Will George W. Bush go down in history...

[dahunan]

Is there anything that these people will not lie about

Why do they have so many defenders ... In reality.. these people in this administration should have been in prison by now

 

[catnap1972]

Originally posted by: dahunan
Is there anything that these people will not lie about

Why do they have so many defenders

The lemmings are afflicted with undiagnosed debilitating mental disorders...that's the only plausible explanation.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally posted by: catnap1972

Originally posted by: dahunan
Is there anything that these people will not lie about

Why do they have so many defenders

The lemmings are afflicted with undiagnosed debilitating mental disorders...that's the only plausible explanation.

The explanation is that millions of Americans love Bush. So much so that they still love him even as their employer's factory is closing and even as they're having difficulty finding work. They love him even as he proposes to allow millions of poor immigrants who will take their jobs (and dilute our culture) into the country.

Why? Because Bush opposes abortion. Bush advocates religion. Bush opposes gay marraige.

We might become a third world country (think of an impoverished nation that is a mix of a Christian Iran and India), but so what? "Thems gays won't be geddiin' married and no more 'bortions!"

Seriously. I know a guy who absolutely despises the Democrats even though he opposes Bush on the immigration issue, even though he doesn't like global labor wage arbitrage, and even though he's only blue collar middle class. But he's a Christian and he opposes abortion and gay marraige (etc.), therefore he'll keep backing Bush and voting Republican. [Note--the Democrats are almost just as bad on these issues.]

We might become an impoverished, overpopulated, third world country, and English might become a foreign language here, but Goddammit, we won't have gay marraige and abortion! That's what tens of millions of Americans are thinking.

 

[CaptnKirk]

Originally posted by: WhipperSnapper

We might become an impoverished, overpopulated, third world country, and English might become a foreign language here, but Goddammit, we won't have gay marraige and abortion! That's what tens of millions of Americans are thinking.

Yup - and where's that Armageddon that the 'Vangelistics been promisin' ?

 

[eits]

bush will EASILY go down in history as having one of the worst 2-term presidencies ever.

the list of scandals goes on and on and on...

it stuns me why no one stands up and challenges this administration. after all the bulllshit they've put the american people through, now they've got a uae company controling our ports? and just yesterday, the new jersey government asked the federal government for the information on the uae port controlers and the government told nj to shut up and mind their own business. i can't find the article to show you, but i heard it on npr yesterday night.

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: WhipperSnapper

Originally posted by: catnap1972

Originally posted by: dahunan
Is there anything that these people will not lie about

Why do they have so many defenders

The lemmings are afflicted with undiagnosed debilitating mental disorders...that's the only plausible explanation.

The explanation is that millions of Americans love Bush. So much so that they still love him even as their employer's factory is closing and even as they're having difficulty finding work. They love him even as he proposes to allow millions of poor immigrants who will take their jobs (and dilute our culture) into the country.

Why? Because Bush opposes abortion. Bush advocates religion. Bush opposes gay marraige.

We might become a third world country (think of an impoverished nation that is a mix of a Christian Iran and India), but so what? "Thems gays won't be geddiin' married and no more 'bortions!"

Seriously. I know a guy who absolutely despises the Democrats even though he opposes Bush on the immigration issue, even though he doesn't like global labor wage arbitrage, and even though he's only blue collar middle class. But he's a Christian and he opposes abortion and gay marraige (etc.), therefore he'll keep backing Bush and voting Republican. [Note--the Democrats are almost just as bad on these issues.]

We might become an impoverished, overpopulated, third world country, and English might become a foreign language here, but Goddammit, we won't have gay marraige and abortion! That's what tens of millions of Americans are thinking.

I have no problem with gay marriage or abortion, I'm a Deist, and I still think that Bush is OK in terms of what type of leader we need right now. That is, during a time of war, we need a leader who will make tough decisions, even if they are unpopular, for the good of the nation. He does so, and it pisses you and alot of people off, but that makes him OK in my book. It's all a matter of priorities, and he seems ot have the correct ones.

Doesnt this throw your entire assumption off a bit? ya, that's right, it does...

 

[palehorse]

double post.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: WhipperSnapper

Originally posted by: catnap1972

Originally posted by: dahunan
Is there anything that these people will not lie about

Why do they have so many defenders

The lemmings are afflicted with undiagnosed debilitating mental disorders...that's the only plausible explanation.

The explanation is that millions of Americans love Bush. So much so that they still love him even as their employer's factory is closing and even as they're having difficulty finding work. They love him even as he proposes to allow millions of poor immigrants who will take their jobs (and dilute our culture) into the country.

Why? Because Bush opposes abortion. Bush advocates religion. Bush opposes gay marraige.

We might become a third world country (think of an impoverished nation that is a mix of a Christian Iran and India), but so what? "Thems gays won't be geddiin' married and no more 'bortions!"

Seriously. I know a guy who absolutely despises the Democrats even though he opposes Bush on the immigration issue, even though he doesn't like global labor wage arbitrage, and even though he's only blue collar middle class. But he's a Christian and he opposes abortion and gay marraige (etc.), therefore he'll keep backing Bush and voting Republican. [Note--the Democrats are almost just as bad on these issues.]

We might become an impoverished, overpopulated, third world country, and English might become a foreign language here, but Goddammit, we won't have gay marraige and abortion! That's what tens of millions of Americans are thinking.

I have no problem with gay marriage or abortion, I'm a Deist, and I still think that Bush is OK in terms of what type of leader we need right now. That is, during a time of war, we need a leader who will make tough decisions, even if they are unpopular, for the good of the nation. He does so, and it pisses you and alot of people off, but that makes him OK in my book. It's all a matter of priorities, and he seems ot have the correct ones.

Doesnt this throw your entire assumption off a bit? ya, that's right, it does...

Well he is a Uniter, he's uniting everybody against him with the exception of the hardcore apologists.

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Well he is a Uniter, he's uniting everybody against him with the exception of the hardcore apologists.

It appears to me that aproximatley 30% of the voters in this country think the US of A can do no wrong as long as the Repugs are running things. People like that are why our democracy is in the shape it's in these days. They should be taken out and shot as the traitors/sell-outs that they are.

 

[shadow9d9]

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: WhipperSnapper

Originally posted by: catnap1972

Originally posted by: dahunan
Is there anything that these people will not lie about

Why do they have so many defenders

The lemmings are afflicted with undiagnosed debilitating mental disorders...that's the only plausible explanation.

The explanation is that millions of Americans love Bush. So much so that they still love him even as their employer's factory is closing and even as they're having difficulty finding work. They love him even as he proposes to allow millions of poor immigrants who will take their jobs (and dilute our culture) into the country.

Why? Because Bush opposes abortion. Bush advocates religion. Bush opposes gay marraige.

We might become a third world country (think of an impoverished nation that is a mix of a Christian Iran and India), but so what? "Thems gays won't be geddiin' married and no more 'bortions!"

Seriously. I know a guy who absolutely despises the Democrats even though he opposes Bush on the immigration issue, even though he doesn't like global labor wage arbitrage, and even though he's only blue collar middle class. But he's a Christian and he opposes abortion and gay marraige (etc.), therefore he'll keep backing Bush and voting Republican. [Note--the Democrats are almost just as bad on these issues.]

We might become an impoverished, overpopulated, third world country, and English might become a foreign language here, but Goddammit, we won't have gay marraige and abortion! That's what tens of millions of Americans are thinking.

I have no problem with gay marriage or abortion, I'm a Deist, and I still think that Bush is OK in terms of what type of leader we need right now. That is, during a time of war, we need a leader who will make tough decisions, even if they are unpopular, for the good of the nation. He does so, and it pisses you and alot of people off, but that makes him OK in my book. It's all a matter of priorities, and he seems ot have the correct ones.

Doesnt this throw your entire assumption off a bit? ya, that's right, it does...

Yeah, creating a terrorist haven/recruiting paradise in Iraq was a real great leadership decision. Spending 1 trillion dollars on a war that was supposed to "pay for itself" is also unpopular.. but I guess according to you, it's all ok because he has these great priorities?

 

[eits]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Well he is a Uniter, he's uniting everybody against him with the exception of the hardcore apologists.

It appears to me that aproximatley 30% of the voters in this country think the US of A can do no wrong as long as the Repugs are running things. People like that are why our democracy is in the shape it's in these days. They should be taken out and shot as the traitors/sell-outs that they are.

qft.

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: shadow9d9
Yeah, creating a terrorist haven/recruiting paradise in Iraq was a real great leadership decision. Spending 1 trillion dollars on a war that was supposed to "pay for itself" is also unpopular.. but I guess according to you, it's all ok because he has these great priorities?

it's much easier to kill the turdbags when you bring them out of the woodwork and into your sights.

 

[dahunan]

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: shadow9d9
Yeah, creating a terrorist haven/recruiting paradise in Iraq was a real great leadership decision. Spending 1 trillion dollars on a war that was supposed to "pay for itself" is also unpopular.. but I guess according to you, it's all ok because he has these great priorities?

it's much easier to kill the turdbags when you bring them out of the woodwork and into your sights.

And you neocons fault them for blowing up the WTC.. whatever..

You are all stupid bullies

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: shadow9d9
Yeah, creating a terrorist haven/recruiting paradise in Iraq was a real great leadership decision. Spending 1 trillion dollars on a war that was supposed to "pay for itself" is also unpopular.. but I guess according to you, it's all ok because he has these great priorities?

it's much easier to kill the turdbags when you bring them out of the woodwork and into your sights.

Yeah, we can see how well it is going. The more you kill, the more there are and the more they hate us.

So what's the dollar cost per terrorist killed running these days? With 1.2 billion muslims or so it could get just a little on the spendy side before it's all over.

Brillant strategy, billant planning, and brillant execution. Gee, I feel so much safer knowing we are being led by such brillant killers.

 

[thereaderrabbit]

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: WhipperSnapper

Originally posted by: catnap1972

Originally posted by: dahunan
Is there anything that these people will not lie about

Why do they have so many defenders

The lemmings are afflicted with undiagnosed debilitating mental disorders...that's the only plausible explanation.

The explanation is that millions of Americans love Bush. So much so that they still love him even as their employer's factory is closing and even as they're having difficulty finding work. They love him even as he proposes to allow millions of poor immigrants who will take their jobs (and dilute our culture) into the country.

Why? Because Bush opposes abortion. Bush advocates religion. Bush opposes gay marraige.

We might become a third world country (think of an impoverished nation that is a mix of a Christian Iran and India), but so what? "Thems gays won't be geddiin' married and no more 'bortions!"

Seriously. I know a guy who absolutely despises the Democrats even though he opposes Bush on the immigration issue, even though he doesn't like global labor wage arbitrage, and even though he's only blue collar middle class. But he's a Christian and he opposes abortion and gay marraige (etc.), therefore he'll keep backing Bush and voting Republican. [Note--the Democrats are almost just as bad on these issues.]

We might become an impoverished, overpopulated, third world country, and English might become a foreign language here, but Goddammit, we won't have gay marraige and abortion! That's what tens of millions of Americans are thinking.

I have no problem with gay marriage or abortion, I'm a Deist, and I still think that Bush is OK in terms of what type of leader we need right now. That is, during a time of war, we need a leader who will make tough decisions, even if they are unpopular, for the good of the nation. He does so, and it pisses you and alot of people off, but that makes him OK in my book. It's all a matter of priorities, and he seems ot have the correct ones.

Doesnt this throw your entire assumption off a bit? ya, that's right, it does...

Every president makes tough decisions every day (democrat or republican). The issue at hand is how good the decisions are. Bush had a bad track record before taking office and he's kept it going while living in the White House. Every day business leaders make tough decisions, but it?s the bad ones who make bad decisions thus finding themselves out of business (unless their dad has lots of money).

 

[Pens1566]

Originally posted by: WhipperSnapper

Originally posted by: Don Rodriguez

Unemployment as of 1/06 is 4.7%.

THE MYTH OF THE UNEMPLOYMENT NUMBERS:

What people don't realize about the unemployment numbers...is that they are heavily politicized numbers that do not necessarily reflect reality.

(1) The numbers do not tell us what kinds of jobs people work. An upper middle class job counts just as much as a poverty-wage job. Did you know that people in third world countries work too? It's quite possible to have 5% unemployment with the majority of the populace being working poor. They're all employed--they're just working poor. (Don't like the low wage? We'll ship your job to China.) So,

95% employment at poverty wage jobs = 5% unemployment. (Yippee!)

and

95% employment at solid middle class jobs = 5% unemployment. (OMG, it looks the same!)

Thus, the unemployment number doesn't tell us all that much about the actual state of the job market or people's standard of living. It doesn't tell us whether we're still a first world country or whether we're descending to third world status.

(2) The unemployment numbers often purposely ignore people who have "dropped out" of the job market. These are people who want to work but often can't find anything other than poverty wage jobs. You'd more or less refer to them as being unemployed if you knew them personally. So, the laid-off 57 year old MBA who suffers age discrimination and who concludes that he might as well just retire early and live frugally off of his savings rather than work at McWalmart is not "unemployed" according to the data even though he'd like to work at a job that's appropriate to his abilities. The college-educated guy who's been searching for a middle class job for over a year might be regarded as having "dropped out" of the labor force--so he doesn't count as unemployed. The college-educated mother of two who decides that it makes more economic sense to be a housewife because she can't find anything better than a $7/hour job also doesn't count as unemployed even though she'd gladly take a job that paid a wage commensurate to the value of her college degree.

(3) The unemployment numbers may count part-time work. The guy who's seriously underemployed and only working 10 hours/week still counts as "employed" even though we know he's probably poor.

(4) The unemployment numbers don't tell us about underemployment. You know that smart guy with the Ph.D. in Chemistry who works 65 hours/week as a postdoctoral research (a "postdoc") without any benefits or job security on a 2-year gypsy scientist position for a mere $30,000/year (!!!)? (This comes after 10 years of college education.) He's employed too as far as the unemployment numbers are concerned! You know that guy with the bachelor's degree who could only find work for $8/hour as a cashier at the local office supply store? He's "employed" too as far as the unemployment numbers are concerned.

(5) It's possible that people who work multiple jobs might count as multiple employed people in the unemployment numbers. So, when the impoverished mother of three who works three jobs is counted, even though she can barely support herself and her family on her three jobs, she counts as (ta-da) three employed people!

As a result, of the above, the real unemployment number is a multiple of the reported "unemployment" number. So, if the unemployment number is "5%" the real number is probably more like 25%.

The unemployment number should be changed to only count solid middle class jobs (and better) jobs. That would provide us with a much better indicator of the state of the employment market. The numbers they're reporting for us now are worse than worthless because they are so misleading.

"It's OK everybody! Just watch mindless TV, and take your happy drugs! No unemployment problems here! Ignore all those news reports about layoffs and the logic that underlies the claims of global labor wage arbitrage. Everything is fine! For those of you who feel we have problems, remember, education is the answer! The claim that we need better education is our opiate of the masses, so take your opiate! Ignore those naysayers and get back to work at your McWalmart job. Go to church and pray! Jesus loves you! Everyone get back to doing what you've been-a-doing. See! The unemployment number is measely 4.5%! We have full employment!"

This needs to be linked anytime the apologists say something like : "but the unemployment % dropped again!!!".

 

[Robor]

If it hasn't already been said...

[Comic Book Guy Voice] Worst president ever [/Comic Book Guy Voice]

 

[sumyungai]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: shadow9d9
Yeah, creating a terrorist haven/recruiting paradise in Iraq was a real great leadership decision. Spending 1 trillion dollars on a war that was supposed to "pay for itself" is also unpopular.. but I guess according to you, it's all ok because he has these great priorities?

it's much easier to kill the turdbags when you bring them out of the woodwork and into your sights.

Yeah, we can see how well it is going. The more you kill, the more there are and the more they hate us.

So what's the dollar cost per terrorist killed running these days? With 1.2 billion muslims or so it could get just a little on the spendy side before it's all over.

Brillant strategy, billant planning, and brillant execution. Gee, I feel so much safer knowing we are being led by such brillant killers.

If we didn't go to war on Iraq, would all the muslims stop hating us? No.

Did Muslims love us when Clinton, a Democrat was in office? From the first World Trade Center bombing and the planning stages for 9/11 I would say thats a NEGATIVE.

After we went to war in Iraq, have we've been attacked? No.

Would you rather not go to war and wait for the next 9/11? As you've seen in the past, it doesn't matter whether it is a Democrat thats in office or a Republican, they will hate us no matter what.

War costs money but its for our safety, hence why no attacks on US soil after 9/11. Would you rather save money and live in fear or spend money and take a chance at future peace? What is your priority money or safety?

Should the president try to be mister popular by trying to make people like him or do what is in the interest for our safety? What is your priority, popularity or safety?

 

[Engineer]

Originally posted by: sumyungai

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: shadow9d9
Yeah, creating a terrorist haven/recruiting paradise in Iraq was a real great leadership decision. Spending 1 trillion dollars on a war that was supposed to "pay for itself" is also unpopular.. but I guess according to you, it's all ok because he has these great priorities?

it's much easier to kill the turdbags when you bring them out of the woodwork and into your sights.

Yeah, we can see how well it is going. The more you kill, the more there are and the more they hate us.

So what's the dollar cost per terrorist killed running these days? With 1.2 billion muslims or so it could get just a little on the spendy side before it's all over.

Brillant strategy, billant planning, and brillant execution. Gee, I feel so much safer knowing we are being led by such brillant killers.

If we didn't go to war on Iraq, would all the muslims stop hating us? No.

Did Muslims love us when Clinton, a Democrat was in office? From the first World Trade Center bombing and the planning stages for 9/11 I would say thats a NEGATIVE.

After we went to war in Iraq, have we've been attacked? No.

Would you rather not go to war and wait for the next 9/11? As you've seen in the past, it doesn't matter whether it is a Democrat thats in office or a Republican, they will hate us no matter what.

War costs money but its for our safety, hence why no attacks on US soil after 9/11. Would you rather save money and live in fear or spend money and take a chance at future peace? What is your priority money or safety?

Should the president try to be mister popular by trying to make people like him or do what is in the interest for our safety? What is your priority, popularity or safety?

And we are safer because we went to Iraq? Hell no. History will prove the chimp to be a failure and liar.

 

[dahunan]

^^ you consider the murder of innocent Iraqis to be in our best interests

^^ WTC 1 was when? = how much time between WTC1 and 9/11?

How many terrorist attacks happened between WTC1 and 9/11?

 

[Pens1566]

Originally posted by: sumyungai

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: shadow9d9
Yeah, creating a terrorist haven/recruiting paradise in Iraq was a real great leadership decision. Spending 1 trillion dollars on a war that was supposed to "pay for itself" is also unpopular.. but I guess according to you, it's all ok because he has these great priorities?

it's much easier to kill the turdbags when you bring them out of the woodwork and into your sights.

Yeah, we can see how well it is going. The more you kill, the more there are and the more they hate us.

So what's the dollar cost per terrorist killed running these days? With 1.2 billion muslims or so it could get just a little on the spendy side before it's all over.

Brillant strategy, billant planning, and brillant execution. Gee, I feel so much safer knowing we are being led by such brillant killers.

If we didn't go to war on Iraq, would all the muslims stop hating us? No.

Did Muslims love us when Clinton, a Democrat was in office? From the first World Trade Center bombing and the planning stages for 9/11 I would say thats a NEGATIVE.

After we went to war in Iraq, have we've been attacked? No.

Would you rather not go to war and wait for the next 9/11? As you've seen in the past, it doesn't matter whether it is a Democrat thats in office or a Republican, they will hate us no matter what.

War costs money but its for our safety, hence why no attacks on US soil after 9/11. Would you rather save money and live in fear or spend money and take a chance at future peace? What is your priority money or safety?

Should the president try to be mister popular by trying to make people like him or do what is in the interest for our safety? What is your priority, popularity or safety?

How about we live in fear (orange alert!!!!!!!) AND spend money like a drunken sailor? Work for you?

Terrorist attacks have actually increased since we invaded Iraq. Just not in the US. Then again, they tend to plot and plan for several years before they strike.

 

[sumyungai]

Originally posted by: dahunan
^^ you consider the murder of innocent Iraqis to be in our best interests

^^ WTC 1 was when? = how much time between WTC1 and 9/11?

How many terrorist attacks happened between WTC1 and 9/11?

Is it Bush's intention to kill innocent Iraqis? Did Bush tell the military to target innocent Iraqis? When you are at war, there will be bystanders, period.

My point with WTC1 is that it doesn't matter who is president or how much appeasement there is. Muslims will hate Infidels NO MATTER WHAT.

Even though we are having a hard time in Iraq, but wouldn't you rather try to do something about a problem instead of just ignoring it?

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: sumyungai

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: shadow9d9
Yeah, creating a terrorist haven/recruiting paradise in Iraq was a real great leadership decision. Spending 1 trillion dollars on a war that was supposed to "pay for itself" is also unpopular.. but I guess according to you, it's all ok because he has these great priorities?

it's much easier to kill the turdbags when you bring them out of the woodwork and into your sights.

Yeah, we can see how well it is going. The more you kill, the more there are and the more they hate us.

So what's the dollar cost per terrorist killed running these days? With 1.2 billion muslims or so it could get just a little on the spendy side before it's all over.

Brillant strategy, billant planning, and brillant execution. Gee, I feel so much safer knowing we are being led by such brillant killers.

If we didn't go to war on Iraq, would all the muslims stop hating us? No.

There would be a lot less Muslims hating us that hate wouldn't be as intense as it is now.

Did Muslims love us when Clinton, a Democrat was in office? From the first World Trade Center bombing and the planning stages for 9/11 I would say thats a NEGATIVE.

I don't suppose your smart enough to figure out who and why the first WTC bombing occured, are you. If hacks like you hadn't been so intense on prosecuting Clinton for something/anything they could find maybe that would have turned out different.

After we went to war in Iraq, have we've been attacked? No.

So can yopu assure me we're not going to be attacked shortly? All it takes is ONE person.

Would you rather not go to war and wait for the next 9/11? As you've seen in the past, it doesn't matter whether it is a Democrat thats in office or a Republican, they will hate us no matter what.

You can rationalize it all you like. The more terrorist we make and the more we make them hate us, the more likely a SERIOUS attack is.

War costs money but its for our safety, hence why no attacks on US soil after 9/11. Would you rather save money and live in fear or spend money and take a chance at future peace? What is your priority money or safety?

Your the one living in fear, that is why you support a war based on lies.

Should the president try to be mister popular by trying to make people like him or do what is in the interest for our safety? What is your priority, popularity or safety?

LOL, my priority is safety and I want to get the most bang for my buck instead of spending it willy nilly to make Haliburton and friends richer.

Go back to OT.

 

[sumyungai]

Originally posted by: Pens1566

Originally posted by: sumyungai

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: shadow9d9
Yeah, creating a terrorist haven/recruiting paradise in Iraq was a real great leadership decision. Spending 1 trillion dollars on a war that was supposed to "pay for itself" is also unpopular.. but I guess according to you, it's all ok because he has these great priorities?

it's much easier to kill the turdbags when you bring them out of the woodwork and into your sights.

Yeah, we can see how well it is going. The more you kill, the more there are and the more they hate us.

So what's the dollar cost per terrorist killed running these days? With 1.2 billion muslims or so it could get just a little on the spendy side before it's all over.

Brillant strategy, billant planning, and brillant execution. Gee, I feel so much safer knowing we are being led by such brillant killers.

If we didn't go to war on Iraq, would all the muslims stop hating us? No.

Did Muslims love us when Clinton, a Democrat was in office? From the first World Trade Center bombing and the planning stages for 9/11 I would say thats a NEGATIVE.

After we went to war in Iraq, have we've been attacked? No.

Would you rather not go to war and wait for the next 9/11? As you've seen in the past, it doesn't matter whether it is a Democrat thats in office or a Republican, they will hate us no matter what.

War costs money but its for our safety, hence why no attacks on US soil after 9/11. Would you rather save money and live in fear or spend money and take a chance at future peace? What is your priority money or safety?

Should the president try to be mister popular by trying to make people like him or do what is in the interest for our safety? What is your priority, popularity or safety?

How about we live in fear (orange alert!!!!!!!) AND spend money like a drunken sailor? Work for you?

Terrorist attacks have actually increased since we invaded Iraq. Just not in the US. Then again, they tend to plot and plan for several years before they strike.

Terrorists have attacked which country? France? Indonesia? Africa? Even Saudi Arabia? Did those countries pissed off the terrorist? Why were they attacked?

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: sumyungai

Originally posted by: Pens1566

Originally posted by: sumyungai

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: shadow9d9
Yeah, creating a terrorist haven/recruiting paradise in Iraq was a real great leadership decision. Spending 1 trillion dollars on a war that was supposed to "pay for itself" is also unpopular.. but I guess according to you, it's all ok because he has these great priorities?

it's much easier to kill the turdbags when you bring them out of the woodwork and into your sights.

Yeah, we can see how well it is going. The more you kill, the more there are and the more they hate us.

So what's the dollar cost per terrorist killed running these days? With 1.2 billion muslims or so it could get just a little on the spendy side before it's all over.

Brillant strategy, billant planning, and brillant execution. Gee, I feel so much safer knowing we are being led by such brillant killers.

If we didn't go to war on Iraq, would all the muslims stop hating us? No.

Did Muslims love us when Clinton, a Democrat was in office? From the first World Trade Center bombing and the planning stages for 9/11 I would say thats a NEGATIVE.

After we went to war in Iraq, have we've been attacked? No.

Would you rather not go to war and wait for the next 9/11? As you've seen in the past, it doesn't matter whether it is a Democrat thats in office or a Republican, they will hate us no matter what.

War costs money but its for our safety, hence why no attacks on US soil after 9/11. Would you rather save money and live in fear or spend money and take a chance at future peace? What is your priority money or safety?

Should the president try to be mister popular by trying to make people like him or do what is in the interest for our safety? What is your priority, popularity or safety?

How about we live in fear (orange alert!!!!!!!) AND spend money like a drunken sailor? Work for you?

Terrorist attacks have actually increased since we invaded Iraq. Just not in the US. Then again, they tend to plot and plan for several years before they strike.

Terrorists have attacked which country? France? Indonesia? Africa? Even Saudi Arabia? Did those countries pissed off the terrorist? Why were they attacked?

Ever hear of Britain?? :laugh: