List of GOOD things that Bush did

Onceler said:
"Bottom line, he through policies or sheer luck, (my guess the former), ruled after 9/11, without another attack by foreign factions on the homeland. "

Again; how many attacks have there been on American soil since Pearl Harbor?
Click to expand...

great, so you admit bush's policies worked...good for you
 
uscitizen said:
We have not gotten smacked with a comet either :cheer:
Click to expand...

There have been close calls in recent years:
A half-mile-wide asteroid crossed Earth's orbit on March 23, 1989, about 400,000 miles from Earth. Our planet had been on that spot six hours earlier.


The closest near miss was an asteroid about 30 feet wide which passed within 106,000 miles of Earth on January 17, 1991.
Click to expand...

i blame republicans as they held the high office....
 
Steppenwolf said:
OK, let's dispense with this dribble point by point.

Insert these answers after each of your "these." What is your objection to prenatal care? War never solved anything -- except slavery, nazism, islamofacism.... The usual liberal mantra: "business bad, business bad, business bad..." Liberals believe in government as the cure-all, while the intelligent realize that the free market creates jobs and is responsible for a doubling of the GDP every generation. The poor in this country are the richest in the world, most having cars, tv's, and owning their own homes. Our only concern over anyone else's life style is when it impinges on the rest of us: we don't care it you have sex in the street except that it would scare the horses. How ironic, an obtuse attack on Governor Palin who has more experience than Obama and wiser than Biden. Last but not least, the theory behind most of your blather is the fear that the sky is falling, that there is always some crisis that only you progressives are aware of, and need to show how much smarter you are than us. Did we save the whales? Avoid those killer African bees? Miss out on the threat of heterosexual AIDS? Now its the Global Warming -- oh, I forgot, since it got cold instead of hot, now its "climate change." BTW, when was the period in modern times that the environment was better?

I didn't mind answering since a conservative is never so tall as when he (she) stoops to educate a liberal. You're welcome.
Click to expand...

Well, we have two very different views. Luckily for me, your free market cure-all has fallen on its face, and we're marching straight back in my direction. So that's all good.

Putting aside your stolen and unattributed quote (just don't do it in the streets and scare the horses, 19th or early 20th century English quote I believe, and your second stolen quote is, stoops to help a child), conservatives do in fact, care what other people do sexually. They are the ones responsible for anti-sodomy laws. I find it ironic that you believe I was making an obtuse remark about Palin, when in fact, it's red states in general. You see, no matter how long you "blather on" about "liberals", the facts are that red states lead the way on unwed births. For instance, Alaska, just jumped an astonishing 19% in teen pregnancies, and Mississippi, Montana, Louisiana, and Oklahoma just saw double digit increases as well. My own state of NY, showed a decrease in teen pregnancies.

In fact you really didn't address anything I said with any sort of defense. It's not "big business" bad to understand that we must have a countervailing force. Anyone who believes otherwise is either a tycoon, or very ignorant of early 20th century labor history. Or why any normal citizen would want to see superfund, which protects YOU, stripped. Or why any normal citizen would want an EPA which falsifies reports so that workers go back to a work area they are told is safe, when in fact, it's deadly. But I don't know of any normal person who does want those things.

In fact, your ideology was given free reign for eight years, and oh, in case you haven't noticed? The sky is falling. Happily, the pendulum has swung back, and, though there will always be people who believe as you do, you're safely in the minority now. That's one thing to thank Bush for.

As for your nastiness, I don't know if it's directed only at me, only at women, or only when it's your time of the month, but it does you no credit. It doesn't make you look cool. It doesn't make you look smart. It makes you look miserable. Just a little advice. Have a nice night.
 
Yurt said:
more than one...WTC 93 under clinton comes to mind

how can you blame bush for 9/11 and yet not congratulate him for no more attacks since? i guess one would have to have a clear case of bias....
Click to expand...

That would be like thanking the wolf for guarding the sheep while he's eating lamb chops.
 
Yurt said:
more than one...WTC 93 under clinton comes to mind

how can you blame bush for 9/11 and yet not congratulate him for no more attacks since? i guess one would have to have a clear case of bias....
Click to expand...

No, just a good knowledge of what went into 9/11. I read about it, you see.

It took Bin Laden 10 years to plan & execute 9/11, and even with that, it was dead in the water at about year 7. It took a chance meeting with Atta and an incredible stroke of luck (for him, anyway) to see it through.

You're of the 9/12 mentality that 9/11 was the 1st of many attacks that Bin Laden had planned for the U.S. He didn't; he had one, and his only hope was that we'd over-react in a way that inflamed the Middle East & inspired others to jihad.

So, no - Bush hasn't "kept us safe." People who say that have a child's understanding of world affairs & terrorism.
 
Onceler said:
No, just a good knowledge of what went into 9/11. I read about it, you see.

It took Bin Laden 10 years to plan & execute 9/11, and even with that, it was dead in the water at about year 7. It took a chance meeting with Atta and an incredible stroke of luck (for him, anyway) to see it through.

You're of the 9/12 mentality that 9/11 was the 1st of many attacks that Bin Laden had planned for the U.S. He didn't; he had one, and his only hope was that we'd over-react in a way that inflamed the Middle East & inspired others to jihad.

So, no - Bush hasn't "kept us safe." People who say that have a child's understanding of world affairs & terrorism.
Click to expand...

interesting you know the mind of osama in such detail...fact is, osama said more attacks were coming....you calling your friend a liar?

if bin ladin had been planning for so long, then don't blame bush, it is was luck, then don't blame bush....

you can't have it both ways...
 
Yurt said:
interesting you know the mind of osama in such detail...fact is, osama said more attacks were coming....you calling your friend a liar?

if bin ladin had been planning for so long, then don't blame bush, it is was luck, then don't blame bush....

you can't have it both ways...
Click to expand...

Like I said - a child's understanding.

It has nothing to do with the "mind of Bin Laden," and everything to do w/ just keeping up with the NIE's since 9/11, and reading about the lead-up to 9/11, which - and this might surprise you - has been investigated.

Bush got a report titled 'Bin Laden determined to attack inside U.S.," and told his staff that they had "covered their asses."
 
you're naive to ignore the threats from AQ that more attacks are planned....

you're going to hang your hat on studies and ignore actual threats....too scary

fact remains, no more attacks under bush, you even credited his policies
 
Yurt said:
you're naive to ignore the threats from AQ that more attacks are planned....

you're going to hang your hat on studies and ignore actual threats....too scary

fact remains, no more attacks under bush, you even credited his policies
Click to expand...

Of course they're going to say after 9/11 that more attacks are in the works. They're terrorists. Their goal is to instill terror.

Duh.

I have no doubt that they're thinking of something, but they've made it pretty clear, and intel has basically confirmed, that when they strike America again, they want to it be even bigger.

If 9/11 took about 10 years, well...you do the math.

Regardless, Bush is a simpleton, and his policies - if you read at all - have actually boosted terrorist recruitment, and ultimately, made us much less safe.
 
Onceler said:
Of course they're going to say after 9/11 that more attacks are in the works. They're terrorists. Their goal is to instill terror.

Duh.

I have no doubt that they're thinking of something, but they've made it pretty clear, and intel has basically confirmed, that when they strike America again, they want to it be even bigger.

If 9/11 took about 10 years, well...you do the math.

Regardless, Bush is a simpleton, and his policies - if you read at all - have actually boosted terrorist recruitment, and ultimately, made us much less safe.
Click to expand...

you want to ignore their threats after 9/11....why don't you think 9/11 should be ignored....they're terrorists....their goal is to instill fear....duh
 
Darla said:
Well, we have two very different views. Luckily for me, your free market cure-all has fallen on its face, and we're marching straight back in my direction. So that's all good.

Putting aside your stolen and unattributed quote (just don't do it in the streets and scare the horses, 19th or early 20th century English quote I believe, and your second stolen quote is, stoops to help a child), conservatives do in fact, care what other people do sexually. They are the ones responsible for anti-sodomy laws. I find it ironic that you believe I was making an obtuse remark about Palin, when in fact, it's red states in general. You see, no matter how long you "blather on" about "liberals", the facts are that red states lead the way on unwed births. For instance, Alaska, just jumped an astonishing 19% in teen pregnancies, and Mississippi, Montana, Louisiana, and Oklahoma just saw double digit increases as well. My own state of NY, showed a decrease in teen pregnancies.

In fact you really didn't address anything I said with any sort of defense. It's not "big business" bad to understand that we must have a countervailing force. Anyone who believes otherwise is either a tycoon, or very ignorant of early 20th century labor history. Or why any normal citizen would want to see superfund, which protects YOU, stripped. Or why any normal citizen would want an EPA which falsifies reports so that workers go back to a work area they are told is safe, when in fact, it's deadly. But I don't know of any normal person who does want those things.

In fact, your ideology was given free reign for eight years, and oh, in case you haven't noticed? The sky is falling. Happily, the pendulum has swung back, and, though there will always be people who believe as you do, you're safely in the minority now. That's one thing to thank Bush for.

As for your nastiness, I don't know if it's directed only at me, only at women, or only when it's your time of the month, but it does you no credit. It doesn't make you look cool. It doesn't make you look smart. It makes you look miserable. Just a little advice. Have a nice night.
Click to expand...

Daaaaamn woman! Wuffie wont mess with you anymore.


Best thing Bush did was to unify the Democrats and to warn us of human-animal hybrids.
 
Yurt said:
you want to ignore their threats after 9/11....why don't you think 9/11 should be ignored....they're terrorists....their goal is to instill fear....duh
Click to expand...

Well, that was certainly coherent.

Why am I talking to you? Is there anything else that Bush has or hasn't done that you would like to profusely apologize for?
 
it is easy to understand....you want to blame bush for 9/11 because he ignored warnings and threats from AQ....then you want to say that bush should ignore the warnings after 9/11....

using your logic, he should have ignored 9/11 as well...afterall they are just terrorists...duh <----your words

i notice you have completely ignored WTC 93, despite repeatedly challenging people to bring up an incident since pearl harbor.....oooops on your part apparently
 
There's a huge difference between a threat and a warning, and I think you know that. And they're clearly not ignored. They're investigated, as they should be. You stupid stupid dolt. Do you guys try to dumb down your arguments? Would it really be that hard to think about this stuff a little or exhibit some honesty now and again?

He didn't challenge someone to come up with "an incident" either. He was making a point about how utterly rare they are and the fact that we haven't had one in 7 years isn't that impressive when you THINK.
 
Yurt said:
it is easy to understand....you want to blame bush for 9/11 because he ignored warnings and threats from AQ....then you want to say that bush should ignore the warnings after 9/11....

using your logic, he should have ignored 9/11 as well...afterall they are just terrorists...duh <----your words

i notice you have completely ignored WTC 93, despite repeatedly challenging people to bring up an incident since pearl harbor.....oooops on your part apparently
Click to expand...

No oops, Yurtsie. I asked "how many." We've been attacked a few times; it depends on what you'd like to count. But it works out to about once every 3-4 decades.

So, somehow, the great GW Bush deserves credit for "keeping us safe" after 9/11, because we weren't attacked again for SEVEN years. Not 3-4 decades; 7 years.

The fact is, his actions have made us less safe, at least according to the last few NIE's.

So, he deserves no credit, unless you want to think irrationally.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top