Election 2004

[DominO123]

Akh, who cares? As if Kerry would've made a big difference. Same piece of crap as far as I'm concerned. Just be happy you have a president. And don't worry, he's not running anything, let alone the country. I'm not upset about anything, except for the fact that Holland has made the American elections its own. Who cares?? Since when are we Americans?? Some obscure country in the middle of nowhere has elections and no one turns around to even see the name of the country. Some stupid bully of a nation with even more stupid people in it votes and we spend our WHOLE day and night clutched to the TV as if it's our own country and our own vote that's going to count. As long as I am not elligible to vote for that country, I could care less who wins or who loses. Get a life people! It's just a stupid election that's certainly not going to make a difference in MY life!

style_images/master/snapback.png

 

I disagree. When you have the most powerful country in the world at the hand of a sicko, I think that it's the business of ALL the world.

[Arpa]

NB. The case of the "neocons" has been discussed here before. You can search using "neocon" to see what was said.

 

Contrary to my long standing habit I was hoping for a change of guard at the White House.

What with the master puppeteer Dick (Cheney) Haliburtian and the entire cabal of a junta.

 

Do you know these people? How is it that they have Americas's welfare in mind?

 

http://www.csmonitor.com/specials/neocon/?leftNavInclude

 

Note the highlighetd area where it is purported that the neocons are the heirs of our "sweetheart" Pres. Woodrow Wilson, the conservative. Note how "conservative" has metamorphosed into "neocons".

Conservative?

Christian?

Perhaps the main reason why many of us sought refuge on these shores.

Does it have a meaning anymore?

When "conservative" turns into (the so-called idiocy of "evangelical/judeo-christian", whatever the hell that may mean) bigotry and racial bias...!!??

 

Now that the US has become a den of Bible thumping evangelical idiots and a very sober and deliberate "neocons" where do we go next? Zimbabwe??

 

Whatever happened to our one time sweetheart General Colin Powell, our Secreteary of State? When is the last time you saw his face? Does he not fit in the junta racially and philosophically? Is his politico-philosophical world view radically counter to the so-called maistream?

===

 

Lest I lose it again, here is the full text.

 

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1248158/posts

 

Fixin' for a fight:In the GOP, the long knives are out for the neoconservatives

U.S.News & World Report ^ | 10/25/04 Issue | Thomas Omestad

 

Posted on 10/17/2004 3:02:51 PM PDT by Ed Current

 

There's no question whom Richard Viguerie wants to see in the White House for the next four years. A founding father of the modern conservative movement, he is foursquare behind President Bush despite what he regards as undue influence from one wing of the GOP, the neoconservatives. In this, Viguerie reflects a hallowed Republican Party tradition: Mute policy differences and unite at election time.

 

But for Viguerie and other conservative leaders, maintaining that discipline this year is harder than usual. The Republicans' united front masks a growing struggle sparked by the president's hawkish and ambitious foreign policy--one that may burst into the open soon after the polls close, whoever wins. "Most conservatives are not comfortable with the neocons," Viguerie says. He decries the neocons as "overbearing" and "immensely influential. . . . They want to be the world's policeman. We don't feel our role is to be Don Quixote, righting all the wrongs in the world."

 

Viguerie's disquiet is widely shared by veteran conservative activists, who are increasingly blaming neoconservatives for placing Iraq at the center of the war on terrorism. "I'm hearing more discussion about foreign policy and the direction of the country than I have heard probably in the last 35 years," says Paul Weyrich, chairman and CEO of the Free Congress Foundation.

 

Heart and soul.

 

The second thoughts on Iraq are re-exposing old ideological fault lines among GOP factions--Wall Streeters, Main Streeters, budget balancers, libertarians, and neoisolationists--that see their own policy priorities jeopardized. The fight within the GOP, Viguerie predicts, "will dwarf what took place in the '60s and '70s" --between the Barry Goldwater and Nelson Rockefeller wings of the party and later between Gerald Ford and Ronald Reagan. "It's going to be early on November 3 that the battle starts for the heart and soul of the Republican Party, and it's not going to be neat and clean," vows Viguerie, who's known for revolutionizing direct-mail fundraising on behalf of conservative candidates.

 

Bush loyalists like Viguerie, Weyrich, David Keene of the American Conservative Union, and Grover Norquist of Americans for Tax Reform are worried about the soaring costs of suppressing the Iraqi insurgency and the war's impact on delaying conservative economic initiatives to cut taxes and the size of government, privatize Social Security, and expand free trade. "Bush has a choice: He can be a part of the redefinition of the party, or he can step aside," says Keene. "The neocons have had some inordinate influence and made some serious mistakes."

 

Some conservatives feel Bush acted hastily on Iraq and needlessly shed allies who had stood with the United States on Afghanistan, mushrooming the costs borne by Washington. Some question his switch on nation building: As a candidate in 2000 taking a traditional conservative view, he rejected it; as president, he has plunged into it in Afghanistan (which last week held its first presidential elections) and Iraq. Others are dismayed by "mistakes," such as assertions based on faulty or misused intelligence on Iraqi weapons. "If Bush loses, the pragmatists will blame it on Iraq," says John Pitney, an expert on GOP politics at California's Claremont McKenna College

 

Some conservatives rue the lost opportunities and the polarization from the war. "Iraq ate up half of the first term," frets a key Republican strategist who consults with the White House. He adds, "This is like being the president during Vietnam, not at the end of World War II."

 

Some of that debate is already bubbling to the surface. GOP Sens. Richard Lugar (chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee), Lindsey Graham, John McCain, and Lincoln Chafee have bemoaned aspects of Iraq policy. Much of the criticism, though, has a broader thrust: Traditional foreign-policy realism is reasserting itself. Sen. Chuck Hagel of Nebraska, a possible presidential candidate in 2008, appears to be sketching out a realist's alternative, emphasizing rebuilding battered alliances and "an appreciation of [u.S. power's] limits." In contrast to Bush's Wilsonian rhetoric about an American calling to spread freedom and democracy, Hagel warned in Foreign Affairs that "foreign policy must not succumb to the distraction of divine mission." He told the Washington Post that the GOP "has come loose of its moorings."

 

Lightning rod.

 

There are other fissures in the party of Ronald Reagan. Some Wall Street Republicans dislike unconservative deficit spending and favor the sort of internationalism practiced by Bush's father. A few have slacked off on raising funds for Bush. Libertarians, along with neoisolationists like Patrick Buchanan, oppose what they see as Bush's post-9/11 proclivity to intervene abroad.

 

The lightning rod for much of the unhappiness is the loose movement of thinkers and policymakers known by the shorthand "neocons." Favoring boldness in asserting American values, they supplied most of the intellectual architecture for the Iraq war, for the Bush doctrine of pre-empting potential threats, and for considering "regime change" in rogue states. For years, neoconservative stars such as Richard Perle, former head of Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld's Defense Policy Board, and Douglas Feith, the No. 3 official at the Pentagon, had been advocating Saddam Hussein's ouster. Toppling Saddam, neocon thinking went, was the key to unlocking a shift toward democracy in the Mideast. Four days after 9/11, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, a leading neocon strategist, urged Bush at Camp David to target Iraq in the first phase of the war on terrorism. Bush opted to defer, but not abandon, that aim. Says former Secretary of State Lawrence Eagleburger, "The neocons were organized. They had intellectual content. Bush was not totally captured by it but tends in that direction." Some observers go further. "They provided coherence for a lot of elements in Bush's thinking," the late James Chace, a professor of international relations at Bard College, said shortly before his death this month. "The president is a neocon."

 

Whatever the case, the neocon movement has traveled a long way indeed: from historical roots in the anti-Stalinist left to the Henry "Scoop" Jackson wing of the Democratic Party and then, for many, on to become Reagan Republicans. The Bush administration has vaulted neocons into positions of unprecedented authority in the Pentagon, Vice President Cheney's office, the National Security Council, and even Colin Powell's State Department. Outside of government, neoconservatives have promoted their views through think tanks like the American Enterprise Institute, publications like the Weekly Standard, and advocacy groups like the Project for the New American Century.

 

While they have no agreed doctrine, neoconservatives see America's unrivaled military power as a force for good and want to unleash it on sources of totalitarian evil--today, seen primarily as Islamic and Arab extremism. Neocons are often called Wilsonian (for the idealistic President Woodrow Wilson) for their emphasis on spreading democracy, especially in the Mideast. Compared with traditional conservatives, neocons are more inclined to favor unilateral force and less concerned with attracting international support.

 

But the neocons now find themselves in a fight for their place in the Republican Party--and in a second term, should Bush win. Former Reagan administration official Stefan Halper and former British diplomat Jonathan Clarke, in a widely discussed book called America Alone: The Neo-Conservatives and the Global Order, charge that Bush's foreign policy was hijacked after 9/11, leading to a "betrayal of both Republican and conservative principles." Francis Fukuyama, a former State Department official in the administration of Bush's father, assailed some fellow neocons and Bush's Iraq policy in a National Interest article. He argued that Bush overlooked the need for international support to build a sense of "legitimacy" for the Iraq invasion, antagonized many by announcing a pre-emption strategy, and "went into Iraq with enormous illusions about how easy the postwar situation would be." Conservative columnists like George Will, Robert Novak, and William F. Buckley Jr. are stoking the fire. Will recently complained that ideology is crowding out facts in Bush's Iraq nation building. "This administration needs a dose of conservatism without the [neo] prefix," he wrote.

 

Rising doubts.

 

Behind the scenes, movement conservatives are disputing neocon ideas as well. Says Alfred Regnery, publisher of the American Spectator and numerous conservative books, "The administration got sold a little bit by the neocons. . . . We should return to a traditional, strong Republican foreign policy: We go to war only as a last resort, and we're not in the business of building nations." Phyllis Schlafly, president of the Eagle Forum, says the administration needs to "finish up the job in Iraq." However, Schlafly says, "we don't think we can be the policeman of the world." She describes herself as "not a fan" of Wilsonian policies: "All this talk of democracy in Iraq is kind of ridiculous," she argues. "What's real-ly important is that they have governments that are friendly to the United States."

 

Weyrich also has doubts about the neocons and Iraq policy. "They were very much on the ascendancy at the beginning of the administration, but they have been tarnished," he says. Weyrich and other conservative leaders met with Bush earlier this year in the Roosevelt Room of the White House. He says that Bush rejected the realist posture adopted by his father in choosing not to occupy Iraq. "He said I want you to understand I'm not my old man," Weyrich recalls. Weyrich, however, believes "we have to get out. . . . I hate to agree with John Kerry on anything because he's a gold-plated phony. But we have become a tremendous recruiting ground for al Qaeda." Some of Weyrich's opinions skirt uncomfortably close to Kerry's attacks on Bush as being disconnected from realities on the ground in Iraq. If Iraq's transition "doesn't work, we'd better face that and not just dig a hole that's deeper and deeper," says Weyrich. "I hope he [bush] doesn't believe his own rhetoric."

 

Inside the administration, senior officials suggest the neoconservatives are losing ground on policy toward Iraq, Iran, and North Korea. And Powell, who has spent much of his tenure in infighting with hawks, recently joked about "right-wing loonies" in a staff meeting when a subordinate referred to "left-wing loonies" in Cuba.

 

Has the neoconservative moment passed? "Neoconservatives feel under attack," says Kenneth Weinstein, chief operating officer of the Hudson Institute, an important outlet for neocon policy ideas. Says one, who would not be identified by name: "The neocons are being blamed . . . . No one wants to take the fall for what's happened in Iraq--not the neoconservatives, not the CIA, not the State Department, not the Pentagon."

 

Suspect leaks. Some neocons also sense an invidious undercurrent in which "neocon" is a code word for Jewish; Buchanan has asserted, for instance, that neocons are doing Israel's bidding. Their anxieties were deepened by the news leak that the FBI is probing a Pentagon analyst in Feith's office for allegedly passing a secret document to Israel through a Washington-based lobbying group, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee. The analyst, Larry Franklin, and AIPAC deny any wrongdoing. Other leaks, too, are seen as efforts to discredit Bush and the neocons: for example, on CIA warnings of post-invasion resistance that were played down by pro-war officials. "This is political warfare," says a neocon analyst.

 

Under fire, neoconservatives out of government are regrouping. This summer saw the rebirth of the Committee on the Present Danger--the third incarnation of a group first launched in the 1950s and restarted in the 1970s to promote a hard line against Soviet communism. Norman Podhoretz, one of the movement's leading thinkers, laments the darkening mood of "gloom and doom," in particular the "newborn pessimism among supporters" of the Iraq war. "Things have gone not badly, not disastrously, but triumphantly," he declared at the group's inaugural conference last month. The group posits that the United States now faces another existential threat and has dubbed the struggle "World War IV," the Cold War being World War III. The group's chairman, former CIA Director James Woolsey, says its rebirth recognizes that "people are to some extent choosing up sides. . . . Get the job done or go back to the '90s" --before 9/11 and Bush's pre-emption doctrine. "A number of critics have a nostalgia for an earlier era," he warns. But with a toxic mix of Arab and Islamist totalitarianism, weapons of mass destruction, and terrorists, he says, "those days are gone with the wind."

 

Woolsey predicts "the long war of the 21st century" will last decades. The fight between neocons and other cons might last just as long.

Edited November 3, 2004 by Arpa

[Anileve]

I am deeply ashamed for Americans. How does it feel to know that our countries fate has been decided by the Hick states? Certainly there are many prominent institutions in Ohio, several cultural centers and avid tourism…I guess I’ll never understand how ranch dominated, shotgun and polygamy infested, trailer-trash prevailing states can hold so much electoral votes which would serve as groundbreakers. Unfortunately the rest of the world doesn’t take into an account that America is not only composed of such degeneracy but of cosmopolitan states with financial centers where people have things other than eating beef jerky and watching sports on their mind.

 

I am really appalled today, with all that technology and an era of digital information it seems that majority of Americans have experienced a heavy blow to their sense of rationale. For once I agree with this passionate rant, it is true, as of today we have earned our pathetic reputation as ignorant and arrogant peons.

===================================

 

It should now be clear to everyone in the world that the U.S. is not a country that is run by a corrupt and brutal government but populated by compassionate citizens simply at the mercy of this government. Unlike in other countries where the government may engage in brutal policies such as the military war on Iraq and the economic war on the world’s poor but the population overwhelmingly opposes these policies, American citizens wholehearted endorse such acts of tyranny and even applaud them. When presented with an opportunity to rid their nations of those in government who would pursue the path of illegal war, the path of economic and military domination of the world, and who cooperate with the U.S. attempt to establish a world empire, the citizens of most countries speak with one voice to defeat these tyrants. In the U.S., they condone their illegal actions by overwhelmingly supporting them.

 

And Americans wonder why they’re hated. They wonder why there are people who are willing to dedicate their lives to their destruction. Let’s be realistic about this: No one is jealous about how free and great the U.S. is. This is the kind of thing that a mother tells some pathetic child to help him deal with being ostracized by other kids. Americans are hated because of their arrogance, their bloodlust, their desire to live vicariously through the criminal acts that their military visits upon the world--at least those parts of the world where people worship a different god than they worship or have different physical characteristics than they have.

 

So when we look at Americans, we need to realize that behind the wheel that SUV that sucks up the oil that America is building an empire to secure, chances are there is someone who applauds the deaths of tens of thousands of innocent Iraqis. Behind that white picket fence and well-manicured lawn in the suburbs, there is someone who takes great delight in the sickness and poverty brought about by the military and economic war their government has waged on the world. In that little rural church where the ignorant, inbred congregation hides behind a book that they haven’t the capacity to understand, they cheer as thousands of innocent people are rounded up for no reason other than their faith. Inside that office building filled with soldiers fighting the global war on the poor, they laugh as Iraqi prisoners are tortured and humiliated. Whenever there is a crowd of smug Americans, chances are that most of them would love nothing more than to see their corrupt military steamroll their way over all non-European populations of the world because they themselves are weak, uneducated, and painfully stupid and the only way they will ever achieve anything is through the actions of war criminals like Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, et al.

 

And just as Americans see the world in simplistic terms of "us" and "them," this is how Americans must be viewed. They all make it possible for Bush to complete his campaign to take over the world and so they are all guilty of war crimes and crimes against humanity, not just their leaders. They have given their stamp of approval to war criminals when given the chance to remove them from power. There is no doubt that what goes around comes around, so if there comes a time when Americans do reach out for the rest of the world’s assistance, the world must turn its back, close its doors, and make them live by the rules that they have chosen. They must be met with the same compassion that they have shown the rest of the world. We must show them the same mercy that they have shown for the Afghanis and Iraqis who were mercilessly mowed down by the tyrants that they support. For there is no hope for America other than to follow to its fateful conclusion the path of the sword by which they continue to live.

 

http://nyc.indymedia.org/feature/display/129971/index.php

[vava]

Just to lighten his depressing mood:

 

See the Bush you want here..

[Armen]

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/6370505/site/newsweek/

 

Here is an article by Kissinger about the international implications written prior to the outcome. Pre-emtion, Nuc. Prolifiration, North Korea, Iraq etc.

[Anonymouse]

Akh, who cares? As if Kerry would've made a big difference. Same piece of crap as far as I'm concerned. Just be happy you have a president. And don't worry, he's not running anything, let alone the country. I'm not upset about anything, except for the fact that Holland has made the American elections its own. Who cares?? Since when are we Americans?? Some obscure country in the middle of nowhere has elections and no one turns around to even see the name of the country. Some stupid bully of a nation with even more stupid people in it votes and we spend our WHOLE day and night clutched to the TV as if it's our own country and our own vote that's going to count. As long as I am not elligible to vote for that country, I could care less who wins or who loses. Get a life people! It's just a stupid election that's certainly not going to make a difference in MY life!

style_images/master/snapback.png

 

I am surprised that you and I actually see eye to eye on this issue. What people forget most of all is that Kerry was from the same establishment interests that Bush represented, and no less than the lobbying groups such as the Israeli Lobby. As the words of Butler Shaffer echo louder and louder, "For this year’s election, the political establishment – impresarios of this three-ring circus – has provided the electorate with yet another meaningless "choice": a Yale graduate, pro-war, pro-Patriot Act, pro-expansive state member of "Skull-and-Bones" George Bush, or a Yale graduate, pro-war, pro-Patriot Act, pro-expansive state member of "Skull-and-Bones" John Kerry. It’s like getting to choose between emphysema and lung cancer!"

 

I am happy of the election outcome, because I hope this translates into the mindless voters that voting is an exercise in futility. Even now teams of lawyers are dispatched into these States to determine the counts. These days, one is far better off with a law degree, than voter registration, since as a lawyer you actually get to decide who will be President.

 

Now, as far as why you should be interested in the kangaroo elections of this country, well it's because alot is riding on this country, and more notably, the darker times that lie ahead. The interlocking global economy depends heavily on this country, so once this country begins to wane, problems will begin to surface in other countries. This war on terrorism is a never ending war chasing a phantom enemy that doesn't exist. Terrorism has existed in all ages, even before the United States, so to have a "war" on terrorism is a fools game. Moreover, the biggest form of terror is war, which the United States has mastered itself in.

 

The myth of the "informed" citizen in his "civic duty" out to “make a difference” with his or her vote becomes less plausible as time goes on. It has become patently obvious that most people simply vote because of voter self-esteem as opposed to any real thoughtful reflection on "issues". It's all about "my guy" winning so long as "your guy" loses. Both the Republicats and the Demorats are guilty of this mentality. The Bush supporters, no matter how informed of the chicanery of this fool, engage in denial and persist on supporting him, because why? The alternative would be a victory for Kerry. The same bankrupt inanity came from the Democrats in their hallow slogan of "Anyone but Bush". As Butler Shaffer exclaimed, "How would you like to be married to or be employed by another whose stated purpose in selecting you was "anybody but Smith?"

 

Elections these days have more to do with social engineering than with any real "choices". The best advice I have gotten ( and it is cheap and easy ) and I will relay it to you folks here, is to stay home on election day.

[Armen]

Educated states voted more for Kerry.

This is the result of rational optimisation and specialization. Efficiency in division of work brings to reverse results for a democracy in the long term.

Edited November 3, 2004 by Armen

[Anonymouse]

Educated states voted more for Kerry.

This is the result of rational optimisation and specialization. Efficiency in division of work brings to reverse results for a democracy in the long term.

style_images/master/snapback.png

 

Not that it matters, America was erected as a representative Republic, not a democracy.

[DominO123]

Vava, did you see how Paul Martin deception was clear?

[DominO123]

Interesting prediction.

 

-----

 

Well, here's a prediction for Bush's next term.

A vast increase in global terrorism, total alienation of the Islamic world,

severe decrease in freedom in the West, and at least one major NBC attack on a

Western or US city.

 

Add to that a the breakup of Iraq and much of it going Islamic Fundamentalist,

with a Turkish invasion of the North.

 

Indecisive war with Iran, but without significant US ground troops (leading to

accelerated Iranian nuclear programs). Pakistan's Musharraf assassinated and the

nation going Islamic Fundie (more so than at present).

 

Problems with China as it becomes the new New Cold War bogeyman and scapegoat.

The US verges on bankruptcy with massive devaluation of the dollar. Oil prices

continue to rise due to ME instability. Recognition that peak oil production has

occurred earlier than expected due to such problems.

 

--

Dirk

 

The Consensus:-

The political party for the new millenium

http://www.theconsensus.org

[DominO123]

http://www.ftd.de/so/br/1098712191930.html

 

 

Did anyone see that??? The source is VERY CREDIBLE!!! A publicity about that should have been made after the durty publciity questioning Kerrys militarys past.

 

Michael Moore should have added this on the list of durty contacts Bush family had,

Edited November 4, 2004 by Fadix

[DominO123]

I wonder if Israel would change its position after learning this.

[DominO123]

I know that some Americans here may think that American elections are none of my business... But I do care for MY country Canada, and I WANT our neighboors that Bush has stolen BACK. Edited November 4, 2004 by Fadix

[Maral]

The Daily Mirror: A large pic of Bush with this caption: “How can 59,054,087 be so dumb!”

 

[Maral]

http://www.ftd.de/so/br/1098712191930.html

 

 

Did anyone see that??? The source is VERY CREDIBLE!!! A publicity about that should have been made after the durty publciity questioning Kerrys militarys past.

 

Michael Moore should have added this on the list of durty contacts Bush family had,

style_images/master/snapback.png

ummm it's in German????

[DominO123]

ummm it's in German????

style_images/master/snapback.png

 

It's a work from a specialist about some American participations in the Shoah, it documents Bushs grandfather factory near Auswitch and his NAZI symppathy and how his factory served the NAZI on the destructions of the prisoners of Auswitch, and how Bushs grandfather became rich of it.

[Azat]

Domino Moore is a total A-Hole. He is the biggest reason why bush is the president.

 

I also dont like this smart people vote for Kerry and dumb people for Bush thing. It is time for the Democratic party to get their act together. They are already talking that next time Hillery Clinton or Barack Obama will run. I guarantee you and am willing to put a $100,000 wager that we will lose once again. I will vote for a woman or an African American but it takes 50+% and there is just no way in this country they can win.

 

Voters said that what mattered most to them was "Morals". Democrats have to show them with the help of the media that a president cannot bring moral values to this country. Parents need to take some responsibilities for the animals they they are raising. The Democratic party needs to realize that if they act like a republican(Not much difference between them these days) people tend to just vote for the real thing and not the person who pretends to be the real thing(by real thing I mean republican). Why pretend to be like republicans. This party had a great history and they need to show and remind people how they have year after year stood up for them and fought for them.

 

I dont know. I guess I am really upset in general, but I think it is not the people but my party that needs to be educated and changed.

[DominO123]

Azat, I'm not seing this like Dumb people voting for the republican and intelligent people for Kerry. I see this as a traitorous act from Americans part against their allies and the West.

 

Here in Canada we are really concerned, the prime minister has asked his ministers and deputies to not make anti-American comments... we have all those disputes like the wood problem that were all created under Bush government. I feel that the Americans have disconnected from the rest of the Western civilisation and reverting into religious fanatism. All those stupid things like "gay marriage" have made a difference. What should have made a differences is the desastrous American economy, job loss, or turning the back to the allies. I don't feel Americans being my neighboors now, I feel closer to the Europeans.

[Sip]

I think the election results clearly show that dumb people tend to vote for Bush. No one can have a majority vote without having the dumb vote since we all know the dumb really outnumber the smart.

 

By the way, great posts Azat and TB

[skhara]

My question has been this:

Why are we so mad, or even surprised? The majority of America are these right wing, spitak, Bush lovers. Seriously, we're call minorities for a reason. And in a "democracy" the majority wins. We need to focus more on local things, build up what we can and deal with the other stuff later. Because this presidential gig is a screw job. Seriously...

style_images/master/snapback.png

 

Couldnt've said it better!

 

 

Just to lighten his depressing mood:

 

See the Bush you want here..

style_images/master/snapback.png

 

LOL!

http://homepage.mac.com/krousen/Bush%20site/images/hairBald.jpg

http://homepage.mac.com/krousen/Bush%20site/images/mouthGoatee.jpg

Edited November 4, 2004 by skhara

[ED]

Shkara, you can get a warning for posting a freshly circumcised penis picture

[Maral]

Shkara, you can get a warning   for posting a freshly circumcised penis picture

style_images/master/snapback.png

 

That's PRESIDENT Freshly Circumcised Penis to you!

[gurgen]

I'm sorry but how can you vote for a person like Bush? Even if the Democratic Party doesn't have it's act together, isn't it evident to any human being with common sense that Bush is a thug? Doesn't it count that he was the first president in I don't know how many years to lose jobs and doesn't it count that he started a needless war? Apparently it doesn't. God bless America.

 

I didn't expect much, but the Americans have really disappointed me today.

[Stormig]

I don't get it. How can a sensationalist like Moore be held "accountable" for ANY political outcome?

As for the Nazi connection of Bush's family - if Israel were so concerned, they'd have taken whatever decisions for his ties with the oil-rich Arab elite.

[Stormig]

Must say, though... A goatie does Bush become...