Sunday, May 28, 2006

Response to That Nonsensical "Qualm 23"

A Ridiculous "Qualm 23" has been circulated around the internet blaming President Bush for anything from increased logging, to deceptions with regard to Iraq, to cutting taxes for the "rich," etc. In other words, it's a rehash of the standard fallacies and distortions of the left, this time strung together with the help of ninth rate poetry.

I choose not to repost it here so as not to give it further publicity (beyond that which is necessary to refute it and the marching cries of the left found therein).

Here is my response:

More reforestation has been done in Pres. Bush's term in office than in any previous administration.

The Iraq war was not an "ego" trip - I feel absurd even answering this. The war was necessary based on Saddam's refusal to open the country to full inspections. UN reports documented the weapons he had at the end of the first gulf war minus the ones he destroyed and showed that he still had tremendous arsenals at his disposal. All intel agencies around the world showed the same.

Whether they were hidden underground, shipped to Syria and Libya or whether UN reports were wrong to begin with is irrelevant. What is relevant is that if Bush had not acted based on the intel at hand - from all world intel agencies, he would then have been derelict of duty.

President Bush also gave Saddam over a year to comply with inspections. Perhaps the "Qualmist" forgot this.

The author complains of international disgrace. That term could more aptly describe the situation had the US not taken action after 12 years of warning Saddam concerning numerous blatant ceasefire violations. That term best describes the UN which indeed took that course of action.

The author blames Bush for tax cuts for the "rich" and for joblessness. Sorry Chuck, you can't have it both ways (and you're actually wrong on both). First of all, the tax cuts were across the board. In fact, the lower brackets were cut far more than the highest was. But it was the cuts to the highest bracket and the investor cuts (which mostly benefited the middle class - but benefited the wealthy as well) that led to the economic recovery that happened after the tech bust and the 1 million jobs lost in one day alone after 9/11. They are what led to us having the lowest unemployment rate after WW2 - Yes, during Bush's tenure.

Most pitiful and pathetic are the lines about "foreign oil" and "media censorship." In 2000 now Pres. Bush was the only candidate ever to stress drilling in Alaska, warning that we must curb our reliance on foreign oil. The pretentious poet who wrote this was certainly laughing mightily at the time, along with all other libs. But that doesn't stop them from blaming Bush for the oil crisis they prevented him from trying to avert.

But this does not come close to the line about media censorship. Whoever wrote this is kidding, right? Does he mean the media that has been on an all out campaign to bend the popular opinion of this President? If they had pulled the same antics during World War 2, focusing on each war casualty and every accusation the opposition hurls while never mentioning the reasons for going to war, a significant portion of the country would have been up in arms about that war as well. Thanks to the media we hear about every war protestor while rarely, if ever, are credible advocates of the war brought on to explain the reasons this war is necessary. The same holds true with regard to every policy of this administrator. The opposition, whether warranted or consisting of nothing more than malcontents, is trumpeted out and their views are given full coverage. Quite different to the situation when Clinton when President and the exact opposite was true. Yet the author of "Qualm 23" insinuates that Bush controls the media. To be polite - Thanks for the laugh!


Elaine Frankonis said...

One man's myth is another's tragedy. Check out my post here and follow the links from there:

Yomin Postelnik said...


I followed that link. How sad. The left has to go beyond pure abject and baseless hatred. The fact that you disagree with his views, and that liberals have a problem with anyone who takes needed military action, is not the President's problem and the stuff you link to is some of the most laughable. hate-filled nonsense that I've seen. If you want to look at a President who was possibly a sociopath, look to the one before this one, the one with several credible rape accusations against him and the one who failed to take action in response to terror attacks as being popular among Euro sycophants was more important to him than was his duty.