anyone against bush, US president?

[dab_20]

i just dont understand what the war is for. i think bush changes his reasoning every week. my brother had to go to iraq 3 times, and he got hurt there. i think bush could care less. some grown ups say i am too young to understand it, but i can understand it just fine. im not dumb. no offense to anyone who supports him. its just kind of a vent. i missed my brother alot, what a stupid war. my friends brother died in iraq last month. i feel awful for her.

[WolvesRawk]

You're right. Bush stinks. But the people who run against him are even worse so America doesn't really have a chance. I'm sorry about your brother getting hurt. The war is really pointless.

[Lady's Human]

I'm going to be as polite as possible and just ask that this be moved to the dog house where it belongs.

[dab_20]

well i wasn't exactly sure were to put it, and i didn't know exactly what the dog house was for. sorry.

[moosmom]

I cannot STAND George Dubya. Didn't vote for him the first OR second time. He's a daddy's puppet and is out to make the rich folks richer while the rest of the country goes down the toilet.

As far as the war in Iraq, our men have been there to train the Iraqi people how to defend their own country. We've done our part and now we need to get out of there and let them do what our men trained them to do.

[WolvesRawk]

I think that he's better than the people that ran against him but he is awful.

[dab_20]

I say its about time to have a girl president!

[WolvesRawk]

I say its about time to have a girl president!Yeah!

[Karen]

First, I moved this to The Dog House, where any discussion of politics belongs.

It would depend on what "girl" was running. I don't necessarily trust female politicians any more than I trust male politicians.

Are you prepared to vote once you turn 18? Serve in public office? What policies would you put forth? What would you change about how the government is run?

[dab_20]

i know i certainly coulden't take on the responsibilities. although, i am like 30 years away from even being able to run for president. :rolleyes: lol

[.sarah]

You can run for president at 35 ;)

I don't know enough about politics to say whether or not Bush is doing a good job. I don't think he's the best president, but having grown up with Clinton as a president I obviously don't have anyone good to compare him too ;)

[dab_20]

oh well than like 22 years. yah clinton and bush are the only presidents there has been since i was born.

[.sarah]

George Bush I believe was the president when I was born, but I know nothing about him except he's our current president's dad.

[Karen]

Well, you have time until you turn 18 to educate yourself on politics, so that your vote will be an educated one!

People fought hard to give you the right to vote, especially as you are female, so make the best of it!

[Suki Wingy]

I do not understand or support him. I rely on CNN to inform me, mostly because my dad has it on ALL the time.

[Corinna]

You youngsters need to learn to get information from more than one source . Be in formed not just what you hear from your circle oof infleance dig out your oun info. go to the voting records of your officals that tells you all about them .
As to the war in Iraq I would rather it is fought there than on our american soil. I would hate to Have 911 here every day. Just like Iraq God bless our service people. and keep them safe

[dab_20]

I agree it's better there than here.

[Miss Z]

Bush is HEAVILY critisized where i live. Most people think he's a complete moron, that's not to say i do, but mention george bush to some people i know and you'll get a lecture on the bad points of the iraq war. I don't really think he's a moron, but i think it's time to pull out of iraq. No matter how many lunatics we pull out of leadership, there's always far more to take the place. And bush isn't entirely to blame, tony blair's in it too....

[Corinna]

Too many people are so focused on one issuse they forget the rest of the things he has to deal with too.

[dab_20]

Well I know it's probably hard for him. But most people who have had someone very close to them that had to go over seas and got hurt or died, are upset with him. That's mainly the reason I am.... because he's making all of them stay over there. When it really isn't nessacery. And he shoulden't be lieing like he is. You shoulden't believe the media... but in his speeches he is lieing out of his own mouth. There is no excuse for that. We deserve the truth.

[Corinna]

We do not have a draft so they entered the service on there own choice , I give high praise for that . They knew the possiblity of war was there I think to many families are not suporting the service persons decision . There has been a lot of units with Montanans iin them that ask us to help there fellow members becouse so many do not have family support, we have a monthly drive here in Montana to send theres folks greetings and nessesities . So to get on my soap box but it seems too many people start this anti war stuff forgetting these folks went becouse they are doing the USA a service to keep us free. and then see the anti stuff makes them feel like they are doing there job for no reason . I'm proud to be an American and proud of the folks that do go so I can be here discussing this with you all.
If I were younger I probly would be there to, but the best a 44 year ol woman can do now is wrtie letters, knit items for them , and pray.
SO lets not make the service floks feel like the vets who came home from Veitnaom ,not appreseacted.

[dab_20]

well i support them 100 percent! my own brother was there so of course i support them!! they are doing a really great job. and i don't support the anti war things that people do as i said earlier.

[Cubby'sMom]

I honestly don't think Bush is a moron, and I support our troops. I agree as well, it's better not to have a war this big on our soil. My brother is in the Marines, he is not stationed in Iraq, but I'm still proud of him. Sometimes I'm not sure we had a choice but to go into Iraq, but I'm only 14, I don't know that much. I pick up alot of stuff in my history class though, and my family as well, and I have formed a few of my own oppinions.

[joycenalex]

there is a difference between supporting the troops and supporting mr bush.

[Lady's Human]

As to the troops staying in Iraq for a long term, we broke it (threw out saddam) we need to fix it, otherwise all that will happen is it will devolve into a civil war.

As to lies, I've yet to see the President (like who it is or not, he holds the office, please give due respect to the office if not the person holding it) proven to have lied. I've heard countless people who oppose him accuse him of lying, yet it continues to be a classic case of mudslinging......throw it up against the wall and see what sticks. If nothing out of this batch sticks, keep slinging.

As to President Bush taking unilateral action in Iraq, Prior to the war, only three european countries opposed the war...............France, Germany, and Russia. What do these three countries have in common? They are all among the largest recipients of illegal oil for food money, they all sold weapons to Iraq after the embargo following the Gulf War was in place, and these three stood to make the most gains if Saddam Hussein stayed in power and the UN Sanctions were lifted (France, 40 Billion Dollar contract to improve oil fields, Russia, 60 billion dollar contract to do similar work, and Germany, who also had significant contracts promised to them). The three countries also held large amounts of Iraqi debt from weapons sales (many illegal weapons sales) and oil field work already completed which they stood to lose if the caolition forces removed Hussein.

As to the President planning the invasion before 9/11, the US Military has plans to invade probably every non-allied country on the face of the earth on the shelf, and these plans are rountinely updated. Anyone ever consider that this was part of a routine review?

As to WMD.......Prior to the war, there were many US allies (and non allies) who suspected that Iraq had WMD. Check out old issues of Janes Defense weekly at the local library. Democrats and Republicans alike had been hammering for years to end the situation and remove Saddam from power. The Democrats just can't stomach the idea (Senator Kerry in particular made some extremely hawkish comments in the late '90s, but changed his mind when he was running against the President (or did he? Depended on the sound bite)) To quote Naill Fergueson, the question shouldn't be why did the US lead an invasion of Iraq, but instead the question should be why it took 13 years and 22 violated UN resolutions to do it.

[dab_20]

Sorry, I didn't exactly understand your post. :confused: But it sounded really smart! :)

[Bonny]

President Bush is my hero. He has done what no other president has had the guts to do. He has started a war on terrorism & I applaud him for having the guts to stand up & not back down. The young men & women that are serving out counrtry & the ones who have died. I have the deepest respect & love them for they to are my heros. They have gone far & above the call of duty to not only save our country but the rest of the world from terrorism. :)

[JenBKR]

I think that everyone needs to remember not to believe everything you hear in the media. Many of the soldiers in Iraq believe in the war. Why? Because they actually see what is going on, not just hear about it from our "media." And remember, during WW II, no one over hear knew about what Hitler was doing, and when people did hear it they did not believe it. Remember, Bush and the government know about classified information that we may never know. Saddam was being compared to Hilter because of some of the horrible things he was doing. I suppose we should've let him continue??

[caseysmom]

My problem with the whole thing is there are lots of horrible dictators out there, but they don't control a lot of oil so oh well we do nothing.

If you want a fight on terrorism, go fight al queda...not Iraq.

[Alysser]

My brother went to war for fourteen months. I really didn't care until he had to go. Then, I really understood. I HATE BUSH! He makes stupid decisions. "I'm going to lower the taxes." That BS. He never did and the rich are getting richer while people are starving and dying. It's sickening. :mad:

[caseysmom]

I think history will show what kind of president Bush is, it seems like all the truths come out later, I honestly think it won't reflect well on this presidency.

[lvpets2002]

I cannot STAND George Dubya. Didn't vote for him the first OR second time. He's a daddy's puppet and is out to make the rich folks richer while the rest of the country goes down the toilet.

As far as the war in Iraq, our men have been there to train the Iraqi people how to defend their own country. We've done our part and now we need to get out of there and let them do what our men trained them to do.

:) Thank you Donna = I could have not worded it any better myself..

[dab_20]

My brother went to war for fourteen months. I really didn't care until he had to go. Then, I really understood. I HATE BUSH! He makes stupid decisions. "I'm going to lower the taxes." That BS. He never did and the rich are getting richer while people are starving and dying. It's sickening. :mad:

Now you can understand me. Your the same age and your brother also went to Iraq.

The reason I think Bush is a liar is not because of the media. It's because he will sya everything is getting better in Iraq and it's NOT. He has said things that I asked my brother about and it's LIES. My brother, like Maltese_Love's, had to experience the real thing so they know.

[Lady's Human]

Maltese, the President DID lower taxes. My federal tax bill went down and I'm far from rich.

The President does not work in a vaccum, and does NOT hold all the power in the country. While the Republican Party on paper controls both houses of Congress, it is a very slim and fractious majority. He cannot simply decide on Monday to do something and have the House and Senate hack off on it and have it law on Tuesday, as his plans for Social Security, taxes, and various budgetary items have shown. The President is in many cases a small part of what goes on. An example of this would be the numbe rof Presidential Vetoes out of his office. At the moment, I believe the number of Vetoes by the President is 0, as he knows the vetoes would be overridden by the congress he supposedly controls.

Things are getting better in Iraq. There is a small portion of the country that is not under control, and that's all the media cares to report on. If you asked a soldier in the Hurtgoen Forest in Germany at the close of WW2 how he thought the war was going, he probably would have said we were in deep trouble and were losing. Why? Because that small sector of the war the soldier saw was where we were getting pounded. The casualty rate was enormous, soldiers were going in as fresh troops one day and out on a stretcher (if they were lucky) the next. While this was going on, the Third Army was rolling up the Southern flank of the Reich and the war was ending. These soldiers in the forest would never have known it, though, as they only saw their sphere of action.

Dab, I believe you said your brother is a Marine, in which case he falls into the same category as the soldiers in the forest. The Marines are in some of the toughest sectors in the fight (Fallujah for example), and don't see a lot of what is going on in the rest of the theater.

The US is also fighting the war on terrorism on other fronts than Iraq, but Iraq is the only one that makes the news. We have soldiers in the Phillipines assisting the fight there. We have soldiers all over the Horn of Africa, and many other places in the world that don't get media coverage, but that doesn't mean they are not fighting terrorism. I have a friend who has spent more time in Africa over the last 4 years than he has spent in the US, but there aren't any cameras covering what he has done. Iraq is merely the cause celebre that people opposed to the President's policies are using to attack what he has done, while most of what he has done was done with the full consent of congess, including the democrats.

[dab_20]

Maltese, the President DID lower taxes. My federal tax bill went down and I'm far from rich.

The President does not work in a vaccum, and does NOT hold all the power in the country. While the Republican Party on paper controls both houses of Congress, it is a very slim and fractious majority. He cannot simply decide on Monday to do something and have the House and Senate hack off on it and have it law on Tuesday, as his plans for Social Security, taxes, and various budgetary items have shown. The President is in many cases a small part of what goes on. An example of this would be the numbe rof Presidential Vetoes out of his office. At the moment, I believe the number of Vetoes by the President is 0, as he knows the vetoes would be overridden by the congress he supposedly controls.

Things are getting better in Iraq. There is a small portion of the country that is not under control, and that's all the media cares to report on. If you asked a soldier in the Hurtgoen Forest in Germany at the close of WW2 how he thought the war was going, he probably would have said we were in deep trouble and were losing. Why? Because that small sector of the war the soldier saw was where we were getting pounded. The casualty rate was enormous, soldiers were going in as fresh troops one day and out on a stretcher (if they were lucky) the next. While this was going on, the Third Army was rolling up the Southern flank of the Reich and the war was ending. These soldiers in the forest would never have known it, though, as they only saw their sphere of action.

Dab, I believe you said your brother is a Marine, in which case he falls into the same category as the soldiers in the forest. The Marines are in some of the toughest sectors in the fight (Fallujah for example), and don't see a lot of what is going on in the rest of the theater.

The US is also fighting the war on terrorism on other fronts than Iraq, but Iraq is the only one that makes the news. We have soldiers in the Phillipines assisting the fight there. We have soldiers all over the Horn of Africa, and many other places in the world that don't get media coverage, but that doesn't mean they are not fighting terrorism. I have a friend who has spent more time in Africa over the last 4 years than he has spent in the US, but there aren't any cameras covering what he has done. Iraq is merely the cause celebre that people opposed to the President's policies are using to attack what he has done, while most of what he has done was done with the full consent of congess, including the democrats.


Thanks for explaining some of that to me. :)

[Corinna]

If you want to see that thigs are inproving this web site has nothing to do with thew Gov.
http://www.goodnewsiraq.com/index2.htm

[dab_20]

Thanks. I will look over the website.

[Lady'sOtherHuman]

Well, you have time until you turn 18 to educate yourself on politics, so that your vote will be an educated one!

People fought hard to give you the right to vote, especially as you are female, so make the best of it!

Amen, Karen. Just remember too, that if you want to vote for a third party to go ahead and vote for them even if you know they won't necessarily make it into office. You're still letting the government know how you feel about what's going on.

[Edwina's Secretary]

One thing to remember.....there are three sides to every story...his, hers and the truth....

Has Bush lied?....to answer that question requires us to know his intent. Has he said some things that were untrue? Yes. Many of his statements regarding the tax cut and who it would help were misleading at best. Yellow cake uranium....bad intelligence. WMDs (which one of his guys said....we know they have them and we know where they are?) Mission accomplished....which he balmed on the sailors..... Today I was in a book store and there was a whole book of the Lies of Bush and His Administration! I didn't buy it as I was already over my limit. Next time.

I believe the nation was mislead into the war in Iraq. Bush shakes the rattle of 9/11...like a voodoo witch doctor...to justify violating the civil rights of Americans. Remember....there has been no connection found between Saddam/Iraq and 9/11. Bush himself has said that. And no WMD.

In fact....many believe the invasion has HELPED Al Qaida recruit. Feeling safer all the time? Take a look at the election of Hamas in Palestine this week.

Is Saddam a bad guy? Absolutely. But let's talk about bad guys (see last week's Parade magazine for a list of the 10 worst...) North Korea, Zimbawe, China..... Are they as bad as Saddam?....depends on whether you live in Iraq or North Korea! Are we going to spill the blood of our people to take out all these bad guys....or will we pick and chose?

Are things better in Iraq? Does the press only report bad news? Those are opinions. Did Bush squander the good will of most of the world toward the US after 9/11? Again...an opinion.

Am I right and he is wrong? Three sides to every story....

Just don't let anyone use fear...the rattle...or fast talk or loose facts and figures to convince you.

Read everything you can. Ask lots of questions.

And remember this quote...."he who is willing to give up freedom for security will have neither."

[Suki Wingy]

I wouldn't know because I'm not yet 18 but my parents say they rather pay higher taxes to help the country and I can see where they are coming from.
As for the common sence and problem solving type intelegence of our President, I don't see how it can be too high. However much I would like to give someone else a chance, I know I will probably never be more than 60% happy with the government even though I tend to be on the liberal 'let everything slide' side, I'm not religious and I would like to see the total separation of any spiritual feelings and government, even though that is NEVER going to happen

[RICHARD]

One thing to remember.....there are three sides to every story...his, hers and the truth....




There's three sides to every story babe:
There's yours and there's mine and the cold, hard truth
I think there's something missing 'round here
I don't know where it's gone
But it's a long way back home
-dh


I feel really safe, What does Hamas have to do with the US?

If you want to feel threatened look at the warning that the Gov't. put out to the people who built the border tunnel in San Diego.....THEY ARE IN DANGER?

What about us? You live closer to the border and to SAN ONOFRE.....Let me know if anything happens? :eek:



And the Voodoo witch doctor thing?
Everyone is worried about GWB's beliefs and now we have to worry about Santeria!!


I say we pick and choose our enemies...

We start out with the morons and work our way up the ladder....you know, kinda like a tournament!

I am still waiting for my cheap Iraqi oil.......After all, we have paid for it in blood..



"He who is willing to give up freedom for security will have neither-

But if you want to be a bobo and tuck you head in the sand, remember to keep your pants up. There are people out there that will take advantage of someone not watching their six"

"Watching your six" is a fighter pilot saying....it means not paying attention to what is behind you!

[BitsyNaceyDog]

I say its about time to have a girl president!

I think we need Hillary!

I didn't read all of the other responses, but as far as I'm concerned the war is more for Bush's personal gain than anything else. I hate that man and I can't imagine anyone doing a worse job than he has. He seems to disregard what so many people think and does what he wants (or whatever is best for him).

[JenBKR]

I think we need Hillary!

NOOOOOOOO :eek:

[Lady's Human]

Bush's personal gain? WHAT personal gain?

[BitsyNaceyDog]

Bush's personal gain? WHAT personal gain?

I am still waiting for my cheap Iraqi oil.......After all, we have paid for it in blood.
That will never happen, not while Bush is President anyway. Don't forget he's in the oil business. He wants the prices we pay to be high, it means more money in his pockets. After all isn't that what his goal is- to make the rich richer and the poor poorer. If that's not his goal, he sure is fooling me.

[Lady's Human]

Former VP Gore has much more than President Bush in oil money. The President's net worth is listed variably as between 9 and 26 million dollars, with the largest single piece of his portfolio being his Crawford, Tx ranch. He has not been in the petroleum industry since the early '80s.

[Edwina's Secretary]

Nice try LH. How did he perform when he was in the oil industry by the way? Poorly? Did he make any money at it? He did? How is that? He sold his little compnay to another company and then sold his stock JUST BEFORE it tanked! Doesn't the SEC have a problem with that kind of action? Doesn't that mean many other people LOST money because they didn't sell when GW did?

All that aside....how much of GW's campaign contributions come from oil companies? WHo was on his committee to look into energy policy? And how much profit did Exxon Mobil make in 2005......NET profit????

Nice spin though.....bringing up Gore's portfolio....

[Lady's Human]

Not spin, ES, fact. Spin is bringing up history that's no longer relevant (Bush's past in the petroleum industry, it's two decades in the past) to smear someone in the present. The transaction that you mentioned was looked into by the SEC and no formal investigation was launched.

Fact would be that Former VP Gore, who constantly proclaims he is an environmentalist and publicly champions combustion emissions caps has large amounts of oil stocks (Standard Oil Co) in his portfolio. While a part of that portfolio is a blind trust, he could contact the trust's administrators and request that they divest in stocks that he finds offensive, which he hasn't done. It falls under the heading of cleaning your own porch first.

Compared to other sectors, the energy industry in general did not contribute much during the 2004 election cycle at all, giving $4.2 Mil, as compared to lawyers and lobbyist groups, who gave over $22 million dollars.

[Edwina's Secretary]

But it is spin when you bring up Gore as a counter to Bush....he was in the 2000 election. History...past...irrevelant.

And aren't you being a teensy bit disengeneous in your statement that the SEC did not launch a formal investigation. Will you tell us what the SEC did?

And if spin is "bringing up past that is no longer relevant"....how do you use it in discussing Cindy Sheehan and the SOTU? Her dead son is past and therefore irrelevant?

[lady_zana]

Not spin, ES, fact. Spin is bringing up history that's no longer relevant (Bush's past in the petroleum industry, it's two decades in the past) to smear someone in the present.

No, spin is saying something in a light to sway public opinion. It isn't always used to smear a person and nor is it always something from the past.


To provide an interpretation of (a statement or event, for example), especially in a way meant to sway public opinion: “a messenger who spins bogus research into a vile theology of hatred” (William A. Henry III).

-- www.dictionary.com

Spin - a political agenda, twisting truths or facts into something that "proves" your point of view.

-- http://ircpolitics.org/glossary.html#S

[Lady's Human]

LZ, in this case, it was spin. There are MANY definitions of it, I was using one that happened to fit the situation.

It was also a smear (bringing up old, unsubstantiated allegations that have been openly aired in public many times). They are not mutually exclusive.

[RICHARD]

No, spin is saying something in a light to sway public opinion. It isn't always used to smear a person and nor is it always something from the past.


To provide an interpretation of (a statement or event, for example), especially in a way meant to sway public opinion: “a messenger who spins bogus research into a vile theology of hatred” (William A. Henry III).

-- www.dictionary.com

Spin - a political agenda, twisting truths or facts into something that "proves" your point of view.

-- http://ircpolitics.org/glossary.html#S


Spin: V. - the cycle after wash.

Maytag.com

Spin: V. - Method used by Lance Armstrong to train for the Tour de Freance.

Livestrong.com

Spin: V. - the proverbial crock of "stuff"

Any politician.com

:confused:

[Edwina's Secretary]

It was also a smear (bringing up old, unsubstantiated allegations that have been openly aired in public many times).

Is this how you would define the action of those guys who accused Kerry of lying about his performance in Viet Nam???

And btw....the SEC DID investigate Bush....never let facts get in the way of a good spin... :D

[Lady's Human]

ES, I looked at several stories, the jist of the preliminary investigation was that nothing was found that would lead to a formal investigation.

There are a lot of questions about Kerry's actions in Vietnam, among them being why he was not given an honorable discharge until the late '70's. (Even if one is discharged from active duty to the reserve components you get a discharge of some sort) The normal route leading to such a late discharge is an OTH (Other than honorable or General under honorable conditions) being challenged leading to an honorable discharge several years after the fact, which is among the many reasons there are a lot of people who question his service record. Given the timeline of the "Winter Soldiers" issues, and given the fact that under the UCMJ it is illegal to participate in partisan political activities (which Winter soldiers most certainly was) while in the service, I would question what the original discharge he was given was. Kerry also caused breaches of the UCMJ while he was campaigning, using uniformed servicemen as political props at campaign events, which is illegal under the hatch act.

[Corinna]

Spin The art of making some thing soft and fuzzy in to durable yarn for knittin Corinna's spinsters Alminac. :D

Sorry couldn't help it. I will ot get sucked in to this debate Just go to www.goodnewsIraq.com Whether you agree we should have gone or not we are making a better life for those folks.
Of course the main stream news wouldn't mention this stuff.

[RICHARD]

ES. (Even if one is discharged from active duty to the reserve components you get a discharge of some sort)


Does his wife know he came back from Viet Nam with this discharge?? :confused:

[Edwina's Secretary]

pssstt...LH....VietNam was a long time ago....you are engaging in what YOU defined as smear!

You are very selective in what you call smear and what you call spin. Your guy spins...the other guy smears.....

A preliminary investigation is an investigation....

I was around during Viet Nam....going into the National Guard or the Reserves...first was very hard to do....it was a way to avoid going to Viet Nam. My brother-in-law at the time did it (you had to use clout to get in...my bil had a dad who was a state cop.) To call GW's enlistment anything other than draft dodging is pure BS.....but I am sure you classify that as a smear....ancient history that has been hashed over.....

But of course in the word of VP Cheney..."I had better things to do..."

How can you not call Kerry's military service smear? It was longer ago than Bush failure as an oilman????

[Lady's Human]

ES, I didn't bring up Kerry's record, you did.

Former VP gore is not old news, as he keeps inserting himself into the political scene, regardless of how inconsequential he is. Funny, it used to be the loser bowed out gracefully and let the winner do the job. The first President Bush was not really heard from after his defeat, President Ford remained largely out of the spotlight, and President Carter did as well. It seems that the part of the graceful loser and the graceful exit of the chief executives is a thing of the past (thank you to President Clinton's team for that).

[AbbyMom]

Jimmy Carter out of the spotlight? Bowed out? He won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2002 for his work at the Carter Center, which is world renowned for conflict mediation and election monitoring. Established 2 years after leaving office.

I just finished his book "Our Endangered Values." I highly recommend it. It's currently number 8 on the NY Times Hardcover best seller list. He's definitely inserting himself into the current political scene.

"Perhaps that's why the former president, Nobel Peace Prize-winner, and bestselling author ranks as one of the planet's most respected voices in the areas of human rights, diplomacy, and good government"

[Edwina's Secretary]

Perhaps that is because Gore wasn't the loser of anything but the Supreme Court election?

And let's be honest....Dole did go on to make tv commercials for erectile dysfunction. Does that count as inserting himself?

[RICHARD]

Perhaps that is because Gored wasn't the loser of anything but the Supreme Court election?

And let's be honest....Dole did go on the make tv commercials for erectile dysfunction. Does that count as inserting himself?


Since I like the Frau Dole I have to refrain on....


Aw what the heck....


He wasn't a very potent politician. :confused:


ES.

You do have a sense of humor! and it's pretty good....

Now let your hair down and don't be so stiff... ;)

[Lady's Human]

AbbysMom,

Carter established the center, and also did other humanitarian work, however he did NOT go to the media and rip apart the succeeding administration in the manner that former Pres. Clinton, former VP Gore, and Senator Kerry have done.

ES, Dole's commercials were more on the line of the inability to insert himself into the situation..... :eek: :D

[Edwina's Secretary]

LH....at least you are consistent...you never let TRUTH get in the way of a spin.....


October 25, 2004 18:17 IST



US President George W Bush has exploited the suffering of September 9/11 and turned back decades of efforts to make the world a safer place, former President Jimmy Carter has said.
Attacking Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair over Iraq in an interview to The Guardian, London, published Monday, Carter said the war was "completely unjust adventure based on misleading statements."

80-year-old Carter, who was President from 1977-1981, but did not win re-election amid the US hostage crisis in Iran, also criticised Bush for "lack of effort" on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and accused him of abandoning nuclear non-proliferation initiatives championed by five presidents.

"The US suffered, in 9/11, a terrible and shocking attack... and George Bush has been adroit at exploiting that attack, and he has elevated himself, in the consciousness of many Americans, to a heroic commander-in-chief, fighting a global threat against America," Carter said.

"He's repeatedly played that card, and to some degree quite successfully. I think that success has dissipated. I don't know if it's dissipating fast enough to affect the election. We'll soon know."

Denying any link between his handling of the Iranian crisis and the present threat, Carter said "The entire Islamic world condemned Iran. Nowadays, because of the unwarranted invasion of Iraq by Bush and Blair, which was a completely unjust adventure based on misleading statements, and the lack of any effort to resolve the Palestinian issue, there is massive Islamic condemnation of the United States."

American media organisations, he said, "have been cowed, because they didn't want to be unpatriotic. There has been a lack of inquisitive journalism. In fact, it's hard to think of a major medium in the US that has been objective and fair and balanced, and critical when criticism was deserved."

On nuclear proliferation, the issue that the Democratic contender John Kerry has identified as the single most serious threat to national security, Carter attacked Bush for abandoning "all of those long, tedious negotiations" carried out by President Eisenhower, Kennedy, Nixon, Reagan and himself.

[Lady's Human]

ES, there USED to be a tradition in the United States, started by George Washington, the the former executive would not comment about his successor's policies. President Carter's successor (President Reagan) was several years ago.

[Edwina's Secretary]

You really need to reread American history. Cleveland....served four years.......was defeated for relection...ran again and defeated his successor. Theodore Roosevelt. Handpicked his successor - William Howard Taft....didn't like the job he did....ran against him as the Bull Party. Lost...but so did Taft.

Should I go on? I have NEVER heard of such a tradition and....if Washington did...he was the only one to observe it! It sure wasn't Jefferson.

I think you can safely say that Lincoln, McKinley, Garfield, and Kennedy, Franklin Roosevelt, Harding... all upheld the tradition. :D :D

[Lady's Human]

ES, there's a difference between running for re-election (which a two term president can no longer do) and sniping from the sidelines for no apparent purpose other than keeping your name in the media.

[Edwina's Secretary]

Cleveland wasn't a two term president when he ran again. Roosevelt was not technically either. He succeeded to his first term when McKinley was shot. They both ran against the guy who succeeded them...four years later.

Maybe Gore and/or Kerry and Clinton are
sniping from the sidelines for no apparent purpose other than keeping your name in the media. for a real apparent reason. They disagree with the Bush administration.... :eek: :eek: That is still permissable in the country....unless of course Bush/Cheney get their way! :rolleyes:

So would you like to explain this statement of yours again????

Carter established the center, and also did other humanitarian work, however he did NOT go to the media and rip apart the succeeding administration in the manner that former Pres. Clinton, former VP Gore, and Senator Kerry have done.

[lady_zana]

ES, there's a difference between running for re-election (which a two term president can no longer do) and sniping from the sidelines for no apparent purpose other than keeping your name in the media.

But lots of presidents critcized other presidents' policies, especially Jefferson, Roosevelt, and Lincoln - and not only when they were running for reelection. Jefferson was one of our most outspoken presidents. He said what the thought and had no problems saying where he thought Adams was wrong in his policies.

[Lady's Human]

Jefferson succeeded Adams,and therefore could not criticize Adams as his successor. Lincoln died in office (He wasn't alive to criticize his successors), as did FDR. TR criticized his successor as he ran against him for election

[Edwina's Secretary]

There you go again LH! There were TWO presidents named Adams. You are correct that John Adams preceded Jefferson but John Quincy Adams came after Jefferson. ANd she is right. Jefferson was very critical of his sucessors...although often still able to remain friendly with them.

[Vette]

Lets just say im not fond of our president and leave it at that.

[RICHARD]

That is the one reason I could never go on Jeopardy!


I don't know squat about the presidents. :confused:

[dab_20]

That is the one reason I could never go on Jeopardy!


I don't know squat about the presidents. :confused:

Thats the same with me... but from what most people say... most other presidents did a heck of alot better than Bush.

[JenBKR]

Thats the same with me... but from what most people say... most other presidents did a heck of alot better than Bush.


Please don't just go by what others say....

[RICHARD]

There you go again LH! There were TWO presidents named Adams. You are correct that John Adams preceded Jefferson but John Quincy Adams came after Jefferson. ANd she is right. Jefferson was very critical of his sucessors...although often still able to remain friendly with them.


Then who was SAM ADAMS??? :confused:

[JenBKR]

Then who was SAM ADAMS??? :confused:

The most important of them all! :D

[LoudLou]

Samuel Adams was an American Patriot and organizer of the Boston Tea Party.

He played a major role in starting the American Revolution.

He was a leader of a group of radicals called the Sons of Liberty

1765 he was elected to a seat in the Massachusetts colonial legislature (called the "General Court"), where he immediately became a vocal opponent of the Stamp Act, helping to instigate Boston's Stamp Act riots of that year. He was responsible for drafting written protests of various British governmental acts.

Drafted a response to the 1767 Townshend Acts, and distributed it to the other twelve colonies in a bid to achieve a united front of resistance to these acts. The failure of the legislature to rescind the contents of this letter at the express demand of King George is usually cited as one of the main factors resulting in the stationing of troops in Boston beginning in 1768, aggravated by protest activities such as Adams' formation of the Non-Importation Association, led to the Boston Massacre 2 years later. After which Adams chaired a town meeting and formed a petition, presented to acting governor Thomas Hutchinson, demanding the removal of two British regiments from Boston. Hutchinson claimed no responsibility for the matter, owing to his temporary status as governor, but stated he would be willing to move one regiment; the meeting was re-convened and Adams successfully urged the crowd of over 5,000 present to stand firm on the terms: "Both regiments or none!" Fearing open warfare, Hutchinson had both regiments removed to Castle William, an old fort on an island in Boston Harbor. These regiments would thereafter be known in the British Parliament as "The Sam Adams Regiments

In 1772 Adams devised a system of Committees of Correspondence, whereby the towns of Massachusetts would consult with each other concerning political matters via messages. Such a scheme was still technically legal under British law, but led to a de facto colonial legislative body. Dabney Carr of Virginia later proposed the adoption of this system throughout the Thirteen Colonies, which led eventually to the formation of the Continental Congress as we know it today.

Best remembered for helping to organize, the Boston Tea Party of December 16, 1773 in response to the Tea Act. After that, Parliament passed what was later to be known as the "Intolerable Acts," which called for the revocation of the colonial charter of Massachusetts and the closing of the port of Boston. Reaction from the colonies was to expedite the opening of a Continental Congress, and when the Massachusetts legislature met in Salem on June 17, 1774, Adams locked the doors and made a motion for the formation of a colonial delegation to attend the Congress.

Was one of the major spokesmen of the Suffolk Resolves drafted in response to the Intolerable Acts, adopted in September 1774. In that same month the Continental Congress held its first meeting. Adams was sent to Philadelphia as a representative from the Massachusetts colony. From the beginning of his time in Congress he was one of the most vocal proponents of independence. After signing the Declaration in 1776, was instrumental in the development and adoption of the loose government embodied in the Articles of Confederation, to which he was also a signatory in 1777. He continued serving in the Congress until 1781, when he was elected to the state senate of Massachusetts. He served in that body until 1788, becoming its president.

When the United States Constitution was drafted, Adams was considered an anti-federalist (They opposed the creation of a stronger national government under the Constitution and sought to leave the government under the Articles of Confederation intact) , but more moderate than others of that political stripe. His contemporaries nicknamed him "the last Puritan" for his views; in 1788 he would write in his diary regarding the federalist and anti-federalist factions, "Neither Interest, I fear, display that Sobriety of Manners, Temperance, or Frugality—among other manly Virtues—which once were the Glory and Strength of our Christian Sparta on the Bay...". He finally came in on the side of ratification, with the stipulation that a bill of rights be added. Additionally, Adams was a member of the conventions that drafted the first Massachusetts state constitution in 1779, and the second one in 1788.

Best Sam Adams quote:

"If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen."



…. Oh, yes and RICHARD he did make beer….:)

[RICHARD]

…. Oh, yes and RICHARD he did make beer….:)



BUFFALO BILLS
# 95 Sam Adams
Position: DT
Height: 6-4
Weight: 335
Born: 06/13/1973
College: Texas A&M
NFL Experience: 12

http://images.nfl.com/images/players/60x80/3006.jpg

;)

[LoudLou]

What about his Dad? Sam Adams Sr. - Offensive guard with the New England Patriots (1972-1980) and New Orleans Saints (1981). :D

[RICHARD]

What about his Dad? Sam Adams Sr. - Offensive guard with the New England Patriots (1972-1980) and New Orleans Saints (1981). :D


YOU ROCK!!!! :)

[dab_20]

Please don't just go by what others say....

Well that's what my dad says... and I believe him.

Bush is apparently is against gays. That is very unfair. My dad is and I take that personally. I bet he does, too. I think we shoulden't have a president that is dicrimanent (sp?) against certain people.

[JenBKR]

Well that's what my dad says... and I believe him.

Bush is apparently is against gays. That is very unfair. My dad is and I take that personally. I bet he does, too. I think we shoulden't have a president that is dicrimanent (sp?) against certain people.

Not saying I am for Bush - but he is not against gays. He believes that a marriage should be between a man and a woman. That is what is in the bible, and Bush follows that. I just believe that everyone should find out for themselves the facts, not necessarily believe what they hear from others (especially the media!!).

[Edwina's Secretary]

(especially the media!!).

Like Fox network! ;) :D ;)

[JenBKR]

Like Fox network! ;) :D ;)

Oh yeah, the rest too.

[Edwina's Secretary]

All kidding aside....how do you anticipate getting the facts? If not from the media? Or your parents?

[JenBKR]

All kidding aside....how do you anticipate getting the facts? If not from the media? Or your parents?

Honestly, I don't know. Hopefully someone else will have a better answer. Maybe that's why I'm not very political - I do listen to what my parents have to say, and what others have to say, and the news, but how much of it do I know to be true? I have no idea...

[Bonny]

If you are a young person growing up asking questions gives you answers. You don't have to believe everything everyone says. Do they still have current events in school? We use to have a weekly reader in grade school (back in the 1950's) then in high school current events. We were to read the newspapers, & watch news reports. You can form an opinion about something but you can also change that opinion with the more information you aquire on a subject. As far as gays & les's you have two choices. The Bible & good morals. But in the Bible it says to love & care for everyone. So if you don't agree with the life style of gays or les's & there choices in life & morally you think it is not right but still these people are humans & the Bible says to love & care for everyone can you ignore what they have been dealt in life. There bodies & minds are telling them something different then what we consider to be normal. Am I for their life style, no, but there is this nagging question is it fair for me to be their judge? Am I not to care for & love them like everyone else? A nagging question for all of us. :p

[JenBKR]

As far as gays & les's you have two choices. The Bible & good morals. But in the Bible it says to love & care for everyone. So if you don't agree with the life style of gays or les's & there choices in life & morally you think it is not right but still these people are humans & the Bible says to love & care for everyone can you ignore what they have been dealt in life. There bodies & minds are telling them something different then what we consider to be normal. Am I for their life style, no, but there is this nagging question is it fair for me to be their judge? Am I not to care for & love them like everyone else? A nagging question for all of us. :p

I agree...I believe in 'love the sinner, hate the sin'

[lady_zana]

Honestly, I don't know. Hopefully someone else will have a better answer. Maybe that's why I'm not very political - I do listen to what my parents have to say, and what others have to say, and the news, but how much of it do I know to be true? I have no idea...


You can get the truth from the media, you just have to know what their spin is. Like with the teasing earlier about Fox - Fox News is very conserative. When you are watching Fox News, you need to understand what they are saying will be very leaned to the right. Likewise, there are news channels which are very liberal and their stories will be "spun" towards the left.

Check the sources when something sounds suspect to you. Let's say you read a 'fact' and the writer said he got the information from CNN. Check his source: did CNN say it in the way he used it or did he put his own 'spin' on the subject?

It gets easier once you begin looking at the facts and sources. With so many opinions coming at you from every direction, it can be overwhelming at first. Once you start looking closer at different forms of media, you'll be able to tell which direction they lean and it will be become much more obvious. :)

[dab_20]

Not saying I am for Bush - but he is not against gays. He believes that a marriage should be between a man and a woman. That is what is in the bible, and Bush follows that. I just believe that everyone should find out for themselves the facts, not necessarily believe what they hear from others (especially the media!!).

Oh. The media should just give us the truth. Barely anyone cares if it's exciting... just give us the dang truth! Stupid media people...

[pnance]

The media tends to sensationalize things or focus only on the bad or most dramatic, in other words what gives the best ratings. They have some basis but a lot of times makes it worse than what it is. That said I think the best way to make an informed opinion is to listen to both sides with an open mind. Hard to do but if you go into a conversation willing to actually listen, while you may not agree with someone you may at least understand their point of view. Who knows they may bring up some points you hadn't thought of.

That's not to say I support Bush or the war in Iraq, far from it in fact. I do however greatly respect the troops for doing a job that I doubt I could do. I'm in San Diego and many of the troops stationed in Iraq are based here. I don't think anyone could hear the stories from the families of these troups and not respect the sacrifices their making whether you support the war or not.

[dab_20]

The media tends to sensationalize things or focus only on the bad or most dramatic, in other words what gives the best ratings. They have some basis but a lot of times makes it worse than what it is. That said I think the best way to make an informed opinion is to listen to both sides with an open mind. Hard to do but if you go into a conversation willing to actually listen, while you may not agree with someone you may at least understand their point of view. Who knows they may bring up some points you hadn't thought of.

That's not to say I support Bush or the war in Iraq, far from it in fact. I do however greatly respect the troops for doing a job that I doubt I could do. I'm in San Diego and many of the troops stationed in Iraq are based here. I don't think anyone could hear the stories from the families of these troups and not respect the sacrifices their making whether you support the war or not.

I agree with you. My brother's base was in San Diego... I forget what the base was called.