NationStates Jolt Archive

I haven't seen very many threads like this, and it's pretty self-explanatory.

~Czardas, Supreme Ruler of the Universe

"Pretty Self Explanatory"

... so is any answer anyone gives from this point on. What's your point?

He has been doing an awful job. And i'm not even a liberal!

... so is any answer anyone gives from this point on. What's your point?I'm trying to find out what everyone's opinion of George W. Bush is, duh! :rolleyes:

~Czardas, Supreme Ruler of the Universe

Bush has been taking this country in the wrong direction from day one. Here's a partial list of things he's done that I don't agree with.

1 Eroding the separation between church and state through "faith based initiatives" and by legislating his religious point of view with a ban on federal funding for stem cell research and for non-abstinance based AIDS programs

2 Cutting taxes on the very rich while spending more and more money and putting the nation deep into debt

3 Pointless war in Iraq

4 Alienating our allies

5 Weakening environmental protections

6 Maintaining close relations with repressive and terrorist-sponsoring regimes like Saudi Arabia

The only thing he did right was invading Afghanistan. Then he moved personel and resources out of Afghanistan so he could attack Iraq, so he eventually managed to screw the pooch on the Afghanistan issue too.

Bush is irrelavent.
You could replace him with a monkey and the "advisors" could spin him into acceptability and the same decisions would be made.

May he rot in hell.

I don't think he is stupid, just ignorant, arrogant, belligerent and one of the worst human beings on the face of the planet. Why hasn't he been assassinated yet?

He started an illegal, pointless war on Iraq which was really a grab for oil, territory, regional control and a religious crusade.

I can't really say anything about his domestic policies because I don't live in America, but I understand he's been upping taxes? Never popular.

Well he sure has fostered an entire hotbead of intense hate here in the UK, which is alienation, so he can't be doing a good job.

Anyway, may he rott in hell and his entire family be sterilised.

Bush is irrelavent.
You could replace him with a monkey and the "advisors" could spin him into acceptability and the same decisions would be made.

I could plug myself to a power socket, and thus uncontrollably smash my head repeatly on my keyboard in spasm and come up with more intelligent quotes than he ever did. :p

That would be funny if he shared a cell with saddam hussein..ha

the title reads: "How do you think George W. Bush is doing his job?"


i figured something along the lines of "with fingerpuppets and vodka" but what do i know? ;)

I could plug myself to a power socket, and thus smash my head repeatly on my keyboard in spasm and come up with more intelligent quotes than he ever did. :p
Exactly my point.
Leaders of major countries are selected by their parties because they're electable not worthy.
Bush doesn't have to be clever, in fact he apeals to a lot of people 'cos he comes across as stupid as they are.
All he has to do is do as he's told and take the flak if it all goes wrong.
What's sad is that we put up with it.

Exactly my point.
Leaders of major countries are selected by their parties because they're electable not worthy.
Bush doesn't have to be clever, in fact he apeals to a lot of people 'cos he comes across as stupid as they are.
All he has to do is do as he's told and take the flak if it all goes wrong.
What's sad is that we put up with it.

http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/graphics/bush_debate_poland.jpg

Here we go again...

I disagree with most of his policies. "No Child Left Behind," the idea of allowing vouchers for private education, social security reform, and the (perhaps only lip-service) support for hydrogen fuel-cell technology are the only aspects of Bush's policy agenda that I can throw at least a little support behind.

I'm trying to find out what everyone's opinion of George W. Bush is, duh! :rolleyes:

~Czardas, Supreme Ruler of the Universe

Surely the supreme ruler doesn't need to question his subjects to know what they think?

What I meant, by the way, was that unless you want a topic full of people screaming that they're the only ones that are right (which may be what you're after; who am I to question?), you might at least recommend that people express some sort of backing to their point as opposed to "Bush. Go loose".

*Shrug*

Whatever. You elected him; In criticising him, I would have to criticise those accountable for his election.

Surely the supreme ruler doesn't need to question his subjects to know what they think?Note that I sign my posts Czardas, Supreme Ruler of the Universe, not Big Brother, Supreme Ruler of the Universe... :rolleyes:

~Guess who, the guess-what of guess-where

Dubya is a crapbucket. and if i actually say what else i want to say, i might just wind up getting myself killed.

This thread was only started to bash Bush, don't even think that isn't your goal, Czardas, I've seen you bash him in several other posts. This thread should be shut down before it gets out of hand, no good will come of it.

1 Eroding the separation between church and state through "faith based initiatives" and by legislating his religious point of view with a ban on federal funding for stem cell research and for non-abstinance based AIDS programs

2 Cutting taxes on the very rich while spending more and more money and putting the nation deep into debt

3 Pointless war in Iraq

4 Alienating our allies

5 Weakening environmental protections

6 Maintaining close relations with repressive and terrorist-sponsoring regimes like Saudi Arabia

The only thing he did right was invading Afghanistan. Then he moved personel and resources out of Afghanistan so he could attack Iraq, so he eventually managed to screw the pooch on the Afghanistan issue too.
I agree, Drunk Commies, with the possible exception of #3. I think that the US should put about 100,000 more troops in Afghanistan and should probably also invade Sudan and exterminate the Janjaweed.

I would also like to add that I am extremely pissed about Guantanamo Bay and Abu Ghraib.

A good point though is that Bush has highlighted the problems of the UN.

We are the fundi-Xian taliban...you will be assimulated....resistance is fultile.

No offence to the moderate Christians.

Dubya is a crapbucket. and if i actually say what else i want to say, i might just wind up getting myself killed.


Why? You must not live in the US.

I disagree with every one of his policies I have ever heard of, but I don't really care, because I tend to believe that the government will always suck, and therefore it's nothing new to me.

This thread was only started to bash Bush, don't even think that isn't your goal, Czardas, I've seen you bash him in several other posts. This thread should be shut down before it gets out of hand, no good will come of it.I know this kind of topic will lead to flaming, trolling, and lots of other illegal things.

Remember though, this is a poll. A referendum if you will. I am conducting it in order to determine officially what NSers' opinion on Bush is. It is not a debate about the President of the United States. If I wanted to bash Bush, my options would have been more like

1- No
2- Not really
3- Certainly not
4- Definitely not
5- Probably not
...you get the picture.

~Czardas, Supreme Ruler of the Universe

May he rot in hell.

I don't think he is stupid, just ignorant, arrogant, belligerent and one of the worst human beings on the face of the planet. Why hasn't he been assassinated yet?


Because most of us like him. And we dont need to kill a president in the US if he isnt doing a good job. We can vote him out next time. Or, if the situation warrants, we can have him impeached.
Maybe its different in whatever backward hole you're used to.

Fitting to my status as an Olde Yuropian, i don't like Bush very much at all. However, i think the worst is over. :p

Not great but not shit.

I can't really say anything <snip> because I don't live in America,


Here is where you should have stopped before the hell and sterilization bits.
The rest sounded ignorant and bitter.

May he rot in hell.

I don't think he is stupid, just ignorant, arrogant, belligerent and one of the worst human beings on the face of the planet. Why hasn't he been assassinated yet?


Because the Americans who know how to shoot voted for him.

Because most of us like him. And we dont need to kill a president in the US if he isnt doing a good job. We can vote him out next time. Or, if the situation warrants, we can have him impeached.
Maybe its different in whatever backward hole you're used to.

Most I thought his approval rating was pretty low. Not to mention the whole not winning the popular vote the first time around thing. Killing him would end his reign of terror early, but no it's not necessary we can wait it out, I guess...

Most I thought his approval rating was pretty low. Not to mention the whole not winning the popular vote the first time around thing. Killing him would end his reign of terror early, but no it's not necessary we can wait it out, I guess...

1. The Constitution doesn't say anything about the popular vote.
2. The second time around, more people voted for him than ever voted for Bill Clinton - and people say that Clinton was popular.
3. Approval ratings go up and down. We've got a few more years.

Because the Americans who know how to shoot voted for him.
Perhaps you can help me in my campaign to arm liberal Americans! ;) :D

just one more thread to add into the mega big bash bush thread. Big whoop the forum doesn't like W. When something new comes up, someone come get me.

Also, just one thing.....Iraq wasn't illegal. Get informed.

Because the Americans who know how to shoot voted for him.
I didn't, but then I prefer pistols, and secret service guys shoot back. If I was a sniper mabe I could get away with it.

Overall he is awful, but I agree with him on one issue only. Social security.

Perhaps you can help me in my campaign to arm liberal Americans! ;) :D

With a few exceptions, most Democrats are actually fearful of weapons. Hoplophobia - which is a real disease.

I've seen someone have a panic attack when visiting my home, just because they saw a rifle in a Tuflok quick relase rifle rack.

Actually hyperventilated and passed out.

With a few exceptions, most Democrats are actually fearful of weapons. Hoplophobia - which is a real disease.

Most of them? Where do you get that idea from?

I didn't, but then I prefer pistols, and secret service guys shoot back. If I was a sniper mabe I could get away with it.


You would have enjoyed the response I saw a couple of weeks ago at the White House. We were in the back, where the iron fence is much closer to the building. My friend stands on the base of the fence and puts his camera above and beyond the fence to snap a picture. With that, a DC policeman on a bicycle pulls up to us on the one side to tell him he cant pass the fence and two camoflaged soldiers with machine guns and dogs responded 5 seconds later on the inside of the fence. I'm not sure where they came from because I hadnt seen them earlier and we were at that spot for 15 minutes.

Most of them? Where do you get that idea from?I'm not afraid of weapons...



...but then I'm not a Democrat, I'm a Social Libertarian Expansionist.

~Czardas, Supreme Ruler of the Universe

Most of them? Where do you get that idea from?

Tell you what.

We can go down to Blue Ridge Arsenal (a local shooting range popular with law enforcement and other people who really like to shoot).

Starting at 9 AM when they open, and ending at 9 PM when they close, we can ask whether people are Democrat, Republican, or don't care.

I can already tell you that it's 94 percent Republican on a Saturday when over 500 people came in - and that in a voting jurisdiction that went largely for Kerry.

I've seen similar informal polls at other ranges in Virginia and Maryland.

I can't really say anything about his domestic policies because I don't live in America, but I understand he's been upping taxes? Never popular.
No, he's been cutting taxes.

To the very wealthy, that is. He gave everyone a tax rebate in 2001 (I believe). The minimum was $300. Nice pocket change to distract from the fact that corporate fat cats received millions and millions back. And then, with the government taking in virtually no money, he increases spending, especially on the military. He's sub-mediocre on the foreign policy, but on domestic issues he's a disaster.

Most I thought his approval rating was pretty low. Not to mention the whole not winning the popular vote the first time around thing. Killing him would end his reign of terror early, but no it's not necessary we can wait it out, I guess...


Approval ratings amongst whom? Polls are generally bullshit and are manipulated to serve a purpose. If you polled me and my circle of friends and family, his approval rating would be fairly high. Have you ever been polled? Have you ever dealt with a person taking a poll?

"killing him" and "reign of terror" are just so moronic I cant comment.

No, he's been cutting taxes.

To the very wealthy, that is. He gave everyone a tax rebate in 2001 (I believe). The minimum was $300. Nice pocket change to distract from the fact that corporate fat cats received millions and millions back. And then, with the government taking in virtually no money, he increases spending, especially on the military. He's sub-mediocre on the foreign policy, but on domestic issues he's a disaster.
He cut income taxes for the lower brackets more than for the upper brackets.

Tell you what.

We can go down to Blue Ridge Arsenal (a local shooting range popular with law enforcement and other people who really like to shoot).

Starting at 9 AM when they open, and ending at 9 PM when they close, we can ask whether people are Democrat, Republican, or don't care.

I can already tell you that it's 94 percent Republican on a Saturday when over 500 people came in - and that in a voting jurisdiction that went largely for Kerry.

I've seen similar informal polls at other ranges in Virginia and Maryland.
That shows that most gun enthusiasts are Republicans. It doesn't particularly show that Democrats *fear* guns. It's possible to be somewhere in between fearing weapons and enthusiastically collecting and shooting them.

Bush has been taking this country in the wrong direction from day one. Here's a partial list of things he's done that I don't agree with.

1 Eroding the separation between church and state through "faith based initiatives" and by legislating his religious point of view with a ban on federal funding for stem cell research and for non-abstinance based AIDS programs

2 Cutting taxes on the very rich while spending more and more money and putting the nation deep into debt

3 Pointless war in Iraq

4 Alienating our allies

5 Weakening environmental protections

6 Maintaining close relations with repressive and terrorist-sponsoring regimes like Saudi Arabia

The only thing he did right was invading Afghanistan. Then he moved personel and resources out of Afghanistan so he could attack Iraq, so he eventually managed to screw the pooch on the Afghanistan issue too.

2: He's cut taxes for everyone. Don't forget that the rich still pay a higher percentage of their income than any other group. Cutting taxes for people frees up additional assets that we can infuse into businesses (by buying more products, investing more, starting new businesses, etc.)... which cannot hurt the economy. As long as that money is spent or invested, tax cuts are good.

3: Pointless? Giving freedom to oppressed people is not pointless.

4: They're just pissed off that we have a president who acts instead of simply voicing his concerns. The UN wasn't going to do anything to Saddam, which would have been ridiculous, so we did. Also, there's a bit of jealousy in that...

6: Like every president before him since the mass-production of the automobile (or at least since we became dependent on Middle Eastern oil). We could drill in Alaska and become independent of the Middle East, but some of you don't want that. (neither do I, unless we could guarantee that it would be safe for the environment)

He cut income taxes for the lower brackets more than for the upper brackets.Yes, those were the income tax rates. But the tax returns were different.

Poor people would lose 21 cents out of every dollar under Bush's new tax system, while rich people would lose only 8 cents. AKA, the reverse progressive tax: rich people pay less and get more back.

~Czardas, Supreme Ruler of the Universe

That shows that most gun enthusiasts are Republicans. It doesn't particularly show that Democrats *fear* guns. It's possible to be somewhere in between fearing weapons and enthusiastically collecting and shooting them.

What it does show is that they don't own them and don't shoot them.

It's not something you can casually pick up and suddenly become good at.

Bush has been taking this country in the wrong direction from day one. Here's a partial list of things he's done that I don't agree with.

1 Eroding the separation between church and state through "faith based initiatives" and by legislating his religious point of view with a ban on federal funding for stem cell research and for non-abstinance based AIDS programs

2 Cutting taxes on the very rich while spending more and more money and putting the nation deep into debt

3 Pointless war in Iraq

4 Alienating our allies

5 Weakening environmental protections

6 Maintaining close relations with repressive and terrorist-sponsoring regimes like Saudi Arabia

The only thing he did right was invading Afghanistan. Then he moved personel and resources out of Afghanistan so he could attack Iraq, so he eventually managed to screw the pooch on the Afghanistan issue too.

Oh I think I know where this will be heading in the long-term... but i better don't tell ;)

3: Pointless? Giving freedom to oppressed people is not pointless.
We did not go into Iraq to free the Iraqis. We went in for a different reason, because Iraq had WMDs, all of which have mysteriously vanished. The WMD excuse was used so it would pass Congress and the UN, as freeing oppressed people would never pass anywhere.

I'm as glad as the next person that we got rid of Saddam Hussein, but we did go into Iraq for a different purpose. Lying in order to achieve a good end is still lying. I'm sorry, but it's true, and lying is a sin against Me. ;)

~Czardas, Supreme Ruler of the Universe

He cut income taxes for the lower brackets more than for the upper brackets.

yes, by percentage.

IE, if a lower-middle-class person's taxes were cut from 15% to 10%, that person will have enjoyed a 33% tax cut.

Whereas, if a wealthy person's taxes were cut from 39.6% to 36%, that person will have seen a 9.1% tax cut.

So... mathematically speaking, I'm not sure where all the hate comes from for the rich. They get, by percentage, the lowest tax cuts, and they still bear the vast majority of our tax burden.

What it does show is that they don't own them and don't shoot them.

It's not something you can casually pick up and suddenly become good at.


Im a Republican. I own several guns. I have thousands of rounds of ammo and all the cleaning equipment. I dont yet belong to a shooting club or range, though there is one in town and I plan to. So far, I havent had the time or cash. I have two brothers and several friends that fit the same category. It seems that the free time we have is spent with family or work around the house. I imagine that there are many many like me.
We vote Republican. Own and maintain guns. Just dont get to shoot like we used to.

We did not go into Iraq to free the Iraqis. We went in for a different reason, because Iraq had WMDs, all of which have mysteriously vanished. The WMD excuse was used so it would pass Congress and the UN, as freeing oppressed people would never pass anywhere.

I'm as glad as the next person that we got rid of Saddam Hussein, but we did go into Iraq for a different purpose. Lying in order to achieve a good end is still lying. I'm sorry, but it's true, and lying is a sin against Me. ;)

~Czardas, Supreme Ruler of the Universe

a)Have we searched all of Iraq? I mean, every square inch? We cannot be 100% certain that there are no WMDs until we do.

b)Removing Saddam was the real reason we went into Iraq. We weren't going in there without deposing Saddam. Had we found WMDs, it would have been easier to get the global support and maybe the UN would have actually acted... but regardless, he was going to be deposed.

And it ain't a lie unless you know that what you tell someone is not true. Simply being wrong does not meet the requirements for a lie.

Im a Republican. I own several guns. I have thousands of rounds of ammo and all the cleaning equipment. I dont yet belong to a shooting club or range, though there is one in town and I plan to. So far, I havent had the time or cash. I have two brothers and several friends that fit the same category. It seems that the free time we have is spent with family or work around the house. I imagine that there are many many like me.
We vote Republican. Own and maintain guns. Just dont get to shoot like we used to.

I've met people like that. But I haven't met any Democrats with several thousand rounds in their house.

I haven't seen more than a handful who own guns, much less shoot them. There used to be more in the early 1990s at the range I used to go to in Maryland, but all of them switched to voting Republican as soon as it became clear which party wanted to take their guns away.

Yes, those were the income tax rates. But the tax returns were different.

Poor people would lose 21 cents out of every dollar under Bush's new tax system, while rich people would lose only 8 cents. AKA, the reverse progressive tax: rich people pay less and get more back.

~Czardas, Supreme Ruler of the Universe
The average total effective tax rate (taxes divided by household income) in 2000 for the bottom quintile was 6.4%, down to 4.6% in 2002. So $0.046 out of every $1.00 was taken from the poorest group. The richest quintile was at 28.0% in 2000 and 26.1% in 2002 ($0.261 out of every $1.00), which shows that the rich still pay much more taxes per every dollar they earn than the poor. Over five times as much.

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/TaxFacts/TFDB/TFTemplate.cfm?Docid=224

I've met people like that. But I haven't met any Democrats with several thousand rounds in their house.

I haven't seen more than a handful who own guns, much less shoot them. There used to be more in the early 1990s at the range I used to go to in Maryland, but all of them switched to voting Republican as soon as it became clear which party wanted to take their guns away.

Sharon Stone apparently owns at least one gun, and being in Hollywood, she's a democrat.

I bet you'd like to show her how to use it, whispering legs.

lol

Sharon Stone owns at least one gun, and being in Hollywood, she's a democrat.

lol

Sean Penn owns one for personal protection, and he carries it. Evidently, though, he has never fired it. When asked, he said that it doesn't take any training to use one.

Keep thinking that way. Very good.

4: They're just pissed off that we have a president who acts instead of simply voicing his concerns. The UN wasn't going to do anything to Saddam, which would have been ridiculous, so we did. Also, there's a bit of jealousy in that...




Well.....I happen to be living in one these countries who jumped on the warwagon when US went to Iraq (Though we only contributed with a sub and a corvette - in a desert war? We do have troops stationed there now).
And I still think it was a wrong decision to go to war on a US-based coalition, as i still think that it possibly will make more enemies for US and Britain than they had before. (fortunatly for us, we're such a small country that noone ever notices us and a lot of people outside Europe doesnt even know where we are).
Notice that i think now we happen to be there, we oughtta finish the job - not only with soldiers, but also with economic aid and lots of it. Not only that thing about their-oil-should-help-rebuild-the-country crap.

I think Bush is doing a crappy job and unfortunatly we have a prime minister who thinks Bush is God and follow him in many of the big mistakes he's done.

I've met people like that. But I haven't met any Democrats with several thousand rounds in their house.

I haven't seen more than a handful who own guns, much less shoot them. There used to be more in the early 1990s at the range I used to go to in Maryland, but all of them switched to voting Republican as soon as it became clear which party wanted to take their guns away.

There are democrats (and other liberals for that matter) who do OWN a gun or guns. The difference is that these are not "gun nuts" (excuse the expression), and therefore do not flaunt them so :mp5:

Overall he is awful, but I agree with him on one issue only. Social security.
What happens to all those private investment accounts when the next Enron style accounting scandal hits and stock prices take a dive? How do all those old people make a living then?

There are democrats (and other liberals for that matter) who do OWN a gun or guns. The difference is that these are not "gun nuts" (excuse the expression), and therefore do not flaunt them so :mp5:

Training every week is a necessity - it is not a sign of being a "gun nut".

Studies have proven that shooting skills drop precipitously if you aren't training every week. So the people that don't go to the range regularly must suck at shooting.

Never seen the Democrats down at the range in force - not since the early 1990s. Know plenty of people who would vote Democrat - if only the Democratic party went pro-gun all the way.

Well.....I happen to be living in one these countries who jumped on the warwagon when US went to Iraq (Though we only contributed with a sub and a corvette - in a desert war? We do have troops stationed there now).
And I still think it was a wrong decision to go to war on a US-based coalition, as i still think that it possibly will make more enemies for US and Britain than they had before. (fortunatly for us, we're such a small country that noone ever notices us and a lot of people outside Europe doesnt even know where we are).
Notice that i think now we happen to be there, we oughtta finish the job - not only with soldiers, but also with economic aid and lots of it. Not only that thing about their-oil-should-help-rebuild-the-country crap.

I think Bush is doing a crappy job and unfortunatly we have a prime minister who thinks Bush is God and follow him in many of the big mistakes he's done.

I want to know what you'd have done differently... because if he'd not decided to get the coalition together and take Saddam out, Saddam would still be in power... you know that the UN wouldn't have done anything.

And a world with Saddam out of power is a better world.

the key will be the inclusion of the Sunni muslims... if they do not have a say in how the country is run, there may yet be civil war. IF Iraq becomes a decent nation that increasingly respects human rights and keeps a form of democratic government in power/force, there's a good chance that they may become an ally of the West.

We did not go into Iraq to free the Iraqis. We went in for a different reason, because Iraq had WMDs, all of which have mysteriously vanished. The WMD excuse was used so it would pass Congress and the UN, as freeing oppressed people would never pass anywhere.

I'm as glad as the next person that we got rid of Saddam Hussein, but we did go into Iraq for a different purpose. Lying in order to achieve a good end is still lying. I'm sorry, but it's true, and lying is a sin against Me.
The lies were necessary. At the time, the public would have never accepted a war just to free a distant people. Lying to achieve a good end is undesireable, but justifiable.

What happens to all those private investment accounts when the next Enron style accounting scandal hits and stock prices take a dive? How do all those old people make a living then?

99% of companies are good... at least.

I can't believe that nobody is mentioning that the stock option is OPTIONAL.

that's o-p-t-i-o-n-a-l

if you want your money to stay in government coffers making no interest (in fact losing value to inflation), that's your prerogative.

If, on the other hand, you want to give it a pretty good chance to grow, as stocks generally do, then this is a great chance for your social security investment to actually be an investment that gains against inflation.

(why are democrats so afraid of investing?)

here in Tennessee, every time I go inside a gas station, I see someone who's obviously poor buying lottery tickets. Unless they get pretty lucky, they're wasting their money. But of course it will be Bush's fault...

They could be buying shares of stock in solid earners like IBM, Coca-Cola, etc... watching their money grow. instead they're wasting it.

I've met people like that. But I haven't met any Democrats with several thousand rounds in their house.

I haven't seen more than a handful who own guns, much less shoot them. There used to be more in the early 1990s at the range I used to go to in Maryland, but all of them switched to voting Republican as soon as it became clear which party wanted to take their guns away.


The people I know who tend to vote democrat have also made anti-gun remarks. I dont address these remarks in the workplace as its a waste of time and no need to create a rift in the workplace. I've found these people would hold that against you. Which is another odd trait amongst anti-gun people. They appear to be intollerant to people with views other than theirs.

I disagree with most of his policies but not all. I think he's an asshole when it comes to cultural things like gays and abortion, but I'm one of the few people that supports his social security idea and his tax cut for the wealthy. (And no, I am not wealthy. I am unemployed and depend on my mom for money for right now, though I have a job interview Wednesday.)

Lying to achieve a good end is undesireable, but justifiable.


I'm finding myself agreeing with you here. Is this a first?

I am unemployed and depend on my mom for money for right now, though I have a job interview Wednesday.)


Dont sweat it- Good luck!

I want to know what you'd have done differently... because if he'd not decided to get the coalition together and take Saddam out, Saddam would still be in power... you know that the UN wouldn't have done anything.

And a world with Saddam out of power is a better world.

the key will be the inclusion of the Sunni muslims... if they do not have a say in how the country is run, there may yet be civil war. IF Iraq becomes a decent nation that increasingly respects human rights and keeps a form of democratic government in power/force, there's a good chance that they may become an ally of the West.

A world with Ho Chi Min outta power would also be a better world and a lotta other regimes......but let that be.
I Suspect that UN wouldnt have acted, but US didnt even wait for the result before they/we went in, mostly because of the convenience of the time of the year, so we will never know.
I imagine that Iraq will not be an ally of the west in the next 50 years or more if we don't do a wholeheartedly effort to increase the infrastructure/education level of the country, they might be a puppet, but not an ally. But you're right, the Sunni muslims has to be included, no government will ever be stabile unless the big majorities have a say.

Dont sweat it- Good luck!

Thanks!

I consider myself to be a Liberal Canadian, if you will. However, I play FPS games all the time, especially WW2 ones. To my ears, weapons like the M1 Garand and the MG42 are awesome sounding. Firing a gun is sensatational, I have fired several BBGuns and even a Lee-Enfield at targets. It is satisfying to know that bullet has hit a target at long range, with things like wind effecting the trajectory. Using a gun to kill an animal or person, however, is something I can not do. I suppose you do need weekly practice to shoot a gun well, but what is there to it for short ranged targets? You align the little metal piece with the end of the barrel, and bang, target dead. I suppose bolt-action rifles need skill, as you have to plan your shots and multi-task. But how many of those do you see on the streets? And who the heck needs 5 guns in their household? For hunting purposes it's understandable, but when you see things like SMGs and automatic shotguns in the closet, you know you've got a wacko on your hands. I don't see what the big craze with collecting guns is. I dunno, some people collect cars and Pokemon dolls, but a person collecting guns, which assumably aren't being used regularly, is a sign that the person needs a lesson in money management, safety and efficiency. IMO.

not only has he made the world a more dangerous place but I think the puppets out of Team America would do a better job :D :sniper: :headbang:

How George W. Bush is doing his job?

I voted other. He ISN'T doing his job: Karl Rove is.

not only has he made the world a more dangerous place but I think the puppets out of Team America would do a better job :D :sniper: :headbang:


Wow, a gun smilie and a head bash in the same sentence....wow.

Nobody is perfect W isn't Lib Dems aren't face it everyone has flaws.

Nobody is perfect W isn't Lib Dems aren't face it everyone has flaws.

Amen! Perfection is not possible if you do not have a common frame of reference. For Christians, it's Jesus, but to an aetheist it may be something else. Therefore, perfection is impossible.

I think he is doing a terrible job as president, and I can't believe the USA elected him! He doesn't even know that misunderestimated is NOT a real word. I'm sick of him and if anyone else is, join the region called '0 join to protest george bush' where I am the delegate.

2: He's cut taxes for everyone. Don't forget that the rich still pay a higher percentage of their income than any other group. Cutting taxes for people frees up additional assets that we can infuse into businesses (by buying more products, investing more, starting new businesses, etc.)... which cannot hurt the economy. As long as that money is spent or invested, tax cuts are good.

3: Pointless? Giving freedom to oppressed people is not pointless.

4: They're just pissed off that we have a president who acts instead of simply voicing his concerns. The UN wasn't going to do anything to Saddam, which would have been ridiculous, so we did. Also, there's a bit of jealousy in that...

6: Like every president before him since the mass-production of the automobile (or at least since we became dependent on Middle Eastern oil). We could drill in Alaska and become independent of the Middle East, but some of you don't want that. (neither do I, unless we could guarantee that it would be safe for the environment)
His tax cuts on the wealthy when our rich people still pay less than any other industrialized nation are an abomination. Especially when a bigger tax cut to the middle class and holding the line on taxes for the wealthy would have stimulated our economy and jumpstarted the recovery faster.

Want to give freedom to oppressed people? Sudan and N. Korea should have come first. Sudan is in the middle of it's second genocide. N. Korea is a much more oppressive government than Saddam's Iraq was. Hell, our buddies in Uzbekistan are as oppressive as Saddam, and we're not doing anything about them.
We were told the war was about WMD. We were told that Saddam could hit the USA with a nuclear, chemical, or biological weapon. That's why congress gave Bush the ability to wage this war. That's why the American people backed this war.

You're partly right, but you also have to give other nations a little taste of the responsibility and the wealth if you want them to back you up. Bush refused to do that. Without allies we get less intelligence back regarding threats to our security. Bush has made us weaker by alienating so many of our old allies.

If Bush really beleived in freedom and really wanted to fight terrorism he'd focus on finding alternate energy and work to destroy the corrupt terrorist regime running Saudi Arabia.

I think he is doing a terrible job as president, and I can't believe the USA elected him! He doesn't even know that misunderestimated is NOT a real word. I'm sick of him and if anyone else is, join the region called '0 join to protest george bush' where I am the delegate.


You vote in the last election?

I have question why do a lot of people hate the war in Iraq?

Can we also just leave the man alone. There are many other people that need to get bashed.

You vote in the last election?

Since they refer to the USA as 'the USA' (not 'this country', 'my country', or 'our country'), I have a strong inclination to believe that Funkdunk is not from the US, and therefore ineligible to vote. Except to vote with the mouth.

His tax cuts on the wealthy when our rich people still pay less than any other industrialized nation are an abomination. Especially when a bigger tax cut to the middle class and holding the line on taxes for the wealthy would have stimulated our economy and jumpstarted the recovery faster.

Want to give freedom to oppressed people? Sudan and N. Korea should have come first. Sudan is in the middle of it's second genocide. N. Korea is a much more oppressive government than Saddam's Iraq was. Hell, our buddies in Uzbekistan are as oppressive as Saddam, and we're not doing anything about them.
We were told the war was about WMD. We were told that Saddam could hit the USA with a nuclear, chemical, or biological weapon. That's why congress gave Bush the ability to wage this war. That's why the American people backed this war.

You're partly right, but you also have to give other nations a little taste of the responsibility and the wealth if you want them to back you up. Bush refused to do that. Without allies we get less intelligence back regarding threats to our security. Bush has made us weaker by alienating so many of our old allies.

If Bush really beleived in freedom and really wanted to fight terrorism he'd focus on finding alternate energy and work to destroy the corrupt terrorist regime running Saudi Arabia.

Part of the reason we have the world's strongest economy is that our taxes -- including those waged against the rich -- are so low. I see economic freedom as a great thing... and the lower our taxes, the greater our economic freedom is. If only we can curb spending to meet the government's income (IE, taxes)... Bush (and congress, really, since they're the ones who add all the damn pork onto bills) could improve at that.

You don't help anyone by raising taxes on the rich. Rather, you curb the ability of our rich folks to invest in (and in some cases totally underwrite) companies that employ so many of us.

as for taking down the House of Saud, we'd need quite a lot of backing... because while we use more oil than anyone else, we don't use it all, and we're not the only ones partly or mostly dependent on Saudi Arabia.

Since they refer to the USA as 'the USA' (not 'this country', 'my country', or 'our country'), I have a strong inclination to believe that Funkdunk is not from the US, and therefore ineligible to vote. Except to vote with the mouth.

but "Funkdunk" is such a basketballesque name!

Part of the reason we have the world's strongest economy is that our taxes -- including those waged against the rich -- are so low. I see economic freedom as a great thing... and the lower our taxes, the greater our economic freedom is. If only we can curb spending to meet the government's income (IE, taxes)... Bush (and congress, really, since they're the ones who add all the damn pork onto bills) could improve at that.

You don't help anyone by raising taxes on the rich. Rather, you curb the ability of our rich folks to invest in (and in some cases totally underwrite) companies that employ so many of us.

as for taking down the House of Saud, we'd need quite a lot of backing... because while we use more oil than anyone else, we don't use it all, and we're not the only ones partly or mostly dependent on Saudi Arabia.
I didn't say raise the tax on the wealthy, I said hold the line on taxes for them and drastically lower taxes on the middle class, you know, the people who's purchases actually drive the economy.

I didn't say raise the tax on the wealthy, I said hold the line on taxes for them and drastically lower taxes on the middle class, you know, the people who's purchases actually drive the economy.

Taxes are a pretty fickle metric. Consider that the government printed all the money: it has the right to take as much or as little of it back as it wants.
Making any drastic change in the tax status quo will disrupt the purchasing power of the incomes BEING taxed, positively or negatively.
For example: I think that the idea you are referring to might cause tremendous inflation, than all the money that was saved on the low taxes would be worthless.

It's crazy to cut taxes to the highest income earners. The highest income earners in America pay most of the taxes collected. Why cut that?? A tiny reduction in taxed for them is a major cut from the rest of America.

http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2005-3/968097/Hahaha.jpg

That'll teach them!

Since they refer to the USA as 'the USA' (not 'this country', 'my country', or 'our country'), I have a strong inclination to believe that Funkdunk is not from the US, and therefore ineligible to vote. Except to vote with the mouth.


You are probably right. Due to my drugged up state, I didn't nodice that.

George W. Bush is a classic example of the "Peter Principle".

I find the attacks, paranoid fear and out and out hatred of Bush are far out of proportion to his actual actions as president. The man just really hasn't done that much to merit the hatred heaped upon him. I found the same thing was true for Clinton. Many of my friends and family hated Clinton with such ferocity and I felt it was really overblown considering what he had actually done.
In a few years a new president will come and Bush will become part of political history and life will continue much as it always has. Democracy will not have been usurped, WWIII will not have begun and hell and your life will be pretty much what it was all along.

I'm finding myself agreeing with you here. Is this a first?
I dunno. It's a general rule that I agree with. It's better to do the right thing for the wrong reasons than the wrong thing for the right reasons. It's all about effects.

Can we also just leave the man alone. There are many other people that need to get bashed.
He's the most powerful man in the world, he's going to get bashed, especially when so many of his policies are completely outrageous.

You would have enjoyed the response I saw a couple of weeks ago at the White House. We were in the back, where the iron fence is much closer to the building. My friend stands on the base of the fence and puts his camera above and beyond the fence to snap a picture. With that, a DC policeman on a bicycle pulls up to us on the one side to tell him he cant pass the fence and two camoflaged soldiers with machine guns and dogs responded 5 seconds later on the inside of the fence. I'm not sure where they came from because I hadnt seen them earlier and we were at that spot for 15 minutes.
We we visited DC back in the mid 70's (shortly after Tricky Dickie got the boot), we were taking pictures in front of the White House and I didn't see any armed guards anywhere. I guess things have changed a tad since then?

George Bush is one of the worst presidents that I have ever seen. He is WAR PRESIDENT and a coward. :gundge:

We we visited DC back in the mid 70's (shortly after Tricky Dickie got the boot), we were taking pictures in front of the White House and I didn't see any armed guards anywhere. I guess things have changed a tad since then?
Every goverment building has big security after 9/11.

I disagree vehemently with a lot of President Bush's actions and stances, but what I really hate about him is how he has polarized this country so much. I really tired of this all or nothing attitude that exists around him. It seems that people must either worship him as the second coming of Christ or despise him like he is Hitler, Stalin, Caligula and Satan all combined. So few seem to be able to view him with any manner of objectivity. It's quite puzzling and quite frustrating.

I'm paleo-conservative. My concern is the errosion of the integrity of the Republic institution that was created by the American founders.

And bush is the biggest ill to the republic yet. His inability to compromise with fellow Americans, and ability to attack fellow good Republicans who have the integrity to not be a rubberstamping organization is ridiculous.

He is a neo-con theocratic fascist threat to this nation. The day ANY American is willing to sacrifice his civil liberties and not sacrifice our flawed foreign policy, they should stop calling themselves American, and start calling themselves neo-con loyalists.

How do you think George W. Bush is doing his job?
Wait, Dubya is doing his job now? Man, I go on vacation for one week and the whole world gets turned upside down...

These are the darkest days of modern American history..... :(

These are the darkest days of modern American history..... :(
All hail Bushmocracy!!