Grading The Presidency of George W Bush

[inyourhonor2010]

All the attention is on the main event in November between Mccain and Obama. But how would you grade the last 8 years of W?

[TigerswillbeTigers]

I'm in..as the lone "complete sucess! I did it for warren1st!:angel:

[CarlE]

I'm in..as the lone "complete sucess! I did it for warren1st!:angel:

If I'm Sadaam Hussein (or his cousin Hussein Obama) I grade is as a complete success.

If I'm Bin Laden, I grade it as bad because after all I DO have to sleep someplace different every night.

[TigerswillbeTigers]

The pole choice is a complete suCess! Play along would ya?

[werperry]

I think history will grade his Presidency as a success. Today...on MP.com...not so much.

[warren1st]

I'm in..as the lone "complete sucess! I did it for warren1st!:angel:

You're not alone. I won't see it but history will show he was a great president. I remember how Truman was so disliked and both parties wanted Ike. The GOP got him and, thus, the presidency for 8 years.

[TigerswillbeTigers]

I meant "the lone" as in, there was only one vote for complete success at the time!
It would be alot easier if you'd just put that "Top of the class" education to work for you! :thumbsup:

[warren1st]

I meant "the lone" as in, there was only one vote for complete success at the time!
It would be alot easier if you'd just put that "Top of the class" education to work for you! :thumbsup:

Yes, I understand very well......and, I came along and also gave him the top rating. Only I wasn't being a smart ass about it.

Frankly, I'm getting a little tired of your put downs. I'll put my intelligence up against any of you guys. Maybe you don't understand my words.

You know, I try to be a freakin' decent poster who is a "visitor" but you guys certainly enjoy your mean-spirited put downs. I can see why there are virtually no posters from McK!!!

[TigerswillbeTigers]

warren1st! You can't be serious, right? Put downs? I was simply making light of something you posted previously! As a matter of fact, in that post I said, "I'll take the high road and completely avoid mentioning the school you're referencing. Good luck with CarlE and the rest of the class clowns!"
Does that sound like a "put down" to you?
Then, before I could post it it, I noticed PB already jumped on your "Top of the class" reference and made a joke about Michigan....NOT ME!


Please show me the additional put downs you're referring to!

Now I know you love Dubya, and I know that you know that I can't stand the way he has lead this country, but that has nothing to do with this, or the fact that in your mind, you "THINK" you're smarter then me! Lol

[CarlE]

Heeeeeeeeeeeey. Who called me a clown????

[TigerswillbeTigers]

Trust me, it was a genuine PUT DOWN of you!


Check out my new signature! Can ya see it?

[Seeker]

Heeeeeeeeeeeey. Who called me a clown????

Ya mean today?

[ChronicTiger]

Heeeeeeeeeeeey. Who called me a clown????


http://massillonproud.com/forum/memberlist.php

:lol:

[Seeker]

Chronic, you made me laugh out loud.

You may now put one stripe on your helmet!

[CATS44]

On Ws watch...

1) Terrorists managed to blow up the WTC and hit the Pentagon.

2) We went to war based on his assertions of WPMs and a Saddam link to Bin Laden...neither of which existed.

3) Ignoring the advice of our military planners, we went into Iraq with too few soldiers, and then bypassed weapons caches without securing them...which led us to where we are now.

4) Ignoring the Powell Doctrine and the experience of his father, we went to war without an exit strategy.

5) Meanwhile, over in Afghanistan, where the real enemy sits, we went in undermanned and still havent found him.

6) He managed to wipe out the international coalition that his father had built.

7) He mismanaged the Katrina aftermath.

8) His choices for Sec of Def and Att Gen both resigned, one because of sheer incompetency and arrogance, the other because of illegalities and arrogance.

9) His own party is running against him.

10) Recession, inflation, and one of the worst housing crises in the nations history mark his economic policies.

It is going to be awfully difficult for historians to give him a passing grade.

IMO you have to go back to the triumverate of Harding-Collidge-Hoover to find an equal to GWB, but even they didnt start a preemptive war.

[CarlE]

http://massillonproud.com/forum/memberlist.php

:lol:

WOW. What a classic post. Do NOT mess with Chronic today. He's on his "A" game.

[mike_da_man13]

if you count wiping your butt with the constitution a success, then he had the best 2 terms ever

[OTC TIGER]

Check out my new signature! Can ya see it?

Boone Pickens said to short oil when it was 120.00 in early spring...it went to 147.00 by July...Boone Pickens promtly said buy oil it's going to 200.00 a barrel...it's currently 109.00 a barrel....It's no wonder he's advocating Wind power he goes which ever way it's blowing.

[Red50Go]

Boone Pickens said to short oil when it was 120.00 in early spring...it went to 147.00 by July...Boone Pickens promtly said buy oil it's going to 200.00 a barrel...it's currently 109.00 a barrel....It's no wonder he's advocating Wind power he goes which ever way it's blowing.

Yeah, poor guy barely has 2 dimes to rub together.

[CarlE]

Yeah, poor guy barely has 2 dimes to rub together.

You beat me.

[TigerswillbeTigers]

Lay off my new candidate T. Boone!

He has a plan! What the hell does your candidate have? A fancy way with words? A damn pipe dream give you when you buy his snake oil? The ability to navigate their way thru that confounded e-bay thing?

WAKE UP ALREADY AND TAKE A BIG SWIG OF BOONES FARM!

[CarlE]

Lay off my new candidate T. Boone!

He has a plan! What the hell does your candidate have? A fancy way with words? A damn pipe dream give you when you buy his snake oil? The ability to navigate their way thru that confounded e-bay thing?

WAKE UP ALREADY AND TAKE A BIG SWIG OF BOONES FARM!

A hot babe as VP. Now leave me alone.

[TigerswillbeTigers]

You know Carl, you're everything mothers today warn their daughters about!

BTW! T. Boone has narrowed his choice for VP to Jessica Alba and Adrianna Lima! You can have your squinty eyed, scrunchy faced, Miss Moose pageant winning moose stew lovin "Trophy" babe!

[CarlE]

You know Carl, you're everything mothers today warn their daughters about!

BTW! T. Boone has narrowed his choice for VP to Jessica Alba and Adrianna Lima! You can have your squinty eyed, scrunchy faced, Miss Moose pageant winning moose stew lovin "Trophy" babe!

Wait just a MINUTE!!! PICKENS FOR PRESIDENT, baby!!!!! Windmills? WHAT windmills????

[TigerswillbeTigers]

I feel compelled to let you know that my man T. Boones plan calls for windmills on St PeteSerbergs beaches!

Unsightly? Perhaps! Lower energy cost for you and your elitest neighbors? Absolutely!

[CarlE]

I feel compelled to let you know that my man T. Boones plan calls for windmills on St PeteSerbergs beaches!

Unsightly? Perhaps! Lower energy cost for you and your elitest neighbors? Absolutely!

You are freaking CLASSIC, bruddah!!!

[Smitty]

Back in the topic: I voted "BAD". I'm a die-hard conservative Republican & solid believer in the church known as Reganomics.... And I'm here to tell everyone that we've had a frikkin' Liberal moron in the White House for the past 8 years. The GOP didn't abandon 43; he abandoned his party.

[TigerswillbeTigers]

LOL! I've gotta tell ya, I think you just offended every single damned liberal in the world by calling the "uniter" one of them Smitty!

That's the ultimate insult. I guess the new catch phrase will be "Bush hugger"!

[Tiger2001]

I voted bad.


I hate Bush.

:afro:

[CATS44]

Perhaps you should ask Barry Goldwater how he rates GWB and the present Republican party...and the so called conservative movement.

Obviously, he isnt here to ask. But he did leave some clues.

1) Goldwater was against religious political involvement, although he spoke of 'spirituality' in many of his speeches.

2) Goldwater was for the rights of gays and lesbians.

3) Goldwater was concerned with population explosion, and along with his wife, established the Arizona Planned Parenthood.

4) Goldwater was a firm believer in technology, but the GOP is against stem cell research. Wosre than that, Goldwater believed in science, while the present GOP expresses disbelief in evolution.

5) Goldwater was a firm believer in balanced budgets. GWB has the biggest deficit in history.

6) Goldwater was a stauch advocate of downsizing government. Bush has overseen the largest expansion of our governement in decades.

7) Goldwater was a firm believer in personal privacy. Bush supporters want to introduce state identity papers.

8) Goldwater thought that government agents who listed into telephone calls and intercepted mail were KGB agents or some other form of Commies. Bush agenst do it with regularity, and esp on the internet.

9) In the late 1980s Goldwater asserted that the GOP had been taken over by a 'bunch of kooks.' Imagine what he would say today. Imagine what he would say about the GOP nominee having to travel to Lynchburg to make peace with Jerry Falwell. Hell, imagine what Goldwater would say about Jerry Falwell. (It probably couldnt be printed.)

I am a proud Goldwater Republican. To paraphrase Reagan....

I didnt leave the Republican party. Along the way it left me.

[TigerswillbeTigers]

I can't seem to get on the right side of this Dubya guy. I used to despise him and was in the minority. Now I vote that he's a success, and I'm in the minority again! :wall:

[Smitty]

Cats44 is correct:

Republican champions of 50 years ago (eg, Ike, Goldwater, Nelson Rockefeller) would not recognize the current GOP. They must be spinning in their graves.

[tubaswinger99]

I'm actually shocked that five people called him a complete success? Makes me laugh....One...Two...Three...Four...Five...ha.ha.h a.ha

http://www.myspacerev.com/uploads3/gqDkXWbwGT.jpg

[Indiana95]

I'm actually shocked that five people called him a complete success? Makes me laugh....One...Two...Three...Four...Five...ha.ha.h a.ha

[/IMG]

At least one vote was a joke...the others are just ignorant and totally blind people who sound like this........baaaa baaaa!

What really concerns me are the ones who think he did an Good and OK job. Are all 24% of the people who approve of Bush blogging on this website? Holy Smokes!

[mike_da_man13]

At least one vote was a joke...the others are just ignorant and totally blind people who sound like this........baaaa baaaa!

What really concerns me are the ones who think he did an Good and OK job. Are all 24% of the people who approve of Bush blogging on this website? Holy Smokes!

:suspect: 24% in a town hit hard by his and his fathers economic views... suprising to say the least.
add in the fact that we are involved in a conflict in iraq, that is extremely hypocritical imo. maybe you guys see things differently.

[CarlE]

At least one vote was a joke...the others are just ignorant and totally blind people who sound like this........baaaa baaaa!

What really concerns me are the ones who think he did an Good and OK job. Are all 24% of the people who approve of Bush blogging on this website? Holy Smokes!

DUBYA IS NOT A REPUBLICAN. He just plays one on TV!! LOL

[TigerVic]

History will tell. Most everyone hates (or is at least tired of) a president as he winds down.

Ask the same question 50 years from now. Maybe we'll be thankful to have had a president that, while he made mistakes like anyone else would (and NO president likes putting our troops in harm's way), stuck fairly well by the principles that this nation was founded upon.

[Indiana95]

stuck fairly well by the principles that this nation was founded upon.

Not trying to be funny, but which principles are you referring to?

[inyourhonor2010]

He must be talking about torturing prisoners in Gitmo, wire tapping American's phones, using presidential privilege to cover up the fact that he ordered those things, outing an active CIA operative, and last but certainly not least invading Iraq just because. But he must have been a good president because we still have the 2nd amendment right? Gimme a break.

[mike_da_man13]

Not trying to be funny, but which principles are you referring to?

prolly the whole propaganda thing to egg on a war....

[CarlE]

He must be talking about torturing prisoners in Gitmo, wire tapping American's phones, using presidential privilege to cover up the fact that he ordered those things, outing an active CIA operative, and last but certainly not least invading Iraq just because. But he must have been a good president because we still have the 2nd amendment right? Gimme a break.


I'm OK with the first two, by the way. A war on terror takes on many faces and sometimes privileges need to be sacrificed. This is about gathering intelligence, not who has the most bombs.

[mike_da_man13]

I'm OK with the first two, by the way. A war on terror takes on many faces and sometimes privileges need to be sacrificed. This is about gathering intelligence, not who has the most bombs.

lol If freedom needs to be sacrificed then according to president bush, isn't that letting the terrorists win? The executive branch has over stepped it's boundaries and has become way more powerful than it should be.

[Texas]

The only reason it is not a freakin F is because he is from Texas. I was so pi---- off that I was actually going to vote for Hilary Clinton until I heard Mccain's speach and he put, how was it worded, Moose stew lovin, moose pageant winner, Governor Pailen on the ticket.God dang is this woman hot. I vote for the barracuda and the guy she is running with.

[Red50Go]

Bush did a great job and Republicans vow reform. Way to cover your bases guys, lol.

[savage4president]

Cats44 is correct:

Republican champions of 50 years ago (eg, Ike, Goldwater, Nelson Rockefeller) would not recognize the current GOP. They must be spinning in their graves.

Damn right!!! Whatever happened to its my money and my body...I will do with both what I see fit. When did the government become so smart as to tell each and everyone of us what is best for us??? Better questions is why in the hell do we actually listen to them?

[OTC TIGER]

[QUOTE=mike_da_man13;119511]:suspect: 24% in a town hit hard by his and his fathers economic views... suprising to say the least.


What economic views would that be...

[CarlE]

lol If freedom needs to be sacrificed then according to president bush, isn't that letting the terrorists win?

Um, no. Could you do me a favor? Please prove that you can read and comprehend before you go vote on November 4th, OK??? And take some friends of yours on this thread with you.

[Red50Go]

[QUOTE]


What economic views would that be...

He has been President for 8 years and you need to ask?

Increase wealthy class (trickle down), support for big oil, deficit spending, debt spending. If I am wrong, someone please explain.

[CarlE]

[QUOTE=OTC TIGER;119756]

He has been President for 8 years and you need to ask?

Increase wealthy class (trickle down), support for big oil, deficit spending, debt spending. If I am wrong, someone please explain.

You're right for the most part. Bush is an idiot. But, please explain to me how the poor prosper when the wealthy don't increase their wealth??? Help me with that, OK?

[Red50Go]

I dont know CarlE. At least I admit I am no economics expert. What I do know is the mean income for the top 1 % has gone up, and income for the middle class has gone down. Do you disagree that the gap has widened? Now that is fine w/ me if there was any evidence that it worked, but given the state of the economy (which I think is a horrible mess, job loss etc) I deduced that this policy may be flawed. I can not guarentee that a greater tax break on the middle class will help the economy but it stands to reason - IMHO. More people spending more money. The tax break on the wealthiest 1% would revert back to the Clinton term, and it seems to me (imo) we did better then.

[WheatCity]

Economics and its associated policies are like a pendulum(sp?).
Under Nixon, Ford, Carter the corporate tax rate was very high and the economy began to lag. Then, Reaganomics came into play, trickle down economic policy began to take hold (involving the cut of corporate tax). For the better part of two decades, our economy has been fantastic (and still is based on a number of measures.)

Perhaps Obama is the best choice at this point for no other reason that his policies will rebalance the system.

[man2man]

I voted bad. I hate Bush. :afro:

This typical of the media-led and liberal-fed public who doesn't know any facts about the Bush presidency, they just heard other people say "I hate Bush" so they join in.

History will add perspective to the turbulent times that engulf us now, and they will praise Bush's effort to create some national and global stability in a time where it was eroding every day.

[mike_da_man13]

This typical of the media-led and liberal-fed public who doesn't know any facts about the Bush presidency, they just heard other people say "I hate Bush" so they join in.

History will add perspective to the turbulent times that engulf us now, and they will praise Bush's effort to create some national and global stability in a time where it was eroding every day.
by that do you mean taking power away from the proletariat and giving it to major corporations?

[Indiana95]

This typical of the media-led and liberal-fed public who doesn't know any facts about the Bush presidency, they just heard other people say "I hate Bush" so they join in.

History will add perspective to the turbulent times that engulf us now, and they will praise Bush's effort to create some national and global stability in a time where it was eroding every day.

What history will actually tell is that you are part of a very small minority of blind sheep who think Dubya is God on earth. My dog has more common sense than this shoot em up texan. Give me a break!

[Kamd50]

What history will actually tell is that you are part of a very small minority of blind sheep who think Dubya is God on earth. My dog has more common sense than this shoot em up texan. Give me a break!

LOL:iagree::thanx:

[Indiana95]

they will praise Bush's effort to create some national and global stability in a time where it was eroding every day.

Bush brought national and global stability? What freakin planet do you live on? :doh: The world and our country has not been this unstable in decades. Furthermore, America's place in the world and its respect from our allies has diminished greatly under your so called hero, the great Dubya. :puke: Again, you've got to be either kidding or completely blind!

[Red50Go]

I guess McCain, Palin, and whole rnc are part of the liberal media too because they cant run away from this guy fast enough.

Republicans, meet your Jimmy Carter. Hey happens to the best of us. :down:

[DE#53]

if you count wiping your butt with the constitution a success, then he had the best 2 terms ever

What's that supposed to mean?

[CarlE]

Bush brought national and global stability? What freakin planet do you live on? :doh: The world and our country has not been this unstable in decades. Furthermore, America's place in the world and its respect from our allies has diminished greatly under your so called hero, the great Dubya. :puke: Again, you've got to be either kidding or completely blind!

PLEASE tell me I'm wrong but did Dimwit Dubya say yesterday that the fall of Lehman, the basement buy of Merrill Lynch, and the impending disaster at AIG was proof that the financial market was "stable", or something to that effect in his press conference? I was surfing last evening and could have sworn I heard an analogy similar to that. It was something similar because the Mrs. and I turned to each other with incredulous looks on our faces and said "what did he say"??? MOron.

[DE#53]

lol If freedom needs to be sacrificed then according to president bush, isn't that letting the terrorists win? The executive branch has over stepped it's boundaries and has become way more powerful than it should be.

perhaps you could share with us ANY liberties you or anyone you know has lost because of G.W. Bush.

[Indiana95]

PLEASE tell me I'm wrong but did Dimwit Dubya say yesterday that the fall of Lehman, the basement buy of Merrill Lynch, and the impending disaster at AIG was proof that the financial market was "stable", or something to that effect in his press conference? I was surfing last evening and could have sworn I heard an analogy similar to that. It was something similar because the Mrs. and I turned to each other with incredulous looks on our faces and said "what did he say"??? MOron.

I'm sorry to say that you heard right my friend. Not only is this Bush's economic mantra, the GOP hopeful (John McCain) continues to repeat Bush's position.....saying over and over that the fundamentals of our economy are strong and stable. This is getting very frightening.

[CarlE]

perhaps you could share with us ANY liberties you or anyone you know has lost because of G.W. Bush.

I have to take my freaking shoes off in the airport every week. I have to keep shaving creme and toothpaste in a plastic container and pull it out of my suitcase before I go through security. EVERY WEEK. Might not seem like a lot to you, but it's monumental to me.

Seriously, NOBODY has lost any "liberties" per se. It's more perception that people are listening in to conversations and watching with outer space satellites.

Believe me, NOBODY is watching mike_da_man13, you, me, Indiana95 or TwbT from afar. Well, wait. I MIGHT have to re-think my bruddah. They MAY very well be watching him. LOL.

[DE#53]

He must be talking about torturing prisoners in Gitmo, wire tapping American's phones, using presidential privilege to cover up the fact that he ordered those things, outing an active CIA operative, and last but certainly not least invading Iraq just because. But he must have been a good president because we still have the 2nd amendment right? Gimme a break.

1st of all by you calling them prisoners you give them too much credit. That implies they were soldiers once. They are Terrorist not enemy Soldiers that would have rights under the Geneva convention. We Do NOT and should not treat Terrorist as such. They are cowards who murder innocent people that's it! These F ing people can't murder enough of us. Stop being such babies and move forward like proud Americans ready to defend and smash those who mean us harm.

Second. You or anybody on MP have not lost any rights that were given to us by the Constitution. I'm sure the Government is not listening to any of your phone conversations. If you aren't doing anything illegal then they aren't listening to your phone calls or watching who your e-mailing. We recently have caught a woman who was a graduate from MIT who had several degrees in the field of biology. She was an expert in germs. She was suspected to have contacts with "bad guys" in Pakistan. The Feds caught her with detailed maps of sights in N.Y. City and was caught with anthrax with a plan to "attack" the city. This was accomplished by monitoring her E-mails. She was already here in our country. We have to watch certain people who are suspected to know the enemy. We are a Nation at War remember?

Third. We never would be over there in Iraq now if the Liberals would have let us finish the job the first time we were there! When we destroyed that whole entire Republican Guard army that was retreating along the road back in 1991 the media showed all those picture and that was it. "You can't continue this". "You have to stop, this isn't war it's murder". Well we stopped, left Sadam in power and here we are today.
After Desert Shield NATO put several restrictions on Sadam. Violation of any of these sanctions would be cause for war as agreed by NATO. Several were broken. NATO didn't want to do anything. He used chemical weapons on his own people. We did nothing. We have proof that he was trying to obtain uranium from the Russians. What do you think he was going to do with that? It's was time to start being proactive and stop letting these pieces of sh!t get away with everything. (U.S.S. Cole, U.S. Embassy bombings, World Trade Towers 1993). Stop being so negative and show some appreciation for what our leaders are doing to defend your liberties! "land of the free and home of the BRAVE" because we won't be intimidated!

[Indiana95]

1st of all by you calling them prisoners you give them too much credit. That implies they were soldiers once. They are Terrorist not enemy Soldiers that would have rights under the Geneva convention. We Do NOT and should not treat Terrorist as such. They are cowards who murder innocent people that's it! These F ing people can't murder enough of us. Stop being such babies and move forward like proud Americans ready to defend and smash those who mean us harm.

Second. You or anybody on MP have not lost any rights that were given to us by the Constitution. I'm sure the Government is not listening to any of your phone conversations. If you aren't doing anything illegal then they aren't listening to your phone calls or watching who your e-mailing. We recently have caught a woman who was a graduate from MIT who had several degrees in the field of biology. She was an expert in germs. She was suspected to have contacts with "bad guys" in Pakistan. The Feds caught her with detailed maps of sights in N.Y. City and was caught with anthrax with a plan to "attack" the city. This was accomplished by monitoring her E-mails. She was already here in our country. We have to watch certain people who are suspected to know the enemy. We are a Nation at War remember?

Third. We never would be over there in Iraq now if the Liberals would have let us finish the job the first time we were there! When we destroyed that whole entire Republican Guard army that was retreating along the road back in 1991 the media showed all those picture and that was it. "You can't continue this". "You have to stop, this isn't war it's murder". Well we stopped, left Sadam in power and here we are today.
After Desert Shield NATO put several restrictions on Sadam. Violation of any of these sanctions would be cause for war as agreed by NATO. Several were broken. NATO didn't want to do anything. He used chemical weapons on his own people. We did nothing. We have proof that he was trying to obtain uranium from the Russians. What do you think he was going to do with that? It's was time to start being proactive and stop letting these pieces of sh!t get away with everything. (U.S.S. Cole, U.S. Embassy bombings, World Trade Towers 1993). Stop being so negative and show some appreciation for what our leaders are doing to defend your liberties! "land of the free and home of the BRAVE" because we won't be intimidated!

Yeah, what he said...STOp complaining about the decisions of our leaders. They know what's best for us....Give me a break.

Sorry to break this to you but you are missing the point. True democracy has been compromised. We have a federal government that SHOULD be held accountable. The ability to ask questions and oppose government positions are elements of democracy. So, you stop being naive, believing everything you are told.

[DE#53]

Yeah, what he said...STOp complaining about the decisions of our leaders. They know what's best for us....Give me a break.

Sorry to break this to you but you are missing the point. True democracy has been compromised. We have a federal government that SHOULD be held accountable. The ability to ask questions and oppose government positions are elements of democracy. So, you stop being naive, believing everything you are told.

Are you going to run the War and and come up with a new plan to defend our home land? If you want to question someone go to the Booster Club meetings on Tuesdays.

[CarlE]

1st of all by you calling them prisoners you give them too much credit. That implies they were soldiers once. They are Terrorist not enemy Soldiers that would have rights under the Geneva convention. We Do NOT and should not treat Terrorist as such. They are cowards who murder innocent people that's it! These F ing people can't murder enough of us. Stop being such babies and move forward like proud Americans ready to defend and smash those who mean us harm.

Second. You or anybody on MP have not lost any rights that were given to us by the Constitution. I'm sure the Government is not listening to any of your phone conversations. If you aren't doing anything illegal then they aren't listening to your phone calls or watching who your e-mailing. We recently have caught a woman who was a graduate from MIT who had several degrees in the field of biology. She was an expert in germs. She was suspected to have contacts with "bad guys" in Pakistan. The Feds caught her with detailed maps of sights in N.Y. City and was caught with anthrax with a plan to "attack" the city. This was accomplished by monitoring her E-mails. She was already here in our country. We have to watch certain people who are suspected to know the enemy. We are a Nation at War remember?

Third. We never would be over there in Iraq now if the Liberals would have let us finish the job the first time we were there! When we destroyed that whole entire Republican Guard army that was retreating along the road back in 1991 the media showed all those picture and that was it. "You can't continue this". "You have to stop, this isn't war it's murder". Well we stopped, left Sadam in power and here we are today.
After Desert Shield NATO put several restrictions on Sadam. Violation of any of these sanctions would be cause for war as agreed by NATO. Several were broken. NATO didn't want to do anything. He used chemical weapons on his own people. We did nothing. We have proof that he was trying to obtain uranium from the Russians. What do you think he was going to do with that? It's was time to start being proactive and stop letting these pieces of sh!t get away with everything. (U.S.S. Cole, U.S. Embassy bombings, World Trade Towers 1993). Stop being so negative and show some appreciation for what our leaders are doing to defend your liberties! "land of the free and home of the BRAVE" because we won't be intimidated!

OK, I'm going to address this paragraph by paragraph. First, I agree TOTALLY with your premise about the "prisoners" in Gitmo. If it were me, I'm not sure I would even be feeding them.

Second, I agree with paragraph two that "normal" Americans, whatever that is, really haven't lost any Constitutional rights. Have we been a little inconvenienced? Sure. Am I OK with that being that we are in trying times? Absolutely. Although the airport scenario I described earlier gets to be a pain in the behind sometimes. One question I do have about the lady from Pakistan that "we" caught. Who is "we"? There is a subtle connotation there that you might be in intelligence for the USA, but then again, you may just be generalizing "we" as America. I'm just curious.

Third, I could NOT disagree with you more. Papa Bush, and probably your hero Colin Powell were responsible for the pullback of our troops after the Red Guard was driven off Kuwaiti soil. This is one the media canNOT be blamed for. I've had an opportunity to spend some time at a charity event with the General in charge of Desert Storm at the time (hint: he lives in Florida) and believe me he sure as heck doesn't blame the media for him having to pull back. That is what I gathered after a fairly lengthy conversation with him. Do I agree that Hussein violated NATO sanctions? Heck yes. Do I believe that he was trying to obtain uranium from Russia? Sure do. Do I believe that he was killing his own people with chemical weapons? Without a doubt. Heck, I'll even take it one step further. Do I believe that he had WMD's there at one time and they are in Syria AS WE SPEAK?? Beyond a shadow of a doubt.

Now, having said ALL of that do I believe that is why Bush Jr. invaded Iraq? Not on your damn life do I EVER believe that in eleventy billion years.

Anyway, my thoughts on the matter. Happy reading!!! LOL.

[CarlE]

Are you going to run the War and and come up with a new plan to defend our home land? If you want to question someone go to the Booster Club meetings on Tuesdays.

Indiana95:

If you are taking him up on this, please swing the jet by TIA and pick me up on your way to the Booster Club meeting, OK??? LOL.

[DragonTigerNemesis]

---
Sorry to break this to you but you are missing the point. True democracy has been compromised.

Sorry to break this to YOU, but we do not live in a "true" democracy.
Never have-by design of the founding fathers.
Never will-unless the Constitution is re-written.

Personally I hope to God the USA never become a democracy.
Any time I contemplate it, I stand at Wal-Mart and watch the people coming out. Not only do I hope that they are never part of a true democracy, I pray that they never show up at the polls to vote.

We are a republic and with any luck we will stay a republic.

BTW, have there ever been any "true" democracies in the world?
Wheat City, can you answer that?

:oh:

[savage4president]

Sorry to break this to YOU, but we do not live in a "true" democracy.
Never have-by design of the founding fathers.
Never will-unless the Constitution is re-written.

Personally I hope to God the USA never become a democracy.
Any time I contemplate it, I stand at Wal-Mart and watch the people coming out. Not only do I hope that they are never part of a true democracy, I pray that they never show up at the polls to vote.

We are a republic and with any luck we will stay a republic.

BTW, have there ever been any "true" democracies in the world?
Wheat City, can you answer that?

:oh:

Ancient Greece was a "true democracy" in that all Free Males had an equal vote, and things were decided by a vote of the free males. But to answer your question...there has never been a 100% true democracy as it is defined. But ancient Greece was by far the closest to it.

[Indiana95]

Are you going to run the War and and come up with a new plan to defend our home land? If you want to question someone go to the Booster Club meetings on Tuesdays.

No I'm not going to run the war that should have never been. BUT I'm not going to blindly accept what our leaders tell us and give unconditional support as you do. I am pushing for new leadership instead of sitting back. Remember this? of the people, for the people and by the people...

[Indiana95]

Indiana95:

If you are taking him up on this, please swing the jet by TIA and pick me up on your way to the Booster Club meeting, OK??? LOL.

Only if you let me bring along TWBT and BS Gunn! Wow, that would be a fun plane ride!

[Indiana95]

Sorry to break this to YOU, but we do not live in a "true" democracy.
Never have-by design of the founding fathers.
Never will-unless the Constitution is re-written.

Personally I hope to God the USA never become a democracy.
Any time I contemplate it, I stand at Wal-Mart and watch the people coming out. Not only do I hope that they are never part of a true democracy, I pray that they never show up at the polls to vote.

We are a republic and with any luck we will stay a republic.

BTW, have there ever been any "true" democracies in the world?
Wheat City, can you answer that?

:oh:


In practical terms, I agree! If there was true democracy, it would be called anarchy. Without government imposing limitations upon our freedoms, imagine what things would be like......SCARY!

However, this begs the question. What was Bush's definition of the democracy that he wanted to spread across the lands? Since governmental limitations to freedom are relative to geography, customs, culture, etc. what makes us think that we can "cut and paste" our definition of democracy all over the world?

[CarlE]

Only if you let me bring along TWBT and BS Gunn! Wow, that would be a fun plane ride!

I'm doubting that plane would ever land, I swear.

[bs.gunn]

I'm sorry to say that you heard right my friend. Not only is this Bush's economic mantra, the GOP hopeful (John McCain) continues to repeat Bush's position.....saying over and over that the fundamentals of our economy are strong and stable. This is getting very frightening.

I'm doubting that plane would ever land, I swear.

It would land because Jesus would be our co-pilot!

[MSlater]

When the WTC was bombed the first time, and Osama Bin Lyin was on the run, he was apprehended in Saudi Arabia. If he was a threat then, why would President Clinton let him go thinking that he was not a threat to society. Things that make you go Hmmmmmmm !

[CarlE]

When the WTC was bombed the first time, and Osama Bin Lyin was on the run, he was apprehended in Saudi Arabia. If he was a threat then, why would President Clinton let him go thinking that he was not a threat to society. Things that make you go Hmmmmmmm !

I'm sure not disagreeing with that. In addition to having him in our sites when he was traipsing around Yemen. We did nothing then, either. Enough blame to go around for everyone that is for sure.

[Indiana95]

When the WTC was bombed the first time, and Osama Bin Lyin was on the run, he was apprehended in Saudi Arabia. If he was a threat then, why would President Clinton let him go thinking that he was not a threat to society. Things that make you go Hmmmmmmm !

Thanks for the intellectual addition to the debate.....NOT. Go back and read up on this history before posting please..

[inyourhonor2010]

Stop being such babies and move forward like proud Americans ready to defend and smash those who mean us harm.
That quote scares me more than anything I've heard in quite a while.
Second. You or anybody on MP have not lost any rights that were given to us by the Constitution. I'm sure the Government is not listening to any of your phone conversations. If you aren't doing anything illegal then they aren't listening to your phone calls or watching who your e-mailing.
Question DE, how do they know you're doing anything criminal? It's not like they have hard evidence that you could take to a court, because if they did they wouldn't need to tap your phone/emails.
1st of all by you calling them prisoners you give them too much credit.
No prisoners at Gitmo? The word prisoner by no means implies they were once soldiers. It implies that they are being held against their will in a prison. Hence the word PRISONer. Second, they are people whether some of us want to believe it or not. Just remember people, if the prisoners at Gitmo don't "deserve" rights today, anyone who crosses our government might not "deserve" them tomorrow. Taking rights away from anyone sets a dangerous trend that can lead to tyranny. If anyone on here knows anything about history (particularly the Federalists and Great Depression Era Germany, you might have a pretty good handle on what I'm talking about.)

[Obie Wan]

Taking rights away from anyone sets a dangerous trend that can lead to tyranny. If anyone on here knows anything about history (particularly the Federalists and Great Depression Era Germany, you might have a pretty good handle on what I'm talking about.)

If you knew anything about history, you'd know about Abraham Lincoln, the Habeas Corpus Act of 1863, Ex parte Quirin, etc.

Don't they teach you kids anything in school?

[inyourhonor2010]

Yea I know Lincoln suspended Habeas Corpus in the Civil War, but that gives our government no excuse to do what they've done in the "war" on terror. I don't care who you're doing it to or why, taking away rights of individuals for "national security" is bull. This isn't about history, it's about NOW. Our government is violating the very principles that made our country different from the rest for over 200 years because they can. Because people will accept it if they think another 9/11 is gonna happen. All Bush has had to do for the past 7 years is say 9/11 and everyone shuts up and follows.

[DE#53]

That quote scares me more than anything I've heard in quite a while.

Question DE, how do they know you're doing anything criminal? It's not like they have hard evidence that you could take to a court, because if they did they wouldn't need to tap your phone/emails.

No prisoners at Gitmo? The word prisoner by no means implies they were once soldiers. It implies that they are being held against their will in a prison. Hence the word PRISONer. Second, they are people whether some of us want to believe it or not. Just remember people, if the prisoners at Gitmo don't "deserve" rights today, anyone who crosses our government might not "deserve" them tomorrow. Taking rights away from anyone sets a dangerous trend that can lead to tyranny. If anyone on here knows anything about history (particularly the Federalists and Great Depression Era Germany, you might have a pretty good handle on what I'm talking about.)

To explain what I mean about smashing those who do us harm... Keep all the politics and T.V. cameras far far away from what our troops have to do and fight the war like war should be fought. Pussy footing around and letting the enemy know what our intentions are by way of the media just drags war out longer and cost us more lives. Thats what the problem was in Viet Nam. We tried to fight that war "by the rules" and let politicians make way too many calls in that war. If we could fight it with no gloves on it would be over much sooner and with less casualties.

How do they know who might be a criminal? There are many Muslim churches in this country that teaches radical islam and are sheltered by our right to freedom of religion. This has been in the news for the past several years since 9/11. If you are of middle east decent I'm sure they have the dark skin and features that is typical of that region. Many of our university have students here on visas from the middle east also. I would imagine if the cops can monitor and stake out drug dealers, the FED can do the same to suspected collaborators of terrorist cells too couldn't they. It would be the same thing. They knew a lot about the terrorist who hijacked the planes on 9/11 once they read the passenger list too right? Since we are at war against radical islam isn't it logical that if people in our own country who are involved in or fit these descriptions shouldn't the FED be allowed to "monitor" them in order to defend us here at home? I can't see how that would be a problem for most americans.

And third. Your a total fool if you want to give these maggots any rights down there in Cuba. It's already been broadcast last year that some of the "detainees" we let go were picked up again by our soldiers in Afghanistan in camps with Al Quada.Should our soldiers have to fight them twice because you want them to have some rights? They are murderers. No declaration of war. They kill innocent women and children.

I know a lot about history. Sherman ended the civil war way earlier than it would have been if it wasn't for his drive to the sea. It was total war. His army burned a path from Atlanta 50 miles wide all the way thru S. Carolina and left nothing behind to let the citizen know any further resistance was futile. When the people at home lost a will to continue with the war it was over within 6 months.
You mentioned Germany in the Depression. Adolf Hitler was in prison at that time for treason for trying to overthrow the German democratic government. Munich Puch. They let him out after only 9 months. They knew he was a radical but let him out anyway. He wasn't even a German. He was from Austria!
They attacked us. They aren't American citizens. They have no rights. Let them die in there. Don't sit at your computer and tell me about them being human and they deserve their rights! Where were the rights to the poor American people who had to jump out of those towers on 9/11? Or to the Firemen or cops who wanted to go home that day to their families? Brave men and women want to defend us and some want to be critical about the means in which they provide that protection.

[DE#53]

Yea I know Lincoln suspended Habeas Corpus in the Civil War, but that gives our government no excuse to do what they've done in the "war" on terror. I don't care who you're doing it to or why, taking away rights of individuals for "national security" is bull. This isn't about history, it's about NOW. Our government is violating the very principles that made our country different from the rest for over 200 years because they can. Because people will accept it if they think another 9/11 is gonna happen. All Bush has had to do for the past 7 years is say 9/11 and everyone shuts up and follows.

AGAIN. Tell me what rights or liberties you or anyone you know have lost! For God sakes we are at war! What do you expect our government to do in order to defend us? There has to be some kind of policing of suspected collaborators doesn't there? Or should we just turn our heads like we used to and wait for another 9/11. It's time we get on board with how the European nations and Israel deal with these same issues. They've been dealing with terrorist way longer than us and they're willing to allow their governments do what they have to to protect them. America changed after 9/11 and we can't just think we are protected by two oceans anymore!

[savage4president]

Yea I know Lincoln suspended Habeas Corpus in the Civil War, but that gives our government no excuse to do what they've done in the "war" on terror. I don't care who you're doing it to or why, taking away rights of individuals for "national security" is bull. This isn't about history, it's about NOW. Our government is violating the very principles that made our country different from the rest for over 200 years because they can. Because people will accept it if they think another 9/11 is gonna happen. All Bush has had to do for the past 7 years is say 9/11 and everyone shuts up and follows.

As poor of a President as G.W. Bush is...when it comes to the "suspension" of rights, the man does not even come close to previous presidents.

1. Alien Acts
2. Sedition Acts
3. Alien and Sedition Acts
4. Chinese Immigration Laws
5. Internment Camps
6. The Palmer Raids
7. J. Edgar Hoover (Which coincides with #6)
8. Jim Crow Laws

Don't get me wrong I'm not a Bush Supporter...but much more civil liberty damage has been done by many more people.

[inyourhonor2010]

OK DE here's the point that you evidently have yet to realize. Violating anyone's rights is wrong. Just because you are an American citizen does not mean you do not have rights. Our judicial system is what made our country different. As John Marshall put it we are a country "of laws, not men". If you bend the laws for anyone, then the laws can be bent all the time. I'm not telling you to let the prisoners at Gitmo lose in a nursery, I'm telling you that they should be given a trial.
I know you probably have only heard this on Cops but does "innocent until proven guilty" mean anything to you?
And comparing the "war" on terrorism to any war of the past in terms of tactics is completely ridiculous because we are not fighting an army, or a nation state, we are fighting an international organization.

[CarlE]

And comparing the "war" on terrorism to any war of the past in terms of tactics is completely ridiculous because we are not fighting an army, or a nation state, we are fighting an international organization.

Try and remember that when you feel like starting one of your collegiate lectures again, OK? You've made his point. The tactics HAVE to be different, including how you treat "prisoners".

[DE#53]

OK DE here's the point that you evidently have yet to realize. Violating anyone's rights is wrong. Just because you are an American citizen does not mean you do not have rights. Our judicial system is what made our country different. As John Marshall put it we are a country "of laws, not men". If you bend the laws for anyone, then the laws can be bent all the time. I'm not telling you to let the prisoners at Gitmo lose in a nursery, I'm telling you that they should be given a trial.
I know you probably have only heard this on Cops but does "innocent until proven guilty" mean anything to you?
And comparing the "war" on terrorism to any war of the past in terms of tactics is completely ridiculous because we are not fighting an army, or a nation state, we are fighting an international organization.

Actually since we are at war with these people if they get a trial it should be held as a war tribunal in a military court. What is the objective? These terrorist have been captured and put out of the war. They are brain washed murderers who live to kill. What do you hope to accomplish by giving them rights? Have you even thought that far? Do you think they can be rehabilitated? Ever allowed to be let free? Why would we want to waist time and money to give a trial to people we have no intention to let free? If they get a trial and are found guilty ( and most of them in there admit their guilt with pride) shouldn't they be executed? Crimes against humanity?

You want to give every detainee at Gitmo the same rights as you and I as far as innocent until proven guilty. That's for american citizens. Not enemies to our country. Show me the document that says our enemies have the same rights to a speedy trial. Captured terrorist must remain captured a least until the war is over. Soldiers who are captured in the field in a uniform may have rights. Soldiers are required to follow rules of war. The Geneva Convention. Any enemy soldier in past wars with america with only a few small exceptions have at least given mercy to a wounded american and given 1st aid. Or, accept a surrender then take them prisoner. Terrorist don't do any of that. Your the one comparing past wars with the current war on terrorism. You can't give terrorist the same rights as you would give an enemy soldier who is in uniform and who would follow the rules of war in the Geneva Convention.

Who will be their defense lawyers? How would they prove their innocents? How would we prove any guilt? "Well we caught Ahab in a terrorist camp backed by the Teleban but we can't prove he killed anyone so we better let him go". Maybe you should not be discussing this with me but an American soldier whose been over there. I'm sure they wouldn't share your eagerness in making sure the Gitmo inmates are properly represented according to the rights they are defending.

This war is very comparable to Viet Nam. We weren't allowed into Cambodia and the NVA knew that. They would hit and run knowing we couldn't follow them back in there. This war is similar because Bin Ladin is somewhere in the Mountains in Pakistan and we can't go in there either. I never mentioned what type of army we are fighting. I said we should be allowed to take our "gloves off" and bring total war to our enemies wherever they may be.

I assume you are a college student and that's great. You have to have that now days. I went to Kent State in the early 90's. But this Utopian view of the world just isn't how the rest of the world looks at us. We can't use reason with Radical maniacs. The only thing they can respect is force.

[MSlater]

I did research, and there is a lot more. Remember he who knows all knows nothing.

[DE#53]

I did research, and there is a lot more. Remember he who knows all knows nothing.

you researched what?

[warren1st]

Try and remember that when you feel like starting one of your collegiate lectures again, OK? You've made his point. The tactics HAVE to be different, including how you treat "prisoners".

Carl - You NAILED that one. I was just going to post the same when I read your's.

[CarlE]

Carl - You NAILED that one. I was just going to post the same when I read your's.


Warren1st:


By the way, when are you coming to FL. again? I owe you a drink at the pool bar.

[MSlater]

http://www.judicialwatch.org/5504.shtml

http://www.papillonsartpalace.com/clintASSon.htm

[Indiana95]

http://www.judicialwatch.org/5504.shtml

http://www.papillonsartpalace.com/clintASSon.htm

Nice right wing websites. Try again.:thumbsdown:

[DE#53]

Nice right wing websites. Try again.:thumbsdown:

Here we go again. Why does this have to be about GOP and DEMS? It's been well known for many years now that Clinton had chances to get bin Ladin either after he was arrested by other countries (twice) or once had an opportunity to kill him via missle strike. Hind sight is 20/20 and it's obvious he didn't think bin Ladin would ever be able to "get us" like he did on 9/11. But can't we all please admit there were mistakes made reguarding bin Ladin and move forward? We don't say it's a lie that Roosevelt knew nothing about a possible strike on Pearl Harbor. Don't deny true fact because the guy you voted for was in office at the time a mistake was made. It's about america being attacked whoever was in office and what we learned about the causes. We owe it to the victims to learn from it and not point fingers or deny fault.

[SuperBran]

Here we go again. Why does this have to be about GOP and DEMS? It's been well known for many years now that Clinton had chances to get bin Ladin either after he was arrested by other countries (twice) or once had an opportunity to kill him via missle strike.

and it's well known that bush had an opportunity to get bin laden in tora bora, but didn't commit enough ground troops. the bush administration admitted this.

so why condemn clinton but not bush?