• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons 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.

From those you who believe in George bush, I ask:

SMIRKnCHIMP

Banned
Joined
Aug 9, 2005
Messages
92
Reaction score
0
Location
Redneck Rivera-Winters / Upper Montana -Summers
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
How can any man who decides he wants to run for political office, on cue suddenly experience a miraculous born again Christian conversion…not being critical, the coincidence is just too opportunistic. A story right out of Hollywood--*Bush said to James Robinson: 'I feel like God wants me to run for President. I can't explain it, but I sense my country is going to need me. .. I know it won't be easy on me or my family, but God wants me to do it.

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,1075950,00.html

From those you who believe in George bush, I ask: What kind of Christian would cold-bloodedly attack an innocent country, using lies as a pretext?

What kind of Christian would do anything & everything possible to make life more difficult for Americans? *exception to that-- those George calls his base, you know the top 1%...those who already have everything a man could want ..10 times over?

What kind of Christian would invoke God and or Jesus name merely to further benefit himself and his lust for power?

My "God" is about giving, kindness, love, compassion, goodness, charity, caring, help, and love thy neighbor!

My faith says; help those who are down-trodden, the meek, the elderly, the tired, those down on their luck, the weary, the handicapped, the sick, the starving, the dying, and the poor!

My god sees no nationality; my god does not place the importance of an American life as superior in importance to the lives of other peoples from other Nations.

My God includes all the Worlds peoples as his children, not just those people who are in the top 1% tax bracket.

The god George bush worships can't be the same god I know...Why you ask? George bush actions speak volumes about who this man really is; his actions say greed is good; life is expendable-- as long as it's in the pursuit of material objects and or political advantage; lying is justified and excused as long as the lying and dying is for self-centered selfishness and or corporate gain!

President George bush and his actions SCREAM--the rich should be given advantage; the poor should be keep at a disadvantage!!


History lesson:

The wholesale murder of the innocent Iraqi women and children is not the American way...but the way of a Nazi don't you agree? Government documents show (Prescott Bush) the President Grandfather the MANAGING Director of a bank seized by the federal government because of its close ties to a German industrialist who helped bankroll Adolph Hitler's rise to power.

FoxNews would not lie!!
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,100474,00.html

Yep, while my family along with millions of other were fighting the Nazi's. While our President’s Grandfather ‘Prescott Bush’ was supporting the mass murder of HITLER because he could make a dollar from it!

Your detailed reply would be most appreciated!!
 

nkgupta80

DP Veteran
Joined
May 31, 2005
Messages
1,720
Reaction score
59
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
The wholesale murder of the innocent Iraqi women and children is not the American way...but the way of a Nazi don't you agree? Government documents show (Prescott Bush) the President Grandfather the MANAGING Director of a bank seized by the federal government because of its close ties to a German industrialist who helped bankroll Adolph Hitler's rise to power.
tons of businesses back in the day had and were forming deals and contracts with German business men. Its what kept many congressmen from declaring war against Germany. This isn't something solely tied to Bush or the republican party.

With that said, I, however, am not a Bush supporter.
 

Republican

New member
Joined
May 19, 2005
Messages
30
Reaction score
0
Location
Tennessee
I truly believe that God wanted Bush to be President. Had Bush ever had Presidential hopes before God spoke to him he would have led a much more low key life. There were many battles endorsed by God in the Bible so I don't feel he'd condemn one of his people for Sending troops to defend his people from Terrorist regimes who we ALL know had WMD. Now those WMD may no longer be in Iraq, I suspect they are in Syria now, But we know that Saddam has had them because he used them on his own people Just ask the poor Kurds, and the UN and every country in the world knew Saddam had them otherwise they wouldn't have passed so many resolutions.
I don't understand how President Bush is making it harder for all the Americans but 1%. He's got tax cuts passed (I bet you got your check and didn't even think of returning it) Which helped give a beautiful boost to the Economy which was slacking due to 9/11 and the Clintion Admins. policys. And just look how many jobs are being created.
Thank God For President Bush.
 

SMIRKnCHIMP

Banned
Joined
Aug 9, 2005
Messages
92
Reaction score
0
Location
Redneck Rivera-Winters / Upper Montana -Summers
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
nkgupta80 said:
tons of businesses back in the day had and were forming deals and contracts with German business men. Its what kept many congressmen from declaring war against Germany. This isn't something solely tied to Bush or the republican party.

With that said, I, however, am not a Bush supporter.
Maybe so BUT, GW's grandaddy got caught.
 

SMIRKnCHIMP

Banned
Joined
Aug 9, 2005
Messages
92
Reaction score
0
Location
Redneck Rivera-Winters / Upper Montana -Summers
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Republican said:
I truly believe that God wanted Bush to be President. Had Bush ever had Presidential hopes before God spoke to him he would have led a much more low key life. There were many battles endorsed by God in the Bible so I don't feel he'd condemn one of his people for Sending troops to defend his people from Terrorist regimes who we ALL know had WMD. Now those WMD may no longer be in Iraq, I suspect they are in Syria now, But we know that Saddam has had them because he used them on his own people Just ask the poor Kurds, and the UN and every country in the world knew Saddam had them otherwise they wouldn't have passed so many resolutions.
I don't understand how President Bush is making it harder for all the Americans but 1%. He's got tax cuts passed (I bet you got your check and didn't even think of returning it) Which helped give a beautiful boost to the Economy which was slacking due to 9/11 and the Clintion Admins. policys. And just look how many jobs are being created.
Thank God For President Bush.

Well I truly believe that the drunk with the appetite for Bolivian Cocaine...became a bible thumper for the sole reason of attracting those like youself. excellent political move.......I for one was reassured that there is not a god in the Christian sense.....because a true kind and generous god would not chose a MORON like GWbush to lead anyone.

President Clinton’s Record on the Economy: In 1992, 10 million Americans were unemployed, the country faced record deficits, and poverty and welfare rolls were growing. Family incomes were losing ground to inflation and jobs were being created at the slowest rate since the Great Depression. Today, America enjoys what may be the strongest economy ever.

* Strong Economic Growth: Since President Clinton and Vice President Gore took office, economic growth has averaged 4.0 percent per year, compared to average growth of 2.8 percent during the Reagan-Bush years. The economy has grown for 116 consecutive months, the most in history.
* Most New Jobs Ever Created Under a Single Administration: The economy has created more than 22.5 million jobs in less than eight years—the most jobs ever created under a single administration, and more than were created in the previous 12 years. Of the total new jobs, 20.7 million, or 92 percent, are in the private sector.
* Median Family Income Up $6,000 since 1993: Economic gains have been made across the spectrum as family incomes increased for all Americans. Since 1993, real median family income has increased by $6,338, from $42,612 in 1993 to $48,950 in 1999 (in 1999 dollars).
* Unemployment at Its Lowest Level in More than 30 Years: Overall unemployment has dropped to the lowest level in more than 30 years, down from 6.9 percent in 1993 to just 4.0 percent in November 2000. The unemployment rate has been below 5 percent for 40 consecutive months. Unemployment for African Americans has fallen from 14.2 percent in 1992 to 7.3 percent in October 2000, the lowest rate on record. Unemployment for Hispanics has fallen from 11.8 percent in October 1992 to 5.0 percent in October 2000, also the lowest rate on record.
* Lowest Inflation since the 1960s: Inflation is at the lowest rate since the Kennedy Administration, averaging 2.5 percent, and it is down from 4.7 percent during the previous administration.
* Highest Homeownership Rate on Record: The homeownership rate reached 67.7 percent for the third quarter of 2000, the highest rate on record. In contrast, the homeownership rate fell from 65.6 percent in the first quarter of 1981 to 63.7 percent in the first quarter of 1993.
* 7 Million Fewer Americans Living in Poverty: The poverty rate has declined from 15.1 percent in 1993 to 11.8 percent last year, the largest six-year drop in poverty in nearly 30 years. There are now 7 million fewer people in poverty than there were in 1993.

Establishing Fiscal Discipline and Paying off the National Debt

President Clinton’s Record on Fiscal Discipline: Between 1981 and 1992, the national debt held by the public quadrupled. The annual budget deficit grew to $290 billion in 1992, the largest ever, and was projected to grow to more than $455 billion by Fiscal Year (FY) 2000. As a result of the tough and sometimes unpopular choices made by President Clinton, and major deficit reduction legislation passed in 1993 and 1997, we have seen eight consecutive years of fiscal improvement for the first time in America’s history.

* Largest Surplus Ever: The surplus in FY 2000 is $237 billion—the third consecutive surplus and the largest surplus ever.
* Largest Three-Year Debt Pay-Down Ever: Between 1998-2000, the publicly held debt was reduced by $363 billion—the largest three-year pay-down in American history. Under Presidents Reagan and Bush, the debt held by the public quadrupled. Under the Clinton-Gore budget, we are on track to pay off the entire publicly held debt on a net basis by 2009.
* Lower Federal Government Spending: After increasing under the previous two administrations, federal government spending as a share of the economy has been cut from 22.2 percent in 1992 to 18 percent in 2000—the lowest level since 1966.
* Reduced Interest Payments on the Debt: In 1993, the net interest payments on the debt held by the public were projected to grow to $348 billion in FY 2000. In 2000, interest payments on the debt were $125 billion lower than projected.
* Americans Benefit from Reduced Debt: Because of fiscal discipline and deficit and debt reduction, it is estimated that a family with a home mortgage of $100,000 might expect to save roughly $2,000 per year in mortgage payments, like a large tax cut.
* Double Digit Growth in Private Investment in Equipment and Software: Lower debt will help maintain strong economic growth and fuel private investments. With government no longer draining resources out of capital markets, private investment in equipment and software averaged 13.3 percent annual growth since 1993, compared to 4.7 percent during 1981 to 1992.

To Establish Fiscal Discipline, President Clinton:
* Enacted the 1993 Deficit Reduction Plan without a Single Republican Vote. Prior to 1993, the debate over fiscal policy often revolved around a false choice between public investment and deficit reduction. The 1993 deficit reduction plan showed that deficit and debt reductions could be accomplished in a progressive way by slashing the deficit in half and making important investments in our future, including education, health care, and science and technology research. The plan included more than $500 billion in deficit reduction. It also cut taxes for 15 million of the hardest-pressed Americans by expanding the Earned Income Tax Credit; created the Direct Student Loan Program; created the first nine Empowerment Zones and first 95 Enterprise Communities; and passed tax cuts for small businesses and research and development.
* Negotiated the Balanced Budget Agreement of 1997. In his 1997 State of the Union address, President Clinton announced his plan to balance the budget for the first time in 27 years. Later that year, he signed the Balanced Budget Act of 1997, a major bipartisan agreement to eliminate the national budget deficit, create the conditions for economic growth, and invest in the education and health of our people. It provided middle-class tax relief with a $500 per child tax credit and the Hope Scholarship and Lifetime Learning tax credits for college. It also created the Children’s Health Insurance Program to serve up to 5 million children and made landmark investments in education initiatives including educational technology, charter schools, Head Start, and Pell Grants. Finally, it added 20 more Empowerment Zones and 20 more rural Enterprise Communities, included the President’s plan to revitalize the District of Columbia, and continued welfare reform though $3 billion in new resources to move welfare recipients to private-sector jobs.
* Dedicated the Surplus to Save Social Security and Reduce the National Debt. In his 1998 and 1999 State of the Union addresses, President Clinton called on the nation to save the surplus until the solvency of Social Security is assured. He also repeatedly vetoed large Republican tax cut bills that would have jeopardized our nation’s fiscal discipline. The President’s actions led to a bipartisan consensus on saving the surplus and paying down the debt.
* Extended Medicare Solvency from 1999 to 2025. When President Clinton took office, Medicare was expected to become insolvent in 1999, then only six years away. The 1993 deficit reduction act dedicated some of the taxes paid by Social Security beneficiaries to the Medicare Trust Fund and extended the life of Medicare by three years to 2002. Thanks to additional provisions to combat waste, fraud and abuse and bipartisan cooperation in the 1997 balanced budget agreement, Medicare is now expected to remain solvent until 2025.


3.2 million manufacturing jobs have been lost under the commander in chimp!

Question? is there an ignore button on this forum, I'm new but sure don't have anything to say to someone like yourself.......sorry.
 
Last edited:

nkgupta80

DP Veteran
Joined
May 31, 2005
Messages
1,720
Reaction score
59
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
3 million manufacturing jobs have been lost under the commander in chimp........Question? is there an ignore button on this forum......I'm new but sure don't have anything to say to someone like yourself.......sorry.
yep, if our country's economy keeps this up, we'll be in a big mess....Manufacturing is what runs a country. If we keep loosing it to countries like China, it'll be like cutting off our legs.

In terms of the Bush administration, I think that most politicians would have no idea how to solve this dillema, regardless of the party. Politicians are too worried about short-term progress. They wanna make sure their reputation during their administration is intact.
 

SMIRKnCHIMP

Banned
Joined
Aug 9, 2005
Messages
92
Reaction score
0
Location
Redneck Rivera-Winters / Upper Montana -Summers
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
nkgupta80 said:
yep, if our country's economy keeps this up, we'll be in a big mess....Manufacturing is what runs a country. If we keep loosing it to countries like China, it'll be like cutting off our legs.

In terms of the Bush administration, I think that most politicians would have no idea how to solve this dillema, regardless of the party. Politicians are too worried about short-term progress. They wanna make sure their reputation during their administration is intact.
I beg to differ.....

OUTLAW the lobbiest contributions to politicans... put the power of government back in the hands of our CITIZENS, of course that will not happen because...All Republicans and 95% of the democrats are in the Pockets of the Multinational Corporations........New World Order in process!
 

nkgupta80

DP Veteran
Joined
May 31, 2005
Messages
1,720
Reaction score
59
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
citizens don't realize it either. All citizens love getting lower taxes regardless of the possible outcomes. No one elects a guy who outright says that he/she will raise taxes.
 

nkgupta80

DP Veteran
Joined
May 31, 2005
Messages
1,720
Reaction score
59
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
I wonder what greenspan would actually do for the economy, if he didn't have to go through so much political coercion.
 
Joined
Aug 9, 2005
Messages
72
Reaction score
0
Location
Nevada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I'm mainly only writing this in response to your first post:

SmirknChimp,

First off, I don't give a crap about that religious B.S., being that I am unreligous. Actually, I'm glad the President has a little bit of self-confidence instead of being a coward that's afraid to act on anything for any reason. And about that garbage about being for the cause of good, I believe that you are misguided, because in the long run our actions in the middle east should prove good if we can achieve our goals.


Do you really honestly, think that Iraq was an innocent country, or that Saddam Hussein, the dictator of Iraq who committed genocide and killed more than 400,000 kurds was an innocent man? Truly, your definition of innocent is quite disturbing. I hope you do not wish to be ruled by such an innocent man.

Also, your comparison of the United States to the Nazis is completely out of line, and a disservice to those who served in World War II, and those who are in the U.S. Armed Forces today. In my opinion it is also a disservice to history and shows your obvious lack of knowledge for the past.

Not only are the United States not murdering civilians by the hordes, but in fact these most recent operations have been less costly to the indigenous civilian population than almost any significant military operation in the past, especially when looking at Vietnam, WWII, and other wars of the past. Today, we don't firebomb cities killing hundreds of thousands at a time like in world war II, we don't artillery and utterly annihilate small towns via the dropping of dumb bombs. Through the use of smart weapons instead dumb weapons and by manually clearing out many buildings door-to-door, we are going out of our way to make sure that as few civilians are killed as possible. In fact, now that the invasion is done, and we are doing peace keeping operations, far more civilians are being killed by the insurgents and suicide bombers than us. And combined, between U.S. inflicted civilian casualties and those of the suicide bombers, the average number of daily civilian casualties still isn't much higher than the number Saddam would murder on a daily basis to aid his agenda.

In fact, if anyone is going to be compared to Hitler, it should be Saddam Hussein, who is a racist that has committed genocide, who exploited his country for his own personal riches.

The Insurgents in Iraq, who most of which aren't even from Iraq are not in much public support of the Iraqi population, which don't take to kindly to being blown up if you can put yourself in there shoes.

Also, last time I heard, Hitler wasn't supported by a very large fraction of the French population when they invaded. Hitler also didn't help set up a French military right after he tore down the first one, and he didn't seem to interested in setting them a good system.

As far as the Weapons of Mass Destruction are concerned, even Saddam thought he had them according to the paper trails... He instilled such fear into his subjects, that the ones that were supposed to head the programs for development of the weapons told him they had been developed to save their own skins from being tortured and killed.

Being that it was a war against terror and not a war against Osama Bin Laden, is another reason Saddam had to be dealt with. While we don't have official evidence, there is significant paper trails that indicate that he could have been funding many officially recognized terrorist organizations including the Al Qaida. Even if he didn't specifically fund terrorists, he still supported them, since he sure wasn't doing anything to prevent them from behiving in his country.

Further, how many American lives could've been saved if Clinton finnished the job when it was his turn? How many lives would it risk in the future if we left the problem unscathed?

Also, are you forgetting that the recent recession started three months before the end of the Clinton administration?

When people come accrossed and start making comparisons between President Bush and Hitler, or any other invalid comparison as drastic as that, how can anyone take them seriously?

History Lesson:
Learn about WWII. If you were to compare modern tactics to the tactics of the ALLIES in WWII, I bet you'd have a heart attack if you can call modern tactics Nazi-like. Look at Dresden for instance. Especially, look at the Nazis and axis powers from WWII. Then when you're done, compare Saddam to Bush.... see which one is more like Hitler.
 

nkgupta80

DP Veteran
Joined
May 31, 2005
Messages
1,720
Reaction score
59
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
i do not think the Iraqi government was innocent, but I do think that it was not relavent in the war against terror. Take this analogy. China attacks us. We get angry. We instead attack North Korea who is also equally deadly but irrelevant in the situation.
 

Youve Got To Be Kidding!

Active member
Joined
Jul 24, 2005
Messages
319
Reaction score
1
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
nkgupta80 said:
tons of businesses back in the day had and were forming deals and contracts with German business men. Its what kept many congressmen from declaring war against Germany. This isn't something solely tied to Bush or the republican party.

With that said, I, however, am not a Bush supporter.

Actualy its tied to them closer than you think, Prescot bush was a Traitor also happens to be bushes granpapa. He was a senetor and his buissuiness where taken for Trading with the enemy. Also he was one of the top 10 Contributors to IGFURBEN - who ran the concentration camps. Bush is a cocxxxxxing nazi. And so are the rest of the republicans who back him.
 
Joined
Aug 9, 2005
Messages
72
Reaction score
0
Location
Nevada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
So let me try to understand your logic here... So you're saying that if your great grandpa made business deals with the Germans in WWII, then 70 years later you are a nazi, and all of your friends are a nazis. :roll:

Stuff like this wasn't too uncommon. Even in many families I know personally, go back far enough, there was some dealings with them.
 
Last edited:

SMIRKnCHIMP

Banned
Joined
Aug 9, 2005
Messages
92
Reaction score
0
Location
Redneck Rivera-Winters / Upper Montana -Summers
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
PhotonicLaceration said:
I'm mainly only writing this in response to your first post:

SmirknChimp,

First off, I don't give a crap about that religious B.S., being that I am unreligous. Actually, I'm glad the President has a little bit of self-confidence instead of being a coward that's afraid to act on anything for any reason. And about that garbage about being for the cause of good, I believe that you are misguided, because in the long run our actions in the middle east should prove good if we can achieve our goals.


Do you really honestly, think that Iraq was an innocent country, or that Saddam Hussein, the dictator of Iraq who committed genocide and killed more than 400,000 kurds was an innocent man? Truly, your definition of innocent is quite disturbing. I hope you do not wish to be ruled by such an innocent man.

Also, your comparison of the United States to the Nazis is completely out of line, and a disservice to those who served in World War II, and those who are in the U.S. Armed Forces today. In my opinion it is also a disservice to history and shows your obvious lack of knowledge for the past.

Not only are the United States not murdering civilians by the hordes, but in fact these most recent operations have been less costly to the indigenous civilian population than almost any significant military operation in the past, especially when looking at Vietnam, WWII, and other wars of the past. Today, we don't firebomb cities killing hundreds of thousands at a time like in world war II, we don't artillery and utterly annihilate small towns via the dropping of dumb bombs. Through the use of smart weapons instead dumb weapons and by manually clearing out many buildings door-to-door, we are going out of our way to make sure that as few civilians are killed as possible. In fact, now that the invasion is done, and we are doing peace keeping operations, far more civilians are being killed by the insurgents and suicide bombers than us. And combined, between U.S. inflicted civilian casualties and those of the suicide bombers, the average number of daily civilian casualties still isn't much higher than the number Saddam would murder on a daily basis to aid his agenda.

In fact, if anyone is going to be compared to Hitler, it should be Saddam Hussein, who is a racist that has committed genocide, who exploited his country for his own personal riches.

The Insurgents in Iraq, who most of which aren't even from Iraq are not in much public support of the Iraqi population, which don't take to kindly to being blown up if you can put yourself in there shoes.

Also, last time I heard, Hitler wasn't supported by a very large fraction of the French population when they invaded. Hitler also didn't help set up a French military right after he tore down the first one, and he didn't seem to interested in setting them a good system.

As far as the Weapons of Mass Destruction are concerned, even Saddam thought he had them according to the paper trails... He instilled such fear into his subjects, that the ones that were supposed to head the programs for development of the weapons told him they had been developed to save their own skins from being tortured and killed.

Being that it was a war against terror and not a war against Osama Bin Laden, is another reason Saddam had to be dealt with. While we don't have official evidence, there is significant paper trails that indicate that he could have been funding many officially recognized terrorist organizations including the Al Qaida. Even if he didn't specifically fund terrorists, he still supported them, since he sure wasn't doing anything to prevent them from behiving in his country.

Further, how many American lives could've been saved if Clinton finnished the job when it was his turn? How many lives would it risk in the future if we left the problem unscathed?

Also, are you forgetting that the recent recession started three months before the end of the Clinton administration?

When people come accrossed and start making comparisons between President Bush and Hitler, or any other invalid comparison as drastic as that, how can anyone take them seriously?

History Lesson:
Learn about WWII. If you were to compare modern tactics to the tactics of the ALLIES in WWII, I bet you'd have a heart attack if you can call modern tactics Nazi-like. Look at Dresden for instance. Especially, look at the Nazis and axis powers from WWII. Then when you're done, compare Saddam to Bush.... see which one is more like Hitler.

I appreciate your opinionated response........I stand BY my original post!
 

SMIRKnCHIMP

Banned
Joined
Aug 9, 2005
Messages
92
Reaction score
0
Location
Redneck Rivera-Winters / Upper Montana -Summers
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
PhotonicLaceration said:
So let me try to understand your logic here... So you're saying that if your great grandpa made business deals with the Germans in WWII, then 70 years later you are a nazi, and all of your friends are a nazis. :roll:

Stuff like this wasn't too uncommon. Even in many families I know personally, go back far enough, there was some dealings with them.

Care to go into detail.
 

nkgupta80

DP Veteran
Joined
May 31, 2005
Messages
1,720
Reaction score
59
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
America was pretty Nazi-supportive back in the day when the war was about to begin.
 
Joined
Aug 9, 2005
Messages
72
Reaction score
0
Location
Nevada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Okay, details, must you ask... Someone related to myself came very close to setting up a park system over there, but instead actually ended up setting one up in Denver.

Before '42, (U.S. involvment) in the United States, everyone was in for the money as we were nuetral (until supply vessels started getting sunk)... and many people were just as against joining war as they are today.
 

IValueFreedom

Member
Joined
Jul 23, 2005
Messages
168
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
SMIRKnCHIMP said:
How can any man who decides he wants to run for political office, on cue suddenly experience a miraculous born again Christian conversion…not being critical, the coincidence is just too opportunistic. A story right out of Hollywood--*Bush said to James Robinson: 'I feel like God wants me to run for President. I can't explain it, but I sense my country is going to need me. .. I know it won't be easy on me or my family, but God wants me to do it.
Umm... is it not possible that someone finds Christ then decides that the best way to help the world is to make a change in it (thru politics)?
Even though I do not support him or his cause, and think he's a horrible horrible man who will spend eternity in Hell (right next to his father and Regan), your argument doesn't seem cohesive.




SMIRKnCHIMP said:
The wholesale murder of the innocent Iraqi women and children is not the American way...but the way of a Nazi don't you agree? Government documents show (Prescott Bush) the President Grandfather the MANAGING Director of a bank seized by the federal government because of its close ties to a German industrialist who helped bankroll Adolph Hitler's rise to power.

FoxNews would not lie!!
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,100474,00.html

Yep, while my family along with millions of other were fighting the Nazi's. While our President’s Grandfather ‘Prescott Bush’ was supporting the mass murder of HITLER because he could make a dollar from it!

Your detailed reply would be most appreciated!!

First, I don't get if the fox news comment is supposed to be sarcastic or serious :\ Fox News is so slanted and biased it should be considered editorial instead of news.

Second, one cannot blame George W. Bush for his grandfather's actions. What you're provoking is a simple smear campaign. There is no logic to "his grandpa supported the German economy during the Nazi era, therefore Geogre W. Bush supports Nazis!!!!"

There are more than enough things that George has done to warrant hatred from ALL Americans who value freedom and the principles that our great nation were founded on to have to make things up or mislead readers.

He's a horrible, immoral man.
 

Blueberry

New member
Joined
Jul 21, 2005
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
Location
New England
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
Bush should immediately sign up his twins for military service to show the world how much he believes in the war effort, to prove that this mission is noble, worth fighting, and most importantly, worth losing family members over.
Put your money where your mouth is, dude. :doh
 

cnredd

Major General Big Lug
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 5, 2005
Messages
8,682
Reaction score
262
Location
Philadelphia,PA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Blueberry said:
Bush should immediately sign up his twins for military service to show the world how much he believes in the war effort, to prove that this mission is noble, worth fighting, and most importantly, worth losing family members over.
Put your money where your mouth is, dude. :doh
Military is a VOLUNTEER service, which has a mandatory age limit.
It is illegal to sign someone else up.

To believe that someone should be forced into military service for what they themselves believe is ignorant.
 

Kelzie

The Almighty
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
13,534
Reaction score
1,000
Location
Denver, CO
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
cnredd said:
Military is a VOLUNTEER service, which has a mandatory age limit.
It is illegal to sign someone else up.

To believe that someone should be forced into military service for what they themselves believe is ignorant.
Or even worse. For what their father believes...
 

cnredd

Major General Big Lug
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 5, 2005
Messages
8,682
Reaction score
262
Location
Philadelphia,PA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
SMIRKnCHIMP said:
WHY ARE YOU NOT IN THE MILITARY
I took the Navy test in '90...they said I did "quite well", but didn't give specifics...failed the physical, which had to be one of the stupidest things on earth considering I was a pro-wrestler at the time....

You are making an assumption that if one agrees with the government's military functions, then they should be there; which, I guess for you, would be quite nice; having everyone who disagrees with you fighting overseas to protect your right to be "48 years old" going on "retarded"....
 

cnredd

Major General Big Lug
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 5, 2005
Messages
8,682
Reaction score
262
Location
Philadelphia,PA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Kelzie said:
Or even worse. For what their father believes...
Overall...agreed, but keep in mind that once someone is 18, they are not bound by law to go along with what daddy says...
 

SMIRKnCHIMP

Banned
Joined
Aug 9, 2005
Messages
92
Reaction score
0
Location
Redneck Rivera-Winters / Upper Montana -Summers
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
cnredd said:
I took the Navy test in '90...they said I did "quite well", but didn't give specifics...failed the physical, which had to be one of the stupidest things on earth considering I was a pro-wrestler at the time....

You are making an assumption that if one agrees with the government's military functions, then they should be there; which, I guess for you, would be quite nice; having everyone who disagrees with you fighting overseas to protect your right to be "48 years old" going on "retarded"....


iNTERNET BOASTERS ARE A-PLENTY........NOT THAT IT MATTERS.....I THINK YOU ARE A TRUTH STRETCHER.


GOMER I SERVED IN THE US AIR-FORCE 1977 TO 1985.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom