Print

[TheRealMethuselah]

TheRealMethuselah

Re: Is President Bush a good president?

dylan, that was uncalled for.

[Pyru]

Pyru

Re: Is President Bush a good president?

dylan, that was uncalled for.

Not really. I mean, you can compare me to Hitler; we both have/had dark hair and both believe/believed in a mixed market economy. It's accurate and I won't take offense to it.

[Limey]

Limey

Re: Is President Bush a good president?

Dylan, as previously said, that was uncalled for.

Personal attacks are against forum rules AND debate rules.

[Cheese]

Cheese

Re: Is President Bush a good president?

He can barely speak English", not "talk" it.  Or are the "conservative hicks" the ones using proper grammer now, and the "educated liberals" the ones with poor speaking habits?

You are zero to one when you practice what you preach.

I figured you'd find some sort of typo, but I didn't bother to read over it, because there's a huge difference between yours and my typo.  The difference is that I'm not being a bum-cheese claiming that Bush is an idiot, because he's not an English scholar.  I never claimed a superiority complex over someone because they can't speak very well.  You did.  (Although I may have gone overboard on the "conservative hick" stereotype that you've fallen into. )

I didn't say "talk English" I said "talk in English". Big difference.

Either way, still very incorrect

Either way, I don't think making a typo or using a somewhat incorrect synonym as a result of tiredness should justify who is smart and dumb.

Perhaps Bush was tired?  Perhaps he gets a lot less sleep than you?

[Scooternew]

Scooternew

Re: Is President Bush a good president?

Hmm, I just saw Cheese's reply to me.
 

He can barely speak English", not "talk" it.  Or are the "conservative hicks" the ones using proper grammer now, and the "educated liberals" the ones with poor speaking habits?

You are zero to one when you practice what you preach. I didn't say "talk English" I said "talk in English". Big difference.

Him being president shouldn't stop him from being allowed to have religious beliefs.

???Him??? should be ???his???.

Either way, let???s leave grammar out of this debate and get to the real meat. Mmm???steak.

I think you are making unfair generalizations towards what I ???talked??? (lol, had to put that in there). I didn't say conservatives were uneducated or hicks. I just said Bush wasn't the sharpest tool in the shed. I didn't say he was an English scholar. I'm not even 100% correct when it comes to English (gasp), but some of the things that Bush says are...well, never mind.

A huge problem I have seen develop with Bush in office is an integration of religion into the government, which is causing problems.

When I said this, I didn't mean that Bush couldn't practice his religion, but when Christianity begins to subsume government, it causes unfair biases towards making laws. I think Christianity had a huge role in the gay marriage laws, ones I don???t agree with. Separation of Church and state is something to be valued, especially with the number of different religions in the U.S. anyway.

When saying old-fashioned, I guess you misunderstood the connotation. I didn???t mean it like that???but if you want to go streaking in the streets, more power to you.

 

Woah, there buddy!  Don't associate us conservatives with the KKK!  The KKK fights against everything that conservatives believe!  We believe in a color-blind society.  We believe that we shouldn't single out minorities (or majorities), and discriminate nor "reverse"-discriminate others!

I was led to believe by more than one person that KKK were strictly conservative (and I would think so on my own, as it seems that KKK always agrees with conservative views), but I understand that the KKK isn???t strictly conservative, and I apologize if you connoted that I was associating you with them in anyway.

You can't blame Katrina on Bush... sure there were problems, but it wasn't his fault.  We make mistakes to learn, no?

I didn???t ???blame??? a category five natural disaster on Bush, but I meant to say that the way he handled the aftermath seemed poor to me, especially the time it took to get help down there.

That picture is *so* clever, btw.  It's not like they couldn't find birds to put next to Michael Moore in wierd poses, that look similar...

Of course they could. Lol, I just thought the picture was funny as hell.

I think his worst failure has been in Iraq.

[NeoGeo-x]

NeoGeo-x

Re: Is President Bush a good president?

And why the name calling?  If I were you, I'd actually write intelligent posts instead of "Bush is a !@#$% because he's a racist because I said so!"

Let's start with the end. Well, I'm suprised that I'm even replying to such a flame, but seriously. When others do not believe that little president of yours is all that good, then that doesn't make them dumb And I don't know what made you think that I wrote something among the lines "it's my opinion so it's true", you're just discarding my arguments. Well, let's move on..

Doesn't that make him a good politician?  Naturally I don't believe it (remember our nice little FBI Investigation?), but wouldn't that make him a good politician and a terrible person if it was true?

That doesn't make any sense to me. Giving a slow response to an emergency does not make anyone a good person, nor a good politician. A good politician cares about his inhabitants, and fancies them over the economy.

Hold on... you just called him a racist.  On what grounds do you make this comment?

Well, New Orleans got flooded. If the same thing was about to happen to Washington, he would sure as hell respond a lot quicker...seeing as it was his ass which was about to be washed away by the water. Washington means a lot to the US (both politically and economically), since it is the capital city of the USA and the government has its seats there.

The same thing can't be said for New Orleans. With New Orleans being a 'black city', I meant that it got a high population of black people. I have never called him a racist, and neither have I said that the colour of skin of these people was his reason to not get the help down there quickly..However, the economic situation of that huge group of people was. And therefore, the economic position of the entire city didn't convince Bush to take quick action.

Canada's more polluting that the US.  Look it up.

Well, for one...that doesn't mean that the USA can pollute all they like. That is no way a license to waste the Earth beyond the point of where it could be restored. And furthermore; when I was talking about the Kyoto protocol, by 'pollution' I meant - of course - CO2 pollution in the atmosphere. The USA IS the biggest producer, you can look it up.

My name is Pitt

[Cheese]

Cheese

Re: Is President Bush a good president?

The USA IS the biggest producer, you can look it up.

But for some reason we use less energy than Canada.

then that doesn't make them dumb

Never called you dumb, just think that your post was.

Well, New Orleans got flooded. If the same thing was about to happen to Washington, he would sure as hell respond a lot quicker...seeing as it was his ass which was about to be washed away by the water. Washington means a lot to the US (both politically and economically), since it is the capital city of the USA and the government has its seats there.

Let's see.... he'd also probably evacuate Washington D.C. no?

The same thing can't be said for New Orleans. With New Orleans being a 'black city', I meant that it got a high population of black people. I have never called him a racist, and neither have I said that the colour of skin of these people was his reason to not get the help down there quickly..However, the economic situation of that huge group of people was. And therefore, the economic position of the entire city didn't convince Bush to take quick action.

How can you ever back that up?  and to me it sounds like YOU are the racist calling it a "black city".  People are people regardless of their skin color.

[Gilgamesh]

Gilgamesh

Re: Is President Bush a good president?

General media and politicians frowned upon the laxity and unefficiency of the US http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/09/08/opinion/polls/main824591.shtml

Assuming that Bush would evacuate Washington DC or New York faster because they're more important than New Orleans sounds a tad silly to me though. Bush himself wasn't the only guy up there to decide plan of action.

[NeoGeo-x]

NeoGeo-x

Re: Is President Bush a good president?

But for some reason we use less energy than Canada.

Once again, I'm talking about the production of CO2. There is no other country that produces as much CO2 as the United States.

Never called you dumb, just think that your post was.

Is it strange that I take offense of that because I'm the author of that post? I don't think so.

Let's see.... he'd also probably evacuate Washington D.C. no?

Yup. And a hell lotta quicker and more efficient than New Orleans.

How can you ever back that up?  and to me it sounds like YOU are the racist calling it a "black city".  People are people regardless of their skin color.

Personally, I agree with your last point, but unfortunately..that's not always the case in today's society. There's a long way to go before the western civilizations are are truly merocratic; especially the US has got a lot of work to do to to cover up the gap between ultrarich and extremely poor. Economic welfare is tied into history, and seeing as the Afro-American people in the USA have got a long history of a low welfare rates (going back further, slavery even). Today's Afro-American population still carries this history with them. Therefore, economics and colour of skin are more or less linked in this case.

My name is Pitt

[Cheese]

Cheese

Re: Is President Bush a good president?

Neo-Geo X, I don't think you're dumb.  I just want you to know that

Let's see.... he'd also probably evacuate Washington D.C. no?

Yup. And a hell lotta quicker and more efficient than New Orleans.

It wasn't Bush's call for New Orleans.  What would YOU propose he do?

Assuming that Bush would evacuate Washington DC or New York faster because they're more important than New Orleans sounds a tad silly to me though. Bush himself wasn't the only guy up there to decide plan of action.

I don't think he really had a say over it?  I agree wholeheartedly

How can you ever back that up?  and to me it sounds like YOU are the racist calling it a "black city".  People are people regardless of their skin color.

Personally, I agree with your last point, but unfortunately..that's not always the case in today's society. There's a long way to go before the western civilizations are are truly merocratic; especially the US has got a lot of work to do to to cover up the gap between ultrarich and extremely poor. Economic welfare is tied into history, and seeing as the Afro-American people in the USA have got a long history of a low welfare rates (going back further, slavery even). Today's Afro-American population still carries this history with them. Therefore, economics and colour of skin are more or less linked in this case.

Bush is not a racist, and I see no reason to believe otherwise.

[Busternaut]

Busternaut

Re: Is President Bush a good president?

No...but i'm from a far better country with a better leader so i shouldn't care.

[Limey]

Limey

Re: Is President Bush a good president?

Not a fan of Mr. Bush at all, but I have to say, the whole new orleans thing was really up to FEMA... Bush did sign several shipments of food/water/etc as soon as he got back in DC (he was in california when katrina hit)

[tippz]

tippz

Re: Is President Bush a good president?

But for some reason we use less energy than Canada.

Once again, I'm talking about the production of CO2. There is no other country that produces as much CO2 as the United States.

OMG we make CO2?!? Gasp! Oh, wait, the amounts of CO2 in the atmosphere have been changing for millions of years... granted pollution does accelerate the natural process a bit (not much) and pollution should be cut down, I think that insisting the whole issue be handled by other people is a bit ridiculous. If the Bush doesn't think that it is the most important thing, and the American people elect him anyway, I think it is obvious that it can't be the most important thing. Seriously, haven't you noticed that the world has been getting warmer since, oh, say the last ice age? What was that, anyway? Global cooling?

Let's see.... he'd also probably evacuate Washington D.C. no?

Yup. And a hell lotta quicker and more efficient than New Orleans.

The morons in New Orleans were told to evacuate and many decided not to evacuate. Is that anyone's fault but the people of New Orleans? No. Then, the National Guard comes in to help and they get shot at. Yeah, obviously all conventional means of help will work in that situation, since the people who shoot at help obviously want it so much!

How can you ever back that up?  and to me it sounds like YOU are the racist calling it a "black city".  People are people regardless of their skin color.

Personally, I agree with your last point, but unfortunately..that's not always the case in today's society. There's a long way to go before the western civilizations are are truly merocratic; especially the US has got a lot of work to do to to cover up the gap between ultrarich and extremely poor. Economic welfare is tied into history, and seeing as the Afro-American people in the USA have got a long history of a low welfare rates (going back further, slavery even). Today's Afro-American population still carries this history with them. Therefore, economics and colour of skin are more or less linked in this case.

I'm just going to say that in the modern world there is no such thing as being poor because your parents were poor. There are so many opportunities in this nation that if you are poor it is because of your own failures (or in some cases because you are lazy)

And that is very true Limey, perhaps that is why now there is talk of reorganizing/replacing FEMA...

[Pyru]

Pyru

Re: Is President Bush a good president?

Tippz, you fail to realise the massive change that human actions do have on the planet. CO₂ levels have risen by ridiculous amounts. The amount of trees on the planet has also drastically decreased. What's the main way CO₂ is removed? Yeah. Trees.

Failing to recognise the irreversible effect of global warming seems stupid. Worse than that, it's irresponsible and selfish. The greatest potential negative effect of global warming/climate change (see, some call it warming because it's a general increase in temperature, but it's really climate change, since it's an overall change in climate not just temperature) is on countries that are already the poorest in the world.

This isn't my big anti-Bush argument. It's just a quick retort. I'll get my big argument out soon. It's quite long. <_< >_>

[Limey]

Limey

Re: Is President Bush a good president?

This is wierd, I really don't like bush or what he does, but I feel the need to protect him in this debate

Honestly bush is also doing whats best for the economy by not signing the kyoto protocol;  It would be hard, and EXTREMELY expensive to meet the standards;  A lot of other countries who DID sign it aren't holding up their requirements.

[Pyru]

Pyru

Re: Is President Bush a good president?

This is wierd, I really don't like bush or what he does, but I feel the need to protect him in this debate

Honestly bush is also doing whats best for the economy by not signing the kyoto protocol;  It would be hard, and EXTREMELY expensive to meet the standards;  A lot of other countries who DID sign it aren't holding up their requirements.

The economy can wait; it's never too late to pick it back up again. Look at the Wall Street Crash; look at the South Sea Shipping crisis; look at China, look at Russia, look at Germany. It's never too late to repair economical damage, but the environment is a completely different matter. We don't know if it's even possible to revert at all.

Besides, if a country doesn't keep within the agreement, it's their own fault. At least most are trying. America isn't at all.

[NeoGeo-x]

NeoGeo-x

Re: Is President Bush a good president?

It wasn't Bush's call for New Orleans.  What would YOU propose he do?

Well, not leaving the city in anarchy for such a long period of time. The authorive power should have been restored way earlier. Remember all the looting and crap? :/

I don't think he really had a say over it?  I agree wholeheartedly

Didn't have a say over it?...he's the president.

Bush is not a racist, and I see no reason to believe otherwise.

Neither do I, and as I said before it hasn't got anything to do with racism. I believe economics played the major role in his reasoning.

My name is Pitt

[tippz]

tippz

Re: Is President Bush a good president?

Tippz, you fail to realise the massive change that human actions do have on the planet. CO₂ levels have risen by ridiculous amounts. The amount of trees on the planet has also drastically decreased. What's the main way CO₂ is removed? Yeah. Trees.

Failing to recognise the irreversible effect of global warming seems stupid. Worse than that, it's irresponsible and selfish. The greatest potential negative effect of global warming/climate change (see, some call it warming because it's a general increase in temperature, but it's really climate change, since it's an overall change in climate not just temperature) is on countries that are already the poorest in the world.

This isn't my big anti-Bush argument. It's just a quick retort. I'll get my big argument out soon. It's quite long. <_< >_>

read; natural cycle
natural cycle
... natural cycle

Ok, now that we know that the level of CO2 changing, while it is being screwed with (slightly) is 100% natural cycle we can move on to deforestation. Deforestation on the other hand, is completly different. It is destroying habitats (in an unnatural way) and should be controled and when possible stopped completely.

[Pyru]

Pyru

Re: Is President Bush a good president?

Tippz, you fail to realise the massive change that human actions do have on the planet. CO₂ levels have risen by ridiculous amounts. The amount of trees on the planet has also drastically decreased. What's the main way CO₂ is removed? Yeah. Trees.

Failing to recognise the irreversible effect of global warming seems stupid. Worse than that, it's irresponsible and selfish. The greatest potential negative effect of global warming/climate change (see, some call it warming because it's a general increase in temperature, but it's really climate change, since it's an overall change in climate not just temperature) is on countries that are already the poorest in the world.

This isn't my big anti-Bush argument. It's just a quick retort. I'll get my big argument out soon. It's quite long. <_< >_>

read; natural cycle
natural cycle
... natural cycle

Ok, now that we know that the level of CO2 changing, while it is being screwed with (slightly) is 100% natural cycle we can move on to deforestation. Deforestation on the other hand, is completly different. It is destroying habitats (in an unnatural way) and should be controled and when possible stopped completely.

We're releasing far more CO₂ into the atmosphere than we know there has been for a long time. It's not a good idea to mess with the global environment as much as industrialised countries are, and Bush is causing more damage by failing to realise this or act upon it.

[Limey]

Limey

Re: Is President Bush a good president?

Even if we stopped emitting ALL co2 emmissions NOW (which wouldn't be possible, we wouldn't be able to exhale ), We wouldn't see the effects for 50 years or so.

And there is technology out there that companies and/or the government ignore... For example, there is a machine that can take in co2 and store it, not letting it get into the atmosphere... But nobody has taken advantage of these machines.

Also we need !@#$% electric cars in america

Also NUCLEAR POWER would be the best way to cut co2 emissions... There is almost no danger these days, and it doesnt pollute.  Great way, but people always think of nuclear things as 'evil'