Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr

Forum Post: What would Obama have to do to be as bad as Bush?

Posted 6 years ago on April 14, 2012, 7 p.m. EST by craigdangit (326)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Just wondering. What would be the tipping point that would make him as bad of a president?



Read the Rules
[-] 10 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 6 years ago

To continue the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. To keep Gitmo open. To not prosecute any wall street execs. Oops, I guess he is just as bad!

[-] 5 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 6 years ago

Throw in a few new wars and we have a perfect storm!

[-] -1 points by PandoraK (1678) 6 years ago

Within 24 hours of taking the Oath of Office, President Obama signed for the closing of Gitmo...Congress refused to fund it.



[+] -4 points by jimmycrackerson (940) from Blackfoot, ID 6 years ago

"To CONTINUE the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. To KEEP Gitmo open."

The war in Afghanistan initiated in 2001 under Bush.

Guantanamo Bay Detention Camp established in 2002 under Bush.

The War in Iraq initiated in 2003 under Bush.

The War in Iraq no longer continues as of 2011 under Obama's reign.

Looks to me like Obama been trying to clean up boy Bush's mess. Though I'd be a fool to suggest he's doing a great job. But it might take decades to undo the problems caused by Bush's playground bully shenanigans. I never trusted monkey bush and I don't trust our new monkey either. Bush is by far the greater of the two evils, but give Obama another four years and scales may tip.

[-] 6 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 6 years ago

Our troops pulled out of Iraq nearly 3 years after Obama took office on Bush's timetable for withdrawal. It shouldn't take till 2014 to pull out of Afghanistan. Especially for a Nobel peace prize winner. Obama has not cleaned up a single mess. In foreign policy, Bush and Obama are clones.

[-] 2 points by jimmycrackerson (940) from Blackfoot, ID 6 years ago

Well during the cloning stage it looks like they made some upgrades. At least I can understand what Obama is saying when he speaks. Even if it is mostly lies.

[-] 6 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 6 years ago

He is an excellent communicator with a thick coat of charisma that is wearing thin if you look closely. A fresh coat will be applied before election.

[-] 7 points by Craiggiedangit (99) 6 years ago

Good at communicating false promises.

[-] 2 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 6 years ago

Any preferences for another candidate? Ron Paul, Rocky Anderson, Buddy Roemer? It's a shame watching the same two horse race every 4 years, especially when the same corporate trainer owns both horses.

[-] 4 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 6 years ago

I think it would have to be somebody like Dennis Kucinich.

[-] 1 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 6 years ago

Kucinich definitely has taken action that aligns with Occupy. Single payer health ,"bringing articles of impeachment against President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney, and being the only Democratic candidate in the 2008 election to have voted against invading Iraq." See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dennis_Kucinich

[-] 1 points by SparkyJP (1646) from Westminster, MD 6 years ago

Exactly - That's why he lost his seat. Kucinich tends to represent the people. That doesn't fit in well with our present congress

[-] 1 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 6 years ago

Yes, there are a lot of things to like about him. Too bad Wall Street would never finance him.

[-] 1 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 6 years ago

Hopefully he refused their financing.

[-] 1 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 6 years ago

Unfortunately, there doesn't seem to be another way for candidates to win these days. If there was, I'd be all for it.

[-] 0 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 6 years ago

Theres a reason for that :)

[-] 3 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 6 years ago

I support them all, besides Obama and Romney.

[-] 1 points by SparkyJP (1646) from Westminster, MD 6 years ago

I nominate the American people as a candidate through a Direct Democracy.


[-] 0 points by dantes443322 (148) 6 years ago

What a farse the 'excellent communicator' meme is. Take away his teleprompter and he is a babbling idiot.

[-] 0 points by takim (23) 6 years ago

excellent communicator? ever listen to him when is not reading from his multiple telepromters.?

[-] 3 points by forbetter (54) 6 years ago

Bravo for a brave post!

[-] 2 points by DanielBarton (1345) 6 years ago

there are still 30,000 mercs in iraq doing what idk but we pay them more than our guys

[-] 1 points by BLOWCHUNKS (43) 6 years ago

lol..... like a beaten spouse, back home on payday.

Obama has been trying so hard to clean up Bush's mess, he ended up having to do worse things than Bush like sign the NDAA and expand the domestic wiretapping program and start bombing Libya.

I'd hate to see what it would look like if he tried to expand the Bush agenda.

[-] 8 points by JadedGem (895) 6 years ago

Well, I for one think the only difference between buying a republican and democrat politician off is the price. Republicans get volume pricing from the .001% and are cheaper to pay off than democrats. Democrats because they actually say they are for the people and have their voters believe them can command a higher buy off price. Both are shit. I hate everything republicans have been standing for with the exception of their position on guns. But the democrats have been the biggest betrayers of their voters. With their actions, I can't tell one from the other regardless of what they claimed.

[-] 1 points by SteveKJR (-497) 6 years ago

You already stated the difference - Republicans are for standing their position on guns whereas the Democrats are not.

But lets not forget the Obination has the black panthers on his side.

[-] 0 points by betuadollar (-313) 6 years ago

And the Panthers are every bit as vehement as the KKK... and you want me to forfeit my guns? Do that and only the cops, as in "all the King's men," will have guns...

[-] -2 points by factsrfun (8485) from Phoenix, AZ 6 years ago

It's people that can't tell the difference that put Bush in the White House, so I guess we will just keep going to war and burning up the planet because people can't tell the difference.

Maybe some day they will be able to.

Maybe someday a group of farseeing smart truth tellers will come along and help them see the difference.

Maybe someday people will stop thinking it's all about them and if they have been betrayed and start thinking it's about the country, maybe someday.

[-] 2 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 6 years ago

Didn't Obama get us into a war with Libya? Now, I know it wasn't called a war, but wasn't it really a war?

[-] 1 points by SparkyJP (1646) from Westminster, MD 6 years ago

Real Cause for Gaddafi's Expulsion: Wanted Gold Currency?

Some believe it [the NATO/US-led Libyan invasion] is about protecting civilians, others say it is about oil, but some are convinced intervention in Libya is all about Gaddafi's plan to introduce the gold dinar, a single African currency made from gold, a true sharing of the wealth.

Gaddafi did not give up. In the months leading up to the military intervention, he called on African and Muslim nations to join together to create this new currency that would rival the dollar and euro. They would sell oil and other resources around the world only for gold dinars.

It is an idea that would shift the economic balance of the world.

"If Gaddafi had an intent to try to re-price his oil or whatever else the country was selling on the global market and accept something else as a currency or maybe launch a gold dinar currency, any move such as that would certainly not be welcomed by the power elite today, who are responsible for controlling the world's central banks," says Anthony Wile, founder and Chief Editor of the Daily Bell.

"So yes, that would certainly be something that would cause his immediate dismissal and the need for other reasons to be brought forward from moving him from power."

And it has happened before.

In 2000, Saddam Hussein announced Iraqi oil would be traded in euros, not dollars. Some say sanctions and an invasion followed because the Americans were desperate to prevent OPEC from transferring oil trading in all its member countries to the euro.

A gold dinar would have had serious consequences for the world financial system, but may also have empowered the people of Africa, something black activists say the US wants to avoid at all costs.

Some say the US and its NATO allies literally could not afford to let that happen.


[-] 2 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 6 years ago

We can do the same thing the Africans were doing. Take your savings out of dollars, and put it into physical silver:


[-] 0 points by betuadollar (-313) 6 years ago

Wait a minute... are you saying the Africans still have gold??? I thought we got it all.

[-] 0 points by factsrfun (8485) from Phoenix, AZ 6 years ago

Yes Obama did support the Arab Spring:


and people did die, it is hard for me to say, I think those people had a point Mubarak and Kaddafi may needed to be removed, I don’t like to see people killing each other though

[-] 1 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 6 years ago

Libya had the best economy in Africa, so why did Khadafi need to be removed? I don't think it was for the benefit of the people of Libya. From what I hear, there is even more torture going on there now.

One reason, is that the US is trying to kick China out of Africa. China had been helping African countries to develop their infrastructure in exchange for raw materials. Wall Street doesn't like to see third world nations working with each other, growing and becoming more independent.

[-] 1 points by Yin7 (44) 6 years ago

Yeah, Libya was bringing back the gold standard which was a good idea for Libya.

[-] 1 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 6 years ago

Yes, that's probably why Obama supported the war against them.

[-] 8 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 6 years ago

It depends on your views. I never voted for Bush, and hence expected a disaster. And got it.

But I did vote for Obama. And that is why, for me, it is much worse.

[-] -3 points by factsrfun (8485) from Phoenix, AZ 6 years ago

it's all about you is it?

I see

[-] -1 points by Spade2 (478) 6 years ago

He's letting his passion cloud his judgement. So don't bother, he'll grow up sooner or later (I hope).

[-] 0 points by factsrfun (8485) from Phoenix, AZ 6 years ago

from the "voting" it seems a lot of people take this personal

the ego is strong

it takes awhile to work through that

[-] 7 points by alexrai (851) 6 years ago

Perhaps having his goons bust down the doors of medical dispensaries so sick patients have to scrounge around street corners for their medicines... oh that's already happening too.

Wait, he is actually like two terms of Bush in one. Like a well packaged political bargain.

Voting for the lesser of two evils is really just delaying the inevitable... although I remain mildly curious if he would actually do something useful in a second term... or whether he'd start kissing ass to whatever lobbying firm currently has him on their secret payroll.

[-] 6 points by JamesS89118 (646) from Las Vegas, NV 6 years ago

If he wrote chicken scratches in the margin's of laws, he would be marginal. Oh wait, he did that! (NDAA)

[-] 1 points by SparkyJP (1646) from Westminster, MD 6 years ago

Obama Demanded Language To Arrest You under NDAA


[-] 5 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 6 years ago

Cut taxes for the rich... wait Obama signed for that....

ummm..... bomb countries that didn't attack us... wait he's done a lot of that too.

ummmmm.... continue Guantanamo Bay.... wait he's still using that...

Obama had my support for the first 2 years. After that he proved to be just another corporate sheep warmonger president.

People can talk all they want about his health care reform bill... and there are good aspects... but over all... we all know for a fact that isn't the type of reform we elected him for. We voted for universal healthcare, not a lobbyist approved bill that benefits insurance companies.

I want to see real solutions. Throwing money and bombs at problems doesn't solve anything.

Dennis Kucinich should have been the nominee in 2008. But all that corporate cash helped put Obama and Clinton on the top ticket.

If Obama was honest, he'd support HR 2990, the NEED act. The only bill that takes the power back from the "too big to fail" banks and from the fed... that bill provides a real solution to universal health care for all and education for all. All while including a budget to build roads and schools which would provide jobs.

read the bill and send it to your congressman. Tell them to read it and learn how to do their job - http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/112/hr2990/text

[-] 4 points by dantes443322 (148) 6 years ago

Probably have to kill American citizens.

Oh, wait.....

[-] 3 points by craigdangit (326) 6 years ago

Yeah, or detain and torture them indefinitely lol

[-] 4 points by TheTrollSlayer (347) from Kingsport, TN 6 years ago

Get re-elected

[-] 1 points by Demian (497) from San Francisco, CA 6 years ago

Lol, how true.

[-] 1 points by ogrdanny (73) from Grand Rapids Charter Township, MI 6 years ago


[-] 1 points by TheTrollSlayer (347) from Kingsport, TN 6 years ago

Really i dont think theres anyway to be as bad as bush but both parties are pitiful.


[-] 3 points by gnomunny (6819) from St Louis, MO 6 years ago
[-] 1 points by EricBlair (447) 6 years ago

I refuse to believe it! Can't be true... The "Repelicans" must have twisted his arm somehow! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8rMh4Vzztcw

[-] 3 points by RedJazz43 (2757) 6 years ago

Of course one party of the 1% is always going to be better than the other party of the 1%. That's how the 1% keeps us wedded to THEIR parties. But the lesser of two evils is still evil.

[-] 2 points by BannedAgain (6) 6 years ago

When he took his oath of office?

OR the first actions he took as prez to fix our economy?

[-] 2 points by Skippy2 (485) 6 years ago

I feel Obama is worse than Bush. With Bush we knew what we were getting. Obama lied through out his campaign. He needs to go.

[-] 2 points by vvvpr (0) 6 years ago

Obama's first term has essentially been Dubya's third: Bush/Cheney and the PNAC gave us 9/11, AUMF 2001, the USA Patriot Act and the market meltdown of 2008. Obama followed suit keeping Gates at the Pentagon, Goldman alum at the Treasury, selling us a "healthcare reform act" that is actually a Big Insurance Bonanza, and signing NDAA 2012, HR347, HR658 and HR3606 a.k.a. the Wall Street Crowdfunding Fraud Act of 2012. And of course, our global perpetual war for oil and profit hasn't skipped a beat since they brought the three towers down.

There was no "change" in 2008. And regardless of who wins this year's elections, there will be no "change" in 2012 ... unless WE make it. And I don't mean by voting on false choices in rigged elections with predetermined outcomes assured if necessary by SCOTUS overrides.

[-] 1 points by craigdangit (326) 6 years ago

Thank you. What exactly will it take for partisan zombies to break out of their shells and realize this? What kind of emotional slavery to one master produces this pitiful mindset?

[-] 1 points by vvvpr (0) 6 years ago

Maybe spreading this will help:

Occupy Bohemian Grove: State of the Counterculture Union Address 2012 by Dr. Ryan Bartek


[-] 1 points by craigdangit (326) 6 years ago

Sounds good.

[-] 2 points by brightonsage (4494) 6 years ago

For the GOP, it would be nothing at all because he IS black, after all, and you just can't be a worse president than that.

For the liberals, it would be trying to compromise with the Tea Party on the debt ceiling and Bush tax cuts, continuing a war and the Patriot Act, failing to get the banks Fannie and Fredie to take a haircut on loan principle, guns in National Parks.....OH, he has already done that.

And for moderate Republicans, they are now called Independents, hey he is doing just great. Are you sure he isn't Bush?

What was that question again?

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 6 years ago

Are there any twinkies left?

[-] 2 points by brightonsage (4494) 6 years ago

I'll check the deeep frier.

[-] 0 points by craigdangit (326) 6 years ago

Actually, the GOP hates him because of the "D" after his name. They could care less what race he is, but it doesn't help any that he is black. I assure you they would hate any other Democrat as much.

Guns in national parks? I thought all the partisan hacks had conveniently forgotten about that one when the forecasted blood-bath didn't happen, and the crime rate went down. I don't know, maybe you wanted the crime rate to go up or something.


[-] 2 points by brightonsage (4494) 6 years ago

If you think that there aren't large numbers for whom the fact that he is black is the LARGEST negative factor, you are very naive.

I am just one of those freaks who doesn't feel more comfortable when idiots who have demonstrated their prejudice and lack of rationality, no, actual disbelief in rationality, facts and science, to be walking around carrying concealed weapons. In fact, members of my family, probably should not be walking around with guns. There are groups I would feel comfortable with, but the American general public isn't one of them. You can shout at me louder than you can shout and it won't make me feel comfortable and you can't pass a law that requires me to feel comfortable and I assure you, it won't make me feel more comfortable. Packing concealed pillows, now that might make me feel comfortable, even though I will admit, people have been suffocated with pillows.

[-] 1 points by craigdangit (326) 6 years ago

It was so much better before the law was passed, when you could guarantee that anyone carrying a concealed weapon in a park was breaking the law already.

I find it tremendously ironic that you just stereotyped entire "groups" that are supposed to be more dangerous than other groups, and now you're saying people should use facts, rationality, and science more.

The chance of having a crime committed against you in a national park is lower now, so you can feel slightly more safe. That, my friend, is science.

Please reread your post. You are engaging in the exact things you accuse others of.

[-] 1 points by brightonsage (4494) 6 years ago

I am just telling you how I honestly feel. I grew up with guns. Fed the family with guns. I have been shot at with guns. I have been in the middle of shootouts between gangs and cops. And I don't need it anymore.

I am an inventor. Would rather find a way to assure the public that almost no one has a gun on them. It was safer in a National Park before there were people. It has gotten less safe since there were people with guns. Just guns and me would be OK. But those people? We know what they do.

[-] 1 points by craigdangit (326) 6 years ago

Oh, yeah, they. What stereotype are you ascribing to be the latest boogeyman now?

And are you still ignoring the fact that crime continued to go down as more people were allowed to carry guns into the national parks?

[-] 1 points by brightonsage (4494) 6 years ago

They is people. It's a personal pronoun referring to "people with guns" It is a play on an NRA slogan, "Guns don't kill people, people kill people." "We know what they do." refers to the last part of the slogan. Where have you been?

BTW, "Stereotypes don't kill people, ....." I think I made my position pretty clear. You don't have to like it. You don't have to agree with it. It is my life and since I am sure that you are a fan of personal responsibility you will applaud my acceptance of the consequences of such a non threatening position.

I am also sure, therefore, that you have health insurance, since not having it would put an unacceptable burden on other citizens (since they are mandated to pay for your ER visits) if you were to accidentally shoot yourself?

[-] 0 points by craigdangit (326) 6 years ago

I'm glad you mentioned that. It's like you are writing the talking points yourself.

When did I ask people to pay for my ER visits? People aren't obligated to pay for products they did not agree to buy. I have never been to an ER and I would like instead to die if I require serious treatment.

You are essentially saying, Since George made Kenneth give me his Mustang, when I asked for a Honda, I am obligated to pay George's friend Bill a premium every month, who will ensure that Kenneth gets payed for the Mustang I ordered. Sounds good.

[-] 2 points by brightonsage (4494) 6 years ago

I don't have time to answer you right now. But I have read your post.

[-] 0 points by bemindful (23) 6 years ago

Only because if you criticize him you are automatically called a racist. I could give a shit that he is black- its because he is red and green that I don't agree with him. When I do consider the fact that he is black, I think it is sad that our first black president has been such a failure. I hope that in the future that another black man will be voted for president- someone honorable like Allen West, or with a similar views and love of the country and respect for the constitution like Herman Cain- men who would truly bring the country together. I hope that when any other black man runs in the future that people will not hold Obama's horrible term against them, just because they are black. Some people will, but I think most people know that its not because Obama is black that he has such a horrible record, it's that he wasn't vetted. I happen to think that nothing good comes of blame and divisiveness. The ends do not justify the means. And, I don't think he is "so cool".(although I did like it when he sang that little Al Green ditty- its about the only thing I've liked about this president) Otherwise, he's an arrogant, cry baby who doesn't know how to conduct foreign policy, economic policy, write a budget, or create a realistic energy policy. BTW, I do appreciate your humor even though we have totally opposite political views.

[-] 1 points by brightonsage (4494) 6 years ago

I am convinced that you are not a racist. I'll show you a failure George W.

If we had elected McCain, we could have seen a bigger one and if he had died in office,......?. I like you but, Allen West is certifiably mentally ill. Given time, he will prove it to you.

Now, if I could only think of a joke?

[-] 2 points by gestopomillyy (1695) 6 years ago

maybe killing 5 or 6 thousand americans in a occupation for oil, for instance.. starting a war with iran

[-] 2 points by craigdangit (326) 6 years ago

What about bombing Libyans for no reason?

[-] 2 points by gestopomillyy (1695) 6 years ago

yes that too

[-] 1 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 6 years ago

What Obama did with NATO in Libya was a short version of what Bush did to Iraq.

Warmonger presidential candidates everywhere! If your country ends with "stan" ... hide yo kids, hide yo wife, cause these presidents bombing everyone up in here.

[-] 1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 6 years ago

Yup, and the people all endorse them.

This country loves war!! Especially a few select sheep on this site.

Excuse me while I vomit.......

[-] 1 points by bobgnote (-55) 6 years ago

Obama is about as good at Republican politics, as the cast of MTV's Jackass was, at skating and BMX, compared to tony Hawk. Obama is almost as good at hoops, as a college player. He is good at bailing the Clinton-deregulated bankers, and awesome at ignoring the need for biomass research, which includes both hemp and switchgrass, but he didn't get that because he and the other former majority Democrats passed 2700 vain pages of Obamacare, never-minding the other, more pressing needs, which wouldn't have lost the Democrat majority in the House. Nobody beats GW, at lousy, since he went after 1958 CIA client Saddam, just because his Daddy set up Saddam and then Dick Cheney said it was necessary to go get Saddam, so Halliburton could profiteer. Nobody beats the Bushwack.

[-] -1 points by craigdangit (326) 6 years ago

True.... but we were allies with Khaddafi before O-Bomb-ya decided to annihilate the country instead of choosing peace.


[-] 1 points by GypsyKing (8719) 6 years ago

The trolls never tire of this same broken record theme. Oh well, I guess they're mentally challenged.

[-] 1 points by craigdangit (326) 6 years ago

Yep. Typical talking point, anyone who disagrees or raises a talking point I can't refute is mentally challenged.

No, it was a serious question. I invite you to explore the wonderful world of debate if you want to see how to do it, lol. There are some great you-tube videos on the subject I hear.

You can join in if you like, and discuss issues with me, I promise I won't bite. Or you can resort to name calling, demagoguery, and of course the old stand-by, hate.

Your choice :)

[-] 1 points by GypsyKing (8719) 6 years ago

Talking point? Exactly. That's all you have, you just get your little marching orders and get right in line like a buch cows to spew the same message in unison. You are pathetic excuses for human beings, devoid of courage or free will. Just empty machines spewing the same effluent, hollow men, hopeless.

And you are doing it to distract us while you try to split the womans vote with your willing tool, the equally hollow men in the mainstream media. You're all perverted.

[-] 1 points by craigdangit (326) 6 years ago

Oooh, you're getting angry. I must be doing something right :)

It won't be long now.

I asked a legitimate question, but sure, I'll role-play as a troll if you wish. My thread gets bumped either way. Ow! Stop! You're hurting me with your nasty words! It reminds me of ninth grade! I'm telling my employer! This wasn't as easy as they said it would be!

Now that you mention it, in between moonbat conspiracy theories, you mentioned something about "Us" "spewing the same message in unison". I am wondering, who is "us"? And what message do we keep spewing in unison? Whatever it is, it must be working, or you wouldn't be angry.

[-] 1 points by GypsyKing (8719) 6 years ago

You've gone the way of the mosquito, and I'm sure that's how everyone treats you! Way to raise the stature of mankind!

[-] 1 points by craigdangit (326) 6 years ago

What? Are you on something?

Only when people's ideological conclusions get shaken do they start name-calling wars.

[-] 1 points by mvjobless (370) 6 years ago

Continue to be exactly as he is today.

[-] 1 points by makeemstop (1) 6 years ago

Please tell me you're not serious... Obama is as much to blame as Bush, and clearly one could argue Obama has been even worse. All of the bailouts, including the 1st one Bush and Obama supported before Obama took office and every bailout Obama initiated while in office lined the pockets of Wall Street and Bankers. None of which served the purpose they were "said" to have been created for. All those that think "say" Obama is on our team, either works for Obama or just has no freaking clue.

Don't reply with moronic comments, stick to the facts to support your rebuttals. Good luck finding any!

[-] 1 points by craigdangit (326) 6 years ago

No, I agree. I realize Obama is just as bad as Bush, I just wanted to know what would make a hard-core Obama supporter realize it. I see too many of them on this board.


[-] 1 points by calliope (25) 6 years ago

I'd like to see what would happen if China or Afghanistan or any country had the most power.

[-] 2 points by craigdangit (326) 6 years ago

Not sure what this has to do with the thread...

If any country other than one that was controlled by the people had the most power, the power hungry people running it would use the power to their advantage.

[-] 1 points by Puzzlin (2898) 6 years ago

So, to compare these two, we should start with what exactly it was that Bush did badly to us. Let's list these here so we can get this thing rolling here.


Here's a good start on the particulars:

Article I Creating a Secret Propaganda Campaign to Manufacture a False Case for War Against Iraq.

Article II Falsely, Systematically, and with Criminal Intent Conflating the Attacks of September 11, 2001, With Misrepresentation of Iraq as a Security Threat as Part of Fraudulent Justification for a War of Aggression.

Article III Misleading the American People and Members of Congress to Believe Iraq Possessed Weapons of Mass Destruction, to Manufacture a False Case for War.

Article IV Misleading the American People and Members of Congress to Believe Iraq Posed an Imminent Threat to the United States.

Article V Illegally Misspending Funds to Secretly Begin a War of Aggression.

Article VI Invading Iraq in Violation of the Requirements of HJRes114.

Article VII Invading Iraq Absent a Declaration of War.

Article VIII Invading Iraq, A Sovereign Nation, in Violation of the UN Charter.

Article IX Failing to Provide Troops With Body Armor and Vehicle Armor

Article X Falsifying Accounts of US Troop Deaths and Injuries for Political Purposes

Article XI Establishment of Permanent U.S. Military Bases in Iraq

Article XII Initiating a War Against Iraq for Control of That Nation's Natural Resources

Article XIIII Creating a Secret Task Force to Develop Energy and Military Policies With Respect to Iraq and Other Countries

Article XIV Misprision of a Felony, Misuse and Exposure of Classified Information And Obstruction of Justice in the Matter of Valerie Plame Wilson, Clandestine Agent of the Central Intelligence Agency

Article XV Providing Immunity from Prosecution for Criminal Contractors in Iraq

Article XVI Reckless Misspending and Waste of U.S. Tax Dollars in Connection With Iraq and US Contractors

Article XVII Illegal Detention: Detaining Indefinitely And Without Charge Persons Both U.S. Citizens and Foreign Captives

Article XVIII Torture: Secretly Authorizing, and Encouraging the Use of Torture Against Captives in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Other Places, as a Matter of Official Policy

Article XIX Rendition: Kidnapping People and Taking Them Against Their Will to "Black Sites" Located in Other Nations, Including Nations Known to Practice Torture

Article XX Imprisoning Children

Article XXI Misleading Congress and the American People About Threats from Iran, and Supporting Terrorist Organizations Within Iran, With the Goal of Overthrowing the Iranian Government

Article XXII Creating Secret Laws

Article XXIII Violation of the Posse Comitatus Act

Article XXIV Spying on American Citizens, Without a Court-Ordered Warrant, in Violation of the Law and the Fourth Amendment

Article XXV Directing Telecommunications Companies to Create an Illegal and Unconstitutional Database of the Private Telephone Numbers and Emails of American Citizens

Article XXVI Announcing the Intent to Violate Laws with Signing Statements

Article XXVII Failing to Comply with Congressional Subpoenas and Instructing Former Employees Not to Comply

Article XXVIII Tampering with Free and Fair Elections, Corruption of the Administration of Justice

Article XXIX Conspiracy to Violate the Voting Rights Act of 1965

Article XXX Misleading Congress and the American People in an Attempt to Destroy Medicare

Article XXXI Katrina: Failure to Plan for the Predicted Disaster of Hurricane Katrina, Failure to Respond to a Civil Emergency

Article XXXII Misleading Congress and the American People, Systematically Undermining Efforts to Address Global Climate Change

Article XXXIII Repeatedly Ignored and Failed to Respond to High Level Intelligence Warnings of Planned Terrorist Attacks in the US, Prior to 911.

Article XXXIV Obstruction of the Investigation into the Attacks of September 11, 2001

Article XXXV Endangering the Health of 911 First Responders

The Puzzler

Are we clear?

[-] 5 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 6 years ago

Awesome list of facts. Bush was a terrible president. Hands down one of the worst and most corrupt. He lead a full scale attack on Iraq, a country that didn't attack us, was not threat, and had nothing to do with 9/11.

Remember when Bush was bombing countries that didn't attack us? I'm glad Obama doesn't do that. Oh, wait....

[-] 2 points by Puzzlin (2898) 6 years ago

Well, we haven't been attacked since 1941 by any country. And, generally, all the wars since have been largely failures. Korea, Vietnam, Beirut, Gulf War, Afghanistan, & Iraq. Iran next up? Good point.

The Puzzler

[-] -2 points by factsrfun (8485) from Phoenix, AZ 6 years ago

So you want to put in Romney? Just like Nader put in Bush. Think about it, do you really want to take that chance?

[-] 4 points by SparkyJP (1646) from Westminster, MD 6 years ago

The SCOTUS put bush in office - Not Nader !!

[-] 0 points by factsrfun (8485) from Phoenix, AZ 6 years ago

I like you sparky, but here's a poem about that, i worte it myself :)

Nader the traitor has crawled under a rock,

It’s the only place safe from the things that he wrot.

As millennia approached us, we had one last shot,

To keep the plant we’re on from getting, too damn hot.

But Nader thought better his name should be heard.

And Gore was left standing with only his word.

(you might say I'm a little pissed about it)

[-] -1 points by factsrfun (8485) from Phoenix, AZ 6 years ago

If Nader had not put his name on the ballot in FL, they could not of done it, Nader must take responsibility for what he did, not what others did, just him, and he said he was not going to do that, he said he would stay off the ballot anywhere it could tip the scale, but he lied like all the others who seek power for themselves, he lied when it mattered most, and killed the planet in the process.

[-] 2 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 6 years ago

No. Your assumption is ignorant. I didn't say one thing about Romney. If you look on your ballot in November, there will be more options than Romney and Obama.

Have fun voting for Goldman Sachs and War in 2012.

Also what are your thoughts on bombing countries that didn't attack us? Do you think laws don't matter? Should every country be allowed to drop bombs in any country they want? Is it only bad when republicans do it?

Also Ralph Nader doesn't have this power you speak of. We've talked about this.

[-] -2 points by factsrfun (8485) from Phoenix, AZ 6 years ago

Yes there are others that will not become prseident, just as Nader did not become president, and none of the ones this year will even get that close, Nader got not one of 270 votes needed. So you can keep trying to make us weak, leave us making no change, and just helping to put more Republicans in office, or we can do something different this time. The more people who think it's about them and their purity the better the GOP will do and the father OWS will be from it's goals.

[-] 2 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 6 years ago

Lulz whatever you have to tell yourself to not feel bad about supporting wars and Goldman Sachs.

Sorry innocent civilians that died from these bombs. I don't give a shit about principles. - that's what you sound like.

[-] 0 points by factsrfun (8485) from Phoenix, AZ 6 years ago

Look whatever you have to tell yourself, while you let people like Bush hold power and send us into wars and burn up the planet,

When the GOP are sending black helicopters into your bedroom, just tell yourself "I didn't vote for the warmonger" that should keep you safe from the long arm of the GOP.

Go ahead, play in the sandbox and let the Republicans run the country.

[-] 1 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 6 years ago


Yeah blame a guy who was 13 when Bush took office.

You're just off your rocker now.

Go to an Obama blog if you want to peddle your Obama 2012 support. You're blaming the wars on the people who strive for peace instead of the people voting for the war mongers... do you understand how dumb you look when you do that?

This is OWS and we know both parties work for the 1% and war. Hence the bailouts for the frauds and the continued war legacy under Obama. Hell, Obama just celebrated signing the Republican Jobs Act. A bill which opens investors to predatory fraud and repealed regulations put in place after ENRON. How many countries has Obama bombed since he took office? The number is higher than Bush.


[-] 1 points by craigdangit (326) 6 years ago

"Yeah, Trevor! vote for the black Republican, not the white republican!"

[-] 0 points by dantes443322 (148) 6 years ago

What about chemtrails and the fake moon landing? Was Bush involved?

[-] 1 points by gnomunny (6819) from St Louis, MO 6 years ago

Fake moon landing? Be careful here, lest you be labeled a "conspiracy nut."


(Check out his series of articles entitled "Wagging the Moondoggie.")

[-] -1 points by craigdangit (326) 6 years ago

"creating secret laws"?

Please ditch the conspiracy theories and we'll talk then.

[-] 1 points by Mowat (164) 6 years ago

Obama is already worse than Bush for being such a weak president.

He surrendered to AIPAC from day -100 (minus hundred) to get elected. Then Goldman Sachs and the other AIPAC supporters (most if not all financial institutions) helped him reach the presidency.

Now, he is just a foreground figure. 1%ers: the FED, Bankers, Hollywood, and AIPAC are in full control of everything.

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 6 years ago

appoint scalia thomas alito roberts

[-] 0 points by takim (23) 6 years ago

kagan and sotomayor,.............. two losers.

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 6 years ago


[-] 0 points by francismjenkins (3713) 6 years ago

Kagan and Sotomayor are two of our greatest justices ....

[-] 1 points by takim (23) 6 years ago

can you support that opinon with any facts? sotomayor referred to herself as " wise latina" . what would have been the press outrage if a caucasion nominee for judge referred to him/herself as a wise white person?

[-] 4 points by francismjenkins (3713) 6 years ago

Well, put it this way, it may be hard for the average white person to understand why a racial or ethnic minority would take such a view, but speaking for myself (as a white person), I at least try to imagine what it would be like if the shoe was on the other foot. What if, instead of being a member of the majority race (in a society that tends to focus on race so much, at least historically speaking), I was a member of the oppressed race? If overt racism suddenly becomes unpopular, but institutional racism is still built into the system, should my own views of myself and how I fit into it all, magically change overnight? I would say this is an absurd expectation.

[-] 0 points by craigdangit (326) 6 years ago

Yeah! Racism is okay if you are a minority.

[-] -2 points by takim (23) 6 years ago

ever hear the phrase "justice is blind" the job of if a judge is to uphold the constitution. thats judicial revue. legislating from the bench is called judicial activism. a judge is NOT supposed to inject their personal beliefs or experiences into a decision . a superme court judge takes 2 oaths, one is to support and defend the constituiton against all enemies foregn and domestic, the other oath is to administer justice with respect to persons and do equal right to the poor and the rich and that i will faithfully and impartially discharge all the duties incumbent upon me under the constitution and laws of the united states.

[-] 0 points by francismjenkins (3713) 6 years ago

Okay, let me put it another way, only a paranoid inbred fucktard would take what was almost certainly an informal loose statement made by Sotomayor, and read so much into it.

[-] 1 points by dantes443322 (148) 6 years ago

You still haven't answered why Kagan and Sotomayor are so great.

[-] 0 points by francismjenkins (3713) 6 years ago

You didn't ask me any questions .... but if you're curious, Google it. If you choose not to, I promise not to give a fuck. If your paranoid delusions cloud objective facts, I'm sorry, I'm not a shrink so I can't help you (but I suggest you go find one).

[-] 0 points by craigdangit (326) 6 years ago

Yeah! Good response! "La La La!!! I can't HEAR you!"

[-] -1 points by TheMisfit (48) 6 years ago

You have been well beaten down by the PC mafia. You don't even see the hypocrisy. It is perfectly okay to be proud of your race or heritage if you are anything but white; but if a white person is proud of the accomplishments that whites have contributed to the world, then you must be some sort of racist. Black pride, Latino pride, Asian pride etc. are all fine, but white pride is somehow evil. Madness.

[-] 1 points by francismjenkins (3713) 6 years ago

Dude, there will never be a day where you inbred intellectual midgets beat anything, except for your little dicks :)

I mean, you guys are the opposite of white pride. The dumbest and the most mentally unstable douche bags in our population is hardly something white people should take "pride" in.

Now run along, don't you have a klan rally to go to, oh wait, maybe you can go and patrol the border, and join your brethren, the low IQ tribe.

[-] 0 points by craigdangit (326) 6 years ago


I just read this thread, I have to say it was one of the most amusing on this whole site. Didn't you say something about objectivism a few posts ago? Now you're stereotyping white people in a racist rant. lol racist

[-] 1 points by francismjenkins (3713) 6 years ago

That's a good one ... considering I'm white :)

[-] 2 points by craigdangit (326) 6 years ago

You can be any race. Racism is merely reinforcing stereotypes about one race, good or bad, so it really doesn't matter which you are. You should look it up some time lol

[-] 1 points by francismjenkins (3713) 6 years ago

And yet here you are getting your panties in a bunch because some judge made a remark about hoping some wise Latina woman will do (whatever).

[-] 0 points by craigdangit (326) 6 years ago

Self hatred... tsk tsk. You likely would have started name calling again if I hadn't pointed it out to you. Partisan sheep fall into the same habits.

[-] 0 points by craigdangit (326) 6 years ago

Wrong again. Someone else brought that up.

And the remark, if you've ever bothered to hear it (Perhaps you assumed it was in good faith without hearing it, IDK) was concerning Wise Latinas making better decisions than white males. Sounds like racism if you have even a shred of objectivity, but hey, I guess that's asking too much of you lol

Now that your ideological beliefs have been shaken, you can go ahead and start name calling again. So predictable.

[-] 2 points by francismjenkins (3713) 6 years ago

Oh yeah, my ideological beliefs have been shaken alright. Let me guess, you wear super hero costumes at home? :)

[-] -2 points by takim (23) 6 years ago

That "informal loose statement" was said at a Berkeyly conference on hispanic judges. what she said was ............"I would hope that a wise latina woman, with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life" does that sound IMPARTIAL to you? the job of a supreme court justice is to apply the the constitution without personal beliefs , prejudices or experiences. sotomayor, by her own words, is a self indentified racist.

[-] 2 points by francismjenkins (3713) 6 years ago

Oooooo, oh no, the Hispanics are coming, stock up on the duck tape, canned food, and bottled water ... duh!

[-] -2 points by takim (23) 6 years ago

You did not address what sotomayor said in relationship to what a supreme court justice takes an oath to uphold. sotomayor , in her own words is a self proclaimed racist. and you? you're a jerk.

[-] -1 points by craigdangit (326) 6 years ago

lol.... ask him what he thinks of Clarence Thomas. He is smarter than to respond lol

...maybe not though.

[-] 0 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 6 years ago

Thank you, Bensdad.


[-] 1 points by amanofnoimportance (82) from Orlando, FL 6 years ago

Make an individual upset in some way.

[-] 0 points by JIFFYSQUID92 (-994) from Portland, OR 6 years ago

Drive to Canada with the pet dog tied to the roof of the car, be CEO of Bain Capital [http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/01/09/400404/romney-bain-bankrupts-billions/] and hide multiple band accounts offshore to evade US taxation.

Or: Publicly claim to be "The Decider" & "The Commander Guy," let Cheney appoint himself as "Vice" POTUS, and let the Military Industrial Complex start and conduct two bogus and boondoggle wars.

Or: Simply promote and defend Citizens United.

[-] 1 points by craigdangit (326) 6 years ago

Okay, I will officially allow you to reread the OP, because the word "Romney" appears no where in the OP. In your partisan anger, you confused the words "Romney" and "Bush". I asked what Obama would have to do to be as bad as Bush. So I am going to have to throw out the first two.

So, Obama can prolong the two wars, and start bombing another country, but Thank goodness he never used the phrase "The Decider" or "The Commander Guy" referring to himself! Those acts are completely comparable!

And thank goodness he said Citizen's United was baaad! Those few, important words completely excuse expanding the Bush wiretapping program, leaving Guantanamo open, bombing Libya and keeping taxes on the rich low!

[-] -1 points by JIFFYSQUID92 (-994) from Portland, OR 6 years ago

Are you retarded?

If YOU Don't Vote, YOU Don't Count!

No More Keys to THESE GOPs!!

[-] 2 points by craigdangit (326) 6 years ago

You're welcome to edit if you like; if your mom sees it, it may hurt her feelings.

[-] 1 points by craigdangit (326) 6 years ago

Yep, I just keep spouting parroted slogans like a total imbecile. Also, FYI the word "R**" is considered to be a slur against the mentally handicapped.

[-] 0 points by betuadollar (-313) 6 years ago

The only difference is the lack of Texan-as-Cracker image; Obama has proved to be every bit as morally corrupt. And people will eventually tire of that never changing black suit image as well.

[-] 1 points by craigdangit (326) 6 years ago

I find that extremely offensive, please refrain from using racial slurs.

[-] 0 points by betuadollar (-313) 6 years ago

According to Black America, a vote for Romney or Newt is the racial equivalent of voting for Mr. Cracker; well, guess what bro...

[-] 1 points by craigdangit (326) 6 years ago

No, black America is not racist like you are.

[-] 0 points by betuadollar (-313) 6 years ago

That's absolutely not true - they are more racist than we have ever been.

[-] 0 points by JonFromSLC (-107) from West Valley City, UT 6 years ago

Keep doing what he's doing. He's on track to be twice as bad. Just keep it up! Pretty soon we'll be at 20 Trillion in debt. YAY!

[-] 0 points by craigdangit (326) 6 years ago

I like again how someone downvoted your post but could not respond with any counter argument.

[-] 0 points by Yin7 (44) 6 years ago

Have a Lobotomy.



[-] -2 points by Pequod (17) 6 years ago

Its neither one's fault. People want entitlements and gifts from government but they also dont want to pay for it.

Its impossible to get elected by telling the truth. We dont want to hear it.

[-] -3 points by takim (23) 6 years ago

obama is already a BAD president.adding more to the deficit in 3 1/2 years that all the preceding presidents.

[-] -1 points by craigdangit (326) 6 years ago

I like how two people downvoted this comment, yet no one was able to respond coherently.

[-] -1 points by takim (23) 6 years ago

the can down vote but they cant refute.

[-] 1 points by craigdangit (326) 6 years ago

Happened again. lol