NationStates Jolt Archive

No, seriously. I hear left and right that Bush got that memo saying that Bin Laden was determined to strike the U.S.

But let's get one thing straight, this "person" is the President. He gets maybe 10 memos a day on different issues on different people determined (doesn't say much does it?) to attack the U.S. Pretty vague of a title if you ask me. If I got 70 memos a week, perhaps 5 of them concerned individuals who wanted to attack the U.S. I wouldn't want to waste time and pay attention to someone who seemed equal to "The Little Engine That Could" and would rather pay more attention to scoring well on that next hole.

Perhaps secretaries didn't think that "Osama Bin Laden determined to attack U.S. so get yer butt off the couch and do something about it Mr. President" was an appropriate title for a memo, but seriously. Who knows what Bush's IQ is? Anyone?

No, the U.S. Pretty vague of a title if you ask me. If I got 70 memos a week, perhaps 5 was an appropriate title for a memo, but seriously. Who knows what Bush's IQ is? Anyone?



We gave bush the benefit of the doubt when he got appointed president without regard for the consent of the governed.

We gave bush the benefit of the doubt when he said iraq had nuclear weapons.

We gave bush the benefit of the doubt when he said iraq had WMDs

We gave bush the benefit of the doubt when he said iraq was building nuclear weapons.

We gave bush the benefit of the doubt when he said iraq was building WMDs

We gave bush the benefit of the doubt when he said iraq was trying to build nuclear weapons.

We gave bush the benefit of the doubt when he said iraq was trying to build WMDs

We gave bush the benefit of the doubt when he said iraq was planning to build nuclear weapons

We gave bush the benefit of the doubt when he said iraq was planning to build WMDs.



The fact is that he is a liar and that his lies have cost more than 15,000 people their lives.

They dont get a second chance, neither do their families or their friends or loved ones.

Neither should bush.

No, seriously. I hear left and right that Bush got that memo saying that Bin Laden was determined to strike the U.S.

But let's get one thing straight, this "person" is the President. He gets maybe 10 memos a day on different issues on different people determined (doesn't say much does it?) to attack the U.S. Pretty vague of a title if you ask me. If I got 70 memos a week, perhaps 5 of them concerned individuals who wanted to attack the U.S. I wouldn't want to waste time and pay attention to someone who seemed equal to "The Little Engine That Could" and would rather pay more attention to scoring well on that next hole.

Perhaps secretaries didn't think that "Osama Bin Laden determined to attack U.S. so get yer butt off the couch and do something about it Mr. President" was an appropriate title for a memo, but seriously. Who knows what Bush's IQ is? Anyone?

Bush has average IQ but he low Wisdom so he has terrible usage of it.
IQ is just the maximum capabilities possible. There are dumb acting people with low IQ and smart ones with low IQ.
Wisdom is your ability to use your IQ. Without it you are badly funded in intellect.

The thing is if the Administration would just tell us how many memos they get that say a country is attacking and most they pay attention to then its not as bad. But they don't because they are lazy or scared about the truth being bad press.

Dude, I can see how easy the topic is to understand but when you're dealing with people that believe all the lies from a Michael Moore film, you're just beating your head against the wall. Liberals can't think for themselves.

Dude, I can see how easy the topic is to understand but when you're dealing with people that believe all the lies from a Michael Moore film, you're just beating your head against the wall. Liberals can't think for themselves.


Collected that $10,000 reward yet?

Ohhh yeah you're a slandering liar. I forgot. For a moment there.


I suggest you go spit on the graves of those jackass deadhead liberal sheep who wrote the declaration of independence and the constitution.

Liberals can't think for themselves. Pot, kettle, black.

Stop making blanket statements, it doesn't exactly make you look like you have much by way of intelligence.

LOL see they only comment on stupid remarks or with stupid remarks - half of them are too busy jumping back and forth from Moore's website looking for a good answer. They lack the imagination to understand seperate points of view.

LOL see they only comment on stupid remarks or with stupid remarks - half of them are too busy jumping back and forth from Moore's website looking for a good answer. They lack the imagination to understand seperate points of view.

Generalizations are fun!

And idiotic.

Just like you.

You stupid fuck.

To the second comment. The benefit of the doubt was evidence of wmd. The building and owndership. All of those are built into one. I still believe that at one point they had them. I mean comon if they didn't why wouldn't they let in the weapon inspectors. Furthor more. I dislike most liberals because well there all around me. Kerry supporters, in my view, follow the popular view. I am not saying you are wrong, don' get me wrong, I'm just saying that with a school filled with kerry supporters there is only one person that was able to put up anything real against Bush. Something like, He can't talk good is not a good excuse I'm sorry. Michael Moore is an idiot. Plain and simple. He admited to lieing to get his point across. Why try and get it across when it is tainted by a lie? Its not true then now is it.

I hate him with a passion and he deserves to be shot. Now you can take that last comment I made and make me look like an idiot with stuff like. " all you can do is insult." go ahead. Im waiting for it.

Generalizations are fun!

And idiotic.

Just like you.

You stupid fuck.

hahaha see how they prove my point, unintelligible drivel.

To the second comment. The benefit of the doubt was evidence of wmd. The building and owndership. All of those are built into one. I still believe that at one point they had them. I mean comon if they didn't why wouldn't they let in the weapon inspectors.

Was Hans Blix on holiday in Iraq?

LOL see they only comment on stupid remarks or with stupid remarks - half of them are too busy jumping back and forth from Moore's website looking for a good answer. They lack the imagination to understand seperate points of view.

Listen, Moore's Credibility isn't the best, this is true, but Bush's is worst. As was made clear earlier in the thread, Bush does his part plus some in lying to the masses. It has costed thousands of lives beyond that of 9/11.
Furthermore, I'm not sure what you think, but even though we are a "super power", it doesn't mean we should flaunt along killing and attacking random people. Even disregarding the events of 9/11, Bush has truely screwed up America.
Unemployment rate is up
Taxes are done, yes, but the deficit is ever increasing
Lives are being lost and young men are going to war, ruining families
Gas prices are up despite the promised oil from Iraq

I could keep going, but trying to convince you otherwise, J0eg0d, is like beating my head against a brick wall :headbang:

Hey guys how bout instead of yelling back and forth how ignorant one another are you actually say something that makes sence? Use some logic. State some facts. You can do it I know you can!

This is to nobodys poitical view or position just the people that yell in arguements instead of well...argueing.

I'll give him the benefit of a doubt... the doubt that he could find his head up his ass with a map. He is a smerking, arrogant ideologue who has no business being president of the United States.

Was Hans Blix on holiday in Iraq?

Refresh my memory....Hans Blix?

hahaha see how they prove my point, unintelligible drivel.

yet again, all you do is post a flame.

Here's an idea: prove it.

Prove that one out of every 2 liberals goes to Moore's website for answers to political questions.

This aughta be good.

yet again, all you do is post a flame.

Here's an idea: prove it.

Prove that one out of every 2 liberals goes to Moore's website for answers to political questions.

This aughta be good.

Well, your one and the next idiot that flames me is the other.
You prove my points with each new post.
Idiots taking the word of a really big fat idiot.

Well, your one and the next idiot that flames me is the other.
You prove my points with each new post.
Idiots taking the word of a really big fat idiot.

Ok, NO. You have to prove that out of every two liberals in the world, one of them will go to the website.

Now get to it.

Refresh my memory....Hans Blix?Hans Blix, the nuclear weapons inspector assigned to Iraq, who found no evidence of Iraqi nuclear weapons.

...and that makes two.

Listen, Moore's Credibility isn't the best, this is true, but Bush's is worst. As was made clear earlier in the thread, Bush does his part plus some in lying to the masses. It has costed thousands of lives beyond that of 9/11.
Furthermore, I'm not sure what you think, but even though we are a "super power", it doesn't mean we should flaunt along killing and attacking random people. Even disregarding the events of 9/11, Bush has truely screwed up America.
Unemployment rate is up
Taxes are done, yes, but the deficit is ever increasing
Lives are being lost and young men are going to war, ruining families
Gas prices are up despite the promised oil from Iraq

I could keep going, but trying to convince you otherwise, J0eg0d, is like beating my head against a brick wall :headbang:

Moore has no credibility in my mind. I have a good arguement against every remark he has said. But lets move away from that subject and move back to Bush.

Right we are a superpower but do you think we just picked Iraq out of a hat? Unemployment has risen yes, thats bad ok ill give you that. Oil increase I was never one to say it would go down. There is no reason to make it go down its highly elastic so if the companys get it cheaper it will bring the oil company more money when they sell it for the same price, or more. Lives are lost, familys ruined. Well its a war and thats what happens. I am totaly for this war and I think instead of "occupieing" (spelt that wrong sorry) we should send a few f18s and apaches in there to whipe out the remaining threats. Another one. We are THE superpower if someone like Iraq we see needs "policing"(a common usage of the word so ill use it) I think we should be allowed to Just because nobody else does. We send out enough aid to foreign countrys, Iraq included, that we should do that. You want us to stop policing? We stop sending aid. Thats how I would look at it. Fine, let Iraq and Afganistan turn into terrorist countrys, Fine let them keep terrorising countrys until it gets out of hand until we have to go to war anyway. Stop it where it starts. Kill the bug now and I think we are doing a pretty damn good job.

I truely believe that the US should Isolate itself until we fix ourselves up. No more sending aid newhere, no more allys, no more imigration. Period Done. Fix us up we don't really need the rest of the world neway. But thats not the way things are. So I'll stick to what we have now and I am happy with it.

Hello!?
Is the Iraq war all we care about?
Gasoline prices are up leaving millions scrambling to pay for gas
Unemployment rates are up leaving thousands without jobs
The country is in deficit, funding cut backs are the only things in sight that will help us
Very few people internationally respect America anymore
Bush's office has broken the US right down the middle into liberals and conservatives... what do we want? A civil war?

Hans Blix, the nuclear weapons inspector assigned to Iraq, who found no evidence of Iraqi nuclear weapons.

Hmm...I don't know what to say really. Maybe I missed something really big...But wasn't there a lot of "If you don't let us in we are going to invade. They didn't so we invaded?"

Hello!?
Is the Iraq war all we care about?
Gasoline prices are up leaving millions scrambling to pay for gas
Unemployment rates are up leaving thousands without jobs
The country is in deficit, funding cut backs are the only things in sight that will help us
Very few people internationally respect America anymore
Bush's office has broken the US right down the middle into liberals and conservatives... what do we want? A civil war?

Civil War; you liberals would get your asses handed to you because none of you want to own a gun.

Hello!?
Is the Iraq war all we care about?
Gasoline prices are up leaving millions scrambling to pay for gas
Unemployment rates are up leaving thousands without jobs
The country is in deficit, funding cut backs are the only things in sight that will help us
Very few people internationally respect America anymore
Bush's office has broken the US right down the middle into liberals and conservatives... what do we want? A civil war?


Gas prices will rise. Kerry won't fix that. Unemployment ...good you got one. Defecit. We have been for many many years. Internationaly, who gives a f***, conservatives liberals. Yep thats how its been for a while used to be Rebulican Democrat now its a bit more. thats all. Civil war? Doubt it. People don't have the balls for a civil war anymore.

Civil War; you liberals would get your asses handed to you because none of you want to own a gun.

Please, PLease just shut up man! You are not helping. People like you make people like me look bad.

Not to say I'm anyone....But you get the point.

Prove that one out of every 2 liberals goes to Moore's website for answers to political questions.

I am a liberal. I am in college at the moment with a major in philosophy.

I have never been to Moore's website. I have never been to Al Franken's website. I have been to the Democratic website, but did not stay long enough to read any of it.

My point?

I get my answers for myself. I do not rely on others thoughts or opinions. I was highly critical of Moore's film because it was bias, even if it does lean strongly towards the left. I can see that there are a lot of morons from both sides who just say a bunch of shit and think that proves their point and the idiocy of the other side. Guess what, it does not. Remember The Red Arrow? He did the same thing. He was a leftist and the same time I was a strong leftist (I am a liberal, not a leftist today). I yelled at him so many times telling him to shut up and prove what he is always saying. He said that I was not a true leftist, that I was a right winger in reality, just because I did not support him.

Joe, you are the same way. You think you are all intelligent with your rants against liberals. People like you (both sides, liberal and conservative) should not have children, especially with someone else who is similar. But should I control you by making it so you cannot? No. You are free to do what you want. Just as long as you know that others, who have some intelligence, think of you as just another ranting moron who needs to shut up because his (or her) words mean nothing due to the repetition and lack of support.

Civil War; you liberals would get your asses handed to you because none of you want to own a gun.

Wow, way to make a relevant comment.

Oh, sorry, that was directed to anybody who wasn't you.


Besides...didn't the liberals win that one?

To the second comment. The benefit of the doubt was evidence of wmd. The building and owndership. All of those are built into one. I still believe that at one point they had them. I mean comon if they didn't why wouldn't they let in the weapon inspectors. Furthor more. I dislike most liberals because well there all around me. Kerry supporters, in my view, follow the popular view. I am not saying you are wrong, don' get me wrong, I'm just saying that with a school filled with kerry supporters there is only one person that was able to put up anything real against Bush. Something like, He can't talk good is not a good excuse I'm sorry. Michael Moore is an idiot. Plain and simple. He admited to lieing to get his point across. Why try and get it across when it is tainted by a lie? Its not true then now is it.

I hate him with a passion and he deserves to be shot. Now you can take that last comment I made and make me look like an idiot with stuff like. " all you can do is insult." go ahead. Im waiting for it.
They did have them. Ten YEARS ago. Iraq was actually cooperating with the UN inspectors. Cowboy Bush had to go in without proof though. . .Thousands are dead now because of his stubborn insitance of invading Iraq.

I am a liberal. I am in college at the moment with a major in philosophy.

I have never been to Moore's website. I have never been to Al Franken's website. I have been to the Democratic website, but did not stay long enough to read any of it.

My point?

I get my answers for myself. I do not rely on others thoughts or opinions. I was highly critical of Moore's film because it was bias, even if it does lean strongly towards the left. I can see that there are a lot of morons from both sides who just say a bunch of shit and think that proves their point and the idiocy of the other side. Guess what, it does not. Remember The Red Arrow? He did the same thing. He was a leftist and the same time I was a strong leftist (I am a liberal, not a leftist today). I yelled at him so many times telling him to shut up and prove what he is always saying. He said that I was not a true leftist, that I was a right winger in reality, just because I did not support him.

Joe, you are the same way. You think you are all intelligent with your rants against liberals. People like you (both sides, liberal and conservative) should not have children, especially with someone else who is similar. But should I control you by making it so you cannot? No. You are free to do what you want. Just as long as you know that others, who have some intelligence, think of you as just another ranting moron who needs to shut up because his (or her) words mean nothing due to the repetition and lack of support.

That was real good. Till the end. Should have kept it as it was more insulting that way. Whats with all the name calling anyway? Most people would cry if I yelled at them in real life lol. I don't see the point in cursing or calling people names online. It doesn't mean anything.

Please, PLease just shut up man! You are not helping. People like you make people like me look bad.

Not to say I'm anyone....But you get the point.

See my point Joe. Even conservatives (who have intelligence) think of you as a moron. Please, shut up. Both sides hate you.

And War Child, I feel your pain. I will admit that I was at one time a communist (teenage thing, you know? I am no longer, obviously), and at that time there was another communist who was worse than Joe. So, I feel your pain. Hopefully he will get banned. :-/

Moore has no credibility in my mind. I have a good arguement against every remark he has said. But lets move away from that subject and move back to Bush.

Right we are a superpower but do you think we just picked Iraq out of a hat? Unemployment has risen yes, thats bad ok ill give you that. Oil increase I was never one to say it would go down. There is no reason to make it go down its highly elastic so if the companys get it cheaper it will bring the oil company more money when they sell it for the same price, or more. Lives are lost, familys ruined. Well its a war and thats what happens. I am totaly for this war and I think instead of "occupieing" (spelt that wrong sorry) we should send a few f18s and apaches in there to whipe out the remaining threats. Another one. We are THE superpower if someone like Iraq we see needs "policing"(a common usage of the word so ill use it) I think we should be allowed to Just because nobody else does. We send out enough aid to foreign countrys, Iraq included, that we should do that. You want us to stop policing? We stop sending aid. Thats how I would look at it. Fine, let Iraq and Afganistan turn into terrorist countrys, Fine let them keep terrorising countrys until it gets out of hand until we have to go to war anyway. Stop it where it starts. Kill the bug now and I think we are doing a pretty damn good job.

I truely believe that the US should Isolate itself until we fix ourselves up. No more sending aid newhere, no more allys, no more imigration. Period Done. Fix us up we don't really need the rest of the world neway. But thats not the way things are. So I'll stick to what we have now and I am happy with it.


Half the reason they hate us over there is because we want them to be democracys. They don't want a democracy, they want a theocracy.
Sometimes policing is nessicary but if everyone but 1 country disagrees, then maybe we should reconsider?
We have control of the oil fields in Iraq, why are gas rates up? Because its not that simple. The war has cut back the amount of oil coming to the US. So now our petrolum run society is being strangled.
We didn't need to do this war. Saddam probally would have died in 10 years anyway. I would be for the war if we had more allies, but we did it basically unilaterally. Sure, England helped, but we did the main part of it.

Isolation would be a terrible thing! Many of our largest companies would shrivel up and DIE without international trading. Many nations would be crippled without our help, and it wouldn't help our standing in the international community. To say the least, we are about as independent as a single worker ant from an ant colony. With deficit so high, we need higher taxes and cut spending.

Well, your one and the next idiot that flames me is the other.
You prove my points with each new post.
Idiots taking the word of a really big fat idiot.

I have to disagree with you. In my life, I have only visited Moore's website once. I've visited Cspan archives and Factcheck.org much more often. I've read through the Constitution. I've read article after article describing the policies of several Presidents. I've read articles especially about the expolits of the current President. I've picked cynically from the bloated corpse of the decomposing free press. I've read from the transcripts of speeches and interviews.

I despise Bush fervently. His entire Presidency and the policies that spin around it is a testament of the abuse of power. While not ultimately happy with Kerry, I do believe in his competence and in the higher level of professionalism he displays.

I've read the arguments. I've tried to keep an open mind. I've taken my own predispositions with a grain of salt. I've introspected and overanalyzed.

Bush is horrible.

There's no "proof" I can give anyone. This is a distillation of the entire experience of my growth as a human being. The mass of information I have digested over the length of my life. There is no one article I can point to. There is no pundit who expresses my views. There are no candidates of any party that express my exact preferences.

The mass of everything I know makes me reject Bush and everything I see him striving most deperately for.

Call me partisan, but you would be more correct to call me convinced.

We gave bush the benefit of the doubt when he got appointed president without regard for the consent of the governed.

We gave bush the benefit of the doubt when he said iraq had nuclear weapons.

We gave bush the benefit of the doubt when he said iraq had WMDs

We gave bush the benefit of the doubt when he said iraq was building nuclear weapons.

We gave bush the benefit of the doubt when he said iraq was building WMDs

We gave bush the benefit of the doubt when he said iraq was trying to build nuclear weapons.

We gave bush the benefit of the doubt when he said iraq was trying to build WMDs

We gave bush the benefit of the doubt when he said iraq was planning to build nuclear weapons

We gave bush the benefit of the doubt when he said iraq was planning to build WMDs.



The fact is that he is a liar and that his lies have cost more than 15,000 people their lives.

They dont get a second chance, neither do their families or their friends or loved ones.

Neither should bush.

First of all, if you knew anything about American politics, youd know Bush won. Fair and square. Yes Im sorry that the existence of the Electoral College bugs you so, but until the law changes, too bad.

Second of all, for all your "Bush said this, Bush said that", he was only repeating what his intelligence agencies fed him. Maybe you should be angry at the CIA instead of Bush. Every other president in US history has listened to his intelligence reports, why are you now attacking Bush for listening to his? Maybe you should have attacked Clinton for not listening to reports that warned him about Osama years before 9/11.

As for costing 15,000 their lives, stabilizing Europe cost millions of lives. Hopefully, with a loss this low, we can attempt to stabilize the Middle East, because they sure havent done very well on their own....

That was real good. Till the end. Should have kept it as it was more insulting that way. Whats with all the name calling anyway? Most people would cry if I yelled at them in real life lol. I don't see the point in cursing or calling people names online. It doesn't mean anything.

I do not know. I take a liking to the words "moronic," "fool," and "idiotic." Oh, and words that are similar.

I do not know, I just love when they are used with each other like "moronic fool" or "idiotic moron."

*shrug* I am weird I guess.

They did have them. Ten YEARS ago. Iraq was actually cooperating with the UN inspectors. Cowboy Bush had to go in without proof though. . .Thousands are dead now because of his stubborn insitance of invading Iraq.


Again with the name calling. It just makes your arguement void in my head when you need to use names to get your point across. There is nothing wrong with people from down south. They are the most polite and considerate people I have ever met. Yet again. Even without the weapons Iraq was a problem nation that needed policing.

I do not know. I take a liking to the words "moronic," "fool," and "idiotic." Oh, and words that are similar.

I do not know, I just love when they are used with each other like "moronic fool" or "idiotic moron."

*shrug* I am weird I guess.

I just like debasing people by picking there arguements about. Instead of calling someone stupid you gives examples why they are. Guess it has something to do with me liking to write...

You are weird. You are one of the few people that actualy know anything to be able to argue. Join the club lol. Wait Wait...do you listen to other peoples arguements also? That would make you real weird.

(Not meant as insulting as any way.)

Just want to point out something:

Economic policies take about 10 years to affect the economy. That's what both my economics class and my government class taught me. Therefore, the current economic troubles cannot be blamed on Bush. So can you all please quit bringing that up as an argument? It's not true.

Thank you for your time. :)

I just like debasing people by picking there arguements about. Instead of calling someone stupid you gives examples why they are. Guess it has something to do with me liking to write...

You are weird. You are one of the few people that actualy know anything to be able to argue. Join the club lol. Wait Wait...do you listen to other peoples arguements also? That would make you real weird.

(Not meant as insulting as any way.)

It was not taken in any way to be insulting.

One thing that really irritates me is when people say "I hate liberals!" or "I hate conservatives!" God, it shows such a lack of understanding that it makes me want to slap them, no matter what their political views are. Of course I do not slap them, that would be mean, but you get my point. Personally, I do not like conservatism, but you are proof that I do not hate conservatives. Because, from what I have gotten from you in this thread, you seem to be a decent individual.

The only thing with me and arguing is I hate doing research. I am a philosophy major, therefor I would rather think about it than read a book on it. So I never bring in outside things when I argue, it is all mere opinion of mine and how I see the world as a whole and the inner workings of it. That is why I like talking about religion and God specifically, because it is way more philosophical.

Anyways... *shuts up*

Just want to point out something:

Economic policies take about 10 years to affect the economy. That's what both my economics class and my government class taught me. Therefore, the current economic troubles cannot be blamed on Bush. So can you all please quit bringing that up as an argument? It's not true.

Thank you for your time. :)


Awesome Comment. I'm going to have to use that one.

Ok Well nobody has posted in a while I think I'm going to get off to bed. I'll check back here in the morning. Maybe, possibly, there will be a decent arguement.

It was not taken in any way to be insulting.

One thing that really irritates me is when people say "I hate liberals!" or "I hate conservatives!" God, it shows such a lack of understanding that it makes me want to slap them, no matter what their political views are. Of course I do not slap them, that would be mean, but you get my point. Personally, I do not like conservatism, but you are proof that I do not hate conservatives. Because, from what I have gotten from you in this thread, you seem to be a decent individual.

The only thing with me and arguing is I hate doing research. I am a philosophy major, therefor I would rather think about it than read a book on it. So I never bring in outside things when I argue, it is all mere opinion of mine and how I see the world as a whole and the inner workings of it. That is why I like talking about religion and God specifically, because it is way more philosophical.

Anyways... *shuts up*

Thanx. :) I get bits and pieces. Usually I just use other peoples arguements and factor in my opinion in a way that it doesn't change the facts. Here and there I'll catch some CNN and I do take Government as a class and Buisness Economics so I know what's up. As to using your opinion. Nothing wrong with that just sometimes it's not enough you know? Well I'm done. Figured I'd respond to this so as to not leave you in the dust.

I think that was all literate I don't know it's getting late. The not insulting I do as a precausion no need for you to take it the wrong way you know?

Thanx. :) I get bits and pieces. Usually I just use other peoples arguements and factor in my opinion in a way that it doesn't change the facts. Here and there I'll catch some CNN and I do take Government as a class and Buisness Economics so I know what's up. As to using your opinion. Nothing wrong with that just sometimes it's not enough you know? Well I'm done. Figured I'd respond to this so as to not leave you in the dust.

I think that was all literate I don't know it's getting late. The not insulting I do as a precausion no need for you to take it the wrong way you know?

I have not taken anything you have said in a wrong way. :-P

I watch the news periodically, so I have some. And I know my opinion is not always enough, that is why I am not the best debater for politics. I like religion better because it is much more philosophical. Anyways, goodnight.

All I 'll say is that Bush claimed to be a uniter, not a divider....all I can see is that fact this nation has been this divided since Veitnam or the Civil War.

Just want to point out something:

Economic policies take about 10 years to affect the economy. That's what both my economics class and my government class taught me. Therefore, the current economic troubles cannot be blamed on Bush. So can you all please quit bringing that up as an argument? It's not true.

Thank you for your time. :)

*simply wishes to indicate agreement with the above*

:sniper:

*simply wishes to indicate agreement with the above*

:sniper:
So the whole recession is basically Bush Sr.s fault because that's whenj the economy started going down hill

If it takes it "about 10 years" to go through, and Bush has been in power for slightly under 4 years, and Clinton was in power for 8 before that?

Ten years ago Clinton was in charge.

Blame Slick Willy.

Of course, that means it goes for every other economic change, good or bad.

Hello!?
Hi, nice to meet you.

Is the Iraq war all we care about?
That, or the Vietnam War.

Gasoline prices are up leaving millions scrambling to pay for gas
Gasoline is a commodity, it should go up like everything else, milk, bread, houses, cars, whatever. If it stays the same, it's because of artificial price fixing.

Unemployment rates are up leaving thousands without jobs
I have two jobs, Army Reservist and 911 Dispatcher. And I'm in college. And actually, the unemployment rate is going down; it's at 5.4% presently.

The country is in deficit, funding cut backs are the only things in sight that will help us
Social Security, NEA, subsides, Medicare, Department of Education, the UN, where should we start?

Very few people internationally respect America anymore
We've never been popular. But who really cares? I'd rather be right and hated than wrong and loved.

Bush's office has broken the US right down the middle into liberals and conservatives... what do we want? A civil war?
I really don't care what political persuasion you are, nor do most people. They care about issues, not about you.

I'd rather be right and hated than wrong and loved.

That's beautiful. May I steal it from you?

Economic policies take about 10 years to affect the economy. That's what both my economics class and my government class taught me. Therefore, the current economic troubles cannot be blamed on Bush. So can you all please quit bringing that up as an argument? It's not true.So it's the economic troubles occuring 10 years from now that we should be blaming on Bush? Seriously, I do get your point. Though I presume that the policies do have some effect before the 10 year mark?
I also presume that policy is not the only thing that effects the economy significantly? Unfortunately, the one economic class I took wasn't very good.

I hope this thread doesn't drown in flames as I would expect.

Well to say that we've never been popular is being a little bit ign'ant, don't you think? We've been loved before, we've been ignored before... however, (and aided by the wonderful internet machine.) we've never been hated like this before!

Someone said the liberals won the first civil war. Wow. I will just leave it at wow, and you can figure it out yourself.

Discrediting Mr. Bush's win because of popular vs. electoral.... Well Lincoln lost the popular vote.

Economics takes 10 years to set in.... well I am not well informed on that subject, so of course I can't argue. But I still think Clinton rocks! Well, we all know the president really doesn't totally shift the economy anyways.

Yeah, it took millions of lives to stabilize Europe. And a couple of years, and a predicted world war, and the needless murder of millions of jews, and as far as europe was concerned, no oil fields.

Which brings me to my next point, one can't compare Iraq to Vietnam too much because there was no oil to "protect" in Vietnam.

Stop complaining about the gas prices. Oh no, $2.00 for a gallon of gas. (Or at leas that is the price where I am.) It was more than 7.00 Euros when I was in Austria, over a year ago. No doubt the price has gone up. Oh yeah, and that's for a liter of gas. There are 3.8 liters in a gallon. The price was about 1.20 euros/liter in Germany when I was there this last summer. Add in the exchange rate, (without doing the raw math) that is roughly almost $6.00/gallon. Keep in mind, this was in the setting of a smaller city. Get a more fuel efficient vehicle if you are really so concerned about the price of gas.

The war in Iraq sucks. I might end up going there. But if some pussies would quit whining about it... christ, I didn't enlist in the Marines because I don't want to fight for my country when called upon.

I would also like to criticize two groups of people. Everyone who says, "Well if you support the war, why don't you do something to help?" Some of those people do everything they can to help. Just because you don't see it doesn't mean it isn't being done, so please, don't make a jack-ass out of yourself. And to you who support the idea but hide behind the army who is fighting for you... and you don't do anything even though you could. F*ck off. (that isn't too many people though... but they've got to know they aren't appreciated. And again, I am against the war. I might end up being there, but that's my duty.)

By the way, I am pro-Kerry. Bush lost my benefit of the doubt during his campaign for presidency in 2k.

So it's the economic troubles occuring 10 years from now that we should be blaming on Bush? Seriously, I do get your point. Though I presume that the policies do have some effect before the 10 year mark?
I also presume that policy is not the only thing that effects the economy significantly? Unfortunately, the one economic class I took wasn't very good.

I hope this thread doesn't drown in flames as I would expect.

Yes, probably yes, and probably yes. That was one of the highlights of my economics class... Most of the rest of it was rather dull. ^^() The fact that another teacher in a different class said the same thing stuck out. I think the most exact time period is 8-20 years, depending on how the market's doing already. So positive changes can take forever to work against negative ones, and vice versa.

Me, too... But that seems to be the current trend for political threads. Maybe we should start a thread just for insulting people, and have everyone go there when they feel the need? :p

Yes, probably yes, and probably yes. That was one of the highlights of my economics class... Most of the rest of it was rather dull. ^^() The fact that another teacher in a different class said the same thing stuck out.My teacher didn't understand what elastic demand was. Fortunately I'm a fairly bookish learner.

I think the most exact time period is 8-20 years, depending on how the market's doing already. So positive changes can take forever to work against negative ones, and vice versa.Which means a president cannot be judged by the performance of the economy during his term. :-( Fortunately, I think most people understand the importance of long-term effects. Unfortunately, I don't think most people (myself included), know what the long-term effects of economic policies are.

Maybe we should start a thread just for insulting people, and have everyone go there when they feel the need? :pI'm torn: I think it's a bad idea, but I like it. I have a vague recollection of such a thread many months back, but I don't recall if the mods ultimately locked it.

Which means a president cannot be judged by the performance of the economy during his term. :-( Fortunately, I think most people understand the importance of long-term effects. Unfortunately, I don't think most people (myself included), know what the long-term effects of economic policies are.

Bingo. Which makes the "Bush sucks 'cause the economy's shot" argument untrue. I just wanted people to realize how stupid it was as an argument, especially since they couldn't back it up. I think they do, too, but we need to see the effects... We'll probabaly notice about 10 years from now, if the economy is better or worse, but I know there's economists out there who've charted all this stuff. The hard part is finding them.


I'm torn: I think it's a bad idea, but I like it. I have a vague recollection of such a thread many months back, but I don't recall if the mods ultimately locked it.

Well, I'd much prefer if the insults were left undirected at anyone in particular. In fact, they could even be anonymous, if we can have it set up like that... Seeing nameless posts of "You flaming pinko liberal screwball!" followed by "Stupid backwater gun-toting right-wing nutjobs!" would be very amusing. Especially if people could manage to pull it off without cursing! Well, without profanity. Having everyone trying to come up with more interesting, scientifically accurate descriptions of exactly when one can stick one's capitalist agenda could be fun. :D



What is it? "I'd rather be Right and hated than Left and loved"? No, wait, is it "What's Right is not always popular, and what's popular is not always Right"? Wait, no... ;) :p :D

I am willing to give Bush the benefit of a doubt. I am willing to believe that he is not phenomenally stupid or that he is not grotesquely evil.

How's that? :)

LOL see they only comment on stupid remarks or with stupid remarks - half of them are too busy jumping back and forth from Moore's website looking for a good answer. They lack the imagination to understand seperate points of view.

You have no clue, do you? I live with someone who's a wife of a soldier IN IRAQ. He (the soldier) is one of my best friends since high school. We don't watch the news on a regular basis for obvious reasons. I get my politics fix from the local newspaper. I kicked myself for taking her to F911 in the first place. We pretend life is normal while she's lucky if she gets a phone call a day from him. We don't talk about what could happen. We try not to deal with a reality that one shell might get a little TOO lucky.

Frankly, I've heard it from Bush. How Iraq is regaining stability rapidly. How our mission was accomplished. That friend just turned 24, and spent his birthday in a place where he gets shelled where the mission was accomplished. Where 2/3rds of the causalities come from the 'war being over'. Where day after day, I see the man who is largely responsible for sending him to war, and over a 1,000 no more different than he is, out to die.

And the reason he joined, you may ask? Money for them to start a family, a life together. Long before war was an issue, and our foreign policy was 'well, if they're not with us, they're against us', he wanted a better life for his family, and the job markets not the best here, so he went into the military.

And I wonder WHY...why did the war start? What was the justification? America under attack? Weapons of Mass Destruction? All of these seem to, by the day, cause anyone to lose faith while people suffer under a failing economy that was built up by a Democrat.

And they don't hold water anymore. There are no weapons of mass destruction, and Iraq seems not to be harboring too many more terrorists than what we supplied in history.

Yes, I'm a liberal. But I'm really a single vote issue on this. The war in Iraq had no justification except to try to justify why we are afraid, to try to flex our muscles, perhaps. I've tried to understand...but I've had ENOUGH. Bush gets no more tries, no more shadow of a doubts. And if that makes me 'unable to see another's position', then they might try having one sometime. Nice troll, by the way, I'm sure it gets you where you need to go in life.

Liberals can't think for themselves.
:rolleyes:

Liberals can't think for themselves.

Hmm...

Liberal...

Okay, what does that mean? It has something to do with "freedom", doesn't it? Something about giving people freedom to do what they think is right and make their own mistakes by, erm, thinking for themselves?

And your argument is?

"Don't flame me, because I'm right."

Ingenius.

We've never been popular.
Wrong. For a long time, especially in the two decades after WW2, the USA was widely seen as the shining light of liberty that it claims to be.

...and for pity's sake get your ideas of liberal right. KERRY IS RIGHT WING!! BUSH IS VERY RIGHT WING! That's your choice, so don't go mithering on about how you hate the liberal, because there aren't any running.

You don't have to be liberal to disagree to the war - you just have to recognise that we were lied to.

Dude, I can see how easy the topic is to understand but when you're dealing with people that believe all the lies from a Michael Moore film, you're just beating your head against the wall. Liberals can't think for themselves.

Neocons like you can't think for yourselves, either. I am a progressive (liberal), and I am quite in control of my facts.

Dude, I can see how easy the topic is to understand but when you're dealing with people that believe all the lies from a Michael Moore film, you're just beating your head against the wall. Liberals can't think for themselves.
Well you see know, that is your main problem.....liberals can think for themselves and they do it well enough and often enough to cause you Bush supporters (I can't say conservatives, because Bush isn't a conservative), nothing but agony.

We gave bush the benefit of the doubt when he got appointed president without regard for the consent of the governed.

We gave bush the benefit of the doubt when he said iraq had nuclear weapons.

We gave bush the benefit of the doubt when he said iraq had WMDs

We gave bush the benefit of the doubt when he said iraq was building nuclear weapons.

We gave bush the benefit of the doubt when he said iraq was building WMDs

We gave bush the benefit of the doubt when he said iraq was trying to build nuclear weapons.

We gave bush the benefit of the doubt when he said iraq was trying to build WMDs

We gave bush the benefit of the doubt when he said iraq was planning to build nuclear weapons

We gave bush the benefit of the doubt when he said iraq was planning to build WMDs.



The fact is that he is a liar and that his lies have cost more than 15,000 people their lives.

They dont get a second chance, neither do their families or their friends or loved ones.

Neither should bush.

Australia gave John Howard the benefit of the doubt! :p
John Howard PM of Australia, has never lied (in his mind)

Gas prices will rise. Kerry won't fix that. Unemployment ...good you got one. Defecit. We have been for many many years.

BZZZZZZZT!!!! WRONG!! Bill Clinton reversed the stupid economic policies of the Reagan and Bush Sr. administrations and created an enormous surplus.

BZZZZZZZT!!!! WRONG!! Bill Clinton reversed the stupid economic policies of the Reagan and Bush Sr. administrations and created an enormous surplus.
No he didn't. Bill Clinton, with his party in control of Congress, was headed for the same deficits as Bush Sr. and Reagan. It was only after Republicans got a stranglehold on Congress that the deficit started to go down, because he couldn't pass his programs (or not as large as he wanted them) anymore.

BZZZZZZZT!!!! WRONG!! Bill Clinton reversed the stupid economic policies of the Reagan and Bush Sr. administrations and created an enormous surplus.

No. Like I said before, economic policies take about 10 years to affect the economy. Therefore, the good economy in Clinton's time was from whoever was president about two terms before him, and the problems we have now are from Clinton's presidency. So... Wait a few more years and we'll see how the economy is then. Then you can bash Bush's economic decisions.

No he didn't. Bill Clinton, with his party in control of Congress, was headed for the same deficits as Bush Sr. and Reagan. It was only after Republicans got a stranglehold on Congress that the deficit started to go down, because he couldn't pass his programs (or not as large as he wanted them) anymore.
So its only safe when the opposing party rules the Presidents office?
So since Republicans rule congress its a better iudea to have a democrat in office?
Just another reason to vote Democrat :)

Whats with all the name calling anyway? Most people would cry if I yelled at them in real life lol. I don't see the point in cursing or calling people names online. It doesn't mean anything.

When you see someone ranting, pushing the party line and generally being provocative enough times, you stop trying to debate and you tell him to go away. That's where we're at with Jo.

So its only safe when the opposing party rules the Presidents office?
So since Republicans rule congress its a better iudea to have a democrat in office?
Just another reason to vote Democrat :)
Actually, most of the time its not safe even when the opposing party controlls the House, Senate, or Both. The Reagan years are a good example. That, in fact, even led to the opposite effect... Reagan compromised and didn't cut spending (as much as he would have) and Tip O'Neill gave him his tax cuts.

No. Like I said before, economic policies take about 10 years to affect the economy. Therefore, the good economy in Clinton's time was from whoever was president about two terms before him, and the problems we have now are from Clinton's presidency. So... Wait a few more years and we'll see how the economy is then. Then you can bash Bush's economic decisions.

That's overly simplistic. Yes, it may take 10 years for the entire economic cycle to turn over, for the full effect of policies to be felt. That does not mean that some policies don't have an immediate impact or that don't have a shorter incubation period than 10 years. There are effects that are more immediate though. For example, if Kerry is successful in retooling the healthcare system in America, immediate economic benefits would be felt, for the positive or the negative, depending on your view.

God, I hate oversimplifications.

About America being popular:

I know it's anecdotal, but I think it's a worthwhile story.

When American soldiers attacked Baghdad, many Iraqi soldiers layed down arms. They came up with their hands out and were instructed to lay down on the ground; they were told they would be kept safe and treated humanely.

But the Americans had no real grasp of Arabic, so the Iraqis had to communicate through other means. One, laying down on the ground, called to an American soldier and pointed towards his own mouth. The soldier, thinking he might be hungry, reached into his pocket and gave the man a piece of candy.

The Iraqi man didn't take it. He just kept pointing at his mouth. Finally, the soldier understood what he and so many other Iraqis had been asking for: cigarettes.

The soldiers tried to give them to as many Iraqis as they could, and the knowledge that the Americans really were kind probably inspired more Iraqis to lay down arms. But now, after the disasters in Abu Graib and elsewhere, surrendering doesn't seem like a viable option to many soldiers.

Meanwhile, in Iran, a massive youth population respectfully (and very, very slowly) pushing its leaders towards democracy has become filled with doubt. Some members, having seen the not so great part of America, wonder whether anti-American propaganda is true.


Is all this Bush's fault? Maybe not directly. But he certainly plays a part in it.

By all accounts, no one has given President Bush the benefit of the doubt. Poor intelligence maybe, but no one would disagree that Hussein was a proven threat. He had invaded Kuwait and used chemical weapons on his own citizens. He thumbed his nose at the U.N. for 6 years and who can remember how many U.N. resolutions. He showed the capacity to act in an aggressive manner and was known of being a torturous tyrant. Let's remember, Iraq is a central country in the Middle East. Throughout history, it has been a pivitol nation. President Bush realizes and has the resolve of knowing this and wishes to establish a stable westward friendly, democratized country in this region. The Islamic extremists have taken upon themselves to rid the world of Western influence by force. This must be answered in just the way the Preisdent is doing. The alternative? A weak, appologist, Kerry administration handing over U.S. sovereignty to the U.N. via France and Germnany. You should be thanking God that G.W. was around when he was or it might of ended up being worse than what we gor on 9/11. :sniper:

That's overly simplistic. Yes, it may take 10 years for the entire economic cycle to turn over, for the full effect of policies to be felt. That does not mean that some policies don't have an immediate impact or that don't have a shorter incubation period than 10 years. There are effects that are more immediate though. For example, if Kerry is successful in retooling the healthcare system in America, immediate economic benefits would be felt, for the positive or the negative, depending on your view.

God, I hate oversimplifications.

Terribly sorry. I'm not an economics major. I've just gotten sick of people pulling the same argument without checking their facts. Yes, it is oversimplistic, but it is also just a summary.

Terribly sorry. I'm not an economics major. I've just gotten sick of people pulling the same argument without checking their facts. Yes, it is oversimplistic, but it is also just a summary.

True, but when making a summary, don't simplify it to the extent that the thrust of the argument is perverted. You used an oversimplification to prove your point, when a more balanced summary would have done no such thing.

I'm not trying to call you out specifically, I'm merely trying to make sure that the information presented here is a bit more accurate.

True, but when making a summary, don't simplify it to the extent that the thrust of the argument is perverted. You used an oversimplification to prove your point, when a more balanced summary would have done no such thing.

I'm not trying to call you out specifically, I'm merely trying to make sure that the information presented here is a bit more accurate.

*nod* I'll try to remember that in the future.

*nod* I'll try to remember that in the future.

*extends his hand in respect*

*extends his hand in respect*

*does the Mel Gibson Conspiracy Theory shake* :D ;)

BZZZZZZZT!!!! WRONG!! Bill Clinton reversed the stupid economic policies of the Reagan and Bush Sr. administrations and created an enormous surplus.


So what your saying is that in 4 years we went from a surplus to 4 trillion dollars in debt? No we may have been catching up but we definatly did not have a surplus or even break even.

So what your saying is that in 4 years we went from a surplus to 4 trillion dollars in debt? No we may have been catching up but we definatly did not have a surplus or even break even.

You are confusing debt with deficit. Deficit is the yearly difference between income and expenses. Debt is the total amount we owe over time. The Clinton Administration left office with a yearly surplus. The Bush administration has run at an ever-increasing deficit each year. Clinton helped to start paying off our debt. Bush has added to it with record deficits for two (or is it three, I forget) years running.

So what your saying is that in 4 years we went from a surplus to 4 trillion dollars in debt? No we may have been catching up but we definatly did not have a surplus or even break even.
We did break even. We stopped getting more in debt.
This isd a example:
I make 100 dollars. I pay about 110 for living. In 10 years that is 100 in dent. If we lower our costs or raise my pay: I make $110.50. Now I make what we pay and a tiny bit more.
We are still in debt but we are not getting deeper. And hey eventually it might be payed off if we stay that way.
That was Clinton. Bush decided to lower revenue thus we got in debt deeper.
The surplus was actually a Social securtity surplus which explains why social security is so little funded right now.

To the second comment. The benefit of the doubt was evidence of wmd. The building and owndership. All of those are built into one. I still believe that at one point they had them. I mean comon if they didn't why wouldn't they let in the weapon inspectors.

Of course they had them. The States sold it to them, where did you think they got them?

Dude, I can see how easy the topic is to understand but when you're dealing with people that believe all the lies from a Michael Moore film, you're just beating your head against the wall. Liberals can't think for themselves.

Ya. Rush Limbaugh said so, so we know it's true. Anyone who isn't swayed by right wing dominance of corporate media clearly doesn't know how to incorporate new information into their body of knowledge. And since right leaning corporate intrests control all the information that's made available to the public there really isn't any excuse for failing to become a brainwashed conservative. I mean, sure, they've probably got college educations to equip them with the intellectual tools to debunk the ubiquitous conservative propoganda, but that doesn't help when balancing information isn't made available. Clearly liberal brains are just to feeble to accept conservative force-feeding.

My step mum goes to University and she told me that she was told that the money spent in Iraq is in the trillions, and is enough money to supply the world with fresh drinking water for the next eight years... Or at least the countries where most of the population can't get fresh water.

I realize that wars can be expensive (although they sometimes boost the economy too) and that maybe some of that money is doing some good, but look at the reports of how the soldiers don't have adaquate equipment! If the money isn't being spent on equipment... someone tell me what's wrong with this picture.

No he didn't. Bill Clinton, with his party in control of Congress, was headed for the same deficits as Bush Sr. and Reagan. It was only after Republicans got a stranglehold on Congress that the deficit started to go down, because he couldn't pass his programs (or not as large as he wanted them) anymore.

Isn't it funny how right-wingers are proud of Regan putting us in debt, Bush Sr sinking us in deeper, claiming it was the republican congress that got us out of debt )with a democratic president there as a coincidence) that started to get us out of debt, and now that repubs control all 3 branches of government and we're sinking into debt so fast that we're actually red-shifting they still claim it's only the repubs that can save us from this lousy mess we got into when the republicans...

Oh, right haven't they trotted out that old "Clinton deficit" yarn again? Another 4 years of this and it will be considered conspiracy theory to argue that the republican party did not invent the airplane.