who's the real dictator? Hussein.

That defination of a dictator is very vague. It fails to mention that a dictator rules indefinately; they choose when they wanna step down or somebody (in this case Bush is deciding for Saddam) when their time is up. Bush, on the otherhand, will be around for a maximum of 8 years (8 years too long, might I add).

^^^^^ 8 years???

what are the chances of him getting his second term???

and what im trying to say is taht bush is no less a dictator than Hussein is...

___________________
www.elkdee.com
Soundcloud sampler: www.soundcloud.com/elkdee

quote:

Originally posted by DJ El Kay Dee i should be ignoring ur usual biased self as usual..dunno why im still replying tho

Haha so ignore me ... I've yet to see a post from you even trying to refute what I say, so my guess is you can't. Well your abstract question is vague becuase:

A) We don't know whether either leader is operating unconstrained by the law because you didn't specify.

and B) We don't know whether either leader is behaving like a tyrant because you didn't specify.

Now if you're referring to Bush which I'm guessing, he is constrained by the law. He can't go out on the streets and start murdering people, he can't steal, etc. He operates under the powers given to him by the US constitution and he can't exceed those powers. So as you see, he is constrained by the law and your first definition doesn't apply.

Now as for the second defintion, he is not operating as a tyrant since the majority of the population agree with what he is doing. As a matter of fact he has a greater than 50% approval rating. People are allowed to dissent and protest, civil liberties are kept in place, etc. Not quite the actions one would expect from a tyrant. So your second definition doesn't apply. I'll expect your usual non reply to my "biased" arguments

quote:

Originally posted by DJ El Kay Dee answer the question

There are many who feel Bush did not win the election, because over 500,000 more people voted for his opponent. Does that answer your question??

___________________
http://www.discoboomer.com/forums/

quote:

Originally posted by DJ El Kay Dee ^^^^^ 8 years??? what are the chances of him getting his second term??? and what im trying to say is taht bush is no less a dictator than Hussein is...

i said a maximum of 8 years. And he will serve a 2nd term, at least I think so.

and Bush being no less than Hussein; ugh, I hate doing this...but Bush isn't responsible for as many deaths as Hussein is. I doubt Hussein is as bad as CNN makes him out to be, but he still isn't a saint.

edit; why the fuck am i on here? damn you liam and this thread

*goes back to writing his essay*

quote:

Originally posted by occrider Haha so ignore me ... I've yet to see a post from you even trying to refute what I say, so my guess is you can't. Well your abstract question is vague becuase: A) We don't know whether either leader is operating unconstrained by the law because you didn't specify. and B) We don't know whether either leader is behaving like a tyrant because you didn't specify. Now if you're referring to Bush which I'm guessing, he is constrained by the law. He can't go out on the streets and start murdering people, he can't steal, etc. He operates under the powers given to him by the US constitution and he can't exceed those powers. So as you see, he is constrained by the law and your first definition doesn't apply. Now as for the second defintion, he is not operating as a tyrant since the majority of the population agree with what he is doing. As a matter of fact he has a greater than 50% approval rating. People are allowed to dissent and protest, civil liberties are kept in place, etc. Not quite the actions one would expect from a tyrant. So your second definition doesn't apply. I'll expect your usual non reply to my "biased" arguments

what im trying to say is...

so Hussein is a dictator and tells people what to do without giving them an option...cos he has the power...

in the same way, Bush doesnt care about all the millions protesting over the past month, nor does he have a justifiable reason other than suspected selfish desires for the war.

so in other words, both are dictators...neither are better than the other

___________________
www.elkdee.com
Soundcloud sampler: www.soundcloud.com/elkdee

quote:

Originally posted by DaveSaenz There are many who feel Bush did not win the election, because over 500,000 more people voted for his opponent. Does that answer your question??

This is true but he won the election LEGALLY in the manner in which our election system is structured. If you have problems with this don't take it up with Bush, take it up with our election system. If roles were reversed Gore would be in white house right now despite Bush getting the popular vote.

quote:

Originally posted by DJ El Kay Dee what im trying to say is... so Hussein is a dictator and tells people what to do without giving them an option...cos he has the power... in the same way, Bush doesnt care about all the millions protesting over the past month, nor does he have a justifiable reason other than suspected selfish desires for the war. so in other words, both are dictators...neither are better than the other

Well yes there are millions protesting the war but the vast majority of Americans agree with his approach to Iraq.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/releases/pr030318.asp

So by your arguments, if Bush were to not go to war he would be ignoring the millions who favor using force in Iraq. Even if the majority of Americans disagreed with him, he still wouldn't be a dictator in the political sense since he was elected into office. Although we are a democracy with respects to our election system, the country is actually run as a republic. The Congress, Senate, and President make all the decisions for the country during their terms in office, and the public have no input whatsoever. As a matter of fact every "democratic" country is more or less a republic. The last true democracy were ancient greek city states who put every government action to a city-wide vote in which every citizen voted.

Btw how am I biased? I typically only use credible news sources and I've taken stances against America from time to time. Just because I believe in something doesn't make me biased.

quote:

Originally posted by Orbax be·nev·o·lent ( P ) Pronunciation Key (b-nv-lnt) adj. Characterized by or suggestive of doing good. bush is a BENEVOLENT dictator, so its all good

wow.

you know what?
Saddam thinks he is doing good also.
and so does Osama.

so i guess they are all benevolent also

quote:

Originally posted by montie wow. you know what? Saddam thinks he is doing good also. and so does Osama. so i guess they are all benevolent also

man..that is the smartest thing ive read whole day...serious...i didnt think about it myself..however it still goes to the same theory taht all ove them are the same (including bush that is)

___________________
www.elkdee.com
Soundcloud sampler: www.soundcloud.com/elkdee

quote:

Originally posted by occrider This is true but he won the election LEGALLY in the manner in which our election system is structured. If you have problems with this don't take it up with Bush, take it up with our election system. If roles were reversed Gore would be in white house right now despite Bush getting the popular vote.

Correct. I wish they would change it so people's votes could actually count! For example if you voted gore in TX, but the state went for Bush. Or if you voted for Bush in Cali but the state went to Gore.

___________________
http://www.discoboomer.com/forums/

quote:

Originally posted by montie wow. you know what? Saddam thinks he is doing good also. and so does Osama. so i guess they are all benevolent also

Lol. That's what I said basically when someone pointed out the word "right" can be interpreted in so many ways.

___________________
http://www.discoboomer.com/forums/