Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

If you had one word to describe President Bush.

page: 3
0
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 25 2005 @ 11:39 PM
link   
Well, I may as well speak the truth. The one word which describes GWB would have to be :

BRILLIANT




posted on Jul, 26 2005 @ 03:36 PM
link   
Yeah i would have to say Bush is Brilliant and our Protector. our Presidents should be. Their are our leaders. Giveing the orders. But i guess the only way you would be right eastcostkid is bye that he is actualy doing the fighting but the troops are...but still.

(SUPORT OUR TROOPS)



posted on Jul, 27 2005 @ 12:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by EastCoastKid

Originally posted by Carseller4
My one word to describe Bush is....

Leader



Baaaahaaahaa!



YOu gotta be kidding me, ritght?!!


How can 59,054,087 people be so dumb?”



posted on Jul, 27 2005 @ 01:23 PM
link   
A few thoughts on that article....


This one contains a front page from the London Daily Mirror. Above the newspaper’s headline floats another picture, this one of a befuddled-looking, newly “reelected” George W. Bush. The headline reads: “HOW CAN 59,054,087 PEOPLE BE SO DUMB?”


We have that front hanging up here in the noozroom..


“The liberties of our country, the freedoms of our civil Constitution are worth defending at all hazards; it is our duty to defend them against all attacks. We have received them as a fair inheritance from our worthy ancestors. They purchased them for us with toil and danger and expense of treasure and blood. It will bring a mark of everlasting infamy on the present generation – enlightened as it is – if we should suffer them to be wrested from us by violence without a struggle, or to be cheated out of them by the artifices of designing men.”
Sam Adams


Amen, brother.

Excellent op/ed.
I encourage everyone to read it. He says many of the very things I've thought... like commenting on how stupid that flagwaver's bumper sticker POWER OF PRIDE is.
Every time I see one of those I cringe. My Christian upbringing tells me that it is wrong to embrace pride in that way. (Pride Cometh Before the Fall..) It's ok to be proud of accomplishments, work, family.. but to be so puffed up with pride that we think we can just 'go kick AyeRab a double s wherever and whenever.. that ain't Christian at all. Quite the opposite.



posted on Jul, 27 2005 @ 01:26 PM
link   
And p.s.

I don't believe for a minute Americans are that stupid.. Bush did NOT get re-elected. He got reSelected through vote fraud.

Thine eyes do not lie.. I have NEVER in 36 years of life seen SO many people turn out to vote! It was incredible. Mass numbers turned out - and those extra voters were NOT standing in line for HOURS to vote for Bush.

Be assured of that.



posted on Jul, 27 2005 @ 02:09 PM
link   
The op/ed is interesting; I'm about half way through it. Naturally I disagree that the reelection of Bush wasn't a moment of idiocy; after all, I did vote for the guy. It does have a unique perspective, though, and makes some very interesting connections.

As to the people standing in line for hours not being there to vote for Bush, I have to disagree. Everyone felt that that election was of paramount importance. I know I did, and I tried to get as many people out to vote as I could. Our nation was (and is) at war, and in the midst of that war we were asked by our government to choose the person who would lead that war. We could choose the person who had been running the war so far, or we could choose someone else. The majority of Americans (people?
) who voted wanted to stay with the current leadership. They believed he was doing a good job, or else they thought the other guy would do a worse job.

What I find really remarkable, though, is this intellectual elitism. You don't agree with my political views, how can you be so stupid? You don't believe the conspiracies I do, how can you be so dumb? You believe Bush is doing a good job, you call him a leader and you're not kidding?! How can you be so dumb?! It just seems really closed minded to me; if someone doesn't agree with me, it must mean they're stupid because I'm the most brilliant individual on the planet, or else I'm the most discerning and can tell who the most brilliant one is and adopt their opinion.

I know some pretty darn smart people who agree with me on political issues, and I know some really, really, really dumb ones who do as well. Same case for those who disagree with me. I don't think I'm God's greatest gift to humanity, and I know I can be, and often am, wrong. I also realize my opinions aren't based on my intelligence, but rather my life experiences.



posted on Jul, 27 2005 @ 02:25 PM
link   
When someone lies to you, and you continue to believe the crap they're shoveling you, that's just dumb. No offense. JJ, I know you're smarter than that.

Bush said there were WMD. Over and over again.

There were none.

In 2001, Condoleeza Rice and Colin Powell both stated that Saddam had been disarmed and that he was positively contained. By 2002, they were singing a completely different tune.


February 24, 2001: "Saddam Hussein has not developed any significant capacity with respect to weapons of mass destruction," says Secretary of State Colin Powell. "He is unable to project conventional power against his neighbors."




July 29, 2001: "We are able to keep his (Saddam's) arms from him," NSC advisor Rice tells the media. "His military forces have not been rebuilt."


See these people (BushCo.) for what they are. LIARS of the highest order.



posted on Jul, 27 2005 @ 02:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by EastCoastKid
When someone lies to you, and you continue to believe the crap they're shoveling you, that's just dumb. No offense. JJ, I know you're smarter than that.

Bush said there were WMD. Over and over again.

There were none.


So did John Kerry. So did France, Russia, the UK, and Germany. The whole world seemed to believe he did, but Bush was the only one who went out and did something about it. He put his neck out on something he really believed to be true, and it got chopped because it wasn't true. The irony is the choppers were all saying the same thing he was, Saddam had WMDs, back before we invaded Iraq.



posted on Jul, 27 2005 @ 05:24 PM
link   
Wow, I just finished reading that article, and all I can really say is...Arrogant hypocrit. This part was especially telling of this guy's mentality of hypocracy:


A note to my legion of fuming detractors: after you look up the meaning of “jingoism,” get all judgmental on me and scrawl another of your angry, pointless, and unimaginative name-calling diatribes, let me help you with your research by answering the inane assumptions and mostly irrelevant questions you’ve already been programmed to ask me: ... Just spare me the other crap. Come up with something new, and add a comma now and then – it won’t use up that much of your crayon.


Yeah, "don't insult me, that's my right to do to you, not the other way around, you illiterate, unreasoning, irrelevant idiots."


Our countrymen and women won’t be brought back to rationality through anger. Only reason can accomplish that.


Then you, too, are contributing to the problem you've come to believe.



posted on Jul, 27 2005 @ 05:39 PM
link   
We all know who really put bush in the White House don't we? It was Saturday Night Live. Bush and his frat brothers were portrayed walking around the White House cocky and cool, chugging budweisers as if it were a frat house. Gore looked like a total loser.

In SNL's own word:

"Strategery"



posted on Jul, 27 2005 @ 06:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by junglejake
So did John Kerry. So did France, Russia, the UK, and Germany. The whole world seemed to believe he did, but Bush was the only one who went out and did something about it. He put his neck out on something he really believed to be true, and it got chopped because it wasn't true. The irony is the choppers were all saying the same thing he was, Saddam had WMDs, back before we invaded Iraq.


So what? They were wrong.

I was on the record in the media saying they were full of it BEFORE the war. So, obviously those who bought into it were given some very BAD information. Frankly, if I had bought into that crap, I would be very very embarassed and pissed off right now.

To this day, I cannot believe that all those Senators and all all those congress critters could have gotten it so wrong.
I think most of 'em are just big fat lyin' phonies who got caught with their pants down.
And that goes for Democrats AND Republicans.



posted on Jul, 27 2005 @ 06:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by EastCoastKid

So what? They were wrong.


They were wrong, but Bush lied? Other nations were coming out and publicly saying Saddam had WMDs, including France and Germany. Why is it the entire world is getting the benefit of the doubt, they were wrong, that's all, yet Bush, for saying the same thing, is a lying [fill in your own words]?

I'm not ignoring your last paragraph, either. Like that hypocritical article stated, accurately I think, we've come to expect and accept corruption in government. The tone of your comments about the senators and congressfolk doesn't display anger, just contempt. Yet when Bush comes up, anger is in the words.



posted on Jul, 27 2005 @ 08:19 PM
link   
Uh, any republicans (JJ baby, get this one here!) remember who told congress that Saddam had WMDs? BUSH!!! He lied to them, knowingly provided false information, so they are not at fault. WHo then went to the UN with the same lies and knowingly false information? Powell! So can't blame the UN.

Bush&Co knowingly lied/provided false information to invade a country that had nothing to do with 9/11 or had any WMDs, was not a threat to anyone!!!

Yet the people who attacked us, Saudi Arabia, still stands as a make out buddy for Bush! WTF?? If republicans had real balls they would attack the enemy! Not someone who was sitting with his thumbs up his ass not knowing what was going on.



posted on Jul, 27 2005 @ 08:26 PM
link   
I got it, JTR, but senators and congressfolk were already talking to the press about it before Bush said anything publically, including Mr. Kerry. What about the other nations, though? If they just took what Bush said as complete truth and made their own statements based on Bush's statement, that would be the first time I know of in world history where a country has taken another world leader at his word without looking into the matter for themselves. I'm sorry, but France doesn't seem the type of country that would just rattle off what America is saying unless they believed it, too.



posted on Jul, 27 2005 @ 08:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by James the Lesser
Uh, any republicans (JJ baby, get this one here!) remember who told congress that Saddam had WMDs? BUSH!!! He lied to them, knowingly provided false information, so they are not at fault. WHo then went to the UN with the same lies and knowingly false information? Powell! So can't blame the UN.

Bush&Co knowingly lied/provided false information to invade a country that had nothing to do with 9/11 or had any WMDs, was not a threat to anyone!!!

Yet the people who attacked us, Saudi Arabia, still stands as a make out buddy for Bush! WTF?? If republicans had real balls they would attack the enemy! Not someone who was sitting with his thumbs up his ass not knowing what was going on.


Geez! Where's Seekerof when ya (don't) need him? After reading a thread on BTS I'm totally gonna let this slide!




Not someone who was sitting with his thumbs up his ass not knowing what was going on.




You got one of my way above votes btw.
Keep keepin on.



posted on Jul, 27 2005 @ 08:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by junglejake
I got it, JTR, but senators and congressfolk were already talking to the press about it before Bush said anything publically, including Mr. Kerry. What about the other nations, though? If they just took what Bush said as complete truth and made their own statements based on Bush's statement, that would be the first time I know of in world history where a country has taken another world leader at his word without looking into the matter for themselves. I'm sorry, but France doesn't seem the type of country that would just rattle off what America is saying unless they believed it, too.


I am currently not in possesson (sp?) of direct quotes b/c I'm drinkin beer, but, you are aware of our nation's current war doctrine aren't you? We do pre-emptive these days. That means FOK the world and their opinions.
That's Rummy-speak.

[edit on 7/27/05 by EastCoastKid]



posted on Jul, 27 2005 @ 08:59 PM
link   
I am aware of that, but I don't understand how that relates to Bush lying.

I'm havin' a beer right now, too
Let's tip one back for America!



posted on Jul, 27 2005 @ 09:12 PM
link   
JJ, I would buy you a beer if I could.

The bottom line is, Bush is the president, he set this in motion. See: 16 words in State of Union address.

That is an impeachable offense.

And remember, Clinton got impeached for lying to a grand jury. The SoTU address is no different, legally. Ask Schippers.



posted on Jul, 28 2005 @ 01:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by EastCoastKid
And p.s.

I don't believe for a minute Americans are that stupid.. Bush did NOT get re-elected. He got reSelected through vote fraud.

Thine eyes do not lie.. I have NEVER in 36 years of life seen SO many people turn out to vote! It was incredible. Mass numbers turned out - and those extra voters were NOT standing in line for HOURS to vote for Bush.

Be assured of that.



I totally agree!

I talk to tons of people waiting in line and the majority openly stated that they didn't care much for Kerry, but they were compelled to vote Bush out of the White House. This was in Northern Virginia too.

It's not the way votes are cast that matters, It's the way they are counted that makes all the difference.



posted on Jul, 28 2005 @ 08:57 AM
link   
What evidence do they have that Bush got re-elected by vote fraud?
Any articles or web sights??





new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join