Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
I'm Gone

Thou Shalt Not Speak Ill of Bush

21 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Filed: Timeline

http://www.amconmag.com/2006/2006_03_13/pr...ticleprint.html

Thou Shalt Not Speak Ill of Bush

A Republican loyalist is fired for sticking to principle.

By Bruce Bartlett

On Feb. 21, Doubleday will publish the book that cost me my job: Impostor: How George W. Bush Bankrupted America and Betrayed the Reagan Legacy.

The germination began when I heard about the extraordinary efforts made by the White House to ram the Medicare drug benefit through the House of Representatives during the night. Until that point, I had given President Bush the benefit of the doubt—even on things with which I was uncomfortable. For example, I had reluctantly concluded the Iraq War was justified on the basis of what I knew at the time it began.

I don’t normally write about foreign policy, but I felt that I had an obligation as a “public intellectual” to render a judgment before the war. It would have been too easy to wait and see what happened and then choose the popular side afterwards.

I still don’t know what information the White House had about WMD, and I don’t believe that President Bush knowingly falsified data to undertake a war he had already decided upon for other reasons. But I am dismayed that the White House subsequently claimed that WMD were only a secondary reason for the war and that liberating the Iraqi people was the primary aim.

Knowing what I know now, I would not have supported the war. But sometimes leaders must take action based on incomplete and inconclusive evidence. Where I really fault the White House is on its extreme reluctance to admit error and for inadequately preparing for the postwar operation. A willingness to admit honest error has always seemed to me to be a hallmark of great leadership. Sadly, this White House failed that test.

As someone primarily concerned with economic policy, enactment of the Medicare drug benefit hit me the way the failure to find WMD hit supporters of the war, especially on the Left, or the way Harriet Miers’s nomination affected judicial conservatives. This is going to cost taxpayers trillions upon trillions of dollars and will eventually lead to massively higher taxes, while doing little to improve the health of those who will benefit from the program or the political fortunes of the Republican Party, which sold its soul just to buy one lousy election.

In the months leading up to a vote, I thought the White House was playing a game of appearing to support a popular but substantively awful program by proclaiming support for it publicly while doing nothing to overcome the differences between the House and Senate versions of the bill. Bush could look like the good guy and blame Congress for the failure to enact the legislation. The proof for this proposition was repeated White House statements that Bush would sign any drug bill no matter what was in it. This position seemed so patently irresponsible that I had to believe that this was all part of a secret plan to kill it.

Consequently, the enormous White House effort to threaten, cajole, and even bribe House members to get the last votes for passage was a slap in the face. I suddenly realized that the White House did want this bill to pass and was not just playing some clever political game designed by Karl Rove, and I concluded that George W. Bush is no conservative.

I found myself increasingly alienated from President Bush and the whole Republican establishment. I didn’t become a Republican to create new entitlement programs and hugely expand the size of government. That’s what Democrats do.

I shared my concerns with Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Ron Suskind, author of the bestselling book The Price of Loyalty. After I wrote a favorable column about Suskind’s book, he called me and we began talking about what makes George W. Bush tick. Where does he get his ideas, we wondered, and how is it that he has such absolute certainty about the rightness of his decisions when he seemingly devotes little time to study or analysis? And why does he stick to those decisions regardless of results?

In the course of my conversations with Suskind, I threw out a lot of ideas as speculation. He wrote some of them up in an article for the New York Times Magazine on Oct. 17, 2004:

Bruce Bartlett, a domestic policy adviser to Ronald Reagan and a treasury official for the first President Bush, told me recently that ‘if Bush wins, there will be a civil war in the Republican Party starting on Nov. 3.’ The nature of that conflict, as Bartlett sees it? Essentially, the same as the one raging across much of the world: a battle between modernists and fundamentalists, pragmatists and true believers, reason and religion.

‘Just in the last few months,’ Bartlett said, ‘I think a light has gone off for people who’ve spent time up close to Bush: that this instinct he’s always talking about is this sort of weird, Messianic idea of what he thinks God has told him to do.’ Bartlett, a 53-year-old columnist and self-described libertarian Republican who has lately been a champion for traditional Republicans concerned about Bush’s governance, went on to say: ‘This is why George W. Bush is so clear-eyed about Al Qaeda and the Islamic fundamentalist enemy. He believes you have to kill them all. They can’t be persuaded, that they’re extremists, driven by a dark vision. He understands them, because he’s just like them …

‘This is why he dispenses with people who confront him with inconvenient facts,’ Bartlett went on to say. ‘He truly believes he’s on a mission from God. Absolute faith like that overwhelms a need for analysis. The whole thing about faith is to believe things for which there is no empirical evidence.’ Bartlett paused, then said, ‘But you can’t run the world on faith.’

If I had known that Ron was going to quote me, I would have been more guarded and explained myself more clearly. For example, I meant my statement about Bush and al-Qaeda as a compliment. I am not a religious person and don’t pretend to understand why anyone would be motivated to kill another person over religious differences. But it is clearly the case that some misguided Muslims do hate the American people, and their hatred is motivated by deep religious faith. I think it is helpful to have a leader whose own deep faith helps him understand our enemies.

As for a civil war in the Republican Party, I was thinking less about a war between faith and reason than the simple fact that once past the election, the race for 2008 would start almost immediately. I also thought that conservatives like myself, long concerned about Bush’s big-government policies, would no longer have any reason to hold their tongues and would become more outspoken in their criticism.

Unfortunately, I was given no opportunity to explain myself. My boss at the National Center for Policy Analysis, the conservative think tank where I worked, told me that Karl Rove had called him to complain about the article, and I was forbidden from writing anything or giving any interviews that might have blunted its political impact.

Like most conservative Republicans, I muted my public criticism of President Bush during the election season. As bad as he was, I feared that Kerry would be even worse. Had Kerry run as if he would return to the moderate liberalism and budgetary policies of Bill Clinton, he would have strongly tempted me and many other conservatives. Instead, he ran to the left and gave us no choice but to vote for Bush as the lesser of evils.

I began my book after the election as a general history of economic policy during the Bush administration. Although I had been critical of Bush in my syndicated column, especially after passage of the drug bill, I was overwhelmingly supportive during his first three years. And during the election, I wrote many columns criticizing Kerry’s proposals.

But it was harder and harder for me to contain my growing frustration with Bush, which spilled out in places like Suskind’s article. This created tensions between me and my Dallas-based employer. I was repeatedly warned that every time I criticized President Bush—even if it was for violating the very principles for which the organization existed—I was losing contributions among Bush’s supporters, who represented a large part of the organization’s fundraising base.

In a meeting with the chairman and president of the organization, I was told that if I continued to criticize the president, I would be fired. At no time did anyone connected with the organization ever tell me that my substantive analysis was wrong. Nor had anyone ever warned me against criticizing Bill Clinton. It was solely a matter of appearances and fundraising, they said.

As I researched, it became increasingly clear to me that I was going to have a hard time finding anything good to say about Bush’s economic policy. Even his tax cuts, which I had supported totally at the time, seemed much less effective with the benefit of hindsight. And contrary to the experience of the 1980s, tax cuts and growing deficits had no limiting effect on congressional spending, which shot through the roof without any White House restraint.

I knew this would create problems, but I thought that if conservatives simply read my argument, analysis, and supporting documentation, they would have no choice but to accept my conclusion that George W. Bush isn’t one of us.

In retrospect, I was naïve in thinking that facts and analysis had much chance against money and misguided loyalty to friends and party. After giving the completed manuscript to my boss, I was fired without severance after 10 years of service.

Said New York Times columnist David Brooks about this incident, “In an era when many commentators write whatever will affirm the prejudices of their own team, Bartlett follows his conscience and has paid a price. He was fired by his conservative think tank for being critical of President Bush.”

I have no reason to believe that the White House had anything to do with this. Bush’s supporters in Dallas didn’t need to be told by anyone in Washington what to do. They probably informed my employer that further donations would not be forthcoming as long as I was on the payroll. My boss told me that my dismissal was a business decision related to lost contributions.

It took longer than I thought it would, but the Republican civil war that I predicted finally erupted with the nomination of Harriet Miers. For many conservatives, this was the final straw—as the drug bill had been for me. Belatedly, they, too, came around to the conclusion that Bush’s abrogation of conservative principles had gone too far, and they turned on him with surprising vehemence.

I think many conservatives knew as well as I did that Bush is no conservative. While the tax cuts were supported by most of them, they also knew that Bush allowed spending to explode and that this would eventually lead to tax increases. Others were disturbed by Bush’s signing of an unconstitutional campaign-finance bill, the growth of government regulation, and failure to do anything about illegal immigration.

But these conservatives thought that the war on terror and the opportunity to get judicial conservatives on the courts trumped. However, continuing problems in Iraq together with growing reports that the evidence of WMD was weak or nonexistent before the war weighed heavily on even the most hawkish conservatives.

When Bush nominated a woefully unqualified crony to the most important of all court appointments, conservative doubts about Bush that had been held in check by 9/11, the war, and the election suddenly exploded. Virtually the entire conservative intelligentsia turned against Bush overnight. The White House foolishly fed this revolt by attacking conservative critics for elitism and sexism. Bush would have been in far worse shape politically if the conservative wing of the Republican Party had a leader who could articulate a respectful critique.

Although I lost my job for writing a book critical of George W. Bush, I have no regrets. Sometimes you just have to say the emperor isn’t wearing any clothes. My loyalty to my country and my party supersede whatever loyalty I may have to my president. As someone once said, facts are hard things.

I think it better for all loyal Republicans to face these facts now, no matter how painful they may be. Denouncing Bush’s conservative critics or firing them from allegedly conservative organizations won’t make those facts go away. Refusing to address them and circling the wagons against even the friendliest of critics only erodes the Republican Party’s base, setting it up for defeat in 2008. Better to have a debate now, when there is still time to change course.

_____________________________________________

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Filed: AOS (apr) Country: Russia
Timeline
Where does he [bush] get his ideas, we wondered, and how is it that he has such absolute certainty about the rightness of his decisions when he seemingly devotes little time to study or analysis? And why does he stick to those decisions regardless of results?

This is spot on!


09-02-2005 Applications for AOS, EAD, and AP received by MSC

10-21-2005 AOS fingerprint notice for 12-08-2005

11-07-2005 AP approved

12-05-2005 Infopass appt at San Jose office for interim EAD -- Refused, because it is already approved by MSC on 11-07-2005

12-07-2005 Attempt at interim EAD at San Francisco office -- no go. Back to San Jose, where CSO (chief station officer) tells they will contact MSC via email to request permission to issue interim EAD

12-08-2005 Biometrics for AOS and EAD. Having no EAD appt letter was no problem (used EAD NOA)

12-15-2005 EAD arrived in the mail

12-24-2005 Received interview letter; interview scheduled 03-01-2006

01-28-2006 Received replacement SSN card in married name (5 wks since application)

03-01-2006 AOS interview -- approved; received stamp in the passport

03-13-2006 Green card arrived in the mail

---

Filing for removal of conditions

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Filed: Citizen (pnd) Country: Canada
Timeline

Wow! I like to see that some US politicians still have principles.


Heading Home!

Naturalization

Feb 28/2011 - sent paperwork

Mar 3/11 - received text & email notification - they have it!

Mar 15/11 - text, email, and notice sent - biometrics booked

April 12/11 - biometrics done - I start studying

May - get the letter

June 27 - Interview and oath ceremony - same day

Lifting Conditions

Feb 5/08 - Sent paperwork by USPS - priority

Feb 14/08 - NOA issued

Feb 28/08 - Biometrics letter received for The Bronx Office - have to reschedule

Mar 22/08 - Biometrics rescheduled - LOVE the Saturday appointment!

Feb ?/09 - done!

I'M HIGHLY OPINIONATED WHEN I WANT TO BE, BUT I NEVER SAID I WAS RIGHT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wow! I like to see that some US politicians still have principles.

Did Bush Jr. pick up his bad ideas (of firing a Republican for speaking out) from Myron Baloney (who would have been Canada's PM emeritus [1] had he not resigned).

With such approach, Bush should worry that other Republicans may see joining a Democrat-initiated impeachment process as their only option to speak out--and may exercise such, making him also emeritus [2].

[1, 2]"e" for "out", "meritus" for "deservedly so".


2005/07/10 I-129F filed for Pras

2005/11/07 I-129F approved, forwarded to NVC--to Chennai Consulate 2005/11/14

2005/12/02 Packet-3 received from Chennai

2005/12/21 Visa Interview Date

2006/04/04 Pras' entry into US at DTW

2006/04/15 Church Wedding at Novi (Detroit suburb), MI

2006/05/01 AOS Packet (I-485/I-131/I-765) filed at Chicago

2006/08/23 AP and EAD approved. Two down, 1.5 to go

2006/10/13 Pras' I-485 interview--APPROVED!

2006/10/27 Pras' conditional GC arrives -- .5 to go (2 yrs to Conditions Removal)

2008/07/21 I-751 (conditions removal) filed

2008/08/22 I-751 biometrics completed

2009/06/18 I-751 approved

2009/07/03 10-year GC received; last 0.5 done!

2009/07/23 Pras files N-400

2009/11/16 My 46TH birthday, Pras N-400 approved

2010/03/18 Pras' swear-in

---------------------------------------------------------------------

As long as the LORD's beside me, I don't care if this road ever ends.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Filed: Timeline
‘Just in the last few months,’ Bartlett said, ‘I think a light has gone off for people who’ve spent time up close to Bush: that this instinct he’s always talking about is this sort of weird, Messianic idea of what he thinks God has told him to do.’ Bartlett, a 53-year-old columnist and self-described libertarian Republican who has lately been a champion for traditional Republicans concerned about Bush’s governance, went on to say: ‘This is why George W. Bush is so clear-eyed about Al Qaeda and the Islamic fundamentalist enemy. He believes you have to kill them all. They can’t be persuaded, that they’re extremists, driven by a dark vision. He understands them, because he’s just like them …

‘This is why he dispenses with people who confront him with inconvenient facts,’ Bartlett went on to say. ‘He truly believes he’s on a mission from God. Absolute faith like that overwhelms a need for analysis. The whole thing about faith is to believe things for which there is no empirical evidence.’ Bartlett paused, then said, ‘But you can’t run the world on faith.’

That, right there, is Bush in a nutshell. A religous fanatic. Nothing more and nothing less.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wow! I like to see that some US politicians still have principles.

i agree with you on that daisy :yes:


Peace to All creatures great and small............................................

But when we turn to the Hebrew literature, we do not find such jokes about the donkey. Rather the animal is known for its strength and its loyalty to its master (Genesis 49:14; Numbers 22:30).

Peppi_drinking_beer.jpg

my burro, bosco ..enjoying a beer in almaty

http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.ph...st&id=10835

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Filed: K-1 Visa Country: Canada
Timeline
‘Just in the last few months,’ Bartlett said, ‘I think a light has gone off for people who’ve spent time up close to Bush: that this instinct he’s always talking about is this sort of weird, Messianic idea of what he thinks God has told him to do.’ Bartlett, a 53-year-old columnist and self-described libertarian Republican who has lately been a champion for traditional Republicans concerned about Bush’s governance, went on to say: ‘This is why George W. Bush is so clear-eyed about Al Qaeda and the Islamic fundamentalist enemy. He believes you have to kill them all. They can’t be persuaded, that they’re extremists, driven by a dark vision. He understands them, because he’s just like them …

‘This is why he dispenses with people who confront him with inconvenient facts,’ Bartlett went on to say. ‘He truly believes he’s on a mission from God. Absolute faith like that overwhelms a need for analysis. The whole thing about faith is to believe things for which there is no empirical evidence.’ Bartlett paused, then said, ‘But you can’t run the world on faith.’

That, right there, is Bush in a nutshell. A religous fanatic. Nothing more and nothing less.

I have always said that.


*January 24 2006 - mailed in I129-F petition

*January 25 2006 - I129-F received at CSC

*January 30 2006 - packet returned.....arggggggggg we forgot one signature!!

*January 31 2006 - sent I129-F back to the CSC, hope we did not forget anything else

*February 1 2006 - I129-F received at CSC again

*February 3 2006 - NOA1

*April 20 2006 - NOA2!!!!!

*April 24 2006 - Touched!

*May 15 2006 - NVC received petition today!

*May 17 2006 - Case left NVC today!!

*May 30 2006 - Received Packet 3 from Vancouver!

*May 30 2006 - Faxed back Packet 3!!

*June 6 2006 - Received packet 4!

*June 20 2006 - Medical in Saskatoon

*June 28 2006 - Interview in Vancouver!!

*June 28 2006 - GOT THE VISA!!!*June 30 2006 - Moving day!

*July 3 2006 - Home at last!!

*July 28 2006 - married!

*September 13 2006 - Mailed AOS/EAD package

*September 25 2006 - Received NOA for AOS/EAD

*October 6 2006 - Biometrics appointments

*October 10 2006 - Touched!

*October 19 2006 - Transferred to CSC!

*October 26 2006 - Received by CSC

*October 27 2006 - Touched

*October 28 2006 - Touched again

*October 31 2006 - Touched again

*November 2 2006 - Touched again

*November 3 2006- and another touch

*November 7 2006- touched

*November 7 2006 - My case approved, still waiting for kids!

*November 8 2006 - Touched my case again

*November 13 2006 - Greencard arrived...yeah I can work!

*November 14 2006 - Touched my case again

*January 2007 - RFE for kids Greencard.

*February 2007 - kids medical and sent in RFE

*February 2007 - Received kids greencards

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This only confirms my certitude that the fine minds of outstanding Americans, supported by majority domestic opinion, have somehow been silenced by the absurd visions of the present dominant political clique.

I can't accept the US Pentagon's vision, with which I am now confronted, of eternal war. I oppose it, and prefer a world of peace and cooperation (non-military of course). And I can't understand why God would command anyone to go kill other human beings. Because of this reasoning, "Religion" has been the cause of most human misery in the last 2000 years. The hell with it.


Sometimes I think I know everything, and I regain consciousness. Seen it all, done it all, forgot most of it....

So much plenitude, yet so much emptiness

everest-summit.jpg

The Journey, Part I: I-129F (K-3)

I 129F sent to Chicago 11/14/05

NOA1 12/14/05, received by snail mail 12/23/05

NOA2 01/17/06, received by snail mail 01/20/05

Received Packet "3" 02/17/06

Medicals done in Nairobi 03/22/06

VISA APPROVED in Nairobi 03/30/06

Husband arrives ni USA!

The Journey, Part II: EAD and AOS

EAD mailed to Chicago 05/17/06

horserun.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Filed: K-1 Visa Country: Peru
Timeline
This only confirms my certitude that the fine minds of outstanding Americans, supported by majority domestic opinion, have somehow been silenced by the absurd visions of the present dominant political clique.

I can't accept the US Pentagon's vision, with which I am now confronted, of eternal war. I oppose it, and prefer a world of peace and cooperation (non-military of course). And I can't understand why God would command anyone to go kill other human beings. Because of this reasoning, "Religion" has been the cause of most human misery in the last 2000 years. The hell with it.

When I feel that way, I watch the Daily Show on Comedy Central and then I feel better.


12/5/05 Sent I129F Petition to Nebraska via Express Mail

12/6/05 Packaged received at 10:38 am in Nebraska

12/9/05 Check cashed (Never been so happy to have money leave my account)

12/12/05 Receive NOA1 snail mail - 30-60 day processing estimate

01/04/06 Receive NOA2 via e-mail

1/20/06 NVC letter in mail...will ship within a week.

2/1/06 Packet 3 and 4 in the mail

3/15/06 Interview - neither approved nor declined need to send in Migratory Movement Certificate AP

3/20/06 Migratory Movement Certificate for myself and fiancee sent to US Embassy in Lima

3/23/06 Visa Approved

5/19/06 I leave for Peru to pick up mi amor

5/25/06 Lucia and I arrive in Chicago

7/01/06 Legal Marriage

9/09/06 Religious Wedding

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Filed: Other Country: United Kingdom
Timeline
‘Just in the last few months,’ Bartlett said, ‘I think a light has gone off for people who’ve spent time up close to Bush: that this instinct he’s always talking about is this sort of weird, Messianic idea of what he thinks God has told him to do.’ Bartlett, a 53-year-old columnist and self-described libertarian Republican who has lately been a champion for traditional Republicans concerned about Bush’s governance, went on to say: ‘This is why George W. Bush is so clear-eyed about Al Qaeda and the Islamic fundamentalist enemy. He believes you have to kill them all. They can’t be persuaded, that they’re extremists, driven by a dark vision. He understands them, because he’s just like them …

‘This is why he dispenses with people who confront him with inconvenient facts,’ Bartlett went on to say. ‘He truly believes he’s on a mission from God. Absolute faith like that overwhelms a need for analysis. The whole thing about faith is to believe things for which there is no empirical evidence.’ Bartlett paused, then said, ‘But you can’t run the world on faith.’

That, right there, is Bush in a nutshell. A religous fanatic. Nothing more and nothing less.

Not sure I agree there. He's only religious when it suits him. This is why he can make a big deal about promoting 'cultures of life', which conveniently forgetting that he has done (and indeed is doing) the precise opposite.

He's no more religious than I am, IMO. Despite what might be claimed in public - I'm sure it looks good to his core supporters (many of whom ARE religious), the image of Bush sitting in the White House agonising and praying over making big decisions. Like hell, the man sheds not a tear. He has no shame, and no conscience apparently either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Filed: Timeline
‘Just in the last few months,’ Bartlett said, ‘I think a light has gone off for people who’ve spent time up close to Bush: that this instinct he’s always talking about is this sort of weird, Messianic idea of what he thinks God has told him to do.’ Bartlett, a 53-year-old columnist and self-described libertarian Republican who has lately been a champion for traditional Republicans concerned about Bush’s governance, went on to say: ‘This is why George W. Bush is so clear-eyed about Al Qaeda and the Islamic fundamentalist enemy. He believes you have to kill them all. They can’t be persuaded, that they’re extremists, driven by a dark vision. He understands them, because he’s just like them …

‘This is why he dispenses with people who confront him with inconvenient facts,’ Bartlett went on to say. ‘He truly believes he’s on a mission from God. Absolute faith like that overwhelms a need for analysis. The whole thing about faith is to believe things for which there is no empirical evidence.’ Bartlett paused, then said, ‘But you can’t run the world on faith.’

That, right there, is Bush in a nutshell. A religous fanatic. Nothing more and nothing less.

Not sure I agree there. He's only religious when it suits him.

Aren't all religious fanatics religious only when it serves their purpose?

Edited by ET-US2004

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Filed: Other Country: United Kingdom
Timeline
‘Just in the last few months,’ Bartlett said, ‘I think a light has gone off for people who’ve spent time up close to Bush: that this instinct he’s always talking about is this sort of weird, Messianic idea of what he thinks God has told him to do.’ Bartlett, a 53-year-old columnist and self-described libertarian Republican who has lately been a champion for traditional Republicans concerned about Bush’s governance, went on to say: ‘This is why George W. Bush is so clear-eyed about Al Qaeda and the Islamic fundamentalist enemy. He believes you have to kill them all. They can’t be persuaded, that they’re extremists, driven by a dark vision. He understands them, because he’s just like them …

‘This is why he dispenses with people who confront him with inconvenient facts,’ Bartlett went on to say. ‘He truly believes he’s on a mission from God. Absolute faith like that overwhelms a need for analysis. The whole thing about faith is to believe things for which there is no empirical evidence.’ Bartlett paused, then said, ‘But you can’t run the world on faith.’

That, right there, is Bush in a nutshell. A religous fanatic. Nothing more and nothing less.

Not sure I agree there. He's only religious when it suits him.

Aren't all religious fanatics religious only when it serves their purpose?

Yes - but you can separate people who hold genuine spiritual / religious views from those who are merely pretending, saying the right thing so they can get kudos and applause from certain sections of the electorate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i think he does what is needed to appease his supporters..if all turned gay over-night...Bush be wearing a ballerina outfit and kisisng Rove on the lips instead of his azz like he usually does


Peace to All creatures great and small............................................

But when we turn to the Hebrew literature, we do not find such jokes about the donkey. Rather the animal is known for its strength and its loyalty to its master (Genesis 49:14; Numbers 22:30).

Peppi_drinking_beer.jpg

my burro, bosco ..enjoying a beer in almaty

http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.ph...st&id=10835

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Filed: Other Country: United Kingdom
Timeline
i think he does what is needed to appease his supporters..if all turned gay over-night...Bush be wearing a ballerina outfit and kisisng Rove on the lips instead of his azz like he usually does

Yep. Prostituting one's morals in return for political gain is rather popular these days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i think he does what is needed to appease his supporters..if all turned gay over-night...Bush be wearing a ballerina outfit and kisisng Rove on the lips instead of his azz like he usually does

Yep. Prostituting one's morals in return for political gain is rather popular these days.

:yes:...


Peace to All creatures great and small............................................

But when we turn to the Hebrew literature, we do not find such jokes about the donkey. Rather the animal is known for its strength and its loyalty to its master (Genesis 49:14; Numbers 22:30).

Peppi_drinking_beer.jpg

my burro, bosco ..enjoying a beer in almaty

http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.ph...st&id=10835

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
- Back to Top -


Important Disclaimer: Please read carefully the Visajourney.com Terms of Service. If you do not agree to the Terms of Service you should not access or view any page (including this page) on VisaJourney.com. Answers and comments provided on Visajourney.com Forums are general information, and are not intended to substitute for informed professional medical, psychiatric, psychological, tax, legal, investment, accounting, or other professional advice. Visajourney.com does not endorse, and expressly disclaims liability for any product, manufacturer, distributor, service or service provider mentioned or any opinion expressed in answers or comments. VisaJourney.com does not condone immigration fraud in any way, shape or manner. VisaJourney.com recommends that if any member or user knows directly of someone involved in fraudulent or illegal activity, that they report such activity directly to the Department of Homeland Security, Immigration and Customs Enforcement. You can contact ICE via email at Immigration.Reply@dhs.gov or you can telephone ICE at 1-866-347-2423. All reported threads/posts containing reference to immigration fraud or illegal activities will be removed from this board. If you feel that you have found inappropriate content, please let us know by contacting us here with a url link to that content. Thank you.
×
×
  • Create New...