It Appears to me

There are at least a dozen or so posters that are worth reading and debating with. You just learn to deal with or ignore the rest.

I am not Anti Conservative. I am Anti Bush. There is an important difference.

Of course the "facts why George Bush is so bad for us" is a very subjective thing. As you will see, the reasons that I am very opposed to Bush are considered good things by others.

I cant answer why "Conservatives should all just go away" since I don't feel this way.

But for the first question.

I have never been so opposed to any leader as I am to Bush. He stands against all of the things that I think make America great.

The main reason I dislike him is because I feel he has a very dangerous view on the world that leads to dangerous harmful policies. Specific examples of this are...

- The war in Iraq. It has produced an international outcry and the deaths of Iraqi's and Americans alike.

- The resources that could really make a difference in stopping terrorism that are being spent in Iraq. (I include local preparation, add FBI resources and international projects to help the situation.

- Comments about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that inflame the situation and contradict US policy of moderation.

- Tax cuts while we have record deficits.

- The fact he uses 9/11 to justify everyting from the war in Iraq, to tax cuts, to unemployment, to jailing citizens without due process.

- The Patriot act. In my opinions the rights it takes away are not at all worth the increase in security.

- His insistance on keeping actions of his administration secret that other administrations would make open.

- His stands on issues such as abortion and homosexual marriage.

- His education policy which takes control out of the hands of the people who can help the most-- teachers and communities.

Of course these are my opinions -- but I think that that is what you asked for. Other people may think that some or all of these things are good for the country.

But in my opinion, Bush is most horrible president we have had in my lifetime. This is my opinions, but there are plenty of reasons I feel this way.

saintsfanbrian,

If you do not like the conservative ideology being under-represented here the obvious solution is to represent it well.

That would be a refreshing change-of-pace.

Some represent it well Joe. I wish there were more, balance in all things, even political representation in a discussion site.

Re: It Appears to me
I agree with McGentrix. Plus, I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for people to give reasons why they hate George Bush.

There are maybe a couple of users who hate conservatives and want us to go away, but you can filter them out. I recommend treating them like you would any hate-filled flamer - ignore them. Refusing to validate them will eventually make them head for greener pastures. The majority of people here seem reasonable, and you can actually talk about the issues most of the time without any name-calling. And that's what a good discussion group should be.

I can't state as FACT that GW has the intellect of a cactus. That's just my opinion. You will find a LOT of opinions here (I think that's part of the idea). I find it odd and uncomfortable that people look at this man and see someone that they believe is qualified to lead this country.

Unfortunately, for conservatives, GW is the de facto leader of the conservative wing. I'm sure there are some intelligent conservatives out there - I've seen some on this board. I just can't figure out why they would accept GW as their figurehead.

Machismo and jingoism do not a good President make.

Unconsciously, you have answered your own question - your post contains the word "lead" and "leader." You do recognize George Bush as a leader, because that's what he does best. He may not be a stellar orator, but he's a decisive leader, and that's exactly what this country needs. Many of us believe he's taking this country in the right direction.

Craven: I rest my case.

Tarantulas, mayhap his standing as the current US president engenders the appelation "leader" and not the "recognition" of what you claim he does best.

That remains to be proven. I believe in my heart that he recognizes Mr. Bush's strong leadership. He may not agree with it, but that's another discussion.

The highlighted phrase is what many of us see Bush's "leadership"and support based upon. Not evidence, not experience, not counsel, but belief. This should not be the basis upon which the leader of a nation makes his decsions.
He "believes" he is always right. He "believes" he is following god's plan. Does this truly not bother you?

It's easy to criticize while adding nothing to the conversation, huh, Joe?

Anyone can do that. Just take a look at this post. I am being critical of your flippance towards those that would venture conservative thought.

I can only speak for myself on this, but we can't all be lawyers or historians or whatever else you feel one needs to be to make a cogent arguement. I have never taken a debate class or bothered to learn all the latin phrases for what people do during these debates, I just know what bothers me and many times, on many threads, it becomes apparent that some just want to be disruptive or gain attention for themselves. I come here BECAUSE of the arguing. Hobitbob, Bi-Polar Bear, Pistoff, and more make my blood boil and make me see red until I have to go do other things for awhile, but I come back. I come back to see if perhaps I can change their mind on even one little thing. No matter how hopeless it becomes, I try.

Keep fighting the good fight McGentrix.

Edit (Moderator): Link and solicitation removed.

I'm sure the people who actually severd in the military will be happy to hear you tell them that being a dependent taught you all about being a soldier!

If any thing, the majority of the people here are social liberals, and economic conservatives.

This the likely path of anyone who has examined the issues from both sides.

I would tend to agree, though I do consider myself to be more to the "moderate" path economically.

Uh, consciously, I made it fairly clear that I do not believe GW is qualified to lead anything, with the possible exception of an Easter egg hunt. Decisive leadership is only good when the decisions are correct - Saddam Hussein was a decisive leader, no? (Please, don't run too far with that - I am not saying that GW is the same as Saddam Hussein.)

And, in my opinion, his inability to communicate well is a direct reflection of his lack of intelligence. I'm not going to change your opinion of him - you're not going to change mine. We'll all have our chance to be heard in November.

Yeah! What he said. Twice.....