Vanity - What is a Bushbot?

[gondramB]

I got called a Bushbot again yesterday - its happening more and more. Now this particular person wants machine gun nests set up at the border to kill anyone who crosses and he sees all foreign trade as evil and thinks the President is trying to end U.S. sovereignty and when he calls me a Freeper he means it as a bad thing... So I'm not too worried about his opinion but it got me thinking...

In a lot of ways I'm more conservative than President Bush - I don't think he places enough importance on controlling spending, border security or dealing with existing illegals. I don't think he has vetoed as much as he should have.

Sometimes I differ on what the President thinks is conservative, for example with evolution or privacy - I'm big on science, individual rights and limits on government.

In some areas, like holding the country together after 9/11 and dealing with Afghanistan, judicial appointments, trade and opposing abortion Presient Bush has done a great job - not perfect but no President is perfect.

I don't think we went into Iraq at the right time in the right way. I don't bring this up much because we are at war now - there is nothing to be gained by complaining about how we went into Iraq - we are there and it needs to be a national effort to see the job through, support our troops and leave a stable Iraq that isn't a threat.

I'm starting to think that a Bushbot is a conservative who, even though he sometimes disagrees with the President continues to support our commander in chief in time of war and who is darn glad he's the President instead of Kerry.

I guess there are worse things to be called.

[trisham]

Well I have a real problem that you started a discussion thread where you brought up the issue and then won't discuss it.

Do you think your own views are that radical that you can not say them?

If so, why start a DISCUSSION thread like this?

**************

It seems I have missed the purpose of this thread. I'm so confused. Here I thought we were talking about the term "bush-bot", and what it means. Did I miss something?

[A CA Guy]

But they also expressed they had a better time and way to go into Iraq, refuse to discuss it, but seem to use their blanket statement as part of the criticism or judgment on our President and his choices.

Hasn't this been the exact same things we see from Democrats all the time that we are holding their feet to the fire over?

Democrats make the blanks statement that... "We have a plan, we are going to do it better or smarter..."
OK, so what the heck is that better smarter plan?....

This is a discussion thread and I'd like to know what the view was that would have been superior to the timing and way the President did it? What was their better smarter plan since they claim to have had one?

This is a very reasonable request, for if that is off limits after THEY brought it up, then all you got here is a some President Bush/Bushbot bashing thread to no purpose IMO but to post the word Bushbot tens of times.
Plus this thread seems to be under the blogger category which suggests the person who started the thread should have less trouble than most expressing their views IMO.

[gondramB]

>>Well I have a real problem that you started a discussion thread where you brought up the issue and then won't discuss it.
Do you think your own views are that radical that you can not say them?
If so, why start a DISCUSSION thread like this?<<

No, I summarized my views. I feel that when the U.N. is not with us but we feel action is needed it is better to act independently and make it clear our actions are independent and not based on U.N. resolutions.


My intent was to discuss the use of the term "Bushbot" when applied to conservatives who sometimes disagree with the President but who support him in this time of war.

What I don't want to do is spend my time talking about why I think think a previous decision was incorrect unless its helpful for current issues. Focusing like that just divides the war effort further.

Applying that same principle is one of the many reasons I am happy to not see us sending peace keeping troops to Lebanon - there is no peace to keep - there is still a state sponsored terrorist army with missiles and a willingness to target cities.

[A CA Guy]

So is your position that the President should have never used the international body of the UN and maybe just grab a few nations and go in any time we wanted to? Was that the better timing and plan for you?

[theFIRMbss]

>secretly Islamofascist supporters

No, they need nicknames --
Something like Osamanauts,
or like Jihaddrones . . .

[gondramB]

Hasn't this been the exact same things we see from Democrats all the time that we are holding their feet to the fire over?

Democrats make the blanks statement that... "We have a plan, we are going to do it better or smarter..." OK, so what the heck is that better smarter plan?....

This is a discussion thread and I'd like to know what the view was that would have been superior to the timing and way the President did it? What was their better smarter plan since they claim to have had one? This is a very reasonable request, for if that is off limits after THEY brought it up, then all you got here is a some President Bush/Bushbot bashing thread to no purpose IMO but to post the word Bushbot tens of times.

I wish I thought this was parody post or that you were helping me by showing an example of the behavior that I admit I have a hard time dealing with. But I get the feeling that you are serious - that you are upset that I disagreed with the President in the past but don't want to turn the thread into a point by point criticism of the President... you even imply I'm like the Democrats.

I have a hard time dealing with this from fellow conservatives and THAT is why I started this thread - to see if others shared any of my feelings.

[A CA Guy]

I have no problem with people disagreeing with the President gondramB.
I don't personally agree with him at all on the border, amnesty for illegals or all the social spending that wasn't needed.

I do think saying you had in your opinion a better plan and time to go into Iraq than the President is quite a statement and being you started the thread with that, you gave us the steak, then snatched it from our plate before we got a taste of it!

I really don't think that what ever your view would be that it could be so forbidden or outrageous that you can not post it. I think the forum is a really great one and that people can handle it here, :-)

I can see you not giving away positions of our troops if you knew them with the "loose lips sinks ships" philosophy, but IMO this isn't the time and I'd really like to know your views on the better time and way Iraq should have been done and how much of it is from the benefit of hindsight?

It's not like I have anything personal against you or am looking to put you on the rack for having a view... :-)

Thanks.

[MikefromOhio]

LOL

Thanks :)

I have to get you to talk with my wife :) LOL

[trisham]

While your questions may be of value, I don't think they apply to the issue at hand. I have no problem with your concerns, but they may be best served in another thread.

[A CA Guy]

I think if someone makes a statement about how they felt they knew better how to handle Iraq and better when to go in, they should state the point since THEY brought it up.

[trisham]

I think if someone makes a statement about how they felt they knew better how to handle Iraq and better when to go in, they should state the point since THEY brought it up.

**************

The subject of this thead is about "bush-bots". You can continue to argue this point, but it's not going to advance your concern.

[A CA Guy]

But in the threads goal of printing the name Bushbot tens of times, it was set up with the issue I posted earlier and if it was brought up in the origin of the thread as an obvious part of the thread, they should be giving us that view.

You should go chastise them about not including things they aren't going to talk about in threads they started.
All I did was ask about the specifics of what they volunteered to give us in a thread.

[trisham]

But in the threads goal of printing the name Bushbot tens of times, it was set up with the issue I posted earlier and if it was brought up in the origin of the thread as an obvious part of the thread, they should be giving us that view.

You should go chastise them about not including things they aren't going to talk about in threads they started. All I did was ask about the specifics of what they volunteered to give us in a thread.

**************

I'm sorry, I know nothing about you. I have no problem with the issues you have raised. In fact, I think they are more than worthy of discussion. However, I don't think this thread is the place for them.

Best regards, and good night to you.

[TexasCajun]

You might be a BushBot if:

You name-call and belittle your fellow longtime FReeper for disagreeing with The President's choice of ties for a particular day, screaming said freeper is splitting the party and wanting to throw the election to the democrats.

Bushbots can often be Freeper Bullies. ...intimidating, demeaning & demanding others think like them.

[Leatherneck_MT]

I think the term Bushbot is a term given to those who agree with the president regardless of what he does.

That's my take on it.

I agree with him about 60% of the time, but there are serious security issues that I wish he was tougher on. I.e. the border.

and yes he should have used the veto pen far more than he has.

Other than that, thank GOD he gave us George Bush at a time we really needed someone of his caliber.