Saturday, November 05, 2005

The Reason I Support Bush

"Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it" --Adolf Hitler

The Liberals keep insisting that Bush lied to get us into war in Iraq. They know that isn't true. As I explored in my previous post, The Democrats agreed that Saddam had WMD before America entered the war of liberation. But now they insist they were always against the war. The Liberals count on the people not doing the research necessary to find out the truth for themselves, and it's working. Now, Bush's poll numbers are down. Is it any wonder? Hitler also said, "The broad masses of a population are more amenable to the appeal of rhetoric than to any other force."

He also said,"The great masses of the people will more easily fall victims to a big lie than to a small one."

Liberals wonder why I, and other Conservatives continue to support President Bush and refuse to believe that he would lead the country into war by lying about the reasons.

I can't speak for other conservatives but I can say why I support him. I believe Bush is a man of honesty and integrity. I doubt sincerely if any Liberals can point to anytime when Bush was caught in a lie. I know they believe he lied, and I know also, that Liberals have been accusing him of lying since he was elected, but no where have I seen any proof. And Liberals have been unable to produce any evidence that he ever lied about anything.

Remember the Presidential campaign of 2004? That was the campaign of the 527 groups? The groups that spent millions of dollars to slime and slander the candidate that they opposed. Remember how the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth continually attacked Senator Kerry's war record?

This excerpt from the SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER reports how Bush demonstrated his integrity, while at the same time slamming him by using words with negative connotations such as "unsubstantiated" and "unproven" when describing the groups charges. In fact, there was a great deal of substantiation of the charges against Kerry's war record.

This is what the Liberal Seattle paper had to say:

Bush did not hesitate when asked about the central charge issued by the Swift Boat veterans' group that has leveled unsubstantiated attacks against Kerry's record in Vietnam. "I think Senator Kerry should be proud of his record," Bush told The (New York) Times. "No, I don't think he lied." (Emphasis mine)

I won't lie. I wasn't completely sure about Bush up until then myself, but his honesty and integrity at that moment convinced me of his qualifications in addition to what I already knew of him.

Contrast that with the allegations that were made during the campaign against Bush by groups such as moveon.org, CBS news' Dan Rather, and John Kerry himself. Forged memos, personal attacks, not only on Bush himself but also on his family, and blatant lies. Kerry never denounced the very groups that were trying to help him. But then again, Kerry's voting record in the Senate was all the voters of America needed to convince them that he was not the best choice for president. Kerry consistently showed himself to have little or no integrity.

Even Don Imus, who was an ardent supporter of Kerry, and admitted freely that he voted for him, stated on many more than one occasion that Kerry was a "lying scumbag", but nevertheless, Imus voted for him.

If anyone is lying, it is the Bush haters. Liars always hate men of integrity.

21 comments:

tugboatcapn said...

Mark, Tony Snow said yesterday that the Republicans had been accused of manipulating Intelligence, but that the Democrats were guilty of manipulating Ignorance.

Cabe said...

Not just the media bashing Bush. Ninety five percent of my College Professors hate him. I wage a war on a daily basis, I don't have many supporters but I'm gaining ground. They compare Bush to Hitler frequently, but when I turned the tables and compared Hitler to Clinton, Carter, and others, they realized that their argument was highly flawed.

tugboatcapn said...

Here is something that I don't get.

On the domestic side, President Bush is the most Liberal President that we have ever had.

He has done more to push the things that Democrats claim to support than any Democrat ever has.

They should LOVE the guy.

No, I DO understand it, now that I think about it.

The Democrats don't actually WANT problems to be solved, by anyone.
They want to be able to point to the problem, scream about the problem, blame the problem on their political opponents, and then run for office on the platform of talking about the problem better than the other guy.

If anyone actually SOLVES a problem, then it hurts Democrats politically.

tugboatcapn said...

ELECTED Democrats, I should say.

MOST elected Democrats, I should say.

(Wouldn't want to generalize, you know...)

BRUISER said...

Tug- The Dems want no problems solved? Its irrational statements such as these that are forcing your culture of corruption to deal with their own convictions. Settledown I know your party is in a political nosedive and all the Ozycontin in Rush's cabinet won't delay the inevitable.

Sheila said...

I consider this to be the most widely argued nonarguement I've ever experienced in the US. Both bases are way too polarized and can't see the forest through the trees. But with each, you only add up to about 35% of the population. The rest of us some up a pretty large majority. We're the swing voters.


Not saying your wanting to argue Mark. I think you implying that if your not a supporter of Bush, YOur automatically NOT patriotic and therefore untrustworthy.

I'm not buying that this time. I support the Office of the President of the United States and have for over 30 years. That statement ought of be good enough for anyone. I love my country.

Off the subject....Of course no one needs to comment on this. A great analysis of the Libby indictment papers from John Dean. Former Counsil to President Nixon.

John Dean on LIbby Indictment

Mark said...

Sheila, RE: "I think you implying that if your not a supporter of Bush, YOur automatically NOT patriotic and therefore untrustworthy."

I am not implying that at all, and frankly, don't see how that could be inferred.

And for the record, I'm not comparing anyone with Hitler, either,I had remembered he once said something about "tell a lie often enough and the people would start to believe it", so I looked that quote up and found the others.

He was a madman, but he understood the advantages of influencing the masses. I think the negative publicity about Bush proves his theory.

Yesterday morning, I had MSNBC on Television as I got ready for work and I was amazed at how many times they referred to how badly Bush was doing in the polls, and how much a failure he is. I didn't count but I know at one point I heard statements on that theme at least 4 times in less than 5 minutes. That's when I realized why there are protests against Bush in South America, and protests all over America. The majority of people only know what they have heard and frequently, because of the way the news is packaged to them, arrive at flawed conclusions. So, although Hitler was a madman, when he said, "The broad masses of a population are more amenable to the appeal of rhetoric than to any other force.", he was right.

That is also why Liberals that resort to "bumper sticker" phrases such as "culture of corruption" when they are attempting to blast the President use those phrases. They can't think for themselves.

And still, none of them can tell us what Bush said that was an intentional lie. If he is as stupid as they say he is, wouldn't he have been caught in a blatant lie by now?

The "brilliant" Bill Clinton has been caught in several.

To use a Conservative "bumper sticker" phrase, Bush haters are "Stuck on stupid."

tugboatcapn said...

That's right, Bruiser. Hammer those poll numbers, boy...

What is it that President Bush is running for next election cycle, Exactly?

BRUISER said...

Well for those of your political party who are savvy there, steamboat, what I am refering to when siting poll numbers this years elections. The ones where Eric Masa former Naval Officer of the United States of America will be running for office in a Republican held seat in New York. The ones where Paul Hackett an Army Officer for the United States of America can run for a seat in Ohio, a Republican Stronghold, and while being smeared by the Republican Candidate there, did frankly , quite well with a small margin loss and is running in the 06 elections. The elections that will finally prove what the polls show in Pennsylvania going to John Casey a moderate yet progressive Democrat. Thats the progress of polls I see...a United States where Tim Kaine beats Jerry Kilgore for Governor of Virginia.

The Politics of Progess ...
Step Aside Let The Man Go Through.

Sheila said...

I get your point Mark and I still stand by mine.

I've actually turned off my cable. It was driving me crazy and the only way I could be sure of getting less propoganda was by not having the temptation of turning to the news programs.

I have seen the tit for tat on both MSNBC and FOX. They both really reve up the propoganda. It's no wonder why the general public is sooooo polarized.

I will point out an Americanism that we all forget at times thought. It was pointed out to me just the other day. A great majority of people in this country DON'T pay attention to any politics until it's time for election or their is something that directly affects them.

You have to remember those polls are an inflated picture of people who will most likely not vote in the next election.

tugboatcapn said...

Paul Hackett?

the guy who tried to run as a pro-war bosom buddy of President Bush?

He still lost, didn't he?

"The elections that will finally prove what the polls show in Pennsylvania going to John Casey a moderate yet progressive Democrat."

Moderate yet progressive?

That, my friend, means that he is running as a Republican in Democrat's clothing as well.

Slander and besmirch the candidates all you want...

The Ideaology is winning.

Mark said...

Sheila, I totally agree with that. Totally.

Sheila said...

Tug, Paul Hackett is running for Ohio Senator in the US Sentate now. Initial polls show an excitement for him.

He lost the state REP seat by the lowest numbers in the history of the state and district. It's going to be an interesting race.

tugboatcapn said...

Show me the Democrat who is running on a platform of "Tax the rich, and give to the poor, We must pull out of Iraq, George Bush lied, eliminate God from everything..." who is getting anywhere.

They have to hide behind terms like "Moderate" or "Progressive" or pretend to be Republicans to get anywhere at the Ballot box.

The Ideaology IS winning.

tugboatcapn said...

Even hillaty is shifting drastically to the right in her run up to the 2008 Presidential massacre.

tugboatcapn said...

Oops, I meant "Election Cycle..."

Sheila said...

Hey mark and Tug,

I thought you might like to see that the press has reported on something positive today. A sound act of proactive leadership.

Ethics refresher at the WH

tugboatcapn said...

Cool!

Sounds like the President is taking the Bull by the horns. (So to speak.)

I have always said that if there is corruption, or inapropriate behavior in our Government, on any level, that I want it dealt with.

(And I don't mean that we should try to make a deal with it, the way the Libs think we are supposed to "Deal" with everything...)

Erudite Redneck said...

One word, Mark:

Sheep.

--ER

Poison Pero said...

Why I support Bush?

1. I'm thrilled he got us involved in the Middle East, and didn't care which dictator had to fall to get us there.........Iraq is perfect because we now have our troops next door to every country there.

I've said all along, we need to be there, I wish we'd add troops, and put full carrier fleets in both the Eastern Meditteranean and Persian Gulf.

2. He's better than the choices we had in 2000 and 2004 --> (R)'s or (D)'s.

3. He's been able to increase the (R) majority in the House and Senate......Which never happens with an acting president.

4. He's put great judges on the bench (SCOTUS and lower courts).....I'm glad we're getting Alito instead of Miers, but even she would have been better than the pukes our past prez put up.

There are plenty of reasons........And he's not perfect, which is ok by me, because noone can be.

"Don't hate the good because he's not the perfect" (Hewitt)
---------------
Why do Liberals hate Bush?

Because they haven't been able to defeat him.

BRUISER said...

Welcome to his 2nd Term where Bush is defeated daily....