I think Bush's actions rise to a level of criminality on par with some of history's nastier henchmen and despots. Killing tens of thousands of innocent civilians got many previous such madmen exiled, jailed, shot or hanged. If there was any justice in all this similar fates would befall Bush.
Posted by steve duncan at October 22, 2006 04:27 AMIt would be sobering to see Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld/Rice in the custody of a serious international tribunal. It would mean the end of American dominance, but also the end of American ideals. History would ever after be divided into those who felt we were a noble experiment run amok, and thise who doubted such principles were seriously adopted to begin with. And the latter would have a stronger case with Bush in the dock.
I think one serious outcome of the upcoming elections and the elections in 2008 goes beyond partisanship and politics as usual. American really do have to decide what our grand national experiment is supposed to be about. Do we believe what we say? Do we DO as we say?
This "beacon of light and enlightenment" stuff is either true or false in the hearts and minds of Americans first and foremost, and we must to demonstrate if we have faith in our principles or not.
Plainly put, supporting a failed and outlaw regime (Bush and all his Project for a New American Century pals) is wrong. We have had several years of definitive experiences which tell us that. If we do not act on the obvious knowledge, we are witting accomplices in the destruction of America. Voting for Bush brings us all the closer to erasing the American legacy from civilization.
Posted by gtash at October 22, 2006 05:53 AMSpace, precisely where the Mofo from Midland belongs.
Preferably, without oxygen.
Posted by Christopher at October 22, 2006 06:39 AMPreferably, without oxygen.
The brain dead don't need oxygen, Christopher.
..."rejects future arms-control agreements that might limit US flexibility in space and asserts a right to deny access to space to anyone 'hostile to US interests'....
Okay. No need to talk or for diplomacy. And we only claim this hostility for those who don't make plastic gew-gaws for Wal-Mart? Why should anyone talk with us since we sure as hell won't talk with them.
If we do not act on the obvious knowledge, we are witting accomplices in the destruction of America.
Exactly. PNAC, the neo-cons and republi-cons have been witting accomplices to these injustices. They are as accountable as their leedurs.
Posted by phidipides at October 22, 2006 07:36 AMgtash, great points.
For my part, it seems clear that the great American experiment is now about overconsumption and increasing materialism. Ensuring that these delightful qualities continue to increase in the face of planetary and environmental destruction and increasing worldwide poverty is the goal of our political system.
To the extent that our current form of constitutional republic frustrates those consumption goals, it will be covertly superseded, as the "people" will want to maintain their delusions of moral supremacy based on their "democratic" government. The Republicans are well aware that their current "policies" do not conform with any rational reading of the constitution.
Thus, while it is crystal clear that we have become an aggressive, hostile militarist power that will use its overwhelming might to protect access to its energy needs, the people are told (and believe) that we are "really" just showing again what an exceptional nation we are, spreadin' democracy and hope as usual!
Maintaining an economic empire through miltary power has never really worked throughout history, and in the days of the IED, cell phones, cheap highly effective munitions and personal automobiles, I'd say it's literally impossible even as a short term proposal, as we are witnessing.
Will we learn, will our "leaders" start telling the American Boob what needs to be done, the kind of sacrifices that are necessary to preserve our constitutional republic? The question answers itself, doesn't it?
Posted by euzoius at October 22, 2006 07:59 AMThe brain dead don't need oxygen, Christopher.
True, Phid.
Posted by Christopher at October 22, 2006 08:52 AMMary, I think you may have misconstrued what Mr. Bush actually meant when he made off-the-record comments, which you accidentally quoted. I believe he really said "We can't beat 'em in Baghdad, but by Gawd, let's see them Iraqistanis take us on in orbit!! I pledge, that before my mandate possibly ends, to place a nuclear device on the moon, and successfully blow it up. Oh, yeah, the device, heh, heh."
Posted by tempus at October 22, 2006 09:05 AMeuzoius, that's some well-put righteous truth
Posted by Sharkbabe at October 22, 2006 09:31 AMmry, t s ths typ f hrt wrtchng thnkng tht frcs m t rspct y. Yt, wnt t dd tht th vnts tht gv s lttl Bsh ls shw s tht th scl frcs f wrld hgmny g fr bynd lttl Bsh. Bsh hsn't cl, whch mks hm th prfct frntln plyr fr th crp lrds nd thr mny mngrs.
Thr r s mny dngrs n wrld vnts tdy, s dcttd by r pltcl bys. Bt lt m jst sy n thng fr nw: tht th pltcl bys shp psychlgcl prcptn f th msss, nd n mny wys. Nw lt m jst pnt t n tny wy: rchstrt ctvts n frgn lnd dsgnd t prdc crtn frm f thnkng n S msss. Ths, fr nstnc, th C plnts nt th mnds f th Tlbn t blw p sts cntnng ncnt rlcs; r, prdcs nd spprts nd bys fghn mlts dsgnd t drw Svt nvsn; th lst s ndlss. My pnt s tht th S msss f vtrs mst s bynd th srfc f crp md jnk thnkng.
ll f s mst b crtcl f th ffcl plcy nd t's crp md rlss. W mst vw TV nd thr md s n xtntn f crp hgmny nd qstn mtvtn, wth cnstnt grd gnst mtnlsm. Fr t s mtn, s cntrstd gnst rsn, tht pwrs p th crp lrds.
Lk t 9/11; nd jst cnsdr, fr th mmnt, tht 9/11 ws cmplt C prtn dsgnd t prdc th rslts tht w hv tdy: cmplt cntrl f tw mr cntrs n th mddl st. nd by cmplt cntrl, mn jst tht, s thy hv ttl cntrl f ll spcts f ths tw cntrs. Dn't blv vrythng tht th crp md prdcs, fr vn rq chs s frm f cntrl.
nywy, mry, thnks fr shwng tht th ntrnt stll hs sm sflnss.
[Editor: ignore=off]mary, it is this type of heart wretching thinking that forces me to respect you.
Wow, Mary, I looked up the phrase, "damn with faint praise" and found scout's "compliment" in the definition! Amazing.
But don't strain yourself, scout. You want to save all that energy for your freaky-ass conspiracy theories. (BTW, you forgot the "jews did 9/11" bit, buddy boy; might as well get it all in there in one swell foop)
Posted by iamcoyote at October 22, 2006 10:02 AMBush, when asked if he had read any of the books written about him, including "State of Denial" said no. When asked if he could possibiliy learn anything from these books, said "no." Doesn't read newspapers, doesn't read books, doesn't read magazines, doesn't read material on the Internet. You know, if I didn't know better, I might begin to believe that Bush can't read.
Oh, I forgot, he is reading something about the English people and 1900. Yeah, sure, right.
Posted by Judith at October 22, 2006 10:47 AMJudith, And we're supposed to believe he read Camus? That's a bit absurd!
Posted by Seven of Six at October 22, 2006 11:12 AMDid Nero read My Pet Goat or was some kindergartener reading it to him?
I was never clear on that.
Posted by euzoius at October 22, 2006 11:36 AMI think he was reading, after a fashion. He managed 'my pet', but was hopelessly lost on the pronunciation of 'goat', coming out as goe-at. When a five-year-old tried to correct him, his response resulted in the infamous 'caught in the headlights' photo.
Posted by tempus at October 22, 2006 12:17 PMtempus, you crack me up!
Posted by iamcoyote at October 22, 2006 12:45 PMWay to go tempus!
Thanks for the good laugh, we needed more of that.
PAZ
Posted by quídam at October 22, 2006 01:38 PMDid Nero read My Pet Goat or was some kindergartener reading it to him?
The kindergartener was reading to him. Don't you remember, Bush's book was upside down?
Bush Quotes - Funny Quotes and Bushisms. You guys will love this site.
http://politicalhumor.about.com/od/bushquotes/
Posted by Judith at October 22, 2006 04:13 PMSeven of Six, Camus? Rove would have us believe that? Shows you how stupid he think people are. That's like me reading a book on how to do open heart surgery.
Posted by Judith at October 22, 2006 04:17 PMWhat Camus was he supposed to have read?
Was it getting off on all of the death in The Plague?
"Through out his life, Camus spoke out against and actively opposed totalitarianism in its many forms..."
"Camus was a pacifist"
"Always go too far, because that's where you'll find the truth."
The only thing that fits with Bu$hCo is the quote...going too far seems to be his thing, though I doubt he is in search of any truth. He would not know truth if it knocked him over (like the pretzle did.)
What Camus was he supposed to have read?
Anjha, he never really said, even when asked point blank during an interview. He didn't read Camus. I'm sure he never heard of Camus, until Rove said "hey, tell dumb America that you read Camus. They will think you are brilliant." Brilliant, yeah right. This from a guy who thinks there are more than one "Internets."
Posted by Judith at October 22, 2006 07:28 PM