1. Election Fiasco
2. 911
3. Enron, Worldcom and other Corporate scandals
4. Economy and stocks hitting bottom
5. Iraq
6. N. Korea
7. Shuttle disaster
.... 2 more years of GW Bush?
Printable View
1. Election Fiasco
2. 911
3. Enron, Worldcom and other Corporate scandals
4. Economy and stocks hitting bottom
5. Iraq
6. N. Korea
7. Shuttle disaster
.... 2 more years of GW Bush?
:rolleyes:
I curse him all the time.
So far, except for #3, those have all been beneficial to him politically, so I guess he is cursed!
lol
Let's see
1) He got in despite losing the popular vote.
2) He has received nearly free reign over our civil liberties under the mantle of protecting Fatherland...I mean Homeland Security.
3) Somehow he managed to bury the conversations with energy and utility execs prior to the scandals since it wasn't in the interest of the american public(but a bj was???)
4) Pushing a tax cut that the american people don't want(don't blast me on that one, you personally may want it but that's sort of anecdotal. I am just looking at poll data) and justifying rampant deficit spending. Hmmmm, sounds familiar.
5) Gets to engender further jingoistic public support for policies plus see number 2.
6) N. Korea, timing is such it's effectively being whitewashed by Iraq situation.
7) Played the strong guy now gets to come out and do the compassion thing. The political downside to this is what?
Personally I'd have to say that the man is remarkably fortunate. And may one day give a prior Pres a run for his money as the Teflon man.
1. Losing the popular vote/election fiasco. Not the first President to win the electoral but not the popular, probably not the last. This is a republic, not a democracy. The alternative is open rebellion of the less populated states. If a fiasco existed it rests squarely upon the shoulders of (portions of) the FL voting system.
2. 9/11 and the loss of freedoms. It could be (and has been) argued that Pres. Clinton's threatening military action...then just bombing and declaring victory emboldened many of the U.S.'s enemies, who began to think the U.S. would never "follow through". I agree that our subsequent loss of freedoms and increasing police state is both frightening and a MAJOR strike against Pres. Bush.
3. Corporate scandals. Just browsing the folders on Enron...here's a few facts oft overlooked by our "unbiased" media.
"From 1990 to 1994 Enron gave 42% of their donations to the Democrats .Florida's state pension fund, which lost $325 million on Enron, is examining what role Frank Savage, a major Democratic donor, may have played in the state's loss. The fund's investments were directed by Alliance Capital Management, where Savage was a senior executive and chairman at the same time he sat on Enron's board. He has donated $100,000 to Democrats and is raising money for New York gubernatorial candidate Carl McCall. Lloyd Bensten, Clinton's first treasury secretary, was a recipient of Enron's money. At the time of his campaign for Senate, he received the second largest donation from Enron. The bulk of Enron's alleged chicanery had to have happened during the Clinton administration. Clinton officials publicly helped Enron win the contract in India as well as in Indonesia. Enron had received U.S. government funds to build power plants in China, the Philippines and Turkey. Enron also won contracts in Pakistan and Russia while accompanying senior U.S. government officials on state trips. In June 1996, four days before India granted final approval to Enron's project, Lay's company gave $100,000 to the DNC."
To sum up, it wasn't a dem or repub thing, it was a POLITICAL thing, but it's funny to watch the media try to lay it off on Republican's without hitting any of their own. Also, though the U.S. public may have been mostly interested in the Clinton BJ, his political opponents were mostly upset about lying under oath...an offense for which people are JAILED. As they should be.
4. Economy...I think it's pretty obvious that market forces are pretty much out of the control of any of the administrations sitting in the Oval office. At least out of the control of a President who's just been in office a little over 2 years! But, I agree that for better or worse the sitting President does get the flak or credit for the economy. Also, the "unbiased" polls I've seen on the proposed tax cut are all worded: "Would you rather have a tax cut, or COMPLETELY ELIMINATE THE DEFICIT." <---Note, no money returned from a tax cut could do that. Everyone I know wants more money back and thinks the government is a wasteful, bloated monster that will just waste their money if they get to keep it. Just check out all the pork being pushed on both sides of the isle snuck into almost any bill being sent to Bush, and I'd guess you agree. Large government sucks, which was implied earlier when talking about Homeland Security. It's funny how the tune changes as we talk about different (usually politically charged) aspects of our government.
5. Iraq. Iraq is something he'll only be criticized for, since the alternative...(letting them develop whatever they want to strike Israel and possibly the U.S.) is far less likely to happen after the U.S. strikes. The only saving grace for Bush may come after the (presumed) victory and dark closets are opened.
6 N. Korea. I admit I may need some educating on this...but, N. Korea was taking aid from the U.S. which we were offering because they agreed to quit working with their nuclear programs.
Then, they come out and say, "Ha, ha, U.S. you are so stupid, we've continued the programs and have nukes." And after this announcement we dropped the aid. I just see this as cause and effect.
7. Shuttle disaster. Hmmm...maybe. Republican's get the reigns, call for tax cuts. Meaning less funding for NASA, who fires the guy who would've caught the problem? Yeah, it's thin. Dam thin, but possible I suppose.
It isn't GW Bush that is cursed, but the rest of the world that is cursed with GW Bush.
Pls, forward any hatemail to: I_don't_care@spam.com.
:D :D
Bush is the President(ergo figure-head), he is neither the cause nor responsible for those things happening.
I doubt if the US President can go against the Senate and win, he does what his advisers tell him is the correct course of action.
Most of those legislation I would assume been lying in a drawer for a loong time and were just waiting for the right circumstances to be put into place.
Just my opinion.
www.whitehouse.org
You'll love it.
Be sure to fill in the Arab Registration Form.
;)
I'll never forget the cover of Conspiracy Report that had Bush Sr. standing menacingly inside the CIA logo. It still scares me. For another scare check this out WARNING - if you look at this site, no doubt the home security/patriot act agents will be confiscating your computer soon.
Interesting website gene.
Please, note, this applies ONLY to people in the USA.Quote:
Originally posted by GeneChing
WARNING - if you look at this site, no doubt the home security/patriot act agents will be confiscating your computer soon.
The rest of the world is free to watch as much as we want.
:D
I thought twice and checked it. I live in the USA.
I sure hope they dont take my computer, then how would I do my homework or bring my work home?
:confused:
Another excellent post, Radh. I'll just add this: Yes, Bush met with Enro execs. They asked for Bush to bail them out of their mess. He refused. Clinton met with Chinese officials and gave them every secret they asked for just a campaign contribution.
Tax cuts- they worked for Reagan. And they worked for Kennedy before him.
The shuttle- it is sad that the libs have to take any tragedy and turn it into political mud. But there you are. The first shuttle disaster was blamed on Reagan, and it didn't stick. I doubt this accusation will stick either.
That was a pretty interesting site Gene....makes me think we have some defensive systems in place around the Pentagon that we want kept secret.
Regarding polls and the typical U.S. citizen's willingness to go war, I found this today:
"...the latest Gallup poll finds overall support for an invasion at 58 percent. And according to a recent ABC News/Washington Post poll, a bare majority now say they would support military action even without UN approval.
Given that the administration hasn't even finished making its case - and hasn't actually called for war - analysts say the current level of support is striking." - CSMonitor
The article also points out that Bush Sr. didn't have this level of support, at this point, before the first Gulf War.
he's friggin awesome.
People aren't used to seeing an American President who actually stands for something. Must have been the 8 years of wishy washy stick your finger in the air and see which way the wind is blowing then get a bj politics that everybody has gotten used to.
I actually wanted McCaine, but I think we got the better man and I'm glad that my primary pick didn't make it.
It's too bad people feel it's rotten to have some dignity and pride.
4 more years, 4 more years, 4 more years!
That was a very sincere post and we respect your sentiment, even if it is wildly misplaced and that your allegiances are to quite possibly the thickest American President that has ever be born.
His ignorance towards your own fellow countrmens/womens needs is on a par with the very terrorists he claims to be trying to liberatte us from. He is no better, no worse. As misdirected as they are too, they fight for faith, he fights for greed.
Bush is a sick man.
Who's ignorance again? :rolleyes:Quote:
His ignorance towards your own fellow countrmens/womens needs is on a par with the very terrorists he claims to be trying to liberatte us from.
they fight for faith, he fights for greed.
Maybe I misread the news reports or my memory isn't what it used to be...
But Wasn't it the Supreme court that called a stop to the recounting (tossing out a fair number of as yet to be counted ballots) and as a result declared BUSH the president?
Beyond that I see GW as the ultimate result of the continuing corruption of a governmental process by the interests of LOTS of MONEY.
a bit like Gollum.
:DQuote:
Originally posted by MightyB
People aren't used to seeing an American President who actually stands for something. Must have been the 8 years of wishy washy stick your finger in the air and see which way the wind is blowing then get a bj politics that everybody has gotten used to.
RM, got any evidence to back up your wild assertions?
What qualifies you to decide MB's allegiences are misplaced?
What is it that makes GW thick (which implies stupidity)?
What is it he doesn't know that makes him ignorant?
What has he done that equates him with terrorists?
What makes him motivated by greed?
You think the terrorists are vindicated because they fight for faith, and you call Bush sick? I'd say that's evidence that your values are a little twisted. By your value system, if I fly a plane into your house and kill you and your family, it would be ok as long as I "believe" you are wrong.
:confused:
All those votes were counted after the election was declared final and the vote, although electoral, was still in favor of Dubya.Quote:
But Wasn't it the Supreme court that called a stop to the recounting (tossing out a fair number of as yet to be counted ballots) and as a result declared BUSH the president?
Yep. No argument there. I get really tired thought of the "Bush's War for Money and Oil" line. Just imagine the thought process, "Hmm, I can start a war with Iraq and take their oil. Then I'd be really really rich. And No one would ever suspect that's the real reason for war". He may not be the smartest man that's ever lived, but those who believe in that conspiracy theory are, in my opinion, right underneath his rung on the intelligence ladder.Quote:
Beyond that I see GW as the ultimate result of the continuing corruption of a governmental process by the interests of LOTS of MONEY.
Well I understand he was granted a "gentleman's C" when graduating collage. Personal college experiance implies that such C'c are granted as favor's... Also, he seems quite proud of this.Quote:
What is it that makes GW thick (which implies stupidity)?
I also read an article indicating he is the President with the lowest IQ in history. I personally don't give much attention to IQ scores, but the guy seems to rely heavily on a teleprompter, and is often seen chewing on his cowboy boots when offering "off the cuff" statments...
Well he DID ask the president of Brasil if there where any black people in his country!!! :rolleyes:Quote:
What is it he doesn't know that makes him ignorant?
errr... well I would say it's a common trait amongst Presidents if not most High level Politicians.Quote:
What makes him motivated by greed?
There was alos some shady business with "aquiring" a low interest loan from a company he "owned" at the time.
Well I'm sorry for throwing my 2cents into a series of questions directed at Repulsive Monkey...
ducks behind desk...
I sort of agree ewallace. BUT from what I've read, such plans have been in place for some time now... Call it conspiracy theory or whatever... It seems more like Bush is playing front man for a er... "Business Plan" that's been in place since before his Dad was in power...Quote:
Just imagine the thought process, "Hmm, I can start a war with Iraq and take their oil. Then I'd be really really rich. And No one would ever suspect that's the real reason for war".
Do you think oil wouldn't end up as one of the spoils of war?
no DIS intended...
The UN's discussion on Powell's presentation can be heard here.
Nope. It would be under the giant microscope of the press, and would further damage foreign relations with middle eastern countries. We didn't take control over Iraq's oil in the first war, and I have no reason to believe that we would this time. If oil was really the case, we would just go in and kick Venezuela's butt too.Quote:
Do you think oil wouldn't end up as one of the spoils of war?
DS, you can come out from behing the desk. It's enough for my point that you had the answers and not RM.;)
He might have only got a 'gentlemens C' in college, but he's sure been able to flummox the Democrats since getting in office. He's taken every issue from them. I do have a problem with his appeasement of the libs on several issues, the latest being the aids relief to Africa. And I'll never forgive him for signing Campaign Finance Reform into law. But if GW is stupid, the libs in this country are really feeding on the bottom of the intelligence pond.
I assume the President of Brasil set him straight, and so he's no longer ignorant on that point. (btw, what did the Pres. of Brasil tell him?:D )
You are correct, greed and politics seem to go hand in hand. I don't know the details of that low interesrt loan, and I doubt you do either since we must rely on a biased press for most of our information. It wouldn't surprise me if there was some shady dealing there, but I'm not ready to condemn him without solid evidence of illegal acts.
DS, at least your post was thoughtful and reasoned. Again, for the record, I'm not a Bush fan. But I get a little tired of some of these petty ultra liberals that have to get on any soapbox and hurl unsubstiated insults at any 'conservative'.
Agreed. Heck, if oil was the issue, we'd have just kept Kuwait- we already had it.Quote:
Originally posted by ewallace
We didn't take control over Iraq's oil in the first war, and I have no reason to believe that we would this time. If oil was really the case, we would just go in and kick Venezuela's butt too.
The League of... I mean the UN has passed 17 resolutions against Iraq in 12 years. They haven't followed through on 1. Everyone goes on how Billy C was so great, but at least GW contacts the UN before he decides upon a course of action. People are real pi$$y towards US political interests in Iraq after a war, but what they don't realize is that France, Germany, and Russia have bigger illegal interests in Iraqi oil that they are exploiting right now. France and Germany are illegaly selling dual purpose technology to Iraq for oil interests, same goes for Russia. They don't want us to expose their dirty little secrets-- Dirty being the key word as in dirty bomb. Where do you think Iraq's nuclear and chemical technology comes from?
I can't understand Korea. They seem to be the ones pushing for war. I can't wait until we unify that sh_t hole.
ght,
I didn't say we don't have interests there. That is a different thing than taking over or taking their oil. Our biggest interest in that whole region is to help stabilize it. And yes, stability helps keep prices down and proffits up for everyone, including Kuwaities and Iraquis. Sadaam's regime is about the only looser here, along with possibly the French, Germans and Russians who've been illegally trading with Iraq.
You guys are saying "US-friendly" as if it's some kind of insult.
Contrary to popular belief, all value systems are not equal. Some value systems really suck; some people are really evil.
"US-friendly" means, among other things, the cessation of the genocide of the kurdish and shiite peoples in Iraq.
Is the "US-friendly" perfect? No. And noone and nothing will ever be. Is "US-friendly" the best option we've got going? Suggest a better one, I'm all ears; the whole world is all ears.
""US-friendly" means, among other things, the cessation of the genocide of the kurdish and shiite peoples in Iraq."
So we're gonna put a Shah in place?
Are you asking seriously, or being facetious? :)
Has another Shiite even tried to take a leadership role since what happenned to the last one? I doubt anybody would be too willing after that.
They wouldn't put a Shiite or Kurd in power, they'd just put a Suni in power who will tolerate the Shiites and Kurds.
first..a link:
http://www.forbes.com/global/2001/1112/020.html
secondly, I recommend that anyone who thinks oil is not the motivation of the Bush administration and for that matter all involved (all western UN countries) both "friend" or "foe", read "The Prize" by Daniel Yergin.
You have to understand that the western world runs on ptroleum products.
Venezuala can be worked out a lot quicker than the middle east situation. IN South america it's about ROI for the workers who are producing the petroleum products.
Not unlike an auto plant strike occuring nation wide.
The entire lifestyle of the Western world is undeniably in a state of total dependence on petroleum products.
It's not really about greed either, it's about power in it's ultimate percieved form and pushing the geopolitical agenda of a very small group.
In the west we take everything for granted and for the most part are asleep on the real issues of the world today. Entire transportion systems across North America would shut down completely if not for oil. Trucks, PLanes, trains and automobiles.
If you control the oil, you control everything that is dependent upon it.
With any luck, human kind will make the leap to higher technologies in the near future and we can look forward to an end toall the fussin and a feudin and move into a brave new world.
Otherwise, be prepared for bad things to continue to happen.
cheers
Darn commies...
Evil US--- Oil oil oil--- bad US --- GW devil --- oil oil oil --- we want nuclear weapons for peaceful reasons --- blah blah blah --- America bad --- yada yada yada --- bad bad bad --- oil oil oil --- blah blah blah blah blah --- alah --- America evil --- blah blah blah...
My head hurts.
pops head out from behind desk...
Well the US did seem OVERLY eager to open up relations with the "new" president the day after the 3 day COUP...Quote:
we would just go in and kick Venezuela's butt too.
talk about supporting "democracy"
1983... Reagan is convinced to remove Iraq from the US's likely terrorist list... By Donald Rumsfeild who then goes to Iraq to open diplomatic relations...
The US wasn't so upset by IRAQ "gassing his own people." An event that has also been refuted in an op-ed piece in the WASHINGTON POST just over a week ago.
ducks back under...
I remember reading an announcement naming the General who would run the "temporary" occuping government similar to one put in place in post WWII Japan...Quote:
They wouldn't put a Shiite or Kurd in power, they'd just put a Suni in power who will tolerate the Shiites and Kurds.
Gene,Quote:
Originally posted by GeneChing
I'll never forget the cover of Conspiracy Report that had Bush Sr. standing menacingly inside the CIA logo. It still scares me. For another scare check this out WARNING - if you look at this site, no doubt the home security/patriot act agents will be confiscating your computer soon.
That site has been debunked. It looks really interesting until you check out any of the other pictures that they didn't include. By the way, I think the terrorists were idiots for flying into the side that just got remodeled. Made a good test for our systems and did minimum damage. Had they hit any other side the damage would have been a few times worse.
mighty b, everyone's head is hurting about it. It's a rock and a hard place.Quote:
Evil US--- Oil oil oil--- bad US --- GW devil --- oil oil oil --- we want nuclear weapons for peaceful reasons --- blah blah blah --- America bad --- yada yada yada --- bad bad bad --- oil oil oil --- blah blah blah blah blah --- alah --- America evil --- blah blah blah...
here's a scenario to think about:
you are the head of a country.
your country depends on your leadership to ensure that everyone gets at least a little bit of a fair shake and at least a fairly comfortable lifestyle.
you understand that in order to provide this, through the will of the people as a nation that certain needs must be met.
someone else comes along and threatens to cut off what you need. If they are successful, you will have a country that becomes poor, with a not so good lifestyle (most of the world is like this) when compared to what there is now.
what do you do to get that thing that keeps the wheels turning in your country?
hmmmmmn...what do..you do???
You also have to consider that you may have to commit shameful acts. How do you sell a nation on the idea that if they want to keep their lifestyle then people elsewhere must make sacrifices?
The U.S aren't the only ones who practice geopolitics like this. But the US does have huge amounts of money and power invested. Many other countries do the same things. And they do hear about it in their media. It's not all about the U.S afterall. It's about the world order and the imminent threats to the lifestyle of the bourgois in the first world countries.
anyway, food for thought..."fight the power man" :D
cheers
Just for the record the United States has a long history of generally ignoring the United Nations as much as possible.
I dont see why going to war vs another nation in order to take its natural resources is a evil cause. For those of you that think oil is THE motivating factor for the Bush Administration to pursue these courses - you sure are on to something! I bet the guys who make these decisions probably got together and asked "What is the hardest way possible to make oil more accessible to us and our friends, and cheaper, any ideas?!" Get real. Look at the big picture. There are many spoils to Iraq besides oil and women.
Afghanistan was about what? Opium fields? To install airbases on chinas ass? Maybe a comittee decided it was the hardest way to get more dirt?
Yes, it is very sad that the US is the most powerful and most prosperous right now. And, yes, its very sad that we are using our power and prosperity to ensure that we get even more powerful and more prosperous. And, yes, its very very sad that we are doing all this at the expense of other countries, nations, peoples, and cultures, instead of our own. And, yes, its very very ver sad for the rest of you that when we decided to play this game 100 years ago, that we decided to win.
See ya'all on the flip side, winners get cool t-shirts.
:eek:
Kung Lek -
You're 100% right. The war is entirely about promoting a certain group's geopolitical agenda.
However, what I don't understand is why you see that as a bad thing.
Everyone has geopolitical agendas. Of note here, specifically, Saddam certainly does.
From my previous post - it's NOT the case that all things are equal. Social relativism is a crock of ****. You can't excuse Saddam's geopolitical agenda under the pretext of respecting his culture. What he does is wrong. Period.
So we're going to go in there and promote our geopolitical agenda. Which includes things like not committing genocide. You know what? That's good. Period.
Are there problems that go along with it? Goodness me, yes. There's problems that go along with _everything_. That's why us humans have been blessed with a faculty called judgement - to choose the best solution to a given problem.
There is a problem here. We're picking the best solution.
Again, I challenge you: if you have a better one, let's hear it.