"I have to say this is one of the most arrogant, incompetent administrations I've ever seen or ever

In January 2007, Hagel openly criticized President Bush's plan

to send an additional 20,000 additional troops to Iraq.

He called it, "the most dangerous foreign policy blunder

in this country since Vietnam, if it's carried out."

Together with Democrats Joseph Biden and Carl Levin he

proposed a non-binding resolution to the Democratic-

controlled Senate Foreign Relations Committee, which

rejected Bush's policy as "not in the national interest" in

a 12-9 vote....

....

After an April 2007 visit to Iraq with Pennsylvania Democratic

Representative Joe Sestak, Hagel expressed his belief that

the occupation of Iraq should not continue indefinitely and

defended Congressional actions to set a timeline for an end in occupation.

In July 2007, Hagel expressed his intention to cooperate

with Senate Democrats in voting for a bill that would set a

timeline to get out of Iraq.

In November 2007, he rated the Bush administration

"the lowest in capacity, in capability, in policy, in

consensus -- almost every area" of any presidency in

the last forty years....

....he said, "I have to say this is one of the most arrogant,

incompetent administrations I've ever seen or ever read about."

> In November 2007, he rated the Bush administration

> "the lowest in capacity, in capability, in policy, in

> consensus -- almost every area" of any presidency in

> the last forty years....

>

> ...he said, "I have to say this is one of the most arrogant,

> incompetent administrations I've ever seen or ever read about."

The neocon philosophy is one of designed incompetence. To them, government

should not provide solutions to problems, nor in any way contribute to the

general welfare of society - this is counter to their mantra and in their

eyes is the path to their biggest fear - communism. They want government to

be ineffective because they resent people's reliance on it for anything, so

they sabotage successful programs where they can, and under-fund at every

opportunity and stonewall instead of being proactive in situations like

Katrina, for instance. It's truly a sadistic clan that's running the

country right now.

In article <FjVGj.25921$rC6.4258@bignews4.bellsouth.net>,

"Sid9" <sid9@bellsouth.net> wrote:

> In January 2007, Hagel openly criticized President Bush's plan

> to send an additional 20,000 additional troops to Iraq.

>

> He called it, "the most dangerous foreign policy blunder

> in this country since Vietnam, if it's carried out."

>

> Together with Democrats Joseph Biden and Carl Levin he

> proposed a non-binding resolution to the Democratic-

> controlled Senate Foreign Relations Committee, which

> rejected Bush's policy as "not in the national interest" in

> a 12-9 vote....

>

> ...

> After an April 2007 visit to Iraq with Pennsylvania Democratic

> Representative Joe Sestak, Hagel expressed his belief that

> the occupation of Iraq should not continue indefinitely and

> defended Congressional actions to set a timeline for an end in occupation.

>

> In July 2007, Hagel expressed his intention to cooperate

> with Senate Democrats in voting for a bill that would set a

> timeline to get out of Iraq.

>

> In November 2007, he rated the Bush administration

> "the lowest in capacity, in capability, in policy, in

> consensus -- almost every area" of any presidency in

> the last forty years....

>

> ...he said, "I have to say this is one of the most arrogant,

> incompetent administrations I've ever seen or ever read about."

>

>

"bluecollarwhitemale" <GeraldCNewton@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:458f5f2c-8250-4064-a51d-98ea4a7f9ab5@m71g2000hse.googlegroups.com...

> On Mar 27, 2:35 pm, "Sid9" <s...@bellsouth.net> wrote:

>> In January 2007, Hagel openly criticized President Bush's plan

>> to send an additional 20,000 additional troops to Iraq.

>>

>> He called it, "the most dangerous foreign policy blunder

>> in this country since Vietnam, if it's carried out."

>>

>> Together with Democrats Joseph Biden and Carl Levin he

>> proposed a non-binding resolution to the Democratic-

>> controlled Senate Foreign Relations Committee, which

>> rejected Bush's policy as "not in the national interest" in

>> a 12-9 vote....

>>

>> ...

>> After an April 2007 visit to Iraq with Pennsylvania Democratic

>> Representative Joe Sestak, Hagel expressed his belief that

>> the occupation of Iraq should not continue indefinitely and

>> defended Congressional actions to set a timeline for an end in

>> occupation.

>>

>> In July 2007, Hagel expressed his intention to cooperate

>> with Senate Democrats in voting for a bill that would set a

>> timeline to get out of Iraq.

>>

>> In November 2007, he rated the Bush administration

>> "the lowest in capacity, in capability, in policy, in

>> consensus -- almost every area" of any presidency in

>> the last forty years....

>>

>> ...he said, "I have to say this is one of the most arrogant,

>> incompetent administrations I've ever seen or ever read about."

>

> Well, for one thing we have not had a single terrorist attack since

> 9/11 thanks to George Bush.

> What do you think Obama would have done? I think he would have talked

> some more. Obama is really good at talking.

Absolutely hilarious!

Funniest thing I've read all day.

Tell me another one!

On Mar 27, 3:53 pm, "john" <j...@doe.com> wrote:

> > In November 2007, he rated the Bush administration

> > "the lowest in capacity, in capability, in policy, in

> > consensus -- almost every area" of any presidency in

> > the last forty years....

>

> > ...he said, "I have to say this is one of the most arrogant,

> > incompetent administrations I've ever seen or ever read about."

>

> The neocon philosophy is one of designed incompetence. To them, government

> should not provide solutions to problems, nor in any way contribute to the

> general welfare of society - this is counter to their mantra and in their

> eyes is the path to their biggest fear - communism. They want government to

> be ineffective because they resent people's reliance on it for anything, so

> they sabotage successful programs where they can, and under-fund at every

> opportunity and stonewall instead of being proactive in situations like

> Katrina, for instance. It's truly a sadistic clan that's running the

> country right now.

It's actually more than their desire to keep government from being a

solution. It's always been about paying less taxes. Look up Grover

Norquist. It's his philosophy that drives this incompetency.

Buchanan was previously considered the worst by historians; he now may

move up a notch to NEXT to worst.

> Well, for one thing we have not had a single terrorist attack since

> 9/11 thanks to George Bush.

> What do you think Obama would have done? I think he would have talked

> some more. Obama is really good at talking.

Obama would not have invaded and occupied Iraq, and 4000 American

military troops, along with 600,000 or so Iraqis, would not have

died for nothing. That we know.

-Al-

"bluecollarwhitemale" <GeraldCNewton@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:458f5f2c-8250-4064-a51d-98ea4a7f9ab5@m71g2000hse.googlegroups.com...

> On Mar 27, 2:35 pm, "Sid9" <s...@bellsouth.net> wrote:

>> In January 2007, Hagel openly criticized President Bush's plan

>> to send an additional 20,000 additional troops to Iraq.

>>

>> He called it, "the most dangerous foreign policy blunder

>> in this country since Vietnam, if it's carried out."

>>

>> Together with Democrats Joseph Biden and Carl Levin he

>> proposed a non-binding resolution to the Democratic-

>> controlled Senate Foreign Relations Committee, which

>> rejected Bush's policy as "not in the national interest" in

>> a 12-9 vote....

>>

>> ...

>> After an April 2007 visit to Iraq with Pennsylvania Democratic

>> Representative Joe Sestak, Hagel expressed his belief that

>> the occupation of Iraq should not continue indefinitely and

>> defended Congressional actions to set a timeline for an end in

>> occupation.

>>

>> In July 2007, Hagel expressed his intention to cooperate

>> with Senate Democrats in voting for a bill that would set a

>> timeline to get out of Iraq.

>>

>> In November 2007, he rated the Bush administration

>> "the lowest in capacity, in capability, in policy, in

>> consensus -- almost every area" of any presidency in

>> the last forty years....

>>

>> ...he said, "I have to say this is one of the most arrogant,

>> incompetent administrations I've ever seen or ever read about."

>

> Well, for one thing we have not had a single terrorist attack since

> 9/11 thanks to George Bush.

> What do you think Obama would have done? I think he would have talked

> some more. Obama is really good at talking.

That has to be the stupidest thing you have written to date.

GO AWAY

"Sid9" <sid9@bellsouth.net> wrote in news:FjVGj.25921$rC6.4258

@bignews4.bellsouth.net:

> In January 2007, Hagel openly criticized President Bush's plan

> to send an additional 20,000 additional troops to Iraq.

>

> He called it, "the most dangerous foreign policy blunder

> in this country since Vietnam, if it's carried out."

>

To bad it seems to have worked out, though, doesn't it?

Frank

"Sid9" <sid9@bellsouth.net> wrote in news:FjVGj.25921$rC6.4258

@bignews4.bellsouth.net:

You want to deliver some NEWS to this newsgroup, Sid? Quote Hagel saying

anything positive about the Bush administration since the day he took office.

> In January 2007, Hagel openly criticized President Bush's plan

> to send an additional 20,000 additional troops to Iraq.

>

> He called it, "the most dangerous foreign policy blunder

> in this country since Vietnam, if it's carried out."

>

> Together with Democrats Joseph Biden and Carl Levin he

> proposed a non-binding resolution to the Democratic-

> controlled Senate Foreign Relations Committee, which

> rejected Bush's policy as "not in the national interest" in

> a 12-9 vote....

>

> ...

> After an April 2007 visit to Iraq with Pennsylvania Democratic

> Representative Joe Sestak, Hagel expressed his belief that

> the occupation of Iraq should not continue indefinitely and

> defended Congressional actions to set a timeline for an end in occupation.

>

> In July 2007, Hagel expressed his intention to cooperate

> with Senate Democrats in voting for a bill that would set a

> timeline to get out of Iraq.

>

> In November 2007, he rated the Bush administration

> "the lowest in capacity, in capability, in policy, in

> consensus -- almost every area" of any presidency in

> the last forty years....

>

> ...he said, "I have to say this is one of the most arrogant,

> incompetent administrations I've ever seen or ever read about."

>

>

>

>

>

--

"Life isn't about waiting for the storm

to pass... it's about learning to dance

in the rain."

"Gray Ghost" <grey_ghost471-newsgroups@yahoo.com> wrote in message

news:Xns9A7256CEB7B54Wereofftoseethewizrd@216.196.97.142...

> "Sid9" <sid9@bellsouth.net> wrote in news:FjVGj.25921$rC6.4258

> @bignews4.bellsouth.net:

>

>> In January 2007, Hagel openly criticized President Bush's plan

>> to send an additional 20,000 additional troops to Iraq.

>>

>> He called it, "the most dangerous foreign policy blunder

>> in this country since Vietnam, if it's carried out."

>>

>

> To bad it seems to have worked out, though, doesn't it?

>

> Frank

Where have you been for the past year and two months?

Iraq continues to be a gigantic failure...getting worse not better.

On Mar 31, 7:42 am, Jim Alder <jimal...@ssnet.com> wrote:

> "Sid9" <s...@bellsouth.net> wrote in news:FjVGj.25921$rC6.4258

> @bignews4.bellsouth.net:

>

> You want to deliver some NEWS to this newsgroup, Sid? Quote Hagel saying

> anything positive about the Bush administration since the day he took office.

That would be news. What has the Bush administration done that was

positive?

BLP

Gray Ghost wrote:

> "Sid9" <sid9@bellsouth.net> wrote in news:FjVGj.25921$rC6.4258

> @bignews4.bellsouth.net:

>

>> In January 2007, Hagel openly criticized President Bush's plan

>> to send an additional 20,000 additional troops to Iraq.

>>

>> He called it, "the most dangerous foreign policy blunder

>> in this country since Vietnam, if it's carried out."

>>

>

> To bad it seems to have worked out, though, doesn't it?

How so? Where is the political progress that it was supposed to make

possible?

The surge has been a dismal failure.

>

> Frank