Rick Perry Feels the Love at Americans for Prosperity Summit

As marvelous as this interesting exchange of views has been, perhaps it's time for a moment of reckoning.

As we all know and agree, what's good for the goose is good for the gander.

So, if Bush '43 acted illegally to commence hostilities against a country we were already at war with - but under a broken Cease Fire Agreement, then why wouldn't Obama's murder of bin Laden be illegal?   That certainly wasn't self-defense.  What about the drones murdering innocent civilians and killing citizens of other countries?  Wouldn't that be illegal? 

Russia has invaded Ukraine.  Isn't that illegal?  

I'm just curious how something is "illegal" for George W. Bush, even though it's a Coalition of around 40 countries, but not illegal for everyone else waging violence against people in other countries. 

In fact, why wasn't the overthrow of Egypt's legitimate government by the Muslim Brotherhood - supported by Obama and partially led by his brother - "illegal"?  The UN certainly didn't pass a resolution approving that. 

So, we seem to have a double-standard here.  

Well, I guess Don KeyHotay must have skulked away because he couldn't answer the question about the charge he's made all night on "illegal", or he took him blankie andhim  teddy bear, and him bunny and went to sleep because his feelings were hurt. 

@DonkeyHotay @noblefurrtexas @mavdog Question:  Why did these people consider the Iraq invasion "illegal"?  I'm honestly curious. 

I ask you again, WHY did these people consider the Iraq invasion illegal?  What laws were broken, and what jurisdiction created those laws, and what WERE the laws? 

(Second time I've asked....btw.)

Depressing that this is the best the Republican party has to offer? 

I don't see that Perry, with all his shortcomings, could do,any worse than the idiot who is in over his head at the WH currently.

Even the faithful have noticed.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/president-obama-needs-to-focus-on-how-the-united-states-can-meet-global-challenges/2014/08/29/11ec9e5e-2f90-11e4-bb9b-997ae96fad33_story.html

@dingo

"He rode the elephant in the room."

@fred.garvin.mp.713 That's the "Spirit of '76".  If our founders had not recognized the dangers inherent in a strong and ever-hungrier central government, they wouldn't have invented the first country in history where government was servant, and citizens were masters. 

If you think they were wrong, look at the disaster now in our country from a central government determined to flip that equation, and succeeding.  We have more government regulations since the 60s than in all of the years of America combined since its founding.

@noblefurrrtexas

Does your computer not google?

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legality_of_the_Iraq_War

@Sotiredofitall

There's more than Perry looking at '16. You can spot viable repub candidates by the flurry of legal activity surrounding them and the "scandals" most important to MSNBC.

Democrats look at Hillary and realize the democratic process alone is not enough to guarantee a win, even though it's a woman's turn. She is simply too ancient.

@TheRuddSki "I don't see ..."

Typical for a myopic moron like you.

@TheRuddSki 

don't see that Perry, with all his shortcomings, could do,any worse than the idiot who is in over his head at the WH currently.

you are fooling yourself. the previous administration showed that it could be done much, much worse.

@TheRuddSki Since Obama is easily our worst president ever, and one of the worst heads-of-state in the world, I'd say Perry in a comma would be a better president. 

At least Perry's missteps are honest ones, as opposed to Obama's which are generally stupidity, outright lies, inexperience, or his terrible problem with racial animus -- odd particularly because he so benefited from Affirmative Action all along the way.

@mavdog The supreme law of the land is the US Constitution, not the charter of the UN.

By the US Constitution, rightly or wrongly, the invasion of Iraq was legal, and supported, approved, and voted for, by the majority of Congress, including Democrats.

On a personal, non legally binding level, I'd never place myself under the legal jurisdiction of a UN that will order its troops to sit idly by, while civilians get mowed down, in plain sight, by warlords.  Decry the morality of the US all  you want, there's plenty of room to do so.  But if you hold up the UN as your moral standard, you're not on high ground, your knee deep in muck.

The then United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan said in September 2004 that: "From our point of view and the UN Charter point of view, it [the war] was illegal.

The UN Security Council, as outlined in Article 39 of the UN Charter, has the ability to rule on the legality of the war, but has yet not been asked by any UN member nation to do so.

There you have it. Absolute Proof the war was illegal.

@bvckvs @Sotiredofitall "Even retards, deadbeats and sociopaths have the right to representation"

Damn, Bucky wrote a nice autobiography there.

@andypandy @Sotiredofitall 

and there's Jeb Bush!

@TheRuddSki After Obama, we'll never have turns again.

@DonkeyHotay @TheRuddSki 

You are too witty...by about half. 

@Donk

So you're going to flood the zone with crap prepared for people who can't think for themselves, eh?

Copy and paste your way to success!

@mavdog

It's hard to top the liberation of 50,000,000 people from tyranny, but maybe with Obama's kelp-like foreign policy, he can liberate those 50,000,000 from democracy.

@noblefurrtexas @TheRuddSki Not that I disagree with you about President Obama's missteps, but aren't Perry's 'honest missteps' pretty much about stupidity, lies and political animus?

@noblefurrtexas

Obama is important to dems now only in regards to his threats to go rogue enacting stuff that Americans don't necessarily want, and his great moments in confident oratory such as "we don't have a strategy".

His narcissism demands a legacy, and since the luster of the fraudulent health thing has worn off, race relations are worse than ever and foreign leaders both friend and foe are mocking him and pushing his buttons, it's going to be amnesty and global climate bullshit from here to the finish line, it's all he has left.

Just pray this kelp-like idiot doesn't make a domestic terror attack more attractive.

@RTGolden1 

I agree that the supreme law of the USA is the US Constitution.

I also agree that the USA does not need acquiescence of the UN to act in its own interests.

A poster made the assertion that the Iraq invasion was approved by the UN, and it is in that context that I challenged them to provide such approval for "regime

change" as they put it. There was never an approval by the UN for the invasion of Iraq or of "regime change".

The UN, like many international organizations, is chock full of self interested, corrupt people.

That being said, International treaties of which the US is a signatory have been viewed as being violated by the Iraq invasion as Iraq had not attacked the US. If we are party to an Agreement we should strive to honor our word.

Also, if one looks at the Iraq War Resolution, it is based on numerous falsehoods (some would go so far as to call them "lies"...), such as 

• that Iraq possessed WMD, 
• that Iraq sheltered and was complicit in the 9/11 attack
  

Ironic in the light of this discussion the resolution required the President to "strictly enforce through the UN Security Council" and "obtain prompt and decisive action by the Security Council ". Which was not done.

@RTGolden1 @mavdog Couldn't have said it better....even though I tried!

Good job!

@TheRuddSki Kofi Annan, the world's most prodigious criminal opines something is illegal, and the liberals fall all over themselves with glee. 

But, that's like having John Dillinger used as the standard for bank examiners.  :)

@TheRuddSki  As you know the UN Charter is not law; never has been, never will be with any luck.

The highest "law" in the United States is the U.S. Constitution. 

So, I'm trying to figure out how the invasion of Iraq as the consequence of Saddam's serial violations of the Cease Fire Agreement make the Coalition Countries - all 40 of them - acting illegally. (btw....they're all members of the UN.)  :)

@TheRuddSki Yep.  That pretty much takes the day in the "illegal" debate.  Of course, we STILL don't know what was illegal about it, what laws were broken and written by whom, the competent jurisdiction for the "laws", and under what authority were they passed with public input. 

According to my B-Law professors in college, "there is no such thing as International Law".  There are treaties, conventions, and agreements, but no laws that cover the globe. 

The Gneva Conventions are about the closest thing we have to International Law, but they aren't laws; they're agreed upon voluntary conduct for war. 

So, what - specifically - was "illegal" about the invasion of Iraq brought on by its violating the Cease Fire Agreements it signed would really be interesting.

Both Jindal and Bush have too much managerial experience for the job.

@rufuslevin 

and...she is not a woman

is that in the same context of you not really being a man?

@rufuslevin

That's why no-one really held Bill's whoring around against him.

@TheRuddSki Do you believe this clown?  It is for sure some village has lost its idiot.  :)

@TheRuddSki Yeah, Ruddski. He is. And he's the one calling other people unoriginal and derivative.

@TheRuddSki ... run ... run and hide from the uncomfortable FACTS, you kkkonservatard racist.

@TheRuddSki 

the "50,000,00 people" weren't liberated "from tyranny", the tyranny still affects them just under a different banner. There are no signs that the people of the country of Iraq wish to not live under tyranny, it's just a question of who is the imposer.

so now that the failure of that expedition is clear, any other major accomplishment you can muster? or is that hollow claim the only thing you got?

@RTGolden1 @noblefurrtexas @TheRuddSki  He's a lousy presidential candidate for the GOP nomination. 

However, he gets pretty high marks as a governor, and managed to work with the business community to create ever-larger numbers of jobs in Texas as the rest of the country was in meltdown. 

I DO think several of his debate gaffs are the shared responsibility of his campaign manager's, Perry's lack of practice and over-confidence, and a somewhat missing talent for debate.

Worst electorate ever.

@TheRuddSki I have my fingers crossed!

@TheRuddSki Well said!  I just couldn't agree more.

@mavdog Iraq had certainly possessed a great many WMDs, and had used them on Kurds as well as their own people, and there were huge mass graves not far from Kuwait where bodies too old to autopsy may have been an indication of WMD use. 

The claim of the 9/11 connection was never used as a reason for the Iraq Invasion.  It may have been a complaint, but the PRIMARY reason Iraq was invaded is Saddam and his military violating the Cease-fire Agreement they signed and agreed to at the end of the Gulf War. 

So, the "invasion" was nothing more than that agreement being vacated as the agreement said it would be if there were violations. 

I personally think the Iraq/9-11 connection is a little spurious. But, there is no question that one of the 9/11 actors had safe asylum in Iraq for some period of time.  The question is whether it was mostly before and/or after 9/11.  I don't know the answer to that. 

But, Bush issued the warning that you were either on the side of the Americans, or on the side of the terrorists.  There was no safe harbor. 

@mavdog So, you're basically saying that Colin Powell lied about having the blessings of the UN - Colin Powell, a former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs and decorated Army officer. 

Around 40 UN members were involved in the Bush '43 Coalition.  In fact, the holdouts were the Russians - a client state of Saddam/Iraq, the Chinese, and - as I recall - a few Arab states...but not many. 

I do not know in what form UN approval took place, but I do know that Kofi was unhappy that Saddam would be replaced because his personal gravy train - an iconic international heist - was about to be over. 

But, there were also no objections by the UN. 

And, neither of those conditions makes the invasion of Iraq "illegal", which was the original false claim that drew so much rebuttal. 

So far, NOBODY has said what - specifically- was illegal, what law(s) were broken in what competent jurisdiction and who wrote such laws and passed them into law.  

@TheRuddSki No more Bushs - No more Clintons   Can't we find a way to move on

@TheRuddSki Yup.  Very true.  Kissinger, who is usually more delicate than this, called it "Reverse Prostitution".  :)

@bmarvel ... so give us some "original" historical facts, jackass.

@Donk

The "facts" prepared for dummies are "lefty claims", debunked years ago.

Anyway, you already lost the debate, Iraq was liberated and there's nothing you can do about it. That's probably the reason for your obvious fury, the raging impotence of the loser who simply cannot accept that he's been neutered.

Your pathetic failure to prevent the liberation will probably haunt your dreams until President No Strategy manages to hand it over to the Islamists who do have a strategy, at which time you and the Islamists can blow each other out of sheer joy.

@mavdog The people of Iraq had, for the first time, the freedom to vote.  Who they voted into power is their choice - as are the consequences of that vote. 

Welcome to a nascent democracy.

@mavdog The murder rate in Iraq was hundreds per week, and Saddam and his bastard sons would kill and maim people just to watch them die or agonize in pain for hours. 

Saddam was also shooting at our planes, our soldiers, and Coalition forces and aircraft.  He was also in gross violation of the Cease Fire Agreement he signed at the end of the Gulf War.  

So, the UN wanted regime change in Iraq, and Bush accomplished that.

@mavdog

Apparently, according to NPR, the Iraqis and Afghanis are really thrilled that they're allowed to vote, and they risk their lives to do so.

More stunning oratory from President Kelp:

“The world’s always been messy … we’re just noticing now in part because of social media"

LOL.

Look, when Maureen Dowd starts mocking him, that means the love affair is over.

@noblefurrtexas 

The claim of the 9/11 connection was never used as a reason for the Iraq Invasion

wrong.completely, totally wrong.

"As recently as Monday, Cheney said in a speech that Hussein "had long-established ties with al Qaeda."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A47812-2004Jun16.html

from H.J. Res. 114, the Iraq War Authorization:

"Whereas members of al Qaida, an organization bearing responsibility for attacks on the United States, its citizens, and interests, including the attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, are known to be in Iraq"

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-107hjres114enr/pdf/BILLS-107hjres114enr.pdf

@noblefurrtexas 

So, you're basically saying that Colin Powell lied about having the blessings of the UN - Colin Powell, a former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs and decorated Army officer.

During an interview with The Daily Show host Jon Stewart, former Secretary of State Colin Powell said he regretted telling the United Nations that Iraq was harboring weapons of mass destruction.

“I, of course, regret the U.N. speech that I gave,” he said, “which became the prominent presentation of our case. But we thought it was correct at the time. The President thought it was correct. Congress thought it was correct.”

In a February 2003 speech to the U.N. Security Council, Powell alleged that Iraq was hiding weapons of mass destruction from inspectors and refusing to disarm. However, after the U.S. had invaded Iraq and overthrown Saddam Hussein, no weapons of mass destruction were found.

“Of course I regret that a lot of it turned out be wrong,” he said.

@Sotiredofitall

I have, I endorse neither.

@DonkeyHotay @bmarvel Awwwwww....did bmarvel hurt your feelings? 

Maybe you can lay a few lines of profanity and sewer logic on bmarvel and reinforce your usually impressive grasp of debate and reasoning.  :)

@DonkeyHotay @bmarvel I'm just curious.  Does

your juvenile probation officer know you're typing on her computer while she changes your ankle bracelet batteries.

@TheRuddSki The danger of confronting a chatterbox like Donkey, Ruddski, is that it becomes all too easy to sink to his level.

You'll notice that he clamors for what he quaintly calls "original facts." (The other day he was describing my arguments as "poignant"; I suspect we are dealing with someone whose first language, or first vocabulary at any rate, is not English.) Yet he never presents any facts of his own, original or otherwise. 

Then he declares the argument won and lapses into name-calling, though name calling at a very immature level. ("jackass...")

In this way he draws his opponents, out of sheer irritation, into overstating their case, making statements that are obvious nonsense. Your assertion that we "liberated" Iraq, for example, could not withstand the scrutiny of even the most dogmatic conservative. We "liberated" Iraq only in the sense that an omelette chef liberates an egg from the hen.

I saw Donkey's kind again and again back in the 1960s, when they filled my apartment every Friday night with their prattle about "revolution." The weekend radicals, i called them. They blathered on about Chomsky and Marcuse, though perhaps only one or two of them had read either author and none understood them.

I'm tempted to say Donkey may outgrow this phase as he matures. But I'm not at all sure. Blog-commenting -- I am the first to confess -- is not a way to refine or mature one's thoughts. And doing battle with the likes of Donkey can only bunt and cheapen them.

@noblefurrtexas @mavdog

War critics astonished as US hawk admits Iraq Invasion was ILLEGAL

In a startling break with the official White House and Downing Street lines, Mr Perle told an audience in London: "I think in this case international law stood in the way of doing the right thing."

Mr Perle, a key member of the defence policy board, which advises the US defence secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, said that "international law ... would have required us to leave Saddam Hussein alone", and this would have been morally unacceptable.

French intransigence, he added, meant there had been "no practical mechanism consistent with the rules of the UN for dealing with Saddam Hussein".

Mr Perle, who was speaking at an event organised by the Institute of Contemporary Arts in London, had argued loudly for the toppling of the Iraqi dictator since the end of the 1991 Gulf war.

"They're just not interested in international law, are they?" said Linda Hugl, a spokeswoman for the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, which launched a high court challenge to the war's legality last year. "It's only when the law suits them that they want to use it.

@noblefurrtexas

So, the UN wanted regime change in Iraq, and Bush accomplished that.

the UN eh? can you point me to the UN authorization for the invasion of Iraq?

I recall the Sec.- General of the UN using the word "illegal" in regard to the invasion..

@TheRuddSki 

yeah, "allowed to vote" for their tyrant. Maliki was elected...all that needs to be said.

interesting, and really says it all, when challenged to show how the prior administration was more successful then the current administration, all you can do is point out how some of Obama's supporters aren't happy with him. deflection at its finest!

what were those major accomplishments of the Bush administration that makes it's record better and not "any worse" than the current WH occupant? do the words "Great Recession" ring a bell?

@andypandy What you say is absolutely true.  The more information there is that's available and hitting us every hour, the more difficult it is to focus on a few things, and/or think about what has happened, its important, and why.

@auntiecairo @noblefurrtexas @mavdog That might be a stretch, but it is a very valid and concerning point.

@mavdog As I said, I consider the 9/11 connection to be spurious.  It was true that Saddam had connections with al-Qaeda.  But, that's hardly a reason to invade an entire country -- especially if the link was one or two al-Qaeda members given asylum. 

The authority for the invasion was the violations of the Cease Fire Agreement. The rest (such as WMDs and the al-Qaeda claim), were just window dressing.

Yes; we were angry beyond imagination over the 9/11 attacks, and rightly so.  But, I think the linkage to Saddam was pretty thin, and I don't know of one shred of evidence that Iraq was in any way associated with the 9/11 attacks.

@mavdog @noblefurrtexas That still doesn't explain why Colin Powell would lie about having the UN's blessings.

You may not know this, but it's critically important. 

The intelligence agencies of America, Great Britain, France, Italy, Turkey, Jordan, ISRAEL, Egypt, and several other countries believed - and had evidence of - WMDs still in Saddam's arsenal.  I might have questions about the CIA at times, but I would NEVER question Great Britain's Security Service (MI-5), their Secret Intelligence Service (MI-6) and the British  Communications Agency (somewhat similar to our own NSA and DIA.)

I also trust Israel's Mossad, Shin Bet, and Aman; probably the best intelligence and security services in the Middle East, and one of the best in the world.  

Italy's intelligence groups also had photos of the WMDs concurrent with monitoring some of its own interests in Iraq. 

But, keep in mind, WMDs were a minor reason for the Iraq invasion.  The primary reason - and authority - was triggered by Saddam's serial and serious violations of the Cease Fire Agreement. That was all the reason we needed. 

Oh, and Bill and Hillary Clinton swore Saddam still had WMDS.

@bmarvel "The other day he was describing my arguments as "poignant""

Only a delusional egomaniac like you would falsely assume those compliments were directed at you.

Go back and re-read the comments and context, numbnuts.

@DonkeyHotay @noblefurrtexas @mavdog How'd that case work out for them? LOL

There is no such actual thing as "International Law".  The highest law in America, for America, and which we recognize is the U.S. Constitution.

There ARE international agreements, covenants, conventions, treaties, membership organizations, and long-held practices.  But, that's it.

@DonkeyHotay @noblefurrtexas @mavdog You know this, but I'll say it anyway.  The charge George H.W.Bush had from the UN and especially from the Arab/Muslim countries who were part of the Coalition was to push Saddam out of Kuwait.

But, if Richard Perle thought that was legal, then he couldn't have sincerely and thoughtfully held the view that George W. Bush was violating the law by enforcing the provisions of the Cease Fire Agreement. @DonkeyHotay @noblefurrtexas @mavdog Question:  Why did these people consider the Iraq invasion "illegal"?  I'm honestly curious. 

See the total incongruity of it? 

@DonkeyHotay @noblefurrtexas @mavdog Question:  Why did these people consider the Iraq invasion "illegal"?  I'm honestly curious.

@DonkeyHotay @noblefurrtexas @mavdog In a word, they're wrong.  It was quite legal, was sanctioned by the U.S. and the UN and coalition countries, and was consistent with the conditions of the Cease Fire Agreement Saddam signed with Stormin Norman.  So, clearly, Mr. Pearle's opinion didn't square with the rest of the world - or even the Secretary of Defense. 

@mavdog @noblefurrtexas I think it's quite critical to know when Kofi declared it illegal.  General Powell, who was Sec. of State at the time, proclaimed that we had the UN's blessings to go into Iraq and accomplish regime change. But, I also believe it is important to remind of the following: 

George W. is an honest man.  He is married to Laura Bush who is extremely honest and a very moral person. 

George W.'s mother is Barbara Bush, one of the most principled First Ladies in our country's history.

His father is George H.W. Bush, one of the most decent people in politics today, and respected around the world for his experience, intellect, and wisdom. 

George W. is the brother of Jeb Bush, one of the more honest governors in our nation.

George W. is also very close to James Baker, one of the best attorneys in America and someone widely respected for his advice as Reagan's Chief of Staff.  His communications director was Karen Parfitt Hughes of Dallas, whose father - Gen. Hal Parfitt - was the last military governor of the Canal Zone.

If ANY of these people thought "W," was violating the law going into Iraq, it wouldn't have happened.  You're known by the company you keep, and it's difficult to keep better company than he did.

@mavdog @noblefurrtexas Without the UN's approval, Bush could not have put together the largest coalition in history to take down Saddam. He put together a larger coalition of countries than his father had, and won a shooting war faster than his supply lines could keep up. 

(He credits that win to his generals and their troops.)

BTW.....Hillary Clinton vote for that War, and - like her husband and a number of other Democrats - believe Saddam hid a large stockpile of WMDs from the inspectors. 

That was confirmed much later, and you recently saw Syria using WMDs in its war that it got from Saddam to hide and take care of. 

@mavdog

Psssst: Maliki is gone. He stepped down, just like Saddam, but different.

If you want to review the entirety of the Bush presidency, go for it, but all the negatives you cite aren't necessarily real, but rather a result of social media.

Btw, which politician sounded the alarm on subprime loans early and often:

1. GW Bush

2. Barney Fwank

3. Hillary

4. Senator Kelp

@noblefurrtexas

The authority for the invasion was the violations of the Cease Fire Agreement

well, you've placed yourself in a box.

the Cease Fire Agreement was a UN document. If you are basing your "authority" for an invasion of Iraq on the Cease Fire Agreement, then a violation of the Agreement would need to be responded to by the UN....and the UN never authorized the US invasion.

uh oh, you have a problem.

@noblefurrtexas ... so G aWol Bu$h used the blood of hapless US troops to enforce the will and desire of some other Nation's financial and political interests, sending U$ soldiers off to die for Arab/Muslim countries, securing tyranical dictatorial monarchies in places like Kuwait?

Noted.

If you've got a problem with Repuglycan War Hawk Richard Perle ADMITTING that the U$ invasion of Iraq was a clear violation of international law, then take it up with him directly, you vile shitsucking weasel.

@noblefurrtexas  <== why are you such an ignorant lying conservatard piece of shit?

@DonkeyHotay @noblefurrtexas @mavdog Oh, and Hillary Clinton and a number of other Democrat lawyers in Congress voted for it.  :)

@mavdog Sorry.....I left out the fact that Lt. Governor Bob Bullock of Texas, a life-long Democrat, was one of the first people to endorse Bush for President, and was - without question - one of the finest and most honest politicians ever in Texas. 

So, the idea that Bush would do something illegal as President is so foreign to his character and administration that I'm very curious what law was broken, in what venue, and why it had jurisdiction. In order the break a law, it has to exist and be in force in the relevant jurisdiction of the offense.

@noblefurrtexas @mavdog "....and won a shooting war faster than his supply lines could keep up...."  As a soldier at that exact time, in that place, please do not use this to support ANY argument you want to be credible.

Shock and awe was a stupid strategy, and a costly one.  Shock and Awe was a political scheme, not a military one.  It ignored the entirety of humanity's considerable experience in warfare.  We didn't 'outrun our supply lines', we failed to secure the rear.  We may have won shooting matches, but only because the opponent knew they couldn't win it.  The Sunni units in the Saddam's military simply buried weapons and supplies, doffed their uniforms and waited for us to roll past.  Then they reemerged as the 'insurgency'.  Refusal to recognize this, and that it would get worse is one of the reasons I declined re-enlistment only 6 years from retirement.  We didn't 'win' that war, we pulled a Dallas Cowboys on it.

@noblefurrtexas 

you recently saw Syria using WMDs in its war that it got from Saddam to hide and take care of. 

You are on a roll!
Now we need to go back to the final report by the Iraq Survey Group, you know the multi-year project that spent 1000's of hours researching and studying the question of Iraq's rumoured WMD, and let them know that noblefurrtexas has determined that their report, that said no WMD were in Iraq and none were sent out of Iraq to Syria before the war, were WRONG! noblefurrtexas deems it so!

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/GPO-DUELFERREPORT/content-detail.html

@noblefurrtexas

(He credits that win to his generals and their troops.)

Which is one reason he maintains popularity with military to this day.

@noblefurrtexas 

I keep looking at your post, and for the UN resolution authorizing the invasion of Iraq.

there isn't one......no resolution to invade Iraq.

@noblefurrtexas <== why are you such an ignorant lying cunt?

Iraq war was illegal and breached UN charter, says Annan

The United Nations secretary general, Kofi Annan, declared explicitly for the first time last night that the US-led war on Iraq was illegal.

Mr Annan said that the invasion was not sanctioned by the UN security council or in accordance with the UN's founding charter. In an interview with the BBC World Service broadcast last night, he was asked outright if the war was illegal. He replied: "Yes, if you wish."

He then added unequivocally: "I have indicated it was not in conformity with the UN charter. From our point of view and from the charter point of view it was illegal."

@noblefurrtexas

War critics astonished as US hawk ADMITS Iraq Invasion was ILLEGAL

International lawyers and anti-war campaigners reacted with astonishment after the influential Pentagon hawk Richard Perle conceded that the invasion of Iraq had been illegal.

In a startling break with the official White House and Downing Street lines, Mr Perle told an audience in London: "I think in this case international law stood in the way of doing the right thing."

Mr Perle, a key member of the defence policy board, which advises the US defence secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, said that "international law ... would have required us to leave Saddam Hussein alone", and this would have been morally unacceptable.

French intransigence, he added, meant there had been "no practical mechanism consistent with the rules of the UN for dealing with Saddam Hussein"

@TheRuddSki 

the flag of surrender...wave it proudly!

Barney Frank called for more oversight of Freddy and Fannie in 2005, but those entities were not responsible for the housing bust.

Clinton voiced concern in 2006 about the lax underwriting for subprime loans. That was a key ingredient to the crash.

Obama submitted a bill in 2006 that would address fraud in mortgages.

The one missing is GW Bush.....

@mavdog @noblefurrtexas The Cease-Fire Agreement, was signed by the U.S. and the Coalition.  While it had UN implications, the UN did not sign the document nor approve it. 

If the Agreement HAD been a treaty principally signed by the UN, then the UN wouldn't have needed additional authority to have Iraq invaded. 

Nope; no problem for me.  And, not once did the Security Council or the UN even attempt to stop the invasion or stop Bush from launching a full-scale war. 

And, keep in mind, George H.W. Bush was President at the time that Saddam signed the Agreement, and Colin Powell was Chairman of the Joint Chiefs during the Gulf War, and later Secretary of State for George W. Bush. 

Suggesting all of these men were too stupid to make sure full-scale war was on sound footing is astounding.  Bill and Hillary Clinton were also for the war. 

It wasn't illegal, and the UN doesn't have the force of law.  A UN resolution is a resolution; not a law.  It may have actionable components, but it is not at all "law".

@DonkeyHotay @noblefurrtexas 

YOU keep saying it was illegal.  So, that means you're certain it was illegal and violated some law(s).  In fact, you've made the average parrot sound like a gifted orator. 

So WHAT LAW(S) may have been broken, what were they, who passed them into law, and in what jurisdiction to they have relevance? 

And, by the way, our men and women in the military at the time George W. Bush was President were not hapless, and were so good that they defeated the Iraqi army and air forces much faster than the Pentagon has predicted. 

They also liberated the people of Iraq and stopped the terror from Saddam, his creepy sons, and their minions.  Saddam was given a choice by the Coalition;  leave Iraq with a ton of money and get safe passage and asylum somewhere else, or stay and fight, and be decimated. 

Saddam, as usual, chose unwisely. 

But, our men and women in the military weren't hapless, helpless, or confused.  They were the best in the world. 

@DonkeyHotay @noblefurrtexas 

"Says Annan" (sic) is like saying "says Pinocchio" or "says the little boy who cried 'wolf' ". 

@DonkeyHotay @noblefurrtexas Did you learn that at the Orphans Home, and did you have actual parents who taught you to express yourself that way to total strangers?

Don't be afraid to be wrong.  But, be afraid of intentionally twisting facts. 

@RTGolden1 @noblefurrtexas @mavdog

U$ Troops = Hapless Dupes sent off to fight and die for the Criminal Bu$h Regime's LIES and DECEPTIONS.

3000+ tools and fools died meaningless deaths for Dick Cheney's megalomanical jingoist hubris.

@mavdog @noblefurrtexas Then how did the U.S. Army, and some Coalition troops, find WMDs buried in the drifting sands of the barren landscape? 

We know he buried a number of them, but most were sent to Syria with an agreement the Assad government would take care of them, but could use them as needed. 

You DO recall, do you not, that Saddam WANTED people to know he had WMDs he could use for payback.  (At one point, he threatened Israel if the Coalition (wisely lacking Israel) invaded.  THAT threat was by comedian Baghdad Bob.

@mavdog @noblefurrtexas You're welcome to believe what you wish.  But, it would be interesting to see where Syria got all those WMDs.  It would also be interesting to know what U.S. satellite photos showing a constant parade of white trucks going from one of Saddam's WMD storage units into Syria.  Maybe they were carrying toys for children. 

This is as far as I go on this subject of the WMDs.  Believe what you will, but keep in mind over 20 of the top intelligence agencies in the world believed Saddam still had a large stockpile of WMDs he never declared or gave up.  And, a few years later, the U.S. Army dug up in the barren sands of Iraq a number of WMDs he should have had. 

@TheRuddSki http://i58.tinypic.com/311mdyw.jpg

@mavdog @noblefurrtexas I can honestly tell you that I don't know if there was a resolution.  Given then voting arrangement of the Security Council, I doubt the Russians would have been terribly happy, as Saddam was one of their largest clients. 

But, it was Colin Powell who said we had the backing of the UN, and with a coalition of around 40 members of the UN, I can't imagine anyone of note thought it illegal or unwarranted.

@mavdog

I keep looking at your post, and for the UN resolution authorizing the invasion of Iraq

What gave you the idea that the UN has to authorize anything America does?

The UNSC unanimously agreed with every justification for Bush's action, they were never asked for permission to invade Iraq because there was no need.

And in spite of the UN, Iraq was liberated.

@mavdog @noblefurrtexas

Because he's a lying piece of shit -- typical low-information konservatard.

@DonkeyHotay @noblefurrtexas I think it's important to remember a few defining facts: 

The UN is not a legal entity.  It is not a country, not a business, not a state, and not even a charity.  It is a voluntary association of countries that can make policies and pass resolutions, but they do not have either the legitimacy or the force of "law". 

Kofi should recognize "illegal" when he sees it.  He did enough of it on his own in Oil For Food. 

He could use "unauthorized", "not sanctioned", "not officials", "not approved", or even "not permitted".  But, using the word "illegal" doesn't apply, mostly because there is no written law that prevents it, and there is no body of laws in a competent jurisdiction that has the authority to declare the breaking of a law that does not exist.

@DonkeyHotay @noblefurrtexas hate to tell you this Donk: As much as you wish it were so, the UN Charter does not carry the force of law in the US, nor has it supplanted the US Constitution.  Keep trying though!

@DonkeyHotay @noblefurrtexas I have no doubt he said what he said.  But, I noticed he carefully threaded the language need in the process, another trait of such a dishonest and deceitful man.

@DonkeyHotay @noblefurrtexas Would this be the same Kof Annan they committed the largest embezzlement in history with Oil for Food, and had more conflicts of interest than one can even imagine?i

@mavdog @TheRuddSki Ummmm.... you do know that Barney Frank's lover and roommate was the head of Fannie Mae (aptly named in this case). 

Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, and a few others - including Sen. Obama - are responsible for the meltdown of the mortgage industry and the burst of the bubbles government interference created.

@mavdog

I had no idea you were blind, and for the sake of argument, let's just say Bush was and is the most evil man in the world.

But looking to the present, do you agree with all the democrats who are urging President No Damn Strategy to hold off on his various threats to America until after the mid-terms?

For some reason, they think unpopular and possibly illegal unitary actions might get negative reaction from even liberal dems.

He's in Wisconsin for a Union Thug Day speech - revisiting the state that handed him, and the unions, their collective asses couple years ago. Hopefully, there will be some more hilarious Great Moments in Oratory, hang in there!

@noblefurrtexas

The Cease-Fire Agreement, was signed by the U.S. and the Coalition. While it had UN implications, the UN did not sign the document nor approve it.

clearly you have no idea what you are talking about here.

your statement is completely, absolutely wrong.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_Resolution_687

@noblefurrtexas 

The legal right to determine how to enforce its own resolutions lies with the Security Council alone (UN Charter Articles 39-42),[34] not with individual nations.[1][4][35]

On 8 November 2002, immediately after the adoption ofSecurity Council resolution 1441, Russia, the People's Republic of China, and France issued a joint statement declaring that Council Resolution 1441 did not authorize any "automaticity" in the use of force against Iraq, and that a further Council resolution was needed were forced to be used.[36]

Critics have also pointed out that the statements of US officials leading up to the war indicated their belief that a new Security Council resolution was required to make an invasion legal, but the UN Security Council has not made such a determination, despite serious debate over this issue. 

To secure Syria's vote in favor of Council Resolution 1441, Secretary of State Powell reportedly advised Syrian officials that "there is nothing in the resolution to allow it to be used as a pretext to launch a war on Iraq."

@noblefurrtexas

Fact -- U$ attack, invasion and occupation of Iraq was ILLEGAL.

Fact -- you're a lying cunt

Any questions?

@DonkeyHotay @RTGolden1 @noblefurrtexas @mavdog With all due respect to you and your opinions: Fuck off, Asshole.

@DonkeyHotay @RTGolden1 @noblefurrtexas @mavdog

What an insane and incorrect assertion to advance in a avalanche of ignorance that is virtually beyond rescue of the other St. Bernard-like radical liberals with kegs of BS hung around their necks. 

@noblefurrtexas 

I believe the report.

the real question is why don't you?

but your being obstinate and proclivity to ignore facts has been proven, so that is a question I actually already know the answer to.

http://punditfromanotherplanet.files.wordpress.com/2014/08/golf-war.jpg?w=590&h=736

@DonkeyHotay @TheRuddSki You know....I could swear that that Obama's press secretary came directly to him from "Time Magazine" and, as we know, Time blamed Bush for almost as many things as Obama has.  But, thanks for sharing that.  (I do have a little problem with Bush flying his own plane onto the deck of a carrier.  I was in the Air Force, and don't believe in runways that don't stay still.)

@Donk

Oh my, a liberal publication bashing bush. Horror.

You poor whelks will go through great lengths to turn the conversation from President Kelp. It's really quite touching, this defensiveness.

@noblefurrtexas " I can honestly tell you that I don't know if there was a resolution"

So you admit you were a lying piece of shit when you falsely claimed there was.

@TheRuddSki 

What gave you the idea that the UN has to authorize anything America does?

I don't.

I am not the poster who made the comment the UN wanted regime change in Iraq, and Bush accomplished that, and when challenged to show that the UN passed a resolution calling for the invasion to effect a regime change fails to provide such.

What gives you the idea that America may flaunt International Law that it has consented and become a party to? You say "there was no need", but in the context of International Law there WAS a need.

@TheRuddSki <== another lying piece of shit, and a proven lowlife bigot and racist too.

Go fuck yourself, you vile hateful old wretch.

@noblefurrtexas <== do you get paid to lie, or are you really that fucking ignorant?

The UN chief had warned the US and its allies a week before the invasion in March 2003 that military action would violate the UN charter. But he has hitherto refrained from using the damning word "illegal".

Both Mr Blair and the foreign secretary, Jack Straw, claim that Saddam Hussein was in breach of security council resolution 1441 passed late in 2002, and of previous resolutions calling on him to give up weapons of mass destruction. France and other countries claimed these were insufficient.

No immediate comment was available from the White House late last night, but American officials have defended the war as an act of self-defence, allowed under the UN charter, in view of Saddam Hussein's supposed plans to build weapons of mass destruction.

However, last September, Mr Annan issued a stern critique of the notion of pre-emptive self-defence, saying it would lead to a breakdown in international order. 

Mr Annan last night said that there should have been a second UN resolution specifically authorising war against Iraq. Mr Blair and Mr Straw tried to secure this second resolution early in 2003 in the run-up to the war but were unable to convince a sceptical security council.

Mr Annan said the security council had warned Iraq in resolution 1441 there would be "consequences" if it did not comply with its demands. But UN regulations require it should have been up to the council to determine what those consequences were.

@noblefurrtexas 

Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, and a few others - including Sen. Obama - are responsible for the meltdown of the mortgage industry and the burst of the bubbles government interference created.

bullshit. show what "government interference" caused Wall Street to sell MBS which were packed with bad borrowers or for the underwriters of the MBS and CMBS to modify the standards?

Government interference didn't cause the 2007 financial meltdown, LACK of government oversight allowed the financial meltdown.

Phil Gramm is more to blame than any of those you try to falsely label as culpable.

@TheRuddSki 

"blind"? you mean like ignoring the points I made and you can't refute? that type of blind, as in "Blind to the facts presented"? tell me, how am I being "blind"?

in your world evil=incompetent? odd to say the least.

GW Bush is a good, well intentioned person who was not a good President. lousy actually.

I'd like to hear exactly what "damn strategy" you propose to employ against the "various threats". be specific now, as that seems to be your criticism de jour.

"Union thug day". priceless. if anything you have a proclivity for using exaggeration bar none.

@mavdog @noblefurrtexas 

@mavdog @noblefurrtexas Who from the UN signed it? 

:)

You keep thinking that a UN resolution is law; and it's not.  But, read a copy of the Cease-Fire Agreement that was signed by our side and Saddam's side, and it clearly does not require a UN resolution to vacate the cease fire in case of violations by Saddam. 

@mavdog @noblefurrtexas Who from the UN signed it? 

:)

@DonkeyHotay @noblefurrtexas There is nothing about a Security Council resolution or a UN resolution that approximates "international law".

So, tell me, what law was broken, passed by what body, and made the authority of what competent jurisdiction? 

You keep calling it illegal, and it wasn't . Otherwise, you could cite a LAW that was broken, and how. 

In fact, it was Saddam who did all of the violating, knowing what the consequences would be. 

@DonkeyHotay Trust me on this.  If I was really a c_nt, I wouldn't be spending my time talking to you or typing on a computer.  :)

Fact -- U$ attack, invasion and occupation of Iraq was ILLEGAL.

Guilty as hell, free as a bird?

@DonkeyHotay It wasn't at all illegal.  You may have to liberal sources that say it was, but they're incorrect.  As fanatical as Washington  Democrats were then, if they would have proved the Iraq war to accomplish regime change was illegal, they would have acted on it.

@RTGolden1 @DonkeyHotay @noblefurrtexas @mavdog

Awww, poor wittle Goldie, did your puerile patriotic delusions of grandeur and righteousness turn into an amoral morass of suicidal nightmares?

You, the 4500+ dead U$ troops, and the 100,000 crippled, maimed and wounded U$ dupes were LIED into an unnecessary illegal war and played as pathetic political pawns by the Criminal Bu$h Junta.

Reality bites, don't it?

@mavdog @noblefurrtexas Of course you believe it.  It's all you've got. 

Try some logic on for size: 

1.  Saddam had and used WMDs for years.  That's not in dispute. (He used them against the Kurds, for example.)

2.  Saddam felt like part of his security from invasion was having battlefield WMDs, and having WMDs which could reach Israel. 

Also recall that his son-in-law said he had WMDS....the very son-in-law Saddam later murdered. 

3.  Saddam was lousy with mobile WMD labs, several of which were found.  Not in dispute. 

4.  Saddam was not bashful about his WMDs.  He simply didn't want to be caught with them unless he was using them. 

5.  The night before the invasion of Iraq, there were all kinds of large trucks and his troops running around in hazmat radiation suits.  They were caught on satellite as well as some other ways.  

6.  Why would Saddam play all the games with the weapons inspectors if he didn't have anything to hide?  (Part of that answer is classified; but the disclosure part is not.  He was guilty as sin of hiding WMDS and the ability to manufacture them.)

7.  Saddam eventually did the smartest thing he could do; ship the WMDs to Syria for safe keeping, but available to use. 

@mavdog @noblefurrtexas I'm not doubting your credibility, despite wanting talking points to be true, but I am skeptical of government reports - and some others - that are not authenticated and pass the sniff test for reseaarch.

@TheRuddSki ... Facts and Reality are Liberal, you gutless kkkonservatard. 

Get used to it.

@DonkeyHotay @noblefurrtexas I never claimed there was.  If you want to know who is lying, there's probably a dirty and dusty mirror close to you somewhere. 

@DonkeyHotay @noblefurrtexas Is it every day that you become this unhinged over a discussion, or did I just happen to pick the wrong day to politely respond to you? 

I NEVER said there was a resolution...or don't recall claiming it.  I did say the UN sanctioned the regime change, and that's from the mouth of Colin Powell who is a very honorable man.

@mavdog Just as a friendly reminder....I never said the UN passed a resolution.  But, Colin Powell said we had the blessings of the UN which wanted regime change, and regime change we did....in just a few days. 

Do you not find it interesting that Bush put together a coalition of UN and NATO countries - about 40 - to cooperate in a joint effort to deal with Saddam?  And, ALL of those countries made it known to the UN that they wanted Saddam out. 

Kofi played both ends against the middle.  He didn't want to end his embezzlement in Oil For Food.  He also couldn't afford to anger the Russians who had veto power in the Security Council. 

But, I never said they passed a resolution, and I doubt they could have. 

However - important point - Saddam signed a Cease Fire Agreement after the Gulf War.  It clearly had UN imprimatur

attached to it. 

When he committed serial violations of the Cease Fire, played games with the UN weapons inspectors, and did about 10 or 12 other things in violation of the Agreement, the UN would have looked like a paper tiger had it not blessed the action to hold Saddam accountable, and run him out of the country.

@mavdog

Your arguments lost in the court of international law long ago.

@DonkeyHotay @TheRuddSki Show me, in Codified US law or the Constitution, where the President has to seek the UN's permission for military action.  There is no such animal.

The UN props up despotic governments the world over.  It embodies everything you spew hatred of the US for on a global scale.  The US and a few other countries cloak their financial aid to despots through UN programs.  Saddam managed to outflank UN-issued embargoes by using funds from other UN programs.

There should only be two or three UN functions, the three that actually do good on the planet:  WHO, UNESCO, and the Economic Development program.

@DonkeyHotay @TheRuddSki You're on a roll.  You refute assertions with nasty comebacks?  There's a massengill product just waiting for your mouth.  :)

@DonkeyHotay @noblefurrtexas I don't doubt a word of this.  But, none of it made the law "illegal". 

While I admired Great Britain's attempt to get the Security Council aboard, they also knew better.  Russia would never have approved it, and had veto power.  But, they knew they had to ask for it for the sake of appearances.

The claim of "self defense" had more to do with Saddam's firing at our aircraft, firing at our troops, jacking around the weapons inspectors, and acquiring illegal war-making materials (including yellow cake for nuclear weapons). 

@DonkeyHotay @noblefurrtexas This is so easy even you could understand it.  At the end of the Gulf War, in order for Stormin Norman NOT to take the battle into Iraq, Saddam signed a Cease-Fire Agreement where he promised certain things, with the clear understanding that violations of those provisions could restart the war and possibly cause Coalition Forces to invade Iraq. 

Saddam clearly violated the Cease Fire, and fired on our aircraft as well as "painting them" with SAM radars.  There were other numerous violations such as equipping his SCUDs with the ability to reach Israel, smuggling in "oil well pipe" that was actually used for constructing a long gun also in violation, and firing on our troops.  (The U.S. does NOT like people shooting at our planes or our soldiers.)

Bush vacated the Cease-Fire Agreement, a huge coalition of countries agreed with him, and they took down Saddam and his regime as requested.

@mavdog @noblefurrtexas Bush ASKED for more oversight, and the Senate refused.  The votes against included major Democrats - like Dodd and Frank (and Obama). 

Don't forget that it was Obama who was associated with ACORN, and instructed them on how to pressure banks into making loans to people who could not or would not repay them, and grant mortgages to people who could not afford them. 

The Democrats also had major influence with the bank examiners, and they CLEARLY made it known to banks who didn't want to make these dangerous loans that they would have all kinds of trouble. 

I don't agree with the industry's solutions which included bundling loans into securities products, and allowing companies like Countrywide....attempts to layoff some of the risks of government-enforced bad loans. 

All of this contributed to a bubble that, eventually, didn't just burst; it blew up!  Bush had no control over what happened, and was not involved as an actor in all of this. 

Somewhere, I actually have documents on the series of votes refusing Bush more oversight over Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and banking regulation policies.  Chris Dodd and Barney Frank are all over them.

@mavdog Punctuation is our friend. 

Actually, I believe history will record that George W. Bush was a much better President than Obama, and certainly better than Clinton when it came to the military. 

Both Obama and Clinton were perpetually late, and even missed appointments.  Bush was hardly ever late for anything unless there was an emergency. 

Bush managed to take an economy in recession from Clinton, and have it back to Full Employment within three years, and that includes 9/11 which almost crashed our economy. 

I didn't like some of the Bush spending policies, and certainly didn't like some of his reorganization plans for consolidating and better communicating between military intelligence, the CIA, and other government agencies. 

But, I admired his courage and wisdom when it came to making trips to war zones, standing up for our troops, and working with Congress to accomplish things. 

@noblefurrtexas ... you're such a sniveling cunt you can't even spell cunt, you limpwristed cunt.

@noblefurrtexas ... so Richard Perle, a member of Donald Rumsfeld's policy team, is a "liberal source" ?

Why are you such a lying cunt? Is that how your mother raised you, or did you develop that trait on your own?

@noblefurrtexas 

but I am skeptical of government reports - and some others - that are not authenticated and pass the sniff test for reseaarch.
oh. that's....interesting.

me, I m skeptical of people who make statements based on zero actual research on the subject and whose statements are likely just their own opinion.

and skeptical of people who ignore those who have spent hour and hours doing research.

and who ignore accepted definitions of words such as "recession".

@DonkeyHotay @TheRuddSki If you believe this, you're in need of serious counseling...and perhaps a new jacket with lots of straps and rings. 

Clinton felt the need to prove it, but Obama is the Olympic Champion at it.

@TheRuddSki 

Your arguments lost in the court of international law long ago.

when you get the chance why don't you cite those "lost...arguments... in the court of international law" for us.

I'd like to see them.

@RTGolden1 "Show me, in Codified US law or the Constitution, where the President has to seek the UN's permission for military action.  There is no such animal."

That's YOUR idiotic straw man -- tilt much?

My god man, have you be kissing Ruddski's ass so much you contracted a nasty case of STUPID?

The POTUS, or any other Nation's leader does not need to seek UN permission prior to military action -- but any such military actions taken must comply with the International Laws on the Rules of War and the International Treaties, Conventions and Agreements those nations agreed to as members of the UN .. or suffer the consequences of violating international War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity.

@RTGolden1 @DonkeyHotay @TheRuddSki I'd also add UNICEF to the list, although it's a little flaky in some places. 

But, their "peacekeepers" are often a disaster, their conventions on women are bigoted and laughable, and I wouldn't give them the control over the Internet with a gun to my head. 

@RTGolden1 @DonkeyHotay @TheRuddSki I will never forget the assertion out of a DEMOCRAT attorney that "Oil For Food" was the biggest and most expensive crime by Kofi and Son in the history of world-class crimes. It didn't take long to blanket the airwaves. 

@noblefurrtexas ... you really are a simple-minded shitsucker, and quite dishonest too. Perfect for the repuglican party.

@noblefurrtexas 

Bush ASKED for more oversight, and the Senate refused. 

wrong. show when he asked for more oversight of the CMBS and MBS industry, or for stronger oversight of the underwriters.

Clearly you forgot all those GW Bush "ownership society" speeches....

Don't forget that it was Obama who was associated with ACORN, and instructed them on how to pressure banks into making loans to people who could not or would not repay them, and grant mortgages to people who could not afford them.

ACORN asked for no such thing. ACORN asked for more lending to lower income areas. Unless you can show that lower income borrowers are by definition not creditworthy your premise is false.

Subprime does not mean low income.

BTW, the mortgage lenders who were most at fault were not the banks. nor Freddie or Fannie. They were the BUYERS of the securities that were "toxic" because the CMBS were not correctly underwritten.

@noblefurrtexas @mavdog 

50 reasons why George aWol Bush was the WORST PRESIDENT in modern history, and a general scumbag.

1. He stole the presidency in 2000. People may forget that Republicans in Florida purged more than 50,000 African-American voters before Election Day, and then went to the Supreme Court where the GOP-appointed majority stopped a recount that would have awarded the presidency to Vice-President Al Gore if all votes were counted. National news organizations verified that outcome long after Bush had been sworn in.

2. Bush’s lies started in that race. Bush ran for office claiming he was a “uniter, not a divider.” Even though he received fewer popular votes than Gore, he quickly claimed he had the mandate from the American public to push his right-wing agenda.  

3. He covered up his past. He was a party boy, the scion of a powerful political family who got away with being a deserter during the Vietnam War. He was reportedly AWOL for over a year from his assigned unit, the Texas Air National Guard, which other military outfits called the "Champagne Division.”

4. He loved the death penalty. As Texas governor from 1995-2000, he signed the most execution orders of any governor in U.S. history—152 people, including the mentally ill and women who were domestic abuse victims. He spared one man’s life, a serial killer.

5. He was a corporate shill from Day 1. Bush locked up the GOP nomination by raising more campaign money from corporate boardrooms than anyone at that time. He lunched with CEOs who would jet into Austin to "educate" him about their political wish lists.

6. He gutted global political progress. He pulled out of the Kyoto Protocol which set requirements for 38 nations to lower greenhouse gas emissions to combat climate change,saying that abiding by the agreement would “harm our economy and hurt our workers.”

7. He embraced global isolationism. He withdrew from the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, over Russia’s protest, taking the U.S. in a direction not seen since World War I. 

8. He ignored warnings about Osama bin Laden. He ignored the Aug. 6, 2001 White House intelligence briefing titled, “Bin Laden determined to strike in the U.S.” Meanwhile, his chief anti-terrorism advisor, Richard Clarke, and first Treasury Secretary, Paul O’Neill, testified in Congress that he was intent on invading Iraq within days of becoming president.

9. Ramped up war on drugs, not terrorists. The Bush administration had twice as many FBI agents assigned to the war on drugs than fighting terrorism before 9/11, and kept thousands in that role after the terror attacks. 

10. “My Pet Goat.” He kept reading a picture book to grade-schoolers at a Florida school forseven minutes after his top aides told him that the World Trade Centers had been attacked in 9/11. Then Air Force One flew away from the school, vanishing for hours after the attack.

11. Squandered global goodwill after 9/11. Bush thumbed his nose at world sympathy for the victims of the September 11, 2001 attacks, by declaring a global war on terrorism and declaring“you are either with us or against us.”

12. Bush turned to Iraq not Afghanistan. The Bush administration soon started beating war drums for an attack on Iraq, where there was no proven Al Qaeda link, instead of Afghanistan, where the 9/11 bombers had trained and Osama bin Laden was based. His 2002 State of the Union speech declared that Iraq was part of an “Axis of Evil.”

13. Attacked United Nation weapons inspectors. The march to war in Iraq started with White House attacks on the credibility of U.N. weapons inspectors in Iraq, whose claims that Saddam Hussein did not have nuclear weapons proved to be true.

14. He flat-out lied about Iraq’s weapons. In a major speech in October 2002, he said that Saddam Hussein had the capacity to send unmanned aircraft to the U.S. with bombs that could range from chemical weapons to nuclear devices. “We cannot wait for the final proof—the smoking gun—that could come in the form of a mushroom cloud,” he said.

15. He ignored the U.N. and launched a war. The Bush administration tried to get the U.N. Security Council to authorize an attack on Iraq, which it refused to do. Bush then decided to lead a "preemptive" attack regardless of international consequences. He did not wait for any congressional authorization to launch a war.

@DonkeyHotay @noblefurrtexas It has nothing to do with you.  It has to do with me. 

I simply don't think it's good form to violate the rules of a site and sink to that kind of language.  You want to; go ahead. Free country -- at least for now.

If you consider refusing to use that kind of language to be wimpy, then it's your business.  But, one of the things I learned in combat in the Air Force was not getting "angry" or losing your cool while fighting people who want to kill you. 

I'm still here!  :)

@DonkeyHotay @noblefurrtexas Try to be original. 

Imagine, if Pearle (who was already in trouble) had convinced Rumsfeld he was right, the invasion would never have take place.  But, Rumsfeld was 150% in favor of it...and he's no dummy. 

In the grand scheme of things, and on the scale of liberal and conservative, I considered Pearle to be a switch hitter with liberal tendencies, and to be risk averse.  I think he was an honorable man.  It's just that smarter men did not agree with him.

@mavdog @noblefurrtexas I answered that with proof from the radical right news organization, CNN. 

Read it and weep. :)

@mavdog @noblefurrtexas Okay, O K A Y, now you've made me do it!  I've had to go to the known Right Wing Radical site, CNN, to prove what I said:

BUSH INHERITED CLINTON'S RECESSION

by cher.  Posted September 8, 2008.  

(See source below) 

John Kerry declared, "[d-179776] inherited the strongest economy in the world - and brought it to its knees." There is no evidence to support this claim. In fact, the evidence now suggests that President Bush inherited a recession. Did the recession begin in the last quarter of 2000 or during the first months of the Bush presidency. Granted, even if the truth is that the recession began in the days after George W. Bush's inauguration, most reasonable people would conclude that a president cannot on a dime turn a $10 trillion economy one way or the other.However, data and supporting analyses from economists indicate that the recession began well before Bush took office, making political criticism of the president on the jobs issue even more inappropriate. According the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER), the unofficial arbiter of business cycles, the recession began in March 2001 and ended in November 2001. NBER analyzes four data series from the U.S. Department of Commerce, the Federal Reserve Board, and other government sources. While previously NBER indicated the recession started in March 2001 (it has not formally revised that date), official revisions of the data indicate that the recession started earlier than that. For example, under revised calculations, real disposable income peaked in October 2000, rather than steadily rising in 2000 and early 2001 as indicated in the original data. Industrial production/manufacturing and trade sales both peaked in June of 2000, instead of September and August, respectively. Non-farm payroll employment peaked in February 2001, not March 2001. And monthly gross domestic product, which the NBER recently announced will be included in dating recessions, also peaked in 2000. According to the Council of Economic Advisers, the median date of these five data series is October 2000 - at least three months before George W. Bush took office. We also know that the stock market started to decline in March of 2000, business investment began to fall in the third quarter of 2000, and initial jobless claims began to rise at the end of 2000 - more evidence that the U.S. economy in late 2000 was in fact "on the front end of a recession," as Vice President-elect Dick Cheney observed on Meet the Press on December 3, 2000. Senator John Kerry and other Democratic party leaders ignore or gloss over these facts. However, even professor Joseph Stiglitz, the chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers under President Clinton, admits that "the economy was slipping into recession even before Bush took office, and the corporate scandals that are rocking America began much earlier." 

Source:  http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-80312

@DonkeyHotay @RTGolden1 So... where are the UN prosecutors, clamoring to prosecute GW?

@mavdog @noblefurrtexas I don't know where you got such a skewed idea of the mortgage meltdown, but I can give you the name and address of a bank where ACORN took over the lobby, demanding the bank grant undeserved loans.  But, it's also a fact that government regulators pressure banks into making these loans; effectively blackmail. 

(They're doing the same thing TODAY about gun shops, gun ranges, firearms dealers, and stores that sell guns.  The Fascism of the far Left is truly scary.)

Bush and Republicans did, in fact, try to push a bill to grant more oversight of Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac.  The response was, in chorus, "don't worry; everything is just fine; you don't need more oversight".  In point of fact, Barney frank should have refrained from voting since his homosexual partner was the head of Fannie Mae.  But, he was at the forefront refusing more oversight. 

I don't at all disagree that the securities against the bundled bad mortgages was a serious problem, and one of many dominoes that fell when things starting going down hill. 

But, the government's forcing banks to abandon their loan requirements and give loans and mortgages to people without credit or income to afford them was the causal element that started it. 

@DonkeyHotay @noblefurrtexas @mavdog  Not to be rude, but we've seen all of these empty charges before, and virtually all are spin, Dem talking points, and/or liberal points of view wrapped up in the disguise of fact.

@Donk

Ok, you trolled me, you get five minutes.

1. He stole the presidency in 2000.

Wrong.

2. he quickly claimed he had the mandate from the American public to push his right-wing agenda.

Wrong.

his "agendas" such as NCLB, Medicare B, etc were bi-lateral, and certainly not right-wing.

Bush had eight years of managerial experience, and with a reputation for effectively dealing with political opposition through compromise and convincing, he knew how to work through the democratic process.

Which, of course would be perceived as a negative by leftists.

3. He covered up his past. He was a party boy, the scion of a powerful political family who got away with being a deserter during the Vietnam War. He was reportedly AWOL for over a year from his assigned unit, the Texas Air National Guard, which other military outfits called the "Champagne Division.”

So he served in the military and liked to party in his youth - two facts never covered up

The rest was debunked years ago. People lost their careers pushing some of this stuff, in an attempt to sway an election with fraud. They lost. Ha-ha.

4. He loved the death penalty.

As did his constituency, a lot.

You my feel that an elected official employing democratic and legal means to do the job his constituency elected him to do is a negative, but then again, you're you.

5. He was a corporate shill from Day 1. Bush locked up the GOP nomination by raising more campaign money from corporate boardrooms than anyone at that time.

Business is important to America. Capitalists, employers and the investor class (me) are uncomfortable with people hostile to the capitalist system, so we're real damn happy with a president who recognizes the importance of business to Americans.

And there's no need to discuss why Obama is known as "President Goldman Sachs", his contribution list is public knowledge.

6. He gutted global political progress. He pulled out of the Kyoto Protocol

"Gutted" LOL, the drama.

Let's see what history says about Kyoto

--President William J. Clinton signed the Kyoto Protocol, but did not ratify it, while President G.W. Bush eliminated the signature completely... "The Clinton administration acknowledges that the protocol... does not meet the requirements set unanimously last year by the Senate for signing the Protocol..."---

Bush kept us out of a bogus UN scheme that not even Clinton liked.

7. He embraced global isolationism.

By working tirelessly to, among other things, build the largest coalition of nations ever to end an ongoing war while liberating millions from a dictator.

He withdrew from the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, over Russia’s protest

Over Russia's protest. Oh. My. Perhaps he did not trust them.

Thankfully, Obama reset everything in regards to Russia. Whew!

I could go on debunking your little list, which was apparently written for you and your fellow trolls by commie stoners at Berkeley, but dinner is served. Ta-ta, comrade, and don't let those waitresses short you on tips tonight!

@noblefurrtexas @mavdog

16. Abandoned international Criminal Court. Before invading Iraq, Bush told the U.N. that the U.S. was withdrawing from ratifying the International Criminal Court Treaty to protect American troops from persecution and to allow it to pursue preemptive war.

17. Colin Powell’s false evidence at U.N. The highly decorated soldier turned Secretary of State presented false evidence at the U.N. as the American mainstream media began its jingoistic drumbeat to launch a war of choice on Saddam Hussein and Iraq.

18. He launched a war on CIA whistleblowers. When a former ambassador, Joseph C. Wilson, wrote a New York Times op-ed saying there was no nuclear threat from Iraq, the White House retaliated by leaking the name and destroying the career of his wife, Valerie Plame, one of the CIA’s top national security experts.

19. Bush pardoned the Plame affair leaker. Before leaving office, Bush pardoned the vice president’s top staffer, Scooter Libby, for leaking Plame’s name to the press.   

20. Bush launched the second Iraq War. In April 2003, the U.S. military invaded Iraq for the second time in two decades, leading to hundreds of thousands of civilian deaths and more than a million refugees as a years of sectarian violence took hold on Iraq. Nearly 6,700 U.S. soldiers have died in the Iraq and Afghan wars.

21. Baghdad looted except for oil ministry. The Pentagon failure to plan for a military occupation and transition to civilian rule was seen as Baghdad was looted while troops guardedthe oil ministry, suggesting this war was fought for oil riches, not terrorism.  

22. The war did not make the U.S. safer. In 2006, a National Intelligence Estimate (a consensus report of the heads of 16 U.S. intelligence agencies) asserted that the Iraq war had increased Islamic radicalism and had worsened the terror threat.

23. U.S. troops were given unsafe gear. From inadequate vests from protection against snipers to Humvees that could not protect soldiers from roadside bombs, the military did not sufficiently equip its soldiers in Iraq, leading to an epidemic of brain injuries. 

24. Meanwhile, the war propaganda continued. From landing on an aircraft carrier in a flight suit to declare “mission accomplished” to surprising troops in Baghdad with a Thanksgiving turkey that was a table decoration used as a prop, Bush defended his war of choice by using soldiers as PR props.

25. He never attended soldiers' funerals. For years after the war started, Bush never attendeda funeral even though as of June 2005, 144 soldiers (of the 1,700 killed thus far) were laid to rest in Arlington National Cemetary, about two miles from the White House.

26. Meanwhile, war profiteering surged.The list of top Bush administration officials whose former corporate employers made billions in Pentagon contracts starts with Vice-President Dick Cheney and Halliburton, which made $39.5 billion, and included his daughter, Liz Cheney, whoran a $300 million Middle East partnership program.

27. Bush ignored international ban on torture. Suspected terrorists were captured and tortured by the U.S. military in Baghdad’s Abu Gharib prison, in the highest profile example of how the Bush White House ignored international agreements, such as the Geneva Convention, that banned torture, and created a secret system of detention that was unmasked when photos made their way to the American media outlets.

28. Created the blackhole at Gitmo and renditions. The Bush White House created the offshore military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, as well as secret detention sites in eastern Europe to evade domestic and military justice systems. Many of the men still jailed in Cuba were turned over to the U.S. military by bounty hunters.  

29. Bush violated U.S. Constitution as well.The Bush White House ignored basic civil liberties, most notably by launching a massive domestic spying program where millions of Americans’ online activities were monitored with the help of big telecom companies. The government had no search warrant or court authority for its electronic dragnet.

30. Iraq war created federal debt crisis.The total costs of the Iraq and Afghan wars will reach between $4 trillion and $6 trillion, when the long-term medical costs are added in for wounded veterans, a March 2013 report by a Harvard researcher has estimated. Earlier reports said the wars cost $2 billion a week.

@noblefurrtexas "I simply don't think it's good form to violate the rules of a site and sink to that kind of language"

Yet a gutless sniveling cunt like you has no problem Violating International Law -- Attacking, Invading and Occupying a far smaller, weaker and poorer sovereign nation, causing the deaths of 100,000+ innocent civilians -- women and children -- in the process, and sending 3000+ hapless U$ dupes / troops to their graves for the Lies, Exaggerations and Fabrications of the Criminal Bu$h regime.

Fuck you, fuck what you stand for, and fuck your mother for bringing a worthless piece of shit like you into this world.

@noblefurrtexas ... you really are dumber than a bucket of dirt, aren't you boy?

Richard Perle -- NOT Pearle -- was PRO WAR, PRO INVASION ... the only difference it that unlike lying cunts like you, he ADMITS that the Invasion was ILLEGAL.

Does it hurt to be so fucking stupid?

@noblefurrtexas 

that was a CNN op-ed btw

"However, economic conditions did not satisfy the common shorthand definition of recession, which is "a fall of a country's real gross domestic product in two or more successive quarters,"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_2000s_recession

@RTGolden1

Bush Torture Indictment

SIGN PETITION: Issue Murder Indictment of George W. Bush

The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder

Ex-Bush intel man: President, Cheney, Rumsfeld guilty of War Crimes 

Bush Convicted of War Crimes in Absentia

@noblefurrtexas 

so, to paraphrase, you CANNOT show ANY evidence that government interference created..the meltdown of the mortgage industry and the burst of the bubbles as you claim, you merely have an opinion.

duly noted.

@DonkeyHotay @noblefurrtexas @mavdog Three points that show the worthliessness of the list: 

29. Bush violated U.S. Constitution as well.The Bush White House ignored basic civil liberties, most notably by launching a massive domestic spying program where millions of Americans’ online activities were monitored with the help of big telecom companies. The government had no search warrant or court authority for its electronic dragnet.

 The courts and Congress say this is incorrect, and they are the last word in this case. 

-----------------------------------------------------

19. Bush pardoned the Plame affair leaker. Before leaving office, Bush pardoned the vice president’s top staffer, Scooter Libby, for leaking Plame’s name to the press. 

Scooter Libby was proved NOT to be the leader.  It was Armitage who did the leaking.  Libby was tried for the Martha Stewart crime of giving the FBI false information - a spurious charge at best. 

------------------------------------------------------------

16. Abandoned international Criminal Court. Before invading Iraq, Bush told the U.N. that the U.S. was withdrawing from ratifying the International Criminal Court Treaty to protect American troops from persecution and to allow it to pursue preemptive war.

Another reason Bush, and a bi-partisan group of American jurists, said that signing that agreement would surrender American sovereignty to a higher international authority with the ability to invent laws or make political laws and rulings.  It was the right thing to do. 

The highest legal authority in America is our constitution.  That will be fact as long as America is a sovereign country, despite all of Obama's attempts to the contrary.

-----------------------------------------------------

The rest of the empty Democratic Talking Points are equally wrong and weak on facts, but high on opinion. 

In fact, as I went through the list, the refutations became so numerous I decided to pick out a few. 

--------------------------------------------------------

Oh....one other.  Bush didn't go to graveside services for fallen soldiers because there were so many, the Secret Service objected to it, and he would have done little else as the casualties increased. 

He DID go to hospitals, attended several memorial services, wrote notes to the parents/wives/family of fallen soldiers, and still- today - goes to DFW to welcome back soldiers. 

Not a single Democrat has done all of that.  So, this is an empty is misguided criticism that is also substantially off the mark.

@noblefurrtexas @mavdog

31. He cut veterans’ healthcare funding. At the height of the Iraq war, the White House cutfunding for veterans’ healthcare by several billion dollars, slashed more than one billion from military housing and opposed extending healthcare to National Guard families, even as they were repeatedly tapped for extended and repeat overseas deployments.

32. Then Bush decided to cut income taxes. In 2001 and 2003, a series of bills lowered income tax rates, cutting federal revenues as the cost of the foreign wars escalated. The tax cuts disproportionately benefited the wealthy, with roughly one-quarter going to the top one percent of incomes compared to 8.9% going to the middle 20 percent. The cuts were supposed to expire in 2013, but most are still on the books.

33. Assault on reproductive rights.From the earliest days of his first term, the Bush White House led a prolonged assault on reproductive rights. He cut funds for U.N. family planning programs, barred military bases from offering abortions, put right-wing evangelicals in regulatory positions where they rejected new birth control drugs, and issued regulations making fetuses—but not women—eligible for federal healthcare.

34. Cut Pell Grant loans for poor students. His administration froze Pell Grants for years and tightened eligibility for loans, affecting 1.5 million low-income students. He also eliminated other federal job training programs that targeted young people.

35. Turned corporations loose on environment. Bush’s environmental record was trulyappalling, starting with abandoning a campaign pledge to tax carbon emissions and then withdrawing from the Kyoto Protocol on greenhouse gases. The Sierra Club lists 300 actions his staff took to undermine federal laws, from cutting enforcement budgets to putting industry lobbyists in charge of agencies to keeping energy policies secret.

36.. Said evolution was a theory—like intelligent design. One of his most inflammatory comments was saying that public schools should teach that evolution is a theory with as much validity as the religious belief in intelligent design, or God’s active hand in creating life. 

37. Misguided school reform effort. Bush’s “No Child Left Behind” initiative made preparation for standardized tests and resulting test scores the top priority in schools, to the dismay of legions of educators who felt that there was more to learning than taking tests. 

38. Appointed flank of right-wing judges. Bush’s two Supreme Court picks—Chief Justice John Roberts and Associate Justice Samuel Alito—have reliably sided with pro-business interests and social conservatives. He also elevated U.S. District Court Judge Charles Pickering to an appeals court, despite his known segregationist views.

39. Gutted the DOJ’s voting rights section. Bush’s Justice Department appointees led a multi-year effort to prosecute so-called voter fraud, including firing seven U.S. attorneys who did not pursue overtly political cases because of lack of evidence.

40. Meanwhile average household incomes fell. When Bush took office in 2000, median household incomes were $52,500. In 2008, they were $50,303, a drop of 4.2 percent, making Bush the only recent two-term president to preside over such a drop.

@DonkeyHotay @noblefurrtexas Awwww....were you trying to hurt my feelings because your's got hurt?  I'm sorry. That must be tough for you. 

Kindly tell me what specific international laws the Coalition and Bush broke.  (You do know there is not such thing as "international law".   Agreements between countries are treaties, covenants, etc.  But, there is no court to adjudicate what you're talking about. )

So, what specific laws were broken, by whom, in what competent jurisdiction, and who is the complainant?

Have you ever thought about public speaking?  You have such a clever way with words that you would be the hit of the Sanitation Workers Annual Convention.  

Meanwhile, I want to recommend a product made just for people like you.  It's called "Summer's Eve", and it's especially applicable to people like you with a nasty mouth and temperament.

@DonkeyHotay @noblefurrtexas Ever heard of Valerie Plame?  Ever heard of Scoop Jackson?  Just curious.

@DonkeyHotay @noblefurrtexas The problem is, the invasion was NOT illegal.  And, I apologize profusely for getting my Perles inversed. 

@mavdog In my opinion, it wasn't the sole contribution to the crash.  But, it was one of a few elements that contributed to the conditions which hosted the crash (or bubble burst). 

As you probably know, financial meltdowns don't have just one cause.  They tend to be a series or combination of elements that - together - create a destabilized effect. 

@DonkeyHotay @noblefurrtexas @mavdog WOW! Talking Points right out of the DNC spin machine. 

It's funny; I haven't seen any articles where Democrats jumped on JFK when he reduced taxes to spur economic activity....as did Reagan....and as did Bush when he received an economy in recession from Clinton, and which was threatened with survival from the 9/11 attack.  Bush did the right thing, and it worked. 

But, NONE of them could be the economic disasters that the Obamunist has been. 

btw.....Did you know Clinton never once submitted a balanced budget to Congress, and that it wasn't until Newt Gingrich became Speaker that they were balanced. 

It would also be handy if you knew what Congress had to pass that you blame on Bush.  And, like his father - also a veteran Navy Pilot,Bush accepted recommendations from the DOD and generally followed them.  

Unlike Clinton and Obama, Bush was not a micro-manager, and didn't stack his administration with "Yes" men or wimps.  

@noblefurrtexas @mavdog

41. And millions more fell below the poverty line. When Bill Clinton left office, 31.6 million Americans were living in poverty. When Bush left office, there were 39.8 million, according to the U.S. Census, an increase of 26.1 percent. The Census said two-thirds of that growth occurred before the economic downturn of 2008.

42. Poverty among children also exploded. The Census also found that 11.6 million children lived below the poverty line when Clinton left office. Under Bush, that number grew by 21 percent to 14.1 million.

43. Millions more lacked access to healthcare. Following these poverty trends, the number of Americans without health insurance was 38.4 million when Clinton left office. When Bush left, that figure had grown by nearly 8 million to 46.3 million, the Census found. Those with employer-provided benefits fell every year he was in office.

44. Bush let black New Orleans drown. Hurricane Katrina exposed Bush’s attitude toward the poor. He didn’t visit the city after the storm destroyed the poorest sections. He praised his Federal Emergency Management Agency director for doing a "heck of a job" as the federal government did little to help thousands in the storm’s aftermath and rebuilding.

45. Yet pandered to religious right. Months before Katrina hit, Bush flew back to the White House to sign a bill to try to stop the comatose Terri Schiavo's feeding tube from being removed, saying the sanctity of life was at stake.

46. Set record for fewest press conferences. During his first term that was defined by the 9/11 attacks, he had the fewest press conferences of any modern president and had never met with the New York Times editorial board.

47. But took the most vacation time. Reporters analyzing Bush’s record found that he took off 1,020 days in two four-year terms—more than one out of every three days. No other modern president comes close. Bush also set the record for the longest vacation among modern presidents—five weeks, the Washington Post noted.   

48. Karl Rove, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld. Not since Richard Nixon’s White House and the era of the Watergate burglary and expansion of the Vietnam War have there been as many power-hungry and arrogant operators holding the levers of power. Cheney ran the White House; Rove the political operation for corporations and the religious right; and Rumsfeld oversaw the wars.

49. He may have stolen the 2004 election as well. The closest Bush came to a public referendum on his presidency was the 2004 election, which came down to the swing state of Ohio. There the GOP’s voter suppression tactics rivaled Florida in 2000 and many unresolved questions remain about whether the former GOP Secretary of State altered the Election Night totals from rural Bible Belt counties.

50. He’s escaped accountability for his actions. From Iraq war General Tommy Franks’declaration that “we don’t do body counts” to numerous efforts to impeach Bush and top administration officials—primarily over launching the war in Iraq—he has never been held to account in any official domestic or international tribunal.

@noblefurrtexas 

Scoop Jackson?

http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--_O0Sbwx2--/18f1au40s27kfjpg.jpg

really don't like him much, he's a Knicks fan....

@noblefurrtexas @mavdog 

financial meltdowns don't have just one cause

this one had a primary cause that set in motion the meltdown that almost brought a Depression. the other cause was good old greed.

and the issue was the Act removed Government oversight. a HUGE mistake.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gramm%E2%80%93Leach%E2%80%93Bliley_Act

@mavdog A good example of this would be if we were in charge of the economy and had influence on the Fed, and decided to raise interest rates and bank reserve amounts just 5%, it would very possibly crash the economy. 

It wouldn't be a single event, but a chain of actions and reactions. 

By the time it became evident that the economy was crashing, it would too late to operate the circuit breakers which might stop it, and the reactions of the stock market, individual lenders, retailers, banks, and credit card companies -- plus days of bad news in the media -- would likely cause a chain reaction that wouldn't stop until it had "bottomed out". 

Depressed enough yet?  :)

@noblefurrtexas 

an economy in recession from Clinton

you need to research this a bit before you use it again.

The US GDP contracted 1.1% in 1Q 2001, expanded 2.3% in 2Q 2001, contracted 1.3% in 3Q 2001, and expanded 1.1% in 4Q 2001.

that is not defined as a recession, which is 2 successive quarters of business contraction.

Bush inherited an economy that was in the midst of one of the strongest growth periods in our nation's history.

Clinton never once submitted a balanced budget to Congress

Clinton had budget surpluses the majority of his tenure in office.

@mavdog @noblefurrtexas Well, you can't hold bad team choices against him?  They vote. 

@mavdog @noblefurrtexas The economy was in recession with Clinton handed it over to Bush. 

@noblefurrtexas 

you missed the joke, this Scoop Jackson...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9FtSDFy6kb8

@noblefurrtexas 

The economy was in recession with Clinton handed it over to Bush

WOW! You need to be sure and contact all of the economists and let them know that as of now YOU have determined the definition of "recession" must change.

No more will the economists of the entire world use the definition of a recession as 2 consecutive quarters of GDP contraction, as of now it will be the definition set out by noblefurrtexas, which is...IDK, whatever you feel at the moment?

ridiculous of you. the US was NOT in a recession when GW Bush took office.

@mavdog @noblefurrtexas LOL!

@mavdog @noblefurrtexas I finally posted proof of that from the far-right wing news organization called CNN.  It's somewhere far down the page. But, it's absolute fact.

@mavdog @noblefurrtexas "The NBER's Business Cycle Dating Committee has determined that a peak in business activity occurred in the U.S. economy in March 2001. A peak marks the end of an expansion and the beginning of a recession. The determination of a peak date in March is thus a determination that the expansion that began in March 1991 ended in March 2001 and a recession began[1]. "  NBER is a group of economists, by the way.

http://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2002/02/art1full.pdf.  

Bureau of Labor Statistics report from 2002 stating the recession started in early 2001.

Two months into office, Bush cannot be held completely responsible for the early 2000's recession (actually no President can be responsible, all by themselves for a recession.  The President is one of many, both government and private, that affect the economy.)

@mavdog @noblefurrtexas Yes it was.  But, I AM proud of you for not using the "surplus" as an argument, for a number of reasons.

@RTGolden1 @mavdog @noblefurrtexas Good show !!!