I'm sick of it, Bush Bashing Options

[*kryogenix*]

I'm really getting tired of all this crap about George Bush. Lately, I've heard the word "evil" attributed to him rather than to Saddam, Bin Laden, Kim Il Jong, etc. He's been called a liar and a traitor by some dems, when they had no proof to back up their claims. I hate how people are saying that he's the reason why we're not so tight with the French anymore, when in fact, there's evidence to show that Saddam bribed the French with oil, meaning it was them who were the corrupt backstabbers. Why is this man hated so much when he's just trying to protect the United States of America?

[inthemudhole]

I do agree with you.
He isn't "evil" like people say he is.
Sure, he may have made a few mistakes, but that's no reason to call him "evil." Everyone makes mistakes.

[karrar]

Why is this man hated so much when he's just trying to protect the United States of America?[/QUOTE]


I think the war on iraq is a huge factor in this "bush sucks" thing............i mean i'm not in favor of the iraq war..... all da bashing probaly would have stopped a while ago had Bush constructed a plan to acheive peace in iraq before he rushed into war ........but yea ..............i dont no

[ComradeRed]

http://abclocal.go.com/wpvi/news/08252004_...forgenazis.html

American Nazis are planning to gather in Valley Forge, PA shortly before the election to protest Bush. Members, including one Minnesota regional chair, have called Bush's administration a "corrupt dictatorship". When you are so corrupt that you scare Nazis, you know something's wrong.

[Spirited Away]

Hillary Clinton says that she hope the whole [Bush] Administration will be fired on Nov 2nd, which kind of made my eyes twitch in annoyance.

[ComradeRed]

Hillary is much worse than Bush.

She makes Ann Coulter look sane.

[gerundio]

No, he's not evil. He's a ding dong retard.

[*kryogenix*]

http://abclocal.go.com/wpvi/news/08252004_...forgenazis.html

American Nazis are planning to gather in Valley Forge, PA shortly before the election to protest Bush. Members, including one Minnesota regional chair, have called Bush's administration a "corrupt dictatorship". When you are so corrupt that you scare Nazis, you know something's wrong.

something is wrong with the nazis.

[WhiteLotus*]

I know. It's getting really annoying

I want Bush to be re-elected anywho. I believe there are second chances for people, and he needs a second chance to fix his mistakes. He's jsut human, you know.

[*CrackedRearView*]

The simple fact is, only maybe 5% (and that's being generous) of the people riding the Hate Bush Bandwagon know why they're along for the trip.

The rest of them are simply cattle who see a television commercial and will automatically base their vote in November accordingly.

That's the sad thing about American politics -- the bandwagon jumpers. It happens on both sides of the candidacy.

[gerundio]

I know. It's getting really annoying

I want Bush to be re-elected anywho.  I believe there are second chances for people, and he needs a second chance to fix his mistakes.  He's jsut human, you know.

Oh, that's real nice of you. Almost made me want to cry, it was so beautiful.



Maybe not.

Go ahead vote for him, so he and Chenney can go and get thousands of more people killed. If Bush did ALL this knowing that he risked not being re-elected, imagine what he will do if he gets another term.

Ignorance is not your friend.

[*CrackedRearView*]

Ignorance is not your friend.

No, but it seems to be yours.

Maybe you should back some of your arguments with a little more credible reinforcement than your own soiled opinion. kthx.

[gerundio]

No, but it seems to be yours.

Maybe you should back some of your arguments with a little more credible reinforcement than your own soiled opinion. kthx.

These aren't my opinions.

The war has finally been accepted by EVERYBODY (even Bush himself now) as a mistake.

Considering his first term, is it illogical to think that Bush's second term will follow the same trend? Hmmm.

[WhiteLotus*]

^^ like i said. maybe Bush will drop out of the war.

Face it. about one million people+ die each day while i million+ are getting reborn

I do understand that some of our family members are out there though. To the best to them.

I honestly think Bush needs to fix his mistakes.

[gerundio]

^^ like i said. maybe Bush will drop out of the war.

Face it. about one million people+ die each day while i million+ are getting reborn

I do understand that some of our family members are out there though. To the best to them.

I honestly think Bush needs to fix his mistakes.

Um ok.

That justifies the war exactly how? That makes no sense. It doesn't matter whether or not it's family members. It's PEOPLE.

And Bush is not going to do **** to fix his mistakes.

[ComradeRed]

something is wrong with the nazis.

Yes, I agree, but they have a point -- Bush is running a very corrupt administration. "No-bid" contracts effectively combine state and business -- creating corrupt fascism. I don't have a problem with private business -- but when a business uses its clout like Halliburton does to get no-bid contracts, subsidies, and special tax breaks (note that I support cutting business taxes FOR ALL BUSINESSES -- not just the ones with political power), it becomes PART OF THE GOVERNMENT, and is no longer a private business.

The Polisci terminology for this is State-Capitalism -- as practiced by Augusto Pinochet of Chile, Benito Mussolini of Italy, etc. State-Capitalism is just as bad as State-Socialism, and since we seem to have both in the United States, we can simply call it Statism -- a term we usually use to describe, say, Stalin or Saddam Hussein.

Bush has also hired 40,000 "Civilian Contractors" to go to Iraq and build weapons and aid US troops -- in the olden days, before we corrupted the English language, people like those were called "Mercenaries", and it was NOT considered a war crime to kill one -- after all, they are part of the occupying force, and in a state of martial law, crime does not exist.

[DavidxN]

if your sick of it then go hide in a cave in some desolate area and then you wont hear anymore crap

[rant_notebook]

if i could vote, id vote for bush, he's against abortion.. and to me that is the worst thing in the entire world. how can u kill a beautiful human?

anyways, people just going along andd saying "go kerry!" when they don't even have any interest in the election, and havent studdied it should pull their head out of their ass and die.

[F1R3B4T]

Hillary is much worse than Bush.

She makes Ann Coulter look sane.

lloll i was going to say that

bush is a wad hes so stupid -.- not evil but jus a tard...

[gerundio]

if i could vote, id vote for bush, he's against abortion.. and to me that is the worst thing in the entire world. how can u kill a beautiful human?

So you say you're pro-life but you're also pro-war? That makes no sense.

[ryfitaDF]

if i could vote, id vote for bush, he's against abortion.. and to me that is the worst thing in the entire world. how can u kill a beautiful human?

anyways, people just going along andd saying "go kerry!" when they don't even have any interest in the election, and havent studdied it should pull their head out of their ass and die.

so it's better to kill a person with a family that loves them, wants them to live, and actually remembers life?

and no one i know is saying "go kerry!". it's all "down with bush!". and i never really jumped on the bandwagon till i was told about the unjust patriot act, the lack of WMDs, the history-making deficit, the possible ensuing depression, and his desire to dephile the constitution with homophobia. i'm sure theres more i can think of, too.

[*CrackedRearView*]

so it's better to kill a person with a family that loves them, wants them to live, and actually remembers life?

Oh, so we can kill little babies, but not grown men who could very well be terrorists in the Iraqi soldiers?

If you're referring to the people we've lost so far in the war -- make sure and check out the number of people we have lost in previous ones. It's the price you pay, sadly.

But when you justify killing babies with a reinforcement like "It's alright, they won't remember life anyway" I get angry. People with your mentality, to be blunt, sicken me.

You're not just killing a baby -- you're killing potential.

Your future wife comes down with serious, and spontaneous brain cancer...and 20+ years ago we aborted the baby that would have invented the cure.

That is the biggest mistake of all -- we're killing potential, and by the thousands each day.

[*kryogenix*]

So you say you're pro-life but you're also pro-war? That makes no sense.

because the war prevents more people in my country from getting killed.

[ComradeRed]

No, war will cause more Americans to die ... 1000 right now, PLUS there will probably be more terrorist attacks after the war.

All of the 9-11 hijackers came from Saudi Arabia. Coincidentally, Saudi Arabia is where all our troops in the Mid East were stationed.

If we pull our troops out of the Mid East, there will be no more Arab terrorist attacks against us.

[gerundio]

because the war prevents more people in my country from getting killed.

Ah no it doesn't. More Americans have died because of the war. And to invade another country with no valid reason, you're just asking for more trouble (more terroism maybe?). If you haven't noticed, the terrorists aren't exactly overjoyed at Bush and friends' actions.

Oh, so we can kill little babies, but not grown men who could very well be terrorists in the Iraqi soldiers?

If you're referring to the people we've lost so far in the war -- make sure and check out the number of people we have lost in previous ones. It's the price you pay, sadly.

But when you justify killing babies with a reinforcement like "It's alright, they won't remember life anyway" I get angry. People with your mentality, to be blunt, sicken me.

You're not just killing a baby -- you're killing potential.

Your future wife comes down with serious, and spontaneous brain cancer...and 20+ years ago we aborted the baby that would have invented the cure.

That is the biggest mistake of all -- we're killing potential, and by the thousands each day.

Nobody here is advocating abortion. You just can't say you're pro-life and then say you're pro-war. It's a huge contradiction. Obviously you can't kill infants, but it's just as wrong to kill an adult. And that line, "that baby could have invented the cure to cancer," is pathetic. It doesn't matter if the baby is going to be a terroist or have down syndrome, everyone has a right to life.

[ComradeRed]

If you haven't noticed, the terrorists aren't exactly overjoyed at Bush and friends' actions.

Actually, Al-Qaeda is really happy we invaded Iraq. They've been trying to get our troops out of Saudi Arabia and overthrow Hussein since the late 80s.

[xxviet727babixx]

who gives a flyin ass bout dis bush crap. seriously we shouldn't have started a war. even though we had a terrorist attack n ****, we ain't gonna make it any betta by killn their ppl n ours n make it MORE CORRUPTED FO EVERYONE. all dis can suck da bigs balls i don't have ok. >_<

[*CrackedRearView*]

It doesn't matter if the baby is going to be a terroist or have down syndrome, everyone has a right to life.

Our enemy has a right to life?

What?! It's the enemy.

[ComradeRed]

So if I call you my enemy, suddenly you no longer have a right to life?

So anyone should be allowed to kill other people -- as long as they declared them an "enemy" first? Who kills their friends?

People only forfeit their right to life when they actually attack us and kill our people first -- like Al-Qaeda.

[gerundio]

Our enemy has a right to life?

What?! It's the enemy.

THE ENEMY. AAAHHHA. THE EVIL ONES.



Yes, everybody has a right to life. And Iraq really didn't do anything to the United States in the first place, so you could hardly consider Iraqis the enemy.

[*kryogenix*]

if your sick of it then go hide in a cave in some desolate area and then you wont hear anymore crap

AHAHAHAHAH! Why would I do that? It's just that i don't enjoy hearing slander about my country's leader.

[iheartsimba]

2 words.


GAY RIGHTS.


enough said.

[ComradeRed]

AHAHAHAHAH! Why would I do that? It's just that i don't enjoy hearing slander about my country's leader.

Slander, by definition, is false. Most Bush bashing is based on facts.

[ryfitaDF]

If you're referring to the people we've lost so far in the war -- make sure and check out the number of people we have lost in previous ones.  It's the price you pay, sadly.

yea i understand we lost billions of soldiers in previous wars for our freedom, but 1000+ lives for false causes is a ripoff.

You're not just killing a baby -- you're killing potential.

what if that 20 year old troop lying dead in iraqui sand would fin that cure? wheres the dead potential now? what about the potential in stem cell research?

and who gets abortions? mothers who don't want children. if they're unwanted they'll have crappy lives anyway. i dunno about you but i'd choose an early grave over a lifetime of suffering.

[sikdragon]

So you say you're pro-life but you're also pro-war? That makes no sense.

in your book sense and logic must not be the same thing. The needs of the many out weigh the needs of the few or the one.

[gerundio]

in your book sense and logic must not be the same thing. The needs of the many out weigh the needs of the few or the one.

You're contradicting yourself here because the number of people who have died in the war is much higher than the number of infants who have escaped abortion.

But why am I trying to argue with you? You have a gun in your signature for crying out loud. WOW.

[ComradeRed]

in your book sense and logic must not be the same thing. The needs of the many out weigh the needs of the few or the one.

That depends on what "needs".

If the "many" need slaves, and the "few" need their liberty, then the needs of the few outweigh the needs of hte many -- slavery is wrong.

Everyone has equal individual rights -- a need can never outweigh a right.

yea i understand we lost billions of soldiers in previous wars for our freedom, but 1000+ lives for false causes is a ripoff.

Billions?

The bloodiest war we've fought was the Civil War: 625,000 Americans dead. .. the second was WWII with 500,000 Americans dead. The third bloodiest was WWI ... only 100,000.

Very few Americans actually died FOR THEIR OWN FREEDOM. The one war that was really fought FOR OUR OWN FREEDOM was the American Revolution -- where only 5,000 Americans died.

[ryfitaDF]

my bad. i just thought with such a violent history there would be billions dead over the past 300 years.

and, excluding the revolution, i know they didn't die for their own freedom, but they fought for future generations' freedom. in this war we're fighting for "iraqui freedom" by forcong democracy on them, therefore being imperialistic and not democratic.

somthing in the back of my head tells me that 50 years from now "iraqui freedom" will be seen as a misteak rather than a triumph. just a feeling, though.

[*CrackedRearView*]

what if that 20 year old troop lying dead in iraqui sand would fin that cure? wheres the dead potential now?

The difference between the two is simple.

We've lost less than 1,000 over the span of several months in Iraq.

We lose over 1,000 unborn fetuses a day, not counting the partial-birth abortions that occur.

[gerundio]

We've lost less than 1,000 over the span of several months in Iraq.

We lose over 1,000 unborn fetuses a day, not counting the partial-birth abortions that occur.

I believe more Americans have died. And many, many, many innocent Iraqis have died. Neither of these two things are acceptable.

Sure... I'm sure 1,000 abortions occur everday in the United States. If it's the truth, well than that is just as unacceptable. But in no way justifies war, so I don't see your point.

[ComradeRed]

Both of you are wrong.

Not to be disrespectful, but very few enlisted soldiers who are killed would have been a major use to society.

HL Mencken did a study of the Civil War, where he determined that, of all the people who were wounded (possibly a million people), the only three wounded soldiers who ended up contributing majorly to society were the writer Ambrose Bierce, Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, and someone else that I forgot off the top of my head. Using that same principle, he concluded that of all the people who died in the Civil War, only one and a half would have made a huge difference. 620,000 people died in the Civil War ... compared to 1,000 Americans in Iraq (along with 50,000 to 100,000 Iraqis). Chances are, none of the American soldiers killed would have ended up finding a cure for cancer or anything so significant. HOWEVER, it is still MORALLY WRONG to kill tens of thousands of people -- and even if you argue that we SAVED tens of thousands of OTHER people -- the fact is that inaction is more morally just than performing both a morally right action and a morally wrong action, since your first moral duty is negative -- i.e. thou shalt not... But that's an entirely different argument.

The reason for this is simple: The people who tend to have the greatest effect on society are the people who go to the best universities, who generally have opportunities before them. If they are in the armed forces, they are probably officers (who die much less frequently than soldiers), or work non-combat job.

Your average grunt on the front lines who risks being killed or wounded tends not to have a college education. Once they leave the army, they will make less money over the course of their lifetime than people who have never been in the army in the first place. This is the case with America, it is EVEN MORE SO the case with Iraqi soldiers -- it is unlikely that any of them would've discovered a cure for anything, let alone cancer.

HOWEVER, to say that an aborted fetus could have done so is equally invalid. Aborted fetuses tend to come from mothers who would not care much for the child anyway. History shows that the VAST majority of great people -- especially in the Modern Era -- come from stable, two-parent homes. Many of them come from poor homes, but those are still stable, poor homes (the most famous example is Harlem). Very few people with irresponsible parents end up ammounting to much.

The sad truth of the matter is that aborted fetuses and frontline soldiers are in a very bad position to amount to much in the first place.

[T00000]

If you're tired of Bush bashing you shouldn't bash the "other side." Bashing Michael Moore and Farenheit 911 is one good way of doing that, which you've done. I'm sorry you think Bush is such a saint but I disagree with everything he stands for besides his disaproval on reinstating the draft. I do believe in gay rights. I also believe that women have a right to abort their babies. I don't support the war in Iraq. Just to name a few major issues he's not doing a good job dealing with. To me Bush seems to be of the opinion that in reality, the only people that deserve to use the United States to the greatest advantage are the wealthiest white men in this society. People have called Democrats liars as well, and many other things that aren't true. It's all a matter of opinion. It's politics. Get over it?

[expoised]

you know... i want Bush to be re-elected. I don't agree with everything he does... but I don't really like Kerry. and i'm not going into why. my post would be too long.

[Saeglopur]

I know. It's getting really annoying

I want Bush to be re-elected anywho. I believe there are second chances for people, and he needs a second chance to fix his mistakes. He's jsut human, you know.

Maybe he has a plan.. and well, it's not fully taking in right now, maybe it needs more time.

[gerundio]

Both of you are wrong.

Not to be disrespectful, but very few enlisted soldiers who are killed would have been a major use to society.

HL Mencken did a study of the Civil War, where he determined that, of all the people who were wounded (possibly a million people), the only three wounded soldiers who ended up contributing majorly to society were the writer Ambrose Bierce, Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, and someone else that I forgot off the top of my head. Using that same principle, he concluded that of all the people who died in the Civil War, only one and a half would have made a huge difference. 620,000 people died in the Civil War ... compared to 1,000 Americans in Iraq (along with 50,000 to 100,000 Iraqis). Chances are, none of the American soldiers killed would have ended up finding a cure for cancer or anything so significant. HOWEVER, it is still MORALLY WRONG to kill tens of thousands of people -- and even if you argue that we SAVED tens of thousands of OTHER people -- the fact is that inaction is more morally just than performing both a morally right action and a morally wrong action, since your first moral duty is negative -- i.e. thou shalt not... But that's an entirely different argument.

The reason for this is simple: The people who tend to have the greatest effect on society are the people who go to the best universities, who generally have opportunities before them. If they are in the armed forces, they are probably officers (who die much less frequently than soldiers), or work non-combat job.

Your average grunt on the front lines who risks being killed or wounded tends not to have a college education. Once they leave the army, they will make less money over the course of their lifetime than people who have never been in the army in the first place. This is the case with America, it is EVEN MORE SO the case with Iraqi soldiers -- it is unlikely that any of them would've discovered a cure for anything, let alone cancer.

HOWEVER, to say that an aborted fetus could have done so is equally invalid. Aborted fetuses tend to come from mothers who would not care much for the child anyway. History shows that the VAST majority of great people -- especially in the Modern Era -- come from stable, two-parent homes. Many of them come from poor homes, but those are still stable, poor homes (the most famous example is Harlem). Very few people with irresponsible parents end up ammounting to much.

The sad truth of the matter is that aborted fetuses and frontline soldiers are in a very bad position to amount to much in the first place.

No I am not wrong. I never said that one of these people could greatly contribute to society, I just said that everyone has the same right to life.

[ComradeRed]

That is correct, but earliuer you said they could have cured cancer.

[T00000]

No I am not wrong. I never said that one of these people could greatly contribute to society, I just said that everyone has the same right to life.

many of the unfertilized eggs that are dripping out of vaginas in a bloody drizzle right now could have contributed to society, but they were never born therefor they didn't. they also have a right to life but they never were alive.

[gerundio]

That is correct, but earliuer you said they could have cured cancer.

Nope. This is what I said:

And that line, "that baby could have invented the cure to cancer," is pathetic.

[gerundio]

many of the unfertilized eggs that are dripping out of vaginas in a bloody drizzle right now could have contributed to society, but they were never born therefor they didn't. they also have a right to life but they never were alive.

Um ok. What's your point? I am neither pro-choice or pro-war.

[*CrackedRearView*]

and who gets abortions? mothers who don't want children. if they're unwanted they'll have crappy lives anyway. i dunno about you but i'd choose an early grave over a lifetime of suffering.

I suppose they should have thought about that a tad bit more before they got themselves pregnant.

[ComradeRed]

The biggest problem with teen pregnancy is that the government tells you "If you can't afford a kid, we'll pay for you."

Getting rid of the Welfare State would get rid of teen pregnancy. Or at least drive it down to the acceptable rate of 10-15%, where it was at in the 1960s, before welfare drove it up to 35%+.

[T00000]

I suppose they should have thought about that a tad bit more before they got themselves pregnant.

Well they didnt...? The fact is, abortion is legal. So as long as it is, humans will get abortions if they want them. THink of it as a delayed period. Taking birth control pills and using condoms is doing the same thing, you're preventing a life from being formed. So unless you're a hardcore catholic or other practicing religion who doesnt believe in abortions, birth control, or sex before marriage, you are basically contradicting yourself.

[*kryogenix*]

The biggest problem with teen pregnancy is that the government tells you "If you can't afford a kid, we'll pay for you."

Getting rid of the Welfare State would get rid of teen pregnancy. Or at least drive it down to the acceptable rate of 10-15%, where it was at in the 1960s, before welfare drove it up to 35%+.

I concur.

Well they didnt...? The fact is, abortion is legal. So as long as it is, humans will get abortions if they want them. THink of it as a delayed period. Taking birth control pills and using condoms is doing the same thing, you're preventing a life from being formed. So unless you're a hardcore catholic or other practicing religion who doesnt believe in abortions, birth control, or sex before marriage, you are basically contradicting yourself.

Why not practice abstinence instead?

[ComradeRed]

Because people have the inalienable right to have consensual sex.

[gerundio]

Why not practice abstinence instead?

Umm, why would you not want to have sex? And anyway, not everybody is as educated as YOU are and knows about condoms, birth pills, etc.

[racegirl24A]

Im not old enough to vote, but if I could, Id vote for Bush. granted, I really dont support the war in Iraq at all, but at least we know what Bush stands for. Kerry flip flops so damn much I duno what he wants to do anymore. This election is pretty much "who do you dislike the least," and my vote would definitly go to Bush.

[ComradeRed]

You could vote for a third party, or just stay home.

A person has a civic duty to vote for what he believes in. If he doesn't believe in any of the choices, then he, by corollary, has a civic duty NOT to vote.

The State of Nevada recognized this. On their Presidential ballot, you can vote for the option, "None of these candidates".

Supporting the lesser of two evils is still supporting evil.

[T00000]

Why not practice abstinence instead?

because people, like me, like to f*ck. Of course I use protection and I dont know why people dont, but regardless of whether they did something to protect themselves or not, they still have a right to their own body.

[*mSz_dOrk_anGeL*]

The simple fact is, only maybe 5% (and that's being generous) of the people riding the Hate Bush Bandwagon know why they're along for the trip.

The rest of them are simply cattle who see a television commercial and will automatically base their vote in November accordingly.

That's the sad thing about American politics -- the bandwagon jumpers. It happens on both sides of the candidacy.

I will have to agree with you on that one.