<p>I like Prez. Bush better than the last one. Bush actually conducted a flimsy war against terrorists and not sit around on his ass. The irony is that I am 100% anti religion and against all conservative ethics (except that gay marriage thing haha)</p>
<p>
[quote]
Quit exaggerating and face reality. Did American experinece any terrorist attack since 9/11? No, all thanks to Bush. I know he's not the smartest of presidents, but he sure is effective as president. And yeah, I also like the fact that Republicans are pro-life and anti-gay
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Effective? It's been 4 years and Bin Laden is still sitting on his happy ass somewhere in Afghanistan. And why are all the money poured into bombing Iraq and not catching him? Let's not forget that's HE is the one responsible for 9/11, not Hussein.</p>
<p>personally I'd prefer John McCain as president.</p>
<p>echoing purrli. are you kidding? effective?
well I'm glad nothing has fallen on your or my head recently, but there has been a spectacular increase in deaths due to terrorist attacks all over the world. We have no reason to thank Bush for the fact that the United States hasn't seen a terrorist attack of that proportion yet. Terroristism will exist in all forms (Islamic extremist or the average home grown American type) regardless of whether or not Senor Bush chose to scapegoat Iraq. The only thing that he has effectively done is increase the pocketbooks of the owners of oil companies in charage of the Iraqi land. Meanwhile, our deficit has grown exponentially. The American dollar has fallen to 1.1 over the Canadian dollar when less than ten years ago we were hovering at almost twice their value. </p>
<p>w1cked-ineffective "action" is just as problematic as doing nothing. our domestic policy has fallen to pieces. why waste energy on "a flimsy war against terrorists" when there are plenty of problems within our borders to take care of? social security? health care? a slipping economy? as far as foreign policy goes, wage a "flimsy war" or take action against genocide and the AIDS epidemic?</p>
<p>George Bush has been a terrible waste of time and money for the United States citizens. We will be suffering his errors for years to come. </p>
<p>for the record, I also hold liberal views on abortion and gay marriage. I am actively pro-choice and pro-gay marriage. Don't even get me started.</p>
<p>"w1cked-ineffective "action" is just as problematic as doing nothing. our domestic policy has fallen to pieces"
Oh really? Could it be due to putting a non priority such as gay marriage before foreign policy? Or maybe due to letting AA stand? Or due to an incredible increase in social spending (Yea, I am blaming current administration)</p>
<p>why waste energy on "a flimsy war against terrorists" when there are plenty of problems within our borders to take care of?
If you don't do anything about terrorism, there will be no border. </p>
<p>social security?
Refresh me, but didn't the current administration try a SS reform? And wasn't it the liberal welfare crowd who booed it down? By spreading misconceptions about privatizaion? And what about AARP and its unholy influence in Washington? </p>
<p>health care? a slipping economy? as far as foreign policy goes, wage a "flimsy war" or take action against genocide and the AIDS epidemic?
How exactly is health care in crisis? Economy? I don't think that we have had a worse economy than any post 1940 decade..Show me stats that we did and you get a cookie. And isnt the war in Iraq action against genocide? Perhaps if you take two minutes out of listening to Michael Moore you will be informed of the mass graves and chemical attacks on the Kurds in Iraq. Or are Kurd lives not important to you? Or is American failure in the war necessary for the advancement of the liberals? The AIDS epidemic? The government can't really do anything about any epidemic, generally because of waste and inefficiency. And the ones who can, i.e. the pharmaceutical companies, get blasted for what they do..So go figure</p>
<p>George Bush has been a terrible waste of time and money for the United States citizens. We will be suffering his errors for years to come. </p>
<p>for the record, I also hold liberal views on abortion and gay marriage. I am actively pro-choice and pro-gay marriage. Don't even get me started
Hats off to you..Population with highest percentage of AIDS, which you seem to care about? Ans: gays..</p>
<p>We're agreeing on the domestic policy here, at least on the social spending, which is a concern for how our economy will do in the following years. Unchecked spending will cause economic crisis. The economy now is doing worse than the mid 90's. Obv we haven't hit a depression yet, but it's a pretty good time to be thinking about our economy instead of Iraq's. Can't have butter, if it's all going to guns. </p>
<p>Terrorism isn't going to take down our borders, unfounded wars of scapegoats will. Contrary to popular belief, we're not the center of the world. It's a problem with being a current superpower: Damned if you do, damned if you don't. Not everyone spends 150% of their energy thinking about what the US is doing. But if the US is going to declare war, we've got to have a reason and a plan. We lack both. And that's the type of thing that does cause the US to become an easy object of frustration or terrorist groups. It is a vicious circle. Like I said, terrorism is going to exist whether you like it or not. The "war on iraq" doesn't have anything to do terrorism on our borders. Attempting to bully the nation into democracy is not causing terrorists to think "oh dear, we were wrong, the US really isnt trying to take over our way of life." I'm not saying I know how to cease terrorism, I'm just saying the "war on Iraq" wasn't a particularly good way of going about it. </p>
<p>not gonna lie, I don't know enough about SS to argue it. It's just an example of domestic policy that got overshadowed by the the losing battle and it got pulled into the spotlight because people were complaining about the fact that Bush hadn't paid much attention to domestic policy. As if to say, "we care about what's going on in the US, see?" </p>
<p>Health care is a crisis because millions of people can't afford it. It's all just money and time on a war that doesn't really have anything to do with 9/11. Yes, Kurds were dying, but that's not the "reason" why they chose to go to war on Iraq is it? I'm not saying we should have ignored their plight, I'm just saying it there are many other nations in need, what specifically prompted an overhaul of the Iraqi government over any other corrupt nation? It's not the failure of the war that's important. It was the reasons behind the start of it, now it's how to get out of it. </p>
<p>Population with the highest population of AIDS: Africa and SE Asia. Funding for foreign aid, social spending, and attacking the deficit? Pouring into an unfounded war.</p>
<p>Pouring into an unfounded war?
sk8ngli and all your friends, go live in Iraq and then come back and tell me that the war is not justified.</p>
<p>sk8ngli, </p>
<p>if you had noticed the quotation bloc, I did NOT say Bush is effective - I was quoting another misguided laddie who held that insane opinion. </p>
<p>Let me restate my views: Bush is an incompetent president who either a) doesn't have a clue what he's doing or b) he is intentionally waging an unnecessary war for those who are benefitting from this expenditure.</p>
<p>I know, purrli, I was agreeing with you. I just don't know how to make those cute little quote boxes. </p>
<p>and I'm not saying I'd love to live in Iraq. I totally agree that the former regime was causing chaos. Let's not forget who put them there. My point is only that our administration just up and decided to wage war on the country claiming it had something to do with 9/11. It doesn't.</p>
<p>Harboring terrorists doesn't have anything to do with 9/11?</p>
<p>"My point is only that our administration just up and decided to wage war on the country claiming it had something to do with 9/11"</p>
<p>-you are so ignorant and liberal it makes me sick. seriously, get a clue and throw out your birkenstocks. </p>
<p>and to that fool who said that this is an unfounded war and that terrorists will never take down our borders, how do you know that? you have a time machine? if so thats sweet. but i know you dont, cause i know by your liberal bias that you have a brain the size of a pea. dude, he was housing terrorists, torturing his people, and even worse an immediate threat to the US considering what had just happened in NYC. But seriously, go back to wherever you came from. im sick of all this un-patriotic ********. support your country and your troops</p>
<p>heh, dissent IS patriotic. it's how our country came about.
(you can cry about how if I was in the third world I wouldn't have such rights blah blah blah, but there's no point in having rights if you can't express them)</p>
<p>and I still don't see action happening against the people who DID orchestrate 9/11.</p>
<p>Give me a few nukes and arming codes if you want to see action being taken against them..</p>
<p>wow you're cool (sarcasm)</p>