first let me say that i'm not trying to let anything i say interfere with our friendship. with that said: 1. HOW DARE YOU BLAME OUR ECONOMIC STRESS ON BUSH. 9/11 was a hit on our economy that amounted to 1 TRILLION DOLLARS!!! Medicare+Iraq War+Patriot Act+Education Funding+everything that Bush imposed on America's budget does not amount to 1 trillion dollars, which tells us that 9/11's effect on the economy is far greater than his. If we didn't have 9/11, our economy would be in better shape than it's ever been because the tax cuts created millions of jobs because more corporate head's hired people with the extra cash they were cut by the government. Bush has had more to deal with than any President possibly since World War II. 2. Bush had no intention of misleading America into Iraq. His administratiion shields him from the truth in most issues and he simply does not understand, nor could he. You are making a claim that you can't back when you say that he has made America less safe, he has imposed COUNTLESS security programs (PATRIOT ACT) and regulations that will prevent a terrorist attack in the United States from ever happening again. As far as policing the world, we are ignoring the areas that we need to police and frankly, our focus is not outside of Iraq and Afghanistan right now. He obviously cares about the safety of America, if you look at the way he reacted to 9/11, that is why he wen't to Iraq, he didn't know what he was getting himself into and yes, he was a douche about admitting his mistakes. 3. Education has recieved a 60% increase in overall funding and it is very obvious that it has improved even though it could've been better designed. When you say for "kids who can afford it", all you are indicatig is a change from the education funding before-hand. Yes, there are plenty of details about many of his programs that could easily be refined, but you can't keep picking away on details that don't match up, because it's making you look foolish. He has improved public schools in plenty of areas around the country, the quality of schools are largely decided by the cities and nieghborhoods that they are in. Bush cut plenty of program's (namely environmental) funding to improve education but he has improved it in many ways on a national level. 4. I won't fight you on the environment thing, because he simply cut out a fuckload of environmental programs to be able to help education, military, and still be able to cut taxes in time to spur the economy. Roosevelt totally wins the environment thing. The environment issue is complicated because if you impose unrealistic environment and labor regulations on energy producers and product manufacters overseas, then millions of workers will be laid off because it costs corporations too much cash to live up to these. If you lay off workers, our GDP will drop, less people will buy shit, advertisers will suffer, products will be discontinued, jobs will be lost, money will not move around, our economy will sufffer. It is easy for a teenager to propose these radical environmental, educational, medical research, and other regulations when they don't pay jack-shit to the government and don't know the first thing about getting a serious job. That's the biggest problem, teenagers have bogus perspectives on most issues, and those of us who know what we're talking about and read stuff like the economist and the new yorker (both of which i do) are better suited to shoot your ass down when it comes to polotics and government.
i used to read the new yorker, but its so goddamn long and comes like every fucking week!
i will concede that his tax cuts probably would have helped our economy otherwise, but otherwise is not the case. the reason nobody in history has ever cut taxes while at war is simple: it doesn't work or make sense. p.s. not trying to deny 9/11's irreversible effect on the economy, but his handling of the economy afterwards w/ wars going on and those shenanigans: it's unacceptable that it has taken 3 years before we begin to see evidence of a turnaround.
as far as iraq, i don't care whether he intended to mislead us or not, he did not have enough (if any) evidence to order a unilateral war, and thousands have died because of it. that too, is unacceptable. also, if what you say is true, i am appalled to know that the president is shielded by his administration because HE CANNOT UNDERSTAND THE ISSUES AND CONSEQUENCES AT STAKE, THIS MAN IS THE LEADER OF THE MOST POWERFUL NATION ON EARTH, THAT TOO, IS UNACCEPTABLE! i also will admit that because of his many programs implemented, we may or may not be safer at home, however, the patriot act which you mention is unconstitutional and violates many of our core rights as american citizens. and this has no bearing whatsoever on the global arena. the fact remains that his blatant disregard towards the rest of the world has alienated even our allies, creating even more global hatred of the u.s.. so while we may be safer by having the government reading our neighbors' library records, terrorist abroad couldn't give a rats ass. and honestly (i'm not saying they don't exist), but i can't remember the last time i heard a suspected terrorist was caught because of the patriot act, help me out here.
60% in school funding, the fact also remains that this funding is going to the schools with the highest scores, a system which doesn't make sense. the good schools get better, the bad schools get worse, that's no way to fix the education system.
and environment regulations, as far as i can tell any regulations under bush are unrealistic! seriously. i beg to differ with your ideas about a suffering economy and the environment. clinton was a champion for the environment, and it was one of his strongest points, the same clinton also presided over the biggest economic boom in american history, so clearly, you don't need to cut regulations to have a working economy. and if the only way bush can get the economy going again is by destroying the environment, then we've got a serious problem.
please, nick, educate me how you are so knowledgable about holding a serious job when you spend 8 hours a day 5 days a week at school, p.s. i worked 8 hours a day all summer and paid my goddamn taxes, bitch!! and who's to be the judge of who does and doesn't know what they're talking about, i'm sure in a parallel universe, alex v. is the only one of us that really knows anything about politics...!?(scary thought) (pss no offense taken, its nice to talk to somebody where you're not just arguing the exact same opinions to each other)
1. HOW DARE YOU BLAME OUR ECONOMIC STRESS ON BUSH. 9/11 was a hit on our economy that amounted to 1 TRILLION DOLLARS!!! Medicare+Iraq War+Patriot Act+Education Funding+everything that Bush imposed on America's budget does not amount to 1 trillion dollars, which tells us that 9/11's effect on the economy is far greater than his. If we didn't have 9/11, our economy would be in better shape than it's ever been because the tax cuts created millions of jobs because more corporate head's hired people with the extra cash they were cut by the government. Bush has had more to deal with than any President possibly since World War II.
2. Bush had no intention of misleading America into Iraq. His administratiion shields him from the truth in most issues and he simply does not understand, nor could he. You are making a claim that you can't back when you say that he has made America less safe, he has imposed COUNTLESS security programs (PATRIOT ACT) and regulations that will prevent a terrorist attack in the United States from ever happening again. As far as policing the world, we are ignoring the areas that we need to police and frankly, our focus is not outside of Iraq and Afghanistan right now. He obviously cares about the safety of America, if you look at the way he reacted to 9/11, that is why he wen't to Iraq, he didn't know what he was getting himself into and yes, he was a douche about admitting his mistakes.
3. Education has recieved a 60% increase in overall funding and it is very obvious that it has improved even though it could've been better designed. When you say for "kids who can afford it", all you are indicatig is a change from the education funding before-hand. Yes, there are plenty of details about many of his programs that could easily be refined, but you can't keep picking away on details that don't match up, because it's making you look foolish. He has improved public schools in plenty of areas around the country, the quality of schools are largely decided by the cities and nieghborhoods that they are in. Bush cut plenty of program's (namely environmental) funding to improve education but he has improved it in many ways on a national level.
4. I won't fight you on the environment thing, because he simply cut out a fuckload of environmental programs to be able to help education, military, and still be able to cut taxes in time to spur the economy. Roosevelt totally wins the environment thing. The environment issue is complicated because if you impose unrealistic environment and labor regulations on energy producers and product manufacters overseas, then millions of workers will be laid off because it costs corporations too much cash to live up to these. If you lay off workers, our GDP will drop, less people will buy shit, advertisers will suffer, products will be discontinued, jobs will be lost, money will not move around, our economy will sufffer. It is easy for a teenager to propose these radical environmental, educational, medical research, and other regulations when they don't pay jack-shit to the government and don't know the first thing about getting a serious job. That's the biggest problem, teenagers have bogus perspectives on most issues, and those of us who know what we're talking about and read stuff like the economist and the new yorker (both of which i do) are better suited to shoot your ass down when it comes to polotics and government.
Reply
i will concede that his tax cuts probably would have helped our economy otherwise, but otherwise is not the case. the reason nobody in history has ever cut taxes while at war is simple: it doesn't work or make sense. p.s. not trying to deny 9/11's irreversible effect on the economy, but his handling of the economy afterwards w/ wars going on and those shenanigans: it's unacceptable that it has taken 3 years before we begin to see evidence of a turnaround.
as far as iraq, i don't care whether he intended to mislead us or not, he did not have enough (if any) evidence to order a unilateral war, and thousands have died because of it. that too, is unacceptable. also, if what you say is true, i am appalled to know that the president is shielded by his administration because HE CANNOT UNDERSTAND THE ISSUES AND CONSEQUENCES AT STAKE, THIS MAN IS THE LEADER OF THE MOST POWERFUL NATION ON EARTH, THAT TOO, IS UNACCEPTABLE! i also will admit that because of his many programs implemented, we may or may not be safer at home, however, the patriot act which you mention is unconstitutional and violates many of our core rights as american citizens. and this has no bearing whatsoever on the global arena. the fact remains that his blatant disregard towards the rest of the world has alienated even our allies, creating even more global hatred of the u.s.. so while we may be safer by having the government reading our neighbors' library records, terrorist abroad couldn't give a rats ass. and honestly (i'm not saying they don't exist), but i can't remember the last time i heard a suspected terrorist was caught because of the patriot act, help me out here.
60% in school funding, the fact also remains that this funding is going to the schools with the highest scores, a system which doesn't make sense. the good schools get better, the bad schools get worse, that's no way to fix the education system.
and environment regulations, as far as i can tell any regulations under bush are unrealistic! seriously. i beg to differ with your ideas about a suffering economy and the environment. clinton was a champion for the environment, and it was one of his strongest points, the same clinton also presided over the biggest economic boom in american history, so clearly, you don't need to cut regulations to have a working economy. and if the only way bush can get the economy going again is by destroying the environment, then we've got a serious problem.
please, nick, educate me how you are so knowledgable about holding a serious job when you spend 8 hours a day 5 days a week at school, p.s. i worked 8 hours a day all summer and paid my goddamn taxes, bitch!! and who's to be the judge of who does and doesn't know what they're talking about, i'm sure in a parallel universe, alex v. is the only one of us that really knows anything about politics...!?(scary thought)
(pss no offense taken, its nice to talk to somebody where you're not just arguing the exact same opinions to each other)
Reply
Leave a comment