Maddenation
George W. Bush by the numbers
If you’re in the mood for a very long list, one that’s better than the Revenge Scale that David suggested, read this edited extract from Graydon Carter, editor of Vanity Fair magazine, who doesn’t seem to like President Bush very much. Here are some highlights:
43 Percentage of the entire world’s military spending that the US spends on defence. (That was in 2002, the year before the invasion of Iraq.)
$401.3bn Proposed military budget for 2004.
15m Amount of a contract awarded to an American firm to build a cement factory in Iraq.
$80,000 Amount an Iraqi firm spent (using Saddam’s confiscated funds) to build the same factory, after delays prevented the American firm from starting it.
2000 Year that Cheney said his policy as CEO of Halliburton oil services company was “we wouldn’t do anything in Iraq”.
$4.7bn Total value of contracts awarded to Halliburton in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Which begs the questions: Is all this true? Is it true for any president you care to investigate? Is this what politics has become?
Patrick • News/Observations/Recommendations • 09/04/04 • 5 comments
Comments
Dad • 09/04/04 • 1:51 PM:How about that Reese Witherspoon cleavage Graydon Carter decided to put on the cover of his latest issue? Why not a picture of Bush on the aircraft carrier?
I suspect these facts are true in at least some sense, although it’s hard to tell without knowing how they were gotten. Selective use of facts out of context and without counterbalancing information can be misleading. For example, Haliburton’s policy under Cheney may well have been exactly what he says it was, considering that Iraq was under Hussein at the time. The other facts mentioned in the article, such as number of times a person or phrase was used in a speech, may not be as significant as they seem. Also, was Bush alone in his beliefs or was he merely reflecting what most of us thought?
I’m not a big supporter of Bush, and I’ve gone on record opposing the war in Iraq. Nonetheless, I believe most of Carter’s “facts” are cheap shots in disguise.
Having said that, your question about what politics has become is a good one. I can’t prove it, but I suspect that the vast majority of politicians are weasels. They go into politics because they crave power and want to enrich themselves and their cronies. They have done this under our noses because we are all basically napping.
Wake up America, and smell the B.S. Vote, yes, but study the candidates and the issues beforehand. Inform yourself and then inform others around you. Talk politics and be skeptical of what you are told. Learn to question the facts and especially the conclusions that are presented to you. And it your knowledge and analysis should bring you power, don’t abuse it, and don’t let it corrupt you.
Patrick • 09/05/04 • 2:51 AM:Yeah, I mean, there’s some intent to obfuscate. For instance:
If W. had 28 “vacation days” in August, then you’d have to be counting weekends, in which case the average American has 117 vacation days a year. Unless you’re saying that being president in a full-time job with no weekends off. Anyway, the point is that he shouldn’t be taking so much vacation. But you also gotta realize that he has to do at least some work while he’s on vacation. This, rhetorically, weakens the argument into a diatribe. One begins to wonder what other “facts” are skewed. I still dislike W, but I still recognize sophistry when I see it.
AJ • 09/10/04 • 6:27 PM:Here’s some more true (or not true) information: Apparently, my boss ran into a fellow who was head of airport security in Iraq for the last 10 years or something and had recently returned to the US. He said he was shocked at how the American media portrays what is happening in Iraq. He said everything is so much better over there. Even European papers don’t report the same headlines making the US seeming out of line.
Also, he commented that of course there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. We gave them to them to use against Iran. But it wouldn’t look to great to say, “Oh sure, we found some big angry weapons, but..er..they say Made in the USA on them.”
Anyway, all just information. I’m sure my boss didn’t make the story up, but I suppose he could have if he thought there was some good reason to.
Some might even argue that if someone says it, it’s true. Take it how you will.
All politicians seem to be politicians to me. It’s annoying. How do you do research on the candidates if you can’t ever trust your information? How much does a person’s past actions effect his future actions?
Is there anyway to vote someone into office who isn’t a politician? I think this was a big reason why Shwarzenegger won in CA. It wasn’t his job to lie about what he wanted to do in office.
Well, on the bright side of life as an American, at least you can’t necessarily sue for being born stupid as much as you used to be able to: Seanbaby is funny.
Patrick • 09/12/04 • 8:54 PM:Just a note: in Uruguay, and I believe in other countries south of the border, the general opinion is that the US news is too soft on the US in Iraq. I don’t doubt that things are much better in Iraq for a lot of people, but it’s obviously not everybody, or else there wouldn’t still be people dying. And you don’t see the pro-US Iraqis out dancing in the streets in a dance-off against the anti-US Iraqis when they capture a tank or somesuch.
As for Weapons of Mass Destruction: I think we’re talking nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons, not long-range missiles or machine guns, though these, too, can cause mass destruction. Perhaps the US did give these weapons to Iraq in the 1980s. But my understanding is that after Saddam showed he was an SOB, the United Nations (not just the US) decided he couldn’t have WMDs anymore, and inspectors eventually were able to go in and shut down some of his research facilities and slap him on the wrist. I find it hard to believe that US troops, inspectors, what have you, did find WMDs that were supplied by the US 20 years ago and just kept quiet about it. Who was this dude who was sure he’d find them and then didn’t? What, is he a Bush hater or something? He changes his story, making himself look like an idiot, just to get Bush in (further) trouble with the rest of the world?
Without knowing anything, my bet is that your head of the Iraq airport dude is educated and relatively wealthy. Of course his life is better without Saddam. He’s thankful to the US for getting rid of the bastard. So would any number of people the world over who are ruled by bloodthirsty dictators. But the US won’t topple dictators unless there’s some moolah to be gained. Instead, they’re likely to prop up dictators, as they’ve done in Latin America during the past half a century.
Patrick • 09/12/04 • 9:05 PM:The joke, of course, is that the US also (secretly) sold weapons to Iran to fight Iraq. Maybe the idea was to keep them beating each other up? Shoulda sold/given them nukes!
Post a comment
Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)
Please capitalize your name properly and use the same information each time you comment. We will not send you spam, and your email address will not be posted.