support for Mr. Bush, our President

Interesting. A pro Bush thread (started more than a day and a half ago) seeking positive Bush comments generates four pages of anti Bush sentiment. The OP asks for any positive comments and the best (only) positive one was a weak generalized support of Bush (honestly, there are too many and it would take all day...very thankful for Bush, Cheney for 8 years!!! ) No specificity at all.

I admit I think he is a dangerous POS and I have since the middle of his first term.

Still, there has almost always been some do or die, stay the course, support our Commander in Chief at all costs, let's kick arse and nuke 'em all knuckleheaded know it alls out there...

Their current silence is deafening and speaks volumes.

Peace and gtty,

Lar
 
Quote from jerry11901:

George W. Bush will probably live long enough to see his name at the bottom of the list of all American Presidents: the worst this nation ever produced. But when asked to defend reasons for his overwhelming failure, the historians will scramble for answers acceptable to the ideology of the guild. They dare not say, "He broke the post-World War II American empire that Franklin Roosevelt launched and Harry Truman put nuclear teeth into." They must find alternative wording. They will mumble something like this: "He overreached the available military power." Ho, hum.

Then there is Bush's other failure: "He bankrupted the Federal government by turning control over to Asian central banks." Again, alternative phraseology will be developed. "He did not set realistic domestic goals." Boring.

The real reason for the media's hatred of Bush is this: "He has imprudently and without verbal grace smashed the Progressive agenda on the rocks of reality." Too forthright.

So, how can the historians tar and feather him, if all he did was push the Progressive agenda too far and too fast? With this: "He was a conscious agent of the Christian Right." The fact that none of his advisors is a card-carrying member of this vast theocratic conspiracy will not matter. Bush is seen as a fellow traveler, even though he, like Clinton (on occasion), attends a United Methodist Church.

The historians will do to Bush what Bush said he would do to Osama bin Laden. They will bring him in "dead or alive."


typical.... the idiot psuedo-historian wants to write history before its even history.... This is why Today's democrats are so laughed at, and despised.

Let me ask you... how has history treated the guy who got us into Vietnam?
 
Quote from MajorUrsa:

By whom? You mean by the republican minority? I don't think so.



.... this is really the only the question i'm left wondering about :



Let me ask you... how has history treated the guy who got us into Vietnam?
 
Quote from increasenow:

been disappointed with the "talk" against our President...please voice your support for Mr Bush, our President...very serious...it has been a great 7 years with him in office...lets get the positive going and hear the great support for him...serious post and no joking...


Well 90% of ET's chit chat residents support the president. Just ask Patersb, AAA and Haroaki. My guess is they're all the same individual.
 
How will Bush be viewed after his presidency??? Can't be better than how he is viewed DURING his presidency...

There are many more reasons why Bush is clearly the most incompetent president this country has ever seen.

For example...

Lately, there have been a series of articles on parents who reject vaccination for their kids due to the mercury content. Funny how all this goes back to Bush in one way or another...


Bush opposed and vetoed a bill passed by Congress which would have given healthcare benefits and plans to children of low-income families who needed them. It would have been funded by an increase in the cigarette tax. Moreover, "without the usual television cameras, what the press avoids to mention in their reporting of the event, however, is that the bill contained an important passage that would have mandated the elimination of toxic mercury (the second most toxic metal known to man behind Uranium) from flu vaccines, a development sharply opposed by pharmaceutical companies." However, prior to vetoing the bill, President Bush had recieved sage and learned counsel advocating hope for the 'controversial' innocent:

"Under the current administration, mercury has been and will continue to be knowingly injected into the youngest of American citizens. The controversial mercury-containing preservative thimerosal has been linked by thousands of parents as being the cause of their children's mercury poisoning and autism."

"The flu vaccine, which continues to be manufactured with mercury, is recommended for all pregnant women, infants and children despite the fact that the Institute of Medicine in 2001 recommended against the policy of exposing these same sensitive groups to thimerosal containing vaccines."


http://www.healthy.net/scr/news.asp?Id=9434


So some groups argue there is no link to mercury in vaccines and illnesses such as autism. Last I checked, I can't eat fish as much as I'd like because of the mercury content. Maybe Big Pharma uses a "different" type of mercury.

Once again Bush...you and your administration have proved yourselves useless and a detriment to society.
 
Quote from increasenow:

been disappointed with the "talk" against our President...please voice your support for Mr Bush, our President...very serious...it has been a great 7 years with him in office...lets get the positive going and hear the great support for him...serious post and no joking...


The only thing I can think of that benefitted all Americans from this admin. was Do Not Call.

Wish they'd included junk FAXes though.
 
Quote from Trader5287:

The only thing I can think of that benefitted all Americans from this admin. was Do Not Call.

and not that bush had anything to do with it, but the ny state do not call list was more effective than the national one. spitzer went after the do not callers...

(and junk faxing is illegal, and has been, for a while now.)
 
Back
Top