Should we trust George W. Bush?

World Net Daily ^ | 8/29/02 | Harry Browne

[Torie]

Ah yes, the destroy it to save it philosophy. That approach loses appeal as one ages.

[Mo1]

According to our way of thinking, Sadam is a madman

Oh that's right .. he doesn't want to cause any trouble

He didn't really mean to kill thousand and thousands of his OWN people ..

He didn't think those chemicals would kill people when he tested them out

Noooooooooooooooooo .. Saddam is a realllly nice guy who meant no harm .. it was just an accident and he didn't really mean it when he declare war on Americans .. he was just misunderstood

GET REAL

[terilyn]

Nobody around me is "chanting agreement with a leader". We're chanting agreement against a man who's obvious objective is to try to build himself up at the expense of the President.

I've seen the "bots" support a lot of what GWB has done, but I've also seen then denounce his signing of CFR, disagree vehemently with his stance on 245i, and grudging accept that the education bill as signed, was the best he could do without the Senate. And don't forget, that was one of the items he ran on. BTW - the dems are mad at the election bill. Seems that they forgot to read the fine print that the money is actually tied to PERFORMANCE. Schools that don't perform, don't get the increased spending. And their students can leave and take their money with them to another public or private school.

I don't shudder at the thought of future security measures. I shudder at the thought of the intelligence that has come to light in the past 11 months. Things that I probably don't want to know. I shudder to think of what kind of a man wouldn't do his job as leader of the greatest nation on earth and defend that said nation. After all, that is the one duty that the federal government is charged with in the constitution, no?

If GWB was truly interested in power grabbing via infringing on our freedoms he would have directed the terror threat "meter" to be elevated on a regular basis. Nothing works like fear to make the sheeple fall in line.

Has he done this? No, he hasn't. He has informed the public of threats when they have information. Let us know when that threat is deemed credible, and let us make up our own minds about the risks we choose to take or not take. That's why we trust this President. He gives us exactly what most conservative people want, the right to digest information and make up our own minds about what we will do with it.

And, you must have been listening to a different speech than I did in front of the joint session of congress. I never once heard GWB claim that we should be ready to give up our liberties and lives. On the contrary, he said that we should be fighting as hard as we can to preserve those very liberties and our very lives.

[Mo1]

Then, it can be rebuilt maybe. Just a thought.

And what happens if it's not .. and but the way .. just how long will it take??

[Torie]

Why do I get this feeling you didn't answer the question. Of course, we know who else could have beaten Gore - McCain! Would that have been good the nation. No! That was not always my opinion.

[Amelia]

any event, the bloom is off the equity investment rose, which was viewed at one time as the universal solvent for balancing the actuarial books with higher returns.

Yeah, if my Social Security account looked like my 401K.....

Actually it might look worse.... ;-)

[KentuckyWoman]

If you don't know what you're talking about it's best to take that into account BEFORE you post. There are several books on history that will help you with your lack of knowledge of the Founders and the Constitution.

I have simply chosen to ignore the fact that you are more obtuse than I originally thought. I am quite well versed in this period of history and only inquired what you thought of it. I simply don't have the time to write a proverbial book for you right now. The point Iwas making, had you bothered to ask, was that the Constitution gives time specific limitions on any 'war' powers assigned to the POTUS. GWB is attempting to take advantage of loop-holes 'discovered' by white house council that go back to the old dems theory about a 'living' document.

[Mulder]

I don't see how anyone who paid attention could have thought Bush was nearly the most conservative candidate running.

I never claimed he was. He did posture himself as a conservative, however.

For starters, his ideas of increasing federal involvement in education were a bit tip-off.

We were told that would be the "price" for getting vouchers through Congress. Well, now we have a 27% increase in the Federal Education budget, and no vouchers.

Have you seen the polls that say the majority of Americans think the government should be involved in a prescription drug program?

The government is already involved in the prescription drug industry. They tax the drug companies at a confiscatory rate. They place onerous and restrictive burdens on them when they attempt to bring a new drug into the marketplace. They create so much red tape, that the cost of prescription drugs is 2-3X what it would be in a truly Free market.

The government created the problem, and they hold themselves up as the solution.

Reagan would have told us that, and stated flat out that the "government is the problem not the solution".

Bush will likely team up with his buddy, Ted Kennedy, once again, and have us taxpayers pay for a new expanisonist and unconstitutional federal program.

[KentuckyWoman]

I repeat, I never heard of you until tonight so it's possible I impressd you more than you impressed me.

Have you considered a memory upgrade. Maybe to 32K. Granted, here lately, I lurk more than I post but I've been around for quite some time and was quite active up until about 3 or 4 months ago. New job duties and additional home schooling subject are taking up more of my time of late.

[FreedominJesusChrist]

"WOW .. you've seen the light??"

No, I haven't seen the "light." I have always supported President Bush strongly on foreign policy issues--he is very strong in that area and has some very solid policy advisors on the issue. I also like Don Rumsfield and believe that he is a very valuable asset to the Bush Administration. I would like to see President Bush paying more attention to the Pentegon rather than to the State Department, in regards to foreign policy and the War on Terror. He seems to be doing that.

Some people here seem to believe that I am this rabid Bush-hater and I would just like to show that I am not. Anyone who knows me in my personal life would not believe me to be a Bush-hater either. President Bush is strong in the area of foreign policy, but in my opinion, could use some work on his domestic policy.

That being said, we need to invade Iraq, kill Sadaam Hussein, and set up a new form of government.

[Mulder]

Why do I get this feeling you didn't answer the question. Of course, we know who else could have beaten Gore - McCain!

It's very possible McCain could have beaten Gore, as it's very possible the other GOP candidates could have also defeated Gore.

I've seen the underdog win too many times to sit here and say there is only candidate who can win an election.

[justshe]

I have my fingers crossed for October.

[Torie]

I don't think you are an expert on the presciption drug industry. Some things are broke, such as the fact that the US perscription drug consumers basically pay for drug research that benefits the world, while Western Europe and Canada are free riders, but that was not what your post addressed. It had that unfortunate populist tone that well, does not comport with the facts, that gets my hair standing on end more than most statements of an ideological nature do. Maybe because I am so certain, to a moral certainty, that it so absolutely wrong! Cheers.

[KentuckyWoman]

As I stated earlier, her/him posting a revised account of history does not make me a liar. It only makes the poster look uninformed.

Oops. Got in a hurry and left out a word. I'm not the one who posted the revisionist history. What I was referring to was written during the 1700s. What was posted back to me was written in either the late 1800s or early 1900s. I forget now and don't want to take the time to go back and re-run the google search.

[Torie]

I actually can't think of a one myself who ran. Orin Hatch anyone? Well, whatever.

[FreedominJesusChrist]

"All you ever do is post facts ...when are we gonna hear some wild inflammatory rhetoric?"

In many ways, that is why I like deport. He sticks to the facts and is perhaps the epitome of the empirical poster here. I have never seem him personally attack anyone here and has shown more self-restraint than I have ever seen anyone on this forum use.

He is a pro at posting quantitative informtion.

[jwalsh07]

Israel is our ally and friend. Should we abandon them to the infidel killers?

I'll go back further than you probably want to and say that the United Nations had NO business creating a country out of whole cloth to make up for what a certain race of people suffered at the hands of other nations. Having gotten THAT out of the way, what makes you believe that we should prop up every country that professes (whether true or not should best be left for another time) to be our friend. I can only think of one country that has ever come to our exclusive aid and that would be France during the Revolutionary war. Others have sided with us during wars and conflicts because it also served their own best interest at the time but now some who HAVE fired on the US now proclaim to be our friends, in large part, because they are receiving the money stolen from you and I at the threat of incarceration. Does this make them our friends? I don't think so. It's like this whole 'war with Iraq' business. Our leaders are talking, what is basically, pre-emptive strikes. You know, do unto others before they get the chance to do unto you. This is NOT grounded in ANY Constitutional ideology and, for that matter, flies directly in the face of everything that a true Constitutional Republic is supposed to stand for. Read the Rise and Fall of the Roman Empire? It could prove quite enlightening to anyone wanting to know what comes next.

A simple yes would have been fine..

[Mo1]

I would like to see President Bush paying more attention to the Pentegon rather than to the State Department, in regards to foreign policy and the War on Terror. He seems to be doing that.

Bush likes to hear all sides of the argument before making a decision

I kind of like that .. if he was surrounded by a bunch of yes men .. then I would be worried ..

[Mulder]

Another thing, can you remember when a president has had a worse first year dealing with things that were not of his making?

No doubt about it, but others had it pretty rough also, especially during our Founding.

And who do you think conservatives should have voted for?

I supported Quayle primarily because of his 30% across the board tax cut. If I had it to do over, I probably would have supported Alan Keyes.

[justshe]

~~~Unless she thought of it first, KW thinks everything is illegal.~~~

Constituitional experts seem to have that disease.

THEY know what is best for everyone else. And they try to convince us that we are ALWAYS on the brink of destruction. AND.....all is black......woe is us....the country is doomed. WE are idiots. WE are sheeple. Brownshirts abound on EVERY corner. STATISTS we are, one and all. Jack-booted thugs. Only THEY have read the Constitution. Only THEY can interpret the BOR for us. I get SO sick of the rhetoric...the jingo-isms...the total inanity of their self-righteous, arrogant bilge. They are worse than a bunch of freshman college idiots solving the problems of the WORLD from their exalted perches in the Quad.

Sorry for the rant.