Replies

Do I think that Pres. Bush has an IQ of 80 and the maturity of a 10 yr old like that post portrays and do I think that sort of post belongs on FR? NO

I'm sure you overlooked pinging me. Heh. No worries, I keep an eye on BushBots like you so here we go pal:

Finley Peter Dunne said "politics ain't beanbag".

You need to remember that, and you also need to remember that even the object of your misguided idol worship would tell you not to worry about dissent, that it is part of a healthy democracy, and that you shouldn't 'overunderestimate' him.

A whole lot worse than what I post about our illustrious President is said about him on a daily basis here on FR -and- elsewhere, much of it justified.

If he hadn't lost his focus, nerve and direction in the waning years and months of his second term, he would be standing tall right now, and I speak as someone who voted for him not once but twice. Why? Because just like this year, the prospect of a President Gore, Kerry or gawd forbid Obama is too horrifying to contemplate. But that doesn't give George W. Legacy a blank check from me, nor should it from you.

And if you want to talk about intelligence quotients and maturity, how intelligent is a person who literally peers into the eyes of Vladimir Putin and then makes the prognosis that he has a 'good soul'? I'm not a big John McCain fan, but when he said that all he saw in Putin's eyes were the letters "K.G.B." that displayed a far more realistic understanding and comprehension of our adversaries and the world in which we live, than did the quixotic optimism our President was indulging in.

And what kind of intelligence is reflected when not one but two of the legs of that naaaaasty 'Axis of Evil' are basically shoved to the back burner and left for the next Administration to deal with? (we're talking about North Korea and Iran, you do remember those rogue states, don't you?

Months and months and months of prattle out of the Bush Administration about how we "won't permit" Iran to develop a nuclear weapon, but no action has been taken. Just talk. Iran has been murdering U.S. troops for years in Iraq through proxies and by supplying IEDs and other munitions, what has the U.S. done about it?

Not one damn thing. Our President seems to have forgotten or overlooked the fact that America is still in a state of war with Iran, based on their illegal invasion, violation and occupation of our Embassy in 1979, and we have every right to respond accordingly, which we have failed to do. We have seen the Condi Rice approach supplant the more realistic John Bolton approach at the State Department, which translates to (surprise!) Chamberlain-like appeasement.

And to return to the subject of this thread, North Korea? This Administration chose to make a deal with a genocidal tyrant that already had demonstrated their untrustworthiness, had established a history of lies, deceit and skulduggery, and the message that sent to the North Korean people is that George W. Bush is content to leave them to their misery and continued oppression while playing the same ol' Clintonian/Albright game of attempting to buy the favor of Kim Jong Il and his murderous regime in hopes they might 'play nice'.

That isn't the mark of a mature OR intelligent leader, that's the mark of a naive amateur who is destined to be played for a sucker every time.

Now shall we continue on to a discussion of Agents Ramos and Compean, and Bush's 'dear friend' Johnny Sutton, the corrupt U.S. prosecutor, or is daylight beginning to dawn upon marble skull?