George W. Bush, Warlord
- Thread starter red
- Start date
*yawn* What a freak. With his very first sentence, this guy showed himself for a partisan freak with no grasp on reality.
"First he appointed himself President." Dubya didn't appoint himself President - he was ELECTED.
As for the rest of the Op-Ed, *yawn* again. I know the Democrats would pee themselves with glee if Bush were to really start rounding up people at random and shooting them. But they're going to have to find something else to caper about because it's not going to happen.
"Under his legalized assassination mandate, Bush could theoretically declare the 2004 Democratic nominee an "enemy combatant," Hellfire his campaign bus and coast to reelection unopposed. It would be a heck of a lot easier than preparing for debates. Yeah, right - that's going to happen.
If people like this had their way, we'd let terrorists in this country completely unfettered to kill Americans as they pleased. Oh yeah...I forgot...they DID have their way for 8 years and that's EXACTLY what the terrorists did. My bad.
"First he appointed himself President." Dubya didn't appoint himself President - he was ELECTED.
As for the rest of the Op-Ed, *yawn* again. I know the Democrats would pee themselves with glee if Bush were to really start rounding up people at random and shooting them. But they're going to have to find something else to caper about because it's not going to happen.
"Under his legalized assassination mandate, Bush could theoretically declare the 2004 Democratic nominee an "enemy combatant," Hellfire his campaign bus and coast to reelection unopposed. It would be a heck of a lot easier than preparing for debates. Yeah, right - that's going to happen.
If people like this had their way, we'd let terrorists in this country completely unfettered to kill Americans as they pleased. Oh yeah...I forgot...they DID have their way for 8 years and that's EXACTLY what the terrorists did. My bad.
One more thing I'm curious about and maybe DemsforMD or Maynard can answer this for me:
When our country has been at war before, say, the Gulf War or Vietnam or WWII, did our American troops have to give every enemy combatant a fair and impartial trial if they got ahold of them? It was my impression that, in war, you shoot first and ask questions later. Which begs the next question: how do you get them to stop shooting at you long enough to take them into custody so you can actually BRING them to trial?
When our country has been at war before, say, the Gulf War or Vietnam or WWII, did our American troops have to give every enemy combatant a fair and impartial trial if they got ahold of them? It was my impression that, in war, you shoot first and ask questions later. Which begs the next question: how do you get them to stop shooting at you long enough to take them into custody so you can actually BRING them to trial?
I used to find this stuff funny but now, after realizing that this is a real person who influences other people to think like him, I don't find it funny anymore. It's scary, actually, that Yahoo lets insane people write for their website.