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.

 

G.W. Bush pros and Cons

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 27 2004 @ 02:01 PM
link   
I believe both Bush and Kerry are below average human beings but I believe I would award Bush points for:

1) Acting swiftly after 9/11 and making a very good initial investment in invading Afghanistan. This investment has since been wasted however without following through and capturing or killing Bin Laden.

2) I would give a half-point to Bush for now having some experience at being President. It remains to be seen if he has the wisdom to now learn from his mistakes (and he has ALOT of learning to do).

That's about it. I believe a monkey throwing darts would have made more correct decisions than President Bush and the same monkey would in all probability do better than Kerry. It amazes me how such low rate people make it to be the final candidates but I suppose it reduces the number of unemployed by 2.




posted on Aug, 27 2004 @ 02:47 PM
link   
1. Bush is good becuase he beefed up americas military muscle and accelarated weapons programs these are the things previous administration damaged.


2. In the previous administration the leader was too soft to handle terrorism and left it alone that was why we where attacked overseas and at home. Since Bush took office i havent seen anymore terrorist attacks why is it that way? its becuase he is a hardcore republican and the world fears him. China had mouth with us saying they would blow up la and invade/nuke taiwan they said all these things to clinton becuase they know he cant do anything now that bush has taken power they kept their mouths shut.


3. He lets the military grow and get better something democrats dont care about until they day something bad happens something democratic voters dont care about.


4. This is all if you still dont like bush go ahead and vote for kerry who would weaken the military big time and forget terrorism about terrorism and dismiss the attacks.



posted on Aug, 27 2004 @ 05:19 PM
link   
Yeah, Bush has done an excellent job.

OF...

Dividing the country
Infuriating the world


His main goal (as stated by Karl Rove) is to get Evangelicals who didn't vote for Bush in 2000 because of his disgusting campaign tactics and drunk driving arrest. That's why he plays up the God thing. Not because that coke head actually believes.

But go ahead...give the "hardass" another 4 years and let him F*** this place up some more.

How anyone could seriously support Bush after looking at his record blows my mind?

I voted for him in 2000, but not this time. This isn't what I expected from him...he's used 9/11 to push forth the most divisive and destructive agenda in history, and you people love him "cuz he's tough."

A tough moron is still a moron.

[edit on 27-8-2004 by cstyle226]



posted on Aug, 28 2004 @ 07:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by ShadowXIX
so increasing military pay for the soldiers protecting your A$$ in Europe is considered a con? Thats pretty sad


American troops are protecting me here? Oh sorry, it seems I just lived in another world!


[edit on 28-8-2004 by shoo]



posted on Aug, 28 2004 @ 07:11 AM
link   
Bush:
I like his plan for abolishing the IRS...


But Badnarik will abolish federal taxation....... Bush would tax us 30% flat for everything we pay for, and no tax would come off our paycheck.

Badnarik wouldn't tax 30% on everything or take money off our paycheck so i'd have to go with badnarik on this one, the man has a point...



posted on Aug, 28 2004 @ 10:31 PM
link   
Hmmm, pros, well, he supports the second amendment.

Cons.
Declared war on false reasons.
More dead after war ended then during war.
Created the new Vietnam.
Created the new black for the 2000's.(In the 50s-70s it was patriotic and right to hate blacks, not it is right and patriotic to hate anyone with a turban)
Believes in "seperate but equal". Give the gays civil union, not marrige. We all know how the last time the "seperate but equal" worked.
Admits that god talks to him.
Admits he doesn't read newspapers.
Is as bad at public speaking as I am.
Bans freedom of speech by making anyone who goes to his meetings on the campaign trail and the convention sign over their soul.(actually a loyalty oath to clap and go yea Bush! every time he blinks)
Brings in CEOs to become cabinet members.(Hmm, wonder what their agenda is)
Has Colin Powell come in as a cabinet member, a highly respected man, a guy who if he ran for president would have won by landslide(except for the south) and made him as respected as a french poodle that has been castrated.
Was not voted in by majority of the people, but majority of the Supreme Court.
Is planning on attacking Iran, North Korea, and possibly China.
Pissed the world off.(isn't Canada ashamed to be neighbors with us now?)
Signed a bill into law that makes it easier for illegal immigrants to thrive in America.
Belongs to the Skull and Bones.(Of course, so does Kerry, but this is a Bush pro/con list)
Took Clinton's largest surplus ever and sent it down to levels unknown by man until Bush sent it there.
Over 1 million jobs lost to outsourcing, a plan Bush supports.
Tries to cover losses by making fast food jobs part of Industrial Jobs Bracket so it looks like unemployment was going down.
Had daddy pay his way through college.
May be a coke head, drunk, murderer. But all police records are locked up tighter then the money at a top rate casino in Las Vegas. So they could be speeding tickets, they could be ritual slaying of babies.
Attacks Kerry's war records. He has none for Kerry to counter attack.
Was a cheerleader.(I know this is a personal con for me, but still, a cheerleader? Wonder if what Sigmund Freud said was true about people who are gay and becoming violent towards gays)

Well, people will let you know more.



posted on Aug, 28 2004 @ 10:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by shoo

Originally posted by ShadowXIX
so increasing military pay for the soldiers protecting your A$$ in Europe is considered a con? Thats pretty sad


American troops are protecting me here? Oh sorry, it seems I just lived in another world!


[edit on 28-8-2004 by shoo]


If there was no American Military we would have been been speaking German or Russian. If you want to believe it or not those Nuclear subs out their right now are protecting all are a$$ from attack.



posted on Aug, 29 2004 @ 12:46 AM
link   
ShadowXIX, yes, in WWII if there was no army we would not be speaking english. Does this look like WWII? And it isn't that the army is bad, it's that invading a country on false pretenses is bad.



posted on Aug, 29 2004 @ 03:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by James the Lesser
ShadowXIX, yes, in WWII if there was no army we would not be speaking english. Does this look like WWII? And it isn't that the army is bad, it's that invading a country on false pretenses is bad.


Exactly. And since the cold war is over there is no more need for such a big force like the USA is deploying all over the world.

Somehow you could get the feeling that the USA is a lot into wars for economic reasons....noooo!
- Yes.

Furthermore we were talking about the present ShadowXIX. Those soldiers that fought in WW2 deserve extra pays... a lot of it! They saved the world - period.

But nowadays the US spendings on military are neither justified nor do they help peace. The only country I see warmongering is the USA, sorry.

[edit on 29-8-2004 by shoo]



posted on Aug, 29 2004 @ 10:45 PM
link   
pros

Originally posted by shoo

Originally posted by ShadowXIX
Increased military pay by 4% per year
$1B more for salary; $20B more for R&D for new weapons
Good track record funding military
Has been good to second amendment rights (didnt create new assualt weapon ban)

Those are considered Cons, here in Europe. How opinions differ

We already know that a weak America is a pro in Europe.

originally posted by: edsinger
He is a man of conviction, he doesnt waver, he doesnt watch the poles to govern, and he is a lot more conservative than I originally gave him credit for.

And last but not least, he has taken the war to the enemy instead of Chamberlain like capitualtion.....

And best of all he just burns the liberals to the core.look at all the personal attacks and smears listed as cons so far, very little truth just a lot of venom. He also understands that unlike the terminally uniformed would like to portray the world is not a touchy feely place.

Cons
Some of his social positions; stem cell, abortion, and some others to a lesser degree.


[edit on 29-8-2004 by keholmes]



posted on Aug, 29 2004 @ 10:58 PM
link   
I know, I'm still here...

Anyway, I'm sick of the thing where they say more dead during the war than before. No, Saddam tortured and killed thousands more civilians than we ever will. And he did it on purpose!



posted on Aug, 30 2004 @ 05:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by keholmes
We already know that a weak America is a pro in Europe.


It's quite interesting that Americans are really that narrowed in their views when it comes to this and don't understand views from outside and just misinterpret them as a threat or attack against their country. I pitty you.



posted on Aug, 30 2004 @ 11:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by shoo

Originally posted by keholmes
We already know that a weak America is a pro in Europe.


It's quite interesting that Americans are really that narrowed in their views when it comes to this and don't understand views from outside and just misinterpret them as a threat or attack against their country. I pitty you.

I understand themyour enlightened and therefore dont need to think through your positions. And the only way I would misinterpret them as a threat or attack was if I was French, Im not so I dont. It is a stated position of the French, and I believe the German governments to counter weight the American government ie weaken. And no need for pity I live in America.



posted on Sep, 1 2004 @ 03:49 PM
link   
It's one of the first things you learn about the world economy that there is no EU without the USA and no USA without the EU.
Same goes for politics.

There may be tentions but a weakness or better a breakdown is a breakdown for both.


So, concluded - the statement that Europeans pursuit a weak America is wrong or let's say inaccurate. Europeans want the balance of power. Economically and politically.



posted on Sep, 1 2004 @ 11:27 PM
link   
Well shoo, thats neat sentiment and all but then I didnt say weakI said weaken and it is painfully obvious that the EU has that as a goal.



posted on Sep, 2 2004 @ 03:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by keholmes
Well shoo, thats neat sentiment and all but then I didnt say weakI said weaken




Originally posted by keholmes
We already know that a weak America is a pro in Europe.


weaken was the word used in your 2nd statement. You said weak in first instance
- nevermind.




top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join