114 comments on “My New all purpose response to Bushies”
That is just totally adorable
The visual equivalent of Kim Thompson’s “You may very well be right.” 🙂 I love it. Used to see it used on Free Republic for the same sentiment.
I usually see this picture (& variations of it) on Fark.com.
But– but where would you pour the syrup? (which Robin informs me is also Cockney rhyming slang for “wig” – it’s from “syrup of figs”)
Way to elevate the debate, Mr. David.
Now I’m hungry for pancakes. Or rabbit meat.
Mmmmm… Rabbit cakes.
Obviously you can get those at IHOP. 🙂
Obviously you can get those at IHOP. 🙂
Oh my God. I can’t decide whether to laugh, boo or to just get upset I didn’t think of it first… 😛
-Rex Hondo-
actually it looks to me like there are _two_ pancakes on the bunny’s head.
Ah, it’s Oolong the bunny!
Actually, those aren’t pancakes; it’s a Japanese snack called dorayaki. Inside the two pancake-like pastries is sweet bean paste (usually). They’re pretty good.
Oolong’s owner took many photos of Oolong with stuff balanced on his head…but the pancake pic is by far the most famous.
When you tell me that’s a photo from Japan I get very nervous. Oolong may not be long for this world…
Adam Strom: Mmmmm… Rabbit cakes.
Luigi Novi: DUCK CAKES!!!
🙂
Adam Strom: Mmmmm… Rabbit cakes.
Luigi Novi: DUCK CAKES!!!
Fudd cakes!
RIP Oolong.
RIP Oolong.
“Way to elevate the debate, Mr. David.”
Debate? What debate? Last time I tried “debating” an issue with someone defending Bush, I came away with elevated blood pressure and a total feeling of comfusion. And now I can finally express that feeling graphically. It’s like their entire support for their debate is to jump up and down, make some unitelligible sounds, point to a box, revaling what’s underneath, and it’s Oolong with a pancake on his head. They smile, cross their arms, and look triumphant.
That’s how much sense Bushies make to me, most of the time. So, kudos for PAD giving back some of the junk we’ve been getting.
This just in: Ðìçk Cheney shot Oolong in the face yesterday
Mary Matalin issued a press release this morning: “The vice president did nothing wrong. Hey, from a distance, that pancake really looks like that thing that quails have on their heads.”
First came the cute picture. Then came Queen Anthai’s “IHOP” comment. And finally Luigi Novi came back with “DUCK CAKES!!!”. What a beautiful and wonderful day it is!
“Way to elevate the debate, Mr. David.”
Debate? What debate? Last time I tried “debating” an issue with someone defending Bush, I came away with elevated blood pressure and a total feeling of comfusion. And now I can finally express that feeling graphically. It’s like their entire support for their debate is to jump up and down, make some unitelligible sounds, point to a box, revaling what’s underneath, and it’s Oolong with a pancake on his head. They smile, cross their arms, and look triumphant.
That’s how much sense Bushies make to me, most of the time. So, kudos for PAD giving back some of the junk we’ve been getting.
*********************
First, let me say, I think the rabbit with a pancake on its head is hilarious.
Second, I am not a Bushie. I think he is one of the worst, most incompetent and sleaziest presidents we’ve ever had. I think he should be kicked out of office (although I know that won’t happen), and should be remembered as an utter failure.
Third, I’m not even a conservative! I usually vote Democratic (although I’m disgusted with both parties and both sides of the ideological debate these days).
All of that said, I find that some (please note I said “some,” not “all” nor even “the majority”) anti-Bushies are just as irrational as the Bushies. For example, in the “THIS JUST IN: BUSH READS THIS WEBSITE, SPRINGS INTO ACTION” thread, a number of people asserted that Bush is as bad as, or worse than, Osama bin Laden. I’m sorry, but I find that assertion sickening. I’ve already articulated my reasoning in the prior thread, so I won’t belabor the point here.
Instead, I’ll simply conclude by saying that meeting irrationality with more irrationality is just unproductive. And as I’ve said repeatedly, all you have to do to is look at Bush’s record objectively to see what an appallingly bad president he’s been. There’s no need to make statements like “he’s worse than Osama.” All that does is muddy up the debate and help obscure the awful things Dubya’s actually done.
In other words, to the crowd that wants to accuse Bush of being as bad or worse than Osama: please, stop. You’re actually helping Bush by doing that.
And if that means I deserve a rabbit with a pancake on its head as a response, so be it. As I said, even if I’m one of the people it’s aimed at, I like it. It made me laugh.
Now THAT is Apropos.
I’m sorry, but I find that assertion sickening.
You know what I find sickening? That Bush has lead Iraq to the verge of civil war.
And that will cause the deaths of far greater numbers of people than bin Laden saying to go ahead with 9/11.
So, I find the assertion completely appropriate.
Oddly enough, the purpose of this blog isn’t to “elevate debate.” The purpose of this blog is to talk about whatever Peter wants to talk about. You want elevated debate, join a debating team or something.
At what point should we stop talking about this being on the “verge” of a civil war?
Posted by Elayne Riggs at March 3, 2006 10:49 AM
Oddly enough, the purpose of this blog isn’t to “elevate debate.” The purpose of this blog is to talk about whatever Peter wants to talk about. You want elevated debate, join a debating team or something.
********************
This may sound odd coming from someone who’s taken up a fair amount of space in PAD’s blog, but: well said. It’s PAD’s blog to do with as he pleases. Don’t like it? Nobody’s stopping you from starting your own blog.
The Royal Society for Putting Things on Top of Other Things is quite pleased…
I’m glad there’s text accompanying the photo. At first glance, I thought it was John Stewart showing off his Oscar outfit.
‘The Royal Society for Putting Things on Top of Other Things is quite pleased.’
And so is the Royal Society for Putting Things Underneath Other Things. Thus proving once and for all that there is some kind of balance in the universe.
Unfortunately, Jimmy Carter has now sworn off IHOP for the rest of his life.
Can we get back to the Rabbit please.
Spike: Can we get back to the Rabbit please.?
Adam Strom: Mmmmm… Rabbit cakes.
Luigi Novi: DUCK CAKES!!!
Kyle Dasan: Wabbit Sea…er…cakes!
I have a question for Bob Jones: Do you ever make a comment that isn’t completely stupid, insulting, and a complete waste of everyone else’s time?
Just asking.
Thanks for the link to Oolong’s short but interesting life’s history. I had no idea of the background of the photo; I just saw it on a website that Kath was cruising, started laughing hysterically, and then asked if there was any way we could toss the picture over here. The result was the posting above.
PAD
“Posted by Den at March 3, 2006 02:09 PM
I have a question for Bob Jones: Do you ever make a comment that isn’t completely stupid, insulting, and a complete waste of everyone else’s time?
I thought it would be creepy but it was actually touching, especially the little bunny slippers gathered around his death bed and what I think are two carrots on his grave. At least I’m hoping they are two carrots. they kind of look like bunny ears poking through the ground which would bring it right back to creepy.
If that bunny’s a minilop with a switchblade, we’re DOOMED.
Although, this entire presidency has indeed been like one long journey down the rabbithole…
Den asks: At what point should we stop talking about this being on the “verge” of a civil war?
I think they need flags.
That’s right, it’s not a civil war until it’s “about slavery” 🙂
Slavery, schmavery; don’t you guys get it: the bunny has a pancake on his head!
“I think they need flags.”
Great. Now I’m picturing all the Iraqis talking like Eddie Izzard.
“Cake or Jihaad!”
“Uh…cake?”
“All right! And you: Cake or Jihaad!”
“Cake…”
“Very well! And you: Cake or Jihaad!”
“Jihaad!”
“Really? No one’s ever chosen Jihaad before. Are you sure you don’t want cake?”
PAD
“a number of people asserted that Bush is as bad as, or worse than, Osama bin Laden. I’m sorry, but I find that assertion sickening.”
Oh, Bush is FAR worse.
1. As already stated, Bush has deliberately killed MORE innocent Iraqis than Osama killed innocent Americans.
2. Osama never swore to uphold our Constitution and obey our laws.
3. Osama never preened himself as a Christian, only to start the most ‘elective’ murder campaign (aka war) America ever had.
4. Osama isn’t single-handedly destroying the checks and balances in our government.
Osama’s bad, but he’s an amateur compared to our Despot-In-Chief.
Dan: 1. As already stated, Bush has deliberately killed MORE innocent Iraqis than Osama killed innocent Americans.
Luigi Novi: Deliberately? Please document this claim.
Dan: 2. Osama never swore to uphold our Constitution and obey our laws.
Luigi Novi: Um………….not caring about or swearing to fundamental human freedoms makes one better than someone who does? How exactly did you construct this idea? Was it with cards?
3. Osama never preened himself as a Christian, only to start the most ‘elective’ murder campaign (aka war) America ever had.
Luigi Novi: Again, what does Osama’s stated religion have to do with the idea that he is better than Bush? You’re saying that one who deliberately murders 3,000 + is better than a President who wages a war that incurs human casualities that are not deliberate? (This of course hinges somewhat on your explanation of Point #1.)
Dan: 4. Osama isn’t single-handedly destroying the checks and balances in our government.
Luigi Novi: So murdering 3,000 people is not worse than tampering with the checks and balances in our government?
Say Dan, which is worse: Stalin murdering 20 million people, or the GOP waging its witchhunt on Clinton? Lemme guess, you think it’s latter? 🙂
Luigi–your superior logic is no match for his primitive emotions! Surrender now!
I’m going with Luigi here. Once you set up the initial hyperbole, what follows cannot possibly be objective about Bush.
Now, if Bush had started an “illegal, immoral war in Iraq”, “slaughtered innocent Iraqis”, “destroyed the US Economy”, “gave tax cuts to his rich friends” and “shredded the US Constitution”, I might be peeved with him. Since none of this is true, I think he’s doing a great job.
Give you a recent example. In my town, the Democrats are currently trying to sell people on the idea that we need a 10% increase in our school budget this year because “Bush is cutting aid to schools”. Well, the reality is that he’s increased funds for schools 41% in the last three years. Another reality is that our town has lost 3% of Federal funding to the schools because enrollment has declined, and the school has to pay for 7 new teachers hired at an average of $48,000 per.
Oh, and Bush’s declining approval numbers according to CBS? yep, he’s down to 34% approval. That is if you ask 400 democrats and 200 republicans. If you ask an even amount of each, Bush’s approval numbers are 50%, or up 5% since January.
Kevin Ryan
I’d be amazed if Bush’s actual poll numbers are up. Admitedly, the CBS poll was oddly weighted in favor of Democrats–whether that was a bias due to the poll, the poll takers, or because Republicans are refusing to be polled at a higher percentage than Democrats I don’t know.
It also depends on whether you are asking all people, likely voters, etc.
I find it interesting that at a time when one would imagine that it has become easier than ever to reach people and poll them, the results are getting worse (in the sense that they are all over the place and not always accurate.) Maybe the fact that everyone IS so easy to reach makes them less accurate. Is that possible?
Lay off the booze, David!
Our office manager at work is a leader in the House Rabbit Society, and says that rabbit’s person does a lot of that sort of thing, but not to worry – the bunny doesn’t mind too much.
Oh, and Bush’s declining approval numbers according to CBS? yep, he’s down to 34% approval. That is if you ask 400 democrats and 200 republicans. If you ask an even amount of each, Bush’s approval numbers are 50%, or up 5% since January.
For CBS’s defense of their methodology (starting point: polls don’t normalize party membership 50/50, because party membership isn’t 50/50) see here, and then follow to Mystery Pollster here — and check out the earlier entry here.
In fact, even when MP recalculates the CBS job approval results for the most recent survey using the average party composition reported on their last three surveys (33% Democrat, 28% Republican, 39% independent or other), the Bush approval percentage still rounds to 34%. The reason is that my recalculation just increases the number of independents at the expense of Democrats. However, Bush’s rating is now so low among both subgroups as measured by CBS that the adjustment makes little difference.
Bush is worse than Osama in the same way the witch hunt on Clinton was worse than Stalin’s murders. At least neither Osama or Stalin pretended to be anything more than what they were.
Bush on the other hand pretends to be Christian and then is hateful. Republicans claimed to be chaste and then were found to be having just as many extra-marital affairs as those in the Democratic party.
On another note: Oolong rocks! Long live Oolong!
Michael J Norton
The difference between Bush and OBL is as simple as their intent. OBL and al-Qaeda are on record as wanting to destroy Western influence in the Muslim world so they can install a Wahhabist Caliphate of “pure” Islam. Such a government would be incompatible with Western tolerance. Non-believers would have no rights and possibly killed. Women would be treated as slaves or worse, etc.
Bush, on the other hand, has made it clear that Western civilization does not want a war on Islam, and has tried in Iraq to bring the three major factions together in a shared regime.
Bush’s vision sounds a lot nicer than OBL’s Caliphate by any measure, so the “Bush is worse” argument just doesn’t hold up.
“Bush’s vision sounds a lot nicer than OBL’s Caliphate by any measure, so the “Bush is worse” argument just doesn’t hold up.”
Unless, of course, you ask the families or relatives of dead Iraqis, Afghans, or Pakistanis, killed by American bombs. They might feel a bit differently about it.
• 
That is just totally adorable
The visual equivalent of Kim Thompson’s “You may very well be right.” 🙂 I love it. Used to see it used on Free Republic for the same sentiment.
I usually see this picture (& variations of it) on Fark.com.
But– but where would you pour the syrup? (which Robin informs me is also Cockney rhyming slang for “wig” – it’s from “syrup of figs”)
Way to elevate the debate, Mr. David.
Now I’m hungry for pancakes. Or rabbit meat.
Mmmmm… Rabbit cakes.
Obviously you can get those at IHOP. 🙂
Obviously you can get those at IHOP. 🙂
Oh my God. I can’t decide whether to laugh, boo or to just get upset I didn’t think of it first… 😛
-Rex Hondo-
actually it looks to me like there are _two_ pancakes on the bunny’s head.
Ah, it’s Oolong the bunny!
Actually, those aren’t pancakes; it’s a Japanese snack called dorayaki. Inside the two pancake-like pastries is sweet bean paste (usually). They’re pretty good.
Oolong’s owner took many photos of Oolong with stuff balanced on his head…but the pancake pic is by far the most famous.
More info: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oolong_%28rabbit%29
When you tell me that’s a photo from Japan I get very nervous. Oolong may not be long for this world…
Adam Strom: Mmmmm… Rabbit cakes.
Luigi Novi: DUCK CAKES!!!
🙂
Adam Strom: Mmmmm… Rabbit cakes.
Luigi Novi: DUCK CAKES!!!
Fudd cakes!
RIP Oolong.
RIP Oolong.
“Way to elevate the debate, Mr. David.”
Debate? What debate? Last time I tried “debating” an issue with someone defending Bush, I came away with elevated blood pressure and a total feeling of comfusion. And now I can finally express that feeling graphically. It’s like their entire support for their debate is to jump up and down, make some unitelligible sounds, point to a box, revaling what’s underneath, and it’s Oolong with a pancake on his head. They smile, cross their arms, and look triumphant.
That’s how much sense Bushies make to me, most of the time. So, kudos for PAD giving back some of the junk we’ve been getting.
This just in: Ðìçk Cheney shot Oolong in the face yesterday
Mary Matalin issued a press release this morning: “The vice president did nothing wrong. Hey, from a distance, that pancake really looks like that thing that quails have on their heads.”
First came the cute picture. Then came Queen Anthai’s “IHOP” comment. And finally Luigi Novi came back with “DUCK CAKES!!!”. What a beautiful and wonderful day it is!
“Way to elevate the debate, Mr. David.”
Debate? What debate? Last time I tried “debating” an issue with someone defending Bush, I came away with elevated blood pressure and a total feeling of comfusion. And now I can finally express that feeling graphically. It’s like their entire support for their debate is to jump up and down, make some unitelligible sounds, point to a box, revaling what’s underneath, and it’s Oolong with a pancake on his head. They smile, cross their arms, and look triumphant.
That’s how much sense Bushies make to me, most of the time. So, kudos for PAD giving back some of the junk we’ve been getting.
*********************
First, let me say, I think the rabbit with a pancake on its head is hilarious.
Second, I am not a Bushie. I think he is one of the worst, most incompetent and sleaziest presidents we’ve ever had. I think he should be kicked out of office (although I know that won’t happen), and should be remembered as an utter failure.
Third, I’m not even a conservative! I usually vote Democratic (although I’m disgusted with both parties and both sides of the ideological debate these days).
All of that said, I find that some (please note I said “some,” not “all” nor even “the majority”) anti-Bushies are just as irrational as the Bushies. For example, in the “THIS JUST IN: BUSH READS THIS WEBSITE, SPRINGS INTO ACTION” thread, a number of people asserted that Bush is as bad as, or worse than, Osama bin Laden. I’m sorry, but I find that assertion sickening. I’ve already articulated my reasoning in the prior thread, so I won’t belabor the point here.
Instead, I’ll simply conclude by saying that meeting irrationality with more irrationality is just unproductive. And as I’ve said repeatedly, all you have to do to is look at Bush’s record objectively to see what an appallingly bad president he’s been. There’s no need to make statements like “he’s worse than Osama.” All that does is muddy up the debate and help obscure the awful things Dubya’s actually done.
In other words, to the crowd that wants to accuse Bush of being as bad or worse than Osama: please, stop. You’re actually helping Bush by doing that.
And if that means I deserve a rabbit with a pancake on its head as a response, so be it. As I said, even if I’m one of the people it’s aimed at, I like it. It made me laugh.
Now THAT is Apropos.
I’m sorry, but I find that assertion sickening.
You know what I find sickening? That Bush has lead Iraq to the verge of civil war.
And that will cause the deaths of far greater numbers of people than bin Laden saying to go ahead with 9/11.
So, I find the assertion completely appropriate.
Oddly enough, the purpose of this blog isn’t to “elevate debate.” The purpose of this blog is to talk about whatever Peter wants to talk about. You want elevated debate, join a debating team or something.
At what point should we stop talking about this being on the “verge” of a civil war?
Posted by Elayne Riggs at March 3, 2006 10:49 AM
Oddly enough, the purpose of this blog isn’t to “elevate debate.” The purpose of this blog is to talk about whatever Peter wants to talk about. You want elevated debate, join a debating team or something.
********************
This may sound odd coming from someone who’s taken up a fair amount of space in PAD’s blog, but: well said. It’s PAD’s blog to do with as he pleases. Don’t like it? Nobody’s stopping you from starting your own blog.
The Royal Society for Putting Things on Top of Other Things is quite pleased…
I’m glad there’s text accompanying the photo. At first glance, I thought it was John Stewart showing off his Oscar outfit.
‘The Royal Society for Putting Things on Top of Other Things is quite pleased.’
And so is the Royal Society for Putting Things Underneath Other Things. Thus proving once and for all that there is some kind of balance in the universe.
Unfortunately, Jimmy Carter has now sworn off IHOP for the rest of his life.
Can we get back to the Rabbit please.
Spike: Can we get back to the Rabbit please.?
Adam Strom: Mmmmm… Rabbit cakes.
Luigi Novi: DUCK CAKES!!!
Kyle Dasan: Wabbit Sea…er…cakes!
I have a question for Bob Jones: Do you ever make a comment that isn’t completely stupid, insulting, and a complete waste of everyone else’s time?
Just asking.
Thanks for the link to Oolong’s short but interesting life’s history. I had no idea of the background of the photo; I just saw it on a website that Kath was cruising, started laughing hysterically, and then asked if there was any way we could toss the picture over here. The result was the posting above.
PAD
“Posted by Den at March 3, 2006 02:09 PM
I have a question for Bob Jones: Do you ever make a comment that isn’t completely stupid, insulting, and a complete waste of everyone else’s time?
Just asking.”
BURN!!!
Wow, you can actually see the last moments of Oolong’s life here– http://sokaisha.hp.infoseek.co.jp/030108/030108.htm
I thought it would be creepy but it was actually touching, especially the little bunny slippers gathered around his death bed and what I think are two carrots on his grave. At least I’m hoping they are two carrots. they kind of look like bunny ears poking through the ground which would bring it right back to creepy.
If that bunny’s a minilop with a switchblade, we’re DOOMED.
Although, this entire presidency has indeed been like one long journey down the rabbithole…
Den asks: At what point should we stop talking about this being on the “verge” of a civil war?
I think they need flags.
That’s right, it’s not a civil war until it’s “about slavery” 🙂
Slavery, schmavery; don’t you guys get it: the bunny has a pancake on his head!
“I think they need flags.”
Great. Now I’m picturing all the Iraqis talking like Eddie Izzard.
“Cake or Jihaad!”
“Uh…cake?”
“All right! And you: Cake or Jihaad!”
“Cake…”
“Very well! And you: Cake or Jihaad!”
“Jihaad!”
“Really? No one’s ever chosen Jihaad before. Are you sure you don’t want cake?”
PAD
“a number of people asserted that Bush is as bad as, or worse than, Osama bin Laden. I’m sorry, but I find that assertion sickening.”
Oh, Bush is FAR worse.
1. As already stated, Bush has deliberately killed MORE innocent Iraqis than Osama killed innocent Americans.
2. Osama never swore to uphold our Constitution and obey our laws.
3. Osama never preened himself as a Christian, only to start the most ‘elective’ murder campaign (aka war) America ever had.
4. Osama isn’t single-handedly destroying the checks and balances in our government.
Osama’s bad, but he’s an amateur compared to our Despot-In-Chief.
Dan: 1. As already stated, Bush has deliberately killed MORE innocent Iraqis than Osama killed innocent Americans.
Luigi Novi: Deliberately? Please document this claim.
Dan: 2. Osama never swore to uphold our Constitution and obey our laws.
Luigi Novi: Um………….not caring about or swearing to fundamental human freedoms makes one better than someone who does? How exactly did you construct this idea? Was it with cards?
3. Osama never preened himself as a Christian, only to start the most ‘elective’ murder campaign (aka war) America ever had.
Luigi Novi: Again, what does Osama’s stated religion have to do with the idea that he is better than Bush? You’re saying that one who deliberately murders 3,000 + is better than a President who wages a war that incurs human casualities that are not deliberate? (This of course hinges somewhat on your explanation of Point #1.)
Dan: 4. Osama isn’t single-handedly destroying the checks and balances in our government.
Luigi Novi: So murdering 3,000 people is not worse than tampering with the checks and balances in our government?
Say Dan, which is worse: Stalin murdering 20 million people, or the GOP waging its witchhunt on Clinton? Lemme guess, you think it’s latter? 🙂
Luigi–your superior logic is no match for his primitive emotions! Surrender now!
I’m going with Luigi here. Once you set up the initial hyperbole, what follows cannot possibly be objective about Bush.
Now, if Bush had started an “illegal, immoral war in Iraq”, “slaughtered innocent Iraqis”, “destroyed the US Economy”, “gave tax cuts to his rich friends” and “shredded the US Constitution”, I might be peeved with him. Since none of this is true, I think he’s doing a great job.
Give you a recent example. In my town, the Democrats are currently trying to sell people on the idea that we need a 10% increase in our school budget this year because “Bush is cutting aid to schools”. Well, the reality is that he’s increased funds for schools 41% in the last three years. Another reality is that our town has lost 3% of Federal funding to the schools because enrollment has declined, and the school has to pay for 7 new teachers hired at an average of $48,000 per.
Oh, and Bush’s declining approval numbers according to CBS? yep, he’s down to 34% approval. That is if you ask 400 democrats and 200 republicans. If you ask an even amount of each, Bush’s approval numbers are 50%, or up 5% since January.
Kevin Ryan
I’d be amazed if Bush’s actual poll numbers are up. Admitedly, the CBS poll was oddly weighted in favor of Democrats–whether that was a bias due to the poll, the poll takers, or because Republicans are refusing to be polled at a higher percentage than Democrats I don’t know.
It also depends on whether you are asking all people, likely voters, etc.
I find it interesting that at a time when one would imagine that it has become easier than ever to reach people and poll them, the results are getting worse (in the sense that they are all over the place and not always accurate.) Maybe the fact that everyone IS so easy to reach makes them less accurate. Is that possible?
Lay off the booze, David!
Our office manager at work is a leader in the House Rabbit Society, and says that rabbit’s person does a lot of that sort of thing, but not to worry – the bunny doesn’t mind too much.
Oh, and Bush’s declining approval numbers according to CBS? yep, he’s down to 34% approval. That is if you ask 400 democrats and 200 republicans. If you ask an even amount of each, Bush’s approval numbers are 50%, or up 5% since January.
For CBS’s defense of their methodology (starting point: polls don’t normalize party membership 50/50, because party membership isn’t 50/50) see here, and then follow to Mystery Pollster here — and check out the earlier entry here.
Bush is worse than Osama in the same way the witch hunt on Clinton was worse than Stalin’s murders. At least neither Osama or Stalin pretended to be anything more than what they were.
Bush on the other hand pretends to be Christian and then is hateful. Republicans claimed to be chaste and then were found to be having just as many extra-marital affairs as those in the Democratic party.
On another note: Oolong rocks! Long live Oolong!
Michael J Norton
The difference between Bush and OBL is as simple as their intent. OBL and al-Qaeda are on record as wanting to destroy Western influence in the Muslim world so they can install a Wahhabist Caliphate of “pure” Islam. Such a government would be incompatible with Western tolerance. Non-believers would have no rights and possibly killed. Women would be treated as slaves or worse, etc.
Bush, on the other hand, has made it clear that Western civilization does not want a war on Islam, and has tried in Iraq to bring the three major factions together in a shared regime.
Bush’s vision sounds a lot nicer than OBL’s Caliphate by any measure, so the “Bush is worse” argument just doesn’t hold up.
“Bush’s vision sounds a lot nicer than OBL’s Caliphate by any measure, so the “Bush is worse” argument just doesn’t hold up.”
Unless, of course, you ask the families or relatives of dead Iraqis, Afghans, or Pakistanis, killed by American bombs. They might feel a bit differently about it.
I’m just saying.
PAD