Think GWB hit a home run?
Not sure, the ideas are good. or is he [:X] the Dems.
0
-
quote:Originally posted by christianwarrior
President Bush has shown himself to be a smart and crafty man, attending the finest schools in our country and doing very well in business.
1) Bush was admitted to Yale despite having a GPA and SAT scores that were BELOW the average scores of Yale matriculants. He got into Yale because of who his daddy was, not based on merit (because his GPA and SAT scores were nowhere near Yale-worthy). And he was a solid "C" student while he was there, thus proving he really didn't deserve to be there in the first place.
2) Bush's business ventures were all TOTAL failures. His first oil company, Arbusto, had to be bought out by his daddy's friends to rescue it from bankruptcy. (BTW, one of the investors in Bush's oil company was a member of the Bin Laden family).
Bush then became CEO of the new company, Spectrum 7, which recorded a net loss under Bush's leadership and had to be rescued from bankruptcy AGAIN by some of daddy's friends. After being bought out (for over DOUBLE what Bush's company was actually worth), this time by Harken Energy, Bush joined Harken's board of Directors. Bush dumped all of his Harken stock just ONE WEEK before they reported a net loss of over $23 million and their stock plummeted by 20%, which triggered an insider trading investigation by the SEC. If you're keeping score, that would be Bush's THIRD failed oil company venture.
Of course, since his Daddy was POTUS at the time and controlled the SEC, the investigation was squashed.0 -
quote:Originally posted by Warpig883
The rating is 28% because 72% of the population is made of sheeple who base their opinion on what the major media outlets (liberals) tell them.
There are 28% of us who base our opinions on common sense and objective thought. Cognition is required for this, try it you might like it.
I agree with your comments!![^][^][^][^]0 -
quote:Originally posted by christianwarrior
He has been elected twice to the highest secular office in the land, both times beating people who were much "smarter."
3) No, he was elected ONCE and appointed ONCE. In case you forgot, Bush received over half a million FEWER votes than his opponent in 2000 and was given the Presidency thanks to a Supreme Court decision and the un-Democratic and outdated Electoral College system. He was NOT elected by the people in 2000.0 -
Well my favorite part of the speech is when he said in 5 years the federal deficit would be balanced. Nothing in his speech said anything about the cuts and how the cuts were going to happen. In fact all he talked about was spending money. Bush in fact has spent more money than any other president in history. Webb's rebutal was on the mark. 0 -
"I think that the most important thing to remember about our president is that he is doing his very best to help us. He's had all the smart people talk to him, he's seen intelligence that we haven't, and he's set a course for our country. As several people in his administration have correctly pointed out, dissent is not really helpful. It weakens morale, makes people doubt, and strengthens the resolve of our enemies.
President Bush has shown himself to be a smart and crafty man, attending the finest schools in our country and doing very well in business. He has been elected twice to the highest secular office in the land, both times beating people who were much "smarter." I think we would do well to support his plans and to watch what we say. What if some of the troops overseas are reading this? Imagine how it would make them feel to see people criticizing the president."
Dateline, Germany, 1944:
"Yes, there have been some setbacks in the Eastern Front. There is a problem with the Allied landings in Normandy, but I am sure our forces will soon have the Americans thrown back into the sea.
Our Fuhrer has shown himself to be a smart and crafty man. He was elected to the highest office in the land.I think we would do well to support his plans and to watch what we say. What if some of the troops in the field are reading this? Imagine how it would make them feel to see people criticizing the Fuhrer."0 -
"SPEARS: Honestly, I think we should just trust our president in every decision he makes and should just support that, you know, and be faithful in what happens.
CARLSON: Do you trust this president?
SPEARS: Yes, I do."
Britney Spears, Sept. 3, 20030 -
Hmmm....the Republicans aren't getting the job done, and the Dems just plain suck...I say we form the Gunbroker Party!! 0 -
Allen- This was a brillant retort!
quote:allen griggs
Advanced Member
USA
4576 Posts
Posted - 01/24/2007 : 06:21:54 AM
"I think that the most important thing to remember about our president is that he is doing his very best to help us. He's had all the smart people talk to him, he's seen intelligence that we haven't, and he's set a course for our country. As several people in his administration have correctly pointed out, dissent is not really helpful. It weakens morale, makes people doubt, and strengthens the resolve of our enemies.
President Bush has shown himself to be a smart and crafty man, attending the finest schools in our country and doing very well in business. He has been elected twice to the highest secular office in the land, both times beating people who were much "smarter." I think we would do well to support his plans and to watch what we say. What if some of the troops overseas are reading this? Imagine how it would make them feel to see people criticizing the president."
Dateline, Germany, 1944:
"Yes, there have been some setbacks in the Eastern Front. There is a problem with the Allied landings in Normandy, but I am sure our forces will soon have the Americans thrown back into the sea.
Our Fuhrer has shown himself to be a smart and crafty man. He was elected to the highest office in the land.I think we would do well to support his plans and to watch what we say. What if some of the troops in the field are reading this? Imagine how it would make them feel to see people criticizing the Fuhrer."0 -
I don't agree with President Bush on all issues (specifically the border issues) but let's not forget that we have not been attacked on our own soil since the war started. And it is not like their isn't some people that would just love to do it and did it when President Clinton was in office also.
The President is a very sincere person in spite of the fact that he might not be able to pronounce the word nuclear. He is always respectful of the former presidents including Clinton and was very respectful to Pelosi last night in spite of the fact that he may not agree with her. President Clinton can pronounce "nuclear" just fine, he just couldn't keep his thing in his pants while he held the highest office in our nation. I think it says a lot about both individuals.0 -
quote:Originally posted by warriorsfan
quote:Originally posted by christianwarrior
He has been elected twice to the highest secular office in the land, both times beating people who were much "smarter."
3) No, he was elected ONCE and appointed ONCE. In case you forgot, Bush received over half a million FEWER votes than his opponent in 2000 and was given the Presidency thanks to a Supreme Court decision and the un-Democratic and outdated Electoral College system. He was NOT elected by the people in 2000.
Oh my god....I cant believe your still crying about that. Get a life man, Gore lost.0 -
quote:The rating is 28% because 72% of the population is made of sheeple who base their opinion on what the major media outlets (liberals) tell them.I notice this wasn't the sentiment when Bush's ratings were higher.
What was the popular refrain at the time?
Oh yes... "Your side lost. Get over it."0 -
No comment on Bush, but Webb reminded me why I hate Democraps. 0 -
All things considered I thought he did well. 0 -
quote:Originally posted by cartod
quote:Originally posted by warriorsfan
quote:Originally posted by christianwarrior
He has been elected twice to the highest secular office in the land, both times beating people who were much "smarter."
3) No, he was elected ONCE and appointed ONCE. In case you forgot, Bush received over half a million FEWER votes than his opponent in 2000 and was given the Presidency thanks to a Supreme Court decision and the un-Democratic and outdated Electoral College system. He was NOT elected by the people in 2000.
Oh my god....I cant believe your still crying about that. Get a life man, Gore lost.
I only brought it up to correct someone else's incorrect assertion that Bush was elected twice. I'm not complaining, merely correcting a factual error. And frankly, I don't think anyone should forget that subversion of Democracy.0 -
The most significant thing about Bush is that he is not very smart and has very poor advisors. Struck out. 0 -
quote:Originally posted by He Dog
The most significant thing about Bush is that he is not very smart and has very poor advisors. Struck out.
Your Masters degree is from M.I.T., Cal Tech? You were Governor of which major state? Or you just enjoy showing off your high IQ?0 -
I thought he did fairly well...and was far superior to the Dem's response. I do not agree with his stance on immigration...and a couple other things. I do like the health care issue. It would enable many self employeed folks to get health care for their families. It will cover roughly $4,000 of your health insurance premiums with a tax credit. While this is less than 1/3 of what a good policy costs, it certainly would help. Bush may not have all the answers, but the Dems have absolutely NONE. 0 -
Senate panel votes against Bush on Iraq By ANNE FLAHERTY, Associated Press Writer
13 minutes ago
WASHINGTON - The Democratic-controlled Senate Foreign Relations Committee dismissed President Bush's plans to increase troops strength in Iraq on Wednesday as "not in the national interest," an unusual wartime repudiation of the commander in chief.
ADVERTISEMENT
The vote on the nonbinding measure was 12-9 and largely along party lines.
"We better be damn sure we know what we're doing, all of us, before we put 22,000 more Americans into that grinder," said Sen. Chuck Hagel (news, bio, voting record) of Nebraska, the sole Republican to join 11 Democrats in support of the measure.
Sen. Joseph Biden (news, bio, voting record), D-Del., the panel's chairman, said the legislation is "not an attempt to embarrass the president. ... It's an attempt to save the president from making a significant mistake with regard to our policy in Iraq."
The full Senate is scheduled to begin debate on the measure next week, and Biden has said he is willing to negotiate changes in hopes of attracting support from more Republicans.
House Democrats intend to hold a vote shortly after the Senate acts.
Even Republicans opposed to the legislation expressed unease with the revised policy involving a war that has lasted nearly four years, claimed the lives of more than 3,000 U.S. troops and helped Democrats win control of Congress in last fall's elections.
"I am not confident that President Bush's plan will succeed," said Sen. Richard Lugar (news, bio, voting record) of Indiana, senior Republican on the committee.
But he said in advance he would vote against the measure. "It is unclear to me how passing a nonbinding resolution that the president has already said he will ignore will contribute to any improvement or modification of our Iraq policy."
"The president is deeply invested in this plan, and the deployments ... have already begun," Lugar added.
He suggested a more forceful role for Congress, and said lawmakers must ensure the administration is "planning for contingencies, including the failure of the Iraqi government to reach compromises and the persistence of violence despite U.S. and Iraqi government efforts."
Separately, Vice President Dick Cheney said passage of a Senate resolution would not change the administration's new strategy in Iraq.
"The Congress has control over the purse strings. They have the right, obviously, if they want, to cut off funding," Cheney said in an interview with Wolf Blitzer of CNN.
"But in terms of this effort, the president has made his decision. We've consulted extensively with them. We'll continue to consult with the Congress. But the fact of the matter is, we need to get the job done."
Divisions over the war were on clear display as the committee met.
Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., said he wanted to change the measure to say flatly that the number of troops in Iraq "may not exceed the levels" in place before Bush announced his new policy. The suggestion failed, 15-6.
Sen. Norm Coleman (news, bio, voting record), R-Minn., sought to amend the legislation to show support for an increase troops in the Anbar province in western Iraq, but not in Baghdad, where the sectarian violence is particularly fierce. His proposal also fell, 17-4.
Sen. Russell Feingold, D-Wis., chastised fellow lawmakers, accusing them of being reticent to respond to Bush's plans. He said he would seek passage of legislation at a later date cutting off funds for the war.
Hagel's remarks were among the most impassioned of the day, and he was unstinting in his criticism of the White House.
"There is no strategy," he said of the Bush administration's war management. "This is a pingpong game with American lives. These young men and women that we put in Anbar province, in Iraq, in Baghdad are not beans; they're real lives. And we better be damn sure we know what we're doing, all of us, before we put 22,000 more Americans into that grinder."
A Vietnam veteran, he fairly lectured fellow senators not to duck a painful debate about a war that has grown increasingly unpopular as it has gone on. "No president of the United States can sustain a foreign policy or a war policy without the sustained support of the American people," Hagel said.
At least eight Republican senators, including Hagel, say they now back legislative proposals registering objections to Bush's decision to boost U.S. military strength in Iraq by 21,500 troops.
The growing list - which includes Sens. Gordon Smith (news, bio, voting record), George Voinovich (news, bio, voting record) and Sam Brownback (news, bio, voting record) - has emboldened Democrats, who are pushing for a vote in the full Senate by next week to rebuke the president's Iraq policy.
In his State of the Union speech Tuesday night, Bush urged skeptical members of Congress to give the plan a chance to work.
Many lawmakers remained reluctant.
"I wonder whether the clock has already run out," said Sen. Susan Collins (news, bio, voting record), R-Maine. She said she was worried that U.S. troops in Iraq are already perceived "not as liberators but as occupiers."
Bush did get a word of support from former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, one of the 2008 Republican presidential hopefuls.
"I believe we should give the president the support to do this. I want us to be successful in Iraq," he said Wednesday on NBC's "Today" show. "I know how important it is to the overall war on terror. Success in Iraq means a more peaceful world for America, it means a victory against terrorists. Failure in Iraq means a big defeat against terrorists and the war on terror is going to be tougher for us."
But Sen. Barack Obama (news, bio, voting record), D-Ill., appearing on the same show, said, "I think all of us are talking about a phased redeployment which would leave American troops in the region to send a strong message, not only to the Iraqi government that we want to help them, but also to neighbors, like Iran, that we're not abandoning the field."0 -
quote:Originally posted by christianwarrior
I think that the most important thing to remember about our president is that he is doing his very best to help us. He's had all the smart people talk to him, he's seen intelligence that we haven't, and he's set a course for our country. As several people in his administration have correctly pointed out, dissent is not really helpful. It weakens morale, makes people doubt, and strengthens the resolve of our enemies.
President Bush has shown himself to be a smart and crafty man, attending the finest schools in our country and doing very well in business. He has been elected twice to the highest secular office in the land, both times beating people who were much "smarter." I think we would do well to support his plans and to watch what we say. What if some of the troops overseas are reading this? Imagine how it would make them feel to see people criticizing the president.
One of the most important rights we have. And don't think for a minute that alot of them aren't saying exactly the same thing. I work with/for them (soldiers) every day.0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
49 comments