Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

At 9/13/09 11:45 PM, animehater wrote: Pumped Billions of dollars to fight disease in Africa,

Yup, he did that... minus the AIDS funds that had been kept for several years because he didn't believe in comprehensive sex education because it advocated for the use contraception and or abortion.

After all... Africa doesn't have anything to worry about HIV/AIDS.

I mean... the money he allocated really helped the anorexia support groups in Africa in a huge way...

kept America safe from another terrorist attack,

Oh goodness.

Brought democracy to two countries.

And it only took a war to force people to realize that they have a choice... in either democracy or democracy.

I think he paved the way for some pretty good outcomes once people get past the immediate.

I don't think Bush was an evil man, but he was a gullible man surrounded by CORRUPT people.

At 9/12/09 07:53 PM, AapoJoki wrote: To my surprise, and contrary to popular belief, there's a large number of Republicans who don't hate science.

Wait a minute what? Since when did republicans ever hate science?

I can think of some stereotypical things that are said about democrats too buddy

lulz

Well... he left, that's good.

At 9/15/09 12:58 AM, HahaISuckMoreThanYou wrote: Wait a minute what? Since when did republicans ever hate science?

I can think of some stereotypical things that are said about democrats too buddy

lulz

Gotta agree. Republicans may get more play as being the party that caters to nutbag religiosi who deny anything scientific that doesn't agree with their ideology but there are quite a few democrats in that same exact boat. Some who even belong to the same groups in fact.

At 9/14/09 10:42 PM, Chanute wrote: He practically destroyed the Republican party and that's a good thing to me.

You make good points, but I think that what some people are thinking is something more around the idea of things that he did willingly to make things better. I...really can't think of anything in that category.

Bush was good for the lulz.

He was awesome for a good laugh.

ANother question is if obama has done anything "Good" Some say trying to get healthcare reform, and passing the stimulus bill was "good" But others think that those where "Bad" pretty much up to who you're asking on whether he was "Good" or not

People are pretty fickle.

I'm not sure if he did ANYTHING good, he Started the Iraq war, he unfortunately dodged the the shoe that was thrown at him. a complete waste of presidency. But he could be quite entertaining at some times.

At 9/18/09 05:31 PM, dudewithashotgun29 wrote: ANother question is if obama has done anything "Good" Some say trying to get healthcare reform, and passing the stimulus bill was "good" But others think that those where "Bad" pretty much up to who you're asking on whether he was "Good" or not

Two things:

1. This topic is not about Obama, it is about George Bush. This statement is totally off topic.

2. Obama hasn't even been in office one year yet, George Bush had two terms. You CANNOT begin assessing Barack Obama like you assess George Bush in this topic. The only way Obama can be compared to Bush is to look at how much, and what kind of legislation Obama passed or retained from the prior president vs. what kind of legislation Bush passed or retained from the prior president AT THIS SAME TIME IN HIS TERM. You can't judge 9 months against 8 years and say the comparison is fair and accurate.

At 9/14/09 06:20 PM, Jon-86 wrote:

Stop watching Fox (or any news channel for that matter) then go to a Mosque and ask them what they are about. They will be happy to answer any questions or concerns you have. Theirs nothing wrong about learning other peoples culture or beliefs and to understand who they are.

Before you just hit them with a stupid generalisation. Their not all Commie Muzlumz howz gonna shot yer babies.....

Their then, rank that for a mini-rant :P

Or, how about YOU taking a look into the Qu'ran instead? Sure, many muslims don't act like they are told - this doesn't mean however this "religon" isn't dangerous.
A little example?

"Fight those who do not believe in Allah, nor in the latter day, nor do they prohibit what Allah and His Messenger have prohibited, nor follow the religion of truth, out of those who have been given the Book, until they pay the tax in acknowledgment of superiority and they are in a state of subjection."
Qur'an 9:29
Oh yeah, can you feel the peacefulness dripping out of every syllable?

"Men are the maintainers of women because Allah has made some of them to excel others and because they spend out of their property; the good women are therefore obedient, guarding the unseen as Allah has guarded; and (as to) those on whose part you fear desertion, admonish them, and leave them alone in the sleeping-places and beat them; then if they obey you, do not seek a way against them; surely Allah is High, Great."
Qur'an 4:34
Some islamic scholars have claimed in interviews that the term "beat" means to beat her - that's right - with a feather. Or a toothstick. And not in the face. Rrriiight.

"Such of your women as have passed the age of monthly courses, for them the prescribed period, if ye have any doubts, is three months, and for those who have no courses (it is the same): for those who carry (life within their wombs), their period is until they deliver their burdens: and for those who fear Allah, He will make their path easy."
Qur'an 65:4
Yep, having sex with pre-pubescent girls is awww-right!

And don't give me that crap "out of context" or "the bible is violent too" - the west went through the period of enlightment, the "hous of islam" didn't.
While I believe that the vast majority of muslims is peace-loving and hard-working - many people seem to deliberately ignore these things. Terrorists just do the things according to this shitty old book, and peaceful Muslims don't. That's it.

Oh and concerning Bush.... he sure as hell dodged that shoe like a pro! =D

Bush is the reason Obama is having a hard time now.

At 9/12/09 05:17 PM, Jon-86 wrote: He was a good source of entertainment.

LOL you are right! It always made me laugh when he was on the news for something he did bad. I ROFL'd when the guy threw the shoe at Bush.

He helped send AIDs medicine to third world countries.

At 9/12/09 05:56 PM, RubberTrucky wrote: the average American is probably not really an idiot

Hahaha, ha.

At 9/12/09 07:17 PM, poxpower wrote: Well he got rid of Saddam.

That's pretty damn good.

1. That's like saying Obama headshotted the pirates. He didn't do it, he spent billions of dollars on an invasion that ended up killing one dude we all hate who will just be replaced with someone else we don't know the name of yet.
2. Not even that, we found him, fed him nice food and had a trial or some shit, then let him go to someone else to do the dirty work.

At 9/18/09 01:35 AM, aviewaskewed wrote: Gotta agree. Republicans may get more play as being the party that caters to nutbag religiosi who deny anything scientific that doesn't agree with their ideology but there are quite a few democrats in that same exact boat. Some who even belong to the same groups in fact.

So you're saying that democrats can't find it republicans religious idealogies ridiculous if one guy named bob in the back just so happens to be in the same club as one of the republicans? You can't judge and entire party based on a few congressman. The majority of republicans are crazy religious, and a few democrats are too. That doesn't mean the democrats are anywhere near the republicans crazy meter overall.

Two things:

1. Calm down, his point wasn't to compare Obama to Bush. It was an example.

2. The point was how do you judge something as "good" or "bad"? There are more than one view on issues. Bush held up stem cell research. Some people think thats a good thing, others dont.

This whole thread is pointless, because whats good and bad depends on the user, and so there is no definitive answer.

But overall, people don't look back on the Bush presidency with much pride.

Let's move on and pretend it never happened :3

Also, I would say not pardoning Scooter Libby. It was nice to see the puppet cut his strings.

At 9/12/09 07:17 PM, poxpower wrote: Well he got rid of Saddam.

That's pretty damn good.

He didn't get rid of Saddam, Saddam's own people got rid of Saddam.

Bush : First Tyrant ruler of America!

At 9/14/09 11:01 PM, fli wrote: I don't think Bush was an evil man, but he was a gullible man surrounded by CORRUPT people.

Sounds like par for the course in Washingon. Where's the town's namesake when you need him?

At 9/22/09 10:47 PM, RDSchley wrote: Bush : First Tyrant ruler of America!

Oh, please, the man was democratically elected twice and served as President for 8 years before peacefully stepping down as required by law. That's not a tyrant.

At 9/22/09 10:47 PM, RDSchley wrote:

Bush : First Tyrant ruler of America!

Lol! If you think of Bush as a Tyrant, we rebelled from king George III back in the American revolutionary war only to later be ruled by king George I.

At 9/22/09 05:19 PM, TheWolfe wrote: So you're saying that democrats can't find it republicans religious idealogies ridiculous if one guy named bob in the back just so happens to be in the same club as one of the republicans? You can't judge and entire party based on a few congressman. The majority of republicans are crazy religious, and a few democrats are too. That doesn't mean the democrats are anywhere near the republicans crazy meter overall.

No, most likely not. But it wouldn't be fair of me to act like there aren't crazies on both sides of the party line, and are crazies on the same issues. It weakens my point if I ignore things like that.

1. Calm down, his point wasn't to compare Obama to Bush. It was an example.

Sure looked like it to me, and really, this topic isn't about Obama, it's about Bush and what Bush accomplished.

2. The point was how do you judge something as "good" or "bad"? There are more than one view on issues. Bush held up stem cell research. Some people think thats a good thing, others dont.

Again I didn't read it like that, it read to me like yet another snipe on Obama and the issues going on currently. There are countless topics already in which that can be done. I don't see why Obama's name needs to come up in a topic like this.

This whole thread is pointless, because whats good and bad depends on the user, and so there is no definitive answer.

Uh, no, actually there are things you can look at and based on a preponderence of the evidence decide if a policy or course of action was good or bad. That's how we judge anything. By what you're saying we wouldn't be able to judge any president because there'd always be people who were of two minds about them.

But overall, people don't look back on the Bush presidency with much pride.

Nope.

Let's move on and pretend it never happened :3

Let's NOT ever do that. You have to remember the past and you have to be critical of executives who don't live up to expectations, or how else do you hold the next crew accountable or spot when they seem to go down the same road as a prior failure?

At 9/14/09 06:20 PM, Jon-86 wrote: Aye, exactly, moronic! September the 11th happened before America got their. Targeting world trade with the means available sends a message. You don't honestly thing that Muslims hate everyone in the west and want to make you convert or die do you???

Stop watching Fox (or any news channel for that matter) then go to a Mosque and ask them what they are about. They will be happy to answer any questions or concerns you have. Theirs nothing wrong about learning other peoples culture or beliefs and to understand who they are.

Before you just hit them with a stupid generalisation. Their not all Commie Muzlumz howz gonna shot yer babies.....

Their then, rank that for a mini-rant :P

Wow, you might wanna take a course in English. Their, there, and they're; They mean different things you know. There's a lot of other errors but I'm not going to go through them all.

Wow, you might wanna take a course in English. Their, there, and they're; They mean different things you know. There's a lot of other errors but I'm not going to go through them all.

Oh, the irony of criticizing a random individual for poor English while completely missing the opprotunity of mocking the guy this thread is all about.

"...You're working hard to put food on your families..."

At 9/22/09 04:06 PM, mayeram wrote: He helped send AIDs medicine to third world countries.

No he didn't.
He infact HINDERED it because the people who gave those sort of medications were the people who taught comprehensive sex education.

And he, being only for abstinence education, wouldn't fund the programs to allocate and distribute those medicines.

At 9/24/09 12:28 AM, aviewaskewed wrote: No, most likely not. But it wouldn't be fair of me to act like there aren't crazies on both sides of the party line, and are crazies on the same issues. It weakens my point if I ignore things like that.

There's crazies everywhere, sure. But right now, most of them are on the right.

Sure looked like it to me, and really, this topic isn't about Obama, it's about Bush and what Bush accomplished.

So reread it?

Again I didn't read it like that, it read to me like yet another snipe on Obama and the issues going on currently. There are countless topics already in which that can be done. I don't see why Obama's name needs to come up in a topic like this.

It's a political forum, and a thread about the previous president. You can't expect no one to bring up Obama.

Uh, no, actually there are things you can look at and based on a preponderence of the evidence decide if a policy or course of action was good or bad. That's how we judge anything. By what you're saying we wouldn't be able to judge any president because there'd always be people who were of two minds about them.

I didn't say it was impossible to judge someone, just that everyone thinks differently, and this is more about yelling over who thinks who is right.

Nope.

Let's move on and pretend it never happened :3

Let's NOT ever do that. You have to remember the past and you have to be critical of executives who don't live up to expectations, or how else do you hold the next crew accountable or spot when they seem to go down the same road as a prior failure?

I somehow thought the :3 at the end would make it more as a joke, but I guess not.
We sure made Bush accountable!
I've had slavery and the holocaust shoved down my throat for so many years. But that doesn't do much, does it? Wars are never going to cease to exist, the freedoms of people will always be abused, genocides will keep on going (and still do). The only point here is to look back and say "hey, that guys a fucker!" but I think we already know that. So lets focus on what's going on NOW before it becomes another mistake in the past.

:3

Some Pros:

Took out Saddam
Crippled Al Queda
Lowered taxes
Great Economy
Temporarily removed death tax

At 9/21/09 04:39 PM, Austrian-Mats wrote:

At 9/14/09 06:20 PM, Jon-86 wrote:

Or, how about YOU taking a look into the Qu'ran instead? Sure, many muslims don't act like they are told - this doesn't mean however this "religon" isn't dangerous.
A little example?

Yeah, sure, let's look into the Middle Eastern Bible that every Muslim follows AT ALL TIMES.

"Fight those who do not believe in Allah, nor in the latter day, nor do they prohibit what Allah and His Messenger have prohibited, nor follow the religion of truth, out of those who have been given the Book, until they pay the tax in acknowledgment of superiority and they are in a state of subjection."
Qur'an 9:29
Oh yeah, can you feel the peacefulness dripping out of every syllable?

"Then Moses spoke to the Israelites, and they took the blasphemer outside the camp and stoned him. The Israelites did as the LORD commanded Moses."
- Leviticus 24:22-23

"Then two scoundrels came and sat opposite him and brought charges against Naboth before the people, saying, "Naboth has cursed both God and the king." So they took him outside the city and stoned him to death."
1 Kings 21:12-14

Those are just two that I remember. There are a lot more of killing unbelievers.

"Men are the maintainers of women because Allah has made some of them to excel others and because they spend out of their property; the good women are therefore obedient, guarding the unseen as Allah has guarded; and (as to) those on whose part you fear desertion, admonish them, and leave them alone in the sleeping-places and beat them; then if they obey you, do not seek a way against them; surely Allah is High, Great."
Qur'an 4:34
Some islamic scholars have claimed in interviews that the term "beat" means to beat her - that's right - with a feather. Or a toothstick. And not in the face. Rrriiight.

Christianity allows beatings of your wife because Men are the protectors of women; and if a slave is beaten and killed, the owner must pay 30 shellings.
Not to mention all the stonings. Oh, and if your wife is not a virgin when you marry her, she must be executed.

"Such of your women as have passed the age of monthly courses, for them the prescribed period, if ye have any doubts, is three months, and for those who have no courses (it is the same): for those who carry (life within their wombs), their period is until they deliver their burdens: and for those who fear Allah, He will make their path easy."
Qur'an 65:4
Yep, having sex with pre-pubescent girls is awww-right!

Can't remember the scripture with the slave girl sex orgy. I was saving it for something special too. Also, they were pubescent; hence they were ok; and yes, we still do that here in the West. As early as 12.

And don't give me that crap "out of context" or "the bible is violent too" - the west went through the period of enlightment, the "hous of islam" didn't.

Yes, them there dirty brown people still use sticks and stones to build yer houses.

While I believe that the vast majority of muslims is peace-loving and hard-working - many people seem to deliberately ignore these things. Terrorists just do the things according to this shitty old book, and peaceful Muslims don't. That's it.

I've already made a topic on the fact that living on everything in the Bible would result in killing quite a lot of people. Like everyone who's shaved their beards.. got divorced... wasn't a virgin when they were married.. etcetera.

Oh and concerning Bush.... he sure as hell dodged that shoe like a pro! =D

Yes, why yes he did.

At 9/12/09 05:56 PM, RubberTrucky wrote: I think this is something for Americans to reply to.
But I would say that he did a lot of things right. He was re-elected, at least, and taken that the average American is probably not really an idiot and I don't want to believe that election was rigged in such a huge scale.

I stand by the fact that people like to blame the politicians and their leaders for everything in the world and overlook the good things they have done. It's just the commoners way to vent all their worries on the upper clas leaders.

I don't know. He set us an ongoing war against Iraq (who did nothing wrong, the public executions you saw happen in Saudi Arabia, why don't we invade there) and he lost the POPULAR vote, but due to the crap voting system, he was voted in.. more or less after Fox News appeared. Everyone from the bourgeois, the upper and lower classes all have opinions and should vent them. A country is run by the people, for the people, is it not? At least in 'American Democracy' it is. I think you're right when you say people overlook good things.. thats not a nice aspect of the media, overlooking the better things that have come from our leaders... but what can you really say about Bush?