Cindy Sheehan throws in the towel

Bush is too dumb to be the devil.

The devil anology (to the extent it applies anywhere) best fits guys like Stalin, Hitler, and Saddam, guys who were crafty and shrewd, but had an abominable sadistic streak. To the extent true evil exists, it was those guys.

But Bush was basically just a simple-minded dolt who was insanely unqualified to be in that position and relied on the WRONG people to tell him what to do in the neo-conservative crowd. But he's not a guy who's gonna take sadistic pleasure in torture or genocide. He's an incompetent moron who's done unfathomable harm, but he's not evil.

 

Anyone so radically believing in God's guidance and mandate is absolutely that dangerous.

 

Give it a rest, Cowbell. We get it already. You think Bush is the dumbest, most evil man to ever walk the face of the earth. Your opinion, probably shared by a large number of the folks here.

You run for office. Give it a shot, since you have all the damn answers. Get busy. You'll probably get at least 20-30 votes from here.

 

That's a valid point.

Meaningless, but valid.

For the real devil resides in the people who got behind this rube (Cheney et al), knowing that once in power they could just pull the strings and wait for an excuse ("September the 11th, September the 11th, September the 11th") to change the world.

And by the way . . .

I don't know if Bush takes "sadistic pleasure" in torture and geocide, but I do know the following:

1) He supports the use of torture, so much so that he used one of his hundreds of "signing statements" in an attempt to override McCain's bill prohibiting torture.

2) As governor of Texas, he did mock a woman pleading for her life on death row.

 

I will not give it a rest, asshole, as long as 30 percent of this country is made up of trogs such as yourself who would still vote for this maniac.

 

Years from now, we'll look at films of Bush and, just like with Hitler, wonder how such a ridiculous, pathetic man commanded the adoration and obedience of millions. Historians will have a field day with the last seven years as they try to figure how we let it happen.

The fact that people mocked and/or slandered Cindy Sheehan, Al Gore, Scott Ritter, Howard Dean and Dennis Kucinich while listening respectfully to and taking seriously the delusional rantings of Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, William Kristol and Bill O'Reilly would be a good start.

(And no, righties, I'm not comparing Bush to Hitler -- other than the ridiculous, pathetic part -- so spare us your righteous indignation and Godwin's Law or whatever the hell it is.)

 

You know, I said almost the exact same thing to someone the other day during a discussion on how history will view Bush. (And you wanna talk about spinning shit, that's the greatest spin job ever -- "I've so completely screwed shit up that it'll take 50 years for people to see I wasn't that bad.")

This idea that people will look back and judge Bush and Co. favorably is an absolute dream that's been tossed out by a group of pathetic men who are now grasping at straws. The fact of the matter is, this guy has done nothing -- NOTHING -- in his seven years in office. And he'll do nothing in eight. He's screwed up everything he's touched and broken about two dozen laws. He's violated his oath of office several times, flat out lied so many damn times we've started to count the times that he tells us the truth and has, without shame, done everything but walk up to the average American with a gun in order to take money from us to give to his "base."

I don't blame Cindy Sheehan for anything she did. Was some of it stupid? Looking back, yeah. But no more so than, oh, I don't know, rubbing the shoulders of a female world leader at an international summit. Sheehan got caught up in it all. But the one thing people can't deny is that a whole lot of people, when this Sheehan woman first started making waves, began question just what the hell was going on in Iraq.

 

Up yours, Cowbell. You don't know jack about who I voted for in either 00 or 04. It sure wasn't Bush.

Keep on repeating yourself, though, if it makes you feel important.

 

Just out of curiosity -- what group of men is claiming that people will look back on GWB favorably?

 

I think it may be longer than 50 years with Bush. The war will probably still be going on then.
I keep hearing people on the right say we need to achive "victory." In the war in Iraq or the war on terror? I have yet to hear what these people consider victory in either case.
And how, exactly, can the war on terror be won? Will there ever be a world without terrorism? Can there ever be a world without terrorism?

 

Exactly -- not only have I not heard an exit strategy, I have not heard a definition of what winning this war actually would be.

 

The architects of this war, the entire Kagan family, and an awful lot of rightwing pundits who are using the "Truman was unpopular, too" argument.