facts about Bush

Bush should be forced to leave the office for his lies like Clinton should be forced to leave office for his lies and even an affair with Monica behind his wife's back but did they force him to leave? no he still have afew more months to work as President before his last term came up. :roll:
 
mld4ds said:
688589372
:rl:

alright thats enough of that, i dont want to get this thread locked for our stupid fight. if u would like to continue it though ur more than welcome to private message me.
 
AJ said:
alright thats enough of that, i dont want to get this thread locked for our stupid fight. if u would like to continue it though ur more than welcome to private message me.

AJ, who brought up the issue of flag? Don't do that again...
 
ok!

hiya!
i think some of you missed the point on the world court.
it does not foucus on the people of a country.. there for if you are an american you have the to a jury of your peers.. the world court would not change that or mess with your rights....

what could have happened is if by some chance Saddam stayed pres and was still running his country from a remote site, he could have the world court press charges against president bush...for invading his country! the world court could put us soilders on trail for mistakes the killed civilans, like when they blew up a hospital..and killed 300 people at the start of the war... the captain of the air squad..althe way down to the pilot chould be charged with manslaughter. :rifle: :rl:

secondly....there where no slaves working in the white house!!! get a grip!lincoln never had slaves ..the prisidents had there own staff who came and went with them. the blacks who worked in the white house where free and were paid!!!

bush was not the first president to have a criminal record.. just the most public. andrew jackson had disorderly conduct charge for punching a fellow officer ,while drunk..lots of pressidents have had drunken assault charges.

on the flip side i think most of them had a brain! bush droped his down the toilet at school!

and ROADRUNNER..if you are reading this ..you missed the point by censering what said about bush......i said you can wish the pres dead and not get in trouble for it! but you cut it out ...just like a freeking chinese govenment censer!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :thumbd:
 
Sorry for offtopic

vfr said:
and ROADRUNNER..if you are reading this ..you missed the point by censering what said about bush......i said you can wish the pres dead and not get in trouble for it! but you cut it out ...just like a freeking chinese govenment censer!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :thumbd:
I'm not replying to defend RoadRunner but I'm here to correct your post. I'm the one who reported your post to mods. I found it inappropriate and I reported. As you do, I don't like Bush but what you said is quite alert.

But yes, anyone can be in trouble if they wish the current president dead or 'shot'. I strongly suggest you to check this latest news: Secret Service investigating university student (click the link).

I did it for your safety. I don't want to see you to get in trouble. That's why I reported. Nothing more or less than that. I did stated in my deleted post that I'm all for an expression of opinion but there is some limit to what we can say about incompetent president.

If you still feel unfair about it then blame me, not RR.

Back to this topic, nice facts, Steel! :thumb:
 
Last edited:
Liebling:-))) said:
Interesting link here (important to check the date of link).

What if you knew that President Bush has withdrawn the United States from the Kyoto Protocol?

http://www.kqed.org/topics/news/perspectives/youdecide/pop/environment/2yes.html

Bush proposal would cut global warming aid

http://www.enterstageright.com/archive/articles/0701tidbits3.htm


I'd have to say I like him more than ever.

The Kyoto protocols are based on shaky science at best. The media doesn't cover the number of Nobel lauriates who disagree with popular thought on global warming.

Even if global warming is fact, and if CFC's and other emissions are the cause, humans only emit 3% of CFC's that go into the atmosphere. Volcanoes spew out the other 97% and have an identified mechanism for delivering them into the stratosphere.

Don't rely on the popular media. Do your own research. Read publications by people who have more credentials than just being in the media.

brianb
 
Steel, u did not mention him cheated his way out of Vietnam war.
 
Eve said:
I believe it has been PROVEN that these are not “facts”.
Uh hu. I believe It hasn't. Facts have two sides. All you conservatives did is just spin or distort. Classic move by conservatives. I know that you know it.

Thus the case closed.
 
Eve said:
Actually, OPINIONS have two sides. FACTS speak for themselves.
I normally would agree but according to conservative media, facts are just opinions. Allow me give you a example:

While watching the MSNBC program, CONNECTED, COAST TO COAST with Ron Reagan, a man from the Evergreen Foundation was on air spinning the myth that the President had to "beg" the Governor of Louisiana to take action. Having been on this show several times I called one of the bookers, Susan Durrwatcher, to alert her to the fact that this man was misrepresenting what happened. I offered Susan the following objective, documented facts (see timeline below). Susan thanked me for my "opinion" and said "we just have a different perspective". Stunned, I asked her by what standard of journalism that an objective fact was mere opinion? I asked her to simply look at the documents and correct the record. She declined.
Source: Sorting out opinion from fact on Katrina by ex-CIA


But I can guess why Bush Admin tend to pull the facts down or hide the facts when they don't like the facts. Allow me give you few out of thousand examples:

President Bush has said that "in a society that is a free society, there will be transparency." That means that in America, we have a government where the public gets to see as much information as possible about its government.

- Knight-Ridder reports today that the Bush administration announced yesterday that it has "decided to stop publishing an annual report on international terrorism after the government's top terrorism center concluded that there were more terrorist attacks in 2004 than in any year since 1985, the first year the publication covered."

- When unemployment was peaking in Bush's first term, the White House tried to stop publishing the Labor Department's regular report on mass layoffs.

- In 2003, when the nation's governors came to Washington to complain about inadequate federal funding for the states, the Bush administration decided to stop publishing the budget report that states use to see what money they are, or aren't, getting.

- In 2003, the National Council for Research on Women found that information about discrimination against women has gone missing from government Web sites, including 25 reports from the U.S. Department of Labor's Women's Bureau.

- In 2002, Democrats uncovered evidence that the Bush administration was removing health information from government websites. Specifically, the administration deleted data showing that abortion does not increase the risk of breast cancer. That scientific data was seen by the White House as a direct affront to the pro-life movement.
Source: http://www.davidsirota.com/2005/04/bush-bad-data-means-stop-publishing.html

I believe I rest my case.
 
Opinion or Fact?

Just plain political bad luck that, in June, Bush took his little ax and chopped $71.2 million from the budget of the New Orleans Corps of Engineers, a 44 percent reduction. As was reported in New Orleans CityBusiness at the time, that meant "major hurricane and flood projects will not be awarded to local engineering firms. Also, a study to determine ways to protect the region from a Category 5 hurricane has been shelved for now."

Molly Ivins
 
jazzy said:
Steel, u did not mention him cheated his way out of Vietnam war.
Hmm? I think you are talking about Bill Clinton.
When they told Clinton that he has to go to war in Vitenam he screamed "NO!" and then ran away lol...what a wussy. why did we even had a president who was a wussy anyway?

But yeah I think I've heard somewhere that Bush has tried to get out of vietnam war too...almost as if he doesnt care much for his country, then why bother running for president when he doesn't give a fuck about anything?
 
Eve said:
Actually, OPINIONS have two sides. FACTS speak for themselves.
Okay, I'm curious about this fact which already has been PROVEN several times. I created a topic about it along with facts sometimes ago and I don't remember what title I added so I couldn't find it when I searched for it. However here's another source: (note: by pro-life, not pro-choice... God bless him and his honesty):


I am a Christian ethicist, and trained in statistical analysis. I am consistently pro-life. My son David is one witness. For my family, "pro-life" is personal. My wife caught rubella in the eighth week of her pregnancy. We decided not to terminate, to love and raise our baby. David is legally blind and severely handicapped; he also is a blessing to us and to the world.

I look at the fruits of political policies more than words. I analyzed the data on abortion during the George W. Bush presidency. There is no single source for this information - federal reports go only to 2000, and many states do not report - but I found enough data to identify trends. My findings are counterintuitive and disturbing.

Abortion was decreasing. When President Bush took office, the nation's abortion rates were at a 24-year low, after a 17.4% decline during the 1990s. This was an average decrease of 1.7% per year, mostly during the latter part of the decade. (This data comes from Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life using the Guttmacher Institute's studies).

Enter George W. Bush in 2001. One would expect the abortion rate to continue its consistent course downward, if not plunge. Instead, the opposite happened.

I found three states that have posted multi-year statistics through 2003, and abortion rates have risen in all three: Kentucky's increased by 3.2% from 2000 to 2003. Michigan's increased by 11.3% from 2000 to 2003. Pennsylvania's increased by 1.9% from 1999 to 2002. I found 13 additional states that reported statistics for 2001 and 2002. Eight states saw an increase in abortion rates (14.6% average increase), and five saw a decrease (4.3% average decrease).

Under President Bush, the decade-long trend of declining abortion rates appears to have reversed. Given the trends of the 1990s, 52,000 more abortions occurred in the United States in 2002 than would have been expected before this change of direction.

How could this be? I see three contributing factors:

First, two thirds of women who abort say they cannot afford a child (Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life Web site). In the past three years, unemployment rates increased half again. Not since Hoover had there been a net loss of jobs during a presidency until the current administration. Average real incomes decreased, and for seven years the minimum wage has not been raised to match inflation. With less income, many prospective mothers fear another mouth to feed.

Second, half of all women who abort say they do not have a reliable mate (Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life). Men who are jobless usually do not marry. Only three of the 16 states had more marriages in 2002 than in 2001, and in those states abortion rates decreased. In the 16 states overall, there were 16,392 fewer marriages than the year before, and 7,869 more abortions. As male unemployment increases, marriages fall and abortion rises.

Third, women worry about health care for themselves and their children. Since 5.2 million more people have no health insurance now than before this presidency - with women of childbearing age overrepresented in those 5.2 million - abortion increases.

The U.S. Catholic Bishops warned of this likely outcome if support for families with children was cut back. My wife and I know - as does my son David - that doctors, nurses, hospitals, medical insurance, special schooling, and parental employment are crucial for a special child. David attended the Kentucky School for the Blind, as well as several schools for children with cerebral palsy and other disabilities. He was mainstreamed in public schools as well. We have two other sons and five grandchildren, and we know that every mother, father, and child needs public and family support.

What does this tell us? Economic policy and abortion are not separate issues; they form one moral imperative. Rhetoric is hollow, mere tinkling brass, without health care, health insurance, jobs, child care, and a living wage. Pro-life in deed, not merely in word, means we need policies that provide jobs and health insurance and support for prospective mothers. [Emphasized by Magatsu]

Glen Stassen is the Lewis B. Smedes Professor of Christian Ethics at Fuller Theological Seminary, and the co-author of Kingdom Ethics: Following Jesus in Contemporary Context, Christianity Today's Book of the Year in theology or ethics.
Source: http://www.sojo.net/index.cfm?action=sojomail.display&issue=041013

Okay, here's a million dollar question for 'Bushie' conservatives in this topic... Are you going to spin this fact which has been PROVEN several times or are you going to accept this FACT speaks for themselves like what Eve said?

I believe and I predict that these people will pick the latter one.

Everyone, have a nice weekend.
 
Last edited:
Steel, I thought we are talking about Bush here since it is a thread about Bush. If we want talk about Clinton, make a different thread about him. Really I don't care about Clinton anymore and he is out of political and no longer important man today.
 
Actually, Magatsu, I hear ya on that one (highlighted portion specifically). Just because one is labeled as "conservative" does not necessarily mean we have to agree with every stance of any one label.
 
Back
Top