If a dem victory.....

[Libsmasher]

H. L. Mencken said nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the american people, and therefore all thoughtful people will concede there is a distinct possibility of a democrat all-side victory this fall, with both houses and the presidency going to the dems. Voters, clueless about the causes of high food and gas prices and the subprime mortgage "crisis" and high cost of health care, and thoroughly dumbed down by years of lib media propaganda, may very well summon just enough intellectual activity in their brains to walk to the polls and vote for "change".

Probably most lib leaders are in their heart of hearts leftists, and they see this election, not without reason, as their moment. For around a hundred years, the normal pattern of the presidency is centrist republicans alternating with liberal democrats. The only conservative president elected since the 1920s was Reagan, and to find a true leftist you have to go back to FDR. (Carter, imo, was a borderline leftist.) Mr. Dimwit Voter doesn't really realize what they would get with Obama - the first genuine leftist in over 60 years, and only the second in american history.

Here's some of what I predict will happen if the dems/libs complete their control of all three federal branches for at least the next four years:

1. Abortion by any female at any age for any reason and any stage of pregnancy will become law, finally achieving the ultimate dream of the abortionists.

2. Recent anti-white discrimination judicial victories will be codified into law.

3. The abandonment of the Republic of China, started by Jimmy Carter 30 years ago, will be completed with the official abrogation of any agreements or understandings to defend ROC.

4. The isolation of Cuba by the US, maintained by 50 years of democrat and republican presidents, will end, propping up and giving new life to the almost dead communist remnant.

5. The long sought "fairness rule" will be enacted by a dem-controlled FCC, bringing an end to conservative talk radio.

6. Needless to say, Iraq will be abandoned, and become either (1) an iranian province or puppet state, (2) a chaotic disintegrating state with the surrounding countries picking up the remnants, or (3) an islamofascist state like the former taliban-controlled afghanistan.

7. Israel, reading the handwriting on the wall, will take bold new military steps to defend itself.

8. Eastern european states, seeing the abandonment of iraq, will protect themselves by backing off from the US.

9. A state-controlled health rationing system will be implemented.

10. Draconian "anti-global warming" edicts will pour forth from the EPA.

 

[GODSPEED]

I agree with some of that. Definetely the whole first paragraph about clueless people who know nothing, but want "change."

 

[pocketfullofshells]

we should listen to the smart voters who voted us Fing Bush right?

so we can have..


I will let you know when I think of something good from the last 8 years

 

[GODSPEED]

we should listen to the smart voters who voted us Fing Bush right?

so we can have..


I will let you know when I think of something good from the last 8 years

for starters..more people have bought homes in his term...the stock market saw it's highest number ever, unemployed at its lowest in 15 years...and we haven't been attacked since the blind side on 9-11

 

[Andy]

we should listen to the smart voters who voted us Fing Bush right?

so we can have..


I will let you know when I think of something good from the last 8 years

Sure. Bush was a good president. If anyone said after 9/11, there won't be another terrorist attack in the US for the rest of Bush's term, they were laughed at. The laugh is on them, which is why so many lame libs hate Bush. He did a good job.

No the war wasn't finished as perfectly as hoped, but anyone who takes a clear stock of the current situation in Iraq and thinks it's not going very well, has their head shoved so far up their politics, they can't see for ****.

If we could elect someone to do as good a job as Bush, we'd be well off. Granted I wish he would have privatized more of Social Security, and reduced wasteful government hand outs, and ended subsidies, and of course removed all the eco-crap that held back our oil companies so we're paying so much for gas.

But wiping out most of Al Qaeda, mushing out Saddam, and preventing most all of the attempted terrorist attacks... he's done a fine job.

 

[Sihouette]

Yes, as an employee for BigOil, Bush and co did a great job of lying to the public to free up endless public funds for his buddies to complete their hostile corporate takeover of the sovereign nation of oil-rich Iraq.

But in doing so, this has resulted directly in our economic peril. That is the root of that weed. And in doing so these people have squarely placed our great nation in a very very vulnerable position. And they deal the final blow by sucking the last bit of wealth out of us by manipulating the gas prices even higher.

Thanks to that "great job" our military is stretched thin, right on the eve of more trouble with Korea, Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iran..we're broke. China owns our a$$ as a result and we couldn't strike back effectively now to save our butts.

Thanks BigOil, and Mr. Bush/Cheney and co. Great job! Traitors. You needn't look any further than the Whitehouse for the real terroist threat to America.

Hillary Clinton knows all this and it's why BigMedia/GOP went to great efforts to gag her campaign giving "favored child" status to Obama all throughout the primaries. They know damn well if Clinton makes it in, she has the grit to sock it to them. Obama flip flops around like a fish on a griddle. All they have to do is turn up the heat and watch him fry before November even comes.. So of course they propped him up for the trap.

And it's working like a charm. Their plan to destroy America is almost complete.

 

[foggedinn]

This sure does seem to be the place for absurd rants. Yea, I have a home!

Seems to me, the choice we're being offered this election is to watch the country go down the tubes by electing democrats, or, to watch the country go down the tubes by electing republicans. I believe that the fellows name that this sort of choice was named after was Hobson.

I don't really buy into the liberal/conservatve dichotomy being pedaled by the talking heads on tv and chatroom posters. Our supposed two party system is nothing of the sort. Unless of course, one could consider an extremely right-wing democratic party and a ridiculously right-wing republican party a two party system.

Personally, I consider this whole mess to be inevitable. Just give the voters in any democratic republic enough time, and they are bound to make decisions fatal to the republic.

 

[pocketfullofshells]

for starters..more people have bought homes in his term...the stock market saw it's highest number ever, unemployed at its lowest in 15 years...and we haven't been attacked since the blind side on 9-11

big fing deal, oooo we have not been attacked since Sept 11...How about the fact that we where attacked on Sept 11? You forget that part, and you cant name one thing Bush did to stop Bin Laden, not even a meeting he held. Last time I asked someone on the right I set up a page, and asked him to name one thing...and ask no one else to post...it sat blank for a month ..and yes he was posting still.

How many years from 1993 when the first hit in the US till the next hit? so what is your point? Clinton at least admitted he wish he had done more and took some blame. But he went what 7 years with out a attack? no patriot act, no war, nothing....So sorry if that does not impress....

And you realy want to try to play the under bush the housing market has been good? realy?

Stock market? ooo yay...I know the market is so much better then under Clinton.

And I know lots os people with jobs, but you know what people with jobs cant pay bills now. Lost there homes, cant afford there cars, or to drive them...Companies having to go to 4 day work weeks just to save energy costs for them and workers....

If you want to rest your case on the stock market and Real Estate market today I would love to see you run on that...If the Right tries to play the things are going well card in the Election I bet McCain cant break 35% and I say that believing he could win this Election.

 

[pocketfullofshells]

This sure does seem to be the place for absurd rants. Yea, I have a home!

Seems to me, the choice we're being offered this election is to watch the country go down the tubes by electing democrats, or, to watch the country go down the tubes by electing republicans. I believe that the fellows name that this sort of choice was named after was Hobson.

I don't really buy into the liberal/conservatve dichotomy being pedaled by the talking heads on tv and chatroom posters. Our supposed two party system is nothing of the sort. Unless of course, one could consider an extremely right-wing democratic party and a ridiculously right-wing republican party a two party system.

Personally, I consider this whole mess to be inevitable. Just give the voters in any democratic republic enough time, and they are bound to make decisions fatal to the republic.

Screw the 2 party system, I am a member of the Independence Party

 

[Popeye]

Those 10 items you listed are all a matter of opinion not a measure of intelligence. In fact, I would suggest that to elect such a lying war mongering ticket as Bush/Cheney twice definitely makes one wonder about the intellect of the American people.

There can be no dispute that two of the main constituencies, though they overlap, within the Republican party are racists and the ignorant. That's really something to be proud of.

 

[Libsmasher]

Those 10 items you listed are all a matter of opinion not a measure of intelligence.

All I said was they were predictions.

 

[BigRob]

big fing deal, oooo we have not been attacked since Sept 11...How about the fact that we where attacked on Sept 11? You forget that part, and you cant name one thing Bush did to stop Bin Laden, not even a meeting he held. Last time I asked someone on the right I set up a page, and asked him to name one thing...and ask no one else to post...it sat blank for a month ..and yes he was posting still.

Yes, we got attacked. Our intelligence got caught with their pants down. Problem is, this post shows a complete lack of comprehension on how intelligence gathering and analysis works.

A big problem pre 9/11 that intelligence agencies had was lack of funding. (cut under Clinton to "balance the budget") There were 1-2 people being forced to cover entire countries, added to the fact that the Freedom of Information Act and Congress have all but destroyed the ability for people to gather intelligence. (We cannot gather good enough intelligence from space). Given this, massive amounts of information were missed or was simply not collected to begin with.

Further, your comment about what Bush was supposed to "do" about Bin Laden is off base. Everyday a threat matrix is put together consisting of the top ten terror threats on the US for that day. If you have ever seen one your entire outlook will change. Something on the scale of 9/11 is by no means the worst threat that the US has been facing.

Hindsight is always 20/20 when demanding what should have been done. After an event has occurred it is easy to go back and put together clues that may have exposed it, however this is not how the world works. While after the fact you can make all the connections you want, there was little if any chance that an underfunded, handcuffed, intelligence agency was going to be able to put much of anything together.

 

[top gun]

Yes, we got attacked. Our intelligence got caught with their pants down. Problem is, this post shows a complete lack of comprehension on how intelligence gathering and analysis works.

A big problem pre 9/11 that intelligence agencies had was lack of funding. (cut under Clinton to "balance the budget") There were 1-2 people being forced to cover entire countries, added to the fact that the Freedom of Information Act and Congress have all but destroyed the ability for people to gather intelligence. (We cannot gather good enough intelligence from space). Given this, massive amounts of information were missed or was simply not collected to begin with.

Further, your comment about what Bush was supposed to "do" about Bin Laden is off base. Everyday a threat matrix is put together consisting of the top ten terror threats on the US for that day. If you have ever seen one your entire outlook will change. Something on the scale of 9/11 is by no means the worst threat that the US has been facing.

Hindsight is always 20/20 when demanding what should have been done. After an event has occurred it is easy to go back and put together clues that may have exposed it, however this is not how the world works. While after the fact you can make all the connections you want, there was little if any chance that an underfunded, handcuffed, intelligence agency was going to be able to put much of anything together.

OMG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

YOU SERIOUSLY MUST BE KIDDING!!!!

IT WAS CLINTON'S FAULT????????????????????????????????????

That assertion is beyond ridiculous and any reasonable person not simply floundering to give Republicans and the Bush/Cheney administration political cover knows it!

Richard Clark and others in the intelligence business in this county and others warned George Bush about possible 9-11 type attacks.

What you're trying to do goes along like this... The Rangers sucked when George Bush ran that baseball organization because the guy that was there before him cut back on gym equipment... not because like a bonehead Bush traded Sammy Sosa.

The captain of a ship at the time of the running into the ice berg is the one responsible. Not some past captain. George Bush failed America and he's been playing shoot 'em up Cowboy everyday since trying not to go down as the ultimate weak guy in charge and everyone around the whole world knows it!

 

[BigRob]

OMG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

YOU SERIOUSLY MUST BE KIDDING!!!!

IT WAS CLINTON'S FAULT????????????????????????????????????

That assertion is beyond ridiculous and any reasonable person not simply floundering to give Republicans and the Bush/Cheney administration political cover knows it!

Richard Clark and others in the intelligence business in this county and others warned George Bush about possible 9-11 type attacks.

What you're trying to do goes along like this... The Rangers sucked when George Bush ran that baseball organization because the guy that was there before him cut back on gym equipment... not because like a bonehead Bush traded Sammy Sosa.

The captain of a ship at the time of the running into the ice berg is the one responsible. Not some past captain. George Bush failed America and he's been playing shoot 'em up Cowboy everyday since trying not to go down as the ultimate weak guy in charge and everyone around the whole world knows it!

First of all, all I said was Clinton cut the intelligence budget, which he did. I assigned no blame to anyone.

Yes, there were scenarios of this type of attack, but they were by no means the most pressing scenarios that were being discussed. Again, after the fact, they now were more pressing and perhaps should have been listened to, but its all being judged in hindsight.

Perhaps you should look at a threat matrix one day. You will then realize how something the scale of 9/11 could be on the backburner.

 

[pocketfullofshells]

Yes, we got attacked. Our intelligence got caught with their pants down. Problem is, this post shows a complete lack of comprehension on how intelligence gathering and analysis works.

A big problem pre 9/11 that intelligence agencies had was lack of funding. (cut under Clinton to "balance the budget") There were 1-2 people being forced to cover entire countries, added to the fact that the Freedom of Information Act and Congress have all but destroyed the ability for people to gather intelligence. (We cannot gather good enough intelligence from space). Given this, massive amounts of information were missed or was simply not collected to begin with.

Further, your comment about what Bush was supposed to "do" about Bin Laden is off base. Everyday a threat matrix is put together consisting of the top ten terror threats on the US for that day. If you have ever seen one your entire outlook will change. Something on the scale of 9/11 is by no means the worst threat that the US has been facing.

Hindsight is always 20/20 when demanding what should have been done. After an event has occurred it is easy to go back and put together clues that may have exposed it, however this is not how the world works. While after the fact you can make all the connections you want, there was little if any chance that an underfunded, handcuffed, intelligence agency was going to be able to put much of anything together.

Bin ladin was the biggest/most Immediate threat going into 2000, Clinton's people told Bush this, they did nothing . Not a damn thing. And Hindsight? Sorry buddy I was talking about this long before Sept 11, and Sept 11 was small to some of the potential I saw. Under Clinton , a entire group just to go after Bin Ladin was formed, and you know what, not once has the head of the Unit ever said funding was a issue...and trust me he has had unkind words for Clinton...and alot for Bush.

Also Bush Co showed us that it was not good intel , it was that they over 8 years have not listened to good intel if it did not fit what they wanted. Under Clinton we had good enough Intel that we launched attacks into Afganistan just Missing Bin Laden, And other times could have but due to political reasons felt we had to pull back ( such as UAE Royalty being very near the sight and not wanting to accidently end up with Dead Royalty on our Hands.

Simple fact is Bush did not care to do anything. Hell Rice can't even read the headline of a memo about Bin Laden planing to attack inside the US, without screwing up. Bush CO wanted Iraq Iraq Iraq...and other things just got in the way.