PDA

View Full Version : Anti-Bushies: Exactly what is it Bush has done or has not done that you object to?


Volcana
Oct 16th, 2004, 12:59 AM
Just one word of warning. If you say 'he's an idiot', I can easily post all the right wing stuff he told his supporters he'd do if he was elcted that he DID do. He may not be the sharpest tool inthe shed, but he delivered for the people who fund the Republican party.

What has Bush DONE, that you object to?

What has Bush NOT done, that you think needed doing?

Topics can include

* Water pollution
* Air pollution
* Mad Cow disease
* The War in Iraq
* The War in Afghanistan
* Poverty
* Genocide in the Sudan
* Race relations
* The race war along the Teaxs border
* Immigration on general
* Feminism
* job losses
* Social Security
* Health care
* North Korea
* Russia
* China
* Israel/Palestine
* Iran
* America as theocracy
* make some up

Volcana
Oct 16th, 2004, 12:29 PM
*bump*

Mariangelina
Oct 16th, 2004, 01:01 PM
The war in Iraq was a massive screwup, he's really pissed off a lot of countries and may have harmed America's relations with them for decades, he's homophobic, doesn't really get the concept of the separation of church and state, he's a warmonger, has managed to turn a big surplus into deficits, and several more reasons I don't feel like writing at the moment.

turt
Oct 16th, 2004, 01:35 PM
The war in Iraq was a massive screwup, he's really pissed off a lot of countries and may have harmed America's relations with them for decades, he's homophobic, doesn't really get the concept of the separation of church and state, he's a warmonger, has managed to turn a big surplus into deficits, and several more reasons I don't feel like writing at the moment.He laughs at international treaties, and he's probably the last person on earth to not see any link between pollution and climatic changes.
He turned down all the sympathy for USA around the world after 9/11, by going into an unnecessary war, and had to change his justifications so many times, the world still doesn't have a clear answer why the US and some governments (being manipulated) went into this mess. (Talk about his opponent being "flip flop" :tape: )
Now the world is more insecure as it was yesterday, and I think Bush really opened a "Pandora box", which could lead to a cataclysmic situation instead of stabilizing the region...

Pengwin
Oct 16th, 2004, 01:43 PM
What's wrong with China? It's trying to be like America in every way it seems at the moment.

Wigglytuff
Oct 16th, 2004, 01:48 PM
Just one word of warning. If you say 'he's an idiot', I can easily post all the right wing stuff he told his supporters he'd do if he was elcted that he DID do. He may not be the sharpest tool inthe shed, but he delivered for the people who fund the Republican party.

What has Bush DONE, that you object to?

What has Bush NOT done, that you think needed doing?

Topics can include

* Water pollution
* Air pollution
* Mad Cow disease
* The War in Iraq
* The War in Afghanistan
* Poverty
* Genocide in the Sudan
* Race relations
* The race war along the Teaxs border
* Immigration on general
* Feminism
* job losses
* Social Security
* Health care
* North Korea
* Russia
* China
* Israel/Palestine
* Iran
* America as theocracy
* make some up

education is missing from your list

for me this one of the main reasons i hate this man. soooooo much in no child left behind is focused SOLELY on making sure that kids from public schools are just unable to compete. shifting the focus on education from LEARNING to TESTING has soooooo many problems its not worth going into. futhermore demanding high stakes testing is often unrealistic and problematic, for example with this new law 3RD graders, that means 8,9 10 years are now subject to these high stakes test, but most are too to even understand the gravity of thier situtaion. forcing teachers to not teach to learn but instead teach to the test. so the goal is not to impart students with important basic knowlegde but to pass the test.

the result, is what has happened in texas, were in order to produce such high numbers of passing students, the requirements to pass have just hit rock bottom. today texas has the LOWEST level of challege and lowest requirements for passing most grade level examines of any state in the Union.

BUT, even though there ARE requirements that ALL students must met, THIS is not one of them so, home schooled and PRIVATELY school children continue to go to school to LEARN not to pass a test, this pushes them even futher ahead of publicly educated youth. making harder, later for publicly educated young adults to complete with those educated in any other setting.

Hagar
Oct 16th, 2004, 01:53 PM
I have a general aversion for Bush but if I have to pick one thing why I am against him:

Starting the war in Iraq. It was unnecessary, it has costed a lot of money, it has created an enormous mess in a very dangerous region. War never brings a solution, it costs a lot of money, a lot of lives.
This conflict should have been solved by diplomacy.
The war in Iraq has made the world a bad, unsafe place and it does major harm to the economy.

cheesestix
Oct 16th, 2004, 01:57 PM
I have a general aversion for Bush but if I have to pick one thing why I am against him:

Starting the war in Iraq. It was unnecessary, it has costed a lot of money, it has created an enormous mess in a very dangerous region. War never brings a solution, it costs a lot of money, a lot of lives.
This conflict should have been solved by diplomacy.
The war in Iraq has made the world a bad, unsafe place and it does major harm to the economy.

Why do YOU care about the money? Are you an American?

Secondly, "War never brings a solution"? I guess the USA never should have gotten involved in WWII?

Jennifer's wife
Oct 16th, 2004, 02:08 PM
bush has pissed me off because he was promising to bring osama and the people involved in 9/11 to justice but 3 years on osama is still free, al quaida (or however u spell it) is still terrorising other places and instead bush wasted time, mony and lives doing the whole iraq thing and hunting down saddam. hello? maybe if he put as much effort into capturing bin laden he might have been caught by now.

secondly, he's a hypocrite preaching about a land of freedom, opportunity, tolerance, democracy, the right to free thinking/speech etc when two people of the same sex do not have the same right as heterosexual couples. they do not have the freedom to marry each other legally. freedom, choice, democracy? MY ASS!

appart from that i like the guy.....he has inadvertantly given me alot of laughs :lol:

cheesestix
Oct 16th, 2004, 02:25 PM
bush has pissed me off because he was promising to bring osama and the people involved in 9/11 to justice but 3 years on osama is still free, al quaida (or however u spell it) is still terrorising other places and instead bush wasted time, mony and lives doing the whole iraq thing and hunting down saddam. hello? maybe if he put as much effort into capturing bin laden he might have been caught by now.

MOST of al-Qaeda is out of commission. But, you said "and the people involved"....well, I guess you're forgetting about Kalid Shaik Mohammed (sp?)(he was THE MASTERMIND behind the attacks)? And what about Ramsi bin Alshib (sp?) (he was another key operational planner in 9/11)? They have both been caught in Pakistan. The Taliban (who let al Qaeda hang out in Afghanistan) is now out of commission....as is most of al-Qaeda. For all we know, Osama is dead.

These other terrorist attacks that you speak of are mostly bombings in Iraq. Would you rather have them happen in Iraq or in the USA? Maybe some of this war could be to divert terrorist attention away from USA soil? Who knows?

BTW, al-Zarqawi (sp?), a key al-Qaeda figure, LIVES IN IRAQ....and had been living there since BEFORE the US went into Iraq. FYI, he is behind most of the terrorism that's going on in Iraq, and the US is trying to get him.

secondly, he's a hypocrite preaching about a land of freedom, opportunity, tolerance, democracy, the right to free thinking/speech etc when two people of the same sex do not have the same right as heterosexual couples. they do not have the freedom to marry each other legally. freedom, choice, democracy? MY ASS!

That's what it boils down to for most you....gay marriage. :rolleyes: BTW, KERRY DOESN'T SUPPORT GAY MARRIAGE EITHER!!!!!!!!!! :rolleyes:

Jennifer's wife
Oct 16th, 2004, 02:43 PM
did i say kerry does? i dont support Kerry either! i know fuk all about him.
and gay marraige isnt what it mostly boils down too so dont tell me what i do/dont should/shouldnt think. oh sorry, ur a bush supporter? guess it goes with the territory.

im glad that key figures in 9/11 have been captured but i think its funny how its ok to assume osama is probably dead. im sure that helps all the victims families who had to assume their loved ones were dead also because theyre bodies couldnt be found.

also funny that bush's family has such strong connections with the Bin laden family :scratch: strange how the bin ladens were allowed to flee from america straight after 9/11 before the FBI got the chance to speak to them......

*JR*
Oct 16th, 2004, 02:45 PM
These other terrorist attacks that you speak of are mostly bombings in Iraq. Would you rather have them happen in Iraq or in the USA? Maybe some of this war could be to divert terrorist attention away from USA soil? Who knows?
IC. We subject both Iraqi civilians and our own troops to getting blown to bits, plus provide a potent recruiting tool for al-Qaeda and its allies, based on a "Maybe... Who knows". :shrug:

Volcana
Oct 16th, 2004, 08:22 PM
MOST of al-Qaeda is out of commission.That's not true. Most of what we knew of the original has been captured or killed. But Al Qaeda recruiting is up. (Here are links to a couple of articles.
http://www.iht.com/articles/89963.html
http://www.americanprogress.org/site/pp.asp?c=biJRJ8OVF&b=83010

Or just google "Al Qaeda recruiting" and start reading. Scary stuff.

And of course, there are the words of Sir Ivor Roberts, the British ambassador in Rome, who called Bush "the best recruiting sergeant for al-Qaeda".

These other terrorist attacks that you speak of are mostly bombings in Iraq.Spain, Egypt, Bali, Malaysia ... there's even some evidence they're invloved in Chechnya now.

Would you rather have them happen in Iraq or in the USA? Maybe some of this war could be to divert terrorist attention away from USA soil? Who knows?If I decide to have a killing contest with somebody, having it in an uninvolved neighbors house, killing members of that uninvolved family as I do it, is COMPLETELY IMMORAL. We could have simply fought Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. It STILL wouldn't have been HERE. That arguement has NOTHING to do with Iraq.

jelena4me
Oct 19th, 2004, 09:46 AM
Geroge Bush and his foreign policies cause plenty of the conflict in the world because of his greed and self interest. Iraq is all about control of oil, and in general US tries to dominate the arab world. No wonder there is so much terrorism, its hardly surprising is it?
And thats to say nothing of the Kyoto protocal . Bush gives not a sh*t about anyone else apart from the US and his rich little buddies.

chapel
Oct 19th, 2004, 09:56 AM
the war in iraq has both its good side and bad side.

good: the whole world knows that he's serious about eradicating terrorism. i heard in the news that there were even talks that he and blair will be (or are....not sure here) nominated for the nobel prize.

bad: no nuclear missle (bomb) has been found until now. he looked like a total fool when he admitted that.

Circe
Oct 19th, 2004, 02:47 PM
MOST of al-Qaeda is out of commission. But, you said "and the people involved"....well, I guess you're forgetting about Kalid Shaik Mohammed (sp?)(he was THE MASTERMIND behind the attacks)? And what about Ramsi bin Alshib (sp?) (he was another key operational planner in 9/11)? They have both been caught in Pakistan. The Taliban (who let al Qaeda hang out in Afghanistan) is now out of commission....as is most of al-Qaeda. For all we know, Osama is dead.

BTW, al-Zarqawi (sp?), a key al-Qaeda figure, LIVES IN IRAQ....and had been living there since BEFORE the US went into Iraq. FYI, he is behind most of the terrorism that's going on in Iraq, and the US is trying to get him.


two points here rankle tho'....al-qaeda as it existed pre- 9/11 might be out of commission but the war in Iraq has pushed new recruits towards their fold. including al-zarkawi who wasn't a card-carrying member of al-qaeda before the war. he's only come out as a declared supporter of bin-laden recently. in fact many thought he was trying to set up a rival outfit. if anything the war has created al-zarkawi as a powerful extremist leader who even gets the benefit of being able to claim he's a "freedom-fighter" without sounding entirely wrong.
in short the contention that he was this al-qaeda leader that we went into the country to exterminate is as false as the rest of the right-wing rhetoric.

flyingmachine
Oct 19th, 2004, 02:59 PM
two points here rankle tho'....al-qaeda as it existed pre- 9/11 might be out of commission but the war in Iraq has pushed new recruits towards their fold. including al-zarkawi who wasn't a card-carrying member of al-qaeda before the war. he's only come out as a declared supporter of bin-laden recently. in fact many thought he was trying to set up a rival outfit. if anything the war has created al-zarkawi as a powerful extremist leader who even gets the benefit of being able to claim he's a "freedom-fighter" without sounding entirely wrong.
in short the contention that he was this al-qaeda leader that we went into the country to exterminate is as false as the rest of the right-wing rhetoric.
:worship: :worship: :worship:

Andy T
Oct 19th, 2004, 03:36 PM
Why do YOU care about the money? Are you an American?

Secondly, "War never brings a solution"? I guess the USA never should have gotten involved in WWII?

The US didn't get involved in WWII until Pearl Harbor. Its involvement was not stimulated by a noble desire to defend democracy against fascism and/or Communism. It had remained outside of the war while Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia and Finland fell to Russia and much of continental Europe - Norway, Denmark, Belgium, The Netherlands Luxembourg, France, Yugoslavia and Greece - was overrun by Germany in the Sept. 1939-Mar. 41 period. Meanwhile Japan had occupied large chunks of China and Indochina.

What was the US doing during these 18 months? Selling oil and fuel to Japan and selling destroyers to Britain. Only in Spring 41 did the US really start supporting the fight against Fascism but it took a full two years for the US to commit troops, and only then because of the direct attack on US territory.

Thank God the US did join the coalition and thank all of those who sacrificed their lives for helping to liberate the occupied lands and relieve the others that were under attack. However, in no way can the US claim to have "led" a moral crusade. Those Germans, Italians, French and other resistance fighters who had struggled against fascism and fascist occupation since 1939 (and before) deserve that accolade more, imo.

This is a bit off topic but it pisses me off when people try to take the moral high ground like this.

Hulet
Oct 19th, 2004, 04:46 PM
Iraq war - directly responsible for the death of thousands of civilians. If I were a war crimes attorney, I would have started a case against him, even though it is very unlikely that he will submit to such a prosecution.

Also for persecuting innocent Arabs and other muslims living in the West through his Homeland Security (ech-ess sounds awfully close to ess-ess, doesn't it?)

Veritas
Oct 19th, 2004, 08:04 PM
* The War in Iraq

Many innocent people died in his 'War on Terrorism' campaign, but at the very least he's given the country a fresh start - one without a dictator at the helm.

* The War in Afghanistan

I'm not too sure about this. A lot of military and financial resources have been dispatched to 'finding' Bin Laden, but with all that support the results haven't been promising. When it comes to the war in Afghanistan, I'm pretty clueless.

* Poverty

Again, I'm not familiar with this Bush-related issue. But hasn't the American economy improved since the beginning of the '03 fiscal year? The U.S. economy grew at an average of over 4% p.a. and that's a lot more than many European powers could only now dream about.

* Immigration on general

I guess September 11 gave the Republicans a good excuse to cut down on visas.

* North Korea

I think Bush and co. have been too soft on this WMD pest. The North Koreans keep demanding and the U.S. keeps a lid on its trap. Where is the powerful, confrontational, do-as-I-say U.S. when we need it the most?

It's amazing they did something about Iraq but hardly anything about North Korea. Of course if they do, China might get involved somehow - on the opposite side - but sanctions and talk aren't doing much at the moment.

* China

Taiwan is tricky, but I think Bush has done a great job when it comes to balancing U.S. commitments to the island and avoiding heated tensions with the mainland. But maybe his party needs to set restrictions on how much U.S. companies can invest in China and slap high tarrifs on Chinese imports. At the rate of China's growth, the U.S. market will be flooded with Chinese-made goods and it won't do the unemployment rate any favours at all. It might be hard to do the Chinese economy any harm since China has been buying a lot of U.S. bonds - which explains why the yuan has been kept artificially low for so long.

* Israel/Palestine

I actually think the U.S. has kept away from this conflict for a while. Maybe maintaining Iraq takes up a lot of their time or Israel seems to be handling those 'freedom fighters' fine without U.S. help.

I have to admire the U.S. for supporting Israel when the entire world seems to shed bucket loads of crocodile tears for these Palestinian 'freedom fighters'. Of course it's easier when you are the world's most powerful and hegemonic country...

* make some up

A lot of people complain about how much 'power' the U.S. has over the entire world. I guess it's understandable, since a lot of domestic politics and economic issues will involve the U.S. being part of it one way or another. But I reckon we should look at the good side of it as well. Would we have preferred it if the Soviets were the ones who stayed in power rather than the Americans? Even though American blundered with its refusal to sign to a treaty which allows its military to be prosecuted by an international court for war crimes commited, at least the U.S. seems to learn from its mistakes. We haven't seen a Mai Lai episode II and because America is probably the most exposed country in the world their soldiers have little to no chance of committing war crimes without having it shown to the public. America promotes freedom and is a signatory to many basic human rights. If we compare it to countries such as China, where even a free media doesn't exist, America begins to look like a tall flower standing in a garden full of weeds.

And Bush has done a lot of things that will piss people off, but I'm surprised a lot of the good he's done has been ignored. It's always 'Iraq, Iraq, Iraq'. It seems as if that's the only real weapon his opponents have against him. Unemployment rates aren't doing much better, but at least the American economy is growing above world average and that is a lot to brag about when you look at countries like Germany who can barely muster a 1% growth rate. He's made national security a big concern. It does go overboard in some cases - like the restriction of visas and the Patriot Act - but at least he's made this a no.1 priority for the U.S.

Oh yeah, and he supports Japan's bid to become a permanent U.N. Security Council member. Anything that will balance out potential Chinese hegemony is a good thing :)

Philbo
Oct 20th, 2004, 12:06 AM
The War in Iraq.

The war in Iraq has realy changed the way I look at the world. In the leadup to the war in Iraq I was pretty much FOR the war. I bought into the lies and the fear mongering and I actually thought Saddam had WMD's and was a dangerous leader with weapons in his arsenal that he could do a lot of damage with.

My BF at at the time basically saw through the bullshit and felt the war was about oil and we argues a LOT over it. I accussed him of being ant-american, he accused me of being 'pro american'..

So after the war etc when the truth slowly became clear, I felt outraged. Outraged at the fact that the neo-cons who run Bush's administration wanted to invade Iraq well before 9/11 basically to redraw the polictical landscape in the middle east and to have an Iraq that was a friendly 'allie'. Then came the knowledge of just how intertwined Bush's family is with the saudi royal families money, how Cheney and a whole slew of other people in his inncer circle have gross conflicts of interest going on with their holdings in various companies that are all profiteering off the war in iraq.

But it cchanged me in the sense that before the Iraq war I basically felt our government did tell us the truth most of the time - or at least wouldnt baltantly lie about something as big as invading another country - now I feel that governments arre full of shit.

I also hate how Bush has shanctioned a whole new generation of nuclear weapons - at the same time as he is trying to stop North Korea and iRan from acquiring them - how can you say what is good enough for the USA is not good enough for other countries?? You cant. It makes the USA look like the biggest hypocrite.

I also hate the way Bush doesnt separate church from state and his belief that he is some messenger of God is really scarey - especially when he is basically a lapgod of huge corporations and he really does not care about anything more than being reelected.

Stamp Paid
Oct 20th, 2004, 01:55 AM
With me, its totally personal. My brother is being sent to Iraq to possibly die, and I hate it.

turt
Oct 20th, 2004, 09:45 AM
The War in Iraq.

The war in Iraq has realy changed the way I look at the world. In the leadup to the war in Iraq I was pretty much FOR the war. I bought into the lies and the fear mongering and I actually thought Saddam had WMD's and was a dangerous leader with weapons in his arsenal that he could do a lot of damage with.

My BF at at the time basically saw through the bullshit and felt the war was about oil and we argues a LOT over it. I accussed him of being ant-american, he accused me of being 'pro american'..

So after the war etc when the truth slowly became clear, I felt outraged. Outraged at the fact that the neo-cons who run Bush's administration wanted to invade Iraq well before 9/11 basically to redraw the polictical landscape in the middle east and to have an Iraq that was a friendly 'allie'. Then came the knowledge of just how intertwined Bush's family is with the saudi royal families money, how Cheney and a whole slew of other people in his inncer circle have gross conflicts of interest going on with their holdings in various companies that are all profiteering off the war in iraq.

But it cchanged me in the sense that before the Iraq war I basically felt our government did tell us the truth most of the time - or at least wouldnt baltantly lie about something as big as invading another country - now I feel that governments arre full of shit.

I also hate how Bush has shanctioned a whole new generation of nuclear weapons - at the same time as he is trying to stop North Korea and iRan from acquiring them - how can you say what is good enough for the USA is not good enough for other countries?? You cant. It makes the USA look like the biggest hypocrite.

I also hate the way Bush doesnt separate church from state and his belief that he is some messenger of God is really scarey - especially when he is basically a lapgod of huge corporations and he really does not care about anything more than being reelected.
So true, but sadly "they" won't listen... :sad:

Hulet
Oct 20th, 2004, 02:23 PM
The War in Iraq.

The war in Iraq has realy changed the way I look at the world. In the leadup to the war in Iraq I was pretty much FOR the war. I bought into the lies and the fear mongering and I actually thought Saddam had WMD's and was a dangerous leader with weapons in his arsenal that he could do a lot of damage with.

Like your bf, I didn't believe the WDM claim. But, one thing I got wrong was my cynical assumption that they will plant the "evidence" after they won the war. You know, like smuggle in some radioactive material in one of Saddam's labs and show the international press the "smoking gun", thereby, justifying the war. To be honest, I don't know why they didn't do that - it goes against every manipulative means they used to march to the war. :confused: In just that case, they have proved me wrong.