1
   

Bush's virtues

 
 
Intrepid
 
  1  
Reply Wed 11 May, 2005 02:49 pm
Cycloptichorn wrote:
Nice work Intrepid

Rayban:

A person can't declare war on a nation; AQ's declaration of war is immaterial.

Cycloptichorn


Thank you Cycloptichorn,

Where I come from, we either put up or shut up. Of course, we do this while we are maintaining the peace :-)
0 Replies
 
rayban1
 
  1  
Reply Wed 11 May, 2005 02:56 pm
BVT wrote:

I'd just like to know, really, why if you're kissing his ass you're engaging in dialogue but if someone is saying he sucks they're sniping from the sidelines. I'm wondering how you get to that. Doesn't seem logical, certainly not fair and balanced. Laughing.

Laughing

Let me ask you a question about logic: If liberals are idealists and conservatives are pragmatists which one is most likely to use logic?

Just so you don't get a mental hernia trying to figure it out.........I'll give you the answer. Conservatives of course Rolling Eyes
0 Replies
 
rayban1
 
  1  
Reply Wed 11 May, 2005 03:09 pm
Hey.....I thought this thread was to be about GW's virtues. How would you like to start another thread about his faults.? Laughing I think you'd have lots of activity from the liberal choir. :wink:
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Wed 11 May, 2005 03:16 pm
You would think so, Rayban, but that just isn't true.

Why? Because a lot of times, logic gets in the way of the action the Conservatives want to take. And so, they use logic less and less as they take more and more action. This is quite evident in our current political environment.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Wed 11 May, 2005 03:18 pm
rayban1 wrote:
BVT wrote:

I'd just like to know, really, why if you're kissing his ass you're engaging in dialogue but if someone is saying he sucks they're sniping from the sidelines. I'm wondering how you get to that. Doesn't seem logical, certainly not fair and balanced. Laughing.

Laughing

Let me ask you a question about logic: If liberals are idealists and conservatives are pragmatists which one is most likely to use logic?

Just so you don't get a mental hernia trying to figure it out.........I'll give you the answer. Conservatives of course Rolling Eyes


You ducked my question and insulted me. True to form. :wink:
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Wed 11 May, 2005 03:24 pm
and btw what does IF have to do with anything. If you pose questions like that have you suffered a mental hernia?
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Wed 11 May, 2005 05:16 pm
woiyo wrote:
As usual, we have the uninformed/ignorant perspective. Let's have some fun!!!



LOL woiyo... simply labeling something a lie doesn't mean you are correct. I have a problem with some of Intrepid's characterizations but I have the same problem with some of your attempts to rebut.. so lets DO have some fun....

Quote:
* Attacked and took over two countries.
One was warranted, one not. No response from woiyo on this one.

Quote:
* Spent the surplus and bankrupted the treasury.
LAST I CHECKED, US TREASURY STILL OPERATING AND COURTS NOT NOTIFIED OF BANKRUPTCY PROCEEDINGS
There was a surplus when Bush took office. It went away due to several reasons some of them Bush's specific actions. Bankrupt is not a term I would use but it is not completely inappropriate. Simply claiming that there is no legal proceeding doesn't invalidate the use of the term bankrupt woiyo. I suggest you go look up the word in a good dictionary. Most companies that declare bankruptcy continue to operate so that is another invalid argument.
Quote:
* Shattered record for biggest annual deficit in history.
THIS IS NOT BASBALL WHERE WE TRACK RECORDS. DEFICIT SPENDING NOT A NEW CONCEPT
It isn't baseball but the deficit DOES have a consequence unlike a record in baseball. Deficits cause debt which must be paid back or defaulted on. Both have consequences. Continuing to run large deficits will lead to REAL problems. Ask Greenspan if you don't believe me.

Quote:
* Set economic record for most private bankruptcies filed in any 12 month period.
NOT ONE OF GW'S COMPANIES HAS FILED FOR BANKRUPCY. HE DID HOWEVER APPROVE LEGISLATION THAT WILL REDUCE BANKRUPCIES
No mention was made of any of GW's companies. Economic record would be a national economic record. The recently passed legislation was not to reduce the number of bankruptcies but to change some from Chapter 7 to Chapter 13. A Chapter 13 bankruptcy is still a bankruptcy. Your argument is based on no facts here woiyo.


Quote:
* Set all-time record for biggest drop in the history of the stock market.
THIS IS INCORRECT BASED ON PERCNETAGE
Hard to argue this one one way or the other. Too many ways to define market. Bush is one of very few Presidents to have every major market index fall during his 4 year term in office. They are all still down from when he originally took office.
Quote:

* First president in decades to execute a federal prisoner.
THAT IS A GOOD THING
Your opinion about the fact has no better value than the opposite one. It is still a fact.
Quote:
* First president in US history to enter office with a criminal record.
A LIE
Which part is the lie? Are you denying Bush was arrested and convicted or are you saying another president was also?
Quote:
*Cut unemployment benefits for more out of work Americans than any president in US history.
A LIE
A misstatement perhaps. I wouldn't call it a lie. Bush did not act quickly to extend benefits during the recession.
Quote:
* Set the all-time record for most foreclosures in a 12 month period.
THAT IS THE LENDERS FAULT FOR MAKING BAD DECISIONS
It might be the lenders fault but it is an economic condition that happened on Bush's watch. Like it or not, Presidents take credit and blame.
Quote:
* Appointed more convicted criminals to administration positions than any president in US history.
A LIE.
I don't know the truth of this one, but simply branding it "A LIE" doesn't prove anything. Intrepid might be willing to provide some evidence if asked. I can think of a couple that were convicted but overturned that are presently serving.
Quote:
* Set the record for the least amount of press conferences than any president since the advent of television.
IRRELEVANT
Why is it irrelevant? It shows an unwillingness to share with the American people. I think that is very relevant in a democracy.
Quote:
* Signed more laws and executive orders amending the Constitution than any president in US history.
A LIE. THE CONSTITUTION CAN NOT BE AMENDED BY A PRESIDENT
A president can't amend the constitution. However many feel he has undermined it with his laws and EOs.
Quote:
* Presided over the biggest energy crises in US history and refused to intervene when corruption was revealed.
WHAT CRISIS??
Where you asleep in 2001? Does the name ENRON mean anything to you? How about California? FERC refused to investigate Enron's energy trading that forced up electrical rates in California. It took other civil action to find the criminal activity involved. FERC should have been all over this but Bush's appointees refused to investigate.
Quote:
* Presided over the highest gasoline prices in US history and refused to use the national reserves as past presidents have.
A SMART MOVE
I don't know that I would categorize presiding over the highest gas prices in US history as a "smart move."
Quote:
* Cut healthcare benefits for war veterans.
A LIE
How is this a lie? If the number of benefits is LESS then it is a cut. Money is NOT a benefit. Your argument ignores the reality of the statement. A benefit is a benefit. If you get more money but fewer benefits then your benefits are cut. Plain and simple.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Wed 11 May, 2005 05:18 pm
rayban1 wrote:
Parados wrote:

<North Korea acquired ZERO nukes from 1992-2002. There was a suspicion they may have tried to go around the treaty signed in 1994 by processing uranium but no evidence to back it up. N Korea only started up its plutonium nuclear program in 2003 after 2 years of Bush fumbling the diplomatic ball. The treaty signed in 1994 was to prevent N Korea from processing plutonium. It did what it was supposed to do until Bush backed out of it. In Jan-March of 2003, North Korea processed enough plutonium for 6 nukes.>

All of what you said and what I said is actually irrelevant because we don't know for certain what they have or have not done. My question to you is: What should Bush have done? There is no military option as I have said and the fact remains that you cannot make a deal with a liar. They will never allow full access by any verification team so why make the attempt.
Of course you can publicize that you have made a deal as Albright and Clinton did.........all that accomplished was to create a false sense of security.......much better to be honest.

On the other hand we can do something about Iran before they actually complete a bomb but time is growing short according to all reports.


I guess if you just ignore all facts then you can make statements like this.
Fact - IAEA was doing inspections from 1994-2002
Fact - CIA and other intelligence agencies have issued assessments of N Korean nuclear capabilities
Fact -N Korea claimed to process the 8000 fuel rods in 2003
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Wed 11 May, 2005 05:20 pm
rayban1 wrote:
Parados wrote:
Bush inherited Bin Laden and did nothing. In spite of all the whining about how Clinton did "nothing" about Bin Laden for 8 years which is nothing but smoke and mirrors since Bin Laden was NOT a problem for 8 years, we are left to look at the fact that Bush still has not found Bin Laden nor did he do one thing prior to 9/11.

Bin Laden was not a problem for 8 years.......oh really. He declared war on us in 1996 with his religious manifesto and some of Clinton's people sounded the alarm but Clinton would not listen. I admit that the warnings did not get through to Bush either but Bush had the economy, formulation of overall policy and getting his management team to function properly, to worry about.......this is an excuse but a valid one. Then 9/11 hit.


Just in case you need some help with your math. 1996 to 2001 is NOT 8 years. If you need further help there is a math forum on A2K.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Wed 11 May, 2005 05:48 pm
It's good to see the regulars have made their appearances with the usual style...

George W. Bush promised to lower our taxes. He did.

When the United States was attacked by Islamo-fascists in 2001, President Bush promised to punish the perpetrators. He kept his promise. Today, Afghanistan, well on its way to becoming a democracy with equal rights for all, including women, is no longer a haven for terrorists. Saddam Hussein, a promoter of terrorism and a mass murderer, is no longer in power. For the first time in their history, the people of Afghanistan and Iraq are on their way to establishing a true democracy.

President Bush promised to improve public education. He kept that promise as well. We now have legislation called "No Child Left Behind." For the first time, schools and teachers are being held accountable nationwide.

Finally he hasn't done everything within his power to ignore, undermine or destroy our founding document, the Constitution and its amendments, and he's demonstrated that he will stick with the issues he campaigned on. If he is making liberals mad, then he is doing something right - and I couldn't be happier.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Wed 11 May, 2005 05:55 pm
woiyo wrote:
Very well said. However, if I may extend on this point of yours...

"In North Korea we have the result of a naive, failed attempt on the part of the previous admin to prevent NK from acquiring a Nuke. This must play itself out diplomatically because there is no military option there without risking the deaths of millions in Seoul SK. "

To say the Clinton Admin was naive is being nice. Madam Albright recommended and Bubba agreed to GIVE the nuke technology to NK. Some naysayers will argue that NK lied to Madam Albright. Yet, one must be stupid or incompetant to believe the NK Govt.

I will add that GW is the first US president to actively look at SS reform. Every former Prez gave lip service to thsi problem, but GW is trying to get something done and he should be commended for it.
I am curious to know what nuke tech you think CLinton gave to NK? Care to elaborate? Or should I just write your statement off as an unimformed/ignorant perspective? I am betting you can't find a single nuclear technology that was given to N Korea that they could use.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Wed 11 May, 2005 06:23 pm
McG!
Quote:
When the United States was attacked by Islamo-fascists in 2001, President Bush promised to punish the perpetrators. He kept his promise.


Well, he kept his promise, that is, unless you consider the fact that we still haven't caught the number one man responsible, the man who is still coordinating attacks against us, Osama Bin Laden.

If you look at it that way, then he broke his promise. And given that terror attacks are up hugely across the world (as you would know, if you read this year's report on world terrorism, the one that Condi ordered quashed) and AQ is as strong as ever. We, on the other hand, are a lot poorer and extended militarily in a situation where we cannot withdraw quickly.

Punished the perpetrators?

Hardly!

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Wed 11 May, 2005 06:32 pm
AQ, al Qaeda I presume, is as strong as ever?

Why, that is beyond ludacris! That makes me want to just point and laugh.

What was the last act of terrorism Osama committed? 9-11. What country is supporting Osama and his small band of trouble makers? None.

You are vastly over rating that poor gang of terrorists.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Wed 11 May, 2005 06:35 pm
McGentrix wrote:

George W. Bush promised to lower our taxes. He did.


Hey, something that is factually true. Congrats McG.

We can disagree about the consequences of it but it is a fact. Bush promised to do it and he did it.

Quote:
When the United States was attacked by Islamo-fascists in 2001, President Bush promised to punish the perpetrators. He kept his promise. Today, Afghanistan, well on its way to becoming a democracy with equal rights for all, including women, is no longer a haven for terrorists. Saddam Hussein, a promoter of terrorism and a mass murderer, is no longer in power. For the first time in their history, the people of Afghanistan and Iraq are on their way to establishing a true democracy.
Bush also promised to get Bin Laden "dead or alive."

I agreed with Bush on invading Afghanistan.

I think you need to check out the latest news from there though. Afghanistan is still controlled in a large part by Islamic extremists that force women to wear Burkas and injure or kill those that don't. I think we would have been better off putting 100,000 troops in Afghanistan and letting that be the threat to Saddam. Get ONE RIGHT rather than do 2 so so or not at all.
Quote:
President Bush promised to improve public education. He kept that promise as well. We now have legislation called "No Child Left Behind." For the first time, schools and teachers are being held accountable nationwide.

He promised to do it but the jury is still out on this one. Just last month a couple of states have pulled out or filed law suits over the lack of funding, Texas being one of them.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Wed 11 May, 2005 06:41 pm
McGentrix wrote:
AQ, al Qaeda I presume, is as strong as ever?

Why, that is beyond ludacris! That makes me want to just point and laugh.

What was the last act of terrorism Osama committed? 9-11. What country is supporting Osama and his small band of trouble makers? None.

You are vastly over rating that poor gang of terrorists.


Interesting take on it McG.. this is from infoplease and only through Dec of last year.source
Quote:
Suspected al-Qaeda Terrorist Acts
1993 (Feb.): Bombing of World Trade Center (WTC); six killed.
1993 (Oct.): Killing of U.S. soldiers in Somalia.
1996 (June): Truck bombing at Khobar Towers barracks in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia, killed 19 Americans.
1998 (Aug.): Bombing of U.S. embassies in East Africa; 224 killed, including 12 Americans.
1999 (Dec.): Plot to bomb millennium celebrations in Seattle foiled when customs agents arrest an Algerian smuggling explosives into the U.S.
2000 (Oct.): Bombing of the USS Cole in port in Yemen; 17 U.S. sailors killed.
2001 (Sept.): Destruction of WTC; attack on Pentagon. Total dead 2,992.
2001 (Dec.): Man tried to denote shoe bomb on flight from Paris to Miami.
2002 (April): Explosion at historic synagogue in Tunisia left 21 dead, including 14 German tourists.
2002 (May): Car exploded outside hotel in Karachi, Pakistan, killing 14, including 11 French citizens.
2002 (June): Bomb exploded outside American consulate in Karachi, Pakistan, killing 12.
2002 (Oct.): Boat crashed into oil tanker off Yemen coast, killing one.
2002 (Oct.): Nightclub bombings in Bali, Indonesia, killed 202, mostly Australian citizens.
2002 (Nov.): Suicide attack on a hotel in Mombasa, Kenya, killed 16.
2003 (May): Suicide bombers killed 34, including 8 Americans, at housing compounds for Westerners in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
2003 (May): Four bombs killed 33 people targeting Jewish, Spanish, and Belgian sites in Casablanca, Morocco.
2003 (Aug.): Suicide car-bomb killed 12, injured 150 at Marriott Hotel in Jakarta, Indonesia.
2003 (Nov.): Explosions rocked a Riyadh, Saudi Arabia housing compound, killing 17.
2003 (Nov.): Suicide car-bombers simultaneously attacked two synagogues in Istanbul, Turkey, killing 25 and injuring hundreds.
2003 (Nov.): Truck bombs detonated at London bank and British consulate in Istanbul, Turkey, killing 26.
2004 (March): Ten terrorists bombs exploded almost simultaneously during the morning rush hour in Madrid, Spain, killing 202 and injuring more than 1,400.
2004 (May): Terrorists attacked Saudi oil company offices in Khobar, Saudi Arabia, killing 22.
2004 (June): Terrorists kidnapped and executed American Paul Johnson, Jr., in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
2004 (Sept.): Car bomb outside the Australian embassy in Jakarta, Indonesia, killed nine.
2004 (Dec.): Terrorists enter the U.S. Consulate in Jiddah, Saudi Arabia, killing nine (including 4 attackers).
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Wed 11 May, 2005 06:49 pm
parados wrote:
McGentrix wrote:
AQ, al Qaeda I presume, is as strong as ever?

Why, that is beyond ludacris! That makes me want to just point and laugh.

What was the last act of terrorism Osama committed? 9-11. What country is supporting Osama and his small band of trouble makers? None.

You are vastly over rating that poor gang of terrorists.


Interesting take on it McG.. this is from infoplease and only through Dec of last year.source
Quote:
Suspected al-Qaeda Terrorist Acts
1993 (Feb.): Bombing of World Trade Center (WTC); six killed.
1993 (Oct.): Killing of U.S. soldiers in Somalia.
1996 (June): Truck bombing at Khobar Towers barracks in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia, killed 19 Americans.
1998 (Aug.): Bombing of U.S. embassies in East Africa; 224 killed, including 12 Americans.
1999 (Dec.): Plot to bomb millennium celebrations in Seattle foiled when customs agents arrest an Algerian smuggling explosives into the U.S.
2000 (Oct.): Bombing of the USS Cole in port in Yemen; 17 U.S. sailors killed.
2001 (Sept.): Destruction of WTC; attack on Pentagon. Total dead 2,992.
2001 (Dec.): Man tried to denote shoe bomb on flight from Paris to Miami.
2002 (April): Explosion at historic synagogue in Tunisia left 21 dead, including 14 German tourists.
2002 (May): Car exploded outside hotel in Karachi, Pakistan, killing 14, including 11 French citizens.
2002 (June): Bomb exploded outside American consulate in Karachi, Pakistan, killing 12.
2002 (Oct.): Boat crashed into oil tanker off Yemen coast, killing one.
2002 (Oct.): Nightclub bombings in Bali, Indonesia, killed 202, mostly Australian citizens.
2002 (Nov.): Suicide attack on a hotel in Mombasa, Kenya, killed 16.
2003 (May): Suicide bombers killed 34, including 8 Americans, at housing compounds for Westerners in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
2003 (May): Four bombs killed 33 people targeting Jewish, Spanish, and Belgian sites in Casablanca, Morocco.
2003 (Aug.): Suicide car-bomb killed 12, injured 150 at Marriott Hotel in Jakarta, Indonesia.
2003 (Nov.): Explosions rocked a Riyadh, Saudi Arabia housing compound, killing 17.
2003 (Nov.): Suicide car-bombers simultaneously attacked two synagogues in Istanbul, Turkey, killing 25 and injuring hundreds.
2003 (Nov.): Truck bombs detonated at London bank and British consulate in Istanbul, Turkey, killing 26.
2004 (March): Ten terrorists bombs exploded almost simultaneously during the morning rush hour in Madrid, Spain, killing 202 and injuring more than 1,400.
2004 (May): Terrorists attacked Saudi oil company offices in Khobar, Saudi Arabia, killing 22.
2004 (June): Terrorists kidnapped and executed American Paul Johnson, Jr., in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
2004 (Sept.): Car bomb outside the Australian embassy in Jakarta, Indonesia, killed nine.
2004 (Dec.): Terrorists enter the U.S. Consulate in Jiddah, Saudi Arabia, killing nine (including 4 attackers).


Yes, terrorism is a horrible thing. Why do you suppose the US has declared war on it?

No, more to your point, which of those has osama been directly accountable for?
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Wed 11 May, 2005 07:00 pm
Quote:
Yes, terrorism is a horrible thing. Why do you suppose the US has declared war on it?

No, more to your point, which of those has osama been directly accountable for?


Heck, he wasn't DIRECTLY accountable for 9/11 if you want to make that the standard. He certainly wasn't directly accountable for the attack in 1993 on WTC. He didn't plan the attack on the Cole either.

What standard must be met in order for you to claim he was "directly accountable"? Was training enough? Or did he have to be involved in all aspects of planning? Create your standard and we can apply it to all attacks McG. Until then, the list stands as attacks by Al Q, of which Osama trained and funded.
0 Replies
 
Intrepid
 
  1  
Reply Wed 11 May, 2005 08:00 pm
rayban1 wrote:
Laughing

Gee, Intrepid all the shouting is bad for your blood pressure........you must have been one of the people who lost their jobs during Clinton's recession.!!!


Rayban1.....
FYI shouting is like this... SHOUTING. Uppercase, bold type is just to make it easy for you to read.

Is that the extent of your rebuttal? You asked for comment and you got it and all I got was a t-shirt that said something about shouting.

No, I lost my job during the Bush fiasco. My job is now being done by 3 Republicans.

I would stay and have a battle of wits, my friend. But, you are obviously unarmed!

Rolling Eyes
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Wed 11 May, 2005 08:12 pm
So lemme get this straight,

Osama and AQ are directly accountable when it suits YOUR purposes, McG, and not directly when it comes to proving that we've harmed their organization.

Right.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Wed 11 May, 2005 08:17 pm
I really wish you would get it straight.

When you said "Well, he kept his promise, that is, unless you consider the fact that we still haven't caught the number one man responsible, the man who is still coordinating attacks against us, Osama Bin Laden." I assumed you were talking about Osama Bin Laden.

Forgive me for not realizing that you were actually talking about al Qaeda in general. I should have been a better mind reader. Rolling Eyes
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Bush's virtues
  3. » Page 2
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 05/01/2025 at 01:32:29