Third Party & Independents: Archives

Well, to be fair, Kerry made some doozies in his acceptance speech, too (“hair pollution” and that line about how we must “conduct terrorist operations”).

I’m not sure pointing out Bush’s discomfort with the faculty of speech helps any more.

-Cf

Its par for the course with this guy; and to think there are people (quite a few actually) that actually want to keep him around to serve four more years. The man is walking insult to every person who considers him or herself learned.

It’s just absolutely incredible how far we’ve fallen intellectually as a society to even entertain re-electing this intellectually-challenged man with a proclivity for “misspeaking,” and “mis-thinking” to be our President.

Post this like one make me almost wish for Bush to win in november. I can only compare the left’s attitude toward Bush with Red Sox’s fans hate for the yankees. Its becoming almost comical, guys.

Its actually rather dumbfounding that someone would take the time to write an article about something this trivial, let alone creating a post to link to that article. Lets try to move the level of debate in this nation UP to talking about ideas. Between these garbage and the swift boat veterans for truth nonesense, its almost enough to make one want to turn off politics all together.

Doesn’t my liberal disapproval of this thread - and indeed, my comments on Kerry’s own verbal gaffes - help our side any, Misha?

-Cf

It’s all in good fun, Misha. I’m sorry that finding that quote funny is not at the level you want. I agree to some extent but we all need humor in our politics. There will be shortage of it come November I’m afraid.

CF- Yes, thank you!! Thankfully, there have also been people on the right to come out against the swift-boat add (from John McCain to Pat Buchanan!). Yet, doesnt it make you worry how large a % of this country are so partisan that they cant see the comical nature of their own one-sided view of the two political parties and their leadership? I am convinced that if the day before the election we discovered unquestioned evidence that John kerry was a canibal or that George W. Bush had killed 3 people, either would get no less than 30% of the vote.

CF,

Kerry has said some “doozies”. I find your “conduct terrorist operations” as funny as the Bush quote. Like I said before though, it’s all in good fun. I won’t vote against Bush just because he bumbles his words. I’m on the fence about voting for Kerry still though. I’m reading some books about him now to help decide.

Misha,

John McCain is impressive to me. Loyal to his party enough to support it, but not so loyal as to get on board with stupid attack ads, or even idiotic things like the Federal Marriage Amendment. We need more people like him in charge. Playing What-If with him and Bush in the 2000 primaries is big fun to me. How would John McCain have handled something like 9/11?

Adam- I opposed McCain in 2000 because of campaign finance reform (I think this election season has proven me right on that one), but I strongly regret opposing him now. After all, Bush ended up signing campaign finance reform anyway (flip flopper!), and McCain would have been a superior president to Bush in every respect. Maybe McCain will make a run for it in 2008- if he does, he will have my support this time around.

I’m actually rather annoyed that nobody in the GOP gave Jethro Bodine a serious primary challenge this time around. WTH are fiscally conservative Republicans thinking? Are they “misunderestimating” him?

But here we go: the premise of Bush being dumb is contradictory to the Moore/Soros premise of Bush being some sinister genius Nazi antichrist figure trying to take over the world.

Jethro Bodine does, after all, mean well. He even knows how to cipher! Naught, naught, carry the naught…

When they talk about GW being dumb they talk about how he was just a party frat boy at Yale. But I would think he would have to have some smarts to score a Harvard MBA.

Doesn’t help him speak though!

Misha,

If I had to vote Republican, John McCain would be my choice. Of course, I was too young to vote in 2000. It seems to long ago now anyway.

Ciggy,

That’s an interesting point about Dumb vs. Nazi Bush. I tend to go more towards dumb Bush. Bush is not dumb of course, but I don’t think he’s as smart as some presidents have been. It’s Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Rove who worry me though.

Ciggy,

But here we go: the premise of Bush being dumb is contradictory to the Moore/Soros premise of Bush being some sinister genius Nazi antichrist figure trying to take over the world.

Not sure I follow. I haven’t heard either Moore or Soros call him a “genius” or anything remotely close to that. He doesn’t have to be that to have imperial ambitions, does he? Look, as much as we on the left harp on his bungling communication skills, it’s not to say we think he is literally retarded. We just expect more from a president. We all misspeak, even Kerry (as pointed out), but Dubya goes above and beyond.

Ciggy, I’ve never heard anyone call Bush a “genius”, or even “smart” (not on the left, and, interestingly, not from the right either). Your whole “Dummy/genius - which is it!?” argument is a classic straw man. I’ve never really understood what makes you think anyone on the left thinks Bush is smart. We all on the left pretty much agree that he’s profoundly dumb in many important ways, particularly on issues like foreign policy, economics, world history, law, and science.

Politically, however, he is quite clever, and that’s a skill (dare I say a type of intelligence?) that cannot be underestimated. Unlike many of my compatriots on the left, I think Bush is actually in charge. He doesn’t make a lot of proactive decisions (probably not any, I’ll wager), leaving most of that to his team, but I’d also bet that Bush himself actually decided to go to war with Iraq. As another example, when there is a dispute between two cabinet members, the President himself has to break the impasse with a real decision. In other words, Cheney and Rummy can’t do it for him: Bush himself has to actually decide to ignore Colin Powell over and over again.

The fact that Bush is (a) policy-dumb, (b) politically astute, and (c) actually in charge is pretty much the most logical explanation of why our country’s current policies and recent history looks like the handiwork of an dullard - because it is.

-Cf

Here’s a big doozie I just heard about:

During the time Bush was supposedly AWOL he was working for southern segregationist George Wallace! This was claimed by someone CNN interviewed in a news special who served with Bush in the national guard(records do back this up actually).

At the same time John Kerry was serving this country honorably, George Bush jr. even then was working to undermine the rights of Americans to vote.

Does anyone see a cycle??????

ANY REPUBLICANS CARE TO RESPOND??? Please do.

Does that mean that GW was a Democrat? I believe Wallace was running as one in ‘72.

Adam, Rove is out of the picture, and Cheney almost is (there better be a good next-in-line for when his ticker finally goes on terminal leave). Rumsfeld ticks me off to no end for the non-plan he non-executed after the non-victory in Iraq.

Bush isn’t someone I’d hang out with socially, but I don’t visualize him in secret satanic rituals like Moore and Soros do either.

jdwear,

I haven’t heard either Moore or Soros call him a “genius” or anything remotely close to that. He doesn’t have to be that to have imperial ambitions, does he?

To get anywhere near accomplishing what many geniuses have failed at, anyone with such ambitions would have to have genius I.Q. as a minimum entry requirement into the game. Bush was dragged out of an alcoholic fog and cleaned up to be the Republican legacy of his father, where it’s clear he would rather just be something on the order of a slightly salty and rough-around-the-edges baseball coach, or the manager of a mildly-sexually-harrassing car dealership. I wouldn’t discount family pressure in him having taken on the job that he did.

CF,

Your whole “Dummy/genius - which is it!?” argument is a classic straw man.

In order for that man to turn to straw, Moore’s insipid tabloid pseudoreportage would have to turn to even more self-contradiction than it already is. He ascribes megalomania on the part of a guy who can’t even pronounce “nuclear”, or properly chew pretzels. I know it’s required for you as a partisan to turn this around on anyone at all who questions the methodology of the character assassination of the man you guys obsess over with hatred every night, but I don’t feel compelled to follow anyone down the road of self-contradiction or other fallacy when they try to make a political point.

Politically, however, he is quite clever, and that’s a skill (dare I say a type of intelligence?) that cannot be underestimated.

There you go contradicting yourself again. First you say he’s an idiot, and now you say he’s “quite clever”. Will the real Democrat partisan hyperbole please stand up?

I’d also bet that Bush himself actually decided to go to war with Iraq.

And that’s supposed to be “quite clever”, even “politically”? Is it just every two seconds that you Kerryites flip-flop, or every three?

The fact that Bush is (a) policy-dumb, (b) politically astute, and (c) actually in charge is pretty much the most logical explanation of why our country’s current policies and recent history looks like the handiwork of an dullard - because it is.

Policy-dumb contradicts “politically astute”. “Actually in charge” contradicts how scripted the war was by PNAC, a.k.a. “the non-thinking ‘think’ tank”. Current policies and recent history are the handiwork of a dullard indeed, and one who is led around like a toy balloon by people who are even DUMBER. And in spite of all that, I still find fault with the way Michael Moore insults the intelligence of everyone who, out of “car wreck curiosity” went and saw his mentally-masturbating excuse of a film.

There must be better ways to criticize the Republicans than Moorean “shit-stirring”. It drags your party down to the level of “Swift Boat Veterans for the Truth” in their synchronicitous apparition, of late. (They in turn are Karma on Kerry for having called his fellow-veterans “war criminals”. An eye for an eye, and a lie for a lie, dontcha know.)

Le Plant: I have no idea. Rather than throwing mental spaghetti at the wall to see if it sticks, why don’t you scare up a rare creature known as “facts” and bring them to the fore, for discussion? Wouldn’t that be a refreshing change?

> Policy-dumb contradicts “politically astute”.

Ciggy, there is no contradiction. Perhaps you are not appreciating the difference between “policy” and “politics”. Bush doesn’t understand policies but he does know how to get elected. He doesn’t understand economics, but he does understand that lowering taxes wins votes. He doesn’t understand world history, but he does know how to screw his political rivals. He doesn’t understand the Constitution, but he knows that advocating stupid crap like the FMA will shore up his conservative base and force the Democrats into a corner.

Also, since when does megalomania require intelligence?

Anyway, if my sentences seem to you to contain a non-stop barrage of contradictions, then perhaps you should take a deep breath and say to yourself “Hm, maybe Chris isn’t a split personality, maybe he’s a rational person who is actually trying to say something.” The idea that there are different ways of being intelligent is hardly an outrageous concept.

-Cf

> ANY REPUBLICANS CARE TO RESPOND??? Please do.

I’m a Democrat, and I think your story about Bush and Wallace is a crock. Sorry, I just tell it like it is.

-Cf

Thanks, Chris, for your spririted defense of our President :). I’ve informed Rove and your check’s in the mail.

The thing is that doesn’t matter. Not the tiniest bit.

Unlike his opponent, Bush is running on his record in government—not what as he did as a young man. Even if Bush had bugged out of National Guard Service to don a pillowcase and work for the Klan (alongside Senator Byrd), it would be be utterly irrelevant at this point because we know the man’s record as President, which is a record of appointing talented members of minorities to the most highly placed cabinet positions in presidential history. That is a fact. Even Clinton, who rarely missed a chance to appear inclusive and pander, doesn’t come close to Bush in this regard.

Can you imagine Bush & Kerry in a debate with Ralph Nader? That would be dope!

But I would think he would have to have some smarts to score a Harvard MBA.

With a C average? My understanding is, you have to party pretty hard to get a C average at Harvard Business School. And judging by the string of failed business he ran, I suspect his professors were being kind.

I have to go with dumb, but politically astute. This guy grew up in politics, and knows all the right people.

Unlike his opponent, Bush is running on his record in government

I wish. His platform is: vote for me or the terrorists will cut your head off.

I’d love to see him run on issues: a net job loss, record breaking deficits, an unnecessary war (Iraq), an unfinished war (Afghanistan), an unstable economy, four million more people without health care insurance, no plan for dealing with a looming Social Security crisis, a weak dollar, lack of action on basic homeland security issues, lack of serious commitment on vital foreign policy issues (China/Taiwan, Israel/Palestine, and North Korea), an energy policy that guarantees thralldom to Middle Eastern dictators, inability to unite our allies against terrorists, inability to unite Americans, etc…

And, he’s dumb as a stump.

CF,

Perhaps you are not appreciating the difference between “policy” and “politics”.

Losing sight of politics while executing policy is exactly the sort of idiocy Bush is prone to fall into. And in this recent case, politics would have saved his ass had he kept them in mind.

Bush doesn’t understand policies but he does know how to get elected.

Easily contradicted by the Iraq war itself. That’s no way to “get elected”.

He doesn’t understand economics, but he does understand that lowering taxes wins votes.

More political stupidity on his part, because in reality it costs votes. Especially when the rich are screaming “TAX ME, TAX ME, TAX ME” and carrying on from within the safety of their limousines over at the Democratic Convention. A smart politician would have given the limo-libs what they demand: not by increasing the tax RATE, but by pulling the loopholes out from under them and the shelters out from over them. Expose them to the full wrath of what they plan for the IRS to unleash on the middle class, and then they’ll have gotten a heapin’ helpin’ of nothing but Karma.

And he’d have won votes in the process. THAT would have been politically SMART.

He doesn’t understand world history, but he does know how to screw his political rivals.

He couldn’t have even known France and Germany were setup to be rivals—if he did know, he’d have at least made some attempt at a plan toward mitigating the anger the PNAC Pipe Dream would have inspired, in them.

Again: politically stupid, not politically astute, as you ascribe to him.

He doesn’t understand the Constitution, but he knows that advocating stupid crap like the FMA will shore up his conservative base and force the Democrats into a corner.

I’ve yet to meet a conservative who stays up late at night worrying that gays might be about to marry each other. Sure, some talk radio pundits blather on about it, Michael Medved especially, but real people have better things to do than obsess over that. It’s another example of Bush miscalculating—overestimating exactly how intolerant his “base” is.

since when does megalomania require intelligence?

Divorce political acumen from megalomania, and you have the typical two year-old grabbing his blocks and shouting “MINE!” If you fear such individuals, then stay away from daycare centers.

The idea that there are different ways of being intelligent is hardly an outrageous concept.

The way you present it in Bush’s case, it’s a self-contradictory one. The one and only thing Bush has really accomplished politically, is to put a great fear in you of “misunderestimating” him. Karl Rove’s one shining star of “gotcha” in the past four years.

Ciggy, hey, look I’m not saying that he’s as politically astute as, say, Reagan or Clinton. Obviously not. You seem to think that we all think he’s some kind of political “genius”. He isn’t by a long shot, but he’s not just a figurehead either.

Anyway, I agree that his political failings are many, but they often are the result of policy failures.

Let’s look at your Iraq war example: It was not his political skills which let him down, but rather his lack of understanding of diplomacy, intelligence, and military strategy. His bad policies are what has led to our country’s current troubles in Iraq, and it is those bad policies which largely undermine his current political situation.

> Bush has really accomplished politically,
> is to put a great fear in you of
> “misunderestimating” him

Now who’s being contradictory? If he’s as politically dumb as you allege, then there’s nothing to underestimate.

-Cf

It was not his political skills which let him down, but rather his lack of understanding of diplomacy, intelligence, and military strategy.

He was wide-eyed and credulous when the King of Jordan warned that Saddam would USE the WMDs if the Americans invaded. Well that would have proved they were there, rather dramatically, and Bush very stupidly thought that Saddam would be that stupid.

Even though the little road trip up to Baghdad from Kuwait was rather quick, it still gave Saddam PUH-LENTY of time to get rid of the WMDs. And now, rather than a little game of hide-and-seek with Hans Blix within Iraq itself, the WMDs are “out there” like the Truth on the X-Files. That is stupidity upon stupidity, or stupidity squared. One cannot possibly “misunderestimate” Jethro Bodine because he is a BOX OF ROCKS.

But…. he means well. Just like Jethro Bodine, he has no malice when he rides his giant four-wheeler over the top of everybody’s Lexus. He’s just immitating something he saw in a movie once, and said “HAWT DAWG!”

It’s maddening, yes. Europe is frustrated, yes. They are especially wounded that their little Saddamite slush funds went away without assurances from Washington that they would be replaced (as Bush SENIOR probably would have done with a few discreet phone calls). But attempting to take over the world? Only Soros can say that without fighting back a smirk.

His bad policies are what has led to our country’s current troubles in Iraq, and it is those bad policies which largely undermine his current political situation.

Which only bolsters my argument that he is politically dumb. Not JUST policy dumb, but dumb all the way around. Not evil; not the antichrist; not Hitler; and no, not even Richard Nixon. Just… dumb. Think of Woody from “Cheers”, as President. He’s not going to hack little babies to pieces in his basement or make clever deals with the Saudis to sell out America—he’ll just be sold a pile of doodoo by snake oil pseudo-think-tanks and say “okay, let’s go for it”.

If he’s as politically dumb as you allege, then there’s nothing to underestimate.

There isn’t. But your friends in the other half of the one mainstream establishment party, your binary partisan twin, the yin to your yang, they have you believing that there is. Moore himself is now convinced of it.

Ciggy, I don’t know where you get the idea that all Democrats worship at the alter of Moore. That’s crazy talk.

But strip out all the adjectives, and I’m close to agreeing with you’re assessment of Bush: “Think of Woody from “Cheers”, as President”.

But he’s got some pretty bright and politically astute guys backing him up and selling him the snake oil.

Ciggy, I don’t know where you get the idea that all Democrats worship at the alter of Moore.

Tell Tom Daschle to stop hugging him, or Jimmy Carter to stop inviting him to sit next to him at the Convention, and maybe your argument will appear a tad less vacuous.

But he’s got some pretty bright and politically astute guys backing him up and selling him the snake oil.

PNAC? They make Bush HIMSELF look smart, by comparison. Rummy? The guy who thought everything would just sort of fall into place magically once Saddam was gone? Aschcroft? Playing patriotic karaoke at press conferences, and obsessing over a singer’s droopy tit while there are terrorists lurking out there?

The only one in that inner circle of power who doesn’t have grits and gravy for brains is Dick Cheney, and he’s one bacon doublecheeseburger away from his funeral anyway.

George H. W. has ten times the brains of his son, and a glorious Gulf War victory under his belt, and he couldn’t even get a second term. W doesn’t have a snowball’s chance in Iraq of anything other than packing up the truck in January for the long ride back to Crawford.

In other posts it seems I pick Kerry apart more, but that’s just because I know as sure as I’m looking at this screen right now, that he’s GOING to be President. He might as well just take over now, and give W some extra vacation time.

I’m already in opposition mode to a Democratic administration which I’m also fairly certain is going to go back on its promise to “only tax the rich” and come after the middle class………………………………………………………………..again.

I think instinctual, not intelligent, is the best word that describes Mr. Bush.

He instinctively thought Saddam would just leave all the WMDs where they were if he invaded?

That’s actually an interesting point, Ciggy. If the invasion was all about disarming Iraq, why did the military bypass all the known WMD sites? Why did they wait weeks in many cases to secure the sites? Bad planning? An overlooked detail? C’mon!

I would say no planning worth speaking of, and no consideration given to the question of “what if Saddam tries to evacuate the WMDs out of there under cover, while troops are invading?”

It’s one more argument for why a conventional approach to this was not appropriate.

In the Special Ops world, if you have squishy intel and want to determine if further action is required, what you do is go in on a reconnaissance mission, with devices sufficient to nail down the hard facts about what you’re trying to determine. Perhaps a few Navy SEAL teams with cameras, geiger counters, chemical detection devices, etc., on a few covert missions here and there, just to verify what Hans Blix was saying (in the spirit of “TRUST BUT VERIFY”), could have prevented enormous embarrassment for the administration.

But then, that would amount to “thinking”.

An interesting entry appeared in one of the military blogs I read written by the grunts in Iraq. here is the blog’s address.

Interview With An Iraqi
One of the soldiers in my Plt has a little hand held micro-cassette recorder. He uses it to record messages back and forth to his wife back home. So out of extreme boredom I borrowed it from him, and I asked the first English speaking Iraqi person I could find, a couple questions. (Note: This interview was NOT taken at gunpoint. I was completely un-armed when I interviewed this individual.)

QUESTION: What do you personally think of the US being here in Iraq and what seems to be the overall Iraq feelings about that?
ANSWER: I wish that American Forces stay here in Iraq for a long time. As you know until now, there is no security in Iraq, so we need American Forces to stay here in Iraq with the help of police guys and the help of the ING guys. I think that the situation will be better. Most of the people they like the American Forces to stay here in Iraq, just to capture the bad guys, and just to get rid of the dangerous weapons. So we need American forces to stay here for along time in order to give the Iraqi’s freedom and security.
QUESTION: What was it like here in Iraq before the war when Saddam was in power? ANSWER: The situation was very bad. Saddam Hussein prevented us to travel to any country. If you want to travel to another country, you can’t travel. Because traveling is very expensive also Saddam Hussein would collect money from you, you must pay the government 700,000 dinar. Too much expensive for a person to travel outside Iraq. We also have no freedom, we cannot speak, we cannot express our feelings towards our government. If you speak about political issues, they gonna arrest you and put you in prison. Three days ago I went to the passport office, I saw many people there, they were fighting with each other, they were shouting, and they don’t stand in a line, so some of the workers that work in the passport office, they charge the people to pay, bribery, to get your passport. If you don’t like to stand in a line, or like to stay with the people in the crowd, you should pay at least 100 dollars to the worker, to the employee, in order to get your passport. So this is what they did.
QUESTION: Why did all these people want to get passports?
ANSWER: They don’t like to stay here. Some of them have relatives outside Iraq. There is no security here, and it’s dangerous here in Iraq, so they want to go outside.
QUESTION: Do you think The U.S. did the right thing by coming over?
ANSWER: Yes the United States did the right thing about coming here. As I told you, to give the Iraqi people freedom. Because we don’t have any freedom before the war. We can’t speak, we cannot talk about the government, we can’t talk about the president. We are restricted here in Iraq.
QUESTION: What do you think of people that protest us being here?
ANSWER: I think some of them are crazy, because why are they protesting? They protest for nothing. Why they protest? American Forces came over here in order to help them. I consider American Forces a friend to the Iraqi people, not an enemy, there is no need to protest.
QUESTION: What was it like here in Iraq, when we first came over and started kicking some serious ass in the beginning of the war?
ANSWER: The situation was very bad. Most of the people they were stealing, killing each other and the people were living in chaos. But the American Forces came here and they established everything, they gave the Iraqi people the right to vote, to choose their president, to choose their mayor, they help the Iraqi to build their country. But before the war the situation was very bad. Most other people tried to kill each other, they tried to steal, they tried to fight. But after the war, when American forces came here, they established everything, they help the Iraqi’s, they helped by giving Iraq money to build their country. They fixed the water pipeline, they fix the power and electricity, they help the students, and they fix many schools. They paint many schools here in Iraq. So, they do a very good job.
QUESTION: Is it less dangerous here in Mosul now than it was in the past? How dangerous is Mosul now?
ANSWER: To be honest with you the situation is still dangerous. Because, many people came from Irania, and they enter inside Iraq. They use Islam and they use that banner to fight against the American Forces, and what they call a jihad, and Islam doesn’t say that, believe me they are far away from Islam. Islam does not say fight your brother or kill the innocent people. So I think their opinions are not true. Their ideas are not true.
QUESTION: Who seems to be the ones causing the most trouble here?
ANSWER: I think most of the people who came to fight against the American Forces came from Iran, they came from Syria, they came from Yemen, they have another party, I think they belong to Al Quida. They came here to fight, but believe me there is no need to fight. You should start with building this country without any fighting, you should start with peace and have people live in security and peace.
QUESTION: What are some of the major improvements you’ve seen here in Mosul and Iraq, now that the United States is here?
ANSWER: They fixed many things here in Iraq, they paved many streets, they built many schools, they fixed the power, electricity, the fixed the water pipe.
QUESTION: What do you think of those sickos that are making the home videos of POW be-headings?
ANSWER: I think this is a very bad thing. To show the world we are brave, we want to cut off the heads of the people that want to work with the American forces, and they are far away from humanity. They don’t have any sense of human being. And Islam does not tell you to go and cut the heads of people that work with the American Forces. This is not true. Islam is a religion that tells the people to work together, to live in peace. There is also a T.V. station here called Al Jazerra, and all they show is the bad side of the American Forces. They do not show the right side or the good side of the American people, they only show the bad side. Only the negative side.
QUESTION: So you don’t think these people are representing Islam at all?
ANSWER: Nooo, no. They are far away from Islam.
QUESTION: How good of a job do you think the ING’s are ICP’s are doing in Iraq?
ANSWER: They are doing a good job, they help the people, as I said the co-operation of the American forces with the ING, they are going to build this country. If there is no co-operation, there is no building. So ING with the American forces, they build this country.
QUESTION: What do you think Iraq will be like 10-20 years from now?
ANSWER: I think Iraq, if all the Iraqi people help each other, they can build this country. And if the Iraqi people try to capture many bad guys with the helping of the police guys and American forces, they are also going to build this country.
QUESTION: What do people do here for fun here in Iraq, like on a Friday night, like do you guys go to the mosque and hang out, or do you guys like go out and party? Like what’s there to do here?
ANSWER: (laughs) No, we like to go down to the river. Very peaceful there.
QUESTION: How many wives can you have here?
ANSWER: If you have enough money, you can have up to 4 wives here in Iraq.
QUESTION: What do you think of George W Bush?
ANSWER: I think he’s a good man.
QUESTION: If George W Bush invited you to the White House for a cup of Chi, what would you say to him?
ANSWER: I would say “welcome!” (laughs) I would go and drink a cup of tea with him. I would be glad to meet him.
QUESTION: Is the word “HAJI” Offensive?
ANSWER: No. It is not offensive. People who go to Mecca and come back, to Iraq, they call them haji, as you know the 5 duties in Islam, one of them is pilgrimage to Mecca. When the person come back from Mecca, that person is a haji.
QUESTION: What about when American’s sometimes use the word Haji to refer to an Iraqi, is that bad?
ANSWER: No.
QUESTION: What do you think of Americans?
ANSWER: Each of one of us have traditions. American people they have there tradition, and we have our own tradition. But I think they’re friends to the Iraqi people.
QUESTION: If you had a chance to jump on a plane with you family and fly to the United States and live there happily ever after would you do it?
ANSWER: Yes! (Huge smile) I wish I could go there and live in the United States.

posted by CBFTW at 9:57 PM 0 comments

I am sorry I did not make myself clear Ciggy. I was not responding to you.

My response was specifically to Christopher, and this assertion:

Politically, however, he is quite clever, and that’s a skill (dare I say a type of intelligence?) that cannot be underestimated.

Lex, forgive me; I am but a worm. I did not notice that you had flagged your comment as private email.