Talk:Worse Than Watergate

From SourceWatch
Jump to navigation Jump to search

On 6/3/04, an anonymous user with IP number added the following comments to this article. I'm moving it to the talk section because, (1) It isn't clear who "Wayne Biro" is; (2) Biro's strongly negative opinion of the book appears to be based on a quick browse in a bookstore rather than actually reading it; and (3) as currently written, these comments are a mixture of first-person and third-person commentary, and first-person comments belong on the talk page rather than in the article itself. --Sheldon Rampton 21:44, 3 Jun 2004 (EDT)


June 3, 2004, Wayne Biro browses through the book which is on prominent display at a local Barnes and Nobel book store, and arrives at the following conclusions:

(1) Dean weaves the simple, clear, and obvious into an unrecognizable spaghetti of contradiction and illogic, while jumping on the lucrative anti-Bush bandwagon. (2) Dean: "Bush deeply flawed secret decisions are costing America…" Response: Since the decisions are secret, the author's bogus claims cannot be contested. How convenient for the author and his targeted anti-Bush audience. (3) Dean: "Bush hiding why America was so unprepared for 9/11." Response: Only an idiot cannot see why America was so unprepared. It is obvious and always has been, barring the obfuscating games the liberals are playing. It is clear there were other issues to deal with, the liberals whining about everything except terrorism, and Osama snuck in under the radar with an unprecedented method of murder. (4) Dean: "Bush concealed government business the public has a right to know about." Response: Since the business is concealed, the author's bogus claims cannot be contested. How convenient for the author and his targeted anti-Bush audience. (5) Dean: "Bush checking (supressing)Congress's and the news media's efforts to check his abuse of power." Response: This is the most laughable of the many bogus claims the author makes on three counts: (1) I see no "checks" put on the news media, which is preponderously anti-Bush, and has spewed out obsessive, self-indulgent, and runaway anti-Busheries since the election, which Clinton's own Supreme Court gave to Bush, discounting the Democrat's chads. (2) The author misperceives any use of power as abuse of power, the author's point of reference obviously being the misuse of power that liberals are accustomed to- such as buying votes with promises of the communistic redistribution of money (in other words, free money). (3) If it weren't for Bush deferring to loony liberals, he would have militarily rolled over the entire Middle East by now, and he wouldn't be pussy-footing around in Iraq, and would have smashed not only the political tyrants in Iraq but the religious tyrants as well. For better or worse, the liberals have checked Bush instead. (6) Dean: "Bush has a hidden agenda in the Middle East" Response: I see no hidden agenda. Bush's agenda is crystal clear- it's time to deal with the misgovernance of the Middle East, a right the US obtained the day the problems of the Middle East spilled bloodily over onto US soil. (7) Dean: "Bush's terrorist policy is war mongering." Response: Quite the contrary. It's quite clear the liberal approach was not working, and only emboldening terrorists. After 9/11 the US had gained the right to aggressively deal with the world's madmen to the full extent of it's power (impeded by liberals). It was time to stop fearing the world's madmen (as the liberals do) or misguidedly punishing their innocent victims (as liberals have done with their mass-murdering economic sanctions). (8) The book is not without typical liberal illogic and contradictions. Example: The first line in a chapter in support of Saddam reads "aligning with terrorists was not in the interest of Saddam in his proctecting his investment in weapons of mass destruction..." Then the liberal argument turns around and claims Saddam had no WMD's? Illogical, to say the least. (9) The only things that make sense in this book are the quotes of Bush (which the author presents in order to attack). Example: Bush Quote: "Time is not on our side. I will not wait on events while danger gathers. The US will not permit the world's most dangerous regimes to threaten us with the world's most destructive weapons." This quote makes perfect sense, even without the impetus of 9/11, out of simple math: Tyrants+Modern Technology=Mass Murder in the US, an issue the liberals refuse to deal with, partly out of self-induced fear, partly out of self-absorbed power-grabbing politics. (10) And so the book goes, on it's way to the dung heap of books that present information in a twisted light. For the record, my stance on Bush: his worst enemy is not the liberal tyranny machine, but himself.