Bush

[jimnyc]

Welcome to the board, Batamo

 

[DKSuddeth]

Batamo, welcome to the board. I'll address your post in points....

1)

Bush's presidency started out mediocre at best but 9/11 gave him his boost. Whether the administration had any collusion in regards to how or why it happened is irrelevant for this point. "

If you are suggesting that Bush and/or his administration had anything to do with the attacks on 9/11, then I believe we have found our 'dumb' person.

NO, I am NOT suggesting that, there are plenty already doing that, however, if with all the evidence, supposition, theory, and unanswered questions and YOU aren't the slightest bit suspicious or have any questions yourself then maybe you aren't as familiar with our governments history as you should be. What I was originally attempting to say though, is that from 9/11 forward Bush became a decisive leader which propelled him in high approval status and rightfully so. Its only later that he backslid, in my opinion.

2)

As for Bush somehow repressing the public here in the US, thats just silly. Currently, and based on Bush's executive order, US citizens cannot be tried by military tribunals. That alone speaks volumes to Bush's 1. faith in American's, and 2. desire to keep the truth open. (It is worthy to note that the president DOES HAVE the power to allow military tribunals to try US citizens.)

As for Bush PERSONALLY repressing the public, no. It would obviously never happen for political survival as we are still a practicing democracy, however, you cannot deny that muslim men(citizen or not) have felt persecuted simply for their ethnic background and those that show dissent for the administrations policies have paid a price. There is little being done to prevent this repression and very little admonishment laid to the repressers by the bush administration for it. Also, lets not forget jose padilla, who has dual citizenship is still an american citizen and while NOT being tried by military tribunal is being kept incommunicado in violation of the US constitution. A president and his administration are to set the example of law according to the US constitution, not find ways around it to conduct itself.
as to your second subpoint (desire to keep the truth open), you're joking right? This has been the most secretive administration in the white house in MY lifetime (37 years) and granted thats not a long time but I've talked with older and they are saying the same.

3)

In regards to killing or catching Osama, this is an extremely difficult operation, and it is foolhardy to believe that he was going to be snatched up quickly. The snake has lived his whole life hiding and fleeing, so he's bound to be good at it.

This was the crux of my argument. Osama COULD have been caught if the afghanistan war had been better planned. This isn't monday morning general talking, this is plain common sense battle tactics. Bush and Rumsfeld did NOT send in enough military to secure afghanistan and capture osama, we all know this as is evident by the circumstances today. We also know that turning attention to Iraq and executing a battle plan with similar military understaffing resulted in the same, yet STILL we hear about the condemnation and subsequent firing of personnel who tried to tell us that it would be more expensive, require more troops, and take more time.

 

[Batamo]

hello all, thanks for the warm welcome

I'm glad to read you aren't accusing the Bush administration of being involved with 9/11. You had me worried. Regarding your suspicion and questions concerning our government's history, I agree completely with it generally. The US has done underhanded things, our foreign policy has often been dumb, clumsy, or terrible. In allowing osama to become what he is there may be some connection. With regards to saddam there certainly is. But it can't be layed all on the Bush administration. We've all heard, I'm sure, how Egypt and others captured and offered Osama to the US during the Clinton years, but were told we weren't interested. I guess my point there is I have no reason to believe the US is any more secretive or inept in foreign relations than in the recent past (say since WWII).

I also agree totally that Bush was basically feeling out the office until 9/11, when he stepped to the forefront. But to his defense, how long was he in office? It is always difficult to establish credibility as a president, and it takes months to get an agenda and to start to pursue it. This was even more difficult given the 2000 election.

Now regarding the treatment of muslims I will say that certainly many have been mistrusted or mistreated. But those are by and large citizens acting out of fear, against other citizens or resident aliens. While the US military is large, it can't possible police an entire nation. The Bush administration (as well as Congress) have spoken out against this, but there really is no way to stop people from mistrusting other people. And lets be fair, they do have reason to be so, since it is quite clear the current terrorist threat comes from a particular religous and geographical location- which is often associated with a certain image. There aren't red-heads currently trying to smuggle bombs into the US.

Jose Padilla is not being held agains the constitution as far as I can tell. I must admit I don't know the details well enough, but during a time of war, the president has broad powers. And lets not forget the purpose of detention: to prevent enemies from going out and renewing their war/struggle/fight where they could be killed.

And I stand by my comments on catching OSAMA. I don't care how large of a military you have, its extremely hard to find people when they live in one of the most underdeveloped country in the world... in a series of caves that extend MILES! Do propose the military stand shoulder to shoulder and form a huge circle around an entire country... and then march in 1 foot by 1 foot? If I wanted to hide from authorities in my neighborhood I could do so for hours. And I am neither prepared to hide, nor allowing myself an entire country filled with friends who are trying to hide me.

My honest opinion is that Bush is getting a very short leash of faith, stemming back to the gore-recount issue. People have always kept that in the back of their mind, particularly democrats, and now they are renewing their complaints. Its gotten to the point where everything Bush does is viewed with a very critical eye. Bill Clinton ran around playing the sax, and people couldn't care less. Why? Because 1. he was clearly elected and 2. his administration had smooth seas to sail on. Yet the problems we face today existed then... they just never came to a head. By and large, the determinitng factor thus far in Bush's administration is luck. He's had none, while clinton had tons. The economy, the terrorist attacks, North Korea, etc.

I say we give our Commander-in-Chief at least some modest support.

 

[lilcountriegal]

Excellent post Batamo and welcome to the board!!

Not to get off topic, BUT:

don't care how large of a military you have, its extremely hard to find people when they live in one of the most underdeveloped country in the world...

I was watching this whole Jackson fiasco on Fox news tonight and they had a clip that I caught the end of. They say new intelligence reports show that Osama has most likely escaped to Iran... (shaved his head bald and trimmed his beard, changing the color).

Has anyone else heard this? I'm short on details...

 

[DKSuddeth]

Jose Padilla is not being held agains the constitution as far as I can tell. I must admit I don't know the details well enough, but during a time of war, the president has broad powers.

These are the facts about Padilla, as I know them anyway.

He was picked up at O'hare airport after returning from pakistan I believe. He was held in custody by the FBI with no charges, only being suspected of intending to detonate a dirty bomb. Initially, I believe, he was afforded the attorney and when the attorney demanded evidence be shown so that he could either be charged with a crime or released it was then that the president labeled him an enemy combatant and he was then moved to the naval brig in norfolk, where he has been incommunicado.

To this day, no evidence has been shown in court or to a judge, he has not talked with any of his attorney's, he has not been charged with a crime. He has dual citizenship so he is an american citizen. This should be clearly against the constitution and bill of rights yet this 'war on terror' has yet to really be defined. How do you determine just who is the enemy and who isn't? its not like we're at war with an established country.

I don't feel that we need to be opening up more than 6 gray areas at once. but hey, im just a civilian, what do I know....pardon my sarcasm and frustration.

 

[5stringJeff]

Originally posted by Batamo
hello all, thanks for the warm welcome

Bill Clinton ran around playing the sax, and people couldn't care less. Why? Because 1. he was clearly elected and 2. his administration had smooth seas to sail on. Yet the problems we face today existed then... they just never came to a head. By and large, the determinitng factor thus far in Bush's administration is luck. He's had none, while clinton had tons. The economy, the terrorist attacks, North Korea, etc.

I didn't get to say it yet, but welcome, Batamo!

My two cents on Slick Willie... first, he got 43% of the popular vote in '92, and 48% in '96 - never a majority, only a plurality. Now I'm not going to complain about it, because the President is elected by the electoral college, not by popular majority, but I find it very interesting that Clinton was elected with smaller percentages of the vote than Dubya, yet no one ever complained that 'more people voted against Clinton than voted for him.'

 

[jimnyc]

Good point, Jeff. I haven't heard that before, very interesting.

 

[jon_forward]

nice post GOP_JEFF!!!! there are alotta folks that just dont understand that everyday is different from the last one.has G.W made mistakes,probably, but at least the poor guy is doing his best. things were kinda slow in the clinton admin except for all the attention he brought on himself[circus] since bush was elected its been one thing after another. you are right about being lucky, bush has had all bad up till now. time for the sun to shine on us for awhile.

 

[ajwps]

Originally posted by Batamo

hello all, thanks for the warm welcome

Bill Clinton ran around playing the sax, and people couldn't care less. Why? Because 1. he was clearly elected and 2. his administration had smooth seas to sail on. Yet the problems we face today existed then... they just never came to a head. By and large, the determinitng factor thus far in Bush's administration is luck. He's had none, while clinton had tons. The economy, the terrorist attacks, North Korea, etc.

Bill Clinton and his co-president wife had smooth sailing because of the previous Republican tax cuts before their 8 year attempt to destroy the United States economy. Clinton raised taxes, tried to impose a failed socialist health care system on America and spent tax money for nonsense while demagoging to his utopian masses.

Now we are paying for Clinton's excesses but with President Bush and the tax cuts and government spending on the war (being spent in the USA), the economy, jobs and prosperity begin to return in just the last three months.

Bush is not having luck but using his own senses instead of polling to see what seems popular right now.

 

[jon_forward]

Put that way my friend I have to concer with your post!

 

[mwbuccs]

Originally posted by Spirit_Soul
Is dumb

Thank you.

anyone that kisses jew ass is dumb.

 

[Ike]

Originally posted by DKSuddeth
While I think its great that the afghani's and iraqi's are now 'liberated' from oppressive rulers, how great can it be if they have to worry about car bombs and anti personnel mines? [/B]

Better than having to worry about arbitrary arrest, detention and slaughter.

Land mines are removed far easier than a murderous dictatorship.

For the first time in the lives of their entire generation, the people of Iraq and Afghanistan, (if they get their act together) have a chance of at actually becoming a real nation.

I wish them goodluck. They will need it.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by DKSuddeth
I could care less about where a person went to school and what they studied. To me, its inconsequential in comparison to how they make policy with regards to me.

I fully agree. I also think we should explicitly seek out individuals who have had no higher education whatsoever to lead our nation.

The 'war on terror' and the 'war in iraq' are, and should remain, very seperate things. The only reason I see for tying the two together is simply to keep the reasoning and validations for both as convoluted and controversial as possible while making it easy to brand anyone who disagrees or speaks out as 'unamerican, anti-american, or unpatriotic'.

Why should they remain separate when, in fact and actuality, they are related? Tying them together is not just a political manipulation, sorry.

Bush's presidency started out mediocre at best but 9/11 gave him his boost.

It started off great. His first priority was to cut taxes. Always a good idea!

Whether the administration had any collusion in regards to how or why it happened is irrelevant for this point.

Sounds like your giving the administration the benefit of the doubt, almost. Are you a neocon?

When the US went after the Taliban in Afghanistan to get bin ladin he had my full support, as well as most of the world. In reducing OBL to 'irrelevancy' or not being a priority then he quite simply failed in my view.

Further worsening the issue was turning the attention to Iraq. Many of the reasons given have so far turned out bogus, or at the least highly suspect, and to play upon the fears of the american people by 'mushroom clouds' is truly despicable. A true leader is not supposed to frighten the populace into submission, whether its with words or force for that only places him or her in the same category as hussein or the taliban.

It now seems that the 'war on terror' has degenerated into nothing more than a 'police action' like vietnam and our troops, along with the iraqi citizens, are paying the salaries of the contracters, sometimes with their very lives.

While I think its great that the afghani's and iraqi's are now 'liberated' from oppressive rulers, how great can it be if they have to worry about car bombs and anti personnel mines?

You need a dose of the bigger picture. Handwringing is so counterproductive, and causes chafing!:clap1:

 

[Bullypulpit]

Originally posted by gop_jeff
He's only got an undergraduate degree from Yale and an MBA from Harvard... so yeah, he must be a moron.

...He never managed more than a "C" average, and at Harvard and Yale, that amounts to a social pass. Especially since he was a legacy from Prescott and George H.W. Bush.

Also, he scored "25" on the pilots exam for the Texas Air Force back during the Vietnam War. That's just above too dumb to walk and chew gum at the same time.

So yeah, I think it's fair to say that Dubbyuh ain't the sharpest tool in the shed.

 

[jimnyc]

...He never managed more than a "C" average, and at Harvard and Yale, that amounts to a social pass. Especially since he was a legacy from Prescott and George H.W. Bush.

Did you graduate with honors from Oxford? Because it sounds like you're saying that passing through Harvard with average grades somehow makes you dumb.

Also, he scored "25" on the pilots exam for the Texas Air Force back during the Vietnam War. That's just above too dumb to walk and chew gum at the same time.

And yet he was a pilot. Could you pass a pilots exam? What have you done that was so much better?

So yeah, I think it's fair to say that Dubbyuh ain't the sharpest tool in the shed.

And yet he seems to have done more than you have. What does that tell us?

 

[Moi]

Originally posted by Bullypulpit
...He never managed more than a "C" average, and at Harvard and Yale, that amounts to a social pass. Especially since he was a legacy from Prescott and George H.W. Bush.

Also, he scored "25" on the pilots exam for the Texas Air Force back during the Vietnam War. That's just above too dumb to walk and chew gum at the same time.

So yeah, I think it's fair to say that Dubbyuh ain't the sharpest tool in the shed.

By your standards, those who are average, which is what a c stands for, shouldn't be able to pursue their chosen career fields? Talk about elitist! Perhaps Bill Gates should resign from Microsoft...if I'm not mistaken, he doesn't even have a degree.

Having the highest IQ and/or scoring the highest on school exams is not, I repeat not, a requirement to be president. I don't know what you think a "social pass" is, but at both universities that I attended, a c average was passing- no ifs, ands or passes. So what is your point?

There are millions of people who manage to make a success of their lives even if they did not spend a lot of time in their youth pursuing success. At no point in this country are you relegated to your lowest performance. People in this country can and do change for the better. I for one am completely sick and tired of you harping on Bush's past in such a manner. Get over it.

You can disagree with his policies and the way he votes or lobbies but it's really ridiculous to use his college career as a reason that you do not like him or support his policies.

 

[jon_forward]

they are scrapping the very bottom trying to smear him, much like a child would act when they know they are wrong....about the same way the 8 democrats are acting toward one another,

 

[Bullypulpit]

Originally posted by jimnyc
Did you graduate with honors from Oxford? Because it sounds like you're saying that passing through Harvard with average grades somehow makes you dumb.

And yet he was a pilot. Could you pass a pilots exam? What have you done that was so much better?

And yet he seems to have done more than you have. What does that tell us?

Point one: I graduated Summa Cum Laude from college.

Point two: With a score of 25, one point above failing utterly, he leapfrogged ahead of many more qualified applicants to a sinecure in the Texas Air Force. He was later grounded for failing to show up for a flight medical, and was AWOL for the last two years of his term.

Point three: I've worked my ass off for everthing I've got. Dubbyuh's had everything handed to him on a silver platter.

 

[Bullypulpit]

Originally posted by Moi
By your standards, those who are average, which is what a c stands for, shouldn't be able to pursue their chosen career fields?

You can disagree with his policies and the way he votes or lobbies but it's really ridiculous to use his college career as a reason that you do not like him or support his policies.

Point one: You surely do like to draw inferences that aren't even there.

Point two: My dislike for Howdy stems from a thorough examination of his life and what he has done with it. He has served himself and his corporate johns rather than the public interest, moreso than any politician I have seen to date. Compared to Dubbyuh, the last crapsack the held the Presidency was a choir-boy.

 

[jimnyc]

Point one: I graduated Summa Cum Laude from college.

That's not what I asked you. Was it Oxford or Harvard? And if some people pass through college with above average grades that doesn't make those that had average grades dumb. I had a 3.9 average when I was in college, does that mean those who had a 3.0 were dumb?

Point two: With a score of 25, one point above failing utterly, he leapfrogged ahead of many more qualified applicants to a sinecure in the Texas Air Force. He was later grounded for failing to show up for a flight medical, and was AWOL for the last two years of his term.

Did he do what was expected of him to attain the title of pilot? Have you accomplished this? If not, what gives you the right to condemn the grades of those who have taken the tests successfully?

Point three: I've worked my ass off for everthing I've got. Dubbyuh's had everything handed to him on a silver platter.

He's worked his ass off as well, both in business and politics. I'd venture a guess that he's been a helluva lot more successful than you as well. Does this make you dumb? Nope, just makes your statements dumb.