“I’m moving to Canada!” Typical over-reaction from crybaby liberals who simply cannot stand to think that they lost an election. It’s the equivalent of a five-year-old threatening to hold his breath until he turns blue.
Can you imagine what will happen if, God forbid, the Dems don’t make some kind of significant political gain in '06 and '08? We’re gonna have a liberal Jonestown on our hands. :rolleyes:
Just wait until Rehnquist retires. All hell will break lose…
Of course the predictions of disaster (such as they were) were hyperbole mostly. But we certainly haven’t seen the worst in Iraq yet. By all signs the insurgency is getting stronger and more organized. I’m not sure Kerry would have made a difference on that front, but it was Bush who got that mess going.
We’re also about to see the ramifications for the Supreme Court. Nobody said the worst would happen over night. It’s been less than a year since the election. Wait and see what kind of shape we’re in by '08.
I think you should include immigration to Europe and Australia as well. Are more americans leaving overall… not only to Canada than before ?
I heard Australian consulates had way more interested parties post 9/11 and after Iraq was invaded.
I know a Frenchman that left his country after the Algeria nasty business which he witnessed. He was disgusted at his country and never lived there again… he actually took more than a decade to even visit it again.
What do you see happening between now and then?
No doubt, though for myself I’m encouraged by his choice of replacement for O’Connor. And everyone knows Rehnquist is pretty conservative, so I think most assume that he’ll attempt to replace him with someone in the same mold…so shouldn’t be a big surprise. If his choice for Rehnquist is as thoughtful as his present choice I’ll be reasonably happy…though I doubt the liberals will (I know they aren’t happy with Roberts, but I think he’s about as good a choice as they could reasonably expect…and a hell of a lot better than I expected). The reality though is that unless the Dems are willing to go to the wall, Bush IS going to get appointments that, while HE may think they are compromises are still going to be people he approves of.
I agree Bush definitely got us into this mess. But by what measure are you using to say that the insurgency is getting stronger and more organized? Seems to me they have merely shifted to softer targets…but I’m unsure this is an indication that they are either getting stronger or more organized. Personally I think when you have to resort to targetting the civilian population it might be a sign that you are getting desparate. Also, I’m unsure how the home grown Iraqi insurgents are going to take this targetting of civilians, blowing up mosques, killing innocent women and children, etc…assuming they aren’t part of the folks actually targetting them. You may be right though and the worst might still be to come…especially since I haven’t heard anymore about how the Iraqi governments proposed amnesty is going (badly I assume since I haven’t heard much more about it).
Over all though I think things are fairly good on the domestic front and this is why even those folks who thought it would be the end of the world when Bush was re-elected and seriously considered bolting the country for greener pastures have quieted down. The economy is definitely on an upswing and folks are going back to work (unemployment is pretty steadily going down last I checked and at less than 6% it was never all THAT bad), and that always makes folks a bit calmer. The war goes badly and the attacks on London have folks riled again but over all it just hasn’t been the disaster people thought it would be. For the most part I think Bush is contained and I think his failure to change Social Security in any meaningful way has had a calming effect too…Bush really isn’t the king.
-XT
You’re leaving out Rove’s treason and the conspiracy to cover it up via massive conspiracy. But not to worry … I and many other Dems will be here to remind you and everyone else of it for the nenext several years. Bon appetit!
BTW, you are aware, aren’t you that the Iraqi insurgents are using MORE powerful weapons in more sophisticated ways, don’t you? Doesn’t sound like "winding down’ to me. But you keep hoping, Xtisme … I think your hopes will be tattered and dim in the next four years.
Shoul read, "conspiracy to cover it up via massive perjury.
He’s been finishing up his latest movie, about US health care.
The loss of Roe V. Wade, more encroachments on SOCAS, many more casualties and ultimately civil war in Iraq, the goddamn flag burning amendment, more gay bashing legislation, continued civil rights violations at Guantanamo Bay, bigger and bigger budget deficits, more pay-offs to Bush coroporate cronies, and a continued lack of accountability for any of the dishonesty, corruption and dirty tricks which have defined the Bush White House.
Can you think of a single thing that will be better because of Bush?
Not gonna happen. The GOP knows it has a vested interested in keeping that decision on the books. Besides, it would take 3 SCOTUS appointments to overturn RvW, assuming that Rehnquist is one of them and Scalia/Thomas are not. And there is simply no way that Congress is going to let 3 anti-RvW justices get confirmed. I’ll place any wager you want on RvW still being on the books when Bush leaves office.
,
What’s SOCAS? You might be right about civil war, although I doubt that a Kerry presidency would have changed the odds one way or the other.
You do realize that president has zero say in the amendment process, right? What “gay bashing” legislation has there been so far (since we’ll see “more” of it)?
Actually, that’s one area that has seen improvement. As bad as the situation mya have been, even the Democratic Congressmen who recently visited said that things are better than they were.
Unlikely. The deficit, as bad as it is, is getting smaller, not bigger.
Vague accusations on the “corporate cronies” part, but I agree that the accountability aspect is unlikely to improve-- especially in a lame duck situation.
His SCOTUS nominations will get that court headed more in a direction that I prefer: A reversal of the trend to increase federal authority and to give more back to the states.
Rove’s ‘treason’ is neither here nor there as far as I’m concerned. I’ve yet to see any of that proof stuff that it was ‘treason’ and personally I think its a tempest in a tea cup, only interesting to the rabidly anti-Bush crowd, but I’ll await events. If he IS guilty of ‘treason’ then I’ll happily cheer when they put him against the wall. I’m not holding my breath though.
You sound like you think I’m a Repubican or a Bush supporter…but then I’m sure anyone who disagree’s with the gloom and doom assessment of the world MUST support Bush, ehe? Glad you and the other ‘Dems’ are here to set me straight. :rolleyes:
No, I’m not aware that the insurgents are using more powerful weapons and sophisticated ways. Seems to me they have switched over to softer targets and suicide bomber tactics a la Palestine. Do you have some cites that they are using more powerful weapons these days, or that their tactics against the US forces are more sophisticated…or more effective?
You talk about my hopes being tattered almost with…relish. Kind of sick, since my ‘hopes’ are for peace. Oh well.
-XT
SOCAS= Separation Of Church And State.
Then there’s the Supreme Court of Republicans of the United States: SCROTUS. 
It’s hard to believe what some people can find to be happy about.
Getting closer though, ain’t it?
If 1, then why not 3?
You think Kerry would have started a war in Iraq? On what basis?
In a time when his party’s leadership in Congress will roll over and lick his face whenever he asks for anything?
All amendments have failed so far, but not for lack of effort.
So who set up Guantanamo as a prison camp in the first place? And aren’t the people there still being held without charges or trial?
Compared to when Bush took office, what is it?
How much more do you need to know about Halliburton before it stops being vague?
At least you’re honest about that.
Funny, John, I never used to be sure you were a partisan hack at heart, but your statements above are indistinguishable from those one would make.
Let’s not forget is was Bush who put Saddam in irons. Also, according to the hardly-right-wing Bono and Geldof, Bush has done much more in the way of aid to Africa than any other president. You could tell it sort of killed them to do it, but they had to give credit to Bush where due.
Is it? And even if it is, does it mean abortion will be illegal (which is what this is all about in the end)? I’m not seeing it personally.
Did Kerry have a magic time machine or is this a whoosh on your part…or are you being dense? Afaik Kerry ran for president AFTER the war in Iraq was already a done deal…so therefore he’d have had to deal with reality, not some fantasy world. So, in that context, you get what John Mace was saying…?
If this was the case then Bush’s Social Security reforms would have sailed through, wouldn’t they have? And he wouldn’t have had to come up with a compromise candidate to replace O’Connor…he could have simply put in someone who was rabidly anti-abortion (if thats really what he’s after).
Whats that got to do with the fact that the situation at Gitmo has improved?
Compared to when Bush took office I’d say the economy is certainly better. The deficite is certainly higher than when he took office, but its coming down…and not all of the deficite is Bush’s fault (though I’ll lay the majority at his feet certainly with this mad Iraqi adventure).
:dubious: I’m not even going to say ‘Pot meet Kettle’ as I don’t think John Mace is anything close to a ‘partisan hack’…certainly he’s not a Bush partisan. You on the other hand…
-XT
Why would they be embarrassed by being proven right?
“What it’s all about” is listing what Bush has done to make this a better world. If the best you have to offer is “He could have made it even worse”, the matter is decided.
Watch it.
Again, note what we’re discussing - what has Bush done? If you like, you can instead claim that Kerry would be chanting “Stay the course, hard work, war against terrism, 9/11”, just the way Bush is. If you’d like to be laughed at, that is.
Not with the minority party ready to filibuster. You do recall Frist’s mighty efforts to get something through, don’t you?
See above.
Looking past your assertion that it is, indeed, a fact, see above re what we’re talking about - Bush’s accomplishments.
Using what for numbers?
SURPLUS, friend. Surplus. Bush started with one. Now he’s run up more debt than even Reagan - and you’re paying for it too.
As I said, I haven’t been used to thinking so either, but what he said is indistinguishable. Got it now?
Illegally. And the world is worse off because of it.