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

Who would you vote for if an election with these two candidates somehow occured?

Bush...Cos I hate black people...No other reason really.

Bush, because even if Obama won, Bush would become President anyway.

bush. obama is more of an actor and likes to pull everyones leg

So our choices are pussy or fascist?

Neither. One is tax and spend, the other is borrow and spend, it's a lose lose situation.

Bush, because I'm a myopic, sensationalist ignoramus.

Yeah, it should be tax the living shit out of the top and spend on the bottom and middle.

Obama. They're both less effective than I'd like but at least Obama doesn't make the whole country look retarded.

neither, i'd rather watch hulk hogan on tna

Well it's kind of like, would you rather have IBS or colorectal cancer?

Obama. Bush had his chance.

Originally posted by Mindship
Obama. Bush had his chance. obama had his chance to. he wont be re elected

Obama. i cant stand anymore retardation and outright lying from bush. i have actually known he has lied on government involvements b/c i was a part of it.

Barack Hussein Osama... I mean, Obama.

Originally posted by jaden101
Bush...Cos I hate black people...No other reason really. but you watch fat albert ?

obama is like a year+ into his election ermm

some of you guys act like his term is almost over and he hasnt come through with any of his promises... how many presidents have made radical changes for the better in their first year? changes on the scale of what obama is facing? i think its a bit early to count him out.

and thats not factoring how pretty much neither of the parties are helping him out... its not like he can just snap his fingers and bypass the shenanigans of the repubs and democrats.

Originally posted by Ms.Marvel
obama is like a year+ into his election ermm

some of you guys act like his term is almost over and he hasnt come through with any of his promises... how many presidents have made radical changes for the better in their first year? changes on the scale of what obama is facing? i think its a bit early to count him out *cough*Truman*cough



I'd vote for Bush. I didn't really care for his policies, but that man was a natural comedian.

Originally posted by Ms.Marvel
how many presidents have made radical changes for the better in their first year? changes on the scale of what obama is facing? Like, at least a third.

Bush, because he makes for more entertaining youtube videos.

Originally posted by jinXed by JaNx
Bush, because he makes for more entertaining youtube videos. and bush is more entertaining on SNL than obama

Obama, so that we can hear more horseshit from the Left.

Obama.

Bush's policy tends to be GENOCIDE!

And I'm not a big fan of that.

Originally posted by lord xyz
Obama.

Bush's policy tends to be GENOCIDE!

And I'm not a big fan of that. i dont mind genocide so long as it is fast clean and justified.

Bush tends to be a blubbering Idiot in charge of measuring the dosage for an execution and ppl watching him in frustration...

the prisoner getting the various needles in different orders losing the chemicals effectiveness and possibly failing to work also bush dropping and breakin vials .....

Originally posted by chomperx9
obama had his chance to. he wont be re elected Bush had eight years. Obama's only had one.

Please note: I'm not happy with Obama so far. But he deserves to be seen at least through one full term (which may indeed be all he gets).

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
i dont mind genocide so long as it is fast clean and justified. Wow.

Brb.

Bk.

Originally posted by lord xyz
Wow.

Brb.

when i think of genocide as look at it more as a thinning the herd and mostly being done to china and its 5 or 6 billion ppl..

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
when i think of genocide as look at it more as a thinning the herd and mostly being done to china and its 5 or 6 billion ppl.. Cool, I wonder if you'll keep that opinion if you're part of the "herd".

Lol, China has nearly 100% of the world's population.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Obama. They're both less effective than I'd like but at least Obama doesn't make the whole country look retarded.

This was my answer, as well. That, and Obama seems to get the idea of "diplomacy" like........infinitely better than Bush.

Originally posted by Mindship
Bush had eight years. Obama's only had one.

Please note: I'm not happy with Obama so far. But he deserves to be seen at least through one full term (which may indeed be all he gets). but in 1 year he made a complete full out of himself. next week we are going to do this next week we are going to fix that and more BS every other week. its some other plan to change the subject cause he cant take care of the stuff he promised before elected.

Originally posted by lord xyz
Cool, I wonder if you'll keep that opinion if you're part of the "herd".

Lol, China has nearly 100% of the world's population. [/QUOTE


i'm not Chinese so i am not worried. also i didnt say ppl should be complacent, if i were considered weak inferior, and was over breeding which i am not i would fight tooth and nails for my survival.

Originally posted by chomperx9
but in 1 year he made a complete full out of himself. next week we are going to do this next week we are going to fix that and more BS every other week. its some other plan to change the subject cause he cant take care of the stuff he promised before elected. It's what politicians do.

at least Obama is consistent and keeps trying to make good and fix the problems. it's not like he doesnt try to make good or did you forget that other politicians are also trying to stop him and keep bills that he tried to pass..

its better then leaving a cluster #@$$ in place like bush did and ignore it.

Neither, let the picture speak.

http://www.freakingnews.com/pictures/67000/Obamush--67078.jpg

Holy crap, Obama has an invisible camera man!

http://img706.imageshack.us/img706/9167/thejokerinthemirror6713.jpg


this one matches him better

Originally posted by Hewhoknowsall
Who would you vote for if an election with these two candidates somehow occured?

Teddy for third party.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Holy crap, Obama has an invisible camera man! It's perspective.

george bush never actually did anything important

Originally posted by overlord
george bush never actually did anything important

http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Politicians/Bush_accomplishments.html

That one is right wing whining which takes some things out of context or blames him for things he didn't do.

http://electjeff.wordpress.com/2009/01/30/accomplishments-of-president-george-w-bush/

That one talks about his postive things. However, that is just some left-wing "ZOMG! He's liek, teh best!" rhetoric. They paint him too good there.

Somewhere inbetween is the truth of what he did.

both suck, although bush has two on top of obama, dissolving magna carta and trying to militarise space. theyr both much the same to the wrest of the world.

Originally posted by leonheartmm
both suck, although bush has two on top of obama, dissolving magna carta and trying to militarise space. theyr both much the same to the wrest of the world. what the hell are you talking about?

Originally posted by overlord
george bush never actually did anything important

Except those 2 wars.

Of course if by "important" you mean "good" then his work and aid to Africa completely eclipses anything done by any other country or American president.

When he 1st came into office only 50,000 Africans with aids were on anti retroviral drugs. Now 1.5 million are because of GWB.

He cancelled $34billon of debt. He increased aid spending by nearly $6billion not to mention the $1.4billion of food aid.

His work has halved number of deaths from malaria in 15 African countries.

Even Bob Geldof (Live Aid organiser) praises Bush's commitment and work in Africa.

Todd Moss who is a senior fellow at the Centre for Global Development said "I don't think it's too strong to say that President Bush's Africa policy is the most distinguished foreign policy legacy of the administration"

Some African leaders say his commitment to aid/food and medical initiatives has saved millions of lives in Africa.

So yeah...People really need to actually learn a bit about the US's role in the world during the Bush administration before making generally ignorant statements.

A pity Bush was such a moron in terms of contraception when it came to helping out Africa. How long did it take him to give condoms again?

Originally posted by Autokrat
A pity Bush was such a moron in terms of contraception when it came to helping out Africa. How long did it take him to give condoms again?

He gave them plenty money. They could've bought their own condoms.

The problem is that many African countries are still steeped in Catholic beliefs from the missionaries started during European colonialisation. This obviously means that there's already a pressure from the religious leaders on the people to not use condoms anyway.

Not to mention there are people actively lobbying governments with massively misleading information on AIDS (particularly in South Africa). People such as Matthias Rath

I read the article above while I was on a flight coming back from holiday and was totally astounded at the bit about Zackie Achmat. Achmat is the founder of the Treatment Action Campaign (TAC) which is a small volountary organisation fighting to get anti retroviral treatment to people in South Africa. He is black, gay and is HIV positive and refuses to take the medication until it is widely available to all despite being begged by Nelson Mandela to take them to save his own life so that he could work to save others.

Matthias Rath sells herbal and vitamin pills and claims that they are more effective at treating AIDS and HIV than ARV's are. Which is completely and utter nonsense but his company's power and wealth is so large that when Achmat criticised their operations he was sued and Rath's team sent a letter to the international criminal court at the Hague trying to have Achmat indicted. Here's what it said




Utterly shocking and disgracful way to treat a man who tirelessly campaigns to fight against AIDS.

It's very difficult to combat problems when countries are being lobbied with such misleading rubbish from one side and people are being pressured from their religious leaders on the other.

So yeah. Not giving condoms out (knowing that many people wouldn't use them anyway) on one hand but saving millions of lives on the other...I'd say he came out on a positive with regards to Africa.

Odd that you never hear about any of this in the mainstream press though eh?...Must be some sort of government conspiracy...Oh no wait...That doesn't work does it?...Must be Obama's fault...

Originally posted by jaden101
He gave them plenty money. They could've bought their own condoms.

The problem is that many African countries are still steeped in Catholic beliefs from the missionaries started during European colonialisation. This obviously means that there's already a pressure from the religious leaders on the people to not use condoms anyway.

Not to mention there are people actively lobbying governments with massively misleading information on AIDS (particularly in South Africa). People such as Matthias Rath

I read the article above while I was on a flight coming back from holiday and was totally astounded at the bit about Zackie Achmat. Achmat is the founder of the Treatment Action Campaign (TAC) which is a small volountary organisation fighting to get anti retroviral treatment to people in South Africa. He is black, gay and is HIV positive and refuses to take the medication until it is widely available to all despite being begged by Nelson Mandela to take them to save his own life so that he could work to save others.

Matthias Rath sells herbal and vitamin pills and claims that they are more effective at treating AIDS and HIV than ARV's are. Which is completely and utter nonsense but his company's power and wealth is so large that when Achmat criticised their operations he was sued and Rath's team sent a letter to the international criminal court at the Hague trying to have Achmat indicted. Here's what it said




Utterly shocking and disgracful way to treat a man who tirelessly campaigns to fight against AIDS.

It's very difficult to combat problems when countries are being lobbied with such misleading rubbish from one side and people are being pressured from their religious leaders on the other.

So yeah. Not giving condoms out (knowing that many people wouldn't use them anyway) on one hand but saving millions of lives on the other...I'd say he came out on a positive with regards to Africa.

Odd that you never hear about any of this in the mainstream press though eh?...Must be some sort of government conspiracy...Oh no wait...That doesn't work does it?...Must be Obama's fault...

You know, one of the things I've struggled not to do is fall along the lines of the new atheists, but I swear it becomes nearly impossible when I look at all this religious gunk and dream of a society free of delusional nonsense.

That being said, I'll give Bush credit for Africa even if I will admit, I don't care about Africa. Maybe its just a problem with my personality, but whenever I try to induce feelings of horror and disgust at what goes on in Africa, I can't seem to feel the way everyone else does. I can oppose on principle, but I don't feel anything.

Originally posted by Autokrat
That being said, I'll give Bush credit for Africa even if I will admit, I don't care about Africa. Maybe its just a problem with my personality, but whenever I try to induce feelings of horror and disgust at what goes on in Africa, I can't seem to feel the way everyone else does. I can oppose on principle, but I don't feel anything. That's probably best. You'd go crazy if you truly cared about all the wee children starving to death. It kinda makes me depressed thinking about them.



... nah.

Originally posted by Autokrat
You know, one of the things I've struggled not to do is fall along the lines of the new atheists, but I swear it becomes nearly impossible when I look at all this religious gunk and dream of a society free of delusional nonsense.

That being said, I'll give Bush credit for Africa even if I will admit, I don't care about Africa. Maybe its just a problem with my personality, but whenever I try to induce feelings of horror and disgust at what goes on in Africa, I can't seem to feel the way everyone else does. I can oppose on principle, but I don't feel anything.

I don't get particularly angry or annoyed by the bad things happening in many African countries but I do get annoyed when good work goes unrecognised.

I realise Bush was far from a great president. I do wonder what any other president's reaction would have been in the wake of 9/11 though. Bush is regarded as a war monger but is it realistic to think that the American public would have backed a decision to take no real action or even the limited bombing of Al-Qaeda training camps in Afghanistan?

Did he come across as an arrogant moron a lot of the time?...Yes...His smirking and leaning over the podium when addressing serious questions annoyed me no end.

Has the post war been generally a **** up?...Yes...But it's not a president's job to plan and execute a war/peace. It is his job to put up the money for it and he did that.

I do find it highly ironic that many people consider the media machine as a tool to cover up the government's corruption and make them look good yet there was virtually no press coverage of the work carried out in Africa by the Bush administration.