|
MoveOn.org ::: Censure Bush! (pg. 2)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| LuNaSeA |
| quote: | Originally posted by intelligent77
well at least i know that my husband wasn't there in vain...
iraq needed to be rid of Sadamn... why keep such recklass hate and evil over there
weapons of mass destruction or not...
...how many of you think it was okay for CHILDREN to be slaughtered? and people to be surpressed the way they were...
everyone is so quick to judge for their whatever reasons.. but i've seen the behind the scene pictures... i almost puked... and to see REAL dead people like that is HORRIFYING.. let alone to know some of the horrifying thing Sadamn Insane did...WTF? I'm not complaining!!!
watch your kid or girlfriend die in your arms from a dictatorship such as his.. and tell me it wasn't worth it! |
you're not the only one. i've seen the pics, knew people who died. you do not have to tell me.
as far as i'm concerned, this country is TURNING INTO a dictatorship..
we actually put sadam in power.. our gov't constantly spits in the wind and it then lands on our face a few years later.. we're censuring bush BECAUSE HE IS A LIAR. i don't give a about sadam right now.. it's about him, his filthy-rich family (bc of oil companies he and daddy owns), and his disgusting STUPID antics...
he even ADMITTED to being WRONG about his motives for going to war.. he basically said "yes, there were No W of MD found but that doesn't mean that they couldn't have made some...." that's like saying 'i have a shoelace in my room...that means i'm going to choke you with it'.. stupid analogy but you get my drift.. i suggest reading some michael moore to get a good perspective on bush with supported facts/backup.. |
|
|
| DaveSZ |
| quote: | Originally posted by intelligent77
|
I'd like to know how you could support a President that doesn't even properly fund the military in his new budget?
http://www.military.com/NewsContent..._021104,00.html
| quote: |
U.S. Military May Run Out Of Money
United Press International
February 11, 2004
WASHINGTON - The military will have no money to pay for the ongoing wars in Iraq and Afghanistan for three months beginning Oct. 1 because the White House is declining to ask Congress for funding until December or January, well after the presidential election.
Army Chief of Staff Gen. Peter Schoomaker told the Senate Armed Services Committee the $38 billion he has for 2004 war operations will last only until the end of September, as he spends $3.7 billion a month in Iraq and about $900 million a month in Afghanistan. The Army has about 114,000 soldiers in Iraq and roughly 10,000 in Afghanistan.
"I am concerned on how we bridge between the end of this fiscal year and when we can get a supplemental in the next fiscal year," Schoomaker told the committee.
The fiscal year -- the government's spending year -- runs from Oct. 1 to Sept. 30 annually. Funds for 2004, therefore, run out Sept. 30, 2004.
The Marine Corps, which will send about 75,000 Marines to Iraq in 2004/2005 and expects to need $1.5 billion, is in a similar financial bind.
"I share the concerns of the chief of staff of the army about this," said Marine Commandant Gen. Michael Hagee.
The war has been funded by emergency supplemental appropriations, separate from the Pentagon's annual budget, which is not set up to pay for "contingency operations."
The first Iraq supplemental, requested in March 2003, gave the Pentagon around $63 billion for the war. The second supplemental of $87 billion was requested by President Bush in September 2003. It will run out on Oct. 1. Roughly $19 billion of that total is going toward Iraq civil reconstruction. About $10 billion is for Afghanistan.
President Bush is not asking Congress for a 2005 supplemental until December or January, according to Pentagon comptroller Dov Zakheim.
U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld told reporters Tuesday the decision not to request a supplemental rested with the White House. He could not explain why the administration would allow a three-month gap in funding the war on terror, ostensibly its top priority.
"They have so many factors to consider. They have to look at all the departments and agencies. I don't know -- they'll certainly know a lot more," Rumsfeld said.
Rumsfeld and Zakheim have said the delay has to do with wanting to wait to get better detail on what the spending needs will be.
Zakheim said the services can cover the gap by shifting funding around in regular budgets until the White House requests additional money.
"As you move into the fiscal year, Oct. 1, November, December, January, you're going to know an awful lot more than you know today in February," Rumsfeld said Tuesday.
The White House had sufficient detail and foresight last year to request $87 billion for the coming fiscal year on Sept. 7, 2003.
That date however, coincided with a precipitous drop in President Bush's approval ratings, according to polling data from the Gallup Organization.
Between Aug. 25 and 26, Bush had an approval rating of 59 percent. In polls conducted Sept. 8-10, it had dropped to 52 percent. Less than two weeks later, Bush's approval rating was at 50 percent -- the lowest ever in his three years in office. His approval rating bounced back to 63 percent immediately after Saddam Hussein was captured in Iraq in December, but dipped to 49 the last week of January. It has risen back to 52 percent this week.
With early polls suggesting likely Democratic candidate Sen. John Kerry and President Bush very close in approval ratings, the White House may not want to risk a drop related to asking for additional funding so close to the November election.
If the current spending rate continues in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Pentagon is likely to need around $50 billion for military operations alone.
|
Wake up!!!!
Bush is playing politics with our young soldiers' lives!
For that he deserves a one way ticket to the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste dump he's proposed in Nevada!
That's not even to mention the gutting in funding for policemen, firemen, education, and the Coast Guard that will cause even more job losses in those sectors.
All this so he can give another tax cut to millionaires.
(No I'm not hating on millionaires, but it's a morally wrong thing to do). |
|
|
| Highmay |
| This thread sucks big time... |
|
|
| galdamez |
| quote: | Originally posted by Highmay
This thread sucks big time... |
Nobody's forcing you to read it. |
|
|
| Highmay |
| quote: | Originally posted by galdamez
Nobody's forcing you to read it. |
no , but i had to actually read the ing thread first in order come to that assessment...
ill explain why everyone on this thread shold burn at the stake when i wake up from my beauty nap... |
|
|
| galdamez |
| quote: | Originally posted by Highmay
no , but i had to actually read the ing thread first in order come to that assessment... |
You couldn't tell by reading the thread title?
| quote: | Originally posted by Highmay
ill explain why everyone on this thread shold burn at the stake when i wake up from my beauty nap... |
So now you are you beautiful?
That is how you say...
GEIGH |
|
|
| LuNaSeA |
| quote: | Originally posted by Highmay
This thread sucks big time... |
dont ing ruin a thread bc you got Personal Beef with me, jayme, why dont you try being mature about it and actually PM me and DEAL WITH IT YOURSELF. as far as i can see, we're having a perfectly legit and mature discussion about the president and actions being taken against his lying.
and if you really think this thread sucks, why dont you tell us why, oh genius? |
|
|
| DaveSZ |
I'd say ironically that Bush was good for the democrats in at least one way:
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0211-02.htm
| quote: |
Published on Wednesday, February 11, 2004 by the Inter Press Service
Cyber-Campaign Demands Congress Censure Bush
by Jim Lobe
WASHINGTON - Grassroots cyber-movement MoveOn.org, which claims more than two million U.S. members, has launched a major campaign demanding Congress formally censure President George W. Bush for lying to it about the threat posed by ousted Iraqi president Saddam Hussein.
Joined by another group, Win Without War (WWW), MoveOn said it had already collected more than 450,000 signatures on an email-based petition drive in just the past week, and will now take out print and television advertising to bring more people into the movement.
The two groups ran a full-page ad (.pdf) in the Washington Post on Tuesday that accused Bush of running ''a campaign of misinformation, of cherry-picking and distorting intelligence, of hype and hysteria that led America into an unnecessary war''.
''There must be consequences when a president misleads the American people, and the Congress, with such disastrous results'', said the ad, which featured a photograph of a pensive Bush with the caption, ”He knew''.
''An independent commission can deal with failures at the intelligence agencies. Congress should deal with the failures at the White House,'' it added.
''Congress devoted considerable attention and, eventually, voted to impeach President (Bill) Clinton for misleading the public about a sexual affair'', said Adam Ruben, national field director of MoveOn.
''It isn't unreasonable to think that misleading the nation about the necessity of going to war constitutes an abuse of power of much greater significance.''
The campaign by MoveOn and WWW, which is expected to be joined by other national anti-war groups in coming days, begins as the administration, including Bush himself, has become increasingly defensive about both the war and the justifications it gave for attacking Iraq in March.
It also comes amid a flurry of new public-opinion polls indicating the president's public approval rating has fallen sharply over the last several weeks, particularly following the admission by Washington's former chief weapons inspector, David Kay, that the administration's pre-war statements about Iraq's alleged weapons-of-mass-destruction (WMD) programs were unfounded.
Polls over the past two weeks have shown Democratic Party front-runner John Kerry either ahead of or in a dead heat with the Republican Party's Bush if the November election were held now.
In the latest poll, taken just after an unprecedented, hour-long interview with Bush on NBC-TV's 'Meet the Press' on Sunday, the Gallup organization found the two candidates in a virtual tie. Just one month ago, Gallup had Bush leading Kerry by 12 percentage points.
But in a second survey taken before the interview, Gallup said the percentage of voters who identified themselves as Democrats had jumped from 30 to 34 percent in just two weeks, while those identifying themselves as Republicans dropped by one percentage point.
As a result, Democrats now lead Republicans by three percentage points in party identification.
That finding is likely to make a major impression in the Republican-controlled Congress, where all 435 seats of the House of Representatives and one-third of the Senate are up for election in November.
Committees in both houses have been investigating pre-war intelligence for months, but they have split along partisan lines over how to do so.
Republicans have insisted that investigations should be confined to mistakes made by the official intelligence community in assessing the threats posed by Iraq before the war, while Democrats have called for the probes to be expanded to include the ways in which senior administration political appointees -- notably in Vice President Dick Cheney's office and the Pentagon -- interfered with that process.
But the Democrats' appeals have been resisted by the Republican chairs of the two committees.
Similarly, Bush tried to co-opt calls for a wider investigation last week by creating a commission to study why the intelligence proved wrong in Iraq, but it will not report until 2005 and its mandate has also been limited to the intelligence itself, rather than any possible manipulation by political appointees.
The MoveOn campaign is designed to bolster demands that the scope of the congressional investigations be expanded as part of a process to formally censure Bush for distorting the intelligence.
''This is not about a failure of intelligence'', said Tom Andrews, a former Democratic congressman who heads WWW, which is itself a coalition of some 42 national groups. ''It's a failure of integrity''.
''Bush knew that the intelligence community's assessment of Iraq's arms programs did not support the administration's pre-conceived notion that Iraq had chemical and nuclear weapons'', said Andrews. ''He knew better -- but he chose to mislead us''.
''If Congress refuses to hold this administration accountable, we will hold its members accountable in every (congressional) district in the country'', he said.
Andrews was joined by two retired senior intelligence officials who charged that, while the official intelligence community made mistakes in their analyses, the much greater fault -- and distortions of intelligence -- lay with the administration's political figures.
''This country is now going through the worst intelligence scandal in its history'', said Melvin Goodman, a former top CIA analyst who teaches at the National Defense University here.
Calling the administration's allegations about Hussein's alleged WMD programs and ties to the al-Qaeda terrorist group a ''campaign of deceit'', he charged that the Office of Special Plans (OSP) established by Pentagon chief Donald Rumsfeld, ''was engaged in falsifying intelligence information'' that was then leaked to the press and sent via Cheney's office to the White House.
''The reasons we were given for going to war were false'', added Larry Johnson, a career CIA officer who served as deputy director of the State Department's Office of Counter Terrorism in the 1990s.
''The Bush administration engaged in a deliberate campaign of information warfare, which employed erroneous and misleading information as part of a broader strategy to build public opinion for an invasion'', he said.
Johnson noted that both Cheney and Rumsfeld consistently asserted the existence of operational ties between Iraq and al-Qaeda. ''But the CIA found no evidence that Iraq was engaged in supporting Islamic terrorism'', he said.
Also on hand Tuesday was Fernando Suarez del Solar from San Diego, California, whose son, a Marine, was killed last March in Iraq. ''He died in Iraq, and for what''? asked Suarez. ''For President Bush's lies''.
MoveOn, which was founded by Internet entrepreneurs, has come to be seen as a model for political organizing and fund-raising through the Internet. In the 2000 elections it raised more than two million dollars for congressional candidates and almost doubled that total in 2002.
Consultations with its fast-growing membership earlier this year resulted in raising millions of dollars for Democratic candidate Howard Dean's now-faltering primary campaign, while its television and newspaper ads are widely considered among the most effective in the country.
|
He's also caused many Republicans to defect lol.
From a military dad:
| quote: |
I've spent a good deal of time with the 3rd Inf Div at Fort Stewart; which my Son is a member of. I stood by with tears in my eyes as they deployed and again when most returned. They are under orders with the threat of punisnment under the U.C.M.J. if they speak against Bush and his cronies or this immoral war. Now when they pass each other they say "A.B.B. sez the 3rd I.D." This stands for anybody but Bush. I must say I'm a registered republican and I did not vote for Bush when he was appointed nor will I vote for him this time. I can only say Run John, Win John, and A.B.B.
|
| quote: |
As I stated in my post a good many soldiers are very angry about the way this action proceeded and was carried on. Many weeks went by when supplies were not there. Many months went by without proper body armor. Some soldiers died because of this and it wasn't right. The phrase of A-B-B sez the 3rd ID, is very telling indeed. My Son is concerned at the threats of punishment for speaking negativly about this administration; as he feels what I taught him about being honest my hurt him. When you discuss why Bush has taken so long to release his records, or discuss how he got into the overstaffed guard unit in the first place draws much ire. No I would say a vast majority of the 3rd ID, will not vote for Bush. These brave soldiers did as ask, with short supplies, with less than adequate body armour, and came home victorious, and angry. Just a side note when Bush went to Fort Stewart, orderers were given, under extreme punishment not to do or say anything against this President. Also to insure this, a record number of 4 day passes were issued, to those who said they could not hold back their feelings.
|
This is in Georgia!:disbelief |
|
|
| limin_li |
That pic makes Viacom/CBS/Paramount a total hyprocrite.
Remember CBS didn't want Moveon.org political ads to be televised.... |
|
|
| DaveSZ |
LOL. Alex Jones is a nutty conspiracy theorist who lives in Austin. I wouldn't take anything he says too seriously. :) You should see his cable access tv show rofl.:stongue:
White House claims loss of jobs is good for America:
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/ht...bushecon10.html
| quote: |
Published on Tuesday, February 10, 2004 by the Seattle Times
Bush Report: Sending Jobs Overseas Helps US
by Seattle Times wire services
WASHINGTON — The movement of American factory jobs and white-collar work to other countries is part of a positive transformation that will enrich the U.S. economy over time, even if it causes short-term pain and dislocation, the Bush administration said yesterday.
The embrace of foreign "outsourcing," an accelerating trend that has contributed to U.S. job losses in recent years and has become an issue in the 2004 elections, is contained in the president's annual report to Congress on the U.S. economy.
"Outsourcing is just a new way of doing international trade," said N. Gregory Mankiw, chairman of Bush's Council of Economic Advisors, which prepared the report. "More things are tradable than were tradable in the past. And that's a good thing."
The report, which predicts the nation will reverse a three-year employment slide by creating 2.6 million jobs in 2004, is part of an effort by the administration to highlight signs that the recovery is picking up speed. Bush's economic stewardship has become a central issue in the presidential campaign.
In his message to Congress yesterday, Bush said the economy "is strong and getting stronger," thanks in part to his tax cuts and other economic programs. He said the nation had survived a stock-market meltdown, recession, terrorist attacks, corporate scandals and war in Afghanistan and Iraq, and it was finally beginning to enjoy "a mounting prosperity that will reach every corner of America."
The president repeated that message during an afternoon "conversation" on the economy at SRC Automotive, an engine-rebuilding plant in Springfield, Mo., where he lashed out at lawmakers who oppose making his tax cuts permanent.
"When they say, 'We're going to repeal Bush's tax cuts,' that means they're going to raise your taxes, and that's wrong. And that's bad economics," he said.
Democrats who want Bush's job were quick to challenge his claims.
Campaigning yesterday in Roanoke, Va., Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts, the front-runner for the Democratic presidential nomination, questioned the credibility of the job-creation forecast.
"I've got a feeling this report was prepared by the same people who brought us the intelligence on Iraq," he said. "I don't think we need a new report about jobs in America. I think we need a new president who's going to create jobs in America."
In an evening appearance at George Mason University in Fairfax, Va., Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina said it would come as a "news bulletin" to the American people that the outsourcing of jobs overseas is good for the country.
"These people," he said of the Bush administration, "what planet do they live on? They are so out of touch."
Last year's Economic Report of the President predicted that 1.7 million jobs would be created in 2003. Instead, the nation lost 53,000 jobs. In Bush's three years in office, 2.2 million jobs have disappeared.
Since the Great Depression, it has never taken this long for the economy to begin creating jobs after emerging from a recession. After the last recession ended in 1991, it took 14 months for employment to begin expanding. Current problems with the economy have gone on nearly twice as long, 26 months.
Most economists said they expect more jobs to be created in 2004 as the recovery gains steam. But many also cautioned that the White House's prediction is aggressive, noting that only 112,000 jobs were created in January.
Economists had expected 150,000 new jobs in Friday's Labor Department report for January. Most have said the economy should be creating 200,000 to 300,000 jobs a month to sustain the recovery.
In a normal year, Bush's hope for 2.6 million new jobs probably could be achieved, said Douglas Porter, senior economist with BMO Nesbitt Burns, an investment firm affiliated with the parent company of Chicago's Harris Bank.
"Unfortunately, this recovery has been marked most notably by persistent weakness in the labor market," Porter said. "I suspect that will continue to be a hallmark of the recovery."
Paul Kasriel, chief economist at Chicago's Northern Trust, was more pessimistic.
"I doubt that we will see that many new jobs created this year," he said of the White House prediction. "I think it will be 1.5 million, which is better than a poke in the eye." But he added, "Even that is iffy."
Much of the report repeats the administration's previous economic prescriptions. For instance, it says the Bush tax cuts must be made permanent to have their full beneficial effect on the economy.
Social Security also must be restructured to let workers put part of their retirement funds in private accounts, the report argues. Doing so could add nearly $5 trillion to the national debt by 2036, the president's advisers note, but the additional borrowing would be repaid 20 years later and the program's long-term health would be more secure.
Compiled from reports by the Los Angeles Times, the Chicago Tribune and Knight Ridder Newspapers.
© Copyright 2004 Seattle Times
|
Yeah tell that to someone who has been laid off and has kids to feed. |
|
|
| occrider |
But it WILL have a positive influence on the long run economy and it IS a structural reform of the labor market that is/was an inevitability Dave. But, you're well aware of my views so perhaps I should leave the economics discussion to the polit forum :).
And agreed bush is an idiot for saying something like that publicly. |
|
|
| Highmay |
| quote: | Originally posted by galdamez
You couldn't tell by reading the thread title?
So now you are you beautiful?
That is how you say...
GEIGH |
Ok this response was so pathetic, it's not even worthy of a proper retort...I'd stick to taking picutres if I were you...
And you.
| quote: | Originally posted by LuNaSeA
dont ing ruin a thread bc you got Personal Beef with me, jayme, why dont you try being mature about it and actually PM me and DEAL WITH IT YOURSELF. as far as i can see,
and if you really think this thread sucks, why dont you tell us why, oh genius? |
Well, I told you I was going to tell you why this thread sucks once I got my beauty sleep. I was running on an hour's worth of sleep today because I stayed up last night studying like the dilligent student that I am...
I'm smarter than to ruin a thread because of personal beef. I'm going to ruin this thread (for you, at least) beacuse of the dumbass comments made on here. Why don't we start by highlighting this sentence: "we're having a perfectly legit and mature discussion about the president and actions being taken against his lying." A legit discussion about his lying? Where was the Clinton thread about HIS lying?? Or how about every thread about every other president about their lying? Wake up and smell the Columbian coffee: Bush didn't lie, he was just wrong about the weapons. That's all. He had to make a call based on the intelligence he had. It didn't come totally to fruition. Ok, he was wrong. happens. Better that we got a malignent narcissist out of power, though, don't you think? Or are you just going to forget that minute detail? Political commentary isn't your M.O. Please don't start now.
Now let's take a look at some of the other comments fueled by emotion which lead to irrationality:
| quote: | Originally posted by galdamez
At the expense of our billions of tax dollars? American lives? Come on, there's violence and hate all over the world. You don't even have to look very far. We've got people suffering in this country with the crime as it is.
In my dad's home country (El Salvador) they've been at war for the past 20 years. Many other places have feuds going on, such as North/South Korea, Ireland, Israel, and the Middle East. When you have war and corrupt leaders you're going to have inhumane acts, but you just can't expect the U.S. to save the day and make the world a better place. We've got problems of our own to deal with! |
Uh, America rules the world. We instill democracy everwhere. Miss the memo, bro? Let's put it in terms you tranceheads understand: America's official theme song is Active Sight - THE SEARCH FOR FREEDOM.
| quote: | Originally posted by LuNaSeA
as far as i'm concerned, this country is TURNING INTO a dictatorship..
we actually put sadam in power.. our gov't constantly spits in the wind and it then lands on our face a few years later.. we're censuring bush BECAUSE HE IS A LIAR. i don't give a about sadam right now.. it's about him, his filthy-rich family (bc of oil companies he and daddy owns), and his disgusting STUPID antics...
|
Oh, ok...We'll just throw out the judicial and legislative branches of government. Oh yeah. Let's throw out politics as we know it. America is turning into a dictatorship!! Run for you lives!! We have absolutely NO SAY in what goes on in DC!! You know, there's this thing that's been dominating our news the past few weeks. What are they called? Primaries? Covered because of our power of voting? Riiiiiiight...I could go on but I wanna hear some EDM. Pete Moss is DJing tonight...
| quote: | Originally posted by intelligent77
well at least i know that my husband wasn't there in vain...
iraq needed to be rid of Sadamn... why keep such recklass hate and evil over there
weapons of mass destruction or not...
...how many of you think it was okay for CHILDREN to be slaughtered? and people to be surpressed the way they were...
everyone is so quick to judge for their whatever reasons.. but i've seen the behind the scene pictures... i almost puked... and to see REAL dead people like that is HORRIFYING.. let alone to know some of the horrifying thing Sadamn Insane did...WTF? I'm not complaining!!!
watch your kid or girlfriend die in your arms from a dictatorship such as his.. and tell me it wasn't worth it! |
THANK YOU!! You are the voice of reason, even though you ARE a Republican :p... |
|
|
|
|
