Friday, June 29, 2007
Even more chillingly, we have been given a taste of their activist right-wing interpretation of freedom of speech. Last week two cases illustrated the court's idea that free speech is more about power and money than actual freedom.
The court has ruled that "issue advocacy" ads that were formerly restricted prior to elections are now protected free speech. In theory, I would agree this would be fair. But practically speaking, we see where this will take us. Now such ads are to be allowed to bombard our living rooms with Big Money interests and corporate agendas. Sure, unions and other interests will be allowed air their views as well, but what it comes down to is whoever has the most money will be flooding the media with their message. We know who that will be. Already corporate lobbying and money shuffling has influenced legislation far removed from democracy's intent. From now on, corporate money will be used to not only buy the politicians favor, but to directly influence voters with the powerful propaganda tools of corporate media. The grossly disproportionate imbalance of wealth will be leveraged to benefit the Republican and corporate interests. Thanks to Reagan's repealing of the Fairness Doctrine and removing any requirement for corporate media's obligation to fairness or balance, Big Business wins again. The public's interest will be smothered.
The other free speech case involves the student in Alaska who was suspended from school for displaying a banner reading, "Bong Hits 4 Jesus." This was not done on school property, mind you. The Supremes just couldn't tolerate it. They reversed the lower courts decision that this was protected expression. One might even ask what the banner's intent or meaning was. Justice John Paul Stevens wrote in his dissent: "To the extent the court independently finds that 'Bong Hits 4 Jesus' objectively amounts to the advocacy of illegal drug use -- in other words, that it can most reasonably be interpreted as such -- that conclusion practically refutes itself. This is a nonsense message, not advocacy."
Chief Justice Roberts knew precisely what it meant so he condemned it, saying, "The 'special characteristics of the school environment' . . . and the governmental interest in stopping student drug abuse -- reflected in the policies of Congress and myriad school boards, including [that of Juneau-Douglas High School] -- allow schools to restrict student expression that they reasonably regard as promoting illegal drug use."
Oh, well, a good conservative Federalist Society guy like Roberts should know. Isn't it interesting to then see his wisdom looking a lot like hypocrisy when he said in the case of the issue advocacy ads, “Where the First Amendment is implicated,” the chief justice said, “the tie goes to the speaker, not the censor.”
That would probably have applied to the kid in Alaska as well, if his banner had not been worded with the politically incorrect, "Bong Hits 4 Jesus." I'm sure his free speech would still be intact if his message had, instead, been, "Bomb Hits 4 Jesus."
Monday, June 25, 2007
Supporting The Troops
Last Wednesday Harvard Medical School professor Stephanie J. Woolhandler presented her findings on veterans' health care to the House Committee on Veterans Affairs. The ranks of uninsured veterans have increased by about 290,000 since the compassionate conservative "War President" was installed by the conservatives of the activist Supreme Court. That would make a total of around 1.8 million vets without health coverage. They have joined their 45 million other fellow countrymen who wonder how they will get medical treatment.
Ever watchful to protect Americans from the right to health care, Republican Representative Cliff Stearns of Florida said to Dr. Woolhandler, "The difficulty would be that because of your desire for universal health care, that could influence how you felt about veterans."
Chet Edwards is the Democratic Representative from Bush's home district in Texas. He said the House has sent Bush a $64.7 billion spending bill to fund Veterans Affairs. It includes a $6 billion increase for vets health care. This is $3.8 billion more than Bush had requested. In the Democrats' weekly radio address on Saturday Edwards said, "For weeks, the White House budget office threatened to veto this bill, because it was above their request. Fortunately, the president finally backed down on his threat to this historic veterans' bill, but only after it was clear that Congress would override a veto."
Last week the Veterans Affairs spending bill passed the House 409-2.
None of the architects of the Iraq War have seen combat. When they had the opportunity to serve in Vietnam Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Perle, and Feith all had "other priorities". The wealthiest Americans will keep their tax cuts. They are also mostly Republicans. That is clearly one of the priorities of this White House.
We can bet that when it comes to veterans' medical care this administration of chickenhawks would prefer to say, "Mission accomplished", and continue to stay the course.
Saturday, June 23, 2007
The Constitution empowers the Vice President with NOTHING, other than assuming the Presidency when required, and voting to break a tie in the Senate. Period.
His Excellency the Dark Lord has excluded himself from an executive order signed by his own alleged boss. Bush directed that all of the executive branch report classified information and documents to an office of the National Archives, the Information Security Oversight Office. Turns out, Dick's legal pit bull David Addington or some other brown-shirt operative has announced the Office of the Vice-President is not really part of the executive branch and thus not bound by the directive.
If this is really true, how then, can Cheney get away with shielding his dirty secrets and skullduggery behind "executive privilege"? Why do we accept this contradictory absurdity? I guess it's just because he says so. Just like it's ok for him to disclose the covert identity of the wife of the man who proclaimed Cheney's war-mongering was built on lies. Yup, he's the guy to trust with national secrets, all right.
One would suppose that this arrogance would be extreme, even for him. Not for this guy. He is so vile he takes it a step further. He has the audacity to propose abolishing the Information Security Oversight Office! And why not? He has almost succeeded in abolishing the Constitution.
Everything the man does is a violation against the decency this country once had. He has become a rogue tyrannical power onto himself. His treachery has become our national shame.
This is especially true when we see little or no principles or courage in the opposition party, and no sense of conscience or respect for the law in the ruling party.
Tuesday, June 19, 2007
The Runaway Train That Hit Scooter Libby
By Richard Cohen
Washington Post Tuesday, June 19, 2007
The attorney general called a meeting. He assembled all the U.S. attorneys in the Great Hall of the Justice Department and told them, in essence, that their chief responsibility was to decide whom not to prosecute. They should limit themselves to cases "in which the offense is the most flagrant, the public harm the greatest" and play no role in political vendettas. The speaker, of course, was not the lamentable Alberto Gonzales but the estimable Robert H. Jackson, who went on to the Supreme Court. This was 1940, but Jackson could have been talking to Patrick J. Fitzgerald. Whatever the case, the special counsel was not listening.
With the sentencing of I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, Fitzgerald has apparently finished his work, which was, not to put too fine a point on it, to make a mountain out of a molehill. At the urging of the liberal press (especially the New York Times), he was appointed to look into a run-of-the-mill leak and wound up prosecuting not the leaker -- Richard Armitag of the State Department -- but Libby, convicted in the end of lying. This is not an entirely trivial matter since government officials should not lie to grand juries, but neither should they be called to account for practicing the dark art of politics. As with sex or real estate, it is often best to keep the lights off.
The upshot was a train wreck -- mile after mile of shame, infamy, embarrassment and occasional farce, all of it described in the forthcoming "Off the Record," a vigorously written account of what went wrong, by Norman Pearlstine, Time Inc.'s former editor in chief. The special counsel used the immense power of the government to jail Judith Miller and to compel other journalists, including Time's Matt Cooper, to suspend their various and sacred vows of silence just so they could, understandably, avoid jail. The press held itself up to mockery, wantonly promising confidentiality, anonymity -- what's the diff, anyway? -- and virtual life after death to anyone with a piece of gossip to peddle. Much heroic braying turned into cries for mercy as the government bore down. As any prosecutor knows -- and Martha Stewart can attest -- white-collar types tend to have a morbid fear of jail.
As Fitzgerald worked his wonders, threatening jail and going after government gossips with splendid pluck, many opponents of the Iraq war cheered. They thought -- if "thought" can be used in this context -- that if the thread was pulled on who had leaked the identity of Valerie Plame to Robert D. Novak, the effort to snooker an entire nation into war would unravel and this would show . . . who knows? Something. For some odd reason, the same people who were so appalled about government snooping, the USA Patriot Act and other such threats to civil liberties cheered as the special prosecutor weed-whacked the press, jailed a reporter and now will send a previously obscure government official to prison for 30 months.
This is precisely the sort of investigation that Jackson was warning about. It would not have been conducted if, say, the Iraq war had ended with 300 deaths and the mission had really been accomplished. An unpopular war produced the popular cry for scalps and, in Libby's case, the additional demand that he express contrition -- a vestigial Stalinist-era yearning for abasement. No one has yet explained, though, how Libby can express contrition and still appeal his conviction. No matter. Antiwar sanctimony excuses the inexplicable.
Accountability is one thing. By all means, let Congress investigate and conduct oversight hearings with relish and abandon. But a prosecution is a different matter. It entails the government at its most coercive -- a power so immense and sometimes so secretive that it poses much more of a threat to civil liberties, including freedom of the press, than anything in the interstices of the scary Patriot Act. The mere arrival of a form letter from the IRS will give any sane person a touch of angina.
I don't expect George Bush to appreciate this. He is the privileged son of a privileged son, and he fears nothing except, probably, doubt. But the rest of us ought to consider what Fitzgerald has wrought and whether we are better off for his efforts. I have come to hate the war and I cannot approve of lying under oath -- not by Scooter, not by Bill Clinton, not by anybody. But the underlying crime is absent, the sentence is excessive and the investigation should not have been conducted in the first place. This is a mess. Should Libby be pardoned? Maybe. Should his sentence be commuted? Definitely.
Dave Dubya's reply:
To: Richard Cohen
Re: Poor Scooter
So, poor Scooter was persecuted because the war didn't go well and the "liberal" New York Times was out to get him. (The same paper that "liberally" parroted the neocon's pre-war propaganda.) And if the war was won with 300 U.S. deaths nobody would challenge the lies that killed them.
An intelligence agent was exposed and the CIA requested an investigation. How do you know "the underlying crime is absent"? A crime may have been committed but was difficult to prove given the complexities of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act. It sure looks like you agree that dissent should be crushed without examination because no light should be cast on those "practicing the dark art of politics."
Say, isn't politics all about the public's interest?
Maybe we shouldn't bother with "a run-of-the-mill leak" and just trust the folks in the White House. And keep passing their "gossip."
Well done, my little media lap dog. Arf, Arf.
Monday, June 18, 2007
For some time now people have have been telling me to start a blog. I now find it easier to do just that, rather than continue with any explanations or excuses for not setting up this little forum. As an introduction to this new "Free Speech Zone" I'd like to begin by offering some of my older rants from the "lunatic fringe voice in the wilderness". - D
Dave Dubya Announces His Prediction for 2004
Sent: Saturday, April 10, 2004
Subject: Re: George Dubya's Second Term
The election is Bush’s to steal again. Until all too recently, the corporate media propaganda machinery has given him the unquestioning support only found in a dictator's dream. It's only after fellow Republicans like Paul O'Neill and Richard Clarke emerge to display some conscience that the "Free Press" allows some truth to trickle to the masses. The Watchdogs of Democracy are still tethered to their 9-11 leashes. They still dutifully report the horrors in Iraq as the "War on Terror." And, say, isn't that Kerry guy way to liberal for the Republican States of America?
Oops, there I go again! As our Attorney General advises, "Americans need to watch what they say." If I don't stop these little rants, I may find myself residing in Camp Ashcroft.
God bless America and Hail Victory!
On To Victory!
With each passing day, we see more of the vast ugly world of unintended consequences our glorious Fuhrer is leading us into. I remember those heady early days of our invasion; watching our tanks rolling with unstoppable momentum across the desert and into the cities. Was I the only person who saw these images on TV with a gripping sense of historical deja vu? It was very much like watching archival footage of the victorious German panzers charging across the Russian steppes. What magnificent propaganda video! Woe to the German in 1941 and to the American in 2003 who voiced a sense of impending disaster. The minister of propaganda Joseph Goebbels would denounce them as Communist Jews. The parrot patriots at Fox News propaganda would denounce them as liberal traitors. It's a good thing, to love history. You get to see it repeated again and again.
- Dave Dubya
"The National Government will regard it as its first and foremost duty to revive in the nation the spirit of unity and cooperation. It will preserve and defend those basic principles on which our nation has been built. It regards Christianity as the foundation of our national morality, and the family as the basis of national life." - Adolph Hitler "My New World Order," Proclamation to the German Nation, Berlin, February 1, 1933
"Naturally the common people don't want war...but after all it is the leaders of a country who determine the policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in every country." -Hermann Goring
"When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag, carrying a cross."- Sinclair Lewis (1935)
The first thing I noticed when slowing down for the red light was the Superman shield painted on the tailgate of a large pick-up in front of me. A closer look revealed the stickers on his back window. There was, for my information, "Bush-Cheney '04" and ”Don't tailgate me or I'll flick a booger onto your windshield." Good advice and fair warning. Clearly somebody who takes no crap from anyone. The other sticker on his window (Isn't it illegal to cover your back window with stickers?) showed the world that we have a truly independent free-thinker here. It read, "Union Member For Bush."
It was to be my privilege to follow this patriotic modern American motorist through the intersection. Along with that privilege, of course, was the responsibility to keep a respectful distance behind this rolling power of pride. The light turned green. The great truck revved and roared, and I was left to navigate through the cloud of exhaust that was belching from his two pipes.
Less than a block away from this blast of acceleration, our hero suddenly hits his brakes and makes a sudden left turn. I can only guess his turn signal must not have been working. As I watch him turn, from a safe, non-tailgating distance, I see the full length image of a flying Superman on the side of his truck. "Wow!" I said to myself, "Thanks to that warning on his window, I may now live to tell others. Always be mindful of the stickers on good right-wing American vehicles. It is for our own safety.
Why Do They Vote For Them?
A good friend who has traveled the world extensively told us that he is often asked if Americans are stupid. Why did people vote for George W. Bush twice? Why do people vote exclusively Republican? These questions nag me constantly. I've rarely heard one of them say because it is the lesser of two evils. That perspective is usually from the people who vote for Democrats or third party candidates.
Voters’ perceptions about the two major parties can certainly be said to have been formed by the corporate news media. After 9/11 every news outlet seemed to be patriotically whipping the country into war fever. The Bushies were cultivating the anger and fear that terrorism fertilizes. So frightened of appearing liberal to the war frenzied public, the media unquestioningly parroted the propaganda of the neo-con war mongers. And let us not forget all of those scary “terror alerts” the news media used to flash at us. Remember how often they seemed to pop up during the weeks running up to the election? Remember any alerts AFTER the election? Me neither. I’m sure it’s just coincidence. Say, is fear-mongering anything like terrorizing? The corporate media succeeded in strongly suggesting to the voters that the Republicans were far better at dealing with national security than the Democrats. Never mind that the largest terror attack on our country happened on Bush’s watch.
How astounding, that the very same corporate media that they manipulated into selling us an unprovoked war is still being portrayed as liberal. It looks like journalism itself has been now painted as liberalism. This does suggest an interesting question. If investigating and reporting facts is liberalism, would that mean that disseminating misinformation and propaganda is conservatism? What would we find if we compared the factual record and accuracy of, say, any Fox News show and any PBS public affairs program?
The corporate media don’t mind what they’re being labeled. They always profit hugely from those in power. The rewards are rich, indeed. Unlimited consolidation, free use of public-owned broadcast frequencies, privileged access to political power, and vast treasures of campaign finance cash that flow into their pockets every election year. Sounds like a conservative’s dream business to me.
In the war’s first years, it was typically Democrats that were most demonized through the “liberal media.” Ever notice that? We have learned so much from TV and talk radio. We have been taught all about those flip-flopping wafflers and out of touch angry stiffs.
Why do we even tolerate all those unpatriotic, America-hating liberals? Their faces were pictured on the TV screen with Saddam and Bin Laden. Sometimes faces of Viet Nam veterans were put there by non-veteran Republicans. They had "other priorities" than to serve in a war they fervently supported.
Republican voters, particularly Bush enthusiasts, seem to see things in black and white. No thought or reflection seems to be required. They see no need to compromise with the other half of the country. And, apparently, no checks and balances are needed in their idealized one-party government. Whatever the Great Leader says is worthy of their blind faith. President Bush would never lie, and he always knows best. After all, God speaks to him, right? Bush said, “God told me to strike Saddam”. I guess that would make him exempt from our laws and our Constitution. And I am also guessing that he would be excused from those Thou shalt not lie, steal, and kill commandments. After all, he is our “War President” who is only following God’s specific instructions. What if he told us God wants him to be our “Benevolent and Wise Dictator for Life”? Isn’t it fascinating that both Bush and Bin Laden say they are following God’s will? Either some serious lies are at work, or God is amused at watching his self righteous “prophets” slaughter uncounted thousands.
Another question I want to ask a Bush voter is who the heck is going to pay for the holy war our Great Leader started in Iraq? $251 billion allocated by Congress as of March 31st 2006. Projections indicate a trillion of someone’s tax dollars will be flushed down that civil war factory our blundering has created. This is not counting health care costs for tens of thousands of wounded and disabled vets. Never mind the lies and falsehoods and deceptions that were used to get us over there. What about the reality of actual costs? The wealthiest citizens of our nation are paying less taxes and gaining more income and the rest of are struggling to stay even or slipping behind. I used to hear a lot of these pro-war types deride those “tax and spend” Democrats. Not a peep about the “borrow and spend even more” Republicans. I bet they still hate Clinton for his fiscal responsibility. Or was it for something else they hated him? Oh, I remember, it was that lie he told us. Don’t you just hate it when a President lies?
Could they have voted for their interests with corporate-written tort "reform" law, or Exxon-Mobil energy policy? Is it their view that the credit card industry should decide what bankruptcy law should be? And that the Medicare drug provisions should be written by pharmaceutical corporations? How about war profiteers deciding to take us to war? “Halliburton” Cheney’s dire fear-mongering and inciting us to war was mysteriously ignored as a conflict of interest. Are Christian values served by making life harder for people facing bankruptcy due to medical conditions? Was it the will of God-fearing church goers to protect corporations from accountability when their negligence or calculated indifference harms the public? That's what we got. And there's plenty more where that came from. This is what the Bush Cartel is doing with their "mandate". It is what they are in business for. Themselves and their big money pals. We will see this type of corporatocracy at work many times before there is even a glimpse of whatever it was these people voted for.
I've heard a few say their reasons had something to do with guns, gays, God, abortion and taxes. Those issues are not going away. Even in a republican-controlled dictatorship. Those five wedges will always be needed by the right wing to leverage voters. That is, until voters are no longer required.
Rush To Judgment
I listened to Rush the Self-Righteous on my car radio for about a 2 minute hate today, being the tolerant and open-minded person I am. Then I heard him spout about the America-hating "Retard, environmental wacko left". The sad fact that so many listeners are infected by this pompous bully’s anger speaks volumes about the state of our nation. This is truly fascist-style hate mongering. When combined with the Fox News propaganda, this mixture is truly poisonous to freedom and democracy. With our one party rule, unprovoked war of aggression, and a corporate proto-fascist Administration operating free from checks and balances, America is really begging the rest of the world to hate us. The "Blame America" crowd so reviled by the Right may be our final vestige of freedom.
The President must lie every day in order to support the foundation of deceit by which he has led us from day one. And he has his following of true believers. Apart from the privileged few whose pockets are lined by the wealth of his war machine, those are the naive "sheeple" that are blind to history, who hold to his words with wild-eyed faith unto the apocalypse. It is so much easier to trust the self-proclaimed born-again President, than to ask questions and engage in independent political thought. This rabid right wing fever is destroying our country, oops, I mean Homeland.
George Bush will be remembered by history as the same type of leader as the likes of Jim Jones, David Koresh, and the other messianic false prophets who claim God's counsel. That is, if there will be any recorded history that survives the "memory hole" Big Brother files it in. Again and again this cult of personality leadership only results in the deaths of innocents. The core believers of this cult are happy to let the Leader eliminate the 4th and 5th Amendments to the Bill of Rights. I'll bet they really don't know or care about the rest of the Constitution either. Except, of course, the 2nd Amendment. Remember, Bush's first lie as president was spoken with his hand on the Bible, swearing to protect and defend the Constitution.
The message of the corporatocracy is clear. Fear and hate the countries and people we identify as enemies of Free Market Fundamentalsim. Pay no attention to what we do and who we do it for. And most important of all, watch your televisions, buy from our sponsors, and enjoy fast, easy credit. And sit quietly and relax, all you deserving obedient Americans. God Bless America. And support the troops.
You can't argue with success. Afghanistan is now a "secure" puppet democracy, with a growing Taliban resurgence. Iraq is a blooming flower of Bush's Green Zone democracy, with more insurgent and ethnic violence than we can imagine. Iran has become the clear winner with Shiite Iraq now in its influence. That makes it their turn to be our enemy. We’re at war with Iran. We’ve always been at war with Iran. Since before 1984.
It is the duty of patriots to expose and oppose these despotic scoundrels.
WMD’s I Found In The War In Iraq
1. Wasn’t More Democracy
2. War-mongering Manipulative Dictator
3. Wayward Moral Direction
4. Wise Men Disregarded
5. Wicked Men’s Deceptions
6. Wrong-headed Media Distortions
7. Wasted Military Deployment
8. Way More Destruction
9. Wisdom Malevolently Dismissed
10. What Mission Defined?
11. White Men’s Domination
12. Wayward Myopic Democrats
13. W’s Moral Depravity
14. Where Money Disappears
15. Why Mothers Despair
16. Where Madness Descends
17. Witless Malicious Decider
18. Woeful Murderous Debacle
19. Widespread Meaningless Deaths
20. We Meet Defeat
Is This Any Way To Run A Democracy?
We regularly hear the Cheney-Bush propaganda machinery talk about life, liberty and democracy as if these were their blessings to bestow, when, in fact, no leadership of this country has destroyed life, liberty and democracy as extensively as they have.
The American people really are the most ill-informed of all the "developed" nations. What can you expect when the ruling radical right constantly equates journalism and higher education with their demonized definition of liberalism? This has always been the tool of choice when power suppresses dissent and promotes war. Like with almost all wars, the majority needs to be manipulated into supporting the ruling oligarchy's agenda. This is where religion comes into play. The heads of state all put on their masks of religiosity to lull their malleable populace into belief in their righteousness. The ruling elite's Machiavellian pretense of religious piety is the first and oldest trick in the book. Authoritarians like Cheney and the Shrub have the shtick down.
Once they've pulled that ruse off, it's now down to anger, hate, and fear mongering. The war machine is fueled by the corporate media's eager willingness to profit by transmitting their propaganda. After manipulating the public's primal emotions (and Americans' are an emotional lot) they forge that seething pliable mixture of anxiety and disinformation with patriotism, nationalism, and finally militarism. This is readily accomplished thanks to nationalism's inherent corrupting idea that "we" are better than "them".
The xenophobic indoctrination is now accomplished. Combine that with the scapegoating and suppression of science, gays, academics, intelligentsia, politically incorrect drug users, immigrants, Muslims, and liberals in general. And there you have it. Yes, it's Fascism.
Japan and Germany lost World War II. Fascism survived. It prospered by worming into our own military industrial complex, and then, through interfacing with global corporatism, came into more power than the world has ever imagined. Eisenhower saw the threat. His farewell address would be the first lesson in civics' and poli-sci courses if we were actually a free democracy. Even when the "opposition" party is in power, little is changed. Perhaps the goose-stepping is slowed a bit. Both parties are bought by the corporatocracy. The corporate elite have their lock on power. That leaves the under-represented middle class and poor to be the alienated majority in our political world. Is this any way to run a Democracy? This country desperately needs publicly financed elections. And we need more political parties and we need proportional representation. These are my suggestions.
There's hope, but the window is closing.
Jack Files Dave: Part 1
If you watched CNN tonight, (November 2nd 2006) you may have seen the "Viewer E-Mail" segment on the Jack Cafferty File. I was passing through the TV room when I heard Jack pose the question," If the Republicans lose the election Tuesday, what should happen to President Bush?"
Coaxed on by Wolf Blitzer and Paula Zahn, Jack read six of the e-mailed responses to the question. The last, and maybe least, of the replies was probably from some idiot drinking a little too much merlot. Dave wrote, "He should be "legally" water-boarded until he can recite the Bill of Rights and define habeas corpus."
We'll see him at Gitmo
Jack Files Dave: Part 2
If you watched CNN tonight, (December 13th 2006) you may have seen the "Viewer E-Mail" segment on the Jack Cafferty File. I was passing through the TV room when I heard Jack pose the question, "How will history Judge President Bush?"
Alright. It's been a while since I last answered Jack. So I guess it’s time to put in my two cents worth again. I was putting a tape in the VCR in case Jack read my email when I thought, “Could Jack actually read BOTH e-mails I submitted in the last 6 weeks? I wonder what makes me such a smart-ass to think that would even happen.” Turns out, mine was the fifth one he read. Dave wrote, "If Americans don't judge Bush for his crimes soon, history will judge us all, along with him later."
Dave Dubya Announces His Prediction For 2008
(April 12, 2007)
Our next president will be Fred Thompson.
Fred Thompson has it wrapped up already. As long as his lymphoma stays in remission, he has all the qualifications.
#1. He's Southern. Murakins don't vote for Yankee presidents. What more proof do you need than the 2004 election? The White House is held hostage by Southerners and Republicans. I'm beginning to regret the North won the Civil War. This is why I'm a Northern Secessionist and wish the Confederacy would just go away and leave us alone. I'm even willing to return the surrender papers General Lee signed. Call me what you want, but the South has been dragging this country back towards the 19th century ever since. (My apologies to my literate and thoughtful Southern friends. You guys must really stand out down there. I'm from a small town in the big woods and I know what it's like being around yokels, rednecks and hillbillies who can't see the world beyond their next six-pack. With all my years of wielding rod and gun, I was close to being one myself.)
#2. He's an actor. Murakins will buy into any act. Remember the 1980 election?
#3. He looks the part. That's enough for simple Murakins who don't want to be bothered with issues.
#4. His name is Anglo-Murakin
#5. He's not black
#6. He's not a woman
#7. What else matters?