If George Bush is running for office again, would you vote for him?

YES! I would vote for GW for the sole reason that my mother-in-law hates him so much! Just so I could say at the dinner table, "Yeah Ma, I voted for Bush! So what?"

And I know he would never win so why not?

As ATS is overwhelmingly - almost hysterically - left-wing, the OP knew the answer to this. This is just another thread for people to express how much they hate George Bush so everyone can agree with each other and talk and let everyone see that they are in the "in crowd" of Bush haters.

His image is way beyond repair, its now up to history to judge him.
I have to admit myself that just hearing his name causes me to just shake my head but at the same time I understand that he has been under enormous pressure since very early on in his presidency.
I mean come one, we gotta cut the guy some slack, he presided over the US when it came under one of the worst attacks in our history after being in office just a few months.
He made a decision and mistakes but he has stuck with it even at the risk of his own popularity but he never wavered.
I cringe at the number of deaths of soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan and it may have been a mistake to go to Iraq to begin with but it would have been a HUGE mistake to back out once we commited.
If we the military would have left when everyone screamed for them to there would have been a huge power vacuum, who knows who wouldve filled it.
I admire him for that but it isnt enough for me to wish he had a 3rd time in office.
For the record, i havent voted since 1992, when i voted for GHW Bush.

Oh c'mon. You know as well as everyone else that GW is a total moron. Whether intentional or not, he will go down as the worst Prez in history next to Carter. Sorry lowlevel, but the man did bring it on himself, starting with his right hand man, Cheney, the hermit VP.

Originally posted by Anonymous ATS
reply to post by Cio88

 

How could anyone do worse than continuing to sit and read "My Pet Goat" for 7 minutes while we were under attack!! 7 minutes is a long time...a long time...

He was advised by people behind the camera not react suddenly to the news that we were under attack. Actually, he was the last adult on location to hear the news. People were holding signs up advising him to remain calm in front of the children. The teacher of this class actually said that, while she didn't vote for him, she could have after she witnessed the calm resolve he displayed in front of her class after recieving such devastating news.

And besides, what could have done? Jumped up and yell, "Send in the Marines!" Now that kind of action would've been extremely immature and a display of low intelligence.

[edit on 7/1/09 by Intelearthling]

hell no watch zeitgeist lol

Wouldn't the answer depend on what office he was seeking? Dogcatcher? Sure. School board? Probably not.

The future will hold him as one of the greatest presidents ever!

[size=20] No.

I wouldnt vote for the man if it was between him and nixon... and im serious... the obvious corruption, the connection between him and these wars.. his oil connections.. his close family relationship with the Bin Ladens in the past... the obvious lies about the Iraq war.. and yet folks here prefer to focus on already debunked propaganda blogs about Obamas brith place... I mean seriously why are folks so in denial?

Originally posted by LowLevelMason
As ATS is overwhelmingly - almost hysterically - left-wing

This is indeed a funny one... its almost as funny as the other hypocritical comments neo-apologists have come up with... Look around buddy, do a thread comparison, you will see this board is overwhelmingly rightwing, I need say more, the evidence is in the sheer number of threads and posts. Lets not forget the active members here... why dont you check where they stand.... youll find the vast number a strong pro-isreal, conservative, Obama hating folk.

First the forum is flooded with anti-left fear mongering threads for the majority part of last year, then after years of supporting Bush and the Iraq war, the conservative majority here attempt to "liberalize" the last 8years through threads to obviously distance themselves, and now theres the claim that despite the sheer flood of anti-left pro isreal posts on here, this place is overwhelmingly liberal.. and obviously the individuals on here who claim this will make no examples.. lets just repeat it over and over again..

Id say theres an attempt here to repeat false messages until it becomes too common to debunk... typical disinfo tactics... and you dont have to be agent to pull of this with an organized online group... you just have to be passionate to the point of denial.... the majority claims to be the minority so everybody follows.

-over 4000 patriotic americans, gone forever... all for a war of denial...
-The overwhelming evidence that points to how false the Iraq war was..
-The closeness of Bush and the Bin Ladens...
-The alliances between both the Reagan and Bush Snr administrations of the 80s and early 90s with Iranian officials...
-The connect between the Bush family and oil, haliburtens involvement in the war on "terror"
-Over a trillion tax payer dollars... wasted... on a war of lies... that has not ended.... and yet neo apologists here prefer to blame the liberal congress elected two years ago... as if this all happened a mere two and a half years ago..

And yet you want to go on about some imaginary alternative universe where this forum is "overwhelmingly liberal" with nothing (as usual from you folks) to back it up.

[edit on 7-1-2009 by southern_Guardian]

I would absolutely vote for George W. again.

That being said, I am hopeful for the Obama presidency and I wish him - and us - good luck.

simple enough to be retarded?

if W's "reaction to 911" (wtf-ever that means) was so graceful, i'd hate to see what would be considered awkward.

i agree with with sisko & picard.

edited for brevity.

[edit on 7/1/2009 by gravykraken]

Originally posted by gravykraken
simple enough to be retarded?

simple enough for you left wings to choose, and more answerable liberally!

reply to post by the_black_project


hey thanks for the blind assumption, broad-stroked generalization, and overtone of superiority. you managed all of that in a one liner!

im no leftist, but thanks for reminding me why i don't like either. extremism is for fanatics.

(psssst... its 'retarded' because it is moot. immaterial, irrelevant... pick an adjective.)

Originally posted by Irish M1ck

Originally posted by ItsTheQuestion
Reread the entire thread, sweetheart; I never said that you did call me a "conservative."

You're a grown man and you're calling another one sweetheart?

Yes. Because it's a funny way to reveal how seriously I'm taking you. However, like much humor, it also reveals that I chose to engage in a petty form of insult. So on one hand, it's still funny; on the other hand, perhaps I should carry myself in a more mature way.

I will say this, however. I am secure enough with myself that I can call you "sweetheart" and not have to question anything about myself, except maybe, as I just mentioned, my own maturity level. That said, I'm making a conscious choice here to address your post, because you've called me out.

And I've responded.

Yeah, you do now, because somebody was kind enough to provide a link with that information.

Actually, no. I learned about it when people started saying it 12 months ago like I told you. You're about a year late with the Kool Aid joke buddy if you are looking for originality.

Well, I guess I'm not as hip as you. Next time I'm looking for the newest in new insults, I'll u2u ya. Also, if you could send me a link to the web-site that informs you when jokes run out, I'd appreciate it. A whole year, huh?

I think you'll find that you are far from the first to say.

The "first to say"....what, exactly? The first to say that somebody seems to be drinking the proverbial Kool-Aid? I never claimed to be the "first." See, every single day I use words and phrases that are not "mine". It's called language. You're familiar with it, too!

In fact, people have been saying "drinking the Obama kool aid" far too much on this board, which is why I asked you to stop to begin with. It's annoying.

Well, I'd say how sorry I am to have annoyed you, but that would be disingenuous of me. Besides, I never put the word "Obama" next to the word "Kool-Aid" [and yes, "Kool-Aid" is one word, not two, because it's hyphenated] [just in case you were going to try and "get" me on that]

Your obvious disdain for "conservatives", whomever you assume and stereotype them to be, reveals what such thinking, and more importantly, FEELING is actually all about.

You remind me of another person on this board who likes to pretend like he knows who I am. I don't have a disdain for all conservatives, but it was conservatives who coined the phrase, "Drinking the Obama Kool Aid".

Technically, I doubt you actually know who "coined the phrase." A "conservative", by your definition? That's a good possibility. Of course, you don't actually know. But you've helped me make the point that you have contempt for so-called "conservatives", because, by your guesswork, it must have been one of those people who came up with the idea of Obama Kool-Aid. Liberals are much more loving and clever.

Myself, I don't get to hung-up on these labels, especially in terms of people's political affiliations. See, the thing about labels is that once you start using them on people, they will invariably do or say something to defy the restrictions of said label. In my book, it's simply bad form. But, that's just me.

How it is that you are making such a huge deal out of this, I'll never understand.

That's fine with me. Some things you just don't want to understand. No harm, no foul. Now, I'm still not sure what constitutes a "huge deal" for you, but it really isn't important to me. I guess maybe "how" I'm making such a "huge deal" out of it is really for you to decide on, because you're the one who has chosen to label it as such.

You are a grown ass man that calls other men sweethearts,

Again, with that line of attack... I cannot be more clear about this than to express to you, with the utmost sincerity, that nothing I said, no word I chose to use in any way contradicts who I know myself to be. If you haven't figured it out yet, it was meant in jest. Kind of like if I called you "poor baby" or something to that effect. And I do recognize the inherent conflict in using such words. And, the more I consider it, I feel as though I owe you a bit of an apology. If another man called me "sweetheart" in such a condescending way, I certainly wouldn't appreciate it. So, if I have offended you, that I apologize.

and cries when people kindly ask you not to say something that offends them.

Can you pass the Kleenex? Even though your suggestion of my having "cried" doesn't sit all to well with me, I concede that I had that coming, since you are still my sweet and sensitive little sugar booger. See, there I go again.

His younger brother is going to run in the next election....awesome.

Originally posted by The Scarecrow

Originally posted by the_black_project
This is a simple question that yields a variety of answers. Whether you love him or hate him, or somewhere in between, you always wonder what someone else would do. So, well, would you? If he was eligible, and running, would you vote for him?

Lol. Priceless response. Effn Priceless. And to answer the question of the OP... In the words of Whitney Houston, "HELL TO THA NAW!"

Originally posted by ItsTheQuestion

Originally posted by BlueRaja
reply to post by verylowfrequency

 

There's no comparison between the likes of Hitler/Bin Laden, and Bush. That's a pretty bleak understanding of history.

"Bleak"? Whatever you actually mean by that, if you're suggesting that it's unfair to compare Bush to Bin Laden and Hitler, then I disagree.

All three men serve the same master[s]. They're all pawns in the game. Their methodology was different, we're taught. What we're not taught--at least not in schools, on tv [it's absurd that television is actually considered a source of educational inforation, but it is]--is why these men were doing what they are alleged to have done? And, for that matter, how did they get to their respective positions of power?

The vast majority of humanity cannot bear to face the truth about all this. Instead, pass me a Diet Pepsi and hand me the gee-dang remote! Are you wiser than a fifth-grader?

Well seeing as how you're the arbiter of "truth" why don't you educate me, as you seem to think I'm operating at the 5th Grade level.

WOW, you guys sure don't want to let Bush go, love him or hate him , mostly people hated him, people will miss having him to gang up on.

It seems to me.

Have fun with that.

HELL NO!

To those of you who say yes....WOW.