Beauprez on the 9/11 Olympics Conspiracy

19 thoughts on “Beauprez on the 9/11 Olympics Conspiracy”

1. cream of the Republican crop!

   Log in to Reply

2. I wonder who has the balls to ever admit to voting for this guy…

   Log in to Reply

   1. I’m a proud member of the 40% who voted for Bob Beauprez

      Log in to Reply

      1. Oh well, everyone makes a mistake now and then.  

         Log in to Reply

      2. All you are missing is the brains. 🙂

         Log in to Reply

         1. 🙂

            Log in to Reply
            1. Log in to Reply
            2. Log in to Reply

3. “Then he went to the Salt Lake Olympics — extremely difficult circumstances — and if it wasn’t tough enough already, they threw in a little event called (bribing IOC officials) on top of it to complicate matters. He pulled that off in great style.”  

   Log in to Reply

4. I’m no Romney fan, and I think Beauprez is a horse’s rear end (like the one he stood next to in his classic campaign commercial), but this Beauprez quote wasn’t that bad in my opinion.

   Beauprez was just trying to say that Romney pulled off a successful 2002 Olympics even after all the problems caused by 9/11 and its security aftermath – wasn’t he?

   I remember people having lots of concerns about how 9/11 was going to affect the Olympics.

   Log in to Reply

   1. The problem isn’t in what he meant to say, but in what he actually ended up saying. When he said that 70% of African Americans have abortions, he meant to say something entirely different than what came out of his mouth.

      Log in to Reply

      1. Lots of ppl make gaffes. What amazes me is that so many ppl hold politicians (esp those on the road) to their statements. It is a joke. I am one of those ppl who can not stand up in front of crowd and do a speech. I freeze. I have seen myself on camera (use to model), and remember how hard it was to say anything for video.

         These days, I judge a politician by their past actions, and their current supporters( If you see a bunch of neo-cons or KKKers supporting a candidate, I run). I figure that is a MUCH better way to judge them. As it is, think about how much reagan and W. did once in the seat? They basically ran things the same way that they ran their states; poorly. The hard ones to judge are those that were congressmen before. Poppa bush was actually pretty good. But he was hard to judge.

         Log in to Reply

         1. Can you list some Republicans you like and then list some neo-cons you don’t?  I want to see what you’re using as qualifications. Not being snarky.  Just curious.

            Log in to Reply

            1. Like:

               1. Eisenhower – Good vision overall. Disliked his adding “under god we trust” and that he put us into ‘nam.
                  
               2. Goldwater – Good vision and kept to principles.
                  
               3. Poppa Bush (though I suspect that he was the force behind the oct. surprise, which I regard as treason, I still liked him) – good vision overall
                  
               4. Schwarzenegger – good vision, able to balance a budget.
                  
               5. paul – Over all, good vision, I KNOW that he will balance the budget quickly. My only fear is the dismemberment of NASA and not enough attention paid to global warming; But he is a tried and true libertarian ! His only flaw is that he liked reagan 🙂
                  
               6. McCann – good vision overall. Willing to be his own person. He is a goldwater type.
                  

               Dislike:

               1. reagan  – monster deficit, lack of good vision, lack of scruples ( october surprise, Iran-Contra, and his was the most corrupt admin of the last century)  But I will admit that it is partially due to lots of inside info that few if any on this list will have. Takes credit where not his (the putting the economy on track was due to Carter’s appointment of volker, and had little to do with reagan, though I will say that his demeanor encouraged a belief).
                  
               2. W – monster deficit, horrible lack of vision and poor leadership;  again, more inside info that few have
                  
               3. Owens – unable to deal with a budget, a true lack of leadership,  scruples (he lived up the road from us; guy ran around on his wife who was a real sweetheart). He could not be trusted which is why the state shot him down when he said to trust him WRT to water. Had he real leadership, he would have known this, and would have put together a reasonable water plan which is desperately needed.
                  
               4. I like romney’s record overall, but will
                  
                  not trust him due to his associations with neo-cons like W, owens, jeb, etc. In addition, he has told numerous lies, not gaffes, about his past. These are not about obscure facts but about himself.
                  
               5. Guiliani ; Worthless in my book; Lack of scruples; takes credit where not his
                  

               Log in to Reply

               1. I agree in the entirety.

                  Eisenhower has worn surprisingly well despite the sense of a lack of excitement during his administration.  Not much in the way of vision beyond the Cold War, but he also understood things like the “sacredness” of Social Security, and not grudgingly.

                  As a Dem, I do not fall into the idolization of Kennedy.  He has NOT worn well.  I think his anti-Communism might have been more than Eisenhower’s in fear of looking weak. We almost got blown to kingdom come in the Missile Crisis.  We are still dealing with the absurd embargo and the policies that he started with Cuban emmigrants.

                  And any squatter at Pols knows what I think of Ronald Reagan.  If he didn’t have his oratorical skills, he probably would have been another half baked Republican failure. Hell, even I like listening to him!

                  Log in to Reply

                  1. He called himself liberal, which was a good thing in those days, and warned against the military industrial complex attaining too much power. The wackos have taken the Republican party far away from the days when General Eisenhower chose to run as a Republican.    

                     Log in to Reply

                  2. All pres. have their issues. But overall, I think that kennedy belongs in the top 10 (and is on most polls), if not in the top 5.

                     He showed a great deal of vision that has worn well. Keep in mind that his anti-communism was very real (In fact, it was Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Ford, and Carter combined that killed USSR, not reagan). I believe that he was far more military minded than most common ppl give him credit for. Overall most military sites rate him highly for his handling of the Missle crisis, though you could easily argue that it was his bay of pigs that lead to it in the first place. But he was also a realists. It was Eisenhower who got us into nam, not kennedy. Just a week before Kennedy was murdered, he had told his staff that he wanted to pull out of nam as he felt that it was not an issue of containment. Then from there, it was him that started and pushed the Civil Rights Admendment (with johnson following it), as well as created peace corps, NASA going to the moon, etc. In addition, He pushed American military more towards missles and killed the B-70 because he felt that USSR could take it out.

                     Contrast this with reagan who brought us the B-1 bomber as well as bringing back the mighty battle ships.  If you ignore the Bay of Pigs, I think that overall Kennedy was a damn good pres.

                     As to reagan, well Even the Navy was opposed to the battle ships, and the air force was ambivalent on the BONE unless it was used to replace the B-52 fleet. Sadly, that was not to be. Fortunately, Carter had started the stealth program in a major way, which is now what all of our new crafts are based on.
                     
                     Likewise, carter started the navy towards a large number of smaller, automated ships that collaborated on attacks. But reagan killed that, and now we are back to it (DDX is to form the backbone of the navy). But I have to agree with you about his oratorical skills.  

                     Log in to Reply

                     1. Good points.

                        But I think a lot of the Kennedy admiration is the Camelot inertia which is even found in younger people.  His looks helped a lot, and I certainly admire his ability to motivate Americans.  “Ask not what your country can do for you, etc.”  One of the great ones.

                        Log in to Reply

                        1. There are many that share you POV.  Of course most are pubs :). And I can not say that it is wrong to think that way. After all, most of the academicians rate reagan in 10-20 and I think that he is WAY overrated.

                           Log in to Reply