Delicious Monster
Thank God for George W. Bush
"W" has taken it in the teeth for his war on Iraq, but, to be fair, let's look at Saddam's Hussein's rap sheet:- He surrounded himself with lackeys so stupid and/or cowed that he never heard any criticism of even his cruelest or most idiotic decisions,
- He literally believed that God was "on his side" and that rationalized any actions he took, no matter how heinous, against those who worshipped a different god,
- His party controlled the media, so they fed his people a steady diet of misinformation about how great he was and how evil his enemies were,
- He rigged elections to ensure he stayed in power while still seeming democratic; winning with results that turned out to be statistically almost impossible. His cronies in government (including members of his family) ignored, overrode, and silenced any complaints about the voting process,
- He had no concept of "civil rights": he spied on his own people when it suited him and stifled free speech when it bothered him, and kept his country in a perpetual state of high alert that was very close to martial law,
- He unilaterally branded those he even suspected of treachery "enemies of the state" and had them arrested without any due process or charges,
- He had these "enemies" thrown into gulags and tortured until they confessed, or just tortured to scare his other "enemies", real or imagined,
- He amassed a huge arsenal of weapons of mass destruction that, if unleashed, could decimate any country he decided was his enemy, which was an ever-growing list,
- He squandered his country's riches on wars and on pampering his rich friends, at the cost of his people's education, health, and well-being,
- He drove his people to war to expand his empire, killing thousands of his own soldiers in the name of "safety" for his people,
- On his order, over three thousand Americans have died in Iraq.
So I say, thank God for men like George W. Bush, who are willing to say to tyrants like this: No, sir, this will not stand. I will do anything in my power to depose you and bring freedom to your people and safety to the world.
"The United States is committed to worldwide elimination of torture, and we are leading this fight by example. Freedom from torture is an inalienable human right. Yet torture continues to be practiced around the world by rogue regimes, whose cruel methods match their determination to crush the human spirit." -- George Bush, 2003
Thank God. If only there were more men like that.
--
I know some of you are tired of me making political posts. I am, too. Really. But I don't think I have the luxury of ignoring politics any more. We are on the verge of losing our country, and I refuse to stay silent because I might alienate some people by yelling about it. It's time to yell about it. On October 18th, two days after my birthday, Bush signed a law throwing habeas corpus to the winds, and explicitly ALLOWING Americans to torture their unlawful prisoners: "enemy combatants" which *he* is allowed to define.
Maybe his Secret Service will read this and decide *I* am an enemy combatant that needs to be silenced. They could; there is nothing to stop them. Their jackboots could kick in my door some night, haul me off without charging me with any particular crime, torture me until I tell them whatever they want to hear, and then trumpet to the world how successful they are at eliminating terrorists like me.
In eighteen days we have a chance to elect a majority in both the house and senate who will oppose Bush for the next two years, and stop this insanity. I am urging you to do what you can. Even just showing up and watching for voter fraud would help. Take a laptop to your polling place and blog what you see. We've had the last two national elections stolen from us, and if we let it happen again _we_ are to blame.
This is the *real* national emergency. Compare the number of Americans who have died for no reason in Iraq (2,279), by Bush's order, to the number who died in the 9/11 attacks (2,973). What are we doing? How is this worth it? Why are our priorities so far out of whack?
Why are we giving up our civil liberties, spending trillions on wars, and sacrificing our kids' lives at Bush's behest? Every year more Americans die of cancer (190x), AIDS (4x), heart disease (309x), and car accidents (20x) than died in 9/11. What are we so afraid of? Why are we willing to spend trillions to depose a puffed-up dictator on the other side of the world but not a couple million to educate our kids in music and art?
We have let the fear of violence against us turn us into animals. We're so frightened by those images of jets crashing into skyscrapers that we've forgotten that being the victim of a terrorist attack is, in fact, among the least likely of the bad things that can happen to us. We have to stop.
175 Comments:
What's the alternative? It's not like the Democrats were anti-PATRIOT act.
At least with GOP you get tax cuts, which like it or not have significantly contributed to the competitiveness of the US economy. Of course some have been badly thought out/implemented (like the famous Hummer tax credit), but in general they are worthwhile.
Note: I'm not a US citizen or resident. I can't vote in this election, just my 2 cents on this.
October 21, 2006 7:00 AM
There are many, many Democrats who oppose Bush's acts of insanity, and many more hoping to be elected in 18 days.
And the US economy was actually much stronger under Bill Clinton. It's ironic that Republicans fall back on the "well, at least we're good for your wallet" argument when our best years have been under Democrats (since Reagan).
October 21, 2006 7:08 AM
I think it's really great that you write these political posts, Wil. People need to be challenged to think about their political opinions; even on blogs about Mac development.
It's too easy to stay uninformed (or worse, misinformed) about the political environment.
October 21, 2006 7:24 AM
Fucking A, sir.
Were I an American I would certainly be voting the bastards out.
As a neighbor to your north however, I'm just happy to have people like yourself using the media power you have to effect change.
Perhaps a win this year will also grant a win in two years, and your government can finally return from the brink of insanity and criminality.
It's really upsetting for me to love Americans but hate America, you know?
October 21, 2006 7:29 AM
Well said.
I have to vote on a Diebold machine, and am wondering what will happen if I cause a scene by demanding a paper ballot.
October 21, 2006 7:30 AM
You know how annoying this is? I would vote against Bush and the Republican Party as soon as I could, but living in germany, I can't. This is not fair, after all, in the current globalised world, decisions made in the US have huge impacts on life in any country. But all I can hope to do for or against these laws is elect people who might try to to hinder Bush at being as bad as he could be.
October 21, 2006 7:43 AM
Great post Wil. Keep on writing political posts!
October 21, 2006 7:47 AM
Kudos. Excellent post.
October 21, 2006 7:56 AM
Thanks, glad to see there are more sane people out there.
October 21, 2006 7:59 AM
Amen to that. And while we are at it, why not assign some blame to the other side of your political spectrum as well? After all, really, it's all about the shade of shite that comes out of the system; American non-wars in Iraq and Afghanistan do have their precedents in Somalia, Kosovo, Bosnia, Haiti, Venezuela, Colombia, the Caucasus, South-East Asia and then some. Republicans and Democrats alike - if they get any chance at defending your corporations' interests in the province, they do not waver.
Nevertheless, Will, I respect your use of the goodwill you've amassed with software writing for pointing out some of the wrongdoings of your current regime.
Cheers,
Marco
October 21, 2006 8:03 AM
Everything you say there is true, Will — except that you're not going to find your solution in the voting booth. The Republicans and Democrats are practically the same party — anyone who's not American can see that plain as day. Every election, the "two" parties and the media play the same game: take an extremely narrow range of opinions, which may differ slightly on how to fight useless wars and how to waste the people's money, and present them as political opposites.
Majoritarianism is a con game, and all your voting districts are gerrymandered anyway — to the point where only a handful of seats out of hundreds are ever a contest in any election. One vote never counts, and Caesar can throw bread to more government-dependent, clueless voters than you can hope to reach by blogging (though I applaud your efforts and spirit).
October 21, 2006 8:20 AM
I wasn't afraid of George W Bush until I read this book. After reading it, I am astounded at the atrocities this man has done (some I wasn't even aware of).
October 21, 2006 8:36 AM
What you guys need is Jed Bartlett. Now THAT was a president.
Seriously. Aaron Sorkin for President.
John
October 21, 2006 8:39 AM
The sooner America collapses of its own dead weight, the better off the rest of the world will be.
October 21, 2006 9:42 AM
"The Republicans and Democrats are practically the same party"
I really get tired of this statement.
The Bush party has brought the country so far from a moderate or centrist type of government it's scary.
Bush/Cheny isn't your dad's republican party.
October 21, 2006 9:47 AM
Wil,
Don't stop the posts. In fact, do try to keep them coming at a steady clip. Otherwise, how will we know when they do come cart you off for this one?
Fortunately, given the ineptness of this administration's handling of just about everything, you probably needn't worry. Though I'm sure they would like to lock you up, I doubt they'd really get around to it.
Plus, they probably won't pick up on the irony of the lead in, so you're probably safe. In fact, if they don't read any further (and we know W. isn't a reader), you might just get added to a "friends" list.
October 21, 2006 10:05 AM
Wil - thank you. Keep these posts coming.
October 21, 2006 10:14 AM
Hear, hear! Now if we could just do something about this Governator in my state.
October 21, 2006 10:27 AM
Keep the posts coming Wil!
No matter how screwed up your political views are, dialog is always important. ;->
If you think that any one president has helped or hurt the economy in the last 50 years or so then you really don't understand ecomomics. We are in a world ecomomy and what drives our ecomony is fear. When people are afraid of what will happen, the ecomomy goes down, when they are not it goes up.
Clinton did nothing to help the ecomony, in fact he did very little at all while in office except to remain benign and pretend that his national health care program (or any government run operation of that size) could work. Bill was just lucky to be in office at the right time during the ramp up of the internet.
If you want to do something to help our country: pray for the end of world conflict and push congress to eliminate the IRS (www.fairtax.org). Worry less about being a Democrat or Republican and (Robert) don't believe everything you read. Do your own research.
October 21, 2006 10:35 AM
you really don't understand ecomomics. We are in a world ecomomy and what drives our ecomony is fear. When people are afraid of what will happen, the ecomomy goes down, when they are not it goes up...Bill was just lucky to be in office at the right time during the ramp up of the internet.
Humor, right?
I'm laughing.
October 21, 2006 10:42 AM
We are fortunate to live across an ocean from the insanity of terrorism.
Consider Israel, the other nation everyone loves to hate. I've talked to people who've spent time in Israel; they say that they rarely met anyone who had not lost a family member to a terrorist attack. That's anecdotal evidence, but even if exaggerated, speaks volumes of the danger they face from their mad neighbors.
So yeah, we over here aren't that likely to die by terrorism. Nor, I doubt, would we ever become so, even if we blithely ignored their existence and happily allowed them to keep on killing a few of us here and there with bombs and planes. Heck, even if they got nuclear weapons (like from, say, pakistan), they could probably only take out like five of our cities, right? No big loss.
Oh, wait. On second thought, no. You can call Bush all the names you like, but please, don't ever say our soldiers are dying for nothing because it's not true.
Shifting gears, I'm tired of people blaming only Bush for whatever new laws they don't like. He may instigate and push for them, of course, but they have to go through the house and senate before reaching his desk for final approval. You can't just blame the man; blame the whole house.
If the new law is as bad as you say, then obviously it's unconstitutional and would never hold up in court. Put your money where your mouth is and really challenge it, where it would have a chance of getting struck down. I'm sure you'll find plenty of people to help and support you along the way.
This is America, after all.
October 21, 2006 10:43 AM
So, coty, "we know W. isn't a reader". Do we? See US News from August of this year.
http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/060817/17bushbooks.htm
This report has him at 60 books in the first 7 to 7.5 months of this year.
October 21, 2006 10:43 AM
What if I believe the 2-party system is fundamentally flawed?
Sure, Bush has done some horrible things -- I won't try to defend any of them -- but Clinton did some bad things, too. (They did a *great* job of sweeping mistakes like Somalia under the rug at election time.)
If I vote for a third-party candidate, I get accused of handing the election to the republicans. If I vote for a big-2 candidate, I'm voting for somebody I don't want in office just because I'm afraid the other big-2 candidate would be worse, and sure enough, he ends up being a slightly-less-bad jerk in office.
How do I place a vote against the system?
Since, as you point out, we are no longer free, perhaps revolution is the only remaining answer.
October 21, 2006 10:53 AM
Excellent post.
I wish many Bushites would read this and have it sink in.
October 21, 2006 11:00 AM
And why is it anyone believes voting for someone you don't know-slash-have never met-slash-are unconnected to is the answer?
Voting for strangers to represent you is like inviting strangers into your home and giving them the keys and the charge cards...on faith.
Bad faith consequences bad resutls.
Be stupid and vote for strangers, or be smart and vote for changers.
October 21, 2006 11:05 AM
.So, coty, "we know W. isn't a reader". Do we? See US News from August of this year.
From same article...
"But portraying Bush as a voracious reader is part of an ongoing White House campaign to restore what a senior adviser calls "gravitas" to the Bush persona."
Me-skeptical.
October 21, 2006 11:06 AM
Wil,
When you say that the economy was stronger under Clinton, I am not sure I understand how you are measuring this. While I agree that on the day Clinton left office the economy was still humming (sorry for the Monica reference) right along, do you discount some of this credit since we now know it was a bubble?
Bush inherited this bubble -- which burst. Does he get stuck with this bad stat? Doesn't he get some credit for essentially starting off in negative territory? The burst would have happened even if Gore was elected.
911. 911 was a big hit to our economy. A major financial center was hit. We lost our national sense of safety within our shores. We lost many business leaders--which hurt the future of the economy.
So, given that the last stock market records we experienced were during a recognized unsustainable environment and given the hit our economy took as a result of 911, I think it is amazing that we are where we are at. We are setting new records for the DOW -- this time based on real earnings. Unemployment is at 4.6%.
Anybody have an adjustable mortgage? If you do then you are well aware of the Fed raising the Prime Rate this last year. Why do they do that? To keep in check an economy they perceive as getting too exuberant. I'm not saying the Fed is always correct in reading their crystal ball, but that is what they do.
The economy is very complex and can't be explained in a paragraph, but let me give you a few ideas to think about. Let's stick with an ecosystem we are all familiar with -- the Mac and iPod. The iPod is purely a luxury item. If times were tough, the iPod sales would drop off substantially. How about Delicious Library? Unless you are a Mom and Pop video store and you are using it to track rentals I don't see how this program is anything but a fun luxury toy. I've heard more than once from the developer of this program that sales are through the roof. Maybe Wil could track this guy down and verify this rumor. :)
October 21, 2006 11:50 AM
All very well put.
Additionally, I'm glad to see that there are others who have been so moved by the political state of the nation to write about it on their blog, even if politics may not be the immediate focus of it.
Keep it up.
October 21, 2006 11:56 AM
This is great, Wil. Thanks.
October 21, 2006 11:58 AM
From same article...
"But portraying Bush as a voracious reader is part of an ongoing White House campaign to restore what a senior adviser calls "gravitas" to the Bush persona."
Me-skeptical.
I don't see that quote in this story.
Even if the above quote comes from a different story -- it doesn't matter. The original assertion that I was disproving was that "we know W. isn't a reader".
Here is the whole story.
"Bush's reading list: heavy on bios and baseball
By Kenneth T. Walsh
Posted 8/17/06
George W. Bush a bookworm? White House aides say it's so. The born-again president's literary interests start with the predictable, such as his daily readings from the Bible. But he also enjoys books about Abraham Lincoln, his political hero, and, of course, yarns about baseball-in a past life, he was, after all, the managing partner of the Texas Rangers. Staffers say the president is actually engaged in an informal contest with White House senior adviser Karl Rove to see who can read more books this year. The latest score card has Bush ahead 60-50.A sampling of the president's reading list so far this year, according to White House aides:
Alexander II: The Last Great Tsar by Edvard Radzinsky
American Prometheus by Kai Bird and Martin Sherwin (a biography of Robert Oppenheimer, an inventor of the atomic bomb)
Clemente: The Passion and Grace of Baseball's Last Hero by David Maraniss (about the late all-star Pittsburgh Pirates right fielder)
Lincoln: A Life of Purpose and Power by Richard Carwardine
Lincoln's Greatest Speech: The Second Inaugural by Ronald C. White Jr.
Mao: The Unknown Story by Jung Chang and Jon Halliday
Nine Parts of Desire: The Hidden World of Islamic Women by Geraldine Brooks
Polio: An American Story by David Oshinsky (discussing how polio affected the United States in the mid-20th century)
The Big Bam: The Life and Times of Babe Ruth by Leigh Montville
The Great Influenza: The Epic Story of the Deadliest Plague in History by John M. Barry
Salt: A World History by Mark Kurlansky
The Stranger by Albert Camus"
October 21, 2006 12:09 PM
You could have easily voted by absentee paper ballot in the time it took you to write this blog post. Why didn't you vote already?
October 21, 2006 12:15 PM
So if it's no big deal to you that nearly 3,000 people died in a little terrorist attack (and there certainly wasn't any good reason for that) because so many more people die of diseases and car accidents and whatnot, why does it matter to you that fewer than that have died, in your words, "for no reason" in Iraq?
Keep in mind that the soldiers who have died in Iraq voluntarily placed themseleves in harm's way. The people who died in New York, Washington, D.C. and Pennsylvania on September 11, 2001 had every reason to believe that they would live to see another day.
October 21, 2006 12:28 PM
Anonymous said...
At least with GOP you get tax cuts, which like it or not have significantly contributed to the competitiveness of the US economy.
No, the GOP doesn't give us tax cuts. Tax cuts are when you lower taxes and lower spending. The GOP gives us tax deferments. They lower taxes, increase spending and take out loans to make up the difference.
GWB is the biggest spender this country has ever had as president. The myth that Republicans are for smaller government and less spending, and that Democrats are for larger government and more spending should be thoroughly shattered after seeing the contrast between Bush II and Clinton.
The GOP is sending us towards insolvency. Watch out in the next few years when the dollar takes a real hit, interest rates see a real rise, the housing market completely collapses, and China stops propping up up our economy so we can buy their products. It's going to be a mess.
The most terrible this is that while lashing out against Democrats for supposedly wanting a "nanny" state, the GOP has given us a Military-Church state. Our economic policies are geared toward increasing corporate profits, not standard of living. Our social policies are driven by Christian zealots eager to legislate their fictitious belief system on the rest of us. Our foreign policy is trying desperately to keep American dominance alive for the sake of the dollar and military contractors. Worse, we have completely lost track of the true meaning of freedom.
Everyone who wants to understand what has really happened in America since WWII, and everyone who considers themselves a Republican, should read as much Eisenhower as possible, especially his Farewell Address where he warns against the perils of the Military-Industrial Complex.
Some Quotes:
A bankrupt America is a defenseless America.
Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed.
In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.
-Justin
October 21, 2006 12:29 PM
The initial comment about tax cuts is the sort of ignorant tripe that really irritates the hell out of me.
The man started an unjust war that has killed hundreds of thousands of people, for crying out loud, and you talk about how great it is for people to have more cash in their pockets. WTF is wrong with you?
October 21, 2006 12:34 PM
Wil, I'm glad your saying something.
People like you, are a real patriot, not just for a country, but for all of us who wish for freedom and civil rights.
Don't let anyone stop you.
October 21, 2006 1:27 PM
If I read it correctly, all of these points you mention apply to Bush... don't they?
For a moment I thought you were in the loony side! Phew!
October 21, 2006 1:27 PM
Wil,
We have the unfortunate luxury of having front-row seats as America adapts to the icky realities of global asymmetric warfare.
History may prove the title of your post to be correct. Ironic perhaps, but possible.
I'm not going to change many minds here, but it may give some of your readers reason to momentarily rethink the context of their animosity toward GWB.
Here we go....
If W was such a deceitful guy, he likely would have planted some fake devices in the Iraqi countryside, and arranged a photo op with men and women in space suits carting the nuclear validation of his pre-emptive foreign policy away for safe keeping.
But it didn't happen that way. In fact, there is a ton of "evidence" that the WMD Myth might turn out to be a myth itself. Just for grins, Google "John Shaw WMD" sometime.
Here's why I'm open to that possibility that the whole WMD fiasco, and subsequent free-fall of the president's popularity is grounded in intentional misinformation:
When W was running for president, he told a reporter one time that he likes to be "Misunderestmated".
Since he's the same guy whether he is wearing his Commander-in-Chief hat or his Political Candidate hat, it seems reasonable on the surface that he would judo-esquely leverage his negative public perception to meet his difficult policy objectives.
I believe that since I didn't lose a leg or a loved one in the desert, my opinion regarding the Iraq war really doesn't count that much. That being said, there are a bunch of details that just don't jive with the conventional wisdom about the war and its justification, especially given the under-reported DOCEX findings.
In closing, perhaps the best thing that could come out of the "W as tyrant" point of view that you and so many others seem to share would be a mass influx of folks rallying 'round the 2nd Ammendment, because a well-armed populace is true tyranny's worst nightmare.
--Mike
October 21, 2006 1:39 PM
Ben Franklin said "They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security."
October 21, 2006 1:51 PM
This post has been removed by a blog administrator.
October 21, 2006 1:51 PM
Bush ROCKS!!!
He is doing an awesome job as president. I want to see you do a better job running the worlds most powerful country. Has he made mistakes? Sure, are they as bad as you make them out to be? NO!!! You have no idea what it takes to make the decisions he has to make.
Bush is doing a GREAT job as president! There is no better person to have at the helm of our country.
October 21, 2006 1:54 PM
@ Doug
All I can say is, the fact that you choose to parse seemingly irrelevant little opinions, instead of focusing on the simple fact that we have in office a man that is inadequate to the job is, well, a sign of the times.
And a sad one at that. The arguments about changing the staff over at the high political offices is not about what has come before, it is about what is happening now.
Another reason for change is that people are attempting to legislate morality from a religious standpoint to secure votes, instead of simply focusing on boring social issues.
People like you are the biggest cork in the asshole of progress. You have to move on, when something does not work, you try something new, period.
It is also very important for you philosophical neophytes (condescending tone added) to understand something regarding this "the other side is just as worse, there is no choice" argument:
-Yes the system is flawed.
-Yes corporate influence has always been there.
But the person elected DOES make a difference.
No reasonable person could argue that electing Gore (insert anyone's name you like) instead of Bush would have made a huge difference in the last 6 years of millions of peoples lives.
My point is not wether the difference is better or worse, but rather that there is, in fact, a difference.
Anyhow, thank you Wil for bringing attention to the fact that yes, each person can make a difference for the future of this country and the world.
Go make it.
October 21, 2006 2:06 PM
Larry said:
Keep in mind that the soldiers who have died in Iraq voluntarily placed themseleves in harm's way.
This is only true of the men and women who enlisted after 9/11. Many who had done so prior to that day probably believed they'd never see a day's combat, and that being in the armed services was a good way to pay for college.
As a survivor of the 9/11 attacks in New York City, I am sickened by what George W. Bush and his rubber-stamp Republican cronies have done in the name of keeping this country safe. "They hate us for our freedom," he used to say of the terrorists. Well, this week, George Bush took away a huge portion of the freedom granted by the Constitution, and they still hate us. Way to go, George. In my book, that means the terrorists won.
October 21, 2006 2:39 PM
As much as I agree on your post, Wil. I do not agree with the two points you blaim Saddam for: WMD and poor education. Those are both not true for Iraq, but highly urgent for the US.
I do hope that the US citizens will finally bring a change since we in Europe obviously are still just a flock of sheep re-chanting what "the leader of the free world" sings.
October 21, 2006 2:50 PM
I want more posts about shirts!
October 21, 2006 2:55 PM
Vote loggerhead. If the president is Republican, vote a Democrat in for Congress. If the president is a Democrat, vote Republican for Congress.
October 21, 2006 3:16 PM
And the US economy was actually much stronger under Bill Clinton.
This isn't true. In fact, factors like unemployment reached record lows, but these things don't get reported as enthusiastically by the press as they were under the Clinton years. Ahem.
These political posts really turn me off. I'm sick of Democrats anyway; they want everyone to forget they voted to go to war just like the Republicans did. "How dare Republicans use scaremongering tactics by telling everyone we're still not safe from terrorism! Oh, and by the way, we're still not safe from terrorism, but it's not being hypocritical to tell you that!"
As for the "torture" stuff, that's just an emotionally loaded word Bush haters use for coerced interrogation which includes lame things like sleep deprivation. Ooh, the horror of making someone stay up late so that they tell us about future terror attacks.
Without coerced interrogation, we wouldn't have a Brooklyn Bridge, as there was a terror attack thwarted based on information gained during such interrogation.
Blech!
October 21, 2006 4:27 PM
You poeple in Europe should be thanking us every time your in trouble you need us (U.S.) to get you out of it we should back off and let you fend for your self good luck....everyone else remember this quote
All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.
Edmund Burke
October 21, 2006 8:10 PM
Please make more posts like this, Wil. Really.
October 21, 2006 8:28 PM
Watching the blogs it’s pretty amazing. As we all know we are a few days away from mid term elections. There is a lot of talk about “how bad the Bush administration” is and how
badly they are running things and how much better the Democrats or anybody but Bush
is gonna loose if the democrats get it to congress etc. etc. etc….
News flash, Bush isn’t up for re-election, duh!!!. So then I got to thinking what’s this really about? Let’s flood the Internet with pointless deceptive talk that makes the government look like a bunch of dorks that they really are, right Dem’s?- political party of corporate distrust? Just remember, if either our Government or our corporate structure goes down, we all lose, game over!
Just then I start thinking, ok I know how to respond to the rhetoric and then someone like Justin comes along (Justin I’m not picking on you in particular) you actually bring up a good viewpoint, but in reality I could go on and on and on why you are wrong, and your truth’s are skewed, but then what’s the point? You would do the same, wouldn’t you?
So get to the point! The point is, that political battles can only be won when you actually compare your “facts” against my facts and we actually verify one or the other. Until then
all is vanity as Ecclesiastics says. You aren’t going to take the physical time to bring out
all your sources nor am I so there is no point. None of us has that much time. I go by experience, if it works, I will measure, plan and hopefully fix. If not, I will dissect as best as I can like everyone else. Ultimately it’s up to everyone to decide who is right and who is blowing smoke.
Well, I could go on and on, but again I would rather list the real reason I’m posting. I love the war in Iraq and here’s why….
10> It’s brought a nasty unpopular war to a bunch of nasty unpopular people e.g. Taliban,
and Al-Qaeda- on their soil instead of ours. Places an Exclamation point after 9/11! For those who lost loved ones regardless of what others may think.
9> The best of the best are over there and they are fighting on your behalf whether you like it or not. If you don’t like it, then pray to Jesus to make it stop. Don’t believe in Him? Bummer! Your loss ;)
8> We took the lead on removing a dysfunctional family (Iraq) Whether it was WMD or his complete world class arrogance toward us and the world, he’s gone and his days are numbered thank you very much.
7> Our security has improved and is much better than before 9/11
6> We have galvanized the world. We know who is with us and who is not. It’s nice to know who your enemy’s are and who your allies are. Nothing worse than not being able to tell which side is on which. I don’t agree with dems/liberals at all, but you know what? They are my balance I know which side they are on, and I love them for that and I love them because they are American! They may hate me and what I stand for, but I can say I love them because I know deep down most of them love America too ;) psssst...Note to Neo cons~ it’s really hard to hate someone when they say they love you don’t you think? Big grin!!
5> War economy’s are better than non-war economy’s (I might be wrong on that), it’s just what I’ve heard and war seems like it spawns new technology which is also a positive. Please spare me on the selfish American talk. I get it.
4> Every year Al-Qaeda did something during the Clinton Administration to us here WTC 93’ for example and abroad USS Cole etc.., this stopped and has been centralized to Iraq and Afghanistan for the most part.
3> It really pisses off the liberal base that we even have a war. I like watching my lib buddies get their edges a bit tinged once in a while. Makes for good Neo fodder.
2> like # 6 it galvanizes a nation, again, if you smell like a lib, look like a lib, typically you are one whether you like the title or not, so just let er’ fly cause I’m sure your responses are gonna be a doozy.
And the number one reason I like the war in Iraq, we have Iran surrounded who is everyone’s real source of embarrassment and is betting that the US and the US public can’t stomach the pain of war so they are ramping up Syria and the whole jihad thang so we all believe it’s ol GW’s fault that we are in this thing and that he just want’s the oil etc. etc.. Notice how smug the Iranian leader is lately? Is it me or do all Muslim leaders excel over American arrogance? Gee I thought we were the most arrogant nation on earth- I rather liked being number one at something. Saddam and the Iranians have got us beat hands down in that department, and what makes matters even worse…. Most anti war Neo’s believe it! Come on, you gotta love it! ;)
October 21, 2006 8:40 PM
ALERT: Gratuitous Ad hominem.
Wil Shipley=Chicken Little
You won't be leading me to Foxy Loxy with your early-60's-sitcom-hysterics and smarter-than-thou-preening.
Wil Shipley!=policy wonk
Shut up and code.
October 21, 2006 8:56 PM
I love the war in Iraq and here’s why….
Why are you here then?
The army needs you there.
Fuckin chickehawk.
October 21, 2006 9:32 PM
Wow, there's a whole bunch of neocon republicans posting here.
October 21, 2006 9:35 PM
Good. I think you're right, Wil, that it is just too important right now to refrain from posting about this stuff.
I usually agree with the many who say (here and elsewhere) that US politicians as a class are dysfunctional creeps in the main, and that there is not a huge difference between the professional Democrat politicians and professional Republican politicians. To generalize (accurately), they're a lot more like each other than they are like anybody you would want to know or invite to dinner.
That said, GEORGE W BUSH IS SOMETHING UNIQUE, ABHORRENT AND VERY VERY DANGEROUS. This guy totally changes the equation.
He is a stupid, stupid man. I don't mean his policies are stupid (although his stupidity is reflected there as well), but I mean it in the more clinical sense. As in: sit him down with a few elementary schoolers and set them on a few problems of basic logic, action and consequence, mathematics, or reading comprehension. Guess who comes in last.
He's a religious zealot, who substitutes the weird convictions of his own interpretation of Christianity for logic when making policy decisions.
But there are lots of losers like this in the world, and some of them even become presidents (look at Iran). What makes Bush Jr. so uniquely dangerous is that he has, on the wings of the 9/11 attacks, unexpectedly been handed an unprecedented opportunity to damage the United States of America (I am not even considering any other part of the world here).
When an overzealous imbecile gains the presidency and starts to radically reshape the United States government, it would normally actually be stopped. We have systems in place, flawed though they be, that typically prevent things like: making people disappear, gulags, negating constitutional rights, and hurling young Americans in to an idiotic war that never, from the very outset, had any possible outcome that could be called a victory.
But GWB has pushed the envelope much, much farther than anybody else has ever been able to do, on the basis of being the stupidest US president in history, *and* happening to come along at one of the most critical moments in US history.
Bush has done a lot more to harm the United States and its citizens in the past few years than any jerkoff terrorist ever has, or could. He needs to be stopped, and the first step is electing those who oppose him. This election, for the most part, the means voting for Democrats.
October 21, 2006 11:05 PM
Will, as a political columnist you make a great software developer.
Please, stick to what you know. The world has enough armchair strategists already, especially ones who seem singularly informed by Michael Moore movies and Sorkin-era episodes of The West Wing.
Be honest: if people showed as much cynicism towards your blog and as you show towards politics then you'd be in trouble. It would be obvious just what sort of stunt this exercise is. (Perhaps you've done the math and determined that there are more sales of Delicious Library to be had from first-time-voter liberals than red necks?)
BTW, comparing Saddam to Bush? It may well garner you the attention you clearly need but normally it would just be DUMB. Since you seem to be reasonably intelligent, it's safe to conclude that such a comparison is needlessly argumentative if not malicious.
October 21, 2006 11:54 PM
Amen, brother. Amen.
October 22, 2006 12:16 AM
While the parallels you draw between Saddam Hussein and George Bush are, for the most point, valid (in kind, if not always by degree), I believe that Hussein was a secular leader, who eschewed God, and not a messianic demagogue, as you suggest.
October 22, 2006 1:07 AM
Ryos: Oh, wait. On second thought, no. You can call Bush all the names you like, but please, don't ever say our soldiers are dying for nothing because it's not true.
Yes, it is. I'm sorry, it's a horrible thought, but Iraq didn't start this war. They didn't attack us. The only mission we've accomplished by invading Iraq is convincing millions more muslims that we really are xenophobes. We are LESS safe today than when we started this war, according to the American government's own statistics.
I specifically said in my post that if we elect a Democratic congress and senate we can block Bush -- note that he controls both houses, and that's exactly what I'm complaining about. The fact his fellow partymembers are in collusion with him doesn't make him less evil or less personally culpable.
Larry: So if it's no big deal to you that nearly 3,000 people died in a little terrorist attack (and there certainly wasn't any good reason for that)...
Way to intentionally misinterpret my argument. I didn't say it's not a big deal when thousands of people die. I'm saying it's not a good trade to give up everything we care about, and sacrifice thousands of more lives, in the name of stopping this attack that's already happened, even though we're not actually taking any actions that will lessen terror attacks, and in fact we are only exacerbating the situation.
The Nog: As for the "torture" stuff, that's just an emotionally loaded word Bush haters use for coerced interrogation which includes lame things like sleep deprivation. Ooh, the horror of making someone stay up late so that they tell us about future terror attacks.
You obviously haven't read the bill or paid any attention to what's actually happened in the gulags we run. The bill allows us to inflict "serious pain" on prisoners who we have charged with no crimes. Don't talk about things you haven't researched, it merely propagates evil.
If we ONLY tortured the actual evil terrorists, well, maybe you could justify it. But how do you know who's a terrorist ahead of time? We have NEVER given a blank check to a government to torture its people and had it be used in a responsible manner.
The first reported case of death by torture by Americans was in The New York Times in 2003 by Carlotta Gall. The military had announced the prisoner died of a heart attack, but when Gall actually saw the death certificate, written in English and issued by the military, it said the cause of death was homicide. The "heart attack" came after he had been beaten so often on this legs that they had "basically been pulpified," according to the coroner. (from Molly Ivins)
Sleep deprivation? I don't think this causes your legs to be pulpified.
You tell me what we got out of stacking naked Iraqis in prison and sexually assaulting them and posing in front of them at Abu Ghraib. That's not the exception, it's the rule. We can't, as a people, torture our prisoners, because we are supposed to be the good guys. If we give this up, what's our justification again? What are we protecting?
Without coerced interrogation, we wouldn't have a Brooklyn Bridge, as there was a terror attack thwarted based on information gained during such interrogation.
This is such an illogical statement it boggles my mind. Who told you this? The same government that told you that it had accomplished its mission in Iraq? That Iraq had WMDs? That it was ok to torture?
If you're this naive, I actually have some shares in the Brooklyn bridge I'd like to sell you.
Anonymous: Please, stick to what you know.
You're right, I shouldn't exercise my right to participate in the political process. I mistakenly believed this was the foundation of democracy, but clearly I'm an idiot -- I need to leave this to the experts, who have completely fucked over our country.
Honestly, at this point just about anyone, no matter how ill-informed, could do a better job running the country than GWB and his clownies.
-W
October 22, 2006 1:14 AM
Very internesting point of view, although I don't agree in few matters.
October 22, 2006 1:15 AM
Will, you are building a strawman.
Nobody is saying you are not allowed to express your point of view.
But there are better places for it than a blog normally reserved for SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT, especially Cocoa and ObjC development.
You are not being persecuted. You are not being howled down. You have simply been called on an obvious stunt.
You have shown previously that you do not handle contradiction or correction too well and are generally intolerant of other people's views.
As a marketing tool, this is crass and obvious. Get back to your day job and improve Delicious Library so that it runs in real time and offers better functionality for international customers.
October 22, 2006 1:28 AM
Will, you are building a strawman.
Nobody is saying you are not allowed to express your point of view.
But there are better places for it than a blog normally reserved for SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT, especially Cocoa and ObjC development.
You are not being persecuted. You are not being howled down. You have simply been called on an obvious stunt.
You have shown previously that you do not handle contradiction or correction too well and are generally intolerant of other people's views.
As a marketing tool, this is crass and obvious. Get back to your day job and improve Delicious Library so that it runs in real time and offers better functionality for international customers.
October 22, 2006 1:35 AM
Great post Will :) Hopefully you've got paper ballots in your state.
October 22, 2006 6:20 AM
Anonymous troll:
I'm not sure how you decided what my blog was "reserved for." Have you read my entries on, uh, "Ray" (the movie), my kittens, depression... just general crap?
How can it be a crass marketing ploy for me to alienate 49% of Americans by posting my political beliefs so strongly? What exactly do I have to gain from this?
It's obvious you are just trying to get me mad when you call me crass, insult my program, and say I'm over-sensitive to criticism in the same post. You should have picked one.
It's funny, because I have plenty of flaws, and you're obviously rooting for them, but you don't know me well enough to pick at the right ones to actually bug me. Why don't you tell me how fat my momma is and how ugly my girlfriend is while you're at it?
Why are you here if you hate reading what I write so much? It's just making you angry. Go do something you like.
Seriously, this isn't a democratic place. It's my blog. I get to write what I like. Them's the rules. The lucky thing is, you can have a blog, too. You can have three if you'd like. You're king there. Go! Go be king!
Leave me be. It helps you none to try to take me down a peg.
-W
October 22, 2006 7:23 AM
I love the war in Iraq and here’s why….
Why are you here then?
The army needs you there.
Fuckin chickehawk.
-----
Is that the best you can do? call me a chickehawk? Gee, so personal, so meaningful I'm so offended...NOT. Well you fall under my #3 reason then. BTW, they probably could use me over in Iraq, but I'm too old, sorry your turn ;)
October 22, 2006 7:35 AM
What would you cry babies be writing about had the insurgency not taken place? Do you really think a country can be changed overnight? Give me a break.
There are groups of people (maniacs) that if given a nuclear explosive they take it and use it first chance they get. I for one appreciate tough non-traditional and yes very possibly inhumane approaches against these bastards. Tough times call for desperate measures. Innocent people are and will likely continue to suffer in our tough stance, but this is absolutely necessary considering the worse-case scenario for my country, my neighbors, and my family.
Keep generalizing and not for one minute taking into consideration all the evil that can result of a passive stance against people that believe their god wants them to destroy America.
I'm not a Republic and will never be and no I haven't been brain washed to what you would call Republican scare tactics. Please see what's occurring throughout the world and then keep crying like a baby because there are things to cry about.
October 22, 2006 9:59 AM
I love you. :)
October 22, 2006 10:54 AM
Oh, give me a break, Wil. My grandfather did time for protesting WW I, and I sure don't see anyone tossing Noam Chomsky or Michael Moore in jail. How far down the list do you think you are? The truth of the matter is, you have NO FEAR at ALL of being tossed in jail for blogging about how much you despise GWB.
If GWB were even as much of an authoritarian as FDR, every Muslim in the United States would be behind bars, or at least a fence at the Santa Ana racetrack.
Frankly, you're not doing any good with overblown fantasies of someone coming to take you away for calling Bush a fascist. Clinton had two people arrested for heckling him; does that make him the second coming of Mussolini?
Your buddy Al Gore was a big fan of the Clipper chip, does that mean that he was hoping to create an American Stasi if he got elected?
What drives me up the wall as a Libertarian, is the way that liberals pretend that only republicans encroach on our rights, and that the democrats are somehow going to make everything right. The record simply doesn't support that contention. Count up the democrats who voted for the patriot act, for christ's sake. (Not to mention their tireless efforts to disarm the public, lest we get too uppity when they're in charge.)
Oh, and as for the economy, to give a president credit for an economic recovery is like give a flea credit for the dog. Governments do not help economies; at best, they can refrain from adding to the damage they do to an economy long enough for the market to work around their interference.
We had a period of prosperity during the Clinton administration thanks to the legislative deadlock of different parties holding the white house and the congress. We had a similar period of prosperity when Reagan was in office for the same reason.
-jcr
October 22, 2006 12:41 PM
@jcr
Sounds like a good reason to vote Democratic this time around.
October 22, 2006 1:20 PM
I'm not American or Democrat or Republican, but I do have to say this:
Nuclear terrorism is the real risk waiting in the wings.
The USSR were never mad enough to "start world war III". But non governmental groups like terrorists don't have coordinates on a map to assure their destruction in retaliation. Barely plausible deniability such as surrounded Iran and Syria's involvement in this year's Lebanese war is also threatening to have a hand in this. There is whether we like it or not a new cold war emerging right now and both sides will have nuclear weapons. Moscow never had a Palestine to trip the trigger. How extreme are the beheadings and suicide bombs we see today? And how covert is the ease of movement such terrorist celebrities as bin Laden have right across Afghanistan and on through the Middle East?
I opposed the Iraq war before the invasion even happened. It has done no good at all, and at huge cost. But I don't sit back and think tomorrow will be safer than today either. Far from it.
We have some pretty huge problems and potential wars lying ahead of us this century. The less bone headed leadership like the Bush administration the better. But isolationism will ultimately be the cause of the biggest disasters. We have to keep our eyes open.
October 22, 2006 1:32 PM
It's true. Voting is terribly important. Unfortunately, the Dems COULD have filibustered the Military Commissions act and chose not to. Pelosi has already stated that Bush will not be impeached if Democrats take the house. So, sure, Bush will have a harder time in office if Dems take the house in this election but it only helps so much. What else are we going to do?
It's a damn good blog, though.
October 22, 2006 1:43 PM
Deadlock in government is the best you can hope for if you vote for either of the major parties. Personally, I support the people who come completely out of the blue like Jesse Ventura, who can occasionally get into office and scare the crap out of the Ruling Party.
Political parties are an unfortunate phenomenon which our constitution didn't really anticipate. The plan was that we were supposed to actually know who we were voting to send to the electoral college, and trust them to choose the best person for the job.
-jcr
October 22, 2006 2:04 PM
Oh, and one other thing about voting.. Pay attention to local and state elections, and primaries, too. Kansas' evolution fracas was an example that shows that it doesn't really take a lot of people to get a nut on a school board and make your state a laughing stock around the world.
IIRC, the LaRouchies managed to snag the democratic nomination for a member of their cult for a statewide office in Illinois, and there was also the time that David Duke the nazi got the republican nomination for governor of louisiana. In both cases, (and the McGovern nomination, for that matter), a small, highly motivated pack of whackos caught a major party napping.
-jcr
October 22, 2006 2:12 PM
elosi has already stated that Bush will not be impeached if Democrats take the house.
What'd be hilarious is, if the Democrats take the House, they draw up article of impeachment anyway. Then when asked, Pelosi can just say, "I lied to get what I wanted. Surely the president can understand that."
October 22, 2006 2:39 PM
Wil,
I appreciate your opinion, but you are missing a real understanding of history.
First, there are always insurgencies in invaded/conquered/freed countries. We faced more than a decade of this in Germany after WWII. There is still anti-Northerner sentiment in the American South (since the Yankees maliciously abused the Southerners they conquered during Reconstruction).
Real life takes place on a timscale that is many orders of magnitude larger than programming.
As for the alleged torture bill, we already surrender all those rights during a plain ol' traffic stop (you just have the right to sue afterward, if you survive). At some point you must trust the government you elect, or unelect them.
I'm sad that you do not know about the America of WWII or WWI. Do some research on how people HAD to live in order to be safe. And then notice that, today, we have more and more freedoms than those folks did.
The fascists of this age are the Radical Liberals.
October 22, 2006 3:34 PM
This is an out-and-out lie. There hasn't been anything like an insurgency in Germany after the liberation at the end of WW II.
"The [Germans'] readiness to work with the victors, to carry out their orders, to accept their advice and their help was genuine; of the resistance which the Allies had expected in the way of 'werewolf' units and nocturnal guerrilla activities, there was no sign. "
Golo Mann, "The History of Germany Since 1789"
October 22, 2006 4:06 PM
SADLY, IT'S INTERNATIONAL CAPS LOCK DAY, SO YOU GUYS HAVE TO PUT UP WITH ME YELLING IN MY RESPONSE.
- THERE ARE OFTEN INSURGENCIES AFTER A WAR, BUT IN PLACES WHERE WE ACTUALLY SPEND SOME DOLLARS RECONSTRUCTING THE LOSING SIDE, WE END UP WITH BETTER FRIENDS THAN EVER. SEE THE SOUTH (ALTHOUGH WE SHOULD HAVE LET THEM "WIN" AND JUST LEAVE OUR DAMN COUNTRY), JAPAN, ETC.
- GWB IGNORED HIS OWN STATE DEPARTMENT'S DETAILED PLANS FOR RECONSTRUCTION AND LET THE MILITARY "HANDLE" THE AFTERMATH OF THE WAR. THIS IS LIKE LETTING YOUR DOBERMAN HANDLE PUTTING STITCHES IN THE NEIGHBOR'S CAT AFTER HE MAULS IT.
- YES, WE ARE AT RISK FROM NUCLEAR ATTACKS. HOWEVER, IT'S IDIOTIC TO THINK WE'RE SAFER BY MAKING MORE ENEMIES. WE HAVE RALLIED MUSLIM EXTREMISTS BY THIS ILL-ADVISED WAR IN IRAQ, MOVING AGAINST A NATION THAT REALLY HAD NO LIKELIHOOD OF ATTACKING US.
I PROPOSE A SIMPLE, RADICAL SOLUTION TO NOT GETTING NUKED, WHICH I CALL, "STOP MAKING ENEMIES." IT WORKS BOTH ON THE PEOPLE WHO WOULD NUKE US *AND* ON THE OTHER COUNTRIES IN THE WORLD WHO USED TO BE OUR ALLIES, AND WOULD WORK WITH US TO PREVENT NUCLEAR ATTACKS LONG BEFORE THEY BECAME VIABLE OPTIONS FOR TINPOTS.
OR A