Republican Convention – A Celebration of Failure and Ignorance

This post was written by marc on August 30, 2004
Posted Under: Bush,Letters to the Editor,Politics

Letter to the Editor

It’s interesting that the Republican convention is a celebration of all the failures of the Bush administration. Starting with 9-11 a tragedy that happen because Bush was on vacation and ignored all the warnings of the impending attacks.

They praise Bush’s response to 9-11 when his response was to sit there and read a story about a goat to school children rather than scramble fighter jets to take out the terrorists.

Then they celebrate the war in Afghanistan which failed to capture Osama bin Laden. Bin Laden is still free – and we are no longer seriously pursuing him.

They call the surrender of our freedom and liberty the “Patriot Act”.

Then they celebrate that war in Iraq which had nothing to do with 9-11 and they found no weapons of mass destruction and he is now stuck there clueless as to what to do. They overthrew a dictator who was torturing and raping the people and replaced them with Americans to torture and rape the people.

They will go on to celebrate the Bush economy which went from the biggest surplus in the history of the world to the biggest deficit in the history of the world.

The problem with the Republicans is – they think failure is success and that success is failure. They think that ignorance and failure is a virtue.

Reader Comments

I have to agree. I simply cannot watch the convention because it is filled with cheerleading the uncheerable. Praising death and destruction of US military and Iraqis for a fraudulent end. We do not have the perpetrator of the September 11th debaucle but that does not stop the Repulican jubilation. Environment suffers, middle and lower class suffer and the pockets of the rich and those lucky enough to be born into wealth continue to prosper.
George Bush has created the largest deficit in history and he claims to be a Republican. Give me a break! He claims to fight terrorists and yet attacks a country that has nothing to do with radical Islamists. He continues to get a free ride regarding his military service, his business propositions that all went sour and the sordid company he keeps i.e. Karl Rove.
I fear he will win in November and the ecomony and environment will continue the downward spiral. What good is safety when the earth has become so dessicated that no one can prosper? Does GW think about his grandchildren with the fiscal responsibilities and environmental woes or does he only think of himself and his need for a sound bank account and the love of pappy?

#1 
Written By mary on August 30th, 2004 @ 8:06 pm

thachize,
regarding your statements, yes, Clinton did cut funding to many establishments, and yet, while he was president, we experienced a much better economy than we ever have. So what, we were attacked, economy sucks now, so and so. How about the fact that when GW became president, he immediately broke ties/treaties with friendly nations. He completely reversed what Clinton did during his presidency to do what? To cripple our economy and prepare us for war? What does he propose to do wihtout the support of other nations? Oh, so we got Britan on our side, big deal. It sounds like you’re just protecting the Republican parties from all of their flaws. I highly doubt that Bin Laden was ever injured, and if he was, he has probably healed his wounds. An economy that has a good 5-10% of it being invested from saudis who share the same family ties with Bin Laden probably wouldn’t want us to kill one of their members. You seem to be trying to prove that during Clinton’s presidency, everything was so peaceful and he made mistakes that cause our current problems today. Oh, please, don’t be silly, we are always engaged in combat, be it big or small. And yet you blame the defecit on a war that was started for what? IRAQ HAS TERRORIST TIES OH GOD WHAT WILL WE DO?! Please, so does Iran, so does Turkey, so does the whole friggin’ Middle East! More like “OH GOD KUWAIT’S AT IRAQ’S BORDERS! WHAT WILL WE DO?” What we call a Terrorist, they call a Liberator. Be honest, who are you trying to defend? If marc is too far to the left, you are way up in the right’s arse. You couldn’t be more onesided. If you choose to argue at least state some things on the opposing side.

Oh, and about the enviroment, its that kind of talk that gave us skin cancer today.

#2 
Written By John on August 31st, 2004 @ 3:33 am

John,
*skin cancer has been around since the sun has, it is not new. The smallest volcano eruption in your life time has spewed more carbon into the atmosphere than every single combustionable ever made, combined.

*Saddam DID NOT stand by the conditions of the surrender

*Clinton’s economy was not great. ENRON and the NASDAQ made you believe that the economy was goood, but it was all smoke and mirrors. Remember, the NASDAQ was down 50% from its high the day before the election of Bush.

*We didn’t get Osama Bin Laden? If we wounded him , he is healed? Well, he still has not rebuilt his video making studio. The guy hasn’t put out a video since the last smashmouth video came out.

#3 
Written By tomocius on August 31st, 2004 @ 5:56 am

Of course Republicans consider ignorance and failure virtues.

Look who they have as their leader and role model.

#4 
Written By Jay on August 31st, 2004 @ 6:15 am

Sorry Jay, we are just no into rapist

#5 
Written By tomocius on August 31st, 2004 @ 7:50 am

And as long as the country’s addiction to oil continues, the more polluted our skies and rivers and land will become. Yes, volcanoes pollute the sky. But it’s all part of a cycle. There’s a rhyme and reason for things in nature. But nature can’t clean what humans dish out. There’s nothing natural about the things we put in ourselves and the environment. And no, I am not one of those environmental whackos or a vegan. I believe in striking a balance with nature. She is here to provide for us, not for us to pillage and plunder all her resources. We are caretakers of this great planet. We should act like it.

#6 
Written By charlie chingas on August 31st, 2004 @ 10:35 am

Well Wills, let me start out by saying that I am sorry that you had skin cancer. Then I would like to thank you for the science lesson. It is okay that you had to go look it up for me, as I had to go look up that Saddam killed more people than Bush did. You keep doing my science homework, and I’ll keep doing your history homework. My point was that one volcano has done more damage than every car ever made. As true as it is, that is a stupid point. Just because something has been around, does not make it right that we do it. I am sure you are a perfect example of that. You PROBABLY don’t drive a car, and if you do it PROBABLY runs on fuel cells. And it is PROBABLY true that you never use areosol cans. Take your example public and bring awareness to the cause.

#7 
Written By tomocius on August 31st, 2004 @ 10:40 am

I guess you cannot micro-manage every word a guy says. It is the same as you driving a car with a combustionable engine while you chirp of the environment. I do not take every word a guy says and run to the dictionary to pin him down on every word he uses. What Bush was trying to say is that the war on terror may never be WON, but that does not mean we should not fight it. I am sure that there were Presidents who thought the cold war could never be won, but they had the backbone to fight it. I would rather a guy say we might not win, but we are going to fight, than to have a leader who will stick his head in the sand and ass in the air so that we get PORKED by the terrorist.

About that smart car, yes I have heard of it. And it sounds like you have heard of it. So, what is the reason that you do not have one? Are you trying to get one? You do not have to wait until everybody has heard about them to actually go and get one. I am sure everybody has heard of a horse and buggy. Don’t be a phony … WALK YOUR TALK!

#8 
Written By tomocius on August 31st, 2004 @ 11:50 am

Wills, do you at least drive a mini Cooper???

#9 
Written By tomocius on August 31st, 2004 @ 11:51 am

Wtf, on vaction? Apparently you do not know the facts as you think you do. Bush was sitting in a room full of first graders in Florida. Get your facts straight smart guy.

#10 
Written By M. Marshall on August 31st, 2004 @ 4:14 pm

Tom, in response to your post from earlier on your reasoning of having a war when the opposing countries didn’t attack us first, i offer this

WWII:
Yes, we were attacked by Japan and we did declare war on both Japan and Germany. However, after we declared war on Japan, Germany declared war on us. Besides, German U-Boats sunk many of our merchant ships heading towards England, I think that serves enough as an attack to something from us. Wouldn’t it be resonable to enter the war by going against the AXIS evne if certain parties of them didn’t attack us (say Italy)?

Korean War:
At that time, in the beginning of the Cold War, we are doing much of what we’re doing now, declaring war on a hardly existant enemy. What I mean is, if we’re declaring war on terror, back durign the Korean War, you could say that we declared war on COMMUNISM. Same goes for Vietnam.

But see, the fact that most American’s could give a less of shit about history makes them ignorant. You brought up numbers of deaths in our current war compared to the larger amounts in the previous wars. Oh, c’mon. America’s army is pretty damn good with all its state-of-the-art equipment, and we’re going against a bunch of raggy rebels equiped with an AK and probably religious literature. I wonder who’ll have more deaths? In WWII we went against countries like GERMANY & JAPAN. They had considerable wealth, yet we squashed them but, yes, losing a lot of soldiers at the same time. I’m sure you could say that Vietnam, we had advanced weapons, but unlike the open spaced battle grounds of Iraq (most of it is done in desert surroundings), Vietnam had lots of foilage and the Vietcongs were experts in manuvering with guerrilla tactics. AN ENEMY UNDERESTIMATED.

So what have we learned? WWII – all guts and glory, we overthrow Hitler and crush the AXIS. Korean War – we gained land almost all of Korea was ours, until we lost it all and was pushed back to the boundary of communist and independent which we have today. So that was a loss. Vietnam – after retreating and political issues, vietnam was overtaken from the northern communist party, until recently it became independent, mostly ON ITS OWN.

So a war based on the same situation as the last two failed ones (highly advanced soldiers go against rebels) you’d think we’d spend more time being cautious than using heaps of manpower and lives of soldiers to try to win. Hell, this war’s not even over, and when it does, I bet the death count would probably be up there.

#11 
Written By John on August 31st, 2004 @ 7:50 pm

oh and:

– i replyed to thachize’s comments of the rainforest in which he said we had better things that were more important which is completely not true and i gave an example of skin cancer which is caused by UV rays from the holes in the ozone layer that WE created.

– saddam may not have stood on the conditions, but if we had the guy, why didn’t we take him out during the gulf war? seems to me that we were saving his punishment for something much more big.

– clinton’s era may have produced negative results in the stock market and economy and so, but if the bush adminstration had the right mind, wouldn’t they act instead of leaving the economy to fall into a pitfall? his tax cuts may satisfy the general public, but we’re still suffering from high oil prices (which effects nearly everything else.)

– the fact that we overtook iraq should explain the state in whcih the middle eastern media is. remember the news channels of iraq showing the beheadings? they have been shushed so far, and the news station that Bin Laden’s tapes were aired most frequently was shut down for a month, probably to be replaced by an american controlled press. we want the enemy to like us, so we control what they see.

#12 
Written By John on August 31st, 2004 @ 8:03 pm

WILLS SAID … Well, if we are going to hold one side to unreasonable standards, we should hold the other to the same set.

No, I am not holding you to a different standard. It is about choice. You don’t even choose the right thing to do. You want the government to make all of us do it.
“I don’t drive a Mini Cooper because you don’t, and unless the government makes us I won’t, even if it is better for my health and well being.”

THIS IS THE LOGIC THAT WE ARE DEBATING AGAINST! IGNORANCE RUNS RAMPANT IN THIS WORLD!

#13 
Written By TOMOCIUS on September 1st, 2004 @ 7:48 am

tom, you said “No, I am not holding you to a different standard. It is about choice.” does that also include the being pro-choice? or do you pick and choose your battles. i’ve noticed that you do not respond to certain posts when links are placed to back that persons info or opinion. ignorance runs rampant in this world? you’re right about that one. it’s mostly neo-conservatives and right-wing christians. oops, there goes that can of worms…

#14 
Written By charlie chingas on September 1st, 2004 @ 8:35 am

When I say it, I am saying it to point out the flaw in the argument. Some people here want choice but show that they cannot handle choice and that they need dictation. What link did I not respond to.

Charlie I am PRO-CHOICE

I want to CHOOSE what school my tax dollars sends my children to.

I want to CHOOSE what retirement account my hard earned money goes into, so that it is there for when (and if) I get there.

And I want women to be able to CHOOSE what to do with their bodies. You are not happy with that. Now you want me to be for this choice for the exact same reason as you are for it. NOT HAPPENING!

#15 
Written By tomocius on September 1st, 2004 @ 9:05 am

tom, i don’t know where you get the idea that i am anti-choice, or that i am forcing you to choose a certain way. sounded like you posted on the wrong subject. choice? admit it, you want to be like me and start posting on the wrong subjects 🙂

#16 
Written By charlie chingas on September 1st, 2004 @ 11:27 am

Wills, a Mini Cooper is one of the cheaper cars you can buy. The last car that I bought, my FIRST brand new car in my life took me a couple of months to decide. The only reason that I did not get the Mini is that my golf clubs did not fit in the back.

#17 
Written By tomocius on September 2nd, 2004 @ 9:22 am

“his tax cuts may satisfy the general public, but we’re still suffering from high oil prices (which effects nearly everything else.)”

I was under the impression that these constant attacks by insurgent forces in Iraq on the pipelines were the reason the prices are higher -causing a decrease in output.

#18 
Written By Shadow Hawk on September 5th, 2004 @ 10:44 pm

Add a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.