Date: 9/24/2003 12:24:00 AM ( From Author )
From Authorid: 24813
I'm off to bed now... I'll pick this up again tomorrow  |
Date: 9/24/2003 6:30:00 AM
From Authorid: 2030
I distrust politicians in general. But I'll say I trust Bush more than the Snake who preceeded him. And I've heard more spin, half truths and outright lies from democrats than from anyone.  |
Date: 9/24/2003 6:58:00 AM
From Authorid: 15228
Is Bush my buddy?? You make it sound like a doll, the 'Bush buddy' doll!! He is the president and there are some things I agree with him on and some things I don't. I don't love him nor do I hate him. I fully support him in some things, in others I don't. It isn't very hard to understand.  |
Date: 9/24/2003 7:47:00 AM
From Authorid: 22852
Not my buddy. As our President I stand behind him. I may not agree with everything he says or does but we must remember that he is the president. And lets face it, he is not the one who writes the speeches, he is not the one who makes the big decisions.. it is his staff  |
Date: 9/24/2003 8:37:00 AM
From Authorid: 16671
Just like any person in life, there are some things I agree with and some that I dont.  |
Date: 9/24/2003 8:51:00 AM
From Authorid: 53284
I have to admit that I like Bush's agressive persuit of the terrorists. Before 911, I was not overly impressed with Mr. Bush. The world changed when terrorists crashed airplanes buildings here in the US. Bush went after the home of the terrorists, Afghanistan. He has been hunting them ever since. Iraq is a different situation. If stability can be brought to Iraq, then hopefully it will have a stabilizing effect on the entire middle east. I do not blindly follow or believe in any of the politicians of either major political party. Most of the time my vote is really the lessor of two poor choices. I am happy that Bush has risen to the occasion with regard to terror. I worry that whoever gets elected next year will not be as agressive in their persuit of terrorists. Time is an alley to terror. If we grow complacent, their will be more terror in our country in the future. I would like to see the US remain in an agressive posture with regard to future terror threats.  |
|
Date: 9/24/2003 9:06:00 AM
From Authorid: 2030
The bottom line is we elect people to act in our best interests. I would say Bush has done so to the best ability that he and his staff have. I don't see him wasting time and taxpayer dollars covering up sex scandals or renting out the Lincoln bedroom for cash he can stash in his "presidential Library fund". Which may beg the question, Where is the 50 million Clinton Library? |
|
Date: 9/24/2003 12:03:00 PM ( From Author )
From Authorid: 24813
I only mentioned Bush because he is the familiar, representative figurehead for what the entire administration stands for. In reality, it's the background administration that is the focus here. |
|
Date: 9/24/2003 12:04:00 PM ( From Author )
From Authorid: 24813
It's obvious we're a nation divided, but why? We all access our information from the same available media outlets. Speak with people on either side, and they'll both provide valid morals to show they want what's best for the population. The difference is that one side values personal freedom, fears wrongful accusations, and distrusts the administration's motives, while the other values security and purely trusts in the administration to protect them and the nation. |
Date: 9/24/2003 12:08:00 PM ( From Author )
From Authorid: 24813
So, if you agree with the administration on the war/terror/security issues, why do you (or don't you) think they have your best interests at heart? Is it because of past precedents? ... you just "know"?... you feel scared or unpatriotic in questioning? ... you feel it's their duty to serve the people? ... you feel obligated by guilt to fulfill your half of a perceived symbiotic relationship with the government? ... you feel terrorists are too scary for you to risk lowering your support, and therefore, your own defense?
|
|
Date: 9/24/2003 4:21:00 PM
From Authorid: 2030
I think you have it completely wrong. We have the niave people who don't see a threat, feel Saddam should have been left alone to torture his people and that it's actually our fault there are terrorists. Then you have some who remember 9-11 and are willing to back an administration that will do what it takes to make sure it doesn't happen again. Obviously an administration that lasted 8 years, gutted the Military and intelligence agencies, ignored repeated warnings, made only half hearted attempts to resolve middle east issues DID NOT have our best interests at heart. A country like the US has to realize there are enimies at the gates all the time. You don't have to be an armed camp but strong Military and intelligence forces Prevent violence. |
|
Date: 9/24/2003 4:22:00 PM
From Authorid: 2030
And BTW personal freedom does not include living in a grand welfare state as the Democrats would like to have. |
Date: 9/24/2003 9:06:00 PM
From Authorid: 34487
I can't say I totally trust our government or ever have. I will say that no government is 100% trustworthy, since they're ran by humans. Since no human(s) are, or ever will be perfect, they will never have complete trust or respect. What's funny is that people forget that. They view Bush as this "Great Conspirator." I will admit that I didn't vote at all in the 2000 election but that was because I was very let-down after Clinton and felt they'd be the same way. I did know Bush was bound to win (whole different subject) but more importantly, I was happy that Gore wouldn't. I always associated Gore with Clinton, not just because he was the VP but because he was sneaky and cowardly too. In general, I think a lot of why a person trusts a president or any person for that matter, is based on that person's demeanor, actions and emotional expression. As for Bush, I do respect and trust him and it's all been earned. I wasn't too sure about him in the beginning, I guess I was believing all the hype and redneck jokes. Any man, that can go through as much as he has in one term which is more than most presidents see in two, deserves some respect. My trust comes from many factors but just to name a few: He hasn't brought embarrassment to his country by way of his personal life, He hasn't been a negative role-model for our youth, He's admitted to his previous alcoholism problem, delt with the voting chaos, became president at a time when our economy was beginning it's recession, delt with 9-11 and all terrorism issues thereafter and then rid Iraq of a executionist monster leader and Regime. He's obviously not just been sitting around pretending to be in charge, checkin' out the cuties in the White House, or taking lavish vacations.  |
|
Date: 9/24/2003 9:13:00 PM
From Authorid: 34487
LOL@BCAR's comment.... Yah, where is the Clinton Library? HMMMM.... |
|
Date: 9/25/2003 6:11:00 PM ( From Author )
From Authorid: 24813
Thanks BCAR, that's closer to the kind of answer I was looking for... To summarize, you see that there are perpetual threats to the US, and thereby feel we all must support our government to give us strength to fight these threats. And to continue along the lines of my other statements, I'd say you trust this administration. I agree that there are most definitely threats to the US. However, I disagree with the administration's implied severity ranking (in spite of what they may truly feel) of these threats. Really, what could have Iraq (or Afghanistan) have done to us? I would be much more worried about North Korea and China (and yes, attacking them would be pretty stupid). This is why the actions taken thus far seem to be to the detriment of the country. The dispersal of our military away from the home front, the creation of international anti-US sentiment, and hence, the supposed need for intrusive domestic security measures, do not appear to be in the citizens' best interests. You may all remind me now of how I forgot to mention terrorists… |
|
Date: 9/25/2003 6:12:00 PM ( From Author )
From Authorid: 24813
By the way, I don't feel resentful toward Bush for creating our problems, nor do I place much blame on him. He was placed in the visible seat of power, and is simply filling a role, and doing it well, allowing others in the background to enact their own policies and recommendations through him. This is where most of the blame lies. |
|
Date: 9/26/2003 6:31:00 AM
From Authorid: 2030
I consider terrorism an act of war. And any country that harbors or aids terrorists as a willing participant in that war. The fact that terrorist organizations exist is a clear and present danger to the citizens of this country. And the Presidents' sworn duty under the oath of office is to protect those citizens. |
|
Date: 9/26/2003 10:05:00 AM
From Authorid: 34487
That's exactly how I feel on that issue BCAR. |
Date: 10/1/2003 6:18:00 PM
From Authorid: 34814
I don't Like any of them. No Bush is more of a headache in my eyes. I really hope we get a new man in office!  |
|
Date: 10/10/2003 11:04:00 PM
From Authorid: 34487
Yah, but if you don't like any of them then why care if another man ends up in office? Kind of a contradiction. |
