Bush is not the one to blame, in fact he doesn't even know what he's doing. He's only the face, not the brain.
He's just a bad actor and an even worse lair, that's all.

So I'll say that I'm not a supporter of the American rulers. They are the ones who's making the world unsafe.

No President is defined by the time of which he is president, but by the changes he leaves behind once he's out of politics or dies, to difine him right now is to not know politics at all, but then again, this site isn't what it used to be.

Yes, but it's the fact that he ALLOWS them to do this, that places the blame equally on his shoulders. As president and commander in chief, he has the ability to change direction, should he desire to do so...but he hasn't...

"I for one fully support President Bush. I truly believe he is the best President our country has ever had. Where exactly do you get off calling him the child of satan? You must be a total dumb-azz that just sees things on the surface and looks no further. That is the major problem with today's American citizens. It is all about the "me" and the "now", nobody cares to see how things are affecting us in the "long run". Bush's foreign policies and the war on Iraq are both things that will benefit America in the long run. I look forward to your response, and to the response of others on this matter. I will leave you with one of my favorite quotes, something I live by. I hope that someday you will see the error of your ways.

War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself.
- John Stewart Mill"

i agree, and im a brit. people expect everything to be done instantly. they think that if we did nothing in iraq, the problem would just go away.

Originally posted by GeniusSage
"I for one fully support President Bush. I truly believe he is the best President our country has ever had. Where exactly do you get off calling him the child of satan? You must be a total dumb-azz that just sees things on the surface and looks no further. That is the major problem with today's American citizens. It is all about the "me" and the "now", nobody cares to see how things are affecting us in the "long run". Bush's foreign policies and the war on Iraq are both things that will benefit America in the long run. I look forward to your response, and to the response of others on this matter. I will leave you with one of my favorite quotes, something I live by. I hope that someday you will see the error of your ways.

War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself.
- John Stewart Mill"

i agree, and im a brit. people expect everything to be done instantly. they think that if we did nothing in iraq, the problem would just go away.

You know, Rush lost his hearing and had to go to rehab for the drugs you must be using.

Gazrok, he has the choice, yes, but what your eyes don't see is very clear to him. No president has the balls to tell his people the true danger they are in, into years later, I don't like bush, but I can tell you this much, 10 to 50 years from now we will see his presidency in a different light.

Bring the soldiers home you say, think about why they're there, not the oil or vice prez. American interest affect everyone not just one man.

I never called for him to bring them home.

Nor do I disagree with the toppling of Saddam.

I was one of the few proponents of this on the site, when it occurred.

However, he #ed up.

He should have:

1. Planted WOMD if he knew he was full of #.

2. Focused more on the flouting of UN decisions, rather than WOMD, and gotten more of the UN on board before acting.

3. Had an interim Iraqi government (of US-friendly Iraqis) ready to go (which is common in such overthrows...)

4. Focused more on convincing the Iraqis they would be better off without Saddam.

5. Got in, taken Saddam out, installed the government, then gotten out, with only limited base agreements, and rebuilding contracts, and oil deals to take home.

Instead, he chose to totally ignore international opinion, and basically act like a bull in a china shop (politically speaking), and for that, he is an idiot, and does not deserve to be our representative to the world.

....Support Bush.

There is no measure, past/current or future hindsight, by which Bush will be judged as accomplished or competent.
The odd thing that happens around here now, is this accepted fait complit..." he'll win because there is no one to oppose him, no viable alternative".
That's just crazy talk, because to believe that, on face value without disclaimer of a repeat theft through a complicit Supreme Court, is to believe that we're better now in any category since he took office!!

Bush supporter here. I think given the circumstances he inherited from the previous administrationssssss, he's doing a very good job and he has my vote.

Originally posted by kramtronix
Bush supporter here. I think given the circumstances he inherited from the previous administrationssssss, he's doing a very good job and he has my vote.

Why is it that alot of people cannot argue for Bush without commenting on the previous administration. They were in power years ago. Get over it. Clinton faked up, but does that mean we should trust or support Bush just because he is not Will Jeff? The sad thing is if it were possible and legal, Clinton probably could have run again and won despite all of the crap that happened. Oh well, I lost my point on this rant...bye bye.

The odd thing that happens around here now, is this accepted fait complit..." he'll win because there is no one to oppose him, no viable alternative".

This would be true if I then voted for Bush...I will not, I will vote for the candidate who has the best chance of beating him, just to get him out of office...but common sense says, it won't happen.

Look, I'd bet good money, that the average American (say 8 out of 10) on the street, couldn't name more than JUST ONE Democratic candidate out of the NINE running! This is why he'll be re-elected. Because it's taking the Dems too long to get behind one candidate, so Dems have to choose between Dean, Clark, Edwards, Sharpton, Leiberman, Gephardt, etc. with only Dean and Clark likely having a prayer of getting the Dem spot. Why the hell are the others even bothering and wasting money??? (and more importantly...time)

It took quite a while for the Republican party to get behind one candidate. Bush and McCain had a very good running.

Why do they have to shoot their load during foreplay? ( kids, I'll explain later )
Why does there have to be blanket national awareness of every angle to a platform at this calendar date for victory to be likely?
I've seen nothing out of the norm or behind schedule in the political machines of the challengers campaigns against the incumbent - same timeline as Dole,Clinton,Bush,McCain.

Be patient, it'll be worth it.

That's wrong, and...disturbing...

Originally posted by joehayner
That's wrong, and...disturbing...

I think it's great. Has an excellent shock value to it.

How could somone think that up? The people holding the sighn should be punched repeatedly in the face, or beaten with a folding chair.