We owe it to the Democrats to show their president the exact same kind of respect and loyalty that they have shown Bush.
Submitted 62 days ago by phaseFavoriteEmbedOptions
We owe it to the Democrats to show their president the exact same kind of respect and loyalty that they have shown Bush.(Please click one)
This comment has been moderated down. (Show Comment)
Not enough room to ask the way I wanted to...In the spirit of reaching across the aisle, we owe it to the Democrats to show their president the exact same kind of respect and loyalty that they have shown our recent Republican president? (quote from Ann Coulter)
Unfortunately, many people who voted for the Democratic Presidential candidate have not been respectful, let alone loyal to President Bush. Loyalty should be earned but respect for the office and for a person should always be there, whether or not you respect their opinions or decisions.
As an American citizen to me to disrespect the person and the office is wrong, no matter who is the Preseident or what party they are from. I would hope that in the next few months, people can put aside their vitrol and show respect for both the current and future Presidents.
[1 point]62 days ago by livelettReplyEdited 62 days ago by livelett
Once a president wipes his arse with the United States Constitution (which is what Bush has done) - HE has disrespected the office far BEYOND what the average American could EVER do. As far as I'm concerned - the bastard should be arrested for TREASON against the People of the United States.
Why he still has defenders - I will never understand. He has used the office of President of the United States of America to bring nothing but dishonor and disrespect to this country.
I was just glad to discover that a lot of traditional conservatives actually ANALYZE policy and ideas before coming to judgment on who should be awarded their vote. Listening to them in here REALLY had me concerned about the future of TRUE conservatism in this country. It seemed as if it had turned from rational and logical thinking into a rabid, VOTE REPUBLICAN ONLY thought process. Glad it turned out to be a blip of the Ask500 conservatives and no where near that thoughtless on a national level. I've re-gained a lot of respect for my countrymen with this election.
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." --Theodore Roosevelt
There is a difference between respecting and criticizing. You respect the rights of a person to speak their mind, but you have the right to criticize what they say .....
You respect the right of a person to live, but you have the right to criticize the way that they live
No. Then she'd have to admit she was a commie-pinko liberal. Only liberals think sex is a privacy issue any more. 21st century conservatives think they not only right to tell people what they can and cannot do in the privacy of their bedrooms - they think they have an obligation to legislate it.
I have witnessed some of your "performances" here, may I suggest you look into your bible and decide if you want to follow the old testament or the teachings of Jesus.
> If I had to guess I would have to say I think you are a satanist.
LOL, sorry, no, actually a Roman Catholic, but go ahead and think that I am a devil worshiping whatever just because we disagree politically and you don't particularly care for my opinions, doesn't make it true, but hey to each his own. How is that for a "performance?"
[2 points]60 days ago by greeneyegirl79ReplyEdited 60 days ago by greeneyegirl79
I wouldn't dream of treating our new President the way they left treated President Bush. I will always look at our government with a critical eye, and write letters to my senators or call to complain, but I would not disrespect our President.
Because he hasn't done what Bush has done. And I will, respectfully, add the word "yet." Once he does - I'll be up in his s**t just as fast as I was this poor excuse for a waste of a president we have now.
Did you listen to Obama's acceptance speech? When he said "and those of you who didn't vote for me - I will hear your voices, too."
That was a philosophy George Bush NEVER held. Bolton said, very clearly, that he AND THE PRESIDENT both believed that the President (Bush) owed his allegiance to the people who supported him in his run for president. But that is not a good philosophy for a president to hold. The President is president of the ENTIRE country - not just the people who voted for him.
Naw - gave that one up. Lost a tooth, was excited until I found out the kid next door was getting $1, and I was only getting a dime. Then I caught my father with his hand under my pillow trying to locate the tooth.
Practical experience is the best teacher. And I do respect the fact that you're older and have seen many more administrations than I have. But don't allow the bad experience to make you cynical - and I think that's what you've done. Give him a chance, Mike. We've got a lot of problems in this country. You know it and I know it. Coolidge's policies are what really lead to this country's Great Depression. Hoover's belief in following those same economic policies are what brought this country to it's knees. Both men thought they were doing right and good. And if those policies had been allowed to go on long enough - who knows? They MIGHT have worked. But people grew hungry (as in lack of jobs and food) as those economic policies failed to take hold fast enough. It took Roosevelt demanding social conscience, and quite a few socialistic principles, to bring it back. Took WWII to REALLY bring it back.
Today's financial geniuses, once again, tried to enact those same fiscal policies that Coolidge and Hoover followed. They really thought that it would work - THIS time. But once again, they found out they were wrong. It DOES work in the models, but it doesn't work FAST enough to keep people from going hungry in this country.
I hope, with every breath, that Obama will turn out to be our Roosevelt. Yes, they will probably have to return to some of the fiscal legislation enacted under Roosevelt that congress has spent the last 15 years wiping out - but we have, once again, seen why these policies were there in the first place. Lack of oversight breeds uncontrollable greed in a capitalistic society. Greed can be good - but uncontrollable greed sees unconscionable acts. Like home mortgages sold at 12% to people whom have no way to repay them, and those mortgages sold to others after being labeled as mortgage backed securities. "Stick it to the other guy before we get stuck" - THAT is unconscionable.
Here's hoping we can make alternative energy our WWII. Put people to work in an entirely new industry - and hope to hell it works. If not, I fear we will see this country spiral down until we become the new Sparta: only mentioned in history books and fireside legends.
Give the guy a chance. If he really screws up - I'll be screaming right along with you.
You persist in these fantasies silly. What is there in Obama's past that makes you think that he is the panacea for all our ills?
Those mortgages were sold to persons who could not afford them because the Democrats in the Congress pressured them to do so. They wanted to buy votes and they succeeded. Unfortunately the rest of us will pay the tab.
My age does not, in itself, endow me with an advanced wisdom or insight. I may have, however, been witness to more scams and can recognize the same scams being used today.
You seem to believe that because Obama has a smooth delivery that he is capable of doing something for which nothing in his life has prepared him. I believe him to be no different than a snake oil salesman with a cure-all for everything that ails you. I sincerely believe that you will come to this realization after a time.
I certainly don't think he's the answer to all our prayers - think anyone who thinks that is as loony as those who think Bush is a great president. (lol) The other day I banged my head on a door jam, looked at the UPS driver and said "Gee, I thought when Obama got elected stuff like that wouldn't happen any more." We both laughed like crazy.
Our current economic problems need to be addressed on the SMALLEST level - the middle class, focusing on jobs that pay a LIVING wage for families, ending a war that should not have started, strengthen our fight where the fight SHOULD be happening, regain respect for our country on an international level, developing other methods of energy so the middle class financial standing is no longer subject to the whims of oil speculators and shipping our dollars paid for energy over seas, etc., etc.
These were all the things that Obama said he also stood for. McCain seemed to be following the same economic policies that the Bush administration supported.
There is a BIG difference between SAYING what you want to happen and MAKING it happen. As to the actual undertaking of all of these tasks, I would be lost. Any one person would. But I think Obama has shown a willingness to LISTEN to those in the know. He relied on Warren Buffet for economic advice during his campaign. McCain was relying on Phil Gramm. I know Warren Buffet is considered one of the best business men in the world. I know Phil Gramm is one of the principle designers of our current financial meltdown.
It will be up to Obama to choose whom he turns to for advice for all of these issues. So far, on the only person I can really POINT to, he's chosen well. I think he's spent enough time in Washington getting to know these people, who has the knowledge, the talent and the love of country enough to make good decisions for the good of the country. He also knows who in Washington is out for themselves. Those whom are 'out for themselves' aren't necessarily bad people - they just believe whatever is good for THEM is also good for the rest of the country. And that isn't true. "If it works for the rich, the poor will eventually benefit" has been the philosophy ever since Reagan - and it has not worked. If our economy is left under that philosophy it MIGHT work - in about a couple of hundred years. The problem is our country and its citizens are suffering NOW. So "hang on ... it'll trickle down ..." will no longer work.
If the US had led the way for globalization in a slower manner - it would have worked. But the move has gone too fast. We injected all of our money - then all of our credit - into the world economy. But it wasn't enough to see that money come back to us. So now we are over-extended with no where to go. The jobs have disappeared - and the Bush/McCain solution was to create more jobs at Walmart and Taco Bell. Jobs that didn't have insurance benefits, and jobs that don't pay enough to feed, clothe, house a family - even working double shifts.
I think most people from both parties gave lots of respect and support to Bush when he first became President. Unfortunately he lost the people's respect.
I have disagreed with every politician on many issues, but I respect every one as a human and the office he or she holds. But I have never disagreed with a leader of a western nation as much as I have disagreed with Bush.
To me it seems that the Bush supporters are defending his bigotry, lying, hate, torture, invasions of privacy and other countries. The list goes on and on. For instance, why do you guys defend torture when Bush does it, but denounce it when Bin Laden does it? Why do you call Bin Laden evil when Bush does similar things and cheer him on?
Community votes are collected from you and other visitors to Ask500People. Independent votes are collected from visitors to hundreds of other websites around the world.
Sign Up or Login
Sorry, this data is only available to users with an account.
Loading...
This comment has been moderated down. (Show Comment)
Not enough room to ask the way I wanted to...In the spirit of reaching across the aisle, we owe it to the Democrats to show their president the exact same kind of respect and loyalty that they have shown our recent Republican president? (quote from Ann Coulter)
"In what respect, Charlie?"
This comment was deleted.
[4 points] 62 days ago by deleted user ReplyWhat else would you expect from someone like Ann Coulter?
Unfortunately, many people who voted for the Democratic Presidential candidate have not been respectful, let alone loyal to President Bush. Loyalty should be earned but respect for the office and for a person should always be there, whether or not you respect their opinions or decisions.
As an American citizen to me to disrespect the person and the office is wrong, no matter who is the Preseident or what party they are from. I would hope that in the next few months, people can put aside their vitrol and show respect for both the current and future Presidents.
Well expressed.
Once a president wipes his arse with the United States Constitution (which is what Bush has done) - HE has disrespected the office far BEYOND what the average American could EVER do. As far as I'm concerned - the bastard should be arrested for TREASON against the People of the United States.
Why he still has defenders - I will never understand. He has used the office of President of the United States of America to bring nothing but dishonor and disrespect to this country.
This comment was deleted.
[2 points] 62 days ago by deleted user ReplyI was just glad to discover that a lot of traditional conservatives actually ANALYZE policy and ideas before coming to judgment on who should be awarded their vote. Listening to them in here REALLY had me concerned about the future of TRUE conservatism in this country. It seemed as if it had turned from rational and logical thinking into a rabid, VOTE REPUBLICAN ONLY thought process. Glad it turned out to be a blip of the Ask500 conservatives and no where near that thoughtless on a national level. I've re-gained a lot of respect for my countrymen with this election.
This comment has been moderated down. (Show Comment)
ABSOLUTELY.
This comment was deleted.
[1 point] 62 days ago by deleted user Reply"To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." --Theodore Roosevelt
There is a difference between respecting and criticizing. You respect the rights of a person to speak their mind, but you have the right to criticize what they say .....
You respect the right of a person to live, but you have the right to criticize the way that they live
Very true - "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."
So you support what consenting adults do in the privacy of their bedroom as their right, but you do not necessarily wish to engage in it yourself?
No. Then she'd have to admit she was a commie-pinko liberal. Only liberals think sex is a privacy issue any more. 21st century conservatives think they not only right to tell people what they can and cannot do in the privacy of their bedrooms - they think they have an obligation to legislate it.
This comment was deleted by greeneyegirl79 .
[0 points] 61 days ago byThis comment was deleted by greeneyegirl79 .
[-1 points] 61 days ago byI have witnessed some of your "performances" here, may I suggest you look into your bible and decide if you want to follow the old testament or the teachings of Jesus.
This comment was deleted by greeneyegirl79 .
[-1 points] 61 days ago byIf I had to guess I would have to say I think you are a satanist.
This comment was deleted by greeneyegirl79 .
[-1 points] 61 days ago by> If I had to guess I would have to say I think you are a satanist.
LOL, sorry, no, actually a Roman Catholic, but go ahead and think that I am a devil worshiping whatever just because we disagree politically and you don't particularly care for my opinions, doesn't make it true, but hey to each his own. How is that for a "performance?"
I wouldn't dream of treating our new President the way they left treated President Bush. I will always look at our government with a critical eye, and write letters to my senators or call to complain, but I would not disrespect our President.
Very noble hoosier2u. But why isn't it fair to treat Obama the same way Bush was treated?
Because he hasn't done what Bush has done. And I will, respectfully, add the word "yet." Once he does - I'll be up in his s**t just as fast as I was this poor excuse for a waste of a president we have now.
This comment was deleted.
[2 points] 62 days ago by deleted user ReplyVery noble hoosier2u. But why isn't it fair to treat Obama the same way Bush was treated?
I will show a President Obama exactly the same loyalty and support that the Democrats did during President Bush's terms of office.
Did you listen to Obama's acceptance speech? When he said "and those of you who didn't vote for me - I will hear your voices, too."
That was a philosophy George Bush NEVER held. Bolton said, very clearly, that he AND THE PRESIDENT both believed that the President (Bush) owed his allegiance to the people who supported him in his run for president. But that is not a good philosophy for a president to hold. The President is president of the ENTIRE country - not just the people who voted for him.
Yes, and I bet you believe in the tooth fairy too.
Naw - gave that one up. Lost a tooth, was excited until I found out the kid next door was getting $1, and I was only getting a dime. Then I caught my father with his hand under my pillow trying to locate the tooth.
Practical experience is the best teacher. And I do respect the fact that you're older and have seen many more administrations than I have. But don't allow the bad experience to make you cynical - and I think that's what you've done. Give him a chance, Mike. We've got a lot of problems in this country. You know it and I know it. Coolidge's policies are what really lead to this country's Great Depression. Hoover's belief in following those same economic policies are what brought this country to it's knees. Both men thought they were doing right and good. And if those policies had been allowed to go on long enough - who knows? They MIGHT have worked. But people grew hungry (as in lack of jobs and food) as those economic policies failed to take hold fast enough. It took Roosevelt demanding social conscience, and quite a few socialistic principles, to bring it back. Took WWII to REALLY bring it back.
Today's financial geniuses, once again, tried to enact those same fiscal policies that Coolidge and Hoover followed. They really thought that it would work - THIS time. But once again, they found out they were wrong. It DOES work in the models, but it doesn't work FAST enough to keep people from going hungry in this country.
I hope, with every breath, that Obama will turn out to be our Roosevelt. Yes, they will probably have to return to some of the fiscal legislation enacted under Roosevelt that congress has spent the last 15 years wiping out - but we have, once again, seen why these policies were there in the first place. Lack of oversight breeds uncontrollable greed in a capitalistic society. Greed can be good - but uncontrollable greed sees unconscionable acts. Like home mortgages sold at 12% to people whom have no way to repay them, and those mortgages sold to others after being labeled as mortgage backed securities. "Stick it to the other guy before we get stuck" - THAT is unconscionable.
Here's hoping we can make alternative energy our WWII. Put people to work in an entirely new industry - and hope to hell it works. If not, I fear we will see this country spiral down until we become the new Sparta: only mentioned in history books and fireside legends.
Give the guy a chance. If he really screws up - I'll be screaming right along with you.
You persist in these fantasies silly. What is there in Obama's past that makes you think that he is the panacea for all our ills?
Those mortgages were sold to persons who could not afford them because the Democrats in the Congress pressured them to do so. They wanted to buy votes and they succeeded. Unfortunately the rest of us will pay the tab.
My age does not, in itself, endow me with an advanced wisdom or insight. I may have, however, been witness to more scams and can recognize the same scams being used today.
You seem to believe that because Obama has a smooth delivery that he is capable of doing something for which nothing in his life has prepared him. I believe him to be no different than a snake oil salesman with a cure-all for everything that ails you. I sincerely believe that you will come to this realization after a time.
I certainly don't think he's the answer to all our prayers - think anyone who thinks that is as loony as those who think Bush is a great president. (lol) The other day I banged my head on a door jam, looked at the UPS driver and said "Gee, I thought when Obama got elected stuff like that wouldn't happen any more." We both laughed like crazy.
Our current economic problems need to be addressed on the SMALLEST level - the middle class, focusing on jobs that pay a LIVING wage for families, ending a war that should not have started, strengthen our fight where the fight SHOULD be happening, regain respect for our country on an international level, developing other methods of energy so the middle class financial standing is no longer subject to the whims of oil speculators and shipping our dollars paid for energy over seas, etc., etc.
These were all the things that Obama said he also stood for. McCain seemed to be following the same economic policies that the Bush administration supported.
There is a BIG difference between SAYING what you want to happen and MAKING it happen. As to the actual undertaking of all of these tasks, I would be lost. Any one person would. But I think Obama has shown a willingness to LISTEN to those in the know. He relied on Warren Buffet for economic advice during his campaign. McCain was relying on Phil Gramm. I know Warren Buffet is considered one of the best business men in the world. I know Phil Gramm is one of the principle designers of our current financial meltdown.
It will be up to Obama to choose whom he turns to for advice for all of these issues. So far, on the only person I can really POINT to, he's chosen well. I think he's spent enough time in Washington getting to know these people, who has the knowledge, the talent and the love of country enough to make good decisions for the good of the country. He also knows who in Washington is out for themselves. Those whom are 'out for themselves' aren't necessarily bad people - they just believe whatever is good for THEM is also good for the rest of the country. And that isn't true. "If it works for the rich, the poor will eventually benefit" has been the philosophy ever since Reagan - and it has not worked. If our economy is left under that philosophy it MIGHT work - in about a couple of hundred years. The problem is our country and its citizens are suffering NOW. So "hang on ... it'll trickle down ..." will no longer work.
If the US had led the way for globalization in a slower manner - it would have worked. But the move has gone too fast. We injected all of our money - then all of our credit - into the world economy. But it wasn't enough to see that money come back to us. So now we are over-extended with no where to go. The jobs have disappeared - and the Bush/McCain solution was to create more jobs at Walmart and Taco Bell. Jobs that didn't have insurance benefits, and jobs that don't pay enough to feed, clothe, house a family - even working double shifts.
will show a President Obama exactly the same loyalty and support that the Democrats did during President Bush's terms of office.
This comment was deleted.
[2 points] 62 days ago by deleted user ReplyHey, another erudite comment from potty mouth.
I think most people from both parties gave lots of respect and support to Bush when he first became President. Unfortunately he lost the people's respect.
I have disagreed with every politician on many issues, but I respect every one as a human and the office he or she holds. But I have never disagreed with a leader of a western nation as much as I have disagreed with Bush.
To me it seems that the Bush supporters are defending his bigotry, lying, hate, torture, invasions of privacy and other countries. The list goes on and on. For instance, why do you guys defend torture when Bush does it, but denounce it when Bin Laden does it? Why do you call Bin Laden evil when Bush does similar things and cheer him on?
What bigotry? What lies? What hate? What torture? What invasions of privacy? What invasions?
Your ignorance is legion as you cannot differentiate between President Bush and Bin Laden. h
Thank you for making my point. I can see the differences, Bin laden is a Muslim and Bush a Christian. Do you see other differences? I know I do.
That was not all meant for you Hauli, the questions were meant for the neocons in here.
No, he fell out of favor with the socialists and amoral creeps like you.
Look in the mirror.