Political question.

[treeninja]

George Bush; a great president or the greatest president?

Remember, if you vote that he's only a great president you are turning your back on America.

[ericjosepi]

Are we talking Sr. or Jr? They're both ****ing morons...

[samureye]

I'm not American, people like to make fun of him, Leno, Conan, that's all good and whatnot, but I had no problem with him. I looked at most of Farenheight 911 and changed my mind completely, then learnt that Moore can basically twist things, so I forgot why I disliked Bush so much, and now i'm back to the beginning. Colbert likes him and I did too. Ah well. Don't care much for American politics, I have my own to deal with :D

[ariastar]

I say "Greatest" in the sense of Alexander the "Great." It doesn't have to mean good. It can mean "unusually or comparatively large in size or dimensions," and he has done some greatly terrible things.

[phatlip12]

I would say he's on the list of worst.

[xibalba]

http://i178.photobucket.com/albums/w243/soadfreak_2007/beavisandbuttheadbush.jpg

[rabidbadger]

This whole thread is a big fat joke, right?

[samureye]

You've been waiting to pust that out of the photobucket, eh?

The scary thing, they didn't photoshop Cheney's mouth.

[samureye]

This whole thread is a big fat joke, right?


I know, right? He didn't even include a Chuck Norris level of greatness as an option.

[acidburn]

This whole thread is a big fat joke, right?

I hope so...........

[electricalburn]

worst presidick

[rabidbadger]

I know, right? He didn't even include a Chuck Norris level of greatness as an option.

Man, when I saw a mod posted here I thought it was to lock this thread, not encourage him. Because this is all...


http://jovan.ru/pics2/flamebait.gif

[masherscf]

People that haven't been alive for more than three presidents should be making poles about presidents.

[samureye]

Funny animation - and can't I partake in the conversations here?

[xibalba]

People that haven't been alive for more than three presidents should be making poles about presidents.

Shouldn't that be "Shouldn't"? :D

[treeninja]

This whole thread is a big fat joke, right?

It's not. George W. Bush brought freedom and democracy to Iraq, however they refused it. They have sectarian violence occuring between people of the same country and race, which is just wrong. Why can't the Iraqis get along like good Christians?

[rabidbadger]

Craig Christ, now I now your joking...

[xibalba]

Craig Christ, now I now your joking...
know^ heh ;)

[magunwarrior]

George Bush; a great president or the greatest president?

Remember, if you vote that he's only a great president you are turning your back on America.

Stop trying to be Stephen Colbert.

[rabidbadger]

Funny animation - and can't I partake in the conversations here?

Of course you can. But you need to look at it more objectively as a mod. The poll is a "push poll" it doesn't have real options. If the kid who started it was making an obvious joke, then fine, but he's serious. He started a one sided conversation with himself, and therefore:

A WITCH!

(throw him into the pond.)

(er, I mean flame bait.)

Now if he wanted to start a real, reasoned political debate thread, then fine. But that was never his intent. Phatlip will shut this thread up the second he stumbles upon it, no doubt.

[sevver]

Iraqis are not Christians (most of them anyhow). I THINK that they are Muslim. I also think that they feel that they are owed land or something, and that God gave them some Promised Land, that they in turn gave away, and now they want back. I am not positive, but it is something like that. I will know eventually though as I am studying some historical things that involve that whole mess.

[xibalba]

Real political debates are boring and usally turn into a big arguement.

[masherscf]

It's not. George W. Bush brought freedom and democracy to Iraq, however they refused it.

George Bush wouldn't know freedom and democracy if it sat on his face.

How could he have thought that he could help build a government when he hates government so much?

[samureye]

Of course you can. But you need to look at it more objectively as a mod. The poll is a "push poll" it doesn't have real options. If the kid who started it was making an obvious joke, then fine, but he's serious. He started a one sided conversation with himself, and therefore:

A WITCH!

(throw him into the pond.)

(er, I mean flame bait.)

Now if he wanted to start a real, reasoned political debate thread, then fine. But that was never his intent. Phatlip will shut this thread up the second he stumbles upon it, no doubt.

Haha, not gonna touch the Phatlip comment.

Nothing wrong with this thing, really, no animosity here. I would like to think that the creator of this thread is not going to act immaturely if someone differs in opinion. That's why I didn't close the thread. Should I close a thread about someone who says they like Google because others may like Yahoo!? No, but if there was a flaming and all that nasty stuff then yes, I would close it.

[canadaneedsmusic]

President Bush is both a bad and good president.

He's a good president because he pulled the country together after 9/11 and did exactly what people wanted. Going into Iraq obviously wasn't the smartest move, not because it wasn't 'right', but because their plan hasn't worked, and they've been there far too long, are losing far too many people, and spending far too much money. But, going there to liberate people was a good idea in my book. And the Iraq people are for the most part on the side of the US in terms of wanting democracy and wanting to start their life. However, it is the small percentage who have taken fighting the 'West' into their own hands that are causing the problems in the entire region. You can't blame Bush for that.

He was/is a bad president because he has spent WAY too much money. He's a Republican yet he spends like a Dem. But then again, it really is the war that is sucking all of the money out of the budget.

So, I think he was a solid president because he was strong, and wasn't afraid to show what the US can do. But was a poor president because of national issues.

[samureye]

From your name, I'd say you were from Canadia.

[xibalba]

Typing in
failure
in google and hitting I'm Feeling Lucky

[samureye]

Typing in
failure
in google and hitting I'm Feeling Lucky

Wow, Google-bombing, never seen that before. I thought it was supposed to be "miserable failure".

[rabidbadger]

I give up. Geeks and politics don't mix.

(Masher, will you marry me? I know, I've asked before. You got a wife, kids, etc, but Eric is playing hard to get, so you're my only hope. We could move to Utah, and have several husband/wife combos...)

[xibalba]

Wow, Google-bombing, never seen that before. I thought it was supposed to be "miserable failure".

That doesn't work anymore takes you to a BBC article about it.

[masherscf]

He was/is a bad president because he has spent WAY too much money. He's a Republican yet he spends like a Dem. But then again, it really is the war that is sucking all of the money out of the budget.

Dude, he spends ... JUST like a Republican. Stop listening to the "tax and spend" democrat BS that they've been slinging for the last thirty years. The first thing I do when I build my time machine is go back and slaughter Walter Mondale before he promises to raise taxes in his nomination acceptance speech. Everyone remembers a democrat promising to raise the taxes... no one remembers why. It was Reagan's deficit spending. Yep, good old Ronny. "The Great Communicator" was also "The Great Spender." Guess what, he tops many lists as the greatest president ever!

Don't believe me? Look at the graph. Look where the graph is steepest...

http://www.cedarcomm.com/~stevelm1/usdebt_files/image002.gif

[sevver]

You can almost cut the desperation with a knife

[canadaneedsmusic]

From your name, I'd say you were from Canadia.

And? Sorry, I don't understand the comment.

[canadaneedsmusic]

masherscf, I wasn't saying that Republican's don't over spend, because they do, if you look at how much debt the US is in it's pretty obvious. What I was saying is that Republicans are supposed to cut spending, not that they do. And Dems want to increase spending because they want to offer more things to the citizens. What is odd is that the Dems recently have been the ones who are better with the money. Both of the Bush's went to war though, which explains some of that spending.

Edit: It's pretty funny how the chart says "first oil war" and "second oil war".

[ariastar]

It's not. George W. Bush brought freedom and democracy to Iraq, however they refused it. They have sectarian violence occuring between people of the same country and race, which is just wrong. Why can't the Iraqis get along like good Christians?

When have Christians ever not killed each other?

And before America invaded Iraq, they at least had running water and shelter, things taken from them now.

[ariastar]

George Bush wouldn't know freedom and democracy if it sat on his face.

How could he have thought that he could help build a government when he hates government so much?

Oil. The same reason behind Desert Shield and Desert Storm.

[rabidbadger]

And both useless wars were based on choice, not protection.

Unless protecting oil fields we don't own is worth more than the

3000 plus AMERICAN LIVES LOST

and the multi thousands of "freed" dead Iraqis...

Bush is evil. the end.

[ariastar]

President Bush is both a bad and good president.

He's a good president because he pulled the country together after 9/11 and did exactly what people wanted. Going into Iraq obviously wasn't the smartest move, not because it wasn't 'right', but because their plan hasn't worked, and they've been there far too long, are losing far too many people, and spending far too much money. But, going there to liberate people was a good idea in my book. And the Iraq people are for the most part on the side of the US in terms of wanting democracy and wanting to start their life. However, it is the small percentage who have taken fighting the 'West' into their own hands that are causing the problems in the entire region. You can't blame Bush for that.

He was/is a bad president because he has spent WAY too much money. He's a Republican yet he spends like a Dem. But then again, it really is the war that is sucking all of the money out of the budget.

So, I think he was a solid president because he was strong, and wasn't afraid to show what the US can do. But was a poor president because of national issues.

Look, there are other countries far worse off than Iraq. Most countries in Africa are far worse. But America doesn't stand to gain anything. i.e. OIL

He was looking for a fight after failing to get Bin Laden. Go after Iraq and Hussein to save face.

Bush didn't pull America together after 9-11. The citizens of this country did. We banded together. He had nothing to do with it other than ordering troops to Afghanistan. No matter who was president, people would have come together. Therefore, he had NOTHING to do with it.

[phatlip12]

The Bush administration started planning the invasion on Iraq before 9-11. IMO, they looked at 9-11 as a "Pearl Harbor"; a means of gaining support to invade (though it really didn't work since so many people were and still are against it).

I'm NOT a crazy conspiracy theorist that believes the government had bombs placed in the towers/pentagon. I must admit though that it does smell a little fishy. Did the government know about the attacks prior to them happening? Interesting thought. There are quite a few things that make it appear as so.

BTW, as long as this thread is kept civil I will leave it open.

[rabidbadger]

Aria: Huzzah!!!

7890

[masherscf]

masherscf, I wasn't saying that Republican's don't over spend, because they do, if you look at how much debt the US is in it's pretty obvious. What I was saying is that Republicans are supposed to cut spending, not that they do. And Dems want to increase spending because they want to offer more things to the citizens. What is odd is that the Dems recently have been the ones who are better with the money. Both of the Bush's went to war though, which explains some of that spending.

Edit: It's pretty funny how the chart says "first oil war" and "second oil war".

Well, you have to have a certain agenda before you even make a graphic like that.

Bush went to war in Iraq for many reasons. In the end, there were more reasons to go than not to.

Here they are...

1. As Saddam had no WMDs, It was only a matter of time before the UN abolished the economic sanctions Saddam. At that point Saddam would have been able to rebuild is military strength and before an actual threat to the US. It was actually a wise idea to want to take him out while he was still weak.

2. The world needs Iraqi oil on the open market. They need it administered peacefully and honestly. The proceeds need to build Iraq, not enrich a crazy man.

3. Saddam tried to assassinate Bush I. Bush II wanted revenge.


It was clear the Saddam needed to be eliminated. Using subtle political pressure to do so was not going be enough. In the early days Bush II was probably afraid that the political stars would not align. In fact, If he hadn't been handed 9-11 on a platter, it may have been years or never for him.

His mistakes in Iraq was thinking that it was something he could do. He started by believing the lies about Vietnam.

The last generation of white-house chest thumpers lied about why Vietnam failed. the lies were a disloyal press that stirred-up popular discontent at home. Protesters that disheartened the troops. This lie blames the press, people and even disheartened troops like John Kerry.

So, here we are again.

[rabidbadger]

Did the government know about the attacks prior to them happening?

And if they did, then they failed. And if they didn't then they failed to know.

Either way. Bush = Failure.


BTW, as long as this thread is kept civil I will leave it open.

You closed our lovely orgy thread for lesser reasons.

[phatlip12]

And if they did, then they failed. And if they didn't then they failed to know.

Either way. Bush = Failure.



You closed our lovely orgy thread for lesser reasons.

Actually, I didn't close the orgy thread. Any kind of "moderator action" I do I use blue text and end it with "~Phatlip12" and that wasn't present in that thread.

Example:
This is an example of me locking a thread~Phatlip12

[electricalburn]

From your name, I'd say you were from Canadia.

canada we dont need your opinion

[rabidbadger]

Actually, I didn't close the orgy thread. Any kind of "moderator action" I do I use blue text and end it with "~Phatlip12" and that wasn't present in that thread.

Example:
This is an example of me locking a thread~Phatlip12


Hmm. Coulda sworn it was you. Whatever. The final mod post by whatever mod killed it has been deleted, and I just suck with names...

Fess up, mods, who killed my favorite thread EVARRR??? :D

[ericjosepi]

canada we dont need your opinion

As in the country or canadaneedsmusic? Because If you mean the whole country I'll just silently sit by as your economy drags down the world and your military continues to stick phallic objects where it doesn't belong on the orders of a money-grubbing corrupt group of politicians.

ALSO: More AMERICANS have died in Iraq than the total death toll from all of 9/11. That's all you need to know that this was a very bad idea.

[electricalburn]

As in the country or canadaneedsmusic? Because If you mean the whole country I'll just silently sit by as your economy drags down the world and your military continues to stick phallic objects where it doesn't belong on the orders of a money-grubbing corrupt group of politicians.

yes



7667889

[phatlip12]

As in the country or canadaneedsmusic? Because If you mean the whole country I'll just silently sit by as your economy drags down the world and your military continues to stick phallic objects where it doesn't belong on the orders of a money-grubbing corrupt group of politicians.

ALSO: More AMERICANS have died in Iraq than the total death toll from all of 9/11. That's all you need to know that this was a very bad idea.

2008 isn't THAT far away. Gesh...

LOL

[rabidbadger]

You go, girl.

Has always pizzed me off about americans (lower case intentional) that we are so america-cenrtic. Maybe it's cause I was raised in another country. Maybe cause I read/hear/watch news/opinion beyond our egotistical shores...

But Canadians, Europeans, Asians, etc... get different view points that we never do. Unless you look for them. And they are just as legit as any Fox Noise rant you might hear while burping your baby or driving the kids to soccer, or whatever you disenchanted, over paid spoiled americans do while pretending to pay attention to what really shapes your lives. (Gas prices triple plus since bush in office.
Conincedence he's an oil man....)

idiots america. "greenday"

[tokenuser]

Religion and politics - flame wars on back to back nights.

Locked.

[samureye]

canada we dont need your opinion

Just wanted to point out that me saying that was a joke and I hope that comment was a joke.