Bush Supporters' Aftermath Thread IV

You say that as though someone cares about your opinion.

0 Replies

McGentrix wrote:

You say that as though someone cares about your opinion.

You wouldn't respond if you didn't care Smile

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Naw, just love to "rub it in" when there are others who agree with my opinion about Ticomaya. The only supporters Ticomaya has when he says anything about me are you and just a handful of other neocons/Bush supporters. That's the way I like it; it adds to my enjoyment of a2k.

0 Replies

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Ticomaya wrote:
Cycloptichorn wrote:
Ticomaya, do you still see yourself as a 'Bush supporter?'

Cycloptichorn

Yes.

Even in the face of, well, the continued idiocy that we see coming from the man?

I submit this says very poor things about your character, Tico.

Cycloptichorn

I think the fact you don't support Bush says very poor things about your character, Cyclops.

0 Replies

Ticomaya wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:
Ticomaya wrote:
Cycloptichorn wrote:
Ticomaya, do you still see yourself as a 'Bush supporter?'

Cycloptichorn

Yes.

Even in the face of, well, the continued idiocy that we see coming from the man?

I submit this says very poor things about your character, Tico.

Cycloptichorn

I think the fact you don't support Bush says very poor things about your character, Cyclops.

You display loyalty to a fault, Tico. In fact, this is quite representative of the 28% or so of Americans who still share your opinion.

Party
Country
Truth

That's the order of importance for Republicans these days. Loyalty to the leader trumps each and every other concern.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Ticomaya wrote:
Cycloptichorn wrote:
Ticomaya wrote:
Cycloptichorn wrote:
Ticomaya, do you still see yourself as a 'Bush supporter?'

Cycloptichorn

Yes.

Even in the face of, well, the continued idiocy that we see coming from the man?

I submit this says very poor things about your character, Tico.

Cycloptichorn

I think the fact you don't support Bush says very poor things about your character, Cyclops.

You display loyalty to a fault, Tico. In fact, this is quite representative of the 28% or so of Americans who still share your opinion.

Party
Country
Truth

That's the order of importance for Republicans these days. Loyalty to the leader trumps each and every other concern.

Cycloptichorn

It's got little to do with loyalty, Cyclops. But it appears you think that just because you and your leftist friends have maintained over time that Bush is an idiot, everyone is supposed to jump on your bandwagon, and you can only attribute the cause for my not doing so to blind loyalty. As McG said, I could care less about your opinion concerning whether or not Bush is deserving of my support.

0 Replies

Ticomaya wrote:

As McG said, I could care less about your opinion concerning whether or not Bush is deserving of my support.

It's "I couldn't care less..."

Smile

0 Replies

Seems like the commercial enterprise on "Bush is an idiot" is successful - for good reason.

http://irregulartimes.com/sbushidiot.html

0 Replies

Ticomaya wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:
Ticomaya wrote:
Cycloptichorn wrote:
Ticomaya wrote:
Cycloptichorn wrote:
Ticomaya, do you still see yourself as a 'Bush supporter?'

Cycloptichorn

Yes.

Even in the face of, well, the continued idiocy that we see coming from the man?

I submit this says very poor things about your character, Tico.

Cycloptichorn

I think the fact you don't support Bush says very poor things about your character, Cyclops.

You display loyalty to a fault, Tico. In fact, this is quite representative of the 28% or so of Americans who still share your opinion.

Party
Country
Truth

That's the order of importance for Republicans these days. Loyalty to the leader trumps each and every other concern.

Cycloptichorn

It's got little to do with loyalty, Cyclops. But it appears you think that just because you and your leftist friends have maintained over time that Bush is an idiot, everyone is supposed to jump on your bandwagon, and you can only attribute the cause for my not doing so to blind loyalty. As McG said, I could care less about your opinion concerning whether or not Bush is deserving of my support.

Like I said - poor character.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Quote:

because you and your leftist friends have maintained over time that Bush is an idiot, everyone is supposed to jump on your bandwagon

But the important questions, Tico, are

"Is our children learning?"

and Can we "put food on our families?"

0 Replies

It's not quite right to pile on. Tico is the only one to admit to still support Bush and I'm curious why. Why he still supports him, I mean. Perhaps if we could just hold off on the character judgments he might tell us.

I'm thinking it's along the lines of "I support President Bush('s retirement sooner than later)".

0 Replies

FreeDuck wrote:

It's not quite right to pile on. Tico is the only one to admit to still support Bush and I'm curious why. Why he still supports him, I mean. Perhaps if we could just hold off on the character judgments he might tell us.

Why should I not support him? Why do you think my opinion should have changed? I'm not going to put my finger in the air and change my opinion just because the general support for the war in Iraq is waning , or because you anti-Bushies have continued to maintain he ought not be supported. Had the war been going better, if the insurgents/terrorists had not put up as strong of a resistance, if the support of the war remained high, would you have changed your opinion of Bush and supported him? No, I'm not swayed by the fickle wind of opinion on this subject, nor am I swayed by whether the war is going swimmingly or otherwise. The terrorists believe that America is a paper tiger that will turn tail in defeat after a few blows. We have shown otherwise thus far in this effort, but the anti-war leftists would prefer that we do exactly that. You might be wishy-washy, but I'm not.

Americans should all want their President to succeed -- regardless of whom it is -- but no so with most leftists in this country, who stridently believe Gore won the 2000 election, Kerry won the 2004 election, and Bush stole both of them. You couldn't get over the fact that Bush was the President and ought to be supported. You wanted him to fail from the beginning of his presidency. And you delight if the news coming out of Iraq is not good. As I've said many times, I believe most leftists want the US to lose because that furthers their political views.

Here's an old A2K thread on that very subject: "I want the US to lose the war in Iraq"

0 Replies

That would be true for most presidents; support our president, that is. However, Bush is another animal in the white house that approves of torture, lying about illegal wiretaps, negating habeas corpus, alienating most of our allies, and starting an illegal war that has now killed and maimed thousands upon thousands - not only our military men and women, but innocent men, women and children of Iraq.

You can continue to support this sicko who says "each life is precious," but doesn't seem at all concerned about the increase in the killing fields of Iraq.

Respect and support is earned. You seem oblivious to this simple fact/truism.

0 Replies

cicerone imposter wrote:

That would be true for most presidents; support our president, that is. However, Bush is another animal in the white house that approves of torture, lying about illegal wiretaps, negating habeas corpus, alienating most of our allies, and starting an illegal war that has now killed and maimed thousands upon thousands - not only our military men and women, but innocent men, women and children of Iraq.

You can continue to support this sicko who says "each life is precious," but doesn't seem at all concerned about the increase in the killing fields of Iraq.

Respect and support is earned. You seem oblivious to this simple fact/truism.

Whoa boy. It's too early to say 'killing fields'. Wait and see what happens if there's a quick pullout...

0 Replies

Ticomaya wrote:

FreeDuck wrote:
It's not quite right to pile on. Tico is the only one to admit to still support Bush and I'm curious why. Why he still supports him, I mean. Perhaps if we could just hold off on the character judgments he might tell us.

Why should I not support him? Why do you think my opinion should have changed? I'm not going to put my finger in the air and change my opinion just because the general support for the war in Iraq is waning , or because you anti-Bushies have continued to maintain he ought not be supported. Had the war been going better, if the insurgents/terrorists had not put up as strong of a resistance, if the support of the war remained high, would you have changed your opinion of Bush and supported him? No, I'm not swayed by the fickle wind of opinion on this subject, nor am I swayed by whether the war is going swimmingly or otherwise. The terrorists believe that America is a paper tiger that will turn tail in defeat after a few blows. We have shown otherwise thus far in this effort, but the anti-war leftists would prefer that we do exactly that. You might be wishy-washy, but I'm not.

Americans should all want their President to succeed -- regardless of whom it is -- but no so with most leftists in this country, who stridently believe Gore won the 2000 election, Kerry won the 2004 election, and Bush stole both of them. You couldn't get over the fact that Bush was the President and ought to be supported. You wanted him to fail from the beginning of his presidency. And you delight if the news coming out of Iraq is not good. As I've said many times, I believe most leftists want the US to lose because that furthers their political views.

Here's an old A2K thread on that very subject: "I want the US to lose the war in Iraq"

Very patriotic, that.

Someone wrote last week:

"What is the difference between a woman and a neoconservative?
-You sometimes a woman on the battlefield."

0 Replies

We get Jon Stewart's "The Daily Show" here, one day late. He has been doing a good job lately (not sparing Democrats, incidentally) and has noted that many conservative commentators have unequivocally turned against GWB.

But it wasn't for killing innocent people overseas
Nor lying to the American people
Nor taking his country to war on a false premise
Nor for using the military to enrich US industrial conglomerates at the expense of the American taxpayer
Nor for policies of kidnap, rendition and torture
Nor for the policy of interment without trial
Nor being the stupidest* and least coherent incumbent ever

No, it was for his handling of the immigration issue.

*no, he didn't think up these strokes on his own

0 Replies

CORRECTION- sorry, word missing from the above

Someone wrote last week:

"What is the difference between a woman and a neoconservative?
-You sometimes see a woman on the battlefield."

0 Replies

Er, that should be "internment without trial", not interment. We haven't started that, at least not yet to my knowledge.

Tico is worried about "terrorists" attacking the USA, as am I. Does he ever think why they might want to do that? On how many countries since 1945 has the USA dropped bombs? The number, usually without any prior declaration of war, may surprise you.

0 Replies

OCCOM BILL wrote:

cicerone imposter wrote:
That would be true for most presidents; support our president, that is. However, Bush is another animal in the white house that approves of torture, lying about illegal wiretaps, negating habeas corpus, alienating most of our allies, and starting an illegal war that has now killed and maimed thousands upon thousands - not only our military men and women, but innocent men, women and children of Iraq.

You can continue to support this sicko who says "each life is precious," but doesn't seem at all concerned about the increase in the killing fields of Iraq.

Respect and support is earned. You seem oblivious to this simple fact/truism.
Whoa boy. It's too early to say 'killing fields'. Wait and see what happens if there's a quick pullout...

True it is not accurate to call the situation in Iraq 'killing fields' with the comparison of Saigon.

Nevertheless, the Iraq situation is horrible enough. Just how bad we don't know because there has not been a reliable body count of civilians who have died as a result of the invasion of Iraq directly or indirectly. A person only needs to keep up with the news, however, to get a sense of how bad it is.

This is pretty interesting to get a few facts of the situation in Iraq

If this had a necessary war and if all those other things didn't take place and if they went about it in the right way by listening to people with differing viewpoints; then if we were still loosing, I believe Americans would have continued to have supported the war despite loosing. It is all the misconceptions and everything else which has come light since the invasion pilled on to the horrible situation in Iraq which has turned the American people against it; with good reason. In fact it is unreasonable to hold on to the support of it all knowing everything we now know.

0 Replies

Bush Supporters' Aftermath Thread IV

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know