|
Question for the bush-bashers (pg. 3)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| DigiNut |
| quote: | Originally posted by boa-redux
...a combination that is offensive to most reasonable people. |
Another good example. Does it not occur to you that a comment like this is, in fact, offensive to many reasonable people who simply don't happen to agree?
Edit: Incidentally, I think it's VERY funny that you mention Reagan while at the same time claiming that Bush is pandering to the lowest common denominator by referring to the USA's enemies as "evildoers." Reagan did PRECISELY that, and that is what made him such a great president. He did it far more eloquently than Bush of course, but he instilled the knowledge in all Americans that they were fighting evil. He made it known that they were "fighting the good fight." Bush may have performed terribly in his attempt to do the same, but in that case you should criticize him on his performance and not his agenda, otherwise there's a clear double standard. |
|
|
| fn_xtc |
Very well said!
| quote: | Originally posted by boa-redux
Ronald Reagan was not a MENSA candidate either, but his ability to comunnicate his extreme views eloquently made him the great comunicator and brought about incredible change.US presidents do not govern unilateraly, they are the figure head of a team.
The problem with W is that instead of raising the standard of the country (USA) he chose to lower the standards of the presidency by communicating at the lowest common denominator in order to cater to his constituancy of rednecks, evangelical extremists and the ignorant masses who believe that those opposed to the US are "evil doers".
It is this polarising approach to politics "you are with us or against us" that drives non americans to wish changes in US politics as most people around the world view the US with admiration and are dismayed to see a bunch of fanatics besmerch the American ideal.
George is not a moron, he is just a lousy public orator selling an extremist agenda, a combination that is offensive to most reasonable people. |
|
|
|
| discojoe |
| quote: | Originally posted by malek
well maybe, just maybe because what america does affects the rest of the world (in a bad way).:rolleyes: |
Of course. What does the election of Canada have to do with issues in France or Somalia.. probably next to nothing, so nobody follows or interferes with our elections. But try to tell the millions of South Americans who have lived through decades of governments put in place by the United States, that their lives arnt effected by American politics. Sit down with an Iraqi (whether you agree with the decision to go to war or not) who's had his entire family blown up by an errant missile and try to convince him that his life isnt affected by american politics. Even ourselves as Canadians must obviously understand our policy is enormously affected by political presure from the united states. As many Canadians lively hood depends on economic ties with the united states, as much of our air quality results in part from our proxity to our neighbours, American politics have an undeniable influence on the day to day lives of millions of Canadians.
As America, for better or worse, has decided since the end of the second world war to concern itself with the politics and affairs of others with its outward looking foreign policy, it is certainly within everyone else's rights to concern themselves with America's matters.
| quote: | | And yet I've noticed a striking number of otherwise courteous people who feel no shame nor reservations about referring to the American president in the most derogatory terms possible in all kinds of private and public settings. I'm curious as to what you think makes George Bush so different from any other political or religious topic, to such an extent that it is somehow acceptable to voice loud hatred of him without provocation. |
The people who call him a **** or say he should burn in hell are taken just as seriously as those who insist he invaded Iraq to remove a person who tortured his own people.
But your constant attempts to defend a man who makes up words like misunderestimate, a man who isnt smart enough to form an opinion about native american's rights, a man who called the president of pakistan 'mushy' (the man who happens to be the most powerful man in the world and the one responsible for negociating nuclear issues in Iran and South Korea, real threats to America and the rest of the world) for no other reason than the sake of being the odd man out, the devils advocate is getting boring in my opinion.
He's not smart enough to be leading the country. Just because you happen to be right leaning doesn't mean you have to defend him. |
|
|
| Cyrus King |
| quote: | Originally posted by Diginut
The most basic principles of social etiquette tell us not to take the unnecessary risk of offending people whom we don't know by voicing strong political or religious views out of the blue. |
I find it ironic that the poster of this very sentence is Diginut... the political/religious right-winged dissidnet on in this forum.:) |
|
|
| discojoe |
| quote: | Originally posted by Cyrus King
I find it ironic that the poster of this very sentence is Diginut... the political/religious right-winged dissidnet on in this forum.:) |
ya haha from the guy who tries over and over to convince people hes not PC. And here he is complaining about people's etiquette?
:conf: :conf: whatever |
|
|
| boa-redux |
| quote: | Originally posted by DigiNut
Is anyone getting it yet? Or do you all still think it's perfectly polite to launch into diatribes against Bush in casual conversation?[/COLOR][/FONT] |
If people are stopping you on the street to discuss George, then you have a serious problem, with no obvious remedy!!!
But if people are engaging you in a social setting, then you should be happy that you are surrounded by people who are capable of meaningful, socially relevant conversation, instead of the usual fare of weather and sport talk. It is entirely up to you to convince them of your point of view, or agree to disagree. Political debate is the root of good government; cherish it!! |
|
|
| DigiNut |
| quote: | Originally posted by Cyrus King
I find it ironic that the poster of this very sentence is Diginut... the political/religious right-winged dissidnet on in this forum.:) |
1. I'm an atheist.
2. I'm politically central.
So I have no idea what you're getting at. As to you discojoe, if you equate political correctness with proper social etiquette then I pity you.
It's a shame that this thread degenerated so quickly into personal attacks. Let me make myself perfectly clear, for the record:
I DO NOT CONSIDER, AND HAVE NEVER CONSIDERED GEORGE BUSH TO BE A MODEL PRESIDENT.
He has MANY problems, for example:
1. He has tried repeatedly to bring religion into politics, which is a definite no-no for the 21st century.
2. His economic policy is not only poor but it is very left-wing in nature. So not only does it hurt the country, but it sours people on Republicans when they're actually following a Democratic mandate.
3. He tries to please everyone, and we all know where that leads.
4. He's a poor public speaker, where rallying the people is one of the most important qualities a president can have.
There are many more points to criticize Bush on. However, what I constantly hear from people is NOT INTELLIGENT CRITICISM of the president. It is churlish, hate-filled bullcrap like:
a) He "lied" to the American people
b) He's an "ape" or a "monkey"
c) He's an "embarrassment to the country"
d) He "invaded" Iraq for "oil"
e) Any sentence making use of the word "Hitler" or "Nazi"
Once again, let me make myself perfectly clear. I am not right wing. I am DEFINITELY not religious. I do not openly support George Bush's presidency; in fact, I think it would be better for the democrats to be in power for reasons I will not get into here. I am not playing devil's advocate. On the forum, I am simply debunking all the outright ignorant and offensive that people continue to say, over and over again. It is very, VERY sad that this makes me a "dissident" in the eyes of some or many. And besides, nobody has yet answered me why Bush is fair game when no other political figures are - why not trash Clinton or Paul Martin? Believe me, they're not model presidents/PMs either.
If someone wants to talk to me about points "1" to "4", that's great, there's a legitimate discussion there. If it's a selection from "a" to "e", you can't possibly consider that to be "meaningful, relevant conversation" (I'm talking to you boa-redux). Criticism of the president is fine; bashing the president for no reason is inappropriate.
Unless, as I asked in my first post, someone here can give me a reason why it's not inappropriate (preferably a reason that doesn't involve further Bush-bashing!).
Capiche? |
|
|
| Jayx1 |
Im all for bluntness. If Bush stirs up the kind of emotions that he obviously does than good for everyone speaking out. Obviously not every has the gift of ettiquette and will blurt out "unintelligent comments" however these are their true feelings in words. I personally think Bush is a lousy president and that he did lie to the american people and the world. There is a lot of evidence that points to that. If people think hes an embarassment to the US it is their right to think that. Just as I thought Chretien was an embarassment to Canada.
To label someone's thoughts as irrelevent just because they cant articulate it into a university style essay is elitist at best and down right arrogant. These are the emotions that this particular politician has stirred up whether you agree with them or not. |
|
|
| hardcore trancer |
in Bush is the reason why millions of people in the middle east are suffering,because of his stupidity and ignorance and his lack of brainpower.
P.S I will always hate Bush and will express my hate toward him at any time and any place,Untill gets the out of office. :) |
|
|
| hardcore trancer |
| quote: | Originally posted by DigiNut
a) He "lied" to the American people
c) He's an "embarrassment to the country"
d) He "invaded" Iraq for "oil"
|
The only problem I have with those statement is that you forgot to mention that not only he lied to his own people but he also LIED to the whole world.
Besides that all of the above are THE TRUTH. |
|
|
| DigiNut |
| quote: | Originally posted by hardcore trancer
in Bush is the reason why millions of people in the middle east are suffering,because of his stupidity and ignorance and his lack of brainpower. |
And that is precisely what I've been talking about all along. I must have been asleep the day comments like this became the social norm.
If I had said the same thing about Clinton 4 years ago, people would have walked away. It has nothing to do with how right or wrong the comment is, it's just hateful, negative, and not something you say to people whom you aren't overly familiar with.
Jay, I never said anything about relevance. Whether their emotions are well-founded is not the issue. The very first sentence I wrote in this thread was that I'm not here to debate that. Many things make us emotional, many things make us angry, but we do not go around mouthing off about them to anybody and everybody (or do we? Again, maybe I was asleep the day that became the social norm). It has nothing to do with how well they express themselves.
I'm genuinely curious as to whether or not you really believe that it is Bush himself that has brought out these emotions in people. This would seem to imply that the people I'm referring to - i.e. Canadians - actually have some knowledge of the president, but I fear the only true public awareness is of what the chronic Bush-bashers say.
But maybe I'm wrong..
Here's a little pop quiz for all of you: name five (5) of president Bush's policies that do not have to do with national defense (including Iraq, 9/11, or any other counterterrorism/security stuff). If you can do that without a google search, then perhaps you've got some intelligent points to make after all. |
|
|
| discojoe |
| quote: | Originally posted by DigiNut
So I have no idea what you're getting at. As to you discojoe, if you equate political correctness with proper social etiquette then I pity you.
|
i do and i think most people would too.. so pity me |
|
|
|
|
