Comments: Burning Bush

don't underestimate our opponent. that's what happened to the Democrats in 2000.

they thought he was a little country bumpkin showing up for the big race, and he played them like a harp. the same way he's playing Congress and the American people (and the world) right now.

I think I'll call the following "question'/"redirect":

"the economy is in the tank..."/"...look, we found Sadam"
"there are no WMDs..."/"...no gay marriages"
"no bid government contracts..."/"...let's go to Mars!"
people, don't worry about what your government is doing... just look over here at the pretty picture...

I wonder what the "next big thing" will be? I think that Bush and the Republicans realize that most of the American public have a very short memory and would rather believe positive things about their government/country than negative things.

take a look at what other people have to say:
http://209.157.64.200/focus/f-news/979778/posts

D, I don't doubt that there are people out there that are asking some questions that are really tough for Bush and Co. to answer. But I am very pessimistic because of the short attention span of the American public and because of Bush and Co. answering the question they WANT to be asked, rather than the question they are actually asked.

I used to be an optimist...

ch

Posted by hareball at February 12, 2004 01:53 PM

Fallout from no WMD's. I knew it would happen if they weren't found. Of course everyone (even Dems.) thought they were there before the war. But when you're in charge you take the fall if you make the wrong call. Bush may take the fall for this one.

Plus the media wants the election to be a horse race. (helps ratings) But too strong to say the machine is falling apart.

"Fascist and jingoist"? Was it fascist and jingoist when Clinton was bombing Iraq, Suddan and Bosnia? No, of course not.

Posted by Trickhorn at February 12, 2004 07:35 PM

Trichorn,

Still patiently waiting for your response to my post.

Posted by Nicko Dicko at February 12, 2004 08:34 PM

I don't really consider it fallout because of no WMDs.

What I don't understand is why we as a country impeached a president after he lied to an inquiry panel about getting a BJ.
But when a president lies to Congress and the American people about why we need to invade a sovereign country and take it over, and then actually does it, we do nothing about it.

What is the difference between Clinton and Bush? Why was Clinton impeached and Bush, likely, will not be impeached? Was it because Clinton lied? Bush lied. Was it because he misled the people? Bush is doing that right now. Was it the sex? I would like to think that using the strongest, best trained, most powerful military in the history of the world to overthrow a nuisance dictator like Saddam is a crime far worse than ANY sexual act.

"With great power comes great responsibility." Bush had a responsibility to the American people, the Iraqi people and to the world to ask the hard questions before invading Iraq. Questions like "What if I'm wrong?" "Why is most of the world against this?" "Could there be another way?" Instead, all he gave the world was statement after statement as to why we SHOULD go to war. Always trying to convince people we needed this war, even at the expense of the truth. Bush wanted us to believe that any lie was true, as long as it supported his desire to go to war.

It's not that I'm against war, the military, guns, capital punishment, or anything else. I feel that there is a time and a place for everything. I just don't like getting pissed on while being told it's raining.

Posted by hareball at February 12, 2004 09:38 PM

Gene Roddenberry save us!!!

Posted by ToddDrevers at February 13, 2004 03:50 PM