Quote:
Originally posted by KSigkid
Which we seem to have a lot of lately - the threads started just to bash Bush (or just to bash Liberals) are pretty weak in my opinion. Luckily some intelligent discussion has occurred amongst all of this.
|
I think the majority of them are started to incite some intelligent debate but quickly degenerate into "Bush sucks!" / "No he doesn't, you suck!" and the points that might actually be interesting to debate or simply to discuss are lost. There are far too many people who can't seem to move past the Bush/anti-Bush mindset. It turns into that whole situation where people care more about "being right" (many times on situations that probably don't have just one right answer) than they do about learning or discussing or having interesting conversation.
Not every article or thread posted that says something negative about Bush is necessarily trying to bait conservatives (and I'm sure the same goes for the opposite side of the political spectrum).
For example, in regards to this issue I would be curious to know how many conservatives would it actually make a difference to if the scenario posed in the first article (that Bush was itching to go to war since the beginning of his term) proved true. I imagine not many, but I don't really know. And why would it make a difference/why wouldn't it make a difference?
Threaded Mode