THOUGHT FOR THE DAY: David Yeagley on George Bush, Gentleman:

He carried himself as the strong man he truly is. He has a steadfast character, an[d] invites courage from others. He is a humble man. He is not a spectacular speaker. He is not charismatic. He is not entertaining. He is simply himself. What we see is real, not performed. He is a gentleman, and very fine one.

As we all learn how do disagree with respect, to oppose with dignity, George Bush has offered us one of the finest examples of our time. He does not belittle his enemies. He recognizes that he, as the president, cannot reduce himself to the level of conversation found in those who hate him, who are desperate to condemn him...

And while we're on the subject, here's Victor Davis Hanson from the article Klaus cites below:

However imperfect, however flawed, however improperly explained our efforts in Iraq were, they nevertheless represented a costly American about-face to offer something in the Middle East other than theocracy or dictatorship — something we are not likely to see again in our lifetime.

Democrats and liberals should likewise realize that for all their hatred of George Bush and the partisan points to be gained by coddling up to the libertarian and paleo-conservative Right, George Bush’s embrace of freedom was far closer to their own past rhetoric than almost any Republican administration in history...

Amen to that.

Posted by Alois on

Comments

[The Editrix]

Great satire! I had no idea Yeagley had a sense of humour.

[Pete (Alois)]

But you know what the really funny thing is?

He's right.

[The Editrix]

Yes, like the proverbial broken clock.

[Pete (Alois)]

"Toughsky shitsky! One can't please everybody."

I love your blog. Must read it often.

[Hugh G. Rection]

I call bullshit.

Bush is humble?

We're talking about a man who put the presidential seal on his fucking mountain bike.

Did Carter put the seal on Billy Beer? Clinton, on his Monica-penetrating cigars? I don't think so.

Every sentence you quote here is bullshit- he doesn't belittle his political enemies? He said if the democrats were elected it would be a victory for the terrorists- that's calling the majority of the voting public terrorist sympathizers for voting in huge numbers for Democrats. Outrageous.

The invasion of Iraq wasn't "improperly explained," it was deceptively explained. Calling it "improperly explained" is just further deception.

Those who protested the rush to war were ridiculed, but they were right. We were right. And now we're ridiculed for wanting Bush to finish his war before handing it off to the next president.

In the words of the vice president on the senate floor... Go fuck yourself.

I don't want our troops sitting in some fucking desert waiting for the next presidential election to be over.

Fuck that shit.

[Pete (Alois)]

Well, well, well. Here we've got a genius troll calling himself Hugh G. Rection and posing as Bill Gates--and expecting himself to be taken seriously?!?

Dude, you are exactly what is wrong with the Dhimmicratic Party.

[Hugh G. Rection]

What on earth makes you think I'm a Democrat? I'm an American who sees a president that's decimated our reputation around the world.

The fact is, his mistakes will take generations to fix, and the good men and women we've lost in this war- our best and brightest- are gone. Families are being destroyed every day, and for what? Record profits for mercenary outfits like Blackwater USA and Cheney's old company (who's stock options he still holds to this fucking day.) Ridiculous.

And don't think I didn't notice that you weren't able to muster anything remotely resembling a response to my points.

Typical Green Party behavior.

What, now you're going to say you're not in the Green Party? Well, I don't see a banner across the top of the page denying it... so it must be true!!!

Assumptions are like assholes, and all that.

Oh, and I am Bill Gates. Want to buy Vista? I got that shit stacked up all over my mansion.

[Pete (Alois)]

We had another troll here awhile back whose nic was a reference to his Monstrous Sexual Equipment. What's up with that, anyway?

Nah, you're not Bill Gates, Mr. G. Rection. I met Bill Gates a few years back. He's polite and funny, so obviously you're not him.

And whether you're a Dhim or a Green or a Seattle anarchist (my hunch is the latter), at some point you need to learn that politics is not always about YOU. No matter how loudly and how often you scream about your Blackwater/Halliburton strawmen, at the end of the day the wolf is still at the door.

What's YOUR plan for the future?

[Hugh G. Rection]

Inspect every cargo container that comes into the country.

Stop fucking around in the wrong country and take out Osama already.

Talk to countries instead of invading them and killing their leaders. (Next up, Iran! Most of the troops have been killed by fighters financially supported by Saudi Arabia- Sunnis, but suddenly we're all ready to nuke Iran...We're not talking to them, we're just presenting evidence that can't be photographed or reported directly on... The media is following along again.)

Protect and defend the Constitution- not just the 2nd amendment, the whole damn thing. (Habeas Corpus. It's suspension is illegal, it needs to be reinstated.)

Put every Irishman in a camp. I hate those potato eatin' bastards. (this one's negotiable.)

How's that for a start?

I'm going to ignore you calling me a troll- someone with a different point of view isn't a troll. Actually people with a different point of view make up the vast majority of the American people.... So maybe you're the troll, eh?

Anyway, I can't help but notice you still haven't been able to come up with a single counterpoint to anything I've said- all you've got are personal attacks, but nothing to back that up. Signs of desperation if I've ever seen it. At this stage I don't think it's presumptuous to say that I've clearly won the points.

One last thing then- we've been in this war longer our involvement in WWII and now we're sending more troops- do you really want this war to go on another five years? Ten? How long should this go on? Isn't it time to finish the job and bring our troops home?

[Pete (Alois)]

You never did answer the question about your nic, or about your fake e-mail address.

Arguing takes time, and we don't have a lot of that to spare for people with fake e-mail addresses. You want to present yourself as a real person, you'll get an argument.

And that's a promise.

[Hugh G. Rection]

You're question re: my nic is "What's up with that?"

Nothing, I have a huge boner. That's about it.

Again- you're completely unresponsive on the points- obviously you have nothing to add.

[Pete (Alois)]

Nope, if you're not coming out, then I've got nothing to add.

And I've got a huge boner too, lucky me. ;-)

[Hugh G. Rection]

Victory is mine!

[Pete (Alois)]

I actually kinda like you, Mr. Rection, even if mine IS bigger.

Why don't you do us the courtesy of providing an ACTUAL E-MAIL ADDRESS (s'okay, we're not going to flood your inbox with ads for Viagra) so we can liven things up around here?

That's just been a standing policy for God knows how long, and is even honored by people in nations as diverse as China and Estonia. Think you can play along?

[Hugh G. Rection]

My alternate email address (other than billg) is thisisafakeemailaddress@hushmail.com

Though I doubt providing a working address is going to result in anything other than more requests to find out populations of this country or that country.

And I didn't say I was big, I said I was Hugh G!

[Pete (Alois)]

I have responded to you at the e-mail provided, Big 'Un.

You get back to me and we're on!

If you don't... well, yo mama wears army boots. And... that's cute. Do it get any bigger? [giggle]

[Hugh G. Rection]

Done.

Now, compare the population of Belgium to the United States for no apparent reason! Quick! Do it! Quick!!!

Don't forget to cite your sources.

[Pete (Alois)]

Still waiting for that reply, Big 'Un.

Still waiting.

[Hugh G. Rection]

I responded on the 14th at 10:30 pm.

I'm done waiting.

You're completely full of shit.

[Pete (Alois)]

Yes, and I replied to your response.

You're "done waiting"?!? Is that some kind of a threat?

Go back and read the response, lad.

[Pete (Alois)]

Okay, let's start picking through the points you have made.

Sounds like you're applying habeas corpus to the prisoners at Gitmo. Number one, they're not protected under the US Constitution, because they're not American citizens. Number two, they're not protected under the Geneva Conventions, because they are illegal combatants (i.e., fighting out of uniform).

Many people seem to not understand that last bit. The Geneva Conventions were written to ensure uniform treatment of POWs... but in order to be protected by the Conventions, signatory states agreed to abide by certain rules of warfare. Fighting in a clearly marked uniform is one of those rules, because it's the only means of distinguishing fighting forces from civilians.

Back in the day (i.e., WWII), illegal combatants were simply shot on the spot. By OUR troops, as well as others.

So much for habeas corpus.

[Hugh G. Rection]

Yes, and I replied to your response.

Nope. You posted here six hours later saying you were still waiting.

Bullshit.

So much for habeas corpus.

You sound exactly like George W. Bush when you say that.

Of course, the Supreme Court disagrees- they hold that habeas does indeed apply to the Gitmo detainees.

If it didn't apply to the Gitmo detainees there would have been no need to suspend it in the MCA.

You can feel free to disagree, but it's not even a debatable point- you happen to be completely wrong.

So, an essential safeguard against false imprisonment falls to the wayside because we can't be bothered to meet the burden of proof that the people we've locked up since 2003 are actual real live criminals.

Imagine for a moment (and only a moment) that Barbara Streisand becomes the next President and she reads your web site (or your email, thanks NSA!) and she decides she doesn't like you. With the MCA in place she now has the power to label you an enemy combatant and you can legally be "disappeared" Chilean style.

That should concern you.

What does it say about our country that when things get tough people like you eagerly throw away their God-given rights and dismiss the legal system (not to mention a government as a whole) that has functioned admirably for more than 200 years.

But yeah, you're right- fuck that noise, this war is different than all the others, I really need my email read by a government official in order to feel safe. Right. Sure. Uh huh.

Has it dawned on you that secret evidence isn't enough to condemn someone to death?

Those of us here in the real world obey something called the rule of law- when shortcuts are taken innocent men get tortured.

A combination of secret, unverifiable, and fake evidence got us into this Iraq mess- here we are years later and the entire country is on fire.

You're just begging for more of the same.

Yeah... let me know how that works out for you in Iran.

So, in summary, most of your post was about Geneva, which I never mentioned. The only part that wasn't about Geneva is completely factually wrong.

I believe your a smart man, this red herring laden drivel makes me think twice.

[Hugh G. Rection]

Here's that missing apostrophe and "e" from the last sentence:

' e

[Pete (Alois)]

1) Thanks for that 'e, Mr. Rection, the incorrect use of "you're/your" is one of my personal bugaboos.

2) If you WEREN'T taking about Geneva, then it would seem that you believe that people here can just be "disappeared" as illegal combatants without any due process, even if they are American citizens. There is no precedent for that.

3) See Daniel Maldonado. That boy's gonna have some explaining to do, but it's not like he was seized a la Joe Stalin and vanished from the radar without anyone knowing about it.

4) Just a request: Can we please do without the name-calling? It's so juvenile, and you don't have to provoke me into "arguing" with you. K?