Psychoblues
Senior Member
Republicans love to boast about their president, President Bush, being consistent. He says what he means, they say, and he means what he says. His faith, which he conveniently found after his life hit rock bottom, is, to hear it, his guide. But above all else, he's consistent. And they may be right, as Wednesday's news proved. In vetoing legislation that had the potential to improve - and even save - lives, the president again proved his supporters right. He has been consistent. Bush has consistently supported pain. Consistently supported suffering. Consistently supported death.
But that's not all. When announcing his veto of the legislation, Bush said, "It crosses a moral boundary that our decent society needs to respect", later adding "America must never abandon our fundamental morals." Bush, therefore, has also consistently been a hypocrite. And so has his party. Your suffering, after all, is their electoral gain. Your suffering excites their base. Your suffering doesn't matter to them.
You know what "crosses a moral boundary that our decent society needs to respect", Mr. President? Sending our armed forces into Iraq based on a pack of lies. Then, once they're there, denying them the proper equipment while serving them spoiled food and contaminated water. Then, once they return home - if they're lucky enough to return home - cutting their benefits while seeking to redefine what constitutes a "veteran" in order to further cut costs. Those things, to me, cross a moral boundary that our decent society needs to respect.
You know what "crosses a moral boundary that our decent society needs to respect", Mr. President? Overseeing widespread human rights violations at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay. Operating secret prisons. Sending terror suspects for detention and interrogation to nations known for torturing prisoners. Using chemical weapons in Iraq while claiming at one point to have invaded the nation to prevent it from developing weapons of mass destruction. Looking the other way as a few bad apples turn their time in Iraq into a civilian killing spree, while the Pentagon relaxes recruitment guidelines so much so that the Southern Poverty Law Center has said that hate groups are infiltrating the military. Those things, to me, cross a moral boundary that our decent society needs to respect.
You know what "crosses a moral boundary that our decent society needs to respect", Mr. President? Picking up a guitar while thousands died along the Gulf Coast. Then, in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, using firemen as props instead of lifesavers. And claiming that "I don't think anyone anticipated the breach of the levees" despite the fact that the president was warned ahead of time - in grave terms - that disaster was fast approaching. Not only that, but also asking no questions and saying "We are fully prepared" during these briefings. Those things, to me, cross a moral boundary that our decent society needs to respect.
You know what "crosses a moral boundary that our decent society needs to respect", Mr. President? Claiming to be a "compassionate conservative" and promoting a "culture of life" while, when you were governor of Texas, presiding over 131 executions. "I've said once and I've said a lot that in every case," you said, "we've adequately answered innocence or guilt." You added that defendants "had full access to the courts. They've had full access to a fair trial." How, Mr. President, do you square your statements with the fact that of those cases, 43 of the 131 defense attorneys were later disciplined or disbarred for their legal ineptitude. Some didn't even present evidence. This, to me, crosses a moral boundary that our decent society needs to respect.
You know what "crosses a moral boundary that our decent society needs to respect", Mr. President? Thanking your financial backers by putting many of them in high-ranking government positions. Positions with responsibility for, among other things, mine safety. Then, to further scratch the back of the energy industry that had so supported your campaigns, relaxing regulations and slashing budgets. What's more, looking the other way as violations rose at the Sago mine. I'm sure you remember what happened there, don't you, Mr. President? Those things, to me, cross a moral boundary that our decent society needs to respect.
But this isn't about respecting moral boundaries is it, Mr. President? No, it's about pandering to your base, those stupid Americans who, in some cases, amount to a scant 3 percent. What's more, pandering to your base using arguments which not only don't hold water, but also aren't supported by a majority of Americans. At every turn - medicinal marijuana, forcing Americans to seek less expensive prescription drugs from Canada, end-of-life issues and now stem cell research - this administration has taken a pro-pain, pro-suffering, pro-death stance. And for what? Certainly not political expediency, as America isn't on the administration's side on this issue, as it isn't on so many others. In fact, the commercials this fall ought to write themselves. No, this was done to appease the extremist fringe that still manages to support this president. Congratulations, guys, your continued ignorance can remain responsible for continued suffering.
"If this bill would have become law, American taxpayers would, for the first time in our history, be compelled to fund the deliberate destruction of human embryos," Bush said Wednesday with his trademark smug arrogance. "And I'm not going to allow it." Tough talk from a president whose cowboy diplomacy has been silenced in the face of global events beyond his intelligence. Tough talk from a president whose administration just had its bluff called by North Korea. Tough talk from a president who is shirking his responsibilities as a global diplomat because he would rather attack Iran than work for peace. I suppose it's far easier to talk tough when those on the receiving end are innocent Americans. So, when you look around at the millions who could have benefited from government-sponsored stem cell research and who instead suffer, thank a Republican. Your suffering doesn't matter to them.
Psychoblues
But that's not all. When announcing his veto of the legislation, Bush said, "It crosses a moral boundary that our decent society needs to respect", later adding "America must never abandon our fundamental morals." Bush, therefore, has also consistently been a hypocrite. And so has his party. Your suffering, after all, is their electoral gain. Your suffering excites their base. Your suffering doesn't matter to them.
You know what "crosses a moral boundary that our decent society needs to respect", Mr. President? Sending our armed forces into Iraq based on a pack of lies. Then, once they're there, denying them the proper equipment while serving them spoiled food and contaminated water. Then, once they return home - if they're lucky enough to return home - cutting their benefits while seeking to redefine what constitutes a "veteran" in order to further cut costs. Those things, to me, cross a moral boundary that our decent society needs to respect.
You know what "crosses a moral boundary that our decent society needs to respect", Mr. President? Overseeing widespread human rights violations at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay. Operating secret prisons. Sending terror suspects for detention and interrogation to nations known for torturing prisoners. Using chemical weapons in Iraq while claiming at one point to have invaded the nation to prevent it from developing weapons of mass destruction. Looking the other way as a few bad apples turn their time in Iraq into a civilian killing spree, while the Pentagon relaxes recruitment guidelines so much so that the Southern Poverty Law Center has said that hate groups are infiltrating the military. Those things, to me, cross a moral boundary that our decent society needs to respect.
You know what "crosses a moral boundary that our decent society needs to respect", Mr. President? Picking up a guitar while thousands died along the Gulf Coast. Then, in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, using firemen as props instead of lifesavers. And claiming that "I don't think anyone anticipated the breach of the levees" despite the fact that the president was warned ahead of time - in grave terms - that disaster was fast approaching. Not only that, but also asking no questions and saying "We are fully prepared" during these briefings. Those things, to me, cross a moral boundary that our decent society needs to respect.
You know what "crosses a moral boundary that our decent society needs to respect", Mr. President? Claiming to be a "compassionate conservative" and promoting a "culture of life" while, when you were governor of Texas, presiding over 131 executions. "I've said once and I've said a lot that in every case," you said, "we've adequately answered innocence or guilt." You added that defendants "had full access to the courts. They've had full access to a fair trial." How, Mr. President, do you square your statements with the fact that of those cases, 43 of the 131 defense attorneys were later disciplined or disbarred for their legal ineptitude. Some didn't even present evidence. This, to me, crosses a moral boundary that our decent society needs to respect.
You know what "crosses a moral boundary that our decent society needs to respect", Mr. President? Thanking your financial backers by putting many of them in high-ranking government positions. Positions with responsibility for, among other things, mine safety. Then, to further scratch the back of the energy industry that had so supported your campaigns, relaxing regulations and slashing budgets. What's more, looking the other way as violations rose at the Sago mine. I'm sure you remember what happened there, don't you, Mr. President? Those things, to me, cross a moral boundary that our decent society needs to respect.
But this isn't about respecting moral boundaries is it, Mr. President? No, it's about pandering to your base, those stupid Americans who, in some cases, amount to a scant 3 percent. What's more, pandering to your base using arguments which not only don't hold water, but also aren't supported by a majority of Americans. At every turn - medicinal marijuana, forcing Americans to seek less expensive prescription drugs from Canada, end-of-life issues and now stem cell research - this administration has taken a pro-pain, pro-suffering, pro-death stance. And for what? Certainly not political expediency, as America isn't on the administration's side on this issue, as it isn't on so many others. In fact, the commercials this fall ought to write themselves. No, this was done to appease the extremist fringe that still manages to support this president. Congratulations, guys, your continued ignorance can remain responsible for continued suffering.
"If this bill would have become law, American taxpayers would, for the first time in our history, be compelled to fund the deliberate destruction of human embryos," Bush said Wednesday with his trademark smug arrogance. "And I'm not going to allow it." Tough talk from a president whose cowboy diplomacy has been silenced in the face of global events beyond his intelligence. Tough talk from a president whose administration just had its bluff called by North Korea. Tough talk from a president who is shirking his responsibilities as a global diplomat because he would rather attack Iran than work for peace. I suppose it's far easier to talk tough when those on the receiving end are innocent Americans. So, when you look around at the millions who could have benefited from government-sponsored stem cell research and who instead suffer, thank a Republican. Your suffering doesn't matter to them.
Psychoblues
