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
|
|
![]() Quand j'étais jeune... ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Staff Alumni Posts: 6,826 Joined: Jan 2004 Member No: 1,272 ![]() |
QUOTE(jo3 @ Jul 28 2004, 2:17 PM) i don't bash ppl online who don't agree with me. i bash people online who have stupid things to say like "bush sucks" and "bush is a moron" Those make me mad, too, not because their political opinions differ from mine, but because I can't stand the ridiculous of the accusation from someone who is no better than the one they are bashing. QUOTE if people stuck to intelligent posts like urs or comradereds, then i would never bash anyone (i'd give them my opinion, but i wouldn't bash them) Sometimes, I don't understand the intelligent posts because they're too in depth or too informative and I only happen to know the general story... But isn't it fun to know that you guys are enlightening some people on their political fallacies? |
|
|
![]() ![]() |