Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Why or why don't you think so?

Time will tell.

It'll be very hard to justify giving that title to someone who won their second election with a larger share.

YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

f uck bush and f uck those idiots voting for him

the elite have cast the most stupid person to help run there game. but all he has to do is dance to there tune, do what they say. and they are happy.

No I would say George Washington was, as he was a terrorist who stole a British colony..

Originally posted by Deano
the elite have cast the most stupid person to help run there game. but all he has to do is dance to there tune, do what they say. and they are happy.


Your posts hurt my eyes.......................no Bush isn't the worst .yet

Originally posted by soleran30
Your posts hurt my eyes.......................no Bush isn't the worst .yet

anyone on here who thinks george bush has the ability to run a country, is in serious need of medical help. And i mean that literally

He's not the best, but ceartainly not the worst, our generation is just alot more angst and whiney then past ones and our media is more hungery for blood, hense how things appear worst then they actually are.

I would say Andrew Jackson was our worst ever president, he was ruthless, rascist, backstabbing, and just a complete dick. Atleast Bush you hear good things about his personal life, ironicaly as dispicable of a man Andrew was, he was increddibly intelligent, it was the only time in American history we WEREN'T in deubt.. evil wins because good is dumb.

Originally posted by Deano
anyone on here who thinks george bush has the ability to run a country, is in serious need of medical help. And i mean that literally

He is running a country ..........................maybe you mean effectively run a country

once again ugh

Originally posted by soleran30
He is running a country ..........................maybe you mean effectively run a country



no i dont.

Originally posted by Deano
no i dont.


huh?

i doubt he could tie his own shoelace

Deano for someone who hates George W. so much you sure talk about him alot.

Which I can't blame you, he should've been on brokeback moutain the manly cowboy him..

i dont hate him.

Originally posted by Deano
i doubt he could tie his own shoelace

Right.

Hard to say, come back in 20 years and ask again.

Originally posted by Fishy
Hard to say, come back in 20 years and ask again.

Why, the past couple of centuires and a half weren't enough?..

Originally posted by FistOfThe North
Why or why don't you think so? Worst? Wut about Jimmy Carter?

Originally posted by JacopeX
Worst? Wut about Jimmy Carter?

and why jimmy carter? oh i cant WAIT for this answer...

Originally posted by PVS
and why jimmy carter? oh i cant WAIT for this answer... Or what about Richard Nixon actually? Wasnt he and his workers caught stealing something and was about to be impeached? Well I think George Bush isnt the worst presidents. Many presidents in the past done bad mistakes or stupid desicions.

Originally posted by JacopeX
Or what about Richard Nixon actually? Wasnt he and his workers caught stealing something and was about to be impeached? Well I think George Bush isnt the worst presidents. Many presidents in the past done bad mistakes or stupid desicions.

no no. you said jimmy carter. now tell me why he was a bad president. what stupid things did he do? dont wait for someone else to answer, i want to hear YOUR answer.

Well this is the besti could answer i guess cuz during the gulf war, terrorist from there took american citizens hostage. jimy carter had helicopters go there but they were all destroyed. He couldve jus used jet planes but I still don know why he chose to have helicopters to go there. In the end, the hostages died. If im wrong, i dont bash me cuz i learned about this awhile ago. Dont remember it that well.

Originally posted by FistOfThe North
Why, the past couple of centuires and a half weren't enough?..

Because Bush his term isn't over yet...

Maybe he pulls off something amazing in his last years in the office... And we are likely all biased either for or against him in some way anyways, so we can't give objective answers at this time.

Kennedy. He pulled the wool over everyones eyes while only caring about where his next ride came from. He was a narcotic addicted mob friendly slimebag. He was the most abhorrent example of a human being and compared to him Bush is like Ghandi.

Originally posted by JacopeX
Well this is the besti could answer i guess cuz during the gulf war, terrorist from there took american citizens hostage. jimy carter had helicopters go there but they were all destroyed. He couldve jus used jet planes but I still don know why he chose to have helicopters to go there. In the end, the hostages died. If im wrong, i dont bash me cuz i learned about this awhile ago. Dont remember it that well.

first of all, it wasn't the gulf war

second of all, they didn't die...Reagan saved them...







you haven't got a clue, dude

Originally posted by Morgoths_Wrath
first of all, it wasn't the gulf war

second of all, they didn't die...Reagan saved them...







you haven't got a clue, dude

haha

yea, but how did Reagan save them..

the hostages were released literally within minutes of Reagan's inauguration

the terrorists knew he wasn't going to mess around

Now i like Reagan. One of ma favorite presidents.

Originally posted by Morgoths_Wrath
the hostages were released literally within minutes of Reagan's inauguration

the terrorists knew he wasn't going to mess around

You didn't get it.

That or you just never knew about the Iran Contra crisis controversy involving Reagan and these same hostages you talk about that were held in Iran.

Do you know how Reagan rescued the hostages? About what he did?

Originally posted by FistOfThe North
Why or why don't you think so?

I have a feeling in a few years or so a President worse than Bush is going to come along and be an even bigger idiot and pretty soon people will forget all about Bush being the worst president ever and look to the new champion.

This "Bush hater" fad will surely die out in a few years when theres a new person for the people to direct all their hate to.

The hatred for Bush will obviously die down when he is replaced, but it will be present for a long time after.

Originally posted by Punker69
I have a feeling in a few years or so a President worse than Bush is going to come along and be an even bigger idiot and pretty soon people will forget all about Bush being the worst president ever and look to the new champion.

This "Bush hater" fad will surely die out in a few years when theres a new person for the people to direct all their hate to.

The "Bush Hate' will obviously die down when he isn't in a position of power to screw the country anymore.

Originally posted by FistOfThe North
You didn't get it.

That or you just never knew about the Iran Contra crisis controversy involving Reagan and these same hostages you talk about that were held in Iran.

Do you know how Reagan rescued the hostages? About what he did?

what did he do?

Originally posted by Morgoths_Wrath
what did he do?

The Iran-Contra Affair (also known as "Irangate" was a mid-1980s political scandal in the United States. President Ronald Reagan's administration sold arms to Iran, an avowed enemy. At the time, Americans were being held hostage in Lebanon by Hezbollah, a militant Shi'a organization loyal to Ayatollah Khomeini.

The Reagan Administration calculated that by selling arms to Iran, that nation would influence the Hezbollah kidnappers in Lebanon to release their hostages. Iran was in the midst of the Iran-Iraq War and could find few nations willing to supply it with weapons. However, the arms shipments began before the first hostage was taken, and ended a long time after the last hostage was released. Selling these arms generated large amounts of cash.

Faced with undeniable evidence of his involvement in the scandal, Reagan expressed regret regarding the situation on national television. In his speech, Reagan stated that his previous assertions that the US did not trade arms for hostages were incorrect. However, he added that he believed what he did was right, and understood how the American people might not think the same way.

He's a Mussolini surrouneded by an entire government made up of Napoleons and Richard Nixons. I still think it's a possibility that we'll have a "sudden terrorist attack" or some other national catastrophe that's gonna end up "Delaying indefinitely" our next election

George Bush is by far the worst President the US has ever seen. The man can't even deliever a speech properly. It's obvious he isn't highly educated, and he certainly does not have the intelligence to run a country.

Originally posted by Makedde
George Bush is by far the worst President the US has ever seen. The man can't even deliever a speech properly. It's obvious he isn't highly educated, and he certainly does not have the intelligence to run a country.

I'd argue that other presidents are far worse, and we only have orator knowledge of perhaps a handful of presidents, and few were very good. FDR sounded outright horrible on the radio. And Bush doesn't need the intelligence to run the country- that's why he has more henchmen than Doctor Evil.

Bush actually scares me. If there is ever a terrorist attack on my country on in America, it'll be his fault.

I don't follow that one bit. Care to explain?

Well, if my country were attacked, I'd feel it was Bush's fault, because if we hadn't been involved in the war, we would never have gotten attacked. Since the war started, we have had more terror threats than ever before. We will be attacked for supporting America in the war. If we were not in the war, we'd probably be safe.

Originally posted by Makedde
Well, if my country were attacked, I'd feel it was Bush's fault, because if we hadn't been involved in the war, we would never have gotten attacked. Since the war started, we have had more terror threats than ever before. We will be attacked for supporting America in the war. If we were not in the war, we'd probably be safe.

Did bush make your country choose to go to war? No, perhaps he used some diplomatic pressure but it was still your own country's fault for following the US into war, you can not blame others for it.

One of the worst. How about Clinton though, anybody?

Originally posted by shaber
One of the worst. How about Clinton though, anybody?

How is clinton worse then Bush? Sleeping around with Monica?

by all means, piss in your pants and blame your neighbour.
Your country wasnt forced to participate

LBJ since we're talking war?

Considering no one on this board (less a few) knows anything about more than 2 presidents, I'd say this should be more of a "Clinton vs. Bush" debate.

oops Ford, Carter, Reagen, Bush sr and then the two last ones........................and Clinton ruled, one of the few US presidents that actully was populare in Europe

The thread topic states the word "Ever."
What about the three dozen other presidents? So aren't each and every one of them worthy of serious consideration, including supplying lengthy discussion from research for all of them, important events and decisions they made during their term(s), and maybe an overall score for each of them, stating specific examples why they do or do not deserve to win this "award."

What qualities should be taken into consideration? Are things like ugliness or dissolute personal life relevant or is it just their capacity as president?

Maybe, 'cause there sure were some ugly dudes in office in the early 1800's.

their works as political leader

Well, I like Carter, cause he smiled a lot.........and Ford cause they did him great on SNL.........Are these good reasons???

Ford, the most stumbling Prez ever........was it a staircase he didnt fall down from?

Old Billy Harrison is my number one...

Well Carter they always made Peanut jokes.........hahaha...........And Ford, yeah, he was always falling....Didn't Chevy Chase do him on SNL...hahaha

"hey Im Chevy Chase and you are not"

I vote for Chevy Chase as the best president........

Oh...I see why Rutherford B. Hayes should be the first one to be looked at closer....

Why? Cause he has a great beard?

Originally posted by debbiejo
Why? Cause he has a great beard?

....sarcasm....

Lucy Hayes was a hottie!

I've toured their house in Ohio.......... ........Now that I think of it, I think they slept in different beds...He must of been a dysfunctional president.

Originally posted by JacopeX
jimy carter had helicopters go there but they were all destroyed. He couldve jus used jet planes but I still don know why he chose to have helicopters to go there.

you think carter should have sent jet fighters to land and pick up the hostages? or perhaps to snipe ground troops? wow you blow me away with your genius.
or perhaps you think he should have just sent jets over to bomb everyone and
put the hostages out of their misery?

Interesting topic. I have a lot of catching up to do.

As for worst president ever, can be called really, no one will ever be sure of what all past presidents were up to during their tenure, so fully informed answer cannot be given.

Bush is a complete f*cknut that and has been the perpetrator of some pretty stupid and duplicitous actions I agree, but I could not say with certainty that he is America's worst prez. ever.

Originally posted by Deano
the elite have cast the most stupid person to help run there game. but all he has to do is dance to there tune, do what they say. and they are happy.

Yes, yes. The shapeshifting alien lizard people rule the world and we are just pawns. Blah, blah, blah.
yawn

Originally posted by JacopeX
Worst? Wut about Jimmy Carter?

As PVS requested, please elaborate, for I fear you have not a clue what you are talking about...again.

Originally posted by JacopeX
Or what about Richard Nixon actually? Wasnt he and his workers caught stealing something and was about to be impeached? Well I think George Bush isnt the worst presidents. Many presidents in the past done bad mistakes or stupid desicions.

Your grasp of history and politics are really special. I can't wait until you are old enough to vote and put that incredible insight into action.

And I doubt Nixon did not do anything that every president before him also did. He just got caught.

Originally posted by JacopeX
Well this is the besti could answer i guess cuz during the gulf war, terrorist from there took american citizens hostage. jimy carter had helicopters go there but they were all destroyed. He couldve jus used jet planes but I still don know why he chose to have helicopters to go there. In the end, the hostages died. If im wrong, i dont bash me cuz i learned about this awhile ago. Dont remember it that well.

Best to sit down, and not answer anything in the GDF. You are more at home in the OTF Jaco, your posts actually make my eyes bleed, gut ache.

Originally posted by shaber
One of the worst. How about Clinton though, anybody?

Clinton was a great president. His personal life was a joke. But as a president he was exceptional. Please elaborate on why you feel that he's a candidate for being the worst.

Originally posted by botankus
Considering no one on this board (less a few) knows anything about more than 2 presidents, I'd say this should be more of a "Clinton vs. Bush" debate.

Does anyone ales find this too be so true as to be both humorous and sad?

One thing I don't get is why Kennedy is still so loved. He was a crook, a cheat, a far worse womanizer than Clinton, and a general all around douche bag. And that can be said for most of the Kennedy clan.

LOL Clinton wasn't to bad the first female president in the USA

This is actually a really good question. However, it depends on who you ask. For example:

Anti-American, liberal, terrorist sympathiser would say: "Yes, he is the WORST and Most Evil American Presiden EVER. Worst than Hitler!!!!!!!"

On the other side of the coin.

Patriotic American, conservative, hick would say: "NO! He is one of our best Presidents! America#1!!!!!!"

As it was mention earlier in the first page "time will tell". After the dust has settle down and maybe 10 years from now we will see the impact President Bush had on this nation and the world.

My best suggestion...stir away from the extremist...they're far too deluded.

Yeah as of right now,Bush is the worst president we have ever had.Society is really headed to the dumps.They just get worse and worse all the time.Clinton used to have that honor because of all the people that knew too much about his dirty dealings in arkansas how he had operitives kill them off-the clinton body count was unreal of how many people who knew clinton who died under very mysterious circumstaces such as Vince Foster.I did not think there could be a more evil corrupt president worse than Clinton but Bush has that new honor.A guy who knew that the world trade center tragedy was going to occur but did NOTHING to try and stop it and even threatened FBI agents with arrest who tried to warn the president.Yeah I would say he is the worst and most evil president ever.

Originally posted by Ushgarak
It'll be very hard to justify giving that title to someone who won their second election with a larger share.

except elections are rigged.There was never a doubt in my mind that Bush would win the election both times because thats what the elite wanted.

I hear the echoes of Deano in that last post.

Originally posted by Makedde
Bush actually scares me. If there is ever a terrorist attack on my country on in America, it'll be his fault.

as well he should.any president who knows that some terrorists are going to hijack a plane and crash it into the world trade center and does NOTHING to stop it and threatens FBI agents with arrest when they warned Bush about it,should scare you.

yup he is

Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
Anti-American, liberal, terrorist sympathiser....

Patriotic American, conservative, hick...

im just going to assume you're being deliberately ironic with those adjectives...

No one has said clinton.

No one can say Clinton because atleast under him the US stayed stable.


Bush is easily the worst since Nixion.

Alot of the things done under this administration will be "water" under the bridge 10 years after Bush is out of office. Out of sight out of mind.

I said that Clinton WAS the worst president until Bush came along. I wouldnt say easily the worst since Clinton is right up there,but yeah since he is even worse than Clinton,and he really is the worst and most corrupt president since Nixon.

Originally posted by Mr Parker
I said that Clinton WAS the worst president until Bush came along. I wouldnt say easily the worst since Clinton is right up there,but yeah since he is even worse than Clinton,and he really is the worst and most corrupt president since Nixon.

nixon? apart from the hippie-hating, war mongering, and corruption, he at least got some shit accomplished. what i mean is, the man WORKED.

Originally posted by PVS
nixon? apart from the hippie-hating, war mongering, and corruption, he at least got some shit accomplished. what i mean is, the man WORKED.

Hippie hating, war mongering and corruption? I would have thought you were talking about Bush until you mentioned that the man worked!

I stand by my answer of Andrew Jackson, he was good for the economy, but a bad person, where as Nixon and Bush, despite thier flaws, are still people you could have dinner with..

You kids and your angst against Republicans. I blame that damn hippity-hoppity music.

Hey I ranked Clinton as being even worse than Nixon.dont lump me in there with the others as an angst republican.

My mistake Mr. Parker, hey, you should join the KMC Justice-League!

Nixon wasn't a bad president. In many ways, he was a very good president. Don't dismiss his accomplishments based on Watergate.

Originally posted by amity75
Kennedy. He pulled the wool over everyones eyes while only caring about where his next ride came from. He was a narcotic addicted mob friendly slimebag. He was the most abhorrent example of a human being and compared to him Bush is like Ghandi.

"NIXON NIXSON HE'S OUR MAN, MCGOVERN BELONGS IN THE GARBAGE CAN"...........Rally song I remembered.

nixon passed some progressive policies like affirmative action (with the intention of using it to stir infighting among unions), but he was a manipulative antisemitic dick who plotted the murder of his enemies (including woodward and bernstein) and purposley dragged out vietnam and illegally bombed other countires.

Wasn't he only caught for what others were doing anyway?

Originally posted by Darth Jello
nixon passed some progressive policies like affirmative action (with the intention of using it to stir infighting among unions), but he was a manipulative antisemitic dick who plotted the murder of his enemies (including woodward and bernstein) and purposley dragged out vietnam and illegally bombed other countires.

yep the guy gave hitler a run for his money as an evil monster.watergate is hardly the reason I blame him.His purposely dragging out vietnam and illegally bombing other countrys like jello said is WHY he like clinton and bush,give hitler a run for his money as the most evil man.

Originally posted by Mr Parker
yep the guy gave hitler a run for his money as an evil monster.watergate is hardly the reason I blame him.His purposely dragging out vietnam and illegally bombing other countrys like jello said is WHY he like clinton and bush,give hitler a run for his money as the most evil man.

Comparing Bush, Nixon and Clinton to Hitler really makes you look like an idiot. Comparing Hitler to Stalin, o.k., I can see that, but Bush, Nixon and Clinton? Get a grip on reality and some perspective there spiderboy.

No it doesnt.Nixon murdered thousands of people extending the war like he did including americans.Clinton has a huge body count of people who have died under mystrious deaths who knew too much about his evil doings in arkansas,BUSH knew the trade center tragedy would happen and did nothing to stop it.Like hitler,they are murderers.people like you just need to take the blinders off and realise that.

Originally posted by FistOfThe North
Why or why don't you think so?

No.


He stacked the deck on the U.S. Supreme Court, securing what I hope will be a conservative approach to the laws in this country for the next 25 years.

Originally posted by Mr Parker
No it doesnt.Nixon murdered thousands of people extending the war like he did including americans.Clinton has a huge body count of people who have died under mystrious deaths who knew too much about his evil doings in arkansas,BUSH knew the trade center tragedy would happen and did nothing to stop it.Like hitler,they are murderers.people like you just need to take the blinders off and realise that.

You are comparing thousands of deaths, and conspiracey ramblings (not to mention totally unconfirmed allegations) with the deaths and torture of millions?

You have no grasp of perspective and a tenious grasp on reality at best.

I beleive there is a short and bogus history to why people hate Bush: ]

1) He is republican- many democrats hate him right away.

2) Hes Texan, has a Texan accent, and messed up while saying like two words during a speech.

3) He became president just before 9/11- many people blamed him of all people.

4) He speaks freely and openly about his own opinions on gay/strait marriage, abortions, and religion. Finally.

5) War in Iraq made him look unpopular and still does. People blame him for the soldiers deaths and say Iraq was a personal vendetta for his own sake. Many claim he was lying and making up data about WMDs and terrorists, etc... bogus.

6) People hate the Patriot Act and the wiretapping and security network he emplaced for good purposes.

Feel free to bash me all you want but thats the lineup of stuff people say he is bad for. In my mind its a pretty bad list to be hating someone for.

I agree tottaly black ghost, most of the "hate" against Bush is immature people's inability to deal with life's problems and needing somebody to blame. When you get right down to it, he's just a guy, a guy with some wacky ideas on how to run the country, that you may or may not agree with, but ohwell, that's why we have a democracy..

Well I don't really hate bush per say..I hate the whole two part system. It sucks really. I don't really believe we have any politicians nowadays who are really out there to "serve the people" as our forefathers would have put it. We need to put some term limits on these career politicians, and put some salary caps on these individuals who are running for various public offices for money. This will help get some "good" people into Washington, and take away some of the problems the US is facing today.

Another thing, anyone who runs for president must have some military experience. No more of this being commander and chief, and not even fighting in a war or draft dodging crap. How the hell can you trust someone as being a leader, if they haven't ever fought for the values that embody the people in which they are leading?

To0 many green little boys have been president in recent years, we need some real men, who are willing to fight for what's right, and have the experience and as well as moral character it takes to lead a nation.

Originally posted by The Black Ghost
1) He is republican- many democrats hate him right away.

Of course Democrats generally dislike the opposition! That's why they're Democrats! Duh. If your points are to have any pertinence, then they shouldn't be appliable to both parties.

Originally posted by The Black Ghost
2) Hes Texan, has a Texan accent, and messed up while saying like two words during a speech..

Most of the US Presidents have been from the South, so geography has no bearing. As for his severe case of verbal diarrhoea, of course people are going to take exception to the leader of the most powerful country in the world not being able to string a few sentences together!

Originally posted by The Black Ghost
3) He became president just before 9/11- many people blamed him of all people.

His approval rating was at its highest immediately after 9/11, so this is utter bullshit.

Originally posted by The Black Ghost
4) He speaks freely and openly about his own opinions on gay/strait marriage, abortions, and religion. Finally.

Speaking freely isn't a problem, it's the utter garbage he spews that people abhor. It's ironic that you should commend him for speaking freely, when the words he is speaking are restricting freedoms.

Originally posted by The Black Ghost
5) War in Iraq made him look unpopular and still does. People blame him for the soldiers deaths and say Iraq was a personal vendetta for his own sake. Many claim he was lying and making up data about WMDs and terrorists, etc... bogus.

Well, it's been proved that the data about WMDs was fabricated, and this was the basis for the war in the first place. So, who do you think deserves the blame for the soldiers death when they were sent to war under false pretences?

Originally posted by The Black Ghost
6) People hate the Patriot Act and the wiretapping and security network he emplaced for good purposes.

What was that you were saying about freedom of speech before? In the immediate aftermath of 9/11, many politicians and commentators spoke of the importance of continuing to respect the Constitution and protecting civil liberties. The Patriot Act erodes these. That is why it is wrong. It is also a perfect example of 'doublespeak', a technique that was very common in the Third Reich.

Originally posted by The Black Ghost
In my mind its a pretty bad list to be hating someone for.

In that case, your mind must enjoy being contradicted by reality. Either that, or...

Ya' Krunk: Your words are exactly the kind of arrogant and somewhat selfish attitude that sadly has spread to so many people these days. The general American public acts the same way you do- always put the blame on somebody else, and its never the people who can actually just step into the shoes of the person in charge and try to think things through logically like all presidents should.


"Of course Democrats generally dislike the opposition! That's why they're Democrats! Duh. If your points are to have any pertinence, then they shouldn't be appliable to both parties."
----A little healty competition is always good because it gives room for different viewpoints and ideals but the way the parties have turned these days can make democrats feel repulicans are an entirely different species who is evil and vice versa. There has to at one point be a hapy medium between the two.

"As for his severe case of verbal diarrhoea, of course people are going to take exception to the leader of the most powerful country in the world not being able to string a few sentences together!"

---Thats harsh for a few mispronounced words. You have obviously never spoken in public before because if you have you would know how difficult it is to give speeches and once in a while you are going to stutter or stumble on a word. Anyways, this is no basis for your view of a president. Consider reading " Fahrenheit 451" by Ray Bradbury and you will realize what I mean.

"His approval rating was at its highest immediately after 9/11, so this is utter bullshit."
---Cool it buddy I was just making a point. Nobodys always right you know. Beleive it or not there are people who beleive he had knowledge of 9/11 before it happened and he could have stopped it. While the CIA often has leads it does not mean this could have been preventable.

"Speaking freely isn't a problem, it's the utter garbage he spews that people abhor. It's ironic that you should commend him for speaking freely, when the words he is speaking are restricting freedoms."
---You could use a little of that "garbage" in your own lifestyle considering how poorly you think of people you have biassed opinions on. The things he says are the truth- thats what everyone really hates.

"Well, it's been proved that the data about WMDs was fabricated, and this was the basis for the war in the first place. So, who do you think deserves the blame for the soldiers death when they were sent to war under false pretences?"
---Beep! Wrong again! the evidence was not fabricated. WMDs were found in mass storages- not in the amounts predicted but still very credibly there. remember Bio-toxins, poison-gas, and other poisons count as WMDs and were used by Saddam to kill thousands of his people- aside from the thousands he killed anyways. Iraq was also a major refuge for terrorists. This is a fact so dont deny it. If you remember we are currently waging a war on terrorism. We also were able to set up a democracy in the middle-east, establish relations in that area, and set up a major base for democratical expansion in the area. While it is terrrible that so many lives were lost- those soldiers indefinately saved the lives of tens of thousands- likely more.

"What was that you were saying about freedom of speech before? In the immediate aftermath of 9/11, many politicians and commentators spoke of the importance of continuing to respect the Constitution and protecting civil liberties. The Patriot Act erodes these. That is why it is wrong. It is also a perfect example of 'doublespeak', a technique that was very common in the Third Reich."
---The Patriot Act was exists only to protect people- as does the wiretapping thing. It already stopped the Golden Gate bridge plot and many other incidents where lives were saved. We are at war, and we are the main target of aggression from over a billion people across the world- I think these extra security measures are neccesary and you should too. Think logically.

"In that case, your mind must enjoy being contradicted by reality. Either that, or..."
---Or what? You, not me, has been making all the irrational and unsupported statements. Dont tell me you know more about reality.

Apparently Black Ghost is living in a completely different reality than the rest of us. Some of your facts and reasoning are really out in left field.

Originally posted by The Black Ghost
Ya' Krunk: Your words are exactly the kind of arrogant and somewhat selfish attitude that sadly has spread to so many people these days. The general American public acts the same way you do- always put the blame on somebody else, and its never the people who can actually just step into the shoes of the person in charge and try to think things through logically like all presidents should.

What ridiculous rubbish you spew! I'm blaming the person who's fault it is; Bush. It's called 'accountability'. Sadly, this is a word that Bush also has trouble with, as he has never admitted the error of his ways. There's another word for this type of behaviour. I see you know how to spell it, but you have used it erroneously. The word? Arrogant. Belligerence also fits. Although, I don't expect you to know the meaning of that word...

Originally posted by The Black Ghost
A little healty competition is always good because it gives room for different viewpoints and ideals but the way the parties have turned these days can make democrats feel repulicans are an entirely different species who is evil and vice versa. There has to at one point be a hapy medium between the two.

There is. It's called the center, but Bush's government is too far to the right to be able to pull together a compromise.

Originally posted by The Black Ghost
Thats harsh for a few mispronounced words. You have obviously never spoken in public before because if you have you would know how difficult it is to give speeches and once in a while you are going to stutter or stumble on a word.

This really shows your ignorance. A few mispronounced words is no cause for concern, but anyone who knows what they are talking about knows it's more than that. Click here for help!

Originally posted by The Black Ghost
Cool it buddy I was just making a point. Nobodys always right you know. Beleive it or not there are people who beleive he had knowledge of 9/11 before it happened and he could have stopped it. While the CIA often has leads it does not mean this could have been preventable.

You spoke crap, I called you out on it. If it was a case of you being wrong in this one instance, then I would accept it as a mistake. However, the catalogue of your mistakes counts past 1, 2, 3, 4, 5...

Originally posted by The Black Ghost
You could use a little of that "garbage" in your own lifestyle considering how poorly you think of people you have biassed opinions on. The things he says are the truth- thats what everyone really hates.

I need to speak garbage? Why is that, little man? So I can sound more like you? I'd rather walk the path of crystal clarity. It does a good job in showing you up...

Originally posted by The Black Ghost
Beep! Wrong again! the evidence was not fabricated. WMDs were found in mass storages- not in the amounts predicted but still very credibly there. remember Bio-toxins, poison-gas, and other poisons count as WMDs and were used by Saddam to kill thousands of his people- aside from the thousands he killed anyways. Iraq was also a major refuge for terrorists. This is a fact so dont deny it. If you remember we are currently waging a war on terrorism. We also were able to set up a democracy in the middle-east, establish relations in that area, and set up a major base for democratical expansion in the area. While it is terrrible that so many lives were lost- those soldiers indefinately saved the lives of tens of thousands- likely more.

Oh, dear. I'm not even going to dignify this with a rebuttal as it is so grossly incorrect.

Originally posted by The Black Ghost
The Patriot Act was exists only to protect people- as does the wiretapping thing. It already stopped the Golden Gate bridge plot and many other incidents where lives were saved. We are at war, and we are the main target of aggression from over a billion people across the world- I think these extra security measures are neccesary and you should too. Think logically.

Please don't offer advice that you yourself are inable to practice. Your whole argument would look a lot better if you knew the truth, however then you wouldn't be arguing what you are. Ah, Catch-22...Continue speaking crap in the hope someone buys it, or cease the spew and acknowledge your mistakes...Decisions, decisions...

Originally posted by The Black Ghost
Or what? You, not me, has been making all the irrational and unsupported statements. Dont tell me you know more about reality.

Oh, the old 'No, you are'-comeback! That was tired in Elementary School, here and now it just makes you look like more of an idiot.

Originally posted by shaber
LBJ since we're talking war?

LBJ wasn't a bad president. A war fell his lap and he handled it the best he could. Kennedy had a plan for Nam and Johnson misinterpreted it.

I agree with most historians on JFK; he was a mediocre president, but because he was capped, he's made out to be some kind of god.

The Black Ghost...

I've just seen your profile, and it's cleared a lot of things up.

When I said this:

Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
Oh, the old 'No, you are'-comeback! That was tired in Elementary School, here and now it just makes you look like more of an idiot.

I didn't realise you had actually only recently graduated from elementary school, so there's no shame in your immaturity. In actual fact, it's great that you are interested in politics, and you have a strong opinion. However, it is important to base such an opinion on truth. I don't know who has told you the things you have stated in this discussion, but they haven't told you the truth. I'm talking about the Bushisms, the WMDs, the situation in Iraq, etc. You're perfectly entitled to like Bush, but when you debate with people it is vital that your argument is based in reality. This is no fault of your own, but in future it would be wise to check the 'facts' you are told. Obviously, you have access to the internet, so you can use it to research some of the 'truths'.

I honestly didn't know you were only 14, and if I did, I wouldn't have engaged you in a debate. It's actually a compliment to you that I didn't realise this earlier. Anyway, that's it from me to you.

The Black Ghost and JacopeX are the youngest people I've seen on KMC. Most people here are college kids.

Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
The Black Ghost...

I've just seen your profile, and it's cleared a lot of things up.

When I said this:



I didn't realise you had actually only recently graduated from elementary school, so there's no shame in your immaturity. In actual fact, it's great that you are interested in politics, and you have a strong opinion. However, it is important to base such an opinion on truth. I don't know who has told you the things you have stated in this discussion, but they haven't told you the truth. I'm talking about the Bushisms, the WMDs, the situation in Iraq, etc. You're perfectly entitled to like Bush, but when you debate with people it is vital that your argument is based in reality. This is no fault of your own, but in future it would be wise to check the 'facts' you are told. Obviously, you have access to the internet, so you can use it to research some of the 'truths'.

I honestly didn't know you were only 14, and if I did, I wouldn't have engaged you in a debate. It's actually a compliment to you that I didn't realise this earlier. Anyway, that's it from me to you.
He's actually 15. But yes most people our age are quite naive and don't bother to 'check' the 'facts' their teachers or parents teach them.

I think voting age should be changed to 16, that could encourage young people to learn and read about politics and current world events.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
The Black Ghost and JacopeX are the youngest people I've seen on KMC. Most people here are college kids.
I'm younger than both of them. And if I'm the youngest person you've seen here then you probably don't hang out at the OTF forum much, full of kids there.

Originally posted by FistOfThe North
Why or why don't you think so?

Warren G. Harding was the worst president ever.

Go Dub'ya!!!

i disagree, though he is up there. the way i see, the worst presidents are/were:
1.King George Bush II
2.Ronald Reagan
3.Poppa Bush
3.Richard Nixon
4.Bill Clinton
5.Ulysses S. Grant
6.Warren Harding
7.Andrew Jackson
8.Martin Van Beurin
9.Jimmy Carter
10.John Adams

Originally posted by Darth Jello

1.King George Bush II


^Why?

If you read anything about Benitto Mussollini you'll understand why. Bush is the stereotypical puppet figurehead that's been a staple of crumbling empires throughout history. A borderline retard who's used his family connections like a lubricant to squeeze through any challenges in life into positions of power right up america's anus, maskeraded as an intelligent human being by a cabal of robber barons, religious zealots, and mass murderers who use nationalism and a personality cult to disguise their crimes, boosting their earnings by conducting wars with other nations while supporting those same nations and terrorists instead of infiltrating them and destroying them from the inside out like they'd done with so many peaceful groups just 4 decades earlier.
welcome to the fall of rome. And just like Rome, if the dubai deal is any indication we will soon be relying on our "barbaric" enemies to guard our borders. Society via the media is becoming more and more desensitized to crime and violence a la christian gladiator matches so now when the Bushies talk about torture, domestic spying, propaganda, assassinations, and disappearances, it's a legitimate topic of consideration without the need for cute names like Tiger Force, or Cointelpro and government officials no longer even pretend that they're not lying.
I believe we are at least a year and a half away from some incident which will postpone elections indefinitely under FEMA provisions and America really will throw out it's constitution and become an empire. PNAC, the straussian, neoliberal special interest group to which every single member of the Bush administration belongs have all but stated this as their goal in their charter and liturature. A unitary executive. A police state masking as a democracy. Full spectrum global dominance and rule the economic and violent fear.
And that is why I think the Bush administration is a cancer on humanity, why Bush is the worst president in the country's history and why TRUE AMERICAN PATRIOTS HOLD THEIR ALLEGIANCE TO THE CONSTITUTION, THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDANCE, AND EACH OTHER, NOT THE PRESIDENT.

I like the fact that it seems necessary to read that very fast.

The first two paragraphs are apposite in regards to Bush's failings, but perhaps you become a little over-exuberant at the end there. Sure, he would appear to be attempting to inure Americans into giving up some civil liberties for the sake of security, but such an obviation does not denote the movement to become an empire. It just sounds a little too Deano.

Originally posted by Darth Jello
i disagree, though he is up there. the way i see, the worst presidents are/were:
1.King George Bush II
2.Ronald Reagan
3.Poppa Bush
3.Richard Nixon
4.Bill Clinton
5.Ulysses S. Grant
6.Warren Harding
7.Andrew Jackson
8.Martin Van Beurin
9.Jimmy Carter
10.John Adams
What's so bad about Reagan?

Margret Thatcher; Reagan's guilty by association.

JFK had to be one of the worst presidents I mean he nailed Marylin and then ditched her for his wife..................oh the nerve!

Originally posted by Eis
I think voting age should be changed to 16, that could encourage young people to learn and read about politics and current world events.


People who are 18 rarely take interest in politics and world events. Heck, most people nowadays under 25 have not a clue what's going on.

The majority of 16 year olds don't have the maturity to make decisions that affect their daily lives never mind trying to make decisions that dictate the policies and direction of their entire nation.

Originally posted by KharmaDog
People who are 18 rarely take interest in politics and world events. Heck, most people nowadays under 25 have not a clue what's going on.

The majority of 16 year olds don't have the maturity to make decisions that affect their daily lives never mind trying to make decisions that dictate the policies and direction of their entire nation.

I would more say that 80% of the population "don't have the maturity to make decisions that affect their daily lives never mind trying to make decisions that dictate the policies and direction of their entire nation."

16 year olds wouldn't make a big difference in the polls just from a number standpoint. 16 year olds should be able to vote only if its right winged religious voting.............


Only the most sophisticated posters on this site are capable of making world descisions as I have seen from any number of the discussions and the amount of political "expertise" and abilty to digest world news

Originally posted by Bardock42
I would more say that 80% of the population "don't have the maturity to make decisions that affect their daily lives never mind trying to make decisions that dictate the policies and direction of their entire nation."

I won't argue that.

Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
Margret Thatcher; Reagan's guilty by association.
I can't say I'm qutie fond of Reagan or Thatcher for that matter, but I hardly see him as number 2 in the worst presidents of the USA ever.

Originally posted by KharmaDog
People who are 18 rarely take interest in politics and world events. Heck, most people nowadays under 25 have not a clue what's going on.

The majority of 16 year olds don't have the maturity to make decisions that affect their daily lives never mind trying to make decisions that dictate the policies and direction of their entire nation.
I think, perhaps foolishly, but I do believe that it would encourage teenagers and push us towards politics.
I think it's definitely worth a chance.

By allowing 16 year olds to vote there wouldn't be any "real" risk persay. What are they going to have a larger turnout at the poles? Maybe a few 16 year old guys will vote for a female president if she is hot enough.................

Re. Reagan:

Well, there was the Iran-Contra affair, the bombing in Beruit, terrorist support in Nicaragua, his support of apartheid-era South Africa, his support of the Pinochet military junta in Chile, and he was a pretty dominant figure in the emergence of the American conservative movement.

I don't see anything wrong with allowing 16 year olds to vote.

Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
Re. Reagan:

Well, there was the Iran-Contra affair, the bombing in Beruit, terrorist support in Nicaragua, his support of apartheid-era South Africa, his support of the Pinochet military junta in Chile, and he was a pretty dominant figure in the emergence of the American conservative movement.


Also don't forget we received a new economic model Reaganonmics! Where they threw out calculators and computers and used only paper and pencils so if there were mistakes later on they could change them to make them work properly

JFK-----------Cuban Missile Crisis, Bay of pigs. At least when the Bush's invaded they got her done so to speak

Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
Re. Reagan:

Well, there was the Iran-Contra affair, the bombing in Beruit, terrorist support in Nicaragua, his support of apartheid-era South Africa, his support of the Pinochet military junta in Chile, and he was a pretty dominant figure in the emergence of the American conservative movement.
During his administration the unemployment and the poverty rate dropped also. Considerable amounts.
I'm not supporting him, at all. I'm saying he's hardly number two in the worst presidents list.
Oh and anyone who knows anything about South American politics would know that Pinochet's dictatorship was necessary for the country's economic growth.

Originally posted by soleran30
By allowing 16 year olds to vote there wouldn't be any "real" risk persay. What are they going to have a larger turnout at the poles? Maybe a few 16 year old guys will vote for a female president if she is hot enough.................

No way in hell should 16 year olds be allowed to vote.

Originally posted by RedAlertv2
No way in hell should 16 year olds be allowed to vote.

Why not? Any reason? No? Thought so.

He just said they shouldn't be able to vote in Hell, that's all.

Originally posted by botankus
He just said they shouldn't be able to vote in Hell, that's all.

True, true, forgive me, for I am strange.

Originally posted by soleran30
Cuban Missile Crisis, Bay of pigs. At least when the Bush's invaded they got her done so to speak

really? whoa thats a relief. so the iraq and afghanistan wars are over. thanks for the awesome news.

Originally posted by PVS
really? whoa thats a relief. so the iraq and afghanistan wars are over. thanks for the awesome news.


I say the invasion worked I never said they were done............

Originally posted by soleran30
I say the invasion worked I never said they were done............

Can't you really say that the invasion worked only when you see a final success?

Originally posted by KharmaDog
Can't you really say that the invasion worked only when you see a final success?

It was meant to be more light hearted just like my reaganomics piece. JFK's barely made into cuba with the bay of pigs just to the beach head, Bush stormed right into the country. Thats all I was saying in a light hearted piece.

Originally posted by soleran30
It was meant to be more light hearted just like my reaganomics piece. JFK's barely made into cuba with the bay of pigs just to the beach head, Bush stormed right into the country. Thats all I was saying in a light hearted piece.

O.k., got it.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Why not? Any reason? No? Thought so.

18 years olds are to stupid to vote letting 16 years old vote won't really help.

Actually we should have IQ tests before voting if you don't score above a certain number you shouldn't be allowed to vote and after that we should have other tests to find out if you know who you are voting for and know the political points of that particulair party before your vote is cast. That would save us all a lot of trouble and make the country a hell of a lot better, it would also reduce the lines at the voting offices.

Originally posted by Fishy
18 years olds are to stupid to vote letting 16 years old vote won't really help.

Actually we should have IQ tests before voting if you don't score above a certain number you shouldn't be allowed to vote and after that we should have other tests to find out if you know who you are voting for and know the political points of that particulair party before your vote is cast. That would save us all a lot of trouble and make the country a hell of a lot better, it would also reduce the lines at the voting offices.

Well. I don't think that 16 year olds are any more stupid than 18 year olds...so I don't see the point. This lie "18" is jsut randomly selected...makes no sense.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Well. I don't think that 16 year olds are any more stupid than 18 year olds...so I don't see the point. This lie "18" is jsut randomly selected...makes no sense.

Well I wouldn't want to let 18 year olds vote either, but unfortunally there is a age where people become adults, and with that have the right to vote. Far to early, but I see no reason to allow even more idiots to vote... Besides we don't get a lot of rights until we are 18 unless all of those laws are changed as well 16 year olds shouldn't be allowed to vote.

I mean it would be stupid if I could decide who would lead this country but couldn't smoke, drive, drink, go out into town on a saturday night, order pizza, get my own insurance policy, order pizza, sign contracts.

Well you know everything...

Originally posted by Fishy
18 years olds are to stupid to vote letting 16 years old vote won't really help.

Actually we should have IQ tests before voting if you don't score above a certain number you shouldn't be allowed to vote and after that we should have other tests to find out if you know who you are voting for and know the political points of that particulair party before your vote is cast. That would save us all a lot of trouble and make the country a hell of a lot better, it would also reduce the lines at the voting offices.


Elitists on parade................can I come to the march! Seeing as IQ tests would prevent a great deal of people even qualifying to vote if you made the score to be oh say 140 I think thats the baseline for Mensa however people like that tend to be more absorbed in their interests and wouldn't even show up to vote they would be to busy playing mind puzzles and such

130 is the minimum for Mensa.

Originally posted by soleran30
Elitists on parade................can I come to the march! Seeing as IQ tests would prevent a great deal of people even qualifying to vote if you made the score to be oh say 140 I think thats the baseline for Mensa however people like that tend to be more absorbed in their interests and wouldn't even show up to vote they would be to busy playing mind puzzles and such

Well it doesn't have to be 140 just a 100 or something? Whats the average number? Just take that number and use that one. It would prevent a lot of idiots from voting.

Originally posted by Fishy
Well I wouldn't want to let 18 year olds vote either, but unfortunally there is a age where people become adults, and with that have the right to vote. Far to early, but I see no reason to allow even more idiots to vote... Besides we don't get a lot of rights until we are 18 unless all of those laws are changed as well 16 year olds shouldn't be allowed to vote.

I mean it would be stupid if I could decide who would lead this country but couldn't smoke, drive, drink, go out into town on a saturday night, order pizza, get my own insurance policy, order pizza, sign contracts.

Well you know everything...

Yeah...like ordering Pizza and such....

But still, 18 is jsut so random...

Okay ordering Pizza was a bullshit example, but it just shows that until 18 you can't do a lot of things you can do after you are 18... And unless 16 year olds get the same rights and duty's as adults then they shouldn't be allowed to vote.

and the 18 number is probably based on something. And even if it isn't, I couldn't care less, its still to young because a lot of 18 year olds are idiots and vote for the party that has the cutest guy/girl leading the party.

Originally posted by Fishy
Okay ordering Pizza was a bullshit example, but it just shows that until 18 you can't do a lot of things you can do after you are 18... And unless 16 year olds get the same rights and duty's as adults then they shouldn't be allowed to vote.

and the 18 number is probably based on something. And even if it isn't, I couldn't care less, its still to young because a lot of 18 year olds are idiots and vote for the party that has the cutest guy/girl leading the party.

Well, I basically agree. Just that I wouldn't mind it being 16. Or 35....but I just think 18 is weird....

Originally posted by Fishy
Okay ordering Pizza was a bullshit example, but it just shows that until 18 you can't do a lot of things you can do after you are 18... And unless 16 year olds get the same rights and duty's as adults then they shouldn't be allowed to vote.

and the 18 number is probably based on something. And even if it isn't, I couldn't care less, its still to young because a lot of 18 year olds are idiots and vote for the party that has the cutest guy/girl leading the party.


Well at least that can keep Hilary outta office! Anyway every president in some way shape or form had some incident while they were in office that created contraversy except Abe Lincoln cuz the man could never tell a lie and that was from his own mouth!

oh must be true then

Abe is great, no debate.., Washington rocks as well.


Anyways there was a president that ran away from the white house during the war of 1812.

Bush is the worst in a while.

True Clinton had amjor flaws but atleast the country was stable and we were not so much in debt.

To those who this apply to: Age is no measure of reason- nor logic, nor knowledge as some people here prove clearly enough. What a sad world this is these days when mispronouncing one or two words during an hour long speech can actually affect people's opinions of them- or when people know how old you are and assume you are immature because you are younger...

Originally posted by The Black Ghost
To those who this apply to: Age is no measure of reason- nor logic, nor knowledge as some people here prove clearly enough.

But wisdom, logic, experience and maturity can only come with time. To argue contrary is silly. Your comments display that you not only have an only basic grasp of politics and human nature, but also a very loose idea of reason, logic and the processing of information. The mastering of these skills comes only with time, and the exercising of those skills over said period of time.

Originally posted by The Black Ghost
What a sad world this is these days when mispronouncing one or two words during an hour long speech can actually affect people's opinions of them

If that were the case I would agree. However, the repeated abuse of the english language, a continuing pattern of exhibiting a lack of comprehension as to the meaning of words and basic sentence structure and the inability to form a clear and concise thought is what has affected people's opinions of Bush. If you can honestly say that you don't agree that he has made a large amount of ridiculous comments, unintelligible statements and just plain massacred the english language then you are blinded by opinion or just have not been paying attention.

Originally posted by The Black Ghost
or when people know how old you are and assume you are immature because you are younger...

If you choose not to be seen as immature, then don't behave as such, and take the time to study and formulate your arguments as opposed to saying things such as:

Originally posted by The Black Ghost
To those who this apply to: Age is no measure of reason- nor logic, nor knowledge as some people here prove clearly enough. What a sad world this is these days when mispronouncing one or two words during an hour long speech can actually affect people's opinions of them- or when people know how old you are and assume you are immature because you are younger...

Indeed.

Even sadder that they believe that a President can summon level 5 hurricanes to kill all the black people he doesn't like.....


Or that he would allow 9/11 to get support to go to Iraq....

When it not only killed thousands of people, hit an economic target, then hit the PENTAGON, which held the nations defense leaders and plenty of generals and such that he would need for the war in Iraq, and..................... oh yeah, flight 93 was headed for the F*CKING White House before it crashed, so he would have also lost his home, half of his employees, and his little doggie.....

Anyone who seriously believes that he planned 9/11 or new EXACTLY what would happen, needs their head examined.


I brought this up in another thread:


There are people out there who want to kill us (lone nutcases and organized killers alike) and who threaten us to do so every day.

Who knows how many try and are caught?

My point:

Bush (or any other pres.) can't just shut everything down when they get a threat. They cant' close wall street, the Bay Bridge, etc.... every time someone says that they will blow it up.

Even with exact info. (which it is doubtfull that he had) of where, when, what flights they left from.... etc.....

It wouldn't matter. If we closed everything, evacuated people, and searched the airports,...... they still would have hit us.

We would have delayed it, not prevented it.

They would have tried again and succeeded.




Lastly, Bush needed no dramatic attack to invade Iraq.

In 1998 Clinton knew that Saddam Hussein was presuing WMD, which is why there was a series of surgical strikes against factories in Iraq.

He has said so in the press, that his administration believed that Saddam either had weapons or was trying to make them.

Considering that we found that he had the capability to make them, that hardly makes the war waged on "false pretenses".

Not to mention that he tried to kill Bush the First.

We know he did.

That's a good enough reason to go after him. What kind of pussies have we become?

No other country would allow us to attempt to assinate their leader, and if you or I even threatened such a thing we would be arrested.

Actually trying and failing would be treason, which is punishable by death.



Bush didn't "need" 9/11 to go into Iraq, as evidenced by the overwhelming majority of Democrat's who voted FOR the war.


Get off his dick.

Well better to draw out your enemies on their turf then let them come to the US and fight.

Thanks for that one. Well if no one is going to beleive me because my age disvalidates any point I make then maybe someone will listen to you at least...

Originally posted by sithsaber408
Even sadder that they believe that a President can summon level 5 hurricanes to kill all the black people he doesn't like.....

Indeed, that is ridiculous, with that I agree.

Originally posted by sithsaber408
Or that he would allow 9/11 to get support to go to Iraq....

When it not only killed thousands of people, hit an economic target, then hit the PENTAGON, which held the nations defense leaders and plenty of generals and such that he would need for the war in Iraq, and..................... oh yeah, flight 93 was headed for the F*CKING White House before it crashed, so he would have also lost his home, half of his employees, and his little doggie.....

Anyone who seriously believes that he planned 9/11 or new EXACTLY what would happen, needs their head examined.

I do however believe that Bush was compliant and acted poorly, though I would never claim the stupidity as to which Deano seems to dictate his life, I do believe that Bush bears a significant responsibility for the fiasco that was 9/11.

Originally posted by sithsaber408
Lastly, Bush needed no dramatic attack to invade Iraq.

In 1998 Clinton knew that Saddam Hussein was presuing WMD, which is why there was a series of surgical strikes against factories in Iraq.

He has said so in the press, that his administration believed that Saddam either had weapons or was trying to make them.

Considering that we found that he had the capability to make them, that hardly makes the war waged on "false pretenses".

Then why all the games? Why the axis of evil? Bush did indeed needed the events to play out as they did because one cannot declare war on another country under the suspicion that they might do something with technology that they might possibly be developing though no hard evidence supports those facts.

Originally posted by sithsaber408
Not to mention that he tried to kill Bush the First.

We know he did.

That's a good enough reason to go after him. What kind of pussies have we become?

Actually, no it's not.

Originally posted by sithsaber408
Bush didn't "need" 9/11 to go into Iraq, as evidenced by the overwhelming majority of Democrat's who voted FOR the war.

Those votes were made by a nation that was misled by misinformation, misdirection, being stuck in the grip of terror after suffering from 9/11 and alot of flag waving.

Do not use the fact that Dems voted for the war to support your point, for they were duped into voting it by believing what they were told, and they now acknowledge that fact.

Originally posted by sithsaber408
Get off his dick.

Perhaps you should get your nose out of his ass.