• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

What do you think about Bush?

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

BMW540I6speed

Golden Member
Aug 26, 2005
1,055
0
0
Bush could be in the catagory of a sociopath. There are sufficient public examples of his sociopathic tendancies to render any private revelations to the contrary as specious. And indeed we see here that many of the private revelations actually serve to reinforce the notion, such as his absolute arrogance in believing he is never to be challenged or questioned yet everyone else most certainly should be.

Viewed from within his circle he is perceived as decisive, intelligent, charming, shrewd, and even visionary. Viewed from without, his flaws become obvious, encompassing petulance, insecurity, inflexibility, spite, indifference to suffering.

Bush's personality types are all over the place, and are particularly drawn to positions of power and influence; that is another defining trait they have, the desire to control others, coupled with lack of empathy or shame.

They're well-represented in any industry that richly rewards winners, which is why they're better represented in politics and in the business world, and likely in the entertainment world, where "kicking ass" can get you ahead - money, fame, power, control - they thirst for those things, will seek what brings it to them, and they don't care how they get it, just so long as it isn't too much work.

Willing to take risks and uncaring of the outcomes (except inasmuch as those outcomes affect them personally), functional sociopaths are able to rise high, whether through brains or connections, but the damage they leave in passing is substantial.

And at the highest levels, such a person would wreak untold social damage - things like suppression of habeas corpus, engaging in disastrous wars of opportunity, Indifference to American cities during disasters, creating secret prisons and sanctioning torture, and adopting things like warrantless surveillance, that kind of thing. Power insulates and protects the wielder of it - might makes right, which is a sociopathic value if ever there was one.

Is "sociopath" too strong a word for Bush? I don't know. But it's certainly plausible, given his behavior in the past and the present.
 

ericlp

Diamond Member
Dec 24, 2000
6,079
186
106
Originally posted by: Robor
I hate George W Bush and his entire lying administration. I didn't vote for him either time either. Worst president and administration in modern history.

I also agree with Lemon Law on the next president having to mend our foreign policy and world image. GWB&Co have absolutely trashed it.
QFT, I did the same, never voted for him... Still amazes me how he won the second time around... I threw in the towel after he won second ... I am not voting again.

Waste of friggen time if you ask me...
 

Zebo

Elite Member
Jul 29, 2001
39,408
2
0
All his friends (e.g. haliburton....blackwater about 5000+ no bid fed contractors) are rich as God about now so I don't think he's dumb just evil - like most politicians just more unabashed about the grift. You think these millionaires (all politicians) go into public service for that paltry salary they are paid? Grow up. FYI- Switzerland has the oldest constitution not USA.
 

tweaker2

Lifer
Aug 5, 2000
11,860
3,084
136
Originally posted by: Arkaign
Originally posted by: Craig234
Originally posted by: Arkaign
There aren't vile enough words in any language to express my wrath and disgust with that subhuman piece of garbage.
From a self-described conservative, did you vote for him in 2000 or 2004? Did you always oppose him, or what was the point where you begant to oppose him?
No, I live in Texas, so I got to see first-hand what a jerk he was up close and personal long before he became President. I didn't vote for him for Governor either.

I'm a conservative in the way that I don't think the government is very good at providing solutions for the most part. But I'm also a pragmatist, and realize by good example, that the gov't can (and should) perform many basic purposes, and things like our Military (political leadership notwithstanding) and Post Office do a fine job in general.

Socially, I don't believe the government should have many powers on telling people what to do/say/think, or how to behave. I believe that our freedoms should not be bent or ignored for political expedience or for temporary 'security', as the precedents set could bring dire consequences for more/all of us in the future. I believe the value of holding a generally high moral standard is much more valuable than the (possible) small gains of lowering ourselves to base and vile acts such as state-sanctioned torture. It's irrelevant how horrible the crimes of our enemies, by lowering our standards we only cheapen what it means to be an American.

Economically, I see evil on both sides of the fence. With the (R)'s for quite some time now, what you get is very high spending on areas with little recirculatory value in the general economy, combined with lower taxes / more exemptions for the rich, along with stagnant/reduced social spending. As the overall recipe is for higher deficits, I vehemently disagree with this approach. With the (D)'s of late, you see moderately high spending in areas with moderate recirculatory value, combined with lower taxes for the poor, and higher taxes for the rich, and slightly increased social spending. I am somewhat more inclined towards this approach, though it's still far from perfect. As both sides tend to favor huge pork spending and government waste, I have little confidence in the performance of either party in managing our economic direction. It's always spend now, pay later, damn the consequences, with little band-aids and fingers in the dam to hold back the inevitable. My ideal economic platform would be : massively reduced spending, combining/eliminating redundant or unnecessary federal agencies, giving more power to the states, much lower taxes for the poorest 50%, moderately lower taxes for the rich, and a 'don't tread on me' foreign policy where we never engage unless directly attacked. I don't mind focused and accountable military spending where necessary, and I strongly support paying for the college and training for our servicemen and women.

So you see, I don't see a good option either way, and as an economic conservative, with what is seen as liberal social values (weird that so many 'conservatives' seem to think the government should be poking it's face in our lives at every turn, and spending our money hand over fist in ill-conceived foreign disasters), I don't really have a viable candidate or platform to support. I'm much more offended by a fake 'conservative', than I am of an honest liberal. The liberal will tell you what he's about, the 'conservative' will tell you with a straight face that he's for lower taxes, smaller government, and more individual responsibility and freedom, all the while shredding the constitution, spending our children's money, lowering taxes for only the rich, and having an utter disregard for due process, a sense of honor, equal justice, or even accountability. So yes, I see Bush as a shit-stain on the roadmap of our tattered country's legacy, and I revile him with utter contempt.

I could name off dozens of people that would have done a much better job as Prez, you, Vic, even ProfJohn is capable of usually putting together coherent thoughts.
i tip my hat in your general direction and thank you for an excellent post.:thumbsup:

 

tamaron

Member
Apr 29, 2008
47
4
71
Thanks from me too, I understand your thoughts and I agree with many of them. It's hopeful to talk with someone that although doesn't fit exactly with my political line, is using respect, coherency and SOLIDARITY, specially with the disadvantaged people.

I see my taxes like a social shock absorber, a tool to give everybody the same opportunities. We have a chance to use this massive income in the best way possible, identify the priority targets and execute them, of course this require an intense debate, and we must learn that this is the base of our freedoms. Debate is not confontation it's progress.

I remember when I had a plain and fatuous thinking about USA, and I realize that my prejudices doesn't allow me to understand and to learn, I see american films, I hear american music, I like your/our/my culture, many of my favourites writers are americans and studying a little of american history I love people like Benjamin Franklin, Emily Dickinson, Harriet Beecher Stowe and many others. So it's a shame to underestimate those treasures.

And for GWB... I hope he stops menacing world asap. Here we are a little scared and as I said it makes me sad because I see people blame the USA people and deny our connections with them. Action/reaction but I don't like it.

PS: sorry for my english
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY