Gee, it's a good thing that the Islamic radicals can't read or speak English. Otherwise, this book might serve as more justification for all that talk about us being Crusaders.
One World,
Domino49
Posted by Domino49 at April 17, 2007 01:24 AMGeorge W. Bush is more Caligula Redux.
His love of blood, torture and the death penalty is quite unlike anything ever seen before in the presidency.
I'll take a healthy, earthy man like Bill Clinton who loves women and food anyday over a psychopath like George W. Bush.
Posted by Christopher at April 17, 2007 03:00 AMPart of whom I am is what went before me, and George W. Bush is no different. Bush's background and history of the Bush family is quit different than the average American. Misdeeds by George W.'s father, George H.W., his grandfather, Prescott Bush, and his great-grandfather, George Herbert Walker are legendary.
The Bush family believes in making money, and war equals money. Profiting from war goes way back in Bush's family history. We all know the stories about Precott Bush and the Nazi War Machine. But American business has always invested in totalitarian regimes, witness our dealings with mainland China.
Belonging to a Secret Society like Brotherhood of Death (aka Skull and Bones) that believes in white rich men having global control on money and valuable resources is just another part of the Bush legacy.
Bush does not believe in Democracy. His family background suggest that he came by this attitude through three generations of people who believed in their rightful place to rule. Remember it was Bush who said, "If this were a dictatorship, it'd be a heck of a lot easier, just so long as I'm the dictator."
I don't believe George believes in God, at least not the one I worship. Greed, corruption, murder, fraud, lying, destruction, and war are NOT fruits of the spirit. These are not the characteristics of someone who fears for their soul. There are only two possibilities. Either Bush is delusional, or he has pulled off the biggest scam of his unscrupulous shyster life.
I am convinced, beyond a shadow of doubt, that this pResident is psychologically perverted, and morally bankrupt. This Congress needs to keep Bush on a very short leash for the next two years. My fear is that they won't.
Posted by Judith at April 17, 2007 04:26 AMAre Conservatives turning against Bush?
The two-page letter, written on stationery of the American Freedom Agenda, a recently formed body designed to promote conservative legal principles, is blunt. Addressed to both Bush and Gonzales, it goes well beyond the U.S. attorneys controversy and details other alleged failings by Gonzales. "Mr. Gonzales has presided over an unprecedented crippling of the Constitution's time-honored checks and balances," it declares. "He has brought rule of law into disrepute, and debased honesty as the coin of the realm." Alluding to ongoing scandal, it notes: "He has engendered the suspicion that partisan politics trumps evenhanded law enforcement in the Department of Justice."
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1610738,00.html
Posted by Judith at April 17, 2007 04:36 AMBelonging to a Secret Society like Brotherhood of Death (aka Skull and Bones)
Bush, Cousin Kerry...., the elites love their secret societies and clubs.
Posted by Christopher at April 17, 2007 04:55 AMLifelong Republican, Marine veteran and former congressman Pete McCloskey has left the GOP and registered with the Democratic Party.
McCloskey says he is disgusted with the "succession of ethical scandals, congressmen taking bribes and abuse of power by both the Republican House leadership and the highest appointees of the White House."
"A pox on (Republicans) and their values," he wrote.
http://www.cctextra.com/blogs/politicsblog/2007/04/mccloskey_leaves_republican_pa.html
Posted by Christopher at April 17, 2007 04:58 AM"Because he believes in God, it is easier for him to make decisions and stick to them than it was for Churchill"
This is an ominous statement. This says that Churchill had the misfortune of having to look at the evidence and circumstances of a situation and make decisions based on those facts.
Bush on the other hand, because his decisions are guided by God, can go cut brush and let atrocities happen.
"where the hell is the outrage", Lee Iacocca
Posted by at April 17, 2007 05:18 AMTh lft wld mch rthr grvl bfr dmn llh t chv bsnc f cnflct thn hv fth n th tr nd lvng Gd.
[Editor: ignore=off]The left would much rather grovel before demon allah to achieve absence of conflict than have faith in the true and living God.
Exactly! The left should be bowing down before your true and living god, Mammon.
Posted by phidipides at April 17, 2007 05:56 AM"The left would much rather grovel before demon allah to achieve absence of conflict than have faith in the true and living God."
Your such a miserable fuck Benito.
What a coward.
Posted by Judith at April 17, 2007 06:15 AMGenghis Khan, the Mongol warrior emperor of the largest empire in the history of civilization, widely perceived as a heathen, actually banned torture during his reign. Thanks to the History Channel last night for that piece of info.
I want no part of Bush's God.
Posted by mainsailset at April 17, 2007 06:26 AMMry, cn trthflly sy tht lttl Bsh s Chrstn hypcrt, n dffrnt tht vr 99% f mst flks tht clm Chrstnty.
n lght f th bv, th clyts f th rlgn f hmnsm/vltnsm/sxsm, d ns, r crrct n thr bsrvtn tht rlgn, tht s hypcrt Chrstnty, sms t hv mr thn n brck n th fndtn f wr nd crp hgmny.
Nvrthlss, vn hypcrt Chrstnty s bttr, n th lng trm, thn th ltrntv f th pgn chs f ll thr fls rlgns, ncnt r r mdrn rhd ns pntd t n th bv.
[Editor: ignore=off]"Two of the best, Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island, and Jim Leach of Iowa, after years of battling for balance and sanity, were defeated last November, and it seems that every Republican presidential candidate is now vying for the support of the Pat Robertsons and Jerry Falwells rather than talking about a return to the values of the party I joined nearly 59 years ago.
"Men who have never felt the fear of combat, and who largely dodged military service in their youth, have led us into grievous wars in far off places with no thought of the diplomacy, grace and respect for other peoples and their cultures which has been an American trademark for at least the last two thirds of a century. We have lost the respect and affection of most of the world outside our borders. My son, Peter, one of the U.S. prosecutors at The Hague of the war crimes in Serbia and elsewhere, tells me that people of other countries no longer look at the country which countenances torture as a beacon for the world and the rule of law." McCloskey
Thanks Christopher for the site.
Posted by Judith at April 17, 2007 06:28 AMmry, ls, n cnnctn t th bv, wld rg tht th src f th strngth f hypcrt Chrstnty s ndd th rlgn f hmnsm, tc. t s th scl chs crtd by th lttr tht pwrs p th fls Chrstns nd thr fls Znst hndlrs/crtrs.
[Editor: ignore=off]people gravitate to like minded people. If you want to see what a person considers himself to be, look at his friends.
As for the "Conservatives" who wrote Bush to complain about Gonzo...this letter shows them to be either collective idiots(see sentence above) or part of yet another misdirection scheme by Rove. Why? All the Constitutional horrors they ascribe to Gonzo are Bush's ideas, not Gonzo's. Their blind alliegiance to Bush makes it apparently impossible to admit that he is the Master pulling Gonzo's strings.
Bush's Christianity was the brain-child of Karl Rove.
Posted by Judith at April 17, 2007 06:33 AMScout, when are you going to understand Bush is not a Christian, real or imaginary? It's shyster bullshit to get the fundamentalist votes. Guess what, it worked.
Posted by Judith at April 17, 2007 06:36 AMT2, your right. I didn't think about that when I posted the information on the letter. Once again, Bush is not being held accountable. It's everyone elses fault, but never the fault of George.
Posted by Judith at April 17, 2007 06:40 AMBush's every decision is perfect because God says so.
That is only true if Bush IS God.
Guess that's what the "true believers" think.
"Turn the other cheek" has become "turn a blind eye to."
Posted by Sharon at April 17, 2007 06:49 AMphidipides and Judith - Props to you both because I can't understand a thing Bendito ever says.
It's like reading a fragment sentence.
Posted by Christopher at April 17, 2007 06:49 AMI think the constant looking back of conservatives to Churchill these days is ridiculous.
First, Churchill wasn't a conservative, not really. He was a pragmatist. He switched parties whenever he felt the need, hardly a man of any kind of political ideals other than trying to keep an empire and country together while fighting against something clearly evil, the Nazis.
Yes, he was a giant on the world stage, but the real reason the conservatives are so enamored of him is because they can't look back on WWII and talk about how great the American leader at that time was, Franklin D. Roosevelt, one of the three greatest presidents we ever had. FDR stood and stands AGAINST EVERYTHING today's Republicans stand for. The conservatives go on and on about Churchill because they can nominally, although not really, claim him as one of their own, and it allows them to ignore the real winner of WWII, the Democrat FDR. Now he was a Giant in this world with a capital G. Shucks, Britain and the world would have been screwed without the Democrat FDR. And he managed to get this country through not one crisis, but two -- the Depression and the near failure of capitalism, and WWII. For good or ill, America's place in the world is a result of the Democrats and FDR, directly, not Churchill.
Then, there's this whole matter of Bush-Churchill comparisons. PUH-lease! Bush isn't fit to clean Churchill's toilets. Churchill, as this article notes, could write books. Bush apparently doesn't even know how to read. Churchill won wars or at least brought them to an end with as little damage as possible to his country and people (his empire's a different story), even if he failed in particular battles. And as I noted, Churchill was a tricky son-of-a-gun, switching parties when needed and positions as well. He certainly didn't adhere to any of today's conservative principles, and more closely resembled in many ways what would be labelled socialist today. Churchill also showed up to actually work.
Bush possesses none of Churchill's qualities, and it's an insult to our country that he occupies the same office someone as great as FDR sat in.
Posted by Brian Bell at April 17, 2007 07:07 AMThe left would much rather grovel before demon allah to achieve absence of conflict than have faith in the true and living God.
The reich wing would much rather blindly, faithfully grovel before the almighty dollar to achieve their immoral, illegal, and unethical policies, than actually use their intelligence to understand the situation.
Posted by (: Tom :) at April 17, 2007 07:17 AMI'm sure the Russian-speaking people would be surprised to hear about how the English-speaking peoples defeated the Nazis by themselves.
Does Andrew Roberts know anyone who personally remembers the first half of the 20th Century? Perhaps it would help him as a historian.
Posted by biggerbox at April 17, 2007 07:34 AMDon't the words Allah and God both refer to the same nonsubstantial subjective construct embodying the unknowable omniscient and omnipotent existential and moral ideal monotheistically deified by the Abrahamic tradition's three religions? Just asking.
Posted by Pvt. Keepout at April 17, 2007 08:12 AMI understand Junyah will be visiting the VT campus today for a service/ceremony in regards to the tragic events of yesterday...also understand he said that people have the right to bear arms....so does that mean he believes people carrying guns should be allowed into the service he's attending today? I mean come on, he has his goons kick people out of events just because their car has an anti bush bumper sticker on it or they are wearing a t-shirt supporting something he disagrees with and doesn't like...yet he says people should be allowed to bear arms...somehow I doubt he means all people and more likely he thinks of the "people" as only being Loyal Bushies?
Posted by emal at April 17, 2007 08:28 AMMry, bt 'wht mn's brdn,' ths, n tslf, hs bn lftd nd twstd frm tr Chrstnty, fr mny rsns tht wn't g nt, bt tht knw tht y cld gss.
Th 'brdn' s trms f tr Chrstnty, s smply gvng th gspl t vryn, nthng mr.
Rtchtng p th bstrctn lttl, w lrn n Jrmh 23, thnk, tht w r nt t crry th 'brdn' nt Jrslm. Ths mns tht w dn't nvnt r wn hypcrt Chrstnty t rflct wht w wnt t hr, whch s whtvr th scl stts q my b t tht prtclr pnt n tm.
Th brdn, f ll lct f Chrst, s t d NTHNG mr thn prsnt th Gspl, whch s th ntr Bbl, rgrdlss f whthr r nt ths hrng hv rs r ys r hv n sprtl rs r ys. Fr, Chrst ds ll th wrk n th prcvr.
[Editor: ignore=off]I understand Junyah will be visiting the VT campus today for a service/ceremony in regards to the tragic events of yesterday.
Just like Katrina, gotta get that photo-op in!
Posted by Seven of Six at April 17, 2007 10:14 AMmry, hv yr hrd th ltst stry frm th srl frnt?
n ld mn lvd ln n Plstn. H wntd t dg hs ptt grdn, bt t ws vry hrd wrk. Hs nly sn, wh wld hv hlpd hm, ws n n srl prsn. Th ld mn wrt lttr t hs sn nd mntnd hs prdcmnt. Shrtly, h rcvd ths rply, \"Fr HVN\'S SK, Dd, dn\'t dg p tht grdn, tht\'s whr brd th GNS!\" t 4 .M. th nxt mrnng, dzn srl sldrs shwd p nd dg p th ntr grdn, wtht fndng ny gns.
Cnfsd, th ld mn wrt nthr nt t hs sn tllng hm wht hppnd nd skng hm wht t d nxt.
Hs sn\'s rply ws: \"Nw plnt yr ptts, Dd. Ths s th bst cn d fr y t ths tm.\"
[Editor: ignore=off]"The burden, of all elect of Christ, is to do NOTHING more than present the Gospel, which is the entire Bible, regardless of whether or not those hearing have ears or eyes or have no spiritual ears or eyes."
I am not going to argue the point with you Scout, but you couldn't be further from the truth. Part of the problem with you is that you are going to cram your viewpoint of the Gospel down people's throat, whether they are interested or not. What a turn off, especially for those who don't believe. What a wonderful way to witness.
Posted by at April 17, 2007 03:07 PMh, Jdth, y'r hypcrt, s cldn't tch y thng. Why nt tk chll pll nd gv yrslf brk? Dd y rd th srl pc n th bv? t's knd lk TV, s y'll b hppy:)
[Editor: ignore=off]Fuck off, you morbid ghoul. You're not wanted here.
Posted by iamcoyote at April 17, 2007 03:25 PMMry, r y mntrng cyt\'s trrbl lngg? Cn\'t y dlt sch nsty cmmnt?
t\'s sd hw bd ppl r trtd by psychtc/tstc dlsnls.
hp smn wll d th rght thng nd gt rd f cyt, t lst fr fw dys; tht wy sh wll lrn t rspct thrs n th nt. Thnk y.
[Editor: ignore=off]hy, Mry, w hv bhvr md tchnqs fr lw fnctnng tstcs, nd vn hgh fnctnng mntls, clld tm t. Cn y lk, d tm t wth cyt? f y dn\'t hv th thrty, rqst tht y pss my bsrvtn t Stv, s ths s hs st.
[Editor: ignore=off]Um, scout, have you read Kipling's White Man's Burden? There's really nothing in it that can easily be interpreted as "the elect of Christ to present the Gospel." It's all about the "burden" of the Western nation to "civilize" the nonwhite peoples of the world and was written on the occasion of the American conquest of the Philippines. There's some discussion about whether Kipling was being serious or whether he was being satirical, but you really have to twist yourself into knots to get your reading. It seems to me it's pretty clearly a political-cultural concept.
Take up the White Man's burden
Send forth the best ye breed
Go, bind your sons to exile
To serve your captives' need;
To wait, in heavy harness,
On fluttered folk and wild
Your new-caught sullen peoples,
Half devil and half child.
Take up the White Man's burden--
In patience to abide,
To veil the threat of terror
And check the show of pride;
By open speech and simple,
An hundred times made plain,
To seek another's profit
And work another's gain.
Take up the White Man's burden--
The savage wars of peace--
Fill full the mouth of Famine,
And bid the sickness cease;
And when your goal is nearest
(The end for others sought)
Watch sloth and heathen folly
Bring all your hope to nought.
Take up the White Man's burden--
No iron rule of kings,
But toil of serf and sweeper--
The tale of common things.
The ports ye shall not enter,
The roads ye shall not tread,
Go, make them with your living
And mark them with your dead.
Take up the White Man's burden,
And reap his old reward--
The blame of those ye better
The hate of those ye guard--
The cry of hosts ye humour
(Ah, slowly!) toward the light:--
"Why brought ye us from bondage,
Our loved Egyptian night?"
Take up the White Man's burden--
Ye dare not stoop to less--
Nor call too loud on Freedom
To cloak your weariness.
By all ye will or whisper,
By all ye leave or do,
The silent sullen peoples
Shall weigh your God and you.
Take up the White Man's burden!
Have done with childish days--
The lightly-proffered laurel,
The easy ungrudged praise:
Comes now, to search your manhood
Through all the thankless years,
Cold, edged with dear-bought wisdom,
The judgment of your peers.
Dl, thnks, bt y hv t psd dwn, Kplng dd th Bblcl twstng. H knw th Bbl s wll s ny hypcrt Chrstn, nd prrtd th ncnt Crsdrs fls Znsm, nd tdys srl fls Znsm nd tdys crp hgmny fls whtvr pgn prncpl tht thy wnt t drm p t cntrl vryn nd vrythng.
Kplng smply pntd th wy fr th dprvd t tk wht s nt thr's by frc. Snd fmlr?
[Editor: ignore=off]