That’s the only way to stage a January election that can have any appearance of legitimacy.

Last spring the U.S. offensive in Falluja was called off after 600 died, many of them innocent civilians. This time, says a U.S. commander, there will be no such mercy: “The cancer of Falluja is going to be cut out."

Kerry could have repudiated this disastrous policy. He could have pointed out that it’s Vietnam all over again, a guaranteed way to lose the hearts and minds of the people we are supposed to be saving.

Instead, he agreed with the Bush administration that the elections must be held as scheduled and look legitimate. How to pull it off amidst such massive opposition? “Recruit troops from our friends and allies for a U.N. protection force,� the Democrat says. “We should also intensify the training of Iraqis to manage and guard the polling places that need to be opened.� As if there were any chance that UN and Iraqi forces could protect voters to provide free fair elections.

Whatever happened to that bright young lieutenant who came home from the war to speak the truth? Now he sounds more like the top brass who blindly followed self-defeating policies and asked a man to be the last to die for a mistake. Why does he endorse the same basic strategy that he so rightly proclaims a failure? Why not bring the troops home now?

Kerry promises to be honest, and he gave us a glimpse of an honest answer. The war was a mistake, he said, but now “we must do everything in our power to complete the mission … get the job done and bring our troops home� (four years from now, at best).

Just what does Kerry think the mission is? In his speech, he gave two answers. The link between them holds a key to understanding what this war is all about.

On the one hand, Kerry’s idea of the mission is to avoid worse danger: “We cannot afford to see Iraq become a permanent source of terror that will endanger America’s security for years to come.�

This is apparently the prevailing thinking in the foreign policy establishment (of which Kerry is a long-time member). The war has created a well-armed, highly motivated anti-American fighting force in Iraq. The war has created grievances among the Iraqi populace that anti-American fighters can feed off of for years. It has also spawned the seed of an alliance between Iraqis and non-Iraqis who would, if they could, use violence to thwart U.S. goals.

For our bipartisan foreign policy elite, this amounts to “terror that will endanger America’s security for years to come.� Ever since the days of Franklin D. Roosevelt, the establishment has been thinking and speaking in such fearful tones of absolute dualism. Anyone who does not support the overall goals of U.S. policy is, by definition, a mortal threat to U.S. security and must be stamped out.

But Kerry also offered a more positive view of the mission: “Our objective -- a stable Iraq, secure within its borders, with a representative government.� In the foreign policy establishment, "stable" is a code word for a country that is a dependable part of the U.S. - led global system. It means a country where electoral democracy (the best government money can buy) and multinational corporate capitalism (under the watchful eye of the IMF and WTO) reign supreme. "Secure" means safe from any effective challenge to the U.S. - friendly system.

Republicans and Democrats alike assume that a challenge to the system anywhere might bring it toppling down everywhere. They believe that our own nation won’t be secure until we stamp out those challenges everywhere. It’s an all-or-nothing game. So they conclude that an Iraq free of U.S. control, where anti-U.S. forces have a voice in the government, would “endanger America’s security for years to come.�

This can all make sense if you believe in the Bush administration’s National Security Strategy . It says that there is only one “single sustainable model for national success: freedom, democracy, and free enterprise. … These values of freedom are right and true for every person, in every society.� The U.S. will use its “unparalleled military strength� to make sure that “all nations and all societies can choose for themselves� to live the way we live. It’s our way or the highway of doom.

That’s not merely the official Bush dogma. It’s bipartisan dogma. No leading Democrat has yet challenged it.

No one can ever prove that these beliefs of the establishment are true, or false. They are just taken on faith. But Kerry cannot question them. That would be like a candidate for Pope questioning the divinity of Christ or the dogma of the virgin birth. If you don’t keep the faith, you won’t ever be a serious candidate for president of the United States. Just ask Ralph Nader. That’s why we have a Democrat who says he will do more of what the Republicans have done in Iraq, but better.

Of course, we may never have to worry about what a President Kerry would do. Times columnist Bob Herbert warns: “If he tries to finesse it, if he tries to play hawk and dove at the same time, if he fails to draw convincingly a clear and distinct line between his approach to this great tragic misadventure and that of the Bush administration, he might as well fold his campaign tents and go home.�

If Herbert is right, it’s probably time to start packing. Maybe Kerry can send those tents to Iraq, to house the thousands who will be homeless after the next U.S. attack.

Ira Chernus is Professor of Religious Studies at the University of Colorado at Boulder and author of American Nonviolence: The History of An Idea.


Zeitgeist is offline  
post #46 of 50 (permalink) Old 09-21-2004, 01:00 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
FeelTheLove's Avatar
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 83 Astral Silver 280 SL
Location: Planet Houston
Posts: 28,829
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
RE: Why doesn't the electorate hate Bush?

Unfortunately, Kerry blew the whole Iraq issue and the forces that were driving the Democratic Party's reawakening that began under Dean's leadership got kicked right in the nuts. The statement that he would do the same thing again given the knowledge on the WMDs that did not exist, will be remember as the statment that cost him the election.

The only thing that I can say in response to your post is that we can at least be assured that Kerry will not follow the neo-con path into another war of occupation, which I am convinced they have planned for Syria after the election, to complete an American controlled land mass that stretches from the Persian Gulf to the Mediterreian, the most sought after global chess piece in the world, placing control of the flow of oil into Europe and Asia completely in American hands and turning the Middle East into a defacto American state that will have to be defended from fanatics forever. I also believe Kerry would put far more focus on Afganistan. Altho I still have hope, his current attempt to right his campaign may have come too little too late.
FeelTheLove is offline  
post #47 of 50 (permalink) Old 09-21-2004, 01:17 PM
BenzWorld Member
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Posts: 189
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
RE: Why doesn't the electorate hate Bush?

Since Cheney’s “vote for us or else� comment, the daily rhetoric from Bush seems darker, more bullying. Is it just me, or do you get the feeling he’s acting very threatening to the anti-Bush side. I hear the thought that declaring martial law, is not beyond his limit.
crash9 is offline  
post #48 of 50 (permalink) Old 09-21-2004, 01:53 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
old300D's Avatar
 
Date registered: Jul 2003
Vehicle: '83 240D
Location: Denver
Posts: 3,774
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
RE: Why doesn't the electorate hate Bush?

I'd be very surprised if the administration went after Fallujah and the other enclaves with any sincerity. I don't think they really care about a "the appearance of a legitimate election" in Iraq. They only care about winning the election in November, and that means limiting the body count. And there will be a body count if they go after Fallujah.

OBK #35

old300D is offline  
post #49 of 50 (permalink) Old 09-21-2004, 02:00 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
FeelTheLove's Avatar
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 83 Astral Silver 280 SL
Location: Planet Houston
Posts: 28,829
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
RE: Why doesn't the electorate hate Bush?

Quote:
crash9 - 9/21/2004 3:17 PM

Since Cheney’s “vote for us or else� comment, the daily rhetoric from Bush seems darker, more bullying. Is it just me, or do you get the feeling he’s acting very threatening to the anti-Bush side. I hear the thought that declaring martial law, is not beyond his limit.
Cheney is dangerous. He wants to believe anything that confirms his black-helicopter view of the world, which is why an Iranian intellgence operative like Chalabi could crawl right up his ass. Just the fact he might become president should send chills down the spine of anyone who loves freedom. He is so far to the right, he's scary, and the Chalabi adventure shows he can be manipulated by those who understand his strange motivations. Definitly a man who should never be President.

FeelTheLove is offline  
post #50 of 50 (permalink) Old 09-21-2004, 02:03 PM
BenzWorld Senior Member
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Posts: 491
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
RE: Why doesn't the electorate hate Bush?

ELECTION?!?! what election? there isn't going to be any stinking election and even if they did a sham election does anyone think it will have any affect on the nuts with the bombs who lose.

"Better park the car bombs fella's we lost and will have to work within the system for four years until we get our chance again"

They better get some cool rules, pronto, or they'll be bogus too.

Forum killa


You have been banned for the following reason:
insulting mod

Date the ban will be lifted: Never
koop is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

  Mercedes-Benz Forum > General Mercedes-Benz Forums > Off-Topic

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Mercedes-Benz Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in











  • Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
     
    Thread Tools
    Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
    Email this Page Email this Page
    Display Modes
    Linear Mode Linear Mode



    Posting Rules  
    You may post new threads
    You may post replies
    You may not post attachments
    You may not edit your posts

    BB code is On
    Smilies are On
    [IMG] code is On
    HTML code is Off
    Trackbacks are On
    Pingbacks are On
    Refbacks are On

     

    Title goes here

    close
    video goes here
    description goes here. Read Full Story
    For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome