OK - we've had lots of threads with Bush bashing and Kerry bashing. But since we've got 4 more years of Bush I'd really like to know why Bush is hated and not trusted?
I've heard he's a liar, a cheater. I've heard he's done things borderline illegal. I've heard he's incompetent. We all know he's not popular in Europe.
But I'd like to know (in a constructive manner if possible so this doesn't become a flame war) which decisions and policies lead to your disdain for him? I'm not trying to setup a thread to blast anybody's opinion, I'm just trying to boil down all the vitriol to specific things he's done (not just negative adjectives) so I can better appreciate why some have such a strong hatred for him.
If you're so inclined, I'd like to hear if there's anything about him or his policies that you like?
I'd be happy to indulge this conversation, but I'm not sure I'll be able to recall everything off the top of my head. For the moment, I'll stick to the basics..
1) It pisses me off that Bush wants to drill for oil in Alaska which will irreversibly damage a fragile ecosystem; this priority placed higher than a renewable energy research, development and build-out simply serves to further the demise of our home world and preserve the status quo rather than making a push for the future the focus.
2) I am glad, however, that the same energy policy includes support for continued research and possibly development of safe nuclear power.
3) It pisses me off that Bush has granted himself the power to declare war on a faceless enemy, the "war on terror", which literally gives him free reign for military conquest anywhere on the globe he chooses under that justification. The power of declaration of war is for Congress alone, and it should further be ammended to the Constitution that it is not legal for war to be declared against any entity other than a sovereign nation.
4) It pisses me off that Bush made the Iraq invasion a high priority without heed to the peaceful desires of the U.N., without regard for lack of substantial evidence, and without any clear and present danger to the U.S. or her citizens.
5) It pisses me off that Bush paints the picture in Iraq as a purveyance of freedom to an oppressed people to appeal to our sense of good & bad in attempting to garner support for the war in the absence of strategic justifications. Why should the President of OUR country place higher priority on the quality of life for some third world country when we have MAJOR problems right here in our own? How can people so easily be duped into believing that it is better our energy and resources are spent there than here? I have to wonder if it isn't because so many of us are visually isolated from the poverty, despair, lack of education and unemployment in our own country - out of sight, out of mind. Maybe people don't realize just how many significant problems are in need of addressing right here at home?
6) IMHO points 3, 4 and 5 above should be apparent to anyone with the ability for rational, impartial thought. If the President indeed is not as stupid as "they" say, then these things must be apparent to him as well. Yet Bush having made these decisions despite weighing all the considerations leads me to suspect ulterior motives in the Iraq conflict. This same logic is what has led many to conclude that the war is about oil. I'm not so sure about that, but I do see the U.S. on a mission to reform the Middle East in order to make a more U.S.-friendly region for long term energy assurance - that is, not to steal the oil, but to have them willfully sell it to us at a great price.
7) Added: It pisses me off that Clinton's brilliant budgeting strategy had us on a road to national financial recovery and the Bush completely destroyed this house of cards with broad, indiscriminant strokes - and that he's compounding the problem further at this point by increasing the government's borrowing limit to over $8Trillion dollars! There is zero plan for the future, only "well maybe one day somebody will figure out how to fix it." By my mind, it looks more like the intention is to one day have such a horribly deep hole that they'll just try to patch it over with a false covering and attempt to write it off and pretend the hole was never there and is no longer valid. ARGH!
That should be good for starters. I'll post more as I think of it.
why do i hate bush so much? let me count the ways.
if i'm in the mood, i'll add things later on, although i think they've all been said in various locations. i'm just passing through quickly right now, so allow me to offer just one for the moment:
i cannot stand his arrogant smirk. most everything that comes out of his mouth comes across as arrogant and smug. okay, lots of people have personalities like that, but when you're guilty of deceiving the american public, then sneer about it, it makes you as hateful as hate can get.
even his 'i have political capital and am going to spend that capital' comes across as disingenuous arrogance. i fully expected him to acknowledge how divided the country was and promise to unite the country, said with sincerity. i should have known better. i think he tried to do that, but all that shone through was arrogance. his very mannerisms exude arrogance.
and don't think it doesn't come across that way to the rest of the world too. i think he needs to take a dale carnegie course.
Sean Kelly said this in post #7 : Maybe so, Beth - care to respond to my points above?
Sure, Sean. At least you did as the original poster requested and stuck to Bush policies and decisions.
With regards to drilling in Alaska, I think time and time again, Bush has mentioned the need to find alternative sources of energy. But what do we do in the meantime? Do you plan on walking or riding your bike everywhere?
As for the so-called declaration of war on terror, I believe it is a doctrine set forth by Bush rather than a formal declaration. I think 9-11 has proved that we must be proactive rather than reactive, and so his policy is a sound one, IMO.
I agree that Iraq was not an imminent threat to the USA, but they do fall into the category of harboring terrorists, and as such were targets to premptive action.
As for Bush spending more fixing Iraq than some of our own domestic issues, that is a real issue, one that he has made promises in his campaign to address and fix.
Beth_K said this in post #6 : Jim, it's all perception. What you think as Bush being smug or him swaggering, I look at him as being confident and sincere.
you are saying 'beauty is in the eye of the beholder.' i say 'love is blind.' he's as arrogant as the day is long, and i'm certainly not the only one who thinks so.
quote:
Sure, Sean. At least you did as the original poster requested and stuck to Bush policies and decisions.
you're correct, beth. i didn't carefully read usanow's 'ground rules' concerning restricting this thread to issues. there are so many, i hardly know where to begin. sean made a good start.
Sean, great response - thanks. I just don't see much alternative to drilling in Alaska. I'm not that informed, but my understanding is that our previous exporation and production in Alaska have not wreaked environmental havoc (outside Exxon Valdez, that is). I agree with Beth_K - we need energy supplies in the interim until alternatives become more viable. I agree w/ your point #2 re: "nucular" power (as Bush would say).
The War on Terror is really a response to 9/11. I think the administration's (not just Bush's) take is that we, as a nation, have to get very serious about the threats posed by radical Islam. They have been saying we are the Great Satan and that they want to destroy us for 25 years now, but 9/11 really woke us up. Can we agree to that point?
I think the Bush policy is legitimized by the fact that terrorists continue to strike around the world, so the threat is real. And I think it's a testimony to our administration's policies that we have not been attacked since 9/11. Sure, some civil liberties have been subtley compromised, but not in a way that really changes our daily lives.
Iraq is a tough one. Clearly, we didn't envision a small section of the population (the Sunnis) to be such a force for resistance. It seems that the Shiites are either intimidated, uninclined, or unequipped to effectively help quell the insurgence. But thinking long term, wouldn't it be good for world stability to have a free, democratic Iraq in the heart of the Mid East? This would have an influence on both Iran and Syria, who sponsor terrorism. And it would help bring stability to the world's energy supply. So that I might better understand, would you be as angry w/ Bush if WMD were found in Iraq? Do you think the case for WMD was manufactured, or were we mistaken? May not matter - but gets to the heart of whether Bush is viewed as evil or his administration is incompetent in your eyes.
As to the Iraqi people, the US has long taken on the role as the savior of the world where possible. We can't join every struggle, but it's no secret we'd like to see peace, freedom, and democracy spread to every corner of the world. So in that respect, Iraq is a political, economic, and humanitarian struggle.
On the deficit issue - I agree. I think the tax cuts have helped stimulate the economy, and ecomomic gains have offset any loss in revenue due to lower tax rates. But spending is out of control. Medicaire expansion was too large, and our share of Iraq was too large. But I hope we can agree that Bush inherited an economy that was heading south fast. 9/11 hurt, as did the implosion of many large scandalous corporations. So I'd say we blame Bush for 30%, the bad economy for 50%, and 9/11 for 20% (just a swag).
Jim - I knew you couldn't resist taking a potshot , but that's OK. I know what it's like when you don't like somebody and their mannerisms exacerbate what you see to be their faults. He can come across as a cocky sob sometimes. In regards to his "political capital" messages, can we agree that the election has basically neutralized Bush for a year? I think he's been a little frustrated by that, and now wants to get moving again on his agenda.
As a follow-on - if we didn't invade Iraq was there any chance that Bush would have gotten your vote?
If there was no Iraq, if no 9-11 catastrophe had brought out the little devil inside, if Bush's entire term in office were one of peace talks, intrastructure, preservation of values and focus on education for children and addressing things like welfare domestically.. he might have gotten my vote.
usanow, you weren't a member of the board in February 2003 when I was an adamant supporter of the war and the extrication of terrorist leaders from Iraq and forcible disarmament of Iraq whose bloody WMD's seemed to play right into the unfolding mysteries of the international network of terror... but Bush's tower of cards started to fall apart a bit at a time as more information was revealed and my position has become a full reversal - in fact I even prefaced my support for the actions we were taking with the condition that what Bush claimed as justification was proven true. In the end, claims have been proven false.
usanow said this in post #13 :
Jim - I knew you couldn't resist taking a potshot , but that's OK. I know what it's like when you don't like somebody and their mannerisms exacerbate what you see to be their faults. He can come across as a cocky sob sometimes.
'twasn't a question of 'not being able to resist.' the heading of this thread threw me a curve. i confess to not taking the time to read your initial post thoroughly - been quite busy lately with the holidays coming up, and other matters.
quote:
In regards to his "political capital" messages, can we agree that the election has basically neutralized Bush for a year? I think he's been a little frustrated by that, and now wants to get moving again on his agenda.
As a follow-on - if we didn't invade Iraq was there any chance that Bush would have gotten your vote?
not very likely. if i listed all the things that i believe in and bush stands for (which, if i ever find the time, i will do), you will see that we are poles apart on nearly everything. the senseless iraq war just aggravated the whole situation. i voted for gore in 2000, felt he got cheated, but didn't resent bush initially. that's always been my policy - give the elected president a chance to prove himself. as i stated more than once, i came together with him on 9/11 like most everyone else. it didn't take long for him to change my mind about him, and i still consider him a fraud.
11-19-2004 04:48 PM
