Have our president learned?

One whole day. Gee, that'd be fantastic if the other 2,920 days were/are done with that in mind.

Especially when you consider the trouble that Israel has been been the Palestinians through.

Your art is very great, i look up to you for it.


(But i have to say this, though i don't vote Repuplican usually Libertarian).

...unlike your politics, which are only banging the same liberal drum where only Democrats like 'war monger' Bill Clinton - who got us into 40 wars during his presidency, by the way, are heralded as 'peace' presidents. - remember Rhawanda, Bosnia, Indonesia, Somlia to name only 4.

I don't see many people talking about his record much, he took credit when he did nothing, (a balanced deficit passed down from a president 14 years earlier - no one can give a definitive answer on WHAT he did to 'balance' the budget, or was that along with the papers Sandy Berger mistakenly destroyed?) vetoing anything passed by the then republican congress and cutting the military by two thirds, (what goaded on Al Queda to attack us in 911 in the first place, ie a weakened military) ask anyone that was in the army during his administration for verification. And manipulation of the media by the salzberg family pro democrat begun in 1948.

Bush has been reactionary mostly, attacking after every other avenue had been exhausted, i seem to remember how in hindsight E-V-E-R-Y single country that was not a third world nation, communist or radical Islam all reported WMD's being developed in Iraq, - where is it all now?
...isn't it astounding that the country that declared War on the USA in 1977, (then president Carter did nothing about it at the time) - now amazingly has all this 'instant' technology for developing a nuclear bomb.

As well as Where are the majority of IUD's made as well as rockets - yet we are still not at war with them??? a clue; they attacked our embassy and held the staff hostage for 277 days, the Nazis did the same thing preceeding WW2 as well as the Japanese.

The other reason for declaring war on Germany... which war by the way did not completely end until Joesph Mengele was assinated by MASADA in 1974, ...terrorist nazis were never reported about since the war was supposedly ended in 1945.

- Myself unfortunately i am too old to go into the army and shoot Islamic Radicals bent upon murdering all Gays, (Furries included) in the world and imposing Sharia law upon every man, woman (second class citizens above slaves in Islamic law) and child, in the entire world. but i will when Hillary or Obama imposes Sharia law as president to 'appease' the Islamic fundamentalists and end Iraq and Afganistan, as a vigillante kind of like "Red Dawn".

in about 20 years from now in hindsight historians will reflect upon Bush being the most maligned president in history from the first day of his presidency - that is unless Sharia law is not repealled.

lest everyone forget Veitnam was blamed on Nixon even though he inherited it from the Democrats - then the democrat controlled congress cut funding for the war enabling General Trih of the NVA to 'win'. little know facts.

It's generally refreshing to see a different viewpoint, especially one with a conservative slant (not all that common around here), but I think you've gone past having a "slant" and into a bit of an avalanche.

Um... thought you might like to know that under Clinton we experienced the longest lasting period of peace-time economic expansion in all of American history. He also balanced the budget and left us with a federal surplus. Sure, he had a few fuckups, but name one president who hasn't! He also left office as the most popular exiting president in history.

There was no federal surplus under Clinton; the money that was supposed to go into the Social Security and Medicare Trust Funds was included as federal income and immediately spent, but the present value of the debt created thereby was moved off the books. This is what Enron did. The GAO has refused for years to certify the federal budget because of this and other accounting frauds. If you apply the same GRAAP (Generally Recognized and Accepted Accounting Principles) standards to the federal budget that are legally required for all publicly traded companies, the deficit last year was really about $3.5 trillion, mostly due to the \"Trust Funds\" being filled with IOUs - debt rather than real wealth. Just like Bush, Clinton excelled at lying. Bush is worse than Clinton in one very important respect that is overlooked by almost everyone: his Medicare Part D has increased the unfunded deficit by about $40 trillion, which is much more than Social Security + Medicare Parts A + B + C deficits combined. If you want to see the consequences roaring down the road, look at this:
http://www.furaffinity.net/journal/235604/

You show me yours and I'll show you mine:

http://www.millercenter.virginia.ed.....sident/clinton

...Clinton also defied his critics by surviving an array of personal scandals, turning the greatest fiscal deficit in American history into a surplus...
___________________________________________________________________

http://www.whitehouse.gov/history/p.....ents/bc42.html

He was the first Democratic president since Franklin D. Roosevelt to win a second term. He could point to the lowest unemployment rate in modern times, the lowest inflation in 30 years, the highest home ownership in the country's history, dropping crime rates in many places, and reduced welfare rolls. He proposed the first balanced budget in decades and achieved a budget surplus.
___________________________________________________________________

Wiki: His policies, on issues such as the North American Free Trade Agreement, have been described as "centrist."[4] [5] Clinton presided over the longest period of peace-time economic expansion in American history, which included a balanced budget and a federal surplus.
__________________________________________________________________

http://www.brookings.edu/articles/2.....ce_schick.aspx

....The battle cry of Bill Clinton's 1992 presidential campaign has been recycled to explain how a $290 billion budget deficit has been transformed into a $100 billion surplus....
__________________________________________________________________

In August 1993, Clinton signed the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993, which passed Congress without a single Republican vote. It raised taxes on the wealthiest 1.2% of taxpayers,[35] while cutting taxes for 15 million low-income families and making tax cuts available to 90% of small businesses.[36] Additionally, it mandated that the budget be balanced over a number of years, through the implementation of spending restraints.
__________________________________________________________________

I'm not saying you are wrong, I'm only saying that I have found a wealth of knowledge very contrarian to what you are espousing.

The GAO (General Accountability Office, previously called the General Accounting Office) and the Social Security and Medicare Trustees reports disagree with you on the real deficit. I agree with you that the Clintons did amazingly well getting out of scrapes (including Hillary's utterly fraudulent cattle futures exploit), but that is truly inconsequential compared to the economic wreckage that he and all other recent presidents and congresses have created.

Here is the problem: If you buy a retirement annuity from an insurance company, they are required by law to actually invest your money in real wealth. For example, most of the airplanes aren't owned by airlines; they are really owed by insurance companies who the airlines pay to use them. Insurance companies, whether for retirement or health care, are NOT permitted to be run like a Ponzi scheme where current payouts are covered by current payins with no real wealth saved to cover future payouts if payins drop below payouts. That is exactly what is going to happen when the Medicare trust fund goes cash flow negative in 2012 and the Social Security trust fund goes cash flow negative in 2017. Read the Trustees' reports.

The reason that Clinton claimed that there was a surplus is that he (and all presidents and congresses since Nixon) have used an accounting scam called the "unified budget." This includes Social Security and Medicare tax income which is then immediately spent to buy votes. Left out of the accounting is the present negative (liability) value of the future payouts that the Medicare and Social Security trust funds will have to make. This multi trillion dollar liability is left off the books! That is biggest reason that the GAO won't certify the federal budget. It is as if a retirement annuity company immediately spent all the premium payments and put IOUs in a filing cabinet.

The Social Security and Medicare trustees have clearly stated that either future payouts will have to be cut by 30% or payroll taxes increased by 60%. Either would be political suicide. So the government is inflating away the value of their promises. The payouts are indexed to the Consumer Price Index which is grossly bogus due to "quality adjustments." Have your living expenses really increased only 2.5% in the past year?

Clinton never had a surplus. Nowhere near. There hasn't been a real federal budget surplus since Eisenhower, which was easy back then when there were over 20 working taxpayers for each retiree, and since Social Security was only 20 years old and there was no Medicare.

Governments have inflated their way out of debts throughout recorded history. Wiemar Germany did that to escape their WWI reparations. I've got some multi trillion mark stamps to show what happened. Then came the Adolph Hitler stamps...

Correction: If I recollect correctly, Kennedy had a real surplus in one year, too, as a result of his relative fiscal conservatism on spending combined with the economic stimulation of his huge tax cuts. Note however, that the ratio of tax payers to retirees was far higher then than now, and that Medicare didn't exist until Johnson. Don't expect a replay. Of course, if Ron Paul were president...

Interesting. If this is true, why isn't there massive uproar? People should be burning shit on the whitehouse lawn because of this. I'm not saying this is untrue just because there isn't uproar, but I'd sure like to know why people aren't being held accountable.

mostly it is because the media made a deal with Harry Truman and the Democrats in 1948. They (the Salzberg family) will only be favarable in reporting about the Democrats, ( being silent if not suppressing any bad news) and if the Democrats sign legislation making the media empire immune from fraud or any legislation that would make it criminal to lie about reality.

Anyone else; yep it is okay to constantly badger them in the media ie newspapers, television, professional bloggers-journalists etc. or outright lie. - if it it is printed in the news it has to be true, right? "space aliens aducted President Clinton's brother" - National Enquirer!

Damn right! And on the steps of Congress, too!! The reason that you don't hear about this is simple: few people know anything about economics, and no politician (except for Ron Paul now, and Daniel Patrick Moynahan way back when) is going to be the willing bearer of terrible news. You can get the Social Security and Medicare Trustees' annual reports in PDF format free. The latest one (which came out early in 2007) is about 200 pages long. When reading it, just remember to pay attention to the dates when cash flow goes negative, not the dates when the "trust funds run out of money." Those dates are far in the future but totally unimportant since the "assets" in the "trust funds" are merely IOUs, not airplanes, boxcars, or office buildings. Taxpayers are going to be terribly bloodied when they have to pay those IOUs off. The magnitude of the tax increases would cause a serious permanent recession if not a depression. Unfortunately, Congress uses a static revenue model which assumes that earning behavior is not effected by major changes in taxes. Bullshit!

I think you have a pretty funny definition of \"war\". =D

Oh gods, why do I dip my tiddlies in politics once again. You can hardly compare a few relatively small UN and international supported actions in a few countries (why do you list Rwanda bbw?) with executing an ill-conceived plan (which has existed on paper since at least 98) guaranteed to throw the middle-east into turmoil for at least a generation with massive looting of the American treasury as a bonus.

Where did you get the idea that a weakened US military was the source of the 9/11 attacks? They'd never stopped trying and it was a relaxation of the vigilance that the Clinton administration had accorded Al-Q that allowed it. Remember how high of a priority they were for Bush-Co? And if a country that spends 45% of the worlds' military budget can't catch one man, what will doubling that do? Why are Britain and France successful in controlling terrorism when their budgets are so much smaller? By the way, the terrorists did win since Bush gave them exactly what they had asked for, a military withdrawal from Saudi-Arabia (leaving 20B worth of installations that they'd paid the Bin-Ladens to build).

Bush has been reactionary mostly, attacking after every other avenue had been exhausted

Three words. Downing Street Memo. Plans were laid in 98. Remember Rumsfeld's actions the day of 9/11... look for any connection with Iraq, push it. It brings to mind Churchill's quote "You can always count on Americans to do the right thing - after they've tried everything else."

i need about three days to get my sources in order. Mostly they come from Retired Military Lt. Colonel Robert Patterson's "Dereliction of Duty", as well as numerous articles via Invester's Businesss Daily editorial page also listing thier sources.
Lt Col. Patterson was never brought into court or sued nor was his book ever critisized by the Clinton's, ...why? every other book ever written explaining the Ex-president's role was sued or made to retract their statements! E-X-C-E-P-T the "Dereliction of Duty" author. interesting no?
Also concerning the Salzberg slant on the intentional bias in media reporting was within a documentary that was actually made upon another subject the creation of the IRS and the Federal Reserve. the documentary is FredoomtoFascism and can still be found on Google.
One thing that can only be verified by common sense analysis is the continueing denial of the Democrats in the goals achieved during the current administration as well as the fact that the Economy has NOT fallen into Rescession/Depression or iminently completely collapsed. Also the 'Surge in Iraq' amazing has coincided with a general lack of big headlines in how Al Queda is winning in Iraq, something the Democrats rather blatantly want to see happen. To obtain complete control of the government the Democrats want a return to 1974, taxing the so called rich.
Think about this for a minute if you were lets say making something like 800 dollars an hour in your job, (you are in fact a surgeon in a New York hospital), you have to charge that much even though you are paid 25% of that! The hospital where you work takes the rest as part of your contract, now you still get to pay on the full amount in Tax even though you do not 'get' the money.
Also you have to pay malpractice insurance which are only taking anopther 20% out of you. These are this high due to the lawyers being awarded such lofty sums like how John Edwards made enough money to go into politics upon.
so what is 05% of 800 an hour? it is about what 40 dollars an hour roughly the same as a foreman in an factory, except that foreman does not have to pay back that monsterous college loan over the first thirty of so years of his.her medical career. So who is rich???
UAW GM autoworkers make something like 74 dollars an hour, 15% goes to Union dues, (basically bribe money to fund the democrats).
Senators make something like 250,000 to 300,000 year. Congressmen make about 150,000 to 175,000 a year. Lobbyists start at about 350,000 to 500,000 a year. so who are the rich again???
Myself i have yet to actually make more than 20,000 a year. the poverty level is 28,000 a year. So Atomicat where are you on this chart?

As for plans being made in 98' Clinton refused to have Bin Laden arrested when he was caught by the Yemeni police in the 98' Master's Golf Tournament. Sandy Berger needed to get his okay, but was never given the order because he could not be bothered during the Tournament. Bin Laden was allowed to go free, there was only a 35 minute window to keep him in custody... little known fact from "Dereliction of Duty". So what were you saying?

You won't catch me defending the Democrats. They're part and parcel of the same machine (good cop bad cop). I think the entire system is a farce and should be razed to the ground. Institute parliamentary democracy like we have up here. It's a flexible system that responds to the voters and isn't that what a democracy should be? Right now we've got a minority government which means everyone has to compromise. Radical swings are buffered by having more than two parties.

The doctor example is completely unrepresentative of the top 1% that the Reps have been giving ridiculous tax breaks to. The Senator example is also completely unrepresentative. Very good examples and hand picked if you want to show how awful the lives of the well-off are though. It's all greed. For instance, nobody twisted anybody's arms to sign those sub-prime mortgages.

My own situation? Not representative either. I hit a concrete wall of catastrophic illness. With time and the help of our godless communist dictatorship I'll be able to support myself again. Have had to completely switch tracks though. New career? Rural photographer and fix-it boy.

Hmmm, our dollar hit $1.10 vs yours recently, that's unheard of. The US economy is locked in a bit of a MAD structure with the asian economies. If they ever want what's locked up in those 30-year T-bills they know that may be a final straw for the US, their major cash-cow.

Canada then eh? about n about in a boat, hehehehe


I actually have Canadian friends believe it or not, they all live in Vancover or Windsor. Where are you, in Quebec?

I'm in northern Manitoba, check my gallery for some spiffy stuff. Well thank goodness, the last time I had the nerve to mention that my life was saved by our medical system I was called a parasite. But that was from one of those Ayn Rand freaks. Gotta love a philosophy that can so consistently crank out assholes.

So you understand then how I feel about the two party system. NUTS!!! Here a small party can have real power and a big party can be utterly wiped out. Shit, when we kicked Mulroney out their party didn't even have offical party status when the dust settled! To have two sides of the same coin run things like their own little play-toy for generation upon generation is sheer insanity.

Most people don't read Jefferson which is too bad because he was utterly brilliant. I consider him to be so far ahead of his time that he'd be completely comfortable in the here and now. He saw the need for an almost complete revolution in every generation and I've no doubt that he'd be black-bagged and disappeared these days.

this is what the united states democracy is. if you vote democrat you are one of the chosen few, ie the Lord and master of the manner.

if you are anybody else you are a Serf. I am a serf.

unless i change my stripes and run for political office then i will have to try to sleep at night knowing i am the root cause of why the USA is going down the tubes, but then i will be able to laugh all the way to the bank every morning!

- i would be supremely stupid if i did run as any other party than the Democrats, i'd have the media always on my side.

I'd N-E-V-E-R lose!!!

Note: with the media on my side that means i can lie my ass off about everything, change my platform on a whim, and deny truth, because the media is run by one family that always only reports favorably on any democrat regardless!!! !

oh yes it is true my slant is this i belong to a political group that wants to outlaw lobbists, and require truth in government, and by this statement that would mean i am a anti-democrat/ anti- republican. :)

like who? Teddy Kennedy? Harry Reid? Newt Gingrich? Nancy Pelosi? John Edwards? Hillary Clinton? Jerry Brown? Barack Obama? Richard Nixon? Bob Filner?

How about...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cynthia_McKinney
I wanna paint her house and gap her spark-plugs! Oh, and give her a foot-rub.

Or an honest woman ya sexist pig! ;)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cynthia_McKinney

Being a socio-libertarian myself, i fidn your take to be... Conservative and Republican, not Libertarian.

<i>vetoing anything passed by the then republican congress and cutting the military by two thirds, (what goaded on Al Queda to attack us in 911 in the first place, ie a weakened military)</i>

And your proof of this claim? Terrorists don't attack countries becuase of weak militaries. No "strongeR" military (and I am definitely for that) could have prevented this issue. Bad Intel and allegied apathy of the government (which, wow, was BUSH's government) caused 9/11.

<i>but i will when Hillary or Obama imposes Sharia law as president to 'appease' the Islamic fundamentalists and end Iraq and Afganistan, as a vigillante kind of like "Red Dawn".</>
Oh get REAL. God need a tin foil hat next? If you SERIOUSLY believe this, I have some ocean front property in northern Arizona to sell you.

All of your claimed "facts" are opinion or rhetoric. Present them as such, not fact. Anything else makes you a liar.

i voted libertarian the last time. im community of the people now. i vote for the non-lawyer, non-Islamic fanatic lover. and yes i will defend your rights too versus Sharia law concessions. I even own guns, and can hit in a handprint at 30 yards with either hand (pistol) or with a bow and arrow 300 yards.
my facts are from these sources, Freedomtofascism a documentary by Russo on Google.
Dereliction of Duty - Lt. Col. Robert Patterson
Invester's Business Daily - editorial page 2006-2007
The Economist 2007
If i am restating lies then the previous sources are all lieing as well.
- none of them have yet been brought to court for fraud nor libel.
You calling me a liar makes you appear conceited. myself i'm going back to my art. bye!

Bye, won't miss yas ^^

You did not prove that Clinton or Obama would concied and allow national sharia law here. THAT was a lie by trying to pass it off as fact.

Have an opinion? FINE, be welcome to it. Thats the wonderful thing about free speech. But don't pass it off as fact. that irritates.

And lets see... An editorial, a Book this is essentially an editorial, and ... well never read the Economist, so I will have to go look at that.

editorials are again OPINION.

go read your New York Times then as fact, go read your Boston Globe as fact, go read your Washington Post as fact, go read your Los Angeles Times as fact - all these, are ALL owed by the same familly the Salzbergs, the only practitioners of double dipping in the coutry of ANY company, corporate or otherwise.
when it happens that the democrats snatch defeat from the jaws of victory it will be fact, Obama is Apostate right now since he used to be Muslim, that would mean he is marked by death by any Iman paid twenty dollars for a Fatwah, (edict to do an action of faith in Islamic law/Sharia law ie a death sentence)
I'm drawing now see yaz, stay safe Dog, lest the fundamentalists get yez, continue being blind! it is the best way to be a victim.
ooh i think i'll do a series about a democrat otter now, hey thankies the adventures of Iggie van Notter ...good name hehehehehee!

well gosh gee willikers looks like it is Hillary to the rescue, like a sharp stick in the Eye; retired General Kerr is openly Gay and was miraculously allowed by CNN to post a Utube and a follow up question when he was at the Republican debates last night.
Woot! seems the General is the top Gay in charge of the steering commitee of Democrat retirees appointed by Hillary (her majesty).
Naw she didn't have anything to do with him posing a question at the Republican debates even though he was able to miraculously also get through a waiting list of over five hundred questioners, AND be able to completely hoodwink the CEO's of CNN as to his political affiliations. Hehehehee, he can be found on Google no less!
Now to make this case i have to add is this an example of the boobery she is capable of in appointing this guy to her staff in the first place, letting him make an end run around her even if he did the entire thing completely on his own???
And Am i therefore a liar in linking her to a probable course of 'Allowing' Sharia law also that far fetched, now???
Balls in your court My fine Otter-buddy!
hehehehe!!!

(now i say 'a sharp stick in the eye' because of this too; he is openly Gay, he is a democrat, he is working for Hillary right now, and he has brought this knavery to the cause of all Gays everywhere, including Furries. this underhanded trick is part and parcel of what kind of people Hillary employs, it pisses me off that he was allowed to embarrass US, If she has any shread of respectability she should fire him, especially IF he acted on his own. Only time will tell. if she does nothing then the truth is glaringly obvious, ...she might not have oredered it, but by inaction she approves of it, and the discredit and outright harm it does to the entire Gay community is completely unacceptaple!)

oh yes there were also numerous other people that were allowed to Utube in thier questions Most were for Oboma and Edwards, one girl even wore a John edwards for presedent shirt when she made her question!
How could all these people even be able to get on at all in a Republican debate. If nothing else heads should roll over at CNN. If nothing of the kind even happens it is once again that fact that democrats can do no crime punishable ever and can get away with blatantly anything. And there is no other party in the USA. it is a one party system, we have been taken over by Social Democrat leftists. The democrats in this fasion should at least call it what they are the Polit Bureau - ie the inner party immune from the people serving only thier own interests along the lines of Social-democracy. meaning even the vote has no meaning!

Actually--I am not a "liberal drum banger", I just hate George W. Bush. He is the worst thing that's ever happened to this country--at least, President-wise. Bill Clinton did NOT get us into 40 wars...he used military action where such was warrented, like ANY US President is forced to do from time to time to protect our interests. I am also not anti-military--we HAVE to have a strong military, esspecially in the world we live in these days. But that doesn't mean we can just waltz around the world doing whatever we want.

Bush INVADED a country--with no specific provocation WHILE we were already at war with the actually attakers from 9/11. He is an idiot.

I am not one of those people who believes that all Republicans are evil and all Dems are angels. Quite the contrary--I simply feel that the Dems are the lesser of evils...give me another choice--if you can wrest control of our limiting 2 party system from the Rs & Ds.

I'm glad you like my art at least. ^0^
*Hugs*

i proof of the 40 war Mr. Puppy.
Every other country in the entire western civilized world agreed that poor old Saddam was creating Radiological, Biological, Chemical and nuclear weapons at the time.
And How is it that several nations ALSO attacked Iraq, a little remembered fact.
Someone else decided to attack a country that i still despise, well two actually even though both are now dead, John Fizgerald Kennedy and Lynndon Baines Johnson niether of them were brought to be reviled by the Media empire for thier crimes!!!
Myself i do not support the ideation of a combination of Church and state, ie the Republican platform, nor do i want control by government deciding what i should live my life within, ie the Democrat platform. The Independents, Green Party and Libertarians are simply Democrats of a different flavoring. I'm not a fan of Socialists nor communists either nor Facists and dictators like Castro, Putin and Chavez. France and Germany both have a broken system of government.
However every four years a group of delegates appointed by each state in a proscess outside of any citizen's vote gives a figurehead for one side to adore and the other side to revile. Whatever the person when they are 'voted' in, they are darlings, by the time it is time for them to go thay are the worst villians on the surface of the planet since only bad news sells papers!
Except for the factor of this, who do you believe to tell you the truth, journalists? or Bloggers? both have exactly the same agenda and many are one in the same. So how do you figure out what is true and what is not? and further how do you arrive at this truth? do you test and experiment like i do or do you blindly allow yourserlf to believe de facto what the newspaper arranges for your consumption. I can give you the same proofs for my arguement, Foxeystallion can for his arguement also. All that you can use as far as i can tell is the same daily plate of shizzle offered up by the media empire's fifth collumn hate campaign.
Or can't you see a lie as it is told to you, I don't take things at face value if they are thought out and arrainged for best spin and political correctness. why do you?
You were born after i was so you did not develop the ability to read between the lines. Also no one will tell the truth about anything anymore. The only way you can get how people actually react is to kick them in the balls first to get to the 'real person' before you ask your questions.
This is pretty much how it is, you have to slap your friends in the face to find out how they really feel about you.
In real life if i ever meet you how i am talking to you now is how i really am. i respect you because of what art i have seen you produce. I respect you for how you have gone about your life.
I respect you for announcing your sexual preference in the face of open hostility from those around you.
I put you and Foxeystallion on a higher pedastle than i put myself.
I haven't 'come out' yet. i'm still terrified. I hide behind the persona of a character i created in a Role playing game i invented.
underneath i am unsure and very lonely. i will probably be alone the rest of my life, living with and around Gays i am relaxed. but letting the world know who i am is too scary still. I've fought the world before, it is nigh impossible. It does not care, it will devore you. people that have created this world that I live in have stacked too much against me to reveal my deepest fears to the light of reality.
You did!
for presidents there is zero i can do to influence them. for politics nothing i can do will change one iota.
I answer these blogs because of the rampant blindness i see. I answer them because i kind of wanted to be noticed. instead i am reviled because i have always supported the underdog. I am hated because i have an opinion other than popular. i was never popular, well only to a small circle of friends until they figured out my sexual preferences. Then as far as they were concerned that was all i was, something to to be hated.
and now here too... .

...Oh my god, I love you.

The man's trying desperately to salvage something worthwhile to call his legacy, given that we all know when the troops leave Iraq is gonna collapse like a burning house of cards in a hurricane.

YAY ONE DAY OF PEACE

only 255 times 2007 more years to go for STATIC WORLD PEACE!

oh wait no i didn't really think that one out, like, at all, because the earth started billions of years ago, not 2007 years ago! haaa, blonde moment!

He has nothing to lose anymore, how many of his staff have already ditched, he may as well try something. heh

It is coming sad after these last nightmarish seven years, but I hope some tough work goes into this.

Back in the 60's a book was written called "The Ugly American". An observation of Americans' egocentric childish view of the world and their place in it. The title of the book if it were written today could also include the words fat and whiney.

When History writes its paragraph of George W. Bush it will record that his single biggest mistake was in believing that the citizens of the United States were better than they actually had become.

Thank God for the present crop of presidential candidates, one of who will right that mistake. Their estimates of those they seek to lead are set much much lower.