An experiment on partisanship

POSTED BY: kpo
UPDATED: Saturday, June 22, 2013 15:55
VIEWED: 4823
PAGE 4 of 4

Bush - not as bad as Hitler or Stalin

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

OK let's have a go at this...

Why Bush was a good president:

Let's start with the Bush tax cuts. These put more money in the pockets of all tax paying Americans, and spurred the economy to growth and job creation for several years (until the financial crisis - that can be traced back to financial de-regulation that started under Clinton). The drop in government revenue also should have acted as a reminder to the government not to overspend; unfortunately what followed was the war on terror, and the election of a wasteful Democrat - both of which precipitated extra spending that Bush couldn't have anticipated.

Now let's move onto foreign policy. Bush campaigned on a foreign policy of avoiding foreign interventions, but when 9-11 happened that policy had to be revisited. Bush began the process of getting Al Qaeda on the run in Afghanistan, and while the cost of the Iraq war is judged too high by most, it shouldn't be forgotten that he removed the tyrant Sadaam and took the fight to our enemies there, fighting extremism abroad so that Americans wouldn't have to face it at home. Then there was The Surge, a decision of courage and foresight that went against public opinion, but turned the situation in Iraq around, and gave the Iraqis a shot, at least, of getting their democracy working. This strong, principled steadfastness sent the message to America's allies that she could be counted on, and to her enemies, that she should not be crossed. Bush never apologised for America; that didn't always win him friends abroad, but neither did it embolden our enemies, and invite them to attack.

Finally Bush showed with his AIDS and No Child Left Behind programs that he was a genuinely caring president, and someone who was willing to work with the other side.

It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

By the by here's an article explaining the study that performed this experiment, on conservatives and liberals: http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2013/06/study-conservatives-more-likel
y-liberals-avoid-cognitive-dissonance

It was an investigation into cognitive dissonance - the sensation you get when you stare in the face arguments/evidence that contradict your own views.

When given the choice, all the conservatives refused to do the exercise, whereas 20 out of 71 liberals agreed to. The researchers posited that the conservative mind may be more prone to dissonance avoidance, and that's why they are less willing to think positively about their political foes.


It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Quote:

---

Originally posted by BYTEMITE:

Quote:

---

George Bush is on trial, you're his lawyer; make the best case that you can that he was a good president.

---

no please his dog would miss him and he has a wife and children or something

Instead of an overt death sentence, send them to colonize ehhhhhh maybe Australia/Antartica/the Atlantic Abyssal Plain/Whatever.

Hey Magons, you guys want an Obama or a Bush 43? I can guarantee freshness! I'll even poke airholes in the box!

---

But will you use a katana to poke those airholes? And will you make sure they poke all the way through?





"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero

"I was wrong" - Hero, 2012

Mitt Romney, introducing his running mate: "Join me in welcoming the next President of the United States, Paul Ryan!"

Rappy's response? "You're lying, gullible ( believing in some BS you heard on msnbc ) or hard of hearing."

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Meanwhile, I'll play.

"President Bush declared three vast new marine national monuments in the Pacific Ocean, protecting an area larger than California.

These preserves are designed to conserve areas that are unspoiled — and largely unvisited — by human beings, including the deepest canyon on earth, the Mariana Trench.

Bush has declared much of the Mariana Trench — some 36,000 feet below the surface of the Pacific — and waters around some nearby islands as a marine national monument. He's also declared as monuments the area around Rose Atoll, part of the Territory of American Samoa, and the seas surrounding seven islands that are U.S. territories scattered in the Pacific."


Love him or hate him, he did that.

He also increased AIDS funding to Africa, more than doubling it. You might not like the strings he attached to it, but he loosened the purse strings and came up with the money, and that's not nothin'.


I'd still like to see him stand trial for war crimes, but he'll have my gratitude for at least those two actions.

And speaking of war crimes, allow me to play from the anti-Obama side as well. I think I'll let writer Michael Ventura speak for me:

Quote:

---

Let us confront the fact – or, if you like, the possibility – that we live in a rogue nation.
A definition is needed: For our purposes, "rogue nation" means a nation that purposefully, continually, and systematically defies the international laws and treaties that govern civilized behavior – treaties that said rogue nation had previously promised to abide by and enforce.
To demonstrate that the United States has gone rogue, we'll detour from examining our Constitution to look at two foundational documents of international law, instigated by and signed by the U.S.: the International Bill of Human Rights and the Geneva Conventions.
In 1945, President Truman appointed Eleanor Roosevelt as one of the first U.S. delegates to the United Nations. As chairperson of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights, the former First Lady was a key player in drafting the International Bill of Human Rights, which the U.N. voted into international law unanimously on December 10, 1948. (There were eight abstentions: the Soviet Bloc, apartheid South Africa, and Saudi Arabia.)
Article 1: "All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights." No exceptions.
Article 2: (italics added): "Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty."
"Without distinction of any kind" – distinctions, for instance, like "enemy combatant." "Or other opinion," like jihadists. "Regardless of jurisdictional or international status ... whether it be ... non-self-governing," so stateless persons and places are included. "Or under any other limitation of sovereignty" – such as failed states.
Article 5: "No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment." No one. Ever.
Article 6: "Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law." Everyone means everyone, and everywhere means everywhere, including Guantánamo Bay, Cuba.
Article 9: "No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile." Again, no one means no one. "Shall be" means ever.
Article 10: "Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal ... [regarding] any criminal charge against him." Any means any, including terrorism.
Let's turn now to the Geneva Conventions, a body of international law that covers countries at war. Here is what the Geneva Conventions consider "grave breaches" (as listed in Wikipedia):
1

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME