Why do so many people on ATS hate Bush?

The "God told me to strike at Al Qaeda" quote may only be second-hand - second-hand from a very reliable source, mind you - but Dubya hasn't hesitated to invoke the name of the almighty.

Anyone remember this:

"I've heard the call. I believe God wants me to run for president.�

Balanced and rational.

Though I don't agree with all of Skadi's points on Bush, I think you were unfair in some of your criticism, CazMedia.

He is recalling retirted and IRR personell to fill the ranks of his stupid wars.
(They knew this could occur when they VOLUNTEERED for millitary service)

I'm pretty sure that these fine men and women joined the armed forces to defend their country, not act as pawns in Bush's Hollywood War Hero fantasy.

He is stupid as a lump of cow turds.
(opinion)

Yes, it's opinion, and yes, it's somewhat indelicately phrased, but c'mon, CazMedia - surely no-one is even trying to defend Bush's stupidity anymore, are they? The guy is a C-grade student, plain and simple - and, coincidentally, he's also plain and simple. That's convenient, huh?

He is clueless and doesnt seem to give a about the rest of us poor people.
(OPINION)

Yes, But opinion supported by a whole barrel-load of evidence.

He continually antagonizes potentially deadly enemies.
(So are there enemies that arent antagonistic? Are there Enemies that arent potentially deadly? If one has a potentially deadly enemy, you will devote constant vigilance to defence from them. Or do you think there is a time where one can "rest" from this vigilance and let your guard down?)

There were a lot of people who weren't enemies until Good Ol' Junior got into the White House - let's start with the French, shall we?

Hes really not the prez, Cheney is. Cheney pulls his strings.
(opinion, Fact is he is the actual President.)

No, he's not really the prez, Gore is. It's pretty simple mathematics. The fact that you guys haven't gone after him with pitchforks and flaming torches just proves how good the Bush junta is at lying to the American people.

He is an incompetant leader, a deserter, and a total moron.
(opoinion, untrue according to the law, opinion)

Opinion but obvious to everyone, untrue according to the law but true according to any decent person's judgement, utterly unarguable.

How informed is this voter to vote on such a pile of speculation, opinion and untruth....does anyone vote on the issues?

If you took off your Republican hat and actually looked at what this moron has done since he cheated his way through Inaugeration Day, I'm sure you'd share a lot of Skadi's opinions. I simply cannot believe that otherwise intelligent people are so blinded by partisanship that they'll try and re-elect Bush. You can't really be ignorant of what he is, I know you can't; and I also know that you can't say it out loud on this board, because Bush's GOP Henchmen will come to your house and break your kneecaps...

So how about this, CazMedia. Listen to your inner voice. When you stand in front of the ballot box in November, no-one will know if you vote for Kerry. That way, you can still wear you GOP badge, you can still protest about a Democratic President for the next four years, but at least you won't have placed your nation in the hands a of stupid, dangeours liar.

C'mon this bunch of Democracts are practically Republican in every important way, so it's not like you'd be betraying your right-wing values. It's perfect!



Editted for clarity and layout.

[edit on 1-7-2004 by StrangeLands]

Strangeland says,
"quote may only be second-hand - second-hand from a very reliable source,"
source relaibility is not in question per say...Second hand information is called HEARSAY and has no standing in a legal sense....LETS VOT ON HEARSAY!

Strangland questions my critique of,
quote:
He is recalling retirted and IRR personell to fill the ranks of his stupid wars.
(They knew this could occur when they VOLUNTEERED for millitary service)

"I'm pretty sure that these fine men and women joined the armed forces to defend their country, not act as pawns for Bush's Hollywood War Hero fantasy."

Blame Bush for what here?
Anyone that joins the millitary joins to serve in whatever capasity they are needed, according to whomever the leader is in office. Recruits are told of the fine print rules when they sign up. This "clause" in their contract if you will, existed long before Bush.

Strangelands commenting on the OPINION that bush is stupid.
"surely no-one is even trying to defend Bush's stupidity anymore, are they? The guy is a C-grade student, plain and simple - and, coincidentally, he's also plain and simple. "

If one is a C student, then that means that youve preformed your educational requirements in a way that is "average"....this is a relative way to score"intelligence" as it doesnt totally measure how smart you are, it also measures how well you met graduation criteria.

Are you trying to DEMEAN the majority of those of us that score C's thruought college and say that this would make us not qualified to become President? There have many plain simple people with low educational credentials, that have become great contributors to this nation...ABE LINCON RING A BELL? Again this is a USELESS way to try and legitimise a vote for President.

Strangelands attempts to justify another OPINIONabout Bush's lack of caring,
"Yes, But opinion supported by a whole barrel-load of evidence."
Evidence thast was not presented, and im sure most of which would be questionable as lack of caring is a floating point depending on who you ask what an appropriate level of care is. (again OPINION)

Strangelands struggles to attack Bush on negative atitudes twords the USA, "There were a lot of people who weren't enemies until Good Ol' Junior got into the White House - let's start with the French, shall we?"

While France certantly han not been very cordial twords US interests for some time now, i hadnt heard they had declaired the USA an enemy...in fact i thought we were still allies!? I consider France and Germany and Russia just as culpable for the Iraq mess (FOOD FOR OIL SCANDLE/erronious or false WMD information) for perpetuating the situation as the USA is for taking actions there. Dont think that becouse those other nations didn't "pull the trigger" in Iraq, that they werent up to their NECKS in what was going on there.

Strangelands discusses weather Bush is the President of the USA,
"No, he's not really the prez, Gore is. It's pretty simple mathematics.

Check REALITY dude!! Bush IS the President of the USA weather you like it or not......the #'s in the popular vote are MEANINGLESS in a society using a representative method to elect the President...Can you say electoral college? Hate Bush because you want to fantasize that he's not the President....Again how do some of you people cast your votes?

Strangeland, still trying to make OPINION into fact,
"
quote:
He is an incompetant leader, a deserter, and a total moron.
(opoinion, untrue according to the law, opinion)
Opinion but obvious to everyone, untrue according to the law but true according to any decent person's judgement, utterly unarguable.

I think "OPINION BUT," pretty much confirms that this reason to hate bush is based on OPINION, however lets pound this one home...
UNTRUE according to the law means that printing statements that are FALSE under the law, is SLANDER under the law....
Hate bush because of our Slanderous and Libel statements??? Please...
Just say"Vote based upon our lies" instead...LOL!

Strangeland states before i intterupt him,
"I'm sure you'd share a lot of Skadi's opinions. I simply cannot believe that otherwise intelligent people are so blinded by partisanship that they'll try and " LET ME HELP YOU HERE.
They'll try and oppose the Presidents reelection based on OPINION, SPECULATION, and LIES!!! Why dont you just throw darts at your ballot to make this decision? Id rather trust random chance than the reasons being given here by you and Skadi for not voting for Bush.

Strangeland tries to whip up some FEAR as a reason,
"I also know that you can't say it out loud on this board, because Bush's GOP Henchmen will come to your house and break your kneecaps... "
OOOhhh Im sooo scared...booga booga....LMAO!
Ill say what I please reguardless of what someone likes or doesnt. COME AND GET ME!

Strangelands urges me to vote by "Listen to your inner voice"
If I did that, there would be NO WAY IN HELL i would not vote for Bush based on any of the "criteria" we've just discussed....almost all of which is OPINION, SPECULATION, OR UNTRUTHS/MISSREPRESENTATION OF FACTS.
ALL of which are used to support an EMOTIONAL basis for justification of this position.

None of this INFORMS about the candidates stated positions, where they differ, where theyre similar....Nothing here actually talks about anything that the President has/has not done in TANGIBLE SPECIFICS, only over-hyped hearsay. THIS IS THE INFORMED, M.MOORE LOVING, BELIEVE ANY FANTASY THAT FITS OUR ADGENDA VOTERS TALKING HERE.....Believe anything, just dont vote BUSH!!

You said I was unfair in my critique, I hope I was twice as unfair with this one, as ive pretty much had to say everything twice since youve only restated the OPINION, SPECULATION, AND UNTRUTHS, from Skadi's post.

DENY OPINION, SPECULATION, AND UNTRUTHS! Oh yeah i meant DENY IGNORANCE!!!

Hm.

You might want to settle down there, CazMedia. I'd hate for you to burst something, and all those capital letters aren't very easy on the eye.

I have stated, time and again, evidence which shows Dubya is stupid. I didn't want to clutter up this thread by posting a selection of links again, but if you really insist, then I'm happy to. I do think it's amusing, however, that you deny Bush is stupid - and then try and explain why a stupid person would make a fine president. Isn't that interesting?

I'm glad that you think that Bush pursuing a personal vendetta and trying to establish some fictional War Hero credentials are appropriate uses of American military forces. Others - y'know, those who were more interested in the spirit of the law, rather than the abused letter - might disagree. But then, that would be no fun, would it? If you looked to the spirit of the law, Bush would never have been handed the Presidency anyway! It's another example, ladies and gentlemen, of the fine tradition of small-minded, miserly, embittered selfishness that has made the Republican party what it is today!

And lastly, I have no problem with C-grade students. I'm sure they're all good people who pay their taxes and live good, happy lives. Do I think that a C-grade student is smart enough to the President? Not in a million years! Look back through this thread to the conversation I had with jsobecky, CazMedia - and then tell me you really think that Dubya is qualified to run your country.

You can write it all off as lies and speculation if that's really what makes you comfortable, that's your right. After all, the only person you have to satisfy is yourself. I just hope that, when the anger wears off and you see more reports of American soldiers dying in Iraq, and you see your ignorant, dopey president being (rightly) ridiculed wherever you look, that you'll still be happy with your decision.

Long live America.

Strangelands please se my post "so you think Bush is dumb"

I read the new thread of the subject of Bush's intelligence, mwm1331, and I can't say it made me change my opinion.

Bush is stupid. The weight of overwhelming evidence - not to mention public opinion - is against you on this one.

I wonder, though - do you really believe he's not as dumb as he looks, or are you just stuck in a partisan rut? It's okay if you are, because I can name half-a-dozen Democrats who weren't willing to admit to Clinton's infidelity despite the fathomless oceans of evidence against him.

So, objectively - do you really think this guy is smart enough to be trusted with your country?

Actually strangelands I didnt direct you to the thread in an attempt to change your mind but rather in hopes that you would post your "evdence" there. In response to your question no I do not believe he is stupid. I believe that those who are opposed to his actions, policies, and politics advance that position because it sounds good and is easier than opposing or debating his policies. It seems to me that the entire argument for his stupdity is based on his verbal difficulties. While this can be indicative of a lack of intelligence in some instances I don't believe it is proof of such. It seems to me that in modern American politics the debate of a politicians positions and thier validity has been for the most part replaced with personal attacks and insults. It happened with Clinton, Bush sr, and Reagan, and is not limited to either party. I started the thread in hopes that people who believe he is stupid would attempt to prove thier point by discussing his policies and actions but thus far all I have seen are quotes of stupid things he has said. In my life I have seen some of the smartest people I have ever met say some of the dumbest thngs I have ever heard and while I have marveled at the inanity of thier comments it has not lessened my respect for ther intellect. It is easy to call someone stupid because it cannot be either proved or disproved, However in my opinion what is difficult is to debate the persons policies as this requires a deep understanding of the issues which influence those policies.

Case in point My wife has masters degree in biophysics and is earning her PHD. She is one of the smartest people I have ever known (vastly more so than myself) On one of our first dates she said that her town had a golf course with "all 9 holes" while I still kid her about it to this day it has not lessened my respect for her one iota.

I don't base my judgement of Bush's intelligence purely on his capacity to mangle the most straightforward of sentences, or his staggering lack of tact, and now isn't the time for more Dumb-Bush quotes.

On second thoughts, why not?

"Do you have blacks too?"
- Dubya voicing real Republican concern to Brazilian President Fernando Henrique Cardoso

"It's the executive branch's job to interpret law"
- Junior showing he should have spent more time watching The West Wing and less time watching Baywatch

"Anyway, I'm so thankful, and so gracious - I'm gracious that my brother Jeb is concerned about the hemisphere as well."
- Dubya saying... something, though I've no idea what, on June 4, 2001

"You teach a child to read, and he or her will be able to pass a literacy test.''
- Junior explaining where Mommy and Daddy went wrong on February 21, 2001

"I suspect that had my dad not been president, he'd be asking the same questions: How'd your meeting go with so-and-so? � How did you feel when you stood up in front of the people for the State of the Union Address - State of the Budget Address, whatever you call it."
- Bush The Lesser, Washington Post. It's okay, it's not like it's important or anything

Now you see why his White House handlers won't let him go near reporters without a script. And it's not just that he displays grammatical and syntactical inexactitude at every turn - he's just plain dumb, too!

• In February 2002, Dubya lectured the Japanese government that Japan and the US had been allies for "a century and a half", conveniently forgetting that little fracas in the 40s.
  
• During the same visit, Dubya confused the words "devaluation" and "deflation" when referring to the yen, causing panic until everyone realised that he didn't know what the hell he was talking about.
  
• During the 2000 campaign, Junior was unable to name the President of Pakistan - even though that country had just undergone a military coup and it was on the front page of every paper for a week.
  
• Or the Prime Minister of India.
  
• When replying to a journalist from Slovakia, George said "The only thing I know about Slovakia is what I learned first-hand from your foreign minister, who came to Texas." The problem, unfortunately, was the Dubya had met the Prime Minister of Slovenia, Janez Drnovsek, not the Foreign Minister of Slovakia. But hey, all those teeny countries sound the same, right?
  
• In 1994, on the touchy subject of religion, Dubya gave us all a thrilling theological insight. "The Episcopal Church is very ritualistic and it has a kind of repetition to the service. It's the same service, basically, over and over again. Different sermon, of course. The Methodist Church is lower key. We don't have the kneeling. And I'm sure there is some kind of heavy doctrinal difference as well, which I'm not sophisticated enough to explain to you."
  
• Bush laid out his plans for the middle east is plain, simple terms. "No one envisioned Saddam, at least at that point in history, no one envisioned him still standing. It's time to finish the task." Unfortunately, he said that in 1999, during an interview with the BBC. Isn't it weird how "evidence" which gave him cause to invade Iraq popped up just a couple of years later? What a coincidence!
  
• And lastly - in 2003, when Bush Jr. gave only his third press conference in three years, he was asked if he had made any mistakes. His full, uneditted reply was:
  

  
  "I wish you'd have given me this written question ahead of time so I can plan for it. Uh... You know, I just, uh... I'm sure something will pop into my head here in the midst of this press conference, with all the pressure of trying to come up with answer, but it hadn't yet. I, uh... I just haven't - you just put me under the spot here, and - maybe I'm not quick, as quick on my feet as I should be in coming up with one."

  No, George. You're not quick at all, are you?
  

If that isn't enough - and God knows it should be - this is man who cannot understand the simplest contradiction in his policies:

• He cuts taxes, but wants to reduce the deficit.
  
• He calls for a foreign policy based on diplomacy and alliance, then unilaterally asserts American power.
  
• He supports in-vitro fertilisation (which destroys embryos) but condemns embryonic stem cell research (because it destroys embryos).
  

Now this isn't the place for debating the relative merits of these policies - but the fact that Bush can believe all of them offers an interesting insight into the complexity of his thought.

So there you have it, mwm1331 - Bush shows himself to be stupid in every thought, word and deed. He is ignorant, uneducated, witless - phrase it however you like. After all the guy is a convicted drunk driver - how stupid do you have to be to think that driving a car while you're tanked up on al-key-hol is a good idea?

As I said before, after all this time it's no longer the job of Bush's opponents to prove he's stupid. I'm happy to debate the subject at any time. But surely the pressure must now shift to his supporters? Isn't it time that someone - anyone - found a single piece of evidence of Bush's intelligence?

I suspect it's an impossible task.

So there you are, mwm1331 - dumb, whichever way you look at it. And for all those who voted for Bush in 2000 believing he would be good for the country you love, there's an old adage you would do well to remember.

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me

Or, as your illustrious "Leader" would have it:

"There's an old saying in Tennessee - I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee - that says, fool me once, shame on - shame on you. Fool me - you can't get fooled again."

strange lands that was an excellent post. I will admit that I am not familiar with bush's Pre-presidential carreer. You have given me some excellent questions to ask and some interesting incidents to look into, and for that I thank you. It will take me some time to research and evaluate my opinion so do not intepret my silence as being in the spirit of ill will.

Strangelands, I am glad that you continue to contribute to this thread. You have time and time again brought it back from the brink of turning into unintelligent flame fest.

Allthough I don't necessarily agree with you that BWG is stupid, per se, some of those quotes are downright hilarious

mwm, thank you too for keeping this thread an intelligent one. Do you guys notice that this is one of the only Bush threads that has stayed that way? Now if we can only convince everyone else to keep their heads on straight.

Originally posted by CazMedia
Skadi that self proclaimed evil elf takes the following posisitions against President Bush...lets examine them to see what motivates this voter.


He is recalling retirted and IRR personell to fill the ranks of his stupid wars.
(They knew this could occur when they VOLUNTEERED for millitary service) Thats not the point. The point is he is using this power to recall for dubious means.

He is getting us involved in entirely too many wars and international problems. (Who determines the proper # of international problems to be involved with for a Nation if not its Leader? Is there a # that has been agreed upon?) This is a country BY the PEOPLE For the PEOPLE. The people, the measure of our resources, and common sense tell us how many conflicts we should be engaged in, not some half with college frat boy who cant spell the countries he wants to bomb.

He is stupid as a lump of cow turds.
(opinion) And a very valid one. He cant chew his food without choking, a phase I passed when I was 1 1/2 years old.

he is Skull and Bones.
(The relavence that can be proven is what? Speculative) Relevant enough, this paticular clan of wierdos from Yale seem to be in a pretty tight knit crime family, eh?

He knew about 9/11 and let it happen.
(speculative and NOT proven) Proven by simply rehashing just the media and his own reports of that day on 9/11, add to that his own behavior.

He is planning on permanently establishing us in Iraq.
(this has never been stated policy and Iraq's step twords independance with soverinty shows otherwise)Um pay attention. They are in the process of building 14 permanent bases in Iraq. And Dubya himself said we might be there even until 2010. And the transfer of "soverignty is a joke. The US still controls alot of the policy, see thread under War on Terrorism about the myths of the Iraqi power transfer.

He is gonna reinstitute the draft.
(speculative, millitary may request this from either candidate, and both have indicated they would approve more troops.)Speculation with alot to back it up. See 28 million given to SS board.

His whole cabinet are the worst bunch of crooks in high office since the Nazis. (OPINION....Where are the court cases, charges, anything ACTIONABLE as evidence, and why arent they proceeding NOW if this evidence exists?)Where were the court cases and trials in Nazi Germany for the Nazis? they didnt have them because they simply were above the law and could do whatever they wanted. Bush's Enron Connections, Cheney and Haliburton, the Liar Condi Rice, the Fascist Ashcroft who was defeated in an election by a dead man, lets not start on the trigger happy war monger Rumsfeld.

He is clueless and doesnt seem to give a about the rest of us poor people.
(OPINION)No, not an opinion. He has supported illegal immigration so his fat cat buddies can pay slave laborers from Mexico to mow thier lawns and work for scraps. His tax cuts did me no good, seeing how I never made enough money to pay much in taxes anyway, and he has supported outsourcing.

He is cutting fat deals behind the scenes with scam, shady govornments.
(Speculative at best...can you cite some of these deals? What criteria do you use to judge a government "shady"?)The Saudis. the real terrorists. He blacked out pages of information concerning the Saudis and 9/11. Pakistan. A military dictator, he cuts aid deals for his assitance in the war in Afghanistan. He bribes our allies into supporting the war with Iraq.

he has done nothing to increase security at our borders.
(Based on what comparrison? Today for example, the US Coast Guard will begin to inspect EVERY cargo ship approaching US ports as part of new homeland security steps. It only takes this one exmple to sink a "done nothing" argument.)Yes, and what about the Mexican border, hmmmmm? Theres a REAL problem. Since Mexico really doesnt to much about screening people who come in, it would be nothing for a terrorist to walk across the border like millions of illegals do every year.

He continually antagonizes potentially deadly enemies.
(So are there enemies that arent antagonistic? Are there Enemies that arent potentially deadly? If one has a potentially deadly enemy, you will devote constant vigilance to defence from them. Or do you think there is a time where one can "rest" from this vigilance and let your guard down?)There are enemies that can be dealt with in less bloody ways, more covertly, and through pressure on other entities. If you antagonize the wrong enemy, his allies will gather around and destroy you. See North Korea. Attack them, and you think China is gonna ignore it? Playing with big military exercises near China while we got a war going on in the middle east is not smart. Ask Hitler about the two front war.
he continues free trade with China.

His is a crazy religious fanatic who hears voice from god. Alot like Bin Laden. (opinion, I have yet to see where the "god told me" quote has been DIRECTUALLY attributal to Bush and not quoted second hand) I have. God told him to run for Office. God told him America has a duty to the world to "fight evil". Right after the 9/11 attacks.

Hes really not the prez, Cheney is. Cheney pulls his strings.
(opinion, Fact is he is the actual President.) He is the president in name. Cheney is the president in reality. Bush is his happy puppet.

He is an incompetant leader, a deserter, and a total moron.
(opoinion, untrue according to the law, opinion)According to his twisted version? Just like, according to the definition, Clinton did not have sex with that woman. Semantics. In reality, he took off. AWOL. Argue the letter of the law all you like, the actual reality of it, he took off and was pretty absent. Incompetant leader? That shows by his actions alone. And the miserable state of the union right now.

His mouth keeps writing America checks our cant cash.
(False, CONGRESS CONTROLS THE PURSE STRINGS OF AMERICA)You obviously dont get the meaning of that phrase. "Dont let your mouth write checks your ass cant cash." A term meaning dont start # you aint gonna be able to take the beating for. hes running around the world starting conflicts and animosities we cant afford to get involved in. He is making the world a deadly place for us.

I hope he burns in hell forever
(Spiteful)Well DUH!!!!!!!!!!

To sum this up...skadi's vote appears to break down to 5 innacurate statements, 7 statements of opinion, and 4 speculations...plus one Hateful remark relfecting hostility. There was nothing inaccurate in my posting. Some was opinion, some was fact, and my opinions can be based on facts that arent spun and sugared up by media.

How informed is this voter to vote on such a pile of speculation, opinion and untruth....does anyone vote on the issues?

Obviously, Im alot more informed and more willing to look deeper into things than you are. Im informed enough to know that voting Democrat and republican is the same thing, and will continue to vote for third party leaders, because, unlike you, I am informed enough to know this two party system is gonna bury America. And I know this current president we have is gonna start a war that is going to hurt us BAD.

Hmm, how to begin to keep this consise?

examination of Skadi's retort,

Issue of: recalling millitary to active duty.
SKADI: "The point is he is using this power to recall for dubious means."
Notice the word dubious thrown in there, this makes this a SPECULATIVE/OPINION statement, instead of a statement of fact.

ISSUE OF: # of wars and international problems.
SKADI: "This is a country BY the PEOPLE For the PEOPLE. The people, the measure of our resources, and common sense tell us how many conflicts we should be engaged in, not some half with college frat boy who cant spell the countries he wants to bomb. "
First of all, the popular vote means nothing. we have a representative democracy here in the USA, so the people dont get to rule, the LEADERS ELECTED do.
ALSO, the phrase "not some half with college frat boy who cant spell the countries he wants to bomb." is soo filled with opinion, that if you had an earlier point, its lost once you hit pure speculations.

ISSUE OF: He is as studid as a lump of cow turds
I said this was a statement of opinion, Skadi agrees..."And a very valid one" Skadi you agreed that this was opinion and not fact, then you try and justify this with choking on a piece of food?
1) Why would you try to back up something you just agreed was opinion not fact? what point can you prove?
2) How can you hate a person for choking on a piece of food?

ISSUE: skull and bones members
Skadi: Relevant enough, this paticular clan of wierdos from Yale seem to be in a pretty tight knit crime family, eh?
You provide nothing to show relavency here, then you again lapse into allegations that are SPECULATIVE at best. Where is evidence of skull and bones being related to any crimes?

ISSUE: pre knowledge of 9-11 and compliance with the event.
Again you offer only tenuous information that NOONE in the WORLD main stream media has EVER said had ANY valididty.
This remains speculative.

ISSUE: permanently establishing us in Iraq.
BIG DEAL, like the USA doesnt have bases all over the world, and multiples of them in some places? I say the red menace is dead, lets close ALL bases in Germany now that their not needed...so what....
How long do you think the USA has had dealings inside of Iraq?
a heck of a lot longer than we've been warring..

ISSUE: reissuing the draft
SKADI again agreeing with my speculation assesment..."Speculation with alot to back it up. See 28 million given to SS board. "
Defense of speculation is not a strong argument to say the least....
registering for selective service has been the law for a long time.. how does the fact that we have a selective service aparatus in place mean that it WILL be used again? It COULD, but there have been NOstatements from the WhitHouse that they would or will do this.
(Again agreed speculation)

ISSUE: His whole cabinet are the worst bunch of crooks in high office since the Nazis. (OPINION....Where are the court cases, charges, anything ACTIONABLE as evidence, and why arent they proceeding NOW if this evidence exists?)Where were the court cases and trials in Nazi Germany for the Nazis? they didnt have them because they simply were above the law and could do whatever they wanted. Bush's Enron Connections, Cheney and Haliburton, the Liar Condi Rice, the Fascist Ashcroft who was defeated in an election by a dead man, lets not start on the trigger happy war monger Rumsfeld.

This misdirection of the argument was supposed to throw me off the trail?
trying to show a linkage between the Bush administration and NAZI's is speculative and playing to fear. you then list a bunch of names, i guess to imply that these people are above the law.
Again, you are trying to contrast 2 unrelated things (BUSH/Nazi's) to draw a SPECULATIVE conclusion.

ISSUE: "He is clueless and doesnt seem to give a about the rest of us poor people.
(OPINION)No, not an opinion. He has supported illegal immigration so his fat cat buddies can pay slave laborers from Mexico to mow thier lawns and work for scraps. His tax cuts did me no good, seeing how I never made enough money to pay much in taxes anyway, and he has supported outsourcing. "
Id like to see any of these allegations proved. specifically support of illegal imigration workers
Also when did he support outsourcing?
The basic statement "He is clueless and doesnt seem to give a about the rest of us poor people. " is almost PURE OPINION. How do you know if he is clueless or not? Where is a directly attributal quote where the President states he supports outsourcing?

ISSUE: cutting deals with shady governments.
Youd like to say the saudis were cut a shady deal, yet you can only cite blacked out pages that WE DONT KNOW what they say? Talk about complete SPECULATION. you never listed any criteria for how one determines weather or not a government is shady....and you alledge bribery to our allies for their support....one way or the other, our allies are responsible for supporting us based upon their OWN assesment of the situation. No one but them decides on what they are going to do. even if we ask/bribe/threaten them...they ultimatley have the authority and responsibillity to decide their own actions...

ISSUE: done nothing about border secutrity.
So i gave you an example about something being done. this makes your statement FALSE, yet you then try to skip over than by MISDIRECTING the argument to bring up another related point....STICK TO THE POINT, which was at least on this one, youvebeen shown to have made a false statment and then try retracting it.

ISSUE: antagonising enemies.
SKADI: There are enemies that can be dealt with in less bloody ways, more covertly, and through pressure on other entities. If you antagonize the wrong enemy, his allies will gather around and destroy you. See North Korea. Attack them, and you think China is gonna ignore it?

At what point do you stop enemy states from messing with you...also how?
Yes there are non violent ways to deal with enimies, but the ultimate expression of DIPLOMACY is WAR.....without the threat of war, what keeps nations from screwing one another over? What makes a treaty enforcable....THE USE OF FORCE that backs up words with ACTIONS.
You mentioned N Korea..."Attack them, and you think China is gonna ignore it? "
Well YES actually.
It is in China's best intrest to keep making millions off of trade with the USA way more so than it is to constantly have to PAY N Korea relief. China knows that N Korea is a cold war relic and i think while they wouldnt ignore a US/NK onflict...they wouldnt jump in front of the USA to stop it either...actually i think the USA would let China take out NK, both to let China show world leadership in their region as well as to keep the USA from having to do anything. but this diverges off topic.
Your defense of this issue was FEAR based...ooh no,someone might fight
ooh noo....hiding never saved anyone or accomplished anything.

ISSUE: Bush religious fanaticism.
There is a whole thread going on where this "QUOTE" about bush saying "god told him so" has 3 pages, and you know what? NOONE there has yet to get closer than 3 steps to actually attributing this to Bush.
second hand hearsay is all iveseen here. remains opinion.

ISSUE: Bush not the President.
Skadi: He is the president in name. Cheney is the president in reality. Bush is his happy puppet.
SO you again admit that your first post was innaccurate (a lie)
THEN you go back to using OPINION that cant be substantiated. (Cheny really President, Bush happy puppet) CAN YOU NOT SEE why im asking questions about these points? look at all the factless OPINION.

ISSUE: incompetancy, desertion, intellect level
Trying to avoid the fact that youve stated OPINION when you say Bush deserted...by throwing the legal realitiy out the window by saying thats just semantics is rediculous. There was no legal dessertion found, Like it or not. You may cntinue to slander all you want,but thats all it is too...slander.
Incompancy is interpretational as "That shows by his actions alone. And the miserable state of the union right now. " are certantly debatable.
I feel his actions are acceptable, you do not....i dont feel things in the union are bad, you do. What criteria do you use to make this judgment?
intellect level....are you sure yours is up to this?

ISSUE: Putting the USA into situations that might be unmanagable.
(not being able to back up the talk with action)
Skadi: "hes running around the world starting conflicts and animosities we cant afford to get involved in. He is making the world a deadly place for us."
What criteria have you used to determine what can/cant be affordable to the USA. When for the past 25 years have you seen Americans not getting threatened and blown up in our embassies, barracks ect..? I think the world has been plenty deadly for Americans for a while, and we cant rubber pad our country to make it "all safe"...you think we can do that for the world?
This remains entirely speculation.

SKADI SAYS: " Obviously, Im alot more informed and more willing to look deeper into things than you are. "

Pretty arrogant statement considering ive pointed out at least 2 times where you "bent the truth" in this one...so much for being soo informed that you had to lie twice.

I'm not good with the quote function so lets hope this comes out right

Originally posted by StrangeLands
I don't base my judgement of Bush's intelligence purely on his capacity to mangle the most straightforward of sentences, or his staggering lack of tact, and now isn't the time for more Dumb-Bush quotes.

On second thoughts, why not?

"Do you have blacks too?"
- Dubya voicing real Republican concern to Brazilian President Fernando Henrique Cardoso

"It's the executive branch's job to interpret law"
- Junior showing he should have spent more time watching The West Wing and less time watching Baywatch

"Anyway, I'm so thankful, and so gracious - I'm gracious that my brother Jeb is concerned about the hemisphere as well."
- Dubya saying... something, though I've no idea what, on June 4, 2001

"You teach a child to read, and he or her will be able to pass a literacy test.''
- Junior explaining where Mommy and Daddy went wrong on February 21, 2001

"I suspect that had my dad not been president, he'd be asking the same questions: How'd your meeting go with so-and-so? � How did you feel when you stood up in front of the people for the State of the Union Address - State of the Budget Address, whatever you call it."
- Bush The Lesser, Washington Post. It's okay, it's not like it's important or anything

I have already explained that I feel quotes are not proof of a lack of intelligence so lets move on to the next part.

Now you see why his White House handlers won't let him go near reporters without a script. And it's not just that he displays grammatical and syntactical inexactitude at every turn - he's just plain dumb, too!

• In February 2002, Dubya lectured the Japanese government that Japan and the US had been allies for "a century and a half", conveniently forgetting that little fracas in the 40s.

I think this may be a matter of misinterpertation. the U.S and japan were allies both before and after WW2. I dont think that this statement shows a lack of knowledge of WW2. Rather I think it was a way of impressing on the japanese peple that except for the regrettable period during WW2 The U.S. and japan have very longstanding ties both economically and politically after all it was an merican admiral wh forced Japan to break out of its isolationism.

During the same visit, Dubya confused the words "devaluation" and "deflation" when referring to the yen, causing panic until everyone realised that he didn't know what the hell he was talking about.

Again I think this relates more to his language difficulty than his understanding of economics, except for switching words was the speech accurate? devaluation and deflation while different concepts do sound alike and if it was only a word transposition than this s not proof of a lack of intelligence. Also I have never disagreed that in many ways he exhibits symtoms of dyslexia, while I do not knoe whether the president is dyslexic or not even if he were it would still not be proof of stupidity.

During the 2000 campaign, Junior was unable to name the President of Pakistan - even though that country had just undergone a military coup and it was on the front page of every paper for a week.
Or the Prime Minister of India.

While I agree that a lack of familiarity of the leaders of two countries wth nuclear capabillities is troubling we do not know if it because he is not smart enough to retain information or if it is was a matter of focusing his education in foriegn affairs towards the middle east instead. While I agree that bush did not have a great understanding of foreign affairs prior to his campaign ( which in truth is no indictment as that information would have had lttle relevance to his duties as govenor of texas) A lack of knowledge is not indicative of itelligence only of the focus of ones education and interests.

When replying to a journalist from Slovakia, George said "The only thing I know about Slovakia is what I learned first-hand from your foreign minister, who came to Texas." The problem, unfortunately, was the Dubya had met the Prime Minister of Slovenia, Janez Drnovsek, not the Foreign Minister of Slovakia. But hey, all those teeny countries sound the same, right?

Again we face the subject of word transposition which I assume we will have to agree to disagree upon

In 1994, on the touchy subject of religion, Dubya gave us all a thrilling theological insight. "The Episcopal Church is very ritualistic and it has a kind of repetition to the service. It's the same service, basically, over and over again. Different sermon, of course. The Methodist Church is lower key. We don't have the kneeling. And I'm sure there is some kind of heavy doctrinal difference as well, which I'm not sophisticated enough to explain to you."

While I agree that lack of knowledge of the doctrinal differences between two churces is indictive of a lack of theological knowledge it neither supports or refutes either of our positions. I believe the last line was meant to be taken in the theologicl context only.

Bush laid out his plans for the middle east is plain, simple terms. "No one envisioned Saddam, at least at that point in history, no one envisioned him still standing. It's time to finish the task." Unfortunately, he said that in 1999, during an interview with the BBC. Isn't it weird how "evidence" which gave him cause to invade Iraq popped up just a couple of years later? What a coincidence!

I have never refuted that Bush intended to move against Iraq at the earliest opportunity I disagree that he manufactured that opportunity. Though I will fully admit that Bush was predisposed to viewing the available data in a way which would support his conclusions I have yet to see any evidence that he manipulated or manufactured that data. We are all after all products of our perception.

And lastly - in 2003, when Bush Jr. gave only his third press conference in three years, he was asked if he had made any mistakes. His full, uneditted reply was:

"I wish you'd have given me this written question ahead of time so I can plan for it. Uh... You know, I just, uh... I'm sure something will pop into my head here in the midst of this press conference, with all the pressure of trying to come up with answer, but it hadn't yet. I, uh... I just haven't - you just put me under the spot here, and - maybe I'm not quick, as quick on my feet as I should be in coming up with one."

No, George. You're not quick at all, are you?

I agree fully that Bush is not quick on his feet when it comes to formulating verbal respionse but agin I cannot objectivly view that alone as proof of mental febleness

If that isn't enough - and God knows it should be - this is man who cannot understand the simplest contradiction in his policies:

• He cuts taxes, but wants to reduce the deficit.

I dont see this in and of itself as a contradiction. If government spending is reduced by more than the tax burden then both goals are obtainable. While I agree tht it is highly ambitious I can not fault a president for his ambition.

He calls for a foreign policy based on diplomacy and alliance, then unilaterally asserts American power.

I disagree tht he unilaterally asserted power in Iraq or Afghanistn which is what I took this comment to be in relation to ( if I am mistaken please explain which actions you were referring to) In the case of afghanistan I remember no countries protesting our involvement there and in the case of Iraq ther was a resolution authorising the use of force. While france and germany wanted to wait before enforcing that resolution the fact remains that the U.S. did have U.N. authority to invade.

He supports in-vitro fertilisation (which destroys embryos) but condemns embryonic stem cell research (because it destroys embryos).

I think this difference can be explained by the fact that I.V fertilistion is done in pursuit of creating a new life. I.E. some embryos are destroyed but It is done to create a new life. whereas in stem cell research ther is no intent to create life. Although I disagree with this policy I do not see an inherant contridiction

Now this isn't the place for debating the relative merits of these policies - but the fact that Bush can believe all of them offers an interesting insight into the complexity of his thought.

But that is my point strangelands while I can understand a cursory examination of these policies would seem to create inconsistancies on deeper examination I do not believe they are
So there you have it, mwm1331 - Bush shows himself to be stupid in every thought, word and deed. He is ignorant, uneducated, witless - phrase it however you like. After all the guy is a convicted drunk driver - how stupid do you have to be to think that driving a car while you're tanked up on al-key-hol is a good idea?

Though I cannot under any cirmucstances condone drunk driving I myself when younger have been guilty of it. While I am still ashamed of it to this day, Its more about carelessness in my opinion than stupidity. While your post did give me food for thought in the end I cannot accept it as proof for the reasons gven above.

As I said before, after all this time it's no longer the job of Bush's opponents to prove he's stupid. I'm happy to debate the subject at any time. But surely the pressure must now shift to his supporters? Isn't it time that someone - anyone - found a single piece of evidence of Bush's intelligence?

I disagree I believ it is up to those who advance claims to prove them as the burden of proof must ALWAYS fll upon the accuser.


I look forward to your reply.

P.S sorry for the wierd structure but I have no clue how to use the quote function