Rate Bush? Hows he doing>

On 3 Sep 2005 05:44:15 -0700, "Bob Haller" wrote:

The election and blood bath on republicans will be based largely on the
failed IRAQ war.


That's what you said last year. Guess who won in November...

Brian

On Sat, 03 Sep 2005 08:29:40 -0500, JazzMan
wrote:


Don't forget, Nixon got re-elected by a landslide right in
the middle of the unfolding of Watergate. Coincidentally,
Nixon was also a Republican, maybe there's a trend to vote
criminal?

Actually, I'm pretty sure that in both cases, the Republicans won
because the Democrats were unable to field a viable candidate. I mean
George McGovern? Come on... Obviously, well over half the country
couldn't stomach a President Kerry, either.

I voted for Dubya, but I'm not that much of a supporter of him (I
think his handling of the war -- irrespective of whether we should
have gone in or not -- has been terrible, and don't get me started on
his tax cuts in wartime.) If the Democrats had offered someone who
wasn't a leftwing zealot, I may well have voted for him/her.

Brian

Nicholas Fitzpatrick wrote:

In article . com,
Bob Haller wrote:
What do all of you think of Bush? With Iraq, gas prices, storm response
and everything else....

How do you rate his job performance?

Well, whoever is with him, to make sure the press don't get really
embarrassing photographs should be fired for incompetence!

Check out this photograph:
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=stor...apm10208301856

Nick

I think he was learning how to play Aaron Neville's "Louisiana"
at the time, since as he was playing that guitar a hundred
thousand people in New Orleans were spending their second
day foraging for food and water in the flooded cesspit that
their city had become the day before, with no help promised or
on the way from anyone.

I would judge from his countenance that he hadn't been informed
of the disaster yet, and frankly I don't think he really knew
where NO was on the map until someone pointed it out to him on
Wednesday.

JazzMan
--
************************************************** ********
Please reply to jsavage"at"airmail.net.
Curse those darned bulk e-mailers!
************************************************** ********
"Rats and roaches live by competition under the laws of
supply and demand. It is the privilege of human beings to
live under the laws of justice and mercy." - Wendell Berry
************************************************** ********

Jonathan Silverlight wrote:

In message , JazzMan
writes
JazzMan wrote:

John Doe wrote:

Bob Haller wrote:
It might be better to demolish and grind the debris, fill in the
bathtub with fill from other areas, and raise the area we above sea
level before rebuilding.

that way it cant flood again.

You're forgetting that the melting ice on top of Greenland will raise
planetary ocean levels by 6m. It isn't just New Orleans that needs
to be raised.

Maybe the proper word would be raized instead of raised?


Of course, I know the proper spelling would be razed, hehehe...

It must be your Scottish blood :-) (raized is a Scots variant of raised)

Oddly enough, a large chunk of my genetic heritage is Scottish.

JazzMan
--
************************************************** ********
Please reply to jsavage"at"airmail.net.
Curse those darned bulk e-mailers!
************************************************** ********
"Rats and roaches live by competition under the laws of
supply and demand. It is the privilege of human beings to
live under the laws of justice and mercy." - Wendell Berry
************************************************** ********

Brian Thorn wrote:

On Sat, 03 Sep 2005 08:29:40 -0500, JazzMan
wrote:

Don't forget, Nixon got re-elected by a landslide right in
the middle of the unfolding of Watergate. Coincidentally,
Nixon was also a Republican, maybe there's a trend to vote
criminal?

Actually, I'm pretty sure that in both cases, the Republicans won
because the Democrats were unable to field a viable candidate. I mean
George McGovern? Come on... Obviously, well over half the country
couldn't stomach a President Kerry, either.

I voted for Dubya, but I'm not that much of a supporter of him (I
think his handling of the war -- irrespective of whether we should
have gone in or not -- has been terrible, and don't get me started on
his tax cuts in wartime.) If the Democrats had offered someone who
wasn't a leftwing zealot, I may well have voted for him/her.

Brian


Well, in a way I guess you got what you voted for, eh?

JazzMan
--
************************************************** ********
Please reply to jsavage"at"airmail.net.
Curse those darned bulk e-mailers!
************************************************** ********
"Rats and roaches live by competition under the laws of
supply and demand. It is the privilege of human beings to
live under the laws of justice and mercy." - Wendell Berry
************************************************** ********

In article .com,
"ed kyle" wrote:

I think that the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina
will be a watershed event in U.S. politics. In
the U.S. right now, just about everyone is
mystified, angry, and embarrased at and by their
government - or lack of government. It isn't
about blaming one political party or the other -
both are to blame - but the current president and
the current party in power are clearly going to
take much of the heat. Lifelong Republicans are
especially angry right now about GW's poor
performance this week (rather than stand in the
rubble, comfort victims, and say something
memorable to bolster confidence, he flew over
New Orleans in his jet on his way back to D.C.
from vacation).

But more important for the long term, I think,
will be the deeper questions that will come next.
For example, should New Orleanians be surprised that
their often corrupt city and state governments let
them down so terribly? Should those who have voted
to cut federal taxes for decades (an effort supported
by Dems and Repubs) be surprised that the U.S.
government wasn't up to the task (the hospital ship
will arrive *next Friday*)? Should those who
have participated in the do-nothing partisan
name-calling bicker-fest that we have had to endure
for years be surprised that their government doesn't
remember how to solve real problems in a crunch?

The U.S. has been split 50-50 politically for
years now. It won't be split 50-50 during the next
election. Americans don't like being made fools of
by their leaders. Big changes are coming.

New Orleans is the Triumph of the 'Pugs. Drink the sweet, sweet water
of freedom from government, y'all.

ObSpaceContent: 'Pugs don't give a **** about space unless there's votes
or money in it for their friends.

In article ,
Brian Thorn wrote:

On 2 Sep 2005 18:27:49 -0700, "ed kyle" wrote:

I think that the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina
will be a watershed event in U.S. politics.

I doubt it. Seriously doubt it. If this were the summer of 2004, I'd
say that the Katrina fiasco and the rising fuel prices would have
great impact on the election. But this is 2005. The next President
won't be elected for three more years and the current guy isn't
eligible anyway.

Why wait three years? We can impeach the incumbent son of a bitch now
for mis- and non-feasance. This Administration is now 0-for-2 in
dealing with foreseeable disasters. We can't afford to see what they'll
screw up when something really serious happens.

In article , John Doe wrote:

Bob Haller wrote:

The U.S. has been split 50-50 politically for
years now. It won't be split 50-50 during the next
election. Americans don't like being made fools of
by their leaders. Big changes are coming.

Don't count on it.

Americans re-elected a war criminal with full knowledge that he had lied
about Iraq, needlessly killed iraqis and americans military men/women,
ruined the government's budget, record deficits etc. Why ? Because he
succesfully diverted attention to other issues such as abortion, gay
marriage and religion.

Within 3 weeks, the media will have forgotten about New Orleans, within
2 years, americans will have forgotten about his initial mishandling of
the job.


On the other hand, if the media regain their ability to investigate and
be critical of the government, there may be hope in the USA. If they
return to their easy job of simply regurgitating white house press
releases, the white house will continue to be succesful in the
brainwashing of americans.

On the third hand, a hundred thousand Democrats have just moved from
N'awlins to Texas.

On Sat, 03 Sep 2005 13:24:45 -0500, richard schumacher
wrote:


Why wait three years? We can impeach the incumbent son of a bitch now
for mis- and non-feasance.

Because he has done nothing approaching the seriousness that
impeachment demands (neither did Clinton... I did not support the
Clinton Impeachment effort, although I've never much liked the man.)
Being slow to respond to a disaster (especially after all the initial
reports were "New Orleans has been spared the direct hit most
feared...") is poor performance, but not an impeachable offense.

And you really want Dick Cheney in the Oval Office now? He'd keel over
during the next crisis, and then we'd be stuck with Dennis Hastert.

This Administration is now 0-for-2 in
dealing with foreseeable disasters. We can't afford to see what they'll
screw up when something really serious happens.

What was the second? And do you think something can be more serious
than thousands dead in Louisiana and Mississippi?

Brian

On Sat, 03 Sep 2005 13:19:19 -0500, richard schumacher
wrote:

ObSpaceContent: 'Pugs don't give a **** about space unless there's votes
or money in it for their friends.

I'd say that's true of somewhere over 90% of all politicians. Do you
honestly think Hillary gives a hoot about space?

Brian