Archive for Bush

“Mission Accomplished!”

Posted in Uncategorized with tags , , , on December 15, 2008 by unvarnishedtruth

shoetoss

Funny, they predicted the Iraqis would be throwing rose pedals at our feet, not size 10s in our faces.

Once again, Ted nails it…

Posted in Uncategorized with tags , , , , , , , on November 22, 2008 by unvarnishedtruth

president-elect

I was going to write about why the Obama victory, good as it was, wasn’t the victory, wasn’t the mandate, wasn’t the “change,” it’s being hyped as being.  Why it was scary that 48% of the people still voted for more of the same thing, despite the fact that this time the same thing showed up with a parody of a statesman (statesperson) in lipstick next to him.  Why it was amazing that Obama’s popular vote win was only by a margin of three percent.  I was going to get around to all that…

Then Ted Rall did it for me.  So being I’m in a lazy mood this month, I’ll just turn the mike over to him.  Come on up, Ted, and talk to the stupid folks who think “change” is in the air…

And when you’re done reading Ted, take a gander at this great cartoon:

A snapshot of twenty-five years (more of less) of Repiglican deregulation and Reagan-Bush “pro-business” philosophy…

Posted in Uncategorized with tags , , , , , , , on November 22, 2008 by unvarnishedtruth

nuclearexplosion1.

He’s Number One…

Posted in Uncategorized with tags , , , , , , , , , on November 3, 2008 by unvarnishedtruth

"I'm the tops, you liberal pussies."

The next time some intellectually-superior liberal tells you what a dummy President Bush is, you can look them straight in the eye and say a poll of 109 historians concluded that G.W.B. ranked “Number 1.”

That’s a lot of people agreeing on something.  Every try to get 109 people to agree on even what should have won Best Picture?  It’s not easy.

Even those who disagreed rated him Number 2.  That’s still quite extraordinary.  You know the saying, “We’re Number Two, But We Try Harder.”  How hard did George Bush, and the men with their hands up his ass, Dick Cheney and Karl Rove, try?

Their accomplishments are remarkable.  In government growth, they made LBJ’s Great Society look puny, at least when one compares expenditures.  In government transparency, they made Hitler, Goering, and Goebbels look like bumbling amateurs.

All I’m saying is, have a little respect for accomplishment.  Sure September 11th helped a lot, but if you were aware of what was going on deep in the bowels of government before then, you’d know they were planning this stuff previously.  9-11 just gave them the blank check they’d been looking for.

I can just imagine the three wise men—W, Dick and Turd Blossom—sitting there with a bottle of Jack Daniels and cigars saying, “Damn, it’s a good thing those hijackers rammed those planes into the towers.  They made our jobs so easy.”

After that, it was an inexorable road to ruin.  Osama bin Laden surely never envisioned he’d do so much to crumble us.  And not have to pay any sort of price.

Did W, D and TB envision they wouldn’t have to catch him, or even make much of an effort, and still retain the hearts of the American sheeple?  (I don’t say “hearts and minds,” because the American sheeple are pretty mindless.  Whether they demonstrated this or not in 2000 is open to question, but it’s beyond dispute that they demonstrated it in 2004.)

Truly, it’s a remarkable achievement.  Mr. President, you will indeed go to the top of the history books.  Just not in the chapter you wanted.

Read about it here.

In other news, Americans still think Repiglicans are better at handling the economy…

Posted in Uncategorized with tags , , , , , , on October 3, 2008 by unvarnishedtruth

Crisis Hits Main Street as Employers Cut More Jobs

By Shobhana Chandra and Rich Miller

Oct. 3 (Bloomberg) — U.S. payrolls plunged in September, signaling the economy may be heading for its worst recession in at least a quarter century as the 13-month-old credit crisis on Wall Street finally hits home on Main Street.

Read the rest here.

.

The damned liberal media…

Posted in Uncategorized with tags , , , , , , , on September 30, 2008 by unvarnishedtruth

Let’s reach back into the saddlebag and take another look at an article from back in 2005 that shows you just how “liberal” the mainstream media is:

Questions of Character

By PAUL KRUGMAN

New York Times, October 14, 2005

George W. Bush, I once wrote, “values loyalty above expertise” and may have “a preference for advisers whose personal fortunes are almost entirely bound up with his own.” And he likes to surround himself with “obsequious courtiers.”

Lots of people are saying things like that these days. But those quotes are from a column published on Nov. 19, 2000.

I don’t believe that I’m any better than the average person at judging other people’s character. I got it right because I said those things in the context of a discussion of Mr. Bush’s choice of economic advisers, a subject in which I do have some expertise.

But many people in the news media do claim, at least implicitly, to be experts at discerning character – and their judgments play a large, sometimes decisive role in our political life. The 2000 election would have ended in a chad-proof victory for Al Gore if many reporters hadn’t taken a dislike to Mr. Gore, while portraying Mr. Bush as an honest, likable guy. The 2004 election was largely decided by the image of Mr. Bush as a strong, effective leader.

So it’s important to ask why those judgments are often so wrong.

Right now, with the Bush administration in meltdown on multiple issues, we’re hearing a lot about President Bush’s personal failings. But what happened to the commanding figure of yore, the heroic leader in the war on terror? The answer, of course, is that the commanding figure never existed: Mr. Bush is the same man he always was. All the character flaws that are now fodder for late-night humor were fully visible, for those willing to see them, during the 2000 campaign.

And President Bush the great leader is far from the only fictional character, bearing no resemblance to the real man, created by media images.

Read the speeches Howard Dean gave before the Iraq war, and compare them with Colin Powell’s pro-war presentation to the U.N. Knowing what we know now, it’s clear that one man was judicious and realistic, while the other was spinning crazy conspiracy theories. But somehow their labels got switched in the way they were presented to the public by the news media.

Why does this happen? A large part of the answer is that the news business places great weight on “up close and personal” interviews with important people, largely because they’re hard to get but also because they play well with the public. But such interviews are rarely revealing. The fact is that most people – myself included – are pretty bad at using personal impressions to judge character. Psychologists find, for example, that most people do little better than chance in distinguishing liars from truth-tellers.

More broadly, the big problem with political reporting based on character portraits is that there are no rules, no way for a reporter to be proved wrong. If a reporter tells you about the steely resolve of a politician who turns out to be ineffectual and unwilling to make hard choices, you’ve been misled, but not in a way that requires a formal correction.

And that makes it all too easy for coverage to be shaped by what reporters feel they can safely say, rather than what they actually think or know. Now that Mr. Bush’s approval ratings are in the 30’s, we’re hearing about his coldness and bad temper, about how aides are afraid to tell him bad news. Does anyone think that journalists have only just discovered these personal characteristics?

Let’s be frank: the Bush administration has made brilliant use of journalistic careerism. Those who wrote puff pieces about Mr. Bush and those around him have been rewarded with career-boosting access. Those who raised questions about his character found themselves under personal attack from the administration’s proxies. (Yes, I’m speaking in part from experience.) Only now, with Mr. Bush in desperate trouble, has the structure of rewards shifted.

So what’s the answer? Journalists who are better at judging character? Unfortunately, that’s not a practical plan. After all, who judges their judgment?

What we really need is political journalism based less on perceptions of personalities and more on actual facts. Schadenfreude aside, we should not be happy that stories about Mr. Bush’s boldness have given way to stories analyzing his facial tics. Think, instead, about how different the world would be today if, during the 2000 campaign, reporting had focused on the candidates’ fiscal policies instead of their wardrobes.

Chinese food for thought…

Posted in Uncategorized with tags , , , , , , , , on September 24, 2008 by unvarnishedtruth

Normally I’d consider this line of thinking the fantasy of some paranoid loon, the same sort who thinks five separate, highly-trained assassins opened fire from the bushes, a manhole cover, the railroad tracks, a helicopter and the highway overpass to nail Kennedy in Dallas.  But with the current administration what it is, and with so many of the darkest doings about Iraq turned out to be true, this article perhaps isn’t the stretch it first seems.  I for one have been puzzled why Hank Paulson has been so adamant that we pass this Wall Street bailout NOW NOW NOW.  It would give Congress absolutely no oversight on how the money is spent and there could be no prosecution for malfeasance.  Do you really want the Bush administration to have all that power?

Read the article here.

In case the link goes away I’m also reproducing the piece below.  It’s from the website Democratic Underground:

Coalition of the Bribed Part II: Is the $700 Billion To Buy China’s Consent for a US-Iran War?

Posted by McCamy Taylor in General Discussion
Tue Sep 23rd 2008, 05:24 PM
Part I: China Owns Us and Our Debt China has invested heavily in our bad debt.http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/sfgate…

China is deeply invested in U.S. government debt; as of just over a year ago, “China owned $376 billion of debt issued by U.S. government agencies, principally Fannie and Freddie.

No problem, you say? China is still the world’s cash cow, since

estimated to total some $1.8 trillion, China’s foreign-exchange reserves, “are the biggest in the world.”

Not so fast. China is having some financial problems of its own.

From an Aug. 20, 2008 article called “Chinese Stocks Still in Trouble.” Worldwide inflation and economic slowdown have effected even China’s markets which have experienced inflation, decreased growth and earnings. If the U.S. markets continue to get worse, China’s market are going to get worse. The individual members of the Bush administration and the NeoCons will still be rich if they allow this country to plunge into a Depression (by now, there money is all invested in other countries and in real estate in other countries), but if they let the U.S. turn into the Titanic, we take China with us.

http://www.usnews.com/blogs/the-ticker/200…

Up until now, the only two things standing in the way of a Wolfowitz/NeoCon engineered first strike against Iran (with Israel dropping the bomb) have been Russia and China, both economic partners of that oil rich country.

II. The “Economic Meltdown” Is Starting to Remind Me Iraq’s WMDs, with Henry Paulson Playing Colin Powell

The media circus surrounding the so called Bailout for the Economic Meltdown are exactly like the media circus which the administration staged six years ago when it told lies about Saddam’s WMDs that were going to fry us in our beds, with thirty minutes warning. Look at the language. “Meltdown”. That is what nuclear reactors do. “Crisis.” As in Go ahead and panic! . The administration insists that we must do something now about the results of predatory lending and bad mortgage debt, even though, as Eliot Spitzer warned us last Valentine’s Day in a Washington Post editorial, for the last five years, the Bush administration has been actively preventing the statesfrom interfering whenever mortgage houses engage in predatory lending. Obama is accused of being unpatriotic if he does not support the bailout, which is the only way to preserve civilization as we know it. Doesn’t he understand the terra-ists—-excuse me, the creditors are knocking at the door? Isn’t he scared ?

(Ignore the fact that John McCain is against the bailout. His objections are all right wing, conservative ideological, and therefore, he is allowed to have them, since presumably ideology trumps common sense in this country. Anyone who questions the double standard in how the two candidates are treated on this subject is accused of interjecting “politics” into this terrible, awful crisis.)

Since I would not want to do anything as reprehensible as interject politics into this very serious issue of how we are fixing to spend almost a trillion dollars of us money with no Congressional or taxpayer oversight , I will return to the issue at hand. The administration is in full Be afraid. Be very afraid. Be so afraid you pee your pants!mode. And they are in a rush. They don’t want us to look too closely at what it is that we are about to sign.

The devil doesn’t want you to look to closely, either, when you are about to sign away your soul.

I smell a rat. What is the hurry? Does it have something to do with the clock ticking out on the Bush-Cheney administration? What was the number one priority of these guys before they came into office? Hint: Project for a New American Century

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_for_t…

In relation to the Persian Gulf, citing particularly Iraq and Iran, Rebuilding America’s Defenses states that “while the unresolved conflict in Iraq provides the immediate justification , the need for a substantial American force presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein” and “Over the long term, Iran may well prove as large a threat to U.S. interests in the Gulf as Iraq has. And even should U.S.-Iranian relations improve, retaining forward-based forces in the region would still be an essential element in U.S. security strategy given the longstanding American interests in the region.”

Well, hell! These guys were planning to invade Iran all along! Times running out for the oil company execs that are the puppet masters for the NeoCons. You know, people like David Rockefeller, who would be running Standard Oil if they had not forced them to pretend to break it up into several baby oil companies. They got away with invading and occupying Iraq (for 100 years they hope). They only have three months left to invade Iran.

As I said before, there are only two things standing in their way. Not Congress. Bush figures he can do whatever he wants and Congress will roll over, afraid to look “weak on terror.” The American people can not stop Israel from launching a first strike, and if Iran strikes back, enough Americans will want to protect Israel that the administration should be able to sell the war to Congress. The military may hem and haw, but they will go along with the American people. Iran may not strike back, but hey, that is one of the risks they have to take.

The two things standing in their way up until now have been Russia___and they think they took care of the Russian problem with the staged war in Georgia this summer, in which John McCain proclaimed “We are all Georgians!” and the NeoCons tried to jump start the Cold War. When Israel attacks the brand new nuclear power plant in Iran, the one which will be full of Russian technical advisers, the U.S. government will say (in effect) Sucks to be Russians . However, the U.S. can not have such a cavalier attitude towards China, which owns us .

So, I wonder if hidden in that $700 billion no strings attached and you can not question me about it later or sue me bailout is a plan to buy off China.

III. How the U.S. Bought the Coalition of the Bribed for the Iraq Invasion

Everyone needs to read this scholarly, well researched but also well written paper called

‘Coalition of the Bribed?’ US Economic Linkage and the Iraq War Coalition. Full text is available online here.

http://www.allacademic.com//meta/p_mla_apa…

The author, Dr. Randall E. Newnham analyzes the different strategies which the Bush administration used to bribe nations into supporting the Iraq War in 2003. A surprising number of countries got direct cash payouts. The larger the countries, the bigger the bribes. The section on economic aid starts on page nine. For example:

Columbia, $574.6 million; Afghanistan, $550 million; Turkey, $255.6 million; Georgia,$89.9 million; the Philippines, $89.7 million; Ethiopia, $58.9 million; and Uzbekistan, $57.5 million.

These were for “little countries”. The U.S. was willing to go much higher for the participation of important players, like Turkey.

In last 2002 and early 2003, as the invasion of Iraq loomed, US planners
desperately wanted to force Saddam into a two front war. In addition to the main attack
from the south, they hoped to send a full division into Iraq from the north. However,
Turkey refused to permit this. The war was deeply unpopular there, and in addition, the
US troops would be assisting the Kurds of northern Iraq, a group distrusted by the Turks.
To overcome this resistance Washington offered an aid package of epic scope. Figures as high as $26 billion were mentioned, an amount substantially larger than the entire annual US ODA budget.

Israel got a billion in aid, Egypt and Jordan each got almost half a billion just for not raising a big stink.

None of these countries had anywhere near the political, economic or military clout of China.

(Note: the article also contains analysis of other tools that were used including special trade favors, U.S. military bases, reconstruction contracts and other economic bribes that were employed to create the impression that we had allies in our colonial venture in Iraq. Particularly ironic was the ploy of promising countries that their old Iraq debts would be paid after the invasion, something we now know the U.S. occupiers had no intention of doing, since this would put the foreign oil companies at risk of international lawsuit by Saddam’s old debtors in places like the United States.)

This article is a great read. Highly recommended.

IV. How to Buy China’s Acquiescence for a U.S War With Iran With Half a Trillion Dollars

This is real simple. Give your Treasury Secretary close to a trillion dollars to spend however he wants settling the massive debts that have been incurred by the U.S. mortgage and investment industry from its greedy, illegal and deceptive practices. Have him tell China “You want to get taken care of or you want me to declare that my first priority is taking care of domestic investors?”

If I were China, I would look the other way when Israel drops the bombs on the new nuclear reactor in Iran, even if it is packed with a thousand innocent Russian techs.

Think about it. We have all said that Bush would never invade Iran….why? What country have we all counted upon to put its foot down on him if he ever decides to act upon the other big NeoCon plan?

China