President Bush Is Not the Enemy

[LuvRPgrl]

Facts?????????? You're high. .

More flaming and false accusations I see.

Your the exact twin of ol' Psycho, everything you state or argue is based on facts and nothing else..

For me, I would take that as a compliment, but Psycho doesnt use facts. But you call me high, then accuse me of basing my arguements on facts??????

The fact is on the election that Bush got elected strictly because of conservative positions and then once in started spending and giving away money like a drunken sailor and abandoned all of his social positions i.e. constitutional ban on gay marriage..

Again, his spending PERCENTAGE of GDP isnt higher than some other recent presidents.
Constitutional ban on homosexual marriage was not gaining support, so he was wise to abandon it and let the states take control, which they have and almost unanimously have made laws against it.
In fact, letting States have control of the issue is more conservative and less liberal than a Federal ban.

No politician will ever get more than half the popular vote in today's polarized America,.

more opinion, and wrong at that.

the fact remains that Bush ran on conervative principles and values then when in office abandoned them like a young black teenage father abandons his children..

Its not a fact. you never give any specifics. Your statement can only be countered by me saying, "no he didnt" then you say, "yes he did" and on and on so we sound like two kids arguing who hit who first.

Immigration you say? Has many here know Bush's position falls right in line with my VERY sensible position, grant the lawabiding ones already here amnesty or at the very least guest worker status then seal the borders, this is the one position where Bush is shining and deciding not to align with the whacko brown skin haters....errrr excuse me illegal immigration alarmists..

I agree, although I dont think you fully understand Bush's proposal on immigration. One thing nobody has mentioned is if the "guest workers" dont return to Mexico, then the money they put in SS is NOT RETURNED TO THEM.

You are exactly what is wrong with American politics today, you believe in tell the people what they want to hear just to get elected,.

LIAR. I never stated or intimated any such thing. Because I say its a necessary evil, doesnt mean I support it, only that one HAS to do it to get elected, this day and age.

I on the other hand say stick to your guns and let the chips fall where they may, guess its a matter of principles between us, heh?.

More a matter of pragmatism. You PROVE my point that you would have Skerry in office now, and then you would blame others. Again.

So you like moderate fence sitters, which is the exact definition of governing from the middle.....hey thats cool....thats what Hillary is running as.....coooooool..

Again you lie. Quote me where I stated I like them. Just because I acknowledge them, unlike one who acts like an ostich and sticks their head in the sand, doesnt mean I LIKE them. Learn the difference, it will be beneficial in helping you not to look stupid.

If you think me saying your brainwashed is flaming take it up with Jimmy and then get out more often......

I wasnt complaining, just saying, if you are gonna flame me, then dont bitch when I return it, as you did before. And I SHOWED WITH YOUR OWN QUOTES, where you started it, then when it got to hot, you ran like a coward to the "dont flame moddies rule", yet ignored that "moddies are held to a higher standard and it wont be tolerated that they flame posters'

so, are you gonna continue to try and impose a double standard?

].

I haven't even gotten started.

Well, thats pretty damn obvious :funnyface

 

[LuvRPgrl]

border policy...having worked the Mexican Border for over twelve years...well I would say yes...GW is way off track..he pleases big business while putting his enforcement officers at risk! not to mention wasting their time...as for the net gain in jobs do to outsourcing...humm please show me these wonderful jobs created...minus the cheap labor jobs imported to please big business!
Quit with the towing the party line already...both parties are for this bundoggle! I am against both of them..and for Scarry Lt.Kerry I have made it very clear as to how I feel about him in numerous posts...!

You still didnt state any specifics on his immigration policy proposal.

As for the net jobs, I will find a link.
And you say we get cheap labor jobs in return? Are you nuts? Its EXACTLY the cheap labor jobs we export because the chinese will do it for so cheap;

 

[LuvRPgrl]

Pakistan?????????? Fucking Bin Laden is hiding in their country and you're going to tell me they can't root him out? Pakistanis don't know which way is up unless they are running a Citgo gas station.

Turkey????? You must be shitting me, remember when we wanted to stage air raids out of there? Tell me what was their answer.

Lebanon? Heh, well maybe.

Talk to Carnavar, he is much more informed on it than you, and he disagrees with your assesment.
Pakistan was vital in our having a jumping off point to Afghanastan, apparently you dont understand war strategy very well, yet you want to be a general about it. Plus you complain PRESIDENT Bush isnt allowing the generals to run the war, when in fact just the opposite is true. I have heard it from the mouths of the Generals themselves.

 

[archangel]

You still didnt state any specifics on his immigration policy proposal.

As for the net jobs, I will find a link.
And you say we get cheap labor jobs in return? Are you nuts? Its EXACTLY the cheap labor jobs we export because the chinese will do it for so cheap;

you hold that is exempt from exporting..pa-lease tell this to the numerous multitudes of high tech workers whos very jobs are now found in India and other places around the world! And for specifics on Border Control-Immigration policy...just look at the results...low wage jobs taking over former Middle class jobs...construction,manufacturing on and on...go cry to GW as he never had to rely on these type of jobs to feed his family...if he did he would surely not export them!

 

[LuvRPgrl]

Would we have MAJOR vital interests there if we would've grabbed our balls, told thw enviromental nutcases to blow theirselves and started drilling wherever there was a trace of oil here in the U.S.?

Nukes? I'm with ya on that, can't let them have them, but i'll tell ya RWA i'm beginning to fall in line with W.J. on some things concerning Israel, while I was on my hiatus from here I did some reading and if the Israelis would just quit fucking around, hell maybe if back in 47 we had just said no to an Israeli state maybe all this crap wouldn't be happening today.

Did you know the Israelis in 47 used the same exact tactics i.e. bombing civilians and public places as the Palestinians use today?

But are they doing it now? Its not '47 anymore dorothy.
As for drilling for oil here, PRESIDENT Bush got anwar drilling passed through.
You think Skerry would have? hahahhahahah

 

[archangel]

Talk to Carnavar, he is much more informed on it than you, and he disagrees with your assesment.
Pakistan was vital in our having a jumping off point to Afghanastan, apparently you dont understand war strategy very well, yet you want to be a general about it. Plus you complain PRESIDENT Bush isnt allowing the generals to run the war, when in fact just the opposite is true. I have heard it from the mouths of the Generals themselves.

Please eloborate kind sir! Except if you are relying on CNN contributing retired Generals...then I will pass on this diatribe!

 

[LuvRPgrl]

Do you really thinking abandoning Israel will stop muslim aggression? That's called appeasement. It didn't work with hitler either.

If Jihad terrorists ceased to exist, our world and the US would be MUCH better off.

If Israel ceased to exist, we wouldnt benefit at all. ANYONE who thinks Israel is why the terrorists are attacking us isnt informed very well, even OBL says there are other reasons.

 

[archangel]

you seem to be addressing another who is off board...c'mon answer my questions to you if ya can!

 

[MtnBiker]

As for drilling for oil here, PRESIDENT Bush got anwar drilling passed through.

Are you sure about that? I do not believe ANWAR drilling actually passed.

 

[archangel]

Are you sure about that? I do not believe ANWAR drilling actually passed.

damn sometimes the truth hurts...it got the Lib boot!

 

[LuvRPgrl]

Please eloborate kind sir! Except if you are relying on CNN contributing retired Generals...then I will pass on this diatribe!

I was specific. I heard it from the generals mouths themselves, and on more than one occasion. That means I either saw/heard it on TV, or radio. They agreed that they got the numbers of troops they thought would be sufficient.

What the critics fail to acknowledge, is the troop level wasnt as easy to determine as it was in Germany/Japan, where the bigger was better.

There was a real concern amongst generals if we used to heavy a hand, and had too many troops there, then there might be more civilians or Iraqi soldiers and ex soldiers who would side with the terrorists because they would have felt we were occupying. and that isnt the image the generals wanted to convey to the IRaqi peoples.

Even the liberal war critics state that many Iraqis think we are occupiers, and that was with reduced troop levels, just think if we had used a heavier hand, there would have surely been even more terrorists to fight.

Now, I know you wont respond to this with a coherent thought, but merely with unsubstantiated opinion or you will ignore it. Same with ORCA.

 

[LuvRPgrl]

Are you sure about that? I do not believe ANWAR drilling actually passed.

In another thread on USMB many posters stated that it passed along with the anti torture mcain bill.

 

[archangel]

I was specific. I heard it from the generals mouths themselves, and on more than one occasion. That means I either saw/heard it on TV, or radio. They agreed that they got the numbers of troops they thought would be sufficient.

What the critics fail to acknowledge, is the troop level wasnt as easy to determine as it was in Germany/Japan, where the bigger was better.

There was a real concern amongst generals if we used to heavy a hand, and had too many troops there, then there might be more civilians or Iraqi soldiers and ex soldiers who would side with the terrorists because they would have felt we were occupying. and that isnt the image the generals wanted to convey to the IRaqi peoples.

Even the liberal war critics state that many Iraqis think we are occupiers, and that was with reduced troop levels, just think if we had used a heavier hand, there would have surely been even more terrorists to fight.

Now, I know you wont respond to this with a coherent thought, but merely with unsubstantiated opinion or you will ignore it. Same with ORCA.

however on your closing note...as I expected...CNN Generals...so I will take my adooo(pun) and check out the SciFi and History Channels...this is a loosing propositition debating with one who just takes the party line without a single individual thought g'night to ya! :blah2:

 

[MtnBiker]

In another thread on USMB many posters stated that it passed along with the anti torture mcain bill.

Nope, the Senate Democrats threatened a filibuster on the Defense Appropriations Bill over the drilling issue.

Senate rejects drilling in Alaska wildlife refuge
Republicans fail to garner enough support to avoid threat of filibuster

Updated: 8:03 p.m. ET Dec. 21, 2005
WASHINGTON - The Senate blocked oil drilling in an Alaska wildlife refuge Wednesday, rejecting a must-pass defense spending bill where supporters positioned the quarter-century-old environmental issue to garner broader support.

Drilling backers fell four votes short of getting the required 60 votes to avoid a threatened filibuster of the defense measure over the oil drilling issue. Senate leaders were expected to withdraw the legislation so it could be reworked without the refuge language. The vote was 56-44.

Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist was among those who for procedural reasons cast a “no” vote, so that he could bring the drilling issue up for another vote.

The vote was a stinging defeat for Sen. Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, who for years has waged an intense fight to open the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. He had thought this time he would finally get his wish.

Stevens called the refuge’s oil vital to national security and bemoaned repeated attempts over the years by opponents using the filibuster to kill drilling proposals.

Democrats, conversely, accused Stevens of holding hostage a military spending bill that includes money to support troops in Iraq and $29 billion for victims of Hurricane Katrina.

'Held hostage'
“Our military is being held hostage by this issue, Arctic drilling,” fumed Sen. Harry Reid, the Democratic leader. The Nevada Democrat said the Senate could move quickly to pass the defense bill once the refuge issue was resolved.

“We all agree we want money for our troops. ... This is not about the troops,” said Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., a strong critic of letting oil development disturb the refuge in northeastern Alaska.

Link

 

[Gunny]

In another thread on USMB many posters stated that it passed along with the anti torture mcain bill.

It passed the House .... not the Senate. It can't go to the President without passing both.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Here is an original idea. Most democrats suck. Palozi, Kenndey, Kerry, Clinton (both of those hose bags), Schmuker,,, oh yeah, we are so lucky to have these parasites in the Congress..

Never heard that idea before.

George W??? OK, so we didn't get a gold ring this time around,

Wow - a right winger who lives in reality. A rare find.

 

[OCA]

Talk to Carnavar, he is much more informed on it than you, and he disagrees with your assesment.
Pakistan was vital in our having a jumping off point to Afghanastan, apparently you dont understand war strategy very well, yet you want to be a general about it. Plus you complain PRESIDENT Bush isnt allowing the generals to run the war, when in fact just the opposite is true. I have heard it from the mouths of the Generals themselves.

Sure you have, care to mention any of these general's names Psycho?

You listen to a Turk, says it all right there.

I guess though fighting the war with 20 person patrols that are highly ineffective, the fact that we lose 1 or two a day even though major combat operations are supposedly over and the FACT that the insurgency grows stronger everyday proves your point, right?

 

[OCA]

More flaming and false accusations I see.


For me, I would take that as a compliment, but Psycho doesnt use facts. But you call me high, then accuse me of basing my arguements on facts??????


Again, his spending PERCENTAGE of GDP isnt higher than some other recent presidents.
Constitutional ban on homosexual marriage was not gaining support, so he was wise to abandon it and let the states take control, which they have and almost unanimously have made laws against it.
In fact, letting States have control of the issue is more conservative and less liberal than a Federal ban.


more opinion, and wrong at that.


Its not a fact. you never give any specifics. Your statement can only be countered by me saying, "no he didnt" then you say, "yes he did" and on and on so we sound like two kids arguing who hit who first.


I agree, although I dont think you fully understand Bush's proposal on immigration. One thing nobody has mentioned is if the "guest workers" dont return to Mexico, then the money they put in SS is NOT RETURNED TO THEM.


LIAR. I never stated or intimated any such thing. Because I say its a necessary evil, doesnt mean I support it, only that one HAS to do it to get elected, this day and age.


More a matter of pragmatism. You PROVE my point that you would have Skerry in office now, and then you would blame others. Again.


Again you lie. Quote me where I stated I like them. Just because I acknowledge them, unlike one who acts like an ostich and sticks their head in the sand, doesnt mean I LIKE them. Learn the difference, it will be beneficial in helping you not to look stupid.


I wasnt complaining, just saying, if you are gonna flame me, then dont bitch when I return it, as you did before. And I SHOWED WITH YOUR OWN QUOTES, where you started it, then when it got to hot, you ran like a coward to the "dont flame moddies rule", yet ignored that "moddies are held to a higher standard and it wont be tolerated that they flame posters'

so, are you gonna continue to try and impose a double standard?

].

Well, thats pretty damn obvious :funnyface

You don't really want to start a flame war with me do you? I never bitched and I never ran, ever. In fact I never flamed you from the very beginning way back when, it was you who in fact decided to roll in the mud(like most mods and libs).

If you don't think you are a mod you need to review your posts, I mean you claim to not be one but accept moderation as if its supposed to be ineveitable so what else are we supposed to think.

Sounds almost like battered woman syndrome to me..."oficer he hits me but I still love him" LMFAO!

 

[OCA]

But are they doing it now? Its not '47 anymore dorothy.
As for drilling for oil here, PRESIDENT Bush got anwar drilling passed through.
You think Skerry would have? hahahhahahah

Are you this dumb or just playing? There is no bill that has passed congress allowing drilling in ANWR. Everything has been blocked or they allow only tests, fucking tests, like we don't already know there is oil there.

God bless the Republican controlled congress.

 

[OCA]

But are they doing it now? Its not '47 anymore dorothy.
As for drilling for oil here, PRESIDENT Bush got anwar drilling passed through.
You think Skerry would have? hahahhahahah

How old are you, 16?

Your ignorance of history and its effects on today's events are astounding, Hillary.