Iraqi Statue honoring President Bush - Page 3

"Does it make you utterly crazy that to many Iraqis Bush "is the symbol of freedom"?"

Do you honestly think Bush is for the people or for the rich people. And what makes you feel either way. What is your take on the family business?

We know you are familiar with aspects of politics, and laugh at the thought of corporate criminals (which is dangerous in itself), you know corruption exists but cannot say to what degree and link no association with the current president (and what about his cabinet), you believe the CIA to be harmless, you know that American interests are all important to our government at any cost, but can you define American interests and how much it actualy benefits Americans, you seem to think that at least currently the only fascism comes from the left, no one has mentioned anything about the Multiple Patriot Acts and Victory Acts as opposed to just one, and I highly doubt any of us have read them, I've perused some and listened to some critiques but mainly from a negative perspective, though that does not discount its possible accuracy.

And beyond Bush, at least this one...

I have not heard mention, whether I've missed it or not, of referrence to the outcome of the School of the America's and the arguable terrorists and tyrants/dictators it has produced. Other than speaking of the symptom of the actual terrors in Latin America.

Yes I honestly think Bush is for the people and not just rich people. However, he is not against rich people like many on the Left claim to be (even though they are often stinking rich). I come to this conclusion because we agree about so much regarding policy.

What family business? You do know that Papa Bush left his father's cushy life and went to west Texas and made his own wealth. You do know that Bush's attempt in the oil business coincided with the Texas oil market collapse and he sold his business. You do know that Bush then became a managing owner of the Texas Rangers. I happened to live in Dallas at the time. Bush was responsible for getting the new ballpark passed and built in Arlington. I was also there when Bush decided to run for governor. I watched Bush debate Ma Richards and I was extremely impressed with his campaign and his eventual victory over such a strong and popular democrat governor. I was also impressed with Bush as Governor and his ability to work so well with the opposition. I was one of the first calling for him to run for President and I donated to his campaign early on. Although at this time I lived in Arizona, I was completely distrustful of my own Senator and his use of spin and attacks. However, I was extremely impressed with the way Bush communicated his message. I was excited that the Party had finally found a candidate that understand the importance of a message and one that was so appealing. The only thing that troubled me was his inability to articulate that message at times however I thought he got considerably better as the campaign went on.

"laugh at the thought of corporate criminals"

What do you mean by this? Of course I know that there are thieves and crooks in corporations just as there are in universities and unions and environmental groups and in the media.

Of course I do not link the current president and his cabinet with any illegalities since there has never been even the slightest shred of evidence that suggested this president or members of his cabinet have broken any laws. And of course I do not believe in guilt by association.

"you believe the CIA to be harmless"

I never said that.

"you seem to think that at least currently the only fascism comes from the left"

I said in this country only. Fascism requires an authoritarian state and the Right believes in limited government.

Limiting the right to any stance has already been an established mistake.

Made his own wealth? You think there was no family, political, or foreign backing like with little Bush, no help just cause he moved out west, that seems a little silly, I'm not claiming to know the details of H W's income but common sense alone creates skepticism for you claim, or how I interpreted it.

The family business is politics and business, pretty cut and dry, and when you get to the wet details, you find banks, oil, private prisons, and general political mixing to a disturbing degree.

The Bush family has so many fingers in so many parts of the pie, with all the brothers and dad involved there is no end.

And you think its because all of these guys are just excellent business men huh.

Boy, when it comes to your claimed opposistion you can see no end to their faults and corruption, but when a Bush is involved its all rose colored glasses, how do you function under such hypocricy? No, seriously, its funny, well, not really, but how people with my arguments can be called bush haters and disregarded, yet people who talk of nothing but the purity of Bush cannot be challenged.

A more honest liar right? Immune to corruption, a down home kind of billionaire. Sheesh. Someone has not learned about the purpose and power of PR backed by money, corporate, and governmental influence. Except when in referrence to the Left I'm sure.

You are so driven by your cynicism that there is no way to have any kind of rational discussion about the Bushes. For you they are evil and anyone that likes them must be wearing rose colored glasses. Ironically, you have yet to make an accusation against W or Papa Bush that reveals any kind of malevolence. Its all indirect associations and assumptions. They are very wealthy thus evil, they are very political thus evil, they are republicans thus only for the rich thus evil, etc ad infinitum.

lol

"What about the reason that no one can be trusted as much as yourself?"
Because I do not trust American democracy either. No more then I trust British or today's German or Japanese democracies.

However, showing that we trust our allies will incline them to trust us. By doing this with nations with comparable values, we will avoid any senseless struggles for more and more power.

Without flag-waving, I would like to point to the EU. Yes, the EU is messy, complicated, in some ways undemocratic. However, because we trusted each other, we now have the biggest, most multi-national and complete area of level competition and free trade.

So to sum up my argument: apart from sentimental attachment there's no reason to trust our nation more then other nations, if they have comparable values. However, trusting other nations has very large advantages, the fruits of these are military integration in the form of NATO and free trade in the for of the EU.

"Because I do not trust American democracy either. No more then I trust British or today's German or Japanese democracies. "

Yes you are speaking from your perspective: a french-british-american. I was speaking from the perspective of the American state only. And as someone as an American only, although Irish American, I tend to agree with that perspective.

I am curious if the EU is larger, per capita and economically, than the 50 states? And the US has encouraged the EUs development. Although Im not sure how wise that may be.

"So to sum up my argument: apart from sentimental attachment there's no reason to trust our nation more then other nations, if they have comparable values"

Sure there is: you can control what your nation does but have no control over what foreign ones, no matter how noble, will do.

Per capita, nowhere near the US. In terms of size of the Economy, the EU is bigger.

"And as someone as an American only, although Irish American, I tend to agree with that perspective. "
Well I trust the Japanese. I don't trust the Indians quite as much because they're poor enough to be potentially unstable. But still, the Indians have comparable values.

I think its perfectly safe to trust, in the long term, those states which are just as likely as the USA to keep their core values of liberal democracy. That means democratic states with western level per capita levels (this makes them nice and stable, likely to keep their values as much as the USA).

Under these criteria. The USA, Canada, Western Europe, Japan and South Korea fit. More can be added if and when Eastern Europe develops as well as parts of Asia.

"Sure there is: you can control what your nation does but have no control over what foreign ones, no matter how noble, will do."
But do you even control your own nation when you are gone? Western Europe and Japan are just as likely as the US to stay liberal democratic.

Your strategy as a government is dependent on who you are loyal to. Are you loyal to the USA or are you loyal to liberal democracy? I personally, and I think most Americans, would fight against the United States if a clearly dictatorial regime were to arise.

If a government serves democracy first, then there is nothing wrong with trusting those nations who are just as likely as your own nation to stay democratic.

First off, I'm sorry every scrap of important information about Bush's money transactions and business dealings as well as true intentions is not openly available to me, and more is secured by National Security.

Second, I'm sure you could name multiple presidents that have delivered no visible malfeasance to accompany your assertion of their illegitimacy or your problem with them. And they would probably be democratic too.

Trusting the family that was smart and lucky enough to be masters of secrecy and deception is a dangerous game. And this assertion comes with much backing, since Prescott's fiasco we have heard little about the business of the Bush's untill 9/11 and W's presidency. Plus, they are all Skull and Bones members who are notorious for their secrecy and are littered with current and ex CIA which H W was the head of for a short while, again furthering the strength and training in secrecy and deception.

W's legacy is his ability to socialize, to connect with sheep and herd them. He has terrible test scores in school and the military, knows little information, and has had everything handed to him. His intelligence is not even the most important part, but it is relevant to his ability to lead. Though good at herding this leaves him being herded as well. Because he simply has not the knowledge that even you posess to make educated decisions, he has to ask or be told (which we all need to talk to others but if he was left alone would not even know where to start).

So manipulation, secrecy, deception, and privilege are what Bush knows, and thats about it. This does not leave much room for honesty as it does better polished and more confident lies which are easier to swallow. As so many do.

I still don't get how you think Bush is for the middle class or lower, there has been no evidence of anything but rich getting richer while poor get poorer.

Privatization of important necessities like insurance and social security profits the rich, and pulls further money that the middle class and poor don't have to pay for it.

The degree of corruption within either way can be argued, as long as the government can be secretive it can continue its corruption, in privatization, it depends on what private companies and who heads and benefits from them. And the list of these names are shrinking and matching those in government anyway. Go figure.

I did a little research.

EU population is:456,285,839 (July 2004 est.)
US is 293,027,571 (July 2004 est.)

EU economic per capita GDP of $25,700 (2004 est.)
US is $37,800 (2004 est.)

Both have about the same GDP although I think US is a bit higher - 11 trillion in 2003

EU GDP - real growth rate: 1% (2004 est.)
US is 3.1% (2003 est.)

EU Unemployment rate is 9.1% (2004 est.)
US is 6% (2003) -----[I think its 5.5% now]


I don't really think any nation could or should trust any other nation, from an historical point of view. You say you trust the Japanese and I must add that I think they are and should be a close ally and are an excellent model. However, the Japanese are some of the most racist and xenophobic people on the planet. The potential for future instability is there. If I were forced to trust any other nation I would choose Australia and England. But ultimately no nation can ever predict the future direction of another nation and thus can only depend on itself.

"But do you even control your own nation when you are gone? Western Europe and Japan are just as likely as the US to stay liberal democratic."

That's not really what I meant. The US has no power, except through war, to ultimately decide the future direction of any nation except itself.

"I personally, and I think most Americans, would fight against the United States if a clearly dictatorial regime were to arise. "

I agree about Americans, Brits, Canadians, Poles and Aussies - not real sure about the French, Japanese, Koreans, Russians, Spanish, Italians, Latin Americans and Germans.

"He has terrible test scores in school and the military, knows little information, and has had everything handed to him"

Did you know that Bush had higher scores that Kerry and that according to his millitary intelligence test had a higher IQ?

Bush also graduated from both Yale and Harvard. Unless you think someone did his homework for him and took his tests (which I wouldnt be surprised if you did) then Bush earned those degrees.

"I still don't get how you think Bush is for the middle class or lower, there has been no evidence of anything but rich getting richer while poor get poorer."

That's rediculous. Back that up with some stats!

You want evidence? Bush's tax cuts - greatly aimed at the middle class and small business.

"Privatization of important necessities like insurance and social security profits the rich, and pulls further money that the middle class and poor don't have to pay for it."

Complete nonsense. In fact privatization of ss profits only the poor and middle class since the rich dont need ss. The increase in ss that the poor and middle class will benefit from is vastly larger than what they are now getting.

Oh, McTex not of particular interest would be how other Arab / Muslim nations might precieve such honor?

quote:

---

"Privatization of important necessities like insurance and social security profits the rich, and pulls further money that the middle class and poor don't have to pay for it."

---

What are you talking about? Are you on SS.? do you need medical care with the rising costs with limited fixed income?

The theory goes that God is on our side, so if anyone is against us they are against God. Why - because we support Isreal, the choosen people. So everyone who is against Isreal, they can all be damned. So if we're not fighting for the oil, we're fighting for God. And if we're not fighting for God or oil, we're fighting for their freedom. No matter why we caused the war over the fact that Iraq was never a threat, didn't have anything to do with 9/11 and Bin Ladin was elsewhere doesn't matter. The hundred thousand dead iraqis, give or take a couple hundred is justifed any way you look at, for God, Oil or Freedom. Deadman aren't free and I don't believe Jesus would approve. But somebody somewhere is raking in the profits, but that's classified.

"However, the Japanese are some of the most racist and xenophobic people on the planet."

Having lived in Japan I can competently say you are indeed and ignorant and judgemental ass. Like any country there are fanatics of any posistion, such generalizations continually mar you as a credible human being.

"Did you know that Bush had higher scores that Kerry and that according to his millitary intelligence test had a higher IQ?"

And I take it you saw his records and didn't read or hear this from a pro Bush or "unbiased" source?

"That's rediculous. Back that up with some stats!"

Why, you don't. Spend some time at the unemployment office, find out how many people are getting laid off, you speak of rhetoric, I speak of physical reality.

I'm sure any stats I would provide you would blow off as leftist propaganda while bolstering and right wing sourced stats. That's a tough game that I wish some honesty could be had.

"You want evidence? Bush's tax cuts - greatly aimed at the middle class and small business."

I've heard just as many claims that that is bull, go figure.

"Complete nonsense. In fact privatization of ss profits only the poor and middle class since the rich dont need ss. The increase in ss that the poor and middle class will benefit from is vastly larger than what they are now getting."

Feel free to explain with stats that you complain about but so little provide. So far I hear but more repeated rhetoric. I know I need more info for details, but I'm sure I'm alone in thinking I don't know everything about it.

"What are you talking about? Are you on SS.? do you need medical care with the rising costs with limited fixed income?"

Does it matter if I am, does your question have a point? The business of money and who profits by where it is is irrelevant to my posistion in life, does that mean I don't have family who aren't on it, and does that matter?

I'm looking at claims just like Bush's and McTex's that talk of SS benefit cuts of up to 40%, does that bother you or are you still more concerned at to whether or not I recieve SS?

Everyone can feel free to clue me in, though I'm quite certain you can all use some more info as well.

"Having lived in Japan I can competently say you are indeed and ignorant and judgemental ass. Like any country there are fanatics of any posistion, such generalizations continually mar you as a credible human being. "

That is not my personpal opinion but rather an extremely common and universal judgment. Maybe you simply weren't aware that you were being constantly referred to as inferior?

"And I take it you saw his records and didn't read or hear this from a pro Bush or "unbiased" source? "

Yes, Im positive. It was either Brokaw or Jennings (cant remember which but am sure it was one of the two) who asked Kerry to comment on this fact shortly proceeding the election. You should have seen Kerry's reaction - it was clasic. Do a google search - Im sure you find my validation.

"Why, you don't."

Becaue you are the one that made the claim - duh!

" Spend some time at the unemployment office, find out how many people are getting laid off, you speak of rhetoric, I speak of physical reality. "

OMG - the US has one of the lowest unemployment rates - not only of industrialized nations but in all of our history as well.

"I've heard just as many claims that that is bull, go figure."

Yeah from stinking rich limosine liberals. "lol"

End of the marriage penalty, rate reductions, increase in the child credit - those are the facts jack!

"Feel free to explain with stats that you complain about but so little provide. So far I hear but more repeated rhetoric. I know I need more info for details, but I'm sure I'm alone in thinking I don't know everything about it."

Easy - investmenst in conservative bonds and market portfolios have a vastly higher rate of return (when analyzing the last 70 years) than that of the current ss system. Also - the gov currently has a similiar private retirement account plan for federal workers which is also extremely more successful (as far as the rate of the investments return) than what ss provides.

Poles? Why them? Because they backed us on the last war? And the others because they speak english?

" But ultimately no nation can ever predict the future direction of another nation and thus can only depend on itself."
Exactly! What if your own nation becomes a dictatorship? Then your policy backfired. You are saying we should concentrate all power (or as much as possible) in the USA, if the USA because despotic, then you've damned liberal democracy.

Our governments shouldn't be thinking about the USA in the long run, they should be thinking about liberal democracy in the USA. That means supporting and trusting those nations who are just as likely as us to remain democratic. The Japanese are isolationist, the lack of scapegoats in their society makes them very stable. The Germans have shown the best democratic and federal government in Europe (better then, say, Thatcher's Britain who featured brutal reforms with only a 40% mandate or Italy with its instability).

Trust them and they will trust you. That's why the EU managed to have 25 indepent nations (27 soon) agree to have true free trade. America's powerpoliticking has made NAFTA a joke, and it only has 3 nations to handle.

If you serve liberal democracy, then you should trust at the very least Japan, Germany, UK, Australia and Canada. If you serve anglo-nationalism then I perfectly understand why you would only trust the UK, Austrialia and New Zeeland... and I almost forgot Poland.