The Bush Thread

[The Major]

Their behavior was childish, simply my opinion. Not really anything that needs to be debated....

He's just a war criminal. Those guys are so misunderstood.

 

[The Major]

Absolutely. Formally handle it. An arrest warrant ought to be formal enough.

That's only an option if someone has the courage to go after them within the government. Obama hasn't shown whether he will or not yet.

 

[Oddzball]

A decade ago: What were the guys insisting on the dignity of the office saying about Bill Clinton?

 

[The Major]

A decade ago: What were the guys insisting on the dignity of the office saying about Bill Clinton?

True.

Nixon got off light, as well.

 

[Handsome Rob]

Their behavior was childish, simply my opinion. Not really anything that needs to be debated....

They've been sore losers for the last eight years. It's not surprising to see them also be sore winners.

 

[redfirebird2008]

I like how Bush referenced personal responsibility as one of his "values" in his speech. It's very amusing to me that he claims to have stood by this value while in office. His Treasury Secretary recently raped the public in order to bail out, you guessed it, a bunch of Wall Street and automotive companies that were NOT personally responsible from the standpoint of accepting that they screwed up and deserved to fail.

 

[The Major]

They've been sore losers for the last eight years.

Ask yourself why we're upset about Bush. We're not discussing a president whose biggest crime was having sex in the Oval office.

It's not surprising to see them also be sore winners.

We're sore winners since the previous president is a war criminal who should be prosecuted. Were a Democratic president in this position I doubt your opinion would be so lenient. And you know what? I'd be on your side with that.

 

[hippie_hunter]

That's only an option if someone has the courage to go after them within the government. Obama hasn't shown whether he will or not yet.

Actually Obama has shown that he won't. He and Pelosi are already arguing because Pelosi wants to investigate the Bush Administration and Obama doesn't.

 

[hippie_hunter]

True.

Nixon got off light, as well.

Nixon got pardoned that's why. If he wasn't he would have most likely been punished in some form.

 

[danoyse]

They've been sore losers for the last eight years. It's not surprising to see them also be sore winners.

I think we have sore losers on all sides. I know someone who pulled his kid out of school today because he didn't want her watching the inauguration in class.

There are some rampant cases of sour grapes from a few who will only call him HUSSEIN on another board I read, thinking it will irk the Obama supporters on the board (who don't really care).

Nothing's changed on the sore loser front, we've just flipped sides.

 

[Handsome Rob]

Ask yourself why we're upset about Bush. We're not discussing a president whose biggest crime was having sex in the Oval office.


We're sore winners since the previous president is a war criminal who should be prosecuted. Were a Democratic president in this position I doubt your opinion would be so lenient. And you know what? I'd be on your side with that.

My parents raised me with more respect for authority than to do something so juvenile as what they did to Pres. Bush. I wouldn't do that to him. I wouldn't do that to Pres. Clinton. I won't do that to Pres. Obama.

Disagreement is fine. I have disagreements with actions of two of these Presidents. Given Pres. Obama's politics, I'm sure I'll have disagreements with him--probably more than either Clinton or Bush. But, when in the presence of an authority figure (even an outgoing one), there should be a certain level of decorum. I may disagree with Pres. Obama on everything, but if I should ever meet him, I will treat him with the respect his office carries. I'd do that with any living President, even after leaving office.

That decorum was not on display, here. They should be ashamed of themselves.

 

[Handsome Rob]

I think we have sore losers on all sides. I know someone who pulled his kid out of school today because he didn't want her watching the inauguration in class.

There are some rampant cases of sour grapes from a few who will only call him HUSSEIN on another board I read, thinking it will irk the Obama supporters on the board (who don't really care).

Nothing's changed on the sore loser front, we've just flipped sides.

On that count, you are definitely right.

I didn't intend my comments to blanket all Democrat/liberal/Obama supporters. I'm only addressing the ones who were so disrespectful to Pres. Bush (the "na na na na hey hey hey" group).

 

[Hobgoblin]

Ask yourself why we're upset about Bush. We're not discussing a president whose biggest crime was having sex in the Oval office.


We're sore winners since the previous president is a war criminal who should be prosecuted. Were a Democratic president in this position I doubt your opinion would be so lenient. And you know what? I'd be on your side with that.

Amen.

 

[StorminNorman]

I like how Bush referenced personal responsibility as one of his "values" in his speech. It's very amusing to me that he claims to have stood by this value while in office. His Treasury Secretary recently raped the public in order to bail out, you guessed it, a bunch of Wall Street and automotive companies that were NOT personally responsible from the standpoint of accepting that they screwed up and deserved to fail.

This is where Bush has failed me. While I have some problems with the execution of Iraq and Afghanistan, I am a fan of Bush's foreign policy - and I salute what the guy has done in Africa and the protection America has seen since 9/11.

But his gross mishandling of budgets and spending and tarnished his President gravely even in my eyes.

I think Bush is a better President than Clinton, and I do not consider him a failure. What I do see is a waste and a man whose was betrayed because of his strong since of loyalty.

 

[danoyse]

I didn't intend my comments to blanket all Democrat/liberal/Obama supporters. I'm only addressing the ones who were so disrespectful to Pres. Bush (the "na na na na hey hey hey" group).

I agree, that was disrespectful. Regardless of our personal feelings, he was our President.

 

[redfirebird2008]

This is where Bush has failed me. While I have some problems with the execution of Iraq and Afghanistan, I am a fan of Bush's foreign policy - and I salute what the guy has done in Africa and the protection America has seen since 9/11.

But his gross mishandling of budgets and spending and tarnished his President gravely even in my eyes.

I think Bush is a better President than Clinton, and I do not consider him a failure. What I do see is a waste and a man whose was betrayed because of his strong since of loyalty.

What I don't understand is how he can even tell his supporters in Midland (which is where I am) that he has stuck to a principle of personal responsibility when he allowed his Treasury Secretary to screw over the tax payers with insane government spending. The people here LOVE Bush, but they HATE the bailouts. And yet there he was delusionally trying to make the claim that he didn't fail them on this front.

 

[redfirebird2008]

My parents raised me with more respect for authority than to do something so juvenile as what they did to Pres. Bush. I wouldn't do that to him. I wouldn't do that to Pres. Clinton. I won't do that to Pres. Obama.

Disagreement is fine. I have disagreements with actions of two of these Presidents. Given Pres. Obama's politics, I'm sure I'll have disagreements with him--probably more than either Clinton or Bush. But, when in the presence of an authority figure (even an outgoing one), there should be a certain level of decorum. I may disagree with Pres. Obama on everything, but if I should ever meet him, I will treat him with the respect his office carries. I'd do that with any living President, even after leaving office.

That decorum was not on display, here. They should be ashamed of themselves.

Agreed. I was heavily disappointed in their behavior. They should follow Obama's lead and be more gracious.

 

[StorminNorman]

Ask yourself why we're upset about Bush. We're not discussing a president whose biggest crime was having sex in the Oval office.

Except Clinton's biggest crime was never having sex in the Oval Office. Not even close.

We're sore winners since the previous president is a war criminal who should be prosecuted. Were a Democratic president in this position I doubt your opinion would be so lenient. And you know what? I'd be on your side with that.

Bush is not a War Criminal and he has no business being prosecuted outside of giving San Fransisco liberals and college students with no real clue about the world something to high five about while watching Jon Stewart.

Amen.

I normally do not criticize a mod, but sorry - for The Major to make the above comment is one thing, but for a Moderator to "Amen" such a juvenile and naive comment as the one above would be amusing if it wasn't so frustrating.

 

[StorminNorman]

What I don't understand is how he can even tell his supporters in Midland (which is where I am) that he has stuck to a principle of personal responsibility when he allowed his Treasury Secretary to screw over the tax payers with insane government spending. The people here LOVE Bush, but they HATE the bailouts. And yet there he was delusionally trying to make the claim that he didn't fail them on this front.

Because most people don't actually understand the reality of the situation so they simply listen and follow and support the people that make them feel comfortable.

 

[Kelly]

Except Clinton's biggest crime was never having sex in the Oval Office. Not even close.



Bush is not a War Criminal and he has no business being prosecuted outside of giving San Fransisco liberals and college students with no real clue about the world something to high five about while watching Jon Stewart.



I normally do not criticize a mod, but sorry - for The Major to make the above comment is one thing, but for a Moderator to "Amen" such a juvenile and naive comment as the one above would be amusing if it wasn't so frustrating.

Stormin' you and I agree, quite often....to my shock...lol

But, I have to disagree here.

These are opinions, and they are held by many...I dare say not the majority...but many. They have every right to their opinion, and just because our name is in red, does not mean we do not have a right to our opinion.

Do I believe that Bush is a war criminal? Of course not....but people have this opinion...and radical as it may be, they have a right to it.

It was not, in my opinion, put out there for no other reason than to give an opinion. If it was done to flame, then it would have been handled as such. Just because it makes you hot under the collar, doesn't mean it was flame.

 

[StorminNorman]

Stormin' you and I agree, quite often....to my shock...lol

But, I have to disagree here.

These are opinions, and they are held by many...I dare say not the majority...but many. They have every right to their opinion, and just because our name is in red, does not mean we do not have a right to our opinion.

Do I believe that Bush is a war criminal? Of course not....but people have this opinion...and raditcal as it may be, they have a right to it.

It was not, in my opinion, put out there for no other reason than to give an opinion. If it was done to flame, then it would have been handled as such. Just because it makes you hot under the collar, doesn't mean it was flame.

But this isn't the opinion of the unwashed masses here - this is the opinion of a POLITICAL MODERATOR. If this was Morg who chimed in with his two cents and agreed to a factually incorrect and silly statement - thats would be fine. But this is someone of above average stature in this forum and I think that they should be held to a higher standard.

My problem is not with it being an opinion I disagree with, I don't even care that its a "radical statement" - but it was a moderator commending, agreeing and supporting a statement that displayed not simply just a radical belief, but a factually incorrect.

It would be like having Mister J in the Batforums go "AMEN!" to a statement in the Batforums that Crispin Glover could of given a better Joker performance than Heath Ledger. It would be like Showtime going "AMEN!" to the statement that Tom Welling IS Superman and except no imitators.

IMO being a Moderator deserves being held to a higher standard, especially when its a moderator of a topic like politics when being radical and (more importantly) being perceived as radical is more explosive than really any other subject in this forum. Besides Smallville, of course.

 

[Kelly]

It may not be an opinion of the masses, nor yours. But, apparently it is theirs, and this is an open forum for those opinions as long as the rules are adhered to.

And hey..... leave Morg alone. *winks*

 

[redfirebird2008]

Oops, please delete. Wrong thread. lol

 

[StorminNorman]

It may not be an opinion of the masses, nor yours. But, apparently it is theirs, and this is an open forum for those opinions as long as the rules are adhered to.

And hey..... leave Morg alone. *winks*

But its not just an extreme opinion, its an extreme opinion that is factually incorrect.

For example:

Ask yourself why we're upset about Bush. We're not discussing a president whose biggest crime was having sex in the Oval office.

Agreeing with this statement displays an ignorance of history, of facts.

 

[Kelly]

But its not just an extreme opinion, its an extreme opinion that is factually incorrect.

For example:

Ask yourself why we're upset about Bush. We're not discussing a president whose biggest crime was having sex in the Oval office.

Agreeing with this statement displays an ignorance of history, of facts.

Well we don't have any factually incorrect opinions on this site, never saw one before..nope.....never...

And last time I looked.....we don't have an infraction for that either....