• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Why do you hate the President?

Dr. Khan

Member
Like the Luthern church which elected a mass murderer, a seriel killer to be it's president so too have the religious Right elected a (BTK like) in the white house. He has led the entire Religious right into a great sin, in the sight of the Lord. The image of the beast is (war) Revelation 14:9 When you come to understand that the beasts In Revelation 13 are the roman Empire and the Holy Roman Empire you will understand the great deception that is in the world thru These beasts.
like all christians who were hopeful of someone to represent them in the White house when we got what we ask for we didn't realize how bad it was. george bush (W) will no doubt be come to be the greatest dissapointment ever in modern history for Christianity. To be president and to dishonor and sully the name of Jesus before all the world is the uglist sin imaginable.
He is truly the worst image of Christianity since the crusades. He makes Bill Clinton look like King David, and he Saul. I hate his image, and what he has done to Jesus' image before the World.
However the Lord shall be glorified in me so I get over it easily, not to hate him; but his works???
 

retrorich

SUPER NOT-A-MOD
The Voice of Reason said:
I have to say that I do not hate Bush - I do find him to be incredibly ignorant, arrogant, hypocritical, self-serving, and shallow - but I do not hate him. For my money, he appears to be the most ignorant President to have been in the Oval Office in my lifetime, and only the political guile of Karl Rove could have kept him propped up long enough to scare the religious right into ignoring everything but the homophobic hatemongering that got W into office.
I agree--except for the "do not hate" part.

Other than that, he's a fine man, worthy of our respect ....
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA :biglaugh: Frubals to you!
 
There are many reasons I dislike him, but one reason I hate him: Iraq. First, that he thinks of war - that is, killing people and sending Americans to die - is a first resort and not a last resort. Second, that he thinks taking over countries and installing puppet regimes so American companies can steal their resources and American troops can be stationed on their soil is compatible with the US being a free republic. Third, that he lied about his reasons for invading and lied about the evidence for WMDs and Iraqi support for Al Qaeda.
 

Feathers in Hair

World's Tallest Hobbit
jamaesi said:
History is written by the victors. :E
Do you think, if he's impeached, he will be a victor? I don't know enough about impeachment, though, to know if it's a possibility.

Then again, I wonder if he'll be a 'victor', even if he makes it through the full presidency.
I have a feeling not only America will suffer for his presidency, but also the Republicans, unless they're willing to express outrage at what he's doing. (And for some people, that would take acknowledging what he's doing.)
 

Scuba Pete

Le plongeur avec attitude...
Feathers, he "owns" those who have the power to impeach him. They know who butters their bread.
 

thorswitch

New Member
I try not to "hate" anyone, but if there is anyone I hate, it's Bush. As to why? Well:

Studies have shown that we are now more vulnerable to terrorism than we were pre-9/11 because of Bush's policies and the war in Iraq

Bush KNEW prior to Congress voting to give him the authority to go to war AS A LAST RESORT that North Korea had begun making nuclear weapons again, but deliberately withheld that information from Congress so that it wouldn't cause them to re-think the wisdom of going after a regime that "might" have WMD as opposed to holding back our forces in case we needed them against a regime that actually DOES have WMD.

He was aware well before 9/11 that Bin Laden was planning to try and strike within the US (as the August 6th, 2001 Presidential Daily Briefing clearly demonstrated) and did NOTHING to try and protect us. On 9/11, as the country was under attack and we had no idea what was happening, not only did he proceed to spend several precious minutes after being notified of the attack still reading to the schoolchildren (even though there were several places where he could EASILY have stood up, announced calmly to the kids how proud he was of their reading skills, encourage them to keep working on it, and then explain that part of being the President means that sometimes you have to change your plans to take care of something unexpected and that he, regretably, had to leave now - NONE of which would have panicked the kids, which is what he said he was trying to avoid by staying to the end of the lesson), but he also stayed at the school for several more minutes for photo-ops before finally leaving to board Air Force One. Had he been a target of the terrorists that day (which, at that time, would have been a reasonable presumption since we didn't really know what was happening), by not leaving the school immediately, he put those kids lives in jeopardy. His photo-ops, though, were more important than the kids safety or his tending to the needs of the nation. Once aboard Air Force One, the story was passed around that there had been threats made against the plane as an explaination for why Bush was flying all over the place, but later, it was acknowledged that no such threat was ever received.

In spite of his constantly talking up National Security, our boarders, airports, shipping ports and other ports of entry are no safer today than they were prior to 9/11. Money for homeland security projects is not distributed to states based on need, but on an obscure forumla that ends up rewarding mainly "red" states with considerably more money per person than "blue" states get, even though most major targest (such as New York City and Los Angelas) are in "blue" states.

Bush and his neo-conservative allies were planning "regime change" in Iraq long before 9/11 even happened. Once the terrorist attacks occured, however, they realized they had their excuse. As such, even though we know that there was no functional relationship or cooperation between Saddam and Al Qaeda, Bush and his allies kept implying that there was a connection until they had convinced a majority of Americans that the connection did exist. Interestingly, in January of 2003, prior to the start of the Iraq war, during a press conference with Tony Blair, both Blair and Bush acknowledged that they could not say there was a connection between Saddam and BIn Laden, and yet he continued to rhetorically link the two in his speeches and in his campaign to start the war.

Rather than finishing the job of capturing Bin Laden, who actually IS responsible for the 9/11 attacks, he divereted resources - including roughtly $700,000 which had been specifically earmarked by Congress for use in the Afghanistan war - from Afghanistan and the hunt for Bin Laden to preparing for the war in Iraq, something which is unconstitutional for him to do. In addition, after bombing the crap out of Afghanistan, once his focus changed to Iraq, he did not propose any funding to help Afghanistan rebuild, despite having made promises to do so.

He has constantly worked to lower environmental standards and trashes any science that indicates that we should actually be concerned about the environment - starting with pulling out of the Kyoto accord and dismissing all scientific research indicating global warning is a genuine concern.

He is not only willing to allow the constitution to be amended to discriminate against a specific group of people (gays), but he has allowed the formentation of hatred toward gays to be used as a political tool to excite his base supporters. I have to admit, though, I find it amusing that he courted the anti-gay lobby so strongly, and now that he's been re-elected seems less interested in actually fulfilling his promises to them, and they're getting rather pissed about it. He may find he bit off more than he can chew on that one.

He seems to be almost entirely unable to tell the truth - or even know what the truth might be in some cases. In addition to all of his lies about 9/11 and the war, there's the whole Social Security "crisis" that doesn't really exist - his idea of creating private accounts won't solve any of the potential problems that SS is facing, and studies are showing that SS will actually be STRONGER if it's left alone than it would under pretty much any variation of the plan that he's promoting; he's lied to our allies on a fairly regular basis, including the recently revealed lie that LIbya was getting nuclear materials from North Korea. In fact, what was happening is that North Korea was selling nuclear materials to Pakistan (our putitive ally) who, in turn, was selling it to Libya - but since we apparently want to stay on Pakistan's good side, acknowledging that they were the ones actually selling stuff to Libya was out of the question. He's promised on various occasions to send large sums of money (such as $15 million to Africa for AIDS research/treatment) but then only includes a fraction of it (such as $5 million of the above mentioned $15) in the budget.

He has no problem promoting pure propaganda, buying off journalists or creating fake news stories to be sent out to local stations promoting his agenda - all of which has been declared illegal by the non-partisan GAO

He appointed first John Aschroft to be attorney general, who was bad enough, but now has made Alberto Gonzales AG, in spite of his having been responsible for the shoddy reviews of Texas death penalty cases, leading to many potentially unjust exections AND, more importantly, in spite of his having written the memos that were intended to provide justification for the use of torture by the military and consequently lead to the abuses of Abu Graib and Guantanamo

He supports a reduction in individual civil liberties, ostensibly in the name of safety - but then fails to take other common sense steps (such as tightening port security) that would ACTUALLY make us safer

His so-called "town hall" meetings and (during the election) campaign rallies were open ONLY to Bush supporters. Some of his campaign rallies required individuals to sign an statement that they were genuine Bush supporters and that their name and likeness could be used to promote Bush's campaign before they could be admitted. If anyone made any kind of derogatory remark, asked a question critical of the president, carried any signs or wore a T-shirt that indicated opposition to any Bush policy, they would be kicked out of the rally. Protestors are not allowed at his personal apperances, but are usually cordoned off in a small "free speech" area up to a half-mile or more away from the president's location.

I could go on, but I think I'll stop now.
 
Top