• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Bush "Still A Factor", Rove Warns

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Sadly, the Petraeus report really written by GWB&co. could have become a genuine bi-partisan discussion about Iraq.

But instead became a mere sideshow as the debate shifted to moveon.org's spin in calling him Betrayus.

Somehow political spin from both sides has become more important than either reality or national unity.
 
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
What if Bush is a really great President and right about Iran and Iraq?
Click to expand...

Then he's probably being treated about as unfairly as Hoover was for the excellent economy in his term. Darned American people.

At least one thing we do know is the American people are wrong - either when the elected him (once) or now that they say he's bad.
 
Originally posted by: wiin
Enduringly disliked by democrats since the 2000 election, that is. democrats are haters. They hate people who disagree with them, who are tolerant of their intolerance. democrats especially hate those who believe in religion, mainly christians, of course. I do not like some of the things that the president did - illigals, for example - but if he were allowed to run again, he would be the better choice compared to any of the candidates from the democrat side.


As for his signature policy being an "unmitigated disaster for our country" just what might that be?
Click to expand...

Welcome to Earth. I'd talk further with you, but clearly the gap is large for us to communicate.
 
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
What if Bush is a really great President and right about Iran and Iraq?
Click to expand...

What if Bush is 21th Century Harry Truman. Despised when he left office but 20 -30 years later viewed as one of the best US presidents.

 
Originally posted by: Evan Lieb
Originally posted by: Pabster

Bush's approval ratings aren't exactly off the scale but have improved greatly since the Petraeus testimony.
Click to expand...

No in fact, his approval ratings haven't changed at all, including his approval on Iraq:

http://www.pollingreport.com/BushJob.htm
http://www.pollingreport.com/iraq.htm
Click to expand...

You must be blind. Take a glance at your first link and notice the decrease in the disapproval column and increase in the approval column. This isn't rocket science.
 
The Siddhartha contention is-----What if Bush is 21th Century Harry Truman. Despised when he left office but 20 -30 years later viewed as one of the best US presidents.

Anything is possible, but in the grand scheme of probabilities, Hitler is more likely to be seen in a positive light than GWB. I think its safe to say, GWB has secured his place as one the great idiots of all time. Harry Truman had the principles and vision to resist the vengeful and helped the entire world including our former enemies rebuild after WW2. GWB has no principles at all.
 
Originally posted by: Lemon law
Anything is possible, but in the grand scheme of probabilities, Hitler is more likely to be seen in a positive light than GWB.
Click to expand...

You expect to be taken seriously when you post utter nonsense like that?

BDS has become a severe affliction.
 
Originally posted by: Craig234
Originally posted by: wiin
Enduringly disliked by democrats since the 2000 election, that is. democrats are haters. They hate people who disagree with them, who are tolerant of their intolerance. democrats especially hate those who believe in religion, mainly christians, of course. I do not like some of the things that the president did - illigals, for example - but if he were allowed to run again, he would be the better choice compared to any of the candidates from the democrat side.


As for his signature policy being an "unmitigated disaster for our country" just what might that be?
Click to expand...

Welcome to Earth. I'd talk further with you, but clearly the gap is large for us to communicate.
Click to expand...

I thought wiin's post must have been a parody of something I had missed.
 
Originally posted by: daveshel
Originally posted by: Craig234
Originally posted by: wiin
Enduringly disliked by democrats since the 2000 election, that is. democrats are haters. They hate people who disagree with them, who are tolerant of their intolerance. democrats especially hate those who believe in religion, mainly christians, of course. I do not like some of the things that the president did - illigals, for example - but if he were allowed to run again, he would be the better choice compared to any of the candidates from the democrat side.


As for his signature policy being an "unmitigated disaster for our country" just what might that be?
Click to expand...

Welcome to Earth. I'd talk further with you, but clearly the gap is large for us to communicate.
Click to expand...

I thought wiin's post must have been a parody of something I had missed.
Click to expand...

It's a parody of reason. It's how Bush got reelected.
 
Originally posted by: wiin
Enduringly disliked by democrats since the 2000 election, that is. democrats are haters. They hate people who disagree with them, who are tolerant of their intolerance. democrats especially hate those who believe in religion, mainly christians, of course. I do not like some of the things that the president did - illigals, for example - but if he were allowed to run again, he would be the better choice compared to any of the candidates from the democrat side.


As for his signature policy being an "unmitigated disaster for our country" just what might that be?
Click to expand...

Enduringly disliked by America. Bush at one point was exactly one percentage point off of the lowest presidential approval rating ever recorded. If things stay as they are, by the time he leaves office he will have set the record for the longest period a president has stayed below 40% approval in American history. That is widespread, enduring dislike for the man.

His signature policy is Iraq. People can argue if we are going to win or lose it (I guess, and I'm sure you are absolutely convinced victory is just around the corner) but even if we won tomorrow the costs, both real and political, are so astronomically high that any reasonable person would consider the choice to invade a disaster on his part.

Anyways, hopefully your post was sarcastic or something as someone else mentioned. Those religion comments are a pretty good dose of crazy though.
 
Originally posted by: wiin
democrats especially hate those who believe in religion, mainly christians, of course.
Click to expand...
Kind of ironic since the vast majority of Democrats are Christians themselves.
 
Originally posted by: Pabster
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Kind of ironic since the vast majority of Democrats are Christians themselves.
Click to expand...

Which makes them hypocrites, no?
Click to expand...

No, it shows those so called "Christians" who are willing to lie and kill and destroy the rights of others in the name of their alleged savior to be the hypocrites.

Christians like that are a good reason to root for the Lions.
 
Originally posted by: Pabster
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Kind of ironic since the vast majority of Democrats are Christians themselves.
Click to expand...

Which makes them hypocrites, no?
Click to expand...

Why do you think that a Dem Christian believing that the government should be secular is a contradiction or is being hypocritical to being a member of the Christian religion itself?

And to answer your question....it depends on the individual and their beliefs. You cannot cajole an entire group with such a broad generalization without more granular data.
 
Originally posted by: RightIsWrong
Why do you think that a Dem Christian believing that the government should be secular is a contradiction or is being hypocritical to being a member of the Christian religion itself?

And to answer your question....it depends on the individual and their beliefs. You cannot cajole an entire group with such a broad generalization without more granular data.
Click to expand...

Isn't a group of people so staunchly in favor of abortion rights a 'bit' hypocritical when their church explicitly prohibits it? Same goes for Same-Sex Marriage. And other social issues.
 
Originally posted by: Pabster
Originally posted by: RightIsWrong
Why do you think that a Dem Christian believing that the government should be secular is a contradiction or is being hypocritical to being a member of the Christian religion itself?

And to answer your question....it depends on the individual and their beliefs. You cannot cajole an entire group with such a broad generalization without more granular data.
Click to expand...

Isn't a group of people so staunchly in favor of abortion rights a 'bit' hypocritical when their church explicitly prohibits it? Same goes for Same-Sex Marriage. And other social issues.
Click to expand...
On the contrary, it's how they live their lives that defines them as Christian, not how they tell others to live their lives.
 
Originally posted by: Pabster
Originally posted by: RightIsWrong
Why do you think that a Dem Christian believing that the government should be secular is a contradiction or is being hypocritical to being a member of the Christian religion itself?

And to answer your question....it depends on the individual and their beliefs. You cannot cajole an entire group with such a broad generalization without more granular data.
Click to expand...

Isn't a group of people so staunchly in favor of abortion rights a 'bit' hypocritical when their church explicitly prohibits it? Same goes for Same-Sex Marriage. And other social issues.
Click to expand...

Isn't a group that believes that the NT trumps the OT being hypocritical when they still subscribe to the "eye for an eye" beliefs, oppose universal healthcare (Didn't some hippy say to take care of each other?) and try their damnedest to abolish/avoid taxation (give unto Caesar that which is Caesar's)?

You will be hard-pressed to find a single person on the planet that doesn't exhibit hypocrisy in one form or another. But to decry one while ignoring another because you agree more with their position just showcases your own. 🙂
 
Originally posted by: Pabster
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Kind of ironic since the vast majority of Democrats are Christians themselves.
Click to expand...

Which makes them hypocrites, no?
Click to expand...

We have a group of Christians FOR war and another group AGAINST war. Explain to me again who the HYPOCRITES are and why?
 
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Originally posted by: Pabster
Originally posted by: RightIsWrong
Why do you think that a Dem Christian believing that the government should be secular is a contradiction or is being hypocritical to being a member of the Christian religion itself?

And to answer your question....it depends on the individual and their beliefs. You cannot cajole an entire group with such a broad generalization without more granular data.
Click to expand...

Isn't a group of people so staunchly in favor of abortion rights a 'bit' hypocritical when their church explicitly prohibits it? Same goes for Same-Sex Marriage. And other social issues.
Click to expand...
On the contrary, it's how they live their lives that defines them as Christian, not how they tell others to live their lives.
Click to expand...

IMO all religious people are hypocrites. If anyone really believed god was looking over their shoulder every second I don't think anyone would ever commit the slightest sin or wrongdoing. It would be like walking around with a cop attached to your ass and still deciding to rob a bank.

"And Kent, stop playing with yourself."
 
Originally posted by: Pabster
Originally posted by: Evan Lieb
Originally posted by: Pabster

Bush's approval ratings aren't exactly off the scale but have improved greatly since the Petraeus testimony.
Click to expand...

No in fact, his approval ratings haven't changed at all, including his approval on Iraq:

http://www.pollingreport.com/BushJob.htm
http://www.pollingreport.com/iraq.htm
Click to expand...

You must be blind. Take a glance at your first link and notice the decrease in the disapproval column and increase in the approval column. This isn't rocket science.
Click to expand...

You're right, it isn't rocket science. Therefore, I'd like to see you man up and point out where his approval ratings have increased since the Petraeus report. According to the Gallup polls in that link, his disapproval rating was 62% a week before the report and is 62% right now. Other polls (including other Gallup ones) show a 2% increase in approval ratings. Of course, if you knew the first thing about statistics or sample sizes, you'd know that even a 3-4% increase can be totally insignificant statistically. It's pretty funny that you parrot this BS, though. Speaks to your poor analytical skills. Or education.
 
Or as Bilbo Baggins in the Hobbit said something like---never leave live dragons out of your calculations.

But on 1/21/2009, quote the raven "Nevermore."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top