I'm not disagreeing with that general notion. Though, you're apparently convinced Bush IS wrong on many issues...whereas I am not.
Yeah, Well, you win some you lose some.
how many, which ones...those are what makes these conversations so fun
My biggest gripe with bush is his stance towards the environment, and that alone is enough to nullify whatever boons he may have. It's not even about who either, any president that shows such a disregard for the earth should not be in office.\
Yeah...War on terror...terror is an abstract concept, there is no base, there is no singular population, there is no physical aspect to terror. Killing some won't stop terror, it won't extinguish it...if anything, it'll rally more people to avenge their friends or what have you.
war on terror indeed, just a buzz term to rally people to the cause.
One of my biggest problems with this state of war we are in is calling it a war. It was a war when we went in to replace teh government of Afghanistan. It was a war when we invaded Iraq. However, I don't consider a continued effort to thwart terrorism and capture terrorists a war, I consider it something between police action and national defense. The terrorists are not a centralized authority that can be clearly defined, engaged and hopefully defeated. Its a lot more messy than that. Bottom line is I don't consider us "at war." We are engaged in a number of post-war clean-up operations and we have greater national security concerns that we use to have.
My point is that I hate how our comander-in-chimp has declared himself a war-time president that requires us to all automatically stand behind him in patriotic blindness and vote him in for another four years.
I, more often than not, find myself in situations where I end up leading rather than following. I am no dummy by any measure, but I would never claim to be an intellectual giant (like some here), Do I do and say dumb things. You bet. More than I would like to admit. Despite that, my real strength is my decisiveness. Because of this strength, others often put me in responsible positions.
The reason, I mention this is that I see Bush as a fellow decision maker. He seems to me to be willing to make the tough decisions and live with the consequences. He looks like a guy with extreme intestinal fortitude. He is obviously not making decisions to guarantee reelection, or to avoid conflict. I admire strong willed people like that. Because that is exactly what I strive to be as a person.
As far as Bush and smarts go, history is littered with people that were considered dumb or silly or not intellectuals that made huge positive impacts on humanity. So I would have to agree with previous posters that when you say bush is dumb or stupid you tend to come off a bit elitist or dismissive. i feel this only weakens your argument.
I don't blindly support anyone. I happen to agree with where he stands on most issues, including Iraq and the WOT. I am not pleased with federal spending levels he has allowed, and I'd like to see a tougher immigration stance as well.
Sounds like you like what he SAYS ("where he stands") a whole lot more than what he actually DOES.
He seems to me to be willing to make the tough decisions and live with the consequences.
Unfortunately it's the American public which "lives with the consequences" much more than Bush and his most powerful supporters in the six-figure income brackets.
Unfortunately it's the American public which "lives with the consequences" much more than Bush and his most powerful supporters in the six-figure income brackets.
I agree, but substitute "American public" for the planet and add corporations to the mix.
Someone should start a Church of Bush if he hasn't already.
As far as Bush and smarts go, history is littered with people that were considered dumb or silly or not intellectuals that made huge positive impacts on humanity.
With respect, history is also littered with millions of dead people, killed by stpuid, uninformed descisions.
In the 21st. C. you just can't be stupid and head up a big corporation let alone a superpower. To be clear, Bush's lack of the facts would be like someone asking the prospective head of Microsoft:
"Who is the CEO of Apple?"
- "I don't know."
"Who is the lead developer of Linux?"
- "I don't know."
"Can you name Sun's proprietary OS?"
- "No, can you name the CFO of SCO?"
"To that I'd have to answer, 'I'm not aiming to be head of Microsoft.'"
Unfortunately it's the American public which "lives with the consequences" much more than Bush and his most powerful supporters in the six-figure income brackets.
That's exactly what I was going to say.
Hell, we already know with Iraq that Bush has MAJOR errors in his judgement.
I agree, but substitute "American public" for the planet and add corporations to the mix.
Someone should start a Church of Bush if he hasn't already.
Um, that is true with every president and legislator and mayor and just about any politician.
You guys act as if all of a sudden, what a president does effects the population, good or bad. If Kerry gets elected he will have the same effects on the American public. Good and Bad.
I am glad you guys were not around during WWII. The American Public sacrificed a whole lot, for little in return, except the knowledge that they were making the future better for future generations.
Sometimes the "in the long run" view is what you need when solving problems. Of course in this time of me first and screw everyone else that may not be possible. Wether you agree with the way it was done or not, you cannot say that the middle east does not have a whole new future.
The big picture.
Kerry will likely rule very similar to Bush, despite all of the hype right now, if he is elected.
You know, there is not reason to be conservative, republican, or libertarian on this board at all. Just for sharing an opinion, here come the flames. Whoosh! Can we just consolidate to one Bush-Republican trashing thread and save everyone a lot of time? Everyone is entitled to have different opinions than mine- whatever... but civil debate in AO is almost dead. I just resent how fast it turns personal and sane discussion of the issues turns into rabid, drooling BS.
Just for giggles... HERE is the Bush04 page when you can search for his donors. There are over 400,000 individual contributors at this point... not just 32 cigar-smoking small-suit-wearing corporate bigwigs as is usually alleged.
Is Bush a better friend to business than Kerry? I'm in business, and I think he is. Hearing the "giant sucking sound" of jobs moving overseas is not good, nor is it fully GWB's fault. NAFTA trade poilcies were pre-Bush, supported by Clinton. We hear about "Bush's Job Loss" - but those policies that are screwing the American worker began under Clinton, maybe even GHW Bush. Asian relocation needs to be addressed with tariffs. And the FTAA can just suck it.
Can anyone find a disclosure like this for Kerry ?
So a poor choice of words=stupid? Come on. You weren't saying that when Howard Dean went ape-shit 3 weeks ago.
giant:
I suppose that's one opinion. Again though...I wonder how someone like Clinton would have fared under the exact same circumstances...a surprise attack with an obviously hostile interviewer. Why was Gore not grilled like that? Hmmm....
jimmac:
What record is that jimmac? Bringing the economy out of recession? Going after Al-Queda on it's own turf? Toppling a mass murderer who defied 17 UN resolutions and used chemical weapons on his own people? Drastically increasing education funding? Adding a prescription drug benefit to medicare? Cutting taxes? Hmmmm.....
THT:
Ummm...yes it is. If not, then why study history at all?
tonton:
Bush has never changed his mind? You've never been sure of your "big" decisions?
The man can't be stupid to have won the victories he has. In the least, he's smart enough to surround himself with people of high intelligence and skill. You simply don't get where Bush has by being dumb...no matter who Daddy was and is. Daddy might get you into Yale and Harvard business school....he doesn't get you out.
Wrong Robot:
I'm not disagreeing with that general notion. Though, you're apparently convinced Bush IS wrong on many issues...whereas I am not.
Uh no. That would be prolonging the recession. Lieing to start a war. Cutting taxes to shut the public up and feed his rich friends. The net result is stellar deficit numbers. There's more if you want it?
Comments
Originally posted by SDW2001
HOW exactly will he win the WOT?
You can't. This is a fundamental delusion these days.
Originally posted by SDW2001
Wrong Robot:
I'm not disagreeing with that general notion. Though, you're apparently convinced Bush IS wrong on many issues...whereas I am not.
Yeah, Well, you win some you lose some.
how many, which ones...those are what makes these conversations so fun
My biggest gripe with bush is his stance towards the environment, and that alone is enough to nullify whatever boons he may have. It's not even about who either, any president that shows such a disregard for the earth should not be in office.
war on terror indeed, just a buzz term to rally people to the cause.
My point is that I hate how our comander-in-chimp has declared himself a war-time president that requires us to all automatically stand behind him in patriotic blindness and vote him in for another four years.
Why was Gore not grilled like that?
although i didn't exactly like the man, i'm sure gore wasn't grilled like that because he would have known the answers.
oh well, i was hoping AO would have started to actually turn over a new leaf. maybe instead it just slowed its descent into the abyss.
The reason, I mention this is that I see Bush as a fellow decision maker. He seems to me to be willing to make the tough decisions and live with the consequences. He looks like a guy with extreme intestinal fortitude. He is obviously not making decisions to guarantee reelection, or to avoid conflict. I admire strong willed people like that. Because that is exactly what I strive to be as a person.
As far as Bush and smarts go, history is littered with people that were considered dumb or silly or not intellectuals that made huge positive impacts on humanity. So I would have to agree with previous posters that when you say bush is dumb or stupid you tend to come off a bit elitist or dismissive. i feel this only weakens your argument.
Originally posted by SDW2001
I don't blindly support anyone. I happen to agree with where he stands on most issues, including Iraq and the WOT. I am not pleased with federal spending levels he has allowed, and I'd like to see a tougher immigration stance as well.
Sounds like you like what he SAYS ("where he stands") a whole lot more than what he actually DOES.
Originally posted by NaplesX
He seems to me to be willing to make the tough decisions and live with the consequences.
Unfortunately it's the American public which "lives with the consequences" much more than Bush and his most powerful supporters in the six-figure income brackets.
Originally posted by FormerLurker
Unfortunately it's the American public which "lives with the consequences" much more than Bush and his most powerful supporters in the six-figure income brackets.
I agree, but substitute "American public" for the planet and add corporations to the mix.
Someone should start a Church of Bush if he hasn't already.
Originally posted by NaplesX
As far as Bush and smarts go, history is littered with people that were considered dumb or silly or not intellectuals that made huge positive impacts on humanity.
With respect, history is also littered with millions of dead people, killed by stpuid, uninformed descisions.
In the 21st. C. you just can't be stupid and head up a big corporation let alone a superpower. To be clear, Bush's lack of the facts would be like someone asking the prospective head of Microsoft:
"Who is the CEO of Apple?"
- "I don't know."
"Who is the lead developer of Linux?"
- "I don't know."
"Can you name Sun's proprietary OS?"
- "No, can you name the CFO of SCO?"
"To that I'd have to answer, 'I'm not aiming to be head of Microsoft.'"
Originally posted by FormerLurker
Unfortunately it's the American public which "lives with the consequences" much more than Bush and his most powerful supporters in the six-figure income brackets.
That's exactly what I was going to say.
Hell, we already know with Iraq that Bush has MAJOR errors in his judgement.
Originally posted by Gilsch
I agree, but substitute "American public" for the planet and add corporations to the mix.
Someone should start a Church of Bush if he hasn't already.
Um, that is true with every president and legislator and mayor and just about any politician.
You guys act as if all of a sudden, what a president does effects the population, good or bad. If Kerry gets elected he will have the same effects on the American public. Good and Bad.
I am glad you guys were not around during WWII. The American Public sacrificed a whole lot, for little in return, except the knowledge that they were making the future better for future generations.
Sometimes the "in the long run" view is what you need when solving problems. Of course in this time of me first and screw everyone else that may not be possible. Wether you agree with the way it was done or not, you cannot say that the middle east does not have a whole new future.
The big picture.
Kerry will likely rule very similar to Bush, despite all of the hype right now, if he is elected.
Is Bush a better friend to business than Kerry? I'm in business, and I think he is. Hearing the "giant sucking sound" of jobs moving overseas is not good, nor is it fully GWB's fault. NAFTA trade poilcies were pre-Bush, supported by Clinton. We hear about "Bush's Job Loss" - but those policies that are screwing the American worker began under Clinton, maybe even GHW Bush. Asian relocation needs to be addressed with tariffs. And the FTAA can just suck it.
Can anyone find a disclosure like this for Kerry ?
You probably wouldn't believe me, because republicans are currently too lost to even look at their own party objectively and realize what's going on.
Originally posted by SDW2001
Why don't you **** off.
Now, now. Temper, temper!
Originally posted by SDW2001
Harald:
So a poor choice of words=stupid? Come on. You weren't saying that when Howard Dean went ape-shit 3 weeks ago.
giant:
I suppose that's one opinion. Again though...I wonder how someone like Clinton would have fared under the exact same circumstances...a surprise attack with an obviously hostile interviewer. Why was Gore not grilled like that? Hmmm....
jimmac:
What record is that jimmac? Bringing the economy out of recession? Going after Al-Queda on it's own turf? Toppling a mass murderer who defied 17 UN resolutions and used chemical weapons on his own people? Drastically increasing education funding? Adding a prescription drug benefit to medicare? Cutting taxes? Hmmmm.....
THT:
Ummm...yes it is. If not, then why study history at all?
tonton:
Bush has never changed his mind? You've never been sure of your "big" decisions?
The man can't be stupid to have won the victories he has. In the least, he's smart enough to surround himself with people of high intelligence and skill. You simply don't get where Bush has by being dumb...no matter who Daddy was and is. Daddy might get you into Yale and Harvard business school....he doesn't get you out.
Wrong Robot:
I'm not disagreeing with that general notion. Though, you're apparently convinced Bush IS wrong on many issues...whereas I am not.
Uh no. That would be prolonging the recession. Lieing to start a war. Cutting taxes to shut the public up and feed his rich friends. The net result is stellar deficit numbers. There's more if you want it?
" Bush has never changed his mind? You've never been sure of your "big" decisions? "
How about revising his employment forcast?