What's Bush's policy for the next four years?

It'll be the same policy as the previous four years: politics before policy.

Whatever it will be, you can count on the fact that the semi-tempering hand of reelections will not play a part in those four years.

You can expect that the extremist that many of us know he (and his gang) is will reveal itself and many more decent Republicans would see what he has done and jump ship . . . .
even though it hasn't been their ship for a long time: Bush jumped their ship but only a few realize it.

Bush policy for the next four years can be summed up in one simple Mussolini quotation:

"The merging of state and corporate power".

Some,Trumptman or Scott. perhaps?, may approve. I find it scary.

I think it's pretty clear ....his own words:

"Our enemies are innovative and resourceful-and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people - and neither do we."

I think his policy for the next 4 years is pretty clear: "John Kerry is a wuss."

I agree, trying to create a police state through fear, the patriot act and lots of spin meanwhile oil is at almost 50 bucks a barrel, Bin Laden is roaming the Earth and we have a war that has cost us 200 billion, a thousand of our sons and daughters and counting. I ask all Republicans to ask themself what has Bush done this past 4 years that deserves reelection? Very Funny how none of his adds can point to accomplishments. why is the Mexican border still wide open? after 4 years you would think the republican congress and president could do something wouldnt you? heck no its about their buddies getting rich off the cheap mexican work force who is here illegally. interesting how they cant seem to do nothing isnt it.

To quote Dave Nelson from NewsRadio... "Pure evil."

Its going to be the return of the dark ages (500AD-1500AD).

This is when the fundies went on the crusades, burnt all the science books and tried to replace them with Christian Doctrine. They invaded scores of other countries and tortured, brutalized their citizens until they either believed in Christ or died. The average person couldn't even spell their own name - all by design of course. Its easier to implant grand ideas into the uneducated, subdued and God fearing. The followers went on a witch hunt to out the non-believers, or pagan religions. Almost all advanced civilizations fell into near anarchy during this time, like the Egyptians and Romans, and human progress reverted 1000 years. I understand the leaders of the Vatican became very rich though.

Contrast this to Bush and Co. (2000AD+)

This is when the fundies went on the crusades, under the banner of WMD. ignored the international community, rejected and repelled much scientific evidence in favour of their personal interpetation of Gods will. Invaded, threatened or plan to invade scores of other countries, tortured their citizens, and tried to give them santa, mcdonalds, and Christ. Tried to get Creationism installed into public schools - Its easier to implant grand ideas into the uneducated, subdued and God fearing. Divided Americans like never before. Threw Iraq into near anarchy. Followers now on a witch hunt to out the dodgy foreign nationals,non-patriots or Muslims. Seems like Bush and his buddies are getting very rich though with oil at $50 a barrel.

Im just waiting for someone to drop the bomb, that should wipe 1000 years off human progress at a shot.

Did someone tell Bush that Babylon and Baghdad are the same place? Damn those books of Revelations.

Now with Bush trying to kill overtime pay for lots of Americans i think it will seal the deal to end his tenure as president. What i find most disturbing is that so many people are locked in their little minds they are Republican that no matter how bad a job he does they will vote republican because they are republicans. Iam a switcher meaning after voting for this guy i will not next time. to many things done wrong, while avg ceo pay has doubled in 2 years this guy is sending out pamphlets to business owners showing how they can screw the worker out of their overtime pay. He really is a republican.

pray that nobody notices the puppet strings?

Supposedly a lot of specifics are supposed to come out of the RNC. We'll see.

Wow. Just, wow.

Two words: Bill Clinton

Well of course! Bush sets oil prices. Not capturing the most elusive man on the planet is all his fault. We shouldn't have gone to war, because Saddam Hussein was just misunderstood. Bush shouldn't get credit for signing and pushing historic tax relief which has provided real relief to families like mine.

And really...stop screaming about the Mexican border. If any action was taken (and it needs to be), you'd be screaming "RACISTS!, RACISTS!"

Really, you need to stop. When one of your claims is discredited in another thread, you can't just repost it in another. Go check out the DOL's ideas about overtime pay.

Your claims about Republicans are just stupid. Sorry, they are. You can't make that kind of claim while Democrats will vote for Anybody But Bush.
Republicans have brought real relief to real families. But, you'll just keep shouting the same old party line of class warfare. It doesn't matter that millions of lower income people were removed from tax rolls entirely with the last tax cuts. It doesn't matter that your beloved savior Billy Bob dramtically raised taxes on the middle class.

None of it matters, because while people like me can point to things I disagree with the President on, peope like you will give him credit for absolutely nothing.

Dont get so upset, Bush is a oil guy and has the most powerful position on the planet. If he cant influence or make a difference in the oil situation then what good is he? and he has ignored the mexican border. are we the united states of america or are we the united states of whoever walks in? Sounds like he gets a F on border security he is sworn to defend and gets a F on helping with the oil problem. good reasons to vote republican isnt it. could he do worse?

So what's Bush going to do? You really can't answer the question either can you?

Whatever it is you can bet without the need to be reelected it will be much worse.

Maybe the Pro-Bush people don't care to waste their time on a bunch of people who aren't going to change their view. Maybe they are wasting their time convincing people to vote for Bush that don't consider the United States to be in the "dark ages" for some people having to take off their shoes at airports and unemployment being 5.5%.

Conversation is a two way street. I'll spend my time talking with those who care to listen. Not those who wonder why I don't want to stand there and enjoy spittle as they scream in my face.

Nick

I agree about the border. But, my question is: What is the challenger going to do differently? As for oil, I don't see how it really applies. Bush doesn't control prices. Demand is soaring in China and in the US. What we need to do is find short and mid-term oil prospects (Alaska, Russia, Mexico, Offshore) and simultaneously develop non-fossily fuel energy.

I don't agree with Bush on everything and I criticize what I feel is wrong wiht his performance. I' not thrilled about the Gay marriage Amendment thing, I am concerned about the deficit, border security and finding bin laden. This being said, I think that not all of the deficit is his fault because of certain uncontrollable external factors. It's also not as high as a percentage of GDP as it has been.

My point is this: I support Bush becuase I agree with him on most isssues, and I'm not an alarmist about things like the deficit and the environment. Sure, they are issues of concern, but I've seen nothing from Kerry to think that he'll do much differently or better. What I have seen is a very "liberal liberal" running as a moderate. He's said he's going to reverse tax cuts which I don't support (even if theya re for the rich). He can't answer a question in a straightforward manner. He's been all over the map on Iraq and national security.

I can criticize Bush too. I just don't see a better man for the job right now. It's possible to critique someone and still support him.

I tell you this in all seriousness: I've talked to a lot of Kerry supporters. I've also talked to a lot of Bush haters. I tell you in complete honesty that I have NEVER come across a SINGLE person that is truly enthusiastic about Kerry. Not one person. Every sentence starts with "The Bush Administration". I really think this is why Kerry will lose. With Bill Clinton we had real enthusiasm. We even had some enthusiasm for Gore. There is none of that now.

Somehow I think it would be fair to wait until after his convention. I believe that's what everyone here was asking for with Kerry.

I'm not sure what that last statement means.

As for whas Bush is going to do, well, I again think it's fair that we wait until after the convention. Wouldn't you agree? I know one thing on the agenda will be Social Security Reform.

Honestly,

I don't think you like Kerry. I really don't. And as for the enlightenment comment, well, I've been saying things like that for two years. Yet, I'm still painted as a blind, six pack drinking, racist, gay hating Bush lover. That's because it's easier to make alarmist charges, become personally insulting, and deal in stereotypes thna it is to actually argue the merits of an issue.

Let me ask you this: If Kerry was running against a McCain or a Dean or a Wesley Clark or even an Edwards, whom would you support? I doubt it would be Kerry.

There is simply no case that Kerry will make a better President than Bush has. None. Kerry is a weak candiadate. He's trying to do what Clinton did, but he lacks Clinton's charisma and approach to go along wth the supposed New Democrat philosophy.

Bush policy for the next four years? "Stay the Course".

I thought we were turning the corner? Shit. I never can remember. They keep changing their message.

I think its true that many many people dislike what this current president has done more then they like Kerry. Bush's liberal fiscal policies have made a mess of our economy, national debt is way to large and his love affair for the Defense Dept and all their money blowing ways bothers me. Missile defense shield is iffy at best and blows billions to those big defense companies plus this makes other nations want to do the same. do we need another cold war? This is 1 point. Overtime pay is a fiasco and Kerry is going to kick Bush on this. issue after issue all i see is Bush backing big corporations and those Ceo's. wether its oil,economy,Iraq,enviroment,overtime pay,missile defense,extending our weekend warriors over in Iraq,Healthcare, Haliburton,Patriot act,Mexican border..... this guy is on the wrong side of everyone of these issues for me. I guess iam a moderate republican but cannot back this guy at all. I just dont see this president as being honest in supporting the Hard working American. he is backing the Non working millionaires and CEO's of this country and we all know those guys pay lobbiest and donate to campaigns to get legislation they want. Bush is in their pocket. Kerry is the antiBush vote for me.

"stay the turning course!

--circles in the mud"


BTW, Aurora, try using the return key in orde to make your posts more readable . . . break up the block of words a little now and
then

Oh god! Not the old " I don't understand your question " ploy!

Look if you have a personal blind spot for issues you don't like maybe you should think more before posting!

Bill Clinton. Former President of the United States of America.

It's OK, everyone, George Bush is allowed to be an incompetent, inarticulate liar because, well, Bill Clinton used to be the President and a lot of folks don't like him.

Bill Clinton. Bill Clinton. Bill Clinton.

"Harry! How could you! My best friend and my husband! In our marital bed!"

"Well, Judith, wow. Just: wow. Bill Clinton."

That's the OYBC Strawman

faust9:


That's where we differ. Your opinion of Kerry should not be affected by his opponent. I'm not saying you shouldn't vote for him (well, I am, but not for that reason). I look at each candidate as an indvidual and then compare them side by side. In this type of comparison I'd rather vote for the guy that has a "core" even if I disagree with some of the things happening in his administration.

Aurora:



Agree with "liberal fiscal policies". Disagree that the economy is "a mess" or that we have been affected by that overspending. A balanced budget does not equal a good economy.



And that's a point that you're very wrong on, with all due respect. I feel strongly that we MUST have missle defense. MAD doesn't work with a nation like North Korea, who now has missile capable of hitting the west coast. Iran will be next. We absolutely must invest whatever it takes to develop a real and viable missile defense shield.




Oil: What is your problem exactly? Economy: What should we do, and do you feel it's not going well now? Overtime: I think we've been "over" that (sorry...couldn't resist). I agree about extnending the deployments. I'm all for two more active divisons....and you? Patriot Act: I've seen isolated examples of abuse, but perhaps you could explain exactly what your problems are with it. I've addressed the others. If you're a moderate Republican, I can't understand how you'd even begin to think about voting for Kerry.



Come on, man. Please start thinking. CEO pay is up, OK, fine. What should Bush do? Push legislation to limit their pay? These are private corporations we're talking about. What should we do? And last time I checked, there a lot of working millionaires out there, all of whom deserve to KEEP THEIR OWN money. Here's what blows my mind: Are you even familiar with campaign finance reform? Aren't you concerened about 527s who accept $20 million contributions by people like George Soros? Kerry and his wife are INCREIDBLY RICH, far more so than Bush, and you think they're going to represent the working man? Are you kidding me? Will you answer my charges as to Bush's tax relief that benefited far more than just "the rich"? Bush is in their pocket. Jesus.

jimmac:



I said I didn't understand because I didn't understand. This is why debating with you is really not worth it, because you're just unfair and ridiculous. I did not comprehend the meaning of the last statement in your previous post. That's as clear as I can make it for you. You posted:




After three readings, I can only assume you are trying to convey that Bush would be literally sitting down, doing nothing, if not for reelection. While I doubt you'd agree with most of what he would be doing, I somehow don't concur that given what we've seen with him so far that you would be correct.
I thought most people criticized Bush for acting to oaggressively and unilaterally?

Hassan:


Way to miss the point. Clinton was notorious for putting politics before policy, which was the anti-Bush charge I was responding to. He even did it with national security, selling out US policy in the name of business interests with China and Russia. Clinton's pro-China and pro-Russia policies forced his administration to ignore China's nuclear proliferation, and North Korea's balatant duplicity. Clinton's poltics before policy caused him to bomb Iraq unilaterally, and then drop the ball on going in to get bin laden. Somehow I don't want to hear about this administration's "politics before policy."

We already know about social security reform and making the tax cuts permanent. I don't think attacking him for having no agenda is appropriate before the convention. As for Kerry, well I do think that ALL challengers bear the burden of spelling out their plans earlier than the incumbent.

Clearly not when an incumbant's policies aren't well spelled out and those that have appeared run contrary to what the public wants.

No. It's just that you don't have a good answer.

This is an election where we choose the candidate who's views best serve the american people as a whole. So what Bush is intending to do is very relevent. And we should know now so we can make an informed decision.