Showing posts with label Saddam Hussein. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Saddam Hussein. Show all posts
Tuesday, September 25, 2007
Tuesday, February 13, 2007
Pelosi to lead way in debate over Iraq - Yahoo! News
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is set to begin a debate on raising troop levels in the Iraq war. Of course, Democrats, in a slight majority, will vote 'yea' on the non-binding resolution, while Republicans will vote against it. According to Republican leader John "Don't Call Me Boner" Boehner,
This is the difference between thinking people and ideological Republicans -- "they" like the status quo. They hold onto "facts" that were established hundreds and thousands of years ago that have been disproved.
The other stupid statement Boner made is the suggestion that the terrorists will follow our troops home. First, nobody believes that. I don't know who he talks to, other than other stupid Republicans, but nobody in their right minds (should we call them "left minds" since "right minds" are so stupid?) believes that, as the troops board their military planes to leave Iraq and join their families who have missed them for 4 freakin' years while they were off fighting a stupid war for even stupider reasons, the terrorists will board planes bound for America.
John Boehner has to be one of the dumbest oafs in Congress. But he comes from Ohio, so that may explain a lot (Ohio is only smarter than Florida and Texas. "We're number 48!").
Now, I don't agree with Nancy Pelosi on a lot of things, I'm sure. Well, I'm not sure because I really don't know what she stands for. And I really don't think "non-binding" resolutions are of any value. I think it's grandstanding. I believe our representatives (that's a key word) ought to do what we tell them to do.
I think it's obvious what the American public wants. Our troops to be safely returned home and taken care of for the rest of their lives, for our President sent them off to an ill-advised war, on false pretenses, and he's been making excuses ever since. All because his daddy's life was threatened by the evil dictator Saddam Insane.
That's the only reason I can think of that makes sense for going to war. There were no WMDs (Words of Mass Deception?) and Bush doesn't give a rat's ass about freedom or democracy. If he did, would he wiretap American citizens' phone conversation, watch their internet activity, keep them from protesting the war and other Executive branch policies, etc.? No. Of course not.
Getting back to the story that inspired my little rant, it doesn't matter whether this resolution passes or not. Bush will do what Bush wants to do: Send more troops to Iraq to die, get their limbs blown off, and/or destroy their mental capacity for the rest of their lives.
I really think Bush, the boy who wanted to grow up to be a cowboy, ought to send himself and his staff over there to fight. That would be a little fairer than his latest "brilliant" idea.
What an ass.
We will embolden terrorists in every corner in the world. We will give Iran free access to the Middle East. And who doesn't believe that the terrorists will just follow our troops home?First of all, to be a little facetious here, it was discovered a long time ago, by Christopher Columbus, that the world was not flat. In fact, it is round (mostly). Therefore, there are no corners. So Boner's contention that "We" will embolden terrorist in corners of the world is patently false, based on his false, or stupid, claim that the world is still flat.
This is the difference between thinking people and ideological Republicans -- "they" like the status quo. They hold onto "facts" that were established hundreds and thousands of years ago that have been disproved.
The other stupid statement Boner made is the suggestion that the terrorists will follow our troops home. First, nobody believes that. I don't know who he talks to, other than other stupid Republicans, but nobody in their right minds (should we call them "left minds" since "right minds" are so stupid?) believes that, as the troops board their military planes to leave Iraq and join their families who have missed them for 4 freakin' years while they were off fighting a stupid war for even stupider reasons, the terrorists will board planes bound for America.
John Boehner has to be one of the dumbest oafs in Congress. But he comes from Ohio, so that may explain a lot (Ohio is only smarter than Florida and Texas. "We're number 48!").
Now, I don't agree with Nancy Pelosi on a lot of things, I'm sure. Well, I'm not sure because I really don't know what she stands for. And I really don't think "non-binding" resolutions are of any value. I think it's grandstanding. I believe our representatives (that's a key word) ought to do what we tell them to do.
I think it's obvious what the American public wants. Our troops to be safely returned home and taken care of for the rest of their lives, for our President sent them off to an ill-advised war, on false pretenses, and he's been making excuses ever since. All because his daddy's life was threatened by the evil dictator Saddam Insane.
That's the only reason I can think of that makes sense for going to war. There were no WMDs (Words of Mass Deception?) and Bush doesn't give a rat's ass about freedom or democracy. If he did, would he wiretap American citizens' phone conversation, watch their internet activity, keep them from protesting the war and other Executive branch policies, etc.? No. Of course not.
Getting back to the story that inspired my little rant, it doesn't matter whether this resolution passes or not. Bush will do what Bush wants to do: Send more troops to Iraq to die, get their limbs blown off, and/or destroy their mental capacity for the rest of their lives.
I really think Bush, the boy who wanted to grow up to be a cowboy, ought to send himself and his staff over there to fight. That would be a little fairer than his latest "brilliant" idea.
What an ass.
Wednesday, December 06, 2006
Bush Iraq strategy, plan "not working" -- Duh!
The Baker "Iraq Study Group" has concluded that Bush's Iraq policies are not working. Well, we paid how much for this 8-month study, a study that will most likely be ignored?
Or, rather than being ignore, Bush might do his famous flip-flopping and hijack the Baker panel's recommendations and claim them as his own, just like he's done with the Department of Homeland Security (initially, he was against such a thing, until he was for it).
In all seriousness, though, it appears that the group has come up with some sound recommendations that maybe Bush will listen to. After all, he's dealing with a man who's far more respected than himself, in James Baker, former Secretary of State under Bush's dad, Poppa Bush. Who knows, the US might be out of Iraq in a couple of years. Hooray! And better yet, the Iraqis might actually then be better off without Saddam (unlike now, where at least they had running water, electricity, and a sewer system).
Or, rather than being ignore, Bush might do his famous flip-flopping and hijack the Baker panel's recommendations and claim them as his own, just like he's done with the Department of Homeland Security (initially, he was against such a thing, until he was for it).
In all seriousness, though, it appears that the group has come up with some sound recommendations that maybe Bush will listen to. After all, he's dealing with a man who's far more respected than himself, in James Baker, former Secretary of State under Bush's dad, Poppa Bush. Who knows, the US might be out of Iraq in a couple of years. Hooray! And better yet, the Iraqis might actually then be better off without Saddam (unlike now, where at least they had running water, electricity, and a sewer system).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
