What has Bush done that is good?

Well it draws perspiration off the body so that...

Oh. All these bush threads are starting to get confusing.

I think he initially dealt with Afghanistan appropriately.

Well on 9/11 his advisors said to stay on the ground. He didn't listen and still flew saying," We need to show these bastards we are not afraid of them."

I said this in Naples' thread about this, and I'll say it here too.

I think that the best thing GWB has done is get people to perk up to politics, and likewise might get more people to vote. Of course, I believe that might also be his undoing since what perked them up is all the shit he's done while in office.

Additionally, he has given comedians countless hours of material, subsequently providing laughter for millions of americans.

This thread is fucking joke.

What a coincidence..... so is Bush.

Touche.

I'll play along.

Bush:

1) WOT: Bush's approach is correct. We need to fight the battle overseas rather than in the streets of Manhattan. If this means a "premptive" invasion, so be it. You can disagree.

2) Afghanistan: The Taliban are gone. Despite what media tells you, they're not coming back. Afghanistan is a different country and is on the path to Democracy.

3) Iraq: There have been mistakes made, but the overall mission is going to be successful. Iraq will become a Democracy, and that in itself will help end terror.

4) Tax Cuts: Just for the rich? Hardly. My combined household income is less than $60,000 a year. I saw a huge benefit from those cuts, from marginal rate cuts to changes in depreciation laws (for example). These cuts have unquestionably stimulated the economy.

Economy to grow at fastest pace in 20 years.

5) Here's where you'll really flip out: The No Child Left Behind Act. That's right, the NCLBA. For all its flaw (and I agree there are many), I know first hand that this law has gotten a lot of school districts of their collective asses. It's forced real and meaninful accountability. Speaking of education, the federal education budget has increased 48% since 2001. Underfunded? No.

6) Partial Birth Abortion Ban. Regardless of stance on abortion in general, this is an inhumane and medically unnecessary procedure.


Bush has done (or will do) plenty I disagree with. Notably, he signed the medicare bill, supports faith based charities and has allowed the deficit to expand rapidly. But as I recall, that's now what this thread is about.

Let's see
He broke with the fatherly doctrine which has been adopted since 1991, which advised to keep in place a wekeaned-yet-solidly installed Iraqi Baathist regime. Fearing the ineffective restraints of sanctions would be entirely eroded (which was well under way at the time), opening the way for a return of the moustachioed regime to the fold of the so-called international community would inevitably lead him to new adventures.
He also dumped the isolationnist tendency despite it having popular resonance among his electorate.

Although I'd rather only metnion the good, I feel I have to mention what was in my opinion his biggest fiasco (I only address global policy here): his failure to contain and marginalise the anti-U.S. rhetoric, which was efficaciously neutered by the previous administration at the time of intervention in the Balkans; this rhetoric crossed over to the mainstream in the aforementioned international community. A damage it will take years to mend.

You're right!

Talking about what Bush has done in the positive is a joke!

He almost had me with that telemarketer thing but you can see where that ended up. It wasn't enough. It was a token gesture.

The same with the plans for moon and mars. I'm all for space travel and it sounds good on the surface. But you know as well as I do it's so far off that he'll be long gone by the time it succeeds or not. Plus it's paying for itself by starving other worthwhile programs like the Hubble which still has some life in it.

I don't have enough room here to list all the things he's done wrong.

http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/2004/07/marshall.htm

No it won't, and democracies with strong splits don't typically work out too well.

Geez SDW!

Not everybody agrees with this or thinks these are good things!

You do get that don't you?


Maybe in some other parallel universe they might work or people might appreciate those gestures.


But we'll just take one as an example. Iraq :

TOTALLY UNNECESSARY!

Hey now! I hadn't thought of that!

Now that the people see what it's like to have someone really bad in office they aren't apathetic anymore.

They want change and to do that you have to be interested.

One of the reasons we waited 2 months before we did anything in Afghanistan was because we were consulting the British and the Russians about their experience and getting their advice. Both of them said we can't succeed if we were to do a massive invasion like we did in Iraq because of the terrain and population.

In the same spirit of underhanded compliments:

1. He's destroyed any remaining semblance of a Republican reputation for fiscal sanity.

2. He's solidified the Republican ideology as based solely on social/religious conservatism, and driven it completely away from libertarian conservatism.

3. He's united the Democratic party around an otherwise bland presidential candidate.

4. He's ended any hope that the US can pursue a policy of pre-emptive war in the future.

I think if the lame attempt at a topic gets too perverted here that we'll just lock it. That is, unless people treat it with some more decorum. It didn't start that way, but a few posts in there were sincere. The last thing this place needs is another exucse for cock fighting.

you should make a point...totally unnecessary is hardly a valid argument. Perhaps you should read a bit deeper into all the reasons we went into Iraq.

Its really painful to have faimly there and hear a handful of people constantly bitch about how "unnecessary" the war on terrorism is when their entire argument is based on Michael Moore's $7.50 play on reality. Just keep pumping your $.02 comments into these forums all day long hoping to change 1 persons mind...you're doing a great job.

You've been reading plato recently?

There are plenty of good things that Bush has contributed durring his presidency the growth of the economy being one of the more notible. While I dont think he is among the greatest presidents to have served I certainly dont see the need to constantly bash every decision he makes. Bush has had to make some extremely tough decisions durring his presidency and I commend him for sticking with these decisions. I never see anyone bashing the UN's contributions or ability to enforce its own laws. Perhaps some of this narrow-minded scrutiny should be directed at this organization.

The United States is one of those democracies. I'm beginning to wonder whether we'd be happier if the South had won the Civil War. That way, the South could have their Republican way, and the North could have their liberal way. In our current situation, only half the people in the country can be happy about the election results.

Just my two cents.

Before 9/11 he signed a really good nuclear disarmament deal with Putin. I don't know where that is now, but I was happy about it at the time.

SDW:

Schools are still underfunded, the percentage increase means almost nothing with regard to whether or not they are underfunded.

I've made my point for SDW several times like no WOMD, no imminent threat, didn't accomplish a damn thing. And how did he pick this country if those reasons are invalid? Stick a pin in a map? There are still many more evil dictators in the world.

I'm sorry you have family there and I don't blame the troops in any way, shape, or form. We shouldn't be there in the first place. It's Bush! Myself and many others were for not going so your family didn't have to be over there before the war. Don't be obtuse.

I'm tired of restating this case every stinking time like I haven't said anything.

This seems to have been a favorite tactic of Bush supporters.

Then they say : I'm not really a Bush supporter but I think he's done some good things ". But then if you read what they think is good it sounds just like a Bush supporter.


Well myself and many others don't care anymore and are just voting Kerry.

Don't you hate how you know these conversations never change anyone's mind, yet we post them anyway. Some sort of exercise in futility. Well, in an attempt to do my hone my debate skills(a.k.a. waste time at work), here is a reply.



No imminent threat? I think a little more research into the reasoning behind this is needed. I do believe the reason for going in was because Iraq failed to meet the demands of the UN. Who had made repeated demands and then repeatedly backed down.

The UN was set up to do what the League of Nations failed to do. Bush is doing what FDR intended the US and Brittan to do though the UN. Go look it up. All these people going off about Bush is a warmonger that is going to start WW3 really need to go back and see how WW1 and WW2 got started. The threat in that region is huge. It's not a simple response to 9/11. It's part of a much larger war on terror. A much larger fight to prevent another world war.

Instead of plagiarizing a few of the facts from this email Ill just post it here too:

Nope... our involvement in the conflict in Vietnam began in the late '50s. JFK only inherited the situation.

Well, oddly enough, this thread is about people listing their opinions on what they feel the President has done right. If we made a thread about what everybody in AO totally agrees Bush did right or wrong, it'd be pretty short since both questions would have zero answers.

In short: You don't get it. Feel free to disagree with some point that were made. But try doing so with an intelligent response.

Of course the country would be better. Because then the South could still be opressing and lynching blacks. Yay @ Rebel victory!!!!

</your post sucks>

Schools are not underfunded. The teachers union has screwed education more than any other single factor. There is no good reason, given the large amount of money spent per capita on education, for there to be so many problems with education. Were the vast sums spent intelligently, the teacher's union equally worried about educating children as they are about preserving the job of alcoholic teachers, and more choice made available to parents about where and how their children are educated, we'd be much happier people.

And who did we "get" as a result of the strike against Afghanistan? Answer: Nobody of any importance, while at the same time we coddled the Saudis, the Pakistanis, and others who have far greater links to international terror. The duplicity and shortsightedness is unbelievable. Maybe India or Pakistan should follow the Bush doctrine of pre-emption and see who can be most macho, and be the first to lob nukes at the other? Perhaps any other nation who feels threatened by the US should strike us first, according to the Bush doctrine? It is the Bush doctrine that will bring war to our shores.


No they are not. Although the Taliban may not be the recognized governmental power in Afghanistan..they havent gone anywhere. In fact they are recruiting, as we speak. The Karzai government is a joke...it has virtually no executive power outside of Kabul. The warlords rule the rest of the country, womens' rights are a little better, but in Kabul only, outside of there, little has changed; opium production is at record levels (as predicted by Mike Ruppert shortly after 9-11), and US troops are being killed there in larger numbers than during the invasion in November 2001. Karzai is the "Mayor of Kabul" and thats about as far as his real influence goes.


If only it could be successful, but killing over 11,000 civilians, destroying their infrastructure, their heritage and antiquities, selling off their assets to western corporations at rock bottom prices, torturing their prisoners, and showing blatant disdain and disregard for their customs and traditions has made the US look like a boorish, thuggish enemy as far as most Iraqis go. A recent coalition poll told the sorry story of 3% of Iraqis looking favorably on the occupation. What a joke! If "democracy", "freedom" and a "decent standard of living" was the US aim in Iraq, then why did the new Iraqi puppet government just declare martial law yesterday? Regarding "liberation", what about all the poor oppressed people in nations all around Iraq which are monarchies or Islamic fundamentalist dictatorships with ghastly human rights records? You approve? Does Bush approve? What do say about invading those nations as well? After all...it was people from Saudi, Egypt, the UAE and Yemen who (according to the FBI), slammed those planes into our buildings, and they haven't been brought to task in one tiny, miniscule fashion. (6 Yemenis have just been charged with attacking the USS Cole). Not a single ambassador from those nations was carpeted after the attacks. And we react by invading the two nations which had the laest involvement, for other reasons no doubt.


While Bush and big government spending go hand in hand:
http://www.independent.org/tii/conte...ss_040624.html

[quote]5) Here's where you'll really flip out: The No Child Left Behind Act. That's right, the NCLBA. For all its flaw (and I agree there are many), I know first hand that this law has gotten a lot of school districts of their collective asses. It's forced real and meaninful accountability. Speaking of education, the federal education budget has increased 48% since 2001. Underfunded? No.

Yes it is underfunded., and always has been. When schools are falling apart, kids have out of date textbooks and teaching profession is held in disdain by much of society (echoed by the pathetic salaries)....there is clearly huge amounts yet to do. That 48% increase? LINK please!


PBA is very rare btw, but better done in a clinic than in a shed with a coathanger. Whats your thoughts on stem cell research?


The good stuff he's done, or inadvertently done:
Galvanized opposition all over the US and the world, and increased awareness of political realities amongst the young.... there is more to life than skateboarding. Maybe the democrats will become a real party representing the left of center, as opposed to "republican lite". Maybe they will become proud of the moniker "liberal", instead of wimping out. Maybe they will become relevant again.

A over-simplistic analogy: What happens to an eagle with a broken left wing, and a right wing thats flapping wildly out of control? It starts to go round in circles and lose altitude faster and faster, until it hits the ground with a sickening thud.....

since the end of major operations in afghanistan, i'd say he's managed to fuck things up real "good".

I dont agree with you one bit but at least you got straight to the point

Bush choosing Colin Powell and Condi Rice for top positions in his cabinet. I may not agree with either and Bush's decisions were almost certainly politically motivated, but having minorities and women in higher positions of power is a good thing.

Colin Powell I understand, but condi rice?

Even if they, like rice, can't do their job? That's just as shallow as the repubs that consciously support them as tokens.

Sammi jo:


We "got" many leaders of AQ and kicked out the Taliban regime. Without the Pakistani's, we'd have a logisitical problem with invasion and an information problem as to the inner workings of Al Qaeda.

Your pre-emption argument is absurd. You are comparing rogue regimes with the United States...and any such comparison is unacceptable. For all your talk of understanding the complexities of geopolitics, you then turn around and simplify the India-Pakistan situation to "Mommy...he jumped of the bridge...so can I!". Please. It's not the same situation.



This paragraph you posted is filled with the typical suppositions and rhetoric I've come to expect from you. The Taliban do not rule the nation, and things for women are A LOT better...not to mention men. Of course the Taliban have not been exterminated. If that had happened, you'd be screaming that Bush was comitting genocide. As for Karzai's influence, you'd have to provide some real backing for that claim.




More bullshit. Even if true, civilians are sometimes killed in war. It's unfortunate and we try to avoid it. Grow up.

We did not target their infastructure as we did in 1991. We've poured billions into rebuilding the country. We have not acted with total disregard for their customs. In other words, you're blatantly wrong.



I'd like to see that poll. I also saw one that says 89% of Iraqis are willing to work with the interim government. That poll was recently conducted by Baghdad University.

You're also wrong about Martial Law. They approved a policy to allow emergency law to be imposed if needed. They've got a serious security situation...what would you like to do instead?





Wait...what are you advocating..invading those countries too? I'm not. There is no evidence of any kind that those governments were involved or were a direct threat to the US or its allies. Saudi Arabia has a horrible human rights record and I agree...but what should we do? Should we stop buying their oil? OK...I'm on board with that. Where would you like to get it from. Oh, right..I forgot...you're a leftist so you oppose drilling ANWR, offshore and anything that has the letters O-I-L in it.




Now that's just cheap. I agree Bush is a big spender. I fault him for most of it. How many times must I present this honest criticism, and can you show how this has hurt the economy?




So your argument is that because it's "very rare" (which you have not supported) that it should be legal? You further argue that this very rare procedure (and therefore not in demand by women) will be carried out en masse in "sheds"?

I support Bush's position on Stem Cell research. Life should not be created and then destroyed. Bush's position is to continue to fund and allow research on existing stem cell lines.



Cute Sammi...cute. so your solution is that we need to become more liberal. This despite a clear trend within the Republican Party to become more liberal on social issues and federal spending. You don't seem to understand! The Republicans have become what the Democrats were in the 1930's and 1940's. They've become the party of FDR. They've not just assumed control of the agenda...they've stolen it.

The Democrats will not succeed until they truly come to the center. They will have to do what the Republicans have done in the past 10 years. They will have to support an aggressive foreign policy, a strong military/pro-national security agenda, limited federal spending and policy of smaller government.

Until they do that, it's only going to get worse for them. If the Dems lose big in this election, the current Clintonite V. Deananic squirmish will look like a love fest. The party will go into a full civil war and complete tail spin.

well I guess you've just about summed this thread up swd

I'll take your lack of response as a no.

So try this, what does "regime change" really mean and where does the concept come from?

I'll take your lack of response as a no.

So try this, what does "regime change" really mean and where does the concept come from? [/B][/QUOTE]

Sorry I didnt know I was supposed to respond to this...I must have been too busy reading the 35468435138975 copy and pasted posts you've added all over AI. Say what you like Plato at least my thoughts are original.

"Heres an article that proves that the other article I posted was right and your wrong"

And what the hell are you talking about "Regime Changes" for anyway? Are you trying to put a thought together on your own.

So you don't know anything about Bush admin foreign policy, which relies very heavily on plato and his famous student, or really political philosophy in general, considering how fundamental those writings are overall.

Because you apparently think others "should read a bit deeper into all the reasons we went into Iraq," meaning you must know all about this stuff. I suppose you also got a copy of wolfowitz's dissertation, too?

For future reference, when I post a quote of yours and then respond to it, my response has something to do with the quote. It's a great BB feature designed to avoid such confusion.

there is no such thing as an original thought.