English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Look at the similarities between Bush and Saddam.

Both have interests in oil. (Saddam has oil interest in Iraq - Bush is an oilman too).
Both invaded other countries (Saddam in Kuwait - Bush everywhere else).
Both have accused of rigging elections. (Saddam every year - Bush in 2000)
Both dislike Iran. (Saddam had fought against Iran - Bush called them part of the axis of evil).
Both have WMD's. Oh wait, sorry scrub that last one.

After the Iraq invasion, the ruling Ba'ath party was banned in Iraq, so should the US do likewise and ban the Republicans ?

2006-12-10 04:13:37 · 18 answers · asked by old_man_blanco 2 in Politics & Government Politics

18 answers

HECK, no! we NEED them...their 'best and brightest' make the dem's dimmest look like rocket scientists by comparison...besides, they're so funny...

2006-12-10 04:17:48 · answer #1 · answered by spike missing debra m 7 · 2 2

First, you are basing the whole Republican party on one man.
Second, Saddam's interests are truely evil whereas Bush's actions were in response to the 9/11 attack. WMDs are shown as a strength for the US since the Cold War in dealing with Communist countries and 3rd world nations who want to gain nuclear weapons. Iran is seen to be the major player in being the power in the mideast and is the major disrupter in trying to achieve peace in the region. The Ba'ath party is seen as a modern version of the Nazis and is well to be banned. The Republican party is the only check in the US on the liberalist Democratic party who is pretty close to socialistic in practices and beliefs.

2006-12-10 12:34:37 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

The Republicans have been pushing to open our oil reserves in Alaska, but the Dems dont want that. Its the Reps who who independence from foreign oil, not the Dems. Bill Clinton fully supported the Iraqi invasion, if it weren't for the Lewinsky scandal taking up all his time, he might have invaded Iraq himself. How can Bush rig an election. Remember, illegal aliens, repeat voters(voters who vote more than once per election) and even some dead people voted for Gore-now who rigged the election. Gore kept getting Florida to recount and recount until it magically went his way, and then got mad when it didnt count that time either. Why would anyone like Iran. the Iranian President is a racist person who wants to build nuclear weapons to destroy that particular race (Jews). No I dont think we should ban the Republican party.

PS-we are not the ones who support 1.26 million totally unnecessary murders a year (abortion), this igure does not count rape or incest victims along with mothers who are medically in danger. This counts only irresponsable mothers who use abortion as birth control.
Yet, I dont think we should ban the Democrat Party and I dont compare you guys to Nazi Germany.

2006-12-10 12:25:11 · answer #3 · answered by Daniel 6 · 2 0

I don't believe that Bush should be banned. He has done a lot of positive things in his years of president, and he is still continuing to help America. A lot of people think that Hurricane Katrina was his fault, or at least the Democrats say so. I think we could of had a better evacuation plan but Bush is concentrating on the war in Iraq and we would of never seen that coming even if we had an evactuation plan.

2006-12-10 12:18:09 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Ok, I realize this is a young audience, but the ignorance in this question and its answers has astonished me. Serisously did that girl (in another answer)really say that many people think hurricane Katrina is Bush's fault? WHAT?? What are they teaching you kids anyway?

Listen people, GEORGE W. BUSH CANNOT CONTROL THE WEATHER!

If y'all are the best and brightest, I'm scared for the future of this country.

2006-12-10 12:51:15 · answer #5 · answered by cornbread 4 · 0 0

If that's the case, and we're fighting communism, then the Democrat Party should be banned as well.

Look at the similarities between Dems and Comms...

Want to take from the rich and redistribute to the poor.
Want to make it illegal for people to worship their beliefs.

I know...it's not that extreme, but I'm countering your ridiculous point.

2006-12-10 12:18:38 · answer #6 · answered by El Bubba 3 · 2 0

Stop blaming the party. It's the people.
Maybe if each time a government officer is elected they had a opposing party running mate there would be less oppertunist corruption. If people would stop voting for a party, and start voting for people things will change.

2006-12-10 12:20:22 · answer #7 · answered by mykl 3 · 0 0

Sure, let's do away with freedom to choose, freedom to voice other opinions, freedom of speech,. Sure lets take the democrats precious Constitution and flush it. The democrats party of tolerance should be changed to party of banning others that disagree with their opinion. Besides next time show proof.

2006-12-10 12:18:50 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

Oh so Liberals like Iran? Figures.....I see Liberals more in common with Sadaam myself, with both calling the Bush administration criminal as well as illegal invaders..

2006-12-10 12:23:28 · answer #9 · answered by BAARAAACK 5 · 1 0

Better we should ban bone-headed dumbocrats. The dumbing down of the world is almost complete! It all ends in 2012!! Man, I can't wait!

2006-12-10 12:47:24 · answer #10 · answered by gunrrobot 2 · 0 0

So because one Republican does something you don't agree with you want to ban the Republican party so that it's a one party state?

How does that make sense?? Oh... it doesn't.

2006-12-10 12:45:45 · answer #11 · answered by ? 5 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers