NationStates Jolt Archive

I've left out the president.

My vote goes to Rummy. I think he knew about the torture in Abu Ghraib long before April 2004, and he just tolerated it. I'm not saying he gave orders for it, but I think he just let it happen.

Just hours after the 9/11 attacks, he was scheming away trying to find a way to use the atrocity to attack Saddam Hussein, even though the dictator had nothing to do with the attacks. He was trying to use the attack to achieve the PNAC goal of regime change in Iraq.

Dick "evil" Cheney and John "if you don't like my laws you're unpatriotic" Ashcroft also scare the hell out of me.

I'm not sure which one scares me the most, but out of all of them, I like Bush the best. If he didn't surround himself with the Legion of Doom, I'd probably vote for him.

I think it's absolutely horrible to refer to them as "evil". They have different policies from me that I don't agree with, but I don't think calling them "evil" ever helps. At worst, you could say they have corrupted values or misplaced concerns, but they aren't working for Satan or trying to undermine the forces of good. This hurts the public discourse.

Oh wait. I forgot Karl Rove. Well, he IS evil. So that's acceptable.

I'd say its that guy.You know the guy I'm talking about.

I'd have to go with Rove as well, because he's completely unaccountable, and because I'm convinced that he's using this election cycle to prove that you can win with nothing but the evangelical vote, and if he's right, this country is fucked.

Ashcroft is the scariest to me, though, because he's one of those psycho evangelicals, and from all accounts is a true believer.

Where is the: all of the above option?

Ashcroft, hands down. Best part of Kerry's acceptance speech at the DNC:

"And I will appoint an Attorney General who actually upholds the Constitution of the United States."

w00t!

For me, it's a toss-up between Ashcroft and Ridge. Although they all profoundly frighten me.

Yes Bush isn't evil, hes just an idiot who lets himself be used like a puppet.

Ashcroft, hands down. Best part of Kerry's acceptance speech at the DNC:

"And I will appoint an Attorney General who actually upholds the Constitution of the United States."

w00t!

I doubt that'll ever happen. Kerry's just milking political dollars, as usual. The slimeball.

I doubt that'll ever happen. Kerry's just milking political dollars, as usual. The slimeball.Hey, if we wind up with an AG who doesn't actually try to actively circumvent the Constitution, I'll be satisfied.

Hey, if we wind up with an AG who doesn't actually try to actively circumvent the Constitution, I'll be satisfied.

Same here. Personally, though, I doubt Kerry could pick someone worse than Ashcroft if he tried.

This is a very hard decisions :headbang: ...

Karl Rove is plain ruthless and deceptive but Ashcroft, Cheny, and Rumsfeld definatly are clandestine...all in all I would have to say the only thing I hate more than Bush is his Administration.

Oh well...

...I'll vote for...Rove (Thank god he is only the political advisor)

Wolfowitz: Seriously argued and believed that Iraqis would treat us as liberators and throw flowers at our feet. He was a little off on that theory.

Ashcroft.

He can't even win an election when his opponent is a corpse.

Speaking of Wolfowitz's claims, shouldn't Ahmed Chalabi be considered a part of the Bush administration? I mean, he had as much pull in intelligence and foreign policy as anyone else did.

Well, first off, I disagree most vehemently with the notion that the Bush regime, however incompetent and pie-in-the-sky they might be, are evil. Hitler was evil. These guys are just a bunch of boomer quacks who can't quite wrap their minds around the fact that the world might not work the way their glorious economic and social theories say it should.

If you were to substitute the term "corrupt" for "evil", I'd say you'd be more on the ball. The person who is most corrupt in the Administration is undoubtably Karl Rove. The reason is very simple: even a cursory examination of his life and political history is proof positive that for him, first and foremost, the ends justify the means, and secondly, the end is nothing but pure political power. This is a man who has bugged his own office in order to release it on the news a few days before the election in order to give his candidate a boost, has repeatedly demonstrated a willingness to engage in character assassination (long before he got around to Kerry and the Swift Boat campaign, he started a whispering campaign that John McCain had fathered a mulatto child), and has raised doublespeak standards in the government to astounding heights (he's one of the people who engineered, for instance, the "Clear Skies" initiative, which allowed for increased air pollution).

The reason why he does this is because he's a devoted follower of Straussian political philosophy. Now granted, Strauss is one of the people I'm least familiar with (curses for me choosing Rawls for my modern political theory instead!), but I have spoken with several people who do know his works, and what they say is fairly universal: Strauss believed in the concept of an overman of sorts, and felt that such an overman was required to lead the people. In that sense, he's sort of along the same wavelength as Nietzsche (although Nietzsche would have been appalled at the political dimensions Strauss applied his work to). Where he differs most dramatically from Nietzsche is in believing that the Overman, because he is so superior to the rest of the population, has an obligation to decide for himself where the nation must head, and the right to tell the population whatever they need to hear in order to get them to go willingly towards the common good. Does this by any chance sound familiar?

As such, I find him highly immoral (although as noted, not quite "evil") and corrupt because of his anti-democratic ethos and Machiavellian practices.

Rumsfeld scares the crap out of me and only because he's not only in charge of the ENTIRE US military, but also because he is intelligent and knows damn well what he's doing!

What?! I don't see Bandar Bush on the list! He counts, right? Seriously though, they all scare the shit out of me. I truly hate them all and they are all crimnals in the truest sense of the word. It came down to Aschcroft and Rove for me (with Cheney and Rummy close behind), but I chose Rove simply becuase of the fact that the other losers on the list wouldn't be in the positions thery're in if Rove hadn't got them there.

FLAME BAIT seriously that tank of gassoline with the lighter by it is tempting.

Rice because she hates Canada, mind you most of that administraition does.

Anyone who thinks bush is giving him far too much credit. I'm not sure why they didn't pick someone who can A: speak and B: actually do work, to lead the party.

Mistakenly, I put Wolfowitz down. I don't consider any of them 'evil', but I find them all universally detestable. If I was able to, I would change my vote to John "Sieg Heil" Ashcroft for two words: Patriot Act (did anyone else find that video clip of him singing as nightmarishly disturbing as I did btw?). Wolfie isn't that far behind- read www.newamericancentury.org- I mean, shit, the guy is basically advocating an American Empire (sorry "Global American Leadership"... :eek:)

Upon reading, Xeno's post, it appears Karl Rove gives Wolf and Ashcroft some competition for the most corrupt/dispicable of the lot.

What are people's thoughts on Powell now anyway?