"Why is George W. Bush's disapproval rating the lowest of any president in modern history ? ( 68 % )"

Good old Jimmy Carter! He is the second reason I left the democrat party.

Yeah. I can understand that.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Diplomatically you are wrong. Every country except one that opposed us going into Iraq has had a change in government leaders and those elected leaders are pro rather than anti American.

Those that don't hate George Bush are usually much quieter than those who do.

Nobody gets insulted or attacked for sticking to the safe party line ("George Bush is like Hitler").

But come election time, the loud-mouthed "peace activists" always get their asses handed to them.

(The British now want Tony Blair back and the Tories are leading in all polls. Labour even lost London!)

Successfully updated karma reason!

Yes, I finally see how it works. The democrats try to do republicans one better. I just wish they understood that the direction they take us is not the one we need to go in.

Yea but! (Trudy's big but there) - They "feel" your pain AND their intentions were good!

Successfully updated karma reason!

Hi, Paladin77 -

The Army investigation into alleged abuses of prisoners was led by General Antonio Taguba, who at its conclusion stated that the Bush administration "has committed war crimes" in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Guantanamo Bay "when the Commander-in-chief authorized a systmatic regime of torture." This quote is from Taguba's preface to a report written by the group Physicians for Human Rights, which is entitled "Broken Laws, Broken Lives: Medical Evidence of Torture by US Personnel and Its Impact." You ought to be able to find it online.

As to the relationship between Saddam and Al Qaeda, I'm genuinely confused that you bring this up when the United States Army says no relationship existed. For my reference, if you care to, see http://www.cnn.com/2008/us/03/13/alqaeda.saddam/.

Here is my point - if Saddam had, as you stated, publicly said "I have WMDs and I'll give them to anyone who will use them to attack America", and if he had an operational relationship with Al Qaeda, then I most likely would have supported making war on Iraq myself. However, not only were these things not true, it was pretty much common knowledge that they weren't true by 2005.

I gather you are either active or ex-military, based on your personal experience with waterboarding (SERE?). Sincerely, I thank you for your service. I don't think AWOL Bush and Five-deferment Cheney are fit to lick your boots.

Please tell me - what "mess" did Bush walk into? Could it have been all that money from the budget surplus lying around that he had to clean up and throw away? As to the two messes that were dumped into his lap in the first nine months, I'm assuming that 9/11 was one of them, but what was the other. And if you are willing to use facts to tell me why Bush has done a good job, then I'll use facts, and only facts, to tell you why in my opinion he hasn't. Fair enough?

Successfully updated karma reason!

Is this place a joke? All I see are so many people (grown adults too at that) that haven't gotten out of the "football mindset" of defeating the other side instead of finding the truth about things. And the whole picture? forget about it. I think of myself as conservative but not a neo-conservative which this little nest appears to be comprised of.

Even if Iraq had "relations" with terrorists that doesn't justify our current government to not even declaring war by constitutional standards but make illegal war, the same that rogue countries do.

Using their logic it's okay to kill many hundreds of civilians for a small group of people. It's not like these Iraqi's have familes and ties who could end up hating America and become terrorists themselves..

Also the amount of money this is costing is ennormeous and the simple thing is we will have to pull out eventually because we will be bankrupt in a few years. All the government is doing is ensuring that will happen because things haven't gotten any better over in the years our army has occupied it. If you think 3 groups are going to give up fighting anytime soon, along with the new breed of Terrorists that America has created then you need to wake up. But I correct myself, they aren't terrorists, they are Iraqi people tired of America's occupation. Just imagine if some foreign country invaded us because of some relation we had. This along with fighting in Afghanistan seems like there's something much bigger and it's not in America's interest.

I love it how people complain about socialism, but apparently they don't know what it is. These wars have been infinitely more disaterous than Socialism could ever hope to be. I hate it myself but would prefer it to these illegal wars any day. Instead of spending billions overseas, why not fix some of America's problems? You know like our border for a start.

Thats another thing that gets me steamed - our goverment is supposed to be fighting terrorism overseas spending all of our money and having to borrow and borrow ensuring that foreign privateers buy America. They basically say they're "protecting us". they can also take away all of our rights by making the patriot act, but they cannot... absolutely cannot build better feneces around our border. Nor increase the border patrol. While thousand of illegal immigrants cross it everyday. Something doesn't add up.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Hi, Roris1X -

Yours is one of the most sensible posts I've read, and I thank you for it.

Successfully updated karma reason!

I think of myself as conservative but not a neo-conservative which this little nest appears to be comprised of.

You were very logical until you used the term neo-conservative. It is a racial slur used by liberals mostly referring to Jews who left the democrat party. I am a Jew, and I left the democrat party in the 70’s because they stopped being conservative. You did not know this and I am not offended by your use of the term because of your ignorance. I just wanted you to know that it is a highly offensive term, like calling a black person a nigger. It is one of the liberals smug code words that allows the ignorant to not hold them accountable for using such a slur and when they are called on it they claim ignorance and that the person is over sensitive.

Even if Iraq had "relations" with terrorists that doesn't justify our current government to not even declaring war by constitutional standards but make illegal war, the same that rogue countries do.

Sorry but that lie does not cut it when the facts are brought to light. We attacked Afghanistan because they were protecting Al Qaeda. They refused to turn over AQ we went in and destroyed the government in our search for the bad guys. This was legal and justified.

The legal justification for going into Iraq had noting to do with Saddam’s decades long ties with terrorism, which was just icing on the cake. The reason we went into Iraq, the reason that is on the record is his continued violations of the armistice agreed to and signed by the government of Iraq. The armistice clearly lays out things that Iraq must do to keep the war from resuming. They failed to do this for over a decade. After 9/11 it was decided to resume the war and end it. There was and is no need for a declaration of war because that had been signed and agreed to by our Congress, the UN, and NATO. The Gulf War, just like the Korean War, was not over. The UN started both wars for the United States, now one of the two is over and done with leaving only one war left to finish. Should North Korea openly violate the armistice that war will continue.

Also the amount of money this is costing is ennormeous and the simple thing is we will have to pull out eventually because we will be bankrupt in a few years.

Check your history, the same was said with our little stay in Japan, 1946-1975. The same was said with our minor visit to Germany 1946-1993. How about our tiny stay in South Korea 1953- present.

It was also said that converting the government from a socialist fascist state to a democratic state. The argument at the time was that the people would not want to leave the comfort of socialism under the power of a dictator and would fail as soon as we left. This was also said about Italy, Japan, Afghanistan, and Iraq. It is in our nation’s best interest to make the conversion just as we did in Japan, Germany, and the rest.

The argument of the cost is the same as the one against the Marshal plan and others where we financed the rebuilding of Germany, and the rest of Europe as well as Japan. We spent more on rebuilding those countries than we did in developing the atomic bomb.

Instead of spending billions overseas, why not fix some of America's problems? You know like our border for a start.

This argument was made when we waged the cold war, as well as our space program. Both have helped our nation in many ways you don’t seem to see. The money is there for our border, it is sitting waiting to be spent, but environmentalist have blocked the building of a border fence because it might hurt the migration of some animal or insect. Liberals are fighting protection of our borders because it is racist. It is not the money it is the political will of our nation that stops us almost every time. You are correct it does not add up.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Paladin77

Your stated ratinale for the Iraq War keeps changing, but you've still got a long way to go to catch up with President Bush, who I think stated some 27 different reasons for going into Iraq. First was WMDs, which we now know was false, and which was believed to be false by many of us.

The Downing Street Memo shows clearly that Bush lied us into the Iraq War. And the complete lack of accountability for the billions of dollars sent into Iraq and lost or stolen makes any comparison to the Marshall Plan invalid in my view.

Successfully updated karma reason!

I knew I would get a reply like this if I actually got one. Basically the logic is "it's the liberal's fault" or "here's a history lesson". If the former was truly that way, we wouldn't be at war because the liberals would prevent it. And you basically isolate parts of my whole argurement instead of seeing the connection between the bs of what our adminstration is doing. And sorry for unorganized paraghs, I'm dead tired now.

Also it saddens me when you say "we" the goverment doesn't give a damn about you or me I'm afraid. The only say we have in it is who gets elected and even that's fishy because of media converage on canidates - like making Ron Paul not exist. The majority of this country doesn't agree with the Iraq war and the government, including the democratic congress aren't doing a damn thing about it.

"You were very logical until you used the term neo-conservative."

Then what is this conservative regime that is ruling our country? it certainly isn't this..

Small goverment

No socialism

No nation building

Anti-war

etc

And again liberals are at the fault of everything again? And sorry I've seen the same smugness in this very thread coming from so called "conservatives".

anyone who thinks they can invade a country killing thousands of innocents for a very small amount of people is pretty smug and elite. And another word comes to mind. Basically its hurting the whole for a few which doesn't make sense and so far has lead to only an increasing amount of deaths and people to fight against. I'm not point a finger at you but at the very ones who iniated and are leading it. Which is both democrats and republicans.

I know the conservative admistration is anything but conservative in this age. And neo-consveratives fit them perfectly.

Also here's a video naming out "neo-conservatives" yes they call themselves that and this is coming from a true conservative.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4df1soW7Dho

Sorry but that lie does not cut it when the facts are brought to light. We attacked Afghanistan because they were protecting Al Qaeda. They refused to turn over AQ we went in and destroyed the government in our search for the bad guys. This was legal and justified.

Actually it is illegal because our government never legally declared war by constitutional means. *repeated* So it's illegal period. Working with NATO, the U.N doesn't justify ignoring our constitution which is supposed to be our way of law. Also again lets ignore the civilians.

Again I'll use the same logic this adminstration is using they can kill thousands of innocents and face no consequence in order to get a small group running around everyhwere. And again just imagine if another country invaded us on the same proposal - it wouldn't stand. And there are Iraqis fighting against us now because of our occupation. The media likes to call them "terrorists".

"Check your history, the same was said with our little stay in Japan, 1946-1975. The same was said with our minor visit to Germany 1946-1993. How about our tiny stay in South Korea 1953- present."

Those aren't in the same league with two full wars going on along with nation building. America now has so many more military bases around the world. Our goverment has built what looks like an small empire and much to the natives displeasure - see South Korea. Also we were just in the beginning of the borrowing "bubble". And now it looks like it could pop any day.

It is costing us billions but of course the mainstream meda will never make it in healdline news. Btw there is no "left or right media" if there was really this liberal bias, Bush would not have gotten elected twice nor would we be in this war. If you do some research there are a few individuals who own the media. Off topic I know but just wanted you know because I'm really sick of hearing about horrible liberals when the very peope you support are the ones screwing us over.

To get back to why we will go bankrupt is we've been borrowing heavily from the chinese and other nations. We just can't keep going at it. That's why we've been able to keep this unconstitional empire running. This is called a bubble and it's about to burst. And if it isn't well America has been and is up for sale like I said for Foreign Investors. Not only will they eventually own America but imagine the influence they will or probably already have now.

"This argument was made when we waged the cold war, as well as our space program. Both have helped our nation in many ways you don’t seem to see. The money is there for our border, it is sitting waiting to be spent, but environmentalist have blocked the building of a border fence because it might hurt the migration of some animal or insect. Liberals are fighting protection of our borders because it is racist. It is not the money it is the political will of our nation that stops us almost every time. You are correct it does not add up."

See above for spending.

How has focusing on a space program instead of common sense things like I've stated helped us? The current admin is literally currently focuing more on outer space than down here in America. That would make a great comic.

Your logic makes no sense regarding our borders. I'm sorry, if the current adminstration can get away with two illegal wars, nation biulding, outrageous military spending, etc they can easily fix our borders.. Liberals are also fighting the war and is that stopping it? You must be talking about liberals as in citizens like you and me well like I previous pointed out we so far have no real power. The demcratic congress is nearly identical to the other side with them making plans to spend even more money on Iraq. This is not the "will of the nation" gimme a break =/. Also you are ignoring the patriot act that can take away all of our rights. They're willing to do something as drastic as that. This again shows the current adminstration doesn't have our interests in mind.

So basically looking at the past in this case doesn't make sense because things have gotten worse - our borrowing and spending bubble, more military bases to make this godforsaken empire, we have no trade surplus now. America doesn't produce anything today besides entertainment. We provide nothing to other countries except nation building which is a huge hole in our pocked to the say the least.

I can already see you're not going to see my way because your so stuck with this party that looks to me is completely self-interest and not for us, the people. Which is a shame because your smarter than I thought you were, you're just not looking at the whole logic and the whole picture. I think your somewhat afraid to go against this outrageous adminstration, along with it's congress thinking it would be unpatriotic. But you would be a true patriot for doing so because they simply don't care about us.

Successfully updated karma reason!

First was WMDs, which we now know was false, and which was believed to be false by many of us.

Some WMDs were found.

You do not "know" that it was "false", you BELIEVE that not enough were found to warrant calling them "WMDs".

That's not the same, really.

anyone who thinks they can invade a country killing thousands of innocents for a very small amount of people is pretty smug and elite.

Unless it is Saddam in which case the action constitutes no cause for war (I remember the demonstrations against the war to liberate Kuwait), or unless the killing doesn't involve an invasion (Saddam murdering hundreds of thousands of Shiites clearly doesn't constitute grounds for complaints).

But it's even worth than that!

I grew up in territory occupied by the US (West-Berlin) and am a citizen of a country the US invaded (Germany).

Smug and elite indeed, but also necessary and good.

Yes, innocent people died. But I blame the Nazis and Saddam for that. Nobody forced Saddam to attack Iran, gas Kurds, invade Kuwait, attack Israel, support PLO terrorists, and slaughter Shiites.

Successfully updated karma reason!

When I say no WMDs were found, I'm quoting President Bush. Best give that argument up. As for Saddam attacking Iran, that was back when we were supporting him, which we did for a number of years. If you examine the diplomatic exchanges that went on between Saddam and the United States before Iraq invaded Kuwait, you could even make a case that we gave him the green light to do so.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Unless it is Saddam in which case the action constitutes no cause for war (I remember the demonstrations against the war to liberate Kuwait), or unless the killing doesn't involve an invasion (Saddam murdering hundreds of thousands of Shiites clearly doesn't constitute grounds for complaints).

But it's even worth than that!

I grew up in territory occupied by the US (West-Berlin) and am a citizen of a country the US invaded (Germany).

Smug and elite indeed, but also necessary and good.

Yes, innocent people died. But I blame the Nazis and Saddam for that. Nobody forced Saddam to attack Iran, gas Kurds, invade Kuwait, attack Israel, support PLO terrorists, and slaughter Shiites.

I just have to highlight this quote again.

Smug and elite indeed, but also necessary and good.

Absolutely insane... It is never neccesary or justified for a thousands of innocents to die for a small group. I will keep repeating it. And we're paying for it too, there are now natives rising up and fighting against us. It's evil and will always be plain and simple.

So again is this place a joke? You literally quote one sentence of my whole side and don't even see the connection of it all. And bring up some reasons with no logic behind them.. You absolutely ignore the whole picture of things. The sheer hyposcry of this adminstration. You ignore the bubble. You ignore the borders. You ignore the patriot act. You ignore that is just breeding more people to fight against. etc

You're 30 start acting like it.

And I really love it.. you're also putting Hitler and the nazis who were on a full scale war, allied with an actual real powerful ally, and together they were literally taking over countries to saddam in the same boat for justification of this war.... And you're really blaming saddam when American troops are the ones who physcially killed the innocents? first with bombs and then on ground. And no one forced America to invade these countries. It was our government's choice. I sure as hell didn't have a say in it and still don't.

Using your same logic it's justfied to declare war on half the world. So I"m done with this place, this is a huge waste of time trying to discuss things with people when they don't even look at your whole side and are trying to become the "winner". I shouldn't have even replied.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Absolutely insane... It is never neccesary or justified for a thousands of innocents to die for a small group.

Might want to tell that to the Jews in 33-45 Europe. I think they will disagree.

Perhaps the Poles, Slavs or other Eastern Europeans will agree with you. DOnt bother asking the ones that did not make it. After all dead men tell no tales - and they dont complain either.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Paladin77

As far as protection of our borders goes, I don't think you can blame that on "the liberals", whoever they are, or the environmentalists either. Correct me if I'm mistaken, but was it not President Bush who pushed for an unlimited number of Mexican trucks to be able to operate within the continental United States (or at least the lower 48), with almost no money budgeted for inspecting their cargo?

As for the Middle East, it's always had a turbulent history. How could it not, just with Jerusalem being the most holy city in the world for Christians, Jews, and Muslims? In my feeling the United States has absolute moral and political obligations to protect and support Israel. The allied powers pretty much abandoned Europe's Jews before and during World War II, and that's quite a weight for the country to carry.

However, there is a growing body of opinion that the Iraq War has made both us and Israel less secure. If you doubt it, then check it out, as I won't do your work for you. There is a tremendous amount of evidence that the Bush administration simply had no idea what it was getting into when it launched this war, with all its talk of us being "greeted as liberators" and Iraqi oil paying for the war, just to mention two incredibly wrong statements. And now that we're in, it's apparent that we have no plan to win it, as no one in this administration can even tell us what victory would look like.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Your stated ratinale for the Iraq War keeps changing, but you've still got a long way to go to catch up with President Bush, who I think stated some 27 different reasons for going into Iraq. First was WMDs, which we now know was false, and which was believed to be false by many of us.

Sorry to confuse you with basic English, allow me to clarify. My reasons have not changed nor has the Presidents. You and others made statements that were either untrue, or misleading, or out right lies. I spoke to those statements. When the issue of legality came up I spoke to that. The legal justification was as I stated, contributing factors were the other things I wrote about. I understand that most people of the opposition like to dance around a laundry list of the ills of the Bush Administration and when one is answered and logically knocked off the table they jump to another until they are back to the first issue reworded. I do like the fact that you are paying attention but your attempt to suggest that I am doing what the opposition party does is incorrect.

The Downing Street Memo shows clearly that Bush lied us into the Iraq War. And the complete lack of accountability for the billions of dollars sent into Iraq and lost or stolen makes any comparison to the Marshall Plan invalid in my view.

Please explain to me what the Downing Street memo said that makes what the president said a lie. While doing this please explain why the opposition party did not use this information to impeach the president. That is two separate requests.

Since our government has spent a trillion dollars over the last 40 years just on education with little or nothing to show for it. I would tend to disagree with you.

Successfully updated karma reason!

knew I would get a reply like this if I actually got one. Basically the logic is "it's the liberal's fault" or "here's a history lesson". If the former was truly that way, we wouldn't be at war because the liberals would prevent it. And you basically isolate parts of my whole argurement instead of seeing the connection between the bs of what our adminstration is doing. And sorry for unorganized paraghs, I'm dead tired now.

Yeah, you get some rest. I have no idea who you are talking to or what you are talking about.

Then what is this conservative regime that is ruling our country?

Both presidents Bush were never ever thought of as conservative by conservatives. They are from the liberal wing of the Republican Party. This is only news to liberals and democrats. Just like it is news that republicans have a liberal wing or a gay wing of the party. We have a far left wing of the party and a far right wing of the party. Just because people call themselves republican does not make them conservative. You say you are a conservative so you should know this already. I am just stating this obvious information to those that only know the propaganda in the media.

I know the conservative admistration is anything but conservative in this age. And neo-consveratives fit them perfectly.

Sorry but neo-conservatives are, if you take the term literally, new (neo) conservatives. Are new conservatives, they are conservatives that have finally stepped up to their beliefs. What you are calling neo-conservatives are liberal republicans. Not right wing, not center right, they are leaning to the left and far left as our current candidate has been doing for decades. As a big tent party we accept all kinds of people and backgrounds. When Mr. Reagan was in office he was attacked by the liberal democrats as well as the liberal republicans. Just in case you did not know this, but the democrats used to have a large conservative wing that has slowly eroded, those people are also new republicans but not new conservatives. I think Trent Lott was the last democrat to cross the line to the Republican Party. The rest have been booted out because they won’t tow the liberal party line. Look at what they did to Senator Lieberman a conservative democrat. Well former democrat.

To get back to why we will go bankrupt is we've been borrowing heavily from the chinese and other nations.

Yeah, they have been saying that when we borrowed heavily from Germany, Japan in the 80’s. It is not the borrowing that will hurt us it is our domestic fiscal policy that will kill us. This policy is written by the Congress not the President.

It is costing us billions but of course the mainstream meda will never make it in healdline news. Btw there is no "left or right media" if there was really this liberal bias, Bush would not have gotten elected twice nor would we be in this war. If you do some research there are a few individuals who own the media. Off topic I know but just wanted you know because I'm really sick of hearing about horrible liberals when the very peope you support are the ones screwing us over.

Okay, now you have left your “conservative” credibility at the door.
The money spent on the war has been front page news but the people have not responded to it so they dropped it.

The lies the so called honest media told during both elections cost the careers of many of the left wing media. So I will again disagree with you.

Your logic makes no sense regarding our borders. I'm sorry, if the current adminstration can get away with two illegal wars, nation biulding, outrageous military spending, etc they can easily fix our borders.. Liberals are also fighting the war and is that stopping it? You must be talking about liberals as in citizens like you and me well like I previous pointed out we so far have no real power. The demcratic congress is nearly identical to the other side with them making plans to spend even more money on Iraq. This is not the "will of the nation" gimme a break =/. Also you are ignoring the patriot act that can take away all of our rights. They're willing to do something as drastic as that. This again shows the current adminstration doesn't have our interests in mind.

okay, since you have not researched what I wrote and you choose not to accept what I wrote, and you have yet to reply with a rebuttal of facts but instead rehash what you wrote preciously I will just wait until you do.

I can already see you're not going to see my way because your so stuck with this party that looks to me is completely self-interest and not for us, the people.

You are so liberal in that statement. You have already made up your mind about me, judge, jury, and executioner. You do not know me. You don’t know that I used to be a democrat, and my family is heavy in democrat politics. My aunt a delegate at the 68 democrat convention is now 80 and on YouTube plugging away for Senator Obama. I may be a republican but I am a conservative first which means I will vote for the person that will be and do the best for our country regardless of party affiliation. As I said Mr. Bush is a liberal republican not a conservative. I have disagreed with him more than I have agreed with him but he is our president. I have said the same about Mr. Clinton. Other than the woman chasing I don’t see much difference between the two. But you keep stereotyping people and putting them in your pigeon holes and ignoring what they say because they disagree with you. What you did in that last paragraph was insulting and ignorant. You are free to have your views and I am free to disagree with them. Since you know it all I will allow you to continue to tell me what I think and feel as that is was good liberals do.

Successfully updated karma reason!

When I say no WMDs were found, I'm quoting President Bush. Best give that argument up.

The full quote was there were no stockpiles of WMD found. When five hundred tons of chemical weapons were discovered in Iraq it was dismissed because it was not nuclear weapons. When biological weapons were discovered in Iraq it was also dismissed because it was not nuclear weapons and biological and chemical weapons were old news and we already knew he had them. Mr. Bush where are the nuclear weapons you made us believe were there. YOU LIED to us Mr. President! You tricked us into going to war!

A hand full of dust was sent in the mail and the nation panicked. Less than a pound of Anthrax actually a few ounces spread over several envelopes panicked the nation. Saddam had tons of it unaccounted for. Did any of it get to the US? We still don’t know. We have heard nothing about the 9/11 anthrax attacks. Someone produced it, someone mailed it people died. Was Iraq involved? I have no idea. Is it easy to make? You can do it in your spare bathroom, make enough to wipe out a city. So just because there are not ten thousand tons of the stuff does not mean he had no WMD.

As far as protection of our borders goes, I don't think you can blame that on "the liberals", whoever they are, or the environmentalists either. Correct me if I'm mistaken, but was it not President Bush who pushed for an unlimited number of Mexican trucks to be able to operate within the continental United States (or at least the lower 48), with almost no money budgeted for inspecting their cargo?

Correct me if I am wrong but does not the congress approve the budget? The president can only make recommendations and veto the bills but he does not write them. The poorly run republican congress followed by the poorly run democrat congress. The President has no power in that regard.

However, there is a growing body of opinion that the Iraq War has made both us and Israel less secure. If you doubt it, then check it out, as I won't do your work for you.

Sorry but I don’t see it. Please explain. I can’t explain why I know this to be untrue but it is. If you explain your views it might allow me to disprove what you believe.

There is a tremendous amount of evidence that the Bush administration simply had no idea what it was getting into when it launched this war, with all its talk of us being "greeted as liberators" and Iraqi oil paying for the war, just to mention two incredibly wrong statements. And now that we're in, it's apparent that we have no plan to win it, as no one in this administration can even tell us what victory would look like.

Prove it.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Using your same logic it's justfied to declare war on half the world. So I"m done with this place, this is a huge waste of time trying to discuss things with people when they don't even look at your whole side and are trying to become the "winner". I shouldn't have even replied.

Translation for people that are not liberal. I lied to gain credibility and not be dismissed as a liberal. Then I got called on it and I can’t find a way out other than a temper tantrum and stomping out the virtual door blaming everyone else. This is not how one debates but it is how some liberals argue their points.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Robert Heinlein once said that you should never try to teach a pig to sing. It's a waste of your time, and it annoys the pig.

I'll apply that to trying to have a fact-based discussion with a loyal Bushie. It's a waste of my time, and annoys the Bushie.

Signing off on this one. You tell yourself whatever you have to to get through another day of the administration of the worst president in history.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Robert Heinlein once said that you should never try to teach a pig to sing. It's a waste of your time, and it annoys the pig.

I'll apply that to trying to have a fact-based discussion with a loyal Bushie. It's a waste of my time, and annoys the Bushie.

Signing off on this one. You tell yourself whatever you have to to get through another day of the administration of the worst president in history.

Translation: he has no facts, no proof, and his arguments have been torn to shreds. Let me run away with my tail between my legs but sounding as if I am above the fray. For the record the worse president in our history was President Carter.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Robert Heinlein once said that you should never try to teach a pig to sing. It's a waste of your time, and it annoys the pig.

I'll apply that to trying to have a fact-based discussion with a loyal Bushie. It's a waste of my time, and annoys the Bushie.

Why is that liberals demand civility in debate with one breath, then jump (not drop, jump) down in the mud as soon as they are refuted and have no argument against the refutation?

Successfully updated karma reason!

This is my last post officially because again paladin77 you islote parts of my whole arguement. It even looks you have to agree with me but state its "obvious information". You ignore the whole logic. You ignore the video calling out this new neo-conservative regime that is taking over. You ignore power this adminstration has and how they're not doing it to help us. You ignore why the Iraq war is bad. You ignore why our Bubble has gotten bigger, yes bigger. etc etc

Also I love it how you want facts but do you even know what facts are? It takes logic to get to facts. Facts are just a word ontop of much critical logic. They're just a small part of the whole picture. And going by your logic, you haven't stated any "researched facts either". I provided a video why this current adminstration IS neo-conservative and you flat out ignored it. So I'm calling you a little shit, especialy for being 50. If the word "fact" wasn't in the english dictionary you wouldn't have anything to go on. They are not these godly things that denouce everything. They can be picked, taken apart, and debunked logically.

Here's a fact that is just as much of a fact as one can be.

"Your logic makes no sense regarding our borders. I'm sorry, if the current adminstration can get away with two illegal wars, nation biulding, outrageous military spending, etc they can easily fix our borders.. Liberals are also fighting the war and is that stopping it? You must be talking about liberals as in citizens like you and me well like I previous pointed out we so far have no real power. The demcratic congress is nearly identical to the other side with them making plans to spend even more money on Iraq. This is not the "will of the nation" gimme a break =/. Also you are ignoring the patriot act that can take away all of our rights. They're willing to do something as drastic as that. This again shows the current adminstration doesn't have our interests in mind."

I think for myself and I've debunked all of your "official facts" using pure logic. I should've copy and pasted my whole post to get the point across.

Also love it how you call me a liberal and try to victimize yourself. I can tell you right now I'm more conservative than you'll ever be. I'm not trying to sterotype you. But hey you do the same thing to me after that, nice. I actually know what beliefs powered the conservative party and it sure isn't alive today. I'm not going to say anything more about your age and how your acting because I think you get my point.

FYI, Anti-war, no taxes at all, non-intervention foreign policy (bush actually ran on that), strict constitutionlists, no socialism, no nation building, small goverment, privacy and liberty, a free market capilistic society, etc have all been real conservative values. And this current adminstratino, check by check have been the exact opposite. Ron Paul has shown me the light on that.

Everythin in this place is about us VS liberals. And it's fucking stupid. If you look at the whole picture, there is only one set of beliefs that is ruling and that is the neo-conservatism.

And you are awesome Dr. Guy. You are another who isloates a part of an arguement, cutting it off from the rest of it's logic while you safely stay by the sidlines not making any arguements your self. And then make snide remark on a mythical side that hasn't been in power for years.

Anyways ciao, I'm not going waste any more time or energy here and of course for the reasons above.

Successfully updated karma reason!

This is my last post officially because again paladin77 you islote parts of my whole arguement. It even looks you have to agree with me but state its "obvious information". You ignore the whole logic.

So your point is that your arguments can’t stand on their own but only as a whole. Just because I answer parts of your posts I have to first read the entirety to get the context. You expect me to make references without putting up the context. This is just silly. Feel free not to post that is your choice.

Also I love it how you want facts but do you even know what facts are?

a fact is something that can be shown to be true, to exist, or to have happened as opposed to and opinion which is, the view somebody takes about an issue, especially when it is based solely on personal judgment. I think you confuse the two.

"Your logic makes no sense regarding our borders. I'm sorry, if the current adminstration can get away with two illegal wars, nation biulding, outrageous military spending, etc they can easily fix our borders.. Liberals are also fighting the war and is that stopping it?

I know that to you it makes no sense because it is not opinion based it is fact based. You make an inaccurate statement and I refute it and you complain that I am not paying attention to your faulty logic. For your logic to work the in accuracies would have to be true, and since they are not true your logic faulty, wrong, illogical. A dictionary definition of the word Neoconservative is as follows; “somebody who, during the mid-1980s, began to support conservatism in society, and in politics in particular, as a reaction to the social freedoms sought throughout the 1960s and early 1970s.” Now President Bush is a liberal and a republican as I explained before which was never answered or refuted by you. You don’t refute anything you only restate your position with no supporting information other than you said it. Which is why you have issues with me taking each section and answering each part to prove your illogic.

I pointed out the FACT that the wars are not illegal, this means nothing to you because you continue to refer to both wars as illegal. To refute this again I say that NATO, that means Europe. The UN, that means the majority of nations on this planet. The US Congress debated the subject and voted to approve the actions. All of these groups signed off on both wars. It is impossible to be illegal except in the minds of people that wish to take issue with the war and have no other valid points to oppose the war. If the war was illegal as you hopefully suggest, then the president can be impeached and arrested. It is against the law for the president to move any troops into combat fro more than 6 months except the U. S. Marine Corps without informing the Congress, the Congress then has the right to refuse funding because the president does not control the money spent only the Congress. It is called the war powers act.

Also here's a video naming out "neo-conservatives" yes they call themselves that and this is coming from a true conservative.

You do understand that almost all the people he calls neo-conservatives are Jews, his video is anti-Jew, anti-logic, and it is from an idiot named Ron Paul! Even the kook fringe of the Republican Party step away from him. The same with democrats. Remember what I wrote that the term Neo Conservatives is a racial slur, if you agree with what he is saying then you are a racist. I do not make this statement lightly, cousin Roy taught me as a child never to use that term lightly. Cousin Roy Wilkins, former head of the NAACP. Sorry had to name drop because you don’t seem to understand even basic things or logic.
Ron Paul is a hate monger, and if he is your role model then you are in sad company.

Everythin in this place is about us VS liberals. And it's fucking stupid.

You have no concept of what you speak. And being this close to an admitted racist masquerading as a conservative makes me unhappy.

I'm not going to say anything more about your age and how your acting because I think you get my point.

I'm 52, what is your point?

If you look at the whole picture, there is only one set of beliefs that is ruling and that is the neo-conservatism.

you love to race bait.

Successfully updated karma reason!

I'm only posting agin to expose you for who you really are - a person that trys to make everything "simpler" so you can actually understand and "win" them. I've seen the way you post and you simply don't want know the truth about things, what is truly right or wrong. All you do is support this current government - no I'm not talking only about bush. You have no beliefs as a conservative and you dare to call me masqerading as one. Also a near racist as that... ...........................................

So If you're just gonna continue to ignore the whole picture again I try to talk about like in every reply I post, then lets just agree to disagree finally. We can go our seperate ways. But I'm not going to sit idly by while you call me a near racist and liberal.

So your point is that your arguments can’t stand on their own but only as a whole. Just because I answer parts of your posts I have to first read the entirety to get the context. You expect me to make references without putting up the context. This is just silly. Feel free not to post that is your choice.

Stop joking. You know you cut down all of my reasons for why something is bad. It's that simple. You try to make it "simpler" while it's not. So you can "win".

Iraq War: Immoral because the majority, innocents have to die for a small group of people.

This causes some of them to actually fight against America, the media loves to call them terrorists.

The spending, the bubble has gotten bigger since the past.. That is common sense. And again foreign privateers are buying out America and it's gotten worse today. It's that simple - bubbles get bigger. If we dont' go bankrupt, then America will be totall be bought and paid for.

http://www.thedigeratilife.com/blog/index.php/2008/01/26/were-on-sale-time-to-buy-america/

http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/2008/03/americas_econom/

It's no wonder things haven't gotten better because of all those things, through and through these wars are insane. They were illogical to start with and it'll end that way, either for us or them.

Yep those are the things you ignored about my reasoning why this war is bad.

You keep trying simplify it and say it wasn't illegal well you're even wrong on that. It is not a fact.

The two wars are illegal - why? The congress didn't declare them CONSTITUTIONALLY. In fact the last war that was declared was WWII. The constitution is our rule of law. They handed the responsiblity over to Bush and he didn't do it either. Again I'm not looking at only bush but the whole governement which I've been talking about all along.

http://www.albionmonitor.com/0402a/iraqwarunconstitutional.html

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul57.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Movement_to_impeach_George_W._Bush#Constitutionality_of_invasion

Constitutionality of invasion

Further information: United States Constitution

In February and March 2003, John Bonifaz served as lead counsel for a coalition of US soldiers, their parents, and members of Congress in John Doe I v. President Bush,^[23] a constitutional challenge to Bush’s authority to wage war against Iraq absent a congressional declaration of war or equivalent action. Bonifaz argued in court that Bush's planned first-strike invasion of Iraq violated the War Powers Clause of the US Constitution.^[24] As a corollary to his lawsuit, Bonifaz has argued publicly and in writing that Bush should be impeached for this. However, Bonifaz's lawsuit was dismissed in February 2003 and, in March 2003, the dismissal was upheld on appeal.

a fact is something that can be shown to be true, to exist, or to have happened as opposed to and opinion which is, the view somebody takes about an issue, especially when it is based solely on personal judgment. I think you confuse the two.

No I don't.... That actually streghens my case also.. Everything I've said about the border can be proved to be true. The proof is right in front of us. If you think some environmentalists, and liberals... Can stop the current governemnt.. Which has started all of what we've seen and had years to build a new fence then you need to think for yourself. They also say fighting terroism abroad is for our "protection" Well closing up the borders would sure protect us.. It's more like the governement listening to lobbyists from corporations who love the cheap illegal labor. Yes I researched the environmentalists to make you happy and I still stand by my logic, if you can't see it then you're the one who doesn't know what logic is at all and cannot grasp a much larger picture of corruption.

About the fact itself, what I said about getting to one is true. It may not be the case for all but for many. Also here's another definition of fact.

a truth known by actual experience or observation; something known to be true: Scientists gather facts about plant growth.

"I know that to you it makes no sense because it is not opinion based it is fact based."

see above. Also how do you think facts become facts? They are based on opinions. That is all there is to it. Unless people get a sign from god saying it's "fact" without them first having to make several opinions about something.

I pointed out the FACT that the wars are not illegal, this means nothing to you because you continue to refer to both wars as illegal. To refute this again I say that NATO, that means Europe. The UN, that means the majority of nations on this planet. The US Congress debated the subject and voted to approve the actions. All of these groups signed off on both wars. It is impossible to be illegal except in the minds of people that wish to take issue with the war and have no other valid points to oppose the war. If the war was illegal as you hopefully suggest, then the president can be impeached and arrested.

see above, yes it was legal internationally but for our own rule of law it wasn't.

You do understand that almost all the people he calls neo-conservatives are Jews, his video is anti-Jew, anti-logic, and it is from an idiot named Ron Paul!

Wow just wow.. I don't know what to say. You said it yourself, only most of the people in the video were jew, and again you can't seem to get the bigger picture... Like the ties and connections they had. The influence.. If it was anti-jew don't you think he would've stated that they were actual jews? I never even knew they were until you brought it up. Your logic is basically "They're jews!111" He also would've stated it something like this

"the jew's influences and the fact that are nasty jews has brought to bring down the conservative party, which has been tradionally white and christian"

And Ron Paul himself has debunked that hate mail that was spreading around. Also he has many supporters, more than this current adminstration. He has even written a book on his time as a presidental candidate which is a bestseller. He has attracted many republicans and democrats alike. And if you're calling me a racist for all of this, it again shows your simple-mindness.

Cousin Roy Wilkins, former head of the NAACP. Sorry had to name drop because you don’t seem to understand even basic things or logic.

This is where I get steamed... you're the one still defendin a side just because it's a side. You believe in nothing. You cannot seem to grasp that things are not as simple as they seem. calling Ron Paul a racist along with the video speaks that tenfold.

Here is what I believe in as a conservative -

Anti-war, no taxes at all, non-intervention foreign policy (bush actually ran on that), strict constitutionlistlism, no socialism, no nation building, small goverment, privacy and liberty, a free market capilistic society, etc have all been real conservative values. And this current adminstration and government has a whole, check by check have been the exact opposite.

You have no concept of what you speak. And being this close to an admitted racist masquerading as a conservative makes me unhappy.

Do you want me to link all of the modern day conservative bs that people are supporting in this place? (notice I didn't say neo-cons just so I won't offend you) Whether they're in blogs or artilces like these? I'm sorry but this place is filled with 90% mordern day conservatism. Everyone in this very thread was all about "us VS liberals".

Aslo see above for my conservatism.

"you love to race bait."

Huh what? what I'm trying to show here that things are bigger than they appear and this current goverment is not in our best interests. I'm not trying to "win" anything. I want this country to improve.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Stop joking. You know you cut down all of my reasons for why something is bad. It's that simple. You try to make it "simpler" while it's not. So you can "win".
Iraq War: Immoral because the majority, innocents have to die for a small group of people.

This is the first time you brought up immoral into the argument. What happened to illegal? Sorry is that too simple? In every war innocents have been hurt, or killed. Let’s see, WWII 25 million non military deaths quickly come to mind. The influenza pandemic brought about by WWI killed that many innocents. Please show me a war where innocents and civilians are not hurt or killed?
Better yet please provided for me a moral war.

This causes some of them to actually fight against America, the media loves to call them terrorists.

Wow, just like the end of WWII where Germans and Japanese did the same thing. Look up the New York Times articles saying how we should never have gotten involved in that war and that it was the war monger Roosevelt that really started the war. You are providing time honored arguments from the anti-war groups from the past 60 years.

Having read the report you linked on America for sale; let me say that this article seemed like a blast from the past. And I was right. articles in Time magazine in the 80’s said the same thing only instead of Arab corporations buying up America it was Arab and Japanese corporations buying America and we had better learn Japanese because they will own all of us in less than a decade. Anyone here need to learn Japanese in order to do business? I don’t see what the problem is so please explain it to me.

Also, the same was said when the Germans and Brits were buying our property ten years ago at the start of the housing bubble. Because our dollar is so weak back then. What I am trying to get you to understand is that we have used other nations money to build our economy every since Nixon took us off the gold standard. I noticed that China was not mentioned in the article, I wonder why?

The Washington note made some inaccurate statements. That the war was in the rare position of not getting direct taxes to pay them. Korea, and Vietnam were the only two wars where we had direct taxes to pay for them the rest almost bankrupted the nation. Neither Gulf war was funded by extra taxes. WWII started the personal income tax to help with the war. Sorry I forgot that one. That’s right until then Americans did not pay a personal income tax. That was supposed to end after the war was paid off but either the war was much more expensive than anyone realized or the politicians refused to get their hands out of our pockets.

It's no wonder things haven't gotten better because of all those things, through and through these wars are insane. They were illogical to start with and it'll end that way, either for us or them.

You make this statement but do not provide any support for it. What in your mind makes it insane?

Yep those are the things you ignored about my reasoning why this war is bad.

Other than the fact that you disagree with me I have not seen any of your reasoning. Care to use your own words instead of not even quoting others just linking to a site and expecting all to see what you see. What I am asking for is context, and your own thoughts.

You keep trying simplify it and say it wasn't illegal well you're even wrong on that. It is not a fact.

The two wars are illegal - why? The congress didn't declare them CONSTITUTIONALLY. In fact the last war that was declared was WWII. The constitution is our rule of law. They handed the responsiblity over to Bush and he didn't do it either. Again I'm not looking at only bush but the whole governement which I've been talking about all along.

Sorry my dear friend, but if you bothered to read the war powers act congress does not have to declare war. The president can send our troops anywhere in the world to fight and if it lasts more that 180 days the president has to inform congress, at that point congress has to approve or disapprove the action and if they disapprove they cut off funding. It happened in Nicaragua with President Reagan. Secondly a formal declaration of war can only be done against a country. Since Al Qaeda is not a nation but a group of people from many nations you can’t declare war against them. In the case of the Gulf wars Congress approved the first one (war powers act)and since it was restarted there is no legal requirement for the president to go back to congress, he did anyway just to cover his bases and only six or ten voted against is so it was legal.

In February and March 2003, John Bonifaz served as lead counsel for a coalition of US soldiers, their parents, and members of Congress in John Doe I v. President Bush,[23] a constitutional challenge to Bush’s authority to wage war against Iraq absent a congressional declaration of war or equivalent action. Bonifaz argued in court that Bush's planned first-strike invasion of Iraq violated the War Powers Clause of the US Constitution.[24] As a corollary to his lawsuit, Bonifaz has argued publicly and in writing that Bush should be impeached for this. However, Bonifaz's lawsuit was dismissed in February 2003 and, in March 2003, the dismissal was upheld on appeal.

a fact is something that can be shown to be true, to exist, or to have happened as opposed to and opinion which is, the view somebody takes about an issue, especially when it is based solely on personal judgment. I think you confuse the two.
No I don't.... That actually streghens my case also..

Please re-read your post, the case was dismissed, and he lost his appeal to a higher court. In legal terms two branches of Government have agreed to going to war and the third branch has made it constitutional. (legal) Please explain to me how losing the case and the courts making the war unanimous strengthen your case? Let me simplify for you, the Executive Branch (the President) said we need to go to war, congress do you approve. The legislative Branch (Congress) approved. It was challenged in a court of law (the Judicial Branch) and was dismissed. It was then appealed to a higher court (the Judicial Branch) and they lost. All three branches of government agree we can legally go to war. There are only three branches of our government, all three concur with the war. Please explain to me how that makes it illegal.

Also how do you think facts become facts? They are based on opinions. That is all there is to it. Unless people get a sign from god saying it's "fact" without them first having to make several opinions about something.

You left out some minor things like proof. My opinion is you are full of dog doo. That is an opinion not a fact, once the opinion is investigated and then proven one way or the other it is just an opinion. Ever hear of the theory of evolution or the big bang theory? They are theories because they have not been proven. They are opinions. There is a lot of evidence suggesting they are true but no facts that point to them being true. To be a scientific fact it has to be observed, examined, and duplicated in an independent lab or duplicated by someone else. Since no one has been able to duplicate the big bang it will remain a theory. Since there is no scientific proof of evolution it will remain the working theory. Since there is no proof that the war is illegal there is only opinion that it is illegal while all the facts are saying otherwise.

And if you're calling me a racist for all of this, it again shows your simple-mindness.

I am saying that if you believe his trash then you are a racist because if you look at the pictures that went with the words it showed a Star of David holding an American president I believe, while he is saying that the Jews were running things. The same hate speech of the anti-Zionist movements since before Hitler took power. We all know what a great humanitarian Hitler was. When you use the same hate speech you get to be classified with the people you hang around.

This is where I get steamed... you're the one still defendin a side just because it's a side.

It has nothing to do with sides it has to do with YOU and your desire to spread illogical lies to further your own beliefs. You state that the war is illegal but the only proof you provide is a case the challenged the war and lost. Had they won and the war continued anyway then I would agree with you that the war was illegal. You say that Ron Paul is not a racist and has debunked the claims that he is a racist. Sorry I have been down this road before with the same statements. I have yet to see any proof that he is not what he claims. A person that is a conspiracy theorist that is blaming it all on the Jews. Also known as Neo-cons, I pointed out the slur long before I wasted my time watching the video that said the same things I pointed out. That was before I knew you were speaking of Ron Paul so it was not against him, or his side in specific. It is what it was a racial slur, akin to the N word. Until I watched his video I did not know he was a racist I thought he was a nice libertarian who might be a good challenge to Senator McCain. I now see why he lost steam and has been forgotten by the main stream. Are you going to bring up the Tri-lateral Commission next or how about the Builderbaker society? Each as been linked to the Bush family along with the Illuminati and the free masons, every conspiracy nut has tried to put some spin to them and all the presidents that have served this nation except President James Earl Carter Jr.

Anti-war, no taxes at all, non-intervention foreign policy (bush actually ran on that), strict constitutionlistlism, no socialism, no nation building, small goverment, privacy and liberty, a free market capilistic society, etc have all been real conservative values. And this current adminstration and government has a whole, check by check have been the exact opposite.

As a former active duty marine I agree with the anti-war part, all the way up until we are attacked, or threatened. Then we make war and destroy anyone and everyone in our way so we can go back to peace and love. War has its place in the world.

I also partially agree with the no taxes thing. Go back to the days when corporations paid for the government. The personal income tax should be done away with.

With our global economy we have to intervene some way sometimes or we will fall as a nation.

Socialism is not part of our constitution so that is not a problem for me either.

I can not agree with nation building, or at least your views on it. We built the nations of Germany, Japan, Korea, Taiwan, and the Philippines where I own a house and land just to name a few nations off the top of my head.

Small government is a great idea all we have to do is get rid of all those stupid social programs that deplete or taxes and we can go back to corporate taxes funding the government.

You are correct they are conservative values. As I have pointed out to you more than once the Bush family is not conservative, never have been conservative, they are elite liberals in the Republican Party. Given the choice of Mr. Bush or Mr. Gore I chose Mr. Bush. Given the choice between Mr. Bush and Mr. Kerry, I chose Mr. Bush. The reason and logic are simple. He was the best choice of the two. Of the two parties only one has a working conservative voice that can at least influence the president. The other party has spent the last three decades purging conservatives out of their party so it was hands down vote republican. The more I look at Mr. Paul the more I am convinced that he will destroy our nation. The libertarians made a bad mistake supporting him.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Ashes of the Singularity

"Why is George W. Bush's disapproval rating the lowest of any president in modern history ? ( 68 % )"

"Why is George W. Bush's disapproval rating the lowest of any president in modern history ? ( 68 % )"

uneducated in reality??

Constitutionality of invasion