• 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.

Republican Challange!

Alex

DP Veteran
Joined
May 31, 2005
Messages
2,963
Reaction score
855
Location
Milwaukee, WI
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Pacridge said:
And again I say you can't know what his reasons were for joining the Air National Guard. There's just no way of knowing why he joined. With his family ties it seems to me he could have easily "pulled a Cheney" and not served anywhere ever. I'm no fan of GW but when you say things like that I think it's insulting to everyone who served in the Guard. Those who serve our country, in any capacity, deserve our respect. IMO.

Here is your reason George Bush joined the National Guard:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/09/08/60II/main641984.shtml

Again... he is a coward.

I am not saying joining the National Guard is any less then anything, I AM SAYING THAT DOING IT TO DODGE THE DRAFT MAKES SOMEONE A COWARD.
 
Last edited:

Alex

DP Veteran
Joined
May 31, 2005
Messages
2,963
Reaction score
855
Location
Milwaukee, WI
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
SixStringHero said:
"[*]Bush lies and yet claims to be Christian"

I thought liberals were adamant about the separation of Church and State, and yet you make a comment that completely contradicts that belief?

How is this contradicting separation of church and state? Bush lied and that is against Christian teachings, therefore he has no integrity.
 

Pacridge

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 14, 2004
Messages
3,918
Reaction score
9
Location
Pacific Northwest US
alex said:
Here is your reason George Bush joined the National Guard:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/09/08/60II/main641984.shtml

Again... he is a coward.

I am not saying joining the National Guard is any less then anything, I AM SAYING THAT DOING IT TO DODGE THE DRAFT MAKES SOMEONE A COWARD.

I think that story may have some credibility issues.



And I still say with his family ties he could have easily avoided the whole military. Why would he serve at all?



I do have issues with the way he served, or lack there of.
 

Pacridge

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 14, 2004
Messages
3,918
Reaction score
9
Location
Pacific Northwest US
alex said:
How is this contradicting separation of church and state? Bush lied and that is against Christian teachings, therefore he has no integrity.

Yeah, I didn't get that either. Pointing out the guy lies and that goes against his religion doesn’t have anything to do with separation of church and state. Just points out he’s not credible and lacks integrity.
 

Squawker

Professor
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
1,314
Reaction score
4
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
No one seems to want to respond on the qoutes I found.
I will answer this and the question galenrox asked about why we don't respond to why we like President Bush. Speaking for myself, you don't need my opinion of him to fuel your hate and lies, you are doing so well all by yourselves. I don't want to participate in it as I prefer to debate the issues.
 

Alex

DP Veteran
Joined
May 31, 2005
Messages
2,963
Reaction score
855
Location
Milwaukee, WI
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
RightatNYU said:
Don't obfusticate. You could have easily said that anyone who lies has no integrity. You threw in the Christianity for a reason, to imply that Bush either doesnt follow his religion or that he's manipulating it, two falsehoods.

I said Christianity because it teaches that lying is a sin. Goerge Bush lied to cause a war, therefore he is a hypocrit to his religion. That is not integrity. When a Christian lies, they are not following their religion.


RightatNYU said:
Where in the 16th, 18th, or 25th Amendments is the government being regulated? And those are only the ones that passed. There have been, literally, over 750 amendments proposed in the past 10 years. Amendments to:

prohibit burning the flag
give equal quality health care to everyone
declare that life begins at conception
end early release of convicted criminals
make English the official language
make housing a constitutional right
protect the environment

That's a short list. None of those "regulate the government," so by your definition, everyone who proposed or supported ANY of them has no integrity. Is that what you're trying to say?

I cannot believe you used the 18th Amendment to prove your point. It did try to regulate the people, you are absolutely correct. It failed and and it was repealed (21st Amendment). This is an argument for NOT passing amendments that regulate the people. They do not work and it is not what our Constitution is for.

I think you mentioned the 25th Amendment in error. This does regulate the government in that it provides specific instructions for replacing a current president.

It would be a stretch for me to write that the 16th Amendment regulates the government. Although it does impose something on people, it does not tell the people that they cannot do something.

RightatNYU said:
...so by your definition, everyone who proposed or supported ANY of them has no integrity. Is that what you're trying to say?
Yes, anyone who swears to uphold our Constitution and then tries to abuse it by passing amendments that restrict the people, has no integrity. All those attempted amendments you mentioned did not pass for a reason-- they where not Constitutional.

RightatNYU said:
Or maybe it showed smart politicking, to say that he supported his party's efforts, but that he personally supported the idea of civil unions? Be honest, if you held every single politician to that same standard, not a damn one would have "integrity." In addition, the amendment and civil unions are not mutually exclusive. Read up.

Abusing our Constitution for political gain is not alright, no matter how anyone tries to spin it. Any politician that does it has no integrity, whether they are Republican or Democrat, or whatever.


RightatNYU said:
Right, it was a bogus war, and he (and every single other person in Washington, in every level of government) pushed for it. So it's his fault.

I'll make sure to remember that you said it's 100% his responsibility when 50 years from now teachers are teaching about the liberation of Afghanistan/Iraq as the turning point in the middle east, and John Kerry Jr. and all the other liberals are claiming that they supported President Bush 100% through all this.

Congress allowed the war because the Bush administration pushed for it. They believed the lies that the White House told them. Being responsible for "the turning point" in the middle east is not ours and it did not have to happen through war. It definitely should not have happened through war based on lies.



RightatNYU said:
One flaw in your argument: Know how that lawmaker got all that power? By following state laws. It's not illegal to do something completely legal. He's doing what he feels is the right thing, using all the avenues that are legalla available to him. You can't fault him for doing something that's accepted as the norm. These things happen all the time, recess nominations and the such.

Just because something happens all the time or because it is the law, does not make it right. It is wrong to give a single person the right to sign executive orders to pass a law or bill that congress denied.

RightatNYU said:
As opposed to draft dodger clinton, or the millions who either a) avoided serving at all, or b) happened not to be called up?

If Clinton dodged the draft, then yes, he is a coward also. I have never heard of this, so if you can direct me to the information, I would appreciate it. All the millions who avoid the draft are cowards. I am not saying that being a coward is a horrible thing. Everyone must protect their life. I am saying that when someone dodges the draft by joining the national guard, they do not have courage. Whether the are Republican or Democrat. Someone listed courage as a reason Republicans are good leaders. George Bush has no courage. If someone happens not to be called up, then they are not dodging anything.
 

Comrade Brian

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 18, 2005
Messages
1,239
Reaction score
0
Location
NE, Minnesota
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
democratmaster said:
No one seems to want to respond on the qoutes I found.

But I do have a quote for you:

We have only one poltical party in the country- the Money Party. And it has two branches- the Republican branch and the Democratic branch. - A. Miller
 

akyron

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 17, 2004
Messages
10,352
Reaction score
2,436
Location
Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
galenrox said:
No, I want it though. I debate so I can more fully understand why there are intelligent people that I disagree with. I want to understand what the people I disagree with are thinking, and to help them understand what I am thinking. So this is actually an honest question, and I have no intention to spread any hate and/or lies from what I am told, I just honestly don't understand why anyone would like George W. Bush, and I want someone to enlighten me in a multi-word explanation.


President Bush's Education Reform Initiatives
Strengthening Our Military, Supporting Our Veterans
The President’s Policies are Helping America’s Small Businesses
Goals of Our Plan for a 21 st Century Military
Americans with Disabilities Act
Strengthening Higher Education
Reforming the Tax Code
Fixing the Current Social Security System
National Energy Policy
Brownfields Program
Security
Project BioShield
Homeownership
Combating Corporate Fraud
Social Security
Hydrogen Fuel Technology
Broadband Technology
Presidential Math and Science Scholars Fund



I also enjoy Scott McClellans press briefings. They can be pretty funny.

If you dont know the President I cannot see how you could like him but I like more of his policies than I don't like right now.
You do not have to like your leader to be willing to follow him.

I disagreed with how Kerry's platform was portrayed as the removal of the President.
They ran a poor campaign. During the debates his personal inclusion of **** Cheny's daughter was a big mistake and really made him appear the typical sleazy politician.
Kerry was smarmy and portrayed himself as weaker than the President and Nader is ....well Ralph Nader.
 

akyron

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 17, 2004
Messages
10,352
Reaction score
2,436
Location
Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
galenrox said:
I just want a government that will only pass laws that we need, not just laws that THEY want.


Amen. This whole buring flag thing is a tremendous waste of time and money.
 

ALiberalModerate

Pragmatist
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
28,734
Reaction score
19,199
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Pacridge said:
I'm not sure you can say why he joined the Air National Guard. Who's knows for sure? Plus when you say things like that it's kind of insulting to everyone who served in the National Guard. Do you seriously think every person who joined the National Guard did so to get out of Vietnam?

Durring Vietnam, pretty much yes. Hence the thousand or so names a waiting list that Bush's dad pulled stings for him to get in front of.
 

ALiberalModerate

Pragmatist
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
28,734
Reaction score
19,199
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Bush is certainly likable, I will give him that. If he wasn’t on the wagon, I suspect he would be a nice guy to have a beer with. That said, I think it’s fairly obvious he stretched the truth on the need for a preemptive war with Iraq. I am sure he felt the ends justified the means, but nevertheless, none of his pre-war claims about Iraq came out to be actually true. Don’t get me wrong though, I don’t think that he is a bad guy. Yeah, he definitely plays it up for the fundies, but they have a history of being pretty easily had you know. I mean, this is the group that has made thugs like Benny Hinn, Jimmy Swaggart, and Jim Baker very rich men. So when they claim that Bush is one notch below Jesus in their book, I don’t know that’s a very good endorsement. Just the same, truly honest presidents usually make pretty crappy presidents (excluding Truman). The only honest ones I can think of that we have had in the last 50 years, Ford and Carter, both were fairly crappy presidents.

All that said, my biggest problem with Bush is that man obviously has no thirst for knowledge what so ever. I think he is a man of average intelligence and with no curiosity at all. He has a very poor grasp of issues. Even his political friends have said about him that many issues are totally off of his radar screen. In terms of brains, the man is no Clinton, FDR, Kennedy, or Nixon. In fact, he is no Reagan or Bush Sr. either. I would wager that Bush is probably one of the most unknowledgeable presidents this nation has had in at least 100 years or more and he puts no obvious efforts forward to rectify that. I am not saying he is an idiot, but rather I am saying that he is obviously a man of average intelligence and has won the last 2 elections not on his governing ability but rather on the fact that he lucked out and ran against the 2 biggest political lightweights since George McGovern. As I wrote in a different thread, Bush has pretty much consistently had low to almost abysmal job approval numbers. Obviously a majority of Americans don’t like the way he is running the nation. If you set aside the fundies and the far right wing zealots, he enjoys little support from the center and none from the left. Reagan and Clinton both had strong approval ratings for much of the presidency. In fact, Clinton had the highest approval ratings since FDR for much of his presidency because by and large 7 to 8 out of 10 people consistently approved of how he ran things (despite all his personal failings). Bush has done good to get 5 out of 10 (and the economy seems pretty decent right now yet he has his lowest numbers ever).
 

Squawker

Professor
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
1,314
Reaction score
4
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
If one believes everything they read in the main stream media, everything you cited is true from the information they gave to the public, SouthernDemocrat. Truth be known, President Bush isn't a retard, and Clinton wasn't Gods gift to America. It is a bit pompous to assume you know what the majority of Americans think, or what President Bush's capabilities are. The most popular, leader is not always the best one.
 

ALiberalModerate

Pragmatist
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
28,734
Reaction score
19,199
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Squawker said:
If one believes everything they read in the main stream media, everything you cited is true from the information they gave to the public, SouthernDemocrat. Truth be known, President Bush isn't a retard, and Clinton wasn't Gods gift to America. It is a bit pompous to assume you know what the majority of Americans think, or what President Bush's capabilities are. The most popular, leader is not always the best one.

I am not saying I have some secret incite into what most Americans think, I am merely going by the man’s job approval ratings, with the exception of the period over 9/11, they have been between mediocre to abysmal. Moreover, as I pointed out, I don’t think he is a retard, I merely stated that it seems he is a man of just average intelligence with little or no thirst for knowledge. In my opinion, one of the core qualifications for being a good president ought to be a huge thirst for knowledge (a quality that even many of his political friends acknowledge that he does not have). Moreover, I did not claim that Clinton was “God’s gift to America”, but rather I pointed out that a huge majority of people consistently liked how Clinton ran the nation, and that Clinton was an extremely intelligent individual (something even his political enemies by and large acknowledge). All you guys on the right seem to do is make excuses for President Bush’s obvious intellectual laziness: “He is not a good speaker”, “He has surrounded himself with very smart people”, “So what if he is an embarrassment to the entire nation when he speaks unscripted” (Ok, you guys don’t say that last one.).
 

Connecticutter

Active member
Joined
Jun 25, 2005
Messages
432
Reaction score
1
Location
New Haven, CT
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Alright - I guess I'm going to dig in and explain what compelled me to vote for George Bush. Its a complex matter, so I think that's why its hard for people to sum it up. Just like many Republicans say that they voted for Bush because he is a good leader and elaborate no further, I have asked Kerry voters why they voted the way they did and sometimes I get things like "because Bush is an Idiot." Etc.

First of all, I don't care about what happened in Vietnam. Swift boat vets, Bush's guard service, didn't seem relevant to me. Then again, I wasn't alive, so what do I know?

I also overlook Bush's public speaking. I know how hard it is to speak on the fly in a public situation, and as often as Bush has to do this, its not hard to find a few clips of him making some gaffes. I think its funny. I've seen Kerry says dumb things as well, and no one notices because he's good at hiding it.

On foriegn policy, each of our candidates has some flaw. Bush had made some tactical mistakes in the War on Terror, especially by using the agument about WMDs in Iraq. I don't think he lied - this was the intel he was getting. John Kerry agreed with him at the time. So did Edwards. I don't think they can use the excuse "Bush fooled me." They are US senators. They are expected to do more reserach than the rest of us. For the future, Bush wants to stay the course, get Iraq and Afghanistan running on their own two feet - and I agree with that.

Kerry's foriegn policy was incoherent. He criticizes Bush for "outsourcing" our soldiers in Afghanistan, yet he also blames Bush for not using more foriegn troops. In Iraq, we know that the European countries were financially involved with the old regime, so nothing would have gotten them to pitch in. Other than that, he didn't offer any alternative to Bush other than the "global test" thing. Bush is against the ICC and other international governing bodies. I don't think that our own politicans are 100% trustworthy, but I think these foriegn politicians are worse and if they start pushing policies down our throat that we don't like, we'd be in a tough position to stop them through democratic means.

On the domestic front, both Bush and Kerry will be big spenders. Kerry would try to raise taxes (or lower the tax cut, however you want to look at it). If the politically allowable deficit stays constant, this would discourage congress from doing much about our spending problem. The democrats main complaint about Bush's spending programs is that they don't get a large enough chunck of the funds.

Another huge issue where I think that there is a big difference between Bush and Kerry is in Judicial nominees. I prefer conservative judges. I don't want the constitution to be declared a "living and breathing document" as much as an employee would want his boss to declare their contract to be living and breathing. Specifically, the recent decisions that institutionalize the war on drugs and eminent domain, both of which I oppose, where refuted by conservative Judges. Judges should interpret our laws, even if they are bad laws. That's what separation of powers is all about.

There are other issues, too, but this post is getting long, so I'm going to end it. Hope this helps clear up what's in the mind of this Bush voter.
 
Top Bottom