Calling all Belgians

On Thu, 05 Apr 2007 23:06:04 -0400, John Forrest Tomlinson
wrote:

Voting for GWB the first time is one thing. Supporting him now - after
Iraq, after the power grabs and the attempts to exand presidential
power, after the massive government spending and insider dealing,
after Katrina. Well, anyone who still supports him is in denial.

I'd vote for him again if I could. He will go down in history as one
of the great Presidents in history. One of the things I admire most
about him is his ability to infuriate his enemies.

On Thu, 05 Apr 2007 23:08:51 -0400, John Forrest Tomlinson
wrote:

I hope this scandal drags on and on -- it's showing the public how
BushCo plays the game. It's sad for the Justice Department, but it's
great politics to watch.


I hope it drags on and on as well because no one cares.

So far, all the Democrats have done is spin their wheels.

Not one piece of legislation has reached the Presidents desk.

On 5 Apr 2007 22:22:43 -0700, "
wrote:

In principle, it's a bad thing to have the
president so isolated and out of options when he still
has to govern the country for almost two years.

Actually, it's the Democratic Congress that have no options other that
to be petty. Bush is running the show and will until he leaves
office.

On Fri, 06 Apr 2007 08:39:13 -0400, Jack Hollis wrote:

On Thu, 05 Apr 2007 23:06:04 -0400, John Forrest Tomlinson
wrote:

Voting for GWB the first time is one thing. Supporting him now - after
Iraq, after the power grabs and the attempts to exand presidential
power, after the massive government spending and insider dealing,
after Katrina. Well, anyone who still supports him is in denial.

I'd vote for him again if I could. He will go down in history as one
of the great Presidents in history. One of the things I admire most
about him is his ability to infuriate his enemies.

You're being facetious, correct?

--
Bob in CT

On 5 Apr 2007 15:45:16 -0700, "Bill C"
wrote:

I'm betting history treats Bush a lot more like Grant, Hoover, and
Nixon, than Lincoln.

These are at worst mediocre presidents, in some cases overtaken by a
scandal largely beyond their control (Grant) [OK, he was a weak
administrator] and another a president that was one of the most
competent, but with major character flaws (Nixon). History will
probably be fascinated by the Nixon-Kissinger duo for the next
century. In any event at least Grant and Nixon accomplished far more
than Bush before and, in Grant's case, after their presidency than
Bush has to date.

I do find it interesting that three different Republican pundits have
said that essentially Nixon was too much of a moderate to be nominated
by the Republican party today.

Curtis L. Russell
Odenton, MD (USA)
Just someone on two wheels...

Ewoud Dronkert wrote in news:461546e3$0
:

Bill C wrote:
Realistically, how tough a job is ambassador to Belgium?

You have to (learn to) speak French and Dutch.


This guy will qualify by ordering andouilette and Heineken.

NS
Sec of State

John Forrest Tomlinson wrote in
:

On 5 Apr 2007 22:22:43 -0700, "
wrote:

it's a bad thing to have the
president so isolated and out of options

He has plenty of options. The problem for him with these options is
that they all involve admissions of major screw-ups, which he won't
do

Bush does admit his mistakes -- he just does it by calling the **** up a
great success, awarding a Medal of Freedom, giving Brownie a pat on the
back while saying he's doing a great job, or otherwise putting a positive
spin on it.

Simple rule -- just apply the rule of opposites to what Dubya says; the
the more successful he claims something is, the more he is really
admitting it is ****ed up.

NS
PR consultant

On Apr 6, 5:39 am, Jack Hollis wrote:
On Thu, 05 Apr 2007 23:06:04 -0400, John Forrest Tomlinson
wrote:
Voting for GWB the first time is one thing. Supporting him now - after
Iraq, after the power grabs and the attempts to exand presidential
power, after the massive government spending and insider dealing,
after Katrina. Well, anyone who still supports him is in denial.

I'd vote for him again if I could. He will go down in history as one
of the great Presidents in history. One of the things I admire most
about him is his ability to infuriate his enemies.

Oceania is at war with Eastasia. Oceania has always
been at war with Eastasia.

Sincerely,
O'Brien

On Fri, 06 Apr 2007 08:31:16 -0500, Curtis L. Russell
wrote:

In any event at least Grant and Nixon accomplished far more
than Bush

Err, Bush accomplished a lot. Destructive stuff, but he got the screw
ups done, big time.
--
JT
****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************

On Apr 6, 6:09 pm, John Forrest Tomlinson
wrote:
On Fri, 06 Apr 2007 08:31:16 -0500, Curtis L. Russell

wrote:
In any event at least Grant and Nixon accomplished far more
than Bush

Err, Bush accomplished a lot. Destructive stuff, but he got the screw
ups done, big time.
--
JT
****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visithttp://www.jt10000.com
****************************

I don't think they will impeach him, but, especially over time, the
books that are going to come out are going to be incredibly damning.
There is just way too much smoke, way too many inside reports, and way
too many questions for this to go away any time soon.

Today's a perfect example. We've got Cheney still linking Saddam and
Al-Qaeda:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6533367.stm

Despite this taken from todays Military.com news report:

Hussein's Prewar Ties to Al-Qaeda Discounted
Washington Post - Free Registration Required | April 06, 2007

Captured Iraqi documents and intelligence interrogations of Saddam
Hussein and two former aides "all confirmed" that Hussein's regime was
not directly cooperating with al Qaeda before the U.S. invasion of
Iraq, according to a declassified Defense Department report released
yesterday. The declassified version of the report, by acting Inspector
General Thomas F. Gimble, also contains new details about the
intelligence community's prewar consensus that the Iraqi government
and al Qaeda figures had only limited contacts, and about its
judgments that reports of deeper links were based on dubious or
unconfirmed information. The report had been released in summary form
in February. More

Sign Up for Newsletter | Email to a Friend | Print This Page |
Military RSS

I used the clip from Military.com to limit the attacks branding it as
left wing conspiracy crap.
There is NOTHING good that can be said for the staging, management
and planning of this fiasco. The military performed magnificently when
the politcians gave a clear objective, got out of the way, and let it
get done. Before that, and since then they've been left with no
rational plan, way too few troops, second rate equipment, and totally
failed diplomacy, all courtesy of this White House and it's flunkies.
Bill C

Just a P.S.

Army Won't Field Rifle Deemed Superior to M4
Military.com | April 06, 2007

The compact M4 carbine - a shortened version of the M16 - that is now
standard issue for most Army troops, some Marines and other
specialized units is facing increased criticism because of its
tendency to malfunction with even the minutest exposure to the
elements. More