From Jim Gilliam's blog archives
Tightening the grip of power...
November 15, 2004 7:00 PM
Two weeks ago, the Republicans built further majorities in the House and Senate. Today, their grip continues to tighten as the only remaining moderate voice in the White House, Colin Powell, resigned and Bush's lackey at the CIA, Porter Goss, began purging his agency of "people who have been obstructing the president's agenda."
In other words Bush is firing anyone who was actually right about Iraq's weapons capability while hoping to install the only person in his administration who has failed more miserably than himself, Condi Rice, as Secretary of State.
If he really does nominate someone so wholly unqualified and incompetent as Condi simply because she has proven her loyalty by lying more than anyone else, it will be a reflection of just how paranoid Bush has become. Lockdowns like this happen when leaders are scared of their backs...and Bush seems terrified.
Tightening the grip of power...
Next Entry: Small Businesses vs. Working Families (11.15.2004)
Previous Entry: Just more of the same (11.12.2004)
Read the 53 comments.
Condi is the ultimate brown-noser. She'll say whatever it takes to get ahead. The best example of that was when she "accidentally" referred to Bush as her husband.
Rumsfeld is the classic example of the guy who can talk the talk but can't walk the walk. Many of us have experienced people who were fantastic at selling themselves, but complete failures at managing projects. Rumsfeld is that person... squared.
He's really charming, uses the appropriate cutting edge jargon, but ultimately he doesn't have the foggiest idea which end of the military is up. Keep him FAR away from decision making. Don't allow him to manage any people or projects of significance. What did you say? He's the SecDef? What a clusterfuck.
More than any of his other faults, Bush is absolutely terrible at promoting and empowering competent managers. Everyone said that he would surround himself with good people. The only good person I'm aware of is Colin Powell, and Bush marginalized him.
Worst thing Powell ever did was to accept the post to Secretary of State. He had to sell the UN on Saddam's WMD's and it turned out to be nothing but hot air. What an embarrassment.
Mon Nov 15 2004 9:04 PM
Condi's finest moment: 9/11 Commission testimony
Mon Nov 15 2004 9:42 PM
I know most democrats abhor the idea of a black woman who can take the reins of power. It contradicts the traditional notion that they stay in their tenement collecting welfare and only appear in public to vote the democrat party line every two years. Maybe a little more exposure to the twenty first century will get you past your Jim Crow history.
Tue Nov 16 2004 8:21 AM
Right Wing Robby:
I cant believe this. You mean to tell me that the President is going to put people on his staff and cabinet that agree with him and wont try to obstruct his agenda? This is an outrage! Thanks for exposing this scandal Jim.
Tue Nov 16 2004 8:33 AM
Are you really making this a racial/sexist thing? Are you serious? Do you really think that has anything to do with Jim's issue?
Are you seriously trying to say that Republicans are more tolerant than Democrats? I'll be the first to praise Bush when I see a high level cabinet member who is openly gay. Then you can preach all you want about tolerance.
Your point makes perfect sense to me. I think Condi is a shill, but that's her job and no one should be surprised by that. It would be the same no matter who is in office.
Tue Nov 16 2004 9:59 AM
You know, I find it pretty strange that some of the top people running our country have been directly involved with the oil industry. George with his failed company, Dick with Halliburton, and Condi with Chevron.
Condi served on Chevron's board of directors for nine years. They even liked her so much, they named an oil tanker after her!
Tue Nov 16 2004 10:50 AM
Tue Nov 16 2004 10:50 AM
Only a moron or a racist would conclude that Howard Dean was qaulified to be president of the United States but question Dr Rice's qualifications to head the State Department. Get used to seeing her name, more likely then not she'll be the republican vice presidential candidate in 2008.
Tue Nov 16 2004 11:07 AM
You are absolutely right. I agree in your premise that governing a state is in no way commensurate with Condi's background as a career special assistant appointee. How dare anyone have the gall to worry about this "qualifications" word, indeed. Anyone that does is clearly a dirty, moronic racist.
Now excuse me while I go apply to be chief nuclear physicist at Diablo Canyon.
I'd like for anyone to summarize the parts of Rice's CV that they feel qualifies her for SecState. Humor us.
But alas, as IJ pointed out, this is no surprise. The Prez just gutted the expertise of CIA leadership, too stubbornly attached to the ethos of truth and accuracy in intell analysis. Rice is no surprise, just something else to lament.
The slippery slope continues.
Tue Nov 16 2004 4:01 PM
Dr. Condoleezza Rice became the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs, commonly referred to as the National Security Advisor, on January 22, 2001.
In June 1999, she completed a six year tenure as Stanford University's Provost, during which she was the institution's chief budget and academic officer. As Provost she was responsible for a $1.5 billion annual budget and the academic program involving 1,400 faculty members and 14,000 students.
As professor of political science, Dr. Rice has been on the Stanford faculty since 1981 and has won two of the highest teaching honors -- the 1984 Walter J. Gores Award for Excellence in Teaching and the 1993 School of Humanities and Sciences Dean's Award for Distinguished Teaching.
At Stanford, she has been a member of the Center for International Security and Arms Control, a Senior Fellow of the Institute for International Studies, and a Fellow (by courtesy) of the Hoover Institution. Her books include Germany Unified and Europe Transformed (1995) with Philip Zelikow, The Gorbachev Era (1986) with Alexander Dallin, and Uncertain Allegiance: The Soviet Union and the Czechoslovak Army (1984). She also has written numerous articles on Soviet and East European foreign and defense policy, and has addressed audiences in settings ranging from the U.S. Ambassador's Residence in Moscow to the Commonwealth Club to the 1992 and 2000 Republican National Conventions.
From 1989 through March 1991, the period of German reunification and the final days of the Soviet Union, she served in the Bush Administration as Director, and then Senior Director, of Soviet and East European Affairs in the National Security Council, and a Special Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs. In 1986, while an international affairs fellow of the Council on Foreign Relations, she served as Special Assistant to the Director of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. In 1997, she served on the Federal Advisory Committee on Gender -- Integrated Training in the Military.
She was a member of the boards of directors for the Chevron Corporation, the Charles Schwab Corporation, the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, the University of Notre Dame, the International Advisory Council of J.P. Morgan and the San Francisco Symphony Board of Governors. She was a Founding Board member of the Center for a New Generation, an educational support fund for schools in East Palo Alto and East Menlo Park, California and was Vice President of the Boys and Girls Club of the Peninsula. In addition, her past board service has encompassed such organizations as Transamerica Corporation, Hewlett Packard, the Carnegie Corporation, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, The Rand Corporation, the National Council for Soviet and East European Studies, the Mid-Peninsula Urban Coalition and KQED, public broadcasting for San Francisco.
Born November 14, 1954 in Birmingham, Alabama, she earned her bachelor's degree in political science, cum laude and Phi Beta Kappa, from the University of Denver in 1974; her master's from the University of Notre Dame in 1975; and her Ph.D. from the Graduate School of International Studies at the University of Denver in 1981. She is a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences and has been awarded honorary doctorates from Morehouse College in 1991, the University of Alabama in 1994, the University of Notre Dame in 1995, the Mississippi College School of Law in 2003, the University of Louisville and Michigan State University in 2004. She resides in Washington, D.C.
Anybody care to compare?
Wed Nov 17 2004 5:56 AM
As for gutting the CIA, it's about time. Missed 9-11, signed off on the WMD in Iraq, leaked reports during the presidential election, and cronyism (remember Joe Wilson?). Anytime the old system doesn't work you have to cut out the dead wood that is strangling the system. I hear George Tenant is writing a book claiming Rice didn't do her job, but its only fitting. If ever there was an expert on not doing their job it would be George Tenant.
Wed Nov 17 2004 6:07 AM
Tom from Madison:
the charge of racism against democrats is WAY off-base--especially that nonsense about dems wanting Black women in their tenements collecting welfare. That's A LIE!
Please enlightne yourself by looking at who the blacks in congress are. Then consider their party affiliation. How many Black Senators and Representatives are Republicans? Why do you think that is?
The fact is Republicans are the least likely people to vote for Black Senators and representatives.
...you're also WAY off base with regard to intelligence failure. The problem was more with the intelligence of those reading the reports and failing to act. Remeber the PDB of August 2001? How about when Gary Hart briefed Condi on specific terror threats the week before 9/11? You remember - W was on vacation in Texas!
Sure, the CIA needs to be improved, but we had the info to prevent 9/11 before it happened. CIA did it's job. Condi and the President didn't do theirs. Then there was the failure to scrmble aircraft on time--another Bush administration failure. Quit trying to make the CIA the scapegoat!
Wed Nov 17 2004 7:01 AM
Sandra Bernhard insulted her in racial terms with a "Yes Massa" accent at another Dean fundraiser the same night. Perhaps the pro-Dean comics find it unbearable that the most powerful black woman in U.S. history, close friend to the president and his wife - and a brilliant classical pianist to boot - dares to be a Republican.
Like I said, only a racist or a moron would claim Dean was qualified to be president but Dr Rice isn't qualified to lead the State Dept. The Dean campaign had more then one fund raising event where Dr Rice was referred to as the House Nigger, and the Bush Maid among other hilarous racial slurs to the glee of his loyal supporters. Given that back drop any claims to a civil discourse concerning Dr Rice have been tainted by the obvious previous racial overtones from the the past. In short, wearing your sheet without your mask has already branded you.
Wed Nov 17 2004 8:51 AM
Front page of the Washington Post, 7/23/03:
Just weeks ago, Condoleezza Rice, President Bush's national security adviser, made a trip to the Middle East that was widely seen as advancing the peace process. There was speculation that she would be a likely choice for secretary of state, and hopes among Republicans that she could become governor of California and even, someday, president.
But she has since become enmeshed in the controversy over the administration's use of intelligence about Iraq's weapons in the run-up to war. She has been made to appear out of the loop by colleagues' claims that she did not read or recall vital pieces of intelligence. And she has made statements about U.S. intelligence on Iraq that have been contradicted by facts that later emerged.
The remarks by Rice and her associates raise two uncomfortable possibilities for the national security adviser. Either she missed or overlooked numerous warnings from intelligence agencies seeking to put caveats on claims about Iraq's nuclear weapons program, or she made public claims that she knew to be false.
Wed Nov 17 2004 9:14 AM
Tom from Madison:
The only advisors, Black or otherwise, that Bush tolerates are those that agree with him or help further his agenda. Powell was a convenient fall guy. Condaleeza is a true believer. We don't need true believers. We need presidential advisors and cabinet members who live in the real world. Somehow Dr. Rice was among the last to realize there were no WMDs when it was her job to be the first. For this she should be fired, not made Secretary of State.
Sandra Bernhard's remarks are not racist. They are a parody of Bush's token exploitation of Black's in his administration.
Howard Dean isn't a racist. Even if he had a racist supporter you could legitimately cite, that still wouldn't make Dean a racist. This is merely sick innuendo.
How about sticking to Rice's record--especially testimony in front of the 9/11 committee? I'd prefer a truth-teller in the Secretary of State position.
Wed Nov 17 2004 9:48 AM
Right Wing Robby:
What you said, Jim, was that Condi was "wholly unqualified and incompetent."
The resume posted above doesnt even get into the 4 languages she speaks fluently and the fact that she graduated college when she was 19 years old and highschool by the time she was 15.
Reading that resume and coming to the conclusion that she is "wholly unqualified and incompetent" to be the Sec of State is ridiculous, partisan and totally unfounded.
The left is going to pin the WMD thing on every member of the administration, staff or janitor that mops the floors while Bush is in the White House. So Ill just keep posting the quotes over and over again until someday(never), you'll concede that EVERYONE thought they were there and it wasnt the new pin cushion of the week, Condi Rice, that is at fault.
One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
* President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998
"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
* President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998
"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
* Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998
"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
* Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998
"We urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
* Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin (D-MI), Tom
Daschle (D-SD), John Kerry ( D - MA), and others Oct. 9, 1998
"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
* Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998
"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
* Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999
"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has invigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
* Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others,
December 5, 2001
"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them."
* Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002
"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
* Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002
"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
* Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002
"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."
* Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002
"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons...."
* Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002
"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force-if necessary-to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
* Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002
"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
* Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002
"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do."
* Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002
"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapon stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
* Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002
"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction."
* Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002
"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation
And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real."
* Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003
Wed Nov 17 2004 9:51 AM
I don't suppose the ever vigilant Post cared to list a colleague by name or list one of the "vital" pieces of information. Like I said, your sheet is showing.
Wed Nov 17 2004 10:01 AM
Tom from Madison:
historical posts are interesting, but not relevant. Our best intelligence immediately before invasion was that Saddam didn't have WMDs--no matter what anybody said going back to 1998.
Wed Nov 17 2004 10:16 AM
Right Wing Robby:
Tom, If I was quoting George Washington you'd have a point but 12 of those quotes were spoken while Bush was in office.
You are ridiculous. Intelligence doesnt flow like a stock ticker over the Presidents desk. Things dont change every hour. You're so partisan that you cant even admit that the Democrats believed exactly the same thing as the rest of the world even when the facts are layed in black and white right in front of your face.
Its seriously hard to even imagine how you do it. The guy you voted for said "..the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real," just months leading up to the war.
Tom, Did John Kerry lie to America? Shouldnt he, as a Senator representing me, the people, be held accountable for lying to us? Why did you vote for a liar Tom? Ted Kennedy lied to us, just like Carl Levin, both Clintons, Gore, Graham....etc.
Why do you support liars Tom?
Wed Nov 17 2004 10:39 AM
"Tom, Did John Kerry lie to America? Shouldnt he, as a Senator representing me, the people, be held accountable for lying to us? Why did you vote for a liar Tom? Ted Kennedy lied to us, just like Carl Levin, both Clintons, Gore, Graham....etc."
Robby, I think you should be asking those questions about the President, who happens to be running the country, and who just happened to take us to war on faulty evidence. The only thing that the people you noted in the quote above did was believe the President.
Nice try to shift the blame, though.
Wed Nov 17 2004 12:11 PM
Right Wing Robby:
Exactly how did Bill Clinton, Carl Levin, John Kerry, Nancy Pelosi and all the rest of them believe what George Bush told them, when George Bush wasnt even in office?
Or was everything they said true on Jan 19th 2001, then suddenly not true on Jan 20th, 2001?
This is funny stuff. Tell me more!
Wed Nov 17 2004 1:01 PM
"The left is going to pin the WMD thing on every member of the administration, staff or janitor that mops the floors while Bush is in the White House."
So you are saying that Rice is a low-level flunky, and therefore doesn't deserve any share of the blame? Exactly how does this fit in with your theory that she is well-qualified to be SecState? Shouldn't Bush have picked someone with a little more stature to fill such an important post?
Or is the truth that Rice, as NSA, is the person who most deserves the blame for the WMD fiasco? WTF was the SecState doing having to personally discard bad intelligence before giving his UN speech? Wasn't it Condi's job to make sure that the SecState had absolutely the best intelligence available? WTF was Condi's job, exactly, if it wasn't that?
Condi's appointment to SecState is truly a case of the lunatics running the asylum. Both she and Rumsfeld spent the last four years trying to do the SecState's job, and completely botching their own responsibilities.
These are not promotable individuals. They should have been fired a long time ago, due to gross negligence. Rumsfeld for failing to plan the postwar occupation of Iraq, and Rice for ignoring the pre-9/11 warning, lying about it in the 9/11 commission testimony, and not doing a single thing over the last four years to defend this country - unless appearing on talk shows counts. She wasn't the Press Secretary. She wasn't the SecState. She was the NSA.
Rumsfeld's military theories are so much ivory tower nonsense, and we can see the results on the ground in Iraq. Warfighting should not be left to the politicians, and especially not stupid ones like Rumsfeld.
Wed Nov 17 2004 1:12 PM
Not only that, but I also shave my head. Please add that to the list of reasons I'm a racist.
Wed Nov 17 2004 2:25 PM
Mike of the Great White North:
I like the way RWR put up all those posts of Democrats saying the things they said. Guess what. I agree with RWR on this one. I wouldn't let them get away with saying that *%&* either. Call a spade a spade. Best intelligence since 91 has said this threat did not exist. So if your going to harp on Bush and co. for his collosal mistake, then you have to include the Democrats who used the same BS for their own political amibitions. I've been saying it for as long as i can remember... your 2 party system really looks like a 1 party dictatorship up here. Domestically policies may differ (socialist vs. conservative) but foreign policy wise they are identical and will lead your country down the sewer. It's just that W is upfront with his warmongering. You can at least give him that.
But by the same token, if i was to put up every quote of Dickhead Cheney claiming of AlQuada-Iraq ties, Rummies absolute knowlege of where the WMD were in Tikrit(north south east and west of it) Condi's mushrooms, and Bush's speeches full of all three misnomers, Jims blog would be overrun, my fingers would be raw stubs and your eyeballs would bleed trying to read it all. So don't be too keen on posting quotes up here. I can tit for tat you to death with them.
Wed Nov 17 2004 10:50 PM
John McCain told Goss the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) is "a dysfunctional organization. It has to be cleaned out." That is, the CIA does not perform its missions. McCain told Goss that as DCI, he must get rid of the old boys and bring in a new team at Langley. Moreover, McCain told me this week, "with CIA leaks intended to harm the re-election campaign of the president of the United States, it is not only dysfunctional but a rogue organization."
Thu Nov 18 2004 6:11 AM
Right Wing Robby:
The United States of America is the greatest country on Earth and will remain so. The fact that you so concerned over my country and not your own shows me our place in the world.
Those who do the most, always get the most complaints. Those who do the least, get none.
Thu Nov 18 2004 6:27 AM
Tom from Madison:
If we are truly the greatest, then we need to hold ourselves to a higher standard. It isn't too much to ask that a president reads, undertands, and acts on his Presidential Daily Briefings. After all, HE'S THE COMMANDER IN CHIEF! Blaming everything on bad intelligence is little more than convenient excuse making.
As the leader of the FREE WORLD, our president is supposed to be accountable to the people. So why does he refuse to appear under oath before the 9/11 committee? Why does he refuse to have his responses recorded electronically? Why does he insist on going with Dick Cheney?
Bush behaves more like a dictator than an American President. Our founding fathers didn't want a King or a Genralissimo. Even a C student who got into Yale based on the family legacy admission policy should get that!
Thu Nov 18 2004 6:50 AM
That's rich! Robert Novak being concerned about CIA leaks. What a joke.
Thu Nov 18 2004 8:16 AM
Don't get too carried away about the no WMD in Iraq. NPR is reporting Sarin gas has been found by Marines in Fallujah. Wonder why the "major" networks are not carrying the story?
Thu Nov 18 2004 8:20 AM
Right Wing Robby:
Dont get to carried away? HAHA
If they found substanial WMD's in IRAQ the left would shrivel up and die. They dont want us to be successful. The left wants us not to find any. They want as much US failure as they can in hopes it will return them to power.
Whats good for America, isnt good for the left.
"If"? Enough said.
Thu Nov 18 2004 8:42 AM
Actually if you read the quote (did you?), it's John McCain who is concerned with the leaks from the CIA, and who also advises Gross to start cutting out the old boys and start over.
This is the same CIA who sent Joey Wilson to investigate the uranium rumors in Niger. Then let him give his only written report on the subject in a column in the NY Times. After the shit settles the Senate investigation finds that not only did Wilson's report to the CIA support the claim that Iraq was attempting to purchase uranium (and contradicts what he'd been telling the NY Times) but his wife did indeed push for her husband to get the job. When is the justice department going to get around to prosecuting Wilson for "exposing" himself?
As for the shaved head, there's always the moron factor.
Thu Nov 18 2004 8:43 AM
"Whats good for America, isnt good for the left."
So finding sarin gas in Iraq is good for America? Anyone who has seen Peter Zimmerman in Uncovered knows that sarin gas only has a shelf life of roughly two months... so "it may not be safe to drink, but it's certainly not sarin nerve gas any longer"
Thu Nov 18 2004 8:47 AM
Right Wing Robby:
If we found stockpiles of WMD's, our credibility on the world stage would be improved. And yes, finding sarin gas among other missing WMD's would be good for the country and the world. You know this. You also know that if we found them the left in this country would cringe. Not because the weapons are bad, but because your arguement and years of calling the President a liar would be exposed to the world as bogus.
Good for America, bad for the left.
I havent even seen that story anywhere but here. How quicky you are to discredit any advancement in finding WMD's Jim. I almost wrote that would be the first thing the left would do. Now I wish I had because my instinct was dead on.
Thu Nov 18 2004 9:05 AM
Right Wing Robby:
I havent seen your movies, nor any of the others. I know of whom they serve, and I know who praises such films. The same people that knocked down the towers, would like Moores work.
I wouldnt give a squirt of piss to see any of them.
Thu Nov 18 2004 9:08 AM
"Not because the weapons are bad, but because your arguement and years of calling the President a liar would be exposed to the world as bogus."
Uhhh, the lie was that Saddam was a "grave and gathering danger." Ask any weapons inspector and they would give you all sorts of reasons, BEFORE THE WAR, of why Saddam was not a threat. Including the fact that sarin gas has a short shelf life.
The only people, democrat or republican, who really said that Saddam was not a threat were people who had actually been in Iraq looking for the weapons. And the press called them traitors. Scott Ritter (a former marine, former weapons inspector, and Republican) in particular.
Thu Nov 18 2004 9:15 AM
Thu Nov 18 2004 9:32 AM
Yeah, the quote's from McCain, but the article is written by Novak, who calls the CIA leaks "disturbing aberrations." I guess he picks and chooses which of those disturbing aberrations are worth announcing to the world in his columns.
Thu Nov 18 2004 10:00 AM
Right Wing Robby:
Umm no Jim. You said "Bush Lied about Iraq Weapons."
You cant find it here under your Blog entitled "Bush Lied about Iraq Weapons."
You really need to get rid of that archive. Its much harder to switch your story with it there.
whatever that means.
Thu Nov 18 2004 10:17 AM
you're truly shameless. did you read the article? it was about bush's claim in the state of the union that iraq was trying to acquire uranium from africa and how the cia told him it wasn't true.
which his why bush said "british intelligence" because his own fucking intelligence group said it was wrong!
the president of the united states knowingly deceived the american people about iraq's weapons capability in the state of the union address. he should be thrown out of office.
that was what my blog post said, and i stand by it.
Thu Nov 18 2004 10:30 AM
Over a year later it turns out that the British reports are correct and the "unnamed" sources within the CIA quoted by CBS where wrong (or where they faxed from a Kinko's in Texas?). I always interpret "unnamed sources" as "some shit we made up" even more so when its connected with C-BS "news".
Thu Nov 18 2004 11:18 AM
Johan of the blue-yellow Neutrals:
"The resume posted above doesnt even get into the 4 languages she speaks fluently /../"
What good is speaking alot of languages when you cant listen?
And the problem with quotes is that they can be placed in such out of context environment that you can even make Arnold look like a little ballerina in a pink dress.
If you take the quote from somewhere, it is usually considered a good practice to include the source so that people who wants can go and look at which context it is taken from.
Thu Nov 18 2004 1:52 PM
Mike of the Great White North:
RWR - pr. "ig-no-ray-mus" n : an ignorant person [syn: know nothing, uneducated person]
It's funny but you didn't even try to rebutt any one of my points. You just let your arrogant superiority complex guide your reply. The only reason im more concerned about your country over mine is because Canada is not leading the world down the course to Armageddon.
The US used to be the greatest country in the world. Now its a backwater island of ignorance, fear and stupidity save for a few pockets of intelligence. You can sit there and stroke off to your own patriotism all you want. Doesn't alter the fact that what i said earlier is correct.
Thu Nov 18 2004 2:53 PM
Do you really think Canada has the ability to lead starving wolves to meat, let alone the word down any path?
Best intelligence since '91 - could you actually find a credible intellegence source that didn't believe Saddam was rearming with WMD in the 1990s? Slick himself was launching cruise missiles and raining death fom the sky all over Iraq for 8 years because they wouldn't "honor" the cease fire agreement.
The United Nations didn't give a flying fuck about what was going on in Iraq - as long as the BILLIONS of dollars in kick backs kept flowing. Money has now been traced to Kofi Anna's son and thoughout the coalition of the unwilling - perhaps Canada's on list of the bribed and payed for. We shall see.
Thu Nov 18 2004 3:25 PM
Right Wing Robby:
The only thing Canada leads the world in is being 'just north of the USA.'
There are plenty of my fellow Americans which at least claim to love this country that I respond to almost everyday. I dont give a rats ass what you think Mike. You should spend less time insulting the worlds only superpower and more time trying to improve your marginalized 'do nothing but complain about everything' socialist country.
Say hi to the Queen for me.
Thu Nov 18 2004 4:13 PM
RWR says "socialist" like it's such a horrible thing... oh wait, it is if you're living in a Capitalist society. Heaven forbid that we can't exploit Third World countries for a profit. And if you think that's aimed just at Republicans, think again.
Of course, if you're going to tell someone to stop insulting your country, it might be a good idea to stop insulting theirs.
I was quite amused with the Arnold and the pink dress comment by Johan. Context is right; you can take quotes and apply them to other situations, but it's kind of important to make sure that you know where the original context the quote was derived from.
Of course, it seems there's a lot of taking-things-and-putting-them-out-of-context going on here.
Thu Nov 18 2004 5:46 PM
Say hi to the queen?
Hi Robby!! How are the bunched panties feeling?
You shouldn't have said that. You come off like a frat kid, seems like you'd know better than to open yourself up for an emasculating nickname. Well...looks like you've just earned yourself a right proper and fitting one. Henceforth, you are known as the "queenie". You seem somewhat accidentally intelligent...but sadly, streetsmart you are clearly not.
Your myopic view of the world is precisely the reason why everybody hates us. Multiply you by about 52 million and we see how ignorance has taken over and unreality has become reality. "We're the greatest, rah rah rah...!" Learn up on the reality-based history, queenie. Study our inconsistent and heavy-handed foreign policy, queenie. Understand the WORLD we live in, not just the country, queenie. Perhaps it'll serve you some obviously well-deserved humility.
Reality ticker alert: We just pushed our borrowing cap up another few trillion. More stupifying tax cuts during war and economic instability. The dollar continues to slide. Our very own deficit spending has destabilized global financial markets. Say hello to the next great financial crisis.
Read up, kids. Kerry or Bush, this was probably gonna happen anyway...just sooner rather than later. This time, the IMF doesn't make a bailout loan big enough for the US...and when the shit hits the fan, we're gonna need all the help we can get. Terrorism isn't the greatest threat to our way of life anymore. It's our own greed. The further our leadership distances itself from economic reality with idealogical consolidation at the top (Rice just perpetuates worldwide disdain for us), the quicker we arrive at this inevitable financial doomsday. Bank on it.
And so long, queenie. Thanks for serving your macho pride up for some much-needed comic relief; not only in this thread...but from this point forward.
Thu Nov 18 2004 10:41 PM
The dollar is sliding, and it's about fucking time too. It's been held to artificially high levels since 1982 and a correction is due. Makes cheap Asian imports even cheaper and our exports even more expensive. A cheap dollar reverses that trend and helps the economy overall. It will result in some short term inflation - but that too is a correction from under reporting it for the past 12 years.
Spending needs to be brought under control, but its not like this is a recent problem. Correcting the inherant issues with SS will go a long ways towardsaddressing this. The federal debt borrowing limit has raised every year that I've been alive. This includes the years that the press claimed had a "balanced budget". The "balanced budget" under Clinton was hoax and never occurred. As for the IMF what a joke. Who the hell do you think funds the IMF?
Fri Nov 19 2004 6:04 AM
...which makes the IMF criticism of US defecit spending and warning of its destabilizing effects even more significant.
Sure, the IMF is generally regarded as a US tool to control the economic policy/structures of developing countries, but in that light, consider that our very own toady IO is cautioning us. Doubt they would do so unless they anticipate a genuine, unavoidable problem and are just covering their collective bank nerd asses.
And raising the debt limit this time was anything but routine.
Stay tuned, this ride is just getting started...
Fri Nov 19 2004 8:45 AM
Tom from Madison:
To RWR and other conservatives:
If we are truly "the best" please explain why we aren't first in the following compared to other countries:
1) longest life expectancy of our citizens,
2) lowest infant mortality rate,
3) highest literacy rate,
For extra credit, please explain why Canada is ahead of the US in all of the above.
I'm not happy about being behind other nations , but those are the facts. We can do better.
Consider tha all the countries that are ahead of us in life expectancy and low infant mortality have some kind of universal health care. There must be some lessons we can learn from them!
Fri Nov 19 2004 9:41 AM
We spend 14% of our GDP on our stupid 3rd party payer, privatized health care system, and the results that Tom described are our returns. Yes, it is more specialized and the most technologically advanced than any other in the world. But this comes at the expense of general, routine, preventative health care services. We internalize and pass on costs from those that can't afford it to those that can anyway.
Why do people argue against a universal system that would be cheaper and for a private system that is more expensive and less effective? Disincentives, sure. I understand that. But surely there is a happy medium to incentivize the field for the best and brightest while providing access to more of our people.
And while I'm at it...why is it, the very minute someone shows concern for their country by rightly criticizing its faults or areas it needs to improve, do they become viewed as "wanting the US to fail"? This insinuation runs antithetical to the reasons why we so often proclaim to be the greatest.
Now. What was this thread about again?
Fri Nov 19 2004 10:51 AM
It was about Jim being a racist or a moron.
Fri Nov 19 2004 11:08 AM
Tom from Madison:
Saying that Condaleeza Rice has been exploited for her race by the Bush Administration is an opinion. If you don't agree, how about using logic instead of resorting to name-calling?
Fri Nov 19 2004 11:22 AM
Mike of the Great White North:
I thank all of you who have said many kind words regarding my country. It was most apreciated. I hope all the people here understand that my comments of the USA reflect only where i think it is heading and not about the people itself. I guess its like trying to give advise to your best friend not to marry someone you know is just a gold digger. You say what you have to say with the best of intentions to get them to open their eyes, but sometimes they just wont listen. All you can do after is shrug your shoulders and hope for the best.
Here's hoping America becomes that 'shining city on the hill' again.
Back on topic now. Isn't it funny how even as Condi 'Mushroom' Rice is about to take over Powells job, he basically pulled a stupid. He came out and said Iran was planning to put together nuke warheads with missiles. Wheres he getting this 'info'? Mohammad Mohaddessin, of the National Council for Resistance in Iran. Does this seem like Deja Vu? Anyone remember Ahmed Chalabi of the Iraqi National Congress and all his valued intelligence. Sounds like the boy is crying 'wolf' again. Is the village going to listen again?
Once again, the IAEA has givin Iran a clean bill of health on it's nuclear activity and documented all it's progress. Iran is willing to allow inspectors into the country with unfettered access. These are the same precursors just before the Iraq war. All we need now is Condi going to the UN with a vial of white powder and it's all over!
Fri Nov 19 2004 12:42 PM