August 11, 2004

Anybody but Bush

You've gotta love these little nuggets...from a story regarding Al-Qaeda's plans to disrupt the elections in November (emphasis mine):

"The goal of the next attack is twofold: to damage the US economy and to undermine the US election," an intelligence official said, referring to the November 2 presidential election pitting Republican President George W. Bush and Democrat John Kerry.

"The view of Al-Qaeda is 'anybody but Bush,'" said the official.

Hmph...That's funny...isn't that what Kerry's view is too. I mean, that's pretty much what this entire election campaign is about. "Anybody but Bush."

So, let's see...I read this, and I think to myself. I wonder who I should vote for in November. Hmmm.

I'm not trying to be pro-Bush here or anything, but I'll let you draw your own conclusions based on what our enemies want us to do.

Update: Speaking of "Anybody but Bush," here's a little humor from The Onion today. It's Kerry's "One-Point Plan for a Better America."

Comments:

Please Note! Failure to abide by the following may result in your comments being edited or deleted: Remain on topic. Foul language and/or personal attacks are not permitted. Excessive links (more than three per thread) must be approved first. If you do include a link in your comment, make sure it is a short link (go to tinyurl.com if it is too long). Try to keep comments to 125 words or less. Thank you.

The Commander-in-Chimp does more for international al qaeda recruiting in one week than Osama ever could.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/0810/dailyUpdate.html?s=ent2

The second biggest tragedy of Gulf War II, after nearly 1000 GI deaths, is that secular Saddam would have been our biggest ally against fundamentalist Osama, and never would have tolerated terists to compete for his power in Iraq. He was no worse than the Vietnamese assholes we supported, or Noriega or any other "anti-communist" drug dealing, mass murdering dictator we propped up in the last fifty years. Except that he had all that oil Halliburton thought they were entitled to steal.

Posted by: The Token Librul at August 11, 2004 04:29 PM

Question TTL. Why all of the cute word plays. If you are honest in your opinion then say it straight out without doing a limbaugh. I cannot see how you think you will make anyone see the light when you use high school like word play.

This is not an attack, you will say it is but it is not. Give your opinion in a mature way and others will honestly read them.

Posted by: gunner at August 11, 2004 08:56 PM

Okay, then, if it makes you happy:

"BUSH does more for international al qaeda recruiting in one week than Osama ever could."
http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/0810/dailyUpdate.html?s=ent2

But I don't give a dead rat's nose if people read my opinions. I usually post links with information that is far more valuable than any opinions. Opinions are anti-knowledge. I'm in favor of gaining and spreading knowledge, facts, data. Ignore all my opinions, I don't care. But inform yourself about issues...something you can't do if all you expose yourself to is corporate media, the vast, right-wing conspiracy (the same thing anymore), or amtalkingheadradio.

There is real journalism going on out there. But you have to go looking for it. And, yes, that's a challenge for you and anyone else with the attention span long enough to read this far.

And as for "doing a limbaugh," I don't have talent on loan from God. So, not to worry.

Posted by: The Token Librul at August 12, 2004 12:01 AM

"BUSH does more for international al qaeda recruiting in one week than Osama ever could."

I agree with this. But the conflict was inevitable. The USS Cole bambing and the African embassy bombings were just the start.
Many say that if we tried to work at peace things would work out. We tried that at the Camp David accords. The Egyptian leader got assasinated and the Israeli lost his office. The conflict in the Middle East is one the fundamentalists wanted(Muslim and Christian). 911 was not a one shot deal.
So yes Bush is making more Al Qaeda members. But this whole conflict is one they started on 911.

I do read most of your articles. I do not agree with some and others are right on the mark. You feel anyone that questions you is a member of the evil right. Sorry but I am not.
If you hold each of the party's leadership to the same rules you will find most of them fail. That is why I am a registered libertarian.

Posted by: gunner at August 12, 2004 10:12 PM

I hold repubs to as high a standard as I can think of simply to make this glob, you know, "fair and balanced," and stuff. Everything is an iceberg and must be explored below the surface of either the corporatemedia or VR-WC, which are pretty much the same thing anymore. (If you don't believe me, witness how CNN, that bastion of librulmedia, treated the whole Cheney/Kerry "sensitive" issue.) That's why I pointed out that real journalism is out there, but you have to dig for it.

But I couldn't care less whether someone questions me. I post links to stories people need to read, and they either read them, or they don't. If someone chooses ignorance and refuses to read informative things, and instead just calls me a cheese-eating surrender monkey, whatever that is, I'll always respond in kind. The days of "Please-Don't-Hurt-Me"* in political discussions are gone forever. So dittoheads better get used to it.

Now, gunner, I'm not calling you a dittohead. I am saying if people don't want to be treated like dittoheads, they should stop acting like dittoheads. But hardcore dittoheads who believe us "libs" are supposed to curl up and die when they chime in to put us in our place with memorized Rushmantras, insults and name-calling need to get used to the new reality.
We fight back now. And because us "libs" are smarter than dittoheads, we'll win. Smart beats mean every time.

*(Yes, that was me. I knew Blake would figure it out immediately, but I wondered if anyone else would see the Stephen King/Richard Bachman thing going on. No one did, proving smart beats mean every time.)

Posted by: The Token Librul at August 13, 2004 01:51 PM

Really? Wow. The fact that the comments from you and the other were so close together in many places was way above me...Not.
I emailed Blake on the 8th of this month to see if he would look at the ISP signatures on the comments because there were way to many common traits for my to be random. Now who is being honest here?

So call me a dittohead if you want. I could care less. I honestly cannot say when I heard his voice last.

" I am saying if people don't want to be treated like dittoheads, they should stop acting like dittoheads."
The shame is that honest debate is so against your nature that the other person commenting becomes an evil right wing entity, no matter what their politics is.

So Bush is a dangerous fool, we agree on that. I think what we are doing in Afghanistan is proper. That is where the true terrorists are, or were. The whole Iraqi war is a political ploy and wrong in my opinion. I think he was trying to show up his dad and we were dragged into his fantasy.(sort of like the Kerry in Cambodia fantasy)

Now the question is what do we do now that we are there?
Yes, yes. Impeach Bush is likely to be your answer.
But the question is what should we do in Iraq?
If we leave the Fundamentalists will take over...
Yes, yes. The fundamentalist Christian right control our country. Stay on subject here TTL.
If we leave now it will be horrible, so either we stay with the coalition or we stay and NATO/UN assistance joins us. I see that as our country's only two real options.
If you have a third tell us. Because I see three real options and one is horrible and the other two are still risky

Posted by: gunner at August 13, 2004 08:37 PM

You wrote: "So call me a dittohead if you want. I could care less."

gunner, do you read English? I clearly said I wasn't calling you a dittohead...

Then you wrote: "The shame is that honest debate is so against your nature that the other person commenting becomes an evil right wing entity, no matter what their politics is."

...but you sure did a good job of acting like one. So, quit it.

Yes, Bush is a dangerous fool. Good, good...

Bush's invasion of Iraq is like Kerry's war story about Christmas in Cambodia? Really?

Now, I do applaud your suggestion to impeach Bush. But we gotta get Cheney at the same time, or he'll let w off the hook like Ford did for Nixon (ptooey!). And then Hastert will let both of them off the hook, so we'll have to get him, too. Okay, put 'em all in the clink. No, Gitmo. And Dumsfeld might as well go along so they can play bridge. Okay, poker.

Iraq? There's a coalition? I thought it was us, Sri Lanka and Liechtenstein (that's the spelling they used on their Olympic sign) still there.

I say turn it over to Halliburton to rearm and rebuild. (Oh, that's right, they're already doing those things. A country with wall-to-wall slightly used AKMs had to buy new guns from Halliburton.) And the oil will pay for it all. (Oh, that's right, they still can't "rehabilitate"--the official Army word last year--the oil yet because they can't protect the wells they...liberated?) After all, the gubmnt can't do anything as well as private enterprise can.

We can't ask the UN to come in. w already told them to jump in the lake last year, so that would be...gasp...shudder...flip-flopping. And he never does that.

NATO...how far is Iraq from the North Atlantic?

See, anybody we call in now will want a cut of the oil profits. And the PNAC guys will never stand for that after bravely sending other people's children to rehab...er, fight the terr...um...disarm the WM...oh, crap, tell me again why we invaded Iraq? Something about 9/11...I remember now, Saudis operating out of Germany and Pakistan...yeah, that was it.

You know, the war in Afghanistan is going so well that this year's heroin crop is projected to be the biggest ever, two or even three times the last big year. Maybe some of those warlords would like to invest in rebuilding Iraq. I bet Cheney could find out and hook them up. And Phil Gramm already knows how to launder illegal money.

There you go, sign Iraq over to Cheney who will find investors in Afghanistan who will pay Halliburton who will pay Gramm to launder their money in the Caribbean so nobody pays taxes.

But Halliburton will have to hire a boatload of fire-breathing patriots for a big job like that. Any takers on this glob? I mean, those who aren't planning to, you know, enlist and serve your country? You're all going to do one or the other, right?

Posted by: The Token Librul at August 14, 2004 12:28 AM

i told you - a cheese eating surrender monkey is a frenchman ...

Posted by: jakec at August 16, 2004 12:42 PM

Hey!!! This is my first time making a post on the site but I've been reading the blogs. Not sure if you care but I'm a political science major at MTSU, so I'm a political junky! First, my impression about this site. I like that it's local but the discussions on this site quickly degrade into a juvenile pissing contest. We've all seen 'The Simpsons' so the surrender monkey reference is not so novel anymore. Like it or not, the French were there for America when we needed it most. Remember Lafayette and the Statue of Liberty??? So please drop the Francophobic references. On to US politics. My gawd, how could anyone vote for Bush??? Let's talk about basic qualifications leader of the most powerful nation in the world. Wouldn't you say that it should be someone who inspired confidence in the American people? You know, I have tried to be patriotic in the time since 911, but every time I hear Bush speak, I cringe at the thought that our country is lead by this man. He cannot articulate a point. He fumbles over the most basic elements of the English Language. He reduces complex matters to a simple old west analogy. But he is the son of a famous politician so we forgave him, initially, of his weaknesses. You can debate all the minutia, but the fact remains that the Executive office requires a leader and Bush is not an effective leader. People follow leaders due to some outstanding attribute. I've not seen any outstanding attributes in Bush in four years. Courage? Confidence? Intelligence? Wisdom? There is a dearth of leadership in the land.

Posted by: Sandra Lyle at August 27, 2004 10:44 PM

Hello Sandra,

Thanks for the post. :)

The comments section does tend to get a little juvenille, I agree. Hence, I don't often post comments.

I almost didn't catch your comment because this was an older entry. Be sure to make posts on other entries as well and add to the discussion.

I have just one thing regarding your comments...isn't making Bush out to be stupid just as juvenille as making some type of "Francophobic" reference?

Posted by: Blake at August 28, 2004 04:27 PM

Boy was I suprised to see that the moderator of the Nashville files had emailed me. Do all newbies get such personal attention!? Blake, to answer your concern in the email, I am not offended. But I don't agree with you that critiquing Bush's weaknesses and stereotyping a whole nation are somehow equivalent. He is not a leader that inspires confidence or has any outstanding qualities.

Posted by: Sandra Lyle at August 30, 2004 09:48 PM

Fair enough. :)

Are there any qualities in Kerry that inspire confidence in you?

Posted by: Blake at August 30, 2004 11:45 PM