Alarming News: I like Morgan Freeberg. A lot.
American Digest: And I like this from "The Blog That Nobody Reads", because it is -- mostly -- about me. What can I say? I'm on an ego trip today. It won't last.
Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler: We were following a trackback and thinking "hmmm... this is a bloody excellent post!", and then we realized that it was just part III of, well, three...Damn. I wish I'd written those.
Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler: ...I just remembered that I found a new blog a short while ago, House of Eratosthenes, that I really like. I like his common sense approach and his curiosity when it comes to why people believe what they believe rather than just what they believe.
Brutally Honest: Morgan Freeberg is brilliant.
Dr. Melissa Clouthier: Morgan Freeberg at House of Eratosthenes (pftthats a mouthful) honors big boned women in skimpy clothing. The picture there is priceless--keep scrolling down.
Exile in Portales: Via Gerard: Morgan Freeberg, a guy with a lot to say. And he speaks The Truth...and it's fascinating stuff. Worth a read, or three. Or six.
Just Muttering: Two nice pieces at House of Eratosthenes, one about a perhaps unintended effect of the Enron mess, and one on the Gore-y environ-movie.
Mein Blogovault: Make "the Blog that No One Reads" one of your daily reads.
The Virginian: I know this post will offend some people, but the author makes some good points.
Poetic Justice: Cletus! Ah gots a laiv one fer yew...
I Hate Bush!
Good morning! There are now 845 days before hating President George W. Bush is just as stylish and just as relevant to current events as hating James K. Polk, or Louis XIII of France.
And yet this piece, now three years old, has lost no currency, none whatsoever. That observation is a rather tragic and, one would hope, poor summation of the most advanced civilization in the world, wouldn’t you have to say?
In My World: Bush Haters of the World Unite!
Posted by Frank J. at 07:19 AM“The meeting of Bush Haters is called to order,” Michael Moore announced, “Jonathan Chait, please read the minutes from the last meeting.”
“By unanimous vote, we declared that we hate Bush,” Chait said as he read from the minutes that were made from hastily writing with a crayon, “Also, by unanimous vote, we declared that we are much smarter than the general populace. By majority vote, it was decided that people were much happier under Saddam than the occupying force led by Bush. We also determined that we will spend more time trying to resolve how Bush can be both extremely dumb and evil and scheming and constantly outsmarting us at the same time. Still open to debate is whether Bush is worse than Hitler.”
“I like Hitler! He kill joos!”
“Oh, I would like to welcome some new members to the Bush Haters club,” Moore said, “but I need to remind our Islamic extremist friends that we refer to Jews here as ‘neo-conservatives’. I think it’s time to open the floor to general fomenting. I’ll start.” Moore took a deep breath and fixed his hat. “I hate Bush!” he screamed, shaking the floor as he jumped up and down, “I’m too busy hating Bush to shave or bathe. And he drives me to eat excessively!”
“You could use some of your eating time to instead bathe,” suggested someone in the audience.
“You shut up!” Moore responded.
After five years of stewardship by an administration the Bush-haters say wasn’t even elected, the upcoming election is about finally — FINALLY — translating their frustration over this “stolen” election into public policy. I guess when they lose elections, they get mad, and when they get mad they compaign and that leads to possibly winning the next election. Fair enough…otherwise disinterested people are persuaded to change their votes out of proxy anger, that’s their right. It’s their vote. And yet, if this process is more representative of the popular will than President Bush himself, how is it that it takes almost six years in a country with two-year election cycles?
And why is it so difficult to collect coherent reasons for hating a President? Yeah yeah, war is not good for children and other living things, and all that. But where is the unifying effect of such a clean and simple hatred? The war has been executed with its share of mistakes, strategic, tactical, and public-relations. How is it that all this other stuff enters into it?
1. In exchange for large U.S. oil companies gaining access to occupied territories, Bush reportedly gave $43 million of your tax dollars to the Taliban in May of 2001 – only 4 months before their September 11th attacks on the United States!
2. Bush had no concern about terrorist attacks on the U.S. before 9/11/01 (see #12 for more info).
3. Bush wholeheartedly supported the infamous “Patriot Act,” which infringes on most of your constitutional rights. In addition, he is an outspoken supporter of the “Patriot Act II.”
4. The Bush Regime failed to protect the people of Baghdad from looting, riots, bombings, and other undue circumstances, following the fall of the city – so that the oil ministry would be heavily guarded by U.S. troops.
5. Bush pulled the United States out of the Kyoto Treaty, a global warming agreement between major world powers, signed in 1997.
6. Bush banned federal aid to any international group offering abortions or abortion counseling, even if their funding from those projects came from other sources. THE HYPOCRISY HAS SPOKEN� although the Bush Regime has been attacking abortion rights in the U.S. too…
7. Bush used his presidential powers to repeal the Alternative Minimum Tax for corporations. All taxes paid under the AMT since its 1987 inception were refunded to the corporations. Does anyone else smell Bush’s campaign finance scheme?
8. CRIMINAL ALERT!!! Bush appointed Elliott Abrams to the National Security Council. Abrams was convicted during the Reagan administration for Iran-Contra ties. Do you really feel safe with a convicted criminal helping to oversee national security?
9. Bush proposed to nominate the attorney responsible for the court case that weakened the Americans with Disabilities Act, Jeffrey Sutton, to judgeship in a federal appeals court.
10. Bush turned the 9/11/01 terrorist attacks on the U.S. into a scheme to justify severely limiting civil rights and attacking the Constitution (see #3), and to avert public attention from the extreme economic threats the Bush Regime has invoked upon the millions of middle-class, working-class, and poor Americans, while giving break after break to large corporations and rich individuals.
11. Of Bush’s proposed $2 trillion tax cut 43% goes to the wealthiest 1% of Americans.
12. After Bush’s “election” was officially announced, President Clinton requested numerous meetings with Bush – specifically to discuss terrorists threats and making them a priority of Bush’s Regime. Bush refused to meet with Pres. Clinton, but allowed one of his staff “underlings” to talk to Clinton instead. Not surprisingly, Bush never bothered to find out what Clinton had to say.
13. Bush cut $35 million in funding for doctors to receive advanced pediatric training. Is this him saying, “No child left behind, unless they’re ill”??
14. Bush has already packed the federal courts with radical conservative judges – Charles Pickering, Pricilla Owens, and Miguel Estrada – to name a few…
The case against President Bush, as I’ve written before, is plagued with the problem of “Mass Murder and Overtime Parking.” If you believe Bush is guilty of Reason-To-Hate-#1 how can you possibly give a rat’s ass about #11? Reason-To-Hate-#5, has to do with the continuing survival of the entire planet, home to six billion souls. If you believe the President’s actions with regard to the Kyoto Treaty have some relevance, which has extinction-level implications for us, how are #6 and #14 even on the radar?
Well, anyway. I got me a whacky idea. Because it seems to me, the pressing issue of our time is not that President Bush has too much power, or not enough of it; the issue of greatest importance, is that all the other issues are being left unaddressed. Our government is spending way too much money, dirty little men who want to live in the seventh century are trying to kill us, we’re being invaded by illegal aliens, and up to about age thirty the average American is bone-chillingly stupid about American principles — and the English language. Those are our issues. President Bush has something to do with one of them through the Bush Doctrine, which we can continue to debate after he’s gone — he’s absolutely on the wrong side on another two of those, and he’s completely irrelevant to the remaining one.
We shouldn’t be arguing about whether we like him or not. Like him? Isn’t that a personal decision/problem anyway? What on earth could it have to do with an election in the first place?
So here’s my idea. Let the Bush-haters win this one. Their swelling hatred makes them something like an inflating balloon…an inflating balloon in a theater, with something life-impactingly important on the screen, and the balloon right in front of your face. It’s so hard to see what’s going on with them running around — hating. Let them win a midterm, and maybe the balloon will pop. And then we can examine the issues much more worthy of our attention. A nationwide discussion of just one of them, conducted with some honesty on both sides, would be a vast improvement what we have now.
Of course, we should consider the consequences of letting the Bush-haters win. If they win the Senate, Bush will have a much harder time confirming judicial officers like John Roberts and Samuel Alito. The likely victor in such a confirmation process, will more closely resemble such distinguished luminaries as Ruth Bader Ginsburg and John Paul Stevens. Hmmm.
Well, there’s a problem. I’m not so sure mainstream America supports Ginsburg and Stevens over Roberts and Alito. Sure the fringe left does, but…once these liberal assholes are sworn in and seated, they tend to — how do I put this nicely. They destroy the law. Utterly, completely. The law can say “don’t destroy property” and the liberal judge will want to debate what “destroy” means, what “property” means, and most assuredly, whether the property-destroyer was motivated by social pressures and personal angst that gave him a special entitlement to set cars on fire. Simply put, where they interpret it, there is no law.
So I guess that idea ultimately favors a government governing without law. That doesn’t seem like one of my better ones. Oh well, we could let the Bush-haters have the House instead. The House doesn’t confirm federal officers or sign treaties, instead, it just — controls the purse strings. And what President ever needed a check on his ability to spend money, besides President Bush?
Yes, that’s the ticket. Pop the Bush-hating balloon, and seat a Democratic House that will exercise the financial restraint for which the Democrats have come to be famous…
…oy.
Well, at least we’ll have some more prudent, cool-headed, reasoned people in charge of those all-important House leadership positions.
*sigh*
Well, you know…sometimes I guess these wild ideas I get aren’t very good. Back to the drawing board.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Liberal Smear tactic
- Diego | 09/28/2006 @ 16:53After looking at your site, I hope you will take the time to check mine out, I look forward to your comments.
[…] Half a year ago I indulged in an exercise in belaboring the obvious. The occasion that inspired the belaboring was the release of a long, long, oh so long list of reasons to hate George W. Bush — who wasn’t running for re-election, but still. Hating’s fun, right? […]
- House of Eratosthenes | 04/14/2007 @ 08:26