bushie boy

Discussion in 'Community' started by jefhatfield, Jun 27, 2002.

  1. jefhatfield Retired

    jefhatfield

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2000
    #1
    does george w bush seem presidential yet?

    do you miss clinton?

    would gore have been better?

    how about ralph nader?
     
  2. eyelikeart Moderator emeritus

    eyelikeart

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2001
    Location:
    Metairie, LA
    #2
    I think Bush has handled himself quite well since 9-11. Yes, I did vote for him, but I am still very impressed at how well he's doing. He doesn't seem like a "president" so much as he does a "person."

    Gore...please. :rolleyes: Can u imagine what sh*t we'd be in if he had been in office during these times?!

    Clinton I could give a rat's ass about (right Alpha? ;)). He didn't do all that much for us during his time in office. I'm sure I'm one of the many who's glad he's gone now.

    Nader...hmm...I cannot wait to see the responses on this one. I'm indifferent.
     
  3. jelloshotsrule macrumors G3

    jelloshotsrule

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Location:
    serendipity
    #3
    when i listen to bush talk or see him, i laugh... which is cool to me. but then again, maybe i shouldn't....

    gore would be no better, not much different. he's owned too.


    nader.... yes!

    i am not sure how he'd have responded to the attack but i'm sure it would have been pretty interesting and unlike most others would do.... it's at least interesting to think about what it would be like to have nader as president. considering he dislikes probably 98% of the politicians in congress.... too bad.

    2004!
     
  4. coolocity macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2002
    Location:
    Central New York
    #4
    Bush is doing a great job. Clinton would have avoided war any way he could, proboblly causing more attacks in the US.

    Commenting on your sig.. if you keep posting 100 topics a day, sure, you'll make it to 2,000 :p
     
  5. jefhatfield thread starter Retired

    jefhatfield

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2000
    #5
    oh, this is juicy stuff!

    i think bush handled himself well since being elected...so i agree with you there

    about gore, i disagree with you... he would do the same as bush and go after the terrorists and i think he would do a good job

    clinton was good for the us economy and a pro business democrat so i take a different stance than you

    and nader...i agree with you...i still would have to see what he says on the issues of today...he may still be a force in 2004...and be the ace that the republicans need again to win
     
  6. mischief macrumors 68030

    mischief

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2001
    Location:
    Santa Cruz Ca
    #6
    President shmesident.

    I voted Gore as a "NO" vote for Bush.

    Personally I think any idiot that respires regularly with as many advisers as the average POTUSA has looks great after **** like 9/11, they just can't help but look good.

    I think that if 2 terms wasn't the limit we'd have had Reagan untill the old geezerly puppet died then swe'd have 4 terms of Clinton.

    Nader wrote 1 good muckraking book about the auto industry. I wouldn't vote Nader if my life depended on it. He'd fold in the first real chrisis.

    Gore? we'll never know. End of story. I think Gore and Dubyaw have more in common than anyone wants to think about.

    George Carlin for President!!!

    Giuido Sarducci for Pope!!!

    :D

    I want to add that if we could vote "yes" for one candidate or "no" ( negating someone elses "yes") for another voter turnout would triple.
     
  7. eyelikeart Moderator emeritus

    eyelikeart

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2001
    Location:
    Metairie, LA
    #7
    Re: President shmesident.

    ha ha ha!!! :D I could just imagine what it would be like if Carlin or even Dennis Leary were president...

    But seriously...with Bush...I thought it was great how they showcased his physically active lifestyle all over the news. One thing for sure, the U.S. may be the most powerful country in the world, but damn we're lazy!! :eek: :rolleyes: ;)
     
  8. sturm375 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2002
    Location:
    Bakersfield, CA
    #8
    Impeach Bush

    Any idiot would have had the same response to 9/11.

    He's a Republican:(

    40% Steel Tarrifs:mad:

    80% increase in farming subsidies:mad:

    By executive order(That means Bush is directly responsible):
    -a Kangaroo court for the POWs that arn't called POWs. They may eventually get a trial, but even if the outcome of the trial is an acuitial, Bush, or Rumsfield retain the ability to hold that person indefinatly.

    -An increase in the use of Secret Eveidence(sp?). Don't we have the right to face our accuser, even if that accuser is some secret documents? How can someone defend themselves if the government can essentially say: "He's guilty, because I said so."

    -Holding an American citizen without trial, grand jury, or even a visit by his lawyer. This directly defies both the 5th and 6th Admendment of our Bill of Rights.:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

    Especially considering the last part, I have already written letters to my reps and senators calling for the removal of Bush. He has broken his Oath of Office, and therefore cannot legally serve as the President, even in times of war!

    In case you didn't catch it, I think Bush is an ******. And I don't care who runs against him, I will not vote for George W. "the Dictator" Bush.
     
  9. jefhatfield thread starter Retired

    jefhatfield

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2000
    #9
    Re: President shmesident.

    my fear is that his lack of political experience would make him strike too hard and be too extreme

    one has to tread lightly and carefully in politics...a loose cannon like nader seems to be at times can hurt him...look at newt gingrich, the all time famous loose cannon, yet he was arguably one of the smartest pols out there with his phd and professorship at a great university...but his emotion and scene stealing made him look like an idiot a lot
     
  10. 3rdpath macrumors 68000

    3rdpath

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2002
    Location:
    2nd star on the right and straight till morning
    #10
    i don't like bush and i think his middle east policies( and posturing) are laughable.

    he looks like he's wearing a suit and shoes that are too big for him...

    and he'll always be some spoiled kid who rode into office on his father's somewhat soiled coat-tails.

    do i miss clinton? no
    would gore be better? no
    and nader wouldn't be able to get anything done within the spoils system.

    dad leaves saddam in place
    dubya leaves osama

    the future looks pretty grim.:eek:
     
  11. jefhatfield thread starter Retired

    jefhatfield

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2000
    #11
    the future of iraq was uncertain if we had overthrown sadaam's govt...our goal was to get him out of kuwait and not escalate...like vietnam

    and about osama...w will get him if he gets the chance and bring him to justice

    i say kill or capture al qaeda and if we capture osama, jail him for life

    do not execute these terrorists because doing that would make them martyrs and open up a pandora's box for many generations to come...let us not make these men into heroes by executing them

    just jail them and have them be forgotten

    yesterday's terrorist heroes end up being forgotten in time...in the nineties, the last major nazi war criminal died in prison and for the life of me, i can't remember his name
     
  12. eyelikeart Moderator emeritus

    eyelikeart

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2001
    Location:
    Metairie, LA
    #12
    I think the point is it wouldn't matter who was president...

    no matter who it was...he/she (hey u never know ;)) would be criticized by someone for what they do...

    not everyone is going to agree on one person ever...I guess it's why I don't fight much for the cause...:rolleyes:
     
  13. Royal Pineapple macrumors 65816

    Royal Pineapple

    #13
    Re: President shmesident.

    hell yes, id vote for him, and as for giuido, hed make a fine pope, but he have to change his name to: Pope Corky IX
    i think you'd have to skip straight to the ninth just to give him some credibility:D
     
  14. krossfyter macrumors 601

    krossfyter

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2002
    Location:
    secret city
    #14
    even though george carlin is a funny guy.. i dont want that guy as president. his good at political comedy not practicality.
     
  15. krossfyter macrumors 601

    krossfyter

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2002
    Location:
    secret city
    #15
    as for nader....


    WHATEVER! his chopping down the military to the equivalent of a simple mouse trap is not going to cut it in this kind of world. its just not practical. hes a good vote taker though.
     
  16. Durandal7 macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2001
    #16
    Bush: He has handled himself fine. Some things I disagree with, but all around not too shabby.

    Gore: Would have handled himself about the same s bushie boy. I just don't like him.

    Clinton: I have seen NO compelling evidence that he did s*** for the economy. The economy went to hell because of bad accounting and the realization that dot-com companies made no money. It doesn't matter who is in office. (Cutting back the military and raising taxes, that always helps he economy :rolleyes: )
     
  17. Backtothemac macrumors 601

    Backtothemac

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2002
    Location:
    San Destin Florida
    #17
    Re: Impeach Bush

    Ok, you knew it was only a matter of time. First off, read the 5th ammendment a little closer, and you will see that it is legal. The same thing has been before the Supreme Court before, and already decided. So you know what? Why give them the rights that Americans get? They are not Americans, they are terrorists, and would slit your throat if you put them in a room with them and give them a knife. Grow up and realize that these are not nice people that we are dealing with.
    F**K your treasonist statements. Go fight for Osama if you want, leave. I feel very strongly about this. You can have your opinion, but how do you think that he has violated his oath of office. Please genious, I cannot wait to hear this.:mad:
     
  18. MrsBacktothemac macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    May 17, 2002
    Location:
    Lafayette Louisiana
    #18
    Sorry I have not been around much, but parton me while I say how I feel about this....

    Sterm before you start accusing our President of treason, do something that most people who run their mouths should do first. Read the whole 5th ammendment, and don't pick out the one line that benifits your cause.
     
  19. Durandal7 macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2001
    #19
    Re: Impeach Bush

    I must say sturm you are part of the problem with this country. People like you do not realize how great this country is. As B2TM and Mrs.B2TM have pointed out, you either haven't read the constitution or are distorting it to your purposes.

    If you think George W. is a dictator than get out of the country. People are fleeing places like Cuba because they have a dictator. Before you go shooting your mouth, why don't you live as a citizen in a country with a real military dictator? I'm sure that when you got back you would quite like it here regardless of the president's political party.

    You think that Bush is treasonous??? I think that you are treasonous! Treason can be considered as giving comfort to the enemy and I'm sure that they are comforted by the fact that you are undermining our government.

    I am sincerely tired of people like you. Go to f***ing Iraq and experience a real dictator, we don't need your kind here.
     
  20. jefhatfield thread starter Retired

    jefhatfield

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2000
    #20
    great to hear from you, mrs b2tm!

    bush is not a dictator or power hungry from what i can see

    now newt gingrich was and he knew what any high school civics student knew, that the speaker of the house was the real power in the free world

    i guess if almost anybody were in newt's position, the power might go to their head...republican or democrat

    i spent years fearing the man knowing just how powerful someone like that was...he and the senate majority/minority leader run what happens "behind closed doors" where the scrutiny is not the same as the white house and where real power is yielded

    maybe the federal reserve is the only entity that has more power, but somehow with the likes of newt and tip o'neil around, the speaker is the real point man for the free world...for better or worse
     
  21. krossfyter macrumors 601

    krossfyter

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2002
    Location:
    secret city
    #21

    nah man... alan greenspan is the most powerful person in the free world.
     

    Attached Files:

  22. sturm375 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2002
    Location:
    Bakersfield, CA
    #22
    Treason?

    Correct me if I am wrong here, but I still live in America. Freedom of Speech? I believe that I am still free to criticise my government with whatever words I wish. Before you go accusing someone of Treason, maybe you should read the 1st Amendment. If Padillia (accused dirty bomber), or anyone else is CONVICTED of terrorist acts in a court of law, I fully support punishment to the fullest extent of the law. Until then, those accused are innocent.

    The 5th Admendment:
    "Amendment V

    No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."

    Now if I remember my english class right, each semi-colon indicates a new, independent thought, so:

    "No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger;"

    "nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb;"

    "nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;"

    "nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."

    Each of those is a complete and independent thought. Bush has deprived Padillia of his liberty without due process of law, and has therefore broken his Oath of Office. Therefore, he is in my opinion, unfit for the office.

    Again, I am not a legal scholar, so if there is anybody out there with better knowledge than I, please correct me. I have heard on the news that 3 times this type of action by a sitting president has been called into question by the Supreme Court. All 3 times the court has ruled in favor of individual rights. The three incidents occured during: 1) The Civil War 2) WW1 3) WW2. Each case was tried well after the incident.
     
  23. jelloshotsrule macrumors G3

    jelloshotsrule

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Location:
    serendipity
    #23

    that's true. that's what my businesswoman girlfriend taught me.... i laughed. and tried to convince her i am...... am i? eh?
     
  24. jefhatfield thread starter Retired

    jefhatfield

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2000
    #24
    Re: Treason?

    that is remarkably well thought out, sturm

    it is hard to imagine what padilla was thinking if he did work for al qaeda, but perhaps due to the evidence against him, he could be seen as an enemy combatant since we are at war with al qaeda and osama bin laden (and maybe other terrorists, too)

    i don't know where padilla falls...as an illegally held us citizen or an enemy caught during war

    whatever happens, we do not have the right to treat him poorly while he awaits trial because if we did, then the terrorist have already won the war

    al qaeda's goal is to make us paranoid and a police state...not to overthrow the us...they know they can't do that in a million years
     
  25. Backtothemac macrumors 601

    Backtothemac

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2002
    Location:
    San Destin Florida
    #25
    Re: Treason?

    Ok, first off, the Mrs did not call you a traitor, I did. That being said, the case has been before the supreme court, and no, they did not rull for individual liberty. No right, and I mean no right is absolute. You have to look at the bigger picture. We are at war. It is not a declared war due to restrictions by our unconstitutuional membership in the UN, but that is another debate. These people are the enemy. They are going to be tried in a military court due to the nature of the information that is being discussed in the trial. Having worked at the CIA, the field agents do not want there name out there in the public, nor would I.

    These people want to murder us. They have said that they want to kill 4 million people, and 1 million children. You have any kids? I bet you don't. If you did you would want these Ba$tards dead first. They will get a trial, but is will not be in a civilian court. They are not members of our society, and thus are not protected by the rights that we live by. Do they have a right to vote in our country? Do they have a right to run for Office? Do they have the right to even friggin be here? Damn, again, GROW UP, and realize that everything in life is not absolute. Rights come with a price. Can British people vote here? You move to Saudi Arabia, and commit a crime. Are they going to try you by there laws, or ours.

    In my opinion, prove guilt, and then shoot them in their friggin heads. Either that, or bring them down here and let us Southern boys deal with them. It is not a question of right or wrong, it is not a question of the 5th ammendment, the 5th ammendment doesnt apply because they are not members of our society, and as it says during time of war. All Bush would have to do is declare them a Clear and Present Danger, and then it doesn't matter anyway. Actually, that is what he basically has done.

    Now, I believe in My God, My Country, and my family. Bush is my President. You can say whatever you want, but calling for him to be removed from office, is stupid, uneducated, and treason. I did not like Clinton, I hated him actually, but you know what. If someone would have call him a traitor I would have responded the same way.

    Sorry for the rant everyone, but my country, and my President mean a lot to me. They both have MY RESPECT!

    --
    At least you were smart enough not to be rude to the Mrs.....:eek:
     

Share This Page