Has the Bush Doctrine failed?

I'll say this with ABSOLUTE confidence... Everything Bush says in public is a bold-faced lie.
Iraq had 0% to do with 9/11 and was the same threat to the US.

[Undertoad]

It's an interesting cherry-picked statement that doesn't mean or say a whole lot, so I'll just comfortably ignore it.

[headsplice]

More fodder:
Latest zogby poll indicates of the 1,104 likely voters polled, almost half are morons.
UT: GWB and his admin were terrific at spin. Since his initial speechwriter left, they've been having some difficulty (which hasn't been helped by the little issue of the spin having NO relation to reality for six years).
Also, it didn't take much to scare the American people into action (any action) after 9/11. Lots and lots of people were afraid of terruhrists coming and blowing shit up in the US again (to which I say, suck it up).
The point of this little bit of oddity is: GWB & Co. didn't have to be master manipulators to start a war shortly after 9/11. They could be stupid about their reasoning (which they were) by implying a link between AQ and SH which would scare the US electorate into supporting the invasion. The politicians could smell which way the wind was blowing (in 2003), and hopped on the bandwagon to war. Now that the excrement is hitting the other wall from the other fan, they're jumping ship again. That's enough mixed metaphors for now. What do you disagree with?

[tw]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

It's an interesting cherry-picked statement that doesn't mean or say a whole lot, so I'll just comfortably ignore it.

Of course you will ignore it. As I keep demonstrating by example, you only see and post what conforms to a political agenda. UT, I have watched you change drastically over the decades. 10 years ago, I would never have pegged you for one to be blind to all facts but those that represent a pre-ordained conclusion.

Reality is that

Iraq had 0% to do with 9/11

If this was not true, then UT could cite quotes in the 9/11 Commission report. He cannot because Iraq had 0% to do with 9/11 - except that a lying president tied the two together to justify a "Pearl Harboring" of Iraq.

Today the same lying president conceded to reality. America has been kidnapping people throughout the world and operating secret CIA prisons in other nations so that American laws and international treaties signed by America could be violated. UT will have to deny that reality - put a spin on it. And yet the facts remain. George Jr also lied about those prisons AND George Jr did so to intentionally circumvent American laws and violate treaties.

And since people like UT are so hardened to extremist rhetoric, they will not demand this as another article of impeachment.

Impeach? Arrest.

[Undertoad]

As I keep demonstrating by example, you only see and post what conforms to a political agenda.

Yes, but remember, you can't read. Whom did I vote for?

And can you point to one post you've made in favor of the Rs? I can point to many posts in both directions.

[tw]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

Yes, but remember, you can't read. Whom did I vote for?

I am literally not sure? You have this bad happen of believing a president who lies repeatedly.

Let's take today's speech. It was about Hamdan - bin Laden's driver. George Jr has the driver hyped as a bodyguard. Therefore we should have hung Hitler's butler? Same logic. Hamdan is completely devoid of rights in direct violation of the US Constitution and Geneva Convention. George Jr administration threw most everything at Hamdan's legal team to make his defense almost impossible. They even insisted the US Supreme Court has no jurisdiction.

Well the Supreme Court threw out almost every George Jr administration claim with forceful language because obviously George Jr administration has been even violating the Geneva Convention. As a result of laws that the Supreme Court said the White House must comply with - George Jr was now forced to admit the US is kidnapping people all over the world AND the US is running secret CIA prisons in other nations. Major admission from an administration that lied about this repeatedly. This George Jr admission was with spin so that it does not sound so bad. But look. He openly admitted he was lying.

OK - where do we find any reason to ever trust anything from George Jr? He even lied about torture authorized by his administration. When do we say "Fool me once, shame on you...."? George Jr is a persistent liar.

Meanwhile we take a quote right from his speech today:

> Third, I'm asking that Congress make it clear that captured terrorists cannot use the Geneva Conventions as a basis to sue our personnel in courts, in U.S. courts. The men and women who protect us should not have to fear lawsuits filed by terrorists because they're doing their jobs.

IOW American soldiers can now sodomize with a broomstick Abner Louima, a farmer found on the battlefield and suspect of being Al Qaeda. Those three military officers cannot be prosecuted in a complaint by Louima. Under this George Jr law, Abner Louima has no protection as defined by a Fundamental Declaration of Human Rights. George Jr wants laws changed so that Hamdan cannot sue in Supreme Court to get his rights back. With this law, Supreme Court could no longer do what it just did - protect American principles. Did you hear what this president is proposing? He wants to make violations of the Geneva Convention legal because there are no consequences. You tell me UT. Is this the kind of man that tells the truth? No. This is a man whose fundamental principles are to corrupt the American way of life.

Anything that scumbag president - just like Richard Nixon - says is suspect. He has his extremist agenda and we are just bait for his legacy. Did you hear what he has proposed in today's speech - or was his spin so good that some of us actually thought he was being honest?

The man wants to make it impossible for the Supreme Court to even stop torture. This scumbag president has no respect for judicial review - be it wire tapping, Geneva Convention, or Fundamental Declaration of Human Rights. Judges would get in the way of Armageddon? You trust a single thing that scumbag says?

Notice how, over each year, after each anti-American event, my words get sharper. You have never heard me so critical of any other American politican. Closest might have been Clinton's bribe of Marjorie Margolis-Mezvinsky. Consider this - you lurkers who foolishly think for one minute this is based in emotion. I even considered voting for George Jr when he first ran. Some will remember my post about how he worked often with Democrats as Governor of TX. Reality: the man (actually Cheney) is clearly as dangerous as Nixon. He is working to restrict Supreme Court powers so that the presidency can violate human rights. The man even sees enemies everywhere - a worldwide network of terrorism - where none exists.

George Jr who cannot be trusted to tell the truth is repeatedly a liar. He even wanted Saddam to be blamed for 9/11. He even declared "Mission Accomplished". Was he honest? If so, then we know his real agenda. Nothing wrong with 20,000 dead and physically disabled Americans to promote a president's legacy.

[Undertoad]

This is your response to my asking for point one post you've made in favor of the Rs?

You only see and post what conforms to a political agenda.

I voted for Kerry. You can't read.

[Hippikos]

It's an interesting cherry-picked statement that doesn't mean or say a whole lot, so I'll just comfortably ignore it.

Interesting to see that every quote that doesn't match your point is cherry picked and need to be ignored. You're in a state of denial.

Talking about denial, the updated version of the WH report "Combating Terrorism" doesn't even mentioned bin-Laden anymore. Bin-who?

I voted for Kerry. You can't read.

I am amazed UT... So you didn't believed the Swift Boat Liars?

George W. Bush is not only a compulsive, illiterate, religious fanatic liar and a moron to boot, but he is personally responsible for the current global state of affairs and alo for the probably most severe times of global anti-Americanism ever. This will take years, if not decades to restore any US credibillity in the world. I expect an answer something like "we don't need y'all anyways" from the usual suspects, but by God, you need your allies. His dynasty will be remembered as the worst in US history, probably only to be compared with Nero in the Roman empire days. An empire that once was invincable.

[Undertoad]

The economy is doing well!

I'm not certain the Swift Boat guys were lying. I just didn't think it was all that meaningful. Kerry fibbed about a number of things in regard to his military record. It's good to know the truth, but we have to acknowledge that there are no utterly clean people in the race for President, and all politicians are relentless self-promoters who put the best possible light on their past.

I felt there was a serious leadership problem all through 2004 and that the administration was unable to get out of its own way on most things.

I was really offended by the administration's re-start of the culture war in mid-2004 when they offered a Constitutional amendment to define marriage. Politicians have to do political things, but the Constitution should be off-limits in that regard.

I felt it was very important, and still do, for the Ds to take their turn at leading the nation during the GWoT. The nation needs to see this as a problem addressed by both sides.

[Spexxvet]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

The economy is doing well!
...

Can you define that a little more specifically?

[Undertoad]

Productivity/GNP continues to increase, inflation is in check despite fuel costs, unemployment is very low, even wages are coming around and government receipts are up. By all important measures, the economy is doing well.

[Spexxvet]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

Productivity/GNP continues to increase, inflation is in check despite fuel costs, unemployment is very low, even wages are coming around and government receipts are up. By all important measures, the economy is doing well.

I disagree. Most indicators might be favorable, but the result is that the rich are just getting richer.

The New York Times reports that the median hourly wage for American workers has declined 2 percent since 2003, after factoring in inflation. Median wages are the point at which equal numbers of workers earn more and less.

The paper reports that while average family income, adjusted for inflation, has continued to advance at a good clip, that has been helped by gains by the top wage earners
The paper says that about nine out of 10 workers have seen inflation that has outpaced their pay increases over the last three years, according to the Labor Department. That includes workers earning up to $80,000 a year, a level that puts them in the 90th percentile of wage earners.

The paper reports that with employment gains softening in recent months, inflationary pressures stay high due to factors such as high energy prices, so the gap between wages and prices could increase for many workers.

The paper reports that the gap between the top wage earners and other workers is growing. It cites research from economists Emmanuel Saez and Thomas Piketty that showed that in 2004, the top 1 percent of earners --a group that includes many chief executives --received 11.2 percent of all wage income, up from 8.7 percent a decade earlier and less than 6 percent three decades ago

[glatt]

Originally Posted by Spexxvet

I disagree. Most indicators might be favorable, but the result is that the rich are just getting richer.

I know that's true for me personally. While my salary increase last year was greater than the "official" inflation rate, I actually had virtually the same take home pay because of increases in medical insurance premiums. Add increased energy costs and other inflation to the mix, and I think I'm making less this year than last year. We're spending less as a result. We spent about $4000 on two trips last year, and only about $800 this year.

From my personal point of view, the economy is very stagnant.

[Shawnee123]

Wow, what's it like to go on a trip?