It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

How can you justify voting Bush?

page: 5
0
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 7 2004 @ 08:44 PM
link   
So many people misunderstand the state of our economy:

1) No matter what pundits say, our economy is infinantly complex. The president does not control which way the economy goes, he is only one factor in it. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I seem to remember three passenger filled airplanes taking out the World Trade Center and hitting the Pentagon, I'm thinking this kind of hurt economic confidence. Or two more non-related economic effecting incidents: madcow disease, and the bird flu, both of which effect exports from the U.S. The short term of the economy is nearly meaningless, only the longterm matters.

2) Job loss is not a signal of a poor economy. This jobloss is not due to a poor economy, it is due to an economic upgrade. Our economy has become the dominant economy in the world so it is going through a time of transition. What you do not see is that we are importing jobs twice as fast as we are exporting them. We are trading our unskilled jobs for more skilled jobs, in essence, our job market is evolving upwards. The only negative side effect is what happens to the unskilled laborers, they generally get left behind. Luckily we have a higher education system that supports sporadic changes of career. Our economy CONTINUES to grow faster then most other economies IN THE WORLD, including europe. We have the longest sustained economic growth, more than any industrialized nation on earth.

So please children, can we learn to think before we speak




posted on Mar, 7 2004 @ 08:47 PM
link   


I don't think it is possible to justify a vote for King George W. Bush, or the Halliburton family.


Kryptos, I generally refrain from namecalling but you my friend, are an idiot.



posted on Mar, 7 2004 @ 08:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by SonsOfLiberty
So please children, can we learn to think before we speak


The answer for me lies within the finely crafted repetitive response ashely will dish out next.



posted on Mar, 7 2004 @ 08:59 PM
link   
Lol Agent47, I just noticed that both of our moods are "agressive." All this political debating has put me in a tiff
. Oh, btw, I'm playing through Hitman 2 again, your avatar convinced me.



posted on Mar, 7 2004 @ 09:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by SonsOfLiberty
Lol Agent47, I just noticed that both of our moods are "agressive." All this political debating has put me in a tiff
. Oh, btw, I'm playing through Hitman 2 again, your avatar convinced me.


Once you get past the learning curve it becomes a highly rewarding experience, FYI you can try and do a perfect job every time but if you cant dont be afraid of just blasting through a level, both can be very rewarding. You can burn off some of that agression .


Im saving mine for the next highly "intelligent" reason why we shouldnt vote for "haliburton". Bunch of ignorant.... oh wait i have to save this for the ignorant.



posted on Mar, 8 2004 @ 11:23 PM
link   
Oh, you genius' are so smart. By the way agent 86 its ashley not ashely.

I decided not to post the stats you requested because it is to much work,and i dont think it would do any good. You just seem wrong and probably like that fact.
Maybe there is just a difference in the way we think. I think with regard to current events and there implications,
and you dont seem to think at all.
What made me laugh the most was your business cycle theory. Lets say the next administration(although unlikely)is to produce growth,is that because of the currents brilliant policy.
If we are no longer attacking countries in the next administrations reign is that because of this administrations brilliant policy.
I realize your experience is limted and whoever wrote the book that you learned these fallacies from has already proven themselves and not relied on the previous author,but thats not the point.
As a successful business owner(entrepenuer)I know for a fact from real life experience that prosperity is not passed on when it comes to business.
The u.s.a is a business and its being run poorly just like everything else this poser has ran.(although who is running things is up to debate).
Oh, by the way any suggestions on who i can blame my current slump in business on? I started the business in 92.



posted on Mar, 8 2004 @ 11:31 PM
link   
Agent 86 you should be nice,maybe someone will hire you.



posted on Mar, 9 2004 @ 12:26 PM
link   
What business is it exactly (might be helpful to know).



posted on Mar, 9 2004 @ 12:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nerdling
My question to all of the republicans out there would have to be:

How can you justify voting for Bush?

Really, how the hell can you support a man who has led America into a massive 3 trillion dollar deficit, record job losses and unemployment figures and leading us into a fruitless, neverending war on terror.

Why?


Well, many people did follow Hitler and believed in him during world war 2 so, although as I'm sad to see people who will follow Bush because they believe in him and think he is telling them the truth, I'm not really surprised about that...I just hope people will wake up before it's too late and that the Entire world will be at war against the US because of all the bad they will have done everywhere... Bush is saying he does that to protect US but, on the contrary, he is fuelling the hatred of those outside the US, therefore fuelling the terror in the US, enabling him to keep control of the US as he does by scaring everybody. I don't like the time we have been living for the last 3-4 years. It is getting darker and darker...



posted on Mar, 9 2004 @ 12:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by orionthehunter
As far as Iraq goes, I say what American was worried about Iraq nuking us before the war started? I certainly wasn't. I was worried about the threat posed by him and his sons a decade from now from building up his country's economy and military. Iraq could have easily developed nukes after sanctions were dropped. Sadam and sons were just plain evil to put thousands into plastic shredders feet first so their screams would last longer. Seems like common sense to fight evil before it gets all powerful. On the other hand I don't like being lied to about WMD. I believe that was just a flat out lie to get enough public support to fight a growing evil threat. Most sane people would not want to fight a nuclear war later on with Iraq. I believe Sadam or sons would have started a nuclear war given time so that justifies that for me. Just my opinion.



If Saddam and son were such a threat, why then did the US helped them so many years ago. Because they wanted their oil...But now that the US felt that they could lose that oil because they couldn't control Saddam as before, they decide to attack him using the WMD as a reason...but in reality, like you probably heard before, they just wanted to continue to get their oil. And the best way to do that is to take control of Iraq...Shouting to the world that it is because of the war against terror and because Saddam was evil and all... That's "BUSHit"



posted on Mar, 9 2004 @ 03:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by ashley
Oh, you genius' are so smart. By the way agent 86 its ashley not ashely.

I decided not to post the stats you requested because it is to much work,and i dont think it would do any good. You just seem wrong and probably like that fact.
Maybe there is just a difference in the way we think. I think with regard to current events and there implications,
and you dont seem to think at all.
What made me laugh the most was your business cycle theory. Lets say the next administration(although unlikely)is to produce growth,is that because of the currents brilliant policy.
If we are no longer attacking countries in the next administrations reign is that because of this administrations brilliant policy.
I realize your experience is limted and whoever wrote the book that you learned these fallacies from has already proven themselves and not relied on the previous author,but thats not the point.
As a successful business owner(entrepenuer)I know for a fact from real life experience that prosperity is not passed on when it comes to business.
The u.s.a is a business and its being run poorly just like everything else this poser has ran.(although who is running things is up to debate).
Oh, by the way any suggestions on who i can blame my current slump in business on? I started the business in 92.


Good cop out for a website about "denying ignorance" " umm my fingers hurt! Im not gonna type the stats which I blindly site!" pus. Anyways, yeah Im sure your a successful entrepaneur but that would probably hurt your fingers more to type whatever you mean by that. If you look up any other thread about the economy you will see its a well known fact that the economy is not immediately affected by a presidents actions, its not some theory created by me. Your a weekend warrior on this board posting when your bored and not really thinking through your posts at that. Im sorry I mispelt your name but its no warrant to carry on with petty attacks on mine. See and if you like to point out what you think is funny about my posts then it is interesting to notice that in your posts whenever I prove you wrong, in this case it was with immigration, you seem to just ignore it and drop the subject. Great debate skills. Bravo.

[Edited on 9-3-2004 by Agent47]



posted on Mar, 9 2004 @ 03:24 PM
link   
Agent, don't even try. Ashley has yet to back up a snigle thing in any post in any thread he has ever posted on.

If I am wrong, and just missed it, they are so few and far between that it approches zero.



posted on Mar, 9 2004 @ 09:22 PM
link   
I believe what the president or administration states to the public and what they think behind the scenes are two different things. Public opinion is important along with poll ratings during election year. I once believed the line about going to Iraq had nothing to do about oil. However after the France Minister of Oil stated the war was all about oil, well who could doubt that? (heavy sarcasm)

Actually if the administration was/is worried about Saudi Arabia falling (civil war or other causes) then the supply of oil would have a major disruption, that could lead to economic trouble here and everywhere. $5 for a gallon of gas would cause trouble. Bush did take action to secure another source of oil. On the other side I do believe Sadam was evil and/or his sons for murdering so many so painfully. Now you could make an argument that the US was evil too for supporting him too but the US saw him as a lesser of two evils for awhile. I believe the WMD was a wishful bluff that nobody was sure about but hoped it would turn up. What were all those Iraqi gas suits for? What happened to all the WMD that Sadam used to have? They weren't accounted for and still aren't.

I believe most people have forgotton but immediately after the Taliban fell and the US had taken major action to fight the supporters of terrorism in Afganhistan, Bush's popularity was extremely high in the polls.
What went wrong afterward is up to debate.

I did laugh at the fact that some said the president was too stupid to know what was going on before 9-11 but afterward some acted like he knew everything and should have alerted the correct people to stop it.

As it stand nows, I am very concerned about our future with either candidate winning.

A couple of other comments, I read in a business magazine that Bush knows the amnesty won't pass congress so it's all for show especially with Mexico watching. In terms of the falling dollar, it is helping US manufacturing compete with European companies. I don't agree with everything Bush has done but I tried to explain how I justify the above.



posted on Mar, 10 2004 @ 01:48 PM
link   


Well, many people did follow Hitler and believed in him during world war 2 so, although as I'm sad to see people who will follow Bush because they believe in him and think he is telling them the truth, I'm not really surprised about that...I just hope people will wake up before it's too late and that the Entire world will be at war against the US because of all the bad they will have done everywhere... Bush is saying he does that to protect US but, on the contrary, he is fuelling the hatred of those outside the US, therefore fuelling the terror in the US, enabling him to keep control of the US as he does by scaring everybody. I don't like the time we have been living for the last 3-4 years. It is getting darker and darker...


You truly belive that Bush lies like "Hitler?" You really think Bush is anything like Hitler!? Don't let your hatred blind you, even I'm not stupid enough to call Kerry a Stalin or Mao...



posted on Mar, 10 2004 @ 05:55 PM
link   
I see the quote above^ was by someone else but I will leave a little bit more opinion here about how to justify lying or not revealing the whole truth.

I'm not trying to accuse anyone of lying for personal reasons but it does make sense if revealing the truth would endanger national security to not reveal the truth. In that case a cover story would be needed. The US and the West along with others are in a war with terror groups. It's debateable what the terror groups already know but no need to tell everyone if a suitable cover story takes care of things. For example if the president told the exact reason or truth behind going to war or other action then he might explain that if a terrorist action did this or a civil war started in country B, then that would result in problem C which results in a global economic disaster which would destroy the western economy worse than the Great Depression. If you don't have work and therefore no money for food, I would say that's a major problem. Now a strictly personal reason for lying might be something like Clinton stating that he had no sexual relations with that woman.

I'm trying to state that where war is concerned, information is important. I'm not stating that I'm not concerned where the country is heading. I believe the big debate in the US before the Iraq war started was if our policy of containment would work. I guess 9-11 changed our policy to not wait to see if someone can kill us. We are going after our enemies before they can get us. This can be scary. I do not want extra enemies. I sincerely hope we do not go after countries that could be contained peacefully without losing any more lives.

Additionally I know alot of people disagree with the US about going to war with Iraq. However I believe Sadam/and or sons were already at war with us even if a bit covertly. Sadam sent a team (assasins to the US) to try to kill the current president's father shortly after the persian gulf war. He constantly shot missles at our aircraft in violation of cease fire agreements. He was a brutal dictator. He controlled the biggest or one of the biggest oil reserves on the planet. After sanctions were dropped, I think he would have been an extremely big threat to the West. I can't prove anything about what might have happened or if nothing would have happened or if millions of lives and WWIII was averted but I can state my opinion of what I foresaw happening if we did nothing.

[Edited on 10-3-2004 by orionthehunter]



posted on Mar, 11 2004 @ 04:12 PM
link   
Ignore everything else and consider this. Originally, political office was a service you performed for your country, it wasn't your career (yes I know its the 21st century and not the 18th century, but the principles are the same). Bush is not a life-long politician, only a recent one.

I believe that there is widespread corruption in politics because for most politicians, politics is their livelihood and the only thing they know, so they do whatever will keep them in the game. This makes it hard for them to act on principles that are not popular and might not get them re-elected. So most do what is popular, though it might be wrong, and avoid what is not popular, though it may be right.

With Bush, you know where he stands, so there really is no guessing about what he will do. He has principles and sticks to them, and though I may not agree all the time, I like that. He is doing what he thinks is needed. When his presidency is over, he will go back to his place in society.

A side note: Tax cuts for the rich? Thats one of the most common criticisms I hear about President Bush. I payed taxes, and I got a check from Uncle Sam, BUT I AM NOT RICH. So people who make that claim are LIARS. Yeah, maybe rich people got a tax cut too, but we are not a socialist country (yet). President Bush said if you paid taxes you will get a tax cut. That includes the rich.

I also got a larger refund this year (married with 2 kids). I took that money and spent it, but according to the media and his oponents, that won't help the economy. Consumers spending money won't help the ecomomy? Whatever. Go drink your Kool-Aid.

What about the huge deficit you ask? We cant afford it? The government gets money from sources other than taxes. Besides, they spend too much anyway. They more they have the more they spend. Give them less and they'll learn to get by on it.

September 11th, 2001 was a big deal even though many (liberals) want us to forget about it. More died that day than did at Pearl Harbor on 07 Dec 1941. That single event (and its repercussions) is the primary reason our budget and economy are in the state they are in. Its not from anything President Bush has done.

[Edited on 12-3-2004 by quaternary]



posted on Mar, 12 2004 @ 09:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by SonsOfLiberty



You truly belive that Bush lies like "Hitler?" You really think Bush is anything like Hitler!? Don't let your hatred blind you, even I'm not stupid enough to call Kerry a Stalin or Mao...


Look, I'm far from being stupid. I'm not saying Bush is like Hitler. But I know that when a country feels threatened by others like the US feels atm, someone like Bush might think he is doing the right thing when he is really just fuelling the hatred more and more and getting the rest of the world pissed at the US. That is very dangerous because sometimes, humans (me, you and everybody else) can become foolish and do stupid things when the governing people are fuelling your hatred for foreign people and countries. The line between sane and insane is quite thin for some people you know...One year ago, I could hear people bashing Iraq, Afganisthan...and because of the war, people in US were starting to hate everybody that didn't want to go to war with them like France...and then, even french canadian since they talk french like in France. That's quite dangerous. I can't judge if Bush is doing a good work inside the US but I know that outside of it, he is making people angry by attacking them and wanting to control everything, even the UN. That is not the thing to do to calm things and make peace. If Bush's goal is to govern the whole world like he wants it, then someday, the whole world could go against him and I hope to never see that. I don't want a new world war conflict...



posted on Mar, 12 2004 @ 11:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by riouxda

Originally posted by orionthehunter
As far as Iraq goes, I say what American was worried about Iraq nuking us before the war started? I certainly wasn't. I was worried about the threat posed by him and his sons a decade from now from building up his country's economy and military. Iraq could have easily developed nukes after sanctions were dropped. Sadam and sons were just plain evil to put thousands into plastic shredders feet first so their screams would last longer. Seems like common sense to fight evil before it gets all powerful. On the other hand I don't like being lied to about WMD. I believe that was just a flat out lie to get enough public support to fight a growing evil threat. Most sane people would not want to fight a nuclear war later on with Iraq. I believe Sadam or sons would have started a nuclear war given time so that justifies that for me. Just my opinion.



If Saddam and son were such a threat, why then did the US helped them so many years ago. Because they wanted their oil...But now that the US felt that they could lose that oil because they couldn't control Saddam as before, they decide to attack him using the WMD as a reason...but in reality, like you probably heard before, they just wanted to continue to get their oil. And the best way to do that is to take control of Iraq...Shouting to the world that it is because of the war against terror and because Saddam was evil and all... That's "BUSHit"


We wanted their oil? What, were you in a coma in the Cold War? You haven't a clue about it, do you? Your assertions make no sense. Did we have control of Iraqi oil? Of course not. Do we now? No, we do not. Is there any substance to your allegations? None whatsoever. Did everyone agree that Hussein was a danger to the U.S., everyone from Kerry to Bush to Clinton to most of the democrats attacking Bush no for political reasons? Yes, they all did, or at least they said that. Now, for political reasons, they forget the past and what they said. Did foreign intel connect Baath agents to Al Quada? Yes, they did.

Again, have we benefited in oil from any of the onsgoings, from the Cold War to now? Only in a stable and non-Soviet controlled Middle East.



posted on Mar, 12 2004 @ 12:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Thomas Crowne

We wanted their oil? What, were you in a coma in the Cold War? You haven't a clue about it, do you? Your assertions make no sense. Did we have control of Iraqi oil? Of course not. Do we now? No, we do not. Is there any substance to your allegations? None whatsoever. Did everyone agree that Hussein was a danger to the U.S., everyone from Kerry to Bush to Clinton to most of the democrats attacking Bush no for political reasons? Yes, they all did, or at least they said that. Now, for political reasons, they forget the past and what they said. Did foreign intel connect Baath agents to Al Quada? Yes, they did.

Again, have we benefited in oil from any of the onsgoings, from the Cold War to now? Only in a stable and non-Soviet controlled Middle East.


Who do you think helped to put Saddam where he was?? The US government!! And why that? Because the government was in good term with him and knew that they would get their oil. I'm not saying that they controlled the oil directly. But they knew they would get their oil so, they didn't worry too much about Saddam or what he could do to the people there. And then, when they start feeling that Saddam could be a threat for the oil distribution to the US, they want him gone!! And why that? Because they want to put someone else there as a leader...Someone they will thrust and know that they will be able to continue to get their oil. You will tell me, would you prefer to not receive the oil from Iraq and be in trouble, not being able to use your car?? Of course not, but why do you think the middle-east countries have so much anger against the US to do such things?? Because we want to control them. If we would just let them do whatever they want with their resources and be at peace with them, do you think terrorism against the US would still exist?? I don't think so, I think the world would be a safer place to live in. Why not try to find new energy sources then? So that we wouldn't need them anymore...Because most of the big distributors of oil in the world are american companies...They don't want that...They want to make money so, they are the one who will continue to finance everything they can so that they can continue to get their oil and make money...They don't care if it causes war...as long as they make money...money...money...It controls the world...Let's invent a new reality show...A gun is given to someone with someone else in front of him...We offer him 100 million dollars if he kills the guy...if he doesn't, he stays as he is now...Do you think the guy would kill the other?? I know some wouldn't do it but, for 100 million dollars, I wouldn't be surprise to see someone killing someone else...Why that? Because money sadly rules the world now...Which is why we will have more and more wars in the future because of it...it is just the beginning of it all!

Anyway, I'm not saying that to offend you personnaly Thomas or anyone else...It is just my opinion...also, I get pissed easily when I see our governing people do things who are not in the interest of humans but in the interest of money. ANyway, sorry if I sound pissed or something... Have been in a rush at work lately... I need a break! See, I can smile too!
Later!

[Edited on 12-3-2004 by riouxda]



posted on Mar, 12 2004 @ 12:52 PM
link   
Hmmm, we helped Saddam (Iraq) against Ayatollah Komanei (Iran) because Saddam was the lesser of two evils, at the time. We helped the mujahideen (Afghanistan) against the communists (Soviet Union) because it was the lesser of two evils at the time.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join