Is Bush Forrest Gump or Machiavelli?

Remove all ads!

Article first:

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/tonyblankley/tb20030604.shtml

So all you Liberals out there, which is it going to be? Or is it both, you just use whichever one is more damaging at the time?

 

More like Pinnochio without the lie detector (growing nose) but with a very similar complex:
Dad i want to be a real boy (president)

 

I think people who call Bush stupid are foolish myself.

That said, this was a ridiculous article. The obvious response is: he didn't fool anyone like is asserted in the above quote. Where does this pompous fella get off? Fooled the French, Russian, and German intelligence indeed -- that explains their support.

As a sidenote, tough to take anything seriously when the first thing I see on the page is Ann Coulter who is the right's version of Michael Moore - making up facts and ad hominems are the most powerful form of debate to them. I think they post on this board.

 

He, he, if this guy is a believing christan, then I am a white rabbit.

Anyway, Bush doesn't think, Condoleeza Rice thinks.

 

Sorry, Darkwolf, I couldn't get past the mean-spirited vitriol that started the article to actually read it.

To answer the question, though, I think Dubya is smart enough to surround himself with smart advisors, AND listen to them more often than not. Or did the Republican party hand-pick his team for him...

Does that make me a <gasp> liberal?

 

Rallymama, that means we agree on the Condoleeza Rice issue ? In my view, she might become President. I don't like her conclusions, but she's got a brain... he, he, like Hillary Clinton. So... the pair for 2008.

No, I am not a democrat, hell, I am not even American ! (Thank god ) But that would be pair, a east-coast well educated liberal brain versus a black woman, well educated, born in the time of Segregation in Alabama, which has the most conservative WASP thinking . Imagine that ! And the demographic analysis of the outcome of the vote concerning ethnical preferences.

[ June 04, 2003, 18:56: Message edited by: Yago ]

 

Hey, Yago, that's TWICE we've agreed on something! YIPPEE!

{pardon my silliness, but I was in a really lousy mood last night and it's finally worn off - maybe I've swung too far teh other way?}

 

Laches,

The statement you are ridiculing is what many of the extreme leftists are starting to claim, not a statement that the author is claiming to be true. He is actually implying that the statement is preposterous, so you are indirectly supporting his position on that particular issue.

Res 1441 (IIRC) put the burden of proof on Saddam, but the French, Germans & Russians didn't want to enforce it militarily, arguably because they stood to loose too many economic benefits that Saddam was either throwing or going to throw their way. They never claimed that Saddam did not have WMD that I ever read.

Rally,

I really hope that you don't think that Hillary would be good for this country as president. Rice I have no problem with she would be as good as anybody else out there, but Clinton has told far too many lies, and obstructed justice far too many times for me to be able to have anything but scorn for her.

 

@Darkwolf: My agreement was with Yago's assessment of Condoleeza Rice's abilities.

 

At Darkwolf:

A. Quoting myself:

B. Just to get the record straight:

a. He, he proving the non-existence of a fact, nice idea, from sleazy lawyers not found on this side of the pond.

b.

Why moving European armies for American oil companies ? If you want it, move your own ass.

c. They claimed that the evidence the US-Goverment showed was so lousy, it was an insult for people who are able to count to ten.

d.

Asking the average inhabitant of the European continent after the above stated facts about sending troops to Iraq, in pictograms:

 

@Yago,

Your post stated:

I just was making sure of which part she was agreeing with, as I believed that she is too intellegent to be suckered in by Hillary's antics, and I am glad to find out I was right!

The sleazy UN politician from your side of the pond signed of on it!

Play with words all you want to, he was expected to prove that he didn't have such weapons by meeting certain expectations, and he refused on all of them. If you tell me to prove that I don't have a million $'s, and that you will accept my bank statements as such proof, when I deliver them to you, I just proved that the non-existance of the million $'s you claimed I had. Saddam could have done the same thing by following the stipulations of 1441.

Sorry I can't help it if most Euros are to afraid to back up what they say with force. Guess that is why no one takes a Frenchman's threat too seriously!

 

Hm, that's why I stated in italics under my post, that I don't support democrats. Hillary Clinton is just about the only women I know, inside American politics and she's got a brain too. But I actually was mainly thinking about the involved ironies, stated in italics .

No they won't. The will say, you propably got bank accounts somewhere hidden on the Bahamas, in Luxemburg, in Liechtenstein, Jersey (Channel Islands) or good lord Switzerland

A. As you remember, there was some serious disagreement about the interpretation of the words in the resolution (the main job of laywers, words and their meanings)

B. Going into a war without convincing plan what exactly to do, having no clue what happens afterwards and then, as Donnie "the naive" Rumsflield, being shocked by the "untidiness" of liberated people, just wasn't a convincing idea in the first place.

[ June 04, 2003, 19:54: Message edited by: Yago ]

 

Negative 50 Billion points to Yago for quoting a cheesy Alanis Morissette song. Ok, so any Alanis Morissette song qualifies but sheesh, standards people, standards.

 

Dam, but I like that song actually.

 

Personally I believe that was a very good picture of the man who wrote that article. You can't even see the strings connecting his hands to Bush's fingers.


(note: that was intended as sarcasm, I'm not one of those guys who sees everything they don't agree with as evil.)

 

He's like a cross between the two

as manipulative and evil as Machiavelli but as dumb as Forrest Gump