Okay, I’m confused. I mean, first I thought “Deep Throat” was Linda Lovelace. Then I found out, no, it’s a guy, and he’s Hal Holbrook. And now it turns out, of all things, that he’s a former FBI bigwig named Mark Felt who is not a woman and doesn’t look a thing like Hal Holbrook (although whenever Hal Holbrook turned up on “West Wing,” I kept wondering if he was later spilling secrets about Bartlet to the Washington Post.)
I find it interesting that he’s felt conflicted all this time, wondering if he was an American hero or an American traitor. Me, I’d say hero. But I can’t help but wonder how the current White House would view him…and, for that matter, if they would prosecute him if they could.
PAD
• 
“Johm replies:
“Pardon a member of the reality community for daring to intrude, but where exactly does it say that?”
“Here’s a quote for you…”
It seemed clear that Bush had made up his mind to take military action, even if the timing was not yet decided. But the case was thin. Saddam was not threatening his neighbours, and his WMD capability was less than that of Libya, North Korea or Iran.
Ok, you actually read the quote, right? You see the part where it says “his WMD capability was less than that of Libya, North Korea or Iran” right? So right there we see that the memo (sorry, minutes) states that he has WMD. There is also another passage The Prime Minister said that it would make a big difference politically and legally if Saddam refused to allow in the UN inspectors. Regime change and WMD were linked in the sense that it was the regime that was producing the WMD…”
WMD capability is not the same as having them. The fun of word games in the halls of power. Bush and crew did the same thing here. WMDs and the search for them morphed into a success, by their spin on it, at finding WMD production capability and potential WMD capability factors. We didn’t find WMDs by god but we stopped him from making them in an instant. Or maybe, sorta, kinda not making them that, well, soon. I have the capability to build enough pipe bombs to wipe out a square city block. Most the stuff is just household stuff or junk in the tol shed. But I don’t have the pipebombs and won’t build them. And the same stuff that gives me the WMD capability of pipe bombs also lets me make legal, non boom boom things. A lot of what was listed as “WMD capability” on Iraq’s part when we wanted to go in there in turned out to be just what Saddam, Brit Intel, a number of our spooks and others said that they were….. Nothing but legal items that served other needs. And most of that stuff that Powell had to humiliate himself with at the U.N. brief turned out to be bogus as hëll.
Oh, and wasn’t it Newsweek that printed the story with experts right after that that explained what all that stuff really was? And didn’t the GWBA blast them back then? And who turned out to be right that time?
Ken, it’s literally a quote from CS Lewis. There’s no room for interpretation. He wrote the Screwtape Letters. I honestly don’t know what problem you have with attributing Lewis to a quote that seems to be true no matter who says it.
The problem is that the way it was presented, out of context, one would assume that Lewis feels it to be a truism. He did not. He felt that it was something the devil would say.
We had troops in Iraq in 2002? And that’s in ALL accounts? Wow, where have I been?
We were bombing Iraq extensively in 2002, according to some of the recent reports that have come out. Bombing that was specifically designed, not to protect the no-fly zones, but to damage Saddam’s military capabilities for the impending invasion by US forces.
Bush doesn’t know the meaning of the word ‘diplomacy’ any more than he knows how to spell it.
WMDs were the primary justification for the invasion, and two years later we have no reason to believe that fear was justified.
Thus, one of the primary reasons for Bush to be tried for war crimes: giving false evidence after false evidence to excuse a war we should never have fought, a war that has lead to the deaths of more than 1600 Americans and countless Iraqi civilians.
I’d also cut out the tongue of the bášŧárd in the Bush Administration who said the Iraqis were nothing more than “collateral”. I believe this was Rumsfeld.
I am fully aware that after an intensive search, no evidence of an Iraqi WMD program has been found, which strongly suggests that there were none to begin with.
Thank you. Now if you can get the rest of the deluded ones to recognize this, we may actually get this country moving in the right direction.
Or was “Saddam bin Laden” meant to be some form of joke?
It’s a comment on the stupidity of the American public at large. People have conveniently ignored the fact that Bush said bin Laden was “no longer a concern”.
Ðámņ, I bet every mass murderer wishes they had Bush on their side – orchestrate the murder of 3000, and then find out you’re no longer worth attention when you’re supposed to be World Enemy #1.
Or, people think we have caught both Hussein and bin Laden.
Or, worse still, they still think Hussein was behind 9/11, as Bush insinuated repeated in the months between 9/11 and our ignoring the world at large by going back to Iraq.
We sent something like 130k troops to Iraq.
How many did we send to Afghanistan? Less than 15k iirc. Man, that’s such an effort to find bin Laden, isn’t it?
I used the quote in context of how the pretense of a free society sheltering the dominance of a fixed game. I’m personally gonna go out on a limb here and assume Lewis would not have approved of inciting prejudice to win S Carolina in 2000 by spreading rumors through telephone polls McCain fathered a black child. Try not to throw yourself out of a window or anything.
Ken,
In The Screwtape Letters, Lewis describes demonic strategy. He believes this is true. He does believe it a truism (it IS a truism).
Big fan of C.S. Lewis. 🙂
The truism is that it is what the devil would do.
Not that Lewis would approve of this strategy, which is how it was presented.
…
Ken, what are you talking about? Does CS Lewis approve of the crack you’re smoking?
Ken,
I don’t why you are choosing to be so ignorantly dense but:
CS Lewis Wrote It.
Therefore, it is attribuatable to him.
Anyone bothering to add where he wrote it is just pouting gravy on it to add more info for people who want to find out more about it.
Why are you such an ášš, and do you know that for a fact the CS Lewis wouldn’t approve?
You should stop making political comments and just say BUSH SUCKS over and over, because that really the ONLY political comment you ever make anyway. You are so stuck in the 70s! You think all Republicans are Nixon, and view yourself as a courageous anti-establishment maverick. Sorry to inform you, but you are totally “establishment” yourself, and you write for COMICS, not The Washington Post. Pop the head!
You should stop making political comments and just say BUSH SUCKS over and over
If you insist…
BUSH SUCKSBUSH SUCKSBUSH SUCKSBUSH SUCKSBUSH SUCKS
BUSH SUCKSBUSH SUCKSBUSH SUCKSBUSH SUCKSBUSH SUCKS
BUSH SUCKSBUSH SUCKSBUSH SUCKSBUSH SUCKSBUSH SUCKS
Man, this is fun!
You think all Republicans are Nixon
Not all. But Bush? Worse than Nixon.
I wonder what would happen if we x-rayed your head. Probably wouldn’t find very much.
” But Bush? Worse than Nixon.”
I’m not so sure about that, Craig. Nixon was clever, often witty, intelligent enough to overcome his lack of charisma, and unwilling to let anyone else tell him what to do or when to do it.
Dubya? Not so much.
Few works of drama balance epic and intimate elements as well as Maus, which weaves identifiable agendas to a subject matter so severe it defies conventional dramatization. There are dozens of successful war movies with John Wayne, Lee Marvin, Steve McQueen, etc, yet there’s only one Schindler’s List.
Your criticism of comics doesn’t represent the market demand, nor the capability of the medium, but the limitations imposed by the industry. This is the point that must be driven home for the medium to move beyond its infantile repressions.
You wrote “BUSH SUCKS” over and over again. Wow, that is SO funny! If one is in the fifth grade, that is. On a more serious note — please list for us the Republicans you think are “not Nixon.” I’m sure the list is very long, or at least long enough to include every RINO there is! Oh, and don’t forget to work BUSH SUCKS into it somehow. That’s your “trademark”!
“Bush sucks” is, at this point, a bit like saying that the sun will come up tomorrow. It’s nobody’s trademark. It’s just a fact of life we have to live with these days. Or “daze” for all the Bush coolaid drinkers I guess.
Here’s what’s REALLY like the sun rising: People like you saying BUSH SUCKS no matter what the man does. It’s easier! Requires no actual thinking, or knowledge of history or politics. Makes you part of the “IN” crowd! Groovy! (But stupid.)
Usually, I refrain from feeding the trolls, but…
X-RAY SUCKS X-RAY SUCKS X-RAY SUCKS X-RAY SUCKS X-RAY SUCKS
Hey, Craig, you’re right! This is fun!
Thanks for showing how much more intelligent you are than Bush, who, unlike you, sucks. Bush sucks! Say it over and over. Why? Well, because it beats thinking, of course!
No, saying Bush sucks actually does require “actual thinking, or knowledge of history or politics.”
Let’s see…
Look at Bush’s admin. Most of his higher ups, including the VP himself, were/are part of a neo-con think tank known as The Project for the New American Century. They have a web site. Check ’em out. There own writings, dating back as far as 1996 on the subject of Iraq, show proof of more then a little preplanning of what’s been going on now.
Iraq is mentioned as a target of regime change even if Saddam was no longer in power by the time they had the people in place to do it. Iraq needed to be taken over and handed to a gov’t that would be U.S. friendly. They even stated in one of their prop pieces there were no good reasons, at the time of that writing, to go in to Iraq but that any opportunity should be taken advantage of to find a reason or excuse to create a public rational to go in. 9/11 was a gift for them. It gave them the chance to play with fear rather then facts and create support for a fools undertaking. They were so public about wanting to take out Iraq that they sent a letter to Clinton demanding we do so back in 97. And with each passing day we get new, solid information that shows more and more that Bush and crew wanted in to Iraq and planned to go in before the first public debate and played fast and loose with the facts.
Remember the Department of Misinformation mishap? That was the secret Department that Bush and crew were planning to use to lie to the U.S. peoples and our allies as well as “the bad guys.” It just blew over back then but the timing of that garbage falls nicely into the new timeline created by the Downing Street minutes and other revelations of late. Oh, but I forgot that the GWBA said that they weren’t going to do that. They were just planning it for, well, kicks and giggles.
How about the “with us or against us” speach making by Bush? Out of their playbook as well. Their vision, again, as they themselves wrote, is for “Pax Americana.” They stated, in writing, that America should be the only superpower, no others should be allowed to try and have say in affairs of the world (our allies included)and any action we take should be rubber stamped by other countries and forced down the throat of anyone who won’t go along with it. The U.N. was something we should control or leave. We should call all the shots and everyone else needs to shut up, get out of the way and do what we say.
How about wearing God on his sleeve? Lot’s of faith talk by him and the G.O.P. But the faith talk of late has been the “us against them” kind. Want to talk about history of/and politics? Read Hitler’s speaches and writings. Despite the popular spin by the neocons that Hitler (amongst others) threw God and Christian references out of public discourse, quite the opposite is true. Hitler used the same kind of us against them preaching, using God, the Bible and Christianity, that Bush and the G.O.P. has been throwing about a lot lately to create wedges and divides in the country. The garbage from the last month plus about Dems hating/voting against “people of faith” or being against “the Christian values that made this country” is straight out of the Hitler & ilk playbook. And before you do the knee jerk thing and burble on about mindless Bush haters comparing him to Hitler…. Go read the dámņëd stuff.
How about the sending of the attacks dogs like good old Rummy to blow smoke about the Koran flap just as the Downing Memo was breaking. And now there are lots of reports coming out that support the story that they attacked. But they did their job. They played the “Lib Media” card, the “Twisted Bush Haters” card and the “Libs/Press costing U.S. lives” card all in one little photo op. Nice wedge making. and now it looks, as of 11:24 EST, that there are lots of things going on that they knew about that support the thrust of the Newsweek story that they attacked and accused of costing lives. But, hey, why start telling the truth now? Oh, and as far as the truth and Bush supporters memory goes, I love how they said that the Newsweek story cost lives and created riots and then, within one week, as the new information about abuses came to light, they denied that that is what they actually said/meant.
And, lastly, one more thing about Bush telling lies. About a year and a half or so ago Bush made a rare appearance on the Sunday morning network chat shows. He was presented with a question about the increased spending by the Fed Gov. It was pointed out that even conservatives, not just Lib Bush haters, had been critical about the increase in spending and how it had ballooned (even once you subtracted increased military spending caused by the war.) Bush stuck that folksy grin he always uses on his face, used that tone of voice he likes to use when doing his “it’s just common sense” thing and looked straight into the camera and said, ” that’s just not true.” Thing is, it was true. He lied to the American people about something that anybody could look up on their own in a manner of moments. He, as he and the admin under him often do, counted on his loyal base to be too stupid or too lazy to look it up and see that he was in fact telling a lie. God, it was funny as hëll the next day to hear Rush and his many clones in radio as well as Fox News stammer their way through the day, as many of them were the critics of the spending, trying to not use the word “lie” or any variation of it to defend what had been said on Sunday.
See, funny as I found it I also found it scary as hëll. Bush told a lie with the exact same demeanor that he says everything else with. He also thought that the American people were so stupid that he could lie about something that was public record and could have been looked up with no effort at all. So, the question I came upon that day, how are we supposed to trust anything the man says about the big things that we can’t look up we he lies about even the little things we can?
Bush lies. Bush sucks.
Sorry.
Last bit is “when he lies.”
Maybe if we keep this up, X-Ray will go ‘nukular’ on us.
As for Republicans, I once respected Colin Powell, but then he went to work for that Bush guy, who, as we all know, sucks ášš.
I still give thumbs up to McCain as well.
With the relentless Lennie-like personal agenda juxtaposed with the demand for thinking on the part of everyone else, I’m wondering if our friend Jeffrey Trawlennie has returned.
But “X-Ray” is right, “Bush sucks” isn’t telling — which is why he introduced it in the first place.
I personally think it’s enough to say the Bin Ladin Determined to Strike in US memo = a monthlong vacation after his first 7 months in office. It speaks of how little he thinks of any American, especially soldiers.
Well, at least we got beyond mindlessly saying BUSH SUCKS over and over. One question: Rather than just saying BUSH SUCKS over and over, is it not better to give actual REASONS for your views? I urge you all to try it. Only one person has, so far.
(Sorry, saying you liked Powell only before he went to the “dark side” is bogus, and shows NO knowledge of politics, history, or anything other than occasional TV watching — if that.)
You said, “Bin Ladin Determined to Strike in US memo = a monthlong vacation after his first 7 months in office.”
It’s long been a secret Democratic wish-dream that America would be attacked again, so it can gleefully be blamed on Bush.
The truth: Despite the horrors of the Bush “memo vacation,” we have NOT been attacked again! Fault Bush for whatever you want, but that is a cold, hard FACT.
“But “X-Ray” is right, “Bush sucks” isn’t telling — which is why he introduced it in the first place.”
Nooo, he introduced it because he’s a troll, and a pathetically obvious one at that.
You spend your time as you see fit, of course, but personally, I don’t see why you would waste even a minute with someone that transparent.
PAD
Oh, come on.
X-Ray, X-Ray, X-Ray.
You demand facts and thinking on the part of everyone else and the best you can do is regurgitate the lowest form of babbling idiocy of the weakest (or most insane) voices of the right.
1)”The truth: Despite the horrors of the Bush “memo vacation,” we have NOT been attacked again!”
Sorry, no. The nonhappening of an event is not a fact or support for one. You buy a car alarm and your car is not broken in to. Was it the car alarm or chance? You get mugged and buy a gun. You don’t get mugged again. Was it the gun or fate? Your house gets robbed and you buy a pitbull. You don’t get robbed again. Dog or chance? You, like so many other people, do all the above and still get burgled, mugged and robbed. You, like so many people, do none of the above and never have one bad thing happen to you. So what does it mean? It means fate is as nasty or as nice as it wants to be. We never had an attack on U.S. soil like 9/11 under Clinton. Does that mean, under your logic, that being attacked on 9/11, one year and eight months after Bush took office, that Clinton was a better protector of the U.S. then Bush? It’s a fact of history that no such attacks took place in the 90’s after all. No. it just means that 9/11 hadn’t happened yet.
Tell me, if an attack on the level of 9/11 happened tomorrow:
A) Would you change your tune and blame the poor performance of Bush?
or
B) Would you blame the determination of the attackers. After all, as everyone has said, they only need to get through once while we have to stop them everytime. The odds are in their favor.
I would blame the attackers.
2) “It’s long been a secret Democratic wish-dream that America would be attacked again….”
Yeah, right. I’m a cop. I want to see people die sooooo bad. Don’t all of us thugs in badges want that? I want to see my brothers die. I want to see friends and coworkers die. I want to see the families left hurt and alone all so I can add one more line to why Bush sucks. My wife is from the Tri-State area originally. She knew people, had close friends, who died in the Towers. She still won’t/can’t look at a picture or footage from that day. You just know that’s what she wants to see with all her heart. Maybe they can wipe out a few more of her friends next time. Hëll, she looks so good in black and can always use it as an excuse to dress up. It’ll just make her so happy, won’t it?
For you to make such a statement only shows that you are one of the most vile, foolish and lowest forms of American out there. You are a fine student and coolaid drinker of the new right. Only, why stop at claiming that anyone who won’t agree with Bush and worship him on fallen knee hates America and wants to see Americans die so we can be happy? Why not tell us, and my little Christian self, how much we hate people of faith, the good Christian values of the Right and the foundations of this country? Go ahead and crack open your copy of Treason and explain to us how we all hate all religions except those embraced by the vile terrorist and we want so bad to see this country fall. Then go grow up and gain a more then a single digit IQ.
“I don’t see why you would waste even a minute with someone that transparent.”
X-ray. Transparent.
Hey, PAD, you made a funny! 🙂
Rather than just saying BUSH SUCKS over and over, is it not better to give actual REASONS for your views? I urge you all to try it. Only one person has, so far.
Maybe you should go back and read past threads (I know, that requires effort on your part).
(Sorry, saying you liked Powell only before he went to the “dark side” is bogus, and shows NO knowledge of politics, history, or anything other than occasional TV watching — if that.)
Which just goes to show, I can provide all the reasons I want why Bush sucks, but unless you’re willing to listen/read (which you’re not), it doesn’t matter.
It’s long been a secret Democratic wish-dream that America would be attacked again, so it can gleefully be blamed on Bush.
It’s a badly held Republican secret that Bush wanted to attack Iraq, regardless.
There’s nothing quite like having the blood of more than 1600 American soldiers and tens of thousands of Iraqi civilians on your hands, is there?
Don’t know if anyone saw an interesting Associated Press article this weekend. It mentioned two friends attending law school in San Francisco. One named Nixon; the other, Jones. Nixon, who’d never previously discussed his family tree with his friend (for whatever reason), is the grandnephew of president Nixon; Jones, is the grandson of Mark Felt. According to the article, they were both a bit bemused by the revelation.
Perhaps someone else will have a better time finding a link on the Associate Press website, but it was in the papers this weekend, so you might olso be able a print copy of the piece lying around in your local paper(s).
Rick
I Used To Be a Neocon explained by one of the converted (link via kottke).
We waste our time because 60,000 voters in Ohio didn’t hear any counter to how talking ill of the president is unAmerican, and some of us live closer to the consequences of these mistaken voters than others.
“We waste our time because 60,000 voters in Ohio didn’t hear any counter to how talking ill of the president is unAmerican, and some of us live closer to the consequences of these mistaken voters than others.”
Fair enough.
PAD
I have no opinion regardingt the Whitewater crimes or the investigation of it or the outing of it.
I do believe that there’s a large probability that Felt just did it to stick something up Nixon’s áršë.
(I like Nixon, but that is irrelevent). I don’t see how Felt could be an American traitor, but I think there can be a reasonable debate on whether he’s an American hero or a dìçk.
I vote that he was a dìçk.
Seriously, when revealing information is done to screw the President or do the right thing, and you choose to screw the President… he’s a dìçk.
and my liking Nixon had nothing to do with my suspicion that Felt was just being a dìçk.
You people crack me up! It’s amazing the amount of time you take to try and turn the fact that we have NOT been attacked again into a negative. Forgive me, but I think not having another 9/11 is a positive. Crazy me.
It’s equally amazing how much you despise Bush! Honestly, have your lives turned to such utter hëll under him? Do you honestly expect your fortunes to dramatically improve once he is out of office?
The reality is that we make our own reality. With our thoughts, we make the world. If you choose to make hating Bush the focus of your political life, so be it.
But what a waste.
“You people crack me up! It’s amazing the amount of time you take to try and turn the fact that we have NOT been attacked again into a negative. Forgive me, but I think not having another 9/11 is a positive. Crazy me.”
No. Nobody is claiming it’s a negative. Yes, it is positive. The thing being disputed is the statement that no major attack since 9/11 is because of Bush and what he’s done.
“It’s equally amazing how much you despise Bush! Honestly, have your lives turned to such utter hëll under him? Do you honestly expect your fortunes to dramatically improve once he is out of office?”
It’s not our lives that have gone downhill. It’s our country. What Bush has done and what he has made America represent saddens many. And the thing is, it didn’t have to be that way. After 9/11 we went after the people who did it. After that, because of some half baked idea some think tank hatched, we went after a country that had nothing to do with what happened on 9/11 while fixing facts, using fear against Americans to get support and showing that the leaders in power now care nothing for truth, justice or the American way (to steal a phrase.) Bush and his crew will go down in history as a stain on the office he holds and to the image of this country.
Ridiculous! You’re oh-so-worried about “someone,” living “somewhere,” but you lack specifics, as liberals always do.
Please tell me one SPECIFIC way that YOUR OWN LIFE has been made worse under Bush, as a result of something BUSH did.
This is patently wrong. 9-11 took place within the week Bush returned from his monthlong memo vacation.
X-Ray, Jeffrey, whatever, if you weren’t so casual with soldiers lives, you wouldn’t reserve the right to misrepresent the truth like this.
You said, “9-11 took place within the week Bush returned from his monthlong memo vacation.”
So what? I said we have not been attacked SINCE THEN, that’s all. Stop trying to make it into something else.
WE HAVE NOT BEEN ATTACKED SINCE 9/11.
Whatever the reason may be, the fact remains true!
Ridiculous! You’re oh-so-worried about “someone,” living “somewhere,” but you lack specifics, as liberals always do.
And thus, more proof toward my comment that actually putting forth a viable opinion means nothing to this troll.
And thus, you can’t tell me one SPECIFIC way that YOUR OWN LIFE has been made worse under Bush, as a result of something BUSH did, so you resort to insult. Typical liberal.
Actually, we did tell you how it made our lives worse. It’s because we care about our country. We care about what the people who are in the highest offices do to/with our country as a whole and to the heart of its values. We care about what people do to the image and soul of our country. I guess that concept is beyond you. From your comments above demanding that it must be in some we directly impacting our day to day lives or $$$ rather then the country as a whole I can understand why. You are the perfect example of the modern neo-con. You’re too greedy and “me” focused to see something like that. So long as you think you’re getting what you want you could care less about anything or anyone else. Including the country it seems. I got mine and screw everyone else.
Sorry, but some of us kept growing after the second grade and learned that being a good American sometimes means putting the greater good above your own greed or wants. Too bad you didn’t seem to do so as well.
Bush hired people who thwarted Richard Clarke and numerous FBI agents from aggressively investigating al-Qaida. This is how the 9-11 attacks were permitted to happen.
After 9-11 he refused to hold any of these people responsible. Sweet Baby Jeesus, his father continues to take money from the bin Laden family through the Carlyle group.
Yes, the suffering of the 9-11 suvivors and the current military are Bush’s fault.
I asked for a SPECIFIC way that YOUR OWN LIFE has been made worse under Bush, as a result of something BUSH did.
Are you a suffering 9/11 survivor?
I didn’t think so.
Try again.
(I notice that NOT ONE poster here has managed to come up with an answer to this question! Not even the liar Peter David!)
In as much as I’m not a sociopath indifferent to the murder of thousands, yes. If you didn’t have a taste for human blood, you wouldn’t place your stakes on so sterile a question.
Try again.
Try: I was unable to find a job and remained unemployed for 6 months after 9/11 specifically because of 9/11, because the economy tanked.
Because the ignorance and stupidity of that fûçkër known as George “I’m going to Hëll” Walker Bush did jack šhìŧ to keep 9/11 from happening.
But hey, I guess going six months without a pay check isn’t good enough for you. I mean, hëll, I didn’t have a building drop on my head or anything on 9/11 and all, ya know?
“Because the ignorance and stupidity of that fûçkër known as George “I’m going to Hëll” Walker Bush did jack šhìŧ to keep 9/11 from happening.”
Wow, so you KNEW 9/11 was going to happen, then? Why didn’t you tell anyone? And anyway, didn’t Bush CAUSE the 9/11 attacks? Even if he didn’t, they were justified because … BUSH SUCKS!
He is definately responsible for all your personal problems! Just tough it out for 4 years. When he leaves office, your life will instantly transform into perfection.
Wow, so you KNEW 9/11 was going to happen, then?
Maybe Bush wouldn’t have worked from a position of ignorance if he’d read that memo a month earlier that bin Laden planned to attack the US.
But, bin Laden just isn’t that important, is he? I mean, it was he and not Hussein that planned the murder of 3000 people within US borders, but we must have our priorities.
The good news is, X-Ray, I’m sure there’s a seat in hëll reserved for you, right next to the Bushes.
What’s the problem? I said Bush knew! Why are you not argeeing with me? BUSH SUCKS!
Funny how this thread died the minute I asked for specifics, isn’t it?