Comments Posted By BBoot
Displaying 11 To 20 Of 23 Comments
And you have no gift wish for the Bushmaster or Cheney, the diplomat? I am surprised. They seem to need a good deal of help with honesty, responsibility, loyalty to the country, and good judgment. You seem to wish ill to anyone who has pointed out that the erstwhile emperor has no clothes and no friends. Perhaps you could examine your own motivations and the sources of the hostility that you seem quite willing to spread widely at this time. Bush has been an unmitigated disaster as President. His judgment has been flawed since the beginning and the results more terrible that we could even have suspected. The interesting thing is that I suspect it would be a blessing to him to be impeached and removed from office so he doesn't have to suffer further confusion with resulting bad acts.
Comment Posted By BBoot On 22.12.2005 @ 12:15
Pardon me, but the Iraq expedition is an unmitigated disaster and waste of resources. It has not accomplished any of the needed goals and only affected terrorism by providing a more convenient field of action. Iraq posed no threat and was no home to terrorists. Why are we having a discussion about how Bushy looked on television making an argument for a policy that is wrong on its face? Similarly the NSA story is much more consequential that the readers here wish to recognize. Bush has far overstepped his bounds and demonstrated, again, his very poor judgement and his limitless thirst for power.
He has added nothing to our security and damaged our treasured values of privacy. What's to celebrate?
Comment Posted By BBoot On 19.12.2005 @ 08:42
DEMS WANT TO TRASH THE WAR WITHOUT GOING ON RECORD OPPOSING IT
Really? You seem to have missed the general coverage of this ploy. The Republicans look like a bunch of undisciplined, spoiled brats unable to engage in serious debate. They appear have drunk too long at Karl Rove's trough in thinking that trickery and denigration will be sufficient to win an policy problem.
Comment Posted By BBoot On 19.11.2005 @ 08:31
It appears this is rather wrong headed thinking. The whole House looked bad and the Republicans the worst for playing games with serious matters. At the same time, of course, the house of chicanery that is Tom DeLay is beginning to fall slowly apart as Scanlon opts to testify instead of taking some jail time. Abramhoff will uncoubtedly fall next then DeLay and Ney will topple while spouting more angry words.
You all really need to pay closer attention to actual events instead of your own chosen perceptions.
Pardon me, but Bush is a liar.
Comment Posted By BBoot On 19.11.2005 @ 08:33
I am surprised that you do not recognize the similarilty of Bush's attacks to those of the last failed Republican, Nixon, who spent far too long attacking his critics as treasonous and too little time trying to solve the problems he faced. We know where this 'bunker mentality' led Nixon. The signs are equally strong for Bush. His staff is mutinous. Key members are under criminal investigation. His public reasoning for war is questioned, correctly. And he has taken to attacks on individuals' motivation instead of facts.
Comment Posted By BBoot On 12.11.2005 @ 11:41
He was wrong to take the US into war in Iraq. The threat he wanted to see was not there. And the benefit was ephemeral: Iraq was not part of any funding stream to al-Quaida. At all the key point Bush ignored good judgment and pressed ahead, selecting intelligence, trimming arguments, and believing ideologues. Now that he is in a corner his only strategy is a broad brush swing at his critics trying to Rove them away with nasty threats and scurrilous charges.
It might matter if anyone believed that Bush really cared much at all about any of this, but his demonstrated beliefs are mostly about his own status and very little about the country, none about the world. This is a fundamentally selfish and small minded man.
Pardon me, but the argument you have produced is essentially one for dictatorial power in the executive, and for systematic rejection of any form of institutional knowledge or wisdom. Perhaps you do not see the similarities for your own reasons but these are the qualities that led to disaster in 1930's Germany, Italy and Japan and other points East and West.
Comment Posted By BBoot On 9.11.2005 @ 11:36
It seems to me that you all are driven by two unfounded fears: one that there is a threat you cannot deal with which requires a scorched earth policy against a class of people, and two that the government itself is untrustworthy and must be specifically neutralized by what ever means available including deception and lying.
This just does not seem to make any kind of sense and leads without fail into conditions from which we cannot extricate ourselves since the simple trust that holds us together is intentionally destroyed.
Norquist, of course, has been making this self-serving argument for years while collecting large fees from foreign governments for access to Republican policy makers.
I cannot help but wonder why you are so willing to forgo your own judgment and trust a man, Bush, who has no experience in the world or in national government.
If all is as you say why is Bushy's approval rating below 40% and dropping? This is your great leader? He has been wrong on nearly every count for five years, which begs the core question of why people voted for a man who so easily lied to them. The capacity of Americans, particularly right wing ones, for self-deception is legendary.
Comment Posted By BBoot On 3.11.2005 @ 17:43
WHAT KIND OF COUNTRY DO WE WANT TO BE?
This discussion king of makes the point that the right-wing arguments for state power have deep, dark sides that may cause far more damage that any anticipated benefit. But the blindness of righties in supporting Bush, who has lied repeatedly to them and the American people, is horrendous. Why persist in the stupidity?
Comment Posted By BBoot On 3.11.2005 @ 17:46
FORMING THE CIRCULAR FIRING SQUAD FOR MIERS
Ah, but it is blind. You are willing to place the future of the nation's justice system hostage to your near term political desires. That seem ultimately risky with only a short term benefit to you and your dearly held fears.
There is no evidence that she will be a reliable conservative vote since it is not at all clear she understands what 'conservative' means except in blind loyalty to Bush, who will no longer be at here side. Much more likely is that, if approved, she will fade into obscurity and further damage the right side legal reputation with another incompetent dogmatic ideologue. That would be useless.
Comment Posted By BBoot On 13.10.2005 @ 08:55
So, as I understand it, you are arguing that pragmatism calls for support of an placing an incompetent on the Supreme Court. Hmm, are you also arguing that the war in Iraq is also really peace? And that throwing people in jail indescriminately is freedom?
I think it is obvious that your logic and your values have taken different roads and are unlikely to arrive in the same place. Abandoning values in the face of practical limits, or making bad choices seem like good ones for the simple reason that one doesn't want to admit being wrong, sees like a fine way to confuse everyone.
Should all leaders be given the same blind support?
Comment Posted By BBoot On 12.10.2005 @ 16:03
