Has Bush united or divided the country ?

FreeDuck wrote:

I would think that the country is pretty much united on those three topics.

We're united on taking active measures, even military measures, to stop the spread of WMD to high risk countries like Iraq and Iran? Really? Fascinating.

You have no substantive attack on my argument. It wasn't a tirade. It is a factual description of the tactics used by your own party in order to divide America.

Tactics such as the 'gay marriage' issue, which the Republicans bring up every election in order to get voters to the polls, and then never do a damn thing about it later.

Tactics such as using 1.6 Billion dollars of taxpayer money on propaganda promoting their own programs to the taxpayers, in just the last two years. Don't believe me? http://www.breitbart.com/news/na/060213231136.kobx68wq.html

Tactics such as having party leaders such as Limbaugh, Hannity, O'reilly, Coulter. People who advocate killing Liberals, deporting them, calling them traitors, accusing them of aiding Al Qaeda, questioning their patriotism constantly. When asked, the Republican party says 'oh, they aren't leaders, noone pays attention to them'; But the money, tv numbers, book sales, and appearances don't lie. They ARE leaders of the Republican party, every bit as much as the elected ones.

The current Administration aren't even conservative! In the slightest! Huge government spending increases during their term, Huge debt increases, Gigantic increases to Entitlement programs(Prescription drug benefit is going to cost trillions, great job), not a single veto, interntational meddling, scandals - doesn't that sound like the way you would describe a Democratic administration?

In order to keep conservatives from figuring this out, your Leaders use Divisive politics to play the Conservatives off of the increasingly Liberal left, using Abortion, Gay marriage, and Fear - fear of terrorism, with the security blanket being National defense - and they have had some success doing this. Up until now, that is; people are starting to wake up.

This is why Bush's approval has been less than 40% for most of a year now, why Senate Republicans have had much lower numbers than predicted just 6 months ago, why the Dems look better than they ever thought they would after the 2004 election. And the scandals, oh, the scandals, I know you hate this - I imagine you hate it about as much as you loved the Clinton scandals!

But they aren't going away - DeLay, Abramoff, Frist, Ney, Safavin, Libby, now Cheney; how many leaders can you lose to scandal before the whole thing starts to unravel?

Therefore I predict the divisive politics will be dragged right back out into the fore this year. I dare you to turn a critical eye to the Republicans and see what they've become while you were busy insulting the Dems.

Now, for crying out loud, please cite examples in context where any of the above advocated "killing liberals, deporting them, ......."

"When contemplating college liberals, you really regret once again that John Walker is not getting the death penalty. We need to execute people like John Walker in order to physically intimidate liberals, by making them realize that they can be killed, too. Otherwise, they will turn out to be outright traitors."

Her words were applauded by National Security Adviser Condoleeza Rice, Secretary of Health and Human Services Tommy Thompson, and Lynne Cheney (wife of Vice President Cheney), all of whom were in attendance.

My only regret with Timothy McVeigh is he did not go to the New York Times Building.

"Wouldn't it be great if anybody who speaks out against this country, to kick them out of the country? Anybody that threatens this country, kick 'em out. We'd get rid of Michael Moore, we'd get rid of half the Democratic Party if we would just import that law. That would be fabulous. The Supreme Court ought to look into this. Absolutely brilliant idea out there."

From the November 8 broadcast of Fox News' The Radio Factor with Bill O'Reilly:

O'REILLY: Hey, you know, if you want to ban military recruiting, fine, but I'm not going to give you another nickel of federal money. You know, if I'm the president of the United States, I walk right into Union Square, I set up my little presidential podium, and I say, "Listen, citizens of San Francisco, if you vote against military recruiting, you're not going to get another nickel in federal funds. Fine. You want to be your own country? Go right ahead."

And if Al Qaeda comes in here and blows you up, we're not going to do anything about it. We're going to say, look, every other place in America is off limits to you, except San Francisco. You want to blow up the Coit Tower? Go ahead.

The 210-foot Coit Tower was dedicated in 1933 and contains a museum and murals that depict working life in 1930s California.

I agree with some of the above. Yet many liberals attempt to cast Bush as some kind of ultra-right wing extremist or something.

Most of us see the corruption banter by Democrats these days as extremely hypocritical because there was little or no interest in doing anything about corruption during the previous administration.

I believe he has united all the whacko's, mental patients, uneducated youth, over-educated pseudo-intellectuals, as well as the dotty, aberrant, delusional, eccentric, odd, queer, strange, foolish, senseless, witless, irrational, unreasonable, delirious, distraught, frantic, frenzied, and hysterical against him.

That has to be good for the country. Keeping the loons busy hating Bush while the country moves on without them.

"When contemplating college liberals, you really regret once again that John Walker is not getting the death penalty. We need to execute people like John Walker in order to physically intimidate liberals, by making them realize that they can be killed, too. Otherwise, they will turn out to be outright traitors."

Her words were applauded by National Security Adviser Condoleeza Rice, Secretary of Health and Human Services Tommy Thompson, and Lynne Cheney (wife of Vice President Cheney), all of whom were in attendance.

Here's a gem:

Quote:

My only regret with Timothy McVeigh is he did not go to the New York Times Building.

http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/a/anncoulter167042.html

Limbaugh:

Quote:

"Wouldn't it be great if anybody who speaks out against this country, to kick them out of the country? Anybody that threatens this country, kick 'em out. We'd get rid of Michael Moore, we'd get rid of half the Democratic Party if we would just import that law. That would be fabulous. The Supreme Court ought to look into this. Absolutely brilliant idea out there."

http://members.verizon.net/~dmatson/blog/2005/08/my-new-favorite-rush-limbaugh-quote.html

O'reilly:

Quote:

From the November 8 broadcast of Fox News' The Radio Factor with Bill O'Reilly:

O'REILLY: Hey, you know, if you want to ban military recruiting, fine, but I'm not going to give you another nickel of federal money. You know, if I'm the president of the United States, I walk right into Union Square, I set up my little presidential podium, and I say, "Listen, citizens of San Francisco, if you vote against military recruiting, you're not going to get another nickel in federal funds. Fine. You want to be your own country? Go right ahead."

And if Al Qaeda comes in here and blows you up, we're not going to do anything about it. We're going to say, look, every other place in America is off limits to you, except San Francisco. You want to blow up the Coit Tower? Go ahead.

The 210-foot Coit Tower was dedicated in 1933 and contains a museum and murals that depict working life in 1930s California.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200511100008

Coulter was the major speaker at the CPAC this year. Cheney is giving his only interview after the shooting incident to Brit f'ing Hume only. You're kidding yourself if you think these people are not leaders of your party, the same way you view certain liberal loudmouths as leaders of the Democratic party.

Quote:

I agree with some of the above. Yet many liberals attempt to cast Bush as some kind of ultra-right wing extremist or something.

They don't act in a right-wing extremist way about anything except religion - abortion and stem cell research - until election time comes around. Then they talk about right-wing issues in order to motivate the extreme base, but only until the election is over.

This is what I mean when I say divisive politics; drawing very sharp lines between Conservative/Liberal by focusing on morality issues, and getting the public to ignore what the administration is really doing.

Quote:

Most of us see the corruption banter by Democrats these days as extremely hypocritical because there was little or no interest in doing anything about corruption during the previous administration.

So, you are looking for a permanent, cyclical state where no party has any moral authority on Corruption, because the preceding party had no authority, et cetera?

Sooner or later the Dems are going to be back in control; and if your party doesn't take corruption seriously (well, they've seriously taken it to new levels) then they will be unable to complain later, you agree?

Wasn't Walker the traitor with the Taliban? Her point was that if other young leftists like Walker decide to do what Walker did, an example of punishment would be a deterrent to them. Perfectly logical.

Brandon9000 wrote:

FreeDuck wrote:

I would think that the country is pretty much united on those three topics.

We're united on taking active measures, even military measures, to stop the spread of WMD to high risk countries like Iraq and Iran? Really? Fascinating.

Was that one of the three things you listed? Really? Fascinating.

1. Terrorism
2. The proliferation of WMD to nations which cannot be relied upon to use them only or primarily as deterrents.
3. The proliferation of WMD to so many countries that their eventual use becomes likely.

The deep thinkers who hear compare Bush with M.L. King and the American revolutionaries are ignoring a key difference between Bush and the others.

Bush claimed he'd be a uniter--wasn't that mentioed at the outset of this thread? King clearly wanted to disrupt an unjust system as did the American revolutionaries. Bush is supposed to be leading a country and setting an example for the free world.

Why not compare to him to other world leaders? I can imagine why not...

Your "point" is a logical fallacy and a rationalization.

Ann Coulter:

Quote:

"When contemplating college liberals, you really regret once again that John Walker is not getting the death penalty. We need to execute people like John Walker in order to physically intimidate liberals, by making them realize that they can be killed, too. Otherwise, they will turn out to be outright traitors."

Her words were applauded by National Security Adviser Condoleeza Rice, Secretary of Health and Human Services Tommy Thompson, and Lynne Cheney (wife of Vice President Cheney), all of whom were in attendance.

Wasn't Walker the traitor with the Taliban? Her point was that if other young leftists like Walker decide to do what Walker did, an example of punishment would be a deterrent to them. Perfectly logical.

Leftist? Walker was a leftist? He was an extremely conservative convert to Islaam. That's your definition of leftist?

Coulter said, and I quote, "We need to execute people like John Walker in order to physically intimidate liberals." And you think this is a perfectly logical thing to say? I'd like to hear you repeat that this is a logical and correct thing to say. Ad no, it wasn't out of context; she meant exactly what she said. I can hunt down plenty of other quotes for you, if you like.

Quote:

Here's a gem:

Quote:

My only regret with Timothy McVeigh is he did not go to the New York Times Building.

http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/a/anncoulter167042.html

Provide some context. You can't take a sentence out of context. Sounds like a point that if he had to blow up a building, maybe blowing up the New York Times would have meant less loss. Sounds reasonable as a tongue in cheek comment.

What are you, ten years old? Are you f*cking kidding me? It isn't reasonable even as a tounge-in-cheek comment.

Quote:

Limbaugh:

Quote:

"Wouldn't it be great if anybody who speaks out against this country, to kick them out of the country? Anybody that threatens this country, kick 'em out. We'd get rid of Michael Moore, we'd get rid of half the Democratic Party if we would just import that law. That would be fabulous. The Supreme Court ought to look into this. Absolutely brilliant idea out there."

http://members.verizon.net/~dmatson/blog/2005/08/my-new-favorite-rush-limbaugh-quote.html

Another case of out of context. Sounds like Limbaugh illustrating the absurd with absurdity, which he does on a regular basis.

Right, so he was just kidding.

Quote:

O'reilly:

Quote:

From the November 8 broadcast of Fox News' The Radio Factor with Bill O'Reilly:

O'REILLY: Hey, you know, if you want to ban military recruiting, fine, but I'm not going to give you another nickel of federal money. You know, if I'm the president of the United States, I walk right into Union Square, I set up my little presidential podium, and I say, "Listen, citizens of San Francisco, if you vote against military recruiting, you're not going to get another nickel in federal funds. Fine. You want to be your own country? Go right ahead."

And if Al Qaeda comes in here and blows you up, we're not going to do anything about it. We're going to say, look, every other place in America is off limits to you, except San Francisco. You want to blow up the Coit Tower? Go ahead.

The 210-foot Coit Tower was dedicated in 1933 and contains a museum and murals that depict working life in 1930s California.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200511100008

Perfectly logical. He isn't advocating destroying San Francisco; he simply is advising San Francisco to support the defense being provided them now against terrorism, but if they choose not too, why should the protection be provided?

deciding whether or not to allow military recruiting on one's college campus does not invalidate one from being protected by the US army.

And it's a stupid thing to say anyways. The town of SanFran has thousands of veterans living in it, families, children, people who have nothing to do with the college. It's just more hate spewed out by your media leaders towards liberals.

Quote:

Coulter was the major speaker at the CPAC this year. Cheney is giving his only interview after the shooting incident to Brit f'ing Hume only. You're kidding yourself if you think these people are not leaders of your party, the same way you view certain liberal loudmouths as leaders of the Democratic party.

I do not view Michael Moore or George Soros as leaders of the Democratic Party. They are big supporters but not leaders. Perhaps a distinction you don't agree with but it is a distinction. People do not vote for Soros or Michael Moore, nor do they vote for Limbaugh, Hannity, and others. Howard Dean, Kerry, Gore, the Clintons are examples of leaders of the party.

Ah, you don't seem to understand that people vote with their wallets. While these 'leaders' aren't voted in with a ballot, millions of conservatives have worked together to propel these people into the limelight, and keep them there, because they agree with the things they say or write.

Quote:

Quote:

I agree with some of the above. Yet many liberals attempt to cast Bush as some kind of ultra-right wing extremist or something.

They don't act in a right-wing extremist way about anything except religion - abortion and stem cell research - until election time comes around. Then they talk about right-wing issues in order to motivate the extreme base, but only until the election is over.

This is what I mean when I say divisive politics; drawing very sharp lines between Conservative/Liberal by focusing on morality issues, and getting the public to ignore what the administration is really doing.

Quote:

Most of us see the corruption banter by Democrats these days as extremely hypocritical because there was little or no interest in doing anything about corruption during the previous administration.

So, you are looking for a permanent, cyclical state where no party has any moral authority on Corruption, because the preceding party had no authority, et cetera?

Sooner or later the Dems are going to be back in control; and if your party doesn't take corruption seriously (well, they've seriously taken it to new levels) then they will be unable to complain later, you agree?

I am simply asserting that the Democratic Party needs to be consistent when applying their so-called desire to root out corrruption. They have not been.

The Republican party surely has been consistent with corruption issues; consistently on the wrong side of them. There are several major scandals going on right now, worse than any blowjob. If you wish to have any moral authority later on, you'd better damn well hope that your party cleans itself up.

And I'm well aware that you would rather insult Democrats than face the reality of your own party.

My point was that dividing a country does not mean that one wasn't doing the right thing.

I'm sure that Bush would have greatly preferred to unite the country.

That is absurd. Repeating the same lie a thousand times doesn't make it true. 9/11 united the country. The sociopathic political hack in the White House could not even hold that unity together.

Brandon is so typical of the loyal Bush fringe who, because of a deep emotional void, cannot admit to being wrong and thus supporting this thug becomes ingrained in his being.

Yes, items 2 and 3 below. Oh, perhaps I should mention that by taking a stand on something, I meant considering it very important and even being willing to act.

You're digging yourself in deeper, Okie. You should have just taken the examples provided and admitted you were wrong, rather than forcing me to point out how further wrong you are.
Cycloptichorn

I don't have any advice that will help you, except try to get a life that is not so paranoid. They are not going to come and get you and take you away. Concentrate on a job or career that you like, plus your family, and you will be surprised at how your anger, fear, and hatred of Republicans will subside. If you've attended some institution of learning that has brainwashed you into your tortured mindset, try to put it behind you. Best of Luck.