Patriots Against Bush...ongoing record of deception

Top 185. Jan 20, 2006 11:47 AM

» Normxxx - What if 'W' had been gotten the Presidency?

What if George W. Bush had been elected president in 2000?

By Will Shetterly | 20 January 2006

A little speculation, inspired by Patrick Nielsen Hayden imagining the horrors of a hypothetical Bush presidency.

Now, this game is a little hard to play, considering that Gore won by half a million votes. But let's grant Patrick's premise: 1. The U.S. still has the blatantly undemocratic Electoral College. 2. Republican officials in Florida use every legal and quasi-legal trick to suppress or discredit votes for Gore. 3. Gore makes the mistake of asking for a recount in a only a few counties instead of the whole state. 4. The Supreme Court compromises its integrity by halting the exercise of democracy and gives the presidency to George W. Bush.

Though it's hard to imagine Bush in the White House instead of facing hard time for the Enron/Halliburton fiascos, alternative history doesn't have to be easy. So, where would we be under a Bush presidency?

Let's start with the Republican strength, the economy. Gore struggled with the economic downturn early in his term and barely has us back on track. You can depend on Republicans to be fiscally conservative. Bush would have built on Clinton's success in turning around the deficit. Now, he might not have done as well as Gore because he would have insisted on tax cuts for the rich and for corporations. But consider this possibility: To make those tax cuts palatable to the American people, he would've had to give something in return. My guess? Universal health care. Remember, it's not a partisan issue. Nixon tried to come up with universal health care. Bush, with a Republican Congress, could have succeeded. And, if he had, I wouldn't mind if the debt wasn't shrinking as fast as it has under Gore. Heck, I wouldn't even mind if Bush was running a small deficit.

International relations wouldn't be that different either. With sanctions and inspections working in Iraq, Bush also would have kept the pressure on Israel to create a viable Palestine. Frankly, peace in the Middle East was inevitable.

And I think Patrick, in his bit of alternate history, knows that. In the most rigorous exercises in science fiction, you change just one detail and see what happens. Instead, Patrick piles assumption upon assumption to create an impossibly inept Bush administration:

1. Even though the Clinton administration warned its successor that Al Quaida was the biggest threat facing the U.S., Patrick assumes that Bush would spend much of the year on vacation and his incompetence would fail to stop the airliner hijack attempt in September of 2001. Sure, Bush would hardly have met Gore's record for the fewest vacation days of any presidency, but to think that Bush would sleepwalk through his first year isn't science fiction; it's pure fantasy.

2. But suppose Bush did fail to stop the hijackers for whatever reason. With that wake-up call, he would've turned all his attention to capturing Bin Laden and breaking up Al Quaida. I'll grant Patrick's scenario of invading Afghanistan. But suggesting that Bush would have failed there, too, and then attacked Iraq without real international support is moving us from fantasy to farce.

3. I think the hardest part of Patrick's scenario for me is this: He imagines a Bush who reverses Clinton's record and creates the greatest deficit in history, whose wars in Afghanistan and Iraq result in two unstable countries, who adds a million people to the unemployment rolls and millions more to the number without health care, and with all this, he wins a second term against a genuine Vietnam war hero?

Patrick, I love you, man, but you've been reading too much science fiction.

I finally decided the whole scenerio is so far-fetched that it doesn't matter whether you need four major improbable steps or only three to produce a Bush presidency. Surely we have better things to do with our time than try to imagine what a failed businessman and mediocre governor would do in the White House.

______________

The contents of this letter/report does not necessarily reflect the opinions or viewpoint of normxxx. They are provided for informational/educational purposes only.

The content of this message is not to be construed as constituting market or investment advice. It is intended for educational purposes only. Individuals should consult with their own advisors for specific investment advice.

-- posted by Normxxx

Top 186. Jan 20, 2006 6:56 PM

» hickfish - Re: What if 'W' had been gotten the Presidency?

Just for clarification Article II and Amendment XII of the U.S. Consitution, both do a nice job of explaining the electoral process.

In response to What if 'W' had been gotten the Presidency? posted by Normxxx:

-- posted by hickfish

Top 187. Feb 14, 2006 8:56 AM

» dancooper - Inneptitude personified

The presidential Shrubbery has effectively shot himself in the foot repeatedly over the course of this past several months. It is astounding that he can still walk (Golly, should I have put the ‘h’ in the word, he, in upper case?)

No matter. Despite his best efforts at self-destruction, the shrub has an adept VP, who can rise to the occasion when needed to provide that added lift. If repeatedly shooting yourself in the foot is inadequate to bring about self-destruction, your associates can always shoot somebody in the face with birdshot to facilitate the ship of state’s fall from grace.

-- posted by dancooper

Top 188. Feb 14, 2006 9:02 AM

» dancooper - Re: Articles and Amendments of the Constitution

In response to Re: What if 'W' had been gotten the Presidency? posted by hickfish:

Some high ranking Repugnicans, not the least influential of whom is Jeb Bush, have effectively re-written some of the text you have referenced.

-- posted by dancooper

Top 189. Mar 2, 2006 11:17 PM

» dancooper - How much trouble could one hurricane possibly be?

This week, the Associated Press released transcripts and video footage showing President Bush being personally briefed the day before Hurricane Katrina hit land. The predictions he heard were precise and accurate—including the failure of the levees. He knew exactly what was coming.

The article excerpted below, is a smoking gun on the Shrub's unpardonable failure to keep us safe—which constitutes one of his own pet agendas, at least as stated, if not truly intended—certainly not executed with any competence.

March 1, 2006
Video Shows Bush Was Warned Before Katrina
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

WASHINGTON (AP)—In dramatic and sometimes agonizing terms, federal disaster officials warned President Bush and his homeland security chief before Hurricane Katrina struck that the storm could breach levees, put lives at risk in New Orleans' Superdome and overwhelm rescuers, according to confidential video footage.

Bush didn't ask a single question during the final briefing before Katrina struck on Aug. 29, but he assured soon-to-be-battered state officials: "We are fully prepared."

The footage—along with seven days of transcripts of briefings obtained by The Associated Press—show in excruciating detail that while federal officials anticipated the tragedy that unfolded in New Orleans and elsewhere along the Gulf Coast, they were fatally slow to realize they had not mustered enough resources to deal with the unprecedented disaster.

Linked by secure video, Bush's confidence on Aug. 28 starkly contrasts with the dire warnings his disaster chief and a cacophony of federal, state and local officials provided during the four days before the storm.

A top hurricane expert voiced "grave concerns" about the levees and then-Federal Emergency Management Agency chief Michael Brown told the president and Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff that he feared there weren't enough disaster teams to help evacuees at the Superdome.

"I'm concerned about ... their ability to respond to a catastrophe within a catastrophe," Brown told his bosses the afternoon before Katrina made landfall.

Some of the footage and transcripts from briefings Aug. 25-31 conflicts with the defenses that federal, state and local officials have made in trying to deflect blame and minimize the political fallout from the failed Katrina response:

—Homeland Security officials have said the "fog of war" blinded them early on to the magnitude of the disaster. But the video and transcripts show federal and local officials discussed threats clearly, reviewed long-made plans and understood Katrina would wreak devastation of historic proportions. "I'm sure it will be the top 10 or 15 when all is said and done," National Hurricane Center's Max Mayfield warned the day Katrina lashed the Gulf Coast.

"I don't buy the `fog of war' defense," Brown told the AP in an interview Wednesday. "It was a fog of bureaucracy."

—Bush declared four days after the storm, "I don't think anybody anticipated the breach of the levees" that gushed deadly flood waters into New Orleans. But the transcripts and video show there was plenty of talk about that possibility—and Bush was worried too.

White House deputy chief of staff Joe Hagin, Louisiana Gov. Kathleen Blanco and Brown discussed fears of a levee breach the day the storm hit.

"I talked to the president twice today, once in Crawford and then again on Air Force One," Brown said. "He's obviously watching the television a lot, and he had some questions about the Dome, he's asking questions about reports of breaches."

—Louisiana officials angrily blamed the federal government for not being prepared but the transcripts shows they were still praising FEMA as the storm roared toward the Gulf Coast and even two days afterward. "I think a lot of the planning FEMA has done with us the past year has really paid off," Col. Jeff Smith, Louisiana's emergency preparedness deputy director, said during the Aug. 28 briefing.

It wasn't long before Smith and other state officials sounded overwhelmed.

"We appreciate everything that you all are doing for us, and all I would ask is that you realize that what's going on and the sense of urgency needs to be ratcheted up," Smith said Aug. 30.
Mississippi begged for more attention in that same briefing.

"We know that there are tens or hundreds of thousands of people in Louisiana that need to be rescued, but we would just ask you, we desperately need to get our share of assets because we'll have people dying—not because of water coming up, but because we can't get them medical treatment in our affected counties," said a Mississippi state official whose name was not mentioned on the tape.

Video footage of the Aug. 28 briefing, the final one before Katrina struck, showed an intense Brown voicing concerns from the government's disaster operation center and imploring colleagues to do whatever was necessary to help victims.

"We're going to need everything that we can possibly muster, not only in this state and in the region, but the nation, to respond to this event," Brown warned. He called the storm "a bad one, a big one" and implored federal agencies to cut through red tape to help people, bending rules if necessary.

"Go ahead and do it," Brown said. "I'll figure out some way to justify it. ... Just let them yell at me."

Bush appeared from a narrow, windowless room at his vacation ranch in Texas, with his elbows on a table. Hagin was sitting alongside him. Neither asked questions in the Aug. 28 briefing.

"I want to assure the folks at the state level that we are fully prepared to not only help you during the storm, but we will move in whatever resources and assets we have at our disposal after the storm," the president said.

The above excerpt from the AP story is a rather graphic indictment against the current administration’s competence. This may have been just another failure for the Dubious Gee Dubya Shrub, but it certainly meant a lot more to those who lost loved ones in the worst natural disaster to hit the U.S. in years, if not the worst such disaster ever.

This fool has proven time and again, to be an incredible waste of time, and of human life, of resources, of world cohesion, of economic security in the form of balanced (surplus) budgets, of perhaps the last bare threads of popular trust in government, of the possibility of World peace, and also (and perhaps mostly), a waste of otherwise perfectly good atmospheric oxygen—a substance the importance of which is obviously no concern to the current administration.

-- posted by dancooper

Top 190. Mar 6, 2006 9:07 AM

» dancooper - Even funnier than the jokes

Anyone desiring a good belly-laugh should take a look back at an article written by a conservative Republican in defense of voting to elect Dubious Dubya Shrub. The reasons may have seemed viable at the time they were composed (by Frank Maldonado, in the conservative politics topic; …sorry about this hindsight laughter, Frank!).

The article is here: http://www.suite101.com/article.cfm/poli...

Among the funniest of rationales for voting in the Shrub instead of Al Gore, were:

Reason number 3, “If George Bush becomes president, poor children will have the same opportunity exercised by Gore's children…”

Reason number 6, “If George Bush is elected, we will not have to listen to four (or even eight) divisive years of class warfare pitting citizen against citizen.” The country certainly didn’t become more divided under this regime, did it?

“Under George Bush, social progress will be measured by the number of people who do not need government assistance…” Yeah, we’ve certainly made tremendous strides in that department.

And finally, reason number 1: “George Bush will begin to return to Americans control of their own retirement assets and income…”

The whole list is funny in retrospect, but these are my favorites. The ensuing discussion thread is also highly recommended reading.

A list such as this one makes me wonder how anybody can still be a shrub supporter after seeing what actually happened over the course of his administration’s control. It is said that hindsight is 20/20. I’ll bet there are still a lot of conservatives with considerable vision impairment despite the advantage of hindsight’s clarity.

Oh no, wait; Sorry, I forgot. All that has gone wrong was not Dubya's fault at all. It was those lowdown Democrats who messed everything up. ...for two terms now.

-- posted by dancooper

Top 191. Mar 28, 2006 9:29 AM

» dancooper - Sinking Ship of State

WASHINGTON (AP) - White House chief of staff Andy Card has resigned and will be replaced by budget director Joshua Bolten.

The ship doth tilt. And the rats are making for the exits.

-- posted by dancooper

Top 192. Apr 3, 2006 10:41 PM

» dancooper - DeLay Resigns

Tom DeLay, after considerable delay, finally has decided to throw in the towel and resign, according to an AP story today quoting Republican officials. So it appears the fallout from all the unnecessary and deceitful crap perpetrated by right wing radicals in recent years, is hitting the proverbial fan, and doing so in great big waves.

To my mind, DeLay’s departure has been unnecessarily delayed, but that delay is far more favorable than the Delay that was in a position of leadership, influential over a great many people.

The foolishness of those who found it expedient to trust someone like Tom Delay is a question for another time. The real benefit to be derived from DeLay’s failure to run in this coming election, is this: Now we can see that the effects of recent Republican leadership have finally created such a rift in the public perception of our government, that the people—even Republicans!—are obviously sick of the current lack of depth in understanding exhibited by our leaders.

The Grand Old Party is willing to cut its losses by cutting loose DeLay in the hope of enticing some questioning votes back into the fold. A lot of Republicans have opted out of the plan designed by the current leadership. Delay represents that current leadership. And the leadership, desperate to maintain control of our government by a majority stranglehold, will cut loose anybody that threatens that stranglehold.

Delay is simply in the way of the agenda. So, there will be no further delay in scheduling DeLay’s departure.

I think this is a sizable measure of the pain the Republican Party is feeling right now, going into the 2006 elections. May that pain be excruciating.

In fact, considering the current unfortunate right wing radical leanings of the party, I will put it in terms that even they can understand: I foresee the pain of this turn of events to be fulfilled in the soon-to-be-seen public (voter) outcry against your party’s obvious abuses. The year, 2006, will result as it should in the now evident overthrow of your influence.

In fact, in words that "you folks" are inclined to appreciate perhaps more than you should, and words that shouldn’t be applied to the general populace, I hope this turn of events HURTS LIKE HELL.

-- posted by dancooper

Top 193. Apr 4, 2006 5:19 PM

» Kirk - PLEASE USE NEW FORUM ON NEW SITE

.
This forum is now closed.

Please start a Bush Bash forum on the new site here
http://investment.suite101.com/discussio...

or use our political forum here
http://investment.suite101.com/discussio...

Please use Kirk's Market Thoughts to post articles and Ideas you want me to comment on between newsletters or to make suggestions for charts to send my FREE STUFF & Sample Newsletter Mailing List

Please no more posts here... they may be deleted.

Thanks!

Kirk Lindstrom: http://investment.suite101.com/
DISCLAIMER: Answers & my words are general in nature, are not meant as specific investment advice, and do not necessarily represent the opinion of anyone but Kirk. Individuals should consult with their own advisors for specific investment advice.
.

-- posted by Kirk