NationStates Jolt Archive

ok
i would jsut like to add that anyone who sais that there was no deficit with clinton that it is true that the national deficit was non existant with clinton but he cut the military down to shreds and had the army living on food stamps.
along with the military he cut alot of other spending down like the entire technology sector and research and developement departments.
so the deficit was existant but if you didnt see what he was doing you didnt see it.
After george bush jr took office the deficit became visible again because he had to build up the military after 9/11, spend on better anti-terrorist training, bring delta force back, and increase the technology sector.

Yes, both Americans and Iraqis have died in the conflict. The Americans died doing jobs they signed up to do. Iraqis died before we ever went to Iraq, died by the thousands by Saddam's hand. As and Iraqi immigrant to the states told a girl on a radio show before the war (i'll see if I can't attach the sound byte), Iraqis may die if the US went to Iraq, but they would definately die if we didn't.

NOTE: Gonna post this while I look for a link to the sound
I don't need a sound byte to know Iraqis were killed by Saddam. Guess what...Iraqis were killed by Saddam in the 80s. Guess what else...we didn't attack Hitler because he was killing Jews. Hitler declared war on us. The United States had (until GW and he genius destroyed it) a long standing history of not being pre-emptive.

....which was repealed...
but you do have the law that limits rights in proper times
like
not screaming fire in a crowded movie theater or bomb ona airplane
during world war 2 the japanese camps in america
the cold war peoples rights being violated for "national security"

World approval ratings of the U.S. are 300% higher than they were under Clinton...

Well, that's an outright lie...

...in fact, the world (at large) opinion of the US is at an all time low according to all sources I've seen.

I don't need a sound byte to know Iraqis were killed by Saddam. Guess what...Iraqis were killed by Saddam in the 80s. Guess what else...we didn't attack Hitler because he was killing Jews. Hitler declared war on us. The United States had (until GW and he genius destroyed it) a long standing history of not being pre-emptive.
thats different
we had just finished world war 1 and were in a depression and following a polict of isolationism and nonivolvment in european affairs
(please excuse me if i cant spell)
and people never really knew to what extent he was killing them
and it wasnt just jews
just so you know
the main part (6 million) of people killed was jews but overall 11 million were killed (including jews)

Yes, Saddam killed his own people and it was horribly wrong, but that was an Iraqi dictator killing Iraquis. More Iraqui civilians were killed by U.S. dropped "smart" bombs than American citizens who were murdered on 9/11 by terrrorists.

Yes, Saddam killed his own people and it was horribly wrong, but that was an Iraqi dictator killing Iraquis. More Iraqui civilians were killed by U.S. dropped "smart" bombs than American citizens who were murdered on 9/11 by terrrorists.
thats incorrect
unless your source isincluding the iraqi elite guards which were killed by tomahawks because they were marching out of the city to fight our troops
then you would be correct with numbers but incorrect in statement becase they were hostiles fighting under saddam

I miss FSB so I shall emulate the experience.

You're all a buncha jerkos. Are you sure it was our soldiers in Adu Grade? It was Clinton who was torturing our prisoners. :sniper: [/acting like an idiot]

While I do believe that Bush is an incompetent president overall, there is one thing I like about him: his funding of NASA. I am an avid supporter of space exploration, which comes from being tottaly obsessed with Star Wars. (I spent $300 on a LEGO Star Destroyer.) I think that y'all need to stop flaming and belittling eachother (except in the case of FSB) and listen to eachothers' opinions. While I cannot say that I am tottaly unbiased, I do try to look at both sides of an argument, after I've formed my opinion.

I miss FSB so I shall emulate the experience.

You're all a buncha jerkos. Are you sure it was our soldiers in Adu Grade? It was Clinton who was torturing our prisoners. :sniper: [/acting like an idiot]

While I do believe that Bush is an incompetent president overall, there is one thing I like about him: his funding of NASA. I am an avid supporter of space exploration, which comes from being tottaly obsessed with Star Wars. (I spent $300 on a LEGO Star Destroyer.) I think that y'all need to stop flaming and belittling eachother (except in the case of FSB) and listen to eachothers' opinions. While I cannot say that I am tottaly unbiased, I do try to look at both sides of an argument, after I've formed my opinion.
so basically you allow for a shift of paradime after formulating an opinion
intresting

USA2:

ok
i would jsut like to add that anyone who sais that there was no deficit with clinton that it is true that the national deficit was non existant with clinton but he cut the military down to shreds and had the army living on food stamps.
along with the military he cut alot of other spending down like the entire technology sector and research and developement departments.
so the deficit was existant but if you didnt see what he was doing you didnt see it.
After george bush jr took office the deficit became visible again because he had to build up the military after 9/11, spend on better anti-terrorist training, bring delta force back, and increase the technology sector

-Bush propsed cutting troops' combat pay by 33% while they were in Iraqi and Afghanistan, he sent only 11,000 troops to hunt for Osama in the wake of 9/11 (less than the number of cops in Manhatten), he proposed cutting healthcare benefits for veterans, and had Dick Cheny hire Halliburton who didnt deliver thousands of meals to the troops

-Clinton had our troops engaged in nation-building exercises which were deemed pointless and uneccessary by Republicans, exercises which are sorely needed to help rebuild Iraq

thats different
we had just finished world war 1 and were in a depression and following a polict of isolationism and nonivolvment in european affairs
(please excuse me if i cant spell)
and people never really knew to what extent he was killing them
and it wasnt just jews
just so you know
the main part (6 million) of people killed was jews but overall 11 million were killed (including jews)
The entire world was in a Depression...and in fact, by the time the war was good and going, we were well on our way out of the depression because we were manufacturing weaponry for our allies...but the real reason is, as you say, the policy of Isolationism. Why should we stick our noses in stuff that isn't our business after all? Sure, Iraq is a problem spot...for Iraqis, not Americans...and the Iraqis that are glad to see the US there will be even more glad when we leave. The only reason they like us being there is because it is better than what they had under Saddam...
What ever happened to revolution anyway? Where was the big bad bully nation to come kick Britain out of America then occupy America for the next few years sucking out our natural resources? It wasn't there. Why? Because we wanted freedom that bad. We had no chance of defeating Britain, but when people saw that we were that adamant about winning our freedom, they came to our aid. If the Iraqis would've made a stand then we come help liberate them, that would have been a whole different story. The Iraqis aren't willing to shed their own blood for their own freedom which is why Iraq is going to be a huge mess. You respect things you earn more than things you are awarded. All we really have to do is cut of the north half of Iraq and call it Kurdistan and all of our problems would be solved...seriously...when will the Kurds get their own nation?

It's obvious to anyone with half a brain that Nixon was by far the best President ever.... BAR NONE

General Sickboy

USA2:

ok
i would jsut like to add that anyone who sais that there was no deficit with clinton that it is true that the national deficit was non existant with clinton but he cut the military down to shreds and had the army living on food stamps.
along with the military he cut alot of other spending down like the entire technology sector and research and developement departments.
so the deficit was existant but if you didnt see what he was doing you didnt see it.
After george bush jr took office the deficit became visible again because he had to build up the military after 9/11, spend on better anti-terrorist training, bring delta force back, and increase the technology sector

-Bush propsed cutting troops' combat pay by 33% while they were in Iraqi and Afghanistan, he sent only 11,000 troops to hunt for Osama in the wake of 9/11 (less than the number of cops in Manhatten), he proposed cutting healthcare benefits for veterans, and had Dick Cheny hire Halliburton who didnt deliver thousands of meals to the troops

-Clinton had our troops engaged in nation-building exercises which were deemed pointless and uneccessary by Republicans, exercises which are sorely needed to help rebuild Iraq

ok he already raised the pay of the military if you take a look ill find out exactly when it was if i cn keep my eyes open that long
and the national building excersizes were pointless because were not the national liberators
its not our job to build other countries
when we do that we create a possible enemy

so basically you allow for a shift of paradime after formulating an opinion
intresting
Much as I try, I'm not perfect. But one day I'll ascend above this mortal plane and aquire god-like power and smite the crap outa all of you. So there.
:P
Though my lack of rationale may be caused my recent discovery of a 3 lb. bag of M&M's. Me likey sugar!

ok he already raised the pay of the military if you take a look ill find out exactly when it was if i cn keep my eyes open that long
and the national building excersizes were pointless because were not the national liberators
its not our job to build other countries
when we do that we create a possible enemy
What the hell...? And I suppose you hate the French because they won't help us rebuild Iraq...?

The entire world was in a Depression...and in fact, by the time the war was good and going, we were well on our way out of the depression because we were manufacturing weaponry for our allies...but the real reason is, as you say, the policy of Isolationism. Why should we stick our noses in stuff that isn't our business after all? Sure, Iraq is a problem spot...for Iraqis, not Americans...and the Iraqis that are glad to see the US there will be even more glad when we leave. The only reason they like us being there is because it is better than what they had under Saddam...
What ever happened to revolution anyway? Where was the big bad bully nation to come kick Britain out of America then occupy America for the next few years sucking out our natural resources? It wasn't there. Why? Because we wanted freedom that bad. We had no chance of defeating Britain, but when people saw that we were that adamant about winning our freedom, they came to our aid. If the Iraqis would've made a stand then we come help liberate them, that would have been a whole different story. The Iraqis aren't willing to shed their own blood for their own freedom which is why Iraq is going to be a huge mess. You respect things you earn more than things you are awarded. All we really have to do is cut of the north half of Iraq and call it Kurdistan and all of our problems would be solved...seriously...when will the Kurds get their own nation?

well they didnt exactly come to our aid
but the declaration of independence listed grievences against the king of england which rightfully justified our declaration of independence and actually kept sopme of the nations that might have helped britan in the war out of it.

What the hell...? And I suppose you hate the French because they won't help us rebuild Iraq...?
no i hate the french because they think they are better than everyone else in the world and their language is totally messed.

well they didnt exactly come to our aid
but the declaration of independence listed grievences against the king of england which rightfully justified our declaration of independence and actually kept sopme of the nations that might have helped britan in the war out of it.
When France saw that we were serious about it and had a chance to win, they were sending supplies galore (that = coming to our aid.), and before that, Generals and Military personnel were coming from all over Europe to help train our soldiers...

no i hate the french because they think they are better than everyone else in the world and their language is totally messed.
Then I hate you because you hate people for things that are 1) not true... 2) stupid...

I'm all for NASA, but i dont like the fact that W is using it to get re-elected. he doesn't care about that and everyon knows that manned space missions are much less economical and effective than unmanned ones. We're sending robots to land on titan, rovers on mars, and a lander with a submarine to explore the deep oceans of europa. any one of these missions alone will bring in more info at a much smaller cost than manned missions.

Then I hate you because you hate people for things that are 1) not true... 2) stupid...
den i ahte u cuz ur prolly french
n ima hot u u little panzy
i mean eva roll up in my neighba hood ima start shootin

no i hate the french because they think they are better than everyone else in the world and their language is totally messed.
By the way, I've got a lot of French in my bloodline, including Charlemagne, who was most-fucking-definitely not a pussy like everyone claims the French are...

And I hate you too. My last name is French and that's where my family is from, but I'm also a proud American, you steryotipical bastard. i dont think i'm better than anyone. and all the french were doing when they opposed the war was standing up for what thy believed in, like most of the world did. people were afraid to speak out here becuause of political manipulation. what happened to free speech?

i call dat 1
charlemaine
yea howd he die

no i hate the french because they think they are better than everyone else in the world and their language is totally messed.
Is it not true that everyone think's they're the best. I sure as hell do. It's part of human nature. And french is actually a very elegant and beautiful language, and no one language can be called inferior. If it accomplishes it's goal of fluent communication then it is a good language. It's also quite similar to english, hence both are called "romantic" languages.

And I hate you too. My last name is French and that's where my family is from, but I'm also a proud American, you steryotipical bastard. i dont think i'm better than anyone. and all the french were doing when they opposed the war was standing up for what thy believed in, like most of the world did. people were afraid to speak out here becuause of political manipulation. what happened to free speech?
dun make me slap ya wit my pimp hand
n if ya r a proud american den im koo wit ya
but n e 1 dat noks dis country n still lives in it aint
they pussies n librals

i call dat 1
charlemaine
yea howd he die
I don't know how he died (not that has much to do with anything, because if you based cowardness off how a person died than Benedict Arnold was the biggest coward ever despite being one of [if not the] best generals we had on our side in the revolution...aside from the whole flip-flop...), but I do know that he was way ahead of his time and if there were better methods of communication during his time, Europe's mainland would probably be called "France"

Is it not true that everyone think's they're the best. I sure as hell do. It's part of human nature. And french is actually a very elegant and beautiful language, and no one language can be called inferior. If it accomplishes it's goal of fluent communication then it is a good language. It's also quite similar to english, hence both are called "romantic" languages.
I think I'm better than a lot of people...a ton of people...but I don't think that has anything to do with my Frenchness, and it most definitely isn't baseless...

I don't know how he died (not that has much to do with anything, because if you based cowardness off how a person died than Benedict Arnold was the biggest coward ever despite being one of [if not the] best generals we had on our side in the revolution...aside from the whole flip-flop...), but I do know that he was way ahead of his time and if there were better methods of communication during his time, Europe's mainland would probably be called "France"
yea but there werent
c theaza sayin
if u from da streets betrayal is worse den deaf
benedict arnold was a coward because he was a backstabber
but yea i gotsa bounce its like 3 am hea
peace
b on ina coupla days if ya wanna argue summo

Opal Isle, just a few words of advice: FIRE THE IGNORECANNON!!!!!

dun make me slap ya wit my pimp hand
n if ya r a proud american den im koo wit ya
but n e 1 dat noks dis country n still lives in it aint
they pussies n librals
Uh...now I'm really done talking to you. "Anyone that knocks this country and still lives in it ain't cool with me. They are pussies and liberals." That's kind of unAmerican...to say that people who oppose your opinion are anti-American...

yea but there werent
c theaza sayin
if u from da streets betrayal is worse den deaf
benedict arnold was a coward because he was a backstabber
but yea i gotsa bounce its like 3 am hea
peace
b on ina coupla days if ya wanna argue summo
Well...I don't want to debate with you because it hurts my head too much to translate this chicken scratch. And if you want to dis any language, you're doing an awfully good job of dissing English...

Uh...now I'm really done talking to you. "Anyone that knocks this country and still lives in it ain't cool with me. They are pussies and liberals." That's kind of unAmerican...to say that people who oppose your opinion are anti-American...
and no i didnt mean it like dat if dats how it sounded
i mean like
if some one sais the country sucks
im ashamed to be an american
i hate this i ahte that
ya kno like jes like complains about how much they ahte it
i mean i unno mayb its jes me but i lkive nex ta dis kid n das all he does
n im jes like if ya dun like it y dun ya leave
go ta mexico or canada
complain thea

George Dubya Bush is a bum who makes his soldiers fire at civillians if they come to close at night. HE and Johnny howard will destroy this world, no joke they are phsycos

Well...I don't want to debate with you because it hurts my head too much to translate this chicken scratch. And if you want to dis any language, you're doing an awfully good job of dissing English...
wut cuz i speak wuteva its called
n i spell things how dey sound n i sayem

I'd ather be liberal than conservative. they enitre progress of human civilization has come form liberal ideas, starting whti democracy in ancient greece. it countinued when our founding forefathers threw off the shackles of oppression and formed america. keep in mind that they formed this great nation, as wes clark reminded, us: as a "liberal democracy". Remember when Rush Libaugh said that we should do away wth all things lberal to cointinue on a path to freedom (something like that)? OK, Rush, let's repeal the 19th amendment and not let women vote, that's a liberal idea. and hey, lets take it away from blacks too. while we're at it, lets move the voting age back up to 21, and legalise slavery again. back to the good ol' days, that's what i say!

I'd ather be liberal than conservative. they enitre progress of human civilization has come form liberal ideas, starting whti democracy in ancient greece. it countinued when our founding forefathers threw off the shackles of oppression and formed america. keep in mind that they formed this great nation, as wes clark reminded, us: as a "liberal democracy". Remember when Rush Libaugh said that we should do away wth all things lberal to cointinue on a path to freedom (something like that)? OK, Rush, let's repeal the 19th amendment and not let women vote, that's a liberal idea. and hey, lets take it away from blacks too. while we're at it, lets move the voting age back up to 21, and legalise slavery again. back to the good ol' days, that's what i say!
different time
different definition of librals
different people
you cant compare ancient greece with modern day america

USA2 could you please talk normally again? You a-hurtin' me head there.

Stupid Lousy Americans, Bickering On About A President Who Can Start A War At The Blink Of An Eye.

Ok, I'm actually a political analyst and write a lot about the Bush Administration on my website www.brianhull.net (http://www.brianhull.net). I have to say this board is infested with some of the most ignorant, or perhaps selectively focuses individuals I have ever seen on the internet. I shouldn't even waste my time, because I figure these individuals extolling the virtues of Mr. Bush are either ultra-conservative trolls, or just so blind to their conservatism that they won't even bother to look at the facts.

I’m going to reiterate once again several other issues that voters should consider, things that I’ve been thinking about, issues that hit a little closer to home for me. I’m not saying Iraq is unimportant, I’m saying that the election in November should not exclusively be based on Iraq. This article will illustrate specifically why George Bush is the worst president ever, and one simply needs to read and digest the following information using simple common sense to reach the same conclusion. I look forward to discussion in the comments about the points illustrated, because with a severe lack of time on my hand, I’ll be unable to write anything else for quite a while, so without further ado……

Again, because I’m a fanatical environmentalist, there is no way that I can show any sort of support for George Bush, the absolute worst environmental president in history, specifically because we are diametrically opposed opposites. Mr. Bush has put the environment well behind the business interests of the oil, mining, timber and power industries. To me it is inexcusable to treat the environment as an expendable commodity to use and exploit in order to make a profit without regard to the detrimental consequences of one’s actions. I hold the belief that the environment is one of the most precious things we as a society possess, and the only thing that we will truly be able to hand down from generation to generation. If we continue on this path of over-consumption, it will be detrimental for future generations. The way most Americans live their lives is horribly dangerous for the planet, specifically because we live in a disposable nation. I am not in the mindset of ignoring the problem, or thinking it’s not a problem, or passing the buck to others and hopefully they’ll figure it out. It’s our fault, so let’s fix the problem by changing our habits before it’s too late.

As a nation, I feel that it is our duty to leave the world in a better condition than when we started, but we currently have a president hell-bent on promoting oil and gas drilling, coal, gold, silver and copper mining, and logging in national parks, weakening clean air and water standards, deregulating toxic emissions from power plants, refusing to increase fuel efficiency standards, weakening pollution control requirements for metropolitan areas, increasing America’s dependence on foreign oil, promoting a nuclear weapons program, allowing nuclear waste to be dumped in regular landfills, allow overgrazing on federal lands, appointing former industry executives and lobbyists to environmental positions (see below), reducing funding for environmental programs, shifting the burden of paying for cleanups from oil and chemical companies to taxpayers (Superfund), rejecting proven science regarding the causes and effects of global warming, editing EPA reports to eliminate controversial information, relaxing regulations on endangered species, and limiting the ability of citizens to have any voice in environmental issues. This is reason #1 why I dislike George Bush.

I was recently in the library perusing a book entitled “Worse Than Watergate” written by John Dean, President Nixon’s former White House counsel. In this book John Dean illustrates comparisons in secrecy between the Bush Administration and the Nixon Administration. It was a fascinating book and is next on my “to read” list. The Bush Administration is one of the least transparent in history. Granted every president with their staff has operated at a certain level of secrecy, you know for “national security” or something like that…. George Bush however, from his first days in office, has tightened government control of information and limited public inspection of his activities. His “liberal” use (pun intended) of executive privilege, national security classifications, stonewalling of congressional requests, alterations of reports, distortion of information, censorship of scientific data generated by regulatory agencies, suppression of facts that don’t fit the administration’s political and ideological agenda, has made it nearly impossible to discern the truth from his White House.

Certain facts to illustrate this point are the scandals regarding the Energy Task Force (Dick Cheney still refuses to release documents about his secret 2001 meetings with energy executives and lobbyists which helped him shape the awful energy policy), the administration official who leaked the name of CIA operative Valerie Plame, the evacuation of members of the Saudi royal family after the September 11, 2001 attacks (the Bush Administration has previously stated that these flights never existed), the elimination of cautionary information regarding the dangers of air and water pollution around ground zero after the destruction of the world trade center, the ficticious ties between Saddam and Al-Qaeda, the fictitious claims of Weapons of Mass Destruction, the no bid government contract to rebuild Iraq to Halliburton, Cheney’s old company (which overcharged taxpayers, provided unsanitary facilities to U.S. troops, and was directly coordinated by Dick Cheney’s office), the constant stonewalling of the 9/11 investigations, the Medicare Bill in which officials of the White House and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) pressured Richard Foster to withhold information from Congress, the concealment of presidential pardons, John Ashcroft’s memo limiting the Freedom of Information Act, and most recently the memos from the Justice Department to the White House in 2002 advising that the torture of al Qaeda terrorist suspects might be legally defensible (John Ashcroft has refused to make public these memos, even though they are not classified…. Yet, and surprisingly enough the lawyers behind the torture memos are in line for federal circuit court judgeships).

What we have here is a system of misinformation, secrecy, cover-ups, concealment, stonewalling and obstruction of justice which is not only anti-democratic, but also leads me to believe that this president and his entire staff have a lot to hide. What infuriates me the most is even when confronted with factual evidence debunking the lies, the Administration continues with its assertions and mistruths. The more evidence there is, the more forceful their lies become. But I suppose that’s the conservative modus operandi, trust, respect and honesty really aren’t necessary when you can just lie to people, and when they question the facts, just bully them into submission, or repeat it often enough through as many sources as possible and people will warm up to the lie.

But I guess actual democracy isn’t Bush’s cup of tea. I mean why abide by the checks and balances of the three branches of government when it’s so much easier and efficient to appoint radically extreme judges (William Pryor and Charles Pickering) to Federal Appeals Courts while Congress is in recess.

Let’s talk about his education policy, shall we. Every time I talk to my friend Sheila, I get to hear about Mr. Bush’s ineptitude with educating our nation’s children. All taglines aside (“Is our children learning?”), why do we currently have a sitting president who cares more about privatizing schools than actually educating students. Once again we have a president pay lip service to education reform, but only to take credit for it, and not to actually achieve any real reform. Like most American’s, I agree that something needs to be done with the education system in our country, but I do not think a federally mandated “one size fits all” testing program is the answer. As good intentioned as it appears, it does not take into consideration the culturally varied and unique range of students in our schools. It takes away the local control of community educators and restricts teachers of different economic and social areas. The fact of the matter is students in rural Montana learn differently and need to be taught differently than students in Providence, Rhode Island.

The accountability provisions are rigid and will promote ineffective educational practices and deform curricula in adverse ways ultimately lowering standards for most students and devaluing non-tested subjects like social studies, physical education, music, and art (everything that makes school fun). Teachers are forced to educate students in specific ways solely to pass an exam and not to enhance the performance of their students. If the testing is anything like the racially and sexually biased SATs, it needs to be removed from the curricula of our school system entirely, because it does not accurately represent the achievement and potential of each individual student. And in the far too likely event that one single student performs poorly on the exam the entire school is designated “in need of improvement”. There needs to be dramatic changes in our education system in order to engage students again. It seems like the methods of teaching kids really do need improvement. Life has so many more distractions now than ever before, and the constant over-stimulation of kids with movies, video games, computers, television, etc. could be a major cause for apathy in learning. If school isn’t exciting to kids, they won’t pay attention.

Bush’s current federal budget eliminates the Even Start program which integrates early childhood education and adult literacy into a unified family program. It also provides only half of the funding promised to after school programs, and eliminates the education, health and nutrition services for the Head Start program.

On the higher education level, Federal Pell Grants, which Congress appropriates $5,800 each, will decrease to just under $2,400 by Bush’s education budget. More than 4.6 million students need the financial assistance of the grant program to pay for college education, and year after year it is underfunded, and forecasts predict 8,000 fewer students will receive assistance this year. We need a president who will actually do more to promote higher education (what a great movie) in this country than talk about how our schools are failing, pretend he’s doing something while he’s actually making it more difficult for educators to teach.

We currently have the largest trade deficit in history. We are importing far more product than exporting which is transferring the “net worth” of our country to foreign investors at an alarming rate. When one goes shopping it’s nearly impossible to find products made in the US anymore.

Bush’s economic agenda seems to be revolving around his “tax relief plan” which unfairly benefits the rich. He touts a plan that enables “American people to keep more of their own money to spend, save and invest”. In theory it sounds like a great idea, but I don’t see it. My federal tax savings was $55 for 2003. Thank you Mr. Bush, that pays for my phone bill for a month. However that $55 was more than offset by an increase in state income taxes, property taxes, and an additional increase in the meal tax for Rhode Island. These taxes were specifically brought on by a decrease in federal funding to our state. Whenever Mr. Bush exalts his economic policy he never mentions that the average tax cut for those making over $1 million a year is $112,925. Due to his ill-conceived tax cut initiative we now have the largest deficit in US history.

I think I see what he’s trying to do though. When there is a huge federal budget deficit what eventually happens is that social service programs (which benefit the poor and middle class) get cut. He recently opposed a $6 billion investment in child care to ensure that parents could move from welfare to work, proposed cuts to Medicaid, froze funding for the nation's welfare program, eliminated a crucial public housing revitalization program which has revitalized thousands of public housing units in low-income urban neighborhoods where affordable housing is desperately needed, etc. When states receive less money, as happens with large deficits, they also need to cut costs by reducing social service and educational programs (which benefit the poor and middle class), also property taxes, hotel taxes, meal taxes, gasoline taxes are all increased to partially offset the money lost in federal funds. These increases in state and local taxes hurt the poor and middle classes and, in a much more subtle way than Bush’s tax cut, increase the disparity between the rich and everyone else.

What we all have to remember is that we are living in a classist society, and the rich don’t care about you or me. They care about money, and they’ll make sure that they make as much of it as possible, even if (and they hope so) that means you don’t get any. So don’t pretend that Mr. Bush is doing you any favors by placating you with a $400 tax cut, because he’s just greasing up your ass.

And could someone please tell me why we’re giving almost $15 billion every year in subsidizes to Fortune 500 companies that continually reduce their U.S. workforces for cheaper labor overseas? No longer are US companies outsourcing only manufacturing jobs, it’s also call center positions for tech support and customer service, engineering jobs, computer programming positions, even medical tests and X-rays are being read and commented on my overseas doctors. Why are we as taxpayers giving them money to lay us off? Why are corporations making more money now than ever before, but are paying historically low levels of corporate taxes? But I digress, this isn’t entirely George Bush’s fault, but a multitude of issues ranging from corporate greed, unsustainability of multi-national capitalism, corruption of politics, and a disregard of labor rights throughout the world, a little out of the scope of this article. One thing I find inexcusable is the outsourcing on government contracted jobs, and George Bush is moving to increase IT outsourcing at federal agencies.

But if George Bush really cared about the working class of the United States then why would he ceaselessly be trying to eliminate overtime pay for up to 8 million American workers? Why does he constantly terminate the civil service and collective bargaining rights of federal workers (National Imagery and Mapping Agency, newly federalized airport security screeners, Justice Department’s U.S. attorney’s offices, the Criminal Division, the U.S. National Central Bureau of INTERPOL, the National Drug Intelligence Center and Office of Intelligence Policy and Review, as well as all 170,000 of the entire Dept. of Homeland Security) Why would he propose new financial reporting and disclosure requirements for national and local unions, far more stringent and sweeping than those of corporations, that are so burdensome estimates show a compliance cost as much as $1 billion a year? Why would he refuse to accept a court ruling overturning his anti-worker executive order (basically he used an executive order requiring employers to post notices telling workers about their right to avoid unionization and union dues obligations, but failed to inform workers about their right to join a union)?

Call me a conspiracy theorist if you must, but it appears obvious to me that he’s union busting. Now regardless of what you think about unions, it’s important to leave that decision up to the workers, and not the federal government or the companies. It’s glaringly obvious the inequality of power between workers and employers, and unions help make sure our nation prioritizes working people’s issues: unions hold corporations accountable, make workplaces safe, protect Social Security and retirement, fight for quality health care and ensure that working people have time to spend with their families. There are good unions and there are bad unions, and again differentiating the two is outside the scope of this article, my point is that unions have been a good instrument for workers to win basic concessions from employers, and union busting only benefits businesses at the expense of workers.

And don’t get me started on John Ashcroft’s Justice Department’s insistence on crushing public dissent of the Bush Administration, criminalizing peacefully protests, the Patriot Act which is specifically designed to take away the civil liberties and privacy protections of law abiding citizens while enveloping it within the handsome guise of protecting us from terrorism. Individuals can be detained with no counsel, federal agents can search anyone's home without a warrant, can obtain financial and medical records, wiretap your phone, confiscate your property, monitor your e-mail, obtain information about which books you've bought or checked out of the library. No authorization is needed, and the FBI started abusing their additional powers almost immediately.

This lack of respect for our civil rights needs to be reversed. We cannot and must not accept Bush’s next step of stealing away our right with his Patriot Act 2, which can revoke citizenship, deport legally permanent residents, build a database of everyone’s DNA information (those refusing the cheek-swab could be fined $200,000 and jailed for a year), spy on an individual’s internet usage, allow secret arrests and detainment, repeal “consent decrees" limiting local law enforcement’s restrictions on political surveillance, and expand the death penalty to cover 15 additional charges. Yes, we need to protect ourselves from terror threats, but to do so in an unregulated way is dangerous.

I’m not going to praise the work of Bill Clinton, but I will say that the former president had some pretty serious anti-terrorism plans in the works which were detailed to and summarily ignored by the incoming Bush Administration. Clinton put Richard Clarke in charge of the fight against Al-Qaeda after the attack on USS Cole on October 12, 2000. Clarke produced a strategy paper detailing ambitious plans to take out Al-Qaeda cells and arrest their personnel, attack their financial support, freeze their assets, stop their funding, aid governments with Al-Qaeda problems, as well as scale up covert actions in Afghanistan to eliminate the training camps and bin Laden.

Even the Hart-Rudman commission report was ignored, “This commission believes mass-casualty terrorism directed against the US homeland is of serious and growing concern. The security of the American homeland from the threats of the new century she be the primary national security mission of the US government.” And nearly five months after the report, Phoenix FBI agent Kenneth Williams notified headquarters regarding some Middle Eastern students at an Arizona flight school…..

Month after month, Bush and his staff were far too busy taking vacations than to meet with Richard Clarke, or to take seriously the threats of terrorism. And the day after the attacks it all of a sudden became Bill Clinton’s fault. This Administration dropped the proverbial terrorism ball and decided it would be better to not accept responsibility for doing so. How very Republican of them.

I guess next should be George Bush’s total lack of respect for the soldiers of our nation who are currently fighting his war on terrorism. Whether you agree with the war or not, it’s important to note that there are up to 51,000 troops were still not properly equipped for combat in Iraq, there is a shortage of protective body armor, the military vehicles being used are not bullet proof, and a recent study shows that one in four casualties in Iraq was due to poor protective gear. But this isn’t the only piece of evidence showing Bush’s disdain for soldiers and veterans. He has also cut $1 billion from the Veterans Administration, proposed veterans health care budgets that have been criticized by veterans groups and the President's own Veterans Affairs secretary, opposed a proposal to give National Guard and Reserve members access to the Pentagon's health-insurance system, rolled back recent modest increases in monthly imminent-danger pay (from $225 to $150) and family-separation allowance (from $250 to $100) for troops getting shot at in combat zones, cut access to the health care system for approximately 164,000 veterans, pushed a cut of $1.5 billion in military housing/medical facility funding, extended the tours of duty of tens of thousands of soldiers in Iraq, and prevented soldiers from leaving Iraq even after their military duty was completed.

I find it insane when people commend Bush’s Iraq War policies, but fail to see that he cares more about making rich people richer than he does about the lives of the soldiers and civilians needlessly dying in Iraq. He would rather give a tax break to benefit the rich than properly equip and protect our fathers and mothers, brothers and sisters, husbands and wives and sons and daughters. Now I ask you, is that the way he should be treating the brave men and women in our armed forces?

Is George Bush really protecting us from terrorism, or is he just making things worse? If Mr. Bush is so concerned with the security of our homeland, why does he grossly underfund it? Over 300 fire fighters died is the world trade center while trying to rescue trapped workers and visitors. These are the people who will pull you out of a burning car, run into an inferno to save your life, and George Bush has reduced their funding, cutting grants to local police, fire, and emergency medical agencies from $4.2 billion in Fiscal Year 2004 to $3.5 billion in Fiscal Year 2005. Mr. Bush’s proposal would also cut first responder training by 43 percent, from $202 million to only $87 million. He refused to fund the SAFER Act which would put more fire fighters, paramedics, emergency medical technicians, rescue workers, ambulance personnel and hazardous materials workers in our communities. And he cut the FIRE Act programs, which sends money directly to local fire departments to enhance their ability to protect the health and safety of the public and firefighting personnel, from $750 million to $500 million. Bush eliminated the Urban Search and Rescue program, his budget proposes no federal funds to meet port facility security requirements, and he has cut grants to help state, local, and hospital bioterrorism efforts.

Not only is he a liar, but he pays just enough lip service to take credit where credit in not due in order to convince people to believe him.

No one likes to be proved wrong, no one likes having their nose rubbed in their mistakes, but why is it that when conservatives are confronted with sound evidence and judgment debunking their beliefs they resort to childish insults and hostility instead of thinking that they could quite possibly be wrong. Hell, I’ve been wrong before, and I’ve accepted that and I spent a lot of time rethinking certain views instead of acting like a wild animal of vicious dog lashing out when trapped. Conservative seem to have a blind allegiance to their conservative agenda regardless and they get insanely aggressive when it’s questioned. Some e-mails I’ve received include, “You’re an idiot.” “You don’t know what you’re talking about.” “Why don’t you shut us asshole and educate yourself with Fox News.” That last one was my favorite. But with every e-mail like that I receive, the thing that’s missing is evidence opposing what I wrote. I suppose when the battle of ideas is lost the next best thing is to throw out insults.

My friend Dave was explaining it to me in a way by using an analogy of punk rock kids and their favorite bands. For instance, SxE Bobby loves Earth Crisis, he moshes hard every time they play and is constantly listening to their music. Along comes Emo Emily and she doesn’t like Earth Crisis because their lyrics are generally unintelligible, unimaginative and every song sounds the same. Instead of actually listening to her opinion, debating with her the issues of the lyrics and music, SxE Bobby calls her a bitch, brings forth a firestorm of insults about her music (which he knows nothing about) and snubs her from that moment on. That’s identity politics, and generally it’s pretty irrational, which can personify quite a few conservatives that I know.

Ok, maybe I’m a little jealous too. I say that because Republicans are just so good at character assassination, formulating lies to sway public opinion and general silencing of the opposition. Mr. Bush’s political advisor, Karl Rove, is simply awe-inspiring in these departments. As despicable of a person he truly is, it’s impressive to see someone so good at their job. He was able to decimate the reputation of John McCain during the 2000 South Carolina primary, spreading lies about fathering illegitimate children, being gay, being pro-abortion, being reprimanded by the Ethics Committee, by using an insidious tactic known as push polling. No actual factual evidence was needed. And no matter how much I disapprove of these methods, Republicans are very effective and organized with their misinformation attacks, and usually the information seeps into the public consciousness well before it can be effectively responded to. And since liberals in politics are generally spineless…. again, I digress.

Digest this information, and please someone articulate to me what redeeming quality does Mr. Bush have? Am I missing something? I would like to know why people like him as a president. Do not dodge the question, do not change the subject, do not compare him with anyone else, just answer me why, and please give me specific reasons. I haven’t studied politics for my whole life, but common sense would dictate that Mr. Bush is environmentally catastrophic, economically devastating, socially obtuse and religiously zealous. But do correct me if I’m wrong…. I’m not afraid to say I’ve made a mistake.

all george has to do is want something that another country has and hell raid them and frame them for something they didnt have, wipe out there country and poof he has a botched up country and what he wanted in the first place. like with iraq all he wanted was the oil over there and he framed saddam for weapons of mass destruction and put parts in other countries on the borders!

Anyone who associates the word "Liberal" with "anti-american", or believes that you have to hate the country you live in, in order to be be a liberal....

...is an idiot.

Most of the time the person is a fifteen year old snot nose kid who doesnt even know what it is to be a liberal, and has dodged the question every time I ask them to explain it,
Or a Trailer-Park Conservative whos been brainwashed by Rush Limbaugh, and Sean Hannity.

Why is that people actually think that being a liberal means that you hate America?

Inflation has not dropped, but it has not risen.

Ever heard of the Bell Curve? I know it may be hard to believe, but they used to grade on a curve, none of this everybody can get an A love fest we see in school today. That means Bush wasn't the brightest kid in his class, but he certainly wasn't the worst.

One time I fell out of a tree and almost died, another time I lost my breaks on a weaving mountain road and almost died. That mean I'm stupid, or human?

I don't know if your vacation spending number is right, but even if it is, it does not compare to the vacation spending of Clinton. Again, read Deriliction of Duty.

You read Plato's Republic? In it he says politicians should have certain temptations removed from then in office as not to cloud their judgement. He proposed something called a wife pool, so the politicians would have a woman on hand to relieve themselves bout would not be influenced by their wives views, and would not have their judgement skewed by jealousy. The other thing Plato proposed was a removal of politicians private ownings (ie stock in Haliburton) while they held office. It was called a blind trust I believe. The founders of this nation decided to adopt the second suggestion, so regardless of what Bush does in office he will gain nothing personally from his actions.

Read the Kay reports, read the internet. Not only was Saddam activly devoloping WMDs, America just recently disposed of many tons (I believe the number was 18) of weapons grade uranium from Iraq. Won't see that on CNN though, because people love to believe Bush lied. And may I ask where all the chemical and biological weapons the US gave Iraq when they were fighting Iran went? They don't just disappear....

What about John Ashcroft. He has been meticulously careful in his investigation of possible threats within the country. The number of arrests is up to what, 150-200 since 9/11? Anyone remember what happened to the Japanese in America after Pearl Harbor?

Which rights does the patriot act restrict? The right to privacy? Show me where that was made a right? "Eternal vigilance is the price of freedom." -Wendell Phillips

Learn about the electoral college. We do NOT have popular vote elections in America. Why? Go ahead and take a look at a map of the united states, with all districts that voted for Bush colored red, and all districts that voted for Gore colored blue. The map will be red, with blue spots in urban California and the North-East (I'm looking at one right now). Why should urban concentrations determine the fate of the nation? Realize also, that Gore did everything he could to take the election. In Florida, ballot boxes full of Bush ballots were found in the trunks of Gore supporters, a second polling was requested, which would have meant all florida armed forces personel overseas would not be able to vote (absentee ballots wouldn't arrive on time), the florida supreme court interpreted a 7 day limit on recounts to mean 17 days, ect.

I don't know anything about the violence against women act, sorry.

All economic decisions of an administration take many years to take effect. The economy Clinton claimed credit for was a result of Regan's trickle down economics, continued by Bush Sr., and the recession started 2 years before the end of Clinton's term... Bush Jr. inherited Clinton's economy, experienced 9/11, and has still made this the shortest recession in recent history. The job recovery has finally caught up with the rest of the economy, and unemployment is only about 4.8% now. (Under Clinton, the average rate was about 5.2%, I don't know where you got your figures Land of Enemy, but they are terribly off. I don't think unemployment has ever been 2.98%)

What in God's name is a World Hate Rating, and where did you find it?

Clinton didn't improve the economy, study economic trends a little. It's fair to assume the recession that started at the end of CLINTON'S term, was just a result of the natural cycle of the economy. But a government should never have a surplus, because it means it's hoarding the citizens' money.

Again, the patriot act is not an attempt to abolish the bill of rights. Feel free to take a look at it, if you're not too busy believing everything Moore tells you.

Are you aware that Clinton had a chance to capture Bin Laden during his administration and passed it up? And Bush neglected terrorism?!?!? Sandy Berger, Clinton's NSA, is under investigation for stealing documents showing the Clinton Administrations liability in 9/11 and hiding them from the 9/11 commission!!!

You sound like you want the US to be attacked again! We havn't been, though there have been attempts. Just the other day, a Syrian music group tried to rush the cockpit of an airliner. Officials believe it was a test run to see how good our security was! We havn't been attacked, how is the bush administration then not responsible? :headbang:

W's not smart enough to run a country. HAHAHAHA. Sweet way to end your post.

EDIT: Sorry, I mean 1.8 tons above, not 18. Typo....

Props to you Providencicola!!!
(hope i spelled that right)

I am an aussie so i hate all leaders in the world they all r gay and jack each other at the U.N

We are not a "liberal democracy." We are a "democratic republic" or a "representative democracy." Sorry, that just jumped out at me. God I wish they made civics a requirement again!

WHat i was referring to is that one of them (i forget which one) described the newly founded america as a 'liberal democracy'.

Dude, go to Google News. You'll see it all there for yourself. Clinton's world approval ratings were, like, -2.7% 'cause of when he bombed Liberia.

I personally think dubyah is great - but when exactly was liberia bombed by Clinton ???

Read the Kay reports, read the internet. Not only was Saddam activly devoloping WMDs, America just recently disposed of many tons (I believe the number was 18) of weapons grade uranium from Iraq. Won't see that on CNN though, because people love to believe Bush lied. And may I ask where all the chemical and biological weapons the US gave Iraq when they were fighting Iran went? They don't just disappear....

Bullshit.

Your a liar, and I DARE you to prove this.
Do you really think that if this were true, that Fox News wouldnt jump all over this and scream "Bush was right! Bush was right!" ?

Dont you think that ONE credible news source like Reuters, or APN, wouldnt be making this a headline?

Dont you think that Bush himself wouldnt make a point of touting this considering how low hes sitting in the polls?


Your either a liar, or a fool.

I DARE you to prove this.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3009082.stm

There you go mate, it's even a british source. And the BBC doesn't like America, or Bush.....

EDIT: Feel free to apoligize

EDIT 2: another source
http://news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,10066789%255E1702,00.html

Savage Waldo brings up a good point. Politicians should have distractions and things that would skew their judgement taken away. I also feel that those who desire power most are those who are least trustworthy not to abuse it. I am reading a book entitled Radical Middle by Mark Satin. He says we should move away from the "us vs. them" mentality and combine the best ideas of both sides to benifit all the people of the world. I must admit that I am buying into this philosophy. The only forseeable downside to this is that the media would have less political bickering to cover.

That's an interesting philosophy, but I don't really know how practical it is, espescially because no matter what decision is made someone will feel victimized, bringing back that "us vs. them" mentality. Just my opinion of course, i would love to see less of the partisan, petty bullshit. A lot more would get done.

Come on backwoods! AM I A LIAR OR A FOOL?!?!?! I PROVED it!

No I didn't I bought the poster in Virgin.

Oh and did I mention...

I've coined new words like misunderestimated and hispanically.
I know how hard it is to put food on your family.
and There is no question that the minuit I was elected the stormclouds on the horizon were almost dirrectly overhead.

Would you like me to continue?

Wow anyone who can not even spell minute even remotely close to how it is spelled should not diss anyones intelligence.

Come on backwoods! AM I A LIAR OR A FOOL?!?!?! I PROVED it!


Your not a liar, that I'll give you.

You still may be a fool though, Yellow Cake uranium cannot be refined to the point where it can be used for Nuclear Grade explosives.
The best that ut can be used for is a "Dirty" bomb, wich are usually too unstable to use.

This isnt a smoking gun, that why Bush isnt trumpeting this as a victory.
The other unenriched uranium is nearly worthless as well.

In short, this would only be a smoking gun if Iraq had the facilities to enrich the uranium in.

They havent since the Isrealis (I believe) bombed it.

Its practically useless to them.

I apologize for calling you a liar, but you need to understand what this is, and what this isnt.
This isnt a smoking gun.

yeah his worldwide approval rating did go up by a lot compared to clinton. i mean did you ever seen the kind of parades and welcome parties he gets everytime he visits Europe??
and the ovewhelming amount of support Bush gets from countries like France and North Korea is amazing!

:cool:

Read the Kay reports, read the internet. Not only was Saddam activly devoloping WMDs, America just recently disposed of many tons (I believe the number was 18) of weapons grade uranium from Iraq. Won't see that on CNN though, because people love to believe Bush lied. And may I ask where all the chemical and biological weapons the US gave Iraq when they were fighting Iran went? They don't just disappear....

Ummmm... you may want to read the article again and do a little study in history. The article was written in June of 2003, and the article reads; "The visit was agreed after weeks of pleading by the IAEA, which has kept the radiological materials at the site safely under UN seal for 12 years." Some rudimentary math brings us to the date of 1991. And we all know what happened in Iraq in 1991, right? They invaded Kuwait, Bush Sr. authorized military action and didn't bother to finish off Saddam. But the real issue is if Iraq was actually a threat to us or not. The answer is no, and here's why. Since 1991, the UN had constant inspections of Iraq, all the biological and chemical weapons they had (given to them by the US Government) were no longer viable, Saddam was contained. Now if we want to argue the finer points of whether or not Saddam was a ruthless dictaor, there's no argument, he was, but lets not forget that all these attrocities that the Bush Administration has demonized him for were committed in the mid to late 80's and 1991, while he was at war with the Iranians, the Kurds, and Kuwait. So stop telling me that Saddam was a threat, he wasn't.

Which rights does the patriot act restrict? The right to privacy? Show me where that was made a right? "Eternal vigilance is the price of freedom." -Wendell Phillips

How about the right to privacy, the right to a speedy trial, being represented by a lawyer. The Patriot Act squashes individuals civil rights. People can be detained with no counsel, federal agents can search anyone's home without a warrant, can obtain financial and medical records, wiretap your phone, monitor your e-mail, obtain information about which books you've bought or checked out of the library. No authorization is needed, and the FBI started abusing their additional powers almost immediately.

"They that can give up essential liberties to obtain a little temporary safety deserves neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin

Peace.... Brian
www.brianhull.net (http://www.brianhull.net)

I agree it's not a "smoking gun" (ha, there's a phrase I havn't heard in a while), but don't dismiss dirty bombs so quickly. They're harder to deliver and much less stable, but the damage they do is still significant. Imagine a 1 ton dirty bomb going off in Boston, or Chicago, or D.C., or LA....scary stuff.

It was the isralies that bombed Iraq's nuclear facilities (which france helped them build haha).

P.S. Remember one of the things Bush said Iraq had was "yellowcake," which we now know they did indeed have, so perhaps the intelligence he used to make a decision to go to Iraq wasn't as flawed as previously thought...

Look at the date on the second piece I posted. July 7 2004.

Sorry boss, the right to privacy does not exist in the united states constitution.

I'm tired and going to bed

I agree it's not a "smoking gun" (ha, there's a phrase I havn't heard in a while), but don't dismiss dirty bombs so quickly. They're harder to deliver and much less stable, but the damage they do is still significant. Imagine a 1 ton dirty bomb going off in Boston, or Chicago, or D.C., or LA....scary stuff.

It was the isralies that bombed Iraq's nuclear facilities (which france helped them build haha).

P.S. Remember one of the things Bush said Iraq had was "yellowcake," which we now know they did indeed have, so perhaps the intelligence he used to make a decision to go to Iraq wasn't as flawed as previously thought...


Actually yes it was.
Bush said that the Yellow cake was brought to them by an entirely different nation.
Its actually a coincidence that they did have some, becuase it certainly wasnt the same material that Bush indicated.

Look at the date on the second piece I posted. July 7 2004. Sorry boss, the right to privacy does not exist in the united states constitution. I'm tired and going to bed
Like I said the first time, read the articles you're sourcing... "The nuclear research complex at al-Tuwaitha, southeast of Baghdad, played a key role in an Iraqi drive to illicitly build nuclear weapons prior to the 1991 Gulf War. It was dismantled in the early 1990s under UN ceasefire resolutions ordering Iraq to abandon its quest for weapons of mass destruction."

The Constitution does not specifically mention a right to privacy. However, Supreme Court decisions over the years have established that the right to privacy is a basic human right, and as such is protected by virtue of the 9th Amendment. The right to privacy has come to the public's attention via several controversial Supreme Court rulings, including several dealing with contraception (the Griswold and Eisenstadt cases), interracial marriage (the Loving case), and abortion (the well-known Roe v. Wade case). In addition, it is said that a right to privacy is inherent in many of the amendments in the Bill of Rights, such as the 3rd, the 4th's search and seizure limits, and the 5th's self- incrimination limit.

I'm going to bed too, it was nice debating (and winning) with you guys. You guys should read my website, it's pretty informative.

Peace.... Brian
www.brianhull.net (http://www.brianhull.net)

heh you've all been trolled hard.

I suppose this is a sarcastic thread. To call Bush a good President is like calling Adolf Hitler a nice man.

I suppose this is a sarcastic thread. To call Bush a good President is like calling Adolf Hitler a nice man.
he was. he was a lover of animals, children, good german people. he only hated jews and slavs and gypsies and the handicapped.

the thing i don't like about bush is his policy to China. actually, i didn't like the policies to China played by ANY american president.