Bush Haters

[pub crawler]

Ohio resident Bob Stewart says of President Bush: "He's been a world-class polarizer. I don't know if I can stomach four more years with him as president. He misled us into the war in Iraq and has mismanaged everything since." ... "[Bush is] supposed to be a conservative and yet he's run up the biggest federal deficit in history. One thing that really turned me (away from Bush) as a lifelong Catholic ... was to see Bush go to the Vatican and try to get the pope to come down hard on Kerry for his stand on abortion. That is absolutely appalling."

Stewart, 44, an insurance agent from Anderson Township near Cincinnati, voted for Bush in 2000 and is a registered Republican.

------------------------------------

In Michigan, Dan Martin has run for local office as a Republican. He says his biggest disappointment is that Bush's reputation as a "compassionate, conservative" governor of Texas hasn't proven true in the White House. "The foreign policy is a mess. The offensive in Iraq is reckless and built on bad decision making. On the domestic front I understand that terrorism has struck and he's occupied but any real progress on a domestic agenda has ground to a halt."

-----------------------------------

In Tennessee, Brian Boland, a young music company manager shopping at a market near Nashville, said: "I've always voted Republican and my folks will just kill me if they find out I'm switching to Kerry this year ... but I am just frustrated with the way Bush has mishandled everything. All the untruths."

----------------------------------

...Ron King, a black Vietnam Veteran, said: "I always voted Republican before but I'm against Bush ever since I found out that he doesn't love this country. His so-called military record is a sham. And the worst part is that he lies so much. He lied about weapons of mass destruction."

---------------------------------

Lloyd Huff, 64, retired director of the Dayton Research Institute in Ohio, says he has "voted for a Republican in every presidential election I can remember" but it will be Kerry this time because "the Bush administration has been the most deceitful, duplicitous, secretive administration this country has ever had."
"Going to war in Iraq was a horrible, horrible mistake," he said. He accused Bush of "an arrogant, swaggering cowboy mentality ... he has done more than anyone to inflame the Muslim world by his words and actions,"

------------------------------------

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=564&e=19&u=/nm/campaign_crossovers_dc

*link edited

 

[verte76]

I don't hate Bush, I simply do not agree with him on the issues. I don't love Kerry, but he's closer to what I believe, so I'm voting for him. I don't want to vote for Nader, even though I like his ideas. At this point I'm not sure what I think of him as a person. I have very strong feelings about civility in politics, and I think he's too damned rude. I won't vote for rude politicians, I don't care if they are liberals.

 

[RockNRollDawgie]

I detest Bush. I thought his old man was bad, but Dubya has got to be the worst
president in US history.
It baffles me as to how anyone, in their
right mind, would ever consider voting
for him again.

 

[nbcrusader]

I love the finger pointing that Bush is the divider. The Bush haters seem to do an awful nice job on their own.

 

[Diemen]

NB, the fact that Bush "haters" seem divisive in no way excuses the fact that Bush is divisive.

 

[LoveTown]

I've tried so very hard to be as open minded as possible during this whole campaign. However I find my patience are running short for people who feel it's their duty to state their pro bush feelings every time somebody says they don't like him. It's my right to dislike him and all that he stands for so please, I beg you, leave me alone and let me have my opinions.

 

[pax]

I don't *hate* Bush. Honestly, I believe he's probably a not-bad guy who I wouldn't mind having a beer or tossing a football with on the ranch in Crawford. I think, however, that he is too easily led by people who don't have America's best interest at heart, that he is too beholden both financially and politically to people I *really* don't like, and that his personal beliefs do not necessarily jive with what is best for the country--and that he is ruled by them far too closely.

 

[verte76]

My sentiments exactly pax. I don't hate Bush, and I'd probably like him personally if I knew him. But I can't agree with his agenda. It's just not what I think is best for our country. I feel this way because I love my country, not because I hate anyone. I just got some news that shocks me. Four years ago my sister voted for Ralph Nader. I wasn't sure what she thought of Kerry until my mother just told me that she is voting for Kerry this year. I almost fell out of my chair. It turns out that she and her boyfriend really dislike Bush.

 

[nbcrusader]

NB, the fact that Bush "haters" seem divisive in no way excuses the fact that Bush is divisive.

It all boils down to name calling and finger pointing. If you don't do it my way, you are divisive.

 

[pub crawler]

It all boils down to name calling and finger pointing. If you don't do it my way, you are divisive.

Would you agree that it goes both ways?

 

[BluberryPoptart]

You want a real Bush hater, I was at a birthday party for an elderly great aunt, and one of the old ladies said she hoped the terrorists would cut his head off on the internet with a rusty old saw and she wanted to watch.

 

[nbcrusader]

Would you agree that it goes both ways?

Yes

 

[BluberryPoptart]

Originally posted by nbcrusader
It all boils down to name calling and finger pointing. If you don't do it my way, you are divisive.

Yes, just like 'ending gridlock' means 'you are only allowed to think and vote the same as me' and if you try to speak another viewpoint, you are causing gridlock

I'd rather have 'gridlock' than a congress where everyone agreed and only voted one way, wouldn't you? Gridlock means things are being debated, all sides are being give a chance and our democracy is at work. When 'gridlock' ends, so will freedom.

 

[RockNRollDawgie]

I've tried so very hard to be as open minded as possible during this whole campaign. However I find my patience are running short for people who feel it's their duty to state their pro bush feelings every time somebody says they don't like him. It's my right to dislike him and all that he stands for so please, I beg you, leave me alone and let me have my opinions.

Bravo!
The pro Bush sentiment is not going to change my mind either.
I just do not like the guy and everything
he stands for.
Uh oh....guess that makes me
"un-patrotic" and " un-American" now?

 

[BluberryPoptart]

Bravo!
The pro Bush sentiment is not going to change my mind either.
I just do not like the guy and everything
he stands for.

Replace "Bush" with "Kerry" and you have my sentiments exactly. Uh oh, I guess to you guys that makes me:

a)not in my right mind

b)brainwashed by religion

c)stupid

d)all of the above

got any more?

 

[Moonlit_Angel]

You want a real Bush hater, I was at a birthday party for an elderly great aunt, and one of the old ladies said she hoped the terrorists would cut his head off on the internet with a rusty old saw and she wanted to watch.

...yeow.

See, yeah, I definitely wouldn't go that far. Bush supporting that amendment really bothered me, so I would admit that I do dislike him some as a result of that...but I don't know if I'd say I downright hate him. As I said once before, there's very few people in this world that I actually hate.

Angela

 

[verte76]

You want a real Bush hater, I was at a birthday party for an elderly great aunt, and one of the old ladies said she hoped the terrorists would cut his head off on the internet with a rusty old saw and she wanted to watch.

Oh my goodness. I think this is excessive, and I'm even a Kerry supporter! This is not at all personal with me. I don't hate Bush; I simply don't agree with Bush's agenda. But, no worries. I live in what is probably the most Republican state in the country, Alabama, and my vote for Kerry most likely won't count in the Electoral College.

 

[RockNRollDawgie]

Replace "Bush" with "Kerry" and you have my sentiments exactly. Uh oh, I guess to you guys that makes me:

a)not in my right mind

b)brainwashed by religion

c)stupid

d)all of the above

got any more?

e. millionaire

f. stockholder in Halliburton

g. stockholder in an oil company

h. relative of Bush family

 

[BluberryPoptart]

e. millionaire

f. stockholder in Halliburton

g. stockholder in an oil company

h. relative of Bush family

x. flat broke, lives in a beat up trailer and makes bareley more than minimum wage

 

[pub crawler]

Ron Reagan in the July 29 edition of Esquire has written, in my opinion, a brilliant critique of the Bush administration that touches on the fact that the term "Bush Hater" is a convenient fabrication of the right wing.

Here's the relevant excerpt:

None of this [deceitful behavior practiced by the Bush Administration], needless to say, guarantees Bush a one-term presidency. The far-right wing of the country?nearly one third of us by some estimates?continues to regard all who refuse to drink the Kool-Aid (liberals, rationalists, Europeans, et cetera) as agents of Satan. Bush could show up on video canoodling with Paris Hilton and still bank their vote. Right-wing talking heads continue painting anyone who fails to genuflect deeply enough as a "hater," and therefore a nut job, probably a crypto-Islamist car bomber. But these protestations have taken on a hysterical, almost comically desperate tone. It's one thing to get trashed by Michael Moore. But when Nobel laureates, a vast majority of the scientific community, and a host of current and former diplomats, intelligence operatives, and military officials line up against you, it becomes increasingly difficult to characterize the opposition as fringe wackos.

Does anyone really favor an administration that so shamelessly lies? One that so tenaciously clings to secrecy, not to protect the American people, but to protect itself? That so willfully misrepresents its true aims and so knowingly misleads the people from whom it derives its power? I simply cannot think so. And to come to the same conclusion does not make you guilty of swallowing some liberal critique of the Bush presidency, because that's not what this is. This is the critique of a person who thinks that lying at the top levels of his government is abhorrent. Call it the honest guy's critique of George W. Bush.

http://www.esquire.com/features/articles/2004/040729_mfe_reagan_1.html

 

[BluberryPoptart]

EVERY administration, EVERY politician shamelessly lies. Why is anyone shocked? Why is it suddenly a big surprise?

 

[BVS]

EVERY administration, EVERY politician shamelessly lies. Why is anyone shocked? Why is it suddenly a big surprise?

Yeah, some lie about blow jobs and some lie about wars.

 

[BluberryPoptart]

and some lies we'll never know because the media never got ahold of them.

 

[BVS]

True that.

 

[A_Wanderer]

What Clinton didnt lie about Rwanda? For crying out loud the Clinton adminstration fucked up in Somalia by walking away after a successful mission claimed 17 casualties and plain didnt want to get involved in Africa again and people died, a lot of people. Clinton pushed for NATO pressure in Bosnia and Kosovo after the carnage had begun, he deployed warships near China and was on the brink of War in Iraq in 1998, he enfored sanctions against Iraq for 8 years killing over a million innocent people and reinforcing the regime. Bush is better than Clinton any day, Bush actually acts and sticks with his decisions, he makes the tough calls rather than sitting on the fence and it saves a lot of lives.

Bush has what 900 KIA in 15 months of war, that must be one of the best wars in history. Liberating an entire country with some 15,000 civilian casualties that is also extremely low. Much lower than the 100,000 people who would have been murdered by the regime. Bush has saved more lives than Clinton and has less blood on his hands.

 

[BluberryPoptart]

What Clinton didnt lie about Rwanda? For crying out loud the Clinton adminstration fucked up in Somalia by walking away after a successful mission claimed 17 casualties and plain didnt want to get involved in Africa again and people died, a lot of people. Clinton pushed for NATO pressure in Bosnia and Kosovo after the carnage had begun, he deployed warships near China and was on the brink of War in Iraq in 1998, he enfored sanctions against Iraq for 8 years killing over a million innocent people and reinforcing the regime.

Anti-republicans always have selective amnesia. They ony make an issue of the things that suit their agenda and the rest is allowed to and encouraged to crawl off and die until no one remembers or cares.

 

[Moonlit_Angel]

Anti-republicans always have selective amnesia. They ony make an issue of the things that suit their agenda and the rest is allowed to and encouraged to crawl off and die until no one remembers or cares.

The same could easily be said about the other side, too, but I'm sure you'd be rather bothered by that genreralization, so why do it to others?

Anywho, I am not an expert on that whole situation that happened under Clinton-at the time it happened, I was only 13, 14 years old then and wasn't anywhere near as interested in politics then as I am now-so I can't really comment on that.

Angela

 

[A_Wanderer]

I dont hate Clinton, I admire the man and his achievements but the point is that sometimes it is better to make the call and go to war than sit on the fence or stand back.

 

[BluberryPoptart]

The same could easily be said about the other side, too, but I'm sure you'd be rather bothered by that genreralization, so why do it to others?


Angela

The only reason I do it is because 'the other side' does it all the time, but denies it. I only try to point out things to hopefully make them see it.

But really, why is it always about what 'side' is more guilty? Things are good or bad regardless of who was president when the atrocities occured. The tragedies themselve should be more important than under whose watch it was, and who gets to use the story to drag the other person's name through the mud.

 

[verte76]

Unfortunately this is a pattern all throughout American political history. Sure they all screw up, they all say at least one thing that isn't true, and so on. It comes down to personal preferences based on one's values and experiences. It is this way for all of us, I think.