If Bush is so Dangerous?

Question

I would like a serious answer from a very left wing Bush hater.
How dangerous do you believe Bush is to our freedom?
I have read many liberals that will even use the Hitler term on Bush.
Fine. Lets just assume he IS that dangerous.

What in the constitution keeps him from becoming a TRUE tryant say that rounds up all gays and puts them in camps.(i do believe this hasnt happened yet... )

What prevents tyranny from getting out of hand.

My true question. If you believe in the evil nature of someone like GW how can you tell law abiding citizens they cannot have guns?

Why can't liberals see that the second ammendment is the 'ace in the hole' for freedom?

All americans should be united in the RIGHT to have a defense against tyrrants.

Can any liberal argue.. Bush is evil! so now... give him your GUNS?

thanks for one serious response.. i see no logical way to

Answer 1

Well he's not getting any of my guns....as far as being gay...Bush can bend over and grab his ankles for who ever he wants......and last but not least.....President Bush is nothing but a drunken deserter who went AWOL.

http://www.awolbush.com/

Answer 2

Bush is dangerous because he has shown time and time again that he will do what HE wants and not what is best for the US. That is shown by his evading Iraq based on fabricated intel that he knew was created.

Bush has used propaganda just like Hitler did. The fact that he has pushed the "Patriot act" like he did questions his adherence to the Constitution and to the American people. The "Military Commissions Act of 2006" is another way that Bush has pushed against being responsible for the torture that he authorised.

The reason why Bush hasn't put all "gays" as you put it, into camps is because the "Gay" issue is a good diversion from what Bush is actually doing. Just like the Anna Nicole Smith drama that they keep playing on the "news." The gay issue is used as to be nothing more than to sqew the issues into something that is positive to the GOP and religious right and divert attention from the real issues. (I personally could care less what someone does in their own bedroom)

I am very much a liberal Democrat and I also believe very strongly in the 2nd amendment as I do in all the other (Except the 14th which should be scraped, or at the very least re-written).

But the fact of the matter is that the 2nd admnendment wont protect you from the government. Look what happened to those border patrol agents who are now in prison for DOING their job? It doesn't matter about how many guns that you have...the Government will always have more. Look at all the dentention camps that Halburton has made...I still am wondering what those are for.

Answer 3

YOU ASK: How dangerous do you believe Bush is to our freedom?

He expanded the size and influence of a centralized government. He used warrantless wire taps and signing statements to expand the central power of the executive. In doing this he set precedents and created conditions that can be exploited by future leaders.

YOU ASK: What in the constitution keeps him from becoming a TRUE tryant...?

Due process and those so-called "activist judges."

YOU ASK: Why can't liberals see that the second ammendment is the 'ace in the hole' for freedom?

I;m sorry, but aren't we talking about Bush -- the guy who SUPPORTED extending the assault weapons ban?

YOU ASK: If you believe in the evil nature of someone like GW ...

"Evil" and "Dangerous" are two different things. "Evil" implies motivation to do bad things. "Dangerous" implies risk. Bush can be dangeorous by being incompetetnt and defensive about his incompetence. That's different from being "evil."

Answer 4

i would never compare him to hitler b/c that is outrageous. however, he knwoingly started a war that will be a conflict for many generations. i believe he did it to protect the overseas oil interests of america. many men and women have died. 70% of the troops disagree with the war. i hate bush so much and if i cannot wait until he is out of office. war is obsolete. war always begins with violence and then ends with diplomacy. why couldn't we have all stayed here and protected the country rather than ging over there and putting ppl in harm's way? b/c when america is attacked the automatic response is we have to defend ourselves. then people say "war is bad" then others say "we can't just sit back and do nothing!" we should have stayed here. out troops would have been more useful here. we could have protected ourselves to the best of our ability without sending young men and women to their deaths. so many ppl survived their first couple tours of duty and died on the third. what have we accomplished? not enough that it was worth the lives of all those young people. war is an old fashioned idea. america hasn't been attacked again in all these years since the invasion of iraq in 2001. Bush is lying about why he is there. the country was investigated by the United nations for three months and they founf no weapons of mass destruction. but bush invaded anyway and the largest ever worldwide protest of 60 countries occurred. the president is a liar and is pulling the wool over the eyes of americans. eh has the opportunity to improve america and turnthe slums into flourishing neighborhoods. and get the poor people into better lives. there are americans who have no running water or heat. i used to be one of them. my family lived in a van for a year until we moved into a horrible apartment inthe ghetto with boards over the windows. hiow does that make an american feel? kids can't live up to their potential b/c they feel worthless. it is not right. we need to leave behind the old ways of letting the president lead us to war without a plan that will work and without a good reason. did he think we would locate every person who had it in for us? no that is silly. we need to take care of americans. how about operation homefront instead of operation iraqi freedom? if america is so concerned about iraqi ppl then how come since the early 90s more than A MILLION iraqi children have died as a result of bombs we have dropped? how come the president can so brazenly start a war with alterior motives and then make eloquent (or as eloquent as bush can get) speeches and ppl are on his side again? why is our government fashioned so that even if the citizens disaggree with something so greatly we have no way to unite and change things? the future of theunited states needs to be secured by leaving petroleum behing and finding other methods of fuel such as hydrogen, electric, bio fuel, and AIR cars. all of these aforementioned methods of fueling cars have been utilized and are running cars right now. why are we living in the past? we need to find another saudi arabia every year to sustain everything we have going right now. we are killing the enviornment and it will ccatch up with us. here in ma we had a day in january when it was 70 degrees outside. the world is falling apart before our eyes and we will die from it.

Answer 5

I see no evidence whatsoever that GW Bush is, or ever has been, anything but a mouthpiece for the military/industrial complex that currently runs the USA.

Pretty much anybody who wants a gun has one. I fail to see how this fact can have any impact in thwarting the bevy of CEOs, ex-CEOs, generals and ex-generals who are determining policy for this country completely outside the electoral process.

Answer 6

Read his newest Homeland Security Report. You will get a true sense of Dictator Shrub. He wants to take as many freedoms away as possible under the guise of Terrorism.
Each time he speaks he shows himself as the true idiot he really is.
Under the Constitution a President may extend his tour of office during a time of war. This would truly make him the dictator he wants to become.

Answer 7

You seem to have approached the '"why" behind the "right to keep and bear arms". Our founders used weaponry to free us from the ruling government (England) and set up their own. They also recognized that this experiment in government could go off track and the populous needed to have their rights to gun ownership to defend themselves from said government. If you own a gun you should belong to a private militia. After all, George Washington was the leader of the militia prior to 1776.

Answer 8

If you really want a "serious response," you won't pepper your question with "liberal" this, and "liberal" that.

We have spent faarrr too much time in this country with the "liberal / conservative" labels, and allowed them to polarize our country, drawing a line between Americans.

That said, I don't think Bush (himself) is dangerous to our freedoms; I think OUR government is impinging on our freedom; and I think Americans are helping it along with polarization from both extremes in political discourse.

Answer 9

I am a liberal, but I honestly have no idea how someone could compare Bush to Hitler. While I don't agree with all his choices, he sure as hell hasn't done any mass-exterminating that I know of. There are crazy people on both sides.

Answer 10

extra risky to whom, individuals or absolutely everyone else? the two way, i might say that Bin weighted down is extra risky; despite the fact that, Bush controls the main useful military in the international, that's additionally risky if misused.