The W
Views: 99182025
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Color chart | Log in for more!
23.9.07 2337
The 7 - Current Events & Politics - Disgusting! Bush Compared To Churchill
This thread has 1 referral leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Pages: 1 2 Next(704 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (38 total)
ScottLadd
Chipolata
Level: 24

Posts: 92/114
EXP: 75980
For next: 2146

Since: 23.1.04
From: Douglas, Isle Of Man

Since last post: 3582 days
Last activity: 3471 days
AIM:  
#1 Posted on 1.9.04 1307.16
Reposted on: 1.9.11 1312.20

    In a ceremony draped in patriotic imagery and dominated by moderate and even liberal figures, the Republican Party opened its convention yesterday by promoting President George W Bush as a leader worthy of comparison with Winston Churchill and Ronald Reagan.

    Rudy Giuliani, the former mayor of New York who helped to rally the nation after the September 11 attacks, recalled Mr Bush's leadership in those dark days.
    A delegate wears a cowboy hat with a Bush re-election sticker at the Republican National Convention

    "Winston Churchill saw the dangers of Hitler when his opponents and much of the press characterised him as a warmongering gadfly," he told delegates at the packed Madison Square Garden convention centre last night.

    "George W Bush sees world terrorism for the evil it is and he will remain consistent to the purpose of defeating it while working to make us ever safer at home.


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/08/31/wus31.xml

I find this as a true Scot and Brit totally offensive. To take a Great British Knight of the Realm and tarnish him to try to win a few votes for Britain's most hated US President ever is an outrage. Why use a real man to compare that imbicile to - somewhere a village is missing its idiot.

I used to think Rudy was an OK bloke but now he just seems to be as naive and blind as the rest of them.
Promote this thread!
BigSteve
Pepperoni
Level: 64

Posts: 71/1091
EXP: 2196169
For next: 17940

Since: 23.7.04
From: Baltimore, MD

Since last post: 2812 days
Last activity: 2540 days
#2 Posted on 1.9.04 1336.18
Reposted on: 1.9.11 1338.54
Being from England, perhaps you should stick to politics from the motherland, eh chap?
Pool-Boy
Lap cheong
Level: 81

Posts: 1546/1759
EXP: 4913668
For next: 79202

Since: 1.8.02
From: Huntington Beach, CA

Since last post: 1286 days
Last activity: 52 days
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#3 Posted on 1.9.04 1344.04
Reposted on: 1.9.11 1345.23
Well, if you look at what Rudy said, the comparision IS valid. Whether history judges then the same isn't for us to decide.

I do find it pretty hateful that you would react to the comparision that way though... I mean, it is one thing to disagree with the comparision, but that was something else entirely.
Reverend J Shaft
Liverwurst
Level: 66

Posts: 224/1137
EXP: 2457452
For next: 4412

Since: 25.6.03
From: Home of The Big House

Since last post: 1 day
Last activity: 11 hours
#4 Posted on 1.9.04 1357.46
Reposted on: 1.9.11 1359.02
I agree with Pool-Boy. Really, can we quit with the "how dare Bush's image be used alongside (insert target of offended group)? No one is saying Bush's career matches that of Churchill. No one is trying to exploit 9/11 victims or the damn Iraqi soccer team.

    Originally posted by ScottLadd
    To take a Great British Knight of the Realm and tarnish him to try to win a few votes for Britain's most hated US President ever is an outrage.


What, do they give out awards for this crap in other countries? Could someone look up Nigeria's favorite US president ever for me? And I seriously doubt anyone's vote was swayed by Giuliani's (mild, at that) comparison of Bush to Churchill.


(edited by Reverend J Shaft on 1.9.04 1458)
redsoxnation
Scrapple
Level: 152

Posts: 4144/7534
EXP: 43596603
For next: 705159

Since: 24.7.02

Since last post: 450 days
Last activity: 450 days
#5 Posted on 1.9.04 1408.27
Reposted on: 1.9.11 1411.50
Considering the Brits couldn't run Churchill out of office quick enough after World War II, this shouldn't be a comparison a Republican is looking for.
Jonny_English
Mettwurst
Level: 28

Posts: 98/157
EXP: 121926
For next: 9414

Since: 18.3.04
From: Derby, UK

Since last post: 2823 days
Last activity: 2646 days
#6 Posted on 1.9.04 1630.27
Reposted on: 1.9.11 1631.32
Well, Churchill was an ill-educated washed up offensive old soak who happened to be in the right place in the right time....make of that what you will.
oldschoolhero
Knackwurst
Level: 104

Posts: 1884/3059
EXP: 11534135
For next: 328030

Since: 2.1.02
From: nWo Country

Since last post: 1957 days
Last activity: 1891 days
#7 Posted on 1.9.04 1636.16
Reposted on: 1.9.11 1636.41
Churchill stood up against a country that tried to invade our land, bombed the shit out of our major cities and cut a swathe of destruction across Europe. GW has smashed two pathetically-armed states into oblivion after a terrorist attack perpetrated by no fixed nation. There are NO Similarities whatsoever. NONE. Any historian in the future that would even think of holding the two cases side-by-side would be an imbecile, because circumstance is entirely different.

I may not find the comparison as cartoonishly loathsome as Laddy up there, but yes, it does irk me. It's taking somebody who watched his country torn apart by war and holding him up next to a man whose honesty, motives and presidential ability are questioned by half the American populace and far more than half of the rest of the world. THAT'S what I object to. Somehow being against the war in Iraq has led to us not "seeing terrorism for what it is". Egads! Could it not possibly be that we think his bullying tactic are totally inappropriate for the elusive many-faced threat? That bludgeoning one small country after another in a desperate attempt to stop a totally autonomous entity is akin to trying to squish a spider with sledgehammer?

That is not Churchill. Churchill is taking up arms when the enemy is breathing on your doorstep and seeing him off. It is not wiping everybody who maybe possibly might someday do you some harm from existence. There is no comparison here.

(edited by oldschoolhero on 1.9.04 1437)
DrDirt
Banger
Level: 96

Posts: 1160/2698
EXP: 8867217
For next: 121602

Since: 8.10.03
From: flyover country

Since last post: 7 days
Last activity: 17 hours
#8 Posted on 1.9.04 1700.07
Reposted on: 1.9.11 1700.33
No one in our lexicon can be compared to Churchill. However, I think the comaprison made has some validity. Churchill was an incredible leader who was so principled it nearly cost him everything. I believe he also won a Nobel Prize for literature. He wasn't always right but he was one of the five most important political leaders of the last century.
ekedolphin
Scrapple
Level: 132

Posts: 2249/5387
EXP: 26926475
For next: 205529

Since: 12.1.02
From: Indianapolis, IN; now residing in Suffolk, VA

Since last post: 97 days
Last activity: 7 days
#9 Posted on 1.9.04 1726.01
Reposted on: 1.9.11 1729.03
I also disagree with the comparison between Bush and Churchill, but... uh, guys, it's the Republican National Convention. They're going to compare Bush to everyone from Mother Teresa to Abraham Lincoln to Jesus, and will also try and bullshit you by telling you that yes, Dubya does care about civil rights, isn't trying to privatize Social Security, would never ever sacrifice the rights of the individual on the altar of corporate business, and is in fact the greatest president in the history of the United States.

Everyone who isn't a Republican knows the truth, though. I don't know, don't expect me to get geared up and say, “My God, those damned Republicans are trying to compare Dubya to Winston Churchill!~” because Dubya's been bullshittin' us since he first decided to run for President. After awhile, the minor stuff doesn't tend to effect me as much.

(edited by ekedolphin on 1.9.04 1827)
Big Bad
Scrapple
Level: 145

Posts: 3269/6726
EXP: 37598549
For next: 5623

Since: 4.1.02
From: Dorchester, Ontario

Since last post: 10 hours
Last activity: 34 min.
#10 Posted on 1.9.04 1733.37
Reposted on: 1.9.11 1734.34
    Originally posted by ScottLadd
    To take a Great British Knight of the Realm and tarnish him to try to win a few votes for Britain's most hated US President ever is an outrage.


You'd figure that Britain's most hated US president ever would be George Washington, but I digress.

Also, it's not an entirely invalid point. If everyone else in the world utterly loathed Paul Martin, it would make me think twice about what my PM was doing.
Dahak
Frankfurter
Level: 57

Posts: 493/772
EXP: 1441695
For next: 44242

Since: 12.5.02
From: Junction City OR.

Since last post: 1997 days
Last activity: 1649 days
#11 Posted on 1.9.04 1811.27
Reposted on: 1.9.11 1812.46
    Originally posted by Big Bad
      Originally posted by ScottLadd
      To take a Great British Knight of the Realm and tarnish him to try to win a few votes for Britain's most hated US President ever is an outrage.


    You'd figure that Britain's most hated US president ever would be George Washington, but I digress.

    Also, it's not an entirely invalid point. If everyone else in the world utterly loathed Paul Martin, it would make me think twice about what my PM was doing.


No I would guess it would be Madison. Invading Canada because of impressed sailors my ass. The US saw an oppurtunity for a land grab.
Honestly England and the US hated each other until 1900 or so and that had a lot more to do with Germany being pissed off about the US taking what was left of the Spanish Empire than the 2 countries becoming "friends".
OndaGrande
Kolbasz
Level: 46

Posts: 134/474
EXP: 665855
For next: 45924

Since: 1.5.03
From: California, Home of THE LAKERS!

Since last post: 68 days
Last activity: 5 hours
#12 Posted on 1.9.04 1952.52
Reposted on: 1.9.11 1953.42
Are we talking about the same Winston Churchill who called the Nazi's "thugs" while at the same time British soldiers were throwing people in India into the black hole of Calcutta for the crime of making salt? I guess I wouldn't want to be compared to him either.
Malarky
Bauerwurst
Level: 23

Posts: 15/104
EXP: 64404
For next: 3320

Since: 19.8.04

Since last post: 3637 days
Last activity: 3634 days
#13 Posted on 1.9.04 2031.47
Reposted on: 1.9.11 2031.54
You're not alone, I almost choked on my sandwich reading that one.....

Although, to be fair to the dolt, history has a way of smoothing over the rough edges a person has and focusing instead on their deeds, and if this whole Greater Middle East plan goes down well, and if Iraq becomes a stable democratic society, history may well judge him to be a good leader, still nowhere near Winston (a war of national survival trumps an imperial operation anyday) but still not too bad.
StaggerLee
Scrapple
Level: 140

Posts: 1857/6302
EXP: 33084251
For next: 202236

Since: 3.10.02
From: Right side of the tracks

Since last post: 17 hours
Last activity: 7 hours
#14 Posted on 2.9.04 0449.38
Reposted on: 2.9.11 0451.57
    Originally posted by Big Bad
      Originally posted by ScottLadd
      To take a Great British Knight of the Realm and tarnish him to try to win a few votes for Britain's most hated US President ever is an outrage.


    You'd figure that Britain's most hated US president ever would be George Washington, but I digress.

    Also, it's not an entirely invalid point. If everyone else in the world utterly loathed Paul Martin, it would make me think twice about what my PM was doing.


So, you would only worry if others hated your PM? Wouldn't want to have an opinion of him before that? I would hate to have to make political decisions based on what people in a far away land, with no voting power in my nation, thought of my president.
spf
Scrapple
Level: 132

Posts: 2925/5402
EXP: 27065952
For next: 66052

Since: 2.1.02
From: The Las Vegas of Canada

Since last post: 55 days
Last activity: 2 hours
AIM:  
#15 Posted on 2.9.04 1037.40
Reposted on: 2.9.11 1046.59
    Originally posted by StaggerLee
      Originally posted by Big Bad
        Originally posted by ScottLadd
        To take a Great British Knight of the Realm and tarnish him to try to win a few votes for Britain's most hated US President ever is an outrage.


      You'd figure that Britain's most hated US president ever would be George Washington, but I digress.

      Also, it's not an entirely invalid point. If everyone else in the world utterly loathed Paul Martin, it would make me think twice about what my PM was doing.


    So, you would only worry if others hated your PM? Wouldn't want to have an opinion of him before that? I would hate to have to make political decisions based on what people in a far away land, with no voting power in my nation, thought of my president.

I don't know, a lot of folks sure seemed pissed off that Spain didn't take our feelings into account when they had their national elections recently. But judging by the giant amount of EU-bashing threads that pop up here apparently the whole "who are you to criticize?" sensibility is something of a one way street.
dMr
Andouille
Level: 89

Posts: 1417/2212
EXP: 6856398
For next: 59530

Since: 2.11.02
From: Edinburgh, Scotland

Since last post: 15 days
Last activity: 4 hours
#16 Posted on 2.9.04 1140.00
Reposted on: 2.9.11 1140.27
    Originally posted by BigSteve
    Being from England


The Isle of Man is a crown dependency with its own courts laws and government. Its residents for the most part are of Celtic descent. England it is not.


    perhaps you should stick to politics from the motherland, eh chap?


Which would be great if the US was an insular little country whose politics had no effect on the world in general. Unfortunately the actions of America have a massive impact on the rest of us, and thus are of concern to the world in general.

We're not asking for the vote over there, but to suggest we shouldn't have an opinion is ridiculous beyond belief.



(edited by dMr on 2.9.04 1740)
StaggerLee
Scrapple
Level: 140

Posts: 1862/6302
EXP: 33084251
For next: 202236

Since: 3.10.02
From: Right side of the tracks

Since last post: 17 hours
Last activity: 7 hours
#17 Posted on 2.9.04 1233.21
Reposted on: 2.9.11 1234.07
(deleted by StaggerLee on 2.9.04 1035)
Net Hack Slasher
Banger
Level: 100

Posts: 2514/2805
EXP: 10123027
For next: 231405

Since: 6.1.02
From: Outer reaches of your mind

Since last post: 3560 days
Last activity: 1980 days
#18 Posted on 5.9.04 0305.35
Reposted on: 5.9.11 0305.35
    Originally posted by ekedolphin
    Everyone who isn't a Republican knows the truth, though. I don't know, don't expect me to get geared up and say, “My God, those damned Republicans are trying to compare Dubya to Winston Churchill!~” because Dubya's been bullshittin' us since he first decided to run for President. After awhile, the minor stuff doesn't tend to effect me as much.

As America seems to be so partisan and divided by party lines you would think maybe non-American's might have the most unbiased view on the whole thing. I guess Liberal Americans are wrong because they are fooled by the "liberal media" and the rest of the world better not comment because we all live in a cocoon or something and can't view from the outside. Everyone view point is wrong on Bush except the Republicans, that's their view point anyways... OSH percentage of Bush being questioned by "far more than half of the rest of the world" is very generous. I never saw an American president this despised & not trusted outside his borders, and he wears it as a badge of honor. You have that attitude how do you expect anyone to trust someone like this.

I have to give him props, I have no idea how he does it but he might be favorite to win. I guess the saying you can fool some of the people all of the time fits here. After the 4 years he had, I have no idea how he's pulled the wool over your eyes with his fear tactics, I really thought Americans' were more savvy than that... I've pretty much given up, if after all that he's done & you still trust, you get what you deserve, I for one likes seeing your economy going into the crapper, it makes our Canadian dollar look somewhat reasonable. I'm tired of looking at this like I'm watching a bad horror movie wondering "Why is this idiot woman running back into the house, that's where the monster is!". If the majority of the American public can't see what every one else sees, then it's bad on you.

As for Giuliani speech, I'm just surprised he said a sentence without the numbers 9 and 11 in it.
StaggerLee
Scrapple
Level: 140

Posts: 1872/6302
EXP: 33084251
For next: 202236

Since: 3.10.02
From: Right side of the tracks

Since last post: 17 hours
Last activity: 7 hours
#19 Posted on 5.9.04 0341.33
Reposted on: 5.9.11 0343.25
    Originally posted by Net Hack Slasher
      Originally posted by ekedolphin
      Everyone who isn't a Republican knows the truth, though. I don't know, don't expect me to get geared up and say, “My God, those damned Republicans are trying to compare Dubya to Winston Churchill!~” because Dubya's been bullshittin' us since he first decided to run for President. After awhile, the minor stuff doesn't tend to effect me as much.

    As America seems to be so partisan and divided by party lines you would think maybe non-American's might have the most unbiased view on the whole thing. I guess Liberal Americans are wrong because they are fooled by the "liberal media" and the rest of the world better not comment because we all live in a cocoon or something and can't view from the outside. Everyone view point is wrong on Bush except the Republicans, that's their view point anyways... OSH percentage of Bush being questioned by "far more than half of the rest of the world" is very generous. I never saw an American president this despised & not trusted outside his borders, and he wears it as a badge of honor. You have that attitude how do you expect anyone to trust someone like this.

    I have to give him props, I have no idea how he does it but he might be favorite to win. I guess the saying you can fool some of the people all of the time fits here. After the 4 years he had, I have no idea how he's pulled the wool over your eyes with his fear tactics, I really thought Americans' were more savvy than that... I've pretty much given up, if after all that he's done & you still trust, you get what you deserve, I for one likes seeing your economy going into the crapper, it makes our Canadian dollar look somewhat reasonable. I'm tired of looking at this like I'm watching a bad horror movie wondering "Why is this idiot woman running back into the house, that's where the monster is!". If the majority of the American public can't see what every one else sees, then it's bad on you.

    As for Giuliani speech, I'm just surprised he said a sentence without the numbers 9 and 11 in it.


No offense, but please do us all stupid Americans who would vote for Bush, a favor, and keep your opinions to yourself.

First off, most of America isnt devided clearly along partisan lines. Most people do not agree with 100% of either party's platform. However, when facing a choice of two, and you have issues with both, you pick the one that you have the most in common with politically and philisophically.

Really, if more than half of America thinks he is the best of the choices for President, then perhaps we dont really need your enlightened opinions.

If more than half the rest of the world doesnt like our President, perhaps its because most of them are just as corrupt morally as they percieve him to be. Or, they see him as a bully for doing the things that the past 12 years of the world's leadership was unable, or unwilling to do.

He wears "his badge of honor" as you call it, because he is probably the only President in the free world who would be willing to do what he felt was right, and not be wishy washy when people spoke out against him. You see it as a weakness that he is stead fast. Perhaps if your Prime Minister, President or whatever the hell you call him were ever put in a position where he had to make the kinds of decisions that President Bush had to make, you might be able to see things like us poor pathetic stupid Americans. But, until Toronto is attacked widespread, and your leader has to, you know, LEAD a nation in peril, perhaps you can just sit there and let us decide who our President will be. Thank you very much!

(edited by StaggerLee on 5.9.04 0146)
oldschoolhero
Knackwurst
Level: 104

Posts: 1887/3059
EXP: 11534135
For next: 328030

Since: 2.1.02
From: nWo Country

Since last post: 1957 days
Last activity: 1891 days
#20 Posted on 5.9.04 0400.13
Reposted on: 5.9.11 0401.03
You mean like Spain's prime minister had to after watching handreds of his citizens die? Or Spain's people? Did that stop many, many Republicans turned their vitriol toward Spain, accusing them of appeasing terrorists when it's, as you would argue, none of their business?

We'll stop criticising American leadership when a)It stops deciding the course of the Western world for the rest of us, and b)You stop making what the rest of us are doing your business. Simple as that.
Pages: 1 2 NextThread ahead: Maybe VAT Tax is not such a great idea afterall
Next thread: Kerry Campaign in microcosm, admits to being a "confused person"
Previous thread: Bill Clinton hospitalized
(704 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
The 7 - Current Events & Politics - Disgusting! Bush Compared To ChurchillRegister and log in to post!

The W™ message board - 7 year recycle

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim
This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.248 seconds.