A Question For Bush Bashers

SlowwHand · August 15, 2003, 18:47

I sit here and watch them say:
Bush is a idiot. A moron. A cowboy.
He doesn't know wtf is going on, or how to relate to a civilized world.

These same people turn around and say:
Bush is scamming people. Tricking. Setting up.
Initiating cover ups.

I guess what I'm asking is, which is it?
Whichever suits your argument at that particular moment in time, is the only possible answer.
A sly moron, isn't an option.

Pretty rinky-dink, if you ask me.

Victor Galis · August 15, 2003, 18:52

The second complaint is generally untrue. It's Bush's advisors that do the scamming. The man himself is clueless.

Bereta_Eder · August 15, 2003, 18:54

Quote:

Originally posted by SlowwHand
Pretty rinky-dink, if you ask me.

What does that mean? It doesn't sound good.

Immortal Wombat · August 15, 2003, 18:55

I've never claimed the latter.

reds4ever · August 15, 2003, 18:55

Quote:

Originally posted by SlowwHand
I sit here and watch them say:
Bush is a idiot. A moron. A cowboy.
He doesn't know wtf is going on, or how to relate to a civilized world.

Bush

These same people turn around and say:
Bush is scamming people. Tricking. Setting up.
Initiating cover ups.

Rice/Rumsfield etc

I guess what I'm asking is, which is it?
Whichever suits your argument at that particular moment in time, is the only possible answer.
A sly moron, isn't an option.

...........

reds4ever · August 15, 2003, 18:56

I made a cats arse out of that!!!!! ;O)

SlowwHand · August 15, 2003, 19:00

I say Bush will show conclusive evidence of WOMD, about the time he hits the campaign trail.
He has to verify, of course. Takes time. Has to be sure.

Then break it off in the democrat's ass.

Traianvs · August 15, 2003, 19:02

Bush is an idiot who scams; if he scammed better then we wouldn't know about it

reds4ever · August 15, 2003, 19:02

Have you been drinking Slow? Spellcheck 'show' for 'make'!

DinoDoc · August 15, 2003, 19:03

Quote:

A Question For Bush Bashers

Do you bash Bush because you are more interested in Cheneys?

SlowwHand · August 15, 2003, 19:04

Classic example of what I said, reds.

St Leo · August 15, 2003, 19:07

There is no monolithic we. The thing about Bush is that the data is erratic and inconsistent. Either he is a manipulative idiot or he is being manipulated by idiots.

By "idiot", it is meant that he takes positions and action 90 to 180 percent opposed to the right ones despite knowing the roughly the same things we do.

Also note that, generally, initiating a cover-up is not an intelligent action. Pulling off a cover-up is, but Bush pays people to do that.

Also, "moron" tends to turn up the most in jokes rather than serious political commentary. It only turns up in political commentary when Bush baffles everyone by the most misguided action possible.

Sava · August 15, 2003, 19:08

I can't say for sure. Here are my theories.

1. Bush is an idiot and a puppet. And the puppet masters are the real evil.

2. Bush is the evil one.

In reality, I think it's a combination of the two, but less of a focus on the evil part. He's proved himself a very ignorant man. I think he's generally not too bright, and there are manipulative people around him giving him advice. He's probably a nice, personable guy with good intentions, but doesn't realize the true consequences of his policies. In terms of his moral beliefs, well, they are based upon his born-again Christian faith which is the epitome of ignorant. In most instances, he probably wants to do the right thing, but doesn't know how to. Instead, he listens to his advisors and makes a decision based upon the information they provide. I think he's more of a puppet than he realizes. But not totally subject to the demands of others. I think that the hesitation in going to war in Iraq is proof of this. He had a hard-on for Saddam before he took office. After 9-11, it was clear he believed Saddam played a role. But he listened to Powell who said that we couldn't go to war without the support of the world or our people. He tried desperately to present his case, but in the end, went to war regardless of what people thought. I think he is impulsive, but not above making calculated, planned policies

Afghanistan was impulsive... that's why the situation is grim.

Iraq was planned, but the occupation wasn't.

BustaMike · August 15, 2003, 19:10

I think he's done an exemplorary job, er, I mean he's shown compasionativity, uh...

reds4ever · August 15, 2003, 19:11

Quote:

Originally posted by SlowwHand
Classic example of what I said, reds.

I know it's a p!ss poor cut'n'paste job, but read my post 4 or 5 posts up, surely the Leader of the Free World should be responsible for the actions of his direct subordinates?

?

Spiffor · August 15, 2003, 19:11

I don't think Bush is an unintelligent guy. Probably not the brightest, and definitely not the most competent for the job, but that doesn't make him a moron.

I also don't think he has made big, elaborated conspiracies. He and his team have manipulated the American public opinion with an age-old political technique, that is scaremongering. Bush did it well, and managed to add religious and jingoistic bigotry in the mix. This didn't require pure genius to be done, but it indeed required some skill.

St Leo · August 15, 2003, 19:12

Quote:

Originally posted by SlowwHand
Classic example of what I said, reds.

Sloww, how many intelligence points do you need to lie?

Example:

Quote:

Police Officer: Are you snorting cocaine?
Coke Addict: Uh, no...
Police Officer: What is this white powder?
Coke Addict: Dunno.
Buddy: It's extra fine sugar I am using in baking. Stop sniffing it, man. That's sick. Are you out of glue or something?
Police Officer: Move along.

As you can see in my totally made-up example, the coke addict initiated the cover-up.

Dom Pedro II · August 15, 2003, 19:12

I really don't know what to think of Bush... Regardless of whether he's a moron being used by big power players, or if he himself is the sly devil, either way I think his whole regime stinks...

I think we elected an administration of thugs who were just waiting for an excuse, and 9/11 gave it to them...

But I think Bush is like Mussolini... I mean, he looked like a big dumb ape, but he obviously wasn't, he was smart, or rather manipulative, enough to get himself to the position of power he was in. But what makes them both seem stupid is that they are not in anyway subtle, and when you are trying to pull some under-handed stuff, that, in itself, is stupid.

Verto · August 15, 2003, 19:13

Not another one...

reds4ever · August 15, 2003, 19:29

I take it the bridge has fallen in on this Troll?

MrFun · August 15, 2003, 20:45

Bush is a homophobe who publicly denounced relationships between two people of the same gender.

Zkribbler · August 15, 2003, 21:12

Quote:

Originally posted by SlowwHand
I say Bush will show conclusive evidence of WOMD,

I say so too. It's pretty generally accepted that Saddam had WMDs in '92. So what happened to them? Either Saddam destroyed them because he suddenly became a peacenik hippie

(which I personally doubt) or else he hid them.

However, we invaded Iraq because of the "imminent threat" that Saddam was going to give/sell some of his WMDs to his good ally al Qaeda.

It's the "alliance" prong of Dubya's justification that I'm waiting to see.

Nubclear · August 15, 2003, 21:24

Quote:

Originally posted by SlowwHand
I sit here and watch them say:
Bush is a idiot. A moron. A cowboy.
He doesn't know wtf is going on, or how to relate to a civilized world.

These same people turn around and say:
Bush is scamming people. Tricking. Setting up.
Initiating cover ups.

I guess what I'm asking is, which is it?
Whichever suits your argument at that particular moment in time, is the only possible answer.
A sly moron, isn't an option.

Pretty rinky-dink, if you ask me.

I sit here and watch them say:
He shipped them to Syria! He had WoMD! He's a terrorist! INVADE SYRIA!

These same people turn around and say:
He shipped them to Iran! He had WoMD! He's a terrorist! INVADE IRAN!

These same people turn around and say:
The WoMD are buried in Iraq! We will find them! It's just a matter of time!

These same people turn around and say:
He tried getting Uranium from Africa! This proves he has WoMD! He's a terrorist!

These same people turn around and say:
Well, he didn't try to get Uranium from Africa its true....But it was never really about the WoMD! We did it to free the Iraqi people!

These same people turn around and say:
We've already found the WoMD! Remember the fertilizer? Yep! WoMD!

I guess what I'm asking is, what is it?
Whichever suits your argument at that particular
moment in time, is the only possible answer.
You can't choose all the options.

Pretty rinky-dink, if you ask me.

Sandman · August 15, 2003, 21:56

Don't forget his utter lack of charisma.

Odin · August 15, 2003, 22:16

I have a friend who says the reason that Saddam gave the inspectors a hard time might of been because he DID distroy them , but he acted like he didn't to not act weak in the eyes of his supporters (remember that he had strong support from hypernationalist arabs, the forerunner of the Ba'athists, in the 70's and 80's).

I Think Bush is a puppet of the Neo-Cons and Big Business. I don't think he is that smart either, he shouldn't of even been accepted to Yale, but then again, $$$ corrupts.

David Floyd · August 15, 2003, 23:44

Quote:

I say Bush will show conclusive evidence of WOMD, about the time he hits the campaign trail.
He has to verify, of course. Takes time. Has to be sure.

So he's gonna use his "evidence" as a political tool, rather than just presenting the truth as it appears. Gotcha.

MrFun · August 15, 2003, 23:45

Quote:

Originally posted by David Floyd

So he's gonna use his "evidence" as a political tool, rather than just presenting the truth as it appears. Gotcha.

Please explain to David, how politicians really operate.

hint David: politicians don't know what "truth" is

David Floyd · August 15, 2003, 23:48

Oh, I know. But people try to portray Bush as "honest", anyway.

Chris 62 · August 16, 2003, 00:45

Quote:

Originally posted by paiktis22

What does that mean? It doesn't sound good.

It means "small and poorly made."

Dis · August 16, 2003, 03:01

Bush doesn't take initiative

This blackout is the best example. 9/11 was another example.

He didn't do **** about terrorism until 9/11. He was playing the same thing Clinton did. Ignore it and hope it goes away. 9/11 forced him to deal with terrorism. Even Al Gore would have stomped Al Quida

Bush didn't deal with the overloaded electrical system. It takes a blackout to get his attention.

He is not proactive, but reactive.