Everyone knows the oil companies are doing great--and have been, ever since 2000 when they got one of their own in the White House.
Exxon-Mobil has enjoyed the largest profits, year after year, of any corporation in the history of the United States, as an example, for the last few years. They just announced more record profits, too, recently so the gorging hasn't stopped, even at the expense of their fellow Americans.
You would think that, with all that money, there might be a remote chance that the people who work for those same companies could and would share in all this profit, wouldn't you?
You would if you lived in Europe, anyway.
Well, this is the good old U.S. of A, where profits are profits and employees are things to be tolerated, if not abused.
Get this, according to the Associated Press:
"With a third contract offer rejected, some 24,000 refinery workers from the Gulf of Mexico to Montana prepared to head to the picket lines Saturday just hours before an existing labor agreement expires."
"The nation's biggest refiner, Valero Energy Corp., said it would shut down some facilities if workers strike. So did European oil company BP PLC."
See, with all those profits, the "little guy"--the Unions and the employees--figure there's money to be shared.
You might think so.
But this is Amerika, where the corporation is king and it operates for its own benefit and existence, employees be damned.
The heck of it is, since Big Oil has so much money, far from being ready to share it with its own employees, what they're going to do is tell those same employees--you know, the ones who make the corporation work and make money?--to just keep waiting for any raises.
With all their profits and the low oil prices per barrel, it BENEFITS the companies to have those same employees go out on strike. With that, there is an extremely high likelihood that the price of oil per barrel will go up.
The corporations nothing but win.
The employees lose.
The American people--and everyone buying gasoline and heating fuel--get screwed.
So get ready for it, ladies and gentlemen.
We are about to get collectively screwed.
Again.
Some more.
Saturday, January 31, 2009
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
The RNC just pulled off one the most funny, sad, pathetic, desperate, pitiful and/or cynical act they possibly could.
Today, they elected, on their sixth vote--it took them 6 tries--their first ever African-American leader of their organization (the Republican National Committee).
Hearing that, you have to just bust out laughing.
Did you see this group last summer, at their national convention?
Or again, did you see the audience at Senator John McCain's concession speech, the night of the election last November?
Both groups, one very large, one large enough, were almost completely, totally lily-white.
Not only that, if a poll were taken, it would very likely be shown to be at least middle class, and a great deal of them upper middle class.
So we got an African-American from the Democratic Party as President so the Republicans threw the American public--and the world--a desperate, pathetic, political bone, way after the fact, of another African-American, in an effort to make themselves look, however ridiculously and disingenuously, like an inclusinve, multi-race party.
We all know better.
I salute the new Chairman, Michael Steele's, ability to take advantage of this situation, betray his people and exploit this opportunity so totally and utterly.
Opportunism never looked so good.
Link to full story here:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/31/us/politics/31web-steele.html?em
Today, they elected, on their sixth vote--it took them 6 tries--their first ever African-American leader of their organization (the Republican National Committee).
Hearing that, you have to just bust out laughing.
Did you see this group last summer, at their national convention?
Or again, did you see the audience at Senator John McCain's concession speech, the night of the election last November?
Both groups, one very large, one large enough, were almost completely, totally lily-white.
Not only that, if a poll were taken, it would very likely be shown to be at least middle class, and a great deal of them upper middle class.
So we got an African-American from the Democratic Party as President so the Republicans threw the American public--and the world--a desperate, pathetic, political bone, way after the fact, of another African-American, in an effort to make themselves look, however ridiculously and disingenuously, like an inclusinve, multi-race party.
We all know better.
I salute the new Chairman, Michael Steele's, ability to take advantage of this situation, betray his people and exploit this opportunity so totally and utterly.
Opportunism never looked so good.
Link to full story here:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/31/us/politics/31web-steele.html?em
Friday, January 30, 2009
3 involved men
There are 3 men, currently, who are very involved with the current negotiations for the economic stimulus and this administration whose approaches are very different.
Two are very similar while the third is very different in their approaches.
It seems that Senator John Cornyn (R., Tx) and Represetative John Boehner (R., OH) both have a "Jones", so to speak, to grandstand and oppose things from the Democrats.
It's not like it's a surprise it's just frustrating.
Rep. Boehner seems to really enjoy the limelight, as much and frequently as possible. I get the sense he isn't sure what he likes more--his own photo on paper or footage of himself on television.
Both Cornyn and Boehner seem to want to block progress just to be blocking progress.
The thing is, we're in one heck of an ugly financial mess right now and we need to put politics aside, unfortunately for these two men, and work for solutions.
It's very unfortunate for them because in the first place, the Republican leadership in the past 8 years got us to where we are today and, as I said here earlier, if we get the solutions we do need--as we should--now, with this Democratic President, the Republicans run the risk of being out of power for many years to come.
A large legacy of screw-ups from the Bush years, followed by success in Obama years will doom them for a long time to come, certainly. (And here's hoping).
Republicans, right now, keep saying we need to put in more tax cuts into the stimulus package and not just spending.
Well, they handed out their tax cuts during the just-left Bush administration--only it was to the very wealthy of the country. Also, we have debt out the wazoo. How do you lower taxes further when we can't pay for what we already get? (But that's another column: tax cuts vs. insanely large spending--neither of which we can afford).
The fact is, we need to solve these very large problems because so many people's lives and livelihoods are at stake now. People have already lost their life savings or their jobs, due to this banking, economic mess.
It's not a time for stalling and blocking. It's a time for solutions.
The third person I mentioned is one Bill Perkins, from Houston, Texas.
Have you seen the large ads Mr. Perkins has run in newspapers either mocking Washington or just asking where the trillions of dollars in bailouts went in the last few months?
They're huge.
And frequent.
He's paying big money to ask these questions.
And I think they need to be asked.
And answered.
It seeemed, for a while there, that no one in Washington wanted to even ASK where the money for the first 1/2 of the bank's bailout went, let alone give Americans answers.
So here's to Mr. Perkins--thank you from the rest of us.
We'd like to know where this boondoggle has gone, too.
Who knows? We might avoid throwing away many more millions--or even billions--of taxpaid dollars, all in a supposed attempt to "kickstart the economy."
Two are very similar while the third is very different in their approaches.
It seems that Senator John Cornyn (R., Tx) and Represetative John Boehner (R., OH) both have a "Jones", so to speak, to grandstand and oppose things from the Democrats.
It's not like it's a surprise it's just frustrating.
Rep. Boehner seems to really enjoy the limelight, as much and frequently as possible. I get the sense he isn't sure what he likes more--his own photo on paper or footage of himself on television.
Both Cornyn and Boehner seem to want to block progress just to be blocking progress.
The thing is, we're in one heck of an ugly financial mess right now and we need to put politics aside, unfortunately for these two men, and work for solutions.
It's very unfortunate for them because in the first place, the Republican leadership in the past 8 years got us to where we are today and, as I said here earlier, if we get the solutions we do need--as we should--now, with this Democratic President, the Republicans run the risk of being out of power for many years to come.
A large legacy of screw-ups from the Bush years, followed by success in Obama years will doom them for a long time to come, certainly. (And here's hoping).
Republicans, right now, keep saying we need to put in more tax cuts into the stimulus package and not just spending.
Well, they handed out their tax cuts during the just-left Bush administration--only it was to the very wealthy of the country. Also, we have debt out the wazoo. How do you lower taxes further when we can't pay for what we already get? (But that's another column: tax cuts vs. insanely large spending--neither of which we can afford).
The fact is, we need to solve these very large problems because so many people's lives and livelihoods are at stake now. People have already lost their life savings or their jobs, due to this banking, economic mess.
It's not a time for stalling and blocking. It's a time for solutions.
The third person I mentioned is one Bill Perkins, from Houston, Texas.
Have you seen the large ads Mr. Perkins has run in newspapers either mocking Washington or just asking where the trillions of dollars in bailouts went in the last few months?
They're huge.
And frequent.
He's paying big money to ask these questions.
And I think they need to be asked.
And answered.
It seeemed, for a while there, that no one in Washington wanted to even ASK where the money for the first 1/2 of the bank's bailout went, let alone give Americans answers.
So here's to Mr. Perkins--thank you from the rest of us.
We'd like to know where this boondoggle has gone, too.
Who knows? We might avoid throwing away many more millions--or even billions--of taxpaid dollars, all in a supposed attempt to "kickstart the economy."
Thursday, January 29, 2009
More good news!
Between Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (Rhode Island) and the ACLU, it looks as though we really are going to look into what our government was up to the last 8 years, after alll, God willing.
It seems Senator Whitehouse was quoted as saying the new President may not "look backwards" but that he intends to examine what's been going on in our supposedly open government.
Now, news today from the ACLU that they may be getting the documents from the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel on the Bush Administration's anti-terrorism policies.
It would be nice to know whether our own government has been operating within the law, after all, don't you agree?
This good news follows the fact that Attorney General nominee (who is, apparently, sure to get the job this week) testified before the Senate in his confirmation hearings that, yes, he thought like most of the rest of the free world that waterboarding is, in fact, torture.
And then there's this:
"Since Obama's directive on disclosure, Melanie Ann Pustay , the director of Justice's Office of Information and Privacy , instructed federal officials that they should process requests for records with a 'clear presumption in favor of disclosure, to resolve doubts in favor of openness, and to not withhold information based on 'speculative or abstract fears.'"
"In another indication that the ACLU may get its way, the nominee to head the OLC, Dawn Johnsen , has previously indicated she thinks that such memos should generally be released."
"Before her nomination, Johnsen wrote in an article for Slate, the Internet magazine, that the central question in the debate was whether OLC could issue 'binding legal opinions that in essence tell the president and the executive branch that they need not comply with existing laws — and then not share those opinions and that legal reasoning with Congress or the American people? I would submit that clearly the answer to that question must be no.'"
It seems that, all along, what we've needed to do was shine light in the dark corners of our government.
But with old "Tricky Dick" Cheney, that just wasn't going to happen--not on his watch.
But his time is over, thank God.
Links here:
http://thinkprogress.org/2009/01/13/whitehouse-investigate-bush/
http://news.yahoo.com/s/mcclatchy/20090128/pl_mcclatchy/3154778
It seems Senator Whitehouse was quoted as saying the new President may not "look backwards" but that he intends to examine what's been going on in our supposedly open government.
Now, news today from the ACLU that they may be getting the documents from the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel on the Bush Administration's anti-terrorism policies.
It would be nice to know whether our own government has been operating within the law, after all, don't you agree?
This good news follows the fact that Attorney General nominee (who is, apparently, sure to get the job this week) testified before the Senate in his confirmation hearings that, yes, he thought like most of the rest of the free world that waterboarding is, in fact, torture.
And then there's this:
"Since Obama's directive on disclosure, Melanie Ann Pustay , the director of Justice's Office of Information and Privacy , instructed federal officials that they should process requests for records with a 'clear presumption in favor of disclosure, to resolve doubts in favor of openness, and to not withhold information based on 'speculative or abstract fears.'"
"In another indication that the ACLU may get its way, the nominee to head the OLC, Dawn Johnsen , has previously indicated she thinks that such memos should generally be released."
"Before her nomination, Johnsen wrote in an article for Slate, the Internet magazine, that the central question in the debate was whether OLC could issue 'binding legal opinions that in essence tell the president and the executive branch that they need not comply with existing laws — and then not share those opinions and that legal reasoning with Congress or the American people? I would submit that clearly the answer to that question must be no.'"
It seems that, all along, what we've needed to do was shine light in the dark corners of our government.
But with old "Tricky Dick" Cheney, that just wasn't going to happen--not on his watch.
But his time is over, thank God.
Links here:
http://thinkprogress.org/2009/01/13/whitehouse-investigate-bush/
http://news.yahoo.com/s/mcclatchy/20090128/pl_mcclatchy/3154778
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
Good news/bad news
Two bits of news have come out this morning.
First, it looks as though President Obama's $825 billion stimulus bill will go through.
For better or worse--and we hope not worse--hopefully this will be a positive stimulus to the economy, what we need to get banks and businesses working again so more people don't lose their jobs.
Hopefully, too, it won't just be pork barrel politics with millions and billions wasted.
Hey, I'm an optimist.
The Dow is up on this news so that's good, too.
The second note is that the price for a barrel of oil just jumped, too, to $42.00 a barrel.
And there's a rub.
Can you imagine how many speculative dollars are going to flow into oil futures if anyone senses that even the American economy begins to recover, let alone the world? How about just the United States, China and India?
There will be so many people buying oil futures, there's no telling how high it would return.
This points out that we have to put back into place the curbs on speculation that our government took out in 2000. The ones we were missing when oil went to $147.00 a barrel and it was in the range of $4.00 a gallon at the local Kwiky Mart.
If we don't, forget about business recovery.
We'll have a small contingent of oil millionaires and everyone else choked off from work.
Here's the links:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/obama_economy
http://www.rigzone.com/news/article.asp?a_id=72189
First, it looks as though President Obama's $825 billion stimulus bill will go through.
For better or worse--and we hope not worse--hopefully this will be a positive stimulus to the economy, what we need to get banks and businesses working again so more people don't lose their jobs.
Hopefully, too, it won't just be pork barrel politics with millions and billions wasted.
Hey, I'm an optimist.
The Dow is up on this news so that's good, too.
The second note is that the price for a barrel of oil just jumped, too, to $42.00 a barrel.
And there's a rub.
Can you imagine how many speculative dollars are going to flow into oil futures if anyone senses that even the American economy begins to recover, let alone the world? How about just the United States, China and India?
There will be so many people buying oil futures, there's no telling how high it would return.
This points out that we have to put back into place the curbs on speculation that our government took out in 2000. The ones we were missing when oil went to $147.00 a barrel and it was in the range of $4.00 a gallon at the local Kwiky Mart.
If we don't, forget about business recovery.
We'll have a small contingent of oil millionaires and everyone else choked off from work.
Here's the links:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/obama_economy
http://www.rigzone.com/news/article.asp?a_id=72189
Monday, January 26, 2009
We can't lose this
So here we are, in the worst economic situation in the last 40 or more years and everyone knows it.
We have a new President who has the American people behind him.
His administration is busting their collective hump, so to speak, to create and exercise the best plan they can come up with, in hopes of saving our financial souls.
And what are the Republicans' response?
Just this moment, they're stalling and threatening to block the development.
I got to thinking about this.
With Republicans in such low standing with the American people, given their track record in the last 8 years, they want to take a stand. They still want to exercise some control. They want to be effective and thought well of.
But here we are, on the edge of a devastating economic crisis, with countries like Britain and Iceland broke--not unlike us, in actuality--and the Republicans think we can delay an economic recovery package.
The bad thing, for the Republicans, is that they're at their lowpoint in popularity.
They may deserve it but, naturally, they don't like it and want to make a comeback and, admittedly, want to do and be something positive for the country.
The fact is, Republicans have a vested interest in having our new President fail--unequivocally.
If President Obama if successful, forget the "Contract with America" and any other plan Republicans come up with.
The Republican Party would be devastated for decades.
And they know this.
Fortunately, for Democrats--and the country--the Republicans know that, if they block an economic recovery plan--even if they delay it--any difficult or ugly consequences would also doom them and their party.
They are, truly, between a figurative rock and a hard place.
They can't afford for this new President to succeed.
None of us can afford him to lose.
We have a new President who has the American people behind him.
His administration is busting their collective hump, so to speak, to create and exercise the best plan they can come up with, in hopes of saving our financial souls.
And what are the Republicans' response?
Just this moment, they're stalling and threatening to block the development.
I got to thinking about this.
With Republicans in such low standing with the American people, given their track record in the last 8 years, they want to take a stand. They still want to exercise some control. They want to be effective and thought well of.
But here we are, on the edge of a devastating economic crisis, with countries like Britain and Iceland broke--not unlike us, in actuality--and the Republicans think we can delay an economic recovery package.
The bad thing, for the Republicans, is that they're at their lowpoint in popularity.
They may deserve it but, naturally, they don't like it and want to make a comeback and, admittedly, want to do and be something positive for the country.
The fact is, Republicans have a vested interest in having our new President fail--unequivocally.
If President Obama if successful, forget the "Contract with America" and any other plan Republicans come up with.
The Republican Party would be devastated for decades.
And they know this.
Fortunately, for Democrats--and the country--the Republicans know that, if they block an economic recovery plan--even if they delay it--any difficult or ugly consequences would also doom them and their party.
They are, truly, between a figurative rock and a hard place.
They can't afford for this new President to succeed.
None of us can afford him to lose.
We need a new world model
When watching the television mini-series "Rome" some year or two ago, I rememeber a scene in which it was suggested that a law should be made to outlaw war.
Yeah, outlaw war.
Internationally.
And that many hundreds of years ago.
Then there was the League of Nations.
And then the United Nations.
And we got closer--for a while.
Well, the time has come.
After reading the paper today and taking stock of so many world situations like Darfur, Zimbabwe, modern Europe, hell, the United States and our mess and messes, along with the countries that are working like in the Netherlands (read: socialist), the time has long since come for a new world model--a new way to run things.
And here it is--at least suggested. Here are some things we should do, collectively, as a world.
For starters, yeah, outlaw war. Outlaw war and unilateral attacks from one country on another. (Hear that, George W. Bush?). If one country were to attack another, the rest of the civilized world would come down on them.
The fact is, this kind of unprovoked attack is already against international law. This would just be a logical extension of what we're already practicing and believing.
The next thing, Socialize banking, energy, oil, health care, everything.
Everyone in the United States will say this is crazy and crazy talk but it's not.
The fact is, nothing we're doing now is working.
From Russia to, again, Zimbabwe, to the EU, virtually the entire continent of Africa, reallly, again, virtually everywhere, all the old systems are broken.
Governments would have to be reworked, too, of course.
A new model, where they truly work and government officials don't practice graft and cronyism but, instead, practice the good government we need. They wouldn't be taking bribes and scamming money off projects.
Clearly, this is the difficult part.
Rotary International practices and emphasizes honesty and truth, literally, all 'round the world, in nearly all countries. I think they could be counted on to assist with both setting up and maintaining good, working, honest, effective governments.
We need a new order. We need solutions. We need things to work.
Right now, worldwide, they aren't working.
President Obama could and should be the one to start this discussion. He'd be the perfect person, at this time, to begin the thoughts and discussions to this new world we need.
The United States can no longer act unilaterally. We need to work with all the other nations of the world in alliances.
Then, while we're doing all this, let's start talking about how we can all work for everyone's benefit--everyone's business, everyone's health care, everyone's decent living and existence. Instead of pitting ourselves and our countries against one another, why can't we all decide we're going to work together for all our benefit, advancement and progress?
We could all agree that a certain standard of living had to be achieved for all of us, along with health care, education, jobs and mass transportation for all. We'd do away with nuclear arms, eventually, in this ideal world.
The old question from the 60's was "What's the opposite of competition?"
The answer was "Collaboration." (It was an old Shawn Phillips album).
Is it going to happen right away? No, no it's not.
But couldn't we work that way, toward collaboration and solutions, all on one planet?
Shouldn't we?
Because we sure need solutions.
Particularly now.
The current, tired, old model isn't working, that's for sure.
I can dream, can't I?
Yeah, outlaw war.
Internationally.
And that many hundreds of years ago.
Then there was the League of Nations.
And then the United Nations.
And we got closer--for a while.
Well, the time has come.
After reading the paper today and taking stock of so many world situations like Darfur, Zimbabwe, modern Europe, hell, the United States and our mess and messes, along with the countries that are working like in the Netherlands (read: socialist), the time has long since come for a new world model--a new way to run things.
And here it is--at least suggested. Here are some things we should do, collectively, as a world.
For starters, yeah, outlaw war. Outlaw war and unilateral attacks from one country on another. (Hear that, George W. Bush?). If one country were to attack another, the rest of the civilized world would come down on them.
The fact is, this kind of unprovoked attack is already against international law. This would just be a logical extension of what we're already practicing and believing.
The next thing, Socialize banking, energy, oil, health care, everything.
Everyone in the United States will say this is crazy and crazy talk but it's not.
The fact is, nothing we're doing now is working.
From Russia to, again, Zimbabwe, to the EU, virtually the entire continent of Africa, reallly, again, virtually everywhere, all the old systems are broken.
Governments would have to be reworked, too, of course.
A new model, where they truly work and government officials don't practice graft and cronyism but, instead, practice the good government we need. They wouldn't be taking bribes and scamming money off projects.
Clearly, this is the difficult part.
Rotary International practices and emphasizes honesty and truth, literally, all 'round the world, in nearly all countries. I think they could be counted on to assist with both setting up and maintaining good, working, honest, effective governments.
We need a new order. We need solutions. We need things to work.
Right now, worldwide, they aren't working.
President Obama could and should be the one to start this discussion. He'd be the perfect person, at this time, to begin the thoughts and discussions to this new world we need.
The United States can no longer act unilaterally. We need to work with all the other nations of the world in alliances.
Then, while we're doing all this, let's start talking about how we can all work for everyone's benefit--everyone's business, everyone's health care, everyone's decent living and existence. Instead of pitting ourselves and our countries against one another, why can't we all decide we're going to work together for all our benefit, advancement and progress?
We could all agree that a certain standard of living had to be achieved for all of us, along with health care, education, jobs and mass transportation for all. We'd do away with nuclear arms, eventually, in this ideal world.
The old question from the 60's was "What's the opposite of competition?"
The answer was "Collaboration." (It was an old Shawn Phillips album).
Is it going to happen right away? No, no it's not.
But couldn't we work that way, toward collaboration and solutions, all on one planet?
Shouldn't we?
Because we sure need solutions.
Particularly now.
The current, tired, old model isn't working, that's for sure.
I can dream, can't I?
Sunday, January 25, 2009
Pyrrhic victories, surely and at best
First, a reminder:
Pyrrhic victory, defined:
Origin: 1880–85; < Gk Pyrrikós; after a remark attributed by Plutarch to Pyrrhus, who declared, after a costly victory over the Romans, that another similar victory would ruin him
Pyr·rhic victory (pĭr'ĭk) Pronunciation Key
n. A victory that is offset by staggering losses. [After Pyrrhus.]
If ever there were Pyrrhic victories, it would be anyone who assumes we've gotten a victory or victories by attacking Iraq.
The fact is, I really don't think anyone's claiming any victories, as such, other than the one claimed by our now ex-president George W. Bush, that he kept us safe from another attack or some such.
Why Pyrrhic?
Well, let's see. more than 4,200 American soldiers killed, many thousands handicapped, maimed and really, destroyed, one way or another, by this war; spending beyond which we can't afford; debt for the war beyond which we can't afford; this was has bankrupted us morally, with our peers in the world; the fact that we tortured people which, may I remind you, is against our own internal law as well as international law?
And so much more.
Yes, Pyrrhic victory.
No one discusses this possibility, really.
No one argues or discusses that maybe we're a war and a bridge and many incursions too far.
In over our heads.
Between this arbitrary war and our unregulated banking and financial and spending messes and our Constitutional issues, huge debts, questions and problems, we're rattled to our foundations.
And no one's talking about it.
Not really.
We're whistling past the graveyard, it seems.
And how can you solve the big problems if you aren't acknowledging their existence?
Pyrrhic victory, defined:
Origin: 1880–85; < Gk Pyrrikós; after a remark attributed by Plutarch to Pyrrhus, who declared, after a costly victory over the Romans, that another similar victory would ruin him
Pyr·rhic victory (pĭr'ĭk) Pronunciation Key
n. A victory that is offset by staggering losses. [After Pyrrhus.]
If ever there were Pyrrhic victories, it would be anyone who assumes we've gotten a victory or victories by attacking Iraq.
The fact is, I really don't think anyone's claiming any victories, as such, other than the one claimed by our now ex-president George W. Bush, that he kept us safe from another attack or some such.
Why Pyrrhic?
Well, let's see. more than 4,200 American soldiers killed, many thousands handicapped, maimed and really, destroyed, one way or another, by this war; spending beyond which we can't afford; debt for the war beyond which we can't afford; this was has bankrupted us morally, with our peers in the world; the fact that we tortured people which, may I remind you, is against our own internal law as well as international law?
And so much more.
Yes, Pyrrhic victory.
No one discusses this possibility, really.
No one argues or discusses that maybe we're a war and a bridge and many incursions too far.
In over our heads.
Between this arbitrary war and our unregulated banking and financial and spending messes and our Constitutional issues, huge debts, questions and problems, we're rattled to our foundations.
And no one's talking about it.
Not really.
We're whistling past the graveyard, it seems.
And how can you solve the big problems if you aren't acknowledging their existence?
Saturday, January 24, 2009
Can you say "delusional"?
Last evening, I saw this headline and article, in the Kansas City Star, by William Kristol, on now Former (thank God) President George W. Bush and his administration and tenure, saying, literally, "A Tribute to a Job Done Well and Faithfully".
Are you effin' kidding me?
Good God.
The man wrecked our Constitution, thrusted the government more into people's personal lives than any other President or government official--including J. Edgar Hoover--spent more money than any other President in the history of the country, ran up more debt than any other President in the history of the United States, took us into an unnecessary war, took us into that same, unnecessary war by misrepresenting information to us, the American people, took us into the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression of approximately 70 years earlier, at least in part, by not regulating business and banking and so much more and Bill Kristol gives a tribute to this clown, dolt and buffoon.
Unbelievable.
Un-freaking-believable.
The guy must be very nearly out of his mind or just simply delusional.
The above complaints are facts and matter-of-fact, they aren't opinions. All those things are what George Bush did and where he's left us.
For instance, in the article, Mr. Kristol says Mr. Bush "shouldered the burdens of office for the past 8 years."
In a word, Mr. Kristol, bullshit.
Mr. Bush himself said the last 8 years weren't a burden of any kind--at all. He said this at his last press conference, publicly.
George Walker Bush didn't have enough imagination and/or depth to take on the burdens of this country.
You want proof?
Iraq.
The war in Iraq.
Attacking Iraq.
Unilaterally attacking Iraq.
Attacking Iraq against and in spite of international law.
Misrepresenting facts, in order to attack Iraq.
Ignoring the deaths, pain and suffering that his Iraq war created, for both Americans and Iraqis.
His repsonse to Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans and the gulf states.
And so much more.
Mr. Kristol gave Mr. Bush credit, in the article, for staying with and behind Israel and I understand that.
But too much of everything else Mr. Bush did was against the country, against international law, against right, against decency and against the American people.
George Walker Bush was for corporations and for corporate profits and that showed clearly in decision after decision.
"A job well and faithfully done"?
Hell no.
Not unless you're rating what he did for Big Business in America.
Only then.
Are you effin' kidding me?
Good God.
The man wrecked our Constitution, thrusted the government more into people's personal lives than any other President or government official--including J. Edgar Hoover--spent more money than any other President in the history of the country, ran up more debt than any other President in the history of the United States, took us into an unnecessary war, took us into that same, unnecessary war by misrepresenting information to us, the American people, took us into the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression of approximately 70 years earlier, at least in part, by not regulating business and banking and so much more and Bill Kristol gives a tribute to this clown, dolt and buffoon.
Unbelievable.
Un-freaking-believable.
The guy must be very nearly out of his mind or just simply delusional.
The above complaints are facts and matter-of-fact, they aren't opinions. All those things are what George Bush did and where he's left us.
For instance, in the article, Mr. Kristol says Mr. Bush "shouldered the burdens of office for the past 8 years."
In a word, Mr. Kristol, bullshit.
Mr. Bush himself said the last 8 years weren't a burden of any kind--at all. He said this at his last press conference, publicly.
George Walker Bush didn't have enough imagination and/or depth to take on the burdens of this country.
You want proof?
Iraq.
The war in Iraq.
Attacking Iraq.
Unilaterally attacking Iraq.
Attacking Iraq against and in spite of international law.
Misrepresenting facts, in order to attack Iraq.
Ignoring the deaths, pain and suffering that his Iraq war created, for both Americans and Iraqis.
His repsonse to Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans and the gulf states.
And so much more.
Mr. Kristol gave Mr. Bush credit, in the article, for staying with and behind Israel and I understand that.
But too much of everything else Mr. Bush did was against the country, against international law, against right, against decency and against the American people.
George Walker Bush was for corporations and for corporate profits and that showed clearly in decision after decision.
"A job well and faithfully done"?
Hell no.
Not unless you're rating what he did for Big Business in America.
Only then.
Friday, January 23, 2009
What The New York Times thinks, anyway
In today's New York Times, it seems very clear what they, at least, think should happen.
First, they covered John Thain's fleecing of his company and the American people, when he was at the head of Merrill Lynch. You probably heard about this guy--he had his private bathroom done for $1.2 million dollars, for starters and then gave away billions of dollars of bonuses, for God's sake, just before Bank of America bought them and just before B of A had to get billions of dollars of your and my tax money to cover all their lossed, these included.
Let it be said now and into the future and in the American history books that John Thain is and was a thief and scumbag.
Second, the Times had an editorial by Paul Krugman, saying we need, as a country, to nationalize banks in the country and the sooner the better.
Third, there was an editorial column saying the same thing.
Finally, there is a fourth separate article pointing out how Sweden's advice to the US in the financial mess we're in would be to, repeat after me--nationalize the banks--or some of them, anyway.
So it's pretty clear what some people and groups in the US think we should be doing.
It will likely happen, too, for a few reasons:
1) It will be called "nationalizing" the banks, not socialism;
2) It will be stated that it's intended to be temporary and finally
3) We're in one hell of an ugly financial crisis and our government leaders don't know what else to do, other than also borrow and hand out trillions of dollars of money.
The banks and their leaders were incredibly irresponsible and greedy, which is why we're in this mess, and that's what the John Thain piggery makes so clear.
One thing is for sure--we need a quick return to good, strong, clear and complete regulation of our banking system, now and forever.
First, they covered John Thain's fleecing of his company and the American people, when he was at the head of Merrill Lynch. You probably heard about this guy--he had his private bathroom done for $1.2 million dollars, for starters and then gave away billions of dollars of bonuses, for God's sake, just before Bank of America bought them and just before B of A had to get billions of dollars of your and my tax money to cover all their lossed, these included.
Let it be said now and into the future and in the American history books that John Thain is and was a thief and scumbag.
Second, the Times had an editorial by Paul Krugman, saying we need, as a country, to nationalize banks in the country and the sooner the better.
Third, there was an editorial column saying the same thing.
Finally, there is a fourth separate article pointing out how Sweden's advice to the US in the financial mess we're in would be to, repeat after me--nationalize the banks--or some of them, anyway.
So it's pretty clear what some people and groups in the US think we should be doing.
It will likely happen, too, for a few reasons:
1) It will be called "nationalizing" the banks, not socialism;
2) It will be stated that it's intended to be temporary and finally
3) We're in one hell of an ugly financial crisis and our government leaders don't know what else to do, other than also borrow and hand out trillions of dollars of money.
The banks and their leaders were incredibly irresponsible and greedy, which is why we're in this mess, and that's what the John Thain piggery makes so clear.
One thing is for sure--we need a quick return to good, strong, clear and complete regulation of our banking system, now and forever.
Thursday, January 22, 2009
What American Soldiers call "war porn"
Defined, it's video of attacks on either enemies or just civilians in a war-torn area, as in Iraq or Afghanistan. NPR this afternoon, told of soldiers fighting the enemy with remote laser-guided bombs, as shown here.
This is the new way we go to war.
This is the new way we go to war.
It starts to come out now
Now that W and the Dick are no longer able to keep the lid on all their shenanigans--and that of Halliburton and KBR--the information and truth starts slowly coming out.
It's being reported just now that the Army has officially declared that "An Army investigation calls the electrocution death of a U.S. soldier in Iraq 'negligent homicide' caused by military contractor KBR Inc. and two of its supervisors."
More: "the manner of death for Staff Sgt. Ryan Maseth, 24, has been changed from accidental to negligent homicide because the contractor failed to ensure that 'qualified electricians and plumbers' worked on the barracks where Maseth died."
I'm thinking there was a high likelihood that there were orders from the White House or the Vice President's mansion or somewhere that said this kind of thing was to be referred to as "accidental", as long as the Bush Cabal was in power.
So this is how it starts.
I think there is going to be a great deal more information coming out about our government and what was--and was not--done and by and to whom in the next several months.
It's not going to be pretty for the clowns who were in power, either.
You might want to sell that Halliburton stock about now.
Link to original story online here:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090122/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/iraq_contractors_electrocutions
It's being reported just now that the Army has officially declared that "An Army investigation calls the electrocution death of a U.S. soldier in Iraq 'negligent homicide' caused by military contractor KBR Inc. and two of its supervisors."
More: "the manner of death for Staff Sgt. Ryan Maseth, 24, has been changed from accidental to negligent homicide because the contractor failed to ensure that 'qualified electricians and plumbers' worked on the barracks where Maseth died."
I'm thinking there was a high likelihood that there were orders from the White House or the Vice President's mansion or somewhere that said this kind of thing was to be referred to as "accidental", as long as the Bush Cabal was in power.
So this is how it starts.
I think there is going to be a great deal more information coming out about our government and what was--and was not--done and by and to whom in the next several months.
It's not going to be pretty for the clowns who were in power, either.
You might want to sell that Halliburton stock about now.
Link to original story online here:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090122/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/iraq_contractors_electrocutions
Helping one another
If you could and would care to help an American soldier somewhere in the United States, the following website has been set up as a charity, to do just that. You can go through and see what they need and send them whatever you can afford:
www.USAtogether.org
It was set up by a Silicon Valley executive who had made a great deal of money and wanted to “give back”. The support doesn’t go through any agency—it goes straight to the person and/or their family, who needs the help. It was on NPR (National Public Radio) this morning.
Please forward the information so word can get around and as many people can help as possible.
Thank you!
www.USAtogether.org
It was set up by a Silicon Valley executive who had made a great deal of money and wanted to “give back”. The support doesn’t go through any agency—it goes straight to the person and/or their family, who needs the help. It was on NPR (National Public Radio) this morning.
Please forward the information so word can get around and as many people can help as possible.
Thank you!
Wednesday, January 21, 2009
"That's what I'm talkin' 'bout!"
Only one full day into the new Obama administration and already it seems like such good things--things we wanted and even expected--are coming to fruition.
Besides speaking to several of the leaders in the Middle East by phone (Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak and Jordan's King Abdullah), the new President Obama then had a meeting with his economic advisers about our fiscal situation and that mess we're in.
He talked of accelerating the country's departure from Iraq with his top military staff.
"As part of Wednesday's burst of activity, Obama's aides circulated an unsigned draft executive order that would require the closing within a year of the Guantanamo prison..."
And this is all extremely refreshing, intelligent and wonderful stuff, all in one day, sure.
Check out all that was done:
--President "Obama announced he was freezing the pay for senior White House staff and tightening up rules for former lobbyists who work in government -- an effort to make good on campaign promises for ethics reform."
--He froze the pay of all administration officials who make more than $100,000.00 per year or more;
--He signed rules making it easier for Americans to get government documents;
--"As part of the transition, Obama last night ordered federal agencies to hold off on pending regulations made in the last days of the Bush administration. The order blocks proposals including those to ease emission requirements for factories and require some foods to be labeled by country of origin";
--"The administration also sought a 120-day pause in military war-crimes tribunals of suspected terrorists detained at Guantanamo Bay Naval Base, Cuba. Obama has vowed to close the facility and revamp the system for holding and trying enemy combatants";
--"Obama also decreed that only he would have the power to assert executive privilege, so as to 'limit its potential for abuse.' That may be a reference to former Vice President Dick Cheney’s assertion of executive privilege in keeping documents from Congress.";
Of all the good things done and changed today, however, this one impressed me most and gave me the most hope:
---"'A lobbyist who joins the Obama administration...is forbidden from working on issues they previously were involved with,' he said. Any person who leaves the administration will be barred from lobbying the government for two years. Government hiring, he said, will henceforth be based on qualifications, competence and experience, 'not political connections.'";
(Link to complete articles here--and they're good:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/bloomberg/20090122/pl_bloomberg/aysq9ot7ervu_1;
http://uk.reuters.com/article/marketsNewsUS/idUKN2042189320090122?pageNumber=1)
It truly is a new day.
A great, new day.
_____________________________
Meanwhile, back at the ranch:
It was just reported that the now former Vice President Dick "The Dick" Cheney was welcomed back to Wyoming with a standing ovation.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
and Rush Limbaugh?
He's concerned that our new President's rules for honesty and openness in government is just a ruse, created so we can go after George Bush.
Hmmm.
Not a bad idea.
It WAS our government, wasn't it, Rush?
Besides speaking to several of the leaders in the Middle East by phone (Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak and Jordan's King Abdullah), the new President Obama then had a meeting with his economic advisers about our fiscal situation and that mess we're in.
He talked of accelerating the country's departure from Iraq with his top military staff.
"As part of Wednesday's burst of activity, Obama's aides circulated an unsigned draft executive order that would require the closing within a year of the Guantanamo prison..."
And this is all extremely refreshing, intelligent and wonderful stuff, all in one day, sure.
Check out all that was done:
--President "Obama announced he was freezing the pay for senior White House staff and tightening up rules for former lobbyists who work in government -- an effort to make good on campaign promises for ethics reform."
--He froze the pay of all administration officials who make more than $100,000.00 per year or more;
--He signed rules making it easier for Americans to get government documents;
--"As part of the transition, Obama last night ordered federal agencies to hold off on pending regulations made in the last days of the Bush administration. The order blocks proposals including those to ease emission requirements for factories and require some foods to be labeled by country of origin";
--"The administration also sought a 120-day pause in military war-crimes tribunals of suspected terrorists detained at Guantanamo Bay Naval Base, Cuba. Obama has vowed to close the facility and revamp the system for holding and trying enemy combatants";
--"Obama also decreed that only he would have the power to assert executive privilege, so as to 'limit its potential for abuse.' That may be a reference to former Vice President Dick Cheney’s assertion of executive privilege in keeping documents from Congress.";
Of all the good things done and changed today, however, this one impressed me most and gave me the most hope:
---"'A lobbyist who joins the Obama administration...is forbidden from working on issues they previously were involved with,' he said. Any person who leaves the administration will be barred from lobbying the government for two years. Government hiring, he said, will henceforth be based on qualifications, competence and experience, 'not political connections.'";
(Link to complete articles here--and they're good:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/bloomberg/20090122/pl_bloomberg/aysq9ot7ervu_1;
http://uk.reuters.com/article/marketsNewsUS/idUKN2042189320090122?pageNumber=1)
It truly is a new day.
A great, new day.
_____________________________
Meanwhile, back at the ranch:
It was just reported that the now former Vice President Dick "The Dick" Cheney was welcomed back to Wyoming with a standing ovation.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
and Rush Limbaugh?
He's concerned that our new President's rules for honesty and openness in government is just a ruse, created so we can go after George Bush.
Hmmm.
Not a bad idea.
It WAS our government, wasn't it, Rush?
Great Expectations (?)
The question keeps getting asked or proposed, lately, about President-elect Obama and that is, "Can he live up to our, literally, great expectations?"
And my answer is, yes--unequivocally, absolutely yes.
And here's why:
The conservative writer David Brooks, on PBS evening news last week, said he thought Obama was "non-partisan", in his words.
From a Conservative Republican, that's pretty extraordinary, for starters.
But more than that--much more--is that it seems that this new President is going to be, apparently and hopefully, a statesman, of all things.
We haven't seen one of those for a long time.
You may have already heard that the President-elect had dinner last week with a few very conservative columnists like William Kristol, for heavens sake, at George Will's home.
That's already very nearly unbelievable.
Can you remember the last time such a thing happened? I know I can't.
Another quote from last Friday evening's newscast was that Mr. Brooks found Mr. Obama to be much less of an "ideologue" and this, too, is so very welcome and now foreign to our politicians and politics.
It's generally agreed that the last 16 years have been tremendously ideological and divisive.
Far from being a "uniter", as President Bush promised he would be, years ago, he and his administration were loaded with ideologues and ideology, to the point of out-and-out dogma.
Right-wing, conservative, business-serving dogma and it's been very divisive and negative for the country.
When Republican Presidential administrations and campaigns started, years ago, clearing and denying attendees at what were supposed to be public speeches and presentations, so they could get audiences that were purely and completely acceptable to them and their ideas and directions, I was surprised--almost shocked--and disappointed, knowing we were going down a bad path.
I think President-elect Obama, as President, is going to bring statemanship, wisdom, calmness and intelligence back to the Presidency and so, the whole country.
Will Democrats and liberals get everything they want, always, from this new President?
No, certainly not. I'll say that right up front.
Barack Obama isn't perfect--he doesn't "walk on water", by any means.
But he's going to be what we need in this country, especially now, when we need to recover from the legal, internal and external, constitutional and financial issues, problems and messes we have now, due to the last 8 years of mismanagement, ineptitude and travesties.
This really is a new day.
A very welcome new day.
And my answer is, yes--unequivocally, absolutely yes.
And here's why:
The conservative writer David Brooks, on PBS evening news last week, said he thought Obama was "non-partisan", in his words.
From a Conservative Republican, that's pretty extraordinary, for starters.
But more than that--much more--is that it seems that this new President is going to be, apparently and hopefully, a statesman, of all things.
We haven't seen one of those for a long time.
You may have already heard that the President-elect had dinner last week with a few very conservative columnists like William Kristol, for heavens sake, at George Will's home.
That's already very nearly unbelievable.
Can you remember the last time such a thing happened? I know I can't.
Another quote from last Friday evening's newscast was that Mr. Brooks found Mr. Obama to be much less of an "ideologue" and this, too, is so very welcome and now foreign to our politicians and politics.
It's generally agreed that the last 16 years have been tremendously ideological and divisive.
Far from being a "uniter", as President Bush promised he would be, years ago, he and his administration were loaded with ideologues and ideology, to the point of out-and-out dogma.
Right-wing, conservative, business-serving dogma and it's been very divisive and negative for the country.
When Republican Presidential administrations and campaigns started, years ago, clearing and denying attendees at what were supposed to be public speeches and presentations, so they could get audiences that were purely and completely acceptable to them and their ideas and directions, I was surprised--almost shocked--and disappointed, knowing we were going down a bad path.
I think President-elect Obama, as President, is going to bring statemanship, wisdom, calmness and intelligence back to the Presidency and so, the whole country.
Will Democrats and liberals get everything they want, always, from this new President?
No, certainly not. I'll say that right up front.
Barack Obama isn't perfect--he doesn't "walk on water", by any means.
But he's going to be what we need in this country, especially now, when we need to recover from the legal, internal and external, constitutional and financial issues, problems and messes we have now, due to the last 8 years of mismanagement, ineptitude and travesties.
This really is a new day.
A very welcome new day.
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
A new day
Thank God. (or whom- or what-ever).
We made it.
A lot of us weren't sure we would.
But we did and we're here.
Doesn't it feel refreshing?
Doesn't it feel as though a great, dirty weight has been lifted off our collective shoulders?
Think of it:
President Barack Hussein Obama.
We came out on the other side of the Bush administration.
As I've said, I wasn't sure we would.
There's two magnificent things about all this, all at once.
The first is that we have a bright, hard-working, intelligent and eloquent President in office, at long last.
And the second is that we no longer have to hear or see or read about that idiot who just left for Texas.
Sure, we'll have problems and sure, he'll disappoint us and we can't possibly get everything we all want but at least we don't have to any longer be ashamed of our President and what he does and what comes out of his mouth.
We, hopefully, no longer will have our government going against us--fighting us to pollute the air or to get their corporate ways and running against our needs, the needs of the people and the middle and lower classes.
"Free at last, free at last! Thank God Almighty, we are free at last!"
We made it.
A lot of us weren't sure we would.
But we did and we're here.
Doesn't it feel refreshing?
Doesn't it feel as though a great, dirty weight has been lifted off our collective shoulders?
Think of it:
President Barack Hussein Obama.
We came out on the other side of the Bush administration.
As I've said, I wasn't sure we would.
There's two magnificent things about all this, all at once.
The first is that we have a bright, hard-working, intelligent and eloquent President in office, at long last.
And the second is that we no longer have to hear or see or read about that idiot who just left for Texas.
Sure, we'll have problems and sure, he'll disappoint us and we can't possibly get everything we all want but at least we don't have to any longer be ashamed of our President and what he does and what comes out of his mouth.
We, hopefully, no longer will have our government going against us--fighting us to pollute the air or to get their corporate ways and running against our needs, the needs of the people and the middle and lower classes.
"Free at last, free at last! Thank God Almighty, we are free at last!"
Monday, January 19, 2009
Conservative comeback?
So here we are in the United States, going to hell in a handbasket and, of course, W is about to walk away--again--from all his screw-ups, naturally, and there's talk of people expecting too much from the new President Obama and his only being human and all and "will the conservatives and Republicans be able to make a comeback", right?
Sure.
And they will.
Someday.
Sure.
But--get this--I just saw the "top ten" list of things none other than Newt Gingrich thinks are the most important things America should get to. And here they are:
1. English should be the official language of government. (87 to 11) English? That's your number one?
2. We want our elected leaders in Washington to focus on increasing the energy supplies of the United States and lowering the costs of gasoline and electricity. (71 to 18) But not decreasing our dependence on fossil fuels?
3. The option of a single rate system should give taxpayers the convenience of filing their taxes with just a single sheet of paper. (82 to 15) Yeah, I see the Senators and representatives in Congress latching on to this one right away, don't you? Them and the IRS and the lobbyists from the accounting firms.
4. Every worker should continue to have the right to a federally supervised secret ballot election when deciding whether to organize a union. (79 to 12) Oh, yeah, just make sure it's EXTREMELY DIFFICULT for Americans to join and form Unions, for God's sake.
5. Keeping the reference to “One Nation Under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance is very important. (88 to 11) Because nothing promotes our country, our economy and our way of life like saying "God" in our pledge and there are no other pressing issues--like, say, the economy--pending right now.
6. Congress should make it a crime to advocate acts of terrorism, violent conduct, or the killing of innocent people in the United States. (83 to 12) Otherwise, people might think we're FOR terrorism.
7. We should dramatically increase our investment in math and science education. (91 to 8) Isn't spending more money contrary to being conservative?
8. We believe that if research indicates we could build clean coal plants in the United States with no carbon emissions, it would be important to build such plants as rapidly as possible. (71 to 8) Clean coal. Yeah. Right. And flying pigs, while we're at it.
9. Illegal immigrants who commit felonies should be deported. (88 to 10) Boy, now there's a tough stance! We'll show them!
10. We support giving a large financial prize to the first company or individual who invents a new, safer way to dispose of nuclear waste products. (79 to 16) But NOT for any of that pussy solar power stuff, which makes so much more sense.
So these are the ideas that are supposed to bring the conservatives and Republicans back into power? (you can see all this at www.newt.org).
Are you kidding me?
Could these guys--Newt in particular here, not just W--be more out of touch with America, the American people and our problems and issues?
It looks like it's going to be a smooth ride for a while, as long as they think like this--that this is the way to solve our problems and get back the American electorate.
Sure.
And they will.
Someday.
Sure.
But--get this--I just saw the "top ten" list of things none other than Newt Gingrich thinks are the most important things America should get to. And here they are:
1. English should be the official language of government. (87 to 11) English? That's your number one?
2. We want our elected leaders in Washington to focus on increasing the energy supplies of the United States and lowering the costs of gasoline and electricity. (71 to 18) But not decreasing our dependence on fossil fuels?
3. The option of a single rate system should give taxpayers the convenience of filing their taxes with just a single sheet of paper. (82 to 15) Yeah, I see the Senators and representatives in Congress latching on to this one right away, don't you? Them and the IRS and the lobbyists from the accounting firms.
4. Every worker should continue to have the right to a federally supervised secret ballot election when deciding whether to organize a union. (79 to 12) Oh, yeah, just make sure it's EXTREMELY DIFFICULT for Americans to join and form Unions, for God's sake.
5. Keeping the reference to “One Nation Under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance is very important. (88 to 11) Because nothing promotes our country, our economy and our way of life like saying "God" in our pledge and there are no other pressing issues--like, say, the economy--pending right now.
6. Congress should make it a crime to advocate acts of terrorism, violent conduct, or the killing of innocent people in the United States. (83 to 12) Otherwise, people might think we're FOR terrorism.
7. We should dramatically increase our investment in math and science education. (91 to 8) Isn't spending more money contrary to being conservative?
8. We believe that if research indicates we could build clean coal plants in the United States with no carbon emissions, it would be important to build such plants as rapidly as possible. (71 to 8) Clean coal. Yeah. Right. And flying pigs, while we're at it.
9. Illegal immigrants who commit felonies should be deported. (88 to 10) Boy, now there's a tough stance! We'll show them!
10. We support giving a large financial prize to the first company or individual who invents a new, safer way to dispose of nuclear waste products. (79 to 16) But NOT for any of that pussy solar power stuff, which makes so much more sense.
So these are the ideas that are supposed to bring the conservatives and Republicans back into power? (you can see all this at www.newt.org).
Are you kidding me?
Could these guys--Newt in particular here, not just W--be more out of touch with America, the American people and our problems and issues?
It looks like it's going to be a smooth ride for a while, as long as they think like this--that this is the way to solve our problems and get back the American electorate.
Rest assured, folks
Conservatism isn't dead.
The thing is, what is and has been wrong for conservatives and Republicans is George W. Bush.
There is patently, absolutely almost nothing that is or was conservative about this guy: He never met a dollar he didn't want to spend; he grew government larger than any other President on his watch; he intruded government into more lives than any other President; he mixed more religion into government and government into religion than any other President; he got the country into more debt and deficit spending than any other President, etc.
Face it--the facts are George W. Bush has been the worst President ever and he's been a bloody nightmare for both Republicans and conservatives.
Getting rid of this clown--or having him walk off stage, anyway--will be the best thing that ever happened to Republicans, the Republican Party and conservatives and conservative thought. Then, once he's gone and we all start collectively forgetting--and most Americans will forget, sadly--conservatives and Republicans can go back to talking about cutting government, cutting government spending and all that they've always proposed and supposed themselves to be.
It would just be nice if they'd keep government out of bedrooms and religion, once and for all, for starters.
The thing is, what is and has been wrong for conservatives and Republicans is George W. Bush.
There is patently, absolutely almost nothing that is or was conservative about this guy: He never met a dollar he didn't want to spend; he grew government larger than any other President on his watch; he intruded government into more lives than any other President; he mixed more religion into government and government into religion than any other President; he got the country into more debt and deficit spending than any other President, etc.
Face it--the facts are George W. Bush has been the worst President ever and he's been a bloody nightmare for both Republicans and conservatives.
Getting rid of this clown--or having him walk off stage, anyway--will be the best thing that ever happened to Republicans, the Republican Party and conservatives and conservative thought. Then, once he's gone and we all start collectively forgetting--and most Americans will forget, sadly--conservatives and Republicans can go back to talking about cutting government, cutting government spending and all that they've always proposed and supposed themselves to be.
It would just be nice if they'd keep government out of bedrooms and religion, once and for all, for starters.
Worst. Ever.
Worst.
President.
Ever.
Let's be clear on this and let's say it again and again so we all remember our lessons:
George Walker Bush was, by far, outstripping all other Presidents in the history of the United States of America, the absolute worst President this country ever lived through.
The former "worsts" now pale compared to this buffoon.
Wareen Harding was incompetent and there was graft in his administration but not even he could touch the lows of this "leader".
President Harding didn't attack another sovereign nation, defying international law and opinion.
President Harding didn't spend every dollar he could get his official hands on like this clown, and put us into massive, historical deficits, thus bankrupting the country.
No other President put so many people, from the very industries they came from, into positions meant to oversee those same industries.
No other President in the history of this country set his very administration against the very people of the country, the way George Walker Bush did.
The thing is, when Ronald Reagan became President, I wasn't sure we'd live through his tenure, even for four years, let alone all eight.
Not with all that demagoguery and ideology.
But we did.
We lived through it and it turned out he realized some of the things he originally wanted weren't good for the country so he changed his opinions and the course for himself and the country.
And Bill Clinton came in and cleaned up his messes. And pretty well, too.
So we lived through that and we've come out at the end of the George W. Bush administration, too, albeit bedraggled, beaten, abused (literally, physically and constitutionally, as it turns out), in horrific debt, with a sullied American name, but we made it.
And now we have to pick ourselves up, dust ourselves off and clean up this mess.
____________________________________________________________________
For more information and clarification and support on George W. Bush as the worst President of the United States--ever--go to this link:
http://www.harpers.org/archive/2008/04/hbc-90002804
President.
Ever.
Let's be clear on this and let's say it again and again so we all remember our lessons:
George Walker Bush was, by far, outstripping all other Presidents in the history of the United States of America, the absolute worst President this country ever lived through.
The former "worsts" now pale compared to this buffoon.
Wareen Harding was incompetent and there was graft in his administration but not even he could touch the lows of this "leader".
President Harding didn't attack another sovereign nation, defying international law and opinion.
President Harding didn't spend every dollar he could get his official hands on like this clown, and put us into massive, historical deficits, thus bankrupting the country.
No other President put so many people, from the very industries they came from, into positions meant to oversee those same industries.
No other President in the history of this country set his very administration against the very people of the country, the way George Walker Bush did.
The thing is, when Ronald Reagan became President, I wasn't sure we'd live through his tenure, even for four years, let alone all eight.
Not with all that demagoguery and ideology.
But we did.
We lived through it and it turned out he realized some of the things he originally wanted weren't good for the country so he changed his opinions and the course for himself and the country.
And Bill Clinton came in and cleaned up his messes. And pretty well, too.
So we lived through that and we've come out at the end of the George W. Bush administration, too, albeit bedraggled, beaten, abused (literally, physically and constitutionally, as it turns out), in horrific debt, with a sullied American name, but we made it.
And now we have to pick ourselves up, dust ourselves off and clean up this mess.
____________________________________________________________________
For more information and clarification and support on George W. Bush as the worst President of the United States--ever--go to this link:
http://www.harpers.org/archive/2008/04/hbc-90002804
Sunday, January 18, 2009
Saturday, January 17, 2009
Worst. President. Ever.
If Donald Trump, of all people, thinks you're the worst President ever, in the history of the United States, you have screwed up on a pretty large scale. The bar is pretty low on that one.
Friday, January 16, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
