NationStates Jolt Archive

Honestly what is your problem with Bush. Do u really want to put Kerry and the Democrats in the office?

Yes.

You obviously really wanted to put Bush and the Republicans into office--didn't you?

hell no. Bush is a great president and we cant let some socialist democrat take over our country. I dont want to hear stupid opinions from other countries either, they are brainwashed by their socialist government.

hell no. Bush is a great president and we cant let some socialist democrat take over our country. I dont want to hear stupid opinions from other countries either, they are brainwashed by their socialist government.
wow.

Honestly what is your problem with Bush. Do u really want to put Kerry and the Democrats in the office?

I only found one error in your thread.. the title should read "Problems" not just "Problem"

*His illiteracy- honestly, the man makes a C average! Can you expect a that person to run the country? I make consistantly better grades than the president, FGS! (Though we shouldn't go Raelian and institute a Geniocracy, of course).
*Unmining the constitution- Ashcroft, Cheney, and Bush are deadset on undermining freedoms (most obvious being the Free Speech Zones, the PATRIOT ACT, and Guantanomo Bay.
*Attempting to dissolve the Supreme Court mandated Seperation of Church and State.
*Funding religious programs through the government.
*One (1) Illegal War, 11-13k citizen deaths, 900+ coalition deaths, unknown Iraqi casualties, who the hell knows how many wounded.
*Corporate corruption and pandering.
*Lieing to the American people blantantly.
*Fearmongering against the American people in an attempt to discredit his opponent, especially implying that terrorists support his opponents
*Blantant use of nationalism (IE- Patriotism) to discredit all democrats, liberals, and opponents as unpatriotic terrorists. (Similar to McCarthy and the Red Scare.)
*Mission Accomplished carrier landing. Worst PR Stunt Evar.

I could go on like this for at least 10 more stars, but it's getting boring.

I stopped reading after about the 2nd or 3rd star because you had already made a bad name for leftists...

The Free Speech Zones isn't a Bush thing...and besides that, you left out the thought of an ammendment that limits right and the quote "There ought to be limits to freedom."

Honestly what is your problem with Bush. Do u really want to put Kerry and the Democrats in the office?
The problem is he's a liar, he's a crook, he's killing the country and a couple of other countries too. He can't be trusted, he's with special interests and not average people, and he cannot be given another four years.

Yes, I do really want to put Kerry in the White House.

I stopped reading after about the 2nd or 3rd star because you had already made a bad name for leftists...

The Free Speech Zones isn't a Bush thing...and besides that, you left out the thought of an ammendment that limits right and the quote "There ought to be limits to freedom."

Okay, so the 1st star isn't a very valid point, but I had to include it.

Yeah the Free Speech Zones existed before Bush, but he's using them a lot more than other parties. (Though, the DNC did too...)

Making a bad name for leftists? If that's what criticising the President is, I'm sure the left will have a hard time not making a bad name.

*His illiteracy- honestly, the man makes a C average! Can you expect a that person to run the country? I make consistantly better grades than the president, FGS! (Though we shouldn't go Raelian and institute a Geniocracy, of course).
*Unmining the constitution- Ashcroft, Cheney, and Bush are deadset on undermining freedoms (most obvious being the Free Speech Zones, the PATRIOT ACT, and Guantanomo Bay.
*Attempting to dissolve the Supreme Court mandated Seperation of Church and State.
*Funding religious programs through the government.
*One (1) Illegal War, 11-13k citizen deaths, 900+ coalition deaths, unknown Iraqi casualties, who the hell knows how many wounded.
*Corporate corruption and pandering.
*Lieing to the American people blantantly.
*Fearmongering against the American people in an attempt to discredit his opponent, especially implying that terrorists support his opponents
*Blantant use of nationalism (IE- Patriotism) to discredit all democrats, liberals, and opponents as unpatriotic terrorists. (Similar to McCarthy and the Red Scare.)
*Mission Accomplished carrier landing. Worst PR Stunt Evar.

I could go on like this for at least 10 more stars, but it's getting boring.

I agree with all of the above except:

I think both wars he got us into were illegal.

McCarthy never accused all his opponents of being unpatriotic.

I consider both parties equally odious, blatantly corrupt, malodorous, anti-American, devious, cynical, and treacherous. Thus, my vote is being cast for a third party candidate. As long as we keep playing the musical chairs game of swapping one loser for another, America will continue stumbling further and further down the path of ruin.

I agree with all of the above except:

I think both wars he got us into were illegal.

McCarthy never accused all his opponents of being unpatriotic.

It's a stretch, but Afghanistan can be justified by saying Al-Quaedia was directly associated with the Former Afghani Government...

Patriotic wasn't a jingoistic word back then, but if you brought McCarthy to the modern era it'd be like calling someone a Commie in that time...

[Speaking as such, anyone know why Afghanistan is called -Istan? As far as I know, all -Istan nations are Former USSR states and Afghanistan wasn't...]

I just read the last star and it's probably the best.

[Speaking as such, anyone know why Afghanistan is called -Istan? As far as I know, all -Istan nations are Former USSR states and Afghanistan wasn't...]

What about Pakistan? (or Trotterstan - I have never been associated with the Soviet Union)

Its a regional cultural/language thing.

The attack on Afganistan was completely justified and IMHO a measured response to the attack on 9/11. I'd have probably nuked the bastards. BTW "stan" means "land" as in land of the Afgans. The war in Iraq is an attempt to remake the Middle East and to finish the job began by his father. Sure it's risky, but can the middle east really get more f-d up than it has been? So long as they kept to themselves, who cared. But once they came over here and started killing Americans, we had to do something. Bush has the balls to do it. Kerry doesn't even have to balls to take responsibility for his gas guzzling SUV (Sure it's in my driveway, but it's the families, not mine). Kerry votes for the war, then votes against the funds needed to fight it ("Actually I voted for the $87 billion, before I voted against it") Kerry accuses the military of horrible atrocities, throws away his medals (actually, someone elses, it was only his ribbons) and then misses no opportunity to brag about his four monthes of service in Vietnam. I pray for Bushes re-election.

*His illiteracy- honestly, the man makes a C average! Can you expect "A" that person to run the country? I make "CONSISTANTLY" better grades than the "PRESIDENT", FGS! (Though we shouldn't go Raelian and institute a Geniocracy, of course).
*"UNMINING" the "CONSTITUTION"- Ashcroft, Cheney, and Bush are deadset on undermining freedoms (most obvious being the Free Speech Zones, the PATRIOT ACT, and "GUANTANOMO" Bay.
*Attempting to dissolve the Supreme Court mandated "SEPERATION" of Church and State.
*Funding religious programs through the government.
*One (1) Illegal War, 11-13k citizen deaths, 900+ coalition deaths, unknown Iraqi casualties, who the "HELL" knows how many wounded.
*Corporate corruption and pandering.
*"LIEING" to the American people blantantly.
*Fearmongering against the American people in an attempt to discredit his opponent, especially implying that terrorists support his opponents
*Blantant use of nationalism (IE- Patriotism) to discredit all "DEMOCRATS", liberals, and opponents as unpatriotic terrorists. (Similar to McCarthy and the Red Scare.)
*Mission Accomplished carrier landing. Worst PR Stunt "EVAR".

I could go on like this for at least 10 more stars, but it's getting boring.
All your makes indicating illiteracy have been capitalized and quoted. I guess you're too stupid to be involved in politics :( And I'm not even touching your grammar.

::ahem::

*Politicizing and trying to destroy the objectivity of science.

Wow... I agree with MadAnthonyWayne a lot. I don't think we will have to worry about Kerry getting elected... He just doesn't have enough Charisma. Ya know? Anyway, I want the goverment smaller, and I want the programs to shrink. >.> I am not Socialist AT all. >.> Bush isn't the best, however he is the better of the two evils. So... Eh. And the whole Economy thing? The only real that has effected anyone I know is Gas price, and raises in food prices. Nothing else really.

All your [writing] [makes] indicating illiteracy[,] ha[s] been capitalized and quoted. I guess you're too stupid to be involved in politics. :( [And] I'm not even touching your grammar.

Ad Hominem, discredit my arguments, not my intelligence or writing skills.

Okay, I have a capitalization fixation, and I made a few typos. And this makes me unfit to criticise the President? I think he's unfit to criticise Kerry, then, since he coined "Misunderestimated" and everyone knows that is not a word.

Speaking of which, I fixed your post. [Adding], [Removing]. I'm sure you'll appreciate the irony of that. While normally I'd save the space for a real argument, I felt the need...

discredit my arguments, not my intelligence or writing skills.


Says the pot to the kettle.....

Says the pot to the kettle.....

Not really. His entire argument was:

A. I criticise Bush for illiteracy (obviously exaggerated if he can read My Pet Goat, and White House Intelligence Briefings.)
B. I made grammatical and spelling errors.
C. I must be illiterate.
D. Therefore, I am too stupid to be president also.

Thus, I pointed out grammatical and spelling errors in his own argument because of lack of actual material to agree with or refute.

Not really. His entire argument was:

A. I criticise Bush for illiteracy (obviously exaggerated if he can read My Pet Goat, and White House Intelligence Briefings.)
B. I made grammatical and spelling errors.
C. I must be illiterate.
D. Therefore, I am too stupid to be president also.

Thus, I pointed out grammatical and spelling errors in his own argument because of lack of actual material to agree with or refute.

Let he who casts the first stone be free of sin. You criticised Bush for his lack of intelligence and in the process exposed your own intellectual weaknesses. It is a bit much to cut up rough after someone points out such a gaff...is it not?

Don't forget Bush's stances against abortion and gay marriage.

What about Pakistan? (or Trotterstan - I have never been associated with the Soviet Union)

Its a regional cultural/language thing.
Yes, "stan" means "homeland" in some language. It was used to put black in certain places in the apartheid regime in South Africa - Bantustans.

My main problem with Bush is that he and his administration have lied shamelessly and repetitively about Iraq ("The reason we keep saying there was a connection between Al-Qaeda and Iraq is because there was one," for example). However, I also worry about some of the things he did as Governor of Texas, such as allowing a man who had been seen by one person, from behind, to be put on death row. As the Governor, he would have had the power to prevent that man being killed, but he didn't.

However, I think Rumsfeld is significantly worse after all those memos trying to overturn the Geneva Conventions.

Let he who casts the first stone be free of sin. You criticised Bush for his lack of intelligence and in the process exposed your own intellectual weaknesses. It is a bit much to cut up rough after someone points out such a gaff...is it not?

He then said that his first point was probably unfair, but he had to put it in. And besides, he isn't the one sending people to war.

it's risky, but can the middle east really get more f-d up than it has been?

Which area would you say is the most screwed up (e.g. Afghanistan, Iraq, Palestine/Israel etc.)

Let he who casts the first stone be free of sin. You criticised Bush for his lack of intelligence and in the process exposed your own intellectual weaknesses. It is a bit much to cut up rough after someone points out such a gaff...is it not?

Difference is that George W. Bush is a national leader for whom a certain level of intelligence should be a minimum requirement for the job. Doomduckistan is not.

If a murderer points out that someone shouldn't be an elected official because he/she has murdered someone, does the status of the originator of the argument (murderer) make the argument in itself any less valid?

Regardless of Doomduckistan's ability to spell, I still observe that Bush manages to display a level of stupidity unbecoming his current position.

Ballotonia

He then said that his first point was probably unfair, but he had to put it in. And besides, he isn't the one sending people to war.


Yes, he did, but, by even mentioning it he left himself open for what came to him. He should have accepted it and moved on, but no! He had the audacity to abuse the person who called him on it for criticising the post and not the argument. Hence my comment about the pot and the kettle.

Besides, what does being unable to spell have to do with sending people to war?

All rise for an announcement by The Most Magnanimous and Honourable King-like Leader Guy of the The Unpropitious Intractable Tor of Swan-Upping, of the corkage-free region of desolate-wonderlands; Trouser Experience.

"I am having no problem with bush since I hire new gardener."

You may be seated The Most Magnanimous and Honourable King-like Leader Guy of the The Unpropitious Intractable Tor of Swan-Upping, of the corkage-free region of desolate-wonderlands; Trouser Experience, has left.

Difference is that George W. Bush is a national leader for whom a certain level of intelligence should be a minimum requirement for the job. Doomduckistan is not.

If a murderer points out that someone shouldn't be an elected official because he/she has murdered someone, does the status of the originator of the argument (murderer) make the argument in itself any less valid?

Regardless of Doomduckistan's ability to spell, I still observe that Bush manages to display a level of stupidity unbecoming his current position.

Ballotonia

You see, you are arguing the wrong issue. I couldn't care less if he was talking about George Bush or Elmo. The fact is, he posted criticising Bush's (or Elmo's if that makes it easier) intelligence. In doing so he produced a number of errors in spelling and grammar which was picked up on by another poster. If he had ignored it, or accepted he had stuffed up then no problem.
Instead, he then abused the person who identified his errors for criticising the post and not the argument. Now, I am sure the irony of this is not lost on you? Therefore I posted about the pot and the kettle.
Trouble is, you try and read more into what I post than what is there. Reading between the lines is useless...there is nothing there but empty space. Thats why they have double-spacing...it is a blank space...nothing to read.

Honestly what is your problem with Bush. Do u really want to put Kerry and the Democrats in the office?

1) sent us into an unneeded war at a time when we were still occupying another nation and supposed to be dedicated to capturing OBL;

2) did (1) without, apparently, any planning for how to deal with the consequences of victory;

3) did (1) not only without the support of our allies but in such a way as to totally antagonize them;

4) did (1) in violation of international law and with no regard for the legal process of inspections that was underway;

5) did (1) by means of lies told either to him (incompitent) or else by him (liar), and created an atmosphere in the intel community the supressed any conclusions that indicated against his premade plans;

6) did (1) after campaigning with a plank that specifically stated that he would not be a nation builder;

7) in doing (1), awarded multi-billions dollar supply and reconstruction contracts to his/Cheney's corporate buddies without any bidding;

8) has been systematically nullifying the First, Fifth and Sixth Ammendments of the U.S. Constitution;

9) introduced a program to funnel tax dollars specifically to religious charities;

10) introduced a program to reduce funding to schools with poor performence scores;

11) avoided danger during the Vitetnam war and yet allows the RNC to disparage the service of Kerry, a war hero;

12) has stated "I don't think atheists can really be Americans";

13) benefitted greatly in the 2000 election from what was by the very least of standards his own brother's gross misadminitration of Florida's election process;

14) took office after an electoral college vote in which Florida illegally, under U.S. Code Title 3, was allowed to participate in;

15) is a paranoid sadist with untreated chemical abuse problems.



As for your second question, since Kerry is the only one who can defeat Bush, HELL FUCKING YES I want him to win!

All your MISTAKES indicating illiteracy have been capitalized and quoted. I guess you're too stupid to be involved in POLITICS. :( And I'm not even touching your grammar.

Guess what? Anyone can be a jackass. :D