Joined: Feb 17, 2005 Posts: 290 Location: drunk in a ditch
Status: Offline
Posted: Thu Oct 06, 2005 11:54 pm Post subject: Mr Bush
Okay im not sure if anyone watched his speech today but I noticed a few creepy things. 1. Bush believes that God told him in a dream to attack Iraq
2. He is comparing the Crusades to the war on terror and american soldiers
3. I could totally hear someone on the tv who was speaking in Bush's ear peace. During the silence you hear parts of his next speech before Bush said anything. I guess the media mic was picking everything up.
Either way HE IS A RAVING LOON AND IS THE PRESIDENT
There has been people talking into the ears of leaders since there was leaders. The person that is "leader" is usually just a figure head, something like the Queen.
Bush is not the ne in power it is the other people that you never see. Also I am not liking the way that the US is going, with more and more it being the Christians against the Islamic.
Also his new pick for the Supreme Court leaves something to the imagination. This person has ZERO experience as a judge, and therefore ZERO qualifications to be one of the top judges in the country. To me that leaves her easier to influence in her decisions since she has never had to make them in the past.
Bush is falling and I am pretty sure it is not his fault, but the guys in the back room are in power and are going to stay in power no matter who you have up front.
Also his new pick for the Supreme Court leaves something to the imagination. This person has ZERO experience as a judge, and therefore ZERO qualifications to be one of the top judges in the country. To me that leaves her easier to influence in her decisions since she has never had to make them in the past.
Yes, very questionable appointment. In fact, many questionable appointments have been made for the last couple of years.
That seems to be rather the point of the supreme court judge appointments - make sure they follow the presidents ideas.
What I can't figure is how someone who is supposed to be totally unbiased in a case, can then be said to be Republican or Democrat and be actually picked on this basis? How do they get those two to figure together!?
What I can't figure is how someone who is supposed to be totally unbiased in a case, can then be said to be Republican or Democrat and be actually picked on this basis? How do they get those two to figure together!?
Conservative judge means judge who has conservative judicial philosophy, not necessarily conservative political view point. Liberal judge means judge who has liberal judicial philosophy, not necessarily liberal political view point.
Believe or not, all supreme court judges are qualified people, and John Roberts, who was appointed very recently, is one of greatest legal minds of this generation in US. It's true that he is believed to have conservative judicial philosophy, but he is well-qualified. I had chance to listen to a part of his hearing, and I must say that I was impressed. The guy is very very bright ...
Naming Harriet Miers was terrible. She was not qualified to begin with, and Bush named her just because he knew her. But you know, she left. Number of people in all political spectrums strongly opposed her nomination and she left. Now, it's true that Bush names people who he knows, but what don't we wait and see? So far, John Roberts was a right pick and he was appointed. Harriet Miers was a wrong pick and she was not appointed.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum
