Thank goodness for Jacob Zuma
Vice President Dick Cheney (L) speaks as Sen. Trent Lott (R-MS) looks on at the U.S. Capitol April 24, 2007 in Washington DC. Call me old fashioned or an Afro-optimist, but given a choice between Cheney and, say, Jacob Zuma, for President, I would be happy to support Mr. Zuma any day. At least Mr. Zuma does not look like a scary psychopath and does not have access to nuclear weapons.
Subscribe to constitutionally speaking
9 comments:
Your petulant and irrational anti-americanism is so sad. Get a life.
I do not think I am particularly anti-american. I am very strongly anti George W Bush and the appropriately named, Dick Cheney. Abroad they have instituted ruinous policies which have led to the death of hundreds of thousands of people in Iraq and elswhere. At home their pro rich policies have been devastating to the poor and the lower middle class. I cannot wait for Barack Obama to take over in January 2009...
Perhaps 'irrational' is a tad harsh, but the veracity of your above assertions is very much debatable. Osama(sic) will have to get over his sophomoric platitudes and take a real stance on issues before he’ll allure any of the voting-age Americans.
Personally I would choose Zuma over Cheney any day. Cheney doesn't just look like a scary psycopath - he is one. The fact that the VP of the United States publicly came out in support of torture as an interrogation method (calling it a "no brainer" as I recall) still boggles my mind. Whereas I think if Zuma had the right advisors his presidency could actually see a lot of progress in SA....
So advocating torture makes one a psychopath? Let's see: your wife/kid/partner is attached to a ticking bomb. There is no time to detach or deactivate the device. You have access to the perpetrator who has memorised the 5 digit deactivation code but refuses to give it to you. Are you telling me you would in no way try to physically/psychologically extract it from him/her? I'd say that makes you the psycho, Jimbo.
http://www.answers.com/topic/ticking-time-bomb-scenario
Thank you masgruva, for that inane response. For some more context on why I think the VP of the States advocating torture is deeply, deeply disturbing can I suggest you read the following?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,,2064157,00.html?gusrc=rss&feed=1
Should I take your red-herring or otherwise lack of response on the torture issue as a concession? Did you get permission from the Party Chairman to engage in rational discourse or should I expect liberal-rag links as the standard form of response?
Thanks for the entirely forgettable link -- highly amusing, I have to admit, but steaming intellectual candy floss nonetheless. Bush as Hitler? That wouldn’t even pass as a cartoon. It’s too long a stretch, even for holocaust deniers and Bush would have to grow a moustache. Control of the press? America must be one of the few countries where you can drop the f-bomb with your president’s name and a colourful description of his mental incapacity in the same sentence and cheerfully pass it off as ‘freedom of speech’. The article seems highly contrived, ridiculously outlandish in its predictions and shamelessly naïve of the fact that America is a country facing a historically unique threat: rabid terrorism -- “now, theoretically capable of killing millions at the push of a button” (as advertised by Jihad-K-Mart).
I see a presidency faced with the unthinkable dilemma of sufficiently protecting a nation from within while preserving all their constitutional freedoms. Bush or Cheney are certainly not flawless -- they happen to be human -- but this is a gross distortion of reality, perpetrated by a liberal media, preaching selective drivel to the choir rather than reporting the facts. I humbly suggest to you that history would have the final say over these bigoted prophets of doom.
Fascist USA -- methinks it’s an oxymoron.
Hahaha, masgruva, once again you make me laugh. Clearly didn't understand the Guardian article at all did you?
Post a Comment