China Visit - Another Bush Failure

from JoeUser Forums


Yes another negative story about King George. The answer as to why so many negative Blogs is that hardly a day passes that does not either reveal another Bush error or show a new mistake that our President has made.

The China visit is a combination of both. It was Bush who expanded the failed trade policy of Clinton to include China. Now we have another $200 Billion trade problem to deal with in this country.

The issues with China are major and run deep. The most apparent is that trade deficit and the refusal of China to stop actions that make it impossible for the trade to come even close to be in balance. In addition to the vast difference in labor costs we have the currency manipulation that makes China's products cheep in this country and our products more expensive in China. We have the lack property rights that causes cheep knock offs made in China competing with our products.

If all that were not enough, we have the largest country in the world that does not allow freedom to their people. In fact China is using our technology and companies to enforce restrictions on individual freedom in China.

We will not deal with Cuba 90 miles from our shore but George W. Bush brings out all the pomp to welcome the leader of the world's largest dictatorship. We send our young people to die in Iraq to spread democracy and then Bush welcomes the President of China.

What is the net result for America from this visit - NOTHING. Way to go George!
politics
14,330 views 48 replies
Reply #1 from JoeUser Forums Top
I still wish you would, for once, blog about something aside from Bush. Just once. Talk about your weekend, a birthday party, some stories from your time in the military. Something about your favorite flavor of ice cream. ANYTHING.

The reason is, with your complete and utter lack of variety, you lose pretty much all credibility. You've become the resident loon. The guy who sits on the street corner with the sandwich boards reading "THE END IS HERE!" and yell about God's wrath and nothing else. Sitting here and doing nothing but bash Bush, even if you ever happen to be right about something, you are discredited by your behavior. You claim to be a moderate republican, but absolutely nothing you say or do here backs that up. You appear to be completely biased, and have no sense of objectivity.

You're like the talking heads on the right who bash the left no matter what they do. Rush hated Clinton for everything. ALl he did was tear on the guy. Deserved or not, the fact that it was always an assault, always negative, always so defying reason or logic is why he holds pretty much zero sway with anyone outside of the far right. Ann Coulter, same way. You employ the same tactics as those you would probably vilify. You're just at the other extreme.

So, please, for your own sake at least, try and show some variety to what you write. Show us there's something to you aside from your blind hatred for Bush and the current administration. Try and appear a bit more human and you just might find people here a tad more receptive to what you're trying to say.
Reply #2 from JoeUser Forums Top
Mmmm Zoomba I like ice cream

Zoomba is right. I would be intrigued to hear some stories from the military. Places you've been. Things you saw. That would be WAY cool.

AD
Fences - Organize your desktop icons today!
Reply #3 from JoeUser Forums Top
I will try just as soon as Bush does something positive. My Blog site is Bush Truth.
Reply #4 from JoeUser Forums Top
And what is the 'Truth' Col?

It is the 'Truth' according to YOU! Period. Anyone who argues against that is plain stupid in your opinion. And you call Bush a dictator?

You WILL NEVER find anything positive if you are looking for dirt.

Do you think he is a good family man? Do you like his ranch?
Reply #5 from JoeUser Forums Top
Reply By: COL GenePosted: Friday, April 21, 2006I will try just as soon as Bush does something positive. My Blog site is Bush Truth


no your blog is bushes truth as seen through the eyes of a bashbashing loon.

gong! gong!! gong!
Reply #6 from JoeUser Forums Top
Col,

Then you're fighting a battle you'll never win. The reason being that you don't know the basic rules of online writing. You don't know how to build an audience (here it's more a crew of hecklers) in an online space, you don't know how to actually debate your points, you don't even acknowledge the potential validity of your opposition... and that is KEY to being an effective speaker/debater.

And I'm not asking you to praise Bush. If you don't like him, you don't like him. I'm just asking for something that will make you appear more human. Something that would imply that you spend any moment of your day doing something aside from seething with hatred for Bush.
Reply #7 from JoeUser Forums Top
The irony of this article is that even though he mentions that China will not stop their actions and that China restricts freedom to it's people, it's still all Bush's fault. That's why no one believes Col.

Hey Col, you don't think Bush does anything positive? Hows about this?

Companies using illegal workers to be targeted
Immigration arrests 9 IFCO bosses along with 1,000 workers From CNN.com Link


Here's a story about something being done about the immigration problem, something that you b_tched about over and over and eyt I have not see you report about it. This is the truth aswell, why did you ignore it or at least take a shot at it? You're a hypocrit Col. Nothing more, nothing less.
Reply #8 from JoeUser Forums Top
#7 by Charles.C
Friday, April 21, 2006


Here's a story about something being done about the immigration problem, something that you b_tched about over and over and eyt I have not see you report about it.


charles, here is how it works with colgene, Bush solves every problem in the world, gene remains silent.

Gene did not get layed last night, "IT'S ALL BUSHES FAULT!!!
Reply #9 from JoeUser Forums Top
Gene did not get layed last night, "IT'S ALL BUSHES FAULT!!!


You know, you might be on to something here. I can imagine him sleepinga dn all of a sudden waking up in the middle of the night screeming "I KNEW IT WAS BUSH'S FAULT". I wonder what his wife thinks of his article.
Reply #10 from JoeUser Forums Top
I never said Bush is responsible for ANYTHING China is doing. What I said is that OUR reaction and policy toward China is what is wrong because it does not mitigate the actions of China that are harming the United States.
Reply #11 from JoeUser Forums Top
What a waste of an article.
Reply #12 from JoeUser Forums Top

#10 by COL Gene
Friday, April 21, 2006


Really? Well let's break it down since you never seem to realize what you write.

You said:

In fact China is using our technology and companies to enforce restrictions on individual freedom in China.


Then you said:

What is the net result for America from this visit - NOTHING. Way to go George!


To me this implies that China is using us to restrict their peoples freedom more and that Bush has done nothing to stop it. Care to try again stating that you don't blame Bush for what's happening in China? I too can look for negative in anything I read, this is what's called a taste of your own medicine. How does it taste Col?
Reply #13 from JoeUser Forums Top
Charles standing at the 3 point line, he shoots, HE SCORES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Reply #14 from JoeUser Forums Top
Hello All, I've been reading thru the Col.'s posts. He has an agenda and its honestly stated. Frankly, when President Clinton was in office, I saw some similar continuous diatribes against him. Anyone who listens to Rush's programe for tarnished journalism knows what a continuous assault on one party and one family is like. My sense is that conservatives just don't like their own methods tossed back at them. Just my opinion. Be well.
Reply #15 from JoeUser Forums Top
#14 by Sodaiho
Friday, April 21, 2006


Hello All, I've been reading thru the Col.'s posts


hello back at ya!

Frankly, when President Clinton was in office, I saw some similar continuous diatribes against him.


I am sure OTHER subjects were talked about, it was not bash bill 24/7/365.

My sense is that conservatives just don't like their own methods tossed back at them. Just my opinion. Be well.


whew!!! good thing I am moderateman heh heh heh
Be well.

you too.
Reply #16 from JoeUser Forums Top
I was very disappointed in the lies Clinton told and the fact that he continued to dismantle our military. However, we did move to a balanced budget, we had the strongest economy ever and we were not fighting a war that did not have to be fought. The policies were far more centrist during Clinton and I believe that was because the power was split. It is a BIG ERROR for either the Conservatives or the Liberals to have control of the House, Senate and WH. The majority in this country are not conservative or liberal and we should not be enacting policies or have court appointments that are one sided.
Reply #17 from JoeUser Forums Top



I was very disappointed in the lies Clinton told and the fact that he continued to dismantle our military.


Not enough apparently.

However, we did move to a balanced budget, we had the strongest economy ever and we were not fighting a war that did not have to be fought.


True about the budget and economy but we might have been fighting this war had Clinton done something about both Saddam and Osama when he had the chance. Not that you care right?

The policies were far more centrist during Clinton and I believe that was because the power was split. It is a BIG ERROR for either the Conservatives or the Liberals to have control of the House, Senate and WH. The majority in this country are not conservative or liberal and we should not be enacting policies or have court appointments that are one sided.


You're right about this. But, if you only blamed everyone everytime you point something out maybe you would have more credebility. Instead you act as if Bush was a one man party or administration. That he types every letter, pushes every button, talks every talk, makes all the desicions by himself.
Reply #18 from JoeUser Forums Top
I NEVER said the actions of China were the fault of Bush. What I said is that the policy of Bush has allowed a bad problem to get much worse.

When Bush took over he had the benefit of seeing a trade policy started by Clinton fail for eight years. It had grown into a $300 plus billion problem. What did Bush do, he expanded that failed policy and turned the problem into an $800 Billion dollar problem.

If George W. Bush were a MD treating his patient for cancer and had prescribed two aspirin that did not control the cancer he would go to four aspirin. Then six and eight aspirin. When the patient died of cancer, Bush would say well, the cancer is not a problem for this patient any more.
Reply #19 from JoeUser Forums Top
I NEVER said the actions of China were the fault of Bush.


See where implications go awry?
Reply #20 from JoeUser Forums Top
What is taking place is people who do not want to admit King George screwed up TWIST the facts and statement made.
Reply #21 from JoeUser Forums Top
What is taking place is people who do not want to admit King George screwed up TWIST the facts and statement made.


Another case and point of how you don't even try to see other's view?
Reply #22 from JoeUser Forums Top
You choose to ignore the point I am making. I did not blame Bush for what China is doing to its people. I am saying Bush is NOT LOOKING OUT FOR OUR BEST INTERESTS.

He has ignored the fact that China steals the property rights of Americans and American Companies. He does nothing when China manipulates their currency exchange rate that makes selling our products in China impossible while allowing their products to destroy American companies like our garment industry. I blame Bush for expanding a policy that clearly failed for 8 years just before he took over and making it an even BIGGER FAILURE. This is about how Bush has harmed America NOT what China is doing to its own people!

When I pointed out the lack of human rights China shows toward its people it was to demonstrate the inconsistency in the Bush policies to China, Iraq and Cuba.
Reply #23 from JoeUser Forums Top
This may be a bit off subject but it illustrates what is happening with Bush and the results of his policies. Like the fact that trade is worse today the government released data showing that wages between 2001 and 2005 showed that for the Average American after inflation, they make less today then 5 years ago. At the same time, people at the top of the economic ladder had huge increases in their after inflation income.

They compared the Bush results with the same data for the Clinton period and found that Averages wage after inflation went up almost 10%. For the Bush period they have dropped 1.4%. In addition, the impact of gas prices hurts the poor and middle income workers while the wealthy can easily deal with the gas price increases. This was just on CNN TV and demonstrates WHY the Average American does not give Bush credit for the economy. Bush points to GDP and the Stock market growth. He points to job creation but those jobs are paying 21% less then the jobs that were lost at the start of his administration and we are still 1.5 Million jobs less then needed to be at the same place as Jan 2001. The things impacting the vast majority do NOT SHOW IMPROVEMENT and they are not happy with the job Bush is doing with the economy.
Reply #24 from JoeUser Forums Top
fact that he continued to dismantle our military


A sent it everywhere in the world as long as it was at the behest of the UN. Kosovo with no exit strategy leaps to mind. Also, he spent the whole decade squandering our status as sole superpower.

However, we did move to a balanced budget, we had the strongest economy ever


And Clinton did it all, right? Just came into office and waved his wand and made it all good. It had nothing whatever to do with the 12 years of Republican leadership and Reaganomics, right? He just moved into the White House and it was all good. Ooookaaaay.

and we were not fighting a war that did not have to be fought.


If he'd taken some, any, stand or action during his term, rather than bending and swaying with the opinion polls and the whims of the UN, maybe it could actually have been avoided. Saddam spent most of the 90s dodging and completely flouting UN sanctions with no real consequences (of course, since March of 2003, we've come to see and understand the why and how).
Clinton had all the reasons he needed to take him out then. War, though, like taking a firm stand in anything, is often unpopular, and in turn often results in negative numbers, and he couldn't have that.

Being a peacenik hippie from the Vietnam Era, Clinton distrusted, and paid literally no attention whatever to, the CIA for the first 3 or 4 years of his presidency.
They were talking about this the other day on the radio, as a matter of fact. When that guy crashed his plane into the White House grounds in the mid-90s, the joke went around that it was the CIA director trying to get an appointment with the president.
The CIA actually had plans to kidnap bin-Laden sometime in the late 90s, but Clinton's lawyers advised him not to okay it, lest bin-Laden die in custody. Could have been embarrassing.
"No Risks Shall Be Taken"----that could have been the motto of the Clinton White House. That's also why he has no legacy to speak of. No pain, no gain.


The policies were far more centrist during Clinton and I believe that was because the power was split.


This actually has a ring of truth, and I salute you for that, Col.
The problem, though, lies in partisanship. When power is split, nothing really gets done because of conflicting agendas; unless of course you have a real statesman in office who can work with both sides. Clinton was not a statesman.
Besides that, in recent years we've seen the Left drifting more and more to the Liberal Left, which is a problem in itself. That only serves to kind of make the Right the "Center".
Sad to say it, but monopoly (or even sadder, a dictatorship, though no one wants that) is much more efficient.


The majority in this country are not conservative or liberal and we should not be enacting policies or have court appointments that are one sided.



True as well. But, speaking of court appointments, let's not forget that it was still a fairly liberal Supreme Court that gave Bush its approval in 2000.
Reply #25 from JoeUser Forums Top
I never said Bush is responsible for ANYTHING China is doing. What I said is that OUR reaction and policy toward China is what is wrong because it does not mitigate the actions of China that are harming the United States.


Awful funny here col klink....GW's reation is the EXACT same as "Slick Willie's" But I do not see one sentence that even comes close to saying that!