![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Where I get a bit ranty
Oct. 30th, 2004 01:20 amSo Bin Laden's been filmin' again.
I would say I am utterly shocked by his appearance so close to the elections, but I would be lying!
I remember talking with friends months ago, thinking, we'll hear from Osama just before the election. Just remember, as much as George Bush says we're at war with terror, notice he's not concerned about capturing the man who did us the greatest injustice. We're too busy killing lesser insurgents and innocent citizens in Iraq.
And in response to bin Laden's tape? Bush has the same old tired strategy: we will win the war on terror. Four years of not winning the war on terror hasn't taught the ol' fella to narrow his focus down a bit, and just nail the mastermind behind the World Trade Center. Helloooo!
But yes, it is good that both Presidents are saying that americans shall not be influenced with bin Laden's latest installment of "Extremist Muslims Gone Wild". But then again, they can both say that while other folks can create doubt and uncertainty.
I'm still amazed that Guiliani suggested the troups were to blame for the explosives blunder. Our troops follow orders for fuck sake! They do it while risking their lives, to boot! Now, like all individuals, there are good soldiers and bad soldiers. However, on the whole, in light of their sacrifice, and in light of the fact that we've asked them to do a hell of a lot with small numbers, we'll give soldiers the benefit of the doubt. Besides, I say that soldiers should not have to be accountable for their sins until our current administration is held accountable for theirs.
You know, it's not a good sign for the economy when you see a lot of commercials appealing to folks with bad credit.
You know, games in politics are to be expected, but I'm fairly certain that the Republicans are the sleaziest of them all. I get emails from conservative friends that like to portray Kerry as some welfare supporter. Please. No candidate truly wants to fund laziness. Except for the current leaders of our country. More people in positions of wealth are lazier than poorer people. I know many of them. I pay close attention to my leadership at my company. They get the best of everything and their job? To schmooze and parrot trite phrases from popular business books. Let me remind you that reading a book and parroting their contents is not hard. Inheriting wealth from your progenitors and living off of it is not hard.
Granted, not all wealthy people are lazy bastards, but I see a good many who are.
Halliburton can tell you: acquiring a no-bid contract from the U.S. Government after you've bought out your american competition is not hard.
They can also tell you that overcharging for their services is also not hard.
But what folks like Rumsfeld and Cheney should be saying is hard: winning military conflicts with an unsatisfactory amount of troops. It should be hard to win a war with over-burdened reservists, many of whom get to lose their jobs while they are off at war.
I would say I am utterly shocked by his appearance so close to the elections, but I would be lying!
I remember talking with friends months ago, thinking, we'll hear from Osama just before the election. Just remember, as much as George Bush says we're at war with terror, notice he's not concerned about capturing the man who did us the greatest injustice. We're too busy killing lesser insurgents and innocent citizens in Iraq.
And in response to bin Laden's tape? Bush has the same old tired strategy: we will win the war on terror. Four years of not winning the war on terror hasn't taught the ol' fella to narrow his focus down a bit, and just nail the mastermind behind the World Trade Center. Helloooo!
But yes, it is good that both Presidents are saying that americans shall not be influenced with bin Laden's latest installment of "Extremist Muslims Gone Wild". But then again, they can both say that while other folks can create doubt and uncertainty.
I'm still amazed that Guiliani suggested the troups were to blame for the explosives blunder. Our troops follow orders for fuck sake! They do it while risking their lives, to boot! Now, like all individuals, there are good soldiers and bad soldiers. However, on the whole, in light of their sacrifice, and in light of the fact that we've asked them to do a hell of a lot with small numbers, we'll give soldiers the benefit of the doubt. Besides, I say that soldiers should not have to be accountable for their sins until our current administration is held accountable for theirs.
You know, it's not a good sign for the economy when you see a lot of commercials appealing to folks with bad credit.
You know, games in politics are to be expected, but I'm fairly certain that the Republicans are the sleaziest of them all. I get emails from conservative friends that like to portray Kerry as some welfare supporter. Please. No candidate truly wants to fund laziness. Except for the current leaders of our country. More people in positions of wealth are lazier than poorer people. I know many of them. I pay close attention to my leadership at my company. They get the best of everything and their job? To schmooze and parrot trite phrases from popular business books. Let me remind you that reading a book and parroting their contents is not hard. Inheriting wealth from your progenitors and living off of it is not hard.
Granted, not all wealthy people are lazy bastards, but I see a good many who are.
Halliburton can tell you: acquiring a no-bid contract from the U.S. Government after you've bought out your american competition is not hard.
They can also tell you that overcharging for their services is also not hard.
But what folks like Rumsfeld and Cheney should be saying is hard: winning military conflicts with an unsatisfactory amount of troops. It should be hard to win a war with over-burdened reservists, many of whom get to lose their jobs while they are off at war.
