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.

 

Bush Hate?

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 15 2004 @ 06:13 PM
link   
Hey, I have been gone for a while (out of country)
and I was just wondering why so many of you hate Bush so bad. Could somebody please give me a serious answer.

No sarcasm please, if you do I will post this over again.
I tried for the same question somewhere else and all I got was a bunch of kids. So if an adult would like to write as an adult (meaning no name calling or anything imature like that) just full logical reasoning I would greatly appreciate it.

Thanks




posted on May, 15 2004 @ 06:20 PM
link   
I have no hate for Bush. I haven't agreed with everything he has done, but I do respect that he has done things and stood for things that may not have been the "popular" thing to do. I believe that for the most part he has said and done what he believes, not necessarily what the party tells him to believe.

I have seen other politicians change their tune when it was politically important to do so. Dubya may have ruffled some feathers here and there, and he's not perfect, but he has at least not wavered from his stance on topics.



posted on May, 15 2004 @ 06:25 PM
link   
That is what I am looking for, I would like to see more though, I know the Bush haters are out there. Please respond and tell me using real logic. Opinions do not count. Thank you.



posted on May, 15 2004 @ 06:29 PM
link   
I don't hate him. I don't really hate anyone. However, I do see him as being very dangerous with his gung-ho mentality mixed with his almost fanatical religious beliefs.



posted on May, 15 2004 @ 06:39 PM
link   
Seriously?

I think most people who think he's "the devil" are much like emoticons.

They can only see through the filter of emotion they place upon specific topics (one such topic is abortion).

Most calmly dislike or disagree with him, only the type above "hates" him, although I think they don't comprehend the full meaning of the word.



posted on May, 15 2004 @ 06:56 PM
link   
I dont hate him, I just feel he is under qualified to be in the US Gov, and over qualified to be in prison................

I hope you dont want me to go into that.

[Edited on 15-5-2004 by All Seeing Eye]



posted on May, 16 2004 @ 12:25 AM
link   
Let's see, where to begin:

1. He allowed the passage of the Patriot Act, which allows citizens to be classified as aliens if they do something "against the US". That right there is enough to warrant his death. To elaborate, the Patriot act allows more cooperation between the FBI and CIA. Policy has always been that FBI is for investigation of internal (to the US) suspected criminals. CIA is for external intelligence to aid the military. We are supposed to be governed by civilians, not military people. The co-mingling of FBI and CIA is dangerous. The military should NOT be gathering intelligence on citizens.

2. He is guilty of dereliction of duty in the US military. No one can remember serving with him. A member of a famous family from Texas, his ancestors were Senators and the like, and nobody remembers serving with him? Come on....

3. He is dumb. He said, "the problem with the French is that they have no word for entrepreneur. Duh, thats a French word!!

4. He is a flip-flopper. After 9/11 he said "catching bin-Laden was the highest priority. Six months later he said that "bin-Laden was unimportant, the war on Terror was much wider than bin-Laden, and that bin-Laden didn't really matter anymore.

5. He's spent hundreds of billions of dollars rebuilding Iraq's infrastucture, but would never spend that to help Americans.

6. He invaded another country "pre-emptively" which is totally against the constitution.

7. He's racist. In the 2000 primaries, he showed his racism by black-balling McCain in South Carolina. His campaigners made the statement that McCain and his wife had adopted a "black" baby. In fact, McCain and his wife adopted a child from Bangladesh, which is not a country of "black" people.

Is that enough already?



posted on May, 16 2004 @ 12:32 AM
link   
Don't forget the whole Florida vote thing. It's too complicated
to get into, just google it and form your own opinion. My opinion is that his brother fixed a lot of ballots, and the court that decided the election was in his pocket. And you know how everyone is so hot on these voting machines, the ones with no paper trails? The head of a company trying to sell voting machines in Ohio told Republicans that he is "committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the president next year."



posted on May, 18 2004 @ 11:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by nemesis9
Let's see, where to begin:

1. He allowed the passage of the Patriot Act, which allows citizens to be classified as aliens if they do something "against the US". That right there is enough to warrant his death.



I stopped reading your post after this ludricrous and juvenile statement. Despite your "facts", this is exactly the kind of emotional outburst of a post that Superkyle asked not to see. (The kind of post that The Colonel is famous for) Judging by your argument you are obviously a liberal. Liberals use and appeal to emotions when making an argument, Conversatives try to lay their case out using fact. I'm not saying one way is better than another, this is just how it is.

I find the misplaced hatred of Bush by the left to be simply breathtaking. This man is NOT Adolf Hitler despite your claims. He is not a Nazi.
Let's get something straight...the bad guy in Iraq was SADDAM HUSSEIN, not GEORGE W. BUSH.

-- Under who's regime did many hundreds of thousands of people die as a result of his actions - the vast majority of them Muslims? Saddam Hussein NOT George W. Bush.

-- According to a 2001 Amnesty International report, "victims of torture in Iraq are subjected to a wide range of forms of torture, including the gouging out of eyes, severe beatings and electric shocks... some victims have died as a result and many have been left with permanent physical and psychological damage." Who led the charge? Saddam Hussein NOT George W. Bush.

-- Who has had approximately 40 of his own relatives murdered? Saddam Hussein NOT George W. Bush.

-- Allegations of prostitution used to intimidate opponents of his regime, have been used by the regime to justify the barbaric beheading of women. Who's regime? Saddam Hussein's NOT George W. Bush's.

-- Documented chemical attacks by the regime, from 1983 to 1988, resulted in some 30,000 Iraqi and Iranian deaths. Who's regime? Saddam Hussein's NOT George W. Bush's.

-- Human Rights Watch estimates that his 1987-1988 campaign of terror against the Kurds killed at least 50,000 and possibly as many as 100,000 Kurds. Who's campaign? Saddam Hussein's NOT George W. Bush's.

-- The regime used chemical agents to include mustard gas and nerve agents in attacks against at least 40 Kurdish villages between 1987-1988. The largest was the attack on Halabja which resulted in approximately 5,000 deaths. Who's regime? Saddam Hussein's NOT George W. Bush's.

-- 2,000 Kurdish villages were destroyed during his campaign of terror. Who's campaign? Saddam Hussein's NOT George W. Bush's.

-- Since the beginning of Operation Iraqi Freedom, coalition forces have discovered military warehouses filled with food supplies meant for the Iraqi people that had been diverted by who's military forces? Saddam Hussein's NOT George W. Bush's.

-- The UN Special Rapporteur's September 2001, report criticized the regime for "the sheer number of executions," the number of "extrajudicial executions on political grounds," and "the absence of a due process of the law." Who's regime? I think you get the picture...



posted on May, 18 2004 @ 11:45 AM
link   
Whoa! Now hold the phone here. I'm neither left nor right. I don't like Bush or Kerry. I vote for the person who I think is honest and can get the job done. So far neither of them have proven to me that they can do so. Bush has not proven anything to me. Nor has Kerry. I'm neither Republic nor Democrat. I don't hate Bush but I don't like him either. I don't like Kerry either. Open your eyes people. What has Bush done for us? The economy has not improved much. Gas prices continue to rise. Don't even get me started with taxes. And the pointless war in Iraq? Please. I don't think Kerry could do any better.



posted on May, 18 2004 @ 11:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by Homer Jay

Liberals use and appeal to emotions when making an argument, Conversatives try to lay their case out using fact. I'm not saying one way is better than another, this is just how it is.




First off, both sides appeal to both emotions and facts...
one side is not "better" than the other...

and judging by YOUR statements I could surmise that you are a republican... But that's not the point here...

I am not a lefty or a righty... In November I am gonna vote who I think is best for the job.

No, I don't like Bush... and I think that the Patriot act is the worst thing to happen to the average American in a looong time. But I don't think that it really mattered who was in the white house this term, because I think that the Patriot Act would've been passed regardless of who was president.

In fact, I think that alot of what has happened over the past 4 years would've happened regardless of who was in charge.

I guess me not liking Bush stems from the fact that I just don't like the dude.



posted on May, 18 2004 @ 12:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Homer Jay



-- According to a 2001 Amnesty International report, "victims of torture in Iraq are subjected to a wide range of forms of torture, including the gouging out of eyes, severe beatings and electric shocks... some victims have died as a result and many have been left with permanent physical and psychological damage." Who led the charge? Saddam Hussein NOT George W. Bush.



So it's OK for bush to allow the torture (including, as mentioned above, electric shock and severe beatings) of Iraqi people as long as we don't permently damage them? And because Saddam did it first? And define psychological damage... I would imagine ANY kind of torture would leave some sort of psychological damage.




posted on May, 18 2004 @ 12:04 PM
link   


I guess me not liking Bush stems from the fact that I just don't like the dude.

I'll second that. When he campaigned in 2000 he reminded me of a weasle. My mom said the same thing. No matter how hard he tries, he doesn't strike me as an honest person, or a very intelligent one.



posted on May, 18 2004 @ 12:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by NothingMakesSense
No matter how hard he tries, he doesn't strike me as an honest person, or a very intelligent one.


He's a politician aint he? I dont trust ANY politician since most of them sell their souls to the devil when they decide to run for office.



posted on May, 18 2004 @ 12:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ocelot
He's a politician aint he? I dont trust ANY politician since most of them sell their souls to the devil when they decide to run for office.


Politician..trust? those two words do not go together



posted on May, 20 2004 @ 05:37 PM
link   
i don't hate him, i don't know him personally. i do however disagree with practically everything he agrees with, and it has gotten to the point where i get sick to my stomache everytime i see him on tv. i won't get into it, everyone else has already.



posted on May, 21 2004 @ 07:23 AM
link   
I've met the guy several times and he's the arrogant Fratboy he appears to be. I worked for the TV station that released the info about his OUI arrest. I was there... no we don't work for the Democratic party nor any other party. The reporter was not a plant as has been said, she was just a darned good rporter who followed up on information she overheard. This is the most secret administration we've had...and secrets like these usually aren't in our best interests...



posted on May, 21 2004 @ 12:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gislebertus
This is the most secret administration we've had...and secrets like these usually aren't in our best interests...


I'll second that idea



posted on May, 21 2004 @ 02:04 PM
link   
Always has been. It was a need to get a world power family's candidate on the throne again, nothing more.

Logically why he should not be supported?

Presided over the loss of approximately three million American jobs in his first two-and-a-half years in office, the worst record since Herbert Hoover.

Overseen an economy in which the stock market suffered its worst decline in the first two years of any administration since Hoover’s.

Taken, in the wake of the terrorist attacks two years ago, the greatest worldwide outpouring of goodwill the United States has enjoyed at least since World War II and squandered it by insisting on pursuing a foolish go-it-almost-alone invasion of Iraq, thereby transforming almost universal support for the United States into worldwide condemnation. (One historian made this point particularly well: “After inadvertently gaining the sympathies of the world 's citizens when terrorists attacked New York and Washington, Bush has deliberately turned the country into the most hated in the world by a policy of breaking all major international agreements, declaring it our right to invade any country that we wish, proving that he’ll manipulate facts to justify anything he wishes to do, and bull-headedly charging into a quagmire.”)

Misled (to use the most charitable word and interpretation) the American public about weapons of mass destruction and supposed ties to Al Qaeda in Iraq and so into a war that has plainly (and entirely predictably) made us less secure, caused a boom in the recruitment of terrorists, is killing American military personnel needlessly, and is threatening to suck up all our available military forces and be a bottomless pit for the money of American taxpayers for years to come.

Failed to follow through in Afghanistan, where the Taliban and Al Qaeda are regrouping, once more increasing the threat to our people.

Insulted and ridiculed other nations and international organizations and now has to go, hat in hand, to those nations and organizations begging for their assistance. ( Don't forget: these are our customers in the world market)

Completely miscalculated or failed to plan for the personnel and monetary needs in Iraq after the war, so that he sought and obtained an $87 billion appropriation for Iraq, a sizable chunk of which is going, without competitive bidding to Haliburton, the company formerly headed by his vice president.

Inherited an annual federal budget surplus of $230 billion and transformed it into a $500+ billion deficit in less than three years. This negative turnaround of three-quarters of a trillion dollars is totally without precedent in our history. The ballooning deficit for fiscal 2004 is rapidly approaching twice the dollar size of the previous record deficit, $290 billion, set in 1992, the last year of the administration of President Bush’s father and, at almost 5 percent of GDP, is closing in on the percentage record set by Ronald Reagan in 1986.

Cut taxes three times, sharply reducing the burden on the rich, reclassified money obtained through stock ownership as more deserving than money earned through work. The idea that dividend income should not be taxed—what might accurately be termed the unearned income tax credit—can be stated succinctly: “If you had to work for your money, we’ll tax it; if you didn’t have to work for it, you can keep it all.”

Severely curtailed the very American freedoms that our military people are supposed to be fighting to defend. (“The Patriot Act,” one of the historians noted, “is the worst since the Alien and Sedition Acts under John Adams.”)

Called upon American armed service people, including Reserve forces, to sacrifice for ever-lengthening tours of duty in a hostile and dangerous environment while he rewards the rich at home with lower taxes and legislative giveaways and gives lucrative no-bid contracts to American corporations linked with the administration.

Given an opportunity to begin to change the consumption-oriented values of the nation after September 11, 2001, when people were prepared to make a sacrifice for the common good, called instead of Americans to ‘sacrifice’ by going out and buying things.

Proclaimed himself to be a conservative while maintaining that big government should be able to run roughshod over the Bill of Rights, and that the government must have all sorts of secrets from the people, but the people can be allowed no privacy from the government. (As one of the historians said, “this is not a conservative administration; it is a reckless and arrogant one, beholden to a mix of right-wing ideologues, neo-con fanatics, and social Darwinian elitists.”)



posted on May, 21 2004 @ 02:24 PM
link   
I didn't realize this thread's title changed from Bush hate? to who's worse....Saddam or Bush? Of course Bush is going to look like a girl scout when compaired to SH.



new topics




 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join