How much has Bush hurt America?

[Annies_Beaver]

You are in major denial. It has always been tough for terrorists to attack in the U.S. When was the last terrorist attack before 9/11? Just because there hasn't been a terrorist attack here in the U.S. since then means nothing.

You need to look around the world to see how terrorism is growing. London was attacked like two years ago right? Terrorist are slaughtering people left and right in Iraq. North Korea has gone nuclear and has threatened to sell nuclear weapons to terrorists. Iran is on its way to being nuclear. Violence is re-erupting in Afghanistan. And now we have a weak, childish, lame duck President who is flip-flopping from "stay the course" to "never been stay the course."

No country or terrorist organization respects the U.S. anymore. Iran and North Korea have demonstrated that anyone can spit in America's face and Bush will sit back and take it.

[The once and future king]

[ QUOTE ]
as evidenced by?

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you living under a rock? Did the findings of the NIE escape your attention?

FYI:

National Intelligence Estimates (NIEs) express the coordinated judgments of the US Intelligence Community made up of 16 intelligence agencies, and thus represent the most authoritative assessment of the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) with respect to a particular national security issue. NIEs are considered to be "estimative" intelligence products, in that they present what intelligence analysts estimate (not predict) may be the course of future events. Coordination of NIEs involves not only trying to resolve any interagency differences, but also assigning confidence levels to the key judgments and rigorously evaluating the sourcing for them. Each NIE is reviewed and approved for dissemination by the National Intelligence Board (NIB), which comprises the DNI and other senior Intelligence Community leaders within the Intelligence Community.

Guess what NIE had to say about the strenght of global terrorism. That it had increased in strenth.

Thats right 16 Inteligence agencies all agree that terrorism has grown stronger. Is that evinced enough for you?

[wacki]

If any of these guys are right:

http://www.logicalscience.com/consensus/consensus.htm

or any of these guys are right:

http://www.logicalscience.com/energy/quotes.html

then bush is the worst president in US history. *If any of those people are right* then he has done more harm to the US than any president in history.

If this guy is right:
http://www.waronscience.com/

Then bush is merely the most damaging president to science in the history of the US.

[Stu Pidasso]

[ QUOTE ]
Are you living under a rock? Did the findings of the NIE escape your attention?.......

Guess what NIE had to say about the strenght of global terrorism. That it had increased in strenth.

Thats right 16 Inteligence agencies all agree that terrorism has grown stronger. Is that evinced enough for you?


[/ QUOTE ]

The report says:

"United States-led counterterrorism efforts have seriously damaged the leadership of
al-Qa’ida and disrupted its operations; however, we judge that al-Qa’ida will continue to
pose the greatest threat to the Homeland and US interests abroad by a single terrorist
organization. We also assess that the global jihadist movement—which includes al-
Qa’ida, affiliated and independent terrorist groups, and emerging networks and cells—is
spreading and adapting to counterterrorism efforts."
Link

The report says that the threat of terrorism decreased, significantly; it goes on to say the threat is now increasing because these terrorist organizations are now starting to adapt to our tactics.

Stu

[bisonbison]

bkholdem:
Bush has hurt us in the exact same proportion, and to the exact same degree that every other president over the past 100 years has hurt us.

So every US administration is equivalent to every other - FDR's to Hoover's to Nixon's to Ford's. Bush's corporate tax cuts == Taft's support for the 16th amendment.

Another great first post for anarchocapitalism!

[bisonbison]

pvn: There you have it. The statist opponents of the incumbents aren't mad that Bush is engaging in imperialism, projecting military power, killing civilians, etc, they're mad that he's not as good it as they think they would be.

Wrong. I'm mad that Bush and the reps and senators who supported his policies have directly contributed to the deaths of about half a million people in the last 3 years. Sorry if that doesn't interest you.

bkholdem: Your just mad we don't want to play your "let's whine and complain about president x (in this case bush) game.

Well, I'm mad cause you've derailed another Politics thread with your retarded, two-tone philosophy.

bkholdem: I personally don't believe it. I wrote that as a means to counter the op's presumptious way to start a post.If he had said has bush helped or hurt us? or something like that i would have not opened or posted in the thread.

So, iron, is there some hidden standard for trolling and derailing that this conduct somehow does not measure up to? You know, for transparency's sake.

[iron81]

[ QUOTE ]
bkholdem: I personally don't believe it. I wrote that as a means to counter the op's presumptious way to start a post.If he had said has bush helped or hurt us? or something like that i would have not opened or posted in the thread.

So, iron, is there some hidden standard for trolling and derailing that this conduct somehow does not measure up to? You know, for transparency's sake.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, but this doesn't come close. Retarded != troll. I think this thread is doing ok.

[bkholdem]

[ QUOTE ]
pvn: There you have it. The statist opponents of the incumbents aren't mad that Bush is engaging in imperialism, projecting military power, killing civilians, etc, they're mad that he's not as good it as they think they would be.

Wrong. I'm mad that Bush and the reps and senators who supported his policies have directly contributed to the deaths of about half a million people in the last 3 years. Sorry if that doesn't interest you.

bkholdem: Your just mad we don't want to play your "let's whine and complain about president x (in this case bush) game.

Well, I'm mad cause you've derailed another Politics thread with your retarded, two-tone philosophy.

bkholdem: I personally don't believe it. I wrote that as a means to counter the op's presumptious way to start a post.If he had said has bush helped or hurt us? or something like that i would have not opened or posted in the thread.

So, iron, is there some hidden standard for trolling and derailing that this conduct somehow does not measure up to? You know, for transparency's sake.

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you talking about the thread started by saying "Sometimes, with all the AC BS that gets posted on here"...?

What on earth makes you think that posting a title "How much has Bush hurt America?" and then making ""Sometimes, with all the AC BS that gets posted on here"... is a reasonable way to start a thread about soliciting people to say negative things about Bush, which is what this thread is intended to do?

And if you want to call me out I would expect that you post ALL of my posts in a thread to keep my posting history in context. I have no problem examining my posting behavior. I take suggestions, do you?

[Exsubmariner]

Honestly Elliot,
I think the much more salient question is would things have been any different if Al Gore won? Would they be better/worse? From the latest round of American political history it is plain to me that for all intents and purposes, with the same contributors, all politicians are basically the same flavor with a different label. I doubt that Al Gore, whose stake in Occidental Oil still provides him income every year would have been any less immune to the oil lobby. Would we have still invaded Iraq? Clinton made a lot of the same noises as Bush did on the matter and John Kerry voted for the war before he voted against it. Looks like we would have gone down the same road, or one parallel to it.

[bisonbison]

And if you want to call me out I would expect that you post ALL of my posts in a thread to keep my posting history in context. I have no problem examining my posting behavior. I take suggestions, do you?

I'm sorry that I only quoted 3 of your posts in this thread to point out how intentionally crappy they were. In the future, I'll try to be more thorough.