Category: Politics

Harry Reid makes the case for Bush being worst prez ever

Senate Majority leader Harry Reid (D) was on Alan Colmes’ talk radio show (I’m not sure if he’s ever been on Hannity & Colmes with both hosts) and explained why he thinks president Bush is the worst president we’ve had. Man is it weak.

His list:
–We had a surplus and now we don’t and it’s Bush’s fault (not 9/11 and the war on terror’s).
-He made the “worst foreign policy decision” in awhile by invading iraq. Respectable opinion as long as you include the majority of democrats that voted for it in that “worst” bunch, but history hasn’t shown it as a miserable failure or stunning success yet, so the verdict is very much not in there. A fact that a self noted historian like Reid would normally factor in a professional diagnosis.
–Cost of the war (both blood and treasure): obvious criticism if you think the war was a mistake then $50 and 1 life lost is a ripoff tragedy. But he is still off to assume in his statement that the benefits of having a military presence in the region that has become a terrorist flypaper (you’ve heard the “Fight them there so we don’t have them here” argument before) is possible to do without, let alone “worth it”.
–Iraq war has destabilized the region: this one is just unintelligent. He supports the claim by saying Iraq is in a civil war. Um, Harry – a civil war in Iraq means it is half better than it used to be. Instead of being a 100% dictator controlled anti-American terrorist allied state, it is an election run American allied state fighting terrorism and the extremest who want to return to the Saddam-rule. Historian Reid is doing Colmes’ audience a disservice with this naive summary of the war same as he would if he said the countries aiding the North in the American civil war should pull out because we were destabilizing the region. We don’t know if Iraq’s outcome will be as good as ours, but that’s the whole point – we don’t know yet. And the educated guesses based on the facts on the ground do not lead down the Reid road.

I also like how Reid is disappointed in John McCain for not running an honerable campaign and then gives zero examples along with accusing him of being unelectable because of his temper but when asked for a juicy example he refuses even one. But trust him that he COULD if he WANTED to. dude… c’mon… that’s kinda pathetic.

Fox News girl fired for telling McCain she voted for him

MediaBistro reports that  “A 24-year-old Fox News Channel production assistant was fired this morning for something she said during the red carpet arrivals at the Time 100 Gala last night.” That “something” was sucking up to Sen John McCain as he walked by. The assistant reportedly said “I voted for you in the primary, you’re going to win” which an FNC spokesperson called “journalistically unacceptable” in confirming that the girl was let go from the company.

It’s harsh to fire the poor girl under standards of proper journalism despite having such a low position, but probably had to be done even though there is literally NO way Fox News could have not gotten bashed for this. Consider every scenario:

They fire her: they’re just keeping up appearances or are being too harsh.
They don’t fire her: they don’t care about the ethics problem because they’re a propaganda machine.
The comment was to Hillary or Obama and they fire her: it was because she stepped out of the talking points of their propaganda machine.
The comment was to Hillary or Obama and they DON’T fire her: she was lying just to suck up to either candidate.

Dumb moment with no winners but worth reporting for exactly that reason as it illustrates an odd position in journalism Fox News inhabits that ironically holds it to higher standards than its cable news competitors, CNN & MSNBC.

Remember when Bill Clinton thought Iraq’s WMD was a big deal?

Ya… Didn’t think you did. Because you’re more interested in scoring political points than knowing basic bullet points of recent history and American foreign policy.

I’m only indignant because it’s been years of this history revision as if Iraq was a total invention by the current President as being an issue at all when the not-so-distant history is that Iraq has always been on the radar as a looming threat that requires more action than just containment and hoping things go well.

Dude, come on though. It’s been years of this. I used to balk at the “liberal media” cries but the mass cover of how the President directly preceding this one was using the exact same foreign policy based on the exact same national security advice of both his administration, his friends and even his not-so-friends – while attacking that same strategy by a different president of the non-liberal party is kindov an argument ender.

It’s fine to criticize any policy decision, but why does the left rely on such manipulation and distortion to make their emotional appeals? It’s unnecessary. There is plenty of legit criticisms to be made about the war on terror and Iraq as a battlefield in it. Why is literally anyone anywhere still peddling the “Bush lied, people died” nonsense? And why is there not a concerted effort among all mainstream publications to just inform the public and THEN editorialize on what is good or bad or a mix of the two?

Every intelligence agency in the world including those who didn’t support the Iraq invasion like France, the KGB, but also the Mossad, German intelligence – everyone looking into the subject concluded Iraq was probably illegally harboring deadly weapons with the ability to destroy on a mass scale.

If you want to argue that after having 3 thousand innocent civilians murdered on our soil by groups in the Middle East, THAT was the time to all of a sudden drop our foreign policy from the previous administrations regarding a different Middle Eastern enemy then do it. Have the guts to do it.

Don’t be a coward and lie about lies that were never lied about.

Bush administration is royally screwing up Iraq…

Well I’ll tehll yu whut – G. Dubya is gonna turn me into a stinking hippie real quick if he can’t (read: won’t) find a better team of managers to make his bumbling in Iraq not be a stain on his legacy that essentially reads “everything they said about him being a dumbass war loving tool was correct”…

Democrats lied about the “Bush lied” sloganeering for months to try and defeat him in an election just to replace him with an exactly-as-aggressive foreign policy platform (just under a goofier, impossibly less-charismatic candidate with a somehow even more scummier slippery politician as VP than Darth Cheney) – but that doesn’t mean Bush and his administration ever had this thing under control or would do a good job.

At this point, 2 years after invading, an objective analysis can only read that he’s doing a bad job. and he’s not showing any sign of changing strategy…

WTF tho? (in this case, “Why” the fkk?)

Just because Democrats were dishonest and wrong in their talking points against the war (after they were for it at first, and then slowly started to be for it again after the election in all the key pockets that actually matter like spending and voting on troop deployment) doesn’t mean Dubya knows what he’s doing. Deciphering what the administrations plan is exactly is getting more and more shady.

Bush’s argument for why we can’t leave Iraq is that that would invite more of our enemies to flood in and take over. Well… yea, that’s likely true, but… well take this quote from CNN about it:

During a speech billed by the White House as a major policy address, Bush said if U.S. forces withdraw from Iraq, insurgents would “use the vacuum created by an American retreat to gain control of a country, a base from which to launch attacks and conduct their war against nonradical Muslim governments.”

Critics have charged that the Iraq war has become a breeding ground for terror, while opinion polls suggest that U.S. public support for the war has been waning since spring.

It’s not just “critics charging” that the Iraq war has become a breeding ground for terror… it is verifiably doing exactly that… and that’s what makes it a tough issue to decode. Because on the one hand, the Democrats are just incoherent liars in claiming that the war in Iraq that the overwhelming majority of them supported for years before 9/11, then after 9/11, then when Congress voted on it, then afterward, –then not anymore but in words only while continuing to give it all their political support. But on the other hand – the initial success in the invasion that a coalition of nations agreed was a necessary action to take is being quickly overshadowed by what appears to just be a lack of competency. Idk if that is Bush’s fault or just Governments fault in being bad at basically any and every big undertaking it uses force to implement whether it is confiscatory tax policies, government expansion of power domestically, or the removal and attempted replacement of a dictatorial regime in the middle east. But something is not right and if the administration doesn’t get it right soon then they will just validate all the hippies who claimed there was no plan and no exit strategy.

Those hippies will still be liars about the other claims, but all it takes is to be right about the main aspect of a thing for the public and for history to review it as having been right about the whole thing all together.

So we will see if things improve and whose policies get the credit for it, but if American troops keep coming home in body bags just to “stabilize and rebuild this hornets nest we knocked down” over in the sands of a country most people couldn’t find on a map – Bush’s second term and entire legacy will be one of the worst in modern history. The “try him for war crimes” bumper sticker started out as nonsense, but through doubling down on something that isn’t going well at the cost of American blood and treasure every day, he is making that nonsense a reality.

Get your sh**t together Dubya & Co…

Zell Miller vs Alan Keyes

Good: (D) Zell Miller

For anyone who doesn’t know who Zell Miller is – he’s a Democratic senator from Georgia who’s the head of “Democrats for Bush”. He’s the first guy in history to deliver the keynote speech at both a democratic and republican convention. In 92 he made quite a powerful speech for Bill Clinton and against Bush the elder and the Republicans with the theme that “they just don’t get it” and why America needed Bill in office. In August 04 he delivered an equally rousing speech for Dubya (must have been an awkward moment seeing the first Bush at the convention) with pretty much the theme of “they just don’t get it”, only this time he’s criticizing his own party. Miller says he was born a democrat and will die a democrat and will not switch his registration just because he’s voting for and supports president Bush & his policies on the war on terror.

Zell: “Media are trying to paint me as an angry nut”…

He wasn’t an angry nut. He was firm and just wore kindov a scowl through his delivery. Wutcha’ll think? I think it was one of the best speeches I’ve ever heard, ever.


Part 2:

> BAD: (R) Alan Keyes

Posted in the hawt-links below – Alan Keyes. The Republican nominee for senate in Illinois is quite the wacko.


Future Vice President and then President, Barack Obama said this amusing slam to/about Keyes:

I don’t think it’s unfair to base who a religious figure like Jesus might favor in a political election, but Keye’s answer her is not even close to the right way of going about it.

Update: Figured I’d post this too cuz it’s interesting. I wanted to add an example of him being crazy-bananas over something so naturally I searched for his positions on homosexuality. This clip isn’t crazy-bananas. I disagree with the opinion and think the non-opinion claim is probably factually wrong, but its not as nuttyfruitcakes as I expected so whatever. I’m including it. Don’t take that as me walking back anything about his sanity.