How bad does Bush want to ruin our future?

It's all about short term gain, and how much they can line their bank accounts before the end of the administration's term, after that they'll be elsewhere, retiring in their flats in the Caribean. They don't give a rat's ass for this country or where it will end up. They could be investing in the development of renueable "greener" sources of energy, or focusing on reducing the national debt, unemployment, poverty, etc., but no one stands to profit from these issues, so instead they're focusing on ways to privatize everything and force the rest of us to depend on their limited resources, that way they maintain control.

If we took a fraction of the money we've spent on the Iraqi war and spent it on domestic issues and helping foreign nations instead, we would be prosperous, the world would love us, and we wouldn't be in the mess we're in now.

Terrorism is the product of desperation, oppression, and injustice; the only way to eliminate terrorism is to promote justice on a global scale.

 

i am spent from ranting about bush 24/7 so i'll sum it up:
i hate bush.

i love how Clinton was almost impeached for getting a little felatio under his desk, though he was a great president...
but now when he have a seriously, dangerous leader...nothing gets done about it.

 

why was clinton a great president again? the recession was caused by clintons policies and Bush has used policies similar to Reaganomics to turn it around in 4 years. Bush also came into office during the middle of a war. Al Queda declared a jihad on us in 1995, and Clinton knew about it and did nothing but let the problem fester. The plans for 9/11 were drawn up during his presidency. We were attacked at home (WTC 1993) and several times abroad during his terms in office. Clinton also had several chances, 1 "120%" sure chance to capture or kill bin laden but never did so. he also lied to a grand jury which is a felony

 

I'm not sure how you come to that conclusion, "Reaganomics", AKA "Voodoo Economics", was, like Bush's policies, a ploy to transfer the wealth and resources from the majority to the elite minority. The idea was touted as a sort of Adam Smith's "free hand" of the economy, which is good, right? Unfortunately, while this may seem sensible on the surface (the theory is fundamental to economics), it fails to take into consideration the fact that the corporate elite are so driven by greed that they lack social conscience, thus we had things like junk bonds and other schemes for the elite to prey on the public, the latest major example being the Enron scandal. Not to mention that during Clinton's tenure we actually had a national surplus, which has been turned into the worst deficit in history by the Bush Administration. The Clinton administration did, however, formulate NAFTA, which has been the source of oppression and corruption. The bottom line is, while "economic anarchy" may seem to be the way to go, it just transfers the wealth from the pockets of the lower and middle class into the hands of the rich, and increases the disparity between us and them.

One thing I find curious is why Bin Laden's family was flown out of this country on the only plane permitted in the sky after the 911 incident, 'kinda makes it seem like a conspiracy, doesn't it?

My biggest issue with Bush is not the horrendous state of the economy (we can blame our glutenous society and any number of politicians for that), but the war, which we had no business or right starting, a war which was based on lies, "weapons of mass destruction", or "weapons of mass distraction" as I like to put it. Bush and co. lied and should be tried as war criminals, but they've got a team of thugs that'll prevent that from happening.

When Clinton lied, at least no one died!

 

THIS IS FOR YOU MELLOW YELLOW^
reaganomics was responsible for pulling us from the horrible carter years into the great economy we saw in the late 80s and 90s. Reagan alone created over 8 million jobs.Not too much different from what we have seen with Bush. The dot.com boom was the only reason clinton added jobs to start with, and everyone knew it was short term and was bound to burst. Add that to the jobs lost and uncertianty in our economy after 9/11, and Bush cant really be blamed for the recession, which we were headed to in the late years of Clintons term

Had the UN not stopped us in the 1990's we would be in Iraq now. That is not clintons fault, but add that too the fact Clinton knew of the growing problem with bin laden and the jihad and did nothin which has led to 9/11, and eh the war doesnt look so much like bush's war now does it? Ill give you the reasons he said we were going are bogus, but the fact remains we overthrew a murderous dictator which is guilty of many human rights violations and paid the UN off. The UN sanctions did nothing but help and protect saddam and the oil for food scam actually gave him alot of money and made some un officals rich as well. It is sad the world community cant agree with us, but non the less, they were making money from saddam so they would they vote for us to go to war? We gave them a decade to do something and they did nothing.

as far as distributing wealth, you are off base. While the gap has grown between the rich and poor, is this really the "evil hated rich's" fault? Should they be punished for being successful? Should their wealth be taken from them and redistributed to people who are unwilling to get the education, the experence, the tools to set themselves apart from the pack? Those are all things that are needed to be successful in a capitalist economy. And has been proven throughout recent history, capitalism is sinply a better and more efficent type of econimic system. There are winners and losers with this just as there will be with any other type, but capitalism gives everyone a chance to keep what they earn instead of having their money taken from them and given to those who do not deserve it

while it is true power currupts, corperations are not all evil. I wont take up for them they do some things i dont agree with, but thats human nature. I dont know your political views but i am guessin you lean more to the left, which gives more power to the govt, and that is more dangerous than any corperation.

all in all, reaganomics is proven by our economy during and after reagan to be a very effective. Giving more of people hard earned money back to them is better than the govt robbing them of it and giving it to those who dont diserve it. It seems you think "fairness" is everyone making the same, which is a nice ends but the ways to that ends simply wont work. I think a more fair idea would be to try to level the playing field and let everyone play by the rules. I know this realisticly cant be 100% done, but like in anything else in life, you have to work for it. It isnt fair in school when kids make all A's who dont study when you might have made a C but studied your ass off, but it is fair to take that persons A from them when they earned it?

 

No matter who is the president someone is going to find a way to hate him. Why is it that everyone in here has so much negative shit to say about our president. why don't all of you spend some time looking at the positive. Maybe there is only a little bit of positive that is coming out of Bush but still, he is our leader and i back him in whatever he does. I just think we should be greatful to have a president like Bush. Stop bad mouthing him and support him.

 

listen to the screw,

I (respectfully) disagree, though you have some interesting and well thought out arguments. There is merit in the idea that capitalism is a good thing and class disparity motivates people to better themselves. The problem is the playing field isn't level, those who are born into money have more opportunities to better themselves than those who do not, and without social programs in place to provide underprivileged folks a chance, they have no hope of succeeding; the poverty they're born into is where they'll stay.

The disparity is growing under the Bush administration. Tax cuts to the rich aren't stimulating the economy, they're just putting the country in more debt. I also disagree with your opinion on Reaganomics, though I guess it comes down to where you get your sources of information, I listen to the left wing stuff, not the main stream media which is owned by the Bush administration. The point is capitalism, when unregulated, produces criminals who prey on the masses. Furthermore, it creates a "delusion of entitlement" in which the rich and powerful think it's their god-given right to screw people, yet it's still immoral and unethical, regardless if it's legal.

Bear in mind that I'm one of the lucky ones, I come from a well-to-do family, and I have the same argument with some of them that I'm having with you now. I had the opportunity to get a graduate level education, which has opened the doors to a good life, and I make a respectable living. Furthermore, I could do a lot better if I were more ambitious, if I cut my hair, and sucked up to "the man", but I choose not to. I would gladly give up some of what I have for a "level playing field" of economic reform.

 

Thats a mighty dangerous attitude to have, and it runs counter to democracy. Do you know what a democracy is? A REAL democracy? The citizens of a country make the decisions. The people ARE the government, rather than controlled by it. The popularity of your brainless, ignorant attitude, your willingness and even desire to put your blindfold on with your own hands - It's how Bush crawled back into the whitehouse for a second term in the first place.

 

mellow yellow, this is for you^^
I listen to all outlets of media, right wing, left wing, and mainstream. you cant just listen to one side, they stress points and omit others. I listen to all sides of the story before i make a decision. I use my life experence, my knowledge, what i have learned in school, and other things to form my views.

you listening to left wing sources would be like me only getting my news from rush limbaugh, both sides have extremist and both sides use propaganda to further their causes and agendas

our current system of social programs give the poor this feeling like they have a god given right to entitlement. No where in our constitution does it say anything about anything being entitled to any payment, espically a payment that has been stolen from their fellow man.

the big business you hate also fuels our economy, the #1 economy in the world. It has led to many technoligical advances. it has led to competiton in the market place which has led to better quality of products.

Capitalism makes it harder on the poor, socialism makes it tought on the workers. Either way someone is going to have it rougher, and i dont think its fair to punish those who work hard and have given themselves an advantage because someone else didnt.

socialism takes away the drive of the worker, when people are not getting properly compensated, they dont put forth 100% effort. As far as Reaganomics go, look at the stastics and they speak volumes. Nothing is fair to everyone, but Reagan's polices led to a major econimic boom and we are seeing a similar thing happening now under Bush.

 

listen to screw,

I don't get all my information from left wing sources, but point taken, I also believe in assessment based on life experiences, etc., and it's evident to me that we are from different backgrounds. I grew up the son of a College Professor in the Northeast in a liberal, left-wing community, so of course that's gonna affect my outlook on things.

I tend to be more socialist than capitalist, this is true, but I'm not against capitalism, and I can see where you're coming from regarding an incentive to succeed, I'm not a big fan of social programs that facilitate or encourage free loaders sitting on their asses while I'm out working to support them. My problem is with situations where people are impoverished, yet they have no way out, despite the fact that they're motivated to succeed. There comes a point where you're hopeless, down-trodden, and demoralised. I know what being unemployed is like, it sucks, you lose your self-esteem 'cause no one wants to hire you, then eventually you lose hope and you don't care anymore.

My problem with Bush and co (aside from the war, which is my biggest problem, I feel I've harped on that one enough) is the blatant, large-scale corruption which goes on. I've had to take pay cuts due to the fact that they're outsourcing the work I do to places like India and China, yet the guys at the top are getting huge pay increases. There's something wrong with this picture, the guys at the top may be getting higher profits for the corporation (and therefore their cut is bigger), but it's due to the criminal nature of their business practices, nothing is made in America anymore, it's the middle class that's suffering, yet places like Wal Mart have free reign to move into a community and screw all the people. Meanwhile the administration is sucking up all our tax payer dollars and giving it to Corporations like Haliburton and anyone else with connections, yet the cost of oil is sky rocketing, where's all the money we pay into the system going? Not to us, but to the fat cats, so the Bush administration has met their agenda: They've stole billions of dollars from the impoverished and the middle class, and they've given it to the wealthy elite who support their agenda. How much money does a person need, anyway?

 

Bush got into office by catering to the very rich and to evangelical Protestants. If they want something to be done, Georgie will do it.

The richies want to become even more rich, and Georgie is more than happy to help.

The evangelicals (at least a loud and significant chunk of them) believe that Jesus is coming and the world is going to end soon, and so environmentalism is not a priority.

 

It should be obvious that George W. "Greedy Brainhole" Bush wants to rule the world. After his presidency, I'm sure that either Jeb Bush or Dick Cheney will run for president and continue George W. "Greedy Brainhole" Bush's vision for world domination.

 

Hmmm. GOOD question! The answer is.... He's already got little brother JEB talkiked into running in 2008. NO MORE BUSH names in the White House! 2 is one too many!

 

It's 2 too many actually Matt, but nought we can do about it at this point save perhaps to have the current one impeached. I won't hold my breath waiting for it though.

 

Go back to canada you hippies, no one wants you here!!

 

man fuck off all you you want to do is fight thats not whatb we do we just gather and talk so buzz the fuck off.

 

Then you and all the bush-lovers should get your asses over to Iraq, and be subject to the terrors of war and murder!

 

well said .

 

WHY? Because you say so? No, I don't support War Mongering Liars who cheat, steal and don't care about anyone but the rich.

 

Could they really drill and mine The Adirondacks?
I thought it was "Forever Wild"
Or is it that the territory described in the newspaper
is not state parkland but a federal wilderness out West.
I don't think that The Catskills or The Adirondacks contain
any oil reserves or mineral deposits.

As far as out west, if voters in those states say
they are against it, than I am too.