• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

question about bush admin "incompetence"

geggy

Muse
geggy
Joined
Apr 19, 2006
Messages
598
This probably belongs in the political forum but this is sort of relate to the notion of "intelligence failure" by the bush administration in preventing the 9/11 attack which in my opinion, is absurd.

If you think the bush administration is so incompetence then how did they come to win two elections in a row (and get away with it)?

Even if they did win these two elections honestly and fairly (yeah right), doesn't it show the true intelligent level of the voters in this country?
 
This is democracy. We live in an age of television.

When you put the two together, you realize that ability to do the job has nothing to do with electability. It comes down to nicer hair. Who looks better on TV. thats how Kennedy beat Nixon.

And the fact that the opposing party can't mount anything close to a decent campaign helps.
 
geggy said:
This probably belongs in the political forum but this is sort of relate to the notion of "intelligence failure" by the bush administration in preventing the 9/11 attack which in my opinion, is absurd.

If you think the bush administration is so incompetence then how did they come to win two elections in a row (and get away with it)?

Even if they did win these two elections honestly and fairly (yeah right), doesn't it show the true intelligent level of the voters in this country?
Click to expand...

You're right; it belongs in the Politics subforum.
 
geggy said:
This probably belongs in the political forum but this is sort of relate to the notion of "intelligence failure" by the bush administration in preventing the 9/11 attack which in my opinion, is absurd.

If you think the bush administration is so incompetence then how did they come to win two elections in a row (and get away with it)?

Even if they did win these two elections honestly and fairly (yeah right), doesn't it show the true intelligent level of the voters in this country?
Click to expand...
so let me get this straight, your saying the notion of LIHOI is flawed because the bush admin was clever enough to steal two elections? lol, your standards of evidence are getting worse every day

and to answer your last question:
doesn't it show the true intelligent level of the voters in this country?
Click to expand...
yes, yes it does
 
I think the issue of the intelligence of the president is an interesting one, but since there doesn't seem to be a good non-ambiguous answer to exactly what intelligence is there may not be a non-ambigous objective answer to the question.

Having said that, the nature of the Bush presidency is unusual, I think, to the degree that it has been defined by others beside Bush. Why is that? Bush seems to be a non-curious individual without strong commitments to any ideology. The ideology of the Bush administration seems to be driven by Rove and Cheney and perhaps some others that fit in with Cheney's ideas. Bush at times just seems he's along for the ride.

I agree that the fact that Bush was able to get elected implies some kind of intelligence, but the key to Bush's election may not be his own intelligence, which seems below average, but rather the skill, intelligence and ruthlessness of Rove.
 
geggy said:
This probably belongs in the political forum but this is sort of relate to the notion of "intelligence failure" by the bush administration in preventing the 9/11 attack which in my opinion, is absurd.

If you think the bush administration is so incompetence then how did they come to win two elections in a row (and get away with it)?

Even if they did win these two elections honestly and fairly (yeah right), doesn't it show the true intelligent level of the voters in this country?
Click to expand...

Being good at one thing does not imply expertise in another area.

The Cheney/Rove team knows how to run and win elections for GWB.

Just because one can win an election doesn't in any way imply the ability to actually perform the job to which one is elected.
 
What's the problem? Stealing is a much simpler thing than hoaxing. Dumping Democratic registrations in the trash is easier than fooling (or cowing) all the structural engineers in the world. Only Reptoids could do that.
 
Last edited:
There are also instances of "politically minded" citizens taking matters into their own hands and doing things without consent or knowledge of the larger pary they think they represent.
 
So the true mastermind of 9/11 is the guy who falls asleep at public functions and shot his friend in the face. Interesting...
 
What is it about politics?

Why is it people who disagree with the choice of president are utterly unable to accept the simple truth that MOST of their fellow citizens simply don't agree with them? Why must this be explained by "stealing elections" or claims that everyone else is stupid?

Why is it people only want democracy when their chosen party wins?

Hypocritical much?

The people of the USA spoke. They wanted the Republicans. That has nothing to do with competence or lackthereof in the Republican camp. It has to do with the desires and wants of the citizens of the United States.

Also, I believe much of the incompetence charge is levelled, not at the administration, but at the broader US Government - specifically the CIA and FBI. And the incompetence occured, not just during the Republican Administration, but over a decade and more.

Personally, I don't believe the government was incompetent. Wait. Let me rephrase that. All governments are incompetent to some degree. I do not believe incompetence explains 9/11 happening. I believe the government departments were powerless to prevent it.

I believe the very nature of the USA, the freedoms that its citizens enjoy, the emphasis on fair trial, the willingness to allow foreigners to enter, and so forth, was what allowed 9/11 to happen, and made it unavoidable.

-Gumboot
 
Gumboot -

Do you hear railings about how Reagan stole the elections? Or Bush 41?

George W. Bush should not have been sworn in as President in 2001. It all came down to Florida, and the Florida vote was improper on many different levels, from the disenfranchising of African-American voters, to poorly designed ballots, to having the chairperson of the Bush2000 campaign in Florida also overseeing the elections...

An objective recount of all ballots (including overvotes where a person was marked AND written in) would have had Gore winning by the same kind of margin that he won the popular vote. (How about that, Gumboot? Most people in American WANTED Gore to be their president. Most people in America DID agree with us.) More voters in Florida voted for Gore than Bush. Gore should have been the certified winner of Florida's electoral votes, and he should have been our President.

I'm not getting involved in what Gore asked for, or anything like that. If all the votes had been counted properly, Gore would have been sworn in that January. And I cannot say that the 9/11 attack might not have occured, but I will state my opinion that Gore would have responded to the Cole attack when the FBI/CIA signed off on Al-Qaeda sponsorship in February, and that he would have taken things like the Aug 6 PDB a hell of a lot more seriously.
 
Incompetence is relevant to the conspiracy issue, so it's only fair to point out that a significant number of historians are already rating this administration as the worst in American history.

This suggests Gumboot may be mistaken--as does a look at the Clinton administrations' excellent record against terrorism (it's on my webpage).

More importantly, the opinion of the historians, and the adminstration's unparalleled track record of cataclysmic failure, suggest these guys could not have engineered and brought off the trickiest hoax ever--fooling everyone in the world except a few weird white guys.

Incompetence is what best explains 9/11. If these guys had set out to do 9/11, 9/11 would most certainly not have happened.
 
Last edited:
boloboffin said:
Gumboot -

Do you hear railings about how Reagan stole the elections? Or Bush 41?

George W. Bush should not have been sworn in as President in 2001. It all came down to Florida, and the Florida vote was improper on many different levels, from the disenfranchising of African-American voters, to poorly designed ballots, to having the chairperson of the Bush2000 campaign in Florida also overseeing the elections...

An objective recount of all ballots (including overvotes where a person was marked AND written in) would have had Gore winning by the same kind of margin that he won the popular vote. (How about that, Gumboot? Most people in American WANTED Gore to be their president. Most people in America DID agree with us.) More voters in Florida voted for Gore than Bush. Gore should have been the certified winner of Florida's electoral votes, and he should have been our President.

I'm not getting involved in what Gore asked for, or anything like that. If all the votes had been counted properly, Gore would have been sworn in that January. And I cannot say that the 9/11 attack might not have occured, but I will state my opinion that Gore would have responded to the Cole attack when the FBI/CIA signed off on Al-Qaeda sponsorship in February, and that he would have taken things like the Aug 6 PDB a hell of a lot more seriously.
Click to expand...

if Gore was president he would have moved to space, and taken the choosen people, just those who helped him invent the internet

Gore, he would have raised taxes on California and blamed California for 9/11.
 
beachnut said:
if Gore was president he would have moved to space, and taken the choosen people, just those who helped him invent the internet

Gore, he would have raised taxes on California and blamed California for 9/11.
Click to expand...

Put. Down. The Bong.
 
Oliver said:
Do you really believe they want all these 911-iraq threads? :p
Click to expand...


Its turning into a Dems vs Reps. I know they have plenty of those in there, but thats where they belong. Besides, its dizzying enough dealing with the CTists. I can't handle the cheerleading coming from both sides of the poltical spectrum.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom