Can Bush do no wrong?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Mariner, Nov 16, 2004.

  1. Mariner
    Offline

    Mariner Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2004
    Messages:
    772
    Thanks Received:
    52
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Location:
    Boston, Mass.
    Ratings:
    +52
    It's striking to me how unanimous support is on these forums for George Bush's policies in a wide variety of areas. I find it hard to believe that conservatives are actually pleased with every single thing the man has done. Even as a generally Clinton-supporting Democrat, I hardly thought Clinton was perfect.

    So what are your least favorite Bush policies, ideas, or decisions?

    For example:

    1. Are you truly thrilled that government has grown under Bush (even excluding Homeland Security and the war in Iraq)? I thought conservatives were for small government. Bush has never vetoed a single spending item during his entire presidency.

    2. Are you really satisfied with the new policy of pre-emption? Even Henry Kissinger, writing in support of Bush in Newsweek a few weeks ago, worried that this policy would give rogue states moral reason to pre-empt us, and cautioned Bush to temper his disregard for the Geneva Convention.

    3. Are you dancing in the streets about the largest deficits in U.S. history? Do you think it's great that China and Saudi Arabia own a trillion dollars each in our credit card debt, and could call it in at any time and send our economy south as fast as a nuclear attack would?

    4. Do you really want to invest your social security money in Enron or pets.com, or to incur the future liability when people who made such choices find themselves homeless and in need of taxpayer support?

    5. Will flattening the tax code, which would almost inevitably raise taxes on everyone earning less than the current cut-off for paying less than you get back (which is around $70K per year), really improve your bottom line? Do you really like the idea of shifting the burden of taxation from wealth (i.e. people who don't work) to income (i.e. people who do)? The current rate on wealth is 10%, and Bush is aiming to lower it.

    There are so many other areas where I can imagine conservatives calling Bush's decisions into question--what's the need, now that Republicans ARE the federal government, for this great show of unanimity? Can Mr. Bush do no wrong?

    Mariner
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  2. CSM
    Offline

    CSM Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2004
    Messages:
    6,907
    Thanks Received:
    708
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Northeast US
    Ratings:
    +708
    Nope, he can't.
     
  3. manu1959
    Offline

    manu1959 Left Coast Isolationist

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2004
    Messages:
    13,761
    Thanks Received:
    1,625
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    california
    Ratings:
    +1,626
    1. Homeland security is a watste of money, we should have aske the french to go arrest the bad guys for us.

    2. No i think we should have apologized for builidng such tall buildings, appologized for gulf war I and invaded kuwait and given it back to sadam

    3. Your right we should not have spent a dime defending ourself after 9/11 we should have fired off a missle, sent in a couple of blackhawak choppers then smoked a moist cigar

    4. No i would like to invest my retirement money in microsoft, BofA, drug companies and oil companies rather than give it to the govt to invest in china and SA (you invested in Eron? thought you hermes libs were inteligent?)

    5. Flatting the tax code would cause everyone to pay the same % of their income...some taxes may go up some down..so what
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 2
  4. 5stringJeff
    Offline

    5stringJeff Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2003
    Messages:
    9,990
    Thanks Received:
    536
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Puyallup, WA
    Ratings:
    +540
    You've obviously not been around very long. Many of us (including me) have taken Bush to task on many issues, including immigration, Medicare, education, the non-use of vetos, etc.
     
  5. dmp
    Offline

    dmp Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2004
    Messages:
    13,088
    Thanks Received:
    741
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Enterprise, Alabama
    Ratings:
    +741
    It's striking to me how you can not read the forums, yet form baseless assumptions. :)
     
  6. no1tovote4
    Offline

    no1tovote4 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2004
    Messages:
    10,294
    Thanks Received:
    616
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Colorado
    Ratings:
    +616
    No, I am not happy with the pill-bill and other government growth. Nor with the idea that the Federal Government is getting their hands even more into Education which is specifically denied them by the Constitution.

    However that "Bush has never vetoed" thing is a little disingenuous. Every major piece of legislation that has passed has either been suggested by or supported by the President. Why would he veto a spending bill he created?


    Preemption is not my chosen method of dealing with an issue but it far outstrips the "wait until they get us" plan.

    Every economist that I know says that deficit spending comes with a slow economy and recommends it as well. It is during the excess years that you pay down the deficit.

    I personally believe that social security has been the bane of our society. It wrecked the extended family atmosphere in which most of our society grew up in before it was created. It created an atmosphere in which families put grandma into a nice old people prison and assume they are cared for by the government. Our young generations have missed the knowledge and wisdom of their elders.

    I would rather just give up what I put into it, chalk it up to a learning experience, and move on.

    If you overburden those who hire you, they will not hire you. Assuming that every rich person needs to pay for your lifestyle simply because they or their predecessors were successful is simply allowing jealousy to influence your decisions. While progressive taxes are clearly the best way, it is unnecessary to use taxes to punish the successful directly into a bad economy as they will no longer have the money to hire.

    Satisfy you?
     
  7. Mariner
    Offline

    Mariner Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2004
    Messages:
    772
    Thanks Received:
    52
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Location:
    Boston, Mass.
    Ratings:
    +52
    forum since the election, so I don't know too much of the history, but still some of the defenses of Bush here have seemed to be really stretching it, and no longer necessary given the outcome of the election. I apologize if I misunderstood most of your positions--but I'm still curious the answer to my question: which particular policies bother you, and why? As a non-Bush supporter I'd be a lot happier if I knew Bush was getting some good feedback from those who elected him but don't agree with everything he's doing.

    Mariner.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  8. CSM
    Offline

    CSM Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2004
    Messages:
    6,907
    Thanks Received:
    708
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Northeast US
    Ratings:
    +708
    a big one for me is the immigration policy of this country. Dont agree at all with the current administrations view on this.
     
  9. Bonnie
    Offline

    Bonnie Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2004
    Messages:
    9,476
    Thanks Received:
    668
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Wherever
    Ratings:
    +669
    yes I am for smaller government spending, cutting social spending raising defense and homeland security budgets, lower taxes, I disagree with Bush for trying to reach across the aisle to Comrade Chappaquidic Kennedy and other Libs only to have his hand bitten off. He should never make that mistake again!!!!!!!!!!

    Yes I agree with diplomacy to a point, but pre-emption in some cases is wiser especially with terrorism!!

    The wealthy and middleclass pay the brunt of the taxes here in the US, they invest their money to expand business and hire more people, who in turn now have a job so they can pay taxes as well,more revenue going into the govt to decrease the deficit. Wealthy, middle class people, and all business owners should get a tax break, if it be in the form of a flat tax to simplify things so be it. For some the taxes will go up for others it will stay roughly the same, and others it will go down. Id have to see the numbers to know if it is feasable.


    Yes I want Social Security to be in my own hands not the Governments. I can do a better job investing that money and making it grow. Social Security was never meant to be permanent, it was put in place by FDR as a temp fix during the Depression as was Welfare, the libs took control and made all these things entitlements to create a permanent voting base of dependants!!

    NO Bush is not perfect, no president is, but he comes damn close to my idea of a good one!!!
     
  10. manu1959
    Offline

    manu1959 Left Coast Isolationist

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2004
    Messages:
    13,761
    Thanks Received:
    1,625
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    california
    Ratings:
    +1,626
    actually i have been more annoyed by the house and senate and their behaviour during a time of national crisis
     

Share This Page