Everyone Who Dislikes/Likes George W. Bush, Tell Us Why In Your Own Words (1 Viewer)

[Pasty]

As a Christian you are fimilar with Jesus saying at John 17:16 that true Christians are no part of this world. So, getting involved in government goes against what it means to be a Christian.

Wow.

 

[TheTippingPoint]

It's exactly what this discussion is supposed to be for.

We've had 20 threads asking the same questions over and over again, with the same point-counter-point confrontations and battling links and copy-and-paste jobs.

This has been going on for nearly three years on this board.

I figured it would be interesting if we just dropped all the pretenses.

That's a good thing. I'm glad that you did it...

I've come to the point where I can agree to disagree about politics. There was a time when I let someone's political views somewhat change my opinion of that person. But I think I have grown past that, so much to the point that I can just appreciate if people care--one way or another--even if it is different than the way I feel.

 

[DadsDream]

...With that in mind, how can anyone say that history will record Bush as anything but a complete joke of a President???

Because at this point, we only know what we are allowed to know. Facts will continue to surface for the next three decades.

Also we have no way of knowing the future. There is no way to tell if events will play out which will vindicate or condemn Bush's actions and inactions.

With that in mind and with Bush's second term winding down, enough facts have surfaced to lend more weight to the negatives rather than the positives.

But, things can change drastically with just a few revelations.

It was 30 years before we found out about JFK and Marilyn Monroe. Compare that to the glowing LIFE magazine accounts of life in the holsom, ever-faithful Kennedy White House when he was alive.

 

[City Champ]

do i like him? NO

two words...
NEW ORLEANS

FIX MY DAMN CITY!!!

 

[patronius]

I hate the SOB for many reasons, most of which have been covered already. One thing that hasn't been discussed much is his total disregard of the Constitution and abuse of individual rights and personal freedom, all under the odiously named "Patriot" Act. Most spectacularly, he and his AG actually believe that the President has the legal right to pluck any US citizen (think you or me) off the street or from his home, put him in prison forever, never bring charges against him, never provide him with legal representation or access to the Courts, all justified by a simple unchallenged assertion that that person is an "enemy combatant."
Habeas corpus, what's that?

 

[dapperdan]

He tried everything in his power to stop the elderly and sick who were basically choosing between food and drugs from getting cheaper drugs in Canada.

The ghost of Mitch Snyder. Subsitute the elderly and their afflications for homeless.

I would have rephrased it slightly to read:"He tried everything in his power to stop the elderly and sick who were basically choosing between food (sometimes dog food), and drugs from getting cheaper drugs in Canada. The more dramatic the better. Lesson 1: Don't stop with these examples being merely elderly and sick, take it one step further, or two steps: the elderly who eat dog food, the elderly who are crippled, etc.

But I 100% agree with you that he is a true politician. Does he really believe in his words, or does he spout them off just to win an election. I definitely agree with you there. He is all about the winning, and any person or belief that stands in his way is getting thrown under the bus in a heartbeat. And I agree that those are not admirable qualities.

Ever since his election, I've wondered which previous Administration Bush's would ultimately come to resemble the most. Ultimately, Bush's Administration stands on it's own, there are just too many differences with past Administrations. As far as personal qualities, I would say that his willingness to use any and every tool at his disposal for his own political gain is on par with Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon, and Bill Clinton. However, he (Bush) strikes me as a President less interested in policy details than any President in my lifetime, a trait that has not served the country well during this time of war.

 

[DadsDream]

Most spectacularly, he and his AG actually believe that the President has the legal right to pluck any US citizen (think you or me) off the street or from his home, put him in prison forever, never bring charges against him, never provide him with legal representation or access to the Courts, all justified by a simple unchallenged assertion that that person is an "enemy combatant."
Habeas corpus, what's that?

Which puts him in the same league as Abraham Lincoln, who suspended habeas corpus, and FDR, who had thousands of Amercian citizens shipped to internment camps and had their property seized all because of their race.

Does it make it right? No.

Are such actions without precident in the face of threat to the nation? No.

 

[Comus]

My biggest is that OBL is now a footnote.


Side-story:
My friend, Sam, went to school with Bush at Harvard.

Man... a conversation with him, about Bush, and he really gets going. Mostly cuz he saw Bush's partying and silver spoon in school. When one thinks "no dummies graduate from Harvard", remember that every NFL player graduated from college as well; things happen for certain people.

My friend used to be conservative. He jumped into the thick of it and went to Vietnam, while - in his words - Bush stayed back. As he says, "How is is that I went to war and came back liberal, yet all my friends in college that didn't go are more conservative and willing to commit troops, like my / butt / was, to danger".

I haven't gotten him to admit if he partied with him, but he won't say he didn't. he just says, "Man, those were some crazy days".


I wonder if Sam is related to 2884?

 

[cruize]

Dan. So you're saying the drug thing didn't happen?

 

[patronius]

Which puts him in the same league as Abraham Lincoln, who suspended habeas corpus, and FDR, who had thousands of Amercian citizens shipped to internment camps and had their property seized all because of their race.

Does it make it right? No.

Are such actions without precident in the face of threat to the nation? No.

Of course it's not right. Lincoln and FDR were morally reprehensible on this score as well. Because evil has precedent doesn't make it any less evil.

 

[dapperdan]

Dan. So you're saying the drug thing didn't happen?

Do I, personally, agree with that law? No. Do I believe that individuals know more about themselves than the government does; i.e. their budgets, where they should purchase drugs that would most benefit them. Absolutely.

Unfortunately, this is a product of a system that has been in place since the 70's. Back in 1979, Milton Friedman highlighted this very exact phenomena in the U.S. medical system during his 10 part series Free To Choose.

So is Bush a better President by deliberately choosing to ignore the wishes of the FDA?
IMO, yes, he would be a better President by leaning on the side of individuals over the FDA, But it's not such an easy issue. It's not as if the FDA is an arm of the Federal Government that is filled with Bush backers, it's not a case of cronyism regarding the FDA's position on the matter.

 

[BullDawg]

BAD

2) Letting go of Rumsfeld

If you're saying letting go of Rumsfeld was a bad thing, most of the DoD whole-heartedly disagrees with you.

 

[DadsDream]

Of course it's not right. Lincoln and FDR were morally reprehensible on this score as well. Because evil has precedent doesn't make it any less evil.

We're cool.

I often read stuff which implies that all such things stem directly Bush (and/or Rove, Cheney, Rumsfeld) and have never happened before in our country.

Frankly, I don't give Bush & Co. that much credit.

One thing which catches my eye though, is the use of the word "evil."

I balk at using that word to describe Lincoln or FDR or Bush or any U.S. president...

...except maybe U.S. Grant. Hey, I'm Southern, OK?

I also balked at Bush's "Axis of Evil." My skin crawled when he said it. "Mistake," I said aloud.

But, I readily accepted Reagan using the term to describe the Soviet Union as an "Empire of Evil."

Why? Hmmm...I'll have to think about that.

 

[nolazach]

I don't like W because he has spread the country further apart. He had the greatest oppurtunity since F. Roosevelt to unite the Nation and he dropped the ball. He pushed Iraq based on his and his advisors agenda, not trying to build an actual coalition. He failed with that war, and it will be remembered as one of the bigges military mistakes in history. He did very little to help the people. Heck his continuing to read a childern's book when he knew we were under attack was prof that he can't think on his own. He has to be told what to do, what to say. He comes off very unintelligent. He is one of the worst presidents of all time. He did nothing during Katina, he did nothing positive for this country. Except leave us a legacy of Debt, and what could become the longest war in American history. It is aready the second longest. Thanks W.

Oh and he didn't win the popular vote, he WAS NOT the person picked by the people. The GOP stole that election. Both times the votes came to a couple of disricts in one state. I am just glad he is a lame duck, and even Republicans are figuring out its time to just let him fall.


I also noticed that this thread should be called "Tells us what you think about the president and I will counter everything you think"

We may have the same "dream" but its seem you are the only one pro-bush besides "scary man avatar"

Most of all above all else he let Amercans die in New Orleans. We had everything we needed o start a rescue effort. He could have takenanything he needed to rescue people. He could have taken over airline flights and sent them here, turned every helicopter into a rescue unit. The list goes on. I am not a military person, but I bet every single soldier would have been more than happy to actually HELP our people. It dosen't take long to get anywhere in the US. We can stop all flights in a few hours, but we can't send them to NOLA????
Look at the "saints are coming video" Aside from a harrier fixing the levees all of those things should have happened. What if it had been an actual attack???

I feel helpless because of that idiot. I definetly would have rathered anyone but him, even Sharpton.

 

[philipkw]

Which puts him in the same league as Abraham Lincoln, who suspended habeas corpus, and FDR, who had thousands of Amercian citizens shipped to internment camps and had their property seized all because of their race.

Does it make it right? No.

Are such actions without precident in the face of threat to the nation? No.

Pardon me while I turn around and puke. Let's not lose our heads and compare the Lincoln administration with the Bush administration. Lincoln surrounded himself with a brilliant cabinet filled with his political rivals. Having a fully realized intellect, he welcomed the challenging arguments these men would pose and put country before politics and patronage in search of viable solution to the problems vexing the nation. Bush surrounded himself with people who share his narrow view despite their lack of experience and corporate conflicts of interest. People who opposed his flawed ideology and tried to bring reason and historical context to the debate have been unceremoniously dumped (e.g. Powell, Shinseki). While the Civil War raged, Lincoln spent countless hours in the library reading books on military strategy with an aim to bring a speedy end and save American blood and treasure. Poor Dubya, it’s been reported, had no idea the difference between Sunni and a Shiite just 2 short months before the Iraq invasion. When faced with military blunders, Lincoln had no qualms about replacing his military leaders. Only to score political points did Dubya finally dismiss Rummy.

Although a fine politician (ie. skilled liar and master manipulator), Bush is an intellectual lightweight and totally bereft of curiosity. The same cannot be said for Lincoln. Comparing the erosion of liberty in Bush’s war of terror ($1 to Borat) and Lincoln’s temporary suspension of habeus corpus is a red herring of the highest order. Lincoln was facing a war, not of his making, on American soil where it was (often literally) brother against brother and was struggling to save the Union. Bush <b>chose</b> to engage the US in an illegal war and has displayed unprecedented fecklessness and a rampant disregard of the Constitution in prosecuting it.

Comparing Bush’s motives with Lincoln’s motives should be a crime under the Patriot Act.