Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has called on U.S. President George W. Bush to participate in a "direct television debate with us," so Iran can voice its point of view on how to end world predicaments."But the condition is that there can be no censorship, especially for the American nation," he said Tuesday.
The White House called the offer to debate Bush a "diversion" from international concerns over Iran's nuclear program, Reuters reported.
And the president of the United States would be stomped in a duel with this guy. Say what you want about Ahmadinejad, he is intelligent and he has been successful in his manipulation of the US, the UN and the media.
Bush, on the other hand, looks dumb even on the rare occasions that he says something smart or articulate.
6 comments:
I admit that Amawhatsisname is very smart and charming, and even makes some points with which I agree. I think his debate challange is pretty brilliant, and he might even be clever enough to outwit Bush in such a spectacle, though certainly not because he advocates an overall superior paradigm for life and living.
Bush would have two factors going for him, at least. One is that nearly all of his opponents drastically overestimate his stupidity. His debates with Kerry (who had a lower college GPA and SAT score than Bush!) showed this. The more important factor that Bush would have in his favor is his advocacy of free markets and free people, and requisite small govts restrained by a bill of personal liberties and erected by free and open elections.
So, Nadir, Bush is the "Grand Wizard"? Of what? The KKK? Has the KKK become so lame that its Grand Wizard isn't even racist? Or do you have any evidence to prove that Bush believes that black people are inferrior and should have denied to them the rights and opportunities afforded all other US citizens?
If you waste the term "Grand Wizard" on Bush, what language will you use if anybody ever does come forward and advocate racial suppression of black folks?
Grandwizard GDub is an old school hip hop name. You're jumping to conclusions, Paul.
How could I possibly infer that the president is racist?
"His debates with Kerry (who had a lower college GPA and SAT score than Bush!) showed this."
You must have been smoking crack during the debates. Though Kerry clearly won the debates, he didn't go for the jugular.
Bush didn't effectively stand his own. He danced around the questions, and failed to put together anything more than rehearsed soundbytes.
I agree that he isn't as stupid as his press, but he doesn't have the mental dexterity to spar with Ahmadinejad. And this has nothing to do with ideology. The Iranian president would just flat out destroy Bush in a debate because the president doesn't debate well. It would be shooting fish in a barrell.
tristan: I disagree with all your points.
1. I have been held at gun point by cops at least twice in the US and I am white.
2. The order to "shoot to kill" looters is very standard, and has been issued throughout US history against whites and by black officials. Maurauding looters have always represented a keen problem during disasters. Imagine trying to perform rescue and evacuation operations while vandals are conducting a looting spree. Most rescue operations -- public and private -- will not send personel into areas in which lawlessness runs rampant. When I lived in Florida in majority white areas hurricanes always came with reminders that police sould "shoot to kill" looters. Yes, white people loot, too, and nobody has ever suggested otherwise. In NOLA, black police and other city officials, including the major, issued this order. They considered the rampant lawlessness to be a major factor impeding rescue operations. Yet few or no looters got shot anyway, demonstrating that the order itself represented an attempted deterrent more so than a faithfully implemented course of action. People who live in low income areas have the most to lose by ignorant lowlifes behaving this way. Insurance company pay-offs cannot possibly set right what looters ruin, which is the entire business climate of an affected area. Only ignorant people such as Kramer on Seinfield believe that insurance companies have a magic wand. I do not believe that the areas devistated by Rodney King looters have fully recovered even to this day; businesses have not returned there, and those that have charge more to pay for their increased perceived risk and increased insurance policies.
3. The looting that promted the "shoot to kill" order had nothing to do with either race or the efforts by refugees to get food and water. The looting for non-food items began immediately when the power failed, and it involved massive property destruction. If you visit NOLA you will see massive vandalism of properties such as banks and appliance stores which don't even contain food or water. Try to find a non-busted open ATM machine anywhere. Next you and Nadir will complain when businesses don't re-invest in these areas. People starting on day 3 that broke into stores to get food enjoyed massive media support from TV commentators, including that white guy on the email we all got. But that black guy with the box of DVDs made things worse for everybody, and he was indeed a looter. The person who sent that famous email apparently couldn't find a press photo of a black person taking food with the caption "looter", and could find white guys labled "looter" only if they had non-food itesm. I suppose you fell for that email.
4. Please be specific about the "buses that were not allowed to rescue people". What are you talking about? The buses that Nagin didn't employ before Katrina struck? Which buses are you talking about?
5. And please justify your claim that anybody is "perpetuationg a completely racist view of muslims". I survey the press media every day and find no such phenomenon.
Thank you for posting to our blog.
Post a Comment