Archive for the 'politics' Category

Has George Bush Kept Us Safe?

Today, I heard someone say, “George Bush has kept us safe.” He argued that that was Bush’s legacy. I couldn’t imagine that he was serious.

On January 20, 2001, George Bush was sworn in as our 43rd president. On September 11, 2001, terrorists, mostly from Saudi Arabia, flew two airplanes into the World Trade Center and one into the Pentagon while a fourth airplane crashed in Pennsylvania on the way to its target. Approximately 3,000 of our countrymen were killed in what has been called the worst terror attack on our nation. Is that what we call safe? In actuality, Mr. Bush did just the opposite: he made us an easy target for terrorists when he ignored the presidential daily briefing that said “Bin Laden determined to strike in U.S.”

Since then, Mr. Bush has invaded a country that was of no threat to us and had, by his own admission, nothing to do with September 11, sending more than 4,000 more Americans to their deaths. Is that what we call keeping us safe?

Al Qaeda is reconstituting, we have made more enemies in the world because of our  invasion of a sovereign nation, and our borders and ports have STILL not been made made safe. In fact, under Bush’s watch, our port security was sold to Dubai! Is that what we call safe? (Eventually, Dubai did sell off its assets in the U. S.)

We have not yet again suffered a terror attack in the U.S. and that’s what some use for the Bush has kept us safe argument. Sure, if you don’t count the three thousand killed by a terror attack under his watch and the over four thousand killed in an invasion that he spearheaded for no reason, then I guess he’s kept us safe. But even then, has he really kept us safe?

It was about 8 years between the first attack on the World Trade Center in 1993 and the second, in 2001. Under Mr. Bush’s watch, we have not pursued Osama bin Laden, have not secured our ports or nuclear facilities, and have given bin Laden ample time to plan his next move. Is that what we call safe?

Advertisements

War on Christmas? Bah! Humbug!

It’s that time of year again, when a segment of the population (for example, Bill O’Reilly) starts whining that the rest of us, Christian and non-Christian alike, have declared a war on Christmas. This started a few years ago when some retailers decided not to wish every customer (who might or might not celebrate Christmas) a merry Christmas regardless of whether every customer cared to be wished a merry Christmas. War on Christmas? I like Christmas as much as the next person, but to these people, who obviously don’t get out much and don’t know what REALLY goes on in this country, I say, war on Christmas? Bah! Humbug!

If you must label something a war, then I would say that there’s a segment of the Christian population who is declaring war on the non-Chirstmas population—-Christians who aren’t consumed by Christmas, Jews, Muslims, etc. Although these Christians like to defend their right to preferential treatment in this country by parroting the empty sentence, This is a Christian country, I say, Guess again.

This is a country with a lot of Christians. This is NOT a Christian country. There is a difference. Although in the last 8 years, extreme right-wing conservative Christians have tried, with some assistance, to convince us that this is a Christian country and have tried to make this a Christian country, the fact remains: we are a nation of all religions, all colors, all beliefs, and many of the people who settled this country did so in order, we are taught in school, to flee religious persecution or oppression. While some of the founding fathers were Christians, they provided that religion should not be forced upon us by our government by establishing the separation of church and state.

But back to the War on Anyone Who Doesn’t Celebrate Christmas….. Starting in early November, our homes are invaded by television commercials that have images such as Christmas-wrapped Hershey’s chocolates dancing across the screen, and our senses are further attacked in almost every retail store by twinkling Christmas trees and Christmas decorations of Santas, candy canes, crosses, and nativity scenes. We can’t pick up a bag of M & M’s that isn’t wrapped in Christmas packaging, and starting in December, we are held hostage by incessant Christmas music while we’re waiting in line to pick up our pizza or pay for our trouser socks. And then we even have to hear the Weather Channel talk about christmas weather! It’s just Christmas bomb after Christmas bomb after Christmas bomb, exploding in our ears and in front of our eyes.

We are forced to watch while our country is taken over by ONE DAY that, for some reason, has been turned into an entire SEASON. Why SHOULD I have to be accosted by “merry christmas” every time I go into a store? And what about the people who are alone for the holidays and don’t want to be reminded of how lonely they are by hearing someone chirp “merry christmas” with every “paper or plastic”?

I could go on, but I won’t. The whole war on christmas thing is a joke. You want to see war? Go to Iraq or Afghanistan or Africa, or go to the inner-city streets and watch people suffering there. But don’t tell me that there’s a damn war on Christmas.

Georgia Congressman Compares Obama to Hitler

Is this still going on? Somebody had better retrieve this gentleman from his bomb shelter to tell him that a) the election is over, b) no one is going to take his precious guns and ammo away from him, and c) he should really stop engaging in what psychotherapists call “projection.”

Congressman Paul Broun told the AP that he’s afraid of Obama forming a citizen army that answers directly to him and using it to establish a Marxist dictatorship. No, I am NOT making this up. Here’s a quote: “It may sound a bit crazy and off base, but the thing is, he’s the one who proposed this national security force,” Rep. Paul Broun said of Obama in an interview Monday with The Associated Press.

Did he say that it may sound A BIT crazy? I don’t know if IT sounds a bit crazy, but Broun sounds absolutely wracked with insanity.

The unhinged members (I think it’s just a small group; the vast majority of them are normal like the rest of us) of the republican party tried this tactic in the hope that it would cause Obama to lose the election, but most people didn’t believe the lie—-I think it was mostly people who were looking for a way to veil their racism, but there were also those non-racists who just weren’t paying attention to what was really going on.

No one is trying to set up a dictatorship (although I have to admit that my own mind has wandered in that direction from time to time over the past 4 or 5 years whenever I heard that George Bush was illegally spying on our e-mails and phone calls, sending citizens to secret prisons–and not-so-secret prisons—where they were tortured and not allowed to have their cases tried, said that the executive branch of the government should have more concentrated power, blah, blah, blah, you know the rest).

Obama was talking about our military being stretched too thin. Here’s another quote: ”

“The Obama transition team declined to comment on Broun’s remarks. But spokesman Tommy Vietor said Obama was referring in the speech to a proposal for a civilian reserve corps that could handle postwar reconstruction efforts such as rebuilding infrastructure — an idea endorsed by the Bush administration.” Bush administration? Bush is a Socialist/Marxist?
Here, read the article for yourselves.
 

 

 

Bush and the Environment

Since the presidential election, George Bush has been gracious and humble and supportive………in public. In private, however, he hasn’t changed. While the media has been tripping all over itself lauding Bush’s speeches on Senator Obama’s election victory and giving us the details of Bush’s graciousness in inviting the Obamas to the White House, No. 43 has been planning more raping and plundering of our precious United States. For anyone who still thinks that George Bush is a religious man who believes in a caring dominion over all kinds of life, let there no longer be any doubt about who he REALLY is.

McClatchy Newspapers reports that behind the conciliation and smiles, behind the congratulations and Godspeed, George Bush is doing business as usual. He’s working to quickly get environmental standards lowered before he leaves office so that more large corporations can continue to make a profit at the expense of the air we breathe and the water we drink. If President Bush gets his way, I hope that President Obama gets his universal health care bill passed very quickly—–because we’ll all need it.

Read the story here.

Why John McCain Lost

There is one reason for John McCain having lost the 2008 presidential election—John McCain. It’s not more complicated than that. I could end the post here, but since so many people seem to fail to grasp that basic logic, I will explain.

John McCain did not lose because he ran too many negative ads, nor did he lose because he spread too many (or too few) lies about Barack Obama. John McCain did not lose because he selected Sarah Palin as his running mate. He did not lose because of a media bias in favor of Barack Obama. He did not lose because of George Bush. He did not lose the election because he leaned too far to the right or because he drifted too far to the center. He didn’t lose because he was too angry.

All of those were merely distractions intended to hide the fact that John McCain did not support policies that Americans wanted. Americans are not interested in eight more years of needless wars, failed economic philosophies, violation of American rights, and so on.

John McCain lost because of John McCain.

Does Anyone Really Care About the Chief of Staff?

For those of you who are Republican, some of your political brethran are making themselves look bitter, ridiculous, and horribly partisan. They’re already trying to undermine and criticize President-elect Obama, thus trying to give the conservative mainstream media political machine an early start to their lies and spin.

Rahm Emanuel is said to have been chosen as Obama’s chief of staff, so John Boehner is already calling foul on Obama’s statement that he’d change the way things are done in Washington. Are you kidding me? Emanuel is known for getting things done. These republicans say that he’s partisan. Oh, really? Here’s a little bit of information: Obama is a DEMOCRAT, and he’s going to choose a lot of DEMOCRATS for his staff and cabinet. He will also choose Republicans, but it sounds as if these Republicans are trying to convince us that Obama is already lying to us because he’s not choosing all right wingers. (I wonder if they’d feel the same way about a John McCain staff choice.) I guess there are some Republicans who don’t like someone who is a straight shooter and can’t be intimidated; it makes it a lot more difficult for the conservatives to lie and spin.

What’s funny about it is that most of us don’t even KNOW what the chief of staff does, and we don’t know the name of Bush’s chief of staff, and, frankly, we don’t care.

If the situation were reversed, the media wouldn’t even be reporting on this piece of insanity. They know that no one cares; they’re just going to dissect every move Obama makes in order to try to turn the public against him. Good luck with that.

Sarah Palin: Fiscal Conservative?

While John Edwards was happily attacked in the mainstream conservative media for getting a 400-dollar haircut when he was running for President, Sarah Palin’s 150,000-dollar shopping spree while on the campaign trail was brushed over by the same media.

It was, indeed, reported that Palin spent tens of thousands of dollars on a make-up artist, a hairstylist, and clothing while campaigning with John McCain, but from what I saw, there was never the “you ought to be ashamed for spending such a gluttonous amount of money on yourself while you PRETEND to care about people who can’t even afford a flobee and a pair of shoes from Goodwill” scolding that was mockingly heaped on Edwards. Now, Newsweek reports that Palin’s shopping spree was even worse than originally leaked. She had other members of the campaign put some of her purchases on their credit cards. Do you think that perhaps she was trying to hide some of the expenses so that she wouldn’t be found out for what she really is? Just asking. Here’s the story in the Alaska Dispatch, which has a link to the full story in Newsweek.

I guess Palin is one of the growing members of the fiscal conservatives who are conservative with how they spend only their OWN money, not anyone else’s. I wonder if this 150,000-plus-dollar spending spree says as much as Palin and who she really is as Edward’s 400-dollar haircut said about him. Hmmmmm.