posted on June 9, 2002 04:16:34 PM new
Rawbunzel - You "might never" because you have a different opinion.
On the subject of why others don't say what they think is so great about President Bush. Maybe (?) because they know that the majority of posters here are Democrats, and if not Democrats..at least against anything the Republican administration does? I don't know. Not many look to be roasted on the stake.
For me....I voted for Nader. Bush was elected. The way I operate is to give the 'new guy a chance'. I don't vote party lines. Our Republican friends harassed us because we didn't vote for Bush, but we just couldn't vote for Gore either.
For me it all started on election day....and for the following weeks. I didn't agree with all the things that happened. We're all aware that our country was/is pretty evenly divided. All that went on made us lean to the Republican side. As President Bush started his presidency, we found ourselves agreeing with most of what he was doing/implimenting. That others don't agree...doesn't present a problem for me. I didn't agree with most of what Clinton did....but I lived through it.
I think I have been one who's posted my thoughts about what I've felt he was/is doing right....IMO. Then 9-11....I support the way he is handling our nation's biggest crisis since Pearl Harbor.
posted on June 9, 2002 04:26:02 PM new
OK.I "might never" but opinions can be changed.
I can certainly understand if you believe he is doing a good job dealing with 9-11 but what other things do you think he has done well? What has he done or implemented that you like?
The economy? The environment? Foreign policy?Bringing the people together?
I will not blast you, I just want to know how others see this administration.
[ edited by rawbunzel on Jun 9, 2002 04:27 PM ]
posted on June 9, 2002 04:32:42 PM new
Knock yourself out doing a search, Linda. You won't be the first person here on the Round Table that has gone through my various posts looking for that very thing that you are. They didn't find it, you won't either, but feel free to try. I'm not trying to discurage you from doing it - have fun. The problem stems from reading what you want to read into my posts, rather than simply reading what I did write.
"I believe I remember you comparing it to the Boston Tea Party."
Umm . . . I'm gonna haveta do a Ronald Reagan imitation here and tell you that "I don't recall that." While revolutions have been discussed here in the RT, and some posters even espoused their support for doing just that, it wasn't me. Good luck on your search though, and what tidbits of discussions that you do find to cut and paste, it won't be the "Smoking Gun" to prove that you are right in your evaluation of my opinions.
posted on June 9, 2002 04:46:02 PM new
nycyn, if I do "dredge" a few fun ones up again, it wont be like I did before. Just one, maybe two, and no more than that (and no more than those one or two per week or bi weekly? I dont know..I will use my judgment and hope its correct). And they will be fun ones, like the food link. I received a few emails from folks who still post here, and dont post here, saying they loved re-reading it and glad they got the link back since they forgot about it long ago (to the food site).
Sorry to derail. Carry on.
Btw..back on topic..I have been trying to think of SOMETHING that Bush has done that is in the positive for the USA. I cant. Not nary one thing.
posted on June 9, 2002 04:50:26 PM new
>>Btw..back on topic..I have been trying to think of SOMETHING that Bush has done that is in the positive for the USA. I cant. Not nary one thing.<<
posted on June 9, 2002 04:52:06 PM new
Raw - What has he done or implemented that you like?
I agreed with and support the voucher system...it didn't pass.
I agreed with the tax cut. Having been in the higher economic level I do think the top % of Americans are paying too much in taxes. Some pay a total of 60% of what they earn.
The economy? To me the economy was just barely starting to sink when Bush took office. Technology stocks we owned had started to fall in about March of 1999...and continued to do so. I believe the economy would have continued to dip even under Gore. And then, again...9-11 hit. And I'm not one who believes that 9-11 happened because of Bush's oil policies. I believe [and have read] that the terrorists had started developing their plan approx. 2 years before 9-11. Do you see me on here screaming it's all Clintons fault for not doing something about them in 1993, 1996 and 1998? No..Why? Because I don't believe that to be the case. Do I think he should have done more about their crimes against our ship, embassy...I don't know. Maybe this attack we're under would have started then.
The environment? I believe we are working at cleaning up the enviornment. Do I think we need to go overboard? No. But when I read things like....the farmers can't have water to grow there crops because some endangered species is more important...I draw the line. To me, that's crazy.
Foreign policy? I don't know ...was taking a wait and see attitude. But I do support how his administration is handling it now. Is he the sharpest light on the tree...maybe not. But I didn't think Clinton did much better even though he was more intelligent. Sometimes common sense is just as important as intellect.
Bringing the people together? I think that was his inital intent. But we're back to where we were during the elections. I don't think he's done anything to divide the country more than we were when he was elected. Do you feel Clinton brought anymore than half our nation together?
posted on June 9, 2002 04:53:10 PM new
I just did a few searches on AOL...."Good things GW Bush has done"..."Positive GW Bush"....KUDO's TO GW BUSH....Thankful to GW Bush....all I got was "watch GW Bush!"...."Bushisms"..."Bush is positively an idiot"...."Good Grief. GWBush!"
posted on June 9, 2002 05:02:25 PM new
Borillar - You won't be the first person here on the Round Table that has gone through my various posts looking for that very thing that you are. Well...then at least I'm not alone in seeing your posts the way I do. I'll try to find comfort in that. If others are taking what you've said the same way there must be some validity to it.
Yes, in the last line of that post you do say you don't advocate violence, just just get the military on our side is all I ask before we go tromping off to overthrow our corrupt government!
I recall Newt Gringrich's Revolution, also referred to as the Republican Revolution. If all that brouhaha is not within your memory, do a Goggle search of Newt Gringrich and revolution. Newt and the Republican Party were obviously anti-American in 1994 when they were staging their revolution. Hahahaha. And if we use the term anti-American as it is being defined here to label any advocation of change from the status quo then I guess Bush's tax cut would be anti-American.
I assume that all of this verbiage is intended to be humorous, because if it were serious it would smack of McCarthyism.
posted on June 9, 2002 05:38:23 PM new
btw lindak...if you disagree with me, or I disagree with you..if your black, white, green or blue...if republican, democrat, none of the above...if woman, man or other...if you admire Bush and think hes super duper keeno or hate Clinton and think hes scum....I like you anyway. Just thought Id tell ya that.
posted on June 9, 2002 05:40:39 PM new Irene! You are good! Borillar can't deny that one.
Hepburn...that is too funny! Even a AOL search turns up nothing!
Linda, your points are interesting.
Do I think Clinton brought more than half the people together? No, but he also did not run on that platform and Bush did....remember "I am a uniter not a divider"?
I believe it is Pappa Bushs oil policies that started this most recent terrorist problem. The current Bush is trying to fix it. I don't believe he can because he has the same attitude twords oil and the middle east that daddy did. People over there have hated us for many years...even before the first Bush. No one has been able to do anything about the problem yet. Clinton did try..he very likely did more than we know about since we the people are told very little. I am sure he wasn't just twiddling his thumbs...he is much more a diplomat than Bush and I am sure he was trying all avenues available to him to solve the problem.
As for the ecomony starting to go down before Bush took office..well, it always goes down or stagnates in an election year as investors wait to see who gets in office and what the policies will be. Apparently investors didn't much like what they saw when Bush got into office thus the steady decline. Add to the mix 9-11 and there is no where to go but down. Do I think the same thing would have happened if Gore had won? I have no way of knowing that. It might have. It might not have as investors would have known what to expect....the continuation of a prosperous economy and the continued payment on the national debt. Now we owe more money than ever and at this rate we will never be out of debt as a country and our children will suffer for it. I have no idea how the measly tax cut could be worth all that to anyone.
Vouchers is moot since it did not pass.
We are not cleaning up the environment anymore. This administration has quietly undone nearly all the environmental protections. They do not advocate the lower consumption of fossil fuels.We are supposed to learn to deal with the melting ice caps and higher temps. Odd way to handle crisis in the environment.
Anyway, I thank you for giving your point of view.
posted on June 9, 2002 05:41:01 PM new
stockticker, thanks for pulling that up. Cut and pasted out of context, it looks like I was discussing something - making some point to something else. It so happens that I was. So what is yer point?
posted on June 9, 2002 05:46:18 PM new
Um...you said "While revolutions have been discussed here in the RT, and some posters even espoused their support for doing just that, it wasn't me."
And I think...mind you, Im not speaking for stockticker..but I THINK the point is you said you never said such a thing..and um...you did.
rawbunzel, I just looked on google too. THey have the same topics in their search as AOL did. Imagine that!
[ edited by hepburn101 on Jun 9, 2002 05:48 PM ]
posted on June 9, 2002 05:51:51 PM new
No point, Borillar. I was taking a break from scrubbing some basement shelving and was just casually reading this thread when saw your challenge. I usually don't read these threads - after all as a non-citizen I don't have any say whatsoever in who your politicians are.
posted on June 9, 2002 05:54:35 PM new
Well, now that Linda is settled down a bit, let's see what she thinks on the issues.
" agreed with the tax cut. Having been in the higher economic level I do think the top % of Americans are paying too much in taxes. Some pay a total of 60% of what they earn."
My question is in two parts and I'd like your (Linda's) input on both parts. On the Tax Cut that Bush got passed:
a) the upfront tax cut rebates were funded by taking money from a privately-owned, but Federally operated savings/investment account. This investment account would accrue interest each year, which is good for the investors, but Congress and the President of both parties kept "borrowing" the interest and leaving unpaid I.O.U.s behind. G.W. Bush, Jr. called for a "Lockbox" after Al Gore did in order to stop what amounted to as "theft", since the money was not being paid back (actually, under Clinton, we had just begun repaying it back). Now, the savings/investment account is called Social Security, which is owned by the People of the United states and is administered by the Federal Govenment for us. Since the tax cut could not be justified in the budget, it had to come from our savings/investment account; meaning that we took the money from ourselves (Social Secuirty) to give to ourselves (Bush Tax Rebate). Furthermore, since we left another I.O.U. there, We the People now have to pay interest on that money that we borrowed to give to ourselves!
Question Linda: What is your evaluation of that situation and was it the right thing for Bush to do?
b) most of the rest of the Tax Cuts do not take effect for nine years hence, are active for one full year, and then the tax cuts are destroyed and the old tax laws come back into place. Unfortunately, Nine Years is much longer than G.W. Bush could hope to serve as President and won't be there to make it permanent. With the problems that this Tax Cut has caused, charged by some powerful, knowledgeable critics - not just Democrats or "Liberals" my,
Question to Linda is, "What chances do you think that this Tax Cut has to stay intact and do you think it was worth it?"
posted on June 9, 2002 05:57:37 PM new
Hep - as I've said before you have a good heart. I don't mind others disagreeing with my opinions.
Well, Irene....thank you. You have once again proved you are the best thread finder ever. That was the thread where I remember the revolution being discussed.
posted on June 9, 2002 05:59:50 PM new
Kudos, Irene. I spent about five minutes trying to find that thread and then thought, "What the he11. Irene will find it."
I remembered it because I posted the words to the Beatles song.
posted on June 9, 2002 06:07:41 PM new
Rawbunzel - Please don't find me rude...but I've been at this all day and I really want to go. I understand that you don't agree with alot of the administrations policies...just like I didn't with Clinton's. It's okay...we all have to deal with the policy making issues of the current administration as best we can. I don't think any differently of you because of your opinions don't match mine. And I'm sure in future posts we'll be discussing our own sides again.
Borillar - I have nothing more to say about all the issues that we as a nation are dealing with tonight. When I see you post something I disagree with...I'll post then.
Heading back down to that shelving. Maybe while I'm scrubbing I'll try ponder Canadians rising up to overthrow the Canadian government. Hard to visualize except perhaps by those pesky Quebecers....
posted on June 9, 2002 06:13:54 PM new
Linda, I do not find you rude at all. I have always been able to be on one side of an issue and still respect the the people on the other. I do respect your opinion, even if it is different than mine! I hope you don't feel I am rude either. I try to be polite. I'm not always successful though.
Hepburn, Not even the great Google? Tells you something doesn't it?
Antiquary! Hi!Newt Gingrich was something wasn't he? And then to find out he was just as "lustful " as Clinton.LOL
posted on June 9, 2002 06:29:34 PM new"Borillar - I have nothing more to say about all the issues that we as a nation are dealing with tonight. When I see you post something I disagree with...I'll post then."
Uh huh, I thought so. When the Going gets Tough . . .
posted on June 9, 2002 06:35:42 PM new
Linda, anti-American is a very general term and the meaning would be dependent upon the context in which it is used. The possibilities are legion.
Hey, Robin. That lusting problem is probably what led to the failure of his Republican Revolution.
But happily for whatever reason it all ended before it became completely revolting.
posted on June 9, 2002 09:50:38 PM new
Higher IQ's generally lead to a dissatisfaction.
When you are capable of seeing patterns not usually detected by the average citizen, remembering things not remembered by the population in general it's not hard to become disgusted.
Me I was there Now I'm Just amused. Take the Hanging chads for example I laughed my ass off.
that's what you fools who voted for those 2 clowns deserved.
I loved that nader remark about If he can't beat that bumbling governor from texas,
RIGHT ON!
I had lots of constructive suggestions. I figured we put all the ballots in 2 cars
the democrats Could let ted the murderer Kennedy drive one with a girlfriend. and Bush he could just let his kids drive.
then we would not have had to listen to the nonsense.
what really ticked me off is that the democrats here went to the winos downtown in Milwaukee and gave them free smokes and booze to go and vote for gore. Where is my free booze ?I think there should be so e sort of blue ribbon fact finding commmission appointed.
So Linda what is it that tickes you off the fact that bonilar complains or the fact that he does not agree with you?
I mean god what do you want a bunch a clones ?
Hell become A Baptist.
Yes I know nothing is sacred to me.
Gets like that after you have died a few times. come back and found that greed is still a number one.
Me I think he has some good points. I dont agree with him on everthing but then I was not cloned either.
WEashington and people Like Nathan Hale or Patrick Henry dont grow on trees and if they did.
That aint what is being planted right now.
posted on June 9, 2002 09:54:28 PM new
Hep, thanks for the post way up there. This place has been burning since I started putting stuff on Ebay.
First---Newt---yuck. I named one of the outside cats after him. Need I say more?
Secondly---I can think of something President Bush has done well. He got he Education Reform passed. We need that!!!!!!
I think he has handled the terrorist problem admirably and with great strength. He calmed the nation and brought about the patriotism we now see everywhere.
He has practically begged people to not racially profile.
Hindsight is 100% but I see reform of the different agencies and freedoms for them to get the job done. That might be dangerous or it might be what we need in time of insidious conflict.
I believe the economy was going downhill before he was elected (at least my economy) and I blame it on Greenspan, no not Clinton and not Bush but Greenspan.
He got the Farm Bill passed. Farmers would much rather make their money on their own but that is impossible with countries embargoing us and past presidents embargoing (hope I spelled that correctly) other countries. Unfortunately, our livlihood depends on subsidies because of politics.
I believe it is the right of every person to have their own opinion. Our country was founded on dissent. I would never dare to even question that.
One more point. The majority of people did not agree with Lincoln. They considered him to be at times sedicious, a bumbling oaf and not ready for the job of being president AND at times he was a tad sedicious but he did manage to bring the country together. As I have read the posts here I have been taken back in history to his times.
Now I'm not trying to compare Pres. Bush to Pres. Lincoln, only history will be able to do that. I'm just trying to say that what I have read is very interesting.
Well, that is my two cents. Probably, two cents too much.
