Bush Reminder

Just in case you forgot what an idiot we have in charge, here are a bunch of reminder quotes from the President. I bet everyone has seen this stuff, but it’s just so amazing. It’s hard to believe they’re all real, but according to the internet, they are.

“It’s clearly the budget. It has a lot of numbers on it.”

“Will the highways on the Internet become more few?”

“Like your neighbor just like you like to be liked yourself.”

“Rarely is the question asked: Is our children learning?” “Laura & I really
don’t realize how bright our children is.”

“I was raised in the West. The west of Texas. It’s pretty close to
California. In more ways than Washington, D.C., is close to California.”

“I propose that every city have a telephone number 119 — for dyslexics who
have an emergency.”

“I believe we are on an irreversible trend toward more freedom and democracy
– but that could change.”

I have made good judgments in the past. I have made good judgments in the

“A low voter turnout is an indication of fewer people going to the polls.”

“Illegitimacy is something we should talk about in terms of not having it.”

“We are ready for any unforeseen event that may or may not occur.”

“We have a firm commitment to NATO, we are a part of NATO. We have a firm
commitment to Europe. We are a part of Europe.”

“The Holocaust was an obscene period in our nation’s history. I mean in this
century’s history. But we all lived in this century. I didn’t live in this

“Quite frankly, teachers are the only profession that teach our children.”

“The American people would not want to know of any misquotes that George
Bush may or may not make.”

“It isn’t pollution that’s harming the environment. It’s the impurities in
our air and water that are doing it.”

[It’s] time for the human race to enter the solar system.”

“There ought to be limits to freedom.”

23 thoughts on “Bush Reminder”

  1. I’m sure that since you found it all on the internet that they are all true and completely taken in context.

    I think that dumb sounding quotes can be found from any public figure in this day and age. Microphones are anywhere and every where today. I know that there are those out there of the democRAT candidates as well.

  2. He is a chimpanzee faced idiot, an under evolved ape of the most dangerous kind, one that believes it is made by a ‘god’.

  3. Well spoken or not, the list of the man’s successes is growing. (Saddam’s capture, the stronger economy and with Blair’s help Kaddafi is conforming).

    The word “idiot” doesn’t come to mind. Except maybe in regards to those knee-jerk liberals with this irrational hatred of George Dubya.

  4. barf, barf, barf. He’s an idiot and it’s not just democrats who are noticing (which, by the way, is starting to bug the crap out of me…all this democrat vs. republican shit – cut it out already). Just my opinion…he’s the president for christsakes and should be an eloquent speaker. Period. I would demand that out of anyone who is the leader of the “free” world. Pu…leaz…Either way, no matter who says that it’s FUNNY!

  5. Hmmm…me, I would rather have a GOOD and HONORABLE leader with integrity. One who doesn’t lie under oath and does what he thinks is right for the country and not for himself. If that person doesn’t happen to be an eloquent speaker, I don’t care. It seems to me that the free world needs a leader and not a figure head, someone to not put a pretty bow on top. I thought it was what was inside that matters.

  6. Is it worse to lie about a bj under oath than it is to lie and cause thousands of deaths when you’re not under oath?

  7. You would have to ask Saddam and Osama. If Saddam would have complied fully with the UN sanctions we wouldn’t have been in Iraq. Osama and Al Queda are the only ones that I know of that have “CAUSED” thousands of deaths. The volunteer soldiers that are now defending and some giving their lives are doing so to defend your right to speak freely and disagree. If Clinton had been concerned with telling the truth and not having oral sex in the oval office we might not have gotten to this point in the first place. Bush has the decency to follow through and actually see Saddam out of power and help the Iraquis develop their own government. Clinton bombed an aspirin factory just to get some of his political adversaries off of his back. Was that necessary? Maybe it’s me, but I don’t recall Bush ever lying about anything. He has quoted sources and intellegence that was given to him and no one has PROVEN that any of it was untrue. I do seem to recall that Clinton was proven a liar. “I did not have sexual relations with that woman!” Blue Dress, semen stain…need I prove my point any further? Where are your facts?

  8. and you know, he tries to play it off as funny because the american people relate to his stupidity! it would be fine if he were just stupid, but he’s stupid AND evil…great. and strobealific, bush lies in everything he says.. he names bills things that are the opposite of what they are and makes them hundreds of pages long so he can stick the truth in the middle amidst fancy words that the american people wont understand. take for example, oh i dont know…the fucking “patriot” act! and why are you still talking about clinton for christs sake??

  9. Ruffled a few feathers…I guess. Nothing Michael Moore writes or says can be taken as fact. He is an entertainer and someone who gets paid to lie for a paycheck.

    I also suppose that you, Mel, have never had a friend that stabbed you in the back when you weren’t expecting it? People and countries have relationships with other people and countries…sometimes they come to an end.

    Next, you didn’t give any facts as to “lies” that Bush has made. You threw out the Patriot Act which has nothing to do with lies, but rather has to do with privacy laws. Altogether, I do not support everything in the Patriot Act, but it does prove anything you are trying to say and shows your desperate attempt to throw anything out there to distract from the fact that you are wrong.

    The reason I refer to Clinton is because he was the last President and is still in control of the Democratic Party. Many on the left hold him up as the example, which is funny to me because he flip flops on most issues depending on which direction he can smell more $$ and sex.

  10. excuse me, but i believe you accidently put michael moore’s name in place of bushes when you mentioned people getting a paycheck for lies…and you are, basically, going to sit at your computer and reply to every single bad thing people write about bush?? you are one sad human being…not just for doing that, but for actually supporting the man.

    i have nothing more to say to you.

  11. No, I was correct in putting Michael Moore’s name there. I don’t reply to every single thing that people write about Bush, but I have on this blog. Mainly, because I read this blog on a daily basis and this post intrigued me. I also believe that there are a lot of angry liberals who are spewing lies left and right and I will and can make it my mission in life to keep them in check and state the truth. It is also apparent, Mel, that it is bothering you so much that you responded again. In doing so doesn’t that make you even more of a “sad human being” than me? I do support Bush whole heartedly and I am very happy about it.

    Mel, I also notice that you didn’t directly respond to what I said…probably because you can’t. Instead you turn it into an attack of me in pure liberal trash style.

  12. Mel,

    I decided to look at your webpage and starting reading some of your stuff and “opinions.” You state that you have trouble with labels, but in the same essay you put very strong labels on both Conservatives and Liberals which I think are your opinions and not true definitions.

    I don’t think you know what you think. I do believe you are just repeating what you are hearing from those around you. I sincerely hope that you look at all the facts about Bush and Iraq and intellegently sort through what is fact and fiction.

    As an artistic person myself, I know how hard it is to not have the same opinions of those that surround us. I do think it is funny that those very people who say that they are “open minded” and “non-conformists” are just repeating the same things that every other “artistic” person says, most of the “Hollywood Elite” and other outspoken celebrities. Also those same people trash the opinions and comments of others that disagree with them.

    Arnold, the Governator, is a prime example that has been bashed. Mel Gibson was immediately attacked over his movie, “The Passion.” It was called anti-semetic as well as other derrogitory things by people who have never seen it. Does that sound very open minded to you?

  13. Strobealific, I respect your opinion and your willingness to stand your ground. However, you are wrong on a number of counts…which is understandable given the amount of mis-information out there.

    Quote #1 – You want “a GOOD and HONORABLE leader with integrity. One who doesn’t lie under oath?” Well then, you want someone other than president Bush. Apparently you never heard about the SCI Funeral Home scandal while GWB was governor of Texas. See, he was held in contempt of court for LYING UNDER OATH (so help him God). One of his campaign contributors was receiving heat for breaking Texas laws, Bush intervened on behalf of the campaign contributor, attempted to avoid a subpoena, and was charged with contempt after lying under oath.

    QUOTE #2 – “Maybe it’s me, but I don’t recall Bush ever lying about anything. He has quoted sources and intellegence that was given to him and no one has PROVEN that any of it was untrue.”

    Are you serious? He’s lied about the costs of war, the length of Iraq’s occupation, education funding, tax cut beneficiaries, his ties to ENron, and the biggest lie of all, the “justifications” for going to war with Iraq. Bush’s own staff including Joseph Wilson and weapons inspector David Kay have proven him to be a liar. Hans Blix and the UN reported long before we went to war that 98% of known WMD in Iraq have been accounted for and destroyed.

    You know what though? None of that matters. All of the pundits, reporters, bloggers and politicians can stop arguing about WMD – we knew they were gone before we invaded Iraq. In fact, we invaded Iraq specifically because the UN reported Iraq was in compliance with Resolution 1441 and that econmic sanctions could be lifted. Saddam already had oil contracts in place with Russia, France and China – under the assumption that sanction would soon be lifted. The US would have lost out on access to the second largest oil reserves in the world with Saddam in power and UN sanctions lifted.

    By the way, if you want to know why we invaded Afghanistan, do a Google search with the words “Unocal” “Oil Pipeline” and “Taliban.” You’ll see the US planned to invade Afghanistan long before 9/11, after negotiations with the Taliban fell through for an oil transmission pipeline across Afghanistan. We bombed the crap out of them, appointed a new government and named a Unocal executive as Ambassador and Special US Envoy.

    Look, heads of state do not spend $166 billion for altruistic reasons. We created the monster that is Saddam Hussein. Reagan/Bush sent him US $, chemical weapons and satellite imagery to gas thousands of people.

    Anyone who thinks this “war on terror” is truly a war on terror is incredibly naive. Saddam Hussein ruled under secular law and was hated by OSB/Al Qaeda for not ruling under the religious laws of Sharia. The Bush administration is made up of over 50 current/former oil industry executives.

    Brent Wilson

  14. Brent,

    Who are you and why am I supposed to take what you say as fact? Again, complete attack of Bush and no reasons why we SHOULD elect someone else. Sorry, but I don’t trust anyone with a hotmail.com email address.

    Here is the reality folks. We are all humans. George W. Bush is a human. All of the Presidential candidates are humans. Humans are flawed and are not perfect. You will not find a single person who would be in a position of power that does not have some connection to someone or something that is not completely “perfect.” Name a democratic candidate that has no past. It can’t be done.

    The bottom line again is who do you want in power and in charge. If you want someone who will stand by and let our enemies, by their choice not ours, kill us…elect one of the democrats.

  15. “Strobealific” – You don’t trust anyone with a hotmail account? That’s cool…I guess I don’t trust folks who post under a fake name. FYI – I am a personal friend of one of the bloggers on this site. Just an average dude with an 8-to-5 job.

    It’s interesting that you (like most people I talk to) require sources and facts from me but you do not expect the same from an administration that is spending 166 billion of our tax dollars on a war based upon forged intelligence documents that were proven false before the war began.

    Who am I? I am a person who believes in government accountability and true democracy. I believe irresponsible corporations, and their influence on America’s political process, are the greatest threat to democracy we’ve ever known. Andrew Jackson predicted this threat to democracy almost 200 years ago. I believe the phrase “pre-emptive war” is synonomous with “facist-imperialist invasion.” I believe the dismantling of our civil liberties through the PATRIOT Acts may foreshadow the end of freedom as we’ve known it in our nation. I believe there is mounting evidence to indicate 9/11 could have been averted. I have also learned not to take everything the multi-millionaires who run the white house say at face value.

    Look man, I don’t have a beef with you. The reason I am typing this right now is because I believe you are misinformed…not wrong per se, just misinformed. I am trying to get the truth out. There is a great deal of misinformation. Let me prove it to you. Here are the sources you requested. I prepared this info just before Christmas for a website I am working on with a friend:

    Who Attacked the United States on September 11th?
    According to the FBI, of the 19 hijackers taking part in the September 11th terrorist attacks, 15 were from Saudi Arabia, two were from the United Arab Emirates, one was from Egypt and one was from Lebanon.

    What is the ìProject for the New American Century?î
    Founded in 1997, the Project for the New American Century (PNAC) is a neo-conservative ìthink tank.î The PNACís stated objective is the ìpromotion of American global leadership.î Itís founding members, including Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz and Jeb Bush, have expressed for many years the need to stabilize the Middle East and Iraq to prevent ìchallenges to our fundamental interests.î
    In 1997, the PNAC urged President Clinton and congress to invade Iraq in order to ìprotect our vital interests in the Gulf.î
    Upon reading the objectives and policy statements on the PNACís website, it becomes clear that Cheney, Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz had plans to invade Iraq and Afghanistan long before September 11th, 2001. Here is a link to the PNACís homepage:
    In fact, the BBC reports senior Bush administration officials announced plans to invade Afghanistan in mid-July of 2001, two months prior to September 11th.

    Is Iraq Tied to 9/11 and Al Qaeda?
    It is widely accepted amongst U.S. and international intelligence personnel that Iraq has no ties to Al Qaeda and was not involved with the terrorist attacks on September 11th. In fact, experts point out that Saddam, a secular Iraqi nationalist who refuses to rule by the Muslim religious law of Sharia, is a natural ìinfidelî enemy of Osama bin Laden.
    According to Newsweek magazine, (Vice-President) Cheney has repeatedly suggested that Baghdad has ties to Al Qaeda. He has refused to rule out suggestions that Iraq was to blame for the 9/11 attacks and may even have played a role in the terrorist bombing of the World Trade Center in 1993. The CIA and FBI, as well as a congressional investigation into the 9/11 attacks, have dismissed this theory. Still, as recently as Sept. 14th, Cheney continued to leave the door open to Iraqi complicity. He brought up a reportówidely discredited by U.S. intelligence officialsóthat 9/11 hijacker Muhammad Atta met with an Iraqi intelligence officer in Prague in April 2001. And he described Iraq as ìthe geographic base of the terrorists who have had us under assault for many years, but most especially on 9/11.î A few days later, President Bush publicly corrected the vice president. There was no evidence, Bush admitted, to suggest that the Iraqis were behind 9/11.



    Weapons of Mass Destruction – The Justification for a $166 Billion War
    In September of 2002, the Bush administration told the American people and the United Nations General Assembly that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction. Donald Rumsfeld provided testimony about the locations of these weapons. The president and his staff referenced intelligence stating Iraq sought the ìsupply of significant quantities of uranium from Africa.î However, former US diplomat Joseph Wilson had already determined (in February 2002) the information was false and was based upon forged documents. The CIA warned the US Government that claims about Iraq’s nuclear ambitions were not true months before President Bush used them to make his case for war.

    Since the invasion and occupation of Iraq, the US has spent eight months searching for weapons of mass destruction. The following is an excerpt from the report from Bush Administration Weapons Inspector David Kay to the CIA dated October 2, 2003:
    ìWe have not uncovered evidence that Iraq undertook significant post-1998 steps to actually build nuclear weapons or produce fissile material…We have not yet been able to corroborate the existence of a mobile biological weapons production effortÖTechnical limitations would prevent any of these processes from being ideally suited to these trailers…Iraq did not have a large, ongoing, centrally controlled chemical weapons program after 1991Ö Iraq’s large-scale capability to develop, produce, and fill new chemical weapon munitions was reduced – if not entirely destroyed – during Operations Desert Storm and Desert Fox, 13 years of UN sanctions and UN inspections.”

    USA Today recently chronicled the Reagan/Bush administrationís financial backing of Iraq in its war on Iran in the 1980ís and the U.S. sale of biological weapons to Saddam Hussein under Reaganís authority. Invoices included in the referenced documents read like shopping lists for biological weapons programs. One 1986 shipment from the Virginia-based American Type Culture Collection included three strains of anthrax, six strains of the bacteria that make botulinum toxin and three strains of the bacteria that cause gas gangrene.
    After a query from Sen. Robert Byrd (D-W.Va) regarding the Iraqi germ transfer program in the 1980ís, Donald Rumsfeld stated, “I have never heard anything like what you’ve read, I have no knowledge of it whatsoever, and I doubt it.”

    Federal Contracts for War and Reconstruction
    Private contractors that received billions in reconstruction contracts for Iraq and Afghanistan contributed significantly to President Bush’s election campaign and stocked their staffs and governing boards with well-connected former federal officials, according to a report released by the Center for Public Integrity.
    The CPI matched companies with political donations to conclude that dozens of companies that won contracts had contributed to national political campaigns, with President Bush receiving more money than any other candidate since 1990–about $500,000.

    Vice-president Dick Cheney is receiving a multi-million dollar ìretirementî package from the Halliburton Corporation.


    Since the war on Iraq began, Halliburton and its subsidiaries have been awarded $15.6 billion in federal contracts through a ìno bidî process.



    In December of 2003, the Pentagon reported the Halliburton Corporation has been price gouging tax payers by at least $61 million so far.



    Afghanistan, the Taliban, and a Texas Oil Company

    The U.S. government and Unocal Oil negotiated with the Taliban for nine years prior to September 11th, 2001 to secure an oil transmission pipeline through Afghanistan.



    Unocalís chief executive negotiator was Afghan-American Zalmay Khalilzad.
    On February 12, 1998, John J. Maresca, vice president of international relations for the Unocal Oil Company, testified before the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on International Relations. Maresca provided information to Congress on Central Asia oil and gas reserves and how they might shape US foreign policy. Unocal’s problem? As Maresca said: “How to get the region’s vast energy resources to the markets.” The oil reserves are in areas north of Afghanistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan and Russia. Routes for a pipeline were proposed that would transport oil on a 42-inch pipe southward through Afghanistan to the Pakistan coast. This pipeline would cost about $2.5 billion and carry about 1 million barrels of oil per day.
    Maresca told Congress, “It’s not going to be built until there is a single Afghan government. That’s the simple answer.”
    High-ranking members of the Taliban were escorted to Sugarland, Texas in the years prior to 9/11 for negotiations and sightseeing tours.
    Negotiations with the Taliban broke down after the Clinton administration fired missiles at Afghanistan in 1998 in retaliation for Osama bin Ladenís bombing of east African embassies. Unocal stated it could not secure financing for the project without an established, internationally recognized government in place in Afghanistan.
    On October 7, 2001, the U.S. attacked Afghanistan. Nine days after a new U.S.-backed government was installed in Kabul, former Unocal advisor Zalmay Khalilzad was named Special Envoy and Ambassador to Afghanistan.

    Other Corporations Are Also Shaping U.S. Public Policy
    Many groups have made accusations that energy corporations have had significant influence over U.S. public energy policy. The government watchdog group Judicial Watch and environmentalists at the Sierra Club, who argue they were shut out of the energy policy process by an administration with ties to the energy industry, sued in hopes of getting more information on the task force’s work. The Supreme Court recently agreed to decide whether Vice President Dick Cheney must disclose his contacts with energy executives, including some from Houston’s Enron Corporation, as the Bush administration drew up its energy policy.
    The White House has spent the past two years fighting to keep those details secret. But a federal judge has ordered Cheney to either turn over his Energy Task Force’s documents to environmentalists and a government watchdog group or provide a detailed list of the documents and the reasons for withholding them. Cheney, a former chief executive of Houston oil-field services firm Halliburton, set up the energy task force in late 2000. Its members met for several months in the early days of the Bush administration and recommended reviving nuclear power as an energy source and opening more public lands, including Alaska’s Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, to oil and gas drilling. He has acknowledged, however, that he or his aides met with executives of the now-bankrupt Enron Corporation – Bush’s biggest campaign contributor during the 2000 presidential election – on at least six occasions as the energy plan was being developed.
    During one of those meetings, Cheney met with Ken Lay, then Enron’s chief executive, who handed the vice president a three-page memo with several suggestions that ended up in the final energy plan.
    In an unprecedented move against a sitting vice president, the investigative arm of Congress (The General Accounting Office) also filed a federal court suit challenging Vice President Dick Cheney’s refusal to hand over documents related to Enron and national energy policy. “This is the first time that GAO has filed suit against a federal official in connection with a records access issue. We take this step reluctantly,” the GAO said in a statement. “Nevertheless, given GAO’s responsibility to Congress and the American people, we have no other choice. Our repeated attempts to reach a reasonable accommodation on this matter have not been successful.”
    Just before the last presidential election, Bush campaign adviser Ralph Reed offered to help the Enron Corporation deregulate the electricity industry by working his “good friends” in Washington and by mobilizing religious leaders and pro-family groups for the cause. For a $380,000 fee, the conservative political strategist proposed a broad lobbying strategy that included using major campaign contributors, conservative talk shows and nonprofits to press Congress for favorable legislation. Reed said he could place letters from community leaders in the opinion pages of major newspapers, producing clips that Reed would “blast fax” to Capitol Hill.
    “We are a loyal member of your team and are prepared to do whatever fits your strategic plan,” Reed wrote in an Oct. 23, 2000, memo obtained by The Washington Post. “In public policy,” he wrote, “it matters less who has the best arguments and more who gets heard — and by whom.”
    The memo offers a glimpse into the relationship between Enron and the influential conservative, who was first recommended to the company in 1997 by Karl Rove, now a senior adviser to President Bush. Reed, head of the Atlanta-based consulting firm Century Strategies, is the former executive director of the Christian Coalition and current chairman of the Georgia Republican Party.

    I know that is a lot to read, but I have a great deal more to share with you if you are interested. Please feel free to verify all sources.

    The truth is that we are witnessing the worst example of “cash and carry” government in history. If you look at the patterns of “public policy” directives from this adminstration you’ll notice a pattern: selling out the public for corporate interests. Think about it: air quality, water quality (mercury kills), Enron wrote America’s energy policy, I could go on for hours.

    Here’s the deal, we need to stop bickering with each other and address the real issue: America’s taxpayers vs. corporate profiteering in Washington. The real issue is not “democrats vs. republicans” or “liberals vs. conservatives.” Do not assume I am a democrat, I am not. I believe the democrats and republicans are basically the same party – the corporate contributor party. What we need is campaign finance reform and the end of special interest politics.

    Strobealific, if you read everything I sent and still believe Bush is a stand-up guy, that’s cool. I really do respect your opinion. But I’d be interested in your thoughts after you’ve had a chance to digest the info.

    Thanks – Brent Wilson

  16. Brent,

    StrobeAlific is my “nick” for online chats, forums and blogging. I am an Audio Engineer and also work under the company “StrobeAlific Audio.” So, it’s not a fake name. It is very much who I am. If you click on my name under this post, you will see that it is linked to my personal blog and that my email address is readily available. You can also see that I have my “business” site at strobealific.com and my personal domain, that other than my blog, is at marcbowyer.com.

    You obviously haven’t read every word that I wrote. I am a realist. I understand that there isn’t a perfect person, but I think that Bush is the best man for the job.

    I did read everything you wrote and looked at a few links, but I don’t have the time to read them all. Some of the links are worthy to be called facts, but very few. Most of them were slanted.

    I think it is funny that half of your links are from the BBC. I also find it humorous that you are using all this energy to find all the bad things about the administration. You haven’t shown, in your opinion, who we should vote for. If you, and everyone else, spent half the time looking for good and positive things in people…the world would be a much better place.

    I enjoy politics. I love America. Will I move to Canada if Dean, or whatever democrat gets elected? No. I will feel less safe though. Have I spent way too much of my time on this blog lately? Yes. Have we changed each others mind or opinion? No.

    I may check back and see if more posts are made, but I probably won’t say much more on this topic. It’s obvious there isn’t much more to say.

    Marc “StrobeAlific” Bowyer
    [email protected]

  17. Sorry, went back on my word and posted again. I wanted to address your “financial contribution” thoughts.

    I do agree that both parties play corporate America for $$, but I don’t think the answer is as easy as you seem to think it is. You may recall there was Campaign Finance Reform recently. All that did was make the money be funneled through other sources like moveon.org, etc. and candidate opt out of the system.

  18. does miss univers “arnold governor” is due to an allince with republican & democrate gay people of california?

    terminator and bush, an austrian (remember ss) and and paranoiac idiot make the pair….

    what about the camp in cuba?

  19. I think Bush should not be president and I do not trust Cheney and Rumsfeld. I don’t know about Kerry, but I think i will vote against bush. These people give me a really bad feeling

Comments are closed.