Why do so many people on ATS hate Bush?

Why do so many people hate Bush?
How Stupid Is Too Stupid?
I don't hate 'Bu#', I just don't like him, 'he is a fool'



"If this were a dictatorship,
it would be a heck of a lot easier,
just so long as I'm the dictator."
December 18, 2000

"To occupy Iraq would instantly shatter our coalition,
turning the whole Arab world against us and make a broken tyrant
into a latter-day hero ... assigning young soldiers to a fruitless hunt
for a securely entrenched dictator and condemning them to fight
in what would be an un-winnable urban guerilla war.
It could only plunge that part of the world into even greater instability."
A World Transformed (1998)
George Herbert Walker Bush



Three years later and President George W. Bush is busy making Dan Quayle look like a brain surgeon and "We the People" are letting him. During his short presidency, Bush has trounced Quayle's record of misspelling and misspeaking and he is positively off the charts when it comes to his lack of world knowledge and basic social skills


[edit on 11-8-2004 by Sauron]

Please go back and read this whole 8 page thread and come up with something new, other than the whole "bush cant talk right" crap.

We already have enough wasted space on that here...anything new to offer or is this just the same intangible and opinionated speculations drummed up by those that cant seem to find something solid to use their hate for?

Oh I�m sorry did I post in the wrong thread? Is this the �we luv� shrub� thread
What�s the title of this thread???? To late I�ll tell ya
It�s called why do so many people on ATS hate Bush?
So in my thinking that means, why do so many people on ATS hate Bush?
Why are you posting here? Can�t you under stand the meaning of the title?
�Why so many people on ATS hate Bush�?
Get real if anyone is wasting space its� you
Trying to defend the unelected pResident and Thief of the United States
In a thread clearly marked Why so many people on ATS hate Bush?
Why doint you start a thread called why I Luv George

George W. Bush is a liar

Shut up George



Each one of the hundreds of boxes had a piece of paper obscuring its "Made in China" label.

Take pill and chill your man is done for in Nov. anyway, then you can rant

Originally posted by CazMedia
When presented with the truth, 27jd's arguments crumble to whiney liberal rants with no substance and all opinion!!! Typical opinionated un-educated, willing to believe whatever the snake-oil salesman is selling as long as it fits with their close minded "get Bush" rhetoric. Run along 27jd, keep spreading the un-informed mis-representations of reality to the brain dead couch potatos that will believe all this crap with out question.

You seem to pride yourself on education, something you seem to be lacking. I'm not a liberal, and sorry to tell you, but you're the one who has purchased the snake-oil. I will run along, and spread the word of a USA that will be respected and will be a positive force in the world again to those who are open-minded enough not to eat what is spoon-fed to them by this administration. Open wide CazMedia! Don't get too much Bu# on your bib.

The rest of the world can kiss my AMERICAN butt!

You're ignorance knows no bounds. This attitude you display proves me correct more than any of your so-called "facts" ever could. Thank you so much for affirming my "un-informed misrepresentations". And to the rest of the world, I apologize for the ignorance of CazMedia, who by no means represents the views or opinions of most of America, just a sad brainwashed minority made up of an ignorant few who have no idea how much we depend on the rest of the world. Hopefully in November this nightmare will end and we will re-forge our alliances and work towards the future of Earth, not just America.

Exactly which sources would you find acceptable.

There are no sources I would find acceptable, I don't have to read anything to know the damage this administration has done to our country. I'm not interested in reading anybody else's opinions on paper. I live in this country, I have witnessed first hand its downward spiral. I guess I'm just not as easily convinced as you are by what I read.

You are entitled to have an opinion and express it.

Unless it differs from yours, right? Then its time to blindly and relentlessly defend Bush with so-called "facts". Keep defending little buddy, I'm sure theres a place in Bush's administration for you, but you'll only be employed til next year. Better start looking for a new job now.

Still think Santa Clause is comming to town?

No, I don't think Santa is "comming" to town. Certainly not to any of Bush's homes. I don't think launching pre-emptive wars on countries that are already contained qualifies as being a "good boy".

I'll choose to look at the facts and then make an assesment instead of just giving blind belief because i need to feel "right" about an issue.

Good for you, you must be gifted to be able to be sure that the "facts" you look at are just that, and not just biased propaganda. And it is wreckless to assume you should believe anything another person tells you, even if it goes against your feelings.

My biggest gripe is not with Bush or Kerry, but with the VOTERS, and the often non issue related drivel that they cling to like the gospel.
We the people need to do better before we can expect the same from our officials.

You should probably not worry so much about what other voters think, and worry about your own future on this planet. Telling the whole world to kiss your AMERICAN butt is not a good way to keep allies in a time when we need them most. Once again I am tired of this discussion, keep talking about "facts", cling to THEM like gospel, and like Sauron stated, create a "why I love Bush" thread. I will not respond again, we have stated our opinions, its time to open the thread to others.




[edit on 11-8-2004 by 27jd]

I dont really hate Bush, or Kerry for that matter.

I look at both of them and most of our elected officals for that matter as the symptiom not the disease.

The disease being the system we have in place right now, the two party system.

The cure is IMO taking place right now and that is people tiring of the same-o BS coming out of Washington and joining other parties, like the Libertarians and the Greens.

Until the power is taken away from the big two we will not see anything change

27jd says,

You seem to pride yourself on education, something you seem to be lacking.

Where was this pride demonstrated? Why cant you stick to the points in question? First you try to divert attention from your weak arguments by attacking my spelling/grammer, now your up to assaulting me on a percieved educational basis with your first sentance. Why dont you address my questions instead of addressing me?

DO NOT PRESUME TO APPOLOGIZE FOR ME! YOU DO NOT SPEAK FOR ME!
Ill say it again...the rest of the world can kiss my American butt.
I say this not out of arrogance, as i am fully aware that America does not exist in a vacume. Yes Allies are important and nessisary. Of course working WITH other nations is better that trying to walk alone....
BUT
NOONE in any other nation was elected to keep the interests of the USA FIRST! While it would be best if things were always nice between allies, this is not reality. I expect that anyone in a leadership position here in the USA government had better be putting American interests first, above the interests of other nations if need be...that is the job they are there to do...weather it ruffles feathers or not.

27jd again rants,

Telling the whole world to kiss your AMERICAN butt is not a good way to keep allies in a time when we need them most.

Hmm you mean like our allies FRANCE and GERMANY, that were in cohoots with saddam on the food for oil rippoff scam? The ones that were profitting from illegal dealings with a dictator they publicly denounced, yet secretly they funneled millions around the sanctions THEY helped put into place, and saddams personal coffers (not iraq's) grew.
Some allies we need to keep eh...lie to our face and profit under the table.
with friends like these....

27jd runs his mouth,

There are no sources I would find acceptable, I don't have to read anything to know the damage this administration has done to our country. I'm not interested in reading anybody else's opinions on paper. I live in this country, I have witnessed first hand its downward spiral. I guess I'm just not as easily convinced as you are by what I read.

Its soo nice to hear that your little solo view of this nation is the only one that you use as referance. So i need to live where you do so that I too can take in the totallity of America from your one vantage point. Youve stated that you dont have to read stuff for information, and that even if you did, you would question the validity of ANY source....so how informed are you really then, discounting information because you dont have to read it in order to "know" the reality of your perspective? Sounds like a closed and sealed mind if you ask me. At least im willing to consider other information before i deem it good/bad. You just skip to the judgments without consideration, congrats on your level of denial of ignorance!

You are entitled to your OPINIONS, but again, you fail to back up your allegations....here in the USA, your innocent until proven guilty, and the burden of proof in on the ACCUSER....You leveled allegations which were questioned, its not up to me to dis-prove you by asking for clarifications from you, Its up to you to back up your rhetoric.

You have avoided just about all of my points, and instead focused attentions on the messenger instead of the message....you have not offered one serious, non emotive, somehow based in any scrap of info, counter to one of my points. I guess that would be had to do as you dont accept ANY other referance materials, nor do you read them to know to use them...rant on, just dont think people will give you any credibillity because youve offered zero.

27jd says the best thing ive heard him say,

I will not respond again,

Bu-bye!
(i suspect he wont be able to NOT respond again) LOL.

[edit on 16-8-2004 by CazMedia]

CazMedia whines,

Originally posted by CazMedia
Where was this pride demonstrated? Why cant you stick to the points in question? First you try to divert attention from your weak arguments by attacking my spelling/grammer, now your up to assaulting me on a percieved educational basis with your first sentance. Why dont you address my questions instead of addressing me?

Because, if somebody is unable to grasp such a basic element as the english language, then I would question their ability to even understand whatever "facts" they read and put forth in a debate. And the pride you demonstrate is evident in your posts as you pathetically attempt to throw around knowledge (littered with terrible grammar).

CazMedia gets a little huffy,

DO NOT PRESUME TO APPOLOGIZE FOR ME! YOU DO NOT SPEAK FOR ME!

I ALREADY DID, AND I DON'T CARE IN THE LEAST IF YOU LIKE IT OR NOT! I HAVE TO SPEAK FOR YOU BECAUSE YOU ARE TOO IGNORANT TO SPEAK FOR YOURSELF!

The ignorance continues,

Ill say it again...the rest of the world can kiss my American butt.

Once again I'd like to take the time to apologize for CazMedia, I think he may have a touch of Tourette's syndrome. Hopefully with increased medical studies (as long as they're not blocked by Bush and his religious agenda) there may be hope for CazMedia.

CazMedia from a previous post,

It was good of you to ask if english was my second language tho as otherwise i feel you would have insulted everyone that posts here for whom english IS the second language, and who may not know the proper rules of english grammar or spelling.

A bit hypocritical wouldn't you say? Why in this instance do you care about the rest of the world? Aren't these the same people that can kiss your American butt?

I say this not out of arrogance, as i am fully aware that America does not exist in a vacume.

Obviously you're not aware, and you can ONLY say that out of arrogance. And France and Germany are hardly the "rest of the world".

Hmm you mean like our allies FRANCE and GERMANY, that were in cohoots with saddam on the food for oil rippoff scam?

Ah, so it's OK to make baseless allegations as long as they suit your purpose? Let's see some of the "proof" you're so quick to speak of. Or are you just spewing propaganda designed to vindicate Bush and his disagreements with them?

Some allies we need to keep eh...lie to our face and profit under the table.
with friends like these....

Whats wrong? Do you think they may become better at it than our government? Not likely.

CazMedia blesses us with infinite wisdom,

At least im willing to consider other information before i deem it good/bad. You just skip to the judgments without consideration, congrats on your level of denial of ignorance!

And what is the depth of your consideration? What would bring you to the conclusion that info is good or bad? Do you read a piece of information in a newspaper, then research every aspect of what you read in depth? You must have no life at all. And for your information, I read and take in quite a bit of information, and I do what anybody does, draw my conclusion and move on. I do not base my opinions solely on my feelings, I view available informaton, but as a whole the media and historians in any part of the world are biased in one way or another, and have an agenda to serve, so if you don't draw your own conclusions, then you should be congratulating yourself on ignorance. You are a sheep, a sheep that that is herded by the Bush administration. Perhaps Bush should've named his little dog CazMedia.


CazMedia becomes a little confused,

You are entitled to your OPINIONS, but again, you fail to back up your allegations....here in the USA, your innocent until proven guilty, and the burden of proof in on the ACCUSER....You leveled allegations which were questioned, its not up to me to dis-prove you by asking for clarifications from you, Its up to you to back up your rhetoric.

Since when has somebody been convicted by somebodies opinion? I don't think I have filed legal charges against anybody. I am not an ACCUSER. I am an American who dislikes the president based on what I have SEEN as well as what I have read. He has not been indicted on any of my "charges". Pull your ignorant head out of your @$$ for a minute and look around, there's actually a world out there that you can walk around in, you can touch, smell, feel, and form opinions based on those things as well. If I was lacking a life outside the internet, I could easily google a thousand pages of info to back my "rhetoric" with what you consider "facts". But being as I have not formally charged anybody, I am under no obligation to do so.

CazMedia spews further,

You have avoided just about all of my points, and instead focused attentions on the messenger instead of the message....you have not offered one serious, non emotive, somehow based in any scrap of info, counter to one of my points. I guess that would be had to do as you dont accept ANY other referance materials, nor do you read them to know to use them...rant on, just dont think people will give you any credibillity because youve offered zero.

You haven't made any points to counter, and again I do read (although again judging your grammar, I question your ability to understand what YOU read) but any info I may put forth, could just as easily be dismissed as partisan and biased. So there is no real way to prove my opinion, just as there is no way to prove yours, regardless of what you think. Opinions do not need to be proven.

The only thing CazMedia is correct about,

Bu-bye!
(i suspect he wont be able to NOT respond again) LOL.

You're right, I cannot back down from a challenge. We can keep this going as long as you wish.


www.hereinreality.com...

liberalslikechrist.org...

www.marxist.com...

www.freerepublic.com...

Here is some "reading" for you, are these the "facts" you request? Now, be a good little lapdog and defend your master! Let me know when you're done debunking all this info, there's plenty more.


















[edit on 16-8-2004 by 27jd]

27jd, youve called me a lapdog, ignorant, and a sheep..in one post.
Im amazed you havnt been warned.

27jd, are you thru with the useless personal attacks? (which i understand are being monitored) Do you feel better now that youve tried to belittle someone instead of sticking to the topics at hand 27jd?

Ive said,

Why cant you stick to the points in question? First you try to divert attention from your weak arguments by attacking my spelling/grammer, now your up to assaulting me on a percieved educational basis with your first sentance. Why dont you address my questions instead of addressing me?

Arkaleus says similar,

27jd, you aren't debating me. You are insulting me and trying to make trouble for me. Stop being such a jerk and meet me as an equal in your words. If you truly love your country, then speak to me as a citizen and address the issues I spoke of.

It would seem this "style of debate" is used by you often....one of the basic tennants of debate skills is to not engage in personal attacks, as they offer nothing to the debate and weaken your stance by putting up a petty smokescreen. At least if your going to dodge the tough questions, be nice about it.

27jd says,

There are no sources I would find acceptable, I don't have to read anything to know the damage this administration has done to our country. I'm not interested in reading anybody else's opinions on paper.

Then he says,

I read and take in quite a bit of information

So which is it Mr. flipflop? Do you read or dont you.
lets look at the crap you do claim to read to form your unbiased views.
www.hereinreality.com...
This is a totally one sided, non objective and blatantly anti-Bush website.
In fact all of the places you cited in your last post have serious credibillity issues...Not one mainstream media outlet on the planet would be able to use any of these as a source. Just look at that freerupublics article, it took only 2 responces before the readers were saying "consider the source".

27jd asks,

Do you read a piece of information in a newspaper, then research every aspect of what you read in depth?

Why YES actually i do. Being that im in an editorial capasity in the 4th largest news market in the USA, I have to to protect my company from being held libel, i must fact check. If i read in the paper something, i just cant take their word for it, i have to still do the research myself or i would be negligent, and plageristic. For those of us that live INSIDE the live infostream....fact checking is a must.

I dont think that you keep an open enough mind, based on your previous comments, to even allow yourself to read/investigate the oppositions side,
let alone actually compare/contrast various different sources in an objective way. You'll just stick to reading/researching from your biased, one sided sources as long as it makes you feel comforted in your shallow and inflexible viewpoint. The truth might be right next to you, yet if you refuse to turn your head and look, you'll have no chance to even see it. Learn to think outside your little box.

I suppose it was unreasonable to expect you to use a legal framework as a guidline in this debate. Certantly you are not litterally filling charges, but why is it unreasonable to utilize legal proceedure as a guide for establishing "how to debate" any topic? If you make an allegation,and someone asks you for clarification or to show the validity of your info, it is up to YOU not them to "prove" your case. From what ive read online on ATS, this axiom seems to be used as a given...in its most basic form, i think "put up or shut up" is the basic idea. If you cant/wont, you sabbotage your own position and credibillity.

I think ill pull a 27jd and
retire from this discussion until personal attacks end, in favor of actual discussion of points at hand takes place.

VOLUME 1

Bush in conjuction with a mostly republican congress has passed vast amounts of corrupt legislation.

Start towards the beginning:

PATRIOT ACT: The money laundering provisions of the original version were watered down because the tobacco companies objected. They would lose too much in the way of profits they make when drug dealers from columbia buy cigarettes in US from them with large checks and smuggle them back to columbia as a way of laundering drug profits.

Colombian law enforcement officials told me that the cigarette smugglers with whom the tobacco companies did business were actually engaged in the laundering of profits from drug sales in the United States.

www.no-smoking.org...

NEW SEC CHIEF: Choice of Harvey Pitt as new head of SEC. Harvey Pitt worked as a lobbyist for the large Accounting firms when they passed the legislation that barred investors from sueing accounting firms that were involved with corporate accounting malfeasance. It was passed by Democrats and Republicans over Clinton's veto. It brought you Enron, Tyco, World Comm, Global Crossing, Adelphia, etc. Harvey Pitt wanted to "go slow" cleaning up the corrupt accounting practices and was finally hounded out and Webster replaced him. John Biggs was the supported replacement, even by Pitt, but the accounting lobby reared it's ugly head again, afraid of someone who would actually clean house and chose Webster.

William Webster, a former director of the FBI and CIA, said that by remaining he was damaging efforts to restore confidence in Wall Street. It emerged shortly after he was named to the post that he was on the audit committee of a small Washington firm, US Technologies, which is facing allegations of fraud.

www.buzzle.com...
Webster lasted 3 weeks.

SARBANES-OXLEY: After trumpeting that he was going after corporate corruption and finally funding the SEC at workable level when signing the bill, Bush subsequently flipflopped and reduced the funding of the SEC back to inoperable levels.

WASHINGTON, Oct. 18 � Less than three months ago, President Bush signed with great fanfare sweeping corporate antifraud legislation that called for a huge increase in the budget of the Securities and Exchange Commission to police corporate America and clean up Wall Street.
Now the White House is backing off the budget provision and urging Congress to provide the agency with 27 percent less money than the new law authorized.

www.nytimes.com...

ENERGY POLICY: Ken Lay, head of an energy brokerage firm Enron, is one of many industry titans helping to determine the energy policy of this country. not a single consumer group was invited to talk with Vice president Cheney. Certainly no one who would have suggested we become less dependant on oil, to not be held hostage to Middle Eastern oil. The Saudis are our good allies, right?

He has appointed Industry insiders to run government agencies that are supposed to be industry watch dogs.

EPA: Run by a former lawyer of lawfirm for big polluters.

JUAN GONZALEZ: Yeah, well Connaughton before he was appointed in June in 2001 by President Bush worked as a lawyer representing firms like SARCO, which has more than 1,000 asbestos liability suits against it and represented other companies, General Electric and others who in the past have had major problems with pollution. So it's astounding that this man who has made a living representing polluters, especially asbestos polluting companies now suddenly was a guy who told the E.P.A. directly to change language about--in relation to asbestos particularly.

www.democracynow.org.../08/26/145232#transcript
Bush has delayed, weakened, avoided every protection of the environment in this country.

to be continued . . .

Why oh why do they hate bush, well lemme think....


Maybe it's due to his librul attutudes?

Or his boundless generosity?

His wonderfully caring approach to the environment maybe?

Got it... its his love for freedom and democracy, must be....

First off I don't "hate" bush....I don't hate anyone. Takes too much energy to hate that could best be used elsewhere. That said, I don't not like his policies or his thought process, and he certainly isn't the brightest bulb in the pack.... I also have a problem with people that vote republican or democrat because they "are" republican or democrat. I think it's a bit like sticking your head in the sand and following blindly. While I am registered as a democrat, I vote for which ever party is the lesser of two running evils...

Originally posted by LadyV
I don't not like his policies or his thought process,

It's hard to like something that's doesn't exist, sweety.

Bush is the marketed president, the paternal, down-home guy that no one should have a problem with, and if you don't like that style it's probably because you're a pseudo-intellectual snob. His affability appeals to people who dislike big fancy words and book reading but really love Top Gun. The fact he can't speak means nothing if you believe that his endless guffaws are simply evidence of his earthy, guy-next-door style.

Amazingly, our president's inability to correctly pronounce the three-syllable word 'nuclear' like a normal English speaker, de-evolving the sound into 'nucular,' is actually mimicked by his pundits, followers, and news announcers on television as part of a highly succesful effort to convince people that a man's struggle to pronounce a word every third grader has mastered is somehow cute and appealing.

Bush is genuine when he speaks. He sincerely believes what he's saying, and he's photogenic. If you've ever seen the photo of him hugging the girl who lost her mother the WTC you can't discount the empathy on his face. However, this man is not making the decisions but serving as the face of the worst political entity ever to crawl out of the sewers of Washington, DC.




It's very difficult to equate this man with the horrible decisions he's made, or at least the ones made for him.








[edit on 23-8-2004 by taibunsuu]

[edit on 23-8-2004 by taibunsuu]

taibunsuu,

I assume the political entity you refer to is Karl Rove, no?
Agreed. He is far worse than Bush himself, personally, I don't really see the empathy you speak of in the photo, looks forced to me, but then again who can really tell how somebody truly feels inside by a look on their face? Only Bush knows the truth.

CazMedia,

I'm glad you have decided to call it quits on our "discussion", personally, I don't see where you get off demanding "proof" of somebodies opinion. And as for your media job, good for you, do you work for FOX news? You're right the mainstream media is completely free of bias...NOT! It's no wonder you defend Bush so much, IT'S YOUR JOB!!

www.opednews.com...

As for your calling me a flip-flopper, I never said I didn't read, I just said I don't need to read something to FORM AN OPINION, I tend to be a more hands on person, that being said I DO read, but I take everything I read with a grain of salt. And yes, the sites I provided WERE biased, I will not deny that, I was simply making a point that there is a ton of information out there, and no matter how much "verifying" you do, the only way you can be SURE something is true, is to have been there. Just look at this mess with the swift boat vets, same people that went after McCain's war record in the primaries, I'm sure you'll say they have no affiliation with Bush, even though one of the members worked for Bush's campaign, and has since stepped down, but do you think it is coincidence that they happen to go after the war record of every one of Bush's opponents that have ACTUALLY served in a war? They are even going as far as to imply that Kerry shot himself! It's dispicable. As for you trying to say I resort to name calling, and of all people you use Arkaleus to demonstrate this, whom you obviously haven't read ANY of the threads that he posts in, here's a little example of his "civil" discussion:

You also seem to think I am alone in my ideas. Just admit it pigs, you hate God, and you hate them who do not sin, because it reveals you for what you are inside. Those who are pure, and who live God's commands perfectly, cannot accept you or your lifestyles. And this is not weird or fanatic, it is how it has always been. Just because so many of you are pigs, it does not make your mud pit the center of the universe.

I am a true Christian. You probably have never met one before. But what is certain, is that you are not, you are not any kind of faith, and that is why you are pigs, and why you have now turned and wish to harm me.

Since the pigs have invaded this thread, this thread is no longer functioning as I had intended. They will turn on their own kind, and eat their own dead flesh, they do not care that I am an American, because they have no real sense of Fraternity or Citizenship. Murderous pigs, you would do to your own people what you have done to those in Iraq and Afghanistan, and I am example of this. So you others, take lesson in this, and become wise, see what evil is, and what it does to the people of America. It has made them mad pigs.

Arkaleus is actually a Mormon converted to Islam (what he considers true Christian?) whom I tried to engage in civil discussion, but he immediately went into a rant like that above, and then when I countered his rant, he plead the post you quoted. As far as having to PROVE my opinions, I don't see how you can ask that of anybody, you asked me to PROVE things like Bush engaged in corrupt business dealings, and like I said you would, you stated the sources I provided were biased, which they were, but does that mean they are lying? Who knows. That's my point, you cannot prove or disprove anything for sure, no matter how deep you dig, it's all a matter of perspective and the only way to know for sure, again is to be there. I know I dislike Bush, from what I have seen AND read. Period. Is Kerry perfect, probably not, but personally, I would like to give him a chance. If you like Bush, fine. Vote for him, may the best man win.





[edit on 23-8-2004 by 27jd]

Originally posted by 27jd
...I DON'T CARE IN THE LEAST IF YOU LIKE IT OR NOT! I HAVE TO SPEAK FOR YOU BECAUSE YOU ARE TOO IGNORANT TO SPEAK FOR YOURSELF!

There's an ideology that scares me...

27jd,

As for you trying to say I resort to name calling, and of all people you use Arkaleus to demonstrate this

Hmm, so what was the use of terms directed twords me like, lapdog, ignorant, and sheep to describe me then? Terms of endearment? A friendly nickname?
Arks arguments or style, even the "what" he was talking about are irrelavent to the point that i made about your debate style.
Indeed he might have been abusive as well, but does that give anyone else license to do the same? I used myself as the first example of a member asking you to hit the points, not the person, and happened to see another member ask the same of you, within days of my situation. I found this both conveinant and poingnent. (most likley spelled wrong)

MOST importantly, switching from debating someones points to attacking them personally is really a red flag that says, "i cant counter him so ill divert atention". a very weak and see thru argument. (go on, wack my spelling/grammar....i have writters and editors to clean up nitpicky details likethat, and live on my spell checker which ATS doesnt have)

27jd says,

I don't see where you get off demanding "proof" of somebodies opinion.

Its not so much a "proof" issue as it is holding up a mirror and asking that person to consider the source. I wonder in amazement how some people can form such wacky ideas sometimes based on WHAT?
There is nothing wrong with asking for validation of an OPINION, especially when its being touted as a FACT.

It is not my job to defend any politician, and in fact if i could obtain PROOF of misdeeds, I would love to page#1 burn them in a heart beat, Bush included...yet so far, NOONE has come up with ANYTHING actionable to impeach, remove, or otherwise say Bush did something illegal; yet the threads are full of such wishful fantasies.

Go back an reread all 9 pages of this thread, i dont think ive attempted to defend Bush on any point, i HAVE asked those leveling silly allegations to explain where this idea comes from so that either I can learn and understand, or to hold up a mirror and say..."you actually are casting your vote based on that opinion, when facts might indicate otherwise?" or at least when the facts dont seem to support the allegation? Or there are NO facts at all, just hyped hearsay and gossip?

27jd,

I never said I didn't read, I just said I don't need to read something to FORM AN OPINION

Indeed you dont, but then dont get bent out of shape if someone questions "how informed a view is that", or "where did that idea come from".

27jd,

you asked me to PROVE things like Bush engaged in corrupt business dealings, and like I said you would, you stated the sources I provided were biased, which they were, but does that mean they are lying?

It all comes down to a matter of credibillity...while there might not be the smoking gun, people can infer things....but how did they infer them is open to question....why, when you know youve been asked to clarify a point, would you discredit your argument by putting up a BIASED source you know would be questioned? (many cant see bias past their anti-bush zeal, and indeed would use such a source, which only validates a lack of objectivity, and willingness to stick their heads into the sand up to their ass)

In this thread it has been alledged "Bush is a desreter" while ill agree he might have gotten special treatment, his honorable discharge means he in no way way guilty of desertion.
yet some will cling to their opinions on this even when shown the discharge paper. (in effect)

This is why im in this thread, not to defend bush, but to sort out the myth from the reality on him.
You alledge corruption or illegal busines dealings, i say ok, show me the charges, or explain why he hasnt been busted for these allegations?
would you prefer that i deny ignorance by just taking your word for it, or can you show something that supports this opinion.

It seems in blind zeal to "get Bush", the people are willing to believe in anything.
If you want my swing vote to go to "anyone but Bush", then show me some REAL reasons, not trumped up hype....that is why people ask for something credible to back opinions.

This is why im still on this thread 9 pages later, ive seen little other than Bush as a rich person from a powerful family seems to get "favors", or somehow skirts things....well what would you expect from ANY connected, powerful, wealthy family? DUH! But thats not policy reasons, thats not tangible enough for me to condem him with.

Look at slanks allegations from a few posts back, a very good attempt at providing SOMETHING more tangible to hate him on.
YET,
this seems like mostly cronyism at best....like any political regiem, dem or rep doesnt engauge in this? why would we be surprised. When Kerry gets into office, lets pick apart all his apointees and see whos scratching whoms back....i think we'll find the same.

Also something to consider is, exactly how many people with the know how, or the experiance with things like managing a huge multinational energy company do you think walk the streets? Mabey a handful here in the USA? It seems silly that people are amazed when we see "insiders" getting to play the game....do you think any of us will get to play? no, why? because wearent involved in the same capasity that these others are...we dont have the same skills, knowledge to even begin to play at this level

Hey slank, dont forget that Colin Powells son is head of the FCC with no experiance...

Slank says,

It was passed by Democrats and Republicans over Clinton's veto.

So here we are on a HATE BUSH thread,trying to pin something from the clinton era, done by congress on bush HOW?

Another perfect example of what are you thinking?



[edit on 24-8-2004 by CazMedia]

I for one cannot wait for this election to be over. Don't know what it was like in the past but this seems really personal.

Originally posted by CazMedia
Hmm, so what was the use of terms directed twords me like, lapdog, ignorant, and sheep to describe me then? Terms of endearment? A friendly nickname?

It's done out of love! NOT!

Arks arguments or style, even the "what" he was talking about are irrelavent to the point that i made about your debate style.

Caz, you have no sense of humor at all, do you?

Indeed he might have been abusive as well, but does that give anyone else license to do the same? I used myself as the first example of a member asking you to hit the points, not the person, and happened to see another member ask the same of you, within days of my situation. I found this both conveinant and poingnent. (most likley spelled wrong)

I've stopped the attacks on your grammar, now your just attacking yourself.

MOST importantly, switching from debating someones points to attacking them personally is really a red flag that says, "i cant counter him so ill divert atention". a very weak and see thru argument. (go on, wack my spelling/grammar....i have writters and editors to clean up nitpicky details likethat, and live on my spell checker which ATS doesnt have)

You won't allow anybody to counter, when I give a source of reference, you will attack the credibility of the source, which in my opinion is just another way to divert attention from the argument. It's a catch 22.

Its not so much a "proof" issue as it is holding up a mirror and asking that person to consider the source. I wonder in amazement how some people can form such wacky ideas sometimes based on WHAT?

Holding up a mirror? I did not write any of the articles I provided you. Whether you choose to accept them or not is up to you. Sure one can say they may be bias, but they provide facts, now it's up to you to prove they are lying. Almost all media is bias in one way or another, who would disagree with that? Some of us choose to believe independent journalists over big media journalists, who I have provided a reference pointing out the right wing bias of, and you have not addressed that.

There is nothing wrong with asking for validation of an OPINION, especially when its being touted as a FACT.

Please point out where I touted my opinion as fact.

It is not my job to defend any politician, and in fact if i could obtain PROOF of misdeeds, I would love to page#1 burn them in a heart beat, Bush included...yet so far, NOONE has come up with ANYTHING actionable to impeach, remove, or otherwise say Bush did something illegal; yet the threads are full of such wishful fantasies.

Once again I provided a reference to the right wing bias of the media, you have not addressed those facts, you know full well you do not decide what will be a page #1 burn.

Ideed you dont, but then dont get bent out of shape if someone questions "how informed a view is that", or "where did that idea come from".

Once again I have provided plenty of points of reference, are you telling us what we should believe? ESPECIALLY coming from a member of the mainstream media?

It all comes down to a matter of credibillity...while there might not be the smoking gun, people can infer things....but how did they infer them is open to question....why, when you know youve been asked to clarify a point, would you discredit your argument by putting up a BIASED source you know would be questioned? (many cant see bias past their anti-bush zeal, and indeed would use such a source, which only validates a lack of objectivity, and willingness to stick their heads into the sand up to their ass)

Like I've stated over and over, it comes down to the information we take in (from whichever biased source we choose to believe, because they all are) and intuition, one who only bases there opinions on one or the other solely, is not denying ingnorance.

In this thread it has been alledged "Bush is a desreter" while ill agree he might have gotten special treatment, his honorable discharge means he in no way way guilty of desertion.
yet some will cling to their opinions on this even when shown the discharge paper. (in effect)

Do you not remember how long it took for the Bush administration to come up with that "paper"? And there still is no accounting for some of the time he was in the guard, but I never really agreed he was a deserter, I think you would have to be sent to a war to desert it, he was all cozy in the states, but I do think he ditched a few times. But that is not one of the major reasons I will not vote for him, Clinton dodged the war too, so it would be hypocritical to dislike him for that reason alone.

This is why im in this thread, not to defend bush, but to sort out the myth from the reality on him.
You alledge corruption or illegal busines dealings, i say ok, show me the charges, or explain why he hasnt been busted for these allegations?
would you prefer that i deny ignorance by just taking your word for it, or can you show something that supports this opinion.

For the umpteenth time, I have provided sources of reference, can you show ME something that disproves this opinion? He hasn't been busted because this administration has a great ability to disperse accountability in every direction around the president, just like a well built car disperses the force of impact in a crash.

It seems in blind zeal to "get Bush", the people are willing to believe in anything.
If you want my swing vote to go to "anyone but Bush", then show me some REAL reasons, not trumped up hype....that is why people ask for something credible to back opinions.

I'm not trying to get your vote, that's up to Kerry and his campaign team, not me. Kerry has my vote, and the vote of everybody I know, which is kinda bizarre, I don't know one person in my personal life that supports Bush, and I know alot of people, it just goes to show the division in this country, there really is two Americas.

When Kerry gets into office, lets pick apart all his apointees and see whos scratching whoms back....i think we'll find the same.

Whats that!? WHEN Kerry gets into office? Is that just a slip, or deep inside do you know Bush is going to lose? Either way, there is no winning in our argument, like I said it's clearly a catch 22, we have been going round and round, probably annoying everybody else. You put your trust in your sources, I will put mine in my sources, and lets just agree to disagree, I apologize if I've offended you with my lapdog comments and such, I was mostly joking and we all know this is a heated election year. But I am extending an olive branch.













[edit on 25-8-2004 by 27jd]

New Lawsuits Aim at Bush EPA Action Enabling Millions of Fish Kills

As reported by BushGreenwatch last February, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) opted to allow existing power plants and other industrial facilities to continue using cooling water systems which kill countless fish in American rivers every year--and to mitigate the damage by trying to restock the fish.

EPA issued this regulation despite a unanimous decision by the Second Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, which found that allowing massive destruction of wildlife in cooling systems, and then attempting to replace them in the ecosystem, did not fulfill the Clean Water Act requirement to use the "best technology available" to mitigate environmental damage.

Now, the Hudson River-based organization Riverkeeper is again leading a national coalition of environmental groups in suing EPA, charging the agency with violating the mandate of Congress under the Clean Water Act.

"Unfortunately, the agency has illegally rewritten the Clean Water Act to allow industry to avoid upgrading power plants that function as aquatic slaughterhouses,"


More

Just another discusting log to throw on the fire.... This is just one more problem out of a whole # load of em, he's out of control...

[edit on 24-8-2004 by TrueLies]

What CazMedia will miss most about Bush being voted out of office.......is sticking his head out the window of Air Force 1.





Just kidding CazMedia, last personal attack I promise! I had to keep this one up!











[edit on 25-8-2004 by 27jd]

Cazmedia says:

This is why im in this thread, not to defend bush, but to sort out the myth from the reality on him.
You alledge corruption or illegal busines dealings, i say ok, show me the charges, or explain why he hasnt been busted for these allegations?

I have three charges, i'd like for you to address the one above, and are you not aware the politicians and people at the top abide by different laws then we do?
It's alot easier for them to get away with something because they are figureheads, cops "let it go" turn the other cheeck because they are figure heads, plus they just deny deny deny until it gets "swept under the rug"

Nixon had corruption in his time, Reagan had corruption, and bush sr and jr have theirs and so did Clinton... It's nothing new, don't be so naive.
I'm sorry you let your politics get in the way of moral justice and logical reasoning, a is a, it just dosen't go away because he's part of your political affiliation. that should be the last thing on your list to think about, deny ignorance or just be part of it because your a republican too....