We all have our disagreements with President Bush. Immigration, U.S. Attorney firings, Iraq , Darfur , etc., are all hot topics these days. The following 'speech' was written recently by an ordinary Maineiac [a resident of the People's Republic of Maine ]. While satirical in nature, all satire must have a basis in fact to be effective. An excellent piece by a person who does not write for a living. Sent with the author's permission.

The speech George W. Bush COULD give:

Normally, I start these things out by saying 'My Fellow Americans.' Not doing it this time. If the polls are any indication, I don't know who more than half of you are anymore. I do know something terrible has happened, and that you're really not fellow Americans any longer.

I'll cut right to the chase here: I quit. Now before anyone gets all in a lather about me quitting to avoid impeachment, or to avoid prosecution or something, let me assure you: There¢s been no breaking of laws or impeachable offenses in this office.

The reason I'm quitting is simple. I'm fed up with you people.

I'm fed up because you have no understanding of what's really going on in the world. Or of what's going on in this once-great nation of ours. And the majority of you are too damned lazy to do your homework and figure it out.
Let's start local. You've been sold a bill of goods by politicians and the news media. Polls show that the majority of you think the economy is in the tank. And that's despite record numbers of homeowners, including record numbers of MINORITY homeowners. And while we're mentioning minorities, I'll point out that minority business ownership is at an all-time high. Our unemployment rate is as low as it ever was during the Clinton Administration. I've mentioned all those things before, but it doesn't seem to have sunk in.

Despite the shock to our economy of 9/11, the stock market has rebounded to record levels and more Americans than ever are participating in these markets. Meanwhile, all you can do is whine about gas prices, and most of you are too damn stupid to realize that gas prices are high because there's increased demand in other parts of the world, and because a small handful of noisy idiots are more worried about polar bears and beachfront property than your economic security.

We face real threats in the world. Don't give me this blood for oil' thing. If I were trading blood for oil I would've already seized Iraq 's oil fields and let the rest of the country go to hell. And don't give me this 'Bush Lied; People Died' crap either. If I were the liar you morons take me for, I could've easily had chemical weapons planted in Iraq so they could be 'discovered.' Instead, I owned up to the fact that the intelligence was faulty. Let me remind you that the rest of the world thought Saddam had the goods, same as me. Let me also remind you that regime change in Iraq was official US policy before I came into office. Some guy named ' Clinton ' established that policy. Bet you didn't know that, did you?

You idiots need to understand that we face a unique enemy. Back during the cold war, there were two major competing political and economic models squaring off. We won that war, but we did so because fundamentally, the Communists wanted to survive, just as we do. We were simply able to outspend and out-tech them.

That's not the case this time. The soldiers of our new enemy don't care if they survive. In fact, they want to die. That'd be fine, as long as they weren't also committed to taking as many of you with them as they can. But they are. They want to kill you. And the bastards are all over the globe.

You should be grateful that they haven't gotten any more of us here in the United States since September 11. But you're not. That's because you've got no idea how hard a small number of intelligence, military, law enforcement, and homeland security people have worked to make sure of that. When this whole mess started, I warned you that this would be a long and difficult fight. I'm disappointed how many of you people think a long and difficult fight amounts to a single season of 'Survivor.

Instead, you've grown impatient. You're incapable of seeing things through the long lens of history, the way our enemies do. You think that wars should last a few months, a few years, tops.

Making matters worse, you actively support those who help the enemy. Every time you buy the New York Times, every time you send a donation to a cut-and-run Democrat's political campaign, well, dammit, you might just as well FedEx a grenade launcher to a Jihadist. It amounts to the same thing.

In this day and age, it's easy enough to find the truth. It's all over the Internet. It just isn't on the pages of the New York Times or on NBC News. But even if it were, I doubt you'd be any smarter. Most of you would rather watch American Idol.

I could say more about your expectations that the government will always be there to bail you out, even if you're too stupid to leave a city that's below sea level and has a hurricane approaching. I could say more about your insane belief that government, not your own wallet, is where the money comes from. But I've come to the conclusion that were I to do so, it would sail right over your heads

So I quit. I'm going back to Crawford. I've got an energy-efficient house down there (Al Gore could only dream) and the capability to be fully self-sufficient. No one ever heard of Crawford before I got elected, and as soon as I'm done here pretty much no one will ever hear of it again. Maybe I'll be lucky enough to die of old age before the last pillars of America fall.

Oh, and by the way, Cheney's quitting too. That means Pelosi is your new President. You asked for it. Watch what she does carefully, because I still have a glimmer of hope that there are just enough of you remaining who are smart enough to turn this thing around in 2008.

So that's it. God bless what's left of America Some of you know what I mean. The rest of you, kiss off!<

That's pretty funny, but I doubt he would actually quit and if he did, he wouldn't be as candid as this reads.

It seems he would actually say this. Since, you know, he's a politician himself.

Did George Carlin write this? Sounds like one of those internet send-arounds people attribute to him.

I voted for Bush in 2000 and had many good election year debates with the liberal, Gore-supportin' Dem who sat in the adjacent cube at work. I said Bush was a strong leader with convictions who would restore America's integrity after the embarassment called the Clinton Administration. He insisted Bush was a war-mongering idiot who would turn out to be a horrible president. I said, "Well, time will tell."

Time has told, and he was right.

ETA: I did like two words of this speech: "I quit." I'd love to hear Bush say that as long as he took that creep Cheney with him.

I guess your are entitled to your opinion, that is until the Islamofacists have their way. Which they arguably would have if ALGore had won. Which they may still get in their cycle of doing things over 10's of years if not hundreds.

Fortunately I'll be long gone and it'll be up to our kids to fight them and liberalism off.

That means you would be happy to have Nancy "Stretch" Pelosi as president.

You're even more deluded and further to the left than I had thought.

Yeah sure you voted for Bush. You voting for Bush is about as likely as you joining the Federalist Society.

Hey, guess what? I'm not a liberal, and I'm not a Democrat. I'm conservative by nature and what I would like the most from politicians and citizens alike is some simple common sense.

The thought of a Democratic president turns my stomach. That aside, the truth is the truth, and Bush is an idiot who has led this country into a real mess. I hope a Republican candidate emerges who is more than just the lesser of two evils.

No, that's not what it means. As usual, it's you talking for me.

Watch your manners now. Remember yesterday's lesson, Madman? Hypocrisy, slinging BS, and using personal attacks are not productive. Those are tactics used by those who have no reasonable position they can defend.

Yeah sure you are not a liberal. If you are not a liberal, then I must be a communist.

Liberals are the only people who call Cheney a creep. What has he ever done that is so "creepy" to you?

Bush certainly has some problems, but he is far from an idiot.

The country is also not a mess. Some things are out of hand. Things like illegal immigration and spending. Both of which Bush has done nothing to combat.

But, the country is far from being a mess. You believe too much of the doom and gloom propaganda that you are spoon fed.

The economy is the best it has ever been in my years of living. The Bush administration is at least doing something about terrorism. More than I can say about many of his political opponents.

The country is not a mess.

"Those who have no reasonable position they can defend". You mean people like you.

I don't need any lessons from liberals like you. Especially liberal hypocrites like you.

You don't even have the courage of your convictions. You constantly argue the liberal side of positions, then deny being a liberal.

Hypocrisy is your middle name.

That should be his farewell speech in January, 2009. That'd be monumentally famous if he did it.

You mean besides shooting his friend in the face and calling a lawyer before calling his friend? You mean creepy that way as in "He's a creep"

Madman, I refuse to argue with you. Every time you start name calling, attacking people, and putting words in their mouths, your credibility sinks a little lower. It's into fractions now as it is and soon we'll have to discuss how to divide zero 'cause that's where it's going.

You're so ultra-conservative that a moderate position looks like Leninism to you.

Are you bi-polar? Some of your posts are lucid, well-thought out, and lack your usual ridiculous tactics. Then you come back with some of the usual crap. Help me understand that.

You do understand that if Bush and Cheney quit then Pelosi would be next in line. So by you saying you wish Bush and Cheney would quit you are saying you want Pelosi in the White House.

Maybe you need to reread it, I kind of feel like it's addressed specifically to you.

Also the first paragraph says who wrote it.

That was the case for me too. Kerry wasn't an option.

Awww.... Boo hoo.... Poor baby.

You won't be missed Bluesky. It is not easy having to adjust my responses to your posts to an intelligence level of which you can understand. It's almost like talking to a child. You have to adjust everything from vocabulary to perspective while responding.

Even here in this thread, in one statement you claim you would be happy if Bush were to quit and take Cheney with him. Then it is pointed out to you that Pelosi would then be president, and by supporting those two guys quitting, that is defacto support for Pelosi ascending to the presidency. Your response was nothing short of childlike. Because you rarely ever think about what you are writing, it is always someone else, usually me, putting words in your mouth.

If you want lucid and well thought out responses to your posts, that requires lucid and well thought out posts from you in the first place. That rarely ever occurs.

To people like you, political issues and debates are nothing more than childlike emotionalism applied to adult issues. Join the adults and you will be treated like an adult.

You're getting too predictable. Same old same old from the Madman.

You say I'll be missed? I'm not going anywhere. I'll be right here pointing out your sorry BS, don't worry about that. What I said (you seem to have a comprehension problem BTW) is that I wouldn't ARGUE with you. Got it now? I could write it 10 more times if it'll help.

Just for fun, let's see an example of your usual crap: After I said Bush could hit the door and take Cheney with him, you said:

"That means you would be happy to have Nancy "Stretch" Pelosi as president."

No, I said nothing of the kind. I believe she would be a terrible president. But we already have a terrible president, so she'd just be terrible in a different way.

But you didn't ask how I would feel about Pelosi, you told me how I would feel.

Then you attacked me with clever visuals of crying babies and your usual arsenal of horses**t.

I'll say it again, Madman. Pay attention now. Are you focusing? When you react that way, it lessens peoples' already microscopic opinion of you. Name-calling is how children handle things. Personal attacks are how weak-minded people handle things. Inflexible, closed-minded positions are how...well, you handle things.

It gets old.

And where have I heard this speech before?

Oh yeah...

"At last, while his companions one and all urged him to save himself as soon as possible from the indignities that threatened him, he bade them dig a grave in his presence, proportioned to the size of his own person, and at the same time bring water and wood for properly disposing of his body. As each of these things was done, he wept and said again and again: 'Qualis artifex pereo!' ('What an artist is lost in me!')"

Too late! This is fidelity!

Go ahead Bluesky. Pick apart everything I say from now on. I welcome such a thing. I should probably say Thank You that you are taking such an interest.

It's not everyday that a hormonally imbalanced schoolmarm like yourself proclaims such outright dedication and attention to my posts. I look forward to whatever future verbal imbroglio's that may entail.

Your current argument about Bush and the ultimate outcome of Pelosi is beyond weak. You are basically admitting that you have no idea of the ramifications of anything you say or write. You don't even care.

I'm not the only one in this thread who has pointed out that you don't even understand what the hell you are talking about.

Grow up Bluesky. I don't care that you seem to have a particular dislike for me on this board. I don't care that you falsely claim to speak for any others who don't like me. It is not going to make me care either way.

Grow up and learn to think about your bullshit before you hit the post button.

I don't dislike you, Madman. If I could identify any feeling at all about you, it would be a keen indifference.

What I dislike are your actions. You can occasionally make a lucid argument, but as soon as you can't, you start attacking people. Some who aren't secure with themselves may be offended by it, or have their feelings hurt. I'm not affected by it at all, and I recognize it for what it is. So fire away and call me every name you want, assign whatever radical motives you wish to me, have all the fun you want trying to cast me in whatever light you find most entertaining. It doesn't bother me a bit. In fact, if the day comes when I'm bothered by anything you or any other internet user writes about me, it'll be time to put a gun to my head.

I don't plan to "pick apart" everything you say, I'm just going to point out those times when instead of discussing things like an intelligent adult you stoop to using tactics more suited to fussy three-year-olds who don't get their way.

I challenge you to answer one question, yes or no: have you ever admitted you were wrong about anything? I sure can't see that happening.

BTW, I saw a saying the other day that somehow reminded me of you and your ilk (you like that phrase, don't you?):

Blind faith in bad leaders isn't patriotism.

I really don't care what you think of me or any of my responses BlueSky. You've been on this board long enough to realize that I treat people in a fairly congruent manner with which they treat me. I rarely if ever attack people who do not attack me. You've chosen long ago to be antagonistic. Not that I care, but I'm sure it probably accounts for your somewhat obsession and sometimes oddly strange persecution complex regarding our dialogs.

I have more respect for people like Wilmac than I do for you. We disagree on almost everything, but at least he has the courage of his convictions. That at least means something. You have no convictions.

Have I ever said I was wrong about something on here? Sure, I've been wrong about things and have freely admitted such. It's always funny how people such as yourself who despise other people who actually have values and convictions, are always the people to ask such questions. People such as yourself with no values or convictions who ride the prevailing winds. You somehow pride yourself and manage to convince yourself that your complete lack of fortitude is called an open mind.

I saw a phrase the other day that completely sums up people of your ilk.... "Pride that dines on vanity, sups on contempt".... Benjamin Franklin

You're funny. Delusional, but funny.

Back up your big mouth by showing me some posts where I attacked you. See, that's not my style so I think maybe it happened in the fantasy world you live in but I really don't think it happened here.

So, will you be backing Cynthia McKinney for president? You'd like her, she's delusional too.

ETA: That bit about treating people how they treat you is a real laugher, man. How you treat people depends on whether THEY AGREE WITH YOU. There's a big difference. You wouldn't know respect if it sat in your lap. Actually, I take that back. The "good" Madman posted in the rescued dogs thread. That's the puzzle, why you can be normal and then ridiculous.

And you've admitted being wrong? Show me. Otherwise I'm calling BS.

You're full of shit. There are ongoing threads right now with people I don't agree with that I haven't attacked. I'll present an argument or debate, but normally I am not the first individual in a thread to go on the attack. I'm aware I have that reputation, but it is largely a misnomer. I'm not denying that I attack other users, but I am normally not the first to draw blood or make a wiseass remark in a thread. Sure, I am guilty of it sometimes, but so are you.

You and I have never gotten along on this board as far as I can recall. At least I don't cry about it like you do.

I'm not crying, just trying to understand why you are the way you are. In that last post you completely misrepresented how you act on this board. You are usually the one to start name-calling and personal attacks. As you yourself said, you have a reputation. Where you're wrong is in calling it a misnomer. In fact, it's well deserved. I've outlined your tactics many times, illustrated many examples, and tried to have reasonable discussions with you. And still you're just the way you were before.

Guess I'm just fascinated by denial.

Tell you what. Let's call a truce and state that from now on, there will be no name-calling and no personal attacks and no attributing false statements/beliefs to others. Hmmm, easy for me since I don't do those things but anyway, let's agree to simply debate with the facts at our disposal.

I think this proposal has a much chance as a paper shirt in a bear fight, but I wanted to try. What do you say?

You can believe whatever you want to believe BlueSky. Whatever makes you happy.

All this back and forth has also ruined another guy's thread.

I'm not sure that we can make your agreement. Agreements are two-sided. You don't think there is a problem on your side. I'll agree to not call you names and make these so-called "false accusations" of which you claim. That's providing you agree to actually be a little more cohesive with your statements. For example, don't say you will turn your lights off at midnight, then deny it will get dark. Then get mad when it is pointed out to you that it will get dark.

It's an apt analogy, but you do things like that all the time. At least in politically oriented threads. You did it in this thread. You might be fascinated with denial.

I'll agree to your terms if you agree to mine. You don't have to be so touchy all the time in many of these threads. Everything is not a personal affront against you. I don't take every comment made towards me as such.

If it's an agreement, we can be the best of friends. Maybe not as good as Shahram and I, but we can work on that.

so...uh...

Cindy Sheehan and Barry bonds walk into this bar....

He's already monumentally infamous.