If i don't pass dynamics, the terrorists have already won
It was definitely a bad call taking a mechanical engineering class; right now I'm praying for a C in advanced dynamics.
Now on to the real reason I post on lj...
Yesterday I heard a clip from a bush press conference on Tuesday; here's a taste (note: I'm leaving out his terrible grammar and vocalized pauses for readability):
"I think during these difficult times and they are difficult when we're at war the American people expect there to be a honest and open debate without needless partisanship. And that's how I view it. I did notice that nobody from the Democrat Party has actually stood up and called for getting rid of the terrorist surveillance program. You know, if that's what they believe, if people in the party believe that, then they ought to stand up and say it. They ought to stand up and say the tools we're using to protect the American people shouldn't be used. They ought to take their message to the people and say, 'Vote for me, I promise we're not going to have a terrorist surveillance program.' That's what they ought to be doing. That's part of what is an open and honest debate."
Notice how he stresses "open and honest debate" so much. Is anyone else dumbstruck by the size of this latest load of bullshit? Yeah, let's have an open and honest debate about it. Please.
The openness and honesty from the administration started in 2004 when, 3 years after bush started the warrantless wiretapping program, he told the american people that "uh, anytime you hear the US government talking about wiretap, it requires, a wiretap requires a court order" and "when we're talking about chasing down terrorists, er, we're talking about getting a court order before we do so." He followed this remarkable honesty--or "lie," if you will--with another act of extreme openness and honesty: when everyone found out about the program, he renamed it the "terrorist surveillance program". This way, if you say you're against it you sound like a terrorist. Pretty clever, but by no means could it be called honest. No, I don't think the Democrats or anyone else in the country is against surveillance of terrorists; I think maybe they just expected us to do it through actual legal channels. What an asshole.
Now on to the real reason I post on lj...
Yesterday I heard a clip from a bush press conference on Tuesday; here's a taste (note: I'm leaving out his terrible grammar and vocalized pauses for readability):
"I think during these difficult times and they are difficult when we're at war the American people expect there to be a honest and open debate without needless partisanship. And that's how I view it. I did notice that nobody from the Democrat Party has actually stood up and called for getting rid of the terrorist surveillance program. You know, if that's what they believe, if people in the party believe that, then they ought to stand up and say it. They ought to stand up and say the tools we're using to protect the American people shouldn't be used. They ought to take their message to the people and say, 'Vote for me, I promise we're not going to have a terrorist surveillance program.' That's what they ought to be doing. That's part of what is an open and honest debate."
Notice how he stresses "open and honest debate" so much. Is anyone else dumbstruck by the size of this latest load of bullshit? Yeah, let's have an open and honest debate about it. Please.
The openness and honesty from the administration started in 2004 when, 3 years after bush started the warrantless wiretapping program, he told the american people that "uh, anytime you hear the US government talking about wiretap, it requires, a wiretap requires a court order" and "when we're talking about chasing down terrorists, er, we're talking about getting a court order before we do so." He followed this remarkable honesty--or "lie," if you will--with another act of extreme openness and honesty: when everyone found out about the program, he renamed it the "terrorist surveillance program". This way, if you say you're against it you sound like a terrorist. Pretty clever, but by no means could it be called honest. No, I don't think the Democrats or anyone else in the country is against surveillance of terrorists; I think maybe they just expected us to do it through actual legal channels. What an asshole.