Bush's speech

[aaron_mag]

There are times when AO makes me want to vomit! This guy is not a good speaker! The last president who was really good at the pulpit was Reagan and I was not a big fan of his. That guy, however, could speak!

Everyone touted Clinton's speaking ability but he SOUNDED insincere and full of it to me and I AGREED with his politics. Some of the sentiment on the board reminds me of the whole "for king and country!" battlecry. In America we modified that cry to "for country!" This is a man who happens to hold the highest office in our nation but he is still just a man. Politics, special interest, etc. dominates his life (as they do for EVERY president). Let me explain that I do NOT think this is a BAD thing. That is the way our system works and it works better than any other system of government ever created (in my humble opinion). That being said I look at ANY politician with a skeptical eye and try and figure out if the interests that they represent are in tune with what I believe are in the best interests of the nation.

Yes I am a democrat but Clinton's politically correct "feel good" speeches made me sick. The democratic senator from my state (we have one Republican (who I voted for) and one Democrat (who I also voted for)) gives speeches about how he attacked big tobacco companies on our behalf. My politics happen to agree with his on smoking but I also realize that he loves to tout this because it is a "safe" issue in Oregon and there is nothing courageous about telling us EXACTLY what we want to hear. Politicians are just men who we entrust to do the administrative tasks while the rest of us focus on producing goods and truly making America a great country. It is, however, our civic duty to be suspicious of them. The founding fathers would expect nothing less of us....

[Collegeboy]

Originally posted by Dave


He didn't say anything that would lead me to believe such a thing. He said that the war on terror is far from over, but that it is not endless. How you wish to interpret that would be your own opinion.

-Dave

Well Iraq has nothing to do with the War on Terrorism. But anyways aside from that, yes he did. You do not do what he did, in the joyous manner that he did and expect the public to accept that the war in Iraq is not over. We might have gotten rid of Saddam, but that is the easy part. The hardest part is yet to come. Bush's speech and actions were way too early. This speech will come back and haunt him when Iraq doesn't turn out like everyone hopes it will.

Since Shartley we all knowwho you are talking about I will answer.

I have never put down the US, I will continue to voice my disagreement over the President on things I disagree with and I voice my agreement on things that I agree with. Easy as that. As to the above statement, the founding fathers wouldn't expect anything less.

[shartley]

Originally posted by Collegeboy
Since Shartley we all knowwho you are talking about I will answer.

I have never put down the US, I will continue to voice my disagreement over the President on things I disagree with and I voice my agreement on things that I agree with. Easy as that. As to the above statement, the founding fathers wouldn't expect anything less.

[Collegeboy]

Originally posted by shartley

Well then the people who think this are blinded fools. We have discussed how many issues of the US on these forums. Iraq, Iraq, war on terror some, some on WWII, and some other ideas. But since I disagree with those ideas that many have on that, I must piss on the US and the president every chance I have.

Please give me a freaking break. I would expect this attitude out of a child, but not out of a grown man.

You can go on being the blinded fool thinking because I disagree with actions, and disagree with what the majority of the population thinks (which is hardly ever right) that I am pissing on the president and the US. But if you ever want to know the truth, if you ever want to stop being the blinded fool, then you will have to turn off those blinders and see me for who I am, not what your blinders tell you.

[shartley]

Originally posted by Collegeboy


Well then the people who think this are blinded fools. We have discussed how many issues of the US on these forums. Iraq, Iraq, war on terror some, some on WWII, and some other ideas. But since I disagree with those ideas that many have on that, I must piss on the US and the president every chance I have.

Please give me a freaking break. I would expect this attitude out of a child, but not out of a grown man.

You can go on being the blinded fool thinking because I disagree with actions, and disagree with what the majority of the population thinks (which is hardly ever right) that I am pissing on the president and the US. But if you ever want to know the truth, if you ever want to stop being the blinded fool, then you will have to turn off those blinders and see me for who I am, not what your blinders tell you.

[Collegeboy]

Originally posted by shartley

The blinded fool speaks.

He could care less about the truth as he said in his last statement.

How is disagreeing with the President, and how is disagreeing with you pissing on the US and the President. How can you come to the conclusion that I piss on the US and the President every time I get if we have only discussed a few highly debated topics.

And no you haven't hit a tender nerve, I am surprisingly calm right now, in fact it is really all a rather good laugh.

Sadly you will never understand what I am saying, you will always be blinded, you will always try and justify your opinion in your mind by the age old cop out of I am older, I know better. In the end, you will be wrong, I will more then likely be more right, but you will not admit it.

[Dave]

Originally posted by Collegeboy


Well Iraq has nothing to do with the War on Terrorism

I was pretty sure that there was some tie to Iraq, about harboring terrorists, but ya know, I could be wrong. In any case, a specific relation to terrorism might not be needed, as Bush's aim was targeted to the 'axis of evil', of which, through information, secret photgraphy, intelligence gathering, etc., Iraq was determined to be a threat.

Originally posted by Collegeboy


But anyways aside from that, yes he did.

Um, no he didn't say anything that would lead me to believe that. Please reread my post and your response.

-Dave

[Dave]

Originally posted by Collegeboy


The blinded fool speaks.

Please lets not use names if we are to carry on a debate.

-Dave

[shartley]

Originally posted by Collegeboy


The blinded fool speaks.

He could care less about the truth as he said in his last statement.

How is disagreeing with the President, and how is disagreeing with you pissing on the US and the President. How can you come to the conclusion that I piss on the US and the President every time I get if we have only discussed a few highly debated topics.

And no you haven't hit a tender nerve, I am surprisingly calm right now, in fact it is really all a rather good laugh.

Sadly you will never understand what I am saying, you will always be blinded, you will always try and justify your opinion in your mind by the age old cop out of I am older, I know better. In the end, you will be wrong, I will more then likely be more right, but you will not admit it.

[Collegeboy]

Originally posted by Dave


I was pretty sure that there was some tie to Iraq, about harboring terrorists, but ya know, I could be wrong. In any case, a specific relation to terrorism might not be needed, as Bush's aim was targeted to the 'axis of evil', of which, through information, secret photgraphy, intelligence gathering, etc., Iraq was determined to be a threat.





Um, no he didn't say anything that would lead me to believe that. Please reread my post and your response.

-Dave

[aaron_mag]

Originally posted by Dave

Please lets not use names if we are to carry on a debate.
-Dave

I also agree with this. When the whole Iraq debate started I got into passionate debates with FactsofLife, 1stdeadeye, Shartely, and Restola. From the little contact I had with them online I felt that I "knew their kind" and knew that their kind was not "my kind". At times I probably said things that were inappropriate.

Then I stumbled across posts FactsofLife made in a totally unrelated thread and I realized that I had no idea who he was, what sort of experiences he has had in life, or why his political opinions differed than my own. So while I have differing opinions (and get sickened by opposing opinions at time) we should not resort to petty name calling unless it is done in jest. I don't mind, for example, when FactsofLife calls me a dope smoking hippee that has forgotten that the 60s are over since it is actually funny (while untrue).

For the most part I think people on AO are respectable an honorable individuals and debating with them on topics has been both educational and fun.

[FactsOfLife]

Originally posted by Collegeboy


Well Iraq has nothing to do with the War on Terrorism.

Moron.

[Collegeboy]

Originally posted by FactsOfLife


Moron.

I bet that took a long time to think of and type up. How many revisions did you have to go through to get that thought engaging and rather excellent post? Man I wish I could sum up my thoughts as you have just done. What a genius.

[1stdeadeye]

Okay!

CB, Put down the boxcutter!

Don't do it!


Too late!

Aaron Mag,
We have had some "spirited" debates. I for one founf them fun. I am not for name calling either and have asked at times for others to refrain. In the French thread, I called CB a name out of frustration. When I debated you, it was a give and take. We both knew the other had valid points and no one is 100% right. CB is so stubborn, that you can not debate him. When you bring facts(again, no pun) to the table as he requests, he responds with rumor and innuendo. You can not have it both ways. CB can not post at Facts and tell him to bring real facts and then post up rumors and other garbage as his supporting information.

In the original French thread, I posted info from the CIA's world factbook and CB called it biased. It was a reference guide for pete's sake. I am done with CB as he has earned the name Facts has bestowed upon him. AM, I look forward to sparring with you in the future as you at least understand the meaning of debate! You also understand a joke when one is presented, no matter how bad it is!

[Collegeboy]

Re: Okay!

Originally posted by 1stdeadeye
CB, Put down the boxcutter!

Don't do it!


Too late!

Aaron Mag,
We have had some "spirited" debates. I for one founf them fun. I am not for name calling either and have asked at times for others to refrain. In the French thread, I called CB a name out of frustration. When I debated you, it was a give and take. We both knew the other had valid points and no one is 100% right. CB is so stubborn, that you can not debate him. When you bring facts(again, no pun) to the table as he requests, he responds with rumor and innuendo. You can not have it both ways. CB can not post at Facts and tell him to bring real facts and then post up rumors and other garbage as his supporting information.

In the original French thread, I posted info from the CIA's world factbook and CB called it biased. It was a reference guide for pete's sake. I am done with CB as he has earned the name Facts has bestowed upon him. AM, I look forward to sparring with you in the future as you at least understand the meaning of debate! You also understand a joke when one is presented, no matter how bad it is!