Gee Max, sorry you feel cheated by Pabst. Obviously I am fair game for all. May I ask in what way my post was about ME? Looks like you just jumped in here and didn't even bother to read the post I wrote that Pabst was referring to. If you had, maybe you wouldn't have jumped to your usual (erroneous) conclusion that I wrote about me. I did not. I did mention my (according to you) "alleged son". But there was a point to that which was relevant to the discussion. As for ARogueTrader's "stalking" comment. Do you deny that you search for my posts so you can enter whatever thread I happen to contribute to? Or is just an amazing coincidence? Peace, RS
C'mon now, anyone who has read your prolific commentary knows your immediate family's individual life histories. Not about you? Of course it is about you; that is your ET raison d'etre, n'est pas? Actually, I was "stalking" Rogue-A-Rama to see what "civil disturb..." er "criticism" he was currently perpetrating and read the whole thread.
OK Max. At least you responded. So tell me, was it Winston Churchill that was about me? Prescott Bush? Dubya or his dad? Guess it was because I mentioned my son. So now that I am already condemned for being proud of him, I will tell you why it was relevant. He was driving my car and got stopped for having an expired tag. The ticket was issued to him because he was driving. The fault was mine. He gave me the ticket, I stuck it in my desk drawer, and forgot about it for too long. Finally I mailed in the ticket with the $40 (or whatever) fine. But I was late. The court cashed the check and never notified me, so I figured all was fine and dandy. A year or so later, I was notified by the Navy that I owed a $12 late fee on the ticket. Until I went to the courthouse and paid it, my son's top secret clearance was on hold. At 40, Dubya had a few DUI's we know of and we can only guess what we don't know of....but I am sure you have seen the video on the internet during the last election just like I did of Dubya's drunken behavior at a wedding party when he was Governor of Texas. http://thesmokinggun.com/graphics/packageart/bush/bush_tsg.mov He has acknowledged alchohol, cocaine and pot use. We do not know what he has not acknowledged. If Dubya were not the elected Commander in Chief, he could NOT get top secret clearance in today's military. NO WAY! In fact, he most likely wouldn't even be accepted at all into the service (age aside). Do I think that past indiscretions should be held against the man now? No, personally I believe that people can and do reform. Not all, but some. It is possible. What is ironic is that guys like Pabst DON'T believe that. Pabst would have all criminals kept in prison permanently. Or put to death if keeping them alive were too expensive. But his beliefs are very selective. Dubya can change. Dubya can be forgiven his sins. But ask Pabst what he thinks of those who's families could not afford the legal representation to make their problems go away. Well, I am sure his answer would be "RS is a prick and an asshole" and that would settle that. Peace, RS
To answer the off topic portion, like I said the readers of ET have intimate knowledge of everyone in your family. And you never miss a chance to update. What is your interpretation of the smokinggun.com video?
The author makes some decent arguments until he gets to this point, where the train goes over the cliff. To say that because we haven't been attacked that we must be winning is a fallacy of cause and effect. If the conclusion is that "America Wins", then why are we on orange alert and cancelling Air-France flights to LA? To definitively win we have to wipe out the terrorists who would do harm to Americans. That's a pretty tall order, though it is clear that progress has been and is being made to that end. But there are no guarantees we won't get blindsighted again by determined terrorists who exploit one of the many gaps in our defences in an hour when we least expect it.
No Max. Say what you will. But as far as I know YOU are the only person that searched public records to find out about me and my family. You say "the readers of ET have intimate knowledge of everyone in (my) family". Yet ONLY YOU know my wife's name, where she works, our address, and even MY NAME. Let alone anything about anyone else in my family other than that I have a son and two step-kids. Big deal. We all know Nitro's dog's name. Do even YOU know any of my children's names? My dog's name? Cat's name? Mother's maiden name? So don't insult all the members of ET by implying that any one of them is remotely like you. No one has "intimate knowledge" except you. And even that is very limited. I know you are dying for more. And the funny thing is you had an opportunity but due to your inability to function in the real (as opposed to virtual) world, you missed out. No one really cares except you. Do you dispute this? Can you explain your fascination? If I am wrong, then please explain it to me. To all of us. I would bet pretty much anything I own that ONLY YOU have enough interest to have done what you did. Which, I assure you, virtually EVERYONE here would think is a pretty good definition of "obsession". ONLY YOU MAX! Is this too hard for you to accept? Do you understand yourself as well as you claim to understand me? Or Aphie, or RogueTrader, or anyone else on your "stalking list"? My interpretation of the video? What is there to "interpret"? Clearly the man was drunk. He managed to look like a buffoon, insult his hosts, all the members of the wedding party, and really our entire political system...."it's an election year" "only in America". His words. This while holding the office of Governor of Texas (and a tall drink). At the end of the video do you think he was pouring lemonade down his throat from a highball glass? Maybe he was gulping down carrot juice. Whatever it was, he could not get it down fast enough. Draw your own conclusions. How did YOU interpret the video? Oh, I forgot...Max only asks...never answers. How about a refreshing change? Surprise us all. Give an answer. Here's your big chance to show everyone I am wrong about you. (Fat Chance!!!!!!!) Peace, RS
Once again Error, where did I say Bush's accomplishments were qualifications/prerequisites for the presidency? ANSWER THE QUESTION...... THE QUESTION!!! John McEnroe, Wimbledon 1978 All I asked is would bilingual self made millionaire with two Ivy League degrees and a Jet pilot license who had the moxy to be elected President of The United States be considered stupid? Hardly. BTW, you point about the Rangers is inane. Out of the 29 Major League ballparks built since WWll, only Pro Player (ex Joe Robbie) was built without public land and/or public funds. Hardly a unique sweetheart deal. The Bush syndicate arguably saved Major League ball in Dallas/Ft. Worth. Also the phrase "incredibly rich" to describe GHB is "incredibly hyperbolic." Yea no tag days for the Bush's, but it's not like pedigree and family money saved Neil Bush.
First off, I never said I thought Bush was stupid. Obviosly he is not. He certainly isn't a rocket scientist, but that isn't required to be be President. If a high IQ was assurance of being a good President, then probably Jimmy Carter would have been the best President in my lifetime. An that was obviously not the case. Or maybe Clinton had the highest IQ. Whatever the case, certainly leadership and IQ are not necessarily directly related. Eisenhower was (like Dubya) a mediocre student. Yet led the Allied forces to victory in Europe. Based on IQ alone, Reagan would have to have been the worst. But somehow he managed. It's about hard work and dedication. (Reagan worked hard?). JFK's IQ is, as far as I know, the only one that was made public. Lower than you would think (119). But he had the ability to use the brains he had. That is what matters. "Incredibly rich" is, I guess, a relative term. For pikers like me, having a summer home in KENNEBUNKPORT means real money. But that's just me. Probably most people have places like that. Sadly, I don't have room to land a Marine helicoptor anywhere on my property. Even if I did, my neighbors are too close and would probably complain about the noise. Neil Bush is doing just fine. You or I would be in prison if we were involved in his capacity in the Silverado fiasco. But Neil is getting offers of $2million stock options from China's Grace Semiconductor, and a position on it's board. Not too shabby. "You know, I could run for governor but I'm basically a media creation. I've never done anything. I've worked for my dad. I worked in the oil business. But that's not the kind of profile you have to have to get elected to public office." G.W.B. before running for Governor. Pabst, there are a few baseball teams that are up for grabs. Anyone lending you the money to buy them? Borrow the money to buy the Expos. I will come work for you as GM cheap. Montreal needs a new stadium. Surely we can get the locals to foot the bill. It's easy, right? Anyone can do it. What you are NOT getting is that I don't really have a problem with Dubya. I wish him the best, and I hope he rises to every occasion and challenge the office and it's circumstances throw his way. God knows we need competent leadership in today's world. My problem is with guys like you who think the man is infallible. Nobody is infallible. All we can do is hope for the best. It does amaze me that this guy is now in the most powerful position on earth. But I know that that is how it is for now. I DO NOT root against him. I DO NOT hate him...or even dislike him. I do respect him for being able to grow up and move on with his life. I leave the "hating" to the right wing fanatics. They are very good at it. They believe that anyone who disagrees with their views are "assholes" and "pricks". Right? Peace, RS
Pakistan: the west's soft centre If Musharraf is assassinated, the war on terror will also be a victim Peter Preston Monday December 29, 2003 The Guardian Here is one terrorist threat even Tony Blair doesn't need to vamp up. It is self-evidently real and ominously recurrent. If, one day soon, it claims its target, then the world of Bush and Blair - plus their so-called war against Osama and chums - will be rocked to its core. The peril couldn't be greater, the edifice more ripe for toppling. Yet somehow, when these bombs go off, we shrug and look away. Somehow we don't make the connections. Consider the chill facts, though. Twice, during the 10 days before Christmas, General Pervez Musharraf, Pakistan's president, has narrowly survived highly professional assassination attempts. First, the bridge he was travelling over near Islamabad was destroyed by five separate charges only seconds after his car made it to the other side. (An electronic blocking device in his limo bought him the fraction of time that saved his life.) Then, as if to signal al-Qaida's return to more tested methods, a Rawalpindi suicide attack killed 14 people and injured nearly 50. Musharraf, again, escaped by seconds. How many more lives does this president have left? Not too many, perhaps. He wasn't, on either occasion, following an advertised route. He and his guards were proceeding privately from point A to point B. His would-be killers weren't leaning on a lamppost in case a nice little target passed by. They knew he was coming. They knew where to plant sophisticated explosives. Their intelligence was perfect. They have an inside track. If they keep to it, they'll surely get him in the end. Which is when the core really starts to rock. Without Pakistan on board, Afghanistan cannot hold. Without Afghanistan, the campaign against terrorism turns to humiliation. Where's Osama? Somewhere in a cave near the border. Where are his men? Regrouping beyond the reach of the stretched forces George Bush has left behind. Musharraf, grimly pursuing his chosen course to the end, keeps Pakistan as the indispensable foundation of coalition activity. But what happens if he vanishes from the scene? The bombers who try and try again aren't stupid. They've asked and answered that question, too. Pakistan hangs in a constitutional void. It has a president, self-selected and sanctified by a dodgy referendum. It doesn't have an anointed successor waiting to take over and carry on seamlessly if the worst happens, only a void. By chance, in the Christmas days between assassination attempts, Musharraf concluded negotiations on a legal framework order that slots the details of his qualified return to democracy in place. He will, for instance, take off his military uniform for the last time at the close of next year. He'll become a sort of civilian. But this deal has been concluded between his parliamentary mates and the rightwing Islamic parties who did so well in the elections. It snubs the two major and continuing parties of potential governance: the Pakistan People's party and the Muslim League. They're left outside while Musharraf wheels, deals and canoodles with the forces in his land most opposed to America, the war against terror and everything he himself stands for. He is either very brave or very stupid. Take him out of the equation and there is no centre left to hold - except, of course, the army. But which self-promoting general, stepping in, is going to plonk his head on the same block? Which intelligence service hierarchy, riddled with the religious fervour President Zia ul-Haq introduced, is going to succour a Musharraf clone? The stakes could not be higher. Pervez Musharraf, for all his evasions, is a pretty determined man. He has India's prime minister coming to town for talks about peace. He has chosen a necessary course and, by and large, sticks to it. But Washington and London, applauding benignly, can take absolutely nothing for granted. Here is a teeming country boasting its own brand new weapons of mass destruction. Knock one piece off the board (or blow up one bridge on time) and everything, including the nature of the finger on the button, changes. Another 9/11 attack on the White House lawn - or the back side of Downing Street? Maybe. The awful warnings of homeland security are always, rather hysterically, with us. But a calculating, canny Osama has a much easier and more tempting place to strike: and is doing just that. Pakistan is the frontline of 2004, with only one lonely (almost) ex-soldier guarding the gate. When the WMD go off there, then the connections engulf us all.
Never have I uttered the statement that any Bush is on my list of top Presidents. I will say that if GWB is able to stabilize the Mid East and make serious inroads eradicating global terror, he will rise to the stature of lets say Nixon, who's detente' with the USSR and China overshadowed a Checkered (pun intended) incumbency. History has been far kinder to RN than to lets say LBJ. BTW here is a link I think you'll enjoy RS. Check out some of JFK's press confrences. Although I'm not a huge fan of JFK domestic economic policy (he missed the mark on steel, we wound up losing the industry), the candor and wit of his forays with the press are a stark contrast to modern politics. He was really a straight shooter. Yes, he truly rose to the occasion, although I'd argue if JFK's IQ was only 119, then Teddy's is 84. http://www.earthstation1.com/John_F._Kennedy.html