First of all, I'd say my comments regarding Bush are as often critical of him (not enough troops in Iraq before the surge, the Harriet Miers nomination, complete lack of immigration enforcement, exporting of jobs, importing of low-wage immigrants, etc.), as they are supportive of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and other steps to protect us from Islamic terrorism. A demonstrated threat, thst democrats like to pretend doesn't even exist.
that'sabout the limit of your criticism of bush, a laundry list of things you don't like. a far cry from the "liberals want to rape our children" rhetoric you spew about the other side.
I voice a lot of criticism of Bush, what the hell do you want?
I just don't indulge in the level of viciousness and outright hatred that you and other more insult-prone liberals here do.
Yeah, I agree much more with the ideals of the Republican party.
And yeah, I do see the liberal-Democrats, that largely control the Democrat party, to be deeply rooted in Marxist ideology that many in the party are even themselves oblivious to, and that feminism, racial politics focused on decades-old racism and forever flagellating Europeans for slavery that was created by blacks, and undermining our culture and history with the hostility that mindset breeds, the abandonment of the "melting pot" approach to immigration, instead embracing a wrongheaded "multiculturalism" notion that is balkanizing America, smothering Christianity from our history and our culture,
all these are concepts rooted in the Marxist teachings of Gramsci and the
Frankfurt School, the Marxists who dreamed of a bloodless communist revolution that would overturn the United States and Western Europe, by slanderously tearing down trust in nationalism, traditional family ties, and religious faith.
But you also ignore that I've praised many other Democrats, such as Joseph Biden, Christopher Dodd, Joseph Lieberman, Byron Dorgan, Sam Nunn, Lloyd Bentsen, Jimmy Carter, Richard Rubin, and on a few points even Bill Clinton (fast action that averted an even deeper crisis, with financial bailouts in Mxico and Indonesia, and also fast military intervention in Haiti and Bosnia, that averted a larger crisis).
Again, you ignore that I often have criticized Bush.
All along, I said we should have more troops in Iraq, and we finally did when Rumsfeld was removed and the Iraq "surge" began.
And even now that it's going well, you guys are in complete denial that there's been a turnaround, as you continue to slander the president and our troops in Iraq.
Any political goal I voice criticism or priority to achieving, such as halting illegal immigration, defending our borders, etc., you blanket-label as "racist" or "bigoted".
And when I oppose NAFTA, the trade deficit, and offshoring jobs, you manufacture some other way to likewise slander or trivialize the issues I give proiority to, ignoring the parts where I'm obviously critical of Bush as well as Democrats.
and bush has actually increased the threat of terrorism. while the simple view is that they're evil and that's that, but the real view of experts is that this is blowback. terrorism came about due to the hatred we created with our manipulations and heavyhandedness in the region. the invasion of iraq has increased the number of terrorists, caused much more resentment, and destabilized the region even further.
I've heard that slander raised repeatedly by the pacifist Bush-hating left, but I've yet to see any hard evidence to support that notion. It's pure anti-Bush propaganda.
The simple fact is, we haven't been attacked again since 9-11, and Al Qaida is on the retreat in Iraq.
There's a professor and former military officer named General Odom, who said almost 2 years ago in a thing called "Odom's 9 points" that every reason for staying in Iraq is actually a reason to leave. That, for example, if we leave Iraq, the U.S. departure would immediately dry up the rallying banner of Western invaders in the middle east.
But the fact is, muslims were attacking a lot of people, in Sudan, in China, in India, in former-soviet Georgia, in Chechnya, in the Phillipines, in Europe, who
weren't attacking them!
So, to me, it's a bullshit argument, to say that if we weren't there, they wouldn't be attacking us. They'd be attacking closer people and states, and once they expanded there, then they'd move on to us.
As Hitler would have, as the Japanese would have.
Stuffing our heads in the sand and abandoning our allies abroad is
not the way to fight islamic expansionism.
I think Bush had the right idea, with intervening in Iraq, but that he should have expanded our military beforehand, called for more sacrifice from the civilian population, and gone in with the military troop levels the Pentagon generals advocated. And it's fair to criticize Bush for that. But if Bush has turned it around, as he has since the surge began, while not overlooking his earlier errors, the current success in Iraq should be acknowledged.
You and the other liberal assholes here just like to paint me as a goose-stepping Bushite, to manufacture a whipping boy who doesn't truly exist.
well you are. you only list a few things that you're critical of and then you support Bush on all the big points and call any opposition to your view "evil liberals."
You're a dumbass who apparently can't read. I've been very clear, post after post, year after year, where I do and don't support Bush. I pretty much just support Bush on the war against terror, and moves that have pushed to keep the economy out of recession, despite a home mortgage crisis, a credit crisis, and other financial problems that preceded Bush but were blamed on him by liberals. Likewise Iran and North Korea.
I've been critical of Bush for lack of enforcement against illegal immigration, a partisan and half-baked Harriet Miers Supreme Court nomination, and basically giving lip service to his conservative Christian base, while in truth doing virtually nothing in support of Christian interests nationally.
You choose to ignore, for partisan reasons, and more pointedly, out of pure hatred of myself and other conservatives, to ignore what I've truly said, in order to make me conform to your stereotype, of whatever it is you love to hate.
I don't post pro-Bush images, because I'm not as pro-Bush as you like to falsely paint me as. Bush is simply the lesser of two evils for me, in a bad 2004 choice between Bush and Kerry. I support him on some issues, and oppose him on many others.

There are certainly plenty of Republican, and even pro-Bush, images and video clips I could post here on a regular basis, if I were interested in the same level of vulgarity, spitefulness and personal insults, and outright lies that you jerks devote your lives to.
While you're accusing myself and others of partisanship, "fear", and "bigotry" that you yourselves unapologetically indulge in with pretty much every post. Oh, the irony...
i stopped caring halfway through the paragraph.
Well goody for you.