The statement that he made is the "shocker" according to the poster. I understand that you think it is reasonable to slander this president, because you hate him and everything he stands for, and that is your right. But, if you can set aside your odium for a minute, maybe you can see that the follow up comment is just inflammatory.
Those kind of things derail the conversation. Let's discuss the so called "shocking" statement he made without the accusations and rhetoric. I really think it is simple. But you and others can't see to help it. Just refrain a bit and maybe we can keep it civil.
Like I said to you before, I could care less about the politics and wether or not GWB wins again or not. So, yes I can handle it.
It looks like it started a conversation to me.
I don't hate Bush for the record. I just think he's a walking disaster as a president. He needs to go. And before you start about who's to replace him? You could give a monkey enough bananas and he could do better!
As far as your feined neutrality.....from your previous posts we know better.
That is not a lead-in for a substantive discussion of his statement.
He claims to have done as much or more than any other president with regard to human rights.
I really shouldn't have to explain how one would begin discussion, but since most of the politik-focused lemmings here have the attention span of a gnat, I'll start you off...
To contradict Bush's statement you need to take the following steps:
1 - Find a president who has done more with regard to human rights.
2 - Point out why (try your best to be fair
Are you serious? Only Jefferson Davis was worse.
Like gelding said, Lincoln, Dubya, Lincoln, Dubya, yup toss-up.
What does his running platform have to do with what his influence ultimately was?
The most Lincoln ever did to actually free any slaves was to piss off the South enough to make them secede.
Lincoln's secretary of state said the Emancipation Proclamation was hollow, and an admission of "our sympathy with the slaves by emancipating the slaves where we cannot reach them and holding them in bondage where we can set them free."
Notice the EP didn't free slaves in the non-rebel states.
Lincoln also called (up until his assassination) for the mass deportation of blacks back to Africa.
Try to find a new hero, this guy was an astounding racist.
If you are unable to see my point in saying that there is very little actual refutation of Bush's statement that's your own problem. If you can find me actually saying Bush is king human rights that's great. But of course, you can't, because you like to argue more than you like to think.
Jefferson Davis was not a US president. Besides, someone like Woodrow Wilson was a bigger bigot than Davis, and given the opportunity, have done the same or worse . But we're all taught that the American Civil War was about slavery.
I don't know why this Bush quote is such a shocker, not so much for the claim itself but that he made such a claim. Any politician would say that sort of thing and been even more boastful if it were an election year. Bush can arguably stake some claim to some human rights records despite stuff like the detainees/combatants issue. But to claim to be the biggest thing in human rights since the abolition of crucifixion, or even to claim he's the biggest thing in human rights since last week is just a play.
As a rule, a self-declared hero is no hero at all. This is the sort of thing that historians decide after you're dead, and you have no say in it except by your actions.
Groverat's point is that others were simply scoffing at the quote, but not refuting it per se -- no rationale or comparisons to justify their (very justifiable) skepticism.
The most Lincoln ever did to actually free any slaves was to piss off the South enough to make them secede.
Lincoln's secretary of state said the Emancipation Proclamation was hollow, and an admission of "our sympathy with the slaves by emancipating the slaves where we cannot reach them and holding them in bondage where we can set them free."
Notice the EP didn't free slaves in the non-rebel states.
Lincoln also called (up until his assassination) for the mass deportation of blacks back to Africa.
Try to find a new hero, this guy was an astounding racist.
And even if you do give George credit for two steps forward (ignoring the laws we broke to take them and the damage to international diplomacy that resulted) you can't ignore the HARM he's done to human rights:
1. Pulling out of Kyoto (does harm to our basic human right to a clean environment in the interest of business).
The US, because of it's strict environmental laws produces in the rage of only 10% or maybe it was less (I am looking for the article now) of the worlds polution. Kyoto was just a failed UN power grab..
Quote:
Originally posted by tonton
2. Creating the so-called "patriot" acts that are clearly a violation of human rights.
Why would you want to help terrorists by spreading that poopie?
Quote:
Originally posted by tonton
3. Starting a war that killed hundreds of thousands.
That is what happens in war. Oh where did you get your numbers? Talk to SH, he started this whole ball rolling back in the 90's. SH is more to blame than GWB. The US government knew they would have to deal with him sooner or later. Why not criticize BC for not taking care of business, or the UN for tying our hands back in Golf War I?
Quote:
Originally posted by tonton
4. Scaring the bejeesus out of people with paranoia resulting from false claims about imaginary terrorist threats.
Would you rather they just sit back and pretend there was no threat? That cost you and me billions not to mention the 3000+ lives. Do you want to see that happen again? What is your revolutionary idea to solve the problem?
Quote:
Originally posted by tonton
5. Perpetuating a culture of mistrust and bigotry against an entire religion and multiple races.
Where are you getting this stuff? Islam is followed by mostly middle eastern people. Who are our agencies supposed to be suspicious of? Swiss Dancers? Last I looked, correct me if I am wrong, the overwhelming majority of terrorists we are talking about are muslim. Radical factions of the muslim faith, but muslim. Once again, how do suggest we approach this so called "injustice"?
Quote:
Originally posted by tonton
6. Causing a global hatred of America (and Americans) that has never before been seen.
You obviously are not taking into consideration the vast numbers of people that have been liberated from oppressive murderers. Their gratefulness does not count, right?
7. Causing a huge growth to the number of homeless population in America.
I would really like to see some definitive proof that GWB or anyone in his admin made some purposeful decision to cause more homeless. Come On.
Quote:
Originally posted by tonton
8. Taking earning power and a secure future away from our sons and daughters for political/business gain.
What exactly are you talking about here. Talk about Vague and inflammatory.
Quote:
Originally posted by tonton
9. Sending more criminals to their death than any governor in modern history.
Are you crying for murderers. Did you forget thier victims?
Quote:
Originally posted by tonton
10. Rolling back medical, educational and scientific support for Americans.
What are you talking about? Vague and inflamitory, your honor. Move to strike.
Quote:
Originally posted by tonton
Need I go on?
I don't know, have you retyped the entire "moveon.org" website yet?
Quote:
Originally posted by tonton
Like it has been said in this thread before, GWB has done more HARM to human rights than any president in history. Ever. How can he possibly claim the opposite?
Your question was inherently flawed, which is why I didn't answer it as one would generally answer a valid question. You associate the abolition of slavery too strongly with Abraham Lincoln.
You need to learn the difference between human rights violations and civil rights violations. You seem to be confused as to which is which.
If you are claiming Bush has violated Human Rights, you'd better make a damn good argument for yourself. Saying he's violated Civil Rights with things like the Patriot Act is a far more plausible case.
Your question was inherently flawed, which is why I didn't answer it as one would generally answer a valid question. You associate the abolition of slavery too strongly with Abraham Lincoln.
Still, what does his running platform have to do with what his influence ultimately was? That question isn't flawed, it's simply direct.
GWB spent the last 4 years making enemies all over the world. Now he is kissing up to everyone. Canada, Mexico, etc. Afghanisthan and Iraq have not been liberated despite what CNN tells you. Afghanisthan no longer intrests anyone since it is a money sink; and it is falling back to the old ways. If you listen hard enough, you might be able to hear Koffi Annan scream about it. As far as Iraq goes, people in America really need to be able to see uncensored footage of the events happening there. Operation Iron Grip = democracy, right...
As far as Iraq goes, people in America really need to be able to see uncensored footage of the events happening there. Operation Iron Grip = democracy, right...
Maybe you should yourself pay more attention. You will not find one single person in the administration who has said Iraq is a democratic state right now.
Comments
I ask that you return to the subject of the thread.
Fellowship
Originally posted by NaplesX
jimmy, jimmy, jimmy..... Sigh...
The statement that he made is the "shocker" according to the poster. I understand that you think it is reasonable to slander this president, because you hate him and everything he stands for, and that is your right. But, if you can set aside your odium for a minute, maybe you can see that the follow up comment is just inflammatory.
Those kind of things derail the conversation. Let's discuss the so called "shocking" statement he made without the accusations and rhetoric. I really think it is simple. But you and others can't see to help it. Just refrain a bit and maybe we can keep it civil.
Like I said to you before, I could care less about the politics and wether or not GWB wins again or not. So, yes I can handle it.
It looks like it started a conversation to me.
I don't hate Bush for the record. I just think he's a walking disaster as a president. He needs to go. And before you start about who's to replace him? You could give a monkey enough bananas and he could do better!
As far as your feined neutrality.....from your previous posts we know better.
That is not a lead-in for a substantive discussion of his statement.
He claims to have done as much or more than any other president with regard to human rights.
I really shouldn't have to explain how one would begin discussion, but since most of the politik-focused lemmings here have the attention span of a gnat, I'll start you off...
To contradict Bush's statement you need to take the following steps:
1 - Find a president who has done more with regard to human rights.
2 - Point out why (try your best to be fair
Are you serious? Only Jefferson Davis was worse.
Like gelding said, Lincoln, Dubya, Lincoln, Dubya, yup toss-up.
Originally posted by groverat
Lincoln ran for president saying that he would do nothing to attack the institution of slavery. He's under Dubya.
What does his running platform have to do with what his influence ultimately was?
thats gotta be the stupidest thing thats ever crossed his lips!
What does his running platform have to do with what his influence ultimately was?
The most Lincoln ever did to actually free any slaves was to piss off the South enough to make them secede.
Lincoln's secretary of state said the Emancipation Proclamation was hollow, and an admission of "our sympathy with the slaves by emancipating the slaves where we cannot reach them and holding them in bondage where we can set them free."
Notice the EP didn't free slaves in the non-rebel states.
Lincoln also called (up until his assassination) for the mass deportation of blacks back to Africa.
Try to find a new hero, this guy was an astounding racist.
As usual, you don't get it.
If you are unable to see my point in saying that there is very little actual refutation of Bush's statement that's your own problem. If you can find me actually saying Bush is king human rights that's great. But of course, you can't, because you like to argue more than you like to think.
Originally posted by Aquatic
Are you serious? Only Jefferson Davis was worse.
Jefferson Davis was not a US president. Besides, someone like Woodrow Wilson was a bigger bigot than Davis, and given the opportunity, have done the same or worse . But we're all taught that the American Civil War was about slavery.
I don't know why this Bush quote is such a shocker, not so much for the claim itself but that he made such a claim. Any politician would say that sort of thing and been even more boastful if it were an election year. Bush can arguably stake some claim to some human rights records despite stuff like the detainees/combatants issue. But to claim to be the biggest thing in human rights since the abolition of crucifixion, or even to claim he's the biggest thing in human rights since last week is just a play.
As a rule, a self-declared hero is no hero at all. This is the sort of thing that historians decide after you're dead, and you have no say in it except by your actions.
Groverat's point is that others were simply scoffing at the quote, but not refuting it per se -- no rationale or comparisons to justify their (very justifiable) skepticism.
Originally posted by groverat
The most Lincoln ever did to actually free any slaves was to piss off the South enough to make them secede.
Lincoln's secretary of state said the Emancipation Proclamation was hollow, and an admission of "our sympathy with the slaves by emancipating the slaves where we cannot reach them and holding them in bondage where we can set them free."
Notice the EP didn't free slaves in the non-rebel states.
Lincoln also called (up until his assassination) for the mass deportation of blacks back to Africa.
Try to find a new hero, this guy was an astounding racist.
You completely avoided my question.
Originally posted by tonton
And even if you do give George credit for two steps forward (ignoring the laws we broke to take them and the damage to international diplomacy that resulted) you can't ignore the HARM he's done to human rights:
1. Pulling out of Kyoto (does harm to our basic human right to a clean environment in the interest of business).
The US, because of it's strict environmental laws produces in the rage of only 10% or maybe it was less (I am looking for the article now) of the worlds polution. Kyoto was just a failed UN power grab..
Originally posted by tonton
2. Creating the so-called "patriot" acts that are clearly a violation of human rights.
http://www.sltrib.com/2003/Sep/09212...enta/94284.asp
http://www.fortwayne.com/mld/newssen...al/7386664.htm
Why would you want to help terrorists by spreading that poopie?
Originally posted by tonton
3. Starting a war that killed hundreds of thousands.
That is what happens in war. Oh where did you get your numbers? Talk to SH, he started this whole ball rolling back in the 90's. SH is more to blame than GWB. The US government knew they would have to deal with him sooner or later. Why not criticize BC for not taking care of business, or the UN for tying our hands back in Golf War I?
Originally posted by tonton
4. Scaring the bejeesus out of people with paranoia resulting from false claims about imaginary terrorist threats.
Would you rather they just sit back and pretend there was no threat? That cost you and me billions not to mention the 3000+ lives. Do you want to see that happen again? What is your revolutionary idea to solve the problem?
Originally posted by tonton
5. Perpetuating a culture of mistrust and bigotry against an entire religion and multiple races.
Where are you getting this stuff? Islam is followed by mostly middle eastern people. Who are our agencies supposed to be suspicious of? Swiss Dancers? Last I looked, correct me if I am wrong, the overwhelming majority of terrorists we are talking about are muslim. Radical factions of the muslim faith, but muslim. Once again, how do suggest we approach this so called "injustice"?
Originally posted by tonton
6. Causing a global hatred of America (and Americans) that has never before been seen.
You obviously are not taking into consideration the vast numbers of people that have been liberated from oppressive murderers. Their gratefulness does not count, right?
http://www.usainreview.com/4_11_Thank_You_Mr_Bush.htm
Originally posted by tonton
7. Causing a huge growth to the number of homeless population in America.
I would really like to see some definitive proof that GWB or anyone in his admin made some purposeful decision to cause more homeless. Come On.
Originally posted by tonton
8. Taking earning power and a secure future away from our sons and daughters for political/business gain.
What exactly are you talking about here. Talk about Vague and inflammatory.
Originally posted by tonton
9. Sending more criminals to their death than any governor in modern history.
Are you crying for murderers. Did you forget thier victims?
Originally posted by tonton
10. Rolling back medical, educational and scientific support for Americans.
What are you talking about? Vague and inflamitory, your honor. Move to strike.
Originally posted by tonton
Need I go on?
I don't know, have you retyped the entire "moveon.org" website yet?
Originally posted by tonton
Like it has been said in this thread before, GWB has done more HARM to human rights than any president in history. Ever. How can he possibly claim the opposite?
The same could be said of your babble.
We really should be thankful for this.
Fellowship
Originally posted by FellowshipChurch iBook
I will say that we have a great human right to sit here and discuss our differences and our different views. "Freedom of speech"
We really should be thankful for this.
Fellowship
I agree totally.
Your question was inherently flawed, which is why I didn't answer it as one would generally answer a valid question. You associate the abolition of slavery too strongly with Abraham Lincoln.
You need to learn the difference between human rights violations and civil rights violations. You seem to be confused as to which is which.
If you are claiming Bush has violated Human Rights, you'd better make a damn good argument for yourself. Saying he's violated Civil Rights with things like the Patriot Act is a far more plausible case.
Originally posted by groverat
Your question was inherently flawed, which is why I didn't answer it as one would generally answer a valid question. You associate the abolition of slavery too strongly with Abraham Lincoln.
Still, what does his running platform have to do with what his influence ultimately was? That question isn't flawed, it's simply direct.
Originally posted by talksense101
If you listen hard enough, you might be able to hear Koffi Annan scream about it.
If you listen hard enough, you'll hear whatever you want to hear and believe it like the gospel.
Originally posted by talksense101
As far as Iraq goes, people in America really need to be able to see uncensored footage of the events happening there. Operation Iron Grip = democracy, right...
Maybe you should yourself pay more attention. You will not find one single person in the administration who has said Iraq is a democratic state right now.