The sad, sorry State of the Union

The snake-oil salesman tried once again Monday night to sell his illusions to a skeptical audience that stopped listening to him years ago.

George W. Bush’s final State of the Union speech marked a sad, pathetic footnote to a failed Presidency: a dismal, clueless exercise in fear-mongering and falsehood; a monument to arrogance and bluster; and a testament to the depths to which this nation’s government has sunk.

For the most part, this seventh and last SOTU was pure Bush: a mixture of unreality and unrelenting hyperbole, delivered in the stilted, halting style of a failed orator.

He tried to convince an skeptical Congress to become more of a co-conspirator to his failed polices, urging the House and Senate to make his failed programs permanent as a lasting monument to his corrupt legacy.

Congress must, he said, make his tax cuts permanent — a move certain to deepen the record deficits that he will leave to the next President.

It must, he demanded, legalize his warrantless wiretapping bill to make government spying on American citizens the alw of the land — cementing his destruction of the Constitution and destroying what little is left of the freedoms we once thought were bedrocks of the American way of life.

It must continue to send billions off to pay for his failed war in Iraq and support a military presence there that will last well into the next decade if not much, much longer.

But even Congress knows a lame duck when it sees one and, with one eye on the approaching November elections, few — Democrat or Republican — are willing to listen to the ravings of George W. Bush.

As Larry Markasak of The Associated Press reports:

A lame duck president called again for immigration reform, an end to lawmakers’ pet projects, control of Social Security spending and making tax cuts permanent. Democrats have rejected those Bush initiatives before.

And, in a sign that the dominant political battles will not be in Congress, many in the House chamber kept an eye during the speech on Sens. Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton — bitter rivals for the Democratic presidential nomination. They sat close to each other, but managed not to shake hands.

Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, who hours earlier had endorsed Obama over Clinton, reached out to shake Sen. Clinton’s hand when she came near.

Delivering the televised Democratic response, Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius urged Bush to work with a Congress controlled by her party.

“The last five years have cost us dearly — in lives lost, in thousands of wounded warriors whose futures may never be the same, in challenges not met here at home because our resources were committed elsewhere,” she said. “America’s foreign policy has left us with fewer allies and more enemies.”

Bush’s time has, indeed, passed and many in Congress and among the American public, wish it was a time that had never happened. His legacy will be a failed, corrupt Presidency that drove this nation to the brink of the abyss and could yet plunge America into it. He has, after all, nearly a year left to complete his dismantling of the Constitution and final elimination of what little integrity is left of the office of President.

In usual Bush style, he twisted facts, played the terrorism fear card and claimed credit for successes that don’t exist. He claims of success in Iraq came on a day when five American soldiers died — the bloodiest death toll for our troops in a long time.

He continues to claim America’s economy is sound at a time then millions have lost their homes, a record number of Iraq vets are homeless and this country slides deeper into recession.

Yes, the President of the United States gave Congress and America his view of the State of the Union Monday night. As he has six times before, he presented a view obscured by illusion, illogic and incoherence.

America is in a sorry state…and it sailed into those dangerous waters with George W. Bush at the helm of the ship of state. But this captain will not go down with his ship. He will walk away and leave others to try and save the sinking U.S.S. America.

33 Responses to "The sad, sorry State of the Union"

  1. SEAL  January 30, 2008 at 1:26 am

    RELIGION IN GOVERNMENT

    Freedom of religion includes freedom FROM religion.

    Morals should play a part in our lawmaking, to be sure, but only the morals upon which we can ALL agree. Morality is not the exclusive province of religion. If it were, that would only create the problem of which religion. As a nation, we draw upon differentiated sources to inspire our laws and it’s no coincidence that many religious ideals are, also, enforceable law. However, any one religion cannot be the guiding influence in government and the decisions that affect ALL members of a society. Because we are such a diverse nation, there are certain issues that must be left to a more subjective nature when dealing with morals. Our laws must be made in an objective manner, discriminating against no one, and only serving as rules and establishing punishment if those rules are broken.

    “The government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion.” *George Washington*

    The separation of church and state doctrine is emphatic in our law. Our founding fathers were determined to keep holy wars from enslaving this continent. They declared their independence not only from a cruel and stupid king, but also from centuries of religious warfare. Christian hierarchs and their prelates had turned Europe into a battleground. They fought against knowledge and free expression of ideas, persecuted nonconformists, and justified the oppression that spawned the exodus to the new world and the American Revolution. America was to be a land of freedom, not religious turf wars. The rights of citizens were to be kept separate from religion’s self-serving claims of certainty and sanctity. Now it is our time to take up their noble cause.

    The Holy War in America — Onward Christian Soldiers!

    Christian demagogues have declared a holy war that they claim to be for the soul of America, the sanctity of life, and the future of Christian faith as synonymic with patriotism, democracy, and family values. They stifle intelligent discourse by badgering us into fixation on two issues — Scripture and sex — as if only those two issues will determine the future of all civilization.

    The mission of the segregationists who enlist religious morality is to handcuff the judiciary and override the separation of powers, the system of checks and balances so wisely built into our Constitution. Through voter referendums, legislation, and amendments they seek to restrict the courts ability to enforce our constitutional protections. On November 2, 2004 lynch mob voting succeeded in writing segregation into law in eleven more states by denying homosexuals the same rights as heterosexuals. Legislatures are allowing medical doctors to refuse treatment to people on moral grounds alone. And, pharmacists can refuse to fill prescriptions (such as birth control) if their moral ideology conflicts with the purpose of the prescribed medication. If allowed to continue and be successful, they will re-create the very conditions that caused Europeans to flee their homes and send America back into a pre-Constitution Puritan age where simply being different is not only a sin, but a CRIME. If we don’t wake up, our nation will be legislatively segregated according to Puritan morality with moral outlaws in a very short period of time.

    CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF 1964, SEC. 202. “All persons shall be entitled to be free, at any establishment or place, from discrimination or segregation of any kind on the ground of race, color, religion, or national origin, if such discrimination or segregation is or purports to be required by any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, rule, or order of a State or any agency or political subdivision thereof.”

    Sex and gender identification and marriage and abortion and pornography are issues that certainly require objectivity, but in the eyes of the law — not in the eyes of a religion. Law must protect free thought and equality — both of which religion denies by defining marriage as a holy sacrament and anything sex a restricted entitlement instead of the individual right of free choice. We don’t need any one “religious body politic” re-defining or re-interpreting anything for our own good or for the good of society or its values, as expressed by a few chosen ones we should listen to. We don’t need laws requiring judges to turn out court decisions limiting our personal freedoms or an administration that wishes to introduce a moral or religious compass for all to follow.

    Civil rights are insular and may not be abdicated to the preference of a moral majority if we are truly to have individual liberty. In Lawrence v Texas [whether homosexual sex could be a crime] the supreme court held that the constitution’s definition of liberty includes the right of adults to conduct consensual personal relationships “in the confines of their homes and their own private lives.” And it underlined that that is true even when those relationships’ “overt expression” is through “intimate conduct.” In short, liberty includes the liberty to have sexual relations according to ones own conscience.

    Today’s Bible warriors are only engaged in the pursuit of power. They play to prejudices and fears. They trespass on people’s yearnings. They distort goodness and magnanimity. They make common cause with greed and privilege. But it’s nothing but a power grab cloaked as religion and as politicians exploit this holy war for campaign funds, membership lists and votes, they are playing with the divisive fire that has destroyed civilizations.

    It is time for people and politics to stop being bullied by religious demagogues. There is no basis whatsoever for thinking that morality is exclusively a religious concern or that any one religious ideology should set the standards for all of humanity. Morality may be a human concern – even an obsession — but it cannot be foisted off onto any God if we are to truly have freedom of thought and expression because religion relies on obedience to faith, e.g. denial of free thought or expression. And, it’s especially dangerous when arguments about morality provide safe cover for denying the rights of the individual by paradoxically seeking special consideration in law for any one moral ideology.

    Religion and law are two separate entities and must be treated as such by the people and their government, not allowing one to influence the other. Not every American owns a Bible or believes in the teachings of Judeo-Christian religions, so it is not fair and equitable to impose those beliefs upon members of a society who don’t share the same beliefs. It is, in fact, constitutionally prohibited in the United States of America.

  2. Wayne K Dolik  January 29, 2008 at 1:28 pm

    Last night Shrub spoke again only to his base, and that is the Republican “Illuminati”. What he said was to continue to give billions of dollars to the M.I.C and my Republican buddies who are raping America out of billions of dollars in Iraq.

    He continued his rant to support the American Medical Mafia that prohibits ordinary folks health care in the richest Country in the World.

    He insults and intimidates the Congress to give a free pass to warrant-less spying of Americans.

    It took 3 Vodka Martinis just to stomach this stuff last night. Shrub has broken the Republican Party forever.

  3. Ted Remington  January 29, 2008 at 2:03 pm

    I fully expected Dumbya to start out with the customary lie:

    The state of the Union is Strong.

    So things are in even worse shape than I thought.

    Edit: Ooops. He had it in the last paragraph, not up front. I guess I missed it trying to follow the subtitles in English.

    Not to pick nits, but this was not Bush’s seventh such address, it’s his eighth. Never, to my knowledge, has an outgoing president given a state of the Union address. He leaves that task to his successor.

    Ted

  4. DejaVuAllOver  January 29, 2008 at 2:04 pm

    Bravo, Barak. I’ve said many times, and will continue to do so, that religion is NOT the problem. Fundamentalism is. The sick belief that your HOLY BOOK, whatever it is, is the absolute, un-erring Word of God handed down to His Chosen People. Divinely Sanctioned Racism and Arrogance. Most religious devotees are good people in need of some wisdom, like all of us. But the fundamentalists of all religions are arrogant egotists and will probably destroy us all if we don’t find a way to talk some sense into these d*&^chebags.

    Another point Re: Obama. Being of African descent and not having any Muslim ancestors is like being from Kansas and never having met a Christian. This argument has had quite a bit of success in shutting up the d$%mbf&*k rednecks, for me at least.

  5. spartacus  January 29, 2008 at 2:22 pm

    Actually, we do have the separation of church and state written into the Constitution. It’s in the Bill of Rights, and was put there specifically because our founders, particularly James Madision, who had personally witnessed Church of England parishoners cleaning out a nest of Baptists near his boyhood home as a child, witnessed the atrocities committed by intolerant religious zealots, were afraid of what those same types of religious zealots would do to the population of this nation. Despite what the religious right would have you believe, most of our founders, including Madison, Jefferson, Washington, Franklin, and many others, were deist, not Christians. They put an ammendment in place to keep persecutions in place that they saw occur, as did their parentsl; after all, some of their parents, grandparents, and so on, came there to escape that brutality. That’s one of the things that makes the behavior of these people not only anti-American, but a complete misprepresentation of history, our founders, and our priciples. It’s the very thing our founders warned us to be on guard against. They deliberately choose to misrepresent what the ammendment says, what our founders believed, and the principles under which our country was founded so they can satisfy their own need to install a theocracy on the rest of us.

    As for Bush’s SOTU…. It was more of the same, a recap of his greatest hits. Fearmongering, blaming Congress, clueless ranting and finger pointing at others for the disasters he has created. What I especially loved was his assessment that we could have a balanced budget by 2012, all the while knowing that he is trying to establish a permanent presence, with soldiers and bases, for us in Iraq. Needless to say, that involves large amounts of money we don’t have. So how, may I ask, is the budget supposed to be balanced under those circumstances? Are we to ignore the entire infrastructure of this country, as well as the poor, our veterans, and every other need here at home, all for his failed and disasterous, unnecessary war in Iraq? That must be what he wants as his legacy. Endless war and nothing else.

    He also has no clue about the economy. When are these people going to realize that the problem is the rampant inflation. Quck fixes are not going to solve that problem, nor put a damper on it. Salaries have not risen with the costs of everything else. People cannot hold onto their homes, pay their bills, and afford to eat, drive, and heat their homes, much less do the other things that people do. That’s what’s killing the economy. These APR mortgage rates have been around for quite awhile, but people haven’t had to face the rate of foreclosures that they are now. It will only get worse until inflation is dealt with, and that can only happen if the price of energy, oil specifically because that is what is affecting everything else, is addressed and fixed in some way. Oil speculation is what is driving the price up; people in the market are making a killing on it while others are losing their shirts on everything else. That wasn’t addressed, nor will it be by this president since he and his Republican allies are a major part of the problem. This recession is all too real, and it is only going to get worse. I don’t think this joker and the people around him have a clue yet what is going on; in a year’s time, an awful lot of damage can be done to this country, its people, and the rest of the world as a result. We’re screwed.

    Yes, this moron was talking to his base, the fools who still believe the lies he spouts and still think things aren’t that bad. I wish the cameras had shown which Republican legilators stood up and applauded this fool so those in their states could have an idea just where they stood in relation to the creature in chief: it’s just one more reason to vote against them, as if anyone needs another reason to vote against Republicans. They’ve enabled this joker to create chaos in another country, ruin us here and our reputation abroad; he has ripped the Constitution to shreds. His legacy is nothing short of disaster.

    We have never had more reason to impeach any president. The fact that he’s still in office is a national disgrace. He needs to be tried for war crimes, or at the very least, crimes here in this country. Mass murderers and people who destroy their nations should not be allowed to get away with their criminal behaviors.

    I’ve been attacked in postings by those religious nutjobs and Bush toadies as well (often they are the same). It’s funny how they assume you are either a lesbian, unemployed, uneducated, or the dregs of society. The hatespeak the people are capable of speaks volumes for the types of asses who support this administration, and the stupidity that goes with them. It boggles the mind just how ignorant people like that are. Just consider the source. Anyone who can still support this jerkweed has to be incapable of any real rational or meaningful thought. Scary, isn’t it?

    At least this was the last one. In less than a year, hopefully, we’ll have President Obama.

  6. Carl Nemo  January 29, 2008 at 2:44 pm

    All I can say is that all you folks are far tougher than I; ie., being able to even watch this traitor perform his lame SOTU oratory supported by the regular hand-clapping of our traitorous politburo. He doesn’t anger me, but instead my blood turns icey cold; ie., a chill within me knowing all too well what he and the Clintons have done to this once great nation.

    Sixteen years of Clinton and Bush presidencies have virtually turned “We the People” into a gaggle of desperate beggars on our own land!

    Little do most people realize just how bad things really are at this point in time. They’ve reduced the American people to nothing but tenants on their land with the “Red Chinese” as our landlord along with every major American city targeted by the Chinese courtesy of Bill Clinton…!?

    George W. Bush and Dick Cheney’s contribution to our demise was to simply raid the U.S. Treasury breaking our backs with monstrous unpayable debt as a function of their engineered war, courtesy of the Wolfowitz-Feith-Cheney rogue intelligence pipeline!

    We best not be late on our payments. Bankruptcy is not an option, so too impeachment…no?! :|

    Carl Nemo **==

  7. CheckerboardStrangler  January 29, 2008 at 3:40 pm

    Actually if you count the fact that Reagan’s effectiveness as a President ended 69 days into his first term after Bush family friend Hinckley’s assassination rendered him frail and feeble, the term of the Bush-Clinton dual monarchy is much longer.

    Reagan took office with a powerful stride sitting atop an agenda of reducing the power of government in our daily lives.
    He rode in as a strong and vital mature American cowboy.
    After the assasination attempt, Ronald Reagan was content to
    give speeches and nap through important cabinet meetings while George Herbert Walker Bush became the most powerful and take charge Vice President in history.

    For all practical purposes, Bush WAS the President for most of Reagan’s two terms in office.

    So, from 1981 until 1988 we had Bush as President during the term of Ronald Reagan, and from 1988 until 1992 we had Bush again as President.
    From 1992 until 2000 we had Bill Clinton.
    From 2001 till the end of 2008 we will have George W. Bush.

    That’s TWENTY-SEVEN YEARS, more than a quarter century.
    If Hillary Clinton is elected will have had a Bush or a Clinton in office for THIRTY-TWO YEARS and if she enjoys a second term in office, America’s dual monarchy of the Bushes and Clintons will have lasted longer than the term of
    Generalissimo Francisco Franco, the fascist dictator of Spain.

    Please tell me why America can’t seem to move beyond a mindset that offers only one more choice than the Soviets had in the USSR.

    This is not “paper or plastic, Coke or Pepsi”.
    The dual monarchy must come to an end.

  8. spartacus  January 29, 2008 at 3:47 pm

    It was GEORGE W. BUSH, Mr. Nemo, who mortgaged our government to the Chinese, not Bill Clinton. Let’s not forget that Clinton balanced the budget and actually had a surplus, which he left in the government coffers when he left office. It was there for his predecessor, GEORGE W. BUSH, to follow through with and keep to the policies that had allowed it to happen: a social security lockbox; cutting spending across the board; making taxes fairer by taxing wealthy Americans at a more equitable rate; and no giveaways to oil companies, among other things. It took Bush less than a year to undo all of that hard work. Instead of GOVERNMENT PROJECTIONS (yes, actual budget office numbers) giving us a balanced budget an the end of the deficit left by the disasterous Reagan spending by 2010, we soon had a budget out of control and a deficit gone haywire, much due to the Iraq war, but a lot of it also due to tax cut for wealthy Americans (despite what he says, most Americans don’t really benefit from them) and large giveaways to oil companies, even a Medicare benefit that’s mainly a giveaway to and written by pharmaceutical companies: something for all of his wealthy friends and contributors. Bush and his enablers soon began to borrow vast amounts of money from China, which they will once again do to pay for his ‘economic stimulus package’, which is nothing more than a feel good package since it really does nothing to address the root cause of the problem. That is something this administration would NEVER be willing to do, and it would surely be vetoed if anyone even dared attempt it. Besides, it would take too long, and every time the Democrats in Congress have tried to address the runaway oil industry, HIS HIGH AND MIGHTY STUBBORNNESS has swiftly vetoed it and his assured them he will continue to so so. The Republicans in Congress, Bush’s enablers and criminal conspirators, continue to support his position and block them at every turn possible. These people don’t care what effect this is having on the population as a whole, or the ripple effect it’s having worldwide. They can’t see the forest for the trees. Bush is our Coolidge/Hoover, with Republicans in Congress supporting him every step of the way as they did then, and the stock market acting as it did in the 20’s. These people are truly failing to see the mess they have created and won’t do anything to fix it, if it isn’t too late now. They insist there isn’t going to be a recession (ha!), just like there was no inflation when we all could see there was: they only admitted to that when it was too obvious to ignore. The “economic stimulus package” is simply a feel good package to make the Republcans running for office less vulnerable to attacks from Democrats over the economy, the thinking being that the extra money will ease things to the point that things will pick up and everything will start moving in the right direction. Things will then pick up and be rosy again, yada yada yada. Problem is, those checks, the way things are now, won’t go very far, and certainly won’t make up the difference that inflation has caused in most of US households for any real legnth of time. Things are going upward now too exponentially to make enough of a dent.

    So don’t blame Bill Clinton for China holding the mortgage to this country. If you were to look at the facts, you’d find out that the person to blame is the same one who put us in the rest of the mess we find ourselves in now. Every time I see someone with a Bush/Cheney sticker still on their car, it’s everything I can do to keep myself from giving them the finger and shouting obscenities. I’m not a vicious or violent person, but W and Cheney are the worst things to happen to this country since the Salem witch trials, and that had a lot to do with religious zealots, too.

  9. Carl Nemo  January 29, 2008 at 4:31 pm

    Hi Spartacus…

    Sorry, but I have to disagree with you. Clinton facilitated NAFTA being shoved down our throats along with joining the WTO against better judgement and the advice of trade experts. All the while Clinton was in office; unholy, unilateral trade deals were set up with the Chinese. In fact they contributed so much to his campaign that it became more than a public embarrassment.

    Clinton was an adamant free trader and he let his chief trade negotiator, Mickey Kantor virtually help put China in the “catbird” seat in terms of wiring trade treaties that benefited the importer, but disadvantaged “we the people” as exporters. The chief export from the ports of New York and Long Beach are cardboard and scrap metal. The only one’s making any money are exporters of raw materials and those engaged in the manufacture of the weapons of war and the bling that goes with such weapons.

    So we can say that Bill Clinton paved the way for China to do us in as a nation both economically and now militarily with Bushco simply but a clean sweep operation of the U.S. Treasury. We the People are left holding the empty bag and if we foolishly elect Hillary to the presidency then we best get used to taking orders from “Big Sister” instead of a “Big Brother” for sometime to come, post some phony reason to implement martial law…! :| They’ve done psyche studies and found that men subliminally enjoy following a woman’s orders muchmoreso over that of man…!? :))

    Visualize that eight years of Bill Clinton’s administrations could be equated to paving contractors providing a quality roadway surface on which the Bushista’s could travel smoothly while finishing us off as a nation. The Bush and Clinton’s are very close friends indeed when it comes to following their NWO/MIC/AIPAC sponsored marching orders…:|

    ***
    http://members.tripod.com/GOPcapitalist/clinton-scandals.html#Chinese
    http://members.tripod.com/GOPcapitalist/clinton-scandals.html#china2
    ***
    http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1282/is_n8_v45/ai_13790976
    http://www.foreignaffairs.org/19930601fareviewessay5534/jeffrey-garten/clinton-s-emerging-trade-policy-act-one-scene-one.html

    Sorry Spartacus but you haven’t done your homework concerning your “main man”… /:)

    Carl Nemo **==

  10. almandine  January 29, 2008 at 5:00 pm

    It could get worse…

    On a trip to Great Britain while he was President of the United States, Bill Clinton had a meeting with Queen Elizabeth.

    During that meeting, he asked her, “How does one manage to run a country so smoothly?”

    “That’s easy,” the Queen replied, “You surround yourself with intelligent ministers and advisors.”

    “But how can I tell whether they are intelligent or not?” asked Bill.

    You ask them a riddle,” she replied, and with that she pressed a button and said, “Would you please send Tony Blair in.”

    When Blair arrived, the Queen Said, “I have a riddle for you to answer for me: Your parents had a child and it was not your sister. It also was not your brother. Who was this child?”

    Blair replied, “That’s easy. The child was me.”

    “Very good,” said the Queen. “You may go now.”

    Sizing up his wife’s chances in her presidential bid, and thinking back on that meeting, Bill Clinton spoke to Hillary. He said to her, “I have a Riddle for you, and the answer is very important. Your parents had a child, and it was not your sister, and it was not your brother. Who was that child?

    Hillary replied, “Yes, it is clearly very important that we determine the answer. Can I deliberate on this for awhile?”

    “Yes,” said Bill, “I’ll give you four hours to come up with the answer.”

    So Hillary called a meeting of her campaign team, from top to bottom, and asked them the riddle. But after much discussion and many suggestions, none of them had a satisfactory answer. She was quite upset, not knowing what she would tell her husband, the former President. As Hillary was leaving her meeting she ran into her most formidable challenger to her Presidential Nomination, Barack Obama.

    So she said, “Mr. Obama, can you answer this riddle for me? Your parents had a child, and it was not your sister, and it was not your brother. Who was the child? ”

    “That’s seems pretty easy,” said Obama, “I think the child would be me.”

    “Oh thank you,” said Hillary. “You may just have ensured my nomination for the democratic candidate for the Presidency of the United States!”

    So Hillary went back to Bill and said, “I think I know the answer to your riddle. The child was Barack Obama.!”

    “No, you dip-ship!” shouted Bill. “The child was Tony Blair.”

    The bottom line… guess where we’re headed if we have the two of them running the country, again.

  11. Carl Nemo  January 29, 2008 at 5:16 pm

    Yo almandine…

    :)) to the 100th power…!

    Nemo **==

  12. Doug Thompson  January 29, 2008 at 5:53 pm

    Ted:

    This was Bush’s seventh SOTU. He did not give the STOU in 2001. Newly-elected Presidents are not invited by Congress to give a state of the union just days into their first term because they haven’t been in office long enough to know the state of the union. New Presidents have been invited to speak to joint sessions of Congress just after they take office but these speeches are not classified as “State of the Union” speeches. Bush delivered his first state of the union in 2002.

  13. Carl Nemo  January 29, 2008 at 9:08 pm

    Thanks CheckerboardStr for the superb outline and historical perspective concerning the fact that the Bush clan and their relief pitcher/s the Clinton’s have managed to hijack this nation for the past 27 years.

    Ronald Reagan, Mr. “wobblehead” was asleep at the helm of state and when not asleep endlessly popped jellybeans. We also had to suffer his mind-numbing empty-headed speeches, the kind that lull senior citizens into complacency that the U.S. is the bestest and the baddest…no?! The man was obviously suffering from onset senility or worse. Hey, maybe the jellybeans were drugged courtesy of H.W. …:))

    The average American refuses to believe that their government could or has been hijacked. It’s my firm belief that our MIC sponsored intelligence services have compromised the presidency of the United States and H.W. Bush was their main man in their initial thrust to do so.

    I highly recommend that Americans acquire and read “Compromised: Clinton, Bush and the CIA, How the Presidency was Co-opted by the CIA” by Terry Reed & John Cummings. It’s a 1994 release by S.P.I. books a division of Shapolsky Publications, Inc. The few times Bill Clinton was questioned about the content of this book, he simply turned “chalk-white” and had nothing to say except “no comment” or dead silence…?! The MSM managed to discredit the book and to eventually put its content on ignore…!

    http://www.amazon.com/Compromised-Clinton-Bush-Terry-Reed/dp/1883955025

    The main plot is about H.W. Bush, then V.P. and Bill Clinton’s involvement, then governor of Arkansas in setting up a CIA airbase in Mena, Arkansas. It’s illegal for the CIA to operate in CONUS being against their charter. Of course we know they do otherwise all the time. The main theme surrounds Iran/Contra and the byzantine, labrynthine network that was set up to smuggle armaments to the Nicaraguan based Sandanista rebels; ie., the Contras, who were resisting the lefty Sandanistas. The real rub was that the Reagan/Bush administration was supplying Iran, an avowed enemy, in violation of the law, weapons for cash that could be diverted for use to arm the Contra’s. Of course drugs were involved for payment because other than baskets and drugs most Central and South American nation’s have nothing other than these commodities. Obviously the movers and shakers behind this scam, the CIA went for the drugs as payment. Well you can just imagine what happened to those drugs. Mena, Arkanas was the main U.S. airbase for weapons for drugs shipments. They surely weren’t destroyed, but ended up being distributed to CIA’s “main men” throughout the U.S. for distribution. It’s even speculated that a CIA chemist showed the street how to make crack cocaine in order to turbo-boost the cash yield form these transactions, the rest is history. Read the book and set yourself free!

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran-Contra_Affair

    So I hate to inform the American people, but your government is nothing but feelgood smoke and mirrors, facilitated by baby-kissing, Ford in every garage, and a chicken in every pot pols who are nothing but a bunch phony’s engaged in an ongoing conspiratorial, tongue-in- cheek shakedown of “we the taxpayers” 24/7/365…! :|

    Carl Nemo **==

  14. AustinRanter  January 29, 2008 at 6:42 pm

    To My Delight,

    Nobody is out with signs and screaming “FOUR MORE YEARS”.

  15. KayBradley  January 29, 2008 at 7:47 pm

    Missing the forest … and the trees!

    First, any way you slice it Obama and Clinton are going to come out of this WITHOUT enough delegates to get the nomination. So guess where that leaves John Edwards?? (who I agree can’t win – but is probably the best mix of hope and ability). Yeap, where he (Edwards) throws his delegates could likely be to the candidate who goes over the top and gets the nomination. Why else would he continue to run? If you can’t win – you can deal to get what you want in policy from the candidate who will likely be the next President.

    Second, many women — AND men — stay with cheating spouses. Certainly Bill gives her an advantage, but they have more in common than sex. Great sex won’t keep a marriage together. This doesn’t mean Bill was right, it just doesn’t mean Hillary is wrong.

    Third, it is exactly the sex scandal that makes BOTH Bill and Hillary want the return to the White House so badly. It offers them BOTH an opportunity to move beyond the sex scandal and put the Clnton legacy in different (and better) terms. I listened to Bill’s arguments against Obama, and I’m sorry if they seem “mean-spirited” to “such a nice guy” – but they were intelligent and well thought out.

    In closing, Obama has not displayed the ability to speak and think and the same time. Scripted campaign talk is nothing more than acting. And the in interviews I have seen which are not scripted — he falters; even to the point of not making sense. He may be a nice positive guy — but that won’t get the job done. Carter was a nice guy — and could speak and think at the same time — but he still ended up being ineffective as a President.

    And unfortunately, after King George, we need a lot of work done — and done fast. At least Hillary would not have any learning curve going into the job.

  16. Carl Nemo  January 29, 2008 at 9:03 pm

    “At least Hillary would not have any learning curve going into the job.”

    Hi Kay Bradley…

    You are absolutely right about “Billary”; ie., they are “one” both having Ph.D’s in advanced scamstering…! :|

    Carl Nemo **==

  17. Ted Remington  January 29, 2008 at 9:34 pm

    Doug:

    I believe you are not correct:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wcexVtp9lRM

    This is a newscast showing highlights from all seven of the prior speeches.

    The first one, according to the ‘cast, was in 2001.

    The one last night was indeed Dumbya’s eighth.

    Ted

  18. Ted Remington  January 29, 2008 at 9:36 pm

    Well, maybe not highlights, exactly.

    Ted

  19. JP  January 30, 2008 at 1:04 am

    If you noticed the three stooges last night dick (deferment) cheney….George (my daddy OWNS the cia) n Nancy (what were those offshore #’s to keep this off the table) and you really see a positive spin here?….It scares the shit ouuta me n I thought I was fearless”

  20. almandine  January 30, 2008 at 1:38 am

    “I listened to Bill’s arguments against Obama, and I’m sorry if they seem “mean-spirited” to “such a nice guy” – but they were intelligent and well thought out.”

    Yes they were… as well as, sleazy, sordid, seedy, spiteful, incorrect, slanted, biased, misleading, and totally inappropriate for a past President of the US! Get him the h#$% out of our lives.

    He’s the one who first gave the Chinese our military secrets (unless Bush 41 is guilty too)… Hu Jintao also probably slept in the Lincoln bedroom.

    And now back to Hillary… another novice trying to seem oh so seasoned and experienced. Bullshit!

  21. bryan mcclellan  January 30, 2008 at 1:58 am

    Whammer Jammmer,Cat fish Stew….?

  22. bryan mcclellan  January 30, 2008 at 2:01 am

    ME TOO J.P.!

  23. Doug Thompson  January 30, 2008 at 5:48 am

    Sorry Ted but the ABC report posted on YouTube was later corrected to note that the 2001 speech was an address to a joint session of Congress and “not” a State of the Union address. That’s the danger of trusting anything you see on YouTube (or ABC for that matter). Do a search on Google news and you will find that this was Bush’s “seventh” SOTU.

  24. Sandra Price  January 29, 2008 at 6:15 am

    Good Rant chief. We have not heard the end of the exposure of this terrible President. I can imagine his supporters lining up the books and hopefully telling the truth of his involvement and pre-knowledge of 9/11.

    Many will expose him and then clear his name as being too mired down with social issues than to guard our freedoms. He will be exposed as a total fool who had no more ability to lead America but had the background to be elected.

    I think America will be better off after this man leaves office and many will no longer buy into the cakes and ale of his or anyone’s promises.

    We might even learn how to question our candidates under the laws within the Constitution.

  25. acf  January 29, 2008 at 6:14 pm

    Yes, Bush is a sorry fool, and arguably the worst president this country has ever seen, but I want him hounded to his grave with legal problems, and I don’t like giving him a presidential pension, and spending millions to protect him while he lives in regal splendor who knows where.

  26. Caine  January 29, 2008 at 8:58 am

    The speech last night, makes me wonder who President Bush was talking to. I know that he was talking to the country as a whole, but IMO he was really only talking to his base. Those that aren’t affected much by the economy, or by war. Those that have enough money to do anything they need no matter what the price. To those folks, I believe Bush hit the nail on the head. He told them what they wanted to hear, and they believe him.

    But, for the general populace, his SOTU address was more fantasy than fiction. Us common folk just can’t relate with GW the way his own people can. It was more of the same from this administration. Say one thing and do another. Preach about doing this, while his administration has really done that.

    I hope that the next 50 weeks pass pass quickly and without incident!

  27. bryan mcclellan  January 29, 2008 at 9:23 am

    As I forced myself to witness our nit wit robot in chief speak for the last time, all that came to mind was,How,knowing the vast collective of knowledge we as a people possess,could such ilk rise to power and retain it for the last seven years.Water,Monica, and all the other Gates are but a pimple along side this raging pus filled boil on the ass of America.It’s going to hurt like hell for along time when we finally lance this son of a bitch and the stench I pray does not overwhelm our great nation.The world at large is inundated with the reeking seepage of this less than humanoid carbuncle and our legislators are to blame as are we.Will we recover from (as Doug has put it so well) ,the illusion,the illogic,and the rampant incoherence,and will the world ever forgive us for our incompetence?

  28. WWWexler  January 29, 2008 at 9:27 am

    I hate to wish my life away, but is there any way we can just wake up on January 21, 2009 with President Obama?

    If anyone knows how to get this done, please let me know.

    -Wexler

  29. barak  January 29, 2008 at 11:15 am

    I try to see something positive here, but I cannot. Bush disgusts me, Chaney makes me want to vomit in his face, and Nancy P standing and applauding is what is expected from someone who is bought and paid for. Token applause is worse than no applause at all, and to those who say that it was the office they were honoring, not the man, I say BullShit! You don’t show respect to something that has been degraded to the level which Bush/Cheney have done. You do not applaud for a man who is a criminal and a traitor. You do not honor this office until we get someone in it who deserves honoring, and who has brought it back to the level it deserves.

    That said, I wanted to say a couple of more words about religion. Recently a letter circulated that really questioned Obama’s integrity, honesty, and motives particularly in view of the preachings of his church. It said some pretty bad things, and accused him of really terrible judgement and tried to tie him to acts which would eventually turn America into a muslim state. I checked it through Snopes.com and learned that it was a fake, and the allegations untrue. I have made it plain that I do not support Obama and that his Chicago roots make him, to me at least, suspect at best and culpable at worst. I have no evidence to support my feelings, but over the 60+ years I have been capable of semi-rational thought, I have learned to listen to myself.

    This leads me to the preachings of the world’s religions, and to the preachings of those who lead the masses who belong to these religions. I differentiate between the religions and the preachers, because in my opinion they are not the same.

    I do not think you can find one religion that advocates violence, intolerance, and disregard for one’s fellow man or woman. Islam, true Islam certainly does not. In fact it prohibits intolerance of those who do not believe in Islam. It shows great understanding and compassion for non-believers.
    Judaism is a little different. It does preach tolerance, but it is more concerned with it’s adherents trying to understand Judaism than what anyone else thinks of Jews or worrying about what Jews think of anyone outside the religion. Basically Judaism says “This book of laws should be understood, and you should study diligently so you will learn to understand the law and how you can apply it to your daily life.

    Christianity seems to be based on the preachings of a Jewish Rabbi (Rabbi simply means teacher, or guide–there is no mystical or mythical attributes given to a Rabbi, just that he has more knowledge than the group he is teaching or leading.) Jesus never preached violence, just tolerance and understanding. He may or may not have made claims of being G-d, or the son of G-d, and he may have done this to grab attention from a drifting, subjugated people who were under the thumbs of the Romans. Its not important. What is important is that he was a man of peace around whom a religion formed.
    You can say the same things about the other religions, Buddhism, Hindu, and so on and so forth. They speak of peace, tolerance, and love for your fellow human being.

    Then we look at the leaders, the preachers, those who lead the flocks of adherents–and we find all the repugnant things we were about to attribute to the religion itself.

    STOP! STOP NOW!!!! It ain’t the religion, folks. It is the Preacher. The Muslim Clerics, the Christian Conservatives, the Jewish Fanatics, all preaching violence, hatred and intolerance. They are the guilty ones. They are the monsters we should isolate and bury far from any public forum. They are the troublemakers, the inciters to violence. Shut them up, turn off the cameras and the tv and the news coverage and they will dry up like so much tumbleweed and roll harmlessly away.

    Believe in your faith. Believe in yourself. Trust your heart and trust in the goodness of your fellow man. Long term, you won’t be disappointed.

  30. Flapsaddle  January 29, 2008 at 11:30 am

    I have to disagree about the question of his style in last night’s SOTU address:

    .For the most part, this seventh and last SOTU was pure Bush: a mixture of unreality and unrelenting hyperbole, delivered in the stilted, halting style of a failed orator.

    I thought that his delivery was more relaxed and less halted and fumbling than his usual presentation. And, all in all, it was no more hyperbolic than most such speeches; LBJ was just awful at them.

    But it’s much of the same that we have heard before.

    Most respectfully,

    T. J. Flapsaddle

  31. keith  January 29, 2008 at 11:35 am

    Has anyone noticed that NONE of the Republican Presidential candidates have yet asked for (or received) Mr. Bush’s endorsement?

    That fact, alone, should speak volumes!

  32. Sandra Price  January 29, 2008 at 12:37 pm

    barak. More humans have been massacred for their belief in their god than any other war effort in recorded history.

    When our new world people came here they instantly distrusted the Indians and the Brits back home sent blankets for trading filled with Small Pox germs. The great church of England was responsible for the extermination of many American Indians. When the Quakers came to America they preached that Indians were not human and should be exterminated as animals. When our very religious founding fathers got organized they bought slaves from Africa and clearly wrote that they were not humans and to be used and abused as necessary. What stuns me is that still is the attitude of the religious right and now they have added women, blacks, Jews and homosexuals as animals.

    Read your new testament again and take hard look at where this division of humans comes from. I know of several forums and sites where threats from the religious right are all over the place and anyone who stands for individual choices and freedoms is called the most disgusting names. I was called “an ignorant slut” on one forum and not a single poster spoke up which leads me to believe they all believe that anyone who is pro-choice is the dregs of the earth. These are the people we elected to lead our government.

    This disgusting behavior comes directly from the bible. It is now a generational mess in America. I keep hoping the racism, anti-semitic nonsense and homophobia might wander off someplace but it is always the religious wackos who bring it up over and over. Until we get the Separation of Church and State in our Constitution, this will continue and people will always distrust a minority and might not even recognize it.

    The only hope for equality in America is with Barak Obama. I’m no socialist but we have a chance to solve one major problem. The American voters have no interest in individual capitalist government and after the economy in America hits bottom, then we can get back to individual actions to believe in men like Ron Paul. There will be others who will work for freedoms and they all understand free enterprise.

  33. almandine  January 29, 2008 at 1:00 pm

    As a political animal, insatiable…

    I always watch and explore such events as the SOTU. Last night I watched basketball. I’m convinced I missed nothing and kept my ulcer from acting up. One year to inauguration, and counting…

Comments are closed.