[Janos]

Originally posted by Rictor
Janos...er, the point is made. Let the man speak his mind, its common curtesy dude.

INTERNET

[Rictor]

woah, they have on computers now?

[aldo_14]

Originally posted by Liberator
While I won't claim that Mr. Bush is anywhere near the perfect president, I will say this once and clearly:

None of you, and I mean NONE of you, could have done a better job in the same situation.  

You fear strong leadership because it means that you'll have to take a side and take action.

Your stances on most issues are jokes based on philosphies that, while looking good on paper, can't work in real life.  Your leading figures are left over hippies that should've stayed in the commune toking up on hemp and lying wherever they fell.  They keep trolling about the same issues while the world has moved on.  

Meanwhile, millions of babies are killed, AIDS is running rampant, and any of a myriad of other tradegies and atrocities take place on a daily basis worldwide.  

It's not GW's fault, it's not America's fault, and yet some people seem to think that it's OUR responsibility to fix it, it's not.  

We can't police the world, we would be guilty of the imperialism we get accused of so often.  

We can't provide medicine for everyone, we don't have the resources.

We can help sure, but it is NOT the responsibility of the United States to pander to and use our resources in the name of less-that-significant has-been and never-will-be nations. [/B]

I think it would be hard to do a worse job than George W Bush in terms of international & global security.

It;s pretty simple to me, really... I'm in the UK.  If the American president - any president - was doing a good, average, or even poor job I wouldn't care.  The fact that I do, illustrates just how much of a **** up the Bush (2) administration has been for the entire planet.

(even excluding the increase in terrorism and the negative impact of the pointless was against Iraq, the Bush environmental policies in particular are deeply, deeply dangerous for the entire world)

[karajorma]

Originally posted by Liberator
None of you, and I mean NONE of you, could have done a better job in the same situation.  [/B]

Rubbish. After 9/11 everyone in the world was on America's side. If you mean that I couldn't have managed to turn almost the entire world against my country without getting myself impeached they yes you're correct. I probably couldn't do that.

Lets face it. If in Jan 2002 you'd replaced Bush with a stuffed cabbage you'd have done less damage to America's reputation abroad.

[HotSnoJ]

Originally posted by an0n
Secondly: You DO have the resources. It costs literally hundredths of a cent to make a pill, but then American drug companies tell AIDS-riddled children that they can't live a happy, normal life unless they cough up $5/pill for the 10000 pills they'll need to stay alive.

Possibly, but then again, it takes of resources to do the needed research for those pills as well. But what do they do with the profits? Well they pay for research on other drugs, pay for people to make the pills, and make a return for the people who risked the money in the first place.

You know, I can't help but chuckle to myself when people complain about the big bad corporations making profits, but then complain about it when they layoff employees because they (the corp.) aren't making profits. Damn it people, business' aren't charities. Shutup, read some basic economics and then shutup again.

[aldo_14]

Originally posted by karajorma

Lets face it. If in Jan 2002 you'd replaced Bush with a stuffed cabbage you'd have done less damage to America's reputation abroad.

I thought they had.....

[Taristin]

They certainly should have...

[Ford Prefect]

First of all, I think it's probably true that none of us could do a better job than him, but his being the PRESIDENT OF THE NATION, we sorta hold him to different standards, which many believe he has failed to meet. Just because he did better than I could doesn't mean he did well. And besides, I know I at least have more tact than that man.

Fear of strong leadership? Perhaps, but then again the patron saint of strong leadership is arguably Machiavelli. I think perhaps a free society does not need strong leadership so much as restrained leadership. I don't trust people who are always decisive from the get-go about what has to be done. The world simply is not that simple.

Oh, and a little point about the AIDS running rampant statement: Bush refuses to fund AIDS programs because they support birth control. Let's stop AIDS, but without condoms. Right on.

[Tiara]

Funny, this happens every time Lib posts in a political debate type thread...

[Rictor]

to be fair, it happens every time anyone posts in a political debate, as long as their views are sufficiently at odds with someone elses. and like we all learned in grade two, it takes two to fight.

[Deepblue]

Originally posted by StratComm
Ah, the good old days of harmless-idiot-Bush.  Falling off a Segway, that whole babbling "Fool me once" line, and so on; a laughingstock is so much better than the current relations nightmare.  I think the little guy is still under there somewhere, he's just hiding behind that pesky war thing.

It ran out of power. John Kerry has fallen off his bike, thats a lot harder to accomplish then falling off of something that is powered by an outside source.

EDIT: Ford, I just gained a little respect for you.

[an0n]

I could do a better job.

I wouldn't get re-elected because I'd piss a bunch of people off making the country better, but I'd still end up doing a better job.

[Deepblue]

.

You can dream.

[StratComm]

Originally posted by Deepblue

It ran out of power. John Kerry has fallen off his bike, thats a lot harder to accomplish then falling off of something that is powered by an outside source.

EDIT: Ford, I just gained a little respect for you.

Ok, where in there was did I reference Kerry?  Way, way outside the realm of the point.  It was intended primarily as a joke, since these silly debates get way too heated at times.  Still, you can't say that Bush has shown a very high aptitude in anything remotely involving more than a basic education.

Whether any given person could have done a better job as President than Bush is not a valid question, there are too many traits that would have to be considered first.  The ultimate question is whether a given person could have better served (1) the American people, and (2) those influenced by American policy who are not American citizens (and no amount of arguing changes that fact; the first duty of a leader is to those he leads) and quite frankly the only people Bush has served have been those that share his own special interests.  Not the job of a President.  Would I have done differently?  I don't know, but I would like to think I would have.  As would most people.

And when it comes to the debate as to whether dubya has done things correctly, well, there isn't much of an argument that can be had there.  He could have done a million things differently and come out better in the long run.  Hell, he could have done everything the same but been a little less transparent in his ulterior motives and would be more highly regarded.  That's not the point.  The point for the Americans here is are we better off now than we were before he was elected, on our own soil as well as internationally?  I say we aren't, but then I get to go and vote like everyone else.  For the rest, well, you don't vote for him, so there's not much that can be done.  Complain all you like, it won't get him to step down, and as these dabates so clearly illustrate, you aren't convincing anyone else either.

[Martinus]

[color=66ff00]Holy **** you guys actually feel sorry for him?!?

Bush intentionally ****ed everything up for his own gains, why can't you see that? He's nothing short of a monster.

He ruined the democratic process taking the right to choose a president away from the american people and improved matters only for his rich friends. I find it appaling that so much evidence exists that he screwed the majority of americans in grandios fashion yet nobody is willing to call him on it.

Is the media brainwashing that good?
[/color]

[StratComm]

Maeg, it's not the media brainwashing.  Average intelligence has dropped to dangerously low levels, and this sort of behavior is just the tip of the iceburg.  That's why Bush's "success" disgusts me, it reflects a blinding ignorance of the masses to such stupidly transparent intentions.  The same goes for Kerry, but between "bad" and "bad," one has to make some sort of distinction.  And what's sad, I'm conservative in principle.  It's Bush that isn't in any sense of the word, except where it doesn't apply to a public office (or shouldn't), religion.

[Martinus]

[color=66ff00]Honestly the elections should be heavily regulated, everyone should be allocated an equal amount of money and it should be the person and the ideas that win it not the person and the 12 ****ing multinationals.

America has always been the subject of much annoyance for me, so much potential pissed away because the greedy few control the masses.
[/color]

[Rictor]

Originally posted by Maeglamor
[color=66ff00]Holy **** you guys actually feel sorry for him?!?

Bush intentionally ****ed everything up for his own gains, why can't you see that? He's nothing short of a monster.

He ruined the democratic process taking the right to choose a president away from the american people and improved matters only for his rich friends. I find it appaling that so much evidence exists that he screwed the majority of americans in grandios fashion yet nobody is willing to call him on it.

Is the media brainwashing that good?
[/color]

I'm not willing to call him on it?

Actually, most of the world, and a sizeable chunk of the American population, is.

[an0n]

Apparently everyone is now a liberal-commie-terrorist or a rightwing-nutjob-with-no-regard-for-the-truth.

[Rictor]

can't I be a nutjob terrorist commie wioth no regard for the truth?
that sounds like the best of both worlds