NationStates Jolt Archive

Are you anti or pro Bush and give me reasoning why you are or aren't for Bush.

Anti-Bush

I disagree with his economic and foreign policies.

Pro-Bush.

I like his direction on national security, and tax cuts are good. Also, he's a hell of a lot better than Kerry.

And he makes hippies made. Whatever makes them made makes me happy. :D

Pro-Bush.
I agree with his policies.

Fairly indifferent, I voted for Bush, but that's mainly because I thought that Kerry was more likely to lead us down the road to a welfare state...

Pro Bush

I support him merely because he is a Republican, and us "reds" must stick together. lol
*but I do hate him for being Sharon's puppet

I am pro-Bush because Bush wants to put an end to the national disgrace of abortion, he wants to crush the sickening idea of gay marriage, gay civil unions, and gay adoption, he takes a strong stand against terror, he dislikes immoral contraception, he dislikes drugs, he supports lower taxes, he dislikes the corrupt UN, and he supports faith-based initiatives.

Pro-Bush based on the fact that he is better than Kerry and Gore put together, even though he has his faults.

I am pro-Bush because Bush wants to put an end to the national disgrace of abortion, he wants to crush the sickening idea of gay marriage, gay civil unions, and gay adoption, he takes a strong stand against terror, he dislikes immoral contraception, he dislikes drugs, he supports lower taxes, he dislikes the corrupt UN, and he supports faith-based initiatives.

Actually, you are incorrect on one of your assertions: (http://msnbc.msn.com/id/6338458)


“I don’t think we should deny people rights to a civil union, a legal arrangement, if that’s what a state chooses to do so,” Bush said in an interview aired Tuesday on ABC. Bush acknowledged that his position put him at odds with the Republican platform, which opposes civil unions.

“I view the definition of marriage different from legal arrangements that enable people to have rights,” said Bush, who has pressed for a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage. “States ought to be able to have the right to pass laws that enable people to be able to have rights like others.”


Bush is only against gay marriage.

And for someone who distrusts the UN, he sure seems to think it's resolutions are enough of a legal requirement to go to war.

I am pro-Bush because Bush wants to put an end to the national disgrace of abortion, he wants to crush the sickening idea of gay marriage, gay civil unions, and gay adoption, he takes a strong stand against terror, he dislikes immoral contraception, he dislikes drugs, he supports lower taxes, he dislikes the corrupt UN, and he supports faith-based initiatives.

Are you some sort of running joke that I have missed out on?

I am pro-Bush because Bush wants to put an end to the national disgrace of abortion, he wants to crush the sickening idea of gay marriage, gay civil unions, and gay adoption, he takes a strong stand against terror, he dislikes immoral contraception, he dislikes drugs, he supports lower taxes, he dislikes the corrupt UN, and he supports faith-based initiatives.

Here's a toast to Commando2! :)

Dubya is da man, foo'!
----Mr. T

I'm against people who encourage the spread of propaganda.

Anti-Bush or pro-Bush. Hmm, that is a tough one. Shaved has its advantages, but natural is nice....

Oh.

You mean the president.

Never mind.

Are you some sort of running joke that I have missed out on?

Well, it's not a terribly funny joke...

Are you some sort of running joke that I have missed out on?
I'm surprised you haven't noticed him kicking about yet.
Hard not to.

Anti-Bush or pro-Bush. Hmm, that is a tough one. Shaved has its advantages, but natural is nice....

Oh.

You mean the president.

Never mind.
Damn I was about to do a Kate Bush joke but you stole my punchline ;)

And for someone who distrusts the UN, he sure seems to think it's resolutions are enough of a legal requirement to go to war.

True, its called doing what you have to, to get what you want.

i would have to say Bush ambivalent. I voted Libertarian, because my state was certainly going for Bush, his economic policies leave a great deal to be desired but they beat hell out of euro style welfare statism, and his foreign relations are pathetic...But Kerry would have been worse. We need better choices than we have had the past two elections....

Anti-Bush. He's vehemently against states' rights (gay marriage amendment, No Child Left Behind), pro-terror (gets along great with President Putrid, Red China, etc.), is gradually building a police state, pro-UN (used the fact that Saddam violated UN resolutions as an excuse to get us into war, got us back in UNESCO, supports Law of the Sea Treaty, etc.), an ardent internationalist (has loaded his administration with CFR members, and supports FTAA, WTO, NAFTA, etc.), is a big supporter of foreign aid, is a counterfeit pro-lifer (gets along great with Spencer, Gonzalez), anti-conservative (refuses to support Ron Paul, Tom Tancredo, and other genuine conservative Republicans), etc.

Here's a toast to Commando2! :)

Holy shit, there's two of them. I didn't actually think people truly thought like this.

I am amazed that someone can work so hard to limit someone else. :(

Are you some sort of running joke that I have missed out on?
I consider him a joke, but I'm quite certain that he believes what he says. I tend to ignore him for reasons that I mentioned above.

I'm not terribly fond of Bush, but if he handled Iraq better I think I would like him more.

I am pro-Bush...he dislikes drugs...

That was not always the case.

I'm surprised you haven't noticed him kicking about yet.
Hard not to.
I seem to recall saying that to you a week ago.

I really don't care any more. I love this way that idiot republicans think he's in some way a better spokesman for their political stance than Reagan (which is just fucking ridiculous economically speaking), and also that America is better as a nation with Dubya in charge. But likewise I resent the insinuation that such a thick **** could rise to such an office. I believe he is but a puppet. A smart puppet, with altruism, but a puppet, nonetheless.

Holy shit, there's two of them. I didn't actually think people truly thought like this.

I am amazed that someone can work so hard to limit someone else. :(

I never said I agree with everything Commando2 said, but I agree with most of his social values, however idealistic they may be.

George W. Bush is not sane.
1. He declared war on an adjective.
2. He believes in "evil".
3. He would expend any amount to support his ideas, dispite his country going broke.

Anti-Bush.
And God had to put me in South Carolina.
*cries*

Can everyone tell me why you hate me so much? Is it one of my opinions or the way I present them? I am just really conservative usually I don't get booed for it at most forums I guess everyone here is uber-liberal.

I never said I agree with everything Commando2 said, but I agree with most of his social values, however idealistic they may be.

Talk about synchronicity...Bush and Hitler (Jugend) have the same values.

I never said I agree with everything Commando2 said, but I agree with most of his social values, however idealistic they may be.

Why do you care so much about the actions of other people? :confused:

George W. Bush is not sane.
1. He declared war on an adjective.
2. He believes in "evil".
3. He would expend any amount to support his ideas, dispite his country going broke.
1. Terrorism is a noun...
2. So does every sane person.
3. Nothing good comes cheap.

I seem to recall saying that to you a week ago.
Yeah.

Why do you care so much about the actions of other people? :confused:


Because it reflects on all of us as a society.

Can everyone tell me why you hate me so much? Is it one of my opinions or the way I present them? I am just really conservative usually I don't get booed for it at most forums I guess everyone here is uber-liberal.
I don't hate you! But then, ... I don't know you.

George W. Bush is not sane.
1. He declared war on an adjective.
2. He believes in "evil".
3. He would expend any amount to support his ideas, dispite his country going broke.
1. No, he declared war on terrorists. "War on Terror" is a catchphrase. Just like the war on poverty.
2. So?
3. And let me guess, you don't care when the government spends money on social programs?

Pro-Bush.

I like his direction on national security, and tax cuts are good. Also, he's a hell of a lot better than Kerry.

And he makes hippies made. Whatever makes them made makes me happy. :D


tax cuts are what makes us the nation with the most debt.
and hippies are awesome. i would like a president that makes the 50's warmongers mad, not the hippies

Why do you care so much about the actions of other people? :confused:

I dont like to see people get bashed for their opinions, especially when I somewhat agree with them. Everyone is the same, sticking up for like-minded people.

ya know, bush may not be seen as the best for foreign relations, but, I would rather have someone stable then someone who questions what our democracy stands for!!!

1. Terrorism is a noun...
2. So does every sane person.
3. Nothing good comes cheap.

1. An abstract idea.
2. Most people don't actually believe in "evil", they just invoke it when something happens that they don't understand.
3. Double Cheeseburgers at McDonalds

I am pro-Bush because Bush wants to put an end to the national disgrace of abortion, he wants to crush the sickening idea of gay marriage, gay civil unions, and gay adoption, he takes a strong stand against terror, he dislikes immoral contraception, he dislikes drugs, he supports lower taxes, he dislikes the corrupt UN, and he supports faith-based initiatives.


what's wrong with gay marraige or gay adoption? just because somebody has different sexual preferences than you, that makes them bad? and what proves that homosexuals make bad parents?
also, faith-based initiatives (if you're talking about church), is against the constitution (seperation of church and state?)

Because it reflects on all of us as a society.

Will God send our entire society to hell?

1. An abstract idea.
2. Most people don't actually believe in "evil", they just invoke it when something happens that they don't understand.
3. Double Cheeseburgers at McDonalds
1. Decapitation and suicide bombing seem fairly concrete.
2. I understand rape, slavery, and sadism fairly well.
3. One movie: Supersize Me

Can everyone tell me why you hate me so much? Is it one of my opinions or the way I present them? I am just really conservative usually I don't get booed for it at most forums I guess everyone here is uber-liberal.

No one hates you.

However, grown up, thinking adults, who are used to making their own moral and ethical choices don't take kindly to a cyber-nanny telling them what is right and wrong and how to live their lives.

Nothing wrong with conservative opinions (well..., actually there is, but you are entitled), but when you assume that you speak for god and can tell others what to do with their lives and advocate having the government determine their values...? Well, of course you are going to get flamed.

And rightly so.


You can be passionate without being patronizing.

I dont like to see people get bashed for their opinions, especially when I somewhat agree with them. Everyone is the same, sticking up for like-minded people.

I am not talking about your sticking up for Commando's opinions, I am asking why you would want to limit so many people from doing what they would want to do.

The good people of this world stick up for the different-minded people as well. Haven't you learned anything from Jesus?

3. And let me guess, you don't care when the government spends money on social programs?
You win the kewpie doll. A goverment spending money on social programs is necessary.

what's wrong with gay marraige or gay adoption?

How is a child supposed to grow up with an understanding of how a marriage should work between a man and a woman if his "parents" are both the same sex? I'm against gay marriage/adoption because of the effects on children, not because they are gay.

You win the kewpie doll. A goverment spending money on social programs is necessary.
No it isn't. UPS is a damn sight more efficient than the postal service.

Affordable tax cuts make sense. It made sense as an ideal when he took office with a surplus. His plans should have been scaled back when the recession hit and the need for wartime expenditures became evident. But he stuck with his initial numbers.

the result has been that he has increased the country's debt by over 30% in only four years since he took office, and somebody somewhere down the line is going to pay the price to balance the books. If you are lucky it won't be you, but don't count on it. Some future President is going to have to return sanity to the country's balance sheet at some point, and that will mean a significant tax hike that could have been avoided with a smaller tax cut during this Presidency.

what's wrong with gay marraige or gay adoption? just because somebody has different sexual preferences than you, that makes them bad? and what proves that homosexuals make bad parents?
also, faith-based initiatives (if you're talking about church), is against the constitution (seperation of church and state?)

Seperation of church and state doesn't exist read the constitution. And sodomites want to corrupt true marriage. I can understand their case for civil unions I guess, but gay marriage is way out of question. Government borrowed marriage from religion, and has the responsibility and honor to keep it pure, not encourage perversion. And a kid with homos for parents would likely be tormented at school unfortunatly as well as get a warped perception of real marriage and real love.

1. Decapitation and suicide bombing seem fairly concrete.
2. I understand rape, slavery, and sadism fairly well.
3. One movie: Supersize Me

1. Good luck fighting a war on that.
2. I doubt that you understand the motives of those people very well.
3. We have differing opinions on good. But I think we can all agree on this one: puppies.

I am asking why you would want to limit so many people from doing what they would want to do.

Any chance you could rephrase this? I either dont understand what you are asking or it is written with poor grammar.

1. Decapitation and suicide bombing seem fairly concrete.
2. I understand rape, slavery, and sadism fairly well.
3. One movie: Supersize Me
1. Wouldn't have happened if the U.S. hadn't intervened.
2. Even rapists, slavers and sadists can be forgiven by God.
3. You got me there...

I think that it's not that I'm pro-bush, but I'm pro-Kerry. I agree with him on many instances (Gay Marriage NOT being one) and you know what? Bush is the reason I converted to Islam^^

That was not always the case.
:D that one was funny
and i think people oppose commando2 because (i'm not sure which one) you have such rightwing views
just a guess

Because it reflects on all of us as a society.
So does discouraging people from being themselves.

I'm not saying that one side is right, but just consider that. The way you act reflects on society as much as the way everybody else acts. You just happen to have different values than those who oppose you. They don't want to force people to do things because they think it's immoral. You don't want people to do things because you think it's immoral.

You're just on opposite sides of the same coin.

I am pro-Bush because Bush wants to put an end to the national disgrace of abortion, he wants to crush the sickening idea of gay marriage, gay civil unions, and gay adoption, he takes a strong stand against terror, he dislikes immoral contraception, he dislikes drugs, he supports lower taxes, he dislikes the corrupt UN, and he supports faith-based initiatives.

Except abortions have risen sharply under Bush after six years of decline under Clinton. Bush supports gay civil unions and the right of gay couples of adopt children. I don't know where you get the assertion that Bush dislikes condoms and I'd like you to point to any statement that proves that effect. Everyone dislikes drugs in politics. He supports lower taxes for the rich, and that is not left-wing paristanship, it's truth. His tax cuts went overwhelmingly to the richest people in this country. I don't know how you go to "corrupt U.N.", but I'll just pass it over. And Democrats aren't the only group of people who disagree with some, not all, faith-based initiative programs that have been opposed - the Supreme Court does also.

Perhaps if you were a little bit more educated about Bush's positions, you would not be so quick to defend him.

1. http://www.covenantnews.com/abortion/archives/007478.html (Abortion)
2. http://www.post-gazette.com/columnists/20020410sally0410p5.asp (Gay Adoption)
3. www.cbpp.org/4-14-04tax-sum.htm (Tax Cuts)
4. aclu.org/ReligiousLiberty/...?ID=15078&c=37&MX=1144&H=1 (Faith Based Initiatives)

How is a child supposed to grow up with an understanding of how a marriage should work between a man and a woman if his "parents" are both the same sex? I'm against gay marriage/adoption because of the effects on children, not because they are gay.

And how are children supposed to "grow up with an understanding of how a marriage should work between a man and a woman" if they lose a parent in the war? Or if one of the parents is abusive? Or .... hell any of a hundred reasons why many hetro marriages sometimes don't work out.

Teaching children about love and respect between people goes far beyond the bounds of marriage, but many parents fail in that task. The idea that a gay couple couldn't be role models in what partnership, respect, affection mean is ludicrous. The mechanics of physical love, after all, is about the last lesson kids will learn about marriage. And by the time they learn that the far more important lessons will already have been taught.

Pro-Bush

I don't see how one can be anti- any American president, unless he has committed high crimes, which Bush has not committed. When Clinton lied under oath there weren't massive right-wing protesters that started an anti-Clinton movement. Disagreeing with ones views is one thing, but loathing and protesting an American President for his political actions is just disrespectful.

Pro-Bush

I don't see how one can be anti- any American president, unless he has committed high crimes, which Bush has not committed. When Clinton lied under oath there weren't massive right-wing protesters that started an anti-Clinton movement. Disagreeing with ones views is one thing, but loathing and protesting an American President for his political actions is just disrespectful.

You don;t really remember the Clinton years do you?

Talk about synchronicity...Bush and Hitler (Jugend) have the same values.
dude! thats hilarious

No it isn't. UPS is a damn sight more efficient than the postal service.
and UPS owned by the government would operate the same.

How is a child supposed to grow up with an understanding of how a marriage should work between a man and a woman if his "parents" are both the same sex? I'm against gay marriage/adoption because of the effects on children, not because they are gay.

Are you seriously using that as an argument?

If so, how do you reconcile all of those brought up in single parent households? My father left and moved to England when I was 3, but I'll be damned if I can't figure out a heterosexual marriage

[QUOTE=Rightleaningones]Pro-Bush

I don't see how one can be anti- any American president, unless he has committed high crimes, which Bush has not committed. When Clinton lied under oath there weren't massive right-wing protesters that started an anti-Clinton movement. Disagreeing with ones views is one thing, but loathing and protesting an American President for his political actions is just disrespectful.[/QUOTE
so now you're saying that just because i don't support bush that i'm anti-american?
that's low

Pro-Bush

I don't see how one can be anti- any American president, unless he has committed high crimes, which Bush has not committed. When Clinton lied under oath there weren't massive right-wing protesters that started an anti-Clinton movement. Disagreeing with ones views is one thing, but loathing and protesting an American President for his political actions is just disrespectful.
Well, if you consider initiating a war against another country to be a high crime...

and if we're not to judge him by his actions, then what?

How is a child supposed to grow up with an understanding of how a marriage should work between a man and a woman if his "parents" are both the same sex? I'm against gay marriage/adoption because of the effects on children, not because they are gay.

I am a man who is married to a woman that was born from and raised by her GAY mother and girlfriend. We have a child and our family functions the way any union of two loving people does. I've been reading this forum and some of the things that come up and mentioned have got me shaking my head wondering how this country is going to survive.

On a side note: Glaivenia, I really like your style.

Pro- Bush.

I generally tend to support the actions of the president- face it, you won't get jack shit done when you have people quarelling and calling a president the anti-chrsit. I supported Clinton. Supported Bush. Had Kerry been elected, I'd support his lousy ass, too. You can disagree with a president's policies and still support him.

This, I think, is the difference between the left and right wings. When the left doesn't agree with a leader, they throw hissy fits, protests, squabbles, websites about how the leader is the anti-christ. When the right doesn't agree with a leader, they say "ok," and try to compromise. They don't protest. They don't throw temper-tantrums when they don't their way.

Anti-Bush. I don't know where to start, so I'll just leave it at that. :rolleyes:

bushis a nazi whos long term goals includ the domination and the extinction of a people

bushis a nazi whos long term goals includ the domination and the extinction of a people
Which people?

And I am fascinated by your use of a new word, "Bushis".

bushis a nazi whos long term goals includ the domination and the extinction of a people

hopefully people like you

Pro- Bush.

I generally tend to support the actions of the president- face it, you won't get jack shit done when you have people quarelling and calling a president the anti-chrsit. I supported Clinton. Supported Bush. Had Kerry been elected, I'd support his lousy ass, too. You can disagree with a president's policies and still support him.

This, I think, is the difference between the left and right wings. When the left doesn't agree with a leader, they throw hissy fits, protests, squabbles, websites about how the leader is the anti-christ. When the right doesn't agree with a leader, they say "ok," and try to compromise. They don't protest. They don't throw temper-tantrums when they don't their way.

You don't really remember the Clinton years either do you?

There were plenty of protests over decisions he made during his term, especially after he tried to kill bin Laden, after the bombing of the factory in the Sudan, during Kosovo and Somalia, not to mention the Ken Starr witchhunt and Lewinski scandals.

He was deemed the anti-christ by Gingrich and the boys, and to this day there are plenty of Republicans who try to lay the blame for many things at his feet.


But nahhhh - you must be right. The political right would never do any of that.....

:rolleyes:

Pro-Bush, I like enough of his policies and stances to consider myself as pro-Bush.

All you Pro Bushers don't mis out!

Invest Everything you have in the Bush Economy!

Sell the house! Sell the Furniture! Max out those credit cards!

Put Everything in the stock market now and support your President!

You know that mental giant, our President is turning the economy around even as I speak!

Don't mis out and make Money Money Money!

If you don't your just a commie liberal pinko anti American Kerry supporter! :D

Anti-Bush or pro-Bush. Hmm, that is a tough one. Shaved has its advantages, but natural is nice....

Oh.

You mean the president.

Never mind.
Dammit, less staying on topic, more interesting offshoots. :p

Indifferent

He's a hell of a lot better than the alternative (Kerry)
I dislike his hardliner approach on abortion and stem cell research.
I think some of his personnel involved with National Security have mishandled it, but not a bad job overall.
I think his intentions going into Iraq were well-meant, but it is going to be very difficult to get out.
I agree with his economic policies.

No it isn't. UPS is a damn sight more efficient than the postal service.

More efficient costs more. What about poor people

I have opinions of my own -- strong opinions -- but I don't always agree with them. -George Bush

Seperation of church and state doesn't exist read the constitution. And sodomites want to corrupt true marriage. I can understand their case for civil unions I guess, but gay marriage is way out of question. Government borrowed marriage from religion, and has the responsibility and honor to keep it pure, not encourage perversion. And a kid with homos for parents would likely be tormented at school unfortunatly as well as get a warped perception of real marriage and real love.

1. It does, try reading the constitution before you post ludacris like that, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

2.What's your conservatives thing with being against gay marriage. God gave men the right of choice, one of th emost important things he could have given us. Not only that but it say's in the christian bible that we are not the ones who should be judging others, it's supposed to be left up to the big man upstairs. Yes it does say in the bible that gays wil go to hell, so what leave it up to God to punish them if he deems it necessary. Seriously other than it being against your religion for YOU to be gay, what gives you the right to take away anothers choice to be so.

3. Apparently someone doesn't know thier history. Marriage was around before religion, especially before christianity. The only thing the Church does about marriage is make it official in the eyes of the government, just like the state.

4. Yeah i'm not so sure i'd let a straight kid be adopted by a gay couple, that'd just be odd for the kid and he could have several problems. This is about the only thing i tend to agree with you on

Pro-Bush.

While I agree that most of Europe is permanent blue-state territory (Even Great Britain, even though Tony Blair is pro-US - how weird is it that he's a member of the labour party?), a recent poll in Poland reports like a 57% job approval rating for Bush there. Furthermore there's a lot of support for Bush's policies, and general pro-American sentiment in most of Eastern Europe.... areas that were under Soviet domination during the Cold War. In addition, the national community had its chance to deal with Saddam Hussein, and twelve years and 17 UN RESOLUTIONS later, he was still violating the original Gulf War Treaty. There has been a near-permanent exchange of fire between Saddam's anti-air guns and US planes for all that time. Something should have been done at the end of that war, and I personally blame Bush senior. I personally believe the corruption in the Oil for Food program exposes a great deal of corruption in the UN, and that serious reforms need to be made. As the UN is the only forum for the type of international cooperation that would make Europe happy, the US will continue to annoy the Europeans until some very serious reforms have been made within the UN. If the Europeans want to throw stones at me, let them. I remain a stanch US Nationalist.

Some will shout out, "You Nazi!" I'll refute that argument by stating that first of all, the only similarity between Republicans and Nazis is the aggresive foreign policy. The Nazi's had a social, government controlled economy. In fact the Nazis were all about government control. What does that mean, exactly? Well, they wanted gun control, total dependence of the populace on them for medical care, money, and anything else they could think of. Which of the two American parties does that sound like? Anyway, It's not that I don't like Liberals. I have a lot of respect for several people that are leftists. I just disagree with them on many levels. And it's not that I don't like being challenged on my opinions; I think you you should challenge your beliefs every day, to make sure you still think you're right, especially opinions of a political nature. What bothers the hell out of me, is people who will, for example, call me a Nazi, and when I give my argument, all they can repond with is calling me a Nazi again. Mindless political rhetoric pisses me off, especially if it's directed at me.

More efficient costs more. What about poor people

I have opinions of my own -- strong opinions -- but I don't always agree with them. -George Bush
What about them?

I'm pro Bush. I agree with his policies (for the most part), and he is a man I would personnally love to meet and shake hands with.

More efficient costs more. What about poor people

I have opinions of my own -- strong opinions -- but I don't always agree with them. -George Bush
1) More efficient doesn't always cost more, if you cut out wasted money in red tape et al.
2) Poor people can get jobs to pay for stuff like everyone else.
3) That quote was said by Dan Qualye, not by Bush.

Seperation of church and state doesn't exist read the constitution. And sodomites want to corrupt true marriage. I can understand their case for civil unions I guess, but gay marriage is way out of question. Government borrowed marriage from religion, and has the responsibility and honor to keep it pure, not encourage perversion. And a kid with homos for parents would likely be tormented at school unfortunatly as well as get a warped perception of real marriage and real love.

Actually you need to read the Constitution.

The establishment clause dictates that the goverment will be neutral with Religion.

Let us also add a comment by Madison himself.

"The number, the industry, and the morality of the Priesthood, & the devotion of the people have been manifestly increased by the total separation of the Chruch from the State"

As to gays:

If the institution of marriage will be destroyed by a few gays getting hitched then it doesn't deserve to exist.

Straights will continue to marry and have children and be the dominate form of marriage.

Civil unions is all that ask. It's the term marriage that evangalistas have a problem. It's rather simpleminded.

"Government borrowed marriage from religion, and has the responsibility and honor to keep it pure, not encourage perversion."

Goverment owes Relgion nothing with Marriage. In fact Religion owes the goverment since it gives tax breaks form married couples and for children.

"And a kid with homos for parents would likely be tormented at school unfortunatly as well as get a warped perception of real marriage and real love."

There are adopted kids all the time. They grow up just fine.

Sure they get harassed by people like you but that could happen anywhere.

How is a child supposed to grow up with an understanding of how a marriage should work between a man and a woman if his "parents" are both the same sex? I'm against gay marriage/adoption because of the effects on children, not because they are gay.
No, no, no. You got it all wrong. Children must be raised by gay parents.

However, boys must be raised by lesbians and girls must be raised by gays. It stands to reason. Boys will argue that mom likes girls and that mom also likes girls so obviously, he, as their child, must also like girls. The same goes for the girls (but in reverse, obviously).

It is really risky to a let a child be raised by straight parents. After all, one of them likes girls and the other one likes boys so which one is the child supposed to like? He (or she) would be terribly confused and then there's a 50% chance he'll grow up gay, instead of straight like he's supposed to.

also, faith-based initiatives (if you're talking about church), is against the constitution (seperation of church and state?)

The words "separation of church and state" are nowhere in the constitution...but 'faith-based initiatives' are very unconstitutional, yes.

Pro-Bush.

While I agree that most of Europe is permanent blue-state territory (Even Great Britain, even though Tony Blair is pro-US - how weird is it that he's a member of the labour party?), a recent poll in Poland reports like a 57% job approval rating for Bush there. Furthermore there's a lot of support for Bush's policies, and general pro-American sentiment in most of Eastern Europe.... areas that were under Soviet domination during the Cold War. In addition, the national community had its chance to deal with Saddam Hussein, and twelve years and 17 UN RESOLUTIONS later, he was still violating the original Gulf War Treaty. There has been a near-permanent exchange of fire between Saddam's anti-air guns and US planes for all that time. Something should have been done at the end of that war, and I personally blame Bush senior. I personally believe the corruption in the Oil for Food program exposes a great deal of corruption in the UN, and that serious reforms need to be made. As the UN is the only forum for the type of international cooperation that would make Europe happy, the US will continue to annoy the Europeans until some very serious reforms have been made within the UN. If the Europeans want to throw stones at me, let them. I remain a stanch US Nationalist.

Some will shout out, "You Nazi!" I'll refute that argument by stating that first of all, the only similarity between Republicans and Nazis is the aggresive foreign policy. The Nazi's had a social, government controlled economy. In fact the Nazis were all about government control. What does that mean, exactly? Well, they wanted gun control, total dependence of the populace on them for medical care, money, and anything else they could think of. Which of the two American parties does that sound like? Anyway, It's not that I don't like Liberals. I have a lot of respect for several people that are leftists. I just disagree with them on many levels. And it's not that I don't like being challenged on my opinions; I think you you should challenge your beliefs every day, to make sure you still think you're right, especially opinions of a political nature. What bothers the hell out of me, is people who will, for example, call me a Nazi, and when I give my argument, all they can repond with is calling me a Nazi again. Mindless political rhetoric pisses me off, especially if it's directed at me.

Very well said! :)

Affordable tax cuts make sense. It made sense as an ideal when he took office with a surplus. His plans should have been scaled back when the recession hit and the need for wartime expenditures became evident. But he stuck with his initial numbers.

the result has been that he has increased the country's debt by over 30% in only four years since he took office, and somebody somewhere down the line is going to pay the price to balance the books. If you are lucky it won't be you, but don't count on it. Some future President is going to have to return sanity to the country's balance sheet at some point, and that will mean a significant tax hike that could have been avoided with a smaller tax cut during this Presidency.

Zepp that Surplus was a Social Security Surplus. That is why we no longer have a surplus and according to Bush SS is in trouble: He gave it away to everyone even those that didn't deserve it.

The rich don't need SS because they can pay for stuff themselves I'm sure, but they got the check anyway due to Bush.

Rightleaningones
I don't see how one can be anti- any American president, unless he has committed high crimes, which Bush has not committed. When Clinton lied under oath there weren't massive right-wing protesters that started an anti-Clinton movement. Disagreeing with ones views is one thing, but loathing and protesting an American President for his political actions is just disrespectful.


Um, back when Clinton was president Republicans were doing the protesting and loathing. So you are being lying to blame the left only when the actions are done by both do.

Why is that republicans think Kerry would turn America into a Welfare state? I'll never understand that.

I'm anti-Bush due to his attitiude, his administration choices (he is responsible for his men and their actions), his policies, his mockery of english language, and stuff like that.

His Scare tactics are also up on the list. His War in Iraq but not Afganiatan are other reasons.

Ok I will upset 51% of the americans in this thread. :D

I am...
Anti-Bush out of his foreign policies and from what I hear of his economic policies and social issues within the USA. You have voted Bush and you may take the punishment for that. Just leave the world in peace, we don't need you anymore.
Pro United Nations because we need the world to progress
Pro European Union - we need unity to avoid the scare of USA and Russia
Pro Social programs - if you don't like it you can go to hell ;)
Pro-Choice Abortion (early) - better having legal ones than illegal ones done
Anti-Death Penalty - in the Bible it says You shall not kill...
Anti-War started on lies and deceptions - The US debt is rising...haha
Not against gay marriage or adoption - why should I. Let them live like us.

And I read and speak french by the way so I don't hate them either. ;)

Who am I? I'm a left-liberal babe from Sweden (most of us are like that)
You guys are welcome to stay in my country if you feel bad about Bush

I'm from england (hence the name) so i dont have the same irrational fear that most americans seem to of being pro-europe. in fact, like many left wing europeans, not only am i a socialist but i also believe in freedom, unlike many of you anti-choice (sorry, "pro-life) and anti-gay people from the "land of the brave and free". i find it extreamly surprising that anyone who's studied philosphy beyond sunday school level could actually take the bible seriously, but thats just my "godless socialist" side comming out.

anyway back to the issue. the main reason im against bush is that he seems to determine all of my own countries foriegn policy and "national security" policy, yet i, along with all the millions of iraqis and afghanistanis dont have any chance to vote against him. he also seems to be one of the biggest idiots in the public eye right now, not only for his amusing use of the english lanuage, but also for the fact that since the US economy is a joke, the majority of people around the world hate him, and he is constantly trying to curb civil liberties, i would say that he has failed in almost every aspect of his job description.

also, what have you guys got against "welfare"? in england if someone is unemployed they are helped to get a job, if they are sick they can get free medical care (although the way things are going all this will come to an end within a few years) and we still have enough disposable income to be the most obese and alcholic country in europe. socialism is not the oposite of freedom, socialism is neccessary to ensure true freedom for all members of society.

but then again im not one of the "brave" or the "free" so why should my opinions count

I'm from england (hence the name) so i dont have the same irrational fear that most americans seem to of being pro-europe. in fact, like many left wing europeans, not only am i a socialist but i also believe in freedom, unlike many of you anti-choice (sorry, "pro-life) and anti-gay people from the "land of the brave and free". i find it extreamly surprising that anyone who's studied philosphy beyond sunday school level could actually take the bible seriously, but thats just my "godless socialist" side comming out.

anyway back to the issue. the main reason im against bush is that he seems to determine all of my own countries foriegn policy and "national security" policy, yet i, along with all the millions of iraqis and afghanistanis dont have any chance to vote against him. he also seems to be one of the biggest idiots in the public eye right now, not only for his amusing use of the english lanuage, but also for the fact that since the US economy is a joke, the majority of people around the world hate him, and he is constantly trying to curb civil liberties, i would say that he has failed in almost every aspect of his job description.

also, what have you guys got against "welfare"? in england if someone is unemployed they are helped to get a job, if they are sick they can get free medical care (although the way things are going all this will come to an end within a few years) and we still have enough disposable income to be the most obese and alcholic country in europe. socialism is not the oposite of freedom, socialism is neccessary to ensure true freedom for all members of society.

but then again im not one of the "brave" or the "free" so why should my opinions count

Welfare is legalized theft. It takes money from people without their consent, and gives it to those who did nothing to earn it. Moreover, nowhere in the constitution does it authorize the government to do such things.

Welfare is legalized theft. It takes money from people without their consent, and gives it to those who did nothing to earn it. Moreover, nowhere in the constitution does it authorize the government to do such things.
Then your constitution sucks. We don't need that kind of crap in Europe. ;)
We are compassionate liberals, that's the only way to be. Jesus himself is one.

Then your constitution sucks. We don't need that kind of crap in Europe. ;)
We are compassionate liberals, that's the only way to be. Jesus himself is one.

However, I have no problem with local or state governments providing welfare.

I am antiBush. This is because I feel that homophobia is exactly like racism, you're discriminating against something someone can't change. Also, he is absent-mindedly declaring war on a tactic, which is simply folly. You can't have a war on Terrorism, because anywhere where people can't form an army, they'll resort to terrorism.

However, I have no problem with local or state governments providing welfare.
That's great.
As long as the welfare to those that really need it is more important than corporate welfare it's ok by my books. You know I get really scared sometimes by how people that are well off look upon less fortunate people. Not everyone is a winner and that can depend out of many reasons. Why not give them a chance to come back to normal? They shouldn't need to beg for help when they are down.

Neither.

I'm pro-Badnarik!!!

That's great.
As long as the welfare to those that really need it is more important than corporate welfare it's ok by my books. You know I get really scared sometimes by how people that are well off look upon less fortunate people. Not everyone is a winner and that can depend out of many reasons. Why not give them a chance to come back to normal? They shouldn't need to beg for help when they are down.

I oppose corporate welfare 100%. As for welfare, I don't support giving poor people money, but giving them food, clothing, etc. (as long as it's given by local or state governments) is all good.

I oppose corporate welfare 100%. As for welfare, I don't support giving poor people money, but giving them food, clothing, etc. (as long as it's given by local or state governments) is all good.
At least then they won't be hungry or cold while sleeping on their park bench.

I oppose corporate welfare 100%. As for welfare, I don't support giving poor people money, but giving them food, clothing, etc. (as long as it's given by local or state governments) is all good.
Well, drug addicts and alcoholics should not get money, they should get food, clothing, shelter and psycho therapy.

But other people can choose themselves what to do with their welfare cheques. At least where I live.

At least then they won't be hungry or cold while sleeping on their park bench.


yeah, what we really need are HOMELESS SHELTERS! WHAT A GOOD IDEA! oh wait.

I am pro-Bush because Bush wants to put an end to the national disgrace of abortion, he wants to crush the sickening idea of gay marriage, gay civil unions, and gay adoption, he takes a strong stand against terror, he dislikes immoral contraception, he dislikes drugs, he supports lower taxes, he dislikes the corrupt UN, and he supports faith-based initiatives.

Bush junior was a cocaine addict, not to mention a drunk.

Bush's his policies only further hatred against America.
Supporting Isreal and giving them weapons so they can kill civillians and lying about WMDs so he can invade resource rich countries.

What he could do to "fight" terrorism:

1) End his blind support of Isreal, and acknowledge that Isreal is the only one who can peacefully end the conflict between them and Palestien. The palestinian government has no real power to stop their citizens and that is because of Isreal turning them into puppets. It is a charade to blame the Palestinian government for what is going on.

2) Pull US military out of Iraq. Focus on Humanitarian aid and rebuilding the country with international support. Let Iraq write its own consitiution instead of the joke one the US has made for them which ALLOWS FOR 100% FOREIGN OWNERSHIP OF IRAQS RESOURCE SECTOR.

3) Apologize to the world for America's meddling in the affairs of other countries and lying so they can go to war.

4) Withdraw US forces from the >200 US army bases around the world.

He puts economy before environment and still succeeds in puting the US even more in debt.

Anti Bush. His economic policy is misguided and his foreign policy is imperialist. Hes curbing civil liberties in the name of freedom in america. How paradoxical is that? Hes against stem cell research abortion and gay marriage which is totally regressive. Also in both elections 2001 and 2004 voting was made exceptionally difficult for black voters on entirely fallacious grounds. He wants to drill for oil in antartica and in general his environmental policy is terrible which is baffling considering the accelerating problem of global warming. He is an outdated president and evolution should weed him out. Im sure that his type will one day be extinct.

Damn you conservative sheep get bent to hell when you realize that someone escaped your masters mind control dont you.
You treat anyone who disagrees with king georges policies like traitors. You label people "un-patriotic if they believe the patriot act is no more that a tool used by the right wing and the justice department to walk all over our civil rights. You simply swallow everything your told about how 75% of al-qaeda has been "captured or killed) and neglect the fact that they are more active than ever. You blindly believe that Iraq was the enemy while failing to notice that we never really did the job we set out to do in Afghanitstan (an oil-less country) You believe that Karl Rove is just an "advisor". You accept that our appointed president is "spreading freedom" to the people of Iraq, and ignore that tens of thousands of iraqis and over 1000 soldiers have died enjoying king georges brand of freedom. You believed the administrations promises of a stronger, safer America, all the while hiding the fact that our military is over extended, there are more terrorist now than there ever has been, and bush himself opened the worlds largest terrorist training camp in Iraq. Did Bush free the Iraqis when he sent troops to guard only the oil ministry, while neglecting the museums, the infrastructure that was left, the hospitals, and any other aspect of the Iraqis culture or social services? Was Paul Wolfowitz's dissertation on defending Israel he gave to the united jewish caucus, where he outlined Iraq as target #1 in regional control just a coincidence since he wrote it in February of 2000? Why do you have nothing but contempt for any American who questions your master? Questioning the decisions of ones elected officials is paramount to keeping them as honest aas you can reasonably expect a politition to be. No my fellow citizen it is not I who have the problem it is you. I maintain enough dis-trust in all elecstd (or selected) officials to do a little research into their motives. You on the other hand close your eyes and drift of to blissful ignorance at the soothing sounds of your owners. If you are in fact an individual who has studied the geo political motives of your right wing feuhrer, and are in fact a willing sherpa of their brand of leadership then while I still may think you are completely wrong, I must say that I do respect you because you are a man of conviction. I can disagree with your principles and believe you are misguided in your convictions, but I absolutely would respect that you have a mind of your own.


Things Republicans Believe;
Being a drug addict is a moral failing and a crime, unless you're a conservative radio host. Then it's an illness and you need our prayers for your recovery.

The United States should get out of the United Nations, and our highest national priority is enforcing U.N. resolutions against Iraq.

Government should relax regulation of Big Business and Big Money but crack down on individuals who use marijuana to relieve the pain of illness.

"Standing Tall for America" means firing your workers and moving their jobs to India.

A woman can't be trusted with decisions about her own body, but multi-national corporations can make decisions affecting all mankind without regulation.

Jesus loves you, and shares your hatred of homosexuals and Hillary Clinton.

The best way to improve military morale is to praise the troops in speeches while slashing veterans' benefits and combat pay.

Group sex and drug use are degenerate sins unless you someday run for governor of California as a Republican.

If condoms are kept out of schools, adolescents won't have sex.

A good way to fight terrorism is to belittle our long-time allies, then demand their cooperation and money.

HMOs and insurance companies have the interest of the public at heart.

Providing health care to all Iraqis is sound policy. Providing health care to all Americans is socialism.

Global warming and tobacco's link to cancer are junk science, but creationism should be taught in schools.

Saddam was a good guy when Reagan armed him, a bad guy when Bush's daddy made war on him, a good guy when Cheney did business with him and a bad guy when Bush needed a "we can't find Bin Laden" diversion.

A president lying about an extramarital affair is an impeachable offense. A president lying to enlist support for a war in which thousands die is solid defense policy.

Government should limit itself to the powers named in the Constitution, which include banning gay marriages and censoring the Internet.

The public has a right to know about Hillary's cattle trades, but George Bush's driving record is none of our business.

You support states' rights, which means Attorney General John Ashcroft can tell states what local voter initiatives they have a right to adopt.

What Bill Clinton did in the 1960s is of vital national interest, but what Bush did in the '80s is irrelevant.

Trade with Cuba is wrong because the country is communist, but trade with China and Vietnam is vital to a spirit of international harmony.

Things AmeriHate believes in :
Plagiarism


Edit : If you don't know what I'm talking about, the entire second half of his post was copied and pasted from somewhere else without credit being given.

And he makes hippies made. Whatever makes them made makes me happy. :D

what do you mean, hippies made? im partway hippie, and i hate bush.

Anti

He has done nothing right, you name it.

Anti-Bush. Most reasons have already been posted. I would really rather live somewhere else...someplace that isnt hated by most of the world.

I find it quite funny that the same people who wear WWJD bracelets think it's ok to ridicule homosexuals.

I'm not religious at all, but I'm pretty sure Jesus wouldn't act the way a lot of christians do when faced with the idea of homosexuality.

Anyway, I'm anti bush. This is for the following reasons.

I believe the environment is more important than the economy
I am against religious fundamentalism
I am pro abortion and pro homosexuality
I believe in high taxes, higher taxes for the wealthy, and good healthcare, eduation, policing and transport for everybody
It's more important to rehabilitate criminals than to punish them
People below the poverty line need to be helped
Too much money is spent on weapons
What the hell is wrong with rich people being taxed more, and money being given to people who actually need it?
Guns are bad
People should drive less, and money should be poured into public transport

I don't get this whole christian conservative thing. Jesus was a liberal lefty, it doesn't make any sense to me. If he was still alive, I'm positive he would frown upon bush.

I don't get this whole christian conservative thing. Jesus was a liberal lefty, it doesn't make any sense to me. If he was still alive, I'm positive he would frown upon bush.
Not in the American political sense. He would frown upon almost every government official, I think.

Originally posted by; Kwangistar:
Things AmeriHate believes in :
Plagiarism


Edit : If you don't know what I'm talking about, the entire second half of his post was copied and pasted from somewhere else without credit being given.

***************************************************

Yeah, it was, I don't intend to take credit for it. And to be honest, I don't think anyone knows who wrote it, I recieved it as the latest in a line of about a thousand e-mail forewards. I do find it interesting though that rather than argue the merits of the observations, you simply go for the "plagerism" tag. I assume you are a card carrying Bush supporting facist with no real opinions or arguments of your own? I guess I'll have to wait until Monday, after the Rush Limbaugh radio show to hear what "your" opinion is. Don't forget a pencil and paper so you can take good notes from El Rushbo about what "your" opinion should be. I'll be here when your ready ;)

Yeah, it was, I don't intend to take credit for it. And to be honest, I don't think anyone knows who wrote it, I recieved it as the latest in a line of about a thousand e-mail forewards. I do find it interesting though that rather than argue the merits of the observations, you simply go for the "plagerism" tag. I assume you are a card carrying Bush supporting facist with no real opinions or arguments of your own? I guess I'll have to wait until Monday, after the Rush Limbaugh radio show to hear what "your" opinion is. Don't forget a pencil and paper so you can take good notes from El Rushbo about what "your" opinion should be. I'll be here when your ready ;)
Real arguments like ad hominems?

Not in the American political sense. He would frown upon almost every government official, I think.

he was, i believe, a socialist, and a hippie.

if anyone lived "don't worry, be happy", it was jesus.

and what about "a camel will go through the eye of a needle before a rich man enters heaven" isn't clicking with Bush.

he was, i believe, a socialist, and a hippie.

if anyone lived "don't worry, be happy", it was jesus.

and what about "a camel will go through the eye of a needle before a rich man enters heaven" isn't clicking with Bush.
Just because he wouldn't be a Republican or Bush-Supporter dosen't mean that he would support the opposite. He didn't force people to follow his teachings - whereas socialists in government would forcibly (via taxes and programs) redistribute wealth.

Yeah, that is true, but this is just about being pro/anti bush, not his oppositions.

Just because he wouldn't be a Republican or Bush-Supporter dosen't mean that he would support the opposite. He didn't force people to follow his teachings - whereas socialists in government would forcibly (via taxes and programs) redistribute wealth.

On the other hand, Jesus never spoke agains tithing but in fact DID speak in support of it on several occasions, and his teachings certainly indicated a desire to redistribute wealth to the poor:

Matthew 23:23 Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law -- judgment, mercy, and faith; these you ought to have done, without leaving the other undone.

Luke 11:41 But rather give alms of such things as you have, and, behold, all things are clean to you.

Luke 11:42 But woe to you, Pharisees! For you tithe mint and rue and all manner of herbs, and pass over judgment and the love of God; these you ought to have done, without leaving the other undone.

So I'm not sure that he would have been so against social systems paid for from taxes as you seem to think.

On the other hand, Jesus never spoke agains tithing but in fact DID speak in support of it on several occasions, and his teachings certainly indicated a desire to redistribute wealth to the poor:

Matthew 23:23 Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law -- judgment, mercy, and faith; these you ought to have done, without leaving the other undone.

Luke 11:41 But rather give alms of such things as you have, and, behold, all things are clean to you.

Luke 11:42 But woe to you, Pharisees! For you tithe mint and rue and all manner of herbs, and pass over judgment and the love of God; these you ought to have done, without leaving the other undone.

So I'm not sure that he would have been so against social systems paid for from taxes as you seem to think.
He also spoke in favor of the 10 commandments. Does that mean he would have supported a system of government in which everyone is forced to worship YHVH? ("I am the Lord they God, thou shall not have strange gods before me")

I'm of the opinion that it is unwise to base politics on ancient religious ideas, and I'm not religious myself.

However, in this instance, I was making the point that christian conservative ideals probably vary greatly from the teachings of jesus, which seems strange to me.

It's a terrible thing to live by a set of ideals, and to claim them to be those of a major religious figure. This leads to believing your morals and ideas to be superior and absolute, and therefore not open for debate or consideration.

This is how wars start.

He also spoke in favor of the 10 commandments. Does that mean he would have supported a system of government in which everyone is forced to worship YHVH? ("I am the Lord they God, thou shall not have strange gods before me")


You yourself have already said that he did not try to force people to follow his teachings, so I would have to say no.

I'm just pointing out that your assertion that he was against taxes and redistribution of wealth is not borne out very well by his teachings. He never speaks out against tithing, and clearly asks people to help out those less fortunate than themselves on many occasions.

You yourself have already said that he did not try to force people to follow his teachings, so I would have to say no.

I'm just pointing out that your assertion that he was against taxes and redistribution of wealth is not borne out very well by his teachings. He never speaks out against tithing, and clearly asks people to help out those less fortunate than themselves on many occasions.

Ah, but if what he said is true- about Jesus being in favor of following the Ten Commandments- then Jesus is against redistrubution of wealth. "Thou shalt not steal?"

You yourself have already said that he did not try to force people to follow his teachings, so I would have to say no.

I'm just pointing out that your assertion that he was against taxes and redistribution of wealth is not borne out very well by his teachings. He never speaks out against tithing, and clearly asks people to help out those less fortunate than themselves on many occasions.
Ok, there was a misunderstanding then. I didn't meant to say that he was against the redistribution of wealth, but rather that he was against using taxes and government (where you have no choice but to "donate") as a vehicle to achieve that goal.

Stealing, charity and taxation are all different things.

Stealing, charity and taxation are all different things.

Agreed. And contrary to popular belief, welfare is not charity. Charity is voluntarily and generously helping those in need. Welfare is forcing people to help those in need, whether they deserve it or not.

I just realized, there is absolutely nothing that George Bush and I agree on. Well, maybe the importance of Baseball. I'm Anti-

Yes, that is also true. I'm of the opinion that it's good to help those in need, but that's just me. All i'm saying is it seems oxymoronic to claim to follow the teachings of jesus, and not feel compassion towards people in need, and want to help them, regardless of who they are are or what they've done.

What would jesus do?

Yes, that is also true. I'm of the opinion that it's good to help those in need, but that's just me. All i'm saying is it seems oxymoronic to claim to follow the teachings of jesus, and not feel compassion towards people in need, and want to help them, regardless of who they are are or what they've done.

What would jesus do?

I do feel compassion for those in need, and it is good to help them. I just don't think people should be forced to help if they don't want to.

We could only wish for that. There are way too many feeble-minded, religious-zealots who vote for the candidate who says "God" the most. We need God to create some sort of natural selection process to weed THOSE people out.

...He is an outdated president and evolution should weed him out. Im sure that his type will one day be extinct.

Yes, you make a good point. I guess it's just a difference in ideals, my ideal world would involve everybody being able to live out their lives in safety, with adequate food and water and whatnot, and I think it's more likely to be achieved through taxation and welfare schemes than by charity.

I am pro-Bush because ... he dislikes drugs, ...

yup, he hates them so much he wants to get rid of them all. Up his nose.

it's not fair, he spent years having fun on drugs, and now he's trying to stop others having that fun. Spoilsport.

I think it's less 'he hates drugs', more 'Karl Rove thinks Bush hating drugs will play better with Middle America'.

Pro

a)He has tried to lower our taxes, which were the highest in US history (either that or 2nd to FDR's) under Clinton (by %).

b)He didn't pussy-foot around when it came to fighting terrorism... took out a brutal dictator... in the process bringing democratic elections to Afghanistan and impending elections in Iraq. Perhaps most importantly, and this allows him to act decisively: he has shown resolve. Resolve is perhaps the most important quality in a leader.

c)While he spends more than I'd like (well... he and Congress spend it...) and I WISH we had a balanced budget, he has not forsaken our troops/global efforts for the sake of the budget. Now, he could cut spending elsewhere -- welfare, or bonuses for having children, tsk tsk -- to help balance the increase in military spending. He and Congress, I mean. There is always so much damn pork on Congressional bills, however, that a balanced budget may never come unless pork is curbed.

d)I think that in his heart, he is a good man. That is as important as anything. I could not say that about Clinton, whom I thought of as a sleazeball (great politician, of course).

arial :headbang: 112sfanti bush

somewhere in his head, bush is thinking 'daddy are you proud of me yet'

bush may look like he is trying to help them but he is really being selfish
so he can be known as a liberator

Pro-Bush good policies shows the world America has balls again.

Mostly, I disagree with Bush's actions and opinions. As for the subject of gay marriages and civil unions, I suppose I can see how, being a religious sacrament, marriages between gay couples would violate some of those beliefs, but for crying out loud, at least allow them civil unions. And as for gay couples raising children, there are drunk parents, parents who have gone to jail, single parents, druggie parents, abusive parents, lying, cheating parents all kinds of corrupt parents that cause all kinds of problems for their children. A gay couple who is upstanding would be a much better choice than a drunk father and an abusive mother. I have a lot more to say, but I have to run. I'll continue this later.

Yes, that is also true. I'm of the opinion that it's good to help those in need, but that's just me. All i'm saying is it seems oxymoronic to claim to follow the teachings of jesus, and not feel compassion towards people in need, and want to help them, regardless of who they are are or what they've done.

What would jesus do?

Taxation is not compassion towards the poor. It is another form of slavery. Being compassionate to the poor is one of the main principles of Christianity. If so called Christians do not give a percentage of their income to charity, they cannot be Christians.

Jesus would not support the welfare system we have today. He didn't want the poor to remain beggars, but he wanted all of us to live rich, full lives. He would want the poor to work, earn a living, and then give some of it back to Him. Karma! Not just receive a check every month. Sloth is sin.

On the other hand, Jesus never spoke agains tithing but in fact DID speak in support of it on several occasions, and his teachings certainly indicated a desire to redistribute wealth to the poor:

So I'm not sure that he would have been so against social systems paid for from taxes as you seem to think.

Oh Zepp! You really are the living end! You missed the point of those verses by a country mile.

Tithing is completely different from taxation. Tithing is from the heart, while taxation is from the sword. Jesus was talking about those with wealth to be generous to the poor (which many in this great country already are). If they are kind to the poor, God will remember them for their kindness and reward them. Also that those poor must be grateful and strive to work hard in their duties, then they will not be poor.

Jesus would not want taxes to pay for these programs as he would obviously be against funding these programs with blood money (aka taxes). He would want the well off to help the poor. Afterall taxes are a way to keep you poor in the first place.

I find it quite funny that the same people who wear WWJD bracelets think it's ok to ridicule homosexuals.

I'm not religious at all, but I'm pretty sure Jesus wouldn't act the way a lot of christians do when faced with the idea of homosexuality.

Anyway, I'm anti bush. This is for the following reasons.

I believe the environment is more important than the economy
I am against religious fundamentalism
I am pro abortion and pro homosexuality
I believe in high taxes, higher taxes for the wealthy, and good healthcare, eduation, policing and transport for everybody
It's more important to rehabilitate criminals than to punish them
People below the poverty line need to be helped
Too much money is spent on weapons
What the hell is wrong with rich people being taxed more, and money being given to people who actually need it?
Guns are bad
People should drive less, and money should be poured into public transport

I don't get this whole christian conservative thing. Jesus was a liberal lefty, it doesn't make any sense to me. If he was still alive, I'm positive he would frown upon bush.


You have an awful political stance. You are actually, in real terms, the following-

- A tree-hugger
- Intolerant
- Pro-genocide and pro-sodomide
- Pro-tyranny on taxes, but I agree with you on healthcare
- A traitor and a weakling
- I agree on the helping the poor
- Weak on national security


And Jesus was a liberal for the time, since he didn't fly with the pagan nonsense and he didn't worship the emperor (considering Jesus was God so why should he worship a mere human?). He wasn't a social liberal like you though.

YAY, NADER the greatest third party leader in the last two elections :p

I'm heavily anti-Bush.

His economic policies directly benefit me, but I find his social (ie intolerant) and foreign (ie suicidal/arrogant) policies to be repulsive and disgusting.

If forced to choose between my pocket or my morals, I have to go with my morals. So I can't say that I like him.

Now I don't want people to hate me because of what im stating, no wait, i take that back, hate me all you want, but Bush couldn't find his nose without someone pointing it out for him, and that may not even be enough to help him find it. :headbang:
Anti-Bush!! :)

Yep and he would need detailed instructions, spoken slowly and using small words to know he was even supposed to be looking for his nose. :)
:gundge:

Actually id just grabbed his hand, slap it on his nose, tape it there and say nose very slowly and loudly.
:D

Three Cheers For King Bush, And World Domination!!!

YAY, NADER the greatest third party leader in the last two elections :p I'm a Democrat, but I supported Nader to an extent in this election. He got something DONE that actually saved many lives, including mine. Thank you.

I am pro-Bush. I dont know why people insult Bushs intelluct just because he talks funny. He has a texan accent. Another reason you should not insult Bush's intelluct he went to some of the top colleges in the country. Now I dont mind the jokes, but some people are serious. I am pro-captialism. I do not believe in big government and restricted buisiness rights like democraits seem to do. I like small government and a extende miltary force. We need to be constantly ahead in military tech or we will not be so strong anymore. I also believ in tax relief on small buisiness. These small companies provide jobs for the not so rich. My dad has a small buisiness and thanks to bush's tax relief he was able to give more jobs to people.

Pro-Bush.

I like his direction on national security, and tax cuts are good. Also, he's a hell of a lot better than Kerry.

And he makes hippies made. Whatever makes them made makes me happy. :D

That made me made man!

HAHAHAH! Dumb ass

I'm anti-Bush

Hey croyodon, you spelled intellect wrong! Anyway, I don't think that because of of his TEXAN ACCENT, I think it because it's true. You shouldn't be talking about intellect when you can't spell it (JOKE)! :eek:

Perhaps King Georges "funny" way of talking is just "strategery" (strategy) aimed at lulling his "opposites" (opposition) into a false sense of security. And he wants OB-GYN's to be able to "...Practice their love with women across the country." And after all
"Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we." —George W. Bush, Washington, D.C., Aug. 5, 2004
http://politicalhumor.about.com/od/bushvideos/v/bushismvideo.htm

I hear alot about how Bush is "Plain spoken" and "Down to Earth"
Since when is having the mentality and vocabulary of a fourth grader a GOOD quality to have as the President of the United States?

You have an awful political stance. You are actually, in real terms, the following-

- A tree-hugger
Ooh, so what's so bad about that? Also, try not to use slander.
- Intolerant
Right back at ya, so he's no worse off than you.
- Pro-genocide and pro-sodomide
Oh, Goddess above, do you ever listen to dictionary definitions? It's not a genocide. About the sodomite thing, look above. :)
- A traitor and a weakling
That's just an outright insult.

Who are you to say your political stance is any better?

I am pro-Bush.... I do not believe in big government...

Erm, if you are against big government then why the hell are you for Bush? He's made the biggest expansion of goverment since the 40s.

He would want the poor to work, earn a living, and then give some of it back to Him. Karma! Not just receive a check every month. Sloth is sin.

Why do conservatives have the impression that a welfare state simply pays for those who cant be bothered to work. Those in countries operating benefit sytems are not stupid. The unemployed are only subsidised when between jobs, they have to have payed taxes for a certain number of years before earning the right to a piece of the pie. Sloth may be sin but parents still have to be able to feed their children if they're layed off. Would you suggest we let the poor starve?

Pro-Bush.
I generally agree with his approach to national security (although I am somewhat skeptical about the possibility of spreading liberty to some cultures and thus do not necessarily share some of his idealism). I totally support his tax cuts and plans to start privatization of Social Security and only don't like that he does not go far enough. I generally share his value and really admire his willingness to stand for them and be mocked.
I totally disagree with his governing philosophy, i.e. that government is there to help people. I believe that signing either No Child Left Behid Act or McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform fully constitutes sufficient ground for impeachment (although by my standards FDR should have been sent to electric chair in 1933 for usurpation of power). Medicare "reform" is an abomination. And Bush's refusal to guard US borders is unexcusable (so is continuing employment of Norm Mineta as Secretary of Transportation).
But considering that Bush was the only major party candidate constitutionally eligible to serve as president (XIV Amendment prohibits Kerry from serving because of his Vietnam era activities), the choice was really a no-brainer.

Anti-Bush :mad:
He's lost millions of jobs, put the nation in to trillions of dollars of debt with his war, his inauguration alone cost $40 000 000 and he is taxing the citizens of Washington D.C. at least $35 000 000 in order to pay for it, the situation in Iraq is not improving, more and more American troops are dying, need I go on?

Pro-Bush

Being a true Canadian, i will go for Bush, Kerry was an isolationist, and that would've effected the economy of Canada and the relations between the Country :D

[QUOTE=Schwulavia]Anti-Bush :mad:
...his inauguration alone cost $40 000 000..QUOTE]

But wasn't it a lovely event, apparantly your country has a 'calling from beyond the stars', isnt that nice, even the aliens support Bush. Surely this is Bush's latest attempt to get the public behind him on Iraq now that his own investigators concluded Suddam never had any, or perhaps ... he's just doing what the voices told him to do...

You have an awful political stance. You are actually, in real terms, the following-

- A tree-hugger
- Intolerant
- Pro-genocide and pro-sodomide
- Pro-tyranny on taxes, but I agree with you on healthcare
- A traitor and a weakling
- I agree on the helping the poor
- Weak on national security



Hehe, ok then. Calling me a tree hugger, that's not really a big deal, I'm not a tree hugger or anything, but the environment does matter, a lot.

You say I'm intolerant, so just to clarify, when I say I'm against religious fundamentalism I mean I'm not a big fan of people who are entirely set in their ways, and do not open their ideas to discussion, proclaiming them to be infallible and absolute. I do not think this way of my opinions.

Pro tyrrany on taxes, I don't know, I guess you could call it that, but that's just my stance, and I appreciate a lot of people don't agree with me.

A traitor and a weakling. Not sure what this is all about. I don't feel any allegiance to my country, if that counts me as a traitor. And I think a lot of criminals could be helped through education, welfare and rehabiliation, if that makes me a weakling.

Pro genocide and pro sodomite. I'm clearly not pro genocide, that's just ridiculous. And sodomy? Who cares? What two consenting adults do in their bedroom is none of my business.

Weak on national security. Yeah, probably. But you know, plenty of countries do just fine without shadowing the rest of the world in fear.

Sorry, I'm not trying to be argumentative or provocative, just thought I'd clear my stance up a bit.

Cheers to Neo Anarchists as well, much appreciated.

Kaykami im sorry for not proof reading my post. I hate the U.N. It is now just a bunch of money sucking monsters. As that one kid said their corrupt(oil and food program).The U.N. is also in debt. They will need more funds to fix this.Gues who the majority of it comes from the US. Adding to our debt. I do believe in a international alliance just not the U.N.

[QUOTE=Schwulavia]Anti-Bush :mad:
...his inauguration alone cost $40 000 000..QUOTE]

But wasn't it a lovely event, apparantly your country has a 'calling from beyond the stars', isnt that nice, even the aliens support Bush. Surely this is Bush's latest attempt to get the public behind him on Iraq now that his own investigators concluded Suddam never had any, or perhaps ... he's just doing what the voices told him to do...

Do you mean the voices that are coming from that mysterious box-shaped thing on his back?