Monthly Archives: July 2007

Bush is the new O.J.

I watched an interview with O.J. Simpson a few years back. Walking on the street, someone came up and asked him for his autograph. He smiled and obliged only to be rebuked when the woman said, “I never met anyone that was a murderer before.” It was an awkward moment, but it left me realizing he was never going to be free. Too many people knew what he did. He can no longer find any type of socialization in this society.

Bush is like that now. Bush is the new O.J.; the Hunchback of Notre Dumb; an outcast, and he doesn’t even know it yet. All Presidents get secret service protection for life, but he may be the first President in the history of the U.S. to actually need that protection. He may have a less than 30% approval rating, but what the polls don’t show are the muffled masses that consider the man a criminal and a murderer. Others justifiably consider him the great ‘betrayer,’ by ignoring his oath of office to protect the constitution. Either way he won’t have many fans after he leaves office.
What will life be like for the newest ex-president? I imagine protests in front of his new 200 million dollar library. Who protests a library? Anyone pissed off at 200 million dollars as a monument to war, so we may see a few people turn out. I also imagine that his name will be used as a metaphor like Hitler to describe power without restraint. I’m sure it will morph into something like, “the Bush path of disaster,” or a country destroyed through war suffered a “Bush.”

As an ex-president, Bush will be relegated to celebrity golf tournaments until he becomes annoyed at the spectators who boo and hiss as he walks by. That annoyance will grow to anger and feelings of betrayal as he refuses to understand the public’s outrage. Eventually he will close himself off from the public like Howard Hughes. And there, tucked away on top of the newly designed Desert Inn and Presidential library, Bush will end up wearing Kleenex boxes on his feet and collecting his fingernail clippings in a big jar. Friends and pundits will begin referring to him as the ex-President, Montgomery Burns or just as “ex.”


What’s sad about this is how his family will become pariah’s as well. His daughters already have to deal with total strangers yelling that daddy deserves to go to prison. I saw that myself in downtown Austin, on 6th street. Like Eva Braun to his Hitler, Laura will have to endure the public scorn as well. I honestly feel bad for her. Even though Papa Bush was no angel, we all forgave his sins when he vomited all over the Japanese Prime minister. That never stops being funny. But now, he may have to wear a cup when he goes out, for fear of someone wanting to celebrate Dubya by christening his beginnings with their foot.

Looking for a metaphor
O.J. isn’t the right metaphor. O.J. got off. I don’t think Bush will elude prison unless the next president pardons him. But there’s a problem with finding a metaphor for Bush. Considering the number of deaths that can be attributed to the man, he’s a huge step above serial killer and one step below Stalin and Hitlers’ genocidal history. Which forces us to try and evaluate Bush’s 600,000 Iraq deaths as opposed to Hitlers’ 6 million or Stalin’s 12 million, and those kind of arguments are better left for Bush’s buddy Jesus. I’m sure Tony Snow will argue the point, declaring only 4 thousand coalition war dead. The problem is, that’s still a thousand more than died in 9/11. And much more than any serial killer.
Bush wants history be the judge of his Presidency. Unfortunately for Bush, he won’t have to wait long. History will be written in the court records of his trial. For this country to have any type of closure, the secrecy he hides behind must be torn away. When that happens, O.J. Simpson will start looking good.
Advertisements

Bush is the new O.J.

I watched an interview with O.J. Simpson a few years back. Walking on the street, someone came up and asked him for his autograph. He smiled and obliged only to be rebuked when the woman said, “I never met anyone that was a murderer before.” It was an awkward moment, but it left me realizing he was never going to be free. Too many people knew what he did. He can no longer find any type of socialization in this society.

Bush is like that now. Bush is the new O.J.; the Hunchback of Notre Dumb; an outcast, and he doesn’t even know it yet. All Presidents get secret service protection for life, but he may be the first President in the history of the U.S. to actually need that protection. He may have a less than 30% approval rating, but what the polls don’t show are the muffled masses that consider the man a criminal and a murderer. Others justifiably consider him the great ‘betrayer,’ by ignoring his oath of office to protect the constitution. Either way he won’t have many fans after he leaves office.
What will life be like for the newest ex-president? I imagine protests in front of his new 200 million dollar library. Who protests a library? Anyone pissed off at 200 million dollars as a monument to war, so we may see a few people turn out. I also imagine that his name will be used as a metaphor like Hitler to describe power without restraint. I’m sure it will morph into something like, “the Bush path of disaster,” or a country destroyed through war suffered a “Bush.”

As an ex-president, Bush will be relegated to celebrity golf tournaments until he becomes annoyed at the spectators who boo and hiss as he walks by. That annoyance will grow to anger and feelings of betrayal as he refuses to understand the public’s outrage. Eventually he will close himself off from the public like Howard Hughes. And there, tucked away on top of the newly designed Desert Inn and Presidential library, Bush will end up wearing Kleenex boxes on his feet and collecting his fingernail clippings in a big jar. Friends and pundits will begin referring to him as the ex-President, Montgomery Burns or just as “ex.”


What’s sad about this is how his family will become pariah’s as well. His daughters already have to deal with total strangers yelling that daddy deserves to go to prison. I saw that myself in downtown Austin, on 6th street. Like Eva Braun to his Hitler, Laura will have to endure the public scorn as well. I honestly feel bad for her. Even though Papa Bush was no angel, we all forgave his sins when he vomited all over the Japanese Prime minister. That never stops being funny. But now, he may have to wear a cup when he goes out, for fear of someone wanting to celebrate Dubya by christening his beginnings with their foot.

Looking for a metaphor
O.J. isn’t the right metaphor. O.J. got off. I don’t think Bush will elude prison unless the next president pardons him. But there’s a problem with finding a metaphor for Bush. Considering the number of deaths that can be attributed to the man, he’s a huge step above serial killer and one step below Stalin and Hitlers’ genocidal history. Which forces us to try and evaluate Bush’s 600,000 Iraq deaths as opposed to Hitlers’ 6 million or Stalin’s 12 million, and those kind of arguments are better left for Bush’s buddy Jesus. I’m sure Tony Snow will argue the point, declaring only 4 thousand coalition war dead. The problem is, that’s still a thousand more than died in 9/11. And much more than any serial killer.
Bush wants history be the judge of his Presidency. Unfortunately for Bush, he won’t have to wait long. History will be written in the court records of his trial. For this country to have any type of closure, the secrecy he hides behind must be torn away. When that happens, O.J. Simpson will start looking good.

Is John Goodman really about good policy for the American people?: NO.

And no, this is not about John Goodman the actor. It’s about John Goodman of the National Center for Policy Analysis.

Ever since the movie ‘Sicko’ has been out, John Goodman has been paid to write these inane opinions about our health care system. The latest was featured in the Kansas City Star:
http://www.kansascity.com/273/story/209372.html
Opinions like Goodman’s are easy to come by. They are bought and paid for. John Goodman of the National Center for Policy Analysis can be placed in the same category as spokesmen for the tobacco institute. The National Center for Policy Analysis is a group who’s goal is to, “develop and promote private alternatives to government regulation and control.” (from their website.) They paid Goodman to be against socialized medicine, not to write about what is morally and ethically and financially best for Americans.

John Goodman points out that in Canada you don’t have ‘right’ to any particular health-care service. Guess what John? We don’t have a right here either. And if you don’t have any money you certainly don’t have that right.
Regarding healthcare in Great Britain and Canada, Goodman goes on to say, “Patients who wait often are waiting in pain. Many are risking their lives. People have to wait for care because of a conscious decision by the government to limit health-care resources.” Is waiting for an insurance adjuster here in the United States is so much better? Insurance adjusters have a monetary incentive to deny your claim and they often do. But what makes statements like this so misleading is they are complete and utter falsehoods. Wait times are just another way to diffuse the issue. The issue should be the availability of medical care, which is something that 45 million Americans are not receiving. Americans without health insurance have to wait in pain until they die. And even if you have health insurance, that doesn’t mean your medical procedure will be approved by the adjuster. And if you are not approved, be prepared to go into bankruptcy. It’s the leading cause of bankruptcy in this country.
But don’t tell John Goodman at the National Center for Policy Analysis about our lack of healthcare. He’ll just say subjective reasoning from a movie about your suffering doesn’t make for good policy. I’m sure the National Center for Policy Analysis has good insurance for John because if he has to wait for more than ten minutes to see a doctor, he might just go home and forget that he is having a heart attack.

Is John Goodman really about good policy for the American people?: NO.

And no, this is not about John Goodman the actor. It’s about John Goodman of the National Center for Policy Analysis.

Ever since the movie ‘Sicko’ has been out, John Goodman has been paid to write these inane opinions about our health care system. The latest was featured in the Kansas City Star:
http://www.kansascity.com/273/story/209372.html
Opinions like Goodman’s are easy to come by. They are bought and paid for. John Goodman of the National Center for Policy Analysis can be placed in the same category as spokesmen for the tobacco institute. The National Center for Policy Analysis is a group who’s goal is to, “develop and promote private alternatives to government regulation and control.” (from their website.) They paid Goodman to be against socialized medicine, not to write about what is morally and ethically and financially best for Americans.

John Goodman points out that in Canada you don’t have ‘right’ to any particular health-care service. Guess what John? We don’t have a right here either. And if you don’t have any money you certainly don’t have that right.
Regarding healthcare in Great Britain and Canada, Goodman goes on to say, “Patients who wait often are waiting in pain. Many are risking their lives. People have to wait for care because of a conscious decision by the government to limit health-care resources.” Is waiting for an insurance adjuster here in the United States is so much better? Insurance adjusters have a monetary incentive to deny your claim and they often do. But what makes statements like this so misleading is they are complete and utter falsehoods. Wait times are just another way to diffuse the issue. The issue should be the availability of medical care, which is something that 45 million Americans are not receiving. Americans without health insurance have to wait in pain until they die. And even if you have health insurance, that doesn’t mean your medical procedure will be approved by the adjuster. And if you are not approved, be prepared to go into bankruptcy. It’s the leading cause of bankruptcy in this country.
But don’t tell John Goodman at the National Center for Policy Analysis about our lack of healthcare. He’ll just say subjective reasoning from a movie about your suffering doesn’t make for good policy. I’m sure the National Center for Policy Analysis has good insurance for John because if he has to wait for more than ten minutes to see a doctor, he might just go home and forget that he is having a heart attack.

Let the name calling begin

The White House has responded to Alberto Gonzales’ contempt of Congress by calling Congress “pathetic.”
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19962268/

And guess what? Bush is right. Congress is as pathetic as a Craig’s list whore. (To bring the metaphor home: http://austin.craigslist.org/ers/381682063.html)
This Congress may be the largest collection of wimps, crybabies and sycophants the world has ever seen. In response, Congress will do nothing. That’s what they’re good at. They don’t have the willpower or the leadership to take on the President. Which is rather odd considering that Bush’s popularity is less than 30%. Oh, they’ll posture, proclaim their righteousness, blabber on about gays getting married and then hit D.C. for a night on the town. What else can they do?

They could look toward family values again and then divorce their wives. Or, they could keep gays from being married. Or, they could jail 11 million illegal immigrants even though we can barely jail the criminals we have now. My point is, I don’t think they’re looking hard enough into what they can do that won’t matter. We need more pie-in-the-sky issues. The wall between U.S. and Mexico is a good start. Let’s wrap that all around the U.S. Write your Congressman right now and ask for money for that Highway to nowhere. We can’t ask the Alaskan Congressman Sen. Stevens now because he’s being looked at on bribery charges as of yesterday. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB118531999682776863.html
But I’m sure there’s another Republican Senator who will take the bribe.

My own Congressman, Rep. Michael McCaul of the 10th District in Texas is sponsoring a house resolution (HR 2240 and HR 2250) to deny any recompense for the drug dealers that were shot in the back and killed by our border patrol agents. I’m not saying he doesn’t have a point, but is that how he wants to spend his time? Apparently, as a politician, he can’t let the courts handle it because it’s an issue that has no detractors and it’s an easy way to impress his constituency. McCaul wants to spend his short time in Congress fighting battles that no one cares about. I’m guessing he doesn’t read the news. He may not even know that our troops are in the middle of a civil war right now, but if any drug dealer who is shot in the back wants to sue, McCaul is there to stop them with a house resolution. Good for you McCaul. Next, lets sponsor a bill to make English the national language or outlaw flag burning. That way you won’t have to do anything of value. Today’s politician is more about not pissing off the voters than doing anything of value. And McCaul is just that. A politician. Is it too much to ask for a leader? Someone that has a little vision.

McCaul also sponsored HR 2764 – An amendment to increase funding (by transfer) for International Narcotics Control and Law enforcement programs by $30 million. By all means, lets spend more money on an unwinnable war. It doesn’t surprise me. That’s what Republicans do. I find it remarkable that officials can’t keep drugs out of a maximum security prison, but our Congress wants to spend money in a totally impossible task of keeping drugs from coming across our massive borders. McCaul’s heart is in the right place, I just don’t believe he’s thought about this much. Why not spend a hundred billion dollars to secure our borders? Why not a trillion? The only thing this country receives from spending money on the drug war is the expense of incarcerating the never ending supply of drug smugglers. I’ve read that every single prisoner costs the government as much as a college education. I always thought Republicans were against entitlement programs and against big government. We’ve got over 2 million in prison now, and nearly 80% are there on drug charges. This isn’t a cheap endeavor. Every time we catch someone, it’s another $36,000 a year until the end of their sentence, and the drug cartels are finding mules faster than Iraq insurgents are finding suicide bombers.

Anyone that has made the slightest study of how drugs are smuggled understands the problem. Drug lords hire dumb ass poor people, that may not even know what they are carrying, to drive drugs across into America. If they get caught, so what? Their profit margin is so high, they just factor in the 10-20% cost of losing those shipments. Add that to the fact that there is an unknowable number of drug tunnels crossing our borders, and you have to ask why we are even trying. This very month they found three others.

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/0712border-tunnel0712-ON.html

But, by all means, let’s take what little credit we have left after this war and throw it down this never ending money pit. It only seems appropriate. This country is about to go bankrupt so we might as well just piss the rest away before the house comes tumbling down around us.

A couple of years ago the right wing started running ads meant to demonize drug users by insisting that drug money goes to terrorist organizations. The left hit back with the notion that gas users pay money to terrorist organizations. They were both right, and both wrong, but it made a great bullshit campaign. While soft drug money like marijuana probably didn’t fund terrorism, hard drugs like heroin probably does. What I can’t get my head around is, if you wanted to de-fund all terrorists across the globe, you’d legalize drugs. That would end terrorism overnight. But I have never met a politician that doesn’t have a knee jerk reaction to ending prohibition, because they all believe legalization means allowing their children to buy heroin like beer or a pack of cigarettes. It’s as if they can’t envision a system where only pharmacists dispense narcotic drugs to users that meet certain criteria, and therefore keep tough drugs out of the hands of children. It doesn’t occur to our legislators that cigarettes kill more people every year than all of the illegal drugs combined. Apparently, that’s okay with them. More the pity.

I am ripping on Rep. McCaul as an example only because he’s my legislator. In reality, I’ve never met the man. I’m sure he’s a nice guy that is just trying to do the right thing. I can see that from his sponsorship of H.R.3043 – An amendment to reduce appropriations for Departmental Management (by transfer), and redirect $2,000,000 to Special Education. Most politicians are trying to help. My rant is directed at the current mentality our representatives seem to have. Like drug mules, there seems to be a never ending supply of politicians willing to sell out the American people for campaign contributions. Bending their common sense to “dance with the one that brought you.” They fight the battles that receive the most press. They posture and strut for C-Span to let their constituents think they are actually working for them. In the end, nothing gets done, and the American people are made to suffer from their knee-jerk reaction to modern problems. Using only ten word answers for debates, they often end up trying to fix problems with these slogans. Problems that, in reality, don’t have an easy answer.

The more I think about it the more I’m convinced, the American people just want at least one thing fixed. That’s why they want an end to the war. I think the public is sick of politicians institutionalizing any problem they can throw money at, as if working on the problem, fixes it. In defense of the politicians, they often have a constituency beating down the door and demanding action on any given issue.

I can’t write about knee-jerk reactions without bringing up WWII in our fight with Japan. Everyone in the U.S. seems content with the notion that using nuclear weapons on Japan was wrong yet necessary. The main argument centers around the millions of American lives it would take to invade Japan. The truth lies in a different place. Near the end of the war we had already killed much more than the atomic bombs did with conventional bombs. 120,000 in Tokyo alone. Their country was a barely alive by the time our nukes were brought to bare. (Something most people already know.) What breaks the argument is our carrier fleet. In 1941, when we took the hit at Pearl Harbor, we had four working carriers in the Pacific. By 1945 we had finished building 25 more carriers, complete with new aircraft, ready to go. The U.S.’s ability to out produce the Japanese was just coming into full swing. In reality, by the end of 1945, we had the ability to destroy the Japanese without nuclear bombs. Truman needed the bomb to force their surrender. But the point I’m trying to make is, if we had sat back and done nothing after Pearl Harbor we still would of won the war. A year later, 1946 was slated to produce another 25 fully functional aircraft carriers. Also, by the end of 1945 our new aircraft were hugely superior to the Japanese Zeros. They didn’t stand a chance. By the end of 1946, the U.S. could of parked 50 or more carriers off the coast of Japan and bombed them to submission with conventional bombs. Our politicians knew this at the time. Truman and others knew our production capacity of military weapons would dwarf the Japanese by 1945. Knowing what we know now, how many of our soldiers died in the Pacific that didn’t need to? All because the public demanded action. All because our politicians didn’t have the will power to tell their own constituency that immediate action was not in their best interest. And it certainly wasn’t in the interest of our soldiers.

Bush forced our military into the Iraq war before we were ready for political reason alone. No armor. Not enough troops. etc. . . The sad part is we never really needed to fight a war in the middle east. The middle east will fix itself. In less than twenty years the oil will run out, and the Muslim nations will be alone with their sand. They won’t have to worry about unclean heathens trampling over their sacred ground. Such a waste.

Let the name calling begin

The White House has responded to Alberto Gonzales’ contempt of Congress by calling Congress “pathetic.”
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19962268/

And guess what? Bush is right. Congress is as pathetic as a Craig’s list whore. (To bring the metaphor home: http://austin.craigslist.org/ers/381682063.html)
This Congress may be the largest collection of wimps, crybabies and sycophants the world has ever seen. In response, Congress will do nothing. That’s what they’re good at. They don’t have the willpower or the leadership to take on the President. Which is rather odd considering that Bush’s popularity is less than 30%. Oh, they’ll posture, proclaim their righteousness, blabber on about gays getting married and then hit D.C. for a night on the town. What else can they do?

They could look toward family values again and then divorce their wives. Or, they could keep gays from being married. Or, they could jail 11 million illegal immigrants even though we can barely jail the criminals we have now. My point is, I don’t think they’re looking hard enough into what they can do that won’t matter. We need more pie-in-the-sky issues. The wall between U.S. and Mexico is a good start. Let’s wrap that all around the U.S. Write your Congressman right now and ask for money for that Highway to nowhere. We can’t ask the Alaskan Congressman Sen. Stevens now because he’s being looked at on bribery charges as of yesterday. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB118531999682776863.html
But I’m sure there’s another Republican Senator who will take the bribe.

My own Congressman, Rep. Michael McCaul of the 10th District in Texas is sponsoring a house resolution (HR 2240 and HR 2250) to deny any recompense for the drug dealers that were shot in the back and killed by our border patrol agents. I’m not saying he doesn’t have a point, but is that how he wants to spend his time? Apparently, as a politician, he can’t let the courts handle it because it’s an issue that has no detractors and it’s an easy way to impress his constituency. McCaul wants to spend his short time in Congress fighting battles that no one cares about. I’m guessing he doesn’t read the news. He may not even know that our troops are in the middle of a civil war right now, but if any drug dealer who is shot in the back wants to sue, McCaul is there to stop them with a house resolution. Good for you McCaul. Next, lets sponsor a bill to make English the national language or outlaw flag burning. That way you won’t have to do anything of value. Today’s politician is more about not pissing off the voters than doing anything of value. And McCaul is just that. A politician. Is it too much to ask for a leader? Someone that has a little vision.

McCaul also sponsored HR 2764 – An amendment to increase funding (by transfer) for International Narcotics Control and Law enforcement programs by $30 million. By all means, lets spend more money on an unwinnable war. It doesn’t surprise me. That’s what Republicans do. I find it remarkable that officials can’t keep drugs out of a maximum security prison, but our Congress wants to spend money in a totally impossible task of keeping drugs from coming across our massive borders. McCaul’s heart is in the right place, I just don’t believe he’s thought about this much. Why not spend a hundred billion dollars to secure our borders? Why not a trillion? The only thing this country receives from spending money on the drug war is the expense of incarcerating the never ending supply of drug smugglers. I’ve read that every single prisoner costs the government as much as a college education. I always thought Republicans were against entitlement programs and against big government. We’ve got over 2 million in prison now, and nearly 80% are there on drug charges. This isn’t a cheap endeavor. Every time we catch someone, it’s another $36,000 a year until the end of their sentence, and the drug cartels are finding mules faster than Iraq insurgents are finding suicide bombers.

Anyone that has made the slightest study of how drugs are smuggled understands the problem. Drug lords hire dumb ass poor people, that may not even know what they are carrying, to drive drugs across into America. If they get caught, so what? Their profit margin is so high, they just factor in the 10-20% cost of losing those shipments. Add that to the fact that there is an unknowable number of drug tunnels crossing our borders, and you have to ask why we are even trying. This very month they found three others.

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/0712border-tunnel0712-ON.html

But, by all means, let’s take what little credit we have left after this war and throw it down this never ending money pit. It only seems appropriate. This country is about to go bankrupt so we might as well just piss the rest away before the house comes tumbling down around us.

A couple of years ago the right wing started running ads meant to demonize drug users by insisting that drug money goes to terrorist organizations. The left hit back with the notion that gas users pay money to terrorist organizations. They were both right, and both wrong, but it made a great bullshit campaign. While soft drug money like marijuana probably didn’t fund terrorism, hard drugs like heroin probably does. What I can’t get my head around is, if you wanted to de-fund all terrorists across the globe, you’d legalize drugs. That would end terrorism overnight. But I have never met a politician that doesn’t have a knee jerk reaction to ending prohibition, because they all believe legalization means allowing their children to buy heroin like beer or a pack of cigarettes. It’s as if they can’t envision a system where only pharmacists dispense narcotic drugs to users that meet certain criteria, and therefore keep tough drugs out of the hands of children. It doesn’t occur to our legislators that cigarettes kill more people every year than all of the illegal drugs combined. Apparently, that’s okay with them. More the pity.

I am ripping on Rep. McCaul as an example only because he’s my legislator. In reality, I’ve never met the man. I’m sure he’s a nice guy that is just trying to do the right thing. I can see that from his sponsorship of H.R.3043 – An amendment to reduce appropriations for Departmental Management (by transfer), and redirect $2,000,000 to Special Education. Most politicians are trying to help. My rant is directed at the current mentality our representatives seem to have. Like drug mules, there seems to be a never ending supply of politicians willing to sell out the American people for campaign contributions. Bending their common sense to “dance with the one that brought you.” They fight the battles that receive the most press. They posture and strut for C-Span to let their constituents think they are actually working for them. In the end, nothing gets done, and the American people are made to suffer from their knee-jerk reaction to modern problems. Using only ten word answers for debates, they often end up trying to fix problems with these slogans. Problems that, in reality, don’t have an easy answer.

The more I think about it the more I’m convinced, the American people just want at least one thing fixed. That’s why they want an end to the war. I think the public is sick of politicians institutionalizing any problem they can throw money at, as if working on the problem, fixes it. In defense of the politicians, they often have a constituency beating down the door and demanding action on any given issue.

I can’t write about knee-jerk reactions without bringing up WWII in our fight with Japan. Everyone in the U.S. seems content with the notion that using nuclear weapons on Japan was wrong yet necessary. The main argument centers around the millions of American lives it would take to invade Japan. The truth lies in a different place. Near the end of the war we had already killed much more than the atomic bombs did with conventional bombs. 120,000 in Tokyo alone. Their country was a barely alive by the time our nukes were brought to bare. (Something most people already know.) What breaks the argument is our carrier fleet. In 1941, when we took the hit at Pearl Harbor, we had four working carriers in the Pacific. By 1945 we had finished building 25 more carriers, complete with new aircraft, ready to go. The U.S.’s ability to out produce the Japanese was just coming into full swing. In reality, by the end of 1945, we had the ability to destroy the Japanese without nuclear bombs. Truman needed the bomb to force their surrender. But the point I’m trying to make is, if we had sat back and done nothing after Pearl Harbor we still would of won the war. A year later, 1946 was slated to produce another 25 fully functional aircraft carriers. Also, by the end of 1945 our new aircraft were hugely superior to the Japanese Zeros. They didn’t stand a chance. By the end of 1946, the U.S. could of parked 50 or more carriers off the coast of Japan and bombed them to submission with conventional bombs. Our politicians knew this at the time. Truman and others knew our production capacity of military weapons would dwarf the Japanese by 1945. Knowing what we know now, how many of our soldiers died in the Pacific that didn’t need to? All because the public demanded action. All because our politicians didn’t have the will power to tell their own constituency that immediate action was not in their best interest. And it certainly wasn’t in the interest of our soldiers.

Bush forced our military into the Iraq war before we were ready for political reason alone. No armor. Not enough troops. etc. . . The sad part is we never really needed to fight a war in the middle east. The middle east will fix itself. In less than twenty years the oil will run out, and the Muslim nations will be alone with their sand. They won’t have to worry about unclean heathens trampling over their sacred ground. Such a waste.

Alberto Gonzales to Senate: Suck My Balls

Alberto Gonzales has no shame at all. There’s a different kind of absurdity involved when you lie under oath and everyone knows you are lying under oath. Why not just say, “I can’t answer your question because I forgot everything I ever knew,” and just get it over with. It’s the same thing. Or how about, “Since the Senate doesn’t have the willpower to prosecute me or the President for breaking the law, suck my balls Senator.” At what point does this farce become real? What has to happen before our Senate moves to action? The President has appointed himself Pope, Grand Wizard, and Dictator, with our Senate acting like they are a bit put out. Are they even alive? Someone poke the Senate with a stick to see if they are still moving. This entire ordeal is embarrassing. Bush wants to spread democracy to Iraq. Can we have a little democracy here in the U.S. first?