Does anyone have proof that Bush was easy on Microsoft?

[FuzzyBee]

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie

Originally posted by: FuzzyBee

Originally posted by: EatSpam

Originally posted by: FuzzyBee

Originally posted by: EatSpam

Somewhat more original that your Bush worshipping!

Um - where is any "Bush worshipping"? Please show me...

<waiting>

At least you pleasure yourself...

Originally posted by: FuzzyBee
That "idiot" was smart enough to get elected. What have you done?

And that's just in this thread! I can just feel the admiration in your words.

Since you can't answer either question, I trust you have nothing to say about either.

Have a great night dreaming of sugarplum fairies!!

Classic!

The 'he got elected so he's better than your guy' argument, that completely ignores both the controversy over how he won the elections, the possibility that the person you're arguing with isn't trying to say 'John Kerry is better than George Bush' (which is really not the point of the person's argument), and the certainty that none of those things make a whit of difference to whether Bush and his admininistration are competent, honest, or neither.

Then you accuse the other person of living in some sort of 'faery-dream-fantasy' world.

This would be like me responding to one of your arguments with 'maybe you should go be another Rush'.

Trust me, you shouldn't, your posts are far too intelligent for that

Let's analyze what you're saying here. First, we have:

The 'he got elected so he's better than your guy' argument, that completely ignores both the controversy over how he won the elections, the possibility that the person you're arguing with isn't trying to say 'John Kerry is better than George Bush' (which is really not the point of the person's argument), and the certainty that none of those things make a whit of difference to whether Bush and his admininistration are competent, honest, or neither.

Huh - where did I say anything of that sort? Please tell me, and note that I haven't edited my posts. (except this one for a typo)

Then you accuse the other person of living in some sort of 'faery-dream-fantasy' world.

You must be if you conjured up the fantasy that I said all of the above.

If you want to vent your frustrations, at least read the posts you're venting about first.

 

[GroundedSailor]

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: Steeplerot

Originally posted by: JD50


Some of you people act as if there was nothing wrong with the world until Bush came into office. Maybe you all should take a step back and forget about your blind hatred for Bush, and maybe you will see that he is not the root of all evil.

Of course there was evil before him much greater, I haven't forgot his dear old dad. (and reagan) :laugh:

Wasn't it Dan Quail (sp?) that was a stupid idiot in the first Bush administration, before him Reagan was a stupid idiot. Hmmmm....seems like Liberals can find some stupid idiot in every Republican administration. Although Reagan won the cold war and is the reason the economy boomed in the 90's. Left to Reagans policies we would be a Having said that, I'm going to go to sleep, I'm sure this will be a 7 page thread by the time I wake up, with all you guys explaining how Reagan had nothing to do with either, and how dumb he was.

There's always going to be critics of any administration on either side. Reagan was an affable man even though he had many faults and made many mistakes. The economy you talk of is not because of him but because congress took control and passed one of the highest tax raises in his second term and minimized the impact of (what I call) his irresponsible fiscal policies. Look at the economic data at the end of his first term and you will see a different picture. I give him credit for having the grace to accept the turnaround in policies in his 2nd term. As to his winning the cold war that is very debatable.

But I find it hard to find good in the policies in what this administration is following. Whether it is Bush himself or whether he is just a pawn of those around him in not important. What is, is the direction the country is going because of current policies and focus. Yes there was plenty wrong with the world before Bush came in but he has only made it worse.

Sticking up for him simply because some others are critical of him is ludicrous and a specious argument.

 

[arsbanned]

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: Steeplerot

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: Salvador
I'm trying to find information that says that Bush was easy on Microsoft. I don't have any proof, but it seems obvious because the suit against Microsoft seemed to go away as soon as the Bush administration took office.

Wow, you aren't biased at all.

Oh yeah, Guess he should have advertised that he was fair and balanced before he showed bias, then its ok.

Or People could just stop blaming everything on Bush. Contrary to what you may think, I am not a Bush supporter, I'm just tired of EVERYTHING getting blamed on him.

Then ask him to stop fvcking up everything he touches. Problem solved.

 

[homercles337]

Originally posted by: FuzzyBee

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
Not me I hate the idiot.

That "idiot" was smart enough to get elected. What have you done?

Fussy, that just shows that 51% of amurikans are also idiots and that the dems are idiots because Kerry was the best they could do.

 

[homercles337]

Originally posted by: Salvador
I meant to say the Bush Administration instead of Bush.

I've read theories about the Bush Administration going easy on Microsoft, but never had any good information on it. That's why I was wondering if anyone here had any good information on this.

This is the MOST secretive admin in history, i doubt you will find more than the anti-trust case going by-by with dumb-dumb.

 

[3chordcharlie]

Originally posted by: FuzzyBee

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie

Originally posted by: FuzzyBee

Originally posted by: EatSpam

Originally posted by: FuzzyBee

Originally posted by: EatSpam

Somewhat more original that your Bush worshipping!

Um - where is any "Bush worshipping"? Please show me...

<waiting>

At least you pleasure yourself...

Originally posted by: FuzzyBee
That "idiot" was smart enough to get elected. What have you done?

And that's just in this thread! I can just feel the admiration in your words.

Since you can't answer either question, I trust you have nothing to say about either.

Have a great night dreaming of sugarplum fairies!!

Classic!

The 'he got elected so he's better than your guy' argument, that completely ignores both the controversy over how he won the elections, the possibility that the person you're arguing with isn't trying to say 'John Kerry is better than George Bush' (which is really not the point of the person's argument), and the certainty that none of those things make a whit of difference to whether Bush and his admininistration are competent, honest, or neither.

Then you accuse the other person of living in some sort of 'faery-dream-fantasy' world.

This would be like me responding to one of your arguments with 'maybe you should go be another Rush'.

Trust me, you shouldn't, your posts are far too intelligent for that

Let's analyze what you're saying here. First, we have:

The 'he got elected so he's better than your guy' argument, that completely ignores both the controversy over how he won the elections, the possibility that the person you're arguing with isn't trying to say 'John Kerry is better than George Bush' (which is really not the point of the person's argument), and the certainty that none of those things make a whit of difference to whether Bush and his admininistration are competent, honest, or neither.

Huh - where did I say anything of that sort? Please tell me, and note that I haven't edited my posts. (except this one for a typo)

Then you accuse the other person of living in some sort of 'faery-dream-fantasy' world.

You must be if you conjured up the fantasy that I said all of the above.

If you want to vent your frustrations, at least read the posts you're venting about first.

First you said 'at least he was smart enough to get elected'. Which leads directly to the fact that he may not have been elected the first time at all, and we'll never know because it was all settled in court, not by a proper recount. Gore shares a lot of the blame for this, he never even asked for a real recount.

The second election you've got exit polls that have never been more wrong, in the one state that mattered, with no paper trail. Conicidence? Let's just say it's pretty big payoff if you bet on that horse.

So your flippant, cliched remark has both the implications I talked about, and is still irrelevant to the argument over whether Bush and his administration have been an unmitigated disaster.

It's very impressive that you would accuse me of living in a fantasy world - I don't recall claiming that Bush isn't president of the USA, which is the only fantasy you could maybe accuse me of having, based on my posts. I can't prove a conspiracy to rig elections, and therefore it's possible that they weren't rigged, even if it is statistically ridiculous to simply accept that conclusion.

 

[FuzzyBee]

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie


First you said 'at least he was smart enough to get elected'. Which leads directly to the fact that he may not have been elected the first time at all, and we'll never know because it was all settled in court, not by a proper recount. Gore shares a lot of the blame for this, he never even asked for a real recount.

The second election you've got exit polls that have never been more wrong, in the one state that mattered, with no paper trail. Conicidence? Let's just say it's pretty big payoff if you bet on that horse.

*SIGH* If exit polls were as accurate as you say, why not just use them instead of the actual election?

So your flippant, cliched remark has both the implications I talked about, and is still irrelevant to the argument over whether Bush and his administration have been an unmitigated disaster.

Where in heck did this become the issue? Please read the thread and note my statement. Geez.

It's very impressive that you would accuse me of living in a fantasy world - I don't recall claiming that Bush isn't president of the USA, which is the only fantasy you could maybe accuse me of having, based on my posts.

But you *do* seem to think you can put words in my mouth :roll:

I can't prove a conspiracy to rig elections, and therefore it's possible that they weren't rigged, even if it is statistically ridiculous to simply accept that conclusion.

*sigh* see my comment above.

Now, if you have anything to say about the actual exchange, please speak up!

 

[3chordcharlie]

Originally posted by: FuzzyBee

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie


First you said 'at least he was smart enough to get elected'. Which leads directly to the fact that he may not have been elected the first time at all, and we'll never know because it was all settled in court, not by a proper recount. Gore shares a lot of the blame for this, he never even asked for a real recount.

The second election you've got exit polls that have never been more wrong, in the one state that mattered, with no paper trail. Conicidence? Let's just say it's pretty big payoff if you bet on that horse.

*SIGH* If exit polls were as accurate as you say, why not just use them instead of the actual election?

So your flippant, cliched remark has both the implications I talked about, and is still irrelevant to the argument over whether Bush and his administration have been an unmitigated disaster.

Where in heck did this become the issue? Please read the thread and note my statement. Geez.

It's very impressive that you would accuse me of living in a fantasy world - I don't recall claiming that Bush isn't president of the USA, which is the only fantasy you could maybe accuse me of having, based on my posts.

But you *do* seem to think you can put words in my mouth :roll:

I can't prove a conspiracy to rig elections, and therefore it's possible that they weren't rigged, even if it is statistically ridiculous to simply accept that conclusion.

*sigh* see my comment above.

Now, if you have anything to say about the actual exchange, please speak up!

'Bush is an idiot'

*checks Rush's big book of 'clever' one-liners* 'he was smart enough to get elected'

*Eatspam checks book of approved responses* 'you're a Bush-worshipper'

*FuzzyBee turns to chapter 2* 'you live in a fantasy world'

3chordcharlie points out that you've done nothing but regurgitate irrelevant, FOX-approved liberal-bashes, and wonders why you stepped into the thread at all.

Out of the two of us, which one made a first-post in this thread that contains some sort of thought, and even analysis beyond the basic 'MS AND BUSH ARE TEH SUXOR' or 'STOP BASHING THE PRESIDENT' (which the OP wasn't doing).

 

[FuzzyBee]

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie

Originally posted by: FuzzyBee

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie


First you said 'at least he was smart enough to get elected'. Which leads directly to the fact that he may not have been elected the first time at all, and we'll never know because it was all settled in court, not by a proper recount. Gore shares a lot of the blame for this, he never even asked for a real recount.

The second election you've got exit polls that have never been more wrong, in the one state that mattered, with no paper trail. Conicidence? Let's just say it's pretty big payoff if you bet on that horse.

*SIGH* If exit polls were as accurate as you say, why not just use them instead of the actual election?

So your flippant, cliched remark has both the implications I talked about, and is still irrelevant to the argument over whether Bush and his administration have been an unmitigated disaster.

Where in heck did this become the issue? Please read the thread and note my statement. Geez.

It's very impressive that you would accuse me of living in a fantasy world - I don't recall claiming that Bush isn't president of the USA, which is the only fantasy you could maybe accuse me of having, based on my posts.

But you *do* seem to think you can put words in my mouth :roll:

I can't prove a conspiracy to rig elections, and therefore it's possible that they weren't rigged, even if it is statistically ridiculous to simply accept that conclusion.

*sigh* see my comment above.

Now, if you have anything to say about the actual exchange, please speak up!

'Bush is an idiot'

*checks Rush's big book of 'clever' one-liners* 'he was smart enough to get elected'

*Eatspam checks book of approved responses* 'you're a Bush-worshipper'

*FuzzyBee turns to chapter 2* 'you live in a fantasy world'

3chordcharlie points out that you've done nothing but regurgitate irrelevant, FOX-approved liberal-bashes, and wonders why you stepped into the thread at all.

Out of the two of us, which one made a first-post in this thread that contains some sort of thought, and even analysis beyond the basic 'MS AND BUSH ARE TEH SUXOR' or 'STOP BASHING THE PRESIDENT' (which the OP wasn't doing).

I love how you make assumptions. Geez - how old are you, 5?

Where is your elementary school vitriol towards the poster with the

Not me I hate the idiot. I didn't like hois Dad, but at least I respected him. Jr?? LMAO, what a joke!!

?

If you honestly think that I'm a "Bush-worshiper" because I realize he's not an idiot, as people seem to think, than that is evidence enough that you live in a playground fantasy world. Grow up and get a real, fresh argument.

 

[3chordcharlie]

Originally posted by: FuzzyBee

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie

Originally posted by: FuzzyBee

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie


First you said 'at least he was smart enough to get elected'. Which leads directly to the fact that he may not have been elected the first time at all, and we'll never know because it was all settled in court, not by a proper recount. Gore shares a lot of the blame for this, he never even asked for a real recount.

The second election you've got exit polls that have never been more wrong, in the one state that mattered, with no paper trail. Conicidence? Let's just say it's pretty big payoff if you bet on that horse.

*SIGH* If exit polls were as accurate as you say, why not just use them instead of the actual election?

So your flippant, cliched remark has both the implications I talked about, and is still irrelevant to the argument over whether Bush and his administration have been an unmitigated disaster.

Where in heck did this become the issue? Please read the thread and note my statement. Geez.

It's very impressive that you would accuse me of living in a fantasy world - I don't recall claiming that Bush isn't president of the USA, which is the only fantasy you could maybe accuse me of having, based on my posts.

But you *do* seem to think you can put words in my mouth :roll:

I can't prove a conspiracy to rig elections, and therefore it's possible that they weren't rigged, even if it is statistically ridiculous to simply accept that conclusion.

*sigh* see my comment above.

Now, if you have anything to say about the actual exchange, please speak up!

'Bush is an idiot'

*checks Rush's big book of 'clever' one-liners* 'he was smart enough to get elected'

*Eatspam checks book of approved responses* 'you're a Bush-worshipper'

*FuzzyBee turns to chapter 2* 'you live in a fantasy world'

3chordcharlie points out that you've done nothing but regurgitate irrelevant, FOX-approved liberal-bashes, and wonders why you stepped into the thread at all.

Out of the two of us, which one made a first-post in this thread that contains some sort of thought, and even analysis beyond the basic 'MS AND BUSH ARE TEH SUXOR' or 'STOP BASHING THE PRESIDENT' (which the OP wasn't doing).

I love how you make assumptions. Geez - how old are you, 5?

Where is your elementary school vitriol towards the poster with the

Not me I hate the idiot. I didn't like hois Dad, but at least I respected him. Jr?? LMAO, what a joke!!

?

If you honestly think that I'm a "Bush-worshiper" because I realize he's not an idiot, as people seem to think, than that is evidence enough that you live in a playground fantasy world. Grow up and get a real, fresh argument.

Bush isn't actually an idiot, though he is a very poor speaker, and often appears to be an idiot. He and his set are getting exactly what they want - more government control of the people (freedom isn't particularly profitable), and more public money into the military-industrial complex in which so many of them are heavily invested.

I would have no grounds to think you were a talking-point-neocon if you didn't sound like one.

Once again, my first post in this thread was logical and on-topic, how about yours?

 

[FuzzyBee]

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie

Bush isn't actually an idiot, though he is a very poor speaker, and often appears to be an idiot. He and his set are getting exactly what they want - more government control of the people (freedom isn't particularly profitable), and more public money into the military-industrial complex in which so many of them are heavily invested.

I would have no grounds to think you were a talking-point-neocon if you didn't sound like one.

Because of one statement. I see! :roll:

Once again, my first post in this thread was logical and on-topic, how about yours?

Ah - you're using the old' attack and run ploy!

 

[3chordcharlie]

Originally posted by: FuzzyBee

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie

Bush isn't actually an idiot, though he is a very poor speaker, and often appears to be an idiot. He and his set are getting exactly what they want - more government control of the people (freedom isn't particularly profitable), and more public money into the military-industrial complex in which so many of them are heavily invested.

I would have no grounds to think you were a talking-point-neocon if you didn't sound like one.

Because of one statement. I see! :roll:

Actually, because of two statements.

Once again, my first post in this thread was logical and on-topic, how about yours?

Ah - you're using the old' attack and run ploy!

Attack and run? I think the topic is mildly interesting, you apparently stepped in to have a little gloat over the GWB being president, and have nothing to add.

Care to contribute anything?

 

[FuzzyBee]

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie
Attack and run? I think the topic is mildly interesting, you apparently stepped in to have a little gloat over the GWB being president, and have nothing to add.

Care to contribute anything?

Saying he's not an idiot is a gloat? What world do you live in?

Huh - let's see. Gates donated approximately the same amount to Republicans and Democrats, as one poster above noted. Why would *suddenly* Republicans want to make his anti-trust case go away, when Democrats didn't? If I were a tin-foil-hat type like most here, I'd say it was because the Dems wanted more donations, or something to that effect, but I'm not that type.

BTW, a little but of Googling would tell you that the "final judgement" phase of the MS antitrust case too over 4 years - I'd hardly call that just "going away".

 

[3chordcharlie]

Originally posted by: FuzzyBee

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie
Attack and run? I think the topic is mildly interesting, you apparently stepped in to have a little gloat over the GWB being president, and have nothing to add.

Care to contribute anything?

Saying he's not an idiot is a gloat? What world do you live in?

Huh - let's see. Gates donated approximately the same amount to Republicans and Democrats, as one poster above noted. Why would *suddenly* Republicans want to make his anti-trust case go away, when Democrats didn't? If I were a tin-foil-hat type like most here, I'd say it was because the Dems wanted more donations, or something to that effect, but I'm not that type.

BTW, a little but of Googling would tell you that the "final judgement" phase of the MS antitrust case too over 4 years - I'd hardly call that just "going away".

A standard interpretation of 'he was smart enough to get elected' would be an attack on the intelligence of the person you're telling, or a brag about the outcome (being elected).

It may have taken 4 years, but the outcome is that after a conviction, it all went away. No splitting the company, no substantial effect on tied-selling. Gates' donations are pretty much irrelevant; the neoconservative theory is that corporations can do no wrong, even if they did. Just ask zendari for his opinion on the last time a company engaged in unethical behaviour

 

[Salvador]

FWIW.. I don't think that Bush is an idiot, but he sure acts like one. Can't we find someone better to represent our country? I'm sick of this champion of mediocrity.

 

[nageov3t]

don't you typically look at ALL of the evidence and then see if it shows that anyone was hard or soft on microsoft before forming a theory and then specifically looking for evidence that supports that theory?

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: Salvador
I'm trying to find information that says that Bush was easy on Microsoft. I don't have any proof, but it seems obvious because the suit against Microsoft seemed to go away as soon as the Bush administration took office.

Not sure how much exists. Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson was a Reagan appointee and it was Jackson that wanted to breakup Microsoft and had several very disparaging remarks about Microsoft.

 

[ntdz]

Originally posted by: Salvador
I'm trying to find information that says that Bush was easy on Microsoft. I don't have any proof, but it seems obvious because the suit against Microsoft seemed to go away as soon as the Bush administration took office.

What's obvious is that Microsoft should never have been broken up, and their punishment fit the "crime."

 

[Salvador]

Originally posted by: loki8481
don't you typically look at ALL of the evidence and then see if it shows that anyone was hard or soft on microsoft before forming a theory and then specifically looking for evidence that supports that theory?

Yes. I do. I was just trying to prove a theory is all.

 

[piasabird]

I question how this law suit was prosecuted and why it seems like nothing has really changed. Maybe some things have changed a little, but it is sometimes hard to see any real changes. I am speaking primarliy form the aspect of an IT Employee.

MS Still seems like they have taken over the IT world. Especially in the server and browser areas. Then they introduced .NET and now that is getting popular.

So was the money paid to all these lawyers really worth spending?

 

[FuzzyBee]

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie
A standard interpretation of 'he was smart enough to get elected' would be an attack on the intelligence of the person you're telling, or a brag about the outcome (being elected).

...or just plain "he was smart enough to get elected".

 

[walkur]

At the risk of slightly going ontoppic...

I believe the EU is still giving MS legal headaches regarding the antitrust issue.
The EU is doing what it does best... paperwork a lot of paperwork

 

[piasabird]

If anything maybe the court system got tired of dealing with the case. The case lasted longer than some judges sat on the bench.