people hate Bush, no one even gives him a chance |
Here are the general forum rules that you must follow before you start any debate topics. Please make sure you've read and followed all directions.
people hate Bush, no one even gives him a chance |
![]()
Post
#1
|
|
i <3 me ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Member Posts: 315 Joined: Jul 2004 Member No: 30,888 ![]() |
Sometimes a political figure becomes so hated that he can't do anything right in the eyes of his enemies. President Bush has achieved this rare and exalted status. His critics are so blinded by animus that the internal consistency of their attacks on him no longer matters. For them, Bush is the double-bind president.
If he stumbles over his words, he is an embarrassing idiot. If he manages to cut taxes or wage a war against Saddam Hussein with bipartisan support, he is a manipulative genius. If he hasn't been able to capture Osama bin Laden, he is endangering U.S. security. If he catches bin Laden, it is only a ploy to influence the elections. If he ignores U.N. resolutions, he is a dangerous unilateralist. If he takes U.N. resolutions on Iraq seriously, he is a dangerous unilateralist. If he doesn't get France to agree to his Iraq policy, he is ignoring important international actors. If he supports multiparty talks on North Korea, he is not doing enough to ignore important international actors. If he bombed Iraq, he should have bombed Saudi Arabia instead, and if he had bombed Saudi Arabia, he should have bombed Iran, and if he had bombed all three, he shouldn't have bombed anyone at all. If he imposes a U.S. occupation on Iraq, he is fomenting Iraqi resistance by making the United States seem an imperial power. If he ends the U.S. occupation, he is cutting and running. If he warns of a terror attack, he is playing alarmist politics. If he doesn't warn of a terror attack, he is dangerously asleep at the switch. If he says we're safer, he's lying, and if he doesn't say we're safer, he's implicitly admitting that he has failed in his core duty as commander in chief. If he adopts a doctrine of preemption, he is unacceptably remaking American national-security policy. If the United States suffers a terror attack on his watch, he should have preempted it. If he signs a far-reaching antiterror law, he is abridging civil liberties. If the United States suffers another terror attack on his watch, he should have had a more vigorous anti-terror law. |
|
|
![]() |
![]()
Post
#2
|
|
i <3 me ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Member Posts: 315 Joined: Jul 2004 Member No: 30,888 ![]() |
ok...i agree w/ some of the stuff u mentioned (like the patriot act..thats bullshit, and it was something bush wanted to do to 1) have more power, or 2) make the people feel like he wasn't gonna give any more mercy to potential terrorists)
and you're right about ss. if it was an option, i wouldn't do it cuz i'd much rather just make my own little ss account that i can just hide away rather than give it to the government QUOTE The fact that he drafted HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF AMERICAN CITIZENS IN BLATANT VIOLATION OF THE THIRTEENTH AMENDMENT shows that he was (a) no better than slave-owners of the early 19th century, and (b) a total coward more worried about his political butt than integrity and honor. true...but he was trying to stop the spread of communism. sure, he could have picked up a rifle, but he would still need soldiers behind his back. and about ur 2nd point...i'm pretty sure most successful politians are more worried about their political butts than integrity and honor, because if they were more concerned about integrity and honor, then they wouldn't be that successful (even though they should be more successful and more respected...but people wanna hear what they wanna here, and politicians will do that they gotta do to get votes) QUOTE A dictator is someone with absolute power. As I have shown unrefuted earlier, Bush has absolute power (or pretty damn close to it) in the United States. we're having another election in 4 months? that alone shows that Bush doesn't have absolute power (unless Kerry is assassinated all of a sudden, but i highly highly highly doubt Bush would do something like that) QUOTE Maybe it's not that bad, but we have an incarceration rate of 0.7% ... this incarceration rate reflects over two-thirds nonviolent offenders. not many ppl have the balls to go out a kill someone. but its pretty easy to try to steal something, or maybe drink and drive, or sell illegal drugs QUOTE There's nothing wrong with being a Patriot, or even a Nationalist. I sympathize with many very pro-American groups such as American Conservative (www.amconmag.org), but being a Belligerent Nationalist is bad. i agree, but sometimes being belligerent is the only option (going into war constantly is definately a bad thing, but war will always occur) ok...u've made ur points...i've made mine. i don't care if people have opinions about the President because it's their own opinion. i just hate it when people say "bush is an idiot" or "bush sucks", and they don't have anything to back it up. Nov. 2004 is where it all happens. may the best man win |
|
|
![]() ![]() |