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: What people think about him? Question from a Brit

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 2 2004 @ 02:29 PM
link   
Being from the Uk, I was just wondering what the American take on Bush is. will he be re-elected? Do people actually like they guy and if they don't/do why?? I don't really want to start a big arguement between rival bush and non-bush supporters, I'd just like to know what peoples views are.




posted on Jul, 2 2004 @ 02:57 PM
link   
my opinion:

bush himself is a playboy. his father sent him to texas to run his oil concerns and a football team in the tradition of "old" eastern money and their idiot sons. he's being willingly manipulated by the neoconservatives and their ideology which would have put reagan to shame, but not being a political thinker, bush doesn't see this. to say he is being manipulated by oil concerns is a moot point, because bush himself has vast interests in oil.

the problem as i see it isn't so much bush himself- the world is full of those who would accept the US presidency without questioning who exactly was handing it to him- the problem is in those who voted for bush because they viewed him as an "ordinary joe," when the office of the president should be reserved for the extraordinary.

-koji K.



posted on Jul, 2 2004 @ 03:22 PM
link   
The American people did not elect Bush President. The truth is that the election was stolen and the republicans (so called guardians of tradition, military strength, fundamental chrisitian beliefs, or as I like to call them, those that will support anything that has the word God, or bombs in it) should have been yelling the loudest because the right to vote and have that vote count was being made a joke by the Bush folks but no he was a republican so it was alright. So much for tradition and those commandments about lying and stealing.
The republicans like to say things like,
There has been no terrorist attack since 911,
they forget to mention that Bush was President during that time and it was the worst attack since Pearl harbor.
There is an upswing in the economy,
they forget to mention the economy was good when Bush took office and since he has been in office the homeless and joblessness has gotten terrible and that people whose unemployment has totally run out are not counted at all even though they have yet to find a job.
They like to blame the dificit on Clinton
They forget to mention there was money in the bank when Clinton left office and that the dificit is solely Bush's fault
Bush is a strong leader and has a backbone
all I can say is that Bush flew around Texas during the Vietnam war and has tried to hide his military records says thing like Bring them on while he is being guarded by secret service as for a backbone I want an MRI report.
Do I like Bush, do I believe the lies, NO!


rc

posted on Jul, 2 2004 @ 03:32 PM
link   
I would say I like Bush all in all. He has done a lot for our country and I think the media has a lot to do with the way people feel about him. Look at what he has gone through and our country is doing wonderful now, who knows how things would be if Gore was in office. I am worried if Kerry gets elected honestly, what will happen with our Homeland Security and National Security. Yes Kerry is talking more about education right now, but I think the big issues should be the concerns. Let the Governors of each state deal with the education. We are Military and we love Bush. Everyone I speak with that is in the military feels the same way.



posted on Jul, 2 2004 @ 03:42 PM
link   
Well Brit I'll tell ya...

You will get two responses.

1. George Bush bad. No like.

2. George Bush good. all liberals are communists.

He is neither. He is a man in a situation that he had thrown on him and all things considered should be commended for for just keeping all the balls in the air.



posted on Jul, 2 2004 @ 03:46 PM
link   
I think he started off as a lame duck President with very little charisma. I wasn't happy about the way he won either. I think his Administration could have done way more to prevent 911.

After 911, I liked how he showed the world that harboring terrorist is not an option by going into Afghanistan and wiping out the Taliban with our awesome military. After that I think he was manipulated into going into Iraq and that's when he completely lost me. Because of Iraq I think we totally lost our momentum on Terrorism and fueled even more hatred of Americans. I think he has weakened our military and has showed the world that we are as arrogant as they think we are.

We can only hope that Kerry (the lesser of the two evils) can rebuild our relationship with the rest of the world



posted on Jul, 2 2004 @ 03:50 PM
link   
Umm..... I hate him. Actually the ONLY person that i do hate (really im not joking). Hope he doesnt get relected.

[edit on 3-7-2004 by asala]



posted on Jul, 2 2004 @ 03:56 PM
link   
Bush's IQ resembles that of a slug. He makes Americans look bad with his cowboy rhetoric. The only platform he has to stand on is terrorism. The whole WMD thing didn' make it any better either. Not that John Kerry will save the day, but we need a change. All these elections are soap opera. It is already determined who will win anyway.

[edit on 7/2/2004 by MOOR45]



posted on Jul, 2 2004 @ 07:46 PM
link   
I have had the "lovely" experience of living under Bush both as Governor of Texas and as President. As Governor, he wasn't so much of a problem because the Gov has no power. When I heard he was running for Prez, I literally laughed my rear off. I mean, we ALL knew he was a playboy who was the black sheep of his family. I figured he didn't have a chance in Hades of actually becoming President of the U.S.
WHOA, was I surprised!
Do I like him? No, he's not my cup of tea.
Do I think he knows what he's doing? Nope. He's a mere figurehead who follows the lead of the neocons.
Is he an evil man? I don't think so. He's just a case of someone who is rather dense and doesn't mind being led by the nose. After all, the black sheep, is now the BIG DEAL in the Bush family.
Will I vote for him? No way. I didn't in the last election either. I wasn't a big fan of Gore's but I figured he would, at the least, be his own man.
I'm a native Texan (living in Phoenix AZ) and I guess I can't complain about Bush's accent etc. I've got one myself. That doesn't bother me. His buffoonery does bother me. (Clinton's little buffonery with Monica bothered me too). Somehow, I have this crazy little idea that the President of the US should act with some dignity. It's a perception thing. I think that's one reason so many people admired Reagan. I didn't agree with his political policies, but he did lend dignity to the office.
BTW, I'm an independent...so, I don't really have apolitical agenda in assessing George Bush.
joey



posted on Jul, 2 2004 @ 08:50 PM
link   
I don't like him. I don't like what he represents.
What he is: A souless, dull witted, shallow, lazy, irresponsible religious dummy, who isn't interested in the job of President, only the glory and perks.

What scares me: HE THINKS HE IS ON A MISSION FROM GOD!!! If reports are true he is turning into Mel 'wacko' Gibson in the Whitehouse. Cheney, who borders on flat out evil, manipulates him. Ashcroft is a christian NAZI who wants to make America a police state. He with a great deal of help from the congress (and this includes many Democrats) is selling legislation and regulations to the highest corporate bidders.

Our current politicians are mostly prostitutes for Corporate America.

As far as im concerned you can barbeque Bush and Cheney on a spit.

I don't support Kerry's national health care policy, but Kerry talks about science, not the ignorance of religious dogma. Kerry still has a soul.
He says we should look to science and not Fear.

The Bush operators like keeping us in fear, it makes us easier to herd around.
Well, that's my opinion.



posted on Jul, 2 2004 @ 09:32 PM
link   
wHile the liberals still calim he stole the election....if ol al only won his home state he would HAVE WON THE ELECTORATE...

I voted against al..

Bush..while not great on his feet...or infront of a camera...is to me..trying to do a tough job....

The recession was bound to happen...9/11 didnt help it..

The scandles of corporate america...well ITS ok to cheat these days...

aint trying to win if ya dont cheat right?

I got 600$ back from the govt...and it went to food n bills


The stock markets back over 10,000

no new attacks here in the states


the perss seems to hate him...so Ill give him the benefit o the doubt

Beefed up the cia. military budgets...good....

Kids play baseball on the white house lawn....good

so a few prisoners got beat, humbled....ok baddddd


whoopsie


I aint crazy about the airport screeners being govt empl....badd

He is spending money like its going out of style....badd


all in all....I say bettern n what ol al would have done....

I dont care for kerry..press loves him...as does old teddy k so bad


Iknow what im getting with bush....I dont with kerry...my 2 cents



posted on Jul, 2 2004 @ 11:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by goose
The American people did not elect Bush President. The truth is that the election was stolen and the republicans (so called guardians of tradition, military strength, fundamental chrisitian beliefs, or as I like to call them, those that will support anything that has the word God, or bombs in it) should have been yelling the loudest because the right to vote and have that vote count was being made a joke by the Bush folks but no he was a republican so it was alright. So much for tradition and those commandments about lying and stealing.



You are mistaken...PERIOD! Bush WON the recount. Our election system is based on electorial votes not the popular vote. It was set up this way to avoid the mass stupidity that the fouding fathers foresaw a long time ago. By any stretch of the means, BUSH won fair and square, even on the recounts. Even though Gore did his best to not allow the military vote. Bush won it even without the military vote. It was close but Bush did win.


Originally posted by goose
The republicans like to say things like,
There has been no terrorist attack since 911,
they forget to mention that Bush was President during that time and it was the worst attack since Pearl harbor.


Yes and the COLE, TwinTowers 1, Oklahoma City..what was done then? The precedent was set before Bush even announced he was running.



Originally posted by goose
There is an upswing in the economy,
they forget to mention the economy was good when Bush took office and since he has been in office the homeless and joblessness has gotten terrible and that people whose unemployment has totally run out are not counted at all even though they have yet to find a job.



The Economy was on its way down before the election, the dot com boom was over. Bush inherited a falling economy that was quickly headed for recession, and in his defense, it was one of the mildest ones we ever had and I know I lost my job during it.


Originally posted by goose
They like to blame the dificit on Clinton
They forget to mention there was money in the bank when Clinton left office and that the dificit is solely Bush's fault



Again you do not understand. Clinton inherited the Reagan/Bush1 boom. Even though he tried his damnest to screw it up with heathcare etc..Economies boom and fall, it happnes no matter who is in office.


Originally posted by goose
Bush is a strong leader and has a backbone
all I can say is that Bush flew around Texas during the Vietnam war and has tried to hide his military records says thing like Bring them on while he is being guarded by secret service as for a backbone I want an MRI report.
Do I like Bush, do I believe the lies, NO!


Well this is obvious, but you need to do better reasearch...



posted on Jul, 3 2004 @ 12:15 AM
link   
Rock hunter what you will discover, is that Americans are very divided on Bush. Which Americans like him?

Hard to say. I used to think it was as easy as geographical distribution, but its not. Look how many people from his own home state of texas cant stand him. So, location means nothing.

Generally the working class who have lost thier jobs arent too fond of him. Religous people usually support him, but many Christian churches are starting to dislike him.

So, its hard to say. some of the country likes him some dont.

I cant stand him. he has ruined our economy, inflated our debt, got us mired in wars that may never end, has done nothing to actually really secure our borders, and has stirred up hornets nests of potentially dangerous sentiments. That, and he is a religous whacko, not that much different from Bin Laden, since he pretty much believes he is hearing directives from god to keep going on this war.

And lets not forget that syndicate of criminals operating in his shadow: Cheney the Haliburton godfather, Rumsfeld the trigger happy bomb chucking war monger, Asscroft the fascist nut who was defeated in an election by a dead opponent, Condi Rice the liar and manipulator of truth. Wolfowitz.............bout the only person in his admin who isnt totally irredeemable is Powell, who, by all accounts, seems out of favor with the Bush admin.

Then of course there is Enron, and the whole stealing of the election. he wasnt elected. He schemed his way in.

He is bad news for America, and a bigger threat to us than the terrorists could be.



posted on Jul, 3 2004 @ 12:17 AM
link   
Skadi it is geographical, in fact it's almost evenly divided between anti-federalist states (usually states that are giving to the federal government) and federalist states (the states that receive money from the Feds).

Also amazing, you blame Bush for "ruining our economy"?

Just shut-up right there you know-nothing.



posted on Jul, 3 2004 @ 12:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by Rock Hunter
Being from the Uk, I was just wondering what the American take on Bush is. will he be re-elected? Do people actually like they guy and if they don't/do why?? I don't really want to start a big arguement between rival bush and non-bush supporters, I'd just like to know what peoples views are.

It probably won't happen in my lifetime but I would
like to eventually have people seeking to be leaders
in government tested with a battery of psychological
tests to determine if they are fit for office.
Projective tests attempt to measure personality
based on the theory that individuals tend to project
their own unconscious attitudes into ambiguous
situations. Given that most motivation for what
passes for "reasoning" in the human mind is hidden
from the persons' consciousness, it would seem
prudent that anyone placed into a position of great
power should be mentally competent to carry out the
duties in accordance with some acceptable measure
of mental health. Having any unconscious altitudes,
or projecting them into international situations,
should be considered a reason for not being given
power of public office. Bush has given ample
evidence in his comments and behavior that he has
done precisely these things in his position as
president. This does not mean to ignore plain outright lying
to implement goals, and that is an ethical issue of
great importance as well.
Objective tests should also be
administered to any potential candidate for public
office. One of the most widely used objective tests
is the Minnesota Multi phasic Personality Inventory
(MMPI), created in 1942 (and updated in the early
1990s) with the goal of defining a normal
personality and detecting specific deviance. The
test produces profiles that can predict class
inclusion for such psychological disorders as
schizophrenia, psychopathy, depression, and hysteria.
The MMPI has been useful in distinguishing
individuals with mental illness from the normal
population. Given that Bush has manifested behavior
and expressed beliefs that have many questioning
weather he may be mentally ill in some fashion, and
given the fact that he is in a position to exercise
supreme power over the fate of the world, any
rational observer should realize that Bush is
unquestionably the most dangerous man on earth at
this time. Should he be re- elected under these
conditions? NO! Instead citizens should seek a
candidate for office that will reinforce the
constitutional separation of powers in our
government, and emphasis each branch of government
to confine its' activities to what is
constitutionally allowed. A rolling back of all
powers usurped by the Central government should be
started, and of course government spending MUST be
curtailed to a sustainable level within the limits
of raising funds by legally acceptable means. I
could go on to say that no one placed into public
office should have ever been a member of any secret
society (for example Skulls and Bones) or any
organization that has in its' charter goals at
variance with the constitutionally authorized goals
of government (for example the Council on Foreign
Relations). We need to start enforcing severe
penalties for violating that last item, including an
automatic death penalty for anyone attempting to
subvert the intent of the US Constitution, and to be
enforced retroactively for any past deeds as well. As
I say, this won't happen in my lifetime, but perhaps
after once more the pendulum of human thirst for
power and control swings to totalitarianism again, this
time globally, and the inevitable rebellion against
it finally succeeds, the primitives in this 21st
century may evolve enough to begin a civilization of
note.



posted on Jul, 3 2004 @ 12:35 AM
link   
Mockan, perhaps you and I could agree on the issue of States' Rights.

However, you shouldn't deny Presidents or elected officials the right to belong to societies, our best Presidents were Freemasons.



posted on Jul, 3 2004 @ 01:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by FreeMason
Mockan, perhaps you and I could agree on the issue of States' Rights.

However, you shouldn't deny Presidents or elected officials the right to belong to societies, our best Presidents were Freemasons.
I wouldn't object to membership in
any benign "open" society or
organization, except of course where
affluent members may have been
recruited into more "elitist" secret
parts of said society attempting to
influence history for their own
ends. For example my stepfather was a
Third Degree Master Mason and Noble
of the Holy Shrine (Ancient Arabic
Order Nobles of the Mystic Shrine
for North America). And I believe he
held the position of Lodge Master at
one time. That does not mean he
associated with Elitists of any of
the inner circles. Before his
retirement from banking he was a
Vice President in charge of loans,
so certainly was in a position to
be useful to Masonic interests, but
he was also a man of high integrity.
And yes we can agree on States Rights,
but the Civil War decided that issue.
Since then the Central government has
continued to usurp powers allowing
it to violate the whole of States
Rights down to the present time.
When the country was divided into
the Federal Districts it provided the
geographical and demographic separation
of the country today for the Central
Government purposes. I am
a bit familiar with the divisions as the
WildLands Project and Agenda 21
required the redividing of the country
in part to remove once and for all
any resistance from advocates of
States Rights.



posted on Jul, 3 2004 @ 06:10 AM
link   
Thanks edsinger for proving my point! People who love Bush has an excuse for him, blame on the last guy in. any excuse is good enough just don't let Bush get any blame. Tell me when Clinton was in office did, you blame everything on the guy before him, well did you? No of course not for that was Daddy Bush, a republican. First of all the election was fixed, the one state it all hinged on his brother just happen to be in control of. And many people in districts with high democratic enrollment, peoples names were taken off, they took them off because they said their names were similar to felons, the polls also closed down earlier in those area. If you are in line to vote at 7 they have to let you vote, they did not do so. So a recount was a joke since many were not permitted to vote


[edit on 3-7-2004 by goose]



posted on Jul, 3 2004 @ 06:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by goose

Thanks edsinger for proving my point! People who love Bush has an excuse for him, blame on the last guy in. any excuse is good enough just don't let Bush get any blame. Tell me when Clinton was in office did, you blame everything on the guy before him, well did you? No of course not for that was Daddy Bush, a republican.
[edit on 3-7-2004 by goose]


But then again, at the time all the Clinton supporters did blame the last guy for anything that was wrong while giving credit for all the good to their guy. Hey, it's the nature of the beast. It only depends which side the tables have turned as to which side is doing this now. So people who loved Clinton had an excuse for him too (and still do amazingly enough).

It's funny, right after 9/11 how all of the most politically active democrats I knew pretty much said the same thing - I was stunned. Basically they expressed that under the circumstance it was a good thing Bush was the one in office because the only thing that mattered was we were under attack and none of them seemed to feel that Gore could have handled this particular critical situation.

One of these days I need to get around to giving them all a call to see if they remember saying it and would admit to it now. (I am sure I will get an earful now from the anti-Bush contingent here though.)


Oh, to answer the question. I actually voted for Clinton at the time and lived to regret it. I did vote for Bush this time around and still have no regrets. He will get my vote again.

[edit on 3-7-2004 by Relentless]



posted on Jul, 3 2004 @ 07:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by Relentless

Originally posted by goose

Thanks edsinger for proving my point! People who love Bush has an excuse for him, blame on the last guy in. any excuse is good enough just don't let Bush get any blame. Tell me when Clinton was in office did, you blame everything on the guy before him, well did you? No of course not for that was Daddy Bush, a republican.
[edit on 3-7-2004 by goose]


But then again, at the time all the Clinton supporters did blame the last guy for anything that was wrong while giving credit for all the good to their guy. Hey, it's the nature of the beast. It only depends which side the tables have turned as to which side is doing this now. So people who loved Clinton had an excuse for him too (and still do amazingly enough).

It's funny, right after 9/11 how all of the most politically active democrats I knew pretty much said the same thing - I was stunned. Basically they expressed that under the circumstance it was a good thing Bush was the one in office because the only thing that mattered was we were under attack and none of them seemed to feel that Gore could have handled this particular critical situation.

One of these days I need to get around to giving them all a call to see if they remember saying it and would admit to it now. (I am sure I will get an earful now from the anti-Bush contingent here though.)


Oh, to answer the question. I actually voted for Clinton at the time and lived to regret it. I did vote for Bush this time around and still have no regrets. He will get my vote again.

[edit on 3-7-2004 by Relentless]



Actually I said just the opposite, I said this would probably not have even happened if Gore had been in office. And, not for one minute have I ever been glad Bush is in office. I did not have to excuse Clinton by giving the last guy in, the credit for the economy. Clinton turned things around pretty quickly and there were jobs, the dificit started going down and when we left we had money in the bank. Now Bush Jr. was not paying attention, to security, to a lot of things when he took office and we all have paid the price. I said when Bush stole the election that we were in for a world of trouble and I was right, we have seen nothing but trouble since he took office. As for the events of 911, I was stunned by the event but not surprised that it had happened, I knew Bush would do a lousy job and he did.

[edit on 3-7-2004 by goose]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join