Help me understand why you support Bush...

Originally posted by keholmes how is this deceiving? I�m not a bible thumper and I don�t see an example of what you believe your parents were deceived with?

Do you really believe that, if elected, Kerry would have initiated laws limiting how and where the Bible could be distributed? Or that he would force laws across all states legalizing gay marriage? These things are not true, and using people's faith as a tool to deceive is immoral.

Yet according to you its only the RNC that is at fault.

If I were to lay blame, I'd put at least 2/3 of it in the RNC lap. The clear strategy was to divide and polarize. Those who enjoy their position on one pole often don't see this.

The divide is not quite as large as you would like it to be�.

I simply can't see how you can say that. In a massive voter turnout, we're cut statistically in half. And geographically, it's a tale of two coasts and the middle/south. The divide is deep, broad, and strong.

Originally posted by Intelearthling The first and foremost reason that I voted for President Bush is that he and I share the same views of what the security of the United States should be. He is firm and unwaivering in his stance on what he believes in, even in the face of adversity.

Conviction is an admirable and desirable quality in a leader. However, a fearless ability to admit mistakes and understanding of when/how to compromise is much more important. These two more important leadership traits are missing in Mr. Bush, but somehow, through the cult of his personality, he has led many to believe it doesn't matter.

Second, his unashamed commitment to our Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ, is rare in Washington D.C. with both parties. A person that can publicly recognize the Only Begotten Son of God, is IMO, a person that can be trusted and the only fear that they have is displeasing our Creator.

This is where we are finding some of the meat of the Bush "cult of personality" phenomenon. I'm not buying that Bush is a true "born again" Christian, given his deeds and the acts of those under him. I believe he is using the guise of faith to corral those of faith. For an example of a President that both exuded obvious sincere faith, one needs look no further than Jimmy Carter.

He understands that it's not important to look good in the worlds eyes.

But he is the self-proclaimed "leader of the free world!" He has said on many occasions that he is "changing the world." How can a person have this desire on one hand, and completely ignore world opinion on the other? It simply doesn't make sense, and will only create enemies, not friends.

Originally posted by Muaddib RNC strategy?.....so religious figures themselves couldn't have thought about doing this...by themselves?....

The person visiting their church identified himself as a "representative of the Republicans" visiting churches to discuss faith based initiatives. The first visit, he did exactly that. The follow-up three visits discussed the "evils of democrats". To me, this sanctioned use of faith as a tool is highly immoral.

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord

Originally posted by LostSailor
I don't think calling all Bush supporters "Bush-voting extreme theists" is very considerate.

The categorization was for "Bush-voting extreme theists", not "Bush voters are extreme theists". I know there are many Bush supporters that are not such, but the fervent extremist is a phenomenon this president enjoys.

As such, these extreme-theist Bush backers feel the need to dictate and legislate what is morality for all of us. These groups use the absurd analogy that if we allow gay marriages, we'll soon be considering legalizing pedophilic activity. An absurd stretch to the extreme. However... an stretch to the opposite extreme is not absurd to these people, such as banning certain classic books and preventing pregnant single-women from teaching in public schools.

The divide is terrifying.

Uh, S.O., you may not like it or believe it, but the nation, that is to say, this group of people with the common bond of a unique culture, does have a specific set of morals, and those particular set of standards is from the Judeo-Christian doctrine. No particular sect of the Christian faith is to run the show, with its peculiar views of certain parts of the Bible, but the general concept is the basis. Unlike the Phychiatric Association which changes its notion of normal and abnormal by what the political mindset is, our standards are stable. Your particular example of homosexuality defies that standard, conflicts with the majority of this nation, and as a matter of fact, will lead to other things we do not want. What you claim absurd now will not be later, just as what you advocate now I knew was coming down the pike 20 years ago.

Legislation is a dictation of morality, that is nothing new. WE do not want your new concept of recognized homosexual relationships. Many of us do not like the public education system's belief that they alone should decide what our children think of it, either. And also, do not think that this seemingly new scene of conservativesw becoming active is new to the country. As a matter of fact, what is very new to the scene is the liberalism that has crept upon the scene in the last several decades. The mainstream of the nation has finally awakened, choking on the garbage that was being forced down their throats. I wouldn't worry,m though, if you do not like it. Unless I'm wrong, the mainstream awakened, got sick, coughed, and will probably go back to sleep, thinking that the left has gotten the message. From listening to them today, I'd say they are still as fervent to destroy morality in this nation as they were before and are insulted by the very notion that those who are the salt of the nation actually have the audacity to speak up! No worry, though, just toss us a few more funny sit-coms, maybe lower the cable bill a bit, and the Heartland will go back to sleep.

Once again, to clarify, the people of faith in this nation have no desire to drag Homosexuals out into the street and flog them to death, but they also do not want it or any other abomination shoved in their faces, nor do they want it shoved in their kids' faces. We'd pretty much like to go back to the days when kids could be kids, at least past 8 years old, before they have to contemplate the garbage that is forced upon them by others.

Well SO I am a bush supporter. In point of fact I think he's a damn good president.
So your question was why right?
Partially because I am sick of politics as usual, I am sick of politicians afraid to say what they think for fear of losing votes. Now thats not to say Bush doesn't do that but he does do it less. He strikes me as the kind of guy who decides on a course of action and follows it through no matter what. I support him because he is the first poitcan I have truly believed when he says "I am a christian". I support him because I am tired f the US military being given a job to do as in kosovo and Bosnia but being crippled by policies. If as happened in mogadishu an American service man in Iraq were dragged behind a jeep at least with Bush as presdent I know there will be retribution. I dont agree with all of hs policies but at least I know what they are. I like the fact that terrorist who don't honor the genva accords are recieving no protection under the geneva accords under his leadership. If they don't follow the rules of war why should we? I like the fact that he truly believes the US is the greatest nation in earth. I guess you could say I support him because in many ways he thinks like I do. Maybe a little simplistic at times, but at least its well defined. America is good, Terrorism is bad. When he says abrtion is wrong he means it. When he says he loves ths country he means it. After the clinton years I and apparently many others are sick of politicians who say so many different things in so many ways you cant tell what they really think. Wth W what you see is what you get,

Alright folks, I've spent far too much time deleting crap and insulting posts from this thread. If we can't engage in a logical and polite discussion on the core rationale of the dedicated Bush supporters, we'll lock this thread and move on. Unfortunately, some of the posts I removed had some salient observations within the content, but contained opening or closing remarks in which either Bush or Kerry supporters would find hurtful insult.

Sorry that folks can't be respectful and mature when discussing these things SO.

I think I said this in another thread, but I think people are scared. They are scared for thier safety, they are scared of another terror attack. It was very convenient for a Bin Laden tape to come out days before the election.

I think it was as if Bin Laden was daring us. And you know people won't back down from a dare. It kinda reminds me of the flu shot. Would so many people really want it if they weren't told they couldn't have it?

Originally posted by Thomas Crowne Uh, S.O., you may not like it or believe it, but the nation, that is to say, this group of people with the common bond of a unique culture, does have a specific set of morals, and those particular set of standards is from the Judeo-Christian doctrine.

Now... you know I know that. But just as there are many "flavors" of Islam, there are many flavors of Christianity. I don't have any issue with a devout man of faith running the show. I tended to like and respect Jimmy Carter (not that he was a particularly good president).

will lead to other things we do not want. What you claim absurd now will not be later, just as what you advocate now I knew was coming down the pike 20 years ago.

Ah-ha... "we do not want". Then simply don't do it. Lead by example not by whip.

We'd pretty much like to go back to the days when kids could be kids,

Bingo. More on this later. But a hint... The metronome of the cycles of history swings ever wider as each generation seeks to correct what they fell are past wrongs by overcompensating their corrections.

Originally posted by drbryankkruta

I tell you what explain this one alone even when this man hits Iran
a stronger and nuke capable country than Iraq and with the greatest terrorist concentration and support in the whole area over there, and they kick our butts on their own soil while their terror population kicks our butt here a peice at a time...........what are you thinking, how did pro-Bushies
just do the right thing ........

You know....if you're not even going to try to keep up with what has been going on in the real world, it's going to make it very difficult to get serious responses.

I want to sincerely thank everyone who has contributed to this thread. I think I have discovered what I set out to learn, and will summarize my thoughts a bit later. First, while I'm a staunch atheist, Thomas will attest (he better), that I still tend to respect and hold in high regard those with faith. I grew up studying the Bible and understand it and its teachings very well. I think that background, combined with the comments of many members, has help me gain some insight. While I came into this with some assumptions, some have been confirmed, but new thoughts have risen that are somewhat surprising. Thanks again everyone. Keep discussing, I'll be back later. (And please, let's examine this point in history with polite respect. We can disagree, even vehemently so, with decorum and good will.)

SO,

I can't really answer your question, but I wanted to ask for your feedback on something that has really surprised me. Why do you think the young anti-war population of the U.S. under-performed in this election? I do not believe there has been a greater push in any prior election to get out the young vote (and at the same time tie the anti-war sentiment to it) than was performed this year.

Young people were being bombarded by "go vote" ads on MTV, Comedy Channel, Eminem for pete's sake. Michael Moore was as active as he could possibly be without having to be restrained .

I have been absolutely floored by the fact that a Republican push to rally what is usually a very lethargic Christian population was more effectual that the omnidirectional push by the Democrats to get the young people active in this election.

I'm hoping to hear what you think caused this push to fail.

Originally posted by Valhall I'm hoping to hear what you think caused this push to fail.

Simple, the Democrats lacked leadership and conviction of policy. Their only strong stance was anti-Bush... that's not enough. The young came out in droves, their fire was strong, their desire for change was stoked, but in the end, they were also divided; but not as much as the nation is. However, this generation of young (19-28) is the next "great generation". More on that later.

Originally posted by Valhall
You know....if you're not even going to try to keep up with what has been going on in the real world, it's going to make it very difficult to get serious responses.

This implies what,

Noone thinks Iran is next , wrong they do and polls have even reflected it on other boards just like this one.

Maybe it's the fact Iran isn't stronger than Iraq , wrong again.

Let's try this one, they are not in any way nuke capable,,, NNNNEEEEETTTT
wrong again that's what the woohaha over the is partialy about.

Now for my last point how about this, Iran is not a better equipted and manned military power than Iraq with a militia of terrorist who hate us waiting in unofficial or official capacities in Iran to act as if in the role of military reserves, and have more capabilities then the militants in Iraq at their disposal as support comes from the Iran goverment..
Whoops wrong again, It is well known by virtually every goverment that Iran is going to be a hard shell to crack and since they are not going to be coming to their attackers Iran has an even larger advantage.....and as for the terrorists supporting the Iranian goverment and vica versa , again something Iran themselves are glad to admit when they face war......and with Bush they are.........And those terrorists are not the flunky militants from Iraq that while loose in organization logistics and etc still give even Tommy Franks pause because of the strength of their abilities and verasity of the defensive and offensive capabilities..



Now which part did I miss in current events cause I'm confused now.

Well, db, first off Iran isn't hitting us over here with anything. Second, though Iran wants a fight (and you may go over to Al Jazeera to confirm that), the U.S. to date has not taken any action against them. If you are attempting to call diplomatic efforts pre-war posturing, then be my guest, but there is no evidence that the diplomatic efforts toward the Iranian nuclear program is in any way leading to more aggressive action....rather the evidence points toward avoiding that.

Would you prefer the U.S. completely ignore Iran, not attempt any diplomatic efforts, and let the UN completely handle it? Do you understand that when the "UN completely handles it" we are part of the UN, and therefore still involved? Do you want us to pull out of the UN, so that the UN can handle this without our involvement? I beg you to write your congressman and say that. Do you feel that the U.N. is being militant in its attempts at diplomacy with Iran? Because I see no one acting more aggressive than diplomacy in any of the countries or organizations involved in this issue.

Originally posted by Valhall
Well, db, first off Iran isn't hitting us over here with anything. Second, though Iran wants a fight (and you may go over to Al Jazeera to confirm that), the U.S. to date has not taken any action against them. If you are attempting to call diplomatic efforts pre-war posturing, then be my guest, but there is no evidence that the diplomatic efforts toward the Iranian nuclear program is in any way leading to more aggressive action....rather the evidence points toward avoiding that.

Would you prefer the U.S. completely ignore Iran, not attempt any diplomatic efforts, and let the UN completely handle it? Do you understand that when the "UN completely handles it" we are part of the UN, and therefore still involved? Do you want us to pull out of the UN, so that the UN can handle this without our involvement? I beg you to write your congressman and say that. Do you feel that the U.N. is being militant in its attempts at diplomacy with Iran? Because I see no one acting more aggressive than diplomacy in any of the countries or organizations involved in this issue.

I have to leave the house for a bit , but bet when I come back I will have just what your looking for a little tidbit

Check with un and see how not involved US has been in this issue, and an all out declaration on last count over 112 times Bush stated he will pursue all elements of terrorism and those who support them no matter their location, so Iran again has been involved by harbouring terrorists.

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
However, this generation of young (19-28) is the next "great generation". More on that later.

I agree.

In the natural political cycle of things we're seeing a realignment across the country that is being spurred by the new generation. California was once a solid Republican stronghold and is now regarded as the most liberal state of the union. States like Georgia who used to favour Democrats especially those born south of Virginia are now untouchable right wing bastions. America is very divided and is NOT willing to move, only New Hampshire changed allegiances in this election.

The Democrats up for reelection in the south were of moderate persuasion as that's what traditionally appeals to the southerners, they've been passed up in favour of religiously fuelled right wing fanatics.

It seems the South is still pissy and is "rising again" in form of George W Bush. Oh, and the mountain states are at it too.

Vallhall,
I got a few of these together I hope my lack of current events knowledge doesnt weigh on you when I show you I can keep up to and have, I am going to sleep now, But you have fun this should cover the issues, I quote dont know about and your lack of belief in the statements I made ref US/Iran relations , World Opinion, etc..... However I have not gotten to the issue of proving my statements on the Iran /terrorists connections , and terrorists population in Iran, and the Iran Military strength yet.

Dont worry its coming in the next installment after I wake up. I can then again stop if you wish which ever I'm not John Kerry I wont conceed.
I wish to say however when this is over me and you have no issues, your
cool by me.



Couple of links about world opinion

Christian /world opinion article

Ten Country poll Shows opinion of US worsens


A few links that show actions , OOOHHHH and that I haven't Been keeping up on world events.......

US pressure for action from UN

Iran Nuke Actions ....Special note picture of high level surveilence, That and Threats are action.

US Puts Iran on Notice

Us State Dept. Iran Briefing

US Iran Policy from US STATE DEPARTMENT see second paragraph first line US is Involved in Iran issues

UN News Story Ref Iranian Nuke Intentions



IRAN / US What views are held about issue links below

Ir an Protest US

AB C NEWS list of multiple articles on Iran Us relations

Iran Daily ref Iran Us Relations

Iran fears future hinges on US elections.....MULTI Listings

I hope bush supporters can tell me why they think Bush confronts the enemy, when Iran and N.Korea pose great threats to the world and he attacked Iraq...lol
If Bush is a Christian why is he not doing anything about the problem in Sudan?
nothing to with the US? I help people all the time, they dont have anything to do with me, isn't that what christians do? If you think Bush went to war with Iraq based on moral grounds, why not go help out Africa what about those people in Sudan? some of you think you are Christians but you are not do you know what being one entails? as for me having proof Bush is not a Christian, actions speak louder than words and if anyone here thinks this administration hasn't lied to you...
i'll start another thread with so many qoutes you'll feel giddy. I want to know if the fact that the international community wanted him out would make some of you vote for him for that reason.

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
First, while I'm a staunch atheist, Thomas will attest (he better), that I still tend to respect and hold in high regard those with faith. I grew up studying the Bible and understand it and its teachings very well.

This is one area where I respected Kerry more. He could put his religious beliefs aside, saying "this is how I feel due to my faith," but at the same time not impose it on anyone else. He disagreed with abortion personally, but knew alot of people didn't and respected their views, while Bush seems to impose his religious beliefs into policy.

Originally posted by Elijio
I hope bush supporters can tell me why they think Bush confronts the enemy, when Iran and N.Korea pose great threats to the world and he attacked Iraq...lol

Whose enemy? Bush's enemy is the man who put a hit out on Daddy and he is in jail now. Oh, I think you mean the guy who was in charge of the 911 attacks killing over 3000 americans. Yeah, he's.... ummm... not a concern.