Bush should not be allowed to speak in Public

[DevilsAdvocate]

Originally posted by: Hayabusarider

Originally posted by: Aceshigh

when he says, something, he means it. No backpedaling here. No clintonitis.

The world has had its share of leaders who were this way. Good old Joe Stalin was one. Not much of a recommendation in itself.

Are you actually comparing W to Joseph Stalin?

W may be a lot of things, but Stalin he is not.

 

[Stark]

Originally posted by: DevilsAdvocate

Originally posted by: Hayabusarider

Originally posted by: Aceshigh

when he says, something, he means it. No backpedaling here. No clintonitis.

The world has had its share of leaders who were this way. Good old Joe Stalin was one. Not much of a recommendation in itself.

Are you actually comparing W to Joseph Stalin?

W may be a lot of things, but Stalin he is not.

Hitler AND Stalin rolled up in one. Gotta love the new anti-war movement.

 

[dcpsoguy]

Originally posted by: lupy

Originally posted by: dcpsoguy

Originally posted by: RanDum72

he may not be the smartest guy on the block but he has good morals

Excuse me, good morals? Didn't he had a drinking problem before?He may even have a hard time comprehending what that word is. Yes he is our President, we should support him regardless of what happens. But following and supporting a dumb person is very hard to do. I think its every American's patriotic duty to question the decisions of probably the worst president in modern U.S. history.

Worst president in modern history? Aren't you forgetting our last president, the traitor, Bill Clinton?

Show me proof that he sold nucular (as our current president would like to say) secrets to the Chinese. FYI FBI can't find jack to convict Wen Ho Lee for giving the Chinese nuclear secrets, so they ended up charging him for not properly handling sensitive information, wow what a let down!!

Here, you dirty liberal.

 

[lupy]

Originally posted by: dcpsoguy
Why must you liberals and anti-Americans continue to trash Bush? Do you know him personally? You guys have nothing against Bush, therefore, you attack his intelligence and the way he talks. You guys make me sick.

It is American to openly question/critize the decision of our elected officials. Bush is the leader of the most powerful country in the world, the least he can do is to take up some speech lessons and at least act semi-intelligently in front of the world.

 

[DivideBYZero]

Originally posted by: fuzzy bee

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero

Originally posted by: fuzzy bee

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero

Originally posted by: fuzzy bee

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero
I tell you something for nothing tho, I'd prefer to have a clever Gay man in power to a stupid straight one ANY day.

Clever?

Do you need me to explain the word for you?

I guess you do - I thought I knew what it meant, but then you used it to describe Charles.

No I didn't. Try re-reading and COMPREHENDING what I wrote.

Oh, I get it - we were comparing two people, and then you decided to compare my person against a totally different person, under the guise that it was the same person you were comparing all along. Makes perfect sense.

If it helps, which I sure hope it does as your comprehension has so far been lacking, I will add another word. This will prevent you automatically assigning personalities that I did not name to the sentence:

I tell you something for nothing tho, I'd prefer to have any clever Gay man in power to a stupid straight one ANY day.[b/]

Now do you understand? A single person was not inferred or implied.

 

[dcpsoguy]

Originally posted by: Stark

Originally posted by: DevilsAdvocate

Originally posted by: Hayabusarider

Originally posted by: Aceshigh

when he says, something, he means it. No backpedaling here. No clintonitis.

The world has had its share of leaders who were this way. Good old Joe Stalin was one. Not much of a recommendation in itself.

Are you actually comparing W to Joseph Stalin?

W may be a lot of things, but Stalin he is not.

Hitler AND Stalin rolled up in one. Gotta love the new anti-war movement.

Calling George Bush a communist and a nazi all in one. Ah, what you liberals come up with.

 

[DevilsAdvocate]

Originally posted by: Insane3D

Originally posted by: SagaLore

Originally posted by: Insane3D

There was not a SINGLE case of ANYONE being prevented from voting.

You know...I read that too fast and I thought you said..

There was not a SINGLE case of ANYONE being prevented from vomiting.

Heh.. Time for some caffeine...

Well I'm sure if a person intentionally voted for Gore, and he had become president, there would be a lot of vomiting going on right now from guilt.

Yeah...sure. Someone forgets the popular vote counts...and the fact that you can't predict how things would or would not have gone in a Gore presidency arbitrarily... I doubt that will stop anyone though....

The popular vote within each state does count when electors are chosen for the Electoral College.

The Electoral College is not going anywhere. Get over it. There is no way in hell the system will ever be changed.

Had Gore won his own state, this would not be an issue. How did he lose his own state?

 

[FuzzyBee]

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero

Originally posted by: fuzzy bee

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero

Originally posted by: fuzzy bee

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero

Originally posted by: fuzzy bee

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero
I tell you something for nothing tho, I'd prefer to have a clever Gay man in power to a stupid straight one ANY day.

Clever?

Do you need me to explain the word for you?

I guess you do - I thought I knew what it meant, but then you used it to describe Charles.

No I didn't. Try re-reading and COMPREHENDING what I wrote.

Oh, I get it - we were comparing two people, and then you decided to compare my person against a totally different person, under the guise that it was the same person you were comparing all along. Makes perfect sense.

If it helps, which I sure hope it does as your comprehension has so far been lacking, I will add another word. This will prevent you automatically assigning personalities that I did not name to the sentence:

I tell you something for nothing tho, I'd prefer to have any clever Gay man in power to a stupid straight one ANY day.

Now do you understand? A single person was not inferred or implied.

That's funny, because we had been discussing Prince Charles immediately prior. Pardon me for not "comprehending" your sudden, unnotified, change of subject.

BTW, I'd also prefer having a clever gay man in power to a stupid straight one. I don't see what this has to do with the original thread, though.

 

[lupy]

Originally posted by: dcpsoguy

Originally posted by: lupy

Originally posted by: dcpsoguy

Originally posted by: RanDum72

he may not be the smartest guy on the block but he has good morals

Excuse me, good morals? Didn't he had a drinking problem before?He may even have a hard time comprehending what that word is. Yes he is our President, we should support him regardless of what happens. But following and supporting a dumb person is very hard to do. I think its every American's patriotic duty to question the decisions of probably the worst president in modern U.S. history.

Worst president in modern history? Aren't you forgetting our last president, the traitor, Bill Clinton?

Show me proof that he sold nucular (as our current president would like to say) secrets to the Chinese. FYI FBI can't find jack to convict Wen Ho Lee for giving the Chinese nuclear secrets, so they ended up charging him for not properly handling sensitive information, wow what a let down!!

Here, you dirty liberal.

Hey pea-brain (you seem to like name calling, so here you can have one too), that's an out-dated story, notice May 20, 1999, that's about the time the story broke out.
Read up on the this!

 

[DivideBYZero]

Originally posted by: fuzzy bee

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero

Originally posted by: fuzzy bee

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero

Originally posted by: fuzzy bee

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero

Originally posted by: fuzzy bee

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero
I tell you something for nothing tho, I'd prefer to have a clever Gay man in power to a stupid straight one ANY day.

Clever?

Do you need me to explain the word for you?

I guess you do - I thought I knew what it meant, but then you used it to describe Charles.

No I didn't. Try re-reading and COMPREHENDING what I wrote.

Oh, I get it - we were comparing two people, and then you decided to compare my person against a totally different person, under the guise that it was the same person you were comparing all along. Makes perfect sense.

If it helps, which I sure hope it does as your comprehension has so far been lacking, I will add another word. This will prevent you automatically assigning personalities that I did not name to the sentence:

I tell you something for nothing tho, I'd prefer to have any clever Gay man in power to a stupid straight one ANY day.

Now do you understand? A single person was not inferred or implied.

That's funny, because we had been discussing Prince Charles immediately prior. Pardon me for not "comprehending" your sudden, unnotified, change of subject.

BTW, I'd also prefer having a clever gay man in power to a stupid straight one. I don't see what this has to do with the original thread, though.

You took it off topic by talking about his private life, then preceded to liken him to a powerful head of state, which was wrong, I called you on it, and you still march on. Drop it.

 

[Insane3D]

The popular vote within each state does count when electors are chosen for the Electoral College.

Really?!? No f'in way! I was referring the notion that everyone that voted for Gore in the election would be now vomiting if he was in office. That makes it sound like it wasn't many people...the fact is, while it does not mean anything to the electorate is that Gore got more votes..plain and simple. I'm not saying he should have won, if Bush got more electoral votes, he wins, and he did. As much as you would like it, I'm not rehashing history because the outcome was settled, and we have to live with it.

The Electoral College is not going anywhere. Get over it. There is no way in hell the system will ever be changed.

First of all, as I said above, he won the majority of electoral votes, so he won. I'm not arguing that fact. Secondly, the system could be changed if enough people wanted it that way, but that system too has it's faults.

Had Gore won his own state, this would not be an issue. How did he lose his own state?

Not sure...bad decisions on the part of his team would be my guess. As I said before, it doesn't matter, it is settled and Bush won...for better or worse.

I was countering the stance that if Gore had won, all the people that had voted for him would be vomiting with guilt. There is no way to know how a Gore presidency would have taken shape, and to sit behind a keyboard and proclaim what would be if "X" candiate got elected is just pure conjecture...

Basically...woulda, shoulda, coulda...

 

[BAMAVOO]

 

[DivideBYZero]

Originally posted by: BAMAVOO

I agree!?

 

[Insane3D]

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero

Originally posted by: BAMAVOO

I agree!?

Ahhh...we finally have come to some common ground.

 

[WinkOsmosis]

Originally posted by: Dari
he may not be the smartest guy on the block but he has good morals. And when he says, something, he means it. No backpedaling here. No clintonitis.

Oh.. morals.. ok...

 

[Cfour]

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero
If he keeps comming out with cr4p like:

"The UN needs to get back it's legs of responsibility"

WTF?

This was yesterday at the Azores conference. Three Leaders, fully able to articulate themselves, then puppet boy came on and someone forgot to pull the strings hard enough.

Rofl learn to type, then talk to us.

"its" not "it's"

 

[DivideBYZero]

Originally posted by: Cfour

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero
If he keeps comming out with cr4p like:

"The UN needs to get back it's legs of responsibility"

WTF?

This was yesterday at the Azores conference. Three Leaders, fully able to articulate themselves, then puppet boy came on and someone forgot to pull the strings hard enough.

Rofl learn to type, then talk to us.

"its" not "it's"

Ooh, well done. I didn't change it for the last punctuation Nazi, why should I do it for you?

Do you have anything to add to this thread? Didn't think so....

 

[OutHouse]

Originally posted by: dcpsoguy
Why must you liberals and anti-Americans continue to trash Bush? Do you know him personally? You guys have nothing against Bush, therefore, you attack his intelligence and the way he talks. You guys make me sick.

I agree.

 

[FuzzyBee]

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero

Originally posted by: Cfour

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero
If he keeps comming out with cr4p like:

"The UN needs to get back it's legs of responsibility"

WTF?

This was yesterday at the Azores conference. Three Leaders, fully able to articulate themselves, then puppet boy came on and someone forgot to pull the strings hard enough.

Rofl learn to type, then talk to us.

"its" not "it's"

Ooh, well done. I didn't change it for the last punctuation Nazi, why should I do it for you?

Do you have anything to add to this thread? Didn't think so....

If you don't agree, you don't have anything to offer to this thread. I don't understand why people that have no vested interest in George W. Bush seem to like to deride him so much. If he's so dumb, what does that make Blair? After all, Blair is Bush's lap dog.

 

[FuzzyBee]

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero

Originally posted by: fuzzy bee

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero

Originally posted by: fuzzy bee

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero

Originally posted by: fuzzy bee

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero

Originally posted by: fuzzy bee

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero
I tell you something for nothing tho, I'd prefer to have a clever Gay man in power to a stupid straight one ANY day.

Clever?

Do you need me to explain the word for you?

I guess you do - I thought I knew what it meant, but then you used it to describe Charles.

No I didn't. Try re-reading and COMPREHENDING what I wrote.

Oh, I get it - we were comparing two people, and then you decided to compare my person against a totally different person, under the guise that it was the same person you were comparing all along. Makes perfect sense.

If it helps, which I sure hope it does as your comprehension has so far been lacking, I will add another word. This will prevent you automatically assigning personalities that I did not name to the sentence:

I tell you something for nothing tho, I'd prefer to have any clever Gay man in power to a stupid straight one ANY day.

Now do you understand? A single person was not inferred or implied.

That's funny, because we had been discussing Prince Charles immediately prior. Pardon me for not "comprehending" your sudden, unnotified, change of subject.

BTW, I'd also prefer having a clever gay man in power to a stupid straight one. I don't see what this has to do with the original thread, though.

You took it off topic by talking about his private life, then preceded to liken him to a powerful head of state, which was wrong, I called you on it, and you still march on. Drop it.

No - I proceeded to liken what you feel as embarrassment over our elected public representative to what I feel to be embarrassment over your royal public representative. As I said in my first post:

Those in glass houses...

Sorry - I thought that you would be able to comprehend this, but I see that you aren't. Have a great day!

 

[isaacmacdonald]

Why must you liberals and anti-Americans continue to trash Bush? Do you know him personally? You guys have nothing against Bush, therefore, you attack his intelligence and the way he talks. You guys make me sick.

Sounds like Sean Hannity-

The truth is many attacks have also been leveled at Kerry (D for President) for different but equal stupidity.

It is reasonable to expect a degree of sophistication from the politicians that are supposed to represent us. While I respect the office of the President, I can't be expected to respect abusurd rhetoric or hopelessly poorly worded speeches.

 

[OutHouse]

Originally posted by: lupy

Originally posted by: dcpsoguy
Why must you liberals and anti-Americans continue to trash Bush? Do you know him personally? You guys have nothing against Bush, therefore, you attack his intelligence and the way he talks. You guys make me sick.

It is American to openly question/critize the decision of our elected officials. Bush is the leader of the most powerful country in the world, the least he can do is to take up some speech lessons and at least act semi-intelligently in front of the world.

Questioning and criticism are a whole lot different than the belittling/name calling and bashing that is going on in all of these threads. One guy a few post ago compared Bush to Stalin, what kind of crap is that? Last time I checked the US didn?t have Gulags in Alaska or food lines for a loaf of bread or the secret police kicking your ass in your apt. Holy Frick!! The intelligence in ATOT has reached a all time low. :|

 

[isaacmacdonald]

Originally posted by: Citrix

Originally posted by: lupy

Originally posted by: dcpsoguy
Why must you liberals and anti-Americans continue to trash Bush? Do you know him personally? You guys have nothing against Bush, therefore, you attack his intelligence and the way he talks. You guys make me sick.

It is American to openly question/critize the decision of our elected officials. Bush is the leader of the most powerful country in the world, the least he can do is to take up some speech lessons and at least act semi-intelligently in front of the world.

Questioning and criticism are a whole lot different than the belittling/name calling and bashing that is going on in all of these threads. One guy a few post ago compared Bush to Stalin, what kind of crap is that? Last time I checked the US didn?t have Gulags in Alaska or food lines for a loaf of bread or the secret police kicking your ass in your apt. Holy Frick!! The intelligence in ATOT has reached a all time low. :|

actually that was a fair comparison. The original poster said it was great that Bush does whatever he says he will, despite public or international opposition. The comparision to stalin was meant to point out that "sticking to your guns" should not be a primary source of pride.

 

[dcpsoguy]

Originally posted by: isaacmacdonald

Why must you liberals and anti-Americans continue to trash Bush? Do you know him personally? You guys have nothing against Bush, therefore, you attack his intelligence and the way he talks. You guys make me sick.

Sounds like Sean Hannity-

The truth is many attacks have also been leveled at Kerry (D for President) for different but equal stupidity.

It is reasonable to expect a degree of sophistication from the politicians that are supposed to represent us. While I respect the office of the President, I can't be expected to respect abusurd rhetoric or hopelessly poorly worded speeches.

Then the people who attack Kerry should get a new way to attack people. No way do I support Kerry, but I do think it is wrong to make fun of the way somebody talks.

 

[dcpsoguy]

Originally posted by: lupy

Originally posted by: dcpsoguy

Originally posted by: lupy

Originally posted by: dcpsoguy

Originally posted by: RanDum72

he may not be the smartest guy on the block but he has good morals

Excuse me, good morals? Didn't he had a drinking problem before?He may even have a hard time comprehending what that word is. Yes he is our President, we should support him regardless of what happens. But following and supporting a dumb person is very hard to do. I think its every American's patriotic duty to question the decisions of probably the worst president in modern U.S. history.

Worst president in modern history? Aren't you forgetting our last president, the traitor, Bill Clinton?

Show me proof that he sold nucular (as our current president would like to say) secrets to the Chinese. FYI FBI can't find jack to convict Wen Ho Lee for giving the Chinese nuclear secrets, so they ended up charging him for not properly handling sensitive information, wow what a let down!!

Here, you dirty liberal.

Hey pea-brain (you seem to like name calling, so here you can have one too), that's an out-dated story, notice May 20, 1999, that's about the time the story broke out.
Read up on the this!

Hey dipshit! Buy this book if you want the true secrets about China. Wen Cho Lee was acquitted of charges, but that still does not deny the fact that Clinton sent nuclear secrets over there.