I agree every President should be criticized, but shouldn't it be done in an uncouth way?
2007-02-09 03:12:37 · 22 answers · asked by Abu 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
I'm not innocent of this either. I've insulted a few people on here.
2007-02-09 03:34:19 · update #1
When it stops being about his policies and ideas, and starts being about his intelligence, appearance, or personality.
2007-02-09 03:15:54 · answer #1 · answered by theearlybirdy 4 · 11⤊ 1⤋
Criticizing the President: There is no reason why we should be in Iraq. We were not attacked by Iraq, and it's leadership has been taken out, thus there is no more reason to be in Iraq. These are the kind of responses that are welcomed. However, below is what you see too often on Yahoo! Answers:
Insulting the President: That monkey, Bush wouldn't know how to handle Iraq if a war general laid it out to him in the dumbest vocabulary possible. How did he manage to get elected TWICE, he has to be the dumbest, non-autistic person I know!
And that was just a watered down version of what has been seen on here. But on a second note, it isn't merely him who this applies to. The same has been done concerning Clinton (both of them), Carter, Reagan, etcetera. And I admit, some of it has come from me. But all in all, that is the difference between criticizing and insulting the president. It all lies in wording.
2007-02-09 03:31:16 · answer #2 · answered by Huey Freeman 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
You are right people can criticize the president. However there is a way to do it. If you don't agree with a decision you say I don't agree with this because and you state your reason. Back it up with facts if you can. But to say Bush is stupid,Bush is idiotic, is childish. My girls when young would come home and say their teacher was stupid and I would say, no he/she isn't stupid but why do you feel that way and we would talk it out. The way people are criticizing now is demeaning to the country and makes our country look even more unintelligent.
2007-02-09 03:26:07 · answer #3 · answered by Brianne 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
The threshold was crossed about three years ago. When the criticism about the war saturated the media, and the criticizers offered no alternatives or solutions of their own, all level headed citizens should have been offended. If American business was run the way detractors have run its campaign against the war, the country would come to a grinding halt (workers would all be standing around complaining, but doing nothing).
2007-02-09 03:25:31 · answer #4 · answered by fretzdawg 2 · 2⤊ 2⤋
nicely thats incorrect i propose if someone judges you, nomatter what in complication-free you've with, in line with some different person. What i'd say is because once you get a 'crew' happening, i'm not holding your area of a few christian 'crew'. in basic terms once you're saying 'im christian' then human beings will acceptable now placed you, adversarial on your will from time to time, into this huge 'crew christian' of about 2.a million billion human beings. Now if in basic terms one among those 2.a million billion human beings says something, yet another crew will acceptable now rent that remark to the entire crew! and that is how those products works, not in basic terms in faith yet in pastime, and conflict as well, especially a lot any nationalistic type, each and each member is held responsible, by technique of their personal crew and different communities. What i'm attempting to assert there's a huge chance of labelling your self as area of this faith or that faith even as 2.a million billion persons have as well. because you do not comprehend what they imagine, or what they have reported. So regularly human beings will attack some issues those human beings say ON BEHALF of the entire complete faith. YOU blanketed, even nonetheless you not in any respect reported this element. wish i'm making sense lol
2016-11-26 19:16:42 · answer #5 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Calling names
2007-02-09 03:23:19 · answer #6 · answered by Reported for insulting my belief 5 · 3⤊ 1⤋
In a democracy, never. Since the president is an elected official by the masses, the president should be open to all insults and compliments by those who decided whether he is doing a good job in office. Sure, they are nut cases who go overboard with insults and compliments. Yet that's there right as citzens.
2007-02-09 03:22:33 · answer #7 · answered by mac 7 · 1⤊ 3⤋
I think the difference between criticizing and insulting is when it goes into their personal life, you criticize his work, but you insult his family.
2007-02-09 03:17:13 · answer #8 · answered by Brandy B 3 · 5⤊ 0⤋
Well, saying boy I just dont agree with what the President is doing in Iraq would be disagreeing.
Saying jeez that Bush is such a douche bag would be insulting.
2007-02-09 03:16:05 · answer #9 · answered by Perplexed 7 · 8⤊ 1⤋
when you stray from fact and just go on a tangent about how you dont like them with no facts to back up your position...if you have the facts straight, its not insulting, its just being critical by saying someone did something you didn't agree with.
2007-02-09 03:16:17 · answer #10 · answered by Christie 3 · 8⤊ 0⤋
criticizing his actions and political views is criticism, criticizing his person is insulting.
I disagree vehemently with George Bush and his policies, but that does not give me the right to attack his personhood.
2007-02-09 03:23:08 · answer #11 · answered by SAMUEL ELI 7 · 3⤊ 1⤋