all-encompassingly

we still remember mitch hedberg

A severed foot is the ultimate stocking stuffer.

Nov 9th 2006

“bush lied!” dan cried

see if you agree with him. dan blogs:

we’ve got a discrepancy here, don’t we. Mr. Bush said during the election that a vote for Democrats is a vote for terrorists. Travis, bless his gullible heart, believed Bush (after all Bush is ordained by God to be our leader), yet just yesterday, Bush compliments Democrats, promises to work with Democrats, and says Democrats care about the security of our country as much as he does. Huh, imagine that.

So is Mr. Bush wrong? When is he wrong? Before the election during campaign speeches, was Bush lying? Or was Bush lying yesterday?

actually, bush answered your question and explained the distinction in that same Q&A, but you only quoted a portion of the key passage:

[portion you quoted]: And I truly believe that Congresswoman Pelosi and Harry Reid care just about as much — you know, they care about the security of this country like I do.

[portion you omitted] They see — you know, no leader in Washington is going to walk away from protecting the country. We have different views on how to do that, but their spirit is such that they want to protect America. That’s what I believe.

source: bush_press_conference.pdf. to another question, he responded:

BUSH: I do believe they care about the security. I disagree — I don’t — I thought they were wrong not making sure our professionals had the tools. And I still believe that. I don’t see how you can protect the country unless you give these professionals tools. They just have a different point of view. That doesn’t mean, you know, they don’t want America to get attacked. That’s why I said what I said.

very simply, he believes democrats’ policies are wrong. bush has relented from calling democrats unpatriotic, taking democrats at their word that they are patriots and that they care as much about national security as republicans do. but he continues to disagree with democrats’ policies.

democrats’ idea of “national security policy” is to give dictators bribes not to develop nukes (of course, the evil dictator immediately began developing them anyway) and call for introspection into our own foreign policy flaws after 9/11 rather than move quickly and decisively to drain the festering swamp of islamic radicalism. now democrats apparently believe that islamic radicalism only exists because we are in iraq.

it is like they completely forgot about the quarter century of deadly attacks the west endured at the hands of these neanderthals prior to the iraq war.

as bush says, democrats, deep in their hearts, probably want to protect america. he just doubts their policies will serve that end. dan continues:

Show me the evidence that with Democrats in power, terrorists will have an easier time attacking America.

Meanwhile, I can prove that terrorists have actually had an easier time attacking America with Republicans in power.

are you kidding? please list all the terrorist attacks in the US since 9/11.

i’m waiting.

democrats oppose profiling at airports, wiretapping of calls made from known terrorist phone numbers, aggressive interrogation of war-on-terror detainees — indeed, any detention at all of enemy combatants in the war on terror. they opposed the war to dismantle terrorist infrastructure in afghanistan, and the war to enforce UN resolution 1441 in iraq. they derided our intervention in iraq as “unilateral” despite our patience in assembling a 30-plus nation coalition. they have called our troops fighting the war nazis, terrorizers of women and children, and stupid. oh, and also likened us to the taliban and saddam hussein.

i’m not sure terrorists would have an easier time attacking america with democrats in power than if we all just laid down and shouted “olly olly oxen free.”

10 Responses to ““bush lied!” dan cried”

  1. doug

    As Dr. Richard Kimball would say…”Oh, snap!”

  2. doug

    May I add, Travis, that your critical reasoning is in doubt as well.

    Bush has only increased and kept alive the non-existent terrorist threat.

    We need to stop waterboarding terrorists and instead give them access to the top-secret intelligence that we have gathered.

    Only then, under the leadership of the Democrats, will these innocent terrorists lay down their tools of non-violence and decide to not attack America anymore, which they haven’t done since 9/11 because they love Bush.

    How can this not make sense to you? Are you dense?

  3. wow, I’m flattered. I’ll get to a response soon.

  4. steve

    Dan, Dan, Dan,

    It does no good to reason with Travis and Doug. They’ve imbibed Rove’s magic Kool-Aid for too long.

    The claim that this administration has made America safer (coming from the collective wisdom of two law school students) is patently false; the National Intelligence Estimate presented to the Senate Intelligence Committee attributes an increased risk in terrorism to the Iraq war. Oh, it also runs contrary to the conventional wisdom of MI5 (http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/europe/11/10/britain.terror/index.html). But you know, Travis and Doug are entitled to “the math” (or “the truth” for that matter).

    I mean really, there is no moral high ground with Doug and Travis. Somewhere along the line they weren’t taught that two wrongs don’t make a right. Descending to the level of your enemies is not a good thing. Mormons of all people should get this especially after the Nephites were rebuked for doing that sort of thing. Instead we’re presented some canned interrogation demo as proof that this is WJWD. And they ignore the fact that torture has never been shown to be effective. They have also ignored the fact that the most effective intelligence gathering technique involves winning the hearts and minds of the people (truly WJWD). Believe me, now that Al Qaeda knows that we torture, they will find a way around it. Ever thought of decoy cells? Dan was right again, we would never know if the intelligence is credible.

    Dan was also right about Bush. He has clearly misled the American public. That’s why we turned around and spanked the “gop” (little grand old party) Nov. 7. What do we get in return as a demonstration of the administration’s incompetence and arrogance? We get Rumsfeld flipping us the bird (see the Crooks and Liars blog). Clearly, Molly Ivins put it quite well before the election when she said, (notice, unlike Coulter who would just steal the quote, I am giving credit to a thoughtful, well-spoken individual)
    “May I remind you what this election is about? Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo, unprecedented presidential powers, unmatched incompetence, unparalleled corruption, unwarranted eavesdropping, Katrina, Enron, Halliburton, global warming, Cheney’s secret energy task force, record oil company profits, $3 gasoline, FEMA, the Supreme Court, Diebold, Florida in 2000, Ohio in 2004, Terri Schiavo, stem cell research, golden parachutes, shrunken pensions, unavailable and expensive health care, habeas corpus, no weapons of mass destruction, sacrificed soldiers and Iraqi civilians, wasted billions, Taliban resurgence, expiration of the assault weapons ban, North Korea, Iran, intelligent design, swift boat hit squads, and on and on.
    This election is about that, but much more — it’s about honor, dignity and comity in this country. It’s about the Constitution, which gives us this great nation.
    Bush ran on a pledge of “restoring honor and integrity” to the White House. Instead, he brought us Tom DeLay, Roy Blunt, Katherine Harris, John Doolittle, Jerry Lewis, Richard Pombo, Mark Foley, Dennis Hastert, David Safavian, Jack Abramoff, Ralph Reed, Karl Rove and an illegal and immoral war in Iraq. People, it’s up to you.”
    Thank heaven’s we’ve sent those crooks on K street packing. Some are even going to rely on evil socialist programs (see Crooks and Liars blog). Thank heaven’s the American public isn’t as far gone as Travis and Doug. By the way, keep up the silly arguments guys; give us the White House in ’08 too.

  5. doug

    I’m not sure if this means that steve=dan, but we certainly welcome the triumphant return of our favorite Rhodes Scholar.

  6. no, Doug, Steve does not = Dan. I am me. He is he.

  7. steve

    Well you really aren’t very perceptive. Dan’s much more articulate than I despite my being a Rhodes Scholar and all. Don’t you ever get sick of untruths?

  8. doug

    Don’t you ever get sick of untruths?

    No. They’re my main source of fiber.

  9. steve

    And I thought your source was just lily-livered, unpatriotic Democrats like myself.

  10. […] Steve, Nov 2006 [link] It’s too easy to push your guys’s buttons. The election is over. I’m taking a break from politics for a while. […]