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

You can't have it both ways NEOCONS/Cons.

No matter what he says you do know he wields the ultimate say in Iraqi affairs, right? At least for now...

2007-01-16 07:08:32 · 27 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Politics

27 answers

Bush cites Christ as a model. He publically tries to emulate him. He fails. He fails spectacularly. He fails to the degree that makes one wonder if he is conscious of Hitler’s advice regarding big lies.
There is absolutely nothing of Christ in Bush and very little of Christ’s influence in his rhetoric..
God believes that human worth is inherent, that the loss of any human life is regrettable. Bush seems to believe that some people are worth less and therefore may be treated as inhuman, treated in ways that he would not treat his dog.
God demands compassion, even for enemies, who are, after all, God’s children. Bush seems to believe that we should revel in the deaths of miscreants, miscreants created, in some cases, by our own government, but when they worked for us, of course, they were heroes.

2007-01-16 07:21:52 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3 6

You know the saying pro-"choice" people say, "Once you are outside the womb, conservatives think you should be own your own." is the dumbest argument they have. No children aren't on their own. But once they grow up and can provide for themselves then, basically, sure people should be on their own. It's called being a responsible adult. And they get the benefits of being an adult, when they act responsibly. And they bear the responsibility for murder.

Anyway, Saddam and his half-brother, Barzan, were tried and executed by the Iraqi government. Pres Bush is now responsible for a botched execution, conducted by another government, and Barzan's neck? There's the problem, some people don't lay responsibility where it belongs. Not on the people that people that want abortions, not on the murderer, not on the people that botched an execution.

2007-01-16 16:32:02 · answer #2 · answered by robling_dwrdesign 5 · 0 0

When the President says the phrase "pro- life" it means that he dose not believe any one should have the right to abort the life of an unborn child.
Hangings and decapitation are not methods of execution in the United States. If you are referring to the hanging of Saddam Hussein, that method of punishment was carried out by his own people, not Americans.
Do some research on the U.S.A's methods of capitol punishment before you post a question like this.

2007-01-16 15:33:00 · answer #3 · answered by i'm @ vertigo 2 · 2 1

You are so ignorant! The decapitation happened during a hanging that was carried out by the Iraqi's! Bush did not execute those people. Once again, you are spewing garbage and filth, but you have no evidence to back up anything you are saying!

2007-01-16 15:30:46 · answer #4 · answered by Starla_C 7 · 0 1

No, he doesn't wield the ultimate say in Iraqi affairs. He doesn't because he is smart enough to know that they have to control their own destiny to be legitimate, and any interference like this would mean Iraq is a puppet.

You are straining at gnats to impugn the president.

You should try a novel idea, like actually debating, using logic and reason, different policies. I won't be holding my breath.

2007-01-16 15:19:54 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2 2

Buckwheat, once again, you misuse the meaning of "pro-life". That is a reference to unborn babies.

And if there is ever a confirmed report of a baby being born with TNT strapped to it's body and a detonator in it's hand, I'll eat my hat.

The hangings, especially in Saddam's case, were an alternative to stoning by a mob.

2007-01-16 15:13:15 · answer #6 · answered by MoltarRocks 7 · 5 1

because there is a clause in fine print on his pro-life preference.

it states that while fools like you distort facts and lie to support mindless chaos, most of the world can disseminate the differences between these two situations and look at things objectively.

you sir, reek of hatred and THAT will be your downfall!

2007-01-16 15:23:21 · answer #7 · answered by user name 5 · 3 0

Bush is pro-life but also pro-capital punishment (he never stopped any in Texas as governor). It sounds like the use of hanging, and having the full video available is his gripe.

This isn't the smoking gun of Bush contradictions. But I'm sure you can find others.

2007-01-16 15:15:59 · answer #8 · answered by xwdguy 6 · 4 1

Little late to be answering, but Bush has condemned the execution, saying, "the government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki 'has still got some maturation to do.'"

So do not always jump to conclusions. Thanks.

2007-01-16 15:54:28 · answer #9 · answered by theearlybirdy 4 · 0 0

I'm not Bush fan but its the same for a lot of liberals. They're pro-choice, but anti-death penalty. It seems to me that both sides are hypocrites on these issues

2007-01-16 15:11:40 · answer #10 · answered by cthomp99 3 · 2 2

That's not true, you have no proof. The Iraqis themselves carried out the hanging and the Bush administration was very disappointed with the way it was done.

2007-01-16 15:11:27 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 3 3

fedest.com, questions and answers