If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
What Americans want...
Former Member
Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
Comments
Well we shall see how truly worse off the country will be in two year's time once baby Bush has matched his father's record of ruining the country in the space of 4 years.
Maybe then people will realise how easily they were played for fools by those who have used every opportunity to up the paranoia factor across the nation.
Watch out world, the safety has finally been disengaged from Bush's gun. Im sure he is as excited as a kid in a snowstorm.
The US will pay the price of thsi for years to come. Mark my words. Although, admittedly, it DOES stop the Democrats from being arseholes for a bit
Yes, notably Bush's plan for a "Homeland Security" department. Basically this passed through congress with bi-partisan support but was held up in the Senate, even though the Democrats only had a majority of one.
As for the US voting, perhaps they consider that national security is the most important issue. Having a sound economy really means little if your country is under threat, as many American apprently consider it to be.
When the Democrats were in the "House" under Clinton they didn't seem to take US Security seriously - attacks on USS Cole and US Embassies went pretty much unchecked and I'm sure that this has played a part in the votes cast.
It is worth noting that inspite of this I wouldn't have voted Republican, but then that's probably no surprise. I'm certainly disappointed to see Jeb returned. After President Bush and President Bush jnr., I have this awful feeling that we may yet see President Bush III...
Given the fact that Clinton was a top rate diplomat who knew how to build and maintain coalitions and alliances without holding a gun to the world's head as it were, its no surprise that Sept. 11th ocurred once the Bush doctrine returned to the White House. A fact that has enabled Bush and co to exploit the fear to obvious political advantage (shame shame).
As for perceived threat, well sadly my fellow countrymen failed to put two and two together and see that a large portion of our current insecurities stem from the flagrant "bullyboy" demeanor of US foreign policy under Bush and his corrupt right-wing cohorts.
Further, concerning this Dept. of Homeland Security, it was absolutely correct for the Senate to hold it up, given the fact that the Bush and Ashcroft demands for its composition would not only make it the largest most intrusive single agency in the US government, but moreover that the proposal insisted that this dept. be considered "above the law". Now that my friends is a recipe for abuse and complete disregard for the Constitution if ever there was one.
On a related note, its also no surprise to see Bush's appointee to the head of the SEC Harvey Pitt stepping down for duplicity in his rather suspect appointment of ex CIA director William Webster (a man linked to ongoing corporate fraud investigations) to the accounting oversight committee.
All in all I think we can expect to see little real change to the corruption of corporate America amongst other such niceities with the Republicans now in full control.
First attack on the WTC - Carried out by a group of resident fundamentalists under Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman a blind Egyptian cleric resident in the US at the time.
Attacks on USS Cole and Foreign Embassies - all ocurred abroad and as such are not as I said previously a direct threat to the safety of Americans at home.
Sure, i concur that the crap began to fall under Clinton, however one may also look at this as knock on effects of the posture adopted by Bush Sr. and his means of handling matters. He certainly inspired enough calls for revenge from these terrorist loonies. Now Baby Bush will just add to the mess with his "gun to the head" attitude. It will thus be interesting to see what legacy our next President is left to face once Bush has skipped out the back door feeling all smug and satisfied that he upheld daddy's status quo.
It does never cease to amaze me though how you conveniently avoid the majority of the points I raise and home in on the most minor of those points. Nevermind the corruption already being demonstrated in the first two years of Bush's admin. Nevermind the blatant disregard for the Constitution contained in Bush's vision of the Dept. of Homeland Security. Nevermind that Bush has already had far greater casualties from terrorist acts under his watch.
Yep, wouldnt want to show the weakness of your position by having to face those realities now would we? lol.
Note that I wouldn't have voted for Bush and you'll probably get a better idea of what my personal approach would have been...
You don't think those attacks threatened Americans? Acts of War (which all those attacks were) generally are considered threats to a nation. But they aren't because your hero ignored them, right? And that act (ignoring them) had no effect on the concept that the attacks of September 11 would be successful, I suppose?
Ever been to South-West Asia? Dealt with the culture on a long-term basis?
It is not a culture that values weakness. And Bill Clinton defined weakness. But you think that is fine and acceptable.
You would have the barbarians at the gate.
The only weakness in positions here is yours, because you have yet to have your fucking head kicked in when you show weakness to the barbarians we are discussing. Maybe you should attend a good English football game and find some hooligan to demonstrate the point to you.
As for corruption, I don't remember Bush or his administration taking money from the PRC, that ground still belongs to your hero. Maybe that isn't corruption, maybe it qualifies more as treason.
But the most important thing is that obviously most Americans don't agree with you. And that's how the system works. So, you can continue to look down your nose at those voters, but they have made their voices heard, and you'll just have to cope with it.
If only this had been around 2 years ago...
Perhaps it's caused permanent brain damage and thus the reason for your overt hostility to any of solutions other than violent ones.
As for corruption, no perhaps Bush didnt receive any finances from the PRC but he, Cheney, and Rumsfeld certainly receive enough kickbacks from US industry to satisfy any oversight committee.
Wonder why after all this time there have only been 2 indictments in the Enron case or why the Bush refused to cooperate with the Congressional investigation into the White House associations with Enron senior execs? hmmmm.... you don't want to wade into that quagmire you might find out you are supporting a bigger crook than Clinton could ever hope to be labelled.
As do gun-toting, loud dressing, uneducated, arrogant americans...
Case of engage brain before a comment is made, because neither truly reflect the mass...
Fair enough comment.