Carl Rove, Dick Cheney, and Condoleeza Rice have crept from their lairs not only to stand firmly behind President Bush in his belief that America can still achieve victory in Iraq, but also to support him in his belief that the 1000 people John Montgomery captured in this photo were actually spelling an acronym for Impressively Macho President Evoking Courage , Awe and Honesty!
E
23 Comments:
Hurrah!!
Imperative
Plan
Enabling
Anti-democratic
Criminal
Halting
tomcat- Obviously you didn't get Condi's memo... sigh... nice acrostic poem though :)
I'll leave the american politics up to you folks I just like the photo...it's amazing what can be accomplished when people unite!
Awesome!
Cheers my friend...hope you are having a fantastic day!!!
awesome photo!
where did you find this, Women?
:D
I just have to suggest another:
Idiot
Manipulators
Planning
Every
Asinine
Corruption
Haphazardly
If you impeach Bush you may as well keep heading down the line with all the morons on both sides of the isle. In fact, you can start with this group of losers: Boxer, Fienstein, Palosi, Waxman, Schwartsendoodle...wait, if we impeach all the worthless ones California isn't going to have ANY politicians left. But then really, would any other state be any better? LOL!
Gene-- I agree there are a lot of politicians who need to vacate the premises on BOTH sides of the aisle...I'd like a nice 3 or 4 party system myself.
two crows-
You can find the photos at beachimpeach.com
Glad you liked it!
thanks, women--
on my blog now.
:)
We often have news from the States on our TV news so it's nice to read about what the "real" people actually think.
Rx
Speaking as a "real" person, I can tell you that the majority of us are not impressed with Captain Crazy or his legion of doom. Please spread the word!!
yes, Ruth--please do.
it is scary to think the rest of the world thinks we stand behind these people.
on the other hand, I'd love to stand in front of em -- in a firing squad, say.
and I'm usually against the death penalty. but sometimes you have to make an exception.
I'd like a nice 3 or 4 party system myself.
I heard that. The least either party could do would be to run someone who has a clue.
so it's nice to read about what the "real" people actually think.
Ruth, make sure you get a good cross sampling of "real" people who don't live in big cities. One thing I find really interesting is how view points between city dwellers and country folk differ here in California. Outlooks can be vastly different dependant upon where someone lives. Those of us in the country aren't real fond of those in the city and visa versa. Everybody has there own concerns I suppose.
Gene--
I couldn't agree with you more!! My husband and I both come from "rural America" and I hear what you're saying about differing concerns. Watching over-development take hold has broken my heart. As a kid I used to be able to lay in the street ( never said I was a particularly smart kid) and not have to worry about a car careening along for a few hours... now, you take your life in your hands walking to the end of the driveway to get your mail... and I don't live in a " big city"... I'm lucky though, we still get deer, blue herons, fox, an occasional coyote, and the usual assortment of other small critters in the backyard.
gene's comment makes me kind of sad.
I consider myself to be a 'real' person. I 'really' do. and I live in Kansas City.
it's not huge as cities go -- but it's an urban area, nonetheless.
I don't consider people who live in rural areas as less-than.
actually, what I try to do [I won't say I'm all the way there yet, but I'm working at it] is not to judge people I don't know by where they live or the color of their skin or their religion or even their politics, or any of those other factors that tend to divide us if we let them.
my guess is we have a lot more in common than we have that separates us.
oh, I take back one portion of what I just said:
I DO judge one person by where he lives at the moment. the man who currently resides in the White House is not on my xmas card list. the folks he surrounds himself with fall into the same category.
I do think there is a different mindset between those who are urban and those who are rural dwellers. However, I don't think that one should take precedence over the other. Our concerns are different because we live different lives in vastly different places. The city dweller may not be as concerned about a "big box" store moving in as a rural dweller might...I suppose what I'm trying to say is that our concerns are bound to be different due to the nature of the lives we lead. However, I also believe that there are basic values that we all hold in common no matter where we live. Those are the ones we need to focus on right now. And for me, one of those basic values is freedom. That is something I will never be willing to trade for someone else's definition of "security".
two crows-
W didn't make my Christmas card list either:)
yeah, the big box stores suck.
I've boycotted walmart for years.
see the results?
I've driven that co. to its KNEES!
:)
Yep... I've been ignoring them for years... they just haven't realized it yet...
women--
got to thinking about the differences this AM.
there is one big difference between urban and rural life.
when I boycot Walmart and Sam's club etc., all i have to do is drive on down the road a piece. so--a very minor inconvenience for me.
in small town america, it might be the only grocery or clothing store in town and driving to the next-closest one is considerably more difficult and time consuming. take the extra gasoline, wear and tear on the car and carbon emissions into account and it's almost in the 'so what's the point? department.'
hadn't thought of that before.
thanks for the reality check.
it's nice, too, to know I'm not alone in my boycott.
usually, when I mention it to people, I just get a blank stare or even, 'so what's your problem?'
mebbe that IS big city thinking. I'd never tho't of that before, either.
I do think there is a different mindset between those who are urban and those who are rural dwellers
That's exactly what I was talking about. Sorry if you took offense two crows but the simple fact is people in the city don't share the same concerns as those of us in the country, and visa versa. The problem is all the votes are in the city, therefore we in the country get things shoved down our throats all the time that may be benificial in the metropolitan area but are disasterous here.
We here in cow country are not real thrilled with the San Francisco mind set. However, anytime something comes to a vote guess who gets the short end of the stick? It ain't them. Obviously they are voting for what benifits them. Unfortunately, one size fits all politics is bad business.
That's all I was really getting at.
thanks for the clarification, Gene.
***
here in Mo., we've had the opposite problem for too long.
there are only 2 good sized cities in MO. Kansas City and St. Louis. And, as both of those are on the state's borders, their populations are cut in half.
So, the rural areas and small towns get their ways much more often.
f'rinstance--we got our first democratic senator in 30+ years last november. in Mo, cities tend to vote dem -- rural areas tend to vote republican.
***
so, I do understand how you might chafe under big-city rule.
Post a Comment