?

Log in

Previous Entry | Next Entry

According to Bush: Obama=Nazi

This is absolutely ridiculous and such an obvious spin job.  It's absolutely disgusting the level this man and his party will sink to keep us at war, to keep killing off the sons and daughters of this country, for oil and vendetta.  I am appalled.


I can't get it to embed... go here.

I think that Bush is more akin to Hitler than Obama, with his invading Iraq for no good reason and refusing to leave.  His statements that Obama wants to "negotiate with terrorists" is such a scare tactic and attempt at marketing McCain.  So far, Iran hasn't done anything.  I think negotiating is always a better first step than invasion, bombing and death. 

Let's not even get started on the fact that he said this garbage in a foreign country!!!!!

Comments

( 15 comments — Leave a comment )
rockysmomma
May. 15th, 2008 09:55 pm (UTC)
Bush = the war and fear mongering president.

Maybe they should have an asterisk next to his name since he didn't officially "win" in 2000.
goldfish_totem
May. 16th, 2008 03:50 am (UTC)
I wholeheartedly agree with you of course!
sweetjezebel
May. 18th, 2008 08:15 am (UTC)
Are you saying Bush is a dictator?
purplejuli
May. 18th, 2008 01:12 pm (UTC)
Yes.
sweetjezebel
May. 18th, 2008 04:07 pm (UTC)
Then by that rationale, will Keith Olbermann be shot & killed?
purplejuli
May. 18th, 2008 06:43 pm (UTC)
No but he'll personally be audited by the IRS.

I don't understand why you're so personally offended and don't see the irony in your comment when it was BUSH who said it was OBAMA who is like Hitler.

So far, it wasn't Obama who won an election (two actually) under strange circumstances regarding fraud and intimidation.


It wasn't Obama who ordered the invasion of another country on fabricated evidence. (All valid intelligence that said Iraq had no WMDs was destroyed. Google "The Downing Street Memo" for more information on how the war was started based on lies.)

It wasn't Obama who sent 4000 Americans to die for no reason after it was "Mission Accomplished." Or Obama who started a war when

It also wasn't Obama who tanked the economy.

It wasn't Obama who manufactured terrorist threats and used them to rationalize the development of a police state including the loss of fundamental citizen rights and the build interment camps (cough, cough, Guantanamo. Cough, cough, Abu Grahib)that fly in the face of the Geneva Convention and the US Constitution.

Nevermind that there is an actual real world Bush/Hitler connection. George Bush's grandfather, the late US senator Prescott Bush, was a director and shareholder of companies that profited from their involvement with the financial backers of Nazi Germany.

Edited at 2008-05-18 06:56 pm (UTC)
sweetjezebel
May. 18th, 2008 09:44 pm (UTC)
I'm personally offended because I simply do not think Bush is a dictator in the least. I *do* however, think that while Osam I mean Obama is not akin to Hitler exactly, he IS cause for alarm & many of us believe if he becomes president it will be the end of this world as we know it.

Regarding the troops who unfortunately lost their lives, don't you agree that they enlisted themselves? There is no draft anymore. They, just as cops do, went into the services knowing fully well what their fates could be. Hell, I'd enlist right now if I could. And happily serve in the war against Iraq.

I'm curious... you are one of those who believes Bush went to war simply for oil. If that is the case, how come we're paying $4 a gallon if we now have all this oil?
sweetjezebel
May. 18th, 2008 10:12 pm (UTC)
Sorry wasn't done, what fundamental rights did you personally have infringed upon?

Oh and personally audited by the IRS. You're 100% sure of this? And even if he was (which I think would be hilarious if it happened, I hope he says whether it does or not because I want to know!) is that what dictators do? They audit? I was under the impression they kill an opposition (i.e. Saddam Hussein)

Also, Guantanamo Bay is, in my mind, one of the most brilliant ideas ever conceived. I think no one should have a clue WHAT is going on there. I think that waterboarding should be the most gentle of the forms of interrogation (of known terrorists) so we can get the intel we need. It's too bad in this time of "political correctness" that anyone there needs to worry about what they're doing.

As for Prescott Bush... what does that have to do with anything? I have ancestors that were Nazis. I also have ancestors that were slave owners. Does that make ME a bad person? Do you know where your roots go, and if you do & it's something terrible, does that make you a bad person?

I'm tired of people saying were only there for oil... we're there for the stabilization of the Middle East. So that we and our children do not have to face the threat of terrorists having nuclear missiles. If you'd like to be a little more informed of OUR side (I took the time to watch & hear what Keith Olbermann said after all...) then please read the email I am forwarding to you. Okay, it's sent.

Finally, we have MANY friends who have done MULTIPLE tours in Iraq and everybody we know has stated we have to win this war no matter what. In fact Brents nephew just re-enlisted for his 3rd tour. I don't think these guys would keep going back again and again (one of them, a fellow officer at the police dept., took his 3rd tour because it was assigned to a friend that had just had a baby so he wanted to be home with it for a bit longer) if they didn't believe in it.

I don't like arguing with you and I'm not trying to. I'm trying to be respectful of your opinions and simply give mine. I just can't keep sitting here saying nothing in response though. It scares me that someone I care SO MUCH about has these (IMO) strange thoughts & beliefs. They're like conspiracy theories! :(
purplejuli
May. 19th, 2008 12:09 am (UTC)
ACLU's concise list of Constitutionally guaranteed rights lost since 911: http://www.aclu.org/safefree/general/26683res20060906.html

Also:
RIGHT TO LIBERTY: Our Habeas Corpus rights were effectively repealed when this administration came up with the term “enemy combatant”.

RIGHT TO LEGAL REPRESENTATION: Anyone, including Americans can now be held without charges and without access to an attorney as an “enemy combatant”.

RIGHT TO A SPEEDY AND PUBLIC TRIAL: Government may jail Americans indefinitely without a trial.

FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION: Government may monitor religious and political institutions without suspecting criminal activity to assist terror investigations.

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION: Not only is much of what this administration is doing is done in secret, but so much of what should be public record are now classified. Even records that were previously available to the public are now classified. Further, Government may prosecute librarians or keepers of any other records if they tell anyone that the government subpoenaed information.

FREEDOM FROM UNREASONABLE SEARCHES: Government may now search and seize Americans' papers and effects without probable cause.

THE CITIZEN CORPS will implement of range of new initiatives to engage ordinary Americans in specific homeland security efforts in their own communities.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/01/20020130.html

OPERATION TIPS: (Terrorist Information and Prevention System): From the White House website 2002: Operation TIPS will enable millions of America transportation workers, postal workers, and public utility employees to identify and report suspicious activities linked to terrorism and crime.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/01/20020130.html

purplejuli
May. 19th, 2008 12:09 am (UTC)
From CBS: Operation TIPS Trips Up? Legislators Want To Block Program Creating 'A Society Of Snitches'
August 8, 2002
In the aftermath of Sept. 11, President Bush laid groundwork for "Operation TIPS", a program which would organize a volunteer army of citizen lookouts to report "suspicious" activities to the federal government.)
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/08/10/national/main518273.shtml

Here is another program to spy on the American people: THE NATIONAL APPLICATIONS OFFICE (NOA)

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) established a new domestic spying operation in 2007 so that with or without congressional authorization or oversight, the executive branch is in charge and will let NAO use state-of-the-art technology, including military satellite imagery, to spy on Americans without their knowledge.

Combined with warrantless wiretapping, pervasive spying of all kinds, the abandonment of the law and checks and balances, intense secrecy, and an array of repressive post-9/11 legislation, Executive Orders and National Security and Homeland Security Presidential Directives, NAO is another national security police state tool any despot would love.

It's now established and may be operating without congressional approval.

"Not only is the surveillance they are contemplating intrusive and omnipresent, it's also invisible. And that's what makes this so dangerous."
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=7824

From the Washington Post:
But civil liberties groups quickly condemned the move, which Kate Martin, director of the Center for National Security Studies, a nonprofit activist group, likened to "Big Brother in the sky." "They want to turn these enormous spy capabilities, built to be used against overseas enemies, onto Americans," Martin said. "They are laying the bricks one at a time for a police state."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/15/AR2007081502430_pf.html


Today, the U.S. spends more than 400 billion dollars are annually on the military industrial complex. This is seven times as much as the next biggest spender worldwide and almost as much as the rest of the world combined. (And Bush and Cheney are personally benefitting financially from this.)

The cost of the war, together with largest tax cuts in history has resulted in record budget deficits and the national debt – which is more than five times the debt of the world. Much of our debt is owned by foreign countries – particularly China. Not only is this a threat to our country, this policy is taking away from education, housing, health care, our infrastructure and other basic needs here in the United States. Since U.S. economic power in the world is collapsing, this administration is trying to compensate with military might and force with what we are losing in economic power.

Our country faces real threats; however, this administration is not pursuing them. They are not going after the real threats (think bin Laden and al Queda), this administration is pursuing its preplanned agenda.

It doesn't matter if it personally happens to me-- though it could if for some reason it was determined I was a threat (and the gov't doesn't have to do much to prove that I am a threat, only say I am-- but when you pass laws that allow phone tapping, records retrieval, etc, you start down a slippery slope, where more and more rights are eroded away.
purplejuli
May. 19th, 2008 12:19 am (UTC)
The problem with Guantanamo is that not everyone who is there belongs there. These people are being held without access to legal representation and without being charged with anything. Additionally, any information gotten from someone by means of torture (and waterboarding is torture-- slow drowning, feeling water fill your lungs, is torture) is likely a case of someone saying what they think their torturers want to hear.

See this NY Times article on how the Bush Administration has overstated the value of Guantanamo detainees:
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C01E7D81239F932A15755C0A9629C8B63


As far as waterboarding goes, I think that unless you have been strapped down to the board, have endured the agonizing feeling of the water overpowering your gag reflex, and then feel your throat open and allow pint after pint of water to involuntarily fill your lungs, you will can't justifiably argue that it's mild torture.

It's slow motion suffocation with enough time to contemplate the inevitability of black out and expiration and usually the person goes into hysterics on the board. And because there's not physical scarring, the victim recovers and can be threatened with its use repeatedly. n.

By sanctioning waterboarding as an interrogation technique, the United States joins a long and illustrious list of nations and governments that includes, but is not limited to: Militarist Japan (WWII), Nazi Germany, North Vietnam, the Khmer Rouge and others.
purplejuli
May. 19th, 2008 12:29 am (UTC)
Regarding the troops who unfortunately lost their lives, don't you agree that they enlisted themselves?

I believe that troops enlist to defend their country against enemies foreign and domestic and swear to uphold the Constitution. The problem occurs when following the orders of the President and defending the Constitution conflict, like now. When following the orders of the president means going against the United Nations to pursue action against a country based on lies. If the reason we went to war in Iraq was because the President said there were weapons of mass destruction and the UN and everyone else in the world said and proved that they didn't, then who's the liar? Who's the one who is a dictator, invading countries on false information and using propaganda to get the people behind him? That's exactly what Bush did and it's exactly what Hitler did when he invaded Poland.

You can say that we're there to stabilize the middle east but, why is stabilization there our problem? Because the middle east is the SECOND largest exporter of oil to the US. The biggest exporter to the US is Canada. Congress and the American people were told we were going there because they had WMDs. Not to stabilize the area. We went in, bombed the hell out of Iraq, took out Hussein, and we're still there and the situation is getting worse because they don't want us there. Al Qaeda wasn't in Iraq before the war but they're there now because we have committed an aggressive act of Colonialism. We essentially went in and imposed our own government. It didn't work in Vietnam and it isn't going to work there. If there is another massive strike against the US, it's going to be because we're still there, where we don't belong.

purplejuli
May. 19th, 2008 01:12 am (UTC)
I read the article you sent me from the general and while he says he's not a Republican, he sure as hell ain't a democrat. I read his bio on some military web site so I know he served a good long time in the Middle East but fact is, everything in that letter is conjecture and prophesy.

Buy off North Korea? How can we buy off anyone when we're funneling all our money into Iraq and the Middle East when Iraq never had nukes to begin with?

I think this statement is particularly interesting:
"I watched Iran and Iraq shoot missiles at each other every day, and all day, for months. They killed hundreds of thousands of their people. Know why? They were fighting for control of the Middle East and that enormous oil supply."

So General Farrington said Iraq and Iran bombed each other for control of oil fields. We now are in control of Iraq and the president is gearing up for an invasion of Iran. Isn't that INTERESTING???? But (sarcasm) it's not about oil at all. Nevermind that both Bush's family and Cheney made their millions in the OIL BUSINESS.

Farrington said, "Do you have any idea what will happen if the entire Middle East turns their support to Iran , which they will obviously do if we pull out? It is not the price of oil we will have to worry about. Oil WILL NOT BE AVAILABLE to this country at any price."

First of all, there's no incentive to the other OPEC nations to support Iran against the US. According to the US Energy Information Administration Canada remains the number one Exporter of Oil to the US, then Saudi Arabia, then Mexico, Nigeria and finally Venezuela.

So if Saudi Arabia and Nigeria (the only two countries that are really at risk to shut of reserves to America... Venezuela relies on the US to much despite their chest thumping) the US is not going to grind to a halt. Canada and the US already have a price agreement in place which manages to keep Canadian fuel prices high.

He's basically saying "They're bad guys, let's kill them all or else we're doomed and anyone who says otherwise is an unpatriotic coward"...Which come to think of it is pretty much what Bush has been saying even since 9/11

purplejuli
May. 19th, 2008 01:21 am (UTC)
My first boyfriend and very close friend is back at Camp Liberty after having spent two years in the mountains of Afganistan. Last night we had dinner with my friend, Lou, a NYC cop and Army reservist. He spent two years in Iraq already and is leaving in two weeks for another years over there.

Being a cop and a military guy who's been there, I take what he had to say seriously. If we "have to win this war" it's because we can't lose to such an unorganized third-world mess. We lost in Vietnam and if we can't get it together there, no one in the world will take us seriously. The problem is we should never have been there in the first place.

What Lou said about people going back over and over is that , in his words, aside from being shot at, it's easier to take a break from the real life problems you have at home. Someone tells you when to eat, when to sleep, when to bathe. You do what you're told and there's no confrontation. You're not fighting with your spouse about bills, you're not arguing with your parents over what you're going to do with your life, it's a complete break from your own personal reality. And in his words, if you're a female soldier, you're a queen. Because even if you're hideously ugly, you're 1 woman to 300 men, so whatever you want, you can get.

I appreciate your viewpoints but I wish you'd back them up with credible facts from reliable sources. I can't believe you think it's "strange" and like a "conspiracy theory" that the president has said and done some seriously underhanded things to accomplish goals he laid out even before 911. It comes down to partisan beliefs and believing what you're told by which news source. On politics, we just have to agree to disagree.

And for the record, I'm not particularly an Obama or Hillary fan and there's no way I'd vote for McCain (who is WAY TOO OLD to be president). I'd rather vote for Ron Paul.
purplejuli
May. 19th, 2008 12:58 am (UTC)
"If that is the case, how come we're paying $4 a gallon if we now have all this oil?

Most of our oil comes from Canada, not the middle east.


There was a great article in my local newspaper this morning about how Bush is now trying to pass the buck and blame the Democrats for soaring gas prices.

Anyway, price increases for gas generally occur when the world crude-oil market tightens and lowers inventories. Also, growing demand can sometimes outpace refinery capacity. In the spring, refineries perform maintenance, which can place a pinch on the gasoline market. By the end of May, refineries are usually back to full capacity.

There's a supply chain and several groups who are responsible for setting the price of the product. The media can sometimes lead you to believe that the price of gas is based solely on the price of crude oil, but there are actually many factors that determine what you pay at the pump. No matter how expensive gas becomes, all of these entities have to get their slice of the pie. According to the U.S. Department of Energy, here's an approximation of where each dollar you spend on gas goes:

* Taxes: 12 cents
* Distribution and Marketing: 8 cents
* Refining: 8 cents
* Crude oil: 72 cents

World events, wars and weather can also raise prices. Anything that affects any part of the process, from the moment the oil is drilled, through refining and distribution to your car will result in a change in price. Military conflicts in parts of the world with lots of oil supplies can make it difficult for oil companies to drill and ship crude oil. Hurricanes have damaged offshore drilling platforms, coastal refineries and shipping ports that receive oil tankers. If a tanker itself is lost or damaged, or leaks its oil into the ocean, that will put a dent in the market as well.

So the fact that there's a war going on in areas where oil is drilled means that the difficulties result in higher prices. By that logic, if we pull out of Iraq and the Middle East, the cost drops.

In California, the state government has set its own reformulated gasoline rules that are stricter than the federally mandated clean-gas laws. The state adopted requirements for cleaner-burning fuel in 1996. This is why Californians pay a higher price for cleaner fuels -- this, plus a local sales-and-use tax, the federal excise tax and a state excise tax. California's distance from the refineries located near the Gulf of Mexico can also add to the cost of gasoline if it chooses to obtain gas supplies from those refineries.

The United States is the world's third largest producer of crude oil. The biggest production region is around the Gulf of Mexico, and the largest producing state is Texas.

Another good question in regard to why gas costs so much these days is why hasn't W released any oil from the reserves, like during the first Gulf War, under his poppa? Instead he recommended expanding the reserves in his 2007 State of the Union Address. The Department of Energy announced in February of 2007 that when complete, the expanded reserves will have a capacity of 1 billion barrels.

This month, in light of record-breaking crude oil prices, the Democratic controlled Congress passed a bill that mandated a halt in the filling of the reserves so more oil would be available to Americans at the pumps and in an attempt to stop the increase in price.

Here's what's happening with Iraq's oil:
http://www.motherjones.com/washington_dispatch/2007/03/iraqi_oil_agreement.html

Another interesting article about oil in the middle east and the president:
http://www.mediamonitors.net/josephclifford2.html
( 15 comments — Leave a comment )