Bush No.1 hero... and villian.

[Panda Man]

Indeed. Whther it be that you hate him, or are just like me and tired of all the b**chin', I don't think anyone (except the "media," perhaps, they are making $$$) will miss Bush.

[yurimxpxman]

Originally Posted by Panda Man

Indeed. Whther it be that you hate him, or are just like me and tired of all the b**chin', I don't think anyone (except the "media," perhaps, they are making $$$) will miss Bush.

I think the real question is who's going to replace him. To be honest, I haven't found any candidates I'd vote for thus far. Condoleeza Rice and Hillary Clinton? I know I'm gonna get a lot of crap for this, but I would never vote for a female president. You may call me old fashioned if you want, but men and women are wired differently - not superior, just different. Women tend to think quite differently from men. That's not a bad thing, but women tend to take emotional sides too often. Men are wired with a better ability to see each side and handle things accordingly. I'm all for women's rights, but they have a different (again, neither inferior nor superior) position in life.

Are there any men that've decided to run for president? I haven't heard of any yet.

[wtcnbrwndo4u]

Originally Posted by yurimxpxman

I think the real question is who's going to replace him. To be honest, I haven't found any candidates I'd vote for thus far. Condoleeza Rice and Hillary Clinton? I know I'm gonna get a lot of crap for this, but I would never vote for a female president. You may call me old fashioned if you want, but men and women are wired differently - not superior, just different. Women tend to think quite differently from men. That's not a bad thing, but women tend to take emotional sides too often. Men are wired with a better ability to see each side and handle things accordingly. I'm all for women's rights, but they have a different (again, neither inferior nor superior) position in life.

Are there any men that've decided to run for president? I haven't heard of any yet.

Hmm, didn't think about that way yet, but I agree with you. Women do think differently from men. But of course, this doesn't mean they shouldn't get a chance. But I haven't heard of any other possible candidates either.

BTW, who the hell names their daughter Condoleeza. Where did that name come from?

[yurimxpxman]

Originally Posted by wtcnbrwndo4u

Hmm, didn't think about that way yet, but I agree with you. Women do think differently from men. But of course, this doesn't mean they shouldn't get a chance. But I haven't heard of any other possible candidates either.

I'm sure there'll be another Nader somewhere

Originally Posted by wtcnbrwndo4u

BTW, who the hell names their daughter Condoleeza. Where did that name come from?

That's what I've been wondering. According to this link, it means "modern". In other words, it has no meaning; her parents just thought it sounded nice.

[wtcnbrwndo4u]

Originally Posted by yurimxpxman

I'm sure there'll be another Nader somewhere

No I think Nader will just run again until he perishes.

Originally Posted by yurimxpxman

That's what I've been wondering. According to this link, it means "modern". In other words, it has no meaning; her parents just thought it sounded nice.

Means modern in "American English?" American English my ass... It might be some tribal name in Africa (no offense to anyone if it does offend).

EDIT: Did you see the ratings on that site?! 25% say Excellent, 26% say Very Good, 21% say Good, 6% say Regular, and 22% say I don't like it.
It should be 0 for the first three, change the fourth one to Irregular, which gets a good 20-30% and the rest to I don't like it.

[Quakindude]

I've been in Iraq, that's no big secret here. I know the relief I saw on the faces of thousands of people when we rolled over Saddam's gov't. There are so many things wrong on so many levels in pinning President Bush with the blame for the state of affairs in the Middle East. After all, if there were no religious violence, a lot fewer Americans dead and a clearer form of victory, the Democrats would have been shouting from the roof tops that Clinton paved the way for President Bushs' successes in Iraq.

While I certainly don't agree with everything the President has done over the last 6 years, or how he has managed Iraq, I also realize that:

1. I wouldn't be the President for any amount of money.
2. I don't know have all the intelligence products that the government does.
3. I don't trust everything the government does to be the "right" thing.
4. Even the President is just a human being progressing through life. Fallible, imperfect and pulls his pants down just like you or I to take a dump.
5. No matter what, there's a certain element of Islamic terrorists that are killing soldiers and NOT civilians. If they couldn't do it in Iraq, there would have been further violence here in the States. The Islamic extremists hated us a long time before Bush, during Bush and will forever after Bush. Period.
6. I agreed with my life on the line with intervening in Iraq. That being said, I think we should have been out of there a long time ago.
7. I would gladly lay down my life in Iraq if it meant just one more day of safety for all those here in the States. If it meant just one man, woman or child would not be killed here by these fanatical idiots. Even if it meant that a prison full of rapists and murderers located here in the States would not be bombed, I would lay that life down without hesitation. Because i HAVE seen the enemy. The enemy IS those Islamic Extremists. And the world will, at some point, HAVE to commit mass killings to protect us from them. Why? Because they train their children from day ONE to HATE, Maim, Kill and Destroy ANYONE who doesn't believe as they do. Even their fellow Islam followers that don't interpret the Koran the way THEY do.

A lot of folks see the beginning of this Middle East stuff as the day President Bush sent the first troops into Iraq.

Those people that are killing our soldiers over there, those people that are responsible for so much of the worlds problems, began attacking others they don't like thousands of years ago. And they started the war we are now fighting many years ago with the first failed bombing attempt on the Trade Centers.

That's my opinion on it.

[garetjax]

Originally Posted by Nasgul

He won't admit he's made the worst mistakes ever and he keeps acting like what he's done is not terrible.

No president ever really admits their mistakes... they let their flunkies do it for them, so the president can save face. Hello, Donald Rumsfeld and George Tenet. You think these guys left prominent positions in office (and paychecks) because it was for the good of America? Hell no, they left because the Bush administration needed scape goats to pin the blame for the debacle that is the Iraq war.

Originally Posted by Nasgul

And he's not articulate at all when he speaks, he's the child poster for: "Support Higher Education"

Totally correct. When I watch Bush give a speech, I feel embarrassed for him. The guy obviously cannot speak publically very well, and his efforts to bridge the gap between his high ranking office and us 'little people' with his inane and insipid anecdotes makes me sick.

Originally Posted by Nasgul

$300 billion wasted, yet, there's tons and tons of people that needs help in this country but yet, George Douche, spends it somewhere else. So he can pay himself and his oil industry buddies.

Correct. You think it's coincidence that the Bush's (including his father) have very tight connections with the oil shah's in the Iraq region?

Originally Posted by Nasgul

I want my taxes back, I'm not paying for our people getting killed for a worthless cause.

I wouldn't say that the entire $300 billion has been wasted, nor the troops serving there or perished either. I have served multiple times on months long deployments in that region, and I know the kinds of things Saddam has done first hand. Hell, I was there in order to prevent him from doing more of those heinous things. The point is that Saddam was going to have to be removed from office one way or another. Anyone that thinks otherwise is delusional.

The guy was a criminal and a threat to society. He had to be removed. So no, $300 billion wasted? No way. The guy was a menace, he had to go. However, the way that the $300 billion was spent in order to conduct the war, I feel, is what really is the issue here.

[Mithosphere]

Man is inherently evil.

[garetjax]

Originally Posted by yurimxpxman

I think the real question is who's going to replace him. To be honest, I haven't found any candidates I'd vote for thus far. Condoleeza Rice and Hillary Clinton? I know I'm gonna get a lot of crap for this, but I would never vote for a female president. You may call me old fashioned if you want, but men and women are wired differently - not superior, just different. Women tend to think quite differently from men. That's not a bad thing, but women tend to take emotional sides too often. Men are wired with a better ability to see each side and handle things accordingly. I'm all for women's rights, but they have a different (again, neither inferior nor superior) position in life.

I dunno. I think that if a female ran for presidency, and her politics and agenda were solid and what I beleived in, I wouldn't have a problem voting for a woman as president. Hell, if it came down to me voting between Hillary Clinton or that idiot John Kerry, I wouldn't need to think twice about that choice.

Beware Blondie ever finding out what you said, Yuri.

[wtcnbrwndo4u]

garetjax, I agree with you on the part that Hussein did need to be taken out of power, but the what ended up going on there by the Bush administration made Iraq a worse, less-safe place than it was.