|
Saturday, 30 October 2004
You Can Run But You Can't HideHey George Bush! OK, let me just say this first, last week 20,000 people filed for unemployment which shows the previous B.S. about employment has been false, but the news media skipped right over that story, as the "American Terrorist" video was displayed. I personally have a few suspicions that the white house set that up to scare people into believing they needed anti-terrorist help from the white house, although, he didn't sound serious to me. I think the following was Osama's reaction to let us know that the statements made by the fake terrorist didn't effect him at all, because they conflicted. Osama Bin Ladin, Usama Bin Ladin, Osama Bin Laden, I don't know his name anymore I have seen it written all of these ways, although the picture of the wall outside their building in Michael Moores movie 'Fahrenheit 9/11' said Bin Ladin, which is different from what most national news papers wrote. Recently, there was a public statement made by Osama Bin Ladin, let me tell you my take on what he said. First, let me say that we all should have read his first statement on December 26th, 2001, but I think the media suppressed it somewhat. Now, what he said recently on his newest video was: "Your security is not in the hands of Kerry or Bush or al Qaeda," bin Laden said in the video. "Your security is in your own hands. Any nation that does not attack us will not be attacked." Which makes me wonder, if we aren't attacking them, who are we attacking? Bin Laden said he decided to attack the twin towers of the World Trade Center in 1982 after the invasion of Lebanon by Israel, which he claimed was backed by the U.S. Navy.Which is news to me, I don't remember hearing about this from the white house. "And as I was looking at those towers that were destroyed in Lebanon, it occurred to me that we have to punish the transgressor with the same," he said, "and that we had to destroy the towers in America, so that they taste what we tasted and they stop killing our women and children." Quote from CNN.com: "In the al Qaeda leader's video, bin Laden wore a gold robe and white cloak and said the attacks were the result of U.S. foreign policy in Arab lands, referring specifically to Lebanon and the Palestinians, and later mentions both Bush and Kerry." This was like saying, "Hey, I'm fine, you haven't come close to capturing or even seeing me, so I am telling you what to do, and I am NOT negotiating."
Posted by azmildman_1 at 10:08 PM MDT
|
Post Comment |
Permalink
Updated: Sunday, 31 October 2004 12:14 AM MDT
George Bush, Watch Your Dad's Lips!I would like to once again point out that George Bush, Sr. and George Bush, Jr. are two completely different people. Yesterday's news reports show us George Bush assuring America that there WILL be a draft. Then he says there WON'T be a draft. He isn't flip-flopping, he just forgets what his handlers told him to say. I imagine that is going to be a kind of crucial thing for foreign diplomacy. His dad went to foreign countries and hob-knobbed with foreigh dignitaries and rulers. If you can imagine a summit meeting where he says one thing, and as the people he is meeting with, who don't trust us now, anyway, see him change his position when he realises he just pissed them off. His interpreter would have to be told, "You will have to edit what he says, he can't speak English very well." It is hard to believe the amount of kids who are already well versed in Republican Rhetoric that has nothing to do with reality. There is a teenager who has written a book on How College Liberalizes Students. This is what I see. It was written in Lawrence Britt's "Fourteen Defining Characteristics of Fascism". Anyone who ever heard the banter of the "Young Republicans" in the sixties should be scared. Brainwashed banter at that time included the "duck and cover" method of protecting our children from an atomic blast. These people told us that if one ducked down quickly on the floor (Isn't this assuming that one has time and was notified soon enough that the bomb was going to hit?) and kneeled on all fours, covering one's head that this method of covering up would save him/her from a blast, that would irradiate (turn into a glowing ash) the wall next to the child. Oh, Yeah! I believe that one. MSNBC, yesterday, October 19, 2004 reported: "...WASHINGTON - The White House on Tuesday asked Congress to reject an attempt by Republican leaders in the House to place in an intelligence reorganization bill some anti-illegal immigration measures that Democrats say they won't support." Once again, we are seeing what George Bush wants isn't the same as what most Republicans want to use to protect us from threats. He evidently doesn't think ahead and ask himself questions like, "Could a terrorist pass himself off as an illegal alien / Mexican in order to gain entrance to the United States?" Why does he block his own party's legislation? Obviously, this is again his one-sighted attempt to block any legislation that might conflict with his own plans that he derived to try to pander to the Hispanic population for political reasons. I am now convinced that George Bush couldn't find Osama Bin Laden if the guy was sitting in his lap. Monday, 25 October 2004
380 Tons of ExplosivesRemember the part about how George Bush never makes mistakes? He is living through watching his own words become the self-destructing force in his career. His dad, of course can see nothing wrong in anything his son does. Unbelievable, I used to respect George Bush, Sr. He should realize that his son, George, is becoming the Billy Carter of the Bush family. Jeb Bush follows his brother around, their relatives are in charge of reports and most of the programming at Fox news. Fox News is still calling themselves fair and balanced. I just watched a debate in which the moderator, who should be impartial, and two other conservatives treated the one Democrat on the show with condescending remarks while cutting Senator Kerry down using fictitious scenarios. I imagine they did this in order to act like they are being political satirists. Although their grammar school level humor isn't humorous. I like to laugh, but all they do is insult, since they haven't got a point or a defensable position. The Republicans and Neocon spin doctors on the news are trying to downplay how important the 380 tons are when one pound can blow up airplane. It isn't important because 400 Tons were destroyed? As usual, when it has to do with Kerry, including an innocent remark or for that matter, any remark, he is being treasonous, but when George Bush ignores everything from the FBI report entitled, "Osama Bin Ladin planning to attack the United States", that detailed the use of planes, as weapons to this obvious blunder with the explosives, they are unimportant to pay attention to. How the hell does that work? Let me lay it out for you in detail. When president after president tries to create more jobs than were lost, and George Bush doesn't, that doesn't seem to matter to the uninformed. When George Bush does anything wrong, they act like everything is OK, and anyone who doesn't agree is Un-American. Then, when he tries to allow more Mexicans than Americans support on employment, that is OK. When George Bush thinks outsourcing American jobs is a good thing, they think that is OK. When George Bush messes with overtime for more than 650,000 American workers and causes dissent and problems with unions in the United States, that is OK. What does he have to do to be NOT OK? With Bill Clinton, it was a blowjob, they acted if it was a matter of national security, but, George Bush can attack another country under false circumstances and after learning the intelligence was wrong, then act like no mistakes were made, IT ISN'T OK! I am still wondering how come he ever got away with the suspicious circumstances for his election in 2000. Please vote for a return to reason in the U.S. Thanks.
Conservative Christians/Evangelical ChristiansIs either presidential candidate someone the Christian Church can say is an example of how Christians live? Let's look at the ads put out by either campaign. The Republicans attack Kerry's personality, although none of the things they say are provable. The Democrats attack George Bush based on his past record. One has been proven to be lying, one is public record. Do you think that ALL Christians are for excommunication of gay people all over the country? Up to you. You decide. The Republicans try to advertise in Churches across the United States. Is that acceptable? You decide. I would like to ask you a simple question that comedian Bill Mahr made about the "church and state" issue, "When did the Republican Party buy the Christian Church?" On our Christian Music Stations we get conservative propaganda that has nothing to do with Christianity. According to the bible a holy war is waged after the people decide. There are too many other variable alterior motives to the war in Iraq. Do we have to stay there? I guess so. We are already there and we would leave in disgrace, like we did in Viet Nam. Should we have gone there? That's a different question. President Bush, Sr. chose not to go. He gave specific reasons why it would never work. We can't play God and change the whole world to make them live up to our standards. If we learned anthing by the Golden Rule, from Jesus's statement to "...Let those among you without sin cast the first stone...", from his replacing the guard's ear that one of Jesus own followers cut off as that same guard was marching Jesus to the place where they would execute him by crucifying him, Jesus chose to walk his own path of forgiveness and "keeping his own house in order" instead of using resentment for others' transgressions to act angrily towards his own murderers. As most of you may have noticed, Senator Kerry never mentions his own spiritual or religious affiliations and feelings. There is a reason why there is a division between Church and State. Most people realize that if there isn't, it is not a knock on the church's influence on politics, it is a matter of politician’s influence on Religion. When that starts happening, we are going to see a whole new nation, based on the government running the Church. Is it our job to play God, either here in the United States or in foreign countries in order to get even with the guys who, like George Bush says, "These are the people who tried to kill my daddy"? You decide. The latest ads put out by the Bush campaign is worse than any of the 527 ads have been so far. It is completely off the issues and pure "Scare Tactic" because George Bush can't run on his record. Then George Bush tries using us Christians by professing to be led by us, as a moral shield to hide behind, in administrating a "Messianic Complex". From what I have seen, George Bush has made up his own mind about what he wants to do based on his own self-will, then tries to get us to support it. The scary thing is, it works. But, then again, Hitler was able to get the German people to love and follow him. I, in no way wish to compare Hitler to George Bush, Hitler had more class and Hitler covered up his agenda on knowledgeable sounding, well spoken speeches.
Posted by azmildman_1 at 12:01 AM MDT
|
Post Comment |
Permalink
Updated: Sunday, 12 July 2009 4:42 PM MDT Tuesday, 19 October 2004
What Part of NO Did You NOT Understand?Republicans seem to think repeating the same lies, that have already been proven to be lies, somehow makes them truths. "If enough of us repeat this, it will make it so." No, that is called being delusional. In mass, being delusional doesn't make it alright, it's still delusional. Now they are relying on the wonderful personality of Dick Cheney to save them (if he can keep from having heart failure during the debate), along with the same part he has been the worst on. He, like George Bush, still talks about Saddam Hussein as if he attacked us on 9/11. In a recent speech, Cheney repeatedly stated that the attack of Saddam Hussein on 9/11 was a great blow to our country. While talking about Iraq during the debate, George Bush said, "We were attacked by the enemy." That is delusional. Also, I just heard another concern for Black Americans. African American men who are concerned that they already have a higher rate of unemployment better think about the fact that the Bush administration has already encouraged outsourcing jobs, tried to ruin unions, and abolished overtime for several hundred thousand Americans. Does anyone believe that George Bush, with at least 3 supreme court justices who are ready to retire, and knowing that the next president is going to appoint their replacements, is going to appoint justices that favor Affirmative Action? With Affirmative action coming up for reapproval, with the supreme court appointments drawing near, and the election coming close for a choice between a president who has been bad for employment and someone who has a record of trying to favor middle class workers, who do you think you should vote for? The Rich Guy Favoring President or the Middle Class Favoring President? I have one request for the spin doctors in this whole deal. It is just this, "Pick a lane!" I can't believe one week they are demanding that polls showing George Bush in the lead are like the ten commandments, engraved in stone, no doubt a sure easy win (Would the words "slam dunk" be rubbing it in too hard?) and the following week, after the debates when George Bush looked like the angry little weenie that he is, and the polls shifted radically in Kerry's favor, they are saying that polls don't really show anything that matters. Saddam Hussein was a crazy man, he was a sick person, the world is better off with him in jail. BUT, he still didn't attack us. So, since Saddam was so easy to arrest, the job of taking him out of power is over. So, why are we asking what the plan is? We should be asking for a new plan. The old one isn't working and "staying the course" in the wrong direction isn't helping. First, I believe the "Axis of Evil" is pretty much Rhetoric. For a poker player, the whole idea to reading your opponent is to read his body language. If you look at the debate and understand that the player who leans forward to speak to you is unsure of what he is doing. The one who leans away is sure of himself. The player who bets while looking you in the eye is trying to convince you of something he is not sure of, the player who throws his money in the pot and doesn't bother to look at you holds the strong hand and is sure of himself. Today, finally, someone connected to the white house is admitting they made two major mistakes. They didn't send enough troops and didn't contain the violence back then. No Kidding, but what are we going to do to correct it? More of the same. On another subject, I want to talk to you about advertising. I don't just mean the 527 ads that George Bush says he doesn't like, even though he and Karl Rove thrive on using them to further Bush's career. Think about this; that is advertising and the same type of people who sell you cigarettes, alcohol, and other common items which are legal in the U.S. despite the harm they do people, are selling you a president also. I studied advertising a long time ago, but I remember the principles behind it. Take any item and create a market, convince people that they need this item, and sell, sell, sell. If you can get a customer hooked on most things for 2 weeks, they are hooked. There is an old question that is asked by people who have been able to admit they were hooked on something not good for them. The question is, "How do you create a habit?" The answer is, "Repeat an act." If you say, hear, or do anything enough times it is engrained in you from now on. So, I bring you to Advertising 101.
If you repeat the same thing over and over again, some people will believe
it. To say that the 527 ads are bad but then not admit the rest of the
advertising is hogwash is being naiive. I don't mean the 'front on attack'
type advertising. I mean the sideways advertising. When Rush Limbaugh
writes books advertising Republican ideas, he is advertising. When Sean
Hannity spends time explaining the right point of view in his opinion (I
want to add that his opinion somehow mysteriously sounds like it was
written by the same people Karl Rove uses to advertise his candidate. Do
you think that is a coincidence?), then he is advertising. When George Bush
sells a CD entitled "Faith" (which I will get to later), it is advertising. Now, here is the lesson: One more thought. Let me say one thing about the word faith. Faith is an interesting word which I have studied because of my own personal quest for spiritual growth. Faith, as it is defined in the dictionary, means "...Belief in something without the need of proof." When you are talking about a spiritual deity who is flawless and not possessing human qualities, frailties, and weaknesses it is possible to believe without need of proof. But; when you are talking about a reason to to to war, when you are talking about a reason to vote for a leader who has made mistakes and doesn't admit them, or for that matter, when you are talking about any type of human being, asking one to have faith is not belief without need of proof, it is asking you to believe "despite" proof to the contrary.
Posted by azmildman_1 at 10:26 AM MDT
|
Post Comment |
Permalink
Updated: Tuesday, 19 October 2004 10:37 AM MDT Sunday, 17 October 2004
EVEN MORE SPIN!Ralph Nader's campaign has been supported by the Republican Party. His whole party is being supported by crooks who haven't seen that registering to vote as "Mickey Mouse, John Kerry, etc." and registering under fictitious names with fictitious addresses is illegal as well as just plain WRONG. He insists he is running a separate platform, although some of the things he says are merely re-worded stances that John Kerry has already made. He is splitting the ticket on purpose and if the misguided persons who are supporting his actions in the name of "doing things our way" would look closely at who is supporting him (RNC party funded). Now, the whole voter registration disenfranchisement thing is off and running. Florida was already trying to use the ficticious "suspected felons" list again and after a lawsuit by the news media was proven to have listed mostly democrats who have never been arrested. Not only have the Republicans been trying to do that again, they also got caught actually hiring people who would throw away anyone's registration if they registered as a democrat. How low will they go now? The fact that extra stem cell research MIGHT have an impact on quadrapalegics is enough for anyone who asks themselves conscieniably, "Is it OK that stem cells are not being harvested from a fetus that was going to be discarded, anyway, so some neocon can act like he did the right thing, even though he is lying?" Someone who realises that these fetuses are going to be discarded anyway has to answer, whether a right to life advocate or not, "NO!" The same people who are trying to twist the idea of whether or not this was an issue, but once again, I have the question, "Why did you wait until an election year to "ACT" like you give a damn?" Recently John Edwards made the statement that people like Christopher Reeves, (The actor who died after being stricken quadrapalegic after a riding accident.) would eventually be able to get up and walk if Kerry wins the presidency and removes the restrictions that George Bush has put on Stem Cell Research. Dick Cheney said that the statement was made that "Everyone in a wheelchair would get up and walk if John Kerry is elected." Once again Dick Cheney, who actually runs the White House more than his President, lied to make another photo op moment that will haunt him later on. This is another smoke screen. The fact that President Bush has restricted stem cell research, which is finishing off all hope of a significant amount of avenues for research is what was in question and continuing to STAY THE COURSE on a wrong turn is not even a smart thought. The whole issue for President Bush is based around "fetuses" being a living human being surrounding the "right to life" and moralistic catholic vote he is trying to pander to. If President Bush really cared about human life and considered it a sacred thing he wouldn't have had more death sentences carried out under his watch as Governor than ANY OTHER GOVERNOR of the entire history of the state of Texas. Think about what that means. We are talking about TEXAS, where the judges are allowed to sentence "suspects" that are convicted to sentences as long as "two hundred years and a day". With the recent controversy over the amount of people who were wrongly accused of a murder and executed before the law could give them their right to appeal, this shows a complete lack of understanding that one might be the "W" word (wrong). In Texas, if one is accused and convicted of murdering someone and the prosecution can prove three credible eyewitnesses, then, that person is sent straight to the head of the line on the "waiting to be executed" list. They don't wait for years on death row, they don't wait in line, they are excuted immediately. As the comedian Ron White joked, "Most states are trying to abolish the death penalty, my state put in an express lane." And it also means that those actions that we see in the movies where (a) the Governor calls at the last minute to give a stay of execution, (b) that part in the movie where they find out that the guy, who has already experienced prison rape and had his family torn apart over a false charge, needs to be released and given compensation, and we, through the magic of Hollywood, get to have a renewal of faith in the system, and in the real world, that will never come. Houston, Texas, the handgun fatality capital of the world, allows drunk people to keep their gun near them in a bar while drinking. Their idea of checking the gun "behind" the bar is to allow them to pull it from their shoulder holster, pull the hammer back so it is ready for action, and then set it in the drink well on top of the bar to the rear. I find it hard to imagine that anyone can, after listening to the debate, listen to George Bush and not consider him a liar. His statements were:
I can't believe the claims that everything one says during the political debate is an issue. The Republicans act like any truth said about them (obviously the truth is offensive to them) is "evil" although their fervor for lying, twisting, and spinning any few words said by an opposing party member are a whole sentence. This is called "TAKING IT OUT OF CONTEXT". E.G. If I said, "The lives of the American people are at risk of seeing a financial collapse in the next four years if the current fiscal policies are continued", and some spin doctor decided to quote, "The lives of the American people are at risk...", and suggested that I was trying to infer that we were in danger of atomic war, that is how taking things out of context is lying. Today we hear that some soldiers in Iraq have refused to do their fueling duties in order to save their own lives, for fear that it was a suicide mission. I would be afraid to do just about anything in Iraq right now, as the same kind of people who ordered the prison abuse, are in charge. Does that show foresight and planning? Does that show that they care about the soldiers themselves, to say nothing of legallities and moral wrong doing? NO! Some are saying that anything done to get the job done is OK and they are reassuring the rest of us that everything is OK in the white house. If you are one of those people who look at a flat tire and look at it as being OK, since it's only flat on the bottom, then, you might believe them. Some people tell us that disagreeing with anything they say, no matter how crazy they are acting, is "un-American". The say we "need" to give up our most important rights in order to be free. I don't need to hear much more. The fact that they already have been lying constantly is enough to get me to not trust what they say.
Posted by azmildman_1 at 6:27 PM MDT
|
Post Comment |
Permalink
Updated: Sunday, 12 July 2009 5:01 PM MDT
Friday, 15 October 2004
Hey Wolf Blitzer, Get A Clue!Hey Wolf, what is wrong with you? You are trying to spin the polls by polling the military? Who do they get their information from? George Bush. Who do they hear from on a regular basis? George Bush. Who has been their only commander and chief? George Bush. So, who are they going to trust, since they don't have ANY OTHER FRAME OF REFERRENCE? But, as you were told, the military doesn't think EITHER candidate has a plan to win the peace and get them out of Iraq. So, once Again, let's ask ourselves the question: "Who do they hear about John Kerry from?" And the answer is, "George Bush." And even though we know all this, they are serving under the present commander and chief and who else don't they trust to keep them from being in an unnecessarily long war? So, the final question is, "Who is it they don't trust because of his past history serving under him?" And once again the answer is, "GEORGE BUSH!"
Posted by azmildman_1 at 10:35 AM MDT
|
Post Comment |
Permalink
Updated: Friday, 15 October 2004 11:22 AM MDT
Mary Cheney / After the DebateI find it interesting again that Mary Cheney, Dick Cheney's daughter, is bringing up all this controversy. If I could speak to her personally, I would say this, "Mary, I am so sorry for what you must be going through. You aren't being shown off in public at all the campaign functions like the Bush and Kerry daughters are, you are discluded from the pagentry and public conversations as if you are a family secret, and when Senator Kerry mentioned you were a lesbian the other night, your mother threw a fit. It must be rough to know your mother is so ashamed of you and that your father works for someone who doesn't believe that gays are born gay and should have the same rights as everyone else. When President Bush was asked if he believed being gay was a choice, he said, "I don't know." That might have been the most honest reply he made that night. The part that I am always surprised by is that the Republicans don't understand that we can hear them NOT answer questions. Mary Cheney's sister also came on television in order to attack Kerry for saying something about Mary at the debate. His statement was, "I think we are all the same in the eyes of God." Then, to the president he asked, "Do you think that being gay is a choice?" Here is what both Mary Cheney's mother and sister said, "What kind of man says something like that?" I can tell you what kind of man says something like that- someone who isn't a religious, right-wing nutcase, born again Christian dry drunk that thinks he is the ruler of the world. He had complimented the Cheney family on their strengths in standing behind their daughter. When Mary's sister was finally asked, "Was your sister insulted?" She repeated her righteously indignant acting remark ("It was insulting.") to Senator Kerry's statement, which, by the way was scripted for her mother and her to say exactly in those words. ("It was insulting, that is all I am going to say.") It would only be insulting to someone who was ashamed of their daughter or sister. My parents have some friends who are NeoCons like the religious zealots who have called Mary Cheney a sinner and they disowned their daughter because she is gay. After a couple decades, the father is dying from Alheimer's and the mother is lonely and wishing she had made a better choice than to listen to Radical Right Wing Religious Leaders who have destroyed their family. Was it worth it to destroy the relationship between a mother and her daughter in order to prove that something (albeit supposedly written in a book by people who still thought the world was flat) was correct? It brings to mind the old addage, "I would rather be happy than right." Lynn Cheney, you might want to think about that.
Posted by azmildman_1 at 3:06 AM MDT
|
Post Comment |
Permalink
Updated: Friday, 15 October 2004 11:02 AM MDT Wednesday, 13 October 2004
Please Vote For A Return to Logical Reason In AmericaThe attack of 9/11 was a terrible thing. But, just because we were attacked, we can't lose focus on our own homeland and the economy as we defend ourselves. Our commander and chief has to be able to chew bubble gum and walk at the same time. (Something comes to mind about pretzels and riding a bicycle.) Accusing anyone of being Un-American because they don't share the views of an administration that has already shown several failed attempts at policy decision is another attempt at being stubborn without reason. Following a paranoid leader who is grasping at straws as he plummets to his destruction, especially when he can't admit his own mistakes, has been the undoing of many a society (I am reminded of Nazi Germany before World War II). See, the NeoCons right there will be jumping up and down and saying I called George Bush a Nazi, even though that was nothing like what I said. They are so ready to jump at anything they consider a verbal faupaux now, because their spin and twist everything said to make anyone who doesn't agree with them sound like an idiot or a conspiracy theorist, not to mention a treasonous traitor. In a fragile economy, with jobs on the increase at about one tenth of the rate needed, we are told things are getting better. That is like telling us that after a huge tornado, with death and destruction laid for miles in front of us, the only thing the people responsible for relief have to say is, "Gee, ain't it grand the wind stopped blowing? Everything is all better now." George Bush says this is the bottom line: "ARE YOU BETTER OFF THAN YOU WERE FOUR YEARS AGO?" And the answer is: "HELL NO!" With a jobless economy, when wages are decreasing for those who have jobs, when benefits and health care have all but disappeared, and now they are messing with overtime for U.S. citizens who work overtime. Ask yourself, "Who is benefitting from laws that deny you a decent wage, benefits, and overtime?" Our country is beginning to look like it is a society of corporate facism. If you want to ask about what farm workers and migrant laborers think, when the Bush administration is supposedly working to help illegal immigrant workers, then, go check the AFL-CIO website. They have a section called the Bush Watch. Do George Bush and Dick Cheney really believe that we think a war created at a convenient target (especially since we now know it wasn't a security issue), in order to "act" like they are doing something about national security is going to distract us from the real issues that middle class parents in the U.S. are facing? During the Ronald Reagan administration they borrowed massive amounts of money from foreign banks to "look like" we hadn't blown the national economy on a lost cause (the Viet Nam War) and that we were still the richest nation in the world. They were afraid that would cause us to lose faith in our government. That is where the disagreement starts. Looking good financially because we are doing so on credit doesn't make us the richest nation, we just look like we are. The problem with that kind of administration is that they leave the debt for future administrations to pay back. They never admitted that is what they did. They left office without anyone noticing they lied, so, why admit mistakes now? That is the biggest part of the problem with our economy now. Let me explain the difference, using an analogy that the average person should understand: If I were president of a small business and I told my employees that business was booming, although the amount of money needed to run that business was ten times what the business was really making, then, I would be lying. If the money that was really coming in was mostly from loans and I didn't divulge these transactions and kept telling my employees that everything was just fine then, I would be lying. Now, here is a financial plan that worked during that time. The plan was not one of improvement. It was a plan of destruction. There were several countries we didn't really like, but payed to do some fighting for us and bands of terrorist cells were created and aimed at the U.S.S.R. When the Soviet government was bankrupt they went broke trying to fight that war on all fronts. Like what is happening to us now. It is almost like a cruel joke someone played our own dirty politics trick back on us and we fell for it. So, that is how America "looked like" it was still the richest nation in the world, but..., we were lied to. Just like Enron found out, a business can't just "SAY" that it has money in order to look good on paper. Now, if I could retire in eight years and let the future owners take over the business as it was about to go bankrupt and say, "Gee, everything was fine while I was on the job", then, I would be lying. Some people call lying to the public and telling them that everything in the economy is getting better, as if it was already improved to the point that "everyone here" should be seeing the improvement, is being "positive". The rest of us call that what it is. It still is "LYING". First, and I might sound cold-blooded for saying this but, previous to the fifties, war was considered a manner of natural selection of our population. At one time, when our population was not as irresponsible about "booming" with babies that we couldn't afford as it is now, our population stayed down. War thinned out the number of young men available to be in the workforce so jobs weren't a problem. The draft took all but the disabled and the elite. After WWII, the number of jobs created was more than the men who returned. Then, the Rosey the Riveter type females wanted to keep the jobs they had filled during the war. Two things, 1) ERA, the equal rights of women who wanted to take jobs that were previously only for men, and 2) the volunteer army or a lack of a selective service draft into military service caused the job growth to be decreased. There just aren't as many jobs as there are people. After Viet Nam, several people were disillusioned with our military and it showed that pouring more money on defense problems doesn't work. LBJ tried. Nixon tried. We backed out. Some people here are misguided enough to think we won the war in Viet Nam. Here is some bad news, the other guys think we lost. When you fly away with the other side still shooting at you and run home, it is considered a loss. Get over it. Since we vowed to quit using nuclear weapons in World War II, we don't scare anyone. Now, this is going to be the complicated part for some people to understand: Picture this: You want to be a tax-paying, hard working American. You always have been. You lose your job because of a disability to work in your chosen field and through no fault of your own. You are now a displaced worker. You are still looking for work and unemployment insurance ran out three + years ago. Some idiot on the news is telling you that unemployment is going down. You know that is because people like you, who can't file for unemployment anymore, are being ignored by the statistics. You are angry at the government for making it sound like the problem is going away instead of getting worse. Even though you have marketable skills for some reason you still can't find a job. You look at the "help wanted" ads in the local newspaper. For some reason the employers in your state are being so picky about who they hire that they are almost NOT hiring anyone except minimum wage and temporary positions. You remember that four years ago the help wanted section was about 25 pages long and now everything in that section of the paper has almost diminished. You went back to college and spent almost three years of your life re-educating yourself for a future goal in an expanding business field. Immediately after graduation you found out that the career that you studied so hard for and that was so available, in the good old U.S.A., land of opportunity, got sent overseas under the guise of "free trade" agreements (which you now know really means cheap labor used instead of paying American workers a fair wage and benefits). You have studied the economy in college and realize the statistics being published don't make sense in all this lack of jobs. You remember when you went to the investment seminar where the guy speaking told you said, "All you have to do is invest that "EXTRA Ten Thousand Dollars" in the stock market." You and almost everyone else there was looking around at each other wondering, "WHAT is he talking about?? What is an EXTRA TEN THOUSAND DOLLARS? If I had that much extra I wouldn't need to be worried about money." Then the stock market crashes. Now, some smiling idiot in a bow tie comes on television and tells you how the economy is doing great because the DOW went up a couple of points. The one thing you want to scream at this smiling idiot is that HE HAS A JOB. He is one of those people with an "extra ten thousand" and he doesn't understand who you are and what you are going through. Welcome to George Bush's America. He thinks he owns it and doesn't have to answer to anyone for his actions. I am not even going to go into the quagmire of the debate about the war, that is subterfuge. The Swiftboat Veterans who might as well call themselves Liars Paid For By Bush Cronies are another example of how his own politics have blown up in his face. The war in Iraq is a smoke screen to avoid the real issues that President Bush is avoiding. There is NO plan for the Bush administration. To try to get America back on track and offset the damage the Bush administration's funding cuts have done to health care, John Kerry came up with a plan. It would be expensive to get started. George Bush is going to leave you without health care under the guise of saving the tax payers' money while spending BILLIONS of the tax payers' money on a war that he himself admitted can't be won. But he thinks that is a better plan. I heard a message on a political anouncement today in which the president said, "We need to focus on developing jobs in America. We need to focus on providing affordable health care to everyone in America." To that I say, "No, we needed to continue to do that four years ago, using the same policies that the previous administration had already implemented, but this administration didn't want to do anthing the "other guys" did and that attitude has cost us the present problems with our economy. Being stubborn and not admitting mistakes is not being strong. It is continuing in a wrong direction. That helps no one. If you doubt what I say is true, look it up. And if you think the present administration is out for the good of the country, ask them why the issues have been the same since the Clinton Administration and why the Bush Administration hasn't addressed them, except verbally, in the past four years. Please vote for a return to reason. Thank You.
Posted by azmildman_1 at 4:34 PM MDT
|
Post Comment |
Permalink
Updated: Wednesday, 13 October 2004 4:48 PM MDT |
quizzical
Guess What? The Last Guy You Said That To Did Run and Hide.
irritated
sad