Thursday, July 22, 2004

W hy George Bush is going to win again

sorry, but the glass is half empty

you guys arent going to like this, but it has to be said

john kerry is going to lose to george bush in 2004and if you feel differently youre welcome to bet a case of guinness otherwise

some of you have...

chances are, if youre reading this blog, youre thinking, theres no way bush can win againi mean, the guys fucked everything up.  everything.  and lied about it.  how can the american people be so stupid to re-elect this power hungry neocon?

in short, Faux Newselections arent decided based on facts, or ideology.  people dont vote their moral conscience, or vote based on their economic standing.  people vote on emotion. 

to this day, ronald reagan is revered as one of the best presidents of all time.  the man was completely incompetent, and towards the end certifiably senile.  yet he could wave the flag and give the communists the finger like no other.  and so he is remembered as great. 

bush lacks reagan's charisma, but you dont need to be brad pitt to out-charisma al gore or john kerry.  simply put, george bush has too many american flags on his side to lose.  the fact that john kerry is a decorated vietnam war veteran and bush is a de-facto draft dodger is irrelevent.  he kills brown skinned people, and thats all that matters.

america, at its base, is a racist nation.  we only did away with dejure segregation 40 years ago.  thats only 20 years better than south africa.  after 911, ameica wanted to kill towelheads.  and bush obliged.  most americans thought iraq had something to do with 911 because they blame all arabs for 911.  most americans dont care whether iraq had WMD, or beat women, or posed a threat, because they just wanted to see an arab nation punished.  if it werent for the new york times, we probably would have never heard of abu ghirab.

which brings me to the real power behind bush's re-election campaign.  Fox News.  america is a segregated nation.  segregated between liberals and conservatives like never before.  if youre reading this blog, youre most likely a liberal.  liberals read blogs like this, hang out with other liberals, read the new york times, and are convinced kerry will win because their liberal friends outnumber their conservative friends.  conservatives are the same way, in that they only hang out with other conservatives, get their information from the same news sources, and even listen to the same music.  not that there's anything wrong with kenny chesney... its groupthink on a massive scale.  nobodys mind has been changed since the last election, and the trenches have just been dug deeper.  the bush supporters still outnumber everyone else. 

there is a war going on right now, an information war between the major news outlets, to determine the future of america.  fox news fully recognizes this, and is actively trying to get george bush re elected.  abc, cbs, and all the rest dont realize theyre in a war, and are still trying to be truly "fair and balanced".  Fox is going to win, because only fox understands that a battle is being waged and how high the stakes are.

bush is going to win.  john kerry is a french speaking liberal from massachusetts, who has the official endorsement of al qaeda.  george bush is the candidate for patriots, for true americans, for christians, and for people who like seeing brown skinned heathens die.  end of story.,2933,126452,00.html


Blogger Peter Parker said...

I still take you up on yur bet. A case of guiness if W wins, and bar credit at cafe fifth when Kerry does.

And those trenches have been dug deeper on our side too. Geroge Bush has mobilized the left wing like no one else could. We'll see what that ammounts to in 99 days.

July 23, 2004 at 6:50 AM  
Blogger Peter Parker said...

Also, this is exactly what they thought in India last election. The BJP was sure tehy were going to win, they spouted hateful rhetoric and made fun of the pakis while improving general relations with the bastard dictator Musharaff. They were so sure that they called teh elections to be 5 months earlier. the polls have them a double digit lead. They lost to Sonia Ghandi and her party of the Left. They won becuase of a massive groundswell of support from the poor and exploited rural people. We can do the same.

July 23, 2004 at 7:00 AM  
Blogger Ron Green said...

Dr Gonzo,
This is the only post I have read on this blog by you personally, but may be my last. I have the spot book marked and have commented a couple of times on posts. This note is more to your fellow bloggers on this site; you are not an asset to the postings, at least by this post. The language choice is completely unnecessary to convey your message and reflects an overall ignorance by the author. It reflects poorly on the publishing entity, in this case, The Unfortunate Result of Literacy and Awareness. I will not infer to restrict your freedom of the press, but I will choose not to read it. At this moment I probably represent a large portion of your readership. If I can come to this site and get the liberal perspective, for I always like to consider the other side of the coin, I will. I tend to have a conservative perspective on issues.
If it (this site) is to be filled with profanity, extremely poor syntax, (I find this typically reflects the amount of thought that went into the writing as a whole), there are tons of sites like that all over the internet, I will move along.
The language in this post is not compelling to a dialog, it is just extreme rhetoric of us vs. them. (CSPAN is good to watch to observe the us vs. them in all its glory. They do refrain from cussing and the syntax is much better though.) The issue you seem to detest most in your post is the one you are representing the most.
I am looking for a site that voices the liberal side of issues, that can allow me to view the "other side of the coin". This allows for a balanced perspective on the issues by both parties.

July 23, 2004 at 11:04 AM  
Blogger Kevin said...

First of all I am a conservative and I just had to look up who Kenny Chesney to make sure he was a singer...I had no clue.

Second, in regard to Iraq, I first direct you to this very flimsy exhibit of evidence from my own blog ( Its a transcript from the West Wing - an episode that aired on Bravo the other day which had the most "liberal" character on the show, Toby, passionately defending President Bartlett's foreign policy, which it seems includes a plan to overthrow Iraq for "harbouring terrorists and trying to develop nuclear weapons." Hmm, I know its just a hunch, but something tells me if this was Al Gore instead of George Bush in the White House many of you would see the wisdom in dealing with this terrorist problem - which is largely an Arab terrorist problem. I don't agree with all of the president's strategies or tactics in this war, but I will not deny and will not stand by when others deny that there is a problem of people of Arab ethniciy and Islamic religious ties trying to murder Americans and other westerners (Madrid) by conducting terrorist attacks on western targets.

This is not about killing "brown skinned people," it is about stopping terrorists - the word designated to describe people who have attempted or succeeded in conducting the mass murder of civilians - of who a large percentage, including 100% of the hijackers on Sept. 11th, 2001, are of Arab and Middle Eastern origin. As Pat directed me to the other day, there was a plot by a right-wing group of white Americans who were amassing weapons for an attack on an undisclosed target... but presumably civilians. They are terrorists. This would be strong evidence to suggest that just targeting Arabs as terrorists could make us miss the people who are actually plotting attacks on the US. However, when targeting people on airlines who may be terrorists, it may be proper to profile for terrorists along racial lines. I know of no evidence that anyone but persons of Arab origin have plotted to hijack an American airliner and use it as a missile for a suicide attack. The 19 hijackers, Moussaoui (presumably), Richard Reid - all Arab men, all willing to die during their attack because they believe that Allah will reward them. Knowing the feelings on religion of at least one of you, I would think that we can all understand the dangers of letting religion get in the way of your way of thinking. The right-wing group is presumably religious, probably Christian, and perhaps they were gearing up to attack abortion clinics. However, Christianity does not condone suicide, nor does any radical sect thereof. Islam does not condone this either, however a radical sect of Islam does - which led to the suicide attacks on Sept. 11th. That being said, I don't expect right-wing Christians to hijack planes and drive them into buildings. The only known group that is willing to do this is the same group that has already done so on multiple occasions. Targeting them could stop an attack. Of course, as my reading so far of the 9/11 report has shown, there are tremendous improvements needed to security in airports. The profiling of Arabs, ideally someday, could be 95% discreet (improved surveillence decection, etc). Ultimately, my point is airlines shouldn't face fines for having more than two Arabs in secondary questioning at a time (, and that bringing this war to the Middle East - ideally not in the exact way that has been done so far - is the prudent thing to do.

We are not a racist nation, we are an awakened nation. This war doesn't call for the steps taken against the Japanese in WWII, but that doesn't mean we need to blind outselves to the fact that our enemy (largely) looks alike, acts alike, and prays alike. If and when John Kerry loses to George Bush, it will be because Kerry has not presented a plan to deal with the threat against America. To John Kerry, Sept. 11th is a distant memory, where the only inconvenience to him was having to evacuate the Capitol Building. For George Bush, Sept. 11th was a realization that the presidency wasn't going to be a cushy job. He visited the smoldering remains, stood over dead bodies, and had to console a nation. This isn't a war for oil, this isn't a war for big contracts, but a war based on intelligence that Iraq was a threat. Was it the foremost threat in the world, perhaps not. But to everyone who says this war is for oil, do you deny that this man was profoundly affected by this event, and is doing what he sees as best within the responsibility that he has? I do not, I am not that pessimistic. I would be doing some things much differently than the president, but I would be acting selflessly, just as I believe this administration acts 99% of the time, and just as anyone else would who remembers that video from Sept. 11th. Video, by the way, which we need to watch again and again and again.

July 23, 2004 at 11:29 AM  
Blogger Dr. Gonzo said...

The language choice is completely necessary.
In fact, I regret not using stronger words than I did.

Sometimes, proper words and fancy language are not enough to emphasize a point.

Take Vietnam for example. One could say that the Vietnam War was fought on questionable grounds, in a less than honorable manner, with tragic consequences.

Thousands of American lives were lost, and millions of Vietnamese were killed.

To use pretty language, and proper blog protocol doesn’t do justice to their sacrifice.

Perhaps if, early in the war, enough public figures had just stood up and said, “the Vietnam War is completely fucked up,” some of those lives might have been saved.

Perhaps if, right now, enough public figures just stand up and say, “the situation in Iraq is completely fucked up,” lives can be saved.

The point of my post was not to invite dialog, but to call attention to the damage polarization has done to this country. We have lost our ability to make informed decisions. George Bush and John Kerry both have some very good ideas. But because of today’s partisan atmosphere, we are forced to choose one camp. We have lost our ability to compromise, to choose the best ideas from both sides.

You say you carry a conservative slant.

I respect that, and in a future article I plan on detailing how bush has completely hijacked the conservative philosophy. I will not infer to restrict your freedom of choice, but I invite you to read it.

July 23, 2004 at 11:39 AM  
Blogger Dr. Gonzo said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

July 23, 2004 at 11:42 AM  
Blogger Ron Green said...

Thank you for the invitation, but a mute point on that particular topic. The labeling of Republicans as conservative and Democrats as liberal is a loose fit at best. Extremely over simplified.
My problem with the Republican party is they are not applying consecrative principles on many issues. I.e. conservation. If conservation is not conservative I don’t know what is?
I was not sold on invading Iraq and voiced by opinion to my elected officials. They obviously were not overly impressed. I have not seen evidence to this date that changes that opinion. My hope is someone knows something more than has been released to the media and to the public.
I have decided after reading a little and talking to many people, we, as a general populous, don know "jack shit" about the Middle East. (That was added for your entertainment) Most seem to prefer it that way, too. With such ignorance; how can we expect intelligence to show in our voting choices? Well I guess as you said, we cant, we vote on emotion. An informed voter is the best weapon we have for this country.
To that end I am currently working thru a history course on US, Middle East relations from World War I to 9/11. How in Gods/Allahs name did we get here? Liberal / Conservative, Republican / Democrat, take a visit, leave a comment, I will begin postings on this topic Monday, July 26th.
Final Note:
"call attention to the damage polarization has done to this country. We have lost our ability to make informed decisions. George Bush and John Kerry both have some very good ideas. But because of today’s partisan atmosphere, we are forced to choose one camp. We have lost our ability to compromise, to choose the best ideas from both sides."
Now that is a great statement. Here is a topic for you:
How do we change the polarization of the political parties?

July 23, 2004 at 2:10 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

kevin the kkk is an extreme christian group. everyone in the kkk is christian! and they have done and do horrible acts of violence! and if we didn't have DISQUSTING policies in the middle east then maybe we could stop breeding more "brown skinned" terrorists - let me just tell you we have WAY more enemies in the middle east since we started attacking innocent Iraqi civilians and that is only going to hurt us.

July 24, 2004 at 6:46 AM  
Blogger Kevin said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

July 24, 2004 at 9:55 PM  
Blogger Kevin said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

July 24, 2004 at 10:00 PM  
Blogger Kevin said...

Anonymous you clearly missed my point, which was Christian groups have not, to my knowledge, used suicide as a method of attack. I don't think anyone needs to be lectured on the KKK here, their evil is clear. With that said, I would be very surprised if a KKK group hijacked an airplane and drove it into a building. I would not be surprised if a group of Arabs did so, and nor would you. I would be much more comfortable on an airplane sitting next to a Grand Wizard than a Syrian who just completed flight school.

Also, we aren't breeding terrorists and its not our job to try to understand them and change them. Our job is to defeat them, something Thomas Friedman said very eloquently when I had the pleasure to hear him lecture at my school this spring.

July 25, 2004 at 9:19 AM  
Blogger eigenwill said...

Of course we can't persuade the terrorists. But we must, however, persuade the millions of Muslims who see the US as supportive of authoritarian regimes, opposed to national aspirations in the Occupied Territories, etc. This will require some changes in US foreign policy -- otherwise the anger will be channeled into support for Islamist movements.

July 25, 2004 at 3:51 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hello sexy girls | sexy webcam videos | live chat xanax cheap xanax buy xanax online phentermine buy phentermine online phentermine cheap tramadol buy tramadol online tramadol cheap levaquin buy levaquin online levaquin cheap lnorvasc buy sex online
babe online casino online casino online lroulette online blackjack online lpoker online phentermine online xanax xanax buy phentermine phentermine buy phentermine cheap | live chat
for fun

January 28, 2007 at 4:36 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

live chat Good job.....thanks.....Must be a reason to find friends in your area! Try this page....

February 10, 2007 at 11:20 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hi all!. Use this search engine for best result: BD search Find all you need in your area!
for fun

February 15, 2007 at 2:59 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hello. Use this search engine for best result: BDsearch Find all you need in your area!

February 21, 2007 at 8:58 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It's a little sex for health...
Only for adults!
Persons by whom it was not executed 18 years, the entrance is strictly prohibited!
It costs(stands) spent time, besides free-of-charge registration(To become a member) and numerous frank video(Only for members).
Welcome to Adult Porno & Sex.
Here pages devoted to health are published.
It is the large search robot, which can help to receive this or that information and as to get this or that goods!
Tramadol Xanax Phentermine Skelaxin Viagra and all that is necessary.

March 9, 2007 at 7:51 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This is good site to spent time on. allergy Read a useful article about tramadol tramadol

January 31, 2012 at 12:04 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home