Hermann Cheruscan…
You sound jealous.
Just what does that have to do with anything in this thread?
Is that an accusation? Tell me how this thread is a troll. Is it not a debateable topic?
From your lips to the ears of Allah.
What’s the debate? This is even less debatable than a december thread. You made a statement that virtually everyone would see is obvious, and for what? So you could see conservatives squirm? So you could get all excited about how you finally proved that Bush isn’t an honest person?
I got news for you…we already knew that. Tell us something new, exciting, or at least interesting, and then we can debate. Until then, all I see is a disillusioned liberal spoiling for a fight to assuage his anger.
AD, The OP was a blatant George W. Bush bash, which is not quite the same thing as a blatant, blanket conservative (or Republican) bash, which would have called more for comparing ideologies (or parties) vice individuals.
Very important distinction, IMHO.
No major disagreements with you on the t-word.
This isn’t always apparent.
Airman Doors, USAF…Do you ever get tired of the Bushies extolling the virtues of Dubya? Don’t you think the truth shines a bit of light on their worshipping?
Call it what you will. But I was seriously looking for the Bushies to defend him. But I see it’s not going to happen.
True, but this was the President who was going to “restore honor and dignity to the White House”.
Can we name this phenomenon? It’s at least as ridiculous as Godwin’s Law, far more common these days, and just as predictable.
Poster #1: I present this criticism of the current administration, and of Republicans in general.
Poster #2: I remind you, sir, that Bill Clinton got a blow job from an intern, and was less than forthcoming about it.
Poster #1: That may be true, but it does not alter my assertion. Here is more support for my position.
Poster #2: Blow job! Blow job blow job blow job!
I suggest Monica’s Law.
Dr. J
Do I? Hell yes I do. I’m sick to shit of hearing about the great Bush and his wonderful policies. I used to be a true believer. I am no longer.
At this point, all I’d like is for 2004 to roll around so I can vote him out.
BUT…
Every time I think I’m starting to be at least sympathetic to liberal causes, someone posts some BS OP and begs to be hammered on it, and I oblige, since it shows the true colors of the liberals as well.
What did you hope to accomplish with this OP? Something tells me it’s not ending up the way you had hoped.
One post shows the true colours of the liberals? really? are we all the same?
I would love for a Bush to lose and be replaced by a conservative.
I would love a conservative in my back garden too, to replace all those bushes.
Dude, you all sing the same line, the same chorus.
“The war is wrong”
“Bush makes the rich richer”
“The Republicans are trying to stack the courts”
“The deficit is growing irresponsibly”
“Shrub is a nincompoop”
Whether I agree with some of that or not is irrelevant. What I do see, though, is you guys shouting at the top of your lungs and not even giving a second’s thought to the fact that approximately half the people in the country disagree with you and maybe their perspective has some merit as well.
Frankly, it gets old really quickly. It sounds like sour grapes since you’re not in charge anymore. Which, of course, it is. Not that the same thing won’t happen when you’re in charge, of course.
Personally, I’m sick of the whole thing.
The exact same thing can be said about conservatives. IMO, in fact it is probably more a conservative behaviour than a liberal one.
I am not in your country by the way. I don’t really care (much) about it’s national policies, just it’s foreign ones.
And another thing. In my country - the liberals are in charge!
(albeit not very liberally)
Let’s just look at the very first claim:
Another view of Bush’s first budget:
I’d call that a ”mixed bag” alright, some losses here and some gains there. But hardly the abandonment of children’s healthcare suggested by the OP’s site.
But wait, there’s more. Bush’s first budget covers the year 2002. So Children’s Hospitals loose $34 million dollars in 2002 according to a budget submitted in April of 2001. But here we learn:
Frankly, I don’t think the rest of the site is worth bothering with. Give me something a little more informative and a little less partisan.
Well, I just read through that link, and while I think it wasn’t a good move for Bush to break those promises, it is naive to think The President will do everything he says, I do happen to agree with most of the budget cuts and such in the ‘Reality’ column, so I can’t get that mad at Bush, because he is doing (mostly) what I want him to do. And give him a bravo for cutting the ethanol subsidy, that has been one of my pet peeves for awhile now.
Yes, Bush is ridiculously dishonest about what he promises, and what he actually does. This is not new to the Presidency, though his administration is remarkably clumsy about it.
But… I like some of what he does. Did I hear something about killing the ethanol subsidy? Right on!
You may want to check out this article:
Looks to me like Impact-Aid has done pretty well by President Bush. And some might even call that part about resisting the sort of “gimmickry” engaged in by Reagan, Bush (I) and Clinton to be “unprecedented” indeed.