The Absolute Failure Of The Bush Administration...

[otterinbham 0]

Drink all the Kool Ade you want. But unassailable conservatives from George Will to William F. Buckley have severe doubts about this administration's competence. Here's another well-thought-out essay.

==============

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml.../29/wbush29.xml

[CCTAU 3,350]

If you get your news from anywhere near Europe, you are an idiot.

Like Tony Blair said when asked why he believes so much in America, he said:

"A simple way to take measure of a country is to look at how many want in......And how many want OUT"

He is one of few who actually see us a great nation. The rest of Europe, even his own parliament wish us to implode. So anything writen by a UK paper is not even good enough for my dog to pi$$ on. Even if it put down dims, I would not read it. God help us, dims are Americans too. They mey be idgits, but they're my idgits.

[otterinbham 0]

Fine. Add Wlliam F. Buckley, George Will, Andrew Sullivan, Milton Friedman, etc. to the parade of critics. All have impeccable conservative credentials, economically and politically. All of them are unanimous in declaring the Bush presidency a catastrophe. Are you going to dismiss them, too? If so, you are a Kool-Ade drinker of the first degree. And, actually, Great Britain is where the modern conservative movement began. Have you ever heard of Margaret Thatcher?

See, where you make a huge mistake is holding a belief that Love of Bush and Love Of Country are the same thing. Further, this discussion has nothing to do with whether or not this is a great country. A great country remains great by understanding its mistakes and rectifying them. Not blundering on and on, piling one disaster onto another. Which means that last thing we need is more chest-beating, CC.

[Bottomfeeder 244]

If you get your news from anywhere near Europe, you are an idiot.

Like Tony Blair said when asked why he believes so much in America, he said:

"A simple way to take measure of a country is to look at how many want in......And how many want OUT"

He is one of few who actually see us a great nation. The rest of Europe, even his own parliament wish us to implode. So anything writen by a UK paper is not even good enough for my dog to pi$$ on. Even if it put down dims, I would not read it. God help us, dims are Americans too. They mey be idgits, but they're my idgits.

This war administration and spend happy congress will ruin this country financially.

I think you need some divine help. May I pray for you?

[CCTAU 3,350]

If you get your news from anywhere near Europe, you are an idiot.

Like Tony Blair said when asked why he believes so much in America, he said:

"A simple way to take measure of a country is to look at how many want in......And how many want OUT"

He is one of few who actually see us a great nation. The rest of Europe, even his own parliament wish us to implode. So anything writen by a UK paper is not even good enough for my dog to pi$$ on. Even if it put down dims, I would not read it. God help us, dims are Americans too. They mey be idgits, but they're my idgits.

This war administration and spend happy congress will ruin this country financially.

I think you need some divine help. May I pray for you?

No thank you. I only accept prayers from those who might actually be heard.

PULEASE . Thatcher did not start any modern day conservatism. She was a strong leader for the UK. But that does not make any Englishman worth listenign to.

She is not even beloved by her countrymen. Just as Tony Blair gets a bad rap. We as Americans love both of them because they stand up for what is right. We get a president that does that and we don't appreciate either.

As far as this administration being a disaster, that is BS. It's far from a disaster. Too many of you idiots out there throw around big words so that your hot air will have a biggger impact. Has this been the best administration financially? No. But what do these others know about war times in this modern world. NOT A DAMN THING. We have not seen war such as this. So how can they proclaim that it's a disaster. I think as you live an learn, you will see that this will be the norm for us as a country for years to come. Until those of you that bury your head in the sand realize that the enemy is out there and he wants you DEAD, we will continue to live with this type of administration from a security standpoint. Or maybe we can get a dim in there and he will pull us out of war and proclaim peace just so the terrorists can come here and attack us again.

Has this administration been one of the best? No. But not even close to a disaster. Disaster is such a totaly devastating word and nothing about our government even as a whole has been devastatingly disasterous.

But go ahead and use your bog words along with all the talking heads. Listen to the Europeans, we really want to be like them.

But don't use words that do not describe what is happening. Disappointing? Maybe. Disastrous? not even close.

[otterinbham 0]

If you get your news from anywhere near Europe, you are an idiot.

Like Tony Blair said when asked why he believes so much in America, he said:

"A simple way to take measure of a country is to look at how many want in......And how many want OUT"

He is one of few who actually see us a great nation. The rest of Europe, even his own parliament wish us to implode. So anything writen by a UK paper is not even good enough for my dog to pi$$ on. Even if it put down dims, I would not read it. God help us, dims are Americans too. They mey be idgits, but they're my idgits.

This war administration and spend happy congress will ruin this country financially.

I think you need some divine help. May I pray for you?

No thank you. I only accept prayers from those who might actually be heard.

PULEASE . Thatcher did not start any modern day conservatism. She was a strong leader for the UK. But that does not make any Englishman worth listenign to.

She is not even beloved by her countrymen. Just as Tony Blair gets a bad rap. We as Americans love both of them because they stand up for what is right. We get a president that does that and we don't appreciate either.

As far as this administration being a disaster, that is BS. It's far from a disaster. Too many of you idiots out there throw around big words so that your hot air will have a biggger impact. Has this been the best administration financially? No. But what do these others know about war times in this modern world. NOT A DAMN THING. We have not seen war such as this. So how can they proclaim that it's a disaster. I think as you live an learn, you will see that this will be the norm for us as a country for years to come. Until those of you that bury your head in the sand realize that the enemy is out there and he wants you DEAD, we will continue to live with this type of administration from a security standpoint. Or maybe we can get a dim in there and he will pull us out of war and proclaim peace just so the terrorists can come here and attack us again.

Has this administration been one of the best? No. But not even close to a disaster. Disaster is such a totaly devastating word and nothing about our government even as a whole has been devastatingly disasterous.

But go ahead and use your bog words along with all the talking heads. Listen to the Europeans, we really want to be like them.

But don't use words that do not describe what is happening. Disappointing? Maybe. Disastrous? not even close.

So that's grape Kool Ade you prefer, right? Sorry. Disaster.

I work with the military. I talk to Majors and Colonels on a bi-weekly basis for my work. I was privy to one session over beers in DC four months ago after a presentation. Now these are guys who are involved with development of asymmetrical warfare tactics. I've gotten to know these guys pretty well over the past two years. Special Forces guys. Army intelligence guys. And while they were all reluctant to simply call it a disaster, they were quite explicit about the number of imbecilic mistakes made in Iraq. Further, they were dismayed by how utterly out of touch the top leadership is about the situation on the ground.

"What," I asked. "The commanders?" One guy didn't say anything. He just hiked his thumb upwards.

"The joint chiefs?"

One guy chimed in. "Nope. Shinseki was pretty vocal from the beginning about it. And look what happened to him." Meanwhile, the other guy just hiked his thumb upwards some more.

"Rumsfeld?" Swift nodding of heads all around.

And, as one guy drained his beer, he said, "But don't quote me by name. I have two more years to go. It used to be that you could hold a dissenting view in the army. Now, it's a good way to get retired early."

Basically, Rumsfeld is the modern answer to McNamara, a buffoon who blew off the advice of the Generals on the pacification and occupation of Iraq. And W gave Rumsfeld a long leash.

[CCTAU 3,350]

And while they were all reluctant to simply call it a disaster........

HMMMM!

Maybe the word still has the same meaning to those not ready to just shoot off their mouth. Also, "those in the know."

[TexasTiger 13,028]

As far as this administration being a disaster, that is BS. It's far from a disaster. ... Disastrous? not even close.

Your standards are obviously exceedingly low.

[Bottomfeeder 244]

As far as this administration being a disaster, that is BS. It's far from a disaster. ... Disastrous? not even close.

Your standards are obviously exceedingly low.

TT,

I think he is just as clueless as the rest of the 20-40% of voters who still support the LOSER ADMIN. It's a sad day for America when some people are still blinded by propagandist like Bill O'Reilly. When some can't even open their minds to the fact that they may actually have been fooled. Now, that's arrogance.

[DKW 86 7,441]

These midterms are shaping up in a purely historical context, that is true.

I have avoided much of the cable news shows, even the Fox ones for some time now because I found bush just too unbearabloe to watch. He is hard spoken and embarassing at times.

The latest version of the Republican Party is some mindnumbing idiotic version of the Democratic Party. Fatcat Influence peddlers like Abramoff and others are far too common. The "spend like you cant think" with our tax dollars is beyond scary.

Bush and others have lead the way for realignment in the Republican Party. This is not a Fiscally Conservative party any more and I dont care for it. If I wanted to vote for Democrats, I can go vote for REAL Democrats.

These new Blue Dog Democrats, I will watch that for real. I have more than my suspicions that they will be run out of the Democratic Party just like Leiberman. There is NO ROOM FOR A CONSERVATIVE IN THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY. So many left the party in the 80s and 90s saying just that.

[otterinbham 0]

And while they were all reluctant to simply call it a disaster........

HMMMM!

Maybe the word still has the same meaning to those not ready to just shoot off their mouth. Also, "those in the know."

Witness, CCTAU, this editorial in the Army Times:

Time for Rumsfeld to go

"So long as our government requires the backing of an aroused and informed public opinion ... it is necessary to tell the hard bruising truth."

That statement was written by Pulitzer Prize-winning war correspondent Marguerite Higgins more than a half-century ago during the Korean War.

But until recently, the "hard bruising" truth about the Iraq war has been difficult to come by from leaders in Washington. One rosy reassurance after another has been handed down by President Bush, Vice President Cheney and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld: "mission accomplished," the insurgency is "in its last throes," and "back off," we know what we're doing, are a few choice examples.

Military leaders generally toed the line, although a few retired generals eventually spoke out from the safety of the sidelines, inciting criticism equally from anti-war types, who thought they should have spoken out while still in uniform, and pro-war foes, who thought the generals should have kept their critiques behind closed doors.

Now, however, a new chorus of criticism is beginning to resonate. Active-duty military leaders are starting to voice misgivings about the war's planning, execution and dimming prospects for success.

Army Gen. John Abizaid, chief of U.S. Central Command, told a Senate Armed Services Committee in September: "I believe that the sectarian violence is probably as bad as I've seen it ... and that if not stopped, it is possible that Iraq could move towards civil war."

Last week, someone leaked to The New York Times a Central Command briefing slide showing an assessment that the civil conflict in Iraq now borders on "critical" and has been sliding toward "chaos" for most of the past year. The strategy in Iraq has been to train an Iraqi army and police force that could gradually take over for U.S. troops in providing for the security of their new government and their nation.

But despite the best efforts of American trainers, the problem of molding a viciously sectarian population into anything resembling a force for national unity has become a losing proposition.

For two years, American sergeants, captains and majors training the Iraqis have told their bosses that Iraqi troops have no sense of national identity, are only in it for the money, don't show up for duty and cannot sustain themselves.

Meanwhile, colonels and generals have asked their bosses for more troops. Service chiefs have asked for more money.

And all along, Rumsfeld has assured us that things are well in hand.

Now, the president says he'll stick with Rumsfeld for the balance of his term in the White House.

This is a mistake.

It is one thing for the majority of Americans to think Rumsfeld has failed. But when the nation's current military leaders start to break publicly with their defense secretary, then it is clear that he is losing control of the institution he ostensibly leads.

These officers have been loyal public promoters of a war policy many privately feared would fail. They have kept their counsel private, adhering to more than two centuries of American tradition of subordination of the military to civilian authority.

And although that tradition, and the officers' deep sense of honor, prevent them from saying this publicly, more and more of them believe it.

Rumsfeld has lost credibility with the uniformed leadership, with the troops, with Congress and with the public at large. His strategy has failed, and his ability to lead is compromised. And although the blame for our failures in Iraq rests with the secretary, it will be the troops who bear its brunt.

This is not about the midterm elections. Regardless of which party wins Nov. 7, the time has come, Mr. President, to face the hard bruising truth:

Donald Rumsfeld must go.

[CCTAU 3,350]

This is NOT from a military leader. This is from an editor writing an opinion on what he thinks he's seeing. Iraq is not on the brink of civil war. Baghdad and the four provinces that make it up are in a tenuous situation. The rest of the country is doing great. It's not the ideal situation, but it is becoming more and more an Iraqi issue as opposed to a US issue. Their government is making decisions and setting up their military for the future of their country. We are part of the problem in that we sometimes won't get out of the way and let them kill each other. As soon as the bad apples are purged by their own government, the soonner they can get their country back.

But what does this have to do with this administration being a disaster? This still is not a "disaster". This is what it is and will be for a long time to come. You are still "reaching" with that "disaster" thing.

it's basically the same thing that we have been bombarded with by the media for almost 6 years...HATE BUSH HATE BUSH BUSH BAD HATE BUSH HATE BUSH. But still no plan, just HATE BUSH.

[TexasTiger 13,028]

But what does this have to do with this administration being a disaster? This still is not a "disaster". This is what it is and will be for a long time to come. You are still "reaching" with that "disaster" thing.

it's basically the same thing that we have been bombarded with by the media for almost 6 years...HATE BUSH HATE BUSH BUSH BAD HATE BUSH HATE BUSH. But still no plan, just HATE BUSH.

uhm...Otter voted for Bush twice, I believe.

[quietfan 233]

A frequent battle cry of the Republicans is "but the Democrats don't offer anything better, they're just out to get Bush."

I don't pretend that the Democrats have all the answers. I wish someone did. But at some point, doesn't a situation become bad enough that you cut your losses regardless of what the alternative is? I mean, if your house is on fire, do you wait to move out until you have architectural plans for another, or do you address the situation at hand? Or to borrow an analogy from the football forum: Should Bama keep Shula forever simply because they don't have a new coach's playbook yet, or should they first admit that the current plan isn't working and commit to a change? The current situation in Iraq is a mess and the ethics situation in Congress isn't much better. Should we just continue to wallow in the mess and keep the same leaders that put us there, or do we admit that something has to change and the current leaders don't seem capable of doing so?

[Bottomfeeder 244]

But what does this have to do with this administration being a disaster? This still is not a "disaster". This is what it is and will be for a long time to come. You are still "reaching" with that "disaster" thing.

it's basically the same thing that we have been bombarded with by the media for almost 6 years...HATE BUSH HATE BUSH BUSH BAD HATE BUSH HATE BUSH. But still no plan, just HATE BUSH.

But, undeniably most do vehemently hate Bush (all of them), including me.

[otterinbham 0]

But what does this have to do with this administration being a disaster? This still is not a "disaster". This is what it is and will be for a long time to come. You are still "reaching" with that "disaster" thing.

it's basically the same thing that we have been bombarded with by the media for almost 6 years...HATE BUSH HATE BUSH BUSH BAD HATE BUSH HATE BUSH. But still no plan, just HATE BUSH.

uhm...Otter voted for Bush twice, I believe.

Yes, I did. Quite reluctantly, in fact. I only wish the Democratic party did not cling to bizarre economic theory of foreign policy that's equally detatched from reality. Then I would have a palatable alternative.

[TexasTiger 13,028]

But what does this have to do with this administration being a disaster? This still is not a "disaster". This is what it is and will be for a long time to come. You are still "reaching" with that "disaster" thing.

it's basically the same thing that we have been bombarded with by the media for almost 6 years...HATE BUSH HATE BUSH BUSH BAD HATE BUSH HATE BUSH. But still no plan, just HATE BUSH.

uhm...Otter voted for Bush twice, I believe.

Yes, I did. Quite reluctantly, in fact. I only wish the Democratic party did not cling to bizarre economic theory of foreign policy that's equally detatched from reality. Then I would have a palatable alternative.

My point is this hardly applies: "HATE BUSH HATE BUSH BUSH BAD HATE BUSH HATE BUSH. But still no plan, just HATE BUSH."

But it is the only level of "reasoning" CCTAU has.

[CCTAU 3,350]

But what does this have to do with this administration being a disaster? This still is not a "disaster". This is what it is and will be for a long time to come. You are still "reaching" with that "disaster" thing.

it's basically the same thing that we have been bombarded with by the media for almost 6 years...HATE BUSH HATE BUSH BUSH BAD HATE BUSH HATE BUSH. But still no plan, just HATE BUSH.

uhm...Otter voted for Bush twice, I believe.

Yes, I did. Quite reluctantly, in fact. I only wish the Democratic party did not cling to bizarre economic theory of foreign policy that's equally detatched from reality. Then I would have a palatable alternative.

My point is this hardly applies: "HATE BUSH HATE BUSH BUSH BAD HATE BUSH HATE BUSH. But still no plan, just HATE BUSH."

But it is the only level of "reasoning" CCTAU has.

It is the ONLY meassage any of your posts have.......HATE BUSH HATE BUSH HATE BUSH HATE BUSH HATE BUSH HATE BUSH HATE BUSH HATE BUSH.

Come up with any kind of logical solution. The subject of this thread is the "absolute" failure. I see no ABSOLUTE failure. There is failure in certain areas as with all administrations, but mostly this is driven by the HATE BUSH librul media and you fools that gobble it up. Once again for that dumbass from Texas, I am not saying all is rosy, just that it is not ABSOLUTE.

[TexasTiger 13,028]

But what does this have to do with this administration being a disaster? This still is not a "disaster". This is what it is and will be for a long time to come. You are still "reaching" with that "disaster" thing.

it's basically the same thing that we have been bombarded with by the media for almost 6 years...HATE BUSH HATE BUSH BUSH BAD HATE BUSH HATE BUSH. But still no plan, just HATE BUSH.

uhm...Otter voted for Bush twice, I believe.

Yes, I did. Quite reluctantly, in fact. I only wish the Democratic party did not cling to bizarre economic theory of foreign policy that's equally detatched from reality. Then I would have a palatable alternative.

My point is this hardly applies: "HATE BUSH HATE BUSH BUSH BAD HATE BUSH HATE BUSH. But still no plan, just HATE BUSH."

But it is the only level of "reasoning" CCTAU has.

It is the ONLY meassage any of your posts have.......HATE BUSH HATE BUSH HATE BUSH HATE BUSH HATE BUSH HATE BUSH HATE BUSH HATE BUSH.

Come up with any kind of logical solution. The subject of this thread is the "absolute" failure. I see no ABSOLUTE failure. There is failure in certain areas as with all administrations, but mostly this is driven by the HATE BUSH librul media and you fools that gobble it up. Once again for that dumbass from Texas, I am not saying all is rosy, just that it is not ABSOLUTE.

Well this wasn't my thread, but I have found that when I have tried to engage your mind at all, it doesn't work. All your mind can process is that anyone who disagrees with Bush hates him.

[Tiger Al 0]

But what does this have to do with this administration being a disaster? This still is not a "disaster". This is what it is and will be for a long time to come. You are still "reaching" with that "disaster" thing.

it's basically the same thing that we have been bombarded with by the media for almost 6 years...HATE BUSH HATE BUSH BUSH BAD HATE BUSH HATE BUSH. But still no plan, just HATE BUSH.

uhm...Otter voted for Bush twice, I believe.

Yes, I did. Quite reluctantly, in fact. I only wish the Democratic party did not cling to bizarre economic theory of foreign policy that's equally detatched from reality. Then I would have a palatable alternative.

My point is this hardly applies: "HATE BUSH HATE BUSH BUSH BAD HATE BUSH HATE BUSH. But still no plan, just HATE BUSH."

But it is the only level of "reasoning" CCTAU has.

It is the ONLY meassage any of your posts have.......HATE BUSH HATE BUSH HATE BUSH HATE BUSH HATE BUSH HATE BUSH HATE BUSH HATE BUSH.

Come up with any kind of logical solution. The subject of this thread is the "absolute" failure. I see no ABSOLUTE failure. There is failure in certain areas as with all administrations, but mostly this is driven by the HATE BUSH librul media and you fools that gobble it up. Once again for that dumbass from Texas, I am not saying all is rosy, just that it is not ABSOLUTE.

The "dumbass" only visits Texas a few months of the year. The rest of the time he's in D.C., just so you know.

[CCTAU 3,350]

But what does this have to do with this administration being a disaster? This still is not a "disaster". This is what it is and will be for a long time to come. You are still "reaching" with that "disaster" thing.

it's basically the same thing that we have been bombarded with by the media for almost 6 years...HATE BUSH HATE BUSH BUSH BAD HATE BUSH HATE BUSH. But still no plan, just HATE BUSH.

uhm...Otter voted for Bush twice, I believe.

Yes, I did. Quite reluctantly, in fact. I only wish the Democratic party did not cling to bizarre economic theory of foreign policy that's equally detatched from reality. Then I would have a palatable alternative.

My point is this hardly applies: "HATE BUSH HATE BUSH BUSH BAD HATE BUSH HATE BUSH. But still no plan, just HATE BUSH."

But it is the only level of "reasoning" CCTAU has.

It is the ONLY meassage any of your posts have.......HATE BUSH HATE BUSH HATE BUSH HATE BUSH HATE BUSH HATE BUSH HATE BUSH HATE BUSH.

Come up with any kind of logical solution. The subject of this thread is the "absolute" failure. I see no ABSOLUTE failure. There is failure in certain areas as with all administrations, but mostly this is driven by the HATE BUSH librul media and you fools that gobble it up. Once again for that dumbass from Texas, I am not saying all is rosy, just that it is not ABSOLUTE.

The "dumbass" only visits Texas a few months of the year. The rest of the time he's in D.C., just so you know.

"Dat a guud wun. Dat a guud wun coach." <in my best Radio voice>