PDA

View Full Version : Bush, Peru and 'Democracy'


Livinginthe past
04-15-2006, 04:18 AM
Peruvians have followed the recent trend in national elections, from Europe to Palestine, by voting en masse for the candidate most hostile to George Bush.

The election in Peru has followed a similar pattern. Ollanta Humala has won widespread support by promising to redistribute wealth towards the poor - George W. Bush responded to this by threatening to withdraw aid if Humala won, and the National Endowment of Democracy (which was founded by another great American President Ronald Reagan), began funding Humala's opponents.

http://www.antiwar.com/paul/paul79.html

The NED is an organisation that exists allegedly to encourage the spread Democracy across the world.

How would Americans feel if the Chinese arrived with millions of dollars to support certain candidates deemed friendly to China? Would this be viewed as a democratic development?

At a recent convention Bush recently said, "There are sceptics who say we can't expect to bring about democracy in every region of the world. They say some countries aren't suited to it. I say we should have more faith in the people"

He dismissed those cynics as 'unrealistic' - which no doubt will upset older Republicans, because in 1953 America invaded Guatemala, overthrowing the elected President because 'democracy in this country is unrealistic' - its funny how 53 years can revalidate the concept of a free election.

Bush also boasted that one consequence of American policy was "in the 1970's democracy began to spread through Latin America".

In Chile, for example, where an election was won by a radical President, until he was overthrown by a CIA-backed coup and replaced by a General.

It is clear that the USA supports a democratic system known as 'proportional assasination' - if you dont like they guy with the most votes - kill him.

In yet another example of American democracy, Bush has threatened to withdraw aid from Bolivia becasue they voted the wrong guy into office, and in Venezuela there have been three attempts to overthrow the anti-Bush President - Chavez.

They have also spent $6million funding parties to oppose Chavez - im sure you people can think of much better places this money could be spent within the boundaries of your own country.

America acts as if its allowing the rest of the world to try out Democracy as a privilege, in a way a teacher might go out of the room for a while saying "Im trusting you to get on with your own work".

But if a country makes the awful mistake of electing the 'wrong person', America comes storming back into the room screaming "Is this how you repay my faith in you? I trusted you to be responsible, and you vote for a maniac with a vaguely socialist approach to farming and the economy! Okay you asked for it - we are going back to life under my friend 'the General'"

Im sure I am not the only one who see's the awful irony in winners of elections, in predominantly South American countries, being labelled as 'undemocratic' - if wasn't so sad it would be funny.

You can't even suggest that America is trying to do the right thing, but in a naive fashion - one look at Mr Bush's allies in Uzbekistan and Pakistan tells a very different story.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_Karimov

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pervez_Musharaf

Or maybe there is a different type of organisation he promotes in those countries, the National Endowment for Dictatorship where he says " there are sceptics who say we can't expect to bring about dictatorship in every region of the world. They say that some countries aren't suited to it. I say we should have more faith in the Generals"

Before I get any replies to this thread - I would like to state again that I am not in any way anti-American, but I am strongly opposed to the American government and its continuous, hypocritical meddling in the affairs of other sovereign nations.

Thanks

NM

clevestinks
04-15-2006, 09:56 AM
Thye whole thing is scary. This world is really F%$^%* up right now. All we need to do is keep pissing off all, all these little countries, that done give a crap about anything or anybody. We may wont to consider bringing as many soldiers home as possible, and protecting our own country.

tony hipchest
04-15-2006, 10:54 AM
i guess we feel we have earned the right to meddle after we kicked ass in so many wars, and because we hand out so much foreign aid, and bail out certain countries in trouble.

imagine how bad we would be with a leader such as hitler, stalin, or hussein.

83-Steelers-43
04-15-2006, 10:56 AM
imagine how bad we would be with a leader such as hitler, stalin, or hussein.

The amusing part, some idiots are comparing Bush to all three of those dictators. :rolleyes:

tony hipchest
04-15-2006, 11:04 AM
The amusing part, some idiots are comparing Bush to all three of those dictators. :rolleyes:and even if he were an americain leader is one of the easiest to "overthrow". 4 years and an election and hes gone! as it stands hes gone in 2 years. no hostile overthrow or rebellion needed.

Livinginthe past
04-15-2006, 11:57 AM
I think we have been down the route about 'foreign aid' and what it represents.

Despite what some may believe it is not a means of keeping poor people alive, because the States can't even ensure that its own people enjoy that privilege.

Its basically a bargaining tool to try and ensure that the most Bush-friendly government gets to power and remains there.

Stalin, Hussein and Hitler are poor comparisons for sure.

But I think Hitler tried to achieve what Bush is attempting to achieve - the only difference is the amount of stealth used to get to this goal.

The fact that Bush can be said to be 'better' than any of the 3 names mentioned is a better indictment of his crimes than anything I have said.

For the record, The British Empire has won many more battles than the Americans have - and I certainly dont think that gives us any right to dictate to other countries on how to run their affairs or elect their leaders.

NM

83-Steelers-43
04-15-2006, 12:13 PM
W's to do list:

Take over the Democratic party by force in order to gain power (check)

Murder 8 million Jews (check)

Conquer half of Europe (check)

Establish a dictatorship (check)

Murder anybody that disagrees with his decisions (check)

lol, some people. I'll stick by my above comments. Complete idiots.

While I will not hesitate to call out W on poor decisions, comparing him to Hitler, Stalin and Hussein is laughable and pathetic. People who believe that are the type of people who are not even worth holding a debate with.

tony hipchest
04-15-2006, 12:18 PM
For the record, The British Empire has won many more battles than the Americans have - and I certainly dont think that gives us any right to dictate to other countries on how to run their affairs or elect their leaders.

NM unfortunately they lost probably one of their most important battles. the battle for america. the usa (which isnt even 300 years old) has thrust itself into the position of being the world super power it is today.

i see you are displeased about america, but really what are you, england, or any other country gonna do about it?

the big, bad, mean, bully of the world is now chinas problem. and when they come knocking on our doorstep, i really dont expect any of our "allies" to step to our aid. what county out there would be willing to take on a titan such as china? what country would send a million troops and lose 100,000 of them on our behalf? in the meantime i guess we will just keep on kicking ass and taking names later. for better or for worse.

looking at the worlds population, i had about a 1 in 25 chance of being born an american. i consider myself lucky.

Livinginthe past
04-15-2006, 12:29 PM
unfortunately they lost probably one of their most important battles. the battle for america. the usa (which isnt even 300 years old) has thrust itself into the position of being the world super power it is today.

i see you are displeased about america, but really what are you, england, or any other country gonna do about it?

the big, bad, mean, bully of the world is now chinas problem. and when they come knocking on our doorstep, i really dont expect any of our "allies" to step to our aid. what county out there would be willing to take on a titan such as china? what country would send a million troops and lose 100,000 of them on our behalf? in the meantime i guess we will just keep on kicking ass and taking names later. for better or for worse.

looking at the worlds population, i had about a 1 in 25 chance of being born an american. i consider myself lucky.

Well thats fine Tony.

I can see that, in the absense of any sort of adult argument, you are going to reduce this to a WWF commentary.

We all find our own levels on these matters.

NM

tony hipchest
04-15-2006, 12:40 PM
Well thats fine Tony.

I can see that, in the absense of any sort of adult argument, you are going to reduce this to a WWF commentary.

We all find our own levels on these matters.

NM

seriously, you pointed out a problem, (which is easy to do) but i saw no solution in your commentary. was the point? just to say america sucks? now that the problem is out there on the table, what do you suggest we, as inhabitants of the world, do to solve it? the bed has been made and now we have to lie in it. runaway train....the cats out of the bag...... and all those other cliches. i dont see how you think you or any other country can force a laisse faire (sp) world policy on america now.

if you want to have a serious argument, instead of just ranting, throw out some solutions to discuss, otherwise your initial post, while good, is hollow.

Livinginthe past
04-15-2006, 12:58 PM
seriously, you pointed out a problem, (which is easy to do) but i saw no solution in your commentary. was the point? just to say america sucks? now that the problem is out there on the table, what do you suggest we, as inhabitants of the world, do to solve it? the bed has been made and now we have to lie in it. runaway train....the cats out of the bag...... and all those other cliches. i dont see how you think you or any other country can force a laisse faire (sp) world policy on america now.

if you want to have a serious argument, instead of just ranting, throw out some solutions to discuss, otherwise your initial post, while good, is hollow.

A solution to the problem would lie with the voting public of America, not a native of the UK Tony.

The attitude you and some of the other posters take on subjects such as this are so similar to what I would expect if I dared to criticise the Steelers - usually the result is a load of one-upmanship such as you just displayed.

"We are bigger than you and we kick everyones ass" - yes thats very constructive Tony...well done.

Just because something is debated it does not mean those debating it hold the answer to the questions - we talk about the draft on other forums dont we?....how exactly are you affecting the Steelers draft Tony? You dont and will not - yet you still debate it.

Asking me to find a solution is puerile and childish - im not surprised..maybe some people with an adult disposition will reply to this thread...I live in hope.


NM

tony hipchest
04-15-2006, 01:15 PM
A solution to the problem would lie with the voting public of America, not a native of the UK Tony.

The attitude you and some of the other posters take on subjects such as this are so similar to what I would expect if I dared to criticise the Steelers - usually the result is a load of one-upmanship such as you just displayed.

"We are bigger than you and we kick everyones ass" - yes thats very constructive Tony...well done.

Just because something is debated it does not mean those debating it hold the answer to the questions - we talk about the draft on other forums dont we?....how exactly are you affecting the Steelers draft Tony? You dont and will not - yet you still debate it.

Asking me to find a solution is puerile and childish - im not surprised..maybe some people with an adult disposition will reply to this thread...I live in hope.


NM theres nothing to discuss or debate in your post. i believe you said it wasnt an anti america post, and i believe you have said you are pretty much anti government in the past. that suggests this is an anti bush post. bush is gone in 2 years. problem solved? i doubt it. Americans are emersed in these types of debates and discussions every day. look at the past 2 elections and america is split down the middle. am i pro bush? no. am i pro america? you better believe it. again when you offer nothing else to the story, its easy to label my viewpoints as childish. good way to duck the qustions i have asked. the smart adult one isnt always the one who points out the problems, it is more often the one who points out a solution. i have a vote so i can assure you i will be a part of the solution an not the problem. thats more than you can say.

just out of curiosity. do you disagree with every american leader or is it just bush? being anti govt and all i dont what to make of your viewpoints.

tony hipchest
04-15-2006, 01:34 PM
Its basically a bargaining tool to try and ensure that the most Bush-friendly government gets to power and remains there.

NM

wrong. american foreign aid existed long before either president bush.

tony hipchest
04-15-2006, 01:47 PM
litp you contend this thread was to bring forth an adult discussion and debate. before you ask what questions i have posed that you failed to answer (typical debate procedures):

"i see you are displeased about america, but really what are you, england, or any other country gonna do about it?"

"was the point? just to say america sucks? now that the problem is out there on the table, what do you suggest we, as inhabitants of the world, do to solve it?"

"that suggests this is an anti bush post. bush is gone in 2 years. problem solved?"


"just out of curiosity. do you disagree with every american leader or is it just bush? being anti govt and all i dont what to make of your viewpoints"

i guess its just easier to label me childish than to actually do what you set out to do. discuss and debate. what you really want out of this thread is this:

LITP is right. bush is bad and needs to go.

you only like the one sided debates. the ones where you fell you are always right. nice strategy to make you look good but not really constructive now is it? but you got your point across, you are anti bush. so is half of all americans. your point is??????

now should we discuss the pros and cons of abortion or capital punishment? why bother? we already know the right one is the one you support (whichever side that may be).

tony hipchest
04-15-2006, 03:01 PM
A solution to the problem would lie with the voting public of America, not a native of the UK Tony.

The attitude you and some of the other posters take on subjects such as this are so similar to what I would expect if I dared to criticise the Steelers - usually the result is a load of one-upmanship such as you just displayed.

"We are bigger than you and we kick everyones ass" - yes thats very constructive Tony...well done.

Just because something is debated it does not mean those debating it hold the answer to the questions - we talk about the draft on other forums dont we?....how exactly are you affecting the Steelers draft Tony? You dont and will not - yet you still debate it.

Asking me to find a solution is puerile and childish - im not surprised..maybe some people with an adult disposition will reply to this thread...I live in hope.


NMthis gets the brilliant deduction of the day award. speak negative of the steelers on a steelers board= negative response. speak negative about america on an american board= negative response.

theres so many holes here i dont know where to begin.



i love the comparison of discussing the draft to world policy. the only difference (although we dont change the outcome of the draft) is that we ACTUALLY offer up solutions and alternatives of who should be drafted. are the solutions or alternatives gonna be right or the correct answers? maybe, maybe not. so, i ask you if you have an opinion on who the steelers (or pats) should draft, for conversations sake, and you give up an answer. it works fine. why do you not have an opinion of what the solution should be to americas poor foreign policies? why, when i ask you to discuss and debate, you (who obviously has NO answer) offers up the response that you are a citizen of the UK and its the american voting publics problem, and then call my responses or solutions childlike?

cop out?

this is obviously a debate/conversation/discussion you were unprepared to enter.

enjoy your wait for an adult like response.

we already know if I had brought up the wwf or nfl draft in this discussion you would play stupid and ask what they had to do with the topic at hand.

Suitanim
04-15-2006, 04:21 PM
How would Americans feel if the Chinese arrived with millions of dollars to support certain candidates deemed friendly to China? Would this be viewed as a democratic development?

Hey, didn't this already happen? Anyone remeber the bags of cash Clinton recieved from China, and the Top Secret info he gave them back for it?

Livinginthe past
04-16-2006, 06:56 AM
this gets the brilliant deduction of the day award. speak negative of the steelers on a steelers board= negative response. speak negative about america on an american board= negative response.

theres so many holes here i dont know where to begin.



i love the comparison of discussing the draft to world policy. the only difference (although we dont change the outcome of the draft) is that we ACTUALLY offer up solutions and alternatives of who should be drafted. are the solutions or alternatives gonna be right or the correct answers? maybe, maybe not. so, i ask you if you have an opinion on who the steelers (or pats) should draft, for conversations sake, and you give up an answer. it works fine. why do you not have an opinion of what the solution should be to americas poor foreign policies? why, when i ask you to discuss and debate, you (who obviously has NO answer) offers up the response that you are a citizen of the UK and its the american voting publics problem, and then call my responses or solutions childlike?

cop out?

this is obviously a debate/conversation/discussion you were unprepared to enter.

enjoy your wait for an adult like response.

we already know if I had brought up the wwf or nfl draft in this discussion you would play stupid and ask what they had to do with the topic at hand.

FYI I have better things to do than sit around and wait for your latest attempt at adult conversation - I can see you had a great time leaving numerous posts in my absense.

Your first reaction is always the childish smack that you bring to the Blast Furnace - making it a Uk vs US issue - we are bigger than you and kick your ass is the basic premise behind your posts.


My solution?

Get Bush out of the Presidency and elect someone who isn't afraid to change a foreign policy that sees America with a dirty finger in every pie across the world.

As I say, its not something I can affect as I dont have a vote in the presidential elections.

Americans have been suckered into thinking that criticising the Government is akin to being unpatriotic - its quite clear that this attitude has worked with you - as your initial response proved - a bigotted, childish outburst labelling the USA as the school playground bully as something to be proud of.

There have been plenty of ex-Presidents who have followed the same m.o as Bush - but only he has done it with so little subtlety as to be completely transparent.

Maybe its true that the majority of Americans just dont care as long as America keeps coming out on top in these conflicts - though I doubt many families of servicemen and women see it that way.

You go ahead and keep your head in the sand and wait for the next 2 years to pass = the rest of us will keep a body count in the meantime.

NM

clevestinks
04-16-2006, 09:15 AM
W's to do list:

Take over the Democratic party by force in order to gain power (check)

Murder 8 million Jews (check)

Conquer half of Europe (check)

Establish a dictatorship (check)

Murder anybody that disagrees with his decisions (check)

lol, some people. I'll stick by my above comments. Complete idiots.

While I will not hesitate to call out W on poor decisions, comparing him to Hitler, Stalin and Hussein is laughable and pathetic. People who believe that are the type of people who are not even worth holding a debate with.
I would never compare W to any of those murders. Bush I think had the right idea, but did not execute it entirely right??????

Suitanim
04-17-2006, 09:47 AM
Seriously, the argument being asserted in this thread is absurb. First, we have a Republican Senator authoring an article about the evils of the NED, which is:

"The National Endowment for Democracy is dependent on the US taxpayer for funding, but because NED is not a government agency, it is not subject to Congressional oversight. It is indeed a heavily subsidized foreign policy loose cannon.

Since its founding in 1983, the National Endowment for Democracy has been headed by Carl Gershman, a member of the neo-Trotskyite Social Democrats/USA."

And the end result of what this rogue element is trying to accomplish is wrongly attributed to both President Bush and the American Government.

Furthermore, most of the examples of US meddling are from before most of the people on this board had even been born, but the author of this thread tries to trick us into thinking these are all recent occurences.

For example, the CIA led Coup in Chile was under the Nixon Administration.

Then there's this gem:
In yet another example of American democracy, Bush has threatened to withdraw aid from Bolivia becasue they voted the wrong guy into office

What he fails to mention is that the US reaction to Bolivian President Morales (a former Coca [Cocaine] grower) is based on Morales opposition to the US's hard stance against Bolivia's cocaine trade. Morales is also a close ally of Chavez in Venezuela, that crazy man who was busy last week preparing a home guard to defend Venezuala against the "Imminent US Invasion"

This thread tries to connect dots that either aren't there, or can't be connected, is poorly researched, has a flawed premise from which even more deeply flawed conclusions are drawn, and, quite frankly, in light of a PM that was sent out recently to myself and a few others, should never have even been posted on this board.

Suitanim
04-17-2006, 10:35 AM
Here's some news about that great guy from Venezuela.

http://quote.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000086&sid=abASlsAyXgoE&refer=news_index

Chavez's Blacklist of Venezuelan Opposition Intimidates Voters
April 17 (Bloomberg) -- In the two years since she signed a petition that forced a recall vote on President Hugo Chavez, Venezuelan lawyer Rocio San Miguel says she lost her government job, colleagues became afraid to talk to her, and her husband, a pilot, was taken off active duty from the Air Force.

``It was a witch hunt,'' said San Miguel, 39. Last month she and two other Foreign Ministry employees filed a complaint with the Organization of American States alleging their political rights were violated when they were fired. The case is pending.

The practice of denying government jobs to some of the 3.4 million Venezuelans who signed the petition has intimidated voters and will help Chavez win re-election in December, said Riordan Roett, an international studies professor at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore.

Blacklisting critics is effective in part because the government and state-run companies employ about 20 percent of workers in the South American country. Chavez, 51, also has stacked the Supreme Court with his backers, stripped landowners of farm land he deems ``underutilized'' and determined who can buy dollars at a preferential government-set exchange rate.

The names on the petition became public after the electoral council gave access to Luis Tascon, a congressman in Chavez's coalition, so the government could check for fraudulent signatures. Tascon created a Web site that posted the names.

The so-called Tascon's List was then used by officials to ensure the people who signed the petition wouldn't be hired by the government and in some cases would be fired, said San Miguel.

Phone calls to presidential spokeswoman Marisol Contreras seeking comment weren't returned. Ilia Azpurua, a legal adviser to Vice President Jose Vicente Rangel, who fired San Miguel and her colleagues, declined to comment. Tascon, 37, didn't return telephone calls seeking comment.

Thousands Fired

Thousands of people who signed the petition have been fired from the civil service and taken out of the running for government contracts, said Alejandro Plaz, president of Sumate, a civic action group that led the failed recall effort.

Maria Verdeal, a government lawyer who says she was fired for signing the petition, last year formed a support group, ``The Movement to Defend the Signers.''

``Those on the list will never get an important position or contract,'' Plaz said. ``That's a pretty powerful incentive not to vote against him.''

Plaz and three other Sumate directors face up to 16 years in jail for charges they illegally accepted $31,000 from the National Endowment for Democracy, a group financed in part by the U.S. government.

Maisanta List

Chavez, an ally of Cuban President Fidel Castro who refers to U.S. President George W. Bush as ``Mr. Danger,'' has been at odds with the U.S. for the past seven years.

Venezuela's president, who entered politics after leading an unsuccessful coup attempt in 1992, reiterated March 19 his claim that Bush wants to overthrow him and invade Venezuela, one of the top four suppliers of oil to the U.S. The U.S. denied the accusations as recently as Dec. 9.

At an April 15, 2005, cabinet meeting, Chavez said his government had been using a list to determine who to hire and fire and called for an end to the practice.

``There are still places that use Tascon's List to determine who gets a job and who doesn't,'' Chavez told his ministers that day, in remarks broadcast from the eastern city of Puerto Ordaz. ``That's over. Bury Tascon's List. Surely it had an important role at one time, but not now.''

Chavez's appeal didn't stop the blacklisting, Plaz said. Soon the Maisanta List began circulating. Named after Chavez's great-grandfather, a general who revolted against the dictatorship of General Juan Vicente Gomez in 1914, the Maisanta List incorporated more information on people, such as whether they participate in government-sponsored social programs, Plaz said.

Documentary

Domenico Tuccinardi, who served as the chief observer of the congressional elections in December for the European Union, said ``political forces'' are using the Maisanta List ``as a tool to pressure and intimidate the electorate.''

Chavez's coalition members swept all 167 national congressional seats in the December vote after most opposition party candidates backed out of the race, saying they didn't trust the electoral council to carry out a fair vote.

``The election process is a total fraud,'' Roett said in a telephone interview from Baltimore. ``If voters believe the process is secret, they will vote. If not, they will not.''

The extent of Chavez's intimidation was documented in a movie called: ``The List: A Society Under Suspicion,'' which was released in February by Ciudadania Activa, a not-for-profit organization. The documentary draws attention to how Chavez in February 2005 mocked those people who had been blacklisted.

That month, Chavez, on a weekly television show, called Congressman Tascon up on the stage with him.

``Do you remember Tascon's Web page?'' Chavez, grinning, asked the live audience. ``People are afraid of Tascon's Web page.''

When Tascon arrived on stage, Chavez greeted him by asking: ``Now I don't appear on your list, do I?''

Mr. Clean
04-17-2006, 06:47 PM
Latin America has a long history of leftist anti-American pseudo intellectualism and a tendency to blame the United States for all that has gone wrong there.

When leftist leaders have been elected in Latin America, it is usually with the promise to "stick it to the Yankees" accompanied with promises of massive government spending and giveaways, all of which appeal to the poor and uneducated masses that populate most of Latin America. Then, disaster results.

Peru elected a dimbulb named Alan Garcia, a leftist that almost destroyed the Peruvian economy. As a result, a Maoist terrorist organization called Sendero Luminoso (Shining Path) formed, obliterating small Indian villages while trafficking in coca. Alberto Fujimori took over and liquidated the Shining Path. The Peruvian economy recovered, but his own corruption drove Fujimori from power. Now, with the backing of Chavez' oil money, another anti-American has won in Latin America. It is not surprising. For anyone to blame this on Bush, that person if a f***ing idiot.

The CIA and the Chilean military staged a coup against Allende, an avowed Communist who was receiving help from Castro and his minions. Most Chileans never wanted Allende and a majority did not vote for Allende. The Allende coup has long been a crying point for the International Left, because, for one, a Communist was driven from power.

Pinochet arrested and tortured both confirmed and suspected Leftists. There is no way to apologize for this. It must be pointed out that the Left has done this wherever they have taken power. To his credit, Pinochet did enact laws safeguarding property rights and invited foreign investment. Today, Chile has a lower unemployment rate than France or Germany, and the fastest growing economy in Latin America.
Chile has elected successive Socialists in its presidential elections, but these people - Lagos and Batchelet - are more like big government free market types.

The cancer is and always has been Fidel Castro. The pinhead Leftists that permeate Latin American and US universities idolize the Dictator of the Tropical Gulag. When Gorbachev cut off Castro's foreign aid, Castro could have been easily driven from power. Instead, the United States elected a jackass - Bill Clinton. Castro cultivated a relationship with Chavez, who alone has access to oil money that he can use to stir up trouble on Castro's behalf. Castro's ally, Guevara, wanted to turn all of Latin America against the United States.
The CIA finished Guevara, the leader of the firing squads in Havana, but with Chavez, Castro may succeed.

As far as I am concerned, the US should have wasted its enemies in the Middle East with nukes, if necessary, and then got rid of the Caribbean Cancer, Castro.

The USA usually ignores Latin America until a very serious problem - illegal immigration, etc. emerges from the region.
This is not a good way to deal with our neighbors, but the career State Department hacks only focus on Europe and the f'n Middle East.

Now, if the rest of the world hats Bush, then that means Bush has done something right. If the rest of the world hates Bush more than Saddam or Castro or the idiot in Iran, then the world has its head up its rear end and needs to see a cranial proctologist.