Tuesday, May 01, 2007

The speech Bush should be giving

A buddy of mine sent me this today, and it's too good not to post. If I was the President's speech writer, this is what I'd be writing.
Normally, I start these things out by saying "My Fellow Americans..."

Not doing it this time. If the polls are any indication, I don't know who more than half of you are anymore. I do know something terrible has happened, and that you're really not fellow Americans any longer.

I'll cut right to the chase here: I quit. Now before anyone gets all in a lather about me quitting to avoid impeachment, or to avoid prosecution or something, let me assure you: there's been no breaking of laws or impeachable offenses in this office. The reason I'm quitting is simple. I'm fed up with you people.

I'm fed up because you have no understanding of what's really going on in the world. Or of what's going on in this once-great nation of ours. And the majority of you are too damned lazy to do your homework and figure it out.

Let's start local. You've been sold a bill of goods by politicians and the news media. Polls show that the majority of you think the economy is in the tank, and that's despite record numbers of homeowners including record numbers of MINORITY homeowners. While we're mentioning minorities, I'll point out that minority business ownership is at an all-time high. Our unemployment rate is as low as it ever was during the Clinton Administration. I've mentioned all those things before, but it doesn't seem to have sunk in.

Despite the shock to our economy of 9/11, the stock market has rebounded to record levels and more Americans than ever are participating in these markets. Meanwhile, all you can do is whine about gas prices, and most of you are too damn stupid to realize that gas prices are high because there's increased demand in other parts of the world, and because a small handful of noisy idiots are more worried about polar bears and beach front property than your economic security.

We face real threats in the world. Don't give me this "blood for oil" thing. If I was trading blood for oil, I would've already seized Iraq's oil fields and let the rest of the country go to hell, and don't give me this 'Bush Lied, People Died' crap either. If I was the liar you morons take me for, I could've easily had chemical weapons planted in Iraq so they could be 'discovered.' Instead, I owned up to the fact that the intelligence was faulty. Let me remind you that the rest of the world thought Saddam had the goods, same as me. Let me also remind you, regime change in Iraq, was official US policy before I came into office. Some guy named 'Clinton' established that policy. Bet you didn't know that, did you?

You idiots need to understand that we face a unique enemy. Back during the cold war, there were two major competing political and economic models squaring off. We won that war, but we did so because fundamentally, the Communists wanted to survive, just as we do. We were simply able to outspend and out-tech them.

That's not the case this time. The soldiers of our new enemy don't care if they survive. In fact, they want to die. That'd be fine, as long as they weren't also committed to taking as many of you with them as they can, but; they are. They want to kill you, and the bastards are all over the globe.

You should be grateful that they haven't gotten any more of us here in the United States since September 11, but; you're not. That's because you've got no idea how hard a small number of intelligence, military, law enforcement and homeland security people have worked to make sure of that. When this whole mess started, I warned you that this would be a long and difficult fight. I'm disappointed how many of you people think a long and difficult fight amounts to a single season of 'Survivor'.

Instead, you've grown impatient. You're incapable of seeing things through the long lens of history, the way our enemies do. You think that wars should last a few months, a few years, tops.

Making matters worse, you actively support those who help the enemy. Every time you buy the New York Times, every time you send a donation to a cut-and-run Democrat's political campaign, well, dammit, you might just as well Fedex a grenade launcher to a Jihadist. It amounts to the same thing.

In this day and age, it's easy enough to find the truth. It's all over the Internet. It just isn't on the pages of the New York Times or on NBC News. Even if it were, I doubt you'd be any smarter. Most of you would rather watch American Idol.

I could say more about your expectations that the government will always be there to bail you out, but; you're too stupid to leave a city that's below sea level and has a hurricane approaching. I could say more about your insane belief that government, not your own wallet, is where the money comes from, but; I've come to the conclusion that were I to do so, it would sail right over your heads.

So I quit. I'm going back to Crawford.

I've got an energy-efficient house down there (Al Gore could only dream) and the capability to be fully self-sufficient. No one ever heard of Crawford before I got elected, and as soon as I'm done here, pretty much no one will ever hear of it again. Maybe I'll be lucky enough to die of old age before the last pillars of America fall.

Oh, and by the way, Cheney's quitting too. ,That means Pelosi is your new President. ,You asked for it. ,Watch what she does carefully, because I still have a glimmer of hope that there're just enough of you remaining who are smart enough to turn this thing around in 2008.

So that's it. God bless what's left of America.
Some of you know what I mean.

3 comments:

Chris Muir said...

Heard that.

Anonymous said...

"Never argue with an idiot; they'll drag you down to their level and beat you with experience."

Even so, I have decided to take up “the decider’s” challenge.For every example of your incompetence and stupidity I give below, there exist many more. These are just the ones that came to mind.

Normally, I start these things out by saying "My Fellow Americans." Not doing it this time. If the polls are any indication, I don't know who more than half of you are anymore. I do know something terrible has happened, and that you're really not fellow Americans any longer.

Guess 72% of the population needs to get a visa, and quick.

"The President is merely the most important among a large number of public servants. He should be supported or opposed exactly to the degree which is warranted by his good conduct or bad conduct, his efficiency or inefficiency in rendering loyal, able, and disinterested service to the Nation as a whole. Therefore it is absolutely necessary that there should be full liberty to tell the truth about his acts, and this means that it is exactly necessary to blame him when he does wrong as to praise him when he does right. Any other attitude in an American citizen is both base and servile. To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public. Nothing but the truth should be spoken about him or any one else. But it is even more important to tell the truth, pleasant or unpleasant, about him than about any one else."

"Roosevelt in the Kansas City Star", 149
May 7, 191
I'll cut right to the chase here: I quit. Now before anyone gets all in a lather about me quitting to avoid impeachment, or to avoid prosecution or something, let me assure you: there's been no breaking of laws or impeachable offenses in this office.

Here’s two quick ones that came to mind – these are just the most recent:

Replacing your own us attorneys mid-term because they refuse to bring false charges against Democrats or pursue Republicans too vigorously.

David Iglesias, who was dumped as U.S. attorney in New Mexico, says Sen. Peter Domenici called him and pressed him to bring indictments in a corruption case involving local Democrats before last November's election. When he didn't give the answer Domenici wanted, "the line went dead." A senior Justice official, who didn't want to be named discussing sensitive legal issues, says Domenici had earlier complained to the deputy attorney general about Iglesias's record on "public corruption." http://209.85.165.104/search?q=cache:XPxPrvq95ocJ:www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17552880/site/newsweek/+iglesias+quotes+firing&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=3&gl=us&client=firefox-a

Or

Violation of the Hatch Act, which forbids utilizing government resources for political gain.

The investigation centers on allegations that officials with the White House political operation improperly made presentations to employees in a number of federal agencies, encouraging them to find ways to support Republican candidates in the midterm elections. The practice came to light when some employees at the General Services Administration complained. http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/04/24/rove.probe/index.


The reason I'm quitting is simple. I'm fed up with you people. I'm fed up because you have no understanding of what's really going on in the world. Or of what's going on in this once-great nation of ours. And the majority of you are too damned lazy to do your homework and figure it out.


From the D.C. insider “Nelson Report” 4/29/07

Sometimes insider gossip seems to confirm what all us outsiders think we're seeing, so, for what it's worth...we're hearing that some big money players up from Texas recently paid a visit to their friend in the White House. The story goes that they got out exactly one question, and the rest of the meeting consisted of The President in an extended whine, a rant, actually, about no one understands him, the critics are all messed up, if only people would see what he's doing things would be OK...etc., etc.

This is called a "bunker mentality" and it's not attractive when a friend does it. When the friend is the President of the United States, it can be downright dangerous. Apparently the Texas friends were suitably appalled, hence the story now in circulation.

Let's start local. You've been sold a bill of goods by politicians and the news media. Polls show that the majority of you think the economy is in the tank. And that's despite record numbers of homeowners including record numbers of MINORITY homeowners. And while we're mentioning minorities, I'll point out that minority business ownership is at an all-time high. Our unemployment rate is as low as it ever was during the Clinton Administration. I've mentioned all those things before, but it doesn't seem to have sunk in.

Looks like the banks are getting a lot of those homes back:

The boom in this industry has been extraordinary. “From 1994 to 2005, the subprime loan market grew from $35 billion to $665 billion,” the Center for Responsible Lending notes in a report entitled “Losing Ground: Foreclosures in the Subprime Market and Their Cost to Homeowners.”

Trumpet.com, Apr. 23rd): "Equifax, the percentage of mortgages in default rose to 2.87%—eclipsing the worst levels following the 2001 recession…The real threat to the economy is the tightening of credit conditions [largely] a result of sub-prime mortgage losses… Sub-prime loans… take up one quarter of the U.S. mortgage market. In other words, a quarter of the nation’s home demand may be about to evaporate as sub-prime mortgage lenders continue to go bankrupt and lending standards are tightened. Without that demand, housing prices, along with new construction, will probably continue to fall.”

As to minority business ownership – the April 10, 2007 report from the US Small Business Association is current through only 2002, so I’d like to see what numbers you are looking at. And don’t forget just how many more minorities there are in the US every year. Here’s the conclusion of the report:

For a number of years, policymakers have pursued policies aimed at fostering minority business ownership as a means of improving the economic well-being of minorities in the United States. Minorities have been making progress in business ownership. With more participation in higher education and the marketplace, minorities have continued to expand their productive capital in knowledge and entrepreneurial experience. In 1982, minorities owned 7 percent of U.S. firms; 20 years later, they owned 18 percent. Black-owned firms increased by 45 percent in just five years from 1997 to 2002; Hispanic-owned firms increased 31 percent. http://www.sba.gov/advo/research/rs298tot.pdf
So pat yourself on the back, W. Here’s something you DIDN’T fuck up.

Here's a great document for you while you are playing cowboy in Texas: http://jec.senate.gov/Documents/Reports/BushIsNoClinton14mar2007.pdf


Despite the shock to our economy of 9/11, the stock market has rebounded to record levels and more Americans than ever are participating in these markets (remember, i'm in this biz so be careful about arguing our economic situation with me, MBD). Meanwhile, all you can do is whine about gas prices, and most of you are too damn stupid to realize that gas prices are high because there's increased demand in other parts of the world, and because a small handful of noisy idiots are more worried about polar bears and beachfront property than your economic security.

I know numbers aren’t your thing, but bear with me here:

Income inequality grew significantly in 2005, with the top 1 percent of Americans — those with incomes that year of more than $348,000 — receiving their largest share of national income since 1928, analysis of newly released tax data shows.

The top 10 percent, roughly those earning more than $100,000, also reached a level of income share not seen since before the Depression.

While total reported income in the United States increased almost 9 percent in 2005, the most recent year for which such data is available, average incomes for those in the bottom 90 percent dipped slightly compared with the year before, dropping $172, or 0.6 percent. http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F00917FC3B540C7A8EDDAA0894DF404482
The rich get richer.... The annual trade deficit has exploded from $377 billion when Bush took office to $763 billion last year, giving foreigners more that $3 trillion of additional claims on U.S. properties. Foreigners already own more than 20% of all U.S. assets. The deficit with China alone topped $230 billion last year. The nation’s infrastructure — the network of roads, bridges, ports, water systems, etc. — on which the entire economy rests and operates, has been downgraded from “D+” to “D” status by the American Society of Civil Engineers. Meanwhile, we lavish close to a trillion dollars a year on various forms of military spending and wars of choice.

Corporate profits are at their highest share of national income since 1948. The top 1% of income earners — those Bush calls his “base” — saw their average pay increase by $146,000 last year. (Yes, that’s just the increase.) Bush’s policies have engorged the coffers of the weapons makers, pharmaceutical, and oil companies, all traditional Republican constituencies.
Bush Republicans, addicted to borrowing, increased the national debt by $3 trillion. President Bush has presided over the largest explosion of debt in our nation’s history. At the end of President Bush’s first year in office, the total national debt was $5.8 trillion. For four years in a row, President Bush has asked Congress to increase the debt limit, resulting in a $3 trillion, or 54 percent, increase in the national debt. By 2006, the national debt is expected to reach $8.5 trillion, and by the end of 2011 that figure is projected to be $11.6 trillion – an increase of 100 percent. (Congressional Budget Office; Senate Budget Committee, Democratic staff)

· 2002: $450 billion increase in the debt limit

· 2003: $984 billion increase in the debt limit (largest
debt increase in U.S. history)

· 2004: $800 billion increase in the debt limit (third largest
debt increase in U.S. history)

· 2006: $781 billion increase in the debt limit (fourth largest
debt increase in U.S. history)
So we borrow record amounts from china and our children to prop up this elaborate house of cards. We’ll, I’m sure your friends are doing well. I know your buddies in the oil business are. Exxon recorded the greatest profits in US history during your term.
Drilling in Anwar or setting up a few domestic wells will do almost nothing except increase profits for Exxon. There’s between a one and three month supply in Anwar. Our dependence on oil is a real problem - one that will require courage, intelligence, and innovation to remedy. Don’t think you’re the guy.

What did you do, you invited oil men to help draft the energy policy and cut taxes on Hummers. Oh, and you also sat idly by while your close buddy Ken Lay and his minions shut off the power to the western US simply to drive up prices and reap huge profits.

We face real threats in the world. Don't give me this ~blood for oil" thing. If I was trading blood for oil I would've already seized Iraq's oil fields and let the rest of the country go to hell. And don't give me this 'Bush Lied People Died' crap either. If I was the liar you morons take me for, I could've easily had chemical weapons planted in Iraq so they could be 'discovered.' Instead, I owned up to the fact that the intelligence was faulty. Let me remind you that the rest of the world thought Saddam had the goods, same as me. Let me also remind you that regime change in Iraq was official US policy before I came into office. Some guy named 'Clinton' established that policy. Bet you didn't know that, did you?

You cherry-picked intelligence, and your invasion of Iraq was an unnecessary disaster that increased terrorists attacks worldwide. Also, I know you aren’t the sharpest knife – but I certainly hope that you are at least lucid enough realize that Clinton didn’t invade Iraq – you did.

In the aftermath of Sept. 11, President Bush ordered his then top anti-terrorism adviser to look for a link between Iraq and the attacks, despite being told there didn't seem to be one… Clarke says that as early as the day after the attacks, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld was pushing for retaliatory strikes on Iraq, even though al Qaeda was based in Afghanistan.http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/03/19/60minutes/main607356.shtml

PNAC - In 1998, following perceived Iraqi unwillingness to co-operate with UN weapons inspections, members of the PNAC, including former defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Paul Wolfowitz, wrote to President Bill Clinton urging him to remove Saddam Hussein from power using U.S. diplomatic, political and military power. The letter argued that Saddam would pose a threat to the United States, its Middle East allies and oil resources in the region if he succeeded in maintaining his stockpile of Weapons of Mass Destruction.

The Office of Special Plans, which existed from September, 2002, to June, 2003, was a Pentagon unit created by Donald Rumsfeld and led by Douglas Feith, to supply senior Bush administration officials with raw intelligence (unvetted by intelligence analysts, see Stovepiping) pertaining to Iraq.In February 2007, the Pentagon's inspector general issued a report that concluded that Feith's office "developed, produced, and then disseminated alternative intelligence assessments on the Iraq and al Qaida relationship, which included some conclusions that were inconsisent with the consensus of the Intelligence Community, to senior decision-makers." The report found that these actions were "inappropriate" though not "illegal." Senator Carl Levin, Chair of the Senate Armed Services Committee, stated that "The bottom line is that intelligence relating to the Iraq-al-Qaeda relationship was manipulated by high-ranking officials in the Department of Defense to support the administration's decision to invade Iraq. The inspector general's report is a devastating condemnation of inappropriate activities in the DOD policy office that helped take this nation to war." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_of_Special_Plans
As to your point about not planting chemical weapons in Iraq – I give you credit. Kudos for your integrity, Mr. Bush.
"Trying to eliminate Saddam .. would have incurred incalculable human and political costs. Apprehending him was probably impossible ... We would have been forced to occupy Baghdad and, in effect, rule Iraq ...there was no viable "exit strategy" we could see, violating another of our principles. Furthermore, we had been self-consciously trying to set a pattern for handling aggression in the post-Cold War world. Going in and occupying Iraq, thus unilaterally exceeding the United Nations' mandate, would have destroyed the precedent of international response to aggression that we hoped to establish. Had we gone the invasion route, the United States could conceivably still be an occupying power in a bitterly hostile land." A World Transformed George H.W. Bush-

Shoulda listened to your dad – not your idiot neoconservative pals.
You idiots need to understand that we face a unique enemy. Back during the cold war, there were two major competing political and economic models squaring off. We won that war, but we did so because fundamentally, the Communists wanted to survive, just as we do. We were simply able to outspend and out-tech them.

That's not the case this time. The soldiers of our new enemy don't care if they survive. In fact, they want to die. That'd be fine, as long as they weren't also committed to taking as many of you with them as they can. But they are. They want to kill you. And they are all over the globe.


"Naturally the common people don't want war: Neither in Russia, nor in England, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, IT IS THE LEADERS of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is TELL THEM THEY ARE BEING ATTACKED, and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. IT WORKS THE SAME IN ANY COUNTRY." Hermann Goering

“The War on Terror”
The phrase itself is meaningless. It defines neither a geographic context nor our presumed enemies. Terrorism is not an enemy but a technique of warfare -- political intimidation through the killing of unarmed non-combatants. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/23/AR2007032301613.html
“A society that will trade a little liberty for a little order will lose both, and deserve neither” Thomas Jefferson

To justify the "war on terror," the administration has lately crafted a false historical narrative that could even become a self-fulfilling prophecy. By claiming that its war is similar to earlier U.S. struggles against Nazism and then Stalinism (while ignoring the fact that both Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia were first-rate military powers, a status al-Qaeda neither has nor can achieve), the administration could be preparing the case for war with Iran. Such war would then plunge America into a protracted conflict spanning Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan and perhaps also Pakistan.

The culture of fear is like a genie that has been let out of its bottle. It acquires a life of Its own -- and can become demoralizing. America today is not the self-confident and determined nation that responded to Pearl Harbor; nor is it the America that heard from its leader, at another moment of crisis, the powerful words "the only thing we have to fear is fear itself"; nor is it the calm America that waged the Cold War with quiet persistence despite the knowledge that a real war could be initiated abruptly within minutes and prompt the death of 100 million Americans within just a few hours. We are now divided, uncertain and potentially very susceptible to panic in the event of another terrorist act in the United States itself. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/23/AR2007032301613.html

You should be grateful that they haven't gotten any more of us here in the United States since September 11. But you're not. That's because you've got no idea how hard a small number of intelligence, military, law enforcement and homeland security people have worked to make sure of that. When this whole mess started, I warned you that this would be a long and difficult fight. I'm disappointed how many of you people think a long and difficult fight amounts to a single season of 'Survivor'. Congrats in only allowing only one of the two significant modern attacks on the US.

August 6, 2001 Presidential Daily Briefing Titled “Bin Laden Determined to strike in US”

Cheney, 3/16/03: “I think it will go relatively quickly, . . . (in) weeks rather than months“

Cheney: Well, I don’t think it’s likely to unfold that way, Tim, because I really do believe that we will be greeted as liberators. [Meet the Press, 3/16/03
We have now been in Iraq longer than we were in either world war or the civil war. But wait – I bet this war on Iraq is only a part of the long war, global war on extremism, war on ter--- wait, what is that fat loser Luntz telling you to call it these days. Are you saying there is no Iraq war, that Iraq is a just a battle in the war on terror. What was Dick talking about then?

Instead, you've grown impatient. You're incapable of seeing things through the long lens of history, the way our enemies do. You think that wars should last a few months, a few years, tops.

Rumsfeld, 2/7/03: “It could last six days, six weeks. I doubt six months.”
Is that why you rebranded this war “the long war” I guess, if you just keep changing the enemy, you can fight forever – or at least weasel your way out of the disaster in Iraq.

Making matters worse, you actively support those who help the enemy. Every time you buy the New York Times, every time you send a donation to a cut-and-run Democrat's political campaign, well, dammit, you might just as well Fedex a grenade launcher to a Jihadist. It amounts to the same thing.

You sure liked the NYTs when Judy Miller was writing questionable stories leaked by your administration for Cheney to then address on morning news shows, claiming ‘the new york times reports.”

Oh, and for equating dissent with terrorism – pretty American of you. You may be right. Democrats do just want to destroy America. Couldn’t possibly be that you are an incompetent buffoon, or a delusional dry-drunk.

So voting for Tammy Duckworth, an Iraqi war veteran who lost both legs when her helicopter was shot down that’s actively supporting terrorism, huh.

These guys have actually seen jihadi weapons. Don’t know why they would want to give them more.

Criticism of President Bush's veto has come from an unlikely quarter -- two retired generals who led troops in Iraq. Major General John Batiste said: "The President vetoed our troops and the American people. His stubborn commitment to a failed strategy in Iraq is incomprehensible." Major Gen. Paul Eaton added: "The President of the United States is holding our Soldiers hostage to his ego."
Guess these guys are ‘actively’ supporting terrorism too. They hate our freedoms.

In this day and age, it's easy enough to find the truth. It's all over the Internet. It just isn't on the pages of the New York Times or on NBC News. But even if it were, I doubt you'd be any smarter. Most of you would rather watch American Idol.
US President George W Bush - 17 June 2004: "The reason I keep insisting that there was a relationship between Iraq and Saddam and al-Qaeda is because there was a relationship between Iraq and al-Qaeda."

US Vice-President Dick Cheney - January 2004:"There's overwhelming evidence... of a connection between al-Qaeda and Iraq".

9/11 Commission - 16 June 2004: "We have no credible evidence that Iraq and al-Qaeda co-operated on attacks against the United States."
White House Spokesman Tony Snow, responding to former CIA director George Tenet’s contention that there was never any evidence of cooperation between Iraq and al-Qaeda: The president has been saying exactly that all along… there has been no attempt to try to link Saddam to September 11
More so than viewers of any other network, those who get their news from Fox News are deciding wrong, believing untrue things about the war in Iraq. Almost half think that Iraq
and Al Qaeda have been linked, a quarter think that world opinion favored the war, and 23 percent think that weapons of mass destruction have been uncovered, according to a new study. None of those statements about the war is true. http://www.medialifemagazine.com/news2003/oct03/oct06/4_thurs/news2thursday.html


I could say more about your expectations that the government will always be there to bail you out, even if you're too stupid to leave a city that's below sea level and has a hurricane approaching. I could say more about your insane belief that government, not your own wallet, is where the money comes from. But I've come to the conclusion that were I to do so, it would sail right over your heads.

Today’s lesson: Fallacies of Explanation - Subverted Support: The phenomenon being explained doesn't exist

I think most Americans are fully aware that the government will not be there to bail us out. And I’m pretty sure that money doesn’t ‘come from’ the government. Here’s something to ponder – instead of being born a blueblood rich kid, messing up everything you have ever touched, only to be the useful idiot for a bunch of ideologues hijacking a once-great party and a complacent America - you were instead born in utter poverty in New Orleans. You can’t fill the SUV up and head out of town for a nice hotel somewhere. What do you do??

Guess you’ve always had the Bush Amex , so I’ll let you slide on that one.

Oh, and real Christian sentiment about New Orleans and the needy there – Heckuva Job!
“There's an old saying in Tennessee — I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee — that says, fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again." George W. Bush

You’re right – it probably would sail right over our heads.

So I quit. I'm going back to Crawford. I've got an energy-efficient house down there (Al Gore could only dream) and the capability to be fully self-sufficient. No one ever heard of Crawford before I got elected, and as soon as I'm done here pretty much no one will ever hear of it again. Maybe I'll be lucky enough to die of old age before the last pillars of America fall.

Oh, we’ll remember you:

In early 2004, an informal survey of 415 historians conducted by the nonpartisan History News Network found that eighty-one percent considered the Bush administration a "failure." http://www.rollingstone.com/news/profile/story/9961300/the_worst_president_in_history

President Bush faces the nation this week more unpopular than any president on the eve of a State of the Union address since Richard Nixon in 1974. http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/PollVault/story?id=2811599&page=1

Oh, and by the way, Cheney's quitting too. That means Pelosi is your new President. You asked for it. Watch what she does carefully, because I still have a glimmer of hope that there're just enough of you remaining who are smart enough to turn this thing around in 2008.

We’ve already started.....

So that's it. God bless what's left of America. Some of you know what I mean.

The rest of you, * off.

"I'm a uniter, not a divider" George W. Bush February 29, 2000

Eric said...

Oh my...the unabridged edition of the DNC talking points.

To delete or not to delete?