Showing posts with label George W. Bush. Show all posts
Showing posts with label George W. Bush. Show all posts

Tuesday, November 1, 2016

Don't Be Fooled by Donald Trump's Big Fat NAFTA Lie

by Nomad



Throughout his presidential campaign, Donald Trump has condemned Bill Clinton's signing of North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).
"NAFTA is the worst trade deal maybe ever signed anywhere, but certainly ever signed in this country."
To his roaring audiences, Trump likes to cite this agreement as the main reason why American workers have lost their jobs. President Bill Clinton is the villain, he tells them. And now, his wife is running for president. The horrorof it!
“I’m going tell our NAFTA partners that I intend to immediately renegotiate the terms of that agreement to get a better deal for our workers,”
According to Trump, NAFTA is the culprit for destroying America's manufacturing sector. Today, there are about 12.2 million manufacturing workers, down from 17 million in 1994, according to the Labor Department. As we have seen in another blog post, this claim is extraordinarily misleading (even for Trump.) 

Sunday, January 10, 2016

"God Told Me So": The Dangerous Delusions of the Religious Republican

by Nomad

It's strange that the typical conservative voter would reject in a courtroom the very thing they openly support in their presidential candidates.


Last week, as reported by local media,  the courts in Cobbs County, Georgia  heard defense of an 18-year-old woman Olivia Nicole Smith. She is accused of the horrific stabbing murder her step-cousin, 17-year-old high school Abbey Hebert. 

According to her testimony, Smith claimed to neighbors, right after the murder, that God had made her do it after she and her cousin smoked marijuana together. She explained that she had "an overwhelming feeling of God coming to her: and that God had disapproved of her behavior.
In response to this imagined judgment, the young woman had an argument with her relative. That argument somehow ended in a butcher knife of murder in the victim's front yard. Prior to this, both victim and accused murderer had been close friends.
The public was justifiably outraged by the sensational crime.   

Of course, it wouldn't be the first time that God (or Satan) has been the alleged accomplice/mastermind of some otherwise inexplicable crime. In fact, it's a pretty common thing.

Astoundingly, in the very same county in Georgia, back in 2008, then 36-year-old Donna Marie Redding told the police that her husband, Gary Dean Parnell, taken the Lord’s name in vain once too many times. 
(For those of you keeping score, that's Commandment Number 3 - taking God's name in vain- while the prohibition on murder is Commandment Number 6.)
Redding's religious sensibilities were utterly offended by all this loose talk, she claimed, and for this reason, Jesus commanded her to shoot her man with a 12-gauge shotgun in the stomach.

Monday, October 19, 2015

Let's Compare Clinton's Phony Email "Scandal" and Dick Cheney's Fetish for Secrecy

by Nomad

Clinton Cheney

After searching in vain since in March of last year, wasting time and spending millions, the Republican Party still expects to find something on about Hillary Clinton's emails. They've already admitted the investigation were politically-motivated.
Too bad these tireless and principled investigators were not around when Vice President Dick Cheney was fighting to keep his secrets classified.


Things have a dreadful habit of backfiring for the Republicans. The more they blustered about President Bill Clinton's adultery the higher his approval rating climbed. By and large, the public thought it was a case of too much about too too little. 

It seems like the party has learned absolutely nothing. Take the fruitless email investigation and the search for.. what are they searching for?. Does anybody remember?
We do know how it began.

Investigation Ad Nauseum

The Republican-controlled House Intelligence Committee Investigation started out, as we all know, as a search for culpability in the deaths of State Department officials in the Benghazi attacks, which left four dead. 

After two agonizing years (filled with unsupported but damaging leaks to the press) the committee found that the CIA and the military acted properly in responding to the 2012 attack on a U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi, Libya, and asserted no wrongdoing by Obama administration appointees.  (Presumably, that would include the appointed Secretary of State.)

On the Benghazi investigation, more than $3,500,000 was thrown away. That figure exceeds the budget of the entire House Intelligence Committee. and does not include "significant expenditures made by the State Department and Defense Department to find and declassify material requested by the committee or the expense of witness travel for those who work for the government."

A miserable flop of a smear. So, what to do now, they asked? Why not a start a new investigation into Democratic candidate's use of a private email server? With the help of the media, the new so-called scandal investigation dragged on and on.
It didn't go smoothly. 
In October, false accusations by Chairman Trey Gowdy forced the CIA to step in with a rebuttal
Gowdy’s accusation was that Secretary Clinton had sent an email containing "some of the most protected information in our intelligence community, the release of which could jeopardize not only national security but human lives.”
Totally untrue. No apology or clarification. The investigation pressed on as it does today. 
How much will be spent on this investigation is anybody's guess. It won't be cheap. As one source noted:
Rep. Gowdy now states the committee will continue its work into 2016 raising its cost to taxpayers to more than $6,000,000, casting his inaction as the result of the Obama administration’s slow pace at producing requested documents, a questionable premise.
Critics of the committee (and the numbers are growing) have called the investigation as nothing short of a taxpayer funded witch hunt of a leading presidential candidate. 

Supporters of the Republican-led investigations say Hillary must be guilty of something. However, many in the GOP seem to forget when it came to keeping secrets. nothing could surpass the overt duplicity of former vice-president Dick Cheney. 

Sunday, October 4, 2015

Oregon, Obama and The Greatness of an Angry Man

by Nomad


In the aftermath of the Oregon shooting, the visibly upset President Obama spoke to reporters and to the nation.
He was not shocked. It's hard to be shocked when, as the UKGuardian points out, there's been on average a mass shooting – involving four or more injured people – nearly every day. There have been an astounding 994 mass shootings in 1,004 days. The president was angry and he made no effort to disguise the fact.

Somehow, said the president, this has become routine. The events, the reactions, the tears and the prayers. Why must this keep happening before something gets done. Is this something we have all become numb to?

He said the burden of guilt falls ultimately on the American people for not demanding more from their representatives in Washington in their respective state legislatures.
"This is a political choice that we make, to allow this to happen every few months in America. We collectively are answerable to those families who lose their loved ones."
"This is not, Obama said, "something I can do myself."
He asked the American public to consider the ways they can get their government to change the laws and to save lives. "To let young people grow up." He declared
"That will require a change of politics on this issue. If you think this is a problem then you should expect your elected officials to reflect your views."

Friday, September 18, 2015

Blame Game: The Truth Behind Syrian President Assad's Accusation of Western Hypocrisy

by Nomad

Syrian President Bashar Assad

In an attempt to deflect his role in the death of his nation and the subsequent exodus of its people, President Assad said it was all the West's fault and it was hypocritical to cry over dead children.


Yesterday The Wall Street Journal reported on an interview with the president of Syria, Bashar al-Assad. During the carefully arranged interview, Assad pointed the finger of blame and hypocrisy at Western countries. These countries, he implied, have backed rebels aiming at toppling the Assad regime. 
This, he claims, is turn what has led to the flood of refugees. 

The Interview and the Numbers

Seated before a panel of very sympathetic Russian reporters, President Assad explained that the reason for the mass desertion of the population is because of terrorism.
"Actually those refugees left Syria because of the terrorism, mainly because of the terrorists and because of the killing, and second because of the results of terrorism. When you have terrorism, and you have the destruction of the infrastructure, you won’t have the basic needs of living, so many people leave because of the terrorism and because they want to earn their living somewhere in this world.
“The West is supporting terrorists since the beginning of the crisis when it said that this was a peaceful uprising. The West is crying for them."
“How can you be sad for a child that dies at sea and you are not sad for the thousands of children, elderly, men and women who died at the hands of terrorists in Syria.”
If you are worried about them, stop supporting terrorists. That’s what we think regarding the crisis. This is the core of the whole issue of refugees.
(For the full interview click here.)
While there is no shortage of hypocrisy in this crisis, Assad's remarks certainly hit a new low in attempts to manipulate world opinion. 
The facts, however, speak for themselves.

Monday, August 17, 2015

JEB and the Family Legacy: Political Dynasty or Plague on the Nation?

by Nomad


Has JEB given up trying to rebrand the discredited Bush brand? Certain remarks he made last week would suggest he is eager to pick up where his infamous brother left off.


When I consider what kind of president Jeb Bush would make, there are a lot of niggling questions that come to mind. I ask myself:
  • Would you really vote for a person who uses an assumed name? 
A lot of people- including journalists- incorrectly assume Jeb Bush's first name is a shortened form of the Biblical-sounding moniker, some kind of reference to the long suffering Job or Zebulun. Yet the truth is Jeb should be written in capital letter as it is actually the first letters of his real name, John Ellis Bush. If you think about it, it doesn't make sense to call the candidate Jeb Bush at all. It could be simply JEB, like JFK or FDR.
As it stands, it is like saying John Ellis Bush Bush.

Using an alias is hardly a standard practice for a candidate. Ask Rafael Edward (a.k.a "Ted") Cruz. To die-hard conspiracy theorists, it vaguely suggests deceit of some sort. After all, when filling out applications, many criminals use their nicknames or false names in the hope you will not be able to see their criminal history.
Anyway, it's his last name that creates a rotten egg smell for most voters.

Thursday, March 26, 2015

The Iraq War and The Fine Art of Republican Revisionism

by Nomad

Anti-War MemeNo matter how intense the barrage of propaganda and how constant the lies, Americans owe it to the 4,486 U.S. soldiers that died in Iraq to remember. Remembering the lessons of the war might just prevent the nation from making the same disastrous mistakes.


Margaret Meiers, in an op-ed piece for the Pittsburgh Post-gazette, asks how Americans can possible be so forgetful of recent events. 
Responding to an earlier newspaper opinion post, she states:
While Fox News and Bush administration officials try to rewrite history, it is known that faulty intelligence was drummed up and cherry-picked to be used to convince the people of the United States, Congress and the United Nations into supporting war.
Intelligence and Something Else
In case,  you need some reminders, Meiers provides us with a short list.
Remember Joe Wilson and Valerie Plame? Judith Miller’s reporting in The New York Times about aluminum tubes? Colin Powell’s address to the United Nations based on lies? The Downing Street memo? Remember “mushroom clouds,” duct tape and Curveball? And let’s not forget the Project for a New American Century, which openly pushed for war against Iraq before 9/​11 (the architects of whom are now Jeb Bush’s election campaign committee to keep him informed on foreign policy). Great.
Ignorance of events that happened, say in your grandfather's time may be forgiven but these things happened in 2003. We have a duty to those who died not to allow lies to mask the truth. We owe them that much at least.

Monday, January 5, 2015

Jeb Bush, the Family Brand and a Bad Case of Political Amnesia

by Nomad



In what many have seen as clear evidence that John Ellis "Jeb" Bush actually plans to throw his hat in the ring for the  2016 presidential race, last week, the former governor of Florida resigned from all of his corporate and non-profit board member positions. That's as subtle a signal as a cannon blast. 

Back in 2008, as his older brother was slinking out of Oval office, many a journalist was commenting how George Bush had dashed ahead of his brother Jeb and effectively blew up the bridge. Rebuilding that bridge was utterly unthinkable given the mess. It was implied that Americans would never ever forget the chaos that eight years of Bush.
 (As we have reported in the past, Jeb's problem has a few major problems that have nothing to do with his brother's incompetence.)

Tuesday, December 30, 2014

Chelsea Manning, Dianne Feinstein and the Far Right's Magic "T" Word

by Nomad


Formerly known as Bradley, Chelsea Manning turned 27 years old earlier this month. He really doesn't have a lot to celebrate. Without a presidential pardon, the military whistle-blower who was convicted on 20 of 22 counts cannot expect to be a free person until he reaches the age of 63.

His crime is familiar to all of us now. He dared to disclose to the public that the US army, the CIA and Iraqi and Afghan forces committed human rights violations.
That was something that Manning never denied. When investigations tracked him down, he admitted to sending Wiki Leaks more than 700,000 confidential files, including U.S. embassy cables, Guantanamo detainee profiles, and footage of airstrikes that killed civilians. 

Unlike many famous spies of the past, his rationale wasn't based on ideological support of America's enemy, like the Rosenbergs or Jonathan Jay Pollard, and it wasn't based on some financial motive, like John Anthony Walker, Jr
In many ways, Manning is a prisoner of conscience.

Monday, December 15, 2014

Free and Downloadable: Senate Report on CIA Detention and Interrogation Program

by Nomad

As any techno-activist will tell you "information wants to be free." To honor that idea, I have made available the Senate's controversial report that has been creating some fearsome aftershocks since last Tuesday. 


One week ago, the Senate released its so-called CIA torture report. It strongly criticized the policy of "enhanced interrogations" for captured detainees and suspected terrorists. After a lengthy investigation, the summary alone came to over 500 pages. 

Saturday, December 13, 2014

Motivated!: George W. Bush and the Hucksters

by Nomad


Last month, I saw an article that I have been meaning to pass along to you. 
First, here's some information about what it means, financially speaking, to be an ex-president.  

The Financial Joys of Being an Ex-President
According to CNN, when a president leaves the White House he remains on the government payroll, receiving an annual pension of about $200,000, health care, paid official travel and an office. The rent on a office fit for an ex-president has to impress and therefore tends to be both swanky and pricey. (The rent on Clinton's New York City offices reportedly run at half a million.) 
All of these it's probably needless to say are taxpayer-funded benefits.

Even for a person as illiterate and as bumbling as George W. Bush, apparently there are plenty of people out there that still can't get enough of the man. His last book, (in which he boasted-among other things- of authorizing torture) reportedly earned him $7 million for the first 1.5 million copies of "Decision Points." (Without the benefit of the conservative book selling tricks, Clinton bested Bush with his own memoirs which netted him $15 million advance.)

Then there is the speech-making circuit. It's not exactly hard work but it is an easy way to earn a year's salary in a day. George Bush, since leaving office has made a tidy fortune.

Getting Motivated!
Ok, now for the story I was telling you about.
Joseph L. Flatley, writing for Whowhatwhy.com, learned how former president George W. Bush found another way to supplement his income since he  moved out of the White House. (Although it is not particularly new news, I thought you'd find it interesting.)

Saturday, November 15, 2014

Bush's Unending Lies: Why Deceptions about Iraq May Be His Only Legacy

by Nomad

Former president George W. Bush's recent comments about Iraq demonstrated that his skill at deception and self-deception is undiminished by time. 
It will probably be the only thing he will be remembered for.


The other day former president George W. Bush was on NPR plugging his book on his father, 41: A Portrait of My Father. While presumably whitewashing his father's career, Bush took a moment to whitewash his own. 

In that interview Bush was asked whether he thought Iraq was safer now compared with when Saddam Hussein was in power. What would Iraq be like today if we hadn't invaded?  
"One could envision a nuclear arms race between Iran and Iraq. The man, Saddam Hussein, would have a lot of revenue as a result of high prices of oil."
Actually this is an outright lie. 
Since 1991, sanctions on exports and imports administrated by the UN had made all exports of oil tightly controlled. Admittedly it wasn't perfect and Saddam was able to find some loopholes. (This is the Middle-East where no rule is entirely fixed and black markets can be found everywhere.)

However, to claim that Iraq could have found the financing for a atomic weapons program is absolute nonsense. In fact, The government of Iraq declined UN offers to ease sanctions which would have enabled Iraq to sell limited quantities of oil to meet its people's needs. Saddam refused in order to effectively hold his own people hostages and to have all sanctions removed. 

The UN did not let up the pressure on the Iraqi government and set up the much-criticized Oil for Food Program in 1995.  Corruption might have been rife in that program but there was never any evidence that money was diverted for any atomic weapons project. 

In fact, 25% Iraqi oil export proceeds allowed under the sanctions were used to the Compensation Fund for war reparation payments, 2.2% went to United Nations administrative and operational costs and 0.8% for the weapons inspection program. The rest (72%) went to humanitarian purposes.
That doesn't leave very much to spend on a clandestine nuclear weapons research program.

Breaking it Down
Immediately after this statement, to preempt reality from wrecking his myth- he added
"And even though there wasn't, you know, a -- we found a dirty bomb, for example -- he had the capacity to make chemical, biological and nuclear weapons. And so there's -- you know, it's all very hypothetical."
The statement is typical of his fumbling oratorical style but there's more to it than mere incoherence. Bush tries to cram so much misrepresentation in one remark, it's hard to know how to break it down.
Let's give it a shot.

Thursday, August 14, 2014

Why Elaine Chao, Wife of Mitch McConnell, Could Help Sink his Re-election Bid 3 /3

by Nomad


Here is the final installment in the series on Ms. Elaine Chao, wife of Senator Mitch McConnell and former Secretary of Labor under George W. Bush.

In this post we shall be looking at how under Ms. Chao, the regulatory authority of Department of Labor was systematically dismantled by conservative policy. The results were both predictable and devastating.


To view Part One
To view Part Two


Mining Safety under Ms. Chao

One agency that the Department of Labor oversees is the Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) which administers the provisions of the Federal Mine Safety Act of 1977.
It is an important responsibility.
MSHA is authorized to force mining companies to comply with safety and health standards. Its goal is "to eliminate fatal accidents, to reduce the frequency and severity of nonfatal accidents, to minimize health hazards, and to promote improved safety and health conditions in the nation's mines." 

A kind of OSHA for the mining industry.
At the end of Elaine Chao's tenure as Secretary of Labor, MSHA came under fire for its generally lax attitude to mining safety. According to Scott Lilly, a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress,
"I think you've got people embedded there who are philosophically hostile to the mission of the agency."
One of those at the center of the storm was the head of MSHA, David Lauriski, a man who had actually worked for the coal industry most of his life. Early on in the Bush era he announced that reforms proposed by the Clinton Administration would be tossed out and that from now on, the agency would enforce those rules that "all parties can accept as necessary and practical."

For an agency whose primary purpose was to oversee the mining companies and protecting miners, the changes in policy came as a shocker. But it shouldn't have come as a surprise. Jumping in bed with corporations was practically a prime directive for the Bush agenda.

Thursday, June 19, 2014

Cheney's Editorial: A Total Detachment from Responsibility and Reality

by Nomad

Minds were boggled this week as ex-vice president Dick Cheney managed to flip history on its head in order to escape his record in advocating the invasion of Iraq. 


In yet another example of Republican delusional thinking, former vice-president Dick Cheney penned an op-ed for the (Rupert Murdoch-owned) The Wall Street Journal this week, blasting President Obama on  foreign policy. 
Specifically he accused the president of "'fantasy' policies that weaken the US armed forces, embolden terror networks like the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria and reduce Washington's ability to influence global events."

It was a startling piece of writing, given the source. For a full appreciation of the text, an experienced mental health expert is perhaps required. Psychological projection is evident throughout and frankly, it's a little frightening to see how detached from reality the man has become.
(If Liz Cheney truly loved her father, she would keep as far  from access to the media as she could. Even Nancy Reagan had the common decency to do that for her husband.)

Wednesday, June 18, 2014

Hypocrites on Parade: Pat Robertson Slams George Bush for Lying about Iraq

by Nomad

Recent remarks by the evangelist Pat Robertson about George Bush and the pretext for the Iraqi invasion were interesting.
Yet, before you shake Robertson's hand, it's important to hear the whole story.


America's Bill of Goods

Yesterday Raw Story delivered this interesting news:
Televangelist Pat Robertson on Monday blasted former President George W. Bush for selling Americans a “bill of goods” before the Iraq invasion, which led to the violence that is currently sweeping across the country.
Robertson, a former ardent Bush supporter, is the founder and chairman of the Christian Broadcasting Network and the Christian Coalition. Broadcasts of his 700 club reportedly reach a daily audience of one million viewers, both on cable and through syndication.  

Saturday, January 11, 2014

The Shocking Truth about Freedom Fries, the French Boycott and Fox News

by Nomad


An exclusive look back at the Conservative revenge against the French for not joining its coalition of the willing: the crusade of Freedom Fries and a boycott of French products, promoted by Fox News.


The French Warning

On February 14, 2003, Dominique de Villepin, French Minister of Foreign Affairs, addressed the UN to state his nation's opposition to the invasion of Iraq.
Ten days ago, the US Secretary of State, Mr. Powell, reported the alleged links between al-Qaeda and the regime in Baghdad. Given the present state of our research and intelligence, in liaison with our allies, nothing allows us to establish such links. On the other hand, we must assess the impact that disputed military action would have on this plan. Would not such intervention today be liable to exacerbate the divisions between societies, cultures and peoples, divisions that nurture terrorism?
UN Dominique de VillepinHis tone was that of an old friend giving advice to a headstrong impulsive youth:
This message comes to you today from an old country, France, from a continent like mine, Europe, that has known wars, occupation and barbarity. An old country that does not forget and knows everything it owes to the freedom-fighters who came from America and elsewhere. And yet has never ceased to stand upright in the face of history and before mankind.
The response from the member nations was unprecedented. His speech received an ovation from the normally circumspect crowd.
Villepin's remarks came on the heels of speeches by chief UN weapons inspectors Hans Blix and Mohamed ElBaradei who had both cautioned against taking a fatal misstep. Instead, they called for a "steady as she goes" policy with regards to the inspections.

The Bush administration was, to put it mildly, less than pleased. It was a critical time in the coalition forming and the prospects of forming any kind of international consensus were growing dim. This was not your daddy's coalition, critics might have told George Bush. 

Government officials were already well aware of the European opposition to any military action against Saddam Hussein. Opinion polls showed the population was against the war, with the opposition as high as 90% in Spain and Italy, and also widespread in Eastern Europe. Key allies like France and Germany both advocated a continuation of the inspections.

The Bush officials and the conservatives in Washington saw all this as nothing short of a European betrayal, led by the weak-willed French.

Monday, September 3, 2012

Why The GOP Can't Be Trusted with Foreign Policy 1/3

McCain John  by Nomad

In this three-part series we take a look back at the evidence in the case against the Republican attitude on foreign policy. We begin with John McCain who seems to have an unfailing record of being dangerously wrong on almost every pronouncement he has made about foreign relations.

Part 1- McCain’s Speech in Tampa
Lost in Paul Ryan’s flagrant dishonesty and Romney’s sticky-gooey sing-song speech, the incoherent silliness of Clint’s burlesque with an empty chair, there was an appearance that might have gone unnoticed at the Republican convention.

His was a familiar face- a bit too familiar, actually: Arizona senator and 2008 Republican presidential candidate John McCain. Whoever decided that McCain’s appearance at the convention would enhance Mitt Romney’s paltry foreign policy credentials should probably defect to the Obama campaign before somebody catches on. 

Monday, May 28, 2012

The Angry Right Wing Voter: Have We Gone Too Far? 1/2

by Nomad


Just look around. It’s easy to see that America is seething. From the Tea Party to the Occupy movement, voters are infuriated with the direction of the country. In itself, that’s not news. With the economy the way it is, that's hardly a surprise. 

And Americans tend to take a personal interest in politics- despite the fact that only 54% of the population voted in the last presidential election. (And that's a high figure from previous elections too!) 
Of course, politics in the US has never been known for its calm reflection and careful thoughtful approach. However, what seems to happening with each election cycle is becoming a matter of concern. No matter what the outcome, growing numbers of Americans are automatically rejecting the results. This in turn pushes the anger to the next level. 

Friday, May 18, 2012

Amazing: Will Americans Actually Give Republicans Another Chance in the 2012 Election?

Mitt George Romney Bush
by Nomad
If you think about it, it's pretty astounding that, after eight years of George W. Bush, anybody in their right minds would even consider voting for another Republican party candidate. 

It must say something about the ability of the American people to forgive- or maybe, just to forget. It has to say something about the character of a nation that they would be willing to trust the same party with the reins of power again in this decade. 

Remember when we were all prepared to impeach Bill Clinton for hanky-panky in the Oval Office while the rest of the world scratched its head and wondered? The GOP talked like it was the end of the world. 
It's really beyond belief that we used to think THAT was as low as a president could fall.  
Yes, it takes your breath away. Especially given the fact that nobody in the Republican party- as far as I recall- ever said they were sorry about: 
  • the unnecessary and illegal war in Iraq, 
  • falsely representing Iraq as an imminent threat to the United States, 
  • mishandling of the disaster relief after Hurricane Katrina, 
  • the failure to respond to prior intelligence and 
  •  fumbling of the 911 investigation, 
  • the disastrous tax cuts which drove the economy into the ditch, 
  • the Patriot Act and the desecration of civil liberties, 
  • the outing of a CIA agent purely for political gain
  • "kidnapping" and detention of foreign nationals without trial, 
  • the use and legitimizing of torture, 
  • the illegal spying on American citizens 
Perhaps I was sleeping but I don't remember hearing anybody apologize for 
  • awarding no-bid contracts in the rebuilding of Iraq,
  • allowing Halliburton and friends to overcharge the government, 
  • Failing to provide adequate protection for contract workers in Iraq  
  • or failing to provide troops with body armor, 
  • falsifying US troop deaths and injuries
  • the national shame of the Abu Ghraib prison scandal
  • the murder of untold Iraq and Afghan civilians who had simply been in the wrong place at the wrong time, 
  • lying to the American people and 
  • disgracing the image of the United States around the world.
And yet, after eight years of George W. Bush- who somehow feels confident enough to endorse Mitt Romney and peddle his self-serving memoirs, still to this day walks amongst the people as a free man. Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld clearly have no fear that they might be someday held accountable. 

Another stunning thing? it's not as though Mitt Romney is a breath of fresh air from the pollution of the Bush years. The same people who got Bush into the White House are behind Romney. Karl Rove's group, American CrossRoads, has recently put out an attack ad on the president, filled with lies and distortions. That's right, Karl (Bush's Brain) Rove. 
And there will, no doubt, be a lot of people who will come back to and vote for the same party and vote for the same people with different faces and different names. 
Other than that, nothing has changed about the Republican party. Only, perhaps, their use of hate and lies to divide the nation may be a bit less restrained.

Even now, there are die-hard Republicans who have the arrogance to proclaim President Obama as "the worst president since Carter." They seem to be serious when they say it but how they can forget the years from 2000 to 2008 so easily is really something that defies explanation.

Wednesday, May 2, 2012

All about Rob: Will Portman be Romney's Running Mate?

by Nomad


Finding a person that doesn’t outshine the bland Mitt Romney was always going to be something of a problem. Even his supporters would admit that, for all his ambition, charismatic is not one of Romney’s great attributes.

Recently, he has been compared to a modern day Don Draper, but with half the looks and none of the charm or sex appeal. That just leaves a head of good hair, a strong jaw and the determination to do whatever it takes to get ahead of the competition.

So the question for the Republicans boiled down to how do you out-vanilla vanilla? The answer, as far as the GOP was concerned was Republican Senator Rob Portman from Ohio . According to the Washington Post:
Two thirds of the state party chairmen and Republican National committeemen and women polled by the online news site BuzzFeed said that the Ohio senator was the most likely and best pick to be Romney’s running mate.
That’s not to say it’s a done deal of course. Still, it’s only fair to ask: who is Mr. Portman and what, besides colorlessness, does Romney like about him?

Portman’s resume seems pretty straightforward.