• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Bush, Time Magazine Person Of The Year?

What Do You Think Of Bush Being Named Person Of The Year?

  • Apposed

    Votes: 22 55.0%

  • Agreed

    Votes: 15 37.5%

  • Not Favoured But Without Concern

    Votes: 3 7.5%
  • Total voters
    40
ludahai said:
Your basis for that being? It seems that he did at least as well as Kerry did at Yale, and Kerry was hailed as an erudit. super-intelligent man by the left.
Click to expand...

American degrees can easily be bought, Bush's degree was surely bought, hello, his father was a multi millionaire :yes:
 
geekgrrl said:
I thought the "American Revolutionary" descriptor of Dubya on the Time website to be positively insulting to the real revolutionaries who served to establish the U.S. as a sovereign nation.

I personally think "American Hamster" is more fitting.

To view a timely reminder of why Bush should not have been Hamster of the Year, read Garry Trudeau's latest collection of Doonesbury's "Bushisms 2004-2005" in today's comics, or go to http://www.doonesbury.com/strip/dailydose.
Click to expand...
Yeah, that's where I like to get my political info -- from a comic strip.
 
Soviet_Guy said:
Bush's I.Q. must be no more than 120.
Click to expand...
If you are correct, then you must give him credit as being the "Great Maximizer" for squeezing a hell of a lot out it.
 
Comrade Brian said:
What do you mean the left, most leftists would want someone better than the 2 main canidates, though kerry was slightly better than bush,

the only thing bush deserves is a life sentence in prison for the horrible acts he's done
Click to expand...
If presidents weren't limited to two terms, GWB would easily win a third term.
 
Fantasea said:
If presidents weren't limited to two terms, GWB would easily win a third term.
Click to expand...

I do not know about easily but it is likely he would win again with dems just having tweedledums to toss against him.
 
To view a timely reminder of why Bush should not have been Hamster of the Year, read Garry Trudeau's latest collection of Doonesbury's "Bushisms 2004-2005" in today's comics, or go to http://www.doonesbury.com/strip/dailydose.
Click to expand...
Fantasea said:
Yeah, that's where I like to get my political info -- from a comic strip.
Click to expand...
Doonsebury gives the Dem's their talking points for the day. I think it's kinda cute. Gives ya that nice warm cuddly feeling. :mrgreen:
 
Soviet_Guy said:
You Republicans are all the same, you all agree with Bush.
Click to expand...


I agree with some of his policies but what does it matter? You get to have your say every four years. The constant bitching in between is meaningless and distracts from more important issues.
I will not purposely say negative things about Former President Clinton out of respect for the office he held whether I disagree with certain policies or not.
We have the only say that counts at the polls.
 
Fantasea said:
If presidents weren't limited to two terms, GWB would easily win a third term.
Click to expand...





Well Bush lost the popular vote in the 1st election so in a majority rule society he defiantly shouldn't be bragging about that. Is win in the 2nd election wasn't a landslide either so I don't know why you think it would be easy......As far as the topic however Bush did indeed have the greatest impact on the years politics so why shouldn't he be Man of the Year? It doesn't make him a great man nor it a great year does it?
 
Fantasea said:
If presidents weren't limited to two terms, GWB would easily win a third term.
Click to expand...

If this were the case, Bush would've never been President...Clinton would now be serving his 4th term! LOL
 
It is Time Man of the Year...not greatest person in the world.

Good or Bad, I don't think it matters. They did something to get them there. Of course I'm not a Bush fan, and there are much better candidates I'm sure.... ;)

By the way, Doonesbury is funny - and you cannot deny that he said those qoutes.

Andrew
 
Hoot said:
If this were the case, Bush would've never been President...Clinton would now be serving his 4th term! LOL
Click to expand...

How true, maybe America should adopt Canadian office terms ( unlimited ). :mrgreen:
 
Hoot said:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fantasea
If presidents weren't limited to two terms, GWB would easily win a third term.
Click to expand...
If this were the case, Bush would've never been President...Clinton would now be serving his 4th term! LOL
Click to expand...
I don't know about that. More likely Clinton would be serving a term of ten to twenty for something.

By the way, did he ever get his license to practice law reinstated?

:rofl
 
Soviet_Guy said:
You Republicans are all the same, you all agree with Bush.
Click to expand...
Who should Republicans agree with? Kennedy, Kerry, Boxer, Schumer, et.al.?
 
Bush Man of the Year? You may as well make Hitler the greatest humanitarian of all time.
 
I agree with it because it's supposed to be the most infleuntial person of the year not just the "best" person. Hitler was a time man of the year and Stalin was twice.
 
Soviet_Guy said:
How about logic.
Click to expand...
I'm glad you said that. For a moment I was afraid you might say, Kennedy, Kerry, Boxer, Schumer, et.al.
 
bushdailymirrordumbpeople3zk.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom