Jump to content


Getting an "Insecure Connection" warning for Exisle? No worry

Details in this thread

Why I Voted For George W. Bush

GW Bush Election Approval of Policy

  • Please log in to reply
122 replies to this topic

#1 eloisel

eloisel

    Non-sequitur

  • Islander
  • 1,998 posts

Posted 15 September 2005 - 07:27 PM

Because of his stance on the following issues:

Abortion:  Supports
prohibiting the dilation and extraction procedure, also known as "partial birth" abortion;
banning use of taxpayer funds for abortion;
waiting periods and parental notification requirements.

Campaign Finance Issues:  Supports
prohibiting federally registered lobbyists from contributing to Members of Congress, while Congress is in session;
instant disclosure of contributions;
banning soft money contributions from labor unions and corporations because members/shareholders have no say in how those contributions are given.

Crime:  Supports
young people who commit crimes to be held accountable for their actions;
encouraging and expanding the role of charities in after-school programs - not only be filled with sports and play, but include lessons in responsibility and character;
military-style boot camps for first-time juvenile felons.
When Governor of Texas, Bush established boot camps and created "Second Chance" group homes for unwed teen welfare mothers - run by faith-based and other private groups - to offer them a place to raise their child in a loving, structured environment, get an education, and receive job training.

Edited by eloisel, 24 September 2005 - 09:31 PM.


#2 eloisel

eloisel

    Non-sequitur

  • Islander
  • 1,998 posts

Posted 15 September 2005 - 07:28 PM

For his stance on Education:  Supports
creation of more charter schools where teachers and professionals receive authorization and funding to establish new schools;
giving all federal education funding to states in the form of block grants and allow the states to spend it as they see fit;
increase funding for block grants to states to help them hire additional teachers;
the Teacher Protection Act to shield teachers, principals, and school board members acting in their official capacity from federal liability arising out of their efforts to maintain discipline in the classroom, so long as they do not engage in reckless or criminal misconduct;
plaintiffs who bring meritless claims in federal court challenging teacher and principal disciplinary actions held liable for the legal expenses, including attorney's fees, incurred in the defense of the teachers and principals;
increase federal funding for abstinence education to a level at least as high as that provided for teen contraception programs;
empowering lower-income parents by providing them with certificates that can be used to pay for after-school activities of their choosing - whether run by a community group, a neighborhood church, or a local school;
implementation of state accountability systems in which students are tested every year in grades 3-8 in reading and math - states will be free to choose their own tests, and the federal government equally share the cost;
increasing choice for parents in the education of their children by allowing federal funds to be used for public and private school choice and innovative education programs;
making federal funds to states and local districts more flexible in return for greater accountability and improved student achievement;
affirmative access to open the doors of opportunity through programs such as the Texas 10 percent plan, where those who graduate in the top 10 percent of their class are automatically admitted to any state college or university
in 2000 asked for 1 billion additional dollars to local districts to raise salaries, or hire more teachers to reduce class size.

#3 eloisel

eloisel

    Non-sequitur

  • Islander
  • 1,998 posts

Posted 15 September 2005 - 07:29 PM

For his stance on:

Affirmative Action:  Opposes quotas and racial preferences.

Environmental Issues:  Supports
the use of ethanol as an alternative fuel;
efforts to ensure clean air and clean water.
requiring federal government carefully evaluate the impact of regulatory initiatives on private property rights. In the event that the government, acting on behalf of all citizens, asks private landowners to refrain from utilizing land, should receive just compensation for their loss;
having the Environment Protection Agency (EPA) set high (but more flexible) standards for brownfield cleanups and ban the federal government from suing local businesses which do the cleaning, provided the standards have been met;
private stewardship of land and water resources encouraged by offering loans through the Land and Water Conservation Fund and through tax incentives to Americans who take the initiative to keep their lands pristine (quote: "It's time to build conservation partnerships between the federal government and state governments, local communities and private landowners.").
Does not support the United Nations (Kyoto Conference) treaty, in its current form, regarding global climate change.  He believes that industry and market driven solutions are the only way to develop alternatives to current energy use patterns.  He supports the moratorium on oil drilling off Florida and California, but thinks drilling should be allowed in the Arctic region near Alaska, so that dependence on foreign oil can be reduced.  Bush believes more use of natural gas, development of "cleaner coal", and electric deregulation will help lessen use of oil.

Gun Issues:  Supports
for any juvenile found guilty of a serious gun offense, a lifetime ban on carrying or purchasing a gun - any gun, for any reason, at any age, ever;
laws that say that if a parent is irresponsible and a child ends up with a weapon, the parent ought to be held accountable
requiring instant background checks at gun shows by allowing gun show promoters to access the instant check system on behalf of vendors.

#4 eloisel

eloisel

    Non-sequitur

  • Islander
  • 1,998 posts

Posted 15 September 2005 - 07:31 PM

For his stance on:

Health Issues:  Supports
Patient's Bill of Rights which includes the right to sue when claims are denied;
individuals and families that do not receive employer-sponsored coverage and that are not eligible for public programs, will receive a health credit of up to $1,000 per individual and $2,000 per family to cover up to 90 percent of the cost of health insurance.
Does not support increasing taxes on alcohol and cigarettes to help defer costs of Medicare and Medicaid.

International Policy:  Supports
in 2000 - payment of dues ($1 billion) to the United Nations only if its bureaucracy is reformed and America's disproportionate share of its costs is reduced;
the cooperative threat reduction programs with Russia to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons to unfriendly nations;
strengthening the American anti-dumping laws which give the Commerce Department additional power to fight imports priced below the manufacturing cost;
repeatedly stessed improving economic, cultural and educational ties with Latin American democracies while at the same time stepping up patrolling of the southern border to stop illegal immigration;
critical of China which he calls "an enemy of religious freedom." He would deal with it as "a competitor, not a strategic partner."

Social Security Issues:  Supports
investing a portion of the budget surplus into the Social Security trust fund;
a lock box measure, limiting Congress's ability to spend Social Security and Medicare surpluses on any other federal programs except Social Security and Medicare, until each program's long-term solvency is guaranteed;
eliminating the Social Security earnings test;
making personal retirement accounts part of Social Security reform.

Edited by eloisel, 15 September 2005 - 07:31 PM.


#5 eloisel

eloisel

    Non-sequitur

  • Islander
  • 1,998 posts

Posted 15 September 2005 - 07:33 PM

For his stance on:

Technology Issues:  Supports
(in 2000) an extension of the moratorium on Internet sales taxation at least through 2004;
figuring out how to combat cyber terrorism.

Welfare and Poverty Issues:  Supports
lifting federal regulations that hamper faith-based institutions from involvement in the delivery of services to the needy.

Missile Defense & Nuclear Weaponry to Protect US Security:
In 2000 campaign proposed a much larger system than Gore’s using about 750 ground-based interceptors deployed at six areas in the US, plus 1,000 space-based interceptors, similar to the missile shield proposed by his father President Bush in 1991, known as GPALS, or "global protection against limited strikes, while also unilaterally reducing the size of the US nuclear arsenal to the "lowest possible number consistent with our national security.

Military:
In 2000 campaign called for a $1 billion pay raise--as well as better housing and more training--for soldiers.  He also proposed a $20 billion investment in research and development, with at least a fifth going towards the purchase of next generation latest weapons.

#6 eloisel

eloisel

    Non-sequitur

  • Islander
  • 1,998 posts

Posted 15 September 2005 - 07:34 PM

The first 5 posts are why I didn't have a problem with George W. Bush in 2000.

Later I'll post why I voted for him in 2004.

P.S.   All information on Bush's position on the issues listed above are found at Project Vote Smart and on Frontline: The Choice 2000.

edited to delete the Jr. as WP pointed out the President is not a Jr.

Edited by eloisel, 24 September 2005 - 09:33 PM.


#7 eloisel

eloisel

    Non-sequitur

  • Islander
  • 1,998 posts

Posted 15 September 2005 - 08:23 PM

Watching the President speak in New Orleans right now, I know why it is I stand beside him.

I've been beat up, beat down, smacked up and kicked around enough to know that when bad things are happening I'm so busy with the moment I can't see beyond myself.  But, when it is all over, I know who it is that is there picking up the pieces.  Not that I've had any federal help in the aftermath of my own personal crisis, but I do know that this President has picked this country up after one major crisis and I see he'll pick it up again, this time.  At this moment, I love George W. Bush.

edited to delete the Jr. as WP pointed out the President is not a Jr., and added the middle initial to clarify which President George Bush is the topic of my post.

Edited by eloisel, 24 September 2005 - 09:34 PM.


#8 Lover of Purple

Lover of Purple

    Mustang Man

  • Retired Board Owner
  • 11,215 posts

Posted 15 September 2005 - 10:07 PM

Very well put!!!

I agree 100% :)


LoP

Bush Supporter

#9 Nonprofit

Nonprofit
  • Islander
  • 2,163 posts

Posted 15 September 2005 - 10:37 PM

Great job and very well done eloisel!!!!!  

I'm in total agreement with you.

RuReddy

#10 G1223

G1223

    The Blunt Object.

  • Dead account
  • 16,164 posts

Posted 15 September 2005 - 10:41 PM

Yeah that was part of the reason

I remember the fund raiser at the buddist temple that only AL Gore thought was not a fund raiser. Heck even his Secret Service detail had it listed as a fund raiser.
If you encounter any Trolls. You really must not forget them.
And if you want to save these shores. For Pity sake Don't Trust them.
paraphrased from H. "Breaker" Morant

TANSTAAFL
If you voted for Obama then all the mistakes he makes are your fault and I will point this out to you every time he does mess up.

When the fall is all that remains. It matters a great deal.

All hail the clich's all emcompassing shadow.

My playing well with other's skill has been vastly overrated

Member of the Order of the Knigths of the Woeful Countance.

#11 Kevin Street

Kevin Street
  • Islander
  • 6,256 posts

Posted 16 September 2005 - 02:31 AM

eloisel said:

The first 5 posts are why I didn't have a problem with George W. Bush, Jr. in 2000.

Later I'll post why I voted for him in 2004.

But why? What's the point of this thread? I like lots of things, but I don't post lists of them in OT.

Not saying you don't have a right to post this here, but if there's a purpose to these lists they're lost on me.
Per aspera ad astra

#12 scherzo

scherzo

    I know things

  • Islander
  • 3,388 posts

Posted 16 September 2005 - 04:13 AM

I'm not  sure since this isn't my thread(or IS IT?:sneaky:...no...wait...yeah it isn't... :( )
...but I think eloisel's posting in response to this Specs-tacular question:
http://www.exisle.ne...ndpost&p=694100
Or...a sinister plot to test the endurance of Lin731's keyboard. :Oo: There are early reports from the area of sparks deflecting off her monitor....

-scherzo(Specs-tacular?...damn it's late)
"Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so."    -Ronald Reagan, October 27 1964
Posted Image

#13 Spectacles

Spectacles
  • Awaiting Authorisation
  • 9,632 posts

Posted 16 September 2005 - 06:21 AM

Quote

Scherzo: I'm not sure since this isn't my thread(or IS IT?sneaky.gif...no...wait...yeah it isn't... sad.gif )
...but I think eloisel's posting in response to this Specs-tacular question:

That's how I took it, too. Though my question wasn't why did you vote for him but why do you support him. That's an important distinction because politicians say all sorts of things to get us to vote for them, but when in office the campaign rhetoric is often revealed as so much smoke and mirrors.

Rather than comment further, I'll just say that Bush often looks better on paper than in reality.   ;)

For instance, compare his campaign promises to be a challenger to lobbyists and a friend of the environment to his actual record:

http://www.prospect....b&articleId=124

And if we're going back to 2000,  consider that Bush said this in one of the debates:

http://www.debates.o...trans2000a.html

Quote

BUSH: Well, if it's in our vital national interest, and that means whether our territory is threatened or people could be harmed, whether or not the alliances are -- our defense alliances are threatened, whether or not our friends in the Middle East are threatened. That would be a time to seriously consider the use of force. Secondly, whether or not the mission was clear. Whether or not it was a clear understanding as to what the mission would be. Thirdly, whether or not we were prepared and trained to win. Whether or not our forces were of high morale and high standing and well-equipped. And finally, whether or not there was an exit strategy. I would take the use of force very seriously. I would be guarded in my approach. I don't think we can be all things to all people in the world. I think we've got to be very careful when we commit our troops. The vice president and I have a disagreement about the use of troops. He believes in nation building. I would be very careful about using our troops as nation builders. I believe the role of the military is to fight and win war and therefore prevent war from happening in the first place. So I would take my responsibility seriously. And it starts with making sure we rebuild our military power. Morale in today's military is too low. We're having trouble meeting recruiting goals. We met the goals this year, but in the previous years we have not met recruiting goals. Some of our troops are not well-equipped. I believe we're overextended in too many places. And therefore I want to rebuild the military power.

That was then. The Iraq War is now, and it has pretty much shown the above to be empty campaign rhetoric.

So, when I asked the question, I was thinking more along the lines of why do you support Bush now? What has he accomplished that you think has been good for the country's present and future well-being?

Edited by Spectacles, 16 September 2005 - 06:42 AM.

"Facts are stupid things." -Ronald Reagan at the 1988 Republican National Convention, attempting to quote John Adams, who said, "Facts are stubborn things"

"Although health care enrollment is actually going pretty well at this point, thousands and maybe millions of Americans have failed to sign up for coverage because they believe the false horror stories they keep hearing." -- Paul Krugman

#14 eloisel

eloisel

    Non-sequitur

  • Islander
  • 1,998 posts

Posted 16 September 2005 - 06:22 AM

Kevin Street, on Sep 16 2005, 07:31 AM, said:

eloisel said:

The first 5 posts are why I didn't have a problem with George W. Bush, Jr. in 2000.

Later I'll post why I voted for him in 2004.

But why? What's the point of this thread? I like lots of things, but I don't post lists of them in OT.

Not saying you don't have a right to post this here, but if there's a purpose to these lists they're lost on me.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

As scherzo pointed out, there have been a number of posters wonder why persons like me support President Bush.  I believe the question "Why" to be valid; however, I found the threads where the wondering is posed not to be conducive to an answer.

I find it interesting that in a forum where, on a regular basis, at the very least more than half of the threads on the front page are attacks on President Bush that a thread on why I support the President would be considered without purpose.

Edited by eloisel, 16 September 2005 - 06:23 AM.


#15 Rhiannonjk

Rhiannonjk

    Woof!

  • Islander
  • 1,507 posts

Posted 16 September 2005 - 06:34 AM

I'm glad to see this thread.  And I'm with Specs - Campaign rhetoric is great, but I want to know why you support him now based on everything we know now.

***Is easily distracted***


#16 eloisel

eloisel

    Non-sequitur

  • Islander
  • 1,998 posts

Posted 16 September 2005 - 07:08 AM

And, I will get to why I support him now.  Mostly it is because I see a strength in him that has kept this country afloat through some difficult times.  Partly, while I don't necessarily agree with wars, I do agree that terrorism is a problem that has to be addressed on a scale of more than tit for tat.  

I will be back, but now I've got to run by work then I'm off to paint a house and fix some broken windows.

#17 G1223

G1223

    The Blunt Object.

  • Dead account
  • 16,164 posts

Posted 16 September 2005 - 07:27 AM

While I do not see Bush as the main reason for our continued survival. I do see his being one of thse hands holding us up. I see Democrats such as Evan Bayh who put the nation ahead of politics and for that fact rarely get the press others get.

That may be why if he is still in the race when the primaries in 2008 get here to Indiana I will be registering to get him in and if he gets on the ballot I would be very likely to vote for him.

Bush has had a rough ride. We had him come in as a the recession hit full speed. We had 9/11 before his first year was over.
If you encounter any Trolls. You really must not forget them.
And if you want to save these shores. For Pity sake Don't Trust them.
paraphrased from H. "Breaker" Morant

TANSTAAFL
If you voted for Obama then all the mistakes he makes are your fault and I will point this out to you every time he does mess up.

When the fall is all that remains. It matters a great deal.

All hail the clich's all emcompassing shadow.

My playing well with other's skill has been vastly overrated

Member of the Order of the Knigths of the Woeful Countance.

#18 Smiley

Smiley

    harumph

  • Islander
  • 937 posts

Posted 16 September 2005 - 07:37 AM

While I am not a fan of Bush (McCain 2000!), I like this thread. It is interesting to see  the differences in what people are thinking. Hopefully this won't break down like many other threads do. McCain 2008! heh heh heh
Friends are just enemies that don't have the guts to kill you.
See Ya Space Cowboy

#19 Rhiannonjk

Rhiannonjk

    Woof!

  • Islander
  • 1,507 posts

Posted 16 September 2005 - 07:57 AM

Smiley, on Sep 16 2005, 08:37 AM, said:

McCain 2008! heh heh heh

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

now thats an idea I can get behind...

***Is easily distracted***


#20 Zwolf

Zwolf
  • Islander
  • 3,683 posts

Posted 16 September 2005 - 08:01 AM

Nice thread.  I don't agree with a bit of it (I agree that many of those things are good ideas; I just don't agree that Bush has come anywhere close to actually doing them) but it's interesting to see people's reasoning.

I watched the president's speech last night, and it sounded good, too, but when you know some of the things he's actually doing, it was less than rousing.  For instance, he mentioned that the workers harmed by the hurricane would be given a chance to catch up on their losses by joining the rebuilding efforts... which is a great idea, except for the fact that he kicked out the Davis-Bacon act so those workers can be paid less than the going rate.  He also mentioned working with the Army Corps of Engineers, when in actuality he's cutting their funding by another $4.6 billion, after he'd given them less than 20% of what they'd quoted was needed to shore up the levees in the first place.  It's that kind of disingeniousness and disparity between what he's saying and what he's doing that makes me quit paying so much attention to what he says.

But, that's me.  Interesting to see how others take it, though.

Cheers,

Zwolf
"I've moved on and I'm feeling fine
And I'll feel even better
When your life has nothing to do with mine."
-Pittbull, "No Love Lost"

"There are things that I'd like to say
But I'm never talking to you again
There's things I'd like to phrase some way
But I'm never talking to you again

I'm never talking to you again
I'm never talking to you
I'm tired of wasting all my time
Trying to talk to you

I'd put you down where you belong
But I'm never talking to you again
I'd show you everywhere you're wrong
But I'm never talking to you again

I'm never talking to you again
I'm never talking to you
I'm tired of wasting all my time
Trying to talk to you

I'm never talking to you again
I'm never talking to you
I'm tired of wasting all my time
Trying to talk to you."
- Husker Du, "Never Talking To You Again"



Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: GW Bush, Election, Approval of Policy

0 user(s) are browsing this forum

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users