Edited title: Liberal talking points, reasons to hate Bush from the left.

[thew]

Why Conservatives Hate Bush…

1. Failed to address the country’s failing public education system.

2. Failed to reform, restructure and cut the American Military which spends more than the next 17 greatest military powers combined most of whom are our allies. Bush increased their budget.

3. Personally decided to grow the federal budget by hundreds of billions of dollars to fight an old man who lives in a cave and who attacked us on a budget of less than 20k.

4. Will be the first President since Herbert Hoover to complete his first term in office with a net lose of jobs.. ( currently down millions of jobs with 5 months to go ).

5. Has grown the federal government by hundreds of thousands of bureaucratic jobs.

6. Alienated and devalued the two standing cornerstones of America’s foreign policy for the last five decades. The United Nations (which we founded) and NATO.

7. Failed to make any meaningful contribution to the Israeli Palestinian conflict. It’s exploded with thousands of deaths per year under President Bush. Last year without any deaths due to terrorism was 1999 the year before Bush took office. Now both sides loose folks every weekend… Direct result of Bush’s hands off policy all the while he is arming Israel.

8. Hurt the governments credibility domestically by deliberately blurring the line between 911 an the invasion of Iraq.

9. Advocated the loss of civil liberties (Patriot Act, Patriot Act II) and now even the first amendment to fight terrorism even though none of these powers or sacrifices by the American people would have stopped 911.

10. Spent and is advocating spending a trillion dollars on an already out of date Star Wars defense plan which only encourages our enemies to build bigger faster weapons.

11. Cut taxes in every year of his administration even while running up record deficits and in time of war. First time taxes have ever been cut in a time of war. Ballooning the federal deficit and federal dept rolling back all the economic gains and fiscal restraint achieved during the 90’s. Cutting taxis is easy.. Cutting spending is what makes you conservative..

12. Held more than 200 POW’s / enemy combatants incommunicado for years now with no charges, evidence, judicial oversite, or Geneva convention rights, including three boys ages 11, 12, 13 (when captured) who were recently released.

Held four Brits for two years without any evidence of wrong doing who were recently released and who will not and can not be charged in Britain because there is no evidence against them. At least one was a relief worker.

[Fred Jones]

With the exception of the enormous federal deficit, seems like a list that would fuel the Liberals hatred of Bush.

[skinsSB2005]

Fred,

You are right. Bit it doesn't fuel any hatred. Just makes us Liberals wish someone else was in office........McCain, Dole , Dean, Kerry, Gore, Bush Sr. anyone but Bush W.

[Ghost of]

thew

What a filthy lying post. I can't imagine most of those points having anything to do with conservatives.

Most offensive is the labelling of the murderer Bin Laden as an "old man in a cave" as if we somehow we should have just sent 10 guys over there and this whole war would be over.

Scumbag.

If you have problems with the guy, fine. But a non-leftist would have come up with a whole batch of other reasons to dislike Bush, among them being his increasing the budget and Patriot Act, but also mostly reasons you missed.

Yet another leftist trying to pass themselves off as something else in some lame attempt to gain credibility.

[luckydevil]

1. Failed to address the country’s failing public education system.

How would a "conservative" address this problem.

[jbooma]

i am conservative and don't hate bush

[Art]

Thew,

Are you still so stung by our conversation yesterday that instead of posting with reason and thought you resort to simple hateful garbage like this that has very little relation with reality?

Your list seems well made to explain irrational liberal disdain of Bush, but actually, for the most part, would be reasons conservatives would like Bush. Did you confuse the word liberal with conservative?

You even use lies in your post, like the lie I've proven in our last conversation that "millions" of jobs have been lost when the actual number is $1.8 million that's accepted as real and less if you believe smaller, newer businesses count.

You lied about holding 200 POWs without communication when we held not a single one since we were not at war and did not capture anyone who was associated with a foreign army and signatory of the Geneva Convention that defines such.

You are clearly won over by the mewling stance of the left. I only hope we can get you enough good information to save you before it's too late. Like I've already done in our last thread. I realize you are embarrassed about that. I realize you don't want to admit you understood something wrong and had to be enlightened by a conservative, but, it's all good. I can help you more than the current liberal zombies you follow.

[thew]

With the exception of the enormous federal deficit, seems like a list that would fuel the Liberals hatred of Bush.

Conservatives care about the deficit ( 7/12 points relate directly with the deficit ) . We also care about the size of the government, civil liberties, the health of the economy and America's standing abroad...

I'm sure liberals could come up with a list which would overlap

"smaller less intrusive government", Reagan vs Carter debates1980..

[luckydevil]

You sound more like a paleo( your stance on the UN is however not conservative)

[Darth Tater]

Thew,

The no action taken by the president or any government official should be driven simply by expedience. The only reason any 'failure to address public education' would raise the ire of conservatives is that Bush never admitted this.

Military budget can never directly raise the ire of any conservative. The size of the military budget is based on requirements. Now, I may disagree with the requirements defined by the administration but not that there is an upper bound on that budget based on any conservative principle. The military budget should be as large as it needs to be.

The federal deficit is an enormous problem and while we do need to cut spending, it appears that this will not happen until the government is forced to do so. We can’t just increase the tax rate (or hold it steady) because most likely that’d simply decrease revenue but even if it didn’t, we’d probably just have a government spending more money.

As far as alienating the UN and NATO, any true conservative would be dancing in the streets. In fact, since the UN has shown its true evil nature, every US citizen should be happy.

[Ghost of]

I find it hilarious that the list simply does not represent even paleocon issues with Bush.

No paleocon is sitting there sucking his thumb over the "alienation" of the UN.

And any paleo worth his salt would list almost first, the problem with our borders and illegal immigration.

That's why the initial post is a bunch of garbage posted by a liar and someone who obviously cannot come to grips with representing himself as he is but most put on a mask to somehow win credibility.

A very leftist trait.

[luckydevil]

And any paleo worth his salt would list almost first, the problem with our borders and illegal immigration

Paelos are also harsh critics of the warfare state(and he/she is).

[Ghost of]

True, lucky but lots of lefties talk about the defense budget as well. So then I move to the next in the list. So since I ddin't see any immigration on that list.

Unfortunately, a lot of paleos are anti-Semitic. They can try to paint it as something else, but that's what it is.

Oh, the biggest signal that this person ISNT a paleocon:

Complains that Bush has been hands-off in the Israeli conflict. Any paleo I heard of, would be for no funding for Israel but staying away from that conflict altogether.

[Destino]

Originally posted by Ghost of Nibbs McPimpin

I can't imagine most of those points having anything to do with conservatives.

Had you posted nothing but the quoted line you would have made a much stronger arguement. I agree the list doesn't seem like a conservative wrote it up.

[thew]

Hateful is a strong word. I feel it's accurate though. I hate that conservatism will be linked in history with Bush who is not conservate. He's set us back decades.

would be reasons conservatives would like Bush. Did you confuse the word liberal with conservative?

Clearly conservative means different things to different folks. Some folks believe conservative means anti abortion. I am not one of those folks. Conservatives to me means fisscally responsible government, sound economic policies, protection of civil rights and strong on defense.

When Pat Buchannan stood up at the 1992 GOP convention and gave 10 reasons we are Republicans I only agreed with one. I'm not a homophobe what can I say. I also believe we need more rights not fewer rights..... I felt Pat's small tent politics were a disaster at the time. Ronald Reagan who addressed the crowd right After Pat said it best.. "Enough with the negatism we want to be the big tent party"..

You lied about (Bush) holding 200 POWs

In truth nobody knows how many folks are being held because we don't publish the number. The number I gave was reported widly in the press and specifically on CNN recently.

we held not a single one since we were not at war and did not capture anyone who was associated with a foreign army and signatory of the Geneva Convention that defines such.

http://www.aiipowmia.com/legis/geneva1950.html

The US Army disagrees with you and Bush about whether the Geneva Convention applies so does the treaty itself..

Article 2

Although one of the Powers in conflict may not be a party to the present Convention, the Powers who are parties thereto shall remain bound by it in their mutual relations.

Article 2

Convention shall also apply to all cases of partial or total occupation of the territory .... the present Convention shall apply to all cases of declared war or of any other armed conflict which may arise

Article 4

A. Prisoners of war, in the sense of the present Convention, are persons belonging to one of the following categories, who have fallen into the power of the enemy:

1. Members of the armed forces of a Party to the conflict as well as members of militias or volunteer corps forming part of such armed forces.

2. Members of other militias and members of other volunteer corps, including those of organized resistance movements, belonging to a Party to the conflict and operating in or outside their own territory, even if this territory is occupied, provided that such militias or volunteer corps, including such organized resistance movements, fulfil the following conditions:

Article 4

Inhabitants of a non-occupied territory, who on the approach of the enemy spontaneously take up arms to resist the invading forces, without having had time to form themselves into regular armed units, provided they carry arms openly and respect the laws and customs of war.

Why would any American wish to disregard the Geneva convention? The American army declaired opennly they advocated adherance to it because they believed it put the presidence in place for American captives to likewise be given the status. They also believed not adhering to it would likewise have implications.....

You think abusing prisoners and the government holding folks outside the law is a conservative value?

How many of those folks have died? Conservatives like free press. We like the Constitution and the laws of the land. Only Radicals don't.

[Hog Fever]

I think You're a bit off base here. As a conservative I find the Republicans not conservative enough on many issues. I am Libertarian on some core issues and refuse to blindly tow the Republican party line although I usually side with them on a balance of the issues. That said allow me to respond:

1. A conservative would favor privatizing public education. Most conservative who can have moved their childern to private schools or are home schooling.

2. A conservative would not favor reducing the military in time of war.

3. A president cannot grow the federal budget. The congress makes the budget. The President sends one over to them for consideration, and then they tear it up and write their own.

4. Art addressed this.

5. Art addressed this.

6. Most conservative dislike the UN because of the idea that it sacrifices our sovereignty and only has a use as a food delivery service or as peacekeepers after the trouble is over. NATO was devalued after the fall of the Soviet Union not from anything Bush did. What is the current threat in central Europe that NATO needs to address? NATO was formed to defend central Europe from the USSR. They no longer exist.

7. Most conservatives admire Israel and their no nonsense stance against terrorism. So Bush is responsible for a conflict that has been going on for years? Come on.

8. Hurt his credibility with whom, the Liberals? They are never going to back his actions anyway. Most people in the US wanted the Iraq situation brought to an end. The US can certainly address that and Bin Laden at the same time.

9. As a conservative I might agree with this one.

10. This issue is not on the conservative radar.

11. Conservatives favor both. I cannot confirm your numbers.

12. Art addressed this.

[thew]

Military budget can never directly raise the ire of any conservative. The size of the military budget is based on requirements.

[/Quote]

What requirement would dictate we spend more money than the next 17 greatest powers combined? Also wasn't it Eisenhower who directly critisized the Military Industrial complex and warned to it's potential for abuse?... Was he not a conservative?

Clearly when the majority of the great nations in the world are strong allies of America... ( Britan, France, Germany, Spain, Italy etc ) and we outspend ALL of them, with no potential threat from a rival country on the horizen and with outspending even the combination of any conceivable potential enemies we need to recheck our assumption. There is nothing more conservatism than that...

Besides all that.. THAT's WHAT BUSH RAN ON!! You think Rumsfeld was there to grow the Pentigon? He was the old hand who was supposed to put his foot down on costly wasteful projects like the Crusaider and shrink the budget back to some semblance of sanity.....

The federal deficit is an enormous problem and while we do need to cut spending, it appears that this will not happen until the government is forced to do so.

Only Republican's shink the government. Clinton did so but only with Republican house and senate driving him too it. Bush has squandered his mandate and our parties best opprotunity to effect long term budgetary change. Not only did he not shrink the government but he grew it by hundreds of Billions of Dollars and hundreds of thousands of beurocrats..

We can’t just increase the tax rate (or hold it steady) because most likely that’d simply decrease revenue but even if it didn’t, we’d probably just have a government spending more money.

No we can't. But we can't just cut taxes and increase spending expodentially because we know nobody will hold us accountable. We wouldn't take that from a democrate sitting down and we sure as hell shouldn't take it from a Republican.

As far as alienating the UN and NATO, any true conservative would be dancing in the streets. In fact, since the UN has shown its true evil nature, every US citizen should be happy.

Dude, America has funded up to 50% of the UN for the majority of the last 5 decades across both Republican and Democratic administrations. It has been one of the greatest tools of American Foreign policy to focus the world on issues we desire. Weakenning the UN only weekens America's ability to lead the world. The UN was instrumental in Korea, averting a global war with Russia, the Cuban Missle crissis, and the First Gulf war. The UN isn't our enemy, it's a tool America created and cultivated for decades.

Nato is our link to the other most successful democracies in the world. Nato is something America would have gladly entered Nuclear confrontations to protect for decades. How exactly does Bush undermineing it now help us? We fought two great wars on that continent and only our direct involvement stopped a third.

Be littleing our allies is not a conservative value....

[thew]

ghost of nibbs mcpimpin

Most offensive is the labelling of the murderer Bin Laden as an "old man in a cave" as if we somehow we should have just sent 10 guys over there and this whole war would be over.

First off Mr. Bush has spent in the Neighborhood of 400 billion dollars on his war in Iraq, his increased defense spending, his department of homeland security.. etc etc etc and we still don't have that old man in a cave... which is what he is...

Clinton did nothing and the Algerians offered to hand us Bin Laudin back in the 90's.

Clearly Bush's unimaginative ballooning of the spending and invasion of Iraq hasn't gotten Bin Laudin. If you listen to what the CIA and FBI are now saying in the 911 hearings we've lost our chance. Al Quada has mushroomed into disjointed splinter cells. Now even if we catch Bin Laudin it's unlikely to be a victory....

How can we hope to win the war on terrorism if we spend Hundreds of Billions of dollars to match an organization which attacked us with a budget of less than 15k!. For the Price of 19 airline tickets.... It's crazy. Read Rumsfeld critique of the war he makes the same point..

Bush is terrible..

Scumbag.

Eat me...

[OURYEAR#56]

Originally posted by Ghost of Nibbs McPimpin

thew

What a filthy lying post. I can't imagine most of those points having anything to do with conservatives.

Most offensive is the labelling of the murderer Bin Laden as an "old man in a cave" as if we somehow we should have just sent 10 guys over there and this whole war would be over.

Scumbag.

If you have problems with the guy, fine. But a non-leftist would have come up with a whole batch of other reasons to dislike Bush, among them being his increasing the budget and Patriot Act, but also mostly reasons you missed.

Yet another leftist trying to pass themselves off as something else in some lame attempt to gain credibility.

I like you, you're funny. Why not attack the issue, and not the messanger. My bad, how do I even come close to listening to a guy that thinks he's a Ghoshtly Pimp. Thew nice post. I'm not liberal or conservatives, like I said before I will vote for the man (unfortunately there's no woman) that give me the chance to realize those ideals presented by Due Process Rights.....It's clear Bush doesn't do that.....and people are beginning to agree. Kerry Kerry Kerry....

[Cskin]

So in essence... Thew's list is the "Liberal Talking Points", cut and pasted from MoveOn.org.

[thew]

Originally Posted By Hog Fever

1. A conservative would favor privatizing public education. Most conservative who can have moved their childern to private schools or are home schooling.

Geoge Bush the first one....

"I want to be known as the education President"...

George W. Bush, the bad one..

There's no greater challenge than to make sure that every child -- and all of us on this stage mean every child, not just a few children -- (applause) -- every single child, regardless of where they live, how they're raised, the income level of their family, every child receive a first-class education in America.

The promise of reforming and improving the American Educational system is central to America's place in the global economy and as such is central to the last two successful Republican campagns.

The reason this is central is because it has consistently been among the top 5 issues driving voters for the last two decades.

I am a product of the public education system when our public education system was the model for the rest of the world. Our Elementary and High School public education systems currently test bellow some third world country's.

Poor public education is not a conservative value....

Hog Fever

2. A conservative would not favor reducing the military in time of war.

List of Republican Presidents who were in office at the start of a major war....

Lincoln

Bush I

Bush II

of these George W Bush is the only Republican to ever take America into an elective war..

I did support the war in the Beginning. I stayed up till 2am to hear Colin Powel address the UN with his case against Iraq while I was in Saudi Arabia. He said, If I know what he knew I would agree with him. Well now I know what he knew and he didn't know enough... 12 more GI's died today in Iraq. For what?

I find it a devistating statistic that America spends more than the next 17 greatest nations combined.. many of those countries being our Allies... Why wouldn't any conservative facing hundreds of billions of dollars worth of deficite spending want to cut that?

A president cannot grow the federal budget. The congress makes the budget. The President sends one over to them for consideration, and then they tear it up and write their own.

Red Herring. Bush got the Buget's he's requested. His new proposed spending were central to the balloon. Again.. 200 Billion dollar deficite spending is not a conservative value.

Most conservative dislike the UN because

Untrue. The UN has been a central tool of American foreign policy for 50 years. To weaken it weakens America's ability to lead the world. I will agree with you however that George Bush's cabol of advisors hold that view though.

Most conservatives admire Israel and their no nonsense stance against terrorism. So Bush is responsible for a conflict that has been going on for years? Come on.

Not when we're paying for it conservatives don't. 1999 the year before Bush took office is the last year when Isreal and Palistine had zero deaths due to terrorism. Bush's hands off policy has made the situation much worse. America needs to be involved if that land is to ever know any peace. We're the only ones who can do it. Bush's avoidance is outrageous... Now thanks to Paul Oneal we know avoidance was part of his grand strategy. That strategy has failed and it's important we recognize this.

Hurt his credibility with whom,

The world. The international coolition Bush has put together has the American tax payer paying the bill for all the costs other than Great Britain. When his father went to war America paid for 20%... That's 20% of our own costs. Any country financially capapable of fielding troops has shunned us. Including our closest allies... Canada, France, Germany, Mexico, Russia, China, Spain.. Bush's war might very well topple Blair in Britain which would create a gap with even Great Britain.... the list goes on and on.....

[chomerics]

Originally posted by Cskin

So in essence... Thew's list is the "Liberal Talking Points", cut and pasted from MoveOn.org.

No, it's just not a neocon viewpoints. Here's what I don't understand, how could the republican party let this happen???

I mean come on now, WTF??? Look at how spending has increased when we cut Taxes? When is this along the lines of conservatism??? I always felt you should cut taxes by cutting spending, not by increasing spending???

Frigging GHB called this crap voodoo economics. Do you know why? Because it's based on false money that hasn't been earned yet??? Remember how the growth of the country over the next ten years was going to allow us to have a tax cut, while not increasing the budget???

The amount of money being poured into social programs is retarted too!!! Since when was it along a conservative's party lines to increase federal funding for schools??? When was the Republicans platform to create a $540billion Medicare package which denys the government the right to negotiate a fair price???

Since when is it a conservatives viewpoint that the federal government has the right to invade your home, wire tap your lines, illegally arrest you with out due process???

You see, these are some of the domestic issues I have with Bush and I think all conservatives should as well. Instead, I hear how it's "the lefties" that are spewing lies. Well, this administration has pushed me to the brink. Kerry may not be the best answer, but I could take a crap and it could run this country better than this moron. He's taken traditional conservative values and thrown them out the window, just so he could push his old, outdated adgenda. For christ sakes, Ashcroft lost an election TO A DEAD GUY!!!!! WTF???

You can go ahead and call me a "lefty" of a "liberal" or what ever slander you want to spew at me, just because I don't agree with your warped neocon view of the world.

[Fred Jones]

Thew, to add to my initial post, I am a middle of the road guy who has both conservative and moderate values. Your initial post I took as a liberal bashing Bush. I would have called it “why the middle hates Bush”. Right wing conservatives would substitute middle for liberal.

I want to add the President has a lot less direct influence on job creation than is written about in the media. Job creation by a president is more political than actual reality. I do not believe tax cuts are directly related to job creation. I also do not believe Clinton did anything directly to create all the jobs during his tenure.

What wasn’t mentioned, but is an underlying problem I have with this administration is that they have a serious flaw admitting that they are wrong. No top level official, except Powell, can admit they are wrong in anything they do. They cannot even mention that they might have been mistaken in almost any major policy issue.

I consider Powell an exception, but than people like Newt were heavily criticizing him at one point.

[thew]

originally posted by chomerics

No, it's just not a neocon viewpoints. Here's what I don't understand, how could the republican party let this happen???

It's because the Republican's aren't the party of conservatives anylonger. It's the party of the homephobes, the anti abortion dogmatistes and those who wish to milk the government out of as much as they can.

None of these are reasons I was a conservative.

Fred Jones

originally posted by chomerics

Your initial post I took as a liberal bashing Bush.

I've never voted for a democratic president in my life. Kerry will be my first. If Kerry doesn't make things better I'll vote him out of office too. Kerry on his worst day could not be worse than Bush.

Fred Jones

I want to add the President has a lot less direct influence on job creation than is written about in the media.

3 million jobs gone. First President since Herbert Hoover to finish his first term with a net negative of job creation. Clinton created what 11 million jobs in his first term in office? Figure that's 14 million jobs we're short of. Their are more folks currently out of work sitting on the side lines since Jimmy Carter was in office. 20 years ago....

And George Bush's economic adviser comes out and says "Out sourcing is good for America". It's a discrace.

The entire high tech sector which lead this countries economic boom of the 90's is in the toilet and Bush advocates increasing the H1B visa's for low priced indentured workers....

I hold Bush responsible for being so out of touch he's a big part of the problem. Job problem is only going to get worse in the next 4 years. We need to get someone in office who at least has his eye on the ball. Bush is only aware of the issues because we're holding his feet to the fire....

ob creation by a president is more political than actual reality.

This is not true. The president and his people set trade policy, set economic policy and also decide which trade practices we are going to fight. Bush has fought no trade practices. You've got to hold the man in charge responsible or you hold no one responsible. The entire fatalistic view "it just doesn't matter is a Bogus lie"...

I do not believe tax cuts are directly related to job creation.

Not when you increase government spending at the same time. Not when you phase in your tax cuts over a decade! Not when you target your cuts exclusively for the uppper .5% of the american workes.

I consider Powell an exception, but than people like Newt were heavily criticizing him at one point.

Powel is perhaps the biggest looser besides Rice in this administration. Powell should have put the countries interests first and resigned when he figured out what was going on. Now he's just the guy who Bush sends out when he want's to try to get folks to like him. He is perhaps the weakest Sec State in the modern history of the country. He was the one known in this administration with respect to foreign policy. I think he could have beaten President Bush at one time for the nomination. Now I don't care if he retires from government for life. He is a failure, unable to make himself heard and understood and too chicken hearted to resign.

Newt were heavily criticizing him at one point

A lot of folks don't like Newt. I thnk he was a pretty bright guy. I don't like all of his positions lately but I don't think we would be in this mess if he was still running the house. In a large way Newt was the man most responsible for the balanced budgets under Clinton.

[luckydevil]

Your views on the UN and education are clearly in conflict with conservatism

True conservatives do not view education as a federal issue, rather as a states issue. One of the themes(early on) of contract with America was to disband the department of education. Most conservatives favor privatization.