What do you think of Bush NOW?

[Tachikaze]

Want to know what's really funny? I have pretty much hated everything about his presidency until I read this article:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12034586/

where he said this:



Then I thought to myself, "Hey, Bush is actually making a little bit of sense for a change..."

Bush is an antichrist.

I agree with Goofball. This was one time when I thought Bush took the right side. I know he probably did it for the wrong reasons, but I agree with the result.

[Divinus Arma]

When libs agree with Bush, there is a problem.

Here are my thoughts about Bush right at this moment:

Warning: Suggestive Imagery

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

[Strike For The South]

He disgusts me. I use to midly dislike him but he supported the immgration bill. Selling out the soul of the country for a few votes.

[Samurai Waki]

I've stayed out of the political scene for the most part. Bush is by no means a good president, in fact he just a bad president, who as it so happens got elected at the wrong time. Perhaps if he followed Reagan or his father instead of Clinton things would be a bit different, but alas, we cannot dwell on what ifs. I know Kerry wouldn't have been a great president either, he promised too much, and his arrogance was unbelievable. I like people who walk the razor's edge, people who ignore the bull**** and focus on the things that matter... I'm not concerned about right or left, I just want a President who knows how to get the job done not for his party, or for himself, but for the people he presides over. I think if Colin Powell was nominated he do fine, but as it stands he shows no interest, and John McCain is the second best choice in my views. He supported Bush on the Dubai Port Deal, when nobody else would, not because he has any love for the man, but because he knew it was right for diplomatic and financial reasons.

[Divinus Arma]

Call me old-fashioned.

If I felt that way (and the way communicated in the first post), and I was an active-duty military guy, oathed to support and defend the constitution and obey the prez, and all... and was aware, because of my extensive military training and experience, that the UCMJ has harsh penalties for mutiny or sedition, disparagement of the national command authority, and conduct that brings discredit to the service...

What's your point? I have every right to question the decisions of our leadership. I do not, however, have a right to act in a manner contrary to that oath which I have sworn to defend. I can say pretty much whatever I want so long as it does not interfere with my official capacity. I am still a citizen. Furthermore, what the hell are you talking about, discredit to my service. I suggest you clarify this point.

I guess that tomorrow, instead of sitting behind my taxpayer-paid-for computer at work (that military duty thing that taxpayers are also paying for, on top of the taxpayer-funded broadband internet),

And what point are you making now? What is that you are suggesting?

I'd just feel honor-bound to report to my commanding officer and tell him that I couldn't conscienciously continue showing up for work anymore, since our fearless leader/commander-in-chief disagrees so fundamentally with my own point of view.

That is so totally absurd, you insult me just making the comment. Your whole rant disgusts me.

Maybe instead, I'd just have another Starbucks, and show up at the office a bit after the cannon has fired, and see what more sedition and disaffection I could breed on an internet game forum.

What have they done to my military?

Get off your high horse and don't attack the character of my service. Have you lost your mind?

:old veteran rant ends:

Gee. I guess this qualifies you to be a dick, huh?

[Ser Clegane]

Please try to keep the discussion civil, guys (and avoid getting personal)

Thanks



Ser Clegane

[KukriKhan]

We shall abide. Thank you for your patience with us in your house.

We shall engage in PM.

[Taffy_is_a_Taff]

Bush, eh?

why doesn't he just create the 51st state: Old Mexico.
I'm sure Fox would be on side.

[Tachikaze]

We shall abide. Thank you for your patience with us in your house.

We shall engage in PM.

I don't think you're the one who needs to apologize. Your criticisms were not personal.

. . . well, unless Bush is reading this.

[Al Khalifah]

Reagan was!

If you would define "a great leader of a nation" as a man who authorised the selling of arms to Iran (and Iraq at the same time - while they were at war) and whose administration used the funds generated by said arms deal to fund an anti-populist terrorist group in Nicaragua (not to mention also using the CIA to wage covert warfare in the country as well), then yes, he was a pretty decent guy.

This is a man who routinely defied Congress and if you wanted a person to blame for the the the terror crisis that faces America right now, I'd have this guy high on my list. Interventionalism may as well have been this man's middle name - his policies may well have worked at the time, but he put America, both militarily and economically on a foundation of sand.

The continued belief that he is America's greatest president is beyond belief to me.

[solypsist]

"hating" bush is far different from hating the platforms and activities of his party and administration.

do i hate bush? no. do i think he's a manchurian candidate? you bet.

[Lemur]

Is Bush really such a terrible president, or has he just had to reside over some very terrible times?

[Alexander the Pretty Good]

Al Khalifah - not the "greatest", just one of the greats.

Or at least, pretty good ().

He did bring down the USSR, in my book - though arguing about that would be OT.

Soly - he works for the manchurians!?!?!!111

Eh, I don't think that gives him enough credit, but probably isn't too far off, either.

[Major Robert Dump]

I dunno, raiding the federal Crime Victims Fund seems like such a good idea to pay for wanton spending and tax cuts, doesn't it? How can anyone disapprove of taking funds from the CVF and diverting it to the general treasury I don't know, I think rape victims and grieving families are stupid, who cares if most of the funds come from assets seized from the badguys in the crimes.

So lets see....an annual cap was put on the fund years ago to prevent excessive spending and abuse. Apparently that cap is a little low, since theres now 1.5 billion surplus, so rather than raising the cap or -- god forbid -- going back to help who were denied assistance because their crime happened too darned late in the fiscal year (sorry, ma'am if you were raped earlier in the year we could help you)

What a stupid, stupid idea.

Pretend this never happened:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/relea...0040417-1.html

Of course lots of people were saying similar things about Bush early in his presidency, even when a good portion of folks who voted for him actually believed he represented them, but people just saw him as a bumbling, illiterate dooder and worried he would get smashed in the next election. Then a few planes came along and saved him

[rory_20_uk]

The economy is not in a state as he's managing to issue more and more treasury bonds (who many trillion is it now?) Basically giving the next person the consequences of his mess to sort out.

He might have stopped with the "them and us", but that's only because you can only wade into the swamp so far before stopping. He's gone further than the clinically sane, but it seems his corporate minders have finally restrained him.

Kerry is worse... good analysis guys. Whatever Bush has done, Kerry would have done worse. Slight partisan flavour here?

And with immigration. The country requires these immigrants to function, as Americans seemingly can't be bothered to do these jobs (same in the UK). So rather than leaving things in the mess they are at the moment he's trying to sort it out (I agree, business drives this, not humanity). I think that this is one thing he's done right recently.

[Taffy_is_a_Taff]

Kerry is worse... good analysis guys. Whatever Bush has done, Kerry would have done worse. Slight partisan flavour here?

Edit: nevermind.

you should see Kerry in action, a true douche. I'm sure he could have done better in the elction campaign if he just didn't say anything.

[Major Robert Dump]

Rory said:

And with immigration. The country requires these immigrants to function, as Americans seemingly can't be bothered to do these jobs (same in the UK). So rather than leaving things in the mess they are at the moment he's trying to sort it out (I agree, business drives this, not humanity). I think that this is one thing he's done right recently

This is garbage. They arent doing jobs americans dont want to do. They are doing jobs that employers wont pay americans enough to do because the illegal workforce has driven down wages, which is also an indirect result of WORLD TRADE and a GLOBAL ECONOMY because as one sector outsources it drives down prices of everything related to it. Theres no need to pay people 9 dollars an hour to be a groundskeeper when you can buy a made-in-china lawnmower at wal-mart for 69 dollars or pay a landscaping company who uses 5.35 illegal laborers.

For gods sake, even the NYT and Wash -- two very liberal papers -- are running opeds with solid research showing that these people dont pay the taxes to cover the benfits they consume, and they have driven down the low/no-skill average wage by 8%.

70% dude. Thats the public speaking, and all the legislators are slowly morphing their opinions so they all look the same, that way the voters wont be able to snipe then off of their stump come election day. I hope they all fall hard.

[Kommodus]

I voted for Bush. Twice. And I don't regret it.

There, I said it. Do you all think I'm an idiot now?

The Iraq war has been mostly a fiasco. I thought it was a bad idea during the run-up to it. When it started I hoped it would have a good outcome. Now it's apparent that many of our fears are true after all - none of the supposed WMDs were found, finishing the job is taking quite a long time, and the Iraqis are incapable of sanely governing themselves.

Bush's handling of the budget leaves much to be desired, too. Almost from the beginning he's spent more like a liberal than a conservative. Under his administration the government has grown larger - hardly the smaller, more efficient government I'd hoped for. As an example, the new Medicare drug program, while I know little about it, seems ridiculous.

These are just a few of my serious disagreements with Bush. There are more. He bears little resemblance to the Republican president I'd prefer.

I don't blame Bush for the economic downturn - I doubt any president truly has much control over the economy. I don't blame him for the slow Katrina response, and I definitely don't blame him for global warming. I understand that many of the decisions he's had to make were difficult ones, and the correct choice is a lot clearer in hindsight.

Is it possible that Gore or Kerry would have handled things better? Is it possible they would have better handled the war on terror, the budget, the economy, the education crisis, etc? Yes, it's possible - I won't speculate. But regardless, there's no way I could have voted for either of them.

Why? Because I can't vote for someone who believes the killing of unborn children should be permitted. Sorry, but I just can't do it. Suppose Hitler had actually had sound economic, social, foreign, and environmental policies, but the one flaw in the ointment was that he favored the killing of Jews and other ethnic cleansing policies? Would you be able, in good conscience, to vote for such a man?

Of course I hope for better choices in the next election. I'll never agree completely with any candidate, that's for sure. And I'll always probably be wrong on a lot of issues, too. After all, where do I get my information but from a biased, selective media that can hardly be trusted?

I have my share of disagreements with Bush - probably more than I'd have with many presidents. But I'm hardly ready to believe the bleak picture the media paints. It's too fickle and untrustworthy.

[A.Saturnus]

Actually, I wasn't thinking of him right now.

[Lemur]

Why does Vermont hate freedom? (Looks as though the only states where Bush's approval tops 50% are Utah, Wyoming and Sweet Home Alabama.)

[Watchman]

I loathe Bush. Nothing new on the Western Front.

I also feel morbidly fascinated by the foaming racism that seems to make the formerly wavering turn against him.

[Don Corleone]

Not only does he talk to God, a clear sign of insanity with any person who isn't in office or can walk on water, he seems to have no idea as to what a 'budget' actually is, let alone knowing how to balance it. And he uses US soldiers to fight a war for personal glory (upstaging daddy).

So praying is a clear sign of insanity? Wow, I know atheists are trying to stack the deck by claiming you shouldn't be allowed to mention God in public, but this is ridiculous... now a belief system is grounds for insanity... Hmm...

I loathe Bush. Nothing new on the Western Front.

I also feel morbidly fascinated by the foaming racism that seems to make the formerly wavering turn against him.

I resemble that remark. I have no problem with large number of Latin Americans coming into this country. The US is built on immigration, always has been and most likely always will be.

But quite frankly Watchman, I don't think you know the first thing about which you are speaking. State governments are going bankrupt because citizens are being forced to provide social services, health care, education etc. for undocumented aliens that make no financial contribution to society. According to the socialists around here, like Idaho, not paying taxes is akin to treason.

What's more, La Raza and other large Latino groups have made it abundantly clear they are not here to become American. They want the language changed to Spanish (y hablo espanol bastante bien). They want the country to integrate into Mexico. They want to change the culture, the history and the direction of the country.. This isn't what I say, go visit La Raza's website or one of these other groups. No reconquista cultura here, thank you very much.

Or, en los verbos que ellos pueden entender, venga aqui! Venga aqui y trabaje' con nostotros, hage' esta pais ayun mejor. Pero no vamos a hacernos mexicanos. Somos norteamericanos, y norteamericanos vamos a quedarnos.

[lars573]

I was against him becoming president in 2000 nd nothing has changed.

[Watchman]

*snip*

...and what all that amounts to is still The Evil Comes From The Outside. Not a second of wondering why things are going to Hell in handbasket when in the past immigration generally worked just fine (what now the already-established tended to resent the newly-arrived...), or why the newer arrivals don't feel like belonging in their new environs. Or if the curious issue of presumably reasonably affluent Americans being willing and, one suspects, eager to pay sub-minimum wage to illegals instead of hiring legally to do the same chores might be one of the roots of the problem, or for that matter grounds for some critical self-reflection.

No. It's them damn greaser Mexican illegals. The Evil Comes From The Outside.

Did you know, I understand the spread of that attitude has tended to be characteristic of societies in decline with increasingly insoluble structural problems throughout history...? Other, related, symptoms have tended to include growing tendencies towards xenophobia, isolationism and general, often romantic and nostalgic, introvertism and longing after "better times when all was right"...

[Alexander the Pretty Good]

I may be totally off-base, but...

Weren't the immigrants that built this country here legally?!

The Irish, the Italians, etc, were they here illegally or not?

[Watchman]

So, why can't the folks who end up coming in illegally come in legally then ? Land of opportunity and all that ?

And I'll snort derisively at anyone who suggests the problem's with them.

[Don Corleone]

...and what all that amounts to is still The Evil Comes From The Outside. Not a second of wondering why things are going to Hell in handbasket when in the past immigration generally worked just fine (what now the already-established tended to resent the newly-arrived...), or why the newer arrivals don't feel like belonging in their new environs. Or if the curious issue of presumably reasonably affluent Americans being willing and, one suspects, eager to pay sub-minimum wage to illegals instead of hiring legally to do the same chores might be one of the roots of the problem, or for that matter grounds for some critical self-reflection.

No. It's them damn greaser Mexican illegals. The Evil Comes From The Outside.

Did you know, I understand the spread of that attitude has tended to be characteristic of societies in decline with increasingly insoluble structural problems throughout history...? Other, related, symptoms have tended to include growing tendencies towards xenophobia, isolationism and general, often romantic and nostalgic, introvertism and longing after "better times when all was right"...

So, we enforce our laws, try to keep our social spending at an affordable level, and we're racist? Beautiful, way to encourage a dialogue...

If I were a Mexican, here legally, I would be more upset about all the illegals than anyone. You're giving the illegals free services that the legal immigrants have to pay for too, and they actually had to stand in line at the embassy to get their paperwork. Hardly seems fair.

For the record, I would imagine left leaning progressives, such as yourself would be the first to stand against illegal immigration. The only reason it's allowed is to artificially force wages down. Your statement about affluent Americans being unwilling to perform menial tasks betrays your ignorance of America. In fact, plenty of people WOULD work in construction, housekeeping, garbage collection, restaurants, etc. if they were paid a living wage. The only people that can live on $6.00/hour are those that aren't paying any taxes. If you're born here, the IRS has you in their ledgers at birth. No such restrictions on the newly arrived undocumenteds.

[Don Corleone]

So, why can't the folks who end up coming in illegally come in legally then ? Land of opportunity and all that ?

And I'll snort derisively at anyone who suggests the problem's with them.

I have no problems with increasing the number of legally admitted aliens from any part of the world, actually.

There does reach a certain point where our human services infrastructure can no longer keep up though. If everyone is entitled to health care, regardless of their ability to pay (and despite what you might have heard, that IS the law of the land here in the USA), hospitals have to raise costs on everyone else to recoup their losses from treating immigrants.

Prove that you're going to work, pay taxes and be a constructive member of society and come on in. Come for a free ride and I say stay home.

What's more, as I pointed out in the Port Authority discussions... there's no reason for us to be worried that the UAE would allow terrorists in.... if terrorists want in, all they have to do is walk across the Rio Grande like everyone else.

Oh, and by the way.. the Mexican government is a bunch of hypocrites. The rules that are being debated in Congress right now are already on the Mexican books... if the Mexican authorities catch an undocumented Guatamalan, off to jail they go.

[Alexander the Pretty Good]

Then prepare to snort in derision. If you decide to violate the law in my country by coming here illegally, I don't think you deserve to be a part of the land of opportunity. Allowing illegals in here takes away from opportunity - those of actual US citizens. Why should employers in Texas and California hire citizens, who demand better wages and such? And thus US citizens suffer, in addition to the cost of supporting those who cannot contribute to the nation as a whole.

[Watchman]

Good job missing much of the point. So it's the fault of the illegals that unscrupulous natives woud rather hire them for nominal wages rather than go the legal way ? R-i-i-i-i-ght.

I'd blame dubious business ethics, widespread, myself, in that regard.