LIBERALS AND DEMS: Convince me

[Lounge Daddy]

[b]PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE until January 8 - liberal, and anti-Bush points ONLY

* Please – LIBERAL and ANTI-BUSH comment only, until Saturday night / Sunday
I wish to gain a build-up of simple points by people who wish to show me the errors of President Bush and why I should not support him
* I work both jobs (by choice – God bless Capitalism) until Saturday evening. I will read through this thread that evening and respond to the points against Bush at that time
* After that, all may post thoughts and points – I am sure other Bush supporters will have better points than me[/b]

a major Dem talking point seems to include language about a "culture of corruption" around the Bush administration
Mr. Dean recently called the Bush Presidency the most corrupt ever in history, and other Bush bashers seem to agree

[i]Naturally I strongly disagree[/i]

There are plenty of flaming liberals, strong Dems, and simple Bush-haters here
Try to explain this supposed "culture of corruption"
[b]I only ask :: Please – no conspiracy theories -- and try to keep it to a simple concise post with facts, as short winded as possible[/b]

I am interested in reading about G.W. Bush’s alleged corruption
I work both of my jobs Thursday, so I will read and respond this weekend


let's do this - i look forward to reading
God bless

[Akalyte]

i'm, pissed, my father in law called Jesus a liberal to the point of communism.

[dairygirl4u2c]

A few things I would point out:

1. I don't know the details, but I understand that Bush did not go through the already established process of using the secret courts to wire tap people. This was in the name of fighting terror. Now, if you don't mind that, that's your option. But a lot of people reasonably don't because they feel it infringes upon their privacy. I'd also be willing to be a lot of people who be pissed if a Democratic President did that. Ben Franklin said anyone who is willing to forsake some essential liberties for temporary security deserves neither liberty nor security. Not sure his basis for saying that, but thoughti t's food for thought.

2. I believe he lied going into the Iraq war. If I remember correct, he said there was a connection between Iraq and Al Quida with the bombing. No one has shown any connection, beyond connections in the 90's. If you say Iraq is terrorits, and that's enough of a reason to go to war, which I agree with, that doesn't excuse a lie.
Whatever the case, he didn't wait longer to build support for invasion and took advantage of the bombing sentiment. He did find resistence in coalition building, but that doesn't mean he couldn't have waited. That would have helped give people a clearer mind before going in, and whatever the case, to plan more. There was no clear and immeninet danger; he simply took advantage of the situation. If you think that's wise, to forsake planning (or to give better justice to invade bad guys) in order to take advantage of people, that's your option.

3. There's also moral issues, such as thinking it's moral to allow civil unions etc to respect others' beliefs when we'd want ours respected, like we surely wouldn't want polygamists denying us thing that they get if they were a majority etc. But this isn't something you as a catholic can budge on so. but i thought i'd mention it.

Edited January 6, 2006 by dairygirl4u2c

[dairygirl4u2c]

Also, to begin to understand how people view President's without much basis, I ask you to do your challenge with Clinton, aside from his moral stances which are obviously against the Church. So many people hate on him, but they have few reasons besides the moral, just like few do with Bush.

[rkwright]

[quote name='Lounge Daddy' date='Jan 7 2006, 10:01 PM']Jeb Bush 2008, any one?
[right][snapback]849311[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

is he Catholic? and is he 'orthodox' catholic?

my one and only struggle with Bush is his pro-capital punishment stance. But its not like Kerry or any democrat's pro life record is a better alternative. Oh well, I tend to be a bit too idealistic.

[MilesChristi]

[quote name='rkwright' date='Jan 8 2006, 01:27 AM']is he Catholic?  and is he 'orthodox' catholic?
[right][snapback]849317[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Yes, Jeb Bush is a Catholic. Not knowing very much about the man, I can't testify to his orthodoxy or lack thereof. However, I seem to recall that he fought pretty hard to save Terri Schiavo's life last year, so that's a positive sign.

[Lounge Daddy]

[quote name='dairygirl4u2c' date='Jan 5 2006, 11:15 PM']A few things I would point out:

1. I don't know the details, but I understand that Bush did not go through the already established process of using the secret courts to wire tap people. This was in the name of fighting terror. Now, if you don't mind that, that's your option. But a lot of people reasonably don't because they feel it infringes upon their privacy. I'd also be willing to be a lot of people who be pissed if a Democratic President did that. Ben Franklin said anyone who is willing to forsake some essential liberties for temporary security deserves neither liberty nor security. Not sure his basis for saying that, but thoughti t's food for thought.
[right][snapback]847519[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

First off: The Fica Court that is repeatedly referenced by the msm was set up in the cold war, and was used when we were concerned that an American at a U.S. embassy overseas was maybe contacting KGB so some other enemy – an official would gain warranted authorization from this Fica Court to begin monitoring phone calls made from this specific embassy.

Secondly: This system has [i]nothing[/i] to do with the current situation – which is [i]monitoring phone calls from overseas made by members of terror organizations into the USA. [/i]So when these liberal Dems and their willing partners in the mainstream media repeatedly suggest that Bush didn’t use this Fica Court (he didn’t and why would he) that Bush is wiretapping domestic phone calls (he isn’t at all) and that rights are violated (the rights of the terrorist making the phone call into the U.S.?) they are showing their hand – liberals playing another round of smear Bush… because that’s the best plan they can come up with. Its also an irresponsible planon the part of the libs in the Democratic Party and everyone involved, because they repeatedly hamstring our national defense for the sake of scoring a few political points in the media.

[b]A few things that are not reported or mentioned by the msm regarding this spying by the NSA:[/b]
1 – The President Bush and the NSA is not conducting domestic spying… although for national security purposes, they legally can – and avoid checking in with court systems. [url="http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/eo12139.htm"]LINK[/url]
2 – If the liberal media is really so upset about domestic spying, why didn’t they pitch a fit about the ECHELON project? Or is it ok if large-scale domestic spying is conducted during a Democrat’s presidency? (ECHELON: a global surveillance system called ECHELON that catches all of your tele-communications and sifts them, catching nuggets of pre-determined flag words, to keep a running log of what you think, do and say... and yes, unlike Bush'e NSA project, ECHELON [b]is[/b] domestic spying) [url="http://cryptome.org/echelon-60min.htm"]LINK[/url] [url="http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/12/19/114807.shtml"]LINK[/url] [url="http://msnbc.com/news/403435.asp?cp1=1"]LINK[/url][url="http://archives.cnn.com/1999/TECH/computing/12/06/nsa.goes.too.far.idg/"]LINK[/url]
3 – the irresponsible liberals in congress and especially in msm refuse to report the big story: who in congress continues to leak top-secret intelligence to willing liberals in the press? THIS IS TREASON during a time of war! And one or more of our elected officials on the Senate Defense Committee, or a similar body in congress continues to blab very sensitive material to the press, thus compromising our defenses.
(btw, its interesting that this treasonous leaker always goes to the Washington Post, NY Times, and the like)

[quote]Other serious leaks clearly have degraded Washington’s ability to obtain intelligence on Iraq.  Damaging press disclosures based on imagery-derived intelligence on Iraq have included the movement of missile systems, the construction of a new command and control network, and the dispersal of WMD equipment following the 11 September 2001 terrorist attacks in New York and Washington.

Terrorists feed on leaks.  Through their investigations into whether the 9/11 attacks resulted from intelligence failure, Congress and the special Commission will learn that important intelligence collection capabilities against Osama bin Laden and al-Qaida were lost in the several years preceding September 2001.  With the concurrence of NSA, the White House officially released just one of these.  As press spokesman Ari Fleischer explained:

    And let me give you a specific example why, in our democracy and in our open system, it is vital that certain information remain secret.  In 1998, for example, as a result of an inappropriate leak of NSA information, it was revealed about NSA being able to listen to Osama bin Laden on his satellite phone.  As a result of the disclosure, he stopped using it.  As a result of the public disclosure, the United States was denied the opportunity to monitor and gain information that could have been very valuable for protecting our country.7

What the public cannot easily know, because the overwhelming bulk of this intelligence must necessarily remain classified, is that the bin Laden example cited here is just the tip of the iceberg.  In recent years, all intelligence agencies—CIA, NSA, NIMA, NRO, and the Defense Intelligence Agency, to cite just the larger ones—have lost important collection capabilities, including against high-value terrorist targets.  These losses have impaired human operations, signals intelligence, and imagery collection.  And they have deprived analysts and policymakers of critical information, unavailable elsewhere, that they should have had.[/quote]
[url="http://www.cia.gov/csi/studies/vol47no1/article04.html"]-- from CIA.gov article HERE[/url]

[Lounge Daddy]

[quote name='dairygirl4u2c' date='Jan 5 2006, 11:15 PM']A few things I would point out:

2. I believe he lied going into the Iraq war. If I remember correct, he said there was a connection between Iraq and Al Quida with the bombing. No one has shown any connection, beyond connections in the 90's. If you say Iraq is terrorits, and that's enough of a reason to go to war, which I agree with, that doesn't excuse a lie.
Whatever the case, he didn't wait longer to build support for invasion and took advantage of the bombing sentiment. He did find resistence in coalition building, but that doesn't mean he couldn't have waited. That would have helped give people a clearer mind before going in, and whatever the case, to plan more. There was no clear and immeninet danger; he simply took advantage of the situation. If you think that's wise, to forsake planning (or to give better justice to invade bad guys) in order to take advantage of people, that's your option.
[right][snapback]847519[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Eh, the Bush lied carp is a tired argument that holds no water.

And the Saddam Hussein - terror connection existed, and more evidence comes constantly after the liberation of Iraq that only continues to support this connection.
Saddam aided terrorists, and at the same time he possessed WMDs, used them in the past, and sought to build up his supply. This was bad for everyone not paid off by Saddams regime (like France Germany and Russia, and the UN leadership)
He was a threat to the USA

Bush pressed the point that Saddam had WMDs, used them against others nations and his own people, and President Clinton went further and claimed Saddam would turn these WMDs on the United States. These are facts – and the only thing we don’t know is what happened with the WMDs.

YES There was a clear and immanent danger posed by Iraq, that is why President Clinton signed an executive order calling for regime change in Iraq – the Pentagon had been going over scenarios on how to go about removing Saddam from power in Iraq by the time President Bush entered the White House…
And when 9/11 happened - the timetable for Iraq was moved up

[url="http://www.yourcongress.com/ViewArticle.asp?article_id=2686"]LINK[/url] [url="http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/09/20020918-11.html#4"]LINK[/url] [url="http://nationalreview.com/interrogatory/hayes200406020847.asp"]LINK[/url] [url="http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/003/527uwabl.asp"]LINK[/url] [url="http://%5bURL=http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:SRvif_BAlWQJ:www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/11/20051114-1.html+clinton+cnn+iraq&hl=en&client=firefox-a"]LINK[/url]
[url="http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/11/20051114-1.html"]LINK[/url]

[Lounge Daddy]

[quote name='dairygirl4u2c' date='Jan 5 2006, 11:15 PM']A few things I would point out:

3. There's also moral issues, such as thinking it's moral to allow civil unions etc to respect others' beliefs when we'd want ours respected, like we surely wouldn't want polygamists denying us thing that they get if they were a majority etc. But this isn't something you as a catholic can budge on so. but i thought i'd mention it.
[right][snapback]847519[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Im not sure I understand your 3rd point…
If your saying you have a problem with President Bush upholding moral principles on gay unions and abortions and such – HELL YA!
And this is not only a Catholic thing, this is a Conservative ideal; President Bush honors his office by upholding the moral and ethical will of the people.

[Lounge Daddy]

[quote name='dairygirl4u2c' date='Jan 6 2006, 03:02 AM']Also, to begin to understand how people view President's without much basis, I ask you to do your challenge with Clinton, aside from his moral stances which are obviously against the Church. So many people hate on him, but they have few reasons besides the moral, just like few do with Bush.
[right][snapback]847713[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
Righty-o
Why would the Bush administration be equated with a culture of corruption?
You tell me the answer - because I see an administration that conducts itself honestly …
And as far as the left trying to criminalize conservatives (rather than demonstrating leadership skills … never mind, they have none to show) no one in the Bush administration has been prosecuted of any crime
And the only solid scandal anyone could come up with was based solely on forged documents.

[Lounge Daddy]

The Bush Presidency is already going down in history as one of the greatest…
The tax cuts are a success, economy kicking butt, stock market swinging away, the morality in the Oval Office, Iraq and Afghanistan are successes, democracy spreading thought the middle-east, Lebanese demanding the freedom of real democracy, etc etc…
And all this despite the loudest noisiest most depressing liberal nay sayers EVER

History forgets the negative people, especially when their wrong – because in the end, no one like negative people, and over the years the liberals have needed to turn to negative people more and more often for support.
History has already forgotten the critics of Reagan who poo-pooed his “tear down this wall” speech – along with every thing else in the 1980s
History has already forgotten the people who criticized the US war against Germany, complaining that Germany never attacked us – Japan did – and we should not simultaneously take on Germany and Japan without more evidence that Germany was aiding Japan and further evidence that Germany presented a threat to the USA.

And History will forget the Johnsonville brat Durbin, Sen Kerry, Barb Boxer, Cindi Sheehan, John Kerry, and their irresponsible public comments happily used by our enemy
And Mike Moore and his propaganda film supporting the enemy – and other like him…
They and their supporters … they will only be remembered as traitors if they are remembered at all

[Lounge Daddy]

[quote name='dairygirl4u2c' date='Jan 6 2006, 03:02 AM']do your challenge with Clinton, aside from his moral stances which are obviously against the Church. So many people hate on him, but they have few reasons besides the moral, just like few do with Bush.
[right][snapback]847713[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
Wow
First of all, I do not “hate” Bill Clinton…
I am a huge critic of Clinton… and asked about corruption in the Clinton presidency…
and evidence, i give you the following:

[quote]RECORDS SET

- The only president ever impeached on grounds of personal malfeasance

- Most number of convictions and guilty pleas by friends and associates**

- Most number of cabinet officials to come under criminal investigation

- Most number of witnesses to flee country or refuse to testify

- Most number of witnesses to die suddenly

- First president sued for sexual harassment.

- First president accused of rape.

- First first lady to come under criminal investigation

- Largest criminal plea agreement in an illegal campaign contribution case

- First president to establish a legal defense fund.

- Greatest amount of illegal campaign contributions

- Greatest amount of illegal campaign contributions from abroad

** According to our best information, 40 government officials were indicted or convicted in the wake of Watergate. A reader computes that there was a total of 31 Reagan era convictions, including 14 because of Iran-Contra and 16 in the Department of Housing & Urban Development scandal. 47 individuals and businesses associated with the Clinton machine were convicted of or pleaded guilty to crimes with 33 of these occurring during the Clinton administration itself.

Number of individuals and businesses associated with the Clinton machine who have been convicted of or pleaded guilty to crimes: 47

- Number of these convictions during Clinton's presidency: 33

- Number of indictments/misdemeanor charges: 61

- Number of congressional witnesses who have pleaded the Fifth Amendment, fled the country to avoid testifying, or (in the case of foreign witnesses) refused to be interviewed: 122

SMALTZ INVESTIGATION

- Guilty pleas and convictions obtained by Donald Smaltz in cases involving charges of bribery and fraud against former Agriculture
Secretary Mike Espy and associated individuals and businesses: 15

- Acquitted or overturned cases (including Espy): 6

- Fines and penalties assessed: $11.5 million

- Amount Tyson Food paid in fines and court costs: $6 million

CLINTON MACHINE CRIMES
FOR WHICH CONVICTIONS WERE OBTAINED

Drug trafficking (3), racketeering, extortion, bribery (4), tax evasion, kickbacks, embezzlement (2), fraud (12), conspiracy (5), fraudulent loans, illegal gifts (1), illegal campaign contributions (5), money laundering (6), perjury, obstruction of justice.

OTHER MATTERS INVESTIGATED BY SPECIAL PROSECUTORS
AND CONGRESS, OR REPORTED IN THE MEDIA

Bank and mail fraud, violations of campaign finance laws, illegal foreign campaign funding, improper exports of sensitive technology, physical violence and threats of violence, solicitation of perjury, intimidation of witnesses, bribery of witnesses, attempted intimidation of prosecutors, perjury before congressional committees, lying in statements to federal investigators and regulatory officials, flight of witnesses, obstruction of justice, bribery of cabinet members, real estate fraud, tax fraud, drug trafficking, failure to investigate drug trafficking, bribery of state officials, use of state police for personal purposes, exchange of promotions or benefits for sexual favors, using state police to provide false court testimony, laundering of drug money through a state agency, false reports by medical examiners and others investigating suspicious deaths, the firing of the RTC and FBI director when these agencies were investigating Clinton and his associates, failure to conduct autopsies in suspicious deaths, providing jobs in return for silence by witnesses, drug abuse, improper acquisition and use of 900 FBI files, improper futures trading, murder, sexual abuse of employees, false testimony before a federal judge, shredding of documents, withholding and concealment of subpoenaed documents, fabricated charges against (and improper firing of) White House employees, inviting drug traffickers, foreign agents and participants in organized crime to the White House.

ARKANSAS ALZHEIMER'S

Number of times that Clinton figures who testified in court or before Congress said that they didn't remember, didn't know, or something similar.

Bill Kennedy 116
Harold Ickes 148
Ricki Seidman 160
Bruce Lindsey 161
Bill Burton 191
Mark Gearan 221
Mack McLarty 233
Neil Egglseston 250
Hillary Clinton 250
John Podesta 264
Jennifer O'Connor 343
Dwight Holton 348
Patsy Thomasson 420
Jeff Eller 697[/quote]

[url="http://prorev.com/missingclinton.htm"]LINK[/url] [url="http://opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=85000448"]LINK[/url]

And of course on top of this you have weapon tech to China, campaign donations from China, selling nights in the Lincoln bedroom almost every night, and other carp – the list could go on

Its kind of silly to call the Bush presidency as having a “culture of corruption” while they are actually trying to defend our country - and has conducted itself legally ethically and responsibly
The same cant be said of the previous administration

[Lounge Daddy]

thats right...
the Clinton admin has
- Most number of convictions and guilty pleas by friends and associates**

- Most number of cabinet officials to come under criminal investigation

- Most number of witnesses to flee country or refuse to testify

- Most number of witnesses to die suddenly

- First president sued for sexual harassment.

- First president accused of rape.

- First first lady to come under criminal investigation

but the Bush admin has the supposed "culture of corruption"
whatever ...
liberals make role-models of criminals, conservatives makes role models out of heroes

[zwergel88]

Okay, here is a consise explaination of why I am totally against Bush and nearly everything that he does...

1. The war was a terrible idea.-Bush got us into a war with faulty intelligence. We now no that Saddam had no ablility to produce weapons of mass destruction and not only had not connections to al quieda but hated it altogether. Bush should have let the weapons inspectors do their job and waited until we got better intelligence but instead he insisted on going in without an exit strategy of any kind. Now Iraq is a new Vietnam. It's infustructure is in shambles and it is nearly in a civil war. The insurgency is growing everyday and short of send in hundreds of thousands of more troops it seems nearly impossible to beat. Their weren't enough troops sent in to begin with, just enough to secure the oil wells. If Bush insists on staying in Iraq until it is stabablized we will probably be there another ten years or more.

2. Bush is eroding the constitution.-US operated prisons in Afganistan, Iraq, and Guantonamo Bay have consistenly failed to live up to international standards set by the Geneva conventions. Prisoners are subject to torture mentally, and most likely physically. Such treatment is morally wrong and garuntees that our troops will suffer harsher treatment. Within the US, American citizens are subject to arbitrary detention and search and seizure because of the patriot act even though such things go against the fourth and fifth, and eighth amendments to the constitution. The new discoveries about the NSA spying on people only shows further the extent to which our freedoms are being eroded.

3. Bush is not pro-life.-Bush may be against abortion but he hasn't done much to end it. Also he is for the death penalty and provided over many executions during his tenure as governor. He even failed to grant clemency to people with mental disabilities and people who had fully reformed their lifes. Bush has also killed thousands and thousands of people in his arbitrary wars. Some estimates guess that as many as 100,000 civilians may have died in Iraq not to mention the over 2000 dead American soldiers.

4. Bush's economy is bad.-Bush is the only president since Hoover to not create a single net job. Instead he had enabled countries to outsource jobs at the expense of human rights and jobs for Americans. Bush has given tax cuts to the rich that have diverted funding away from much needed programs like no child left behind which has remained unfunded. The policy of giving tax cuts to the rich and hoping that it will trickle down is what Bush One calle "vodoo economics"

5. Our world is much less safe- Terrorism is on the rise thanks to what has happened in Iraq and Afganistan. People who weren't terrorists before are now induced to become fighters against Americans. Also, we have failed even more that four years after September 11th to catch bin Ladin. Could it be that we are too preoccupied with the quagmire that is Iraq. Further more terrorists are now better armed. When US troops invaded Iraq the munitions dumps of the former regime were left unguarded and were therefore looted by people who are now insurgents. Finally, our involvement in the Middle East has meant that the US has ignored problems in North Korea, the former soviet union, and Africa, especially Sudan. People are suffering much more in these places than they ever were in Iraq but because of our stupid war we are unable to help them.

I could go on and on about why Bush is not only a bad president but probably one of the worst presidents in history. Hopefully he will be impeached. You've probably heard these arguments before but hopefully someday you'll see what I mean.

If we are not living in a "culture of corruption" I don't know who is. Oh wait that reminds me of something else. The Bush administration is very very corrupt. The vice president receives 12,000 dollars a month from the very same company that is awarded most of the contracts in Iraq at the expense of Iraqi workers who do not get the bids. Halliburton has been investigated many times for over charging the government. Also, many of the judges that Bush appoints have corporate connections that create conflicts of interests. Alito who may be the next supreme court judge has ruled in favor of companies that he has invested in. There are about a million other examples of corruption including the ties between the Bushs and the bin Ladins but it would take hours to name them all.

Trust me Bush is evil.

[zwergel88]

Okay, here is a consise explaination of why I am totally against Bush and nearly everything that he does...

1. The war was a terrible idea.-Bush got us into a war with faulty intelligence. We now no that Saddam had no ablility to produce weapons of mass destruction and not only had not connections to al quieda but hated it altogether. Bush should have let the weapons inspectors do their job and waited until we got better intelligence but instead he insisted on going in without an exit strategy of any kind. Now Iraq is a new Vietnam. It's infustructure is in shambles and it is nearly in a civil war. The insurgency is growing everyday and short of send in hundreds of thousands of more troops it seems nearly impossible to beat. Their weren't enough troops sent in to begin with, just enough to secure the oil wells. If Bush insists on staying in Iraq until it is stabablized we will probably be there another ten years or more.

2. Bush is eroding the constitution.-US operated prisons in Afganistan, Iraq, and Guantonamo Bay have consistenly failed to live up to international standards set by the Geneva conventions. Prisoners are subject to torture mentally, and most likely physically. Such treatment is morally wrong and garuntees that our troops will suffer harsher treatment. Within the US, American citizens are subject to arbitrary detention and search and seizure because of the patriot act even though such things go against the fourth and fifth, and eighth amendments to the constitution. The new discoveries about the NSA spying on people only shows further the extent to which our freedoms are being eroded.

3. Bush is not pro-life.-Bush may be against abortion but he hasn't done much to end it. Also he is for the death penalty and provided over many executions during his tenure as governor. He even failed to grant clemency to people with mental disabilities and people who had fully reformed their lifes. Bush has also killed thousands and thousands of people in his arbitrary wars. Some estimates guess that as many as 100,000 civilians may have died in Iraq not to mention the over 2000 dead American soldiers.

4. Bush's economy is bad.-Bush is the only president since Hoover to not create a single net job. Instead he had enabled countries to outsource jobs at the expense of human rights and jobs for Americans. Bush has given tax cuts to the rich that have diverted funding away from much needed programs like no child left behind which has remained unfunded. The policy of giving tax cuts to the rich and hoping that it will trickle down is what Bush One calle "vodoo economics"

5. Our world is much less safe- Terrorism is on the rise thanks to what has happened in Iraq and Afganistan. People who weren't terrorists before are now induced to become fighters against Americans. Also, we have failed even more that four years after September 11th to catch bin Ladin. Could it be that we are too preoccupied with the quagmire that is Iraq. Further more terrorists are now better armed. When US troops invaded Iraq the munitions dumps of the former regime were left unguarded and were therefore looted by people who are now insurgents. Finally, our involvement in the Middle East has meant that the US has ignored problems in North Korea, the former soviet union, and Africa, especially Sudan. People are suffering much more in these places than they ever were in Iraq but because of our stupid war we are unable to help them.

I could go on and on about why Bush is not only a bad president but probably one of the worst presidents in history. Hopefully he will be impeached. You've probably heard these arguments before but hopefully someday you'll see what I mean.

If we are not living in a "culture of corruption" I don't know who is. Oh wait that reminds me of something else. The Bush administration is very very corrupt. The vice president receives 12,000 dollars a month from the very same company that is awarded most of the contracts in Iraq at the expense of Iraqi workers who do not get the bids. Halliburton has been investigated many times for over charging the government. Also, many of the judges that Bush appoints have corporate connections that create conflicts of interests. Alito who may be the next supreme court judge has ruled in favor of companies that he has invested in. There are about a million other examples of corruption including the ties between the Bushs and the bin Ladins but it would take hours to name them all.

Trust me Bush is evil.