BUSH QUIT GOLF FOR IRAQ

[shinerbock]

Originally Posted by nittanyalum

^^^The man has spent over 40% of his presidency ON VACATION.

Listen, I know you're a rabid liberal who harbors extreme spite for our POTUS, but I'm gonna need you to back this up.

Also, about Jan 2009, I'm sure everyone will be happy until we begin mourning the death of the free market in approx. Mar. 2009.

[starang21]

Originally Posted by shinerbock

Listen, I know you're a rabid liberal who harbors extreme spite for our POTUS, but I'm gonna need you to back this up.

i don't know about 40 percent, but there have been articles written about his "vacationing" throughout his presidency.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/...n/5042364.html

http://ask.yahoo.com/20031001.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...080201703.html

but i highly doubt it's vacationing in the conventional sense.

[Leslie Anne]

Could you explain why, please?

[shinerbock]

Originally Posted by Leslie Anne

Could you explain why, please?

Was that directed to me? I say a lot of things people may question, so please let me know what I need to explain (if you're talking to me).

[Leslie Anne]

Sorry.
Yes, I was asking you, Shiner, to explain why you think that Drolefille's comment was a "dangerous sentiment."

[shinerbock]

Originally Posted by Leslie Anne

Sorry.
Yes, I was asking you, Shiner, to explain why you think that Drolefille's comment was a "dangerous sentiment."

I think it is a dangerous sentiment because I perceive it to be an argument for economic equality and social engineering. This is beating a dead horse for me, but I think the anti-enterprise instincts of many American liberals are very dangerous for this country.

I don't believe the government should work to ensure we're all financially equal. I certainly don't believe the government should do this at the expense of one segment of society. Whenever the government decides to take something from one citizen on the rationale that "they don't really need it," I get pretty concerned.

[Leslie Anne]

Originally Posted by shinerbock

I think it is a dangerous sentiment because I perceive it to be an argument for economic equality and social engineering. This is beating a dead horse for me, but I think the anti-enterprise instincts of many American liberals are very dangerous for this country.

I don't believe the government should work to ensure we're all financially equal.

Thank you for your response, Shiner.

Of course, I can't speak for Drolefille (and she'd probably strangle me if I tried to) so I can only offer my own perspective on her response. Nate said that people should get an education. The response was that not everyone can afford an education. Then there was a sarcastic comment about the government helping and what a catastrophe that would be.

I do not believe that anyone here is suggesting pure economic equality. I certainly am not. There is, however, an argument to be made that increasing the potential for economic security (not equality) is good for any society.

You also might be surprised to find that most liberals (including myself) are not anti-enterprise at all. I think you're taking general ideas and forcing them into extremes that aren't actually a reality.

I'm by no means a Bush apologist, and I find some people's obsession with demonizing him quite entertaining, but I will say this about Olberman's video. He spends the first part of his video on a tirade, claiming that Bush makes a fear-mongering threat that if a Democrat is elected, an 9/11 type attack on America is eminent.

If you watch the video, Bush was asked what the "worst-case/doomsday scenario" would be, if we pull out of Iraq. Well, he says the Doomsday scenario would be another attack by terrorists on America. Can anyone argue that indeed, that would be the worst case scenario? Bush doesn't say, "oh its not doomsday, its certain!". He just replied that if we pull out, that would be the worst-case result. I happen to agree.

The rest of the video is KO at his over-the-top, bombastic best. Will he even have viewers after Bush leaves office?

[DaemonSeid]

Originally Posted by wreckingcrew

I'm by no means a Bush apologist, and I find some people's obsession with demonizing him quite entertaining, but I will say this about Olberman's video. He spends the first part of his video on a tirade, claiming that Bush makes a fear-mongering threat that if a Democrat is elected, an 9/11 type attack on America is eminent.

If you watch the video, Bush was asked what the "worst-case/doomsday scenario" would be, if we pull out of Iraq. Well, he says the Doomsday scenario would be another attack by terrorists on America. Can anyone argue that indeed, that would be the worst case scenario? Bush doesn't say, "oh its not doomsday, its certain!". He just replied that if we pull out, that would be the worst-case result. I happen to agree.

The rest of the video is KO at his over-the-top, bombastic best. Will he even have viewers after Bush leaves office?

Pulling out of anything too early is always guaranteed to get you a dirty look

[nate2512]

Originally Posted by Juspreet

OMG, he is really weird...

Who?