You've never just said it like it is Gene... only what your stoned, "hate Bush" reddened eyes see.


I will agree with you on one thing though, Prs. Bush doesn't have a leg to stand on when he says, "it costs too much".

When I started to write my two books about Bush, I did not have the negative feeling about him that I had after I researched his background and the results of his policies. I can not believe that ANYONE who truly looked at the experience GWB brought to the Presidency and an honest look at what has taken place in both the foreign and domestic agenda, that one could conclude that Bush has been good for the vast majority of Americans. The facts just do not support that he has made ANYTHING better and many issues have gotten much worse since January 2001.

That's the thing Gene, we treat you just like you treat Prs. Bush. Even those of us who still support Prs. Bush don't claim to support everything about him. I support him in the war in Iraq, but I also admit he has botched parts of it.

You go just as far in trashing Bush as we go in trashing you. I mean, look at the lengths you're willing to go to trash him. You don't care if it has nothing to do with Bush's job, you'll use it as an example of his incompetence.

Look at Katrina. You know he has little to do with disaster response. You know he has NOTHING to do with state and local Disaster protocols. Yet, you were right there with the liars in the incompetent press. Claiming it was a fiasco because of Bush.

Well, when you lie, I'll be there to call you on it.

If you had any real decency or credibility, you would acknowledge what wasn't his fault or his responsibilty... or at least leave those things out.

Instead you reveal yourself for the baffoon you are.

Believe it or not, if there was an opportunity, I wouldn't mind meeting you in person. I figure you are more than what you present here at JU, and it would be cool to see the other sides of you.

In regards to the topic at hand, $ 190 billion for war and yet threatenging to veto a health bill for children, I have to agree with Col Gene. And no, it's not because of my 'emotional' lefty thinking that apparently has left me brain damaged. It's a valid question- why is it OK for the government to spend almost half a trillion dollars on a war of choice overseas (total amount since war began), yet when a basic service for children, who are the future of a nation regardless of whether they're your children directly or not, is not ok? Can someone please enlighten me as to why the benevolent White house cut taxes, then heaped on the spending for a war overseas? If they were really serious about the future of the country, they would have kept taxes the same or raised them to cover the costs of the war. Instead, that cost is now on the biggest visa bill ever racked up, and someday the foreign creditors that allowed the U.S to continue it's war are going to want to collect. Is it more important to spend money on killing foreigners rather than take care of your own citizens? And no, I don't buy into the argument that this is a war of necessity and we're fighting them "over there, so we don't have to fight them here"

Artyism, it's a myth from the inception, this money isn't being proposed to help kids that have no other means of help, there is aid for them, this is just an increase in the money going to a program (bureacracy). Only a small portion of the budgeted money would have actually made it to any kid.

SCHIP isn't underfunded, it is overbloated.

sorry this is wrong to. this is an underhanded way to bring in universal health care.

That too

“You go just as far in trashing Bush as we go in trashing you. I mean, look at the lengths you're willing to go to trash him. You don't care if it has nothing to do with Bush's job, you'll use it as an example of his incompetence.”


I provide the actual results of Bush and his policies. The Iraq war for example is a series of mistakes that build on each other. The most serious error was to attack Iraq and the failure of Bush to understand what his father knew-- We would get bogged down in a civil war and would destabilize Iraq if we invaded. Then Bush did not follow the military experts as to the resources needed to prevent the violence we see today. First we did not control the internal factions and we also failed to prevent foreign terrorists from setting up operations. Finally, Bush disbanded the internal structure needed to run the country-- the Army, Police and Civil workers. To sugar coat the extent of the failures of Bush in Iraq is what people do who say Bush made mistakes in how he conducted the war. No Bush made the series of mistakes starting with the monumental error to invade Iraq, This was a strategic mistake which shows Bush has no understanding of the danger that faces us in the Moslem World. That is not trashing Bush. That is recognizing the extent of the failure of this man in Iraq and the destabilizing effect on entire region. What he did will impact us for decades and the only unknown is just HOW much of a price will we pay for his ignorance.

most of what you provide is actually democrat policy. you just put bushes name to it. and half the stuff that is bushs doings you spin to fit your agenda.

Then we will continue to treat you with the same mindless venom that you vomit on Bush.. because you deserve no better.

What a fine example of Christian tolerance & respect.

Notice the "While the U.S. has been tied up in Irag" lead-in - I seriously doubt the "senior U.S. military official in Japan ever uttered those 9 words, but whoever wrote the article, not to mention Gene, would like you to think so. It's another of those "counterfactual conditionals" Gene loves to play with.

Gene....you claim to be a Christian.

So, here is a question:

Do you pray daily for President Bush. I mean, really pray for the man. Intercede for him. Pray that he would seek God, and make the right choices, no matter how much under pressure he is in. Putting away all political motivivation, and simply stand in the gap for the man and PRAY for him? Because, if you are a Christian (as you seem to say you are), you should be doing that, because that is what God has called us to do. Pray for ALL men, especially those in authority.

Just think about that....because, from the way you talk on here about Bush, I doubt that you truly do pray for the man like you should.

Chris

Reply By: danielost Posted: Saturday, September 29, 2007
I provide the actual results of Bush and his policies.


Most of what you provide is actually democrat policy. You just put bushes name to it. and half the stuff that is bushs doings you spin to fit your agenda.

That is a lie. My research had NOTHING to do with ANY group. The results I sighted about Iraq, the deficit, trade, immigration, education etc is accurate. The problem is that it documents what the policies we have been following have produced. There is no question the results show we have NOT effectively resolved ANY of the issue that faced Bush in 2001 and he has added the problem of Iraq and the deficit.

The positions taken by the Democrats on many issues reflect the failure of the current policies. The GOP/ Bush approach is to STAY THE COURSE even when that course is clearly not working.

Reply By: ParaTed2k Posted: Saturday, September 29, 2007
Then we will continue to treat you with the same mindless venom that you vomit on Bush. Because you deserve no better.

Since what I post is predicated on the most knowledgeable experts and the agencies that collect the results, you are saying these sources which I use are "Mindless Venomous” sources. For example, on Iraq I sight people like Baker, Armitage, Powell, Scheuer, McCaffery, Zinni, Shinseki, Prof. Record. In the way Bush handled our fiscal affairs I sight O’Neil, Greenspan, Walker, U.S. Treasury. Which of these sources are Mindless or Venomous?