Artful Dodger: open you eyes and you will SEE the why....do I have documents I can put in the mail to ya...no,I don't sorry about that.
Like I said...we can debate this till the day we both die,we will never agree.This is a moot point between us,really.No one wins...I have my feelings,you have yours...I just hope you are happy with how Bush led our country the past 8 years and the legacy that he has left...

anastasia: I just hope you are happy with how Bush led our country the past 8 years and the legacy that he has left...


I guess we (Art and I and other conservatives) are mostly frustrated because we believe that much of the negative feelings towards Bush come from completely slanted, one sided, liberal, Bush haters from day one, like the main stream press, and hollywood lefties (who wouldnt be given the time of day if they werent all so pretty)

Thats why you hear us in here so often speaking about media bias etc, because we (or I, lets keep it to I) dont believe that most people are informed enough to have any opinion of Bush, other than what Katie Couric told them, or what they heard Sean Penn say!

Now, this probably isnt you, anyone willing to come in here and speak her mind, obviously has more of an active interest than the average mindless person. But a lot of the time you are the only one we get to bash because the really mindless types arent in here to be able to explain that there is another side!

Thats why Art is always pushing for facts and reason etc, because you are really in here representing so many people who are not in here, people we cant grab by the throat and choke the very life from their worthless bodies (whoops, did I just say that?) Because to us there really arent as many reasons as people think there are, if you actually take the time to think about it. Like our lists... you said there were way more bad things about Bush than good, but its not so easy to really sit down and make that list when it is more than just mindless platitudes.

No, I dont think Bush was a great President, nor do I think he was as bad as many say. I just hate that for most of the past 8 years I have spent trying to defend him from attacks made by people who attacked him simply becaquse they hated the guy from day one, Im glad I wont have to do that anymore, and I am looking forward to keeping libs on their toes for the next 8!

Artful Dodger: so now I am also uninformed....ya know...you guys and your left side right side,liberal,conservative....what if by chance I just don't happen to fall into any of your lil steriotypes?? I AM a democrat...WHO says I am a liberal right winged one?? you?? Chuck?? WHO said I HATED BUSH from DAY ONE?? you?? Chuck??? because I surely didn't.so you say I don't need a spreadsheet,I don't need to mail you some documents,WHAT do you want?? what do you want!? I think my opinions ARE rational...but wtf do I know anyways,huh? NOTHING I say you will be happy with...you nit pick EVERYTHING to death.I want YOU to show ME some rationale to Bush's desisions in his favor.Guess what....you can and I still would probably NOT agree with them...so where does that leave us?? back to square one.

Czuch: No terrorist attacks... so those internal ones don't count?

He didn't kill Saddam, the Iraqi's did. Under their law, and quite a mess by the video.
A democratic Iraq..... Only partially, as it's not a stable area, with even police supplying arms to enemy combatants.
Freedom.... Not yet, the war isn't over and the fear of being killed is still so much present just like under Saddam.
More stability..... .... He opened up a can of worms, and made Iraq a central point for anti western types to goto.
Fewer people messing with the USA.... Not really, If you look at it logically through the resources committed to Iraq the USA is in a weaker position to defend itself against a powerful country, or of a group of countries.
More of a national debt you mean!!
Well then, the other presidents can't of done much, as it's not exactly been in the news much what he's done for Africa.
... He went on holiday alot at the expense of the American people.

(V): Well I was talking about what benefits we will have realized because of Bush 20 or 30 years from now, looking back on this.... If by then Iraq is a stable, democratic, model for other middle eastern countries, and an ally of the US, well it will all be because of Bush and Bush presidency will have been considered largely a success!

Czuch: That was probably the real reason for the invasion,, but czuch, the USA in my opinion has no business forcing their "model" or ideals on other countries. Of course Saddam was a problem and needed to be dealt with eventually, sanctions never work and the UN oil for food deal, was criminal.But what a mess this was...and an ally? maybe for Iran

Artful Dodger: Help should have started at a local level...when THAT failed,and we seen imagies on TV of bloated bodies floating around the city,people stuck on the roofs of their houses,all the people stuck in the football stadium,begging for help,for water,for food for a way out,when the local level failed as it did,the Whitehouse SHOULD HAVE stepped in.
He finds it very easy to butt his nose into others problems all over the world but when Katrina hit...Bush was....oh yeah!! VACATION! he was on vacation,playing golf,and singing his little country songs and roasting mashmellows...thats what Bush was doing.Was it HIS responsibility and his ALONE to help,nope,but for God's sake,put the marshmellows down,step away from the golf club and ...here's a thought...HELP YOUR COUNTRYMEN OUT!

Charles Martel: the USA in my opinion has no business forcing their "model" or ideals on other countries.........true....I ahve always thgouht that way

anastasia: It would have against the law for Bush to take control before the Gov of La asked for it. He asked for the Gov to ask, and she refused. Miss and Ala ask for it before it hit and the Government was ready, try again.

Vikings: OMG...wow! no kidding wow...yeah THAT totally changed my mind on EVERYTHING then....oh,no it didn't...sorry,my bad....Against the law...hmmm,ok....it would be against the law for Bush to step in and help...yeah,because he has always worried about what the people have thought of him.
It's not just me that thinks he should have helped more....I'm just the one here saying anything about it....how about sucking it up and just say...ya know what,these people are TRAPPED and need some help....ohhh,noooo,I think I would rather stay on vacation

Vikings: I would normally agree - but we see how Bush went into Iraq against many wishes - why not do the same to help his own people? Why would Bush care so much to make the people in Iraq lives better... and not his own people?

OK, that was a little bit of sarcasm

Katrina was cause by a lot of issues, many plans and actions were made long before Bush was ever involved - and Katrina caused many of those plans and actions to fail and I don't think Bush or his people should be held responsible for the failure - but they are of course held responsible to make it better for next time. So when the next big natural disaster strikes, if Bush & his people did not learn from Katrina to make it better - then that would be where to blame Bush.

anastasia: Do you understand that we live in the UNITED STATES of America? Not the Dictator ship of America

coan.net: I can tell you from inside information that FEMA is much better now

Vikings: do YOU understand the meaning of helping others?
doesn't really matter...like I said said agian and again..we will never agree on this stuff,so be it,whatever.
Bush had a few good things while in office...I think he had more negative..MY OPINION.
your is that..what he was wonderful?? ok,cool,glad ya feel that way..glad ya feel which ever way ya wanna feel...I'm done with this whole thing...I don;t care what I say,what I don't say...what you say,what you don't say.....we disagree...THAT I think is something we can agree on!

Charles Martel: the USA in my opinion has no business forcing their "model" or ideals on other countries.........true....I ahve always thgouht that way


here is the problem i have with this kind of thought.... I can agree on one level that we should not force anyone to do anything, but I also do think these countries can have it both ways. What I mean is that here we are paying to feed their people (in Iraq) ...Saddam is stealing the money for the food we are supposed to be buying them,... we are spending countless amounts of time energy and money to monitor them and to sanction them and to monitor the sanction then tohave them broken anyway.... okay fine with me, dont go in and help the Iraqi people have hope for their futures, but dont give them anything at all!! We arent allowed to help them by getting rid of their tyrant leader, well we arent going to spend another dime on them at all!


See, when it comes right down to it, we did not force anything on anybody, they forced it upon themselves, really!!!

Its the same ol liberal garbage.... dont teach them to fish just give them fish. At some point if you are responsible to feed the people because their leader wont do it, then you have the responsibility to help them become more self sufficiant, the best long term way to make them more self sufficient is to give them a stable democratic society.


We are not going into any country we dont like their government and forcing democracy down their throats.... but Iraq was obviously not working, and you libs out there keep whining about how much the war costs, but what would it cost us to feed and monitor Iraq generation after generation? Or even worse, wait 10 years and then have to go in and help out?

I think it was inevitable what was going to happen in Iraq, it was just a matter of when and how..... the stars just lined up right for us to go in when we did, and I am glad for it!

Czuch: why you say how we were feeding the people in Iraq - was that because we made it impossible for the people of Iraq to sell oil and buy feed themselves?

I mean I understand the need of the emargo against Iraq - but to try to use the result of that (no money for food) as a reason to do more.... Sorry, fail.

coan.net: I see a point there.... but what was the option then? Before the oil embargo Saddam was selling oil and using the cash to make weapons to kill his own people with.

Its great to say just stay out of their affairs, let them be, but someday their mess will become our mess, and then its a way bigger mess.... there are no easy solutions, and I dont know what the best ones are or arent, but nobody does. We just do the best we can with what we have and sometimes histroy proves what we did to be the right thing sometimes it shows that maybe something else is better.

But you cannot tell me that for sure what we did in Iraq was wrong and for sure not doing something would have been better in the long term.

anastasia: I can sense and understand your frustration.... opinions are just that opinions... but heres the point, If you say you dont like Bush because he never signed a law protecting albino wambats, then that is your opinion and i might not agree but thats that.

But lets say Bush had signed that law, and your opinion of Bush was based on wrong intel?

Your gonna tell us you werent one to hate Bush from day one, that your hatred for him is based on certain things he did or did not do?

he handled Katrina poorly you say? Well even though he stayed away at the request of the governor of that state, your opinion is that he should have done something more anyway, and that is totally legit opinion, yeah he should have broken the law and helped these people anyway. That works for me!

But if you say he handled Katrina wrong because he did not follow some specific guidelines set forth in the constitution or set forth by whomever, well that is an opinion based on false information, and is therefore less legitimate.

See you cannot have an opinion about facts, facts and opinions are two different things! Also if your opinions are based on facts that arent really factual, well that brings those opinions into debate as well.

But in a discussion board format you either need to keep your opinions more open and vague, IE I dont care what the laws were, he should have done more anyway, or you have to be able to defend them when they are not, IE he broke the law so I dont like him!

Czuch: If.... yes the word is If......... And forgive me for stating some of the obvious, but would Bush have gone in if it wasn't for his support from our UK Gov? And 'If' Iraq is stable, it'll be noted that Bush had no plan for the aftermath of the invasion and that many ripped off the American tax payer through charging over the odds.

It'll be noted that the presidents after cleaned up the mess.

Vikings: Mmmm If Bush had rolled up with a convoy of stuff and men at the state line and asked the people if they wanted help, or asked the Gov to get and explain to him why he should turn around the convoy on public TV....

.... It's called politics and the appliance of.

(V): Oh okay.... all Bushs fault but not all the glory? hehehe well for sure its not all about Bush, of course you all were great allies among others, and any credit for any success there will obviously be spread about, but this is inevitably going to be Bushs blunder or good achievement, either way!

I really never understood what we all were thinking by not completely shutting down the Iraqi boarders after the initial fall? If not for the foreign insurgency coming in, I think we would have been gone long ago!

(V): There was a history of people from inside Iraq trying to organize help to oust saddam, we were actually all set up for one under Clinton, and he backed out at the last minute, leaving the insiders hung out in the wind!

After that it was hard for them to trust any help would be available, and without help, nothing they could do alone.

it has just been announced here that our troops in afghanistan WILL ALL be home by 2012...whoopee doodle and the fight goes on...........................

Czuch: You mean the uprising that was called for by Bush in 1991 and when it came to actual foreign support was cancelled the Intifada were left to Saddam's *cough* mercy.

(V): See if you can find it, I probably remember it wrong, but it seems like it was something either with Clinton, or maybe papa George?

Czuch: It was Papa Bush. After the Kuwait business, those who didn't like Saddam were encouraged to uprise by Papa Bush's admin , but at the time they needed outside help they got none. So Saddam went around and slaughtered them all.

http://www.alternet.org/waroniraq/49864/?page=entire

Dear old G Dubya practically apologised for living the last 8 years....it seems even he knows what a knob he made of himself. Well he can go back to making Laura her morning coffee (his words not mine)

Artful Dodger: yes he sure will, and time will tell. I sure as hell wouldnt like his job.

Bernice: One on the list even describes Bushs enhancing relations with your country!

Czuch: whos opinion was that? He is NOT a liked man. Little Johhny Howard (the man who took Obamas bed) was a man who cow-towed down to Bush and his stupid ideas. Even the British prime minister had more sense than that.

exactly who is Fred Barnes?

Bernice: Fred Barnes is a conservative leaning political columnists.... Having helped relations with your country doesnt depend on his popularity there.

He isnt very popular here right now either, but he still has done things that have helped our country.

Popularity changes a lot... remember Bush approval rating at one time was something like 93%?

Czuch: ah....a journalist....one who tells lies and tries to force their opinion onto the unsuspecting ROFLMBO

Bernice: Like we have been talking about lately... its all opinion, I dont see any lies in his opinions, but at least if you read in here you are not one of the unsuspecting anymore!

Czuch: yeah right

Czuch: Barnes has a show on Fox News also,go figure

Jim Dandy: Well, are liberals the only ones to have valid opinions of Bush then?

Czuch: Barnes is known for his loyalty to Bush

Czuch: who determines if it is a **valid opinion**

and I want factual evidence to back up your answer please LOL

Im doing an AD

Czuch: Wow... enhanced interrorgation (sp) of prisoners is an achievement.... Rejecting a treaty that pretty much now he and his admin say is correct in terms that they are 90%+ sure that the reasons behind the treaty were well founded now.

.... What a great Republican site you found Czuch, but can you find a neutral one, not Repub or Liberal?

(V): You guys asked for a list... didnt say it had to come from someone who hates bush?

Czuch: ah ha but you called us all doubters......hence the reaction you got.........LOL

Czuch: I thought it was pretty classless for Bush to snub Helen Thomas in his final press conf today.At 88 she is the dean of White House reporters,he ignored her raised hand,.........stay classy GW

Jim Dandy: There is a history there, between the two of them, and she blew it awhile ago as far as getting him to answer any of her questions, it all her own fault and it has more to do with her class than his.....

Czuch: It's sad when politicians lose sight of the fact reporters are there to report to the people.Thomas asked him questions he didn't like,so Bush basically thumbed his nose to the people wanting those answers.

Jim Dandy: Helen Thomas Asks President Bush Why He Went to War
Thomash3-22

At the White House Tuesday, veteran correspondent Helen Thomas took President Bush to task on his reasons for invading Iraq. It was the first time Bush had called on Thomas, known as the "First Lady of the American Press", in three years. [includes rush transcript]

* >Share
o delicio.us
o digg
o facebook
o newsvine
o reddit
o slashdot
o stumbleupon


Email to a friend

Help

Printer-friendly version

Purchase DVD/CD
LISTEN
WATCH


Real Video Stream

Real Audio Stream

MP3 Download

More…

* White House press conference, March 21, 2006

Rush Transcript
This transcript is available free of charge. However, donations help us provide closed captioning for the deaf and hard of hearing on our TV broadcast. Thank you for your generous contribution.
Donate - $25, $50, $100, More...

AMY GOODMAN: We return to President Bush's news conference. Veteran White House correspondent Helen Thomas asked President Bush what some analysts called the most direct questioning he's ever received on his reasons for invading Iraq.

HELEN THOMAS: I'd like to ask you, Mr. President, your decision to invade Iraq has caused the deaths of thousands of Americans and Iraqis, wounds of Americans and Iraqis for a lifetime. Every reason given, publicly at least, has turned out not to be true. My question is, why did you really want to go to war? From the moment you stepped into the White House, from your Cabinet—your Cabinet officers, intelligence people, and so forth—what was your real reason? You have said it wasn't oil—quest for oil, it hasn't been Israel, or anything else. What was it?

PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH: I think your premise, in all due respect to your question and to you as a lifelong journalist, is that, you know, I didn't want war. To assume I wanted war is just flat wrong, Helen, in all due respect—

HELEN THOMAS: Everything—

PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH: Hold on for a second, please.

HELEN THOMAS:—everything I've heard—

PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH: Excuse me, excuse me. No president wants war. Everything you may have heard is that, but it's just simply not true. My attitude about the defense of this country changed on September the 11th. We—when we got attacked, I vowed then and there to use every asset at my disposal to protect the American people. Our foreign policy changed on that day, Helen. You know, we used to think we were secure because of oceans and previous diplomacy, but we realized on September the 11th, 2001, that killers could destroy innocent life. And I'm never going to forget it. And I'm never going to forget the vow I made to the American people that we will do everything in our power to protect our people.

Part of that meant to make sure that we didn't allow people to provide safe haven to an enemy. And that's why I went into Iraq—hold on for a second—

HELEN THOMAS: They didn't do anything to you or to our country.

PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH: Look—excuse me for a second, please. Excuse me for a second. They did. The Taliban provided safe haven for al-Qaeda. That's where al-Qaeda trained—

HELEN THOMAS: I'm talking about Iraq—

PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH: Helen, excuse me. That's where—Afghanistan provided safe haven for al-Qaeda. That's where they trained. That's where they plotted. That's where they planned the attacks that killed thousands of innocent Americans.

I also saw a threat in Iraq. I was hoping to solve this problem diplomatically. That's why I went to the Security Council; that's why it was important to pass 1441, which was unanimously passed. And the world said, 'Disarm, disclose, or face serious consequences'—

HELEN THOMAS:—go to war—

PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH:—and therefore, we worked with the world, we worked to make sure that Saddam Hussein heard the message of the world. And when he chose to deny inspectors, when he chose not to disclose, then I had the difficult decision to make to remove him. And we did, and the world is safer for it.

AMY GOODMAN: That was President Bush answering Helen Thomas at the White House on Tuesday. Commonly referred to as the "First Lady of the Press, Helen Thomas is the most senior member of the White House Press Corps. She has served as a White House correspondent for some 57 years and has covered every president since John F. Kennedy. It was the fist time President Bush has called on Helen Thomas in three years.

Jim Dandy: Not true... she asked and he tried to answer, she just doesnt like the answer she was getting...


Reporters also lose sight of the fact that they are there to REPORT, not make the news, she is a typical "left wing biased news media" referred to often here, who is first and foremost a Bush hater! She asked then interrupted him.. he is the president for christ sakes, she is the one showing absolutly no respect, why should he let her even in the room?

You have to give her credit,well into her 80's she was one of the few White House reporters not willing to give GW a free ride

Jim Dandy: Yeah, credit for being a biased news reporter with an agenda....