I thought your comment had something to do with my preference for a tax cut, it just didn't make any sense.Ickabod said:
OTB
Bush
- Thread starter screwge
- Start date
OTB
That's becasue he's pro abortion don't ya know.Peace4u said:God told me to vote for Kerry.
OTB
I think I’ll make one foray into that election in a foreign county I shouldn’t even care about, and then I’m done. No more politics for me – at least on this board. EDIT - Um, for the next week or so. Or day, depending how I feel. Shut up.
Ironically, I think if there is a strong element to the Bush Presidency, it has been his domestic policy. Ironic because Bush polls as strong on foreign policy and weak on domestic; also ironic because Bush Sr. was seen as something of a genius with foreign policy and lost the election because he raised taxes.
Bush has consistently asked Congress for too few funds for the No Child Left Behind Program, but in general he is a species of that new and oddest of political animals; the tax-cutter-and-spender. Ten years ago the burgeoning neo-conservative moment could do nothing but cry about the evils of deficits; now they seem to be big fans of them.
Bush inherited a busting economy that wasn’t helped by 9/11, and I’m hard pressed to see what he’s done constructively to help matters. The most we might say is that he hasn’t made things substantially worse, which is, perhaps, no more than any president can do.
This makes the Patriot Act sound innocuous, which it most certainly isn’t. Suspending habeus corpus is not only a slap to the face of the Constitution, it’s a slap to the entire social contractual tradition in place since the frigging Magna Carta.
The Patriot Act is like the BIG RED PANIC BUTTON, you know, the one you’re never supposed to push, even when things seem like they’re at their worst. Are aliens invading? Fine, we’ll find a solution, just don’t push the BIG RED PANIC BUTTON. Does everybody have some horrible disease? Call the doctors, and stay away from the BIG RED PANIC BUTTON. During times of crisis it often takes the most courage not to take the most drastic measures.
Do we really know what’s going within AQ? Are we more confident that are intelligence has really improved so much over 4 years that we can say with confidence that AQ is shrinking, not growing? I don’t know; I worry that nobody within the Bush stable does either.
I agreed, cautiously, with the Afghanistan invasion, but I was concerned at the time with a war prosecuted almost totally from the air. Kerry’s best line so far – he hasn’t had many – was that Bush outsourced the war in Afghanistan. Doing so essentially lead to a further Balkanisation of an already fragmented country. Every indication we have says that Karzai controls little outside the Isle du Kabul, rendering the recent election almost a non-issue.
Afghanistan was an opportunity to begin a real process of state-building within the Middle East, an opportunity that is slowly slipping away.
I'm generally in favor of his domestic agenda, No Child Left Behind and the Guest Worker programs are EXACTLY what I'd do if the country came to its senses and elected me King. I'm a Reagan Republican that believes in a smaller government that should only invest in certain areas (defense, justice, education...). Bush has actually spent more money than I'm comfortable with. I'm a big fan of his cutting ALL tax rates and increasing the child tax credit. I believe you grow your way out of deficits not tax your way out. Agree or not, these are my reasons.
Ironically, I think if there is a strong element to the Bush Presidency, it has been his domestic policy. Ironic because Bush polls as strong on foreign policy and weak on domestic; also ironic because Bush Sr. was seen as something of a genius with foreign policy and lost the election because he raised taxes.
Bush has consistently asked Congress for too few funds for the No Child Left Behind Program, but in general he is a species of that new and oddest of political animals; the tax-cutter-and-spender. Ten years ago the burgeoning neo-conservative moment could do nothing but cry about the evils of deficits; now they seem to be big fans of them.
Bush inherited a busting economy that wasn’t helped by 9/11, and I’m hard pressed to see what he’s done constructively to help matters. The most we might say is that he hasn’t made things substantially worse, which is, perhaps, no more than any president can do.
Now, the big issues of Terrorism and Iraq. And no, I don't link them (note plural). I'm a fan of the Patriot Act, I think we need to use our intelligence and law enforcement capabilities better - having a "Wall" between them is insane. I think the FBI should (with a court order) be able to tap all my phones, not just a single one that they get the order for (if I'm a target of an investigation). I believe AQ is a bigger threat to our country that the FBI, but then I live a pretty clean life ;-)
This makes the Patriot Act sound innocuous, which it most certainly isn’t. Suspending habeus corpus is not only a slap to the face of the Constitution, it’s a slap to the entire social contractual tradition in place since the frigging Magna Carta.
The Patriot Act is like the BIG RED PANIC BUTTON, you know, the one you’re never supposed to push, even when things seem like they’re at their worst. Are aliens invading? Fine, we’ll find a solution, just don’t push the BIG RED PANIC BUTTON. Does everybody have some horrible disease? Call the doctors, and stay away from the BIG RED PANIC BUTTON. During times of crisis it often takes the most courage not to take the most drastic measures.
I thought the invasion of Afghanistan was justified, and with elections recently, has put the country and our security in better shape. Its been reported that we've captured or killed 75% of AQ - not a bad start. While we all know that Karl Rove will drop OBL into the waiting hands of the 101 Airborne in the next week, even if that doesn't happen it will have been a successful campaign so far against AQ.
Do we really know what’s going within AQ? Are we more confident that are intelligence has really improved so much over 4 years that we can say with confidence that AQ is shrinking, not growing? I don’t know; I worry that nobody within the Bush stable does either.
I agreed, cautiously, with the Afghanistan invasion, but I was concerned at the time with a war prosecuted almost totally from the air. Kerry’s best line so far – he hasn’t had many – was that Bush outsourced the war in Afghanistan. Doing so essentially lead to a further Balkanisation of an already fragmented country. Every indication we have says that Karzai controls little outside the Isle du Kabul, rendering the recent election almost a non-issue.
Afghanistan was an opportunity to begin a real process of state-building within the Middle East, an opportunity that is slowly slipping away.
Iraq is an issue that many disagree with me on, but here is my view. I thought Iraq had WMD, more importantly (given I don't get National Security Briefings - something else we should fix) I believe the POTUS believed it as well. He was wrong - along with everyone else (Kerry, Clinton, Blair - name someone and they were wrong except for Blix). My view is he went for a valid reason and it turned out to be wrong (reading that sentence again I've opened myself up to Peckr and other fools but I'll leave it to them to play with). What can we do from here, finish the job, was it worth it, I would say (and many would again disagree) absolutely - the Iraqi people are better off, the world is better off and tens of thousands of kids aren't dieing every year due to sanctions but we've lost 1k troops - a hard trade but not a bad one.
The CIA is unique within Washington’s Alphabet Soup. Unlike the FBI or the Secret Service, that are overseen by agencies like the Justice or Treasury Depts. that are to a degree arms-length, the CIA reports directly to the POTUS, and, beyond the oversight committees in Congress, is responsible to no one but the POTUS. I suppose this is, to a degree, a matter of faith, but let me say that I have rarely been as sure of anything than I am that Bush told the CIA to find evidence of WMD’s in Iraq – and they kindly obliged.
The most despicable thing Bush has done in this campaign is to make fun of his opponents for believing in his phoney war. “Look at how dumb these guys are – they even believed me!� Americans have an implicit faith, which I respect and think Canadians could use more of, that regardless of party affiliation when it comes to something as serious as war their President is not going to deceive them; so when the POTUS says that there is an immanent threat, they believe him, and authorize him to act accordingly. To abuse this trust is reason enough to turf any President.
Now the second question, Bush vs Kerry:
This is a really easy one, Bush knows what he thinks (but has a hard time saying it) and Kerry doesn't (but sounds good telling you what you want to hear). An easy decision for me. Some examples:
Kerry voted against the Iraq war in 1991, then admonished Bush 1 for not going all the way to Baghdad (even though he didn't have the "global test" on his side to do that). He simply doesn't stick with anything, classic slimy Democrat in that he plays the race card (we'll get your votes counted), class card (I drive an SUV, oops I don't, ah, my wife owns them), the envy card (the middle class bla bla bla), the scare card (social security bla bla bal).
He's spent more time talking about his service in Vietnam than he spent there or talking about his 20 years in the Senate (where he accomplished nothing).
Call me crazy, but how much does any Senator really “accomplish� over their career? Bush has depended on the American public’s ignorance (Canadians, I’ll note, are just as ignorant) of the mechanics of their parliamentary system, where the same bill might be voted upon a dozen times in two dozen different versions. No Senator’s record could possibly stand up to the test of “consistency�
Yes, Kerry did talk about Vietnam way, way too much.
At lead Howard Dean believed something and you knew where he stood.
Agreed.
I actually have relatives who live in the US and they are actually going to vote for Bush. I've had long talks and basically their stance is this:screwge said:As a Canadian, I would like to know from our US terbites what it is that would justify a vote for Bush. From here, it seems that he is grossly incompetent, particularly in the area he claims to be much better than Kerry – the war against terrorism.
The Bush Administration's decision to deceive the public and go to war against Iraq was terrible and a disaster. They absolutely did not support the war effort. Bush foreign policy has been a disaster. They also feel that the current administartion has made it a more dangerous place for Americans. Also they feel there is no place for firearms in a civilized society
but...
They support most of the Republican platform on domestic and moral policy and they feel that this is more important to them (wrongly IMHO) than the foreign policy disaster. They have standard conservative values:
-religious (thankfully not the "born again" type though)
-against abortion
-feel homosexuality is against what nature intended
-feels both programs like welfare and affirmative action, while good intentioned, is now too broken to be effective
-too much violence on TV - would like stronger censorship
-drugs are bad, including weed
-hate getting taxed on programs they don't support (less taxes)
-tough stance on crime
etc....
They are also confused on Kerry's stance on saying abortion and homosexuality is wrong but then say his beliefs don't matter (They perfer someone who tries to stand up for what they believe in).
So these are their reasons. They feel the GOP domestic and moral policies affect them more than the disaster in Iraq. (I didn't say I agree, this is just their reason).
Bush support
1. Dittiots - Those brainless stooges who listen to RushLimbaugh (and a huge list of RL wannabes all over the US media) and buy off on that kind of drivel.
2. The religious right - Both the hard core bible belt types and televangelicals - people who get religion from watching 700 Club and similar crap on television. A lot of genuine morons down here believe GWB when he says God wanted him to be president.
3. One issue fanatics (often tied to the religious right, but not entirely) who think that if some disadvantaged woman chooses abortion or or a couple of gay guy want to say their married it will be the end of the world as they know it - there are numerous variations on this theme.
4. Those who genuinely care little about their fellow human beings or society and think that tax cuts for the rich will ultimately benefit them - regardless of who else may suffer or what the long term consequences are. The rich get richer and the poor get poorer and inevitably some day it all comes crashing down - but they don't care since they will already be dead with more toys at the end.
5. Those who are scared or terrorists (25 years ago it was communists, but same principle) and think more of a police state can protect them. Bush is an expert on fear, since he's such a complete coward himself. Bush and his spin doctors pander to fear every day.
Anyone think of anything I missed? I'm just glad as hell that this crap will die down for awhile in just a weeks time - one way or the other.
Unfortunately, there's a variety of reasons. I'll try to list a few:screwge said:thanks OTB. I have spent the last little while looking for your previous comments. I found several, but they didn't really address the question I posed. Why do 50% of Americans support Bush. Its not a trick question, or meant to inflame, I'd really like to know. The answer is not obvious, so I was hoping someone could state the positive case (as opposed to he's better than Kerry, although I acknowledge this is a valid response). If 50% support him so vehemently, he must have strong points. I don't see them from this perspective, so I'm hoping to be educated. Thanks to those who reply.
1. Dittiots - Those brainless stooges who listen to RushLimbaugh (and a huge list of RL wannabes all over the US media) and buy off on that kind of drivel.
2. The religious right - Both the hard core bible belt types and televangelicals - people who get religion from watching 700 Club and similar crap on television. A lot of genuine morons down here believe GWB when he says God wanted him to be president.
3. One issue fanatics (often tied to the religious right, but not entirely) who think that if some disadvantaged woman chooses abortion or or a couple of gay guy want to say their married it will be the end of the world as they know it - there are numerous variations on this theme.
4. Those who genuinely care little about their fellow human beings or society and think that tax cuts for the rich will ultimately benefit them - regardless of who else may suffer or what the long term consequences are. The rich get richer and the poor get poorer and inevitably some day it all comes crashing down - but they don't care since they will already be dead with more toys at the end.
5. Those who are scared or terrorists (25 years ago it was communists, but same principle) and think more of a police state can protect them. Bush is an expert on fear, since he's such a complete coward himself. Bush and his spin doctors pander to fear every day.
Anyone think of anything I missed? I'm just glad as hell that this crap will die down for awhile in just a weeks time - one way or the other.
Re: Bush support
Yea you forgot to sign the post, john kerry.
ummmy2kmark said:Unfortunately, there's a variety of reasons. I'll try to list a few:
Anyone think of anything I missed? I'm just glad as hell that this crap will die down for awhile in just a weeks time - one way or the other.
Yea you forgot to sign the post, john kerry.
Re: Bush support
None of those apply to me and I voted for Bush - but then again simple people look for simple explanations.
OTB
Hmmmm,y2kmark said:Unfortunately, there's a variety of reasons. I'll try to list a few:
1. Dittiots - Those brainless stooges who listen to RushLimbaugh (and a huge list of RL wannabes all over the US media) and buy off on that kind of drivel.
2. The religious right - Both the hard core bible belt types and televangelicals - people who get religion from watching 700 Club and similar crap on television. A lot of genuine morons down here believe GWB when he says God wanted him to be president.
3. One issue fanatics (often tied to the religious right, but not entirely) who think that if some disadvantaged woman chooses abortion or or a couple of gay guy want to say their married it will be the end of the world as they know it - there are numerous variations on this theme.
4. Those who genuinely care little about their fellow human beings or society and think that tax cuts for the rich will ultimately benefit them - regardless of who else may suffer or what the long term consequences are. The rich get richer and the poor get poorer and inevitably some day it all comes crashing down - but they don't care since they will already be dead with more toys at the end.
5. Those who are scared or terrorists (25 years ago it was communists, but same principle) and think more of a police state can protect them. Bush is an expert on fear, since he's such a complete coward himself. Bush and his spin doctors pander to fear every day.
Anyone think of anything I missed? I'm just glad as hell that this crap will die down for awhile in just a weeks time - one way or the other.
None of those apply to me and I voted for Bush - but then again simple people look for simple explanations.
OTB
Originally posted by langeweile
The question for me is this:
Do I believe that a goverment should make certain choices for me? or do I believe that people in general are smart enough to make their own choices?
I believe that most people know whats good for them, better than any goverment does.
Waiting.........Ickabod said:Clue me in on some of the choices that Government- or liberals - desire to take out of your hands that you have a problem with.
Re: Re: Bush support
Not even #4? Assuming it was just "people who believe tax cuts - even for the rich - are good?"onthebottom said:Hmmmm,
None of those apply to me and I voted for Bush - but then again simple people look for simple explanations.
OTB
No, it's not. Bush is a man of faith, and has only ever suggested that he sought guidance from his faith. I say this as a card-carrying atheist socialist, but I have known and respected many people of faith who derive great intellectual substance from religion.
I don't have a problem with a religious man being president. I have a problem with George Bush being president.
I don't have a problem with a religious man being president. I have a problem with George Bush being president.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by langeweile
The question for me is this:
Do I believe that a goverment should make certain choices for me? or do I believe that people in general are smart enough to make their own choices?
I believe that most people know whats good for them, better than any goverment does.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Ickabod
Clue me in on some of the choices that Government- or liberals - desire to take out of your hands that you have a problem with.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by langeweile
The question for me is this:
Do I believe that a goverment should make certain choices for me? or do I believe that people in general are smart enough to make their own choices?
I believe that most people know whats good for them, better than any goverment does.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Ickabod
Clue me in on some of the choices that Government- or liberals - desire to take out of your hands that you have a problem with.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And waiting......Ickabod said:Waiting.........
Health careIckabod said:quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by langeweile
The question for me is this:
Do I believe that a goverment should make certain choices for me? or do I believe that people in general are smart enough to make their own choices?
I believe that most people know whats good for them, better than any goverment does.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Ickabod
Clue me in on some of the choices that Government- or liberals - desire to take out of your hands that you have a problem with.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And waiting......
Education
Social Security
Those just for starters
Everyone? Remember me? My view before the war was that only 5% of Iraq's WMD were unaccounted for and none were nuclear. The other 95% were already destroyed. Saddam was also contained, a threat to no one but Iraq itself. So why was little old me right and the rest of the world wrong? Maybe it's because I wasn't the only one right. The facts were out there, but the flip side of the WMD debate wasn't getting the air time. Even today the US media is still one sided when it comes to viewing it's countries foreign affairs. Most facts of the abuses inflicted by American foreign policies never come to light for the American public to see. A sad situation and one I wish could be corrected.onthebottom said:
Iraq is an issue that many disagree with me on, but here is my view. I thought Iraq had WMD, more importantly (given I don't get National Security Briefings - something else we should fix) I believe the POTUS believed it as well. He was wrong - along with everyone else (Kerry, Clinton, Blair - name someone and they were wrong except for Blix).
OTB
I might addlangeweile said:Health care
Education
Social Security
Those just for starters
Abortion
Drug use
Farm subsidations
I am still thinking
Section. 8.
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
To borrow Money on the credit of the United States;
To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;
To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;
To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;
To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;
To establish Post Offices and post Roads;
To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;
To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;
To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations;
To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;
To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;
To provide and maintain a Navy;
To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;
To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;
To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings;--And
To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
To borrow Money on the credit of the United States;
To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;
To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;
To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;
To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;
To establish Post Offices and post Roads;
To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;
To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;
To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations;
To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;
To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;
To provide and maintain a Navy;
To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;
To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;
To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings;--And
To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof
I think screwge's post is bang on! Yours, on the other hand, is dismissive, overbearing and just plain rude. You might just as well have told him that there was simply no point in expressing his opinion here because:onthebottom said:Congratulations on your 6th post.
Please read all of my posts over the last 2 years and if you have any more questions please PM me.
OTB
A) OTB has done it longer, more often and so perfectly that nobody will ever compare.
B) Screwge couldn't possibly have a new or even interesting point of view because he doesn't have anywhere near the required number of posts. Either that or he just isn't welcome to say anything here until he's got a much greater number of posts.
C) Nobody else on terb will pay any attention to screwge's POV because we're all so utterly convinced that yours is the one and only truth.
D) We're all perfectly happy to let you decide what or who we should be listening to. Although we've never formally elected you as the editor of American content here on terb, it is universally accepted that you will act as our spokeperson and protector against all thoughts critical of GWB in particular and the US in general.
E) Screwge mustn't question your supremacy out here in the open forum. Instead he must send you a PM so you can finish the job of dusting him off in private.
Here's a novel idea: We Canadians can welcome screwge and encourage him to continue expressing his opinions here on the TORONTO Escort Review Board.
Re: Re: Re: Bush support
OTB
Not even number 4, but thanks for asking.Drunken Master said:Not even #4? Assuming it was just "people who believe tax cuts - even for the rich - are good?"
OTB
