Tuesday, October 30, 2007

Now Hear This

All you pencil dicked boys with man sized dreams. Or is it pencil dicked wannabe men with boyish dreams?

Fuck it.

One of the things that's frustrated the shit out of me since day one with my blog is: How many ways/times can you say the same thing? ie Bush.

Fuck this idea of "bush bashing." There is no such thing. I criticize Reagan for his notions of Government not being able to solve problems when Government IS the problem, but the thing is that in the case of Dubya, Reagan was right: He (dubya) IS THE problem. Without him... we would not have runaway deficits. Without him... we would not have a..game of cowboys and Indians being played out with real lives and live ammo with real casualties..Operation Hammer and Anvil..Operation Plymouth Rock..Operation Lightning..Operation Stinky Linky Log...Oops... that was leaked by a Secret Service guy standing guard outside the shitter. Bashing implies lying; making shit up. When you talk about the cesspool of corruption that Dub has brought about, well, where is the "bashing?"


So easy to get side tracked... hard to stay focussed. Back to the dreamers... These guys for starters:

Elliott Abrams Gary Bauer William J. Bennett Jeb Bush

Dick Cheney Eliot A. Cohen Midge Decter Paula Dobriansky Steve Forbes

Aaron Friedberg Francis Fukuyama Frank Gaffney Fred C. Ikle

Donald Kagan
Zalmay Khalilzad I. Lewis Libby Norman Podhoretz

Dan Quayle
Peter W. Rodman Stephen P. Rosen Henry S. Rowen

Donald Rumsfeld
Vin Weber George Weigel Paul Wolfowitz

Oooh sorry I didn't realize there were some women in there. Whatever you signers of the PNAC statement of Reaganite policy of...Moral clarity...

Iran is T-O-T-A-L-L-Y within their rights to want and pursue a nuke. Why?


If Dubya was not such a warmongerer, There would be no threat to Iran. And no need for them to pursue defensive nukes.

There would be NO Iraq War and no threat of an Iran War if it were not for Dubya. Period.

The question we should be asking is not, Why does Iran want a Nuke? The question should be, Can we assure Iran that W will be gone and soon they will be safe?


Dale said...

If you look at the pieces of the puzzle, I think Iran is no longer "looking" for nukes. It is no secret that Ahmadinejad and Putin are awfully buddy-buddy these days. Don't forget there were around 400 of the infamous "suitcase nukes" that seemed to disappear after the collapse of the Soviet Union and are now unaccounted for. Putin is getting bolder and bolder, and now Ahmadinejad seems to be right along with him.

Something tells me we (we really means Bush) have bitten off more than we can chew. When the shit hits the fan, we're gonna be covered in it.

Chris in Seattle said...

Face it... with Dubya the Codpiece Cowboy running around what would you do if you ran a country? I know for damn sure I would want a nuke or two to keep him away from me. You notice how little attention he's given N Korea? Same with Pakistan?

Common sense or cowardice, the end result is the same: They have nukes or don't have oil, he leaves them alone.

and you're right: We will be covered in shit when it hits the fan.

Dale said...

I agree totally. If I ran a country, I would want nukes to protect myself against Bush. With Russia obviously on Iran's side I think it should get mighty interesting, especially when China has to choose it's side. It's almost like a giant fucking game of Risk. I used to love that game. I'm not so sure how I feel about it being real-life now though.