In your world, Kennedy would have withdrawn had he not been shot. There's no proof of this of course, but that's your world for you.
In your world, Bush lied even though there is absolutely no evidence to support your conclusion.
In your world, the False Dilemma reigns supreme. "Either they lied or were incompetent" is your favorite line re: Iraq. When the nation's intel services provide intelligence that's utterly wrong, that doesn't make anyone incompetent, except for the intel services themselves. Would you have known the difference between "good" intel and "bad" intel? By the way, the "bad" intel is the intel that our government believed through Clinton's term, and it's the same intel Clinton used to justify bombing in 1998. Imagine that.
In your world, Bush brought down the economy. This doesn't hold a drop of water however, because the first signs of economic slowdown were detected in March of 2000 with the fall of the Nasdaq. By December 2000, companies such as Apple (for example) were issuing warnings based on a "global economic slowdown". There is nothing Bush, (nor anyone else) could have done to affect ANY aspect of the economy in the three months it took for us to go into "recession" after he took office. What Bush DID do was cut taxes, which which undoubtedly helped the economy. And now, after 9/11, recession, corporate scandals (which I'm sure you blame Bush for as well) and a war, the economy is growing at 4-5%, unemployment is down and falling, and the markets are at 2 1/2 year highs. Ummm...what did Bush do to the economy again?
Also in your world, Nixon caused the quagmire in Vietnam. Never mind that when Nixon took office, the war began to go BETTER. Nixon, despite being corrupt, was brilliant with foreign policy and the running of a war.
And most laughably, in your world Reaganomics didn't work, even though it most likely saved this nation from not just recession, but full scale depression. Ronald Reagan is going to go down in history with FDR and Lincoln, for pete's sake. Reagan understood that the United States had to negotiate from a position of strength, which yes, cost money. This brings me to the deficit: The deficit is NOT at record highs as a percentage of GDP. And I must ask....if we had someone else in office, do you really believe we wouldn't have a deficit? Of course we would, because when the economy slows, revenue drops.
" In your world, Bush lied even though there is absolutely no evidence to support your conclusion. "
Ordinary people have been convicted on less circumstancial evidence.
As for the rest of your parallel universe view where Nixon and Bush are just nice men out to do right by us......
GEEEEEEZZZZZ!!!!
The funny thing is as I was typing this my friend called ( you know " Out The Door In 2004 " ) and he said he recently saw a graph where the deficit goes along kind of on a steady incline for a few years and then around 2008 it shoots up to even new stellar heights so we will really be screwed.
Also I never said Nixon started the war. If you could screw your reading comprehension up a few notches you'll find that I said it was started by the Vietnamise themselves.
Ah, but like any good second hand artist ( Bill Gates ) he took the material at hand and really made it BIG!.
Back to Bush and the economy. Also yes we were long overdue for a downturn. It's what Bush did with that when it happened. It could have been shorter and alot less severe. Yeah lets go fight an unnecessary war and spend billions in a time of economic strife ( and pass some tax cuts to feed the rich and keep the masses quiet ).
Which brings me to the subject of bad intel.
Yes there is lots of bad intel out there. And the person recieving can't be blamed for that. However if everyone is telling that person that it's bad they should pay attention. This makes that person either incompetent or if they want it to say only what they want to further their agenda's that makes them a liar. And it really does seem now that a lot of people were telling Mr. Bush this was stupid. As a matter of fact without even looking at the intel a lot of ordinary people didn't buy it.
As far as reaganomics we didn't have recession we had serial recession. Or mini recessions. Please don't try to tell me anything different. I was a working adult during that period. Things seemed good but the nation was literally living on credit ( sound familure ). This finally led to the real thing at the end of the 80's during Bush Sr. tenure. Also lest we forget Reagan promised to balance the budget 3 times during his tenure. Guess what happened ( or never did )?
Ah, but we've been all through this before haven't we?
Here is reason enough not to support the embarrassment we have in the White House.
RESUME
GEORGE W. BUSH
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue
Washington, DC 20520
EDUCATION AND EXPERIENCE:
_
Law Enforcement:
I was arrested in Kennebunkport, Maine, in 1976 for driving under the influence of alcohol. I pled guilty, paid a fine, and had my driver's license suspended for 30 days. My Texas driving record has been "lost" and is not available.
Military:
I joined the Texas Air National Guard and went AWOL. I refused to take a drug test or answer any questions about my drug use. By joining the Texas Air National Guard, I was able to avoid combat duty in Vietnam.
College:
I graduated from Yale University with a low C average. I was a cheerleader.
_ __
PAST WORK EXPERIENCE:
___ *__ I ran for U.S. Congress and lost. I began my career in the oil business in Midland, Texas, in 1975.
___ *__ I bought an oil company, but couldn't find any oil in Texas._ The company went bankrupt shortly after I sold all my stock. I bought the Texas Rangers baseball team in a sweetheart deal that took land using taxpayer money.
___ *__ With the help of my father and our friends in the oil industry (including Enron CEO Ken Lay), I was elected governor of Texas.
___
ACCOMPLISHMENTS AS GOVERNOR OF TEXAS:
_
___ *__ I changed Texas pollution laws to favor power and oil companies, making Texas the most polluted state in the Union. During my tenure, Houston replaced Los Angeles as the most smog-ridden city in America.
___ *__ I cut taxes and bankrupted the Texas treasury to the tune of billions in borrowed money.
___ *__ I set the record for the most executions by any governor in American history.
___ *__ With the help of my brother, the governor of Florida, and my father's appointments to the Supreme Court, I became President after losing by over 500,000 votes.
___
ACCOMPLISHMENTS AS PRESIDENT:
_
___ *__ I am the first President in U.S. history to enter office with a criminal record.
___ *__ I invaded and occupied two countries at a continuing cost of over one billion dollars per week.
___ *__ I spent the U.S. surplus and effectively bankrupted the U.S. Treasury.
___ *__ I shattered the record for the largest annual deficit in U.S. history.
___ *__ I set an economic record for most private bankruptcies filed in any 12-month period.
___ *__ I set the all-time record for most foreclosures in a 12-month period..
___ *__ I set the all-time record for the biggest drop in the history of the U.S. stock market. In my first year in office, over 2 million Americans lost their jobs and that trend cntinues every month.
___ *__ I'm proud that the members of my cabinet are the richest of any administration in U.S. history. My "poorest millionaire," Condoleeza Rice, has a Chevron oil tanker named after her.
___ *__ I set the record for most campaign fund-raising trips by a U.S. President.
___ *__ I am the all-time U.S. and world record-holder for receiving the most corporate campaign donations.
___ *__ My largest lifetime campaign contributor, and one of my best friends, Kenneth Lay, presided over the largest corporate bankruptcy fraud in U.S. History, Enron.
___ *__ My political party used Enron private jets and corporate attorneys to assure my success with the U.S. Supreme Court during my election decision.
___ *__ I have protected my friends at Enron and Halliburton against investigation or prosecution. More time and money was spent investigating the Monica Lewinsky affair than has been spent investigating one of the biggest corporate rip- offs in history.
___ *__ I presided over the biggest energy crisis in U.S. history and refused to intervene when corruption involving the oil industry was_ revealed. I presided over the highest gasoline prices in U.S. history.
___ *__ I changed the U.S. policy to allow convicted criminals to be awarded government contracts.
___ *__ I appointed more convicted criminals to administration than any President in U.S. history.
___ *__ I created the Ministry of Homeland Security, the largest bureaucracy in the history of the United States government.
___ *__ I've broken more international treaties than any President in U.S. history.
___ *__ I am the first President in U.S. history to have the United Nations remove the U.S. from the Human Rights Commission.
___ *__ I withdrew the U.S. from the World Court of Law.
___ *__ I refused to allow inspector's access to U.S. "prisoners of_ war" detainees and thereby have refused to abide by the Geneva_ Convention.
___ *__ I am the first President in history to refuse United Nations election inspectors (during the 2002 U.S. election).
___ *__ I set the record for fewest numbers of press conferences of any President since the advent of television.
___ *__ I set the all-time record for most days on vacation in any one-year period. After taking off the entire month of August, I presided over the worst security failure in U.S. history.
___ *__ I garnered the most sympathy for the U.S. after the World Trade Center attacks and less than a year later made the U.S. the most hated country in the world, the largest failure of diplomacy in world history.
___ *__ I have set the all-time record for most people worldwide to simultaneously protest me in public venues (15 million people), shattering the record for protests against any person in the history of mankind.
___ *__ I am the first President in U.S. history to order an unprovoked, pre-emptive attack and the military occupation of a sovereign nation. I did so against the will of the United Nations, the majority of U.S. citizens, and the world community.
___ *__ I have cut health care benefits for war veterans and support a cut in duty benefits for active duty troops and their families --_ in wartime.
___ *__ In my State of the Union Address, I lied about our reasons for attacking Iraq and then blamed the lies on our British friends.
___ *__ I am the first President in history to have a majority of Europeans (71%) view my presidency as the biggest threat to world peace and security.
___ *__ I am supporting development of a nuclear "Tactical Bunker Buster," a WMD.
___ *__ I have so far failed to fulfill my pledge to bring Osama Bin Laden [sic] to justice.
___
RECORDS AND REFERENCES:
___
___ *__ All records of my tenure as governor of Texas are now in my father's library, sealed and unavailable for public view.
___ *__ All records of SEC investigations into my insider trading and my bankrupt companies are sealed in secrecy and unavailable for public view.
___ *__ All records or minutes from meetings that I, or my Vice-President, attended regarding public energy policy are sealed in secrecy and unavailable for public review.
An absolute ban on clear cutting, which not only decimates the forest but leaves the the remaining land open to erosion, resulting in further devistation of streams in the watershed, which become choked with silt. (Moreover, the replanting programs on clear cut land are often futile, since without some canopy the saplings get too much heat and not enough soil).
Some kind of reasonable policy about logging on public lands, which at the moment amounts to a give away of the people's assets. Until you've hiked a national forest, and moved past the scrim of trees left to act as a "potempkin forest" to the casual observer into the moonscape of clear cutting, it's hard to imagine just how vile this policy is.
I have no problem with tree plantations as a renewable resource (although like a lot of big agra, mono crop plus pesticide is a disaster waiting to happen). I just think counting this acrage as part of the "forest" that remains is misleading.
SDW, small, local timber companies have often done a good job of stewardship of the forests they harvest from. The problem, as in so many industries, is the consolidation of these firms into "mega-loggers" whose economic model is more akin to Enron than a local lumber mill, who ship entire forests to Japan as pulp for paper, who treat forests as just another marker in the asset game, to be liquidated when the numbers look good, who can't understand or don't care why anyone would have any particular attachment to old-growth redwoods or virgin stands of magnificent trees or pristine watersheds that are home to thousands of species and a recreational opportunity for thousands of Americans.
1. There is no evidence of any kind that Bush lied. None. Zero.
2. If you are not happy with Bush's actions during the slowdown, then what should have been done? Should he have RAISED taxes? Should he have proposed tax relief for those that don't pay taxes? Further, your comments on the length and severity of the recession do nothing but demonstrate your utter ignorance of economic cycles. We had a very BRIEF and SHALLOW recession.
3. Reaganomics worked. Serial recession? WTF world did you live in? This nation has essentially lived on credit for years. Please tell me you're not suggesting Reagan caused this? Please.
SDW2001, have you consulted anyone on this? Reaganomics didnt work, really, its a well supported statement citing all sorts of data suggesting that the money that the top income bracket got stayed in the top income bracket. But then again, reality does not seem to be your forte.
Did Bush lie? No, I don't think he actually did, but his crime is he BELIEVED. He believed everything Rumsfield, Chenny, Rowe, Wolfowitz, etc told him without question. When I vote against Bush it is these neocons who I am really voting against. Bush can always use that old Nazi defense that he was only following orders, he is just a chump who could never come up with the sort of folly he has gotten us into in Iraq on his own.
And who did these Neocons believe? They believed Chalabi and others in the professional Iraqi resistance whose very livelihood since the first Iraq war was based on pumping up Sadam so America would keep paying them millions to try to overthrow him. Chalabi is nothing more than a common criminal convicted of embezzling 300 million dollars from a bank he used to run in Jordan, yet these guys trusted him because he told them exactly what they wanted to hear. I have spent a lot of time traveling and working in Muslim countries and I can tell you one thing you quickly learn...lieing is part of their culture. This may sound racist, but time and again I have been told by Muslim friends in these countries not to trust what their fellow countrymen tell me. To them it is just part of daily life and they expect it from others they deal with. People would promise me all kinds of help, usually saying they had some friend or relative who was in a position of power who could do something for me. Before I figured out what was going on I caused all kinds of trouble when I tried to take them up on their offers of help. Invariably there would come a point when I realized they had no connections who could do anything and there would be a lot of embarrassment on their part. It is just considered polite in their culture to tell others what they think they want to hear and to boost their ego by bragging about their connections. It amazes me to no end that there wasn't anyone telling these guys not to trust Chalabi, but they had their agenda and probably didn't listen to anyone who contradicted that.
As someone who grew up during the 60s this whole mess is just deja vu all over again. I can remember Westmoreland's frequent press conferences telling us how the war in Vietnam was going great and we would soon win. Just a few more bombs here and there to kill a few thousand more VC and they would just give up. Well, they didn't give up and the reason is the same now as it was then. We were no more fighting communism then as we are fighting Islam, the Baathist, or al-Qaida now. It is about nationalism. No one likes to be occupied by another country, no matter who noble our intentions may be. And just like then when our spread of the war into Laos and Cambodia actually caused those countries to become communist instead of preventing it, our invasion of Iraq has empowered the radical Muslims around the world and made them much stronger. If we allow any sort of real democracy in Iraq it is inevitable that a radical Muslim, anti-american government will be elected, just like what happened in Algeria. The biggest mistake these neocons are making is assuming that Arabs and Muslims are just like us and will respond in the way we would in an equivalent situation. This is a huge mistake. This people aren't us. Half of all Iraqis are married to their bloody cousin...this alone should give us pause. Just as a stronger connection to their clan rather than their state has caused Somalis to destroy their country, the people in Iraq will put their own families self interest ahead of their country causing us and them all kinds of grief.
While it has been argued the Clinton administration also believed Iraq has large stockpiles of WMD they did not believe it was enough of a threat to justify a full scale invasion of the country. What I consider to be the much more insidious untruth fostered on us by the Bush White House is this idea that there was some link between Iraq and al-Qaida. It really amazes me how little Americans actually understand about what al-Qaida is trying to accomplish. One would think that people would pay attention to the old saying about knowing your enemy, but it seems people are either to lazy to read or just want to be spoon fed propaganda that our government dishes out. al-Qaida and Osama's goal is not to change or defeat America. They need America as it is. What they are trying to do is change Islam into their radical vision. Like the communists before them they know that change can not occur if people are happy and satisfied. There purpose in attacking America is to get us to respond in ways that will radicalize Muslims around the world. For this reason our invasion of Afghanistan was exactly what they wanted and our invasion of Iraq was more than they could probably even hope for. Our invasion of Iraq has been the biggest recruiting tool they have had since the Soviets invaded Afghanistan. What they really want is a full scale war between Christians and Muslims that will bring the average Muslim around to their way of thinking. Invading Iraq in no way, shape, or form has made us the least bit safer. Sadam was a terrible tyrant who needed to go, but a major part of his tyranny was in suppressing the kind of radical Islam that is now strengthening within Iraq and much of the Islamic world. While he perverted the Baathists Ideals to his own evil ends, the party originated as a secular force against Islamic involvement in government. If you read the early writings of its founders you would see that their goal was exactly the kind of government we would hope to see take root throughout the Middle East.
It really amazes me that people can't see who our real enemies in the Islamic world are. It is Saudi Arabia and Pakistan that we should be the most worried about. Even without its people funding much of al-Qaida the Saudis have been spreading their extreme version of Islam around the world for years. I first traveled around Malaysia and Indonesia in 1985 and have been back many times since. Every time I return I find more conservative dress and radicalism from the young. This is directly a result of the funding of Islamic schools by the Saudis. These schools promise free education to the kids of poor families who would otherwise not be able to afford to send their kids to school. The families don't really want their kids to have this kind of strict education which is little more than brain washing in the Saudi Wahabism form of Islam, but they feel they can't let their kids go without school. Now these kids are becoming young adults and joining in the terrorist attacks that have taken place in Bali and other parts of Indonesia. And when America does something stupid like invading Iraq they can say: "See, we told you America was the enemy of Islam...follow us and we will lead you to the promised land!"
Pakistan is also a great danger to us. We have foolishly trusted them for years, ever since we used them to fight the Soviets in Afghanistan. As has been recently reveled they have not only made the Islamic worlds first atomic bomb, they have been exporting nuclear technology around the world. For now our only friend there is a dictator who was no more elected than Sadam was and who is hardly in control of much of the government under him. The only elected body in the country is dominated by fundamentalist who consider America the enemy. All it will take is one of the many assassination attempts against Musharraf to succeed and we will have al-Qaida's
sympathizers controlling nuclear weapons. Why Bush and his cronies can't see this as a great danger is beyond me. Instead they see Iran as part of their axis of evil when that country is becoming more and more liberal as young people born after the revolution come to dominate the country. Sure, the old Islamist still hold most of the power, but their days are numbered as they die out. Iran has the potential to become one of the most democratic countries in the Muslim world, but every time we rattle our saber at them it empowers the radicals and sets back any chance for change.
Some times I can't really decide if getting ride of Bush will be a good idea since he will have left such a mess that will just be blamed on whoever defeats him. Maybe we should just reelect him so he has to live with the consequences of his actions. People say we can't cut and run in Iraq, but that is what Bush is already planning to do come June. As soon as his handlers realized that Iraq was not going to be the cake walk they told him to expect they have been planning on how to get the hell out of their before the election. Installation of an Iraqi government that they expected to take place after a couple of years of occupation has been moved up to June for purely political reasons. Unfortunately for whoever gets stuck with it Iraq will never be an easy fix.
1. There is no evidence of any kind that Bush lied. None. Zero.
2. If you are not happy with Bush's actions during the slowdown, then what should have been done? Should he have RAISED taxes? Should he have proposed tax relief for those that don't pay taxes? Further, your comments on the length and severity of the recession do nothing but demonstrate your utter ignorance of economic cycles. We had a very BRIEF and SHALLOW recession.
3. Reaganomics worked. Serial recession? WTF world did you live in? This nation has essentially lived on credit for years. Please tell me you're not suggesting Reagan caused this? Please.
We've been through this before. Let's see back then you would have been about oh, 10 ( or younger if you want to talk about the deregulation of Federal loans blunder ) when all this was happening. My self I was in my early 30's. I remember it period. We've been through the deregulation BS that caused all those scandals. We've also seen the impact of raising the deficit before with Reagan.
Also he was another president that ....well how does groverat put it? " Spends money like a drunken sailor ".
What could Bush have done differently? Well not spending billions on a stupid war would have been a big start. Perhaps not giving the tax cuts and trying to pay for things might have not been popular but better for us in the long run. You've got to admit ( of course you won't becuase your view is so hoplessly slanted in favor of the idea that Bush can do no wrong )things in this recession were really different than your average recession ( record unemployment that still is present even though other factors have started to recover etc. ). By the way I wouldn't call " The worst unemployment since WII " shallow.
As far as evidence of Bush lieing well if it smells like a pig, it feels like a pig, and makes sounds like a pig it must be a pig.
I'm not saying there's grounds for legal action here......yet. But it's certainly obvious enough that it will affect the election. If he didn't lie and simply believed the data ( becuase it was what he wanted to hear ) that makes him and his staff incompetent. There is no 3rd option here.
But as I've said we've been through this before.
The thing is SDW I'm not playing that stupid game with you anymore. You ask me why I feel this way. I tell you in spades. Then you act like we never had the conversation. This playing dumb attitude isn't going to work ( or help save your precious Bush ).
I will continue to remind you however when you try to foster a falsehood on this forum.
1.) Who of you have the awesome responsibility of running this country, or any aspect therein?
2.) Who of you have been under that pressure in addition to trying to perform well in a nationally televised interview?
3.) Who here has ever looked into GWB's eyes and talked to him face to face?
Many of you seem to think you can judge a man simply by selected audio and video clips from the internet.
I would put any of you self appointed experts up against GWB any day. I think that you foolishly underestimate him based on second hand rhetoric. You are all pretty silly with your claims of special knowledge.
1.) Who of you have the awesome responsibility of running this country, or any aspect therein?
2.) Who of you have been under that pressure in addition to trying to perform well in a nationally televised interview?
3.) Who here has ever looked into GWB's eyes and talked to him face to face?
Many of you seem to think you can judge a man simply by selected audio and video clips from the internet.
I would put any of you self appointed experts up against GWB any day. I think that you foolishly underestimate him based on second hand rhetoric. You are all pretty silly with your claims of special knowledge.
I should have known you would pipe in on this. Most people would see (possibly after it being pointed out to them), they cannot directly relate to such things.
Don't get me wrong, we all should have opinions, that is one of the things in life that is still free. But I just think it is wrong to start assuming that you can start to make statement so matter-of-factly when it comes to things that you know zip, nothing about.
I hear some of you say things like "See Bush is an idiot, he messed up this word or that sentence." A lot people around him seem to think otherwise. A whole lot of people in this country also think otherwise.
Am I saying he is a rocket scientist, no because I do not know. And neither do any of you guys/girls. I am saying that he is our president. Just that fact should produce some level of respect, wether you agree with his policies or not.
By letting your misguided collective hate overshadow the respect you should show GWB, if only on the level of being another human being, shows your own mentality and sense of fairness. I hope that people do not treat you the way you and your compatriots are treating this president.
The democratic party has made a big mistake promoting this kind of rhetoric. You see, someone has to set an example. They personally attack this president, then when the next democrat gets in office, he gets attacked, and so on and on. I find it hard to believe that you high minders don't see that.
Already this election year looks like it will be spent on tawdry affairs and drinking and accusations thereof. The issues have been thrown out the window. That is what you want, I suppose.
I should have known you would pipe in on this. Most people would see (possibly after it being pointed out to them), they cannot directly relate to such things.
Don't get me wrong, we all should have opinions, that is one of the things in life that is still free. But I just think it is wrong to start assuming that you can start to make statement so matter-of-factly when it comes to things that you know zip, nothing about.
I hear some of you say things like "See Bush is an idiot, he messed up this word or that sentence." A lot people around him seem to think otherwise. A whole lot of people in this country also think otherwise.
Am I saying he is a rocket scientist, no because I do not know. And neither do any of you guys/girls. I am saying that he is our president. Just that fact should produce some level of respect, wether you agree with his policies or not.
By letting your misguided collective hate overshadow the respect you should show GWB, if only on the level of being another human being, shows your own mentality and sense of fairness. I hope that people do not treat you the way you and your compatriots are treating this president.
The democratic party has made a big mistake promoting this kind of rhetoric. You see, someone has to set an example. They personally attack this president, then when the next democrat gets in office, he gets attacked, and so on and on. I find it hard to believe that you high minders don't see that.
Already this election year looks like it will be spent on tawdry affairs and drinking and accusations thereof. The issues have been thrown out the window. That is what you want, I suppose.
Decorum has to start somewhere. Why not here?
I think it is rather indecorous of you to read through pages of posts with detailed critiques of Bush's policies and chide us for misguided collective hate. Perhaps some personally attack this president, but most are up in arms about, among other things:
-- the way the war in Iraq has been prosecuted/justified
-- the contempt for internationalism and its mechanisms
-- the near trillion dollar swing in the nations surplus to deficit
-- the tax cuts that have favored the wealthy
-- the secrecy of the whitehouse coupled with it's chuminess with corporate interests
-- the use of "the war on terror" to tar opposition as less than patriotic
-- John Ashcroft's contempt for civil liberties
-- etc.
This, of course, after a Democratic administration that was attacked for virtually nothing but personal, visceral animosity. Where was the respect for the office of the president then?
I should have known you would pipe in on this. Most people would see (possibly after it being pointed out to them), they cannot directly relate to such things.
Don't get me wrong, we all should have opinions, that is one of the things in life that is still free. But I just think it is wrong to start assuming that you can start to make statement so matter-of-factly when it comes to things that you know zip, nothing about.
I hear some of you say things like "See Bush is an idiot, he messed up this word or that sentence." A lot people around him seem to think otherwise. A whole lot of people in this country also think otherwise.
Am I saying he is a rocket scientist, no because I do not know. And neither do any of you guys/girls. I am saying that he is our president. Just that fact should produce some level of respect, wether you agree with his policies or not.
By letting your misguided collective hate overshadow the respect you should show GWB, if only on the level of being another human being, shows your own mentality and sense of fairness. I hope that people do not treat you the way you and your compatriots are treating this president.
The democratic party has made a big mistake promoting this kind of rhetoric. You see, someone has to set an example. They personally attack this president, then when the next democrat gets in office, he gets attacked, and so on and on. I find it hard to believe that you high minders don't see that.
Already this election year looks like it will be spent on tawdry affairs and drinking and accusations thereof. The issues have been thrown out the window. That is what you want, I suppose.
Decorum has to start somewhere. Why not here?
Where's the WOMD?
How come jobs aren't recovering with the recovery?
Why was the recession that bad in the first place?
Why did we go to war with iraq during a time of economic strife?
Come to think of it why did we go to war with Iraq?
And look at that deficit go!
No! This guy doesn't command any respect from me. Respect has to be earned. It's not given freely in my book!
If it looks like an idiot, acts like an idiot, makes decisions like an idiot, it must be an idiot!
You don't seem to understand. Bush works for us. The american people. Not the other way around. And guess who hasn't been doing his job?
It's not a monarchy kiddo.
How come Bush makes so many blatantly obvious moves to garner votes that are just full of hot air and insincerity ( yeah lets go back to the moon ). And ironically I'm all for space exploration! OUT THE DOOR IN 2004!
I'm sorry but for the things he's done ( and please don't ask me " what? " like a dumb mule if you haven't been reading this board up until now it's not my fault or job to outline it for you ) he deserves no mercy. Throw the bum out!
1.) Who of you have the awesome responsibility of running this country, or any aspect therein?
Me. I have.
Which apparently puts me in the unique position of being the only person on the planet able to exercise my democratic right to criticise the behaviour and policies of the elected head of my government.
I think it is rather indecorous of you to read through pages of posts with detailed critiques of Bush's policies and chide us for misguided collective hate. Perhaps some personally attack this president, but most are up in arms about, among other things:
-- the way the war in Iraq has been prosecuted/justified
-- the contempt for internationalism and its mechanisms
-- the near trillion dollar swing in the nations surplus to deficit
-- the tax cuts that have favored the wealthy
-- the secrecy of the whitehouse coupled with it's chuminess with corporate interests
-- the use of "the war on terror" to tar opposition as less than patriotic
-- John Ashcroft's contempt for civil liberties
-- etc.
This, of course, after a Democratic administration that was attacked for virtually nothing but personal, visceral animosity. Where was the respect for the office of the president then?
I will go along with every point there as being legitimate points of discussion. And they should be discussed. However, some of the points that you bring up are connected with or arguably a result of previous administrations. Not all mind you, but some. Every president has his problems and troubles of the times. I am surprised you would bring up Clinton, he had more than his share. Besides, I for one never attacked Clinton for his mistakes. I actually felt bad for the guy. I mean, he would seem to jump from the frying pan to the fire. Clinton did a considerable amount of good things in areas while making some bad decisions in the process. I thing the office of the President and just about any other office for that matter forces you to do some good.
And by the way, I don't see anything wrong with critiquing any sitting official on his/her policies. That is our job as responsible citizens, I suppose. Please don't take what I said as an attack on the left. I am merely pointing out that disagreement to policies has been replaced by personal hatred, from the left, for what seems by all accounts to be a good man. I mean, come on, are you all trying to say that GWB has not done anything out of a sense of duty to his office and country?
Anyway, don't try to turn me into your enemy. I just get riled up when I see some of the garbage that festers here sometimes.
Which apparently puts me in the unique position of being the only person on the planet able to exercise my democratic right to criticise the behaviour and policies of the elected head of my government.
I hope you won't be voting, NaplesX.
Really?
Enlighten me on what part of this government are in your loving care.
I will go along with every point there as being legitimate points of discussion. And they should be discussed. However, some of the points that you bring up are connected with or arguably a result of previous administrations. Not all mind you, but some. Every president has his problems and troubles of the times. I am surprised you would bring up Clinton, he had more than his share. Besides, I for one never attacked Clinton for his mistakes. I actually felt bad for the guy. I mean, he would seem to jump from the frying pan to the fire. Clinton did a considerable amount of good things in areas while making some bad decisions in the process. I thing the office of the President and just about any other office for that matter forces you to do some good.
And by the way, I don't see anything wrong with critiquing any sitting official on his/her policies. That is our job as responsible citizens, I suppose. Please don't take what I said as an attack on the left. I am merely pointing out that disagreement to policies has been replaced by personal hatred, from the left, for what seems by all accounts to be a good man. I mean, come on, are you all trying to say that GWB has not done anything out of a sense of duty to his office and country?
Anyway, don't try to turn me into your enemy. I just get riled up when I see some of the garbage that festers here sometimes.
How come jobs aren't recovering with the recovery?
Why was the recession that bad in the first place?
Why did we go to war with iraq during a time of economic strife?
Come to think of it why did we go to war with Iraq?
And look at that deficit go!
No! This guy doesn't command any respect from me. Respect has to be earned. It's not given freely in my book!
If it looks like an idiot, acts like an idiot, makes decisions like an idiot, it must be an idiot!
You don't seem to understand. Bush works for us. The american people. Not the other way around. And guess who hasn't been doing his job?
It's not a monarchy kiddo.
How come Bush makes so many blatantly obvious moves to garner votes that are just full of hot air and insincerity ( yeah lets go back to the moon ). And ironically I'm all for space exploration! OUT THE DOOR IN 2004!
I'm sorry but for the things he's done ( and please don't ask me " what? " like a dumb mule if you haven't been reading this board up until now it's not my fault or job to outline it for you ) he deserves no mercy. Throw the bum out!
just a few questions to your reply.
Has Bill Clinton as president earned your respect? If so, in what aspects of his service? And should his "personal" actions and choices while president influence that respect he earned? What about the almost parallel choices and reasonings he had regarding terrorism/Iraq?
Comments
Originally posted by SDW2001
Jimmac, you're a true believer.
In your world, Kennedy would have withdrawn had he not been shot. There's no proof of this of course, but that's your world for you.
In your world, Bush lied even though there is absolutely no evidence to support your conclusion.
In your world, the False Dilemma reigns supreme. "Either they lied or were incompetent" is your favorite line re: Iraq. When the nation's intel services provide intelligence that's utterly wrong, that doesn't make anyone incompetent, except for the intel services themselves. Would you have known the difference between "good" intel and "bad" intel? By the way, the "bad" intel is the intel that our government believed through Clinton's term, and it's the same intel Clinton used to justify bombing in 1998. Imagine that.
In your world, Bush brought down the economy. This doesn't hold a drop of water however, because the first signs of economic slowdown were detected in March of 2000 with the fall of the Nasdaq. By December 2000, companies such as Apple (for example) were issuing warnings based on a "global economic slowdown". There is nothing Bush, (nor anyone else) could have done to affect ANY aspect of the economy in the three months it took for us to go into "recession" after he took office. What Bush DID do was cut taxes, which which undoubtedly helped the economy. And now, after 9/11, recession, corporate scandals (which I'm sure you blame Bush for as well) and a war, the economy is growing at 4-5%, unemployment is down and falling, and the markets are at 2 1/2 year highs. Ummm...what did Bush do to the economy again?
Also in your world, Nixon caused the quagmire in Vietnam. Never mind that when Nixon took office, the war began to go BETTER. Nixon, despite being corrupt, was brilliant with foreign policy and the running of a war.
And most laughably, in your world Reaganomics didn't work, even though it most likely saved this nation from not just recession, but full scale depression. Ronald Reagan is going to go down in history with FDR and Lincoln, for pete's sake. Reagan understood that the United States had to negotiate from a position of strength, which yes, cost money. This brings me to the deficit: The deficit is NOT at record highs as a percentage of GDP. And I must ask....if we had someone else in office, do you really believe we wouldn't have a deficit? Of course we would, because when the economy slows, revenue drops.
" In your world, Bush lied even though there is absolutely no evidence to support your conclusion. "
Ordinary people have been convicted on less circumstancial evidence.
As for the rest of your parallel universe view where Nixon and Bush are just nice men out to do right by us......
GEEEEEEZZZZZ!!!!
The funny thing is as I was typing this my friend called ( you know " Out The Door In 2004 " ) and he said he recently saw a graph where the deficit goes along kind of on a steady incline for a few years and then around 2008 it shoots up to even new stellar heights so we will really be screwed.
Also I never said Nixon started the war. If you could screw your reading comprehension up a few notches you'll find that I said it was started by the Vietnamise themselves.
Ah, but like any good second hand artist ( Bill Gates ) he took the material at hand and really made it BIG!.
Back to Bush and the economy. Also yes we were long overdue for a downturn. It's what Bush did with that when it happened. It could have been shorter and alot less severe. Yeah lets go fight an unnecessary war and spend billions in a time of economic strife ( and pass some tax cuts to feed the rich and keep the masses quiet ).
Which brings me to the subject of bad intel.
Yes there is lots of bad intel out there. And the person recieving can't be blamed for that. However if everyone is telling that person that it's bad they should pay attention. This makes that person either incompetent or if they want it to say only what they want to further their agenda's that makes them a liar. And it really does seem now that a lot of people were telling Mr. Bush this was stupid. As a matter of fact without even looking at the intel a lot of ordinary people didn't buy it.
As far as reaganomics we didn't have recession we had serial recession. Or mini recessions. Please don't try to tell me anything different. I was a working adult during that period. Things seemed good but the nation was literally living on credit ( sound familure ). This finally led to the real thing at the end of the 80's during Bush Sr. tenure. Also lest we forget Reagan promised to balance the budget 3 times during his tenure. Guess what happened ( or never did )?
Ah, but we've been all through this before haven't we?
RESUME
GEORGE W. BUSH
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue
Washington, DC 20520
EDUCATION AND EXPERIENCE:
_
Law Enforcement:
I was arrested in Kennebunkport, Maine, in 1976 for driving under the influence of alcohol. I pled guilty, paid a fine, and had my driver's license suspended for 30 days. My Texas driving record has been "lost" and is not available.
Military:
I joined the Texas Air National Guard and went AWOL. I refused to take a drug test or answer any questions about my drug use. By joining the Texas Air National Guard, I was able to avoid combat duty in Vietnam.
College:
I graduated from Yale University with a low C average. I was a cheerleader.
_ __
PAST WORK EXPERIENCE:
___ *__ I ran for U.S. Congress and lost. I began my career in the oil business in Midland, Texas, in 1975.
___ *__ I bought an oil company, but couldn't find any oil in Texas._ The company went bankrupt shortly after I sold all my stock. I bought the Texas Rangers baseball team in a sweetheart deal that took land using taxpayer money.
___ *__ With the help of my father and our friends in the oil industry (including Enron CEO Ken Lay), I was elected governor of Texas.
___
ACCOMPLISHMENTS AS GOVERNOR OF TEXAS:
_
___ *__ I changed Texas pollution laws to favor power and oil companies, making Texas the most polluted state in the Union. During my tenure, Houston replaced Los Angeles as the most smog-ridden city in America.
___ *__ I cut taxes and bankrupted the Texas treasury to the tune of billions in borrowed money.
___ *__ I set the record for the most executions by any governor in American history.
___ *__ With the help of my brother, the governor of Florida, and my father's appointments to the Supreme Court, I became President after losing by over 500,000 votes.
___
ACCOMPLISHMENTS AS PRESIDENT:
_
___ *__ I am the first President in U.S. history to enter office with a criminal record.
___ *__ I invaded and occupied two countries at a continuing cost of over one billion dollars per week.
___ *__ I spent the U.S. surplus and effectively bankrupted the U.S. Treasury.
___ *__ I shattered the record for the largest annual deficit in U.S. history.
___ *__ I set an economic record for most private bankruptcies filed in any 12-month period.
___ *__ I set the all-time record for most foreclosures in a 12-month period..
___ *__ I set the all-time record for the biggest drop in the history of the U.S. stock market. In my first year in office, over 2 million Americans lost their jobs and that trend cntinues every month.
___ *__ I'm proud that the members of my cabinet are the richest of any administration in U.S. history. My "poorest millionaire," Condoleeza Rice, has a Chevron oil tanker named after her.
___ *__ I set the record for most campaign fund-raising trips by a U.S. President.
___ *__ I am the all-time U.S. and world record-holder for receiving the most corporate campaign donations.
___ *__ My largest lifetime campaign contributor, and one of my best friends, Kenneth Lay, presided over the largest corporate bankruptcy fraud in U.S. History, Enron.
___ *__ My political party used Enron private jets and corporate attorneys to assure my success with the U.S. Supreme Court during my election decision.
___ *__ I have protected my friends at Enron and Halliburton against investigation or prosecution. More time and money was spent investigating the Monica Lewinsky affair than has been spent investigating one of the biggest corporate rip- offs in history.
___ *__ I presided over the biggest energy crisis in U.S. history and refused to intervene when corruption involving the oil industry was_ revealed. I presided over the highest gasoline prices in U.S. history.
___ *__ I changed the U.S. policy to allow convicted criminals to be awarded government contracts.
___ *__ I appointed more convicted criminals to administration than any President in U.S. history.
___ *__ I created the Ministry of Homeland Security, the largest bureaucracy in the history of the United States government.
___ *__ I've broken more international treaties than any President in U.S. history.
___ *__ I am the first President in U.S. history to have the United Nations remove the U.S. from the Human Rights Commission.
___ *__ I withdrew the U.S. from the World Court of Law.
___ *__ I refused to allow inspector's access to U.S. "prisoners of_ war" detainees and thereby have refused to abide by the Geneva_ Convention.
___ *__ I am the first President in history to refuse United Nations election inspectors (during the 2002 U.S. election).
___ *__ I set the record for fewest numbers of press conferences of any President since the advent of television.
___ *__ I set the all-time record for most days on vacation in any one-year period. After taking off the entire month of August, I presided over the worst security failure in U.S. history.
___ *__ I garnered the most sympathy for the U.S. after the World Trade Center attacks and less than a year later made the U.S. the most hated country in the world, the largest failure of diplomacy in world history.
___ *__ I have set the all-time record for most people worldwide to simultaneously protest me in public venues (15 million people), shattering the record for protests against any person in the history of mankind.
___ *__ I am the first President in U.S. history to order an unprovoked, pre-emptive attack and the military occupation of a sovereign nation. I did so against the will of the United Nations, the majority of U.S. citizens, and the world community.
___ *__ I have cut health care benefits for war veterans and support a cut in duty benefits for active duty troops and their families --_ in wartime.
___ *__ In my State of the Union Address, I lied about our reasons for attacking Iraq and then blamed the lies on our British friends.
___ *__ I am the first President in history to have a majority of Europeans (71%) view my presidency as the biggest threat to world peace and security.
___ *__ I am supporting development of a nuclear "Tactical Bunker Buster," a WMD.
___ *__ I have so far failed to fulfill my pledge to bring Osama Bin Laden [sic] to justice.
___
RECORDS AND REFERENCES:
___
___ *__ All records of my tenure as governor of Texas are now in my father's library, sealed and unavailable for public view.
___ *__ All records of SEC investigations into my insider trading and my bankrupt companies are sealed in secrecy and unavailable for public view.
___ *__ All records or minutes from meetings that I, or my Vice-President, attended regarding public energy policy are sealed in secrecy and unavailable for public review.
___
Please consider my experience when voting in 2004
Originally posted by SDW2001
Such as? What ways?
Selective ecological removal of certain trees basically. Low impact removal of trees.
Originally posted by SDW2001
Such as? What ways?
An absolute ban on clear cutting, which not only decimates the forest but leaves the the remaining land open to erosion, resulting in further devistation of streams in the watershed, which become choked with silt. (Moreover, the replanting programs on clear cut land are often futile, since without some canopy the saplings get too much heat and not enough soil).
Some kind of reasonable policy about logging on public lands, which at the moment amounts to a give away of the people's assets. Until you've hiked a national forest, and moved past the scrim of trees left to act as a "potempkin forest" to the casual observer into the moonscape of clear cutting, it's hard to imagine just how vile this policy is.
I have no problem with tree plantations as a renewable resource (although like a lot of big agra, mono crop plus pesticide is a disaster waiting to happen). I just think counting this acrage as part of the "forest" that remains is misleading.
SDW, small, local timber companies have often done a good job of stewardship of the forests they harvest from. The problem, as in so many industries, is the consolidation of these firms into "mega-loggers" whose economic model is more akin to Enron than a local lumber mill, who ship entire forests to Japan as pulp for paper, who treat forests as just another marker in the asset game, to be liquidated when the numbers look good, who can't understand or don't care why anyone would have any particular attachment to old-growth redwoods or virgin stands of magnificent trees or pristine watersheds that are home to thousands of species and a recreational opportunity for thousands of Americans.
Forests are not a commodity.
1. There is no evidence of any kind that Bush lied. None. Zero.
2. If you are not happy with Bush's actions during the slowdown, then what should have been done? Should he have RAISED taxes? Should he have proposed tax relief for those that don't pay taxes? Further, your comments on the length and severity of the recession do nothing but demonstrate your utter ignorance of economic cycles. We had a very BRIEF and SHALLOW recession.
3. Reaganomics worked. Serial recession? WTF world did you live in? This nation has essentially lived on credit for years. Please tell me you're not suggesting Reagan caused this? Please.
SDW2001, have you consulted anyone on this? Reaganomics didnt work, really, its a well supported statement citing all sorts of data suggesting that the money that the top income bracket got stayed in the top income bracket. But then again, reality does not seem to be your forte.
And who did these Neocons believe? They believed Chalabi and others in the professional Iraqi resistance whose very livelihood since the first Iraq war was based on pumping up Sadam so America would keep paying them millions to try to overthrow him. Chalabi is nothing more than a common criminal convicted of embezzling 300 million dollars from a bank he used to run in Jordan, yet these guys trusted him because he told them exactly what they wanted to hear. I have spent a lot of time traveling and working in Muslim countries and I can tell you one thing you quickly learn...lieing is part of their culture. This may sound racist, but time and again I have been told by Muslim friends in these countries not to trust what their fellow countrymen tell me. To them it is just part of daily life and they expect it from others they deal with. People would promise me all kinds of help, usually saying they had some friend or relative who was in a position of power who could do something for me. Before I figured out what was going on I caused all kinds of trouble when I tried to take them up on their offers of help. Invariably there would come a point when I realized they had no connections who could do anything and there would be a lot of embarrassment on their part. It is just considered polite in their culture to tell others what they think they want to hear and to boost their ego by bragging about their connections. It amazes me to no end that there wasn't anyone telling these guys not to trust Chalabi, but they had their agenda and probably didn't listen to anyone who contradicted that.
As someone who grew up during the 60s this whole mess is just deja vu all over again. I can remember Westmoreland's frequent press conferences telling us how the war in Vietnam was going great and we would soon win. Just a few more bombs here and there to kill a few thousand more VC and they would just give up. Well, they didn't give up and the reason is the same now as it was then. We were no more fighting communism then as we are fighting Islam, the Baathist, or al-Qaida now. It is about nationalism. No one likes to be occupied by another country, no matter who noble our intentions may be. And just like then when our spread of the war into Laos and Cambodia actually caused those countries to become communist instead of preventing it, our invasion of Iraq has empowered the radical Muslims around the world and made them much stronger. If we allow any sort of real democracy in Iraq it is inevitable that a radical Muslim, anti-american government will be elected, just like what happened in Algeria. The biggest mistake these neocons are making is assuming that Arabs and Muslims are just like us and will respond in the way we would in an equivalent situation. This is a huge mistake. This people aren't us. Half of all Iraqis are married to their bloody cousin...this alone should give us pause. Just as a stronger connection to their clan rather than their state has caused Somalis to destroy their country, the people in Iraq will put their own families self interest ahead of their country causing us and them all kinds of grief.
While it has been argued the Clinton administration also believed Iraq has large stockpiles of WMD they did not believe it was enough of a threat to justify a full scale invasion of the country. What I consider to be the much more insidious untruth fostered on us by the Bush White House is this idea that there was some link between Iraq and al-Qaida. It really amazes me how little Americans actually understand about what al-Qaida is trying to accomplish. One would think that people would pay attention to the old saying about knowing your enemy, but it seems people are either to lazy to read or just want to be spoon fed propaganda that our government dishes out. al-Qaida and Osama's goal is not to change or defeat America. They need America as it is. What they are trying to do is change Islam into their radical vision. Like the communists before them they know that change can not occur if people are happy and satisfied. There purpose in attacking America is to get us to respond in ways that will radicalize Muslims around the world. For this reason our invasion of Afghanistan was exactly what they wanted and our invasion of Iraq was more than they could probably even hope for. Our invasion of Iraq has been the biggest recruiting tool they have had since the Soviets invaded Afghanistan. What they really want is a full scale war between Christians and Muslims that will bring the average Muslim around to their way of thinking. Invading Iraq in no way, shape, or form has made us the least bit safer. Sadam was a terrible tyrant who needed to go, but a major part of his tyranny was in suppressing the kind of radical Islam that is now strengthening within Iraq and much of the Islamic world. While he perverted the Baathists Ideals to his own evil ends, the party originated as a secular force against Islamic involvement in government. If you read the early writings of its founders you would see that their goal was exactly the kind of government we would hope to see take root throughout the Middle East.
It really amazes me that people can't see who our real enemies in the Islamic world are. It is Saudi Arabia and Pakistan that we should be the most worried about. Even without its people funding much of al-Qaida the Saudis have been spreading their extreme version of Islam around the world for years. I first traveled around Malaysia and Indonesia in 1985 and have been back many times since. Every time I return I find more conservative dress and radicalism from the young. This is directly a result of the funding of Islamic schools by the Saudis. These schools promise free education to the kids of poor families who would otherwise not be able to afford to send their kids to school. The families don't really want their kids to have this kind of strict education which is little more than brain washing in the Saudi Wahabism form of Islam, but they feel they can't let their kids go without school. Now these kids are becoming young adults and joining in the terrorist attacks that have taken place in Bali and other parts of Indonesia. And when America does something stupid like invading Iraq they can say: "See, we told you America was the enemy of Islam...follow us and we will lead you to the promised land!"
Pakistan is also a great danger to us. We have foolishly trusted them for years, ever since we used them to fight the Soviets in Afghanistan. As has been recently reveled they have not only made the Islamic worlds first atomic bomb, they have been exporting nuclear technology around the world. For now our only friend there is a dictator who was no more elected than Sadam was and who is hardly in control of much of the government under him. The only elected body in the country is dominated by fundamentalist who consider America the enemy. All it will take is one of the many assassination attempts against Musharraf to succeed and we will have al-Qaida's
sympathizers controlling nuclear weapons. Why Bush and his cronies can't see this as a great danger is beyond me. Instead they see Iran as part of their axis of evil when that country is becoming more and more liberal as young people born after the revolution come to dominate the country. Sure, the old Islamist still hold most of the power, but their days are numbered as they die out. Iran has the potential to become one of the most democratic countries in the Muslim world, but every time we rattle our saber at them it empowers the radicals and sets back any chance for change.
Some times I can't really decide if getting ride of Bush will be a good idea since he will have left such a mess that will just be blamed on whoever defeats him. Maybe we should just reelect him so he has to live with the consequences of his actions. People say we can't cut and run in Iraq, but that is what Bush is already planning to do come June. As soon as his handlers realized that Iraq was not going to be the cake walk they told him to expect they have been planning on how to get the hell out of their before the election. Installation of an Iraqi government that they expected to take place after a couple of years of occupation has been moved up to June for purely political reasons. Unfortunately for whoever gets stuck with it Iraq will never be an easy fix.
Originally posted by SDW2001
Jimmac:
1. There is no evidence of any kind that Bush lied. None. Zero.
2. If you are not happy with Bush's actions during the slowdown, then what should have been done? Should he have RAISED taxes? Should he have proposed tax relief for those that don't pay taxes? Further, your comments on the length and severity of the recession do nothing but demonstrate your utter ignorance of economic cycles. We had a very BRIEF and SHALLOW recession.
3. Reaganomics worked. Serial recession? WTF world did you live in? This nation has essentially lived on credit for years. Please tell me you're not suggesting Reagan caused this? Please.
We've been through this before. Let's see back then you would have been about oh, 10 ( or younger if you want to talk about the deregulation of Federal loans blunder ) when all this was happening. My self I was in my early 30's. I remember it period. We've been through the deregulation BS that caused all those scandals. We've also seen the impact of raising the deficit before with Reagan.
Also he was another president that ....well how does groverat put it? " Spends money like a drunken sailor ".
What could Bush have done differently? Well not spending billions on a stupid war would have been a big start. Perhaps not giving the tax cuts and trying to pay for things might have not been popular but better for us in the long run. You've got to admit ( of course you won't becuase your view is so hoplessly slanted in favor of the idea that Bush can do no wrong )things in this recession were really different than your average recession ( record unemployment that still is present even though other factors have started to recover etc. ). By the way I wouldn't call " The worst unemployment since WII " shallow.
As far as evidence of Bush lieing well if it smells like a pig, it feels like a pig, and makes sounds like a pig it must be a pig.
I'm not saying there's grounds for legal action here......yet. But it's certainly obvious enough that it will affect the election. If he didn't lie and simply believed the data ( becuase it was what he wanted to hear ) that makes him and his staff incompetent. There is no 3rd option here.
But as I've said we've been through this before.
The thing is SDW I'm not playing that stupid game with you anymore. You ask me why I feel this way. I tell you in spades. Then you act like we never had the conversation. This playing dumb attitude isn't going to work ( or help save your precious Bush ).
I will continue to remind you however when you try to foster a falsehood on this forum.
" Maybe we should just reelect him so he has to live with the consequences of his actions. "
No way charlie! He wouldn't ever live with his actions and as a matter of fact he would do it again if given the chance!
The effects of what he's done will be hovering around us for at least the rest of my ( hopefully ) 20 to 30 year life span.
Huh, uh. He's done enough damage! No need to let him do more.
1.) Who of you have the awesome responsibility of running this country, or any aspect therein?
2.) Who of you have been under that pressure in addition to trying to perform well in a nationally televised interview?
3.) Who here has ever looked into GWB's eyes and talked to him face to face?
Many of you seem to think you can judge a man simply by selected audio and video clips from the internet.
I would put any of you self appointed experts up against GWB any day. I think that you foolishly underestimate him based on second hand rhetoric. You are all pretty silly with your claims of special knowledge.
Originally posted by NaplesX
I just want to ask a couple of questions:
1.) Who of you have the awesome responsibility of running this country, or any aspect therein?
2.) Who of you have been under that pressure in addition to trying to perform well in a nationally televised interview?
3.) Who here has ever looked into GWB's eyes and talked to him face to face?
Many of you seem to think you can judge a man simply by selected audio and video clips from the internet.
I would put any of you self appointed experts up against GWB any day. I think that you foolishly underestimate him based on second hand rhetoric. You are all pretty silly with your claims of special knowledge.
So you have?
Doesn't matter if you have.
I don't need to.
You know why?
ACTIONS SPEAK LOUDER THAN WORDS!
Originally posted by jimmac
So you have?
Doesn't matter if you have.
I don't need to.
You know why?
ACTIONS SPEAK LOUDER THAN WORDS!
Hey Jimmac,
I should have known you would pipe in on this. Most people would see (possibly after it being pointed out to them), they cannot directly relate to such things.
Don't get me wrong, we all should have opinions, that is one of the things in life that is still free. But I just think it is wrong to start assuming that you can start to make statement so matter-of-factly when it comes to things that you know zip, nothing about.
I hear some of you say things like "See Bush is an idiot, he messed up this word or that sentence." A lot people around him seem to think otherwise. A whole lot of people in this country also think otherwise.
Am I saying he is a rocket scientist, no because I do not know. And neither do any of you guys/girls. I am saying that he is our president. Just that fact should produce some level of respect, wether you agree with his policies or not.
By letting your misguided collective hate overshadow the respect you should show GWB, if only on the level of being another human being, shows your own mentality and sense of fairness. I hope that people do not treat you the way you and your compatriots are treating this president.
The democratic party has made a big mistake promoting this kind of rhetoric. You see, someone has to set an example. They personally attack this president, then when the next democrat gets in office, he gets attacked, and so on and on. I find it hard to believe that you high minders don't see that.
Already this election year looks like it will be spent on tawdry affairs and drinking and accusations thereof. The issues have been thrown out the window. That is what you want, I suppose.
Decorum has to start somewhere. Why not here?
Originally posted by NaplesX
Hey Jimmac,
I should have known you would pipe in on this. Most people would see (possibly after it being pointed out to them), they cannot directly relate to such things.
Don't get me wrong, we all should have opinions, that is one of the things in life that is still free. But I just think it is wrong to start assuming that you can start to make statement so matter-of-factly when it comes to things that you know zip, nothing about.
I hear some of you say things like "See Bush is an idiot, he messed up this word or that sentence." A lot people around him seem to think otherwise. A whole lot of people in this country also think otherwise.
Am I saying he is a rocket scientist, no because I do not know. And neither do any of you guys/girls. I am saying that he is our president. Just that fact should produce some level of respect, wether you agree with his policies or not.
By letting your misguided collective hate overshadow the respect you should show GWB, if only on the level of being another human being, shows your own mentality and sense of fairness. I hope that people do not treat you the way you and your compatriots are treating this president.
The democratic party has made a big mistake promoting this kind of rhetoric. You see, someone has to set an example. They personally attack this president, then when the next democrat gets in office, he gets attacked, and so on and on. I find it hard to believe that you high minders don't see that.
Already this election year looks like it will be spent on tawdry affairs and drinking and accusations thereof. The issues have been thrown out the window. That is what you want, I suppose.
Decorum has to start somewhere. Why not here?
I think it is rather indecorous of you to read through pages of posts with detailed critiques of Bush's policies and chide us for misguided collective hate. Perhaps some personally attack this president, but most are up in arms about, among other things:
-- the way the war in Iraq has been prosecuted/justified
-- the contempt for internationalism and its mechanisms
-- the near trillion dollar swing in the nations surplus to deficit
-- the tax cuts that have favored the wealthy
-- the secrecy of the whitehouse coupled with it's chuminess with corporate interests
-- the use of "the war on terror" to tar opposition as less than patriotic
-- John Ashcroft's contempt for civil liberties
-- etc.
This, of course, after a Democratic administration that was attacked for virtually nothing but personal, visceral animosity. Where was the respect for the office of the president then?
Originally posted by NaplesX
Hey Jimmac,
I should have known you would pipe in on this. Most people would see (possibly after it being pointed out to them), they cannot directly relate to such things.
Don't get me wrong, we all should have opinions, that is one of the things in life that is still free. But I just think it is wrong to start assuming that you can start to make statement so matter-of-factly when it comes to things that you know zip, nothing about.
I hear some of you say things like "See Bush is an idiot, he messed up this word or that sentence." A lot people around him seem to think otherwise. A whole lot of people in this country also think otherwise.
Am I saying he is a rocket scientist, no because I do not know. And neither do any of you guys/girls. I am saying that he is our president. Just that fact should produce some level of respect, wether you agree with his policies or not.
By letting your misguided collective hate overshadow the respect you should show GWB, if only on the level of being another human being, shows your own mentality and sense of fairness. I hope that people do not treat you the way you and your compatriots are treating this president.
The democratic party has made a big mistake promoting this kind of rhetoric. You see, someone has to set an example. They personally attack this president, then when the next democrat gets in office, he gets attacked, and so on and on. I find it hard to believe that you high minders don't see that.
Already this election year looks like it will be spent on tawdry affairs and drinking and accusations thereof. The issues have been thrown out the window. That is what you want, I suppose.
Decorum has to start somewhere. Why not here?
Where's the WOMD?
How come jobs aren't recovering with the recovery?
Why was the recession that bad in the first place?
Why did we go to war with iraq during a time of economic strife?
Come to think of it why did we go to war with Iraq?
And look at that deficit go!
No! This guy doesn't command any respect from me. Respect has to be earned. It's not given freely in my book!
If it looks like an idiot, acts like an idiot, makes decisions like an idiot, it must be an idiot!
You don't seem to understand. Bush works for us. The american people. Not the other way around. And guess who hasn't been doing his job?
It's not a monarchy kiddo.
How come Bush makes so many blatantly obvious moves to garner votes that are just full of hot air and insincerity ( yeah lets go back to the moon ). And ironically I'm all for space exploration! OUT THE DOOR IN 2004!
I'm sorry but for the things he's done ( and please don't ask me " what? " like a dumb mule if you haven't been reading this board up until now it's not my fault or job to outline it for you ) he deserves no mercy. Throw the bum out!
Originally posted by NaplesX
I just want to ask a couple of questions:
1.) Who of you have the awesome responsibility of running this country, or any aspect therein?
Me. I have.
Which apparently puts me in the unique position of being the only person on the planet able to exercise my democratic right to criticise the behaviour and policies of the elected head of my government.
I hope you won't be voting, NaplesX.
Originally posted by addabox
I think it is rather indecorous of you to read through pages of posts with detailed critiques of Bush's policies and chide us for misguided collective hate. Perhaps some personally attack this president, but most are up in arms about, among other things:
-- the way the war in Iraq has been prosecuted/justified
-- the contempt for internationalism and its mechanisms
-- the near trillion dollar swing in the nations surplus to deficit
-- the tax cuts that have favored the wealthy
-- the secrecy of the whitehouse coupled with it's chuminess with corporate interests
-- the use of "the war on terror" to tar opposition as less than patriotic
-- John Ashcroft's contempt for civil liberties
-- etc.
This, of course, after a Democratic administration that was attacked for virtually nothing but personal, visceral animosity. Where was the respect for the office of the president then?
I will go along with every point there as being legitimate points of discussion. And they should be discussed. However, some of the points that you bring up are connected with or arguably a result of previous administrations. Not all mind you, but some. Every president has his problems and troubles of the times. I am surprised you would bring up Clinton, he had more than his share. Besides, I for one never attacked Clinton for his mistakes. I actually felt bad for the guy. I mean, he would seem to jump from the frying pan to the fire. Clinton did a considerable amount of good things in areas while making some bad decisions in the process. I thing the office of the President and just about any other office for that matter forces you to do some good.
And by the way, I don't see anything wrong with critiquing any sitting official on his/her policies. That is our job as responsible citizens, I suppose. Please don't take what I said as an attack on the left. I am merely pointing out that disagreement to policies has been replaced by personal hatred, from the left, for what seems by all accounts to be a good man. I mean, come on, are you all trying to say that GWB has not done anything out of a sense of duty to his office and country?
Anyway, don't try to turn me into your enemy. I just get riled up when I see some of the garbage that festers here sometimes.
Originally posted by Hassan i Sabbah
Me. I have.
Which apparently puts me in the unique position of being the only person on the planet able to exercise my democratic right to criticise the behaviour and policies of the elected head of my government.
I hope you won't be voting, NaplesX.
Really?
Enlighten me on what part of this government are in your loving care.
Originally posted by NaplesX
Really?
Enlighten me on what part of this government are in your loving care.
" We the people "
Get it?
Originally posted by NaplesX
I will go along with every point there as being legitimate points of discussion. And they should be discussed. However, some of the points that you bring up are connected with or arguably a result of previous administrations. Not all mind you, but some. Every president has his problems and troubles of the times. I am surprised you would bring up Clinton, he had more than his share. Besides, I for one never attacked Clinton for his mistakes. I actually felt bad for the guy. I mean, he would seem to jump from the frying pan to the fire. Clinton did a considerable amount of good things in areas while making some bad decisions in the process. I thing the office of the President and just about any other office for that matter forces you to do some good.
And by the way, I don't see anything wrong with critiquing any sitting official on his/her policies. That is our job as responsible citizens, I suppose. Please don't take what I said as an attack on the left. I am merely pointing out that disagreement to policies has been replaced by personal hatred, from the left, for what seems by all accounts to be a good man. I mean, come on, are you all trying to say that GWB has not done anything out of a sense of duty to his office and country?
Anyway, don't try to turn me into your enemy. I just get riled up when I see some of the garbage that festers here sometimes.
-----------------------------------------------------------
" And they should be discussed. "
-----------------------------------------------------------
They already have been! Add infinitum!
No point in doing it again for someone who dosn't seem to have much reading comprehension.
Originally posted by jimmac
Where's the WOMD?
How come jobs aren't recovering with the recovery?
Why was the recession that bad in the first place?
Why did we go to war with iraq during a time of economic strife?
Come to think of it why did we go to war with Iraq?
And look at that deficit go!
No! This guy doesn't command any respect from me. Respect has to be earned. It's not given freely in my book!
If it looks like an idiot, acts like an idiot, makes decisions like an idiot, it must be an idiot!
You don't seem to understand. Bush works for us. The american people. Not the other way around. And guess who hasn't been doing his job?
It's not a monarchy kiddo.
How come Bush makes so many blatantly obvious moves to garner votes that are just full of hot air and insincerity ( yeah lets go back to the moon ). And ironically I'm all for space exploration! OUT THE DOOR IN 2004!
I'm sorry but for the things he's done ( and please don't ask me " what? " like a dumb mule if you haven't been reading this board up until now it's not my fault or job to outline it for you ) he deserves no mercy. Throw the bum out!
just a few questions to your reply.
Has Bill Clinton as president earned your respect? If so, in what aspects of his service? And should his "personal" actions and choices while president influence that respect he earned? What about the almost parallel choices and reasonings he had regarding terrorism/Iraq?