Round 1: Mobster101 Vs. Cspace2
#2
Posted 09 May 2005 - 07:39 PM
I believe that Bush is a god US president. He is, honest, hard fighting, and he has experience. His father was a president and his brother is a sGovernor. He has the know-how and the history to lead our country. Now, if you look at his presidency (sp?) and say he has destroyed the economy and brought us into a war. But, the economy wasn't that good before hand. And, in this "war" we have ended main-stream terrorism and defeated one of the biggest terrorists in the world. And the president was re-elected which shows me MOST of America thinks he is a good president and some say that you can't disagree with the masses.. (+3)
I believe the world feels safer with Bush as president and I belief he is a great president and that is my first post in this debate as well as my feelings.
Sincerely,
Mobster101
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
** Total: +4 **
This post has been edited by Baseballl: 09 May 2005 - 08:05 PM
#3
Posted 10 May 2005 - 01:42 AM
That statement is completely wrong. Bush had entered office with the strongest economy in US History, and in less than two years, he sent every economic category down. He set an economic record for most bankruptcies in a twelve month period. He broke the record for biggest economic deficit in world history. He was elected for his first term by losing the elections by half a million votes. (+3)
http://www.pollingre...com/BushJob.htm Look at this website. Tell me that this president with a 47% job approval rating shows that most of America thinks he is a good President. (+2)
What?
I'll leave my other arguments for later.
Thanks,
Cspace
My sources: http://www.badbadbush.com/ (+5)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
** Total: +11 **
This post has been edited by Baseballl: 10 May 2005 - 07:03 PM

#4
Posted 10 May 2005 - 03:16 PM
Now, my statement about history was that he has a Governor brother, a 2-term president Father, and he himself has been a great leader in other areas. So, his FAMILY history shows he has great leaders behind him. (+2)
And, it is not good to use a site called "badbadbush.com" because, if someone doesn't like someone then they cannot have a un-biased opinion with a site named like that. Lets say I don't like leftyy (lets just say) I'm not going to tell everyone he is a great guy and owns the forums. My feelings about him hide my good judgment. So a site that already has people who dislike bush IS NOT a good source for real, non biased information.
Now, is it possible to not like someone and still have a good opinion on them? Sure, but if I was going to post information on leftyy on a website and I wanted to give fair, un-biased information on him my site would not be, www.badbadleftyy.com. Do you get my point? The name implies they allready don't like him, therefor there opions must be biased. (+1)
I will admit that was a mistke on my part, and for that I opologize.
(off topic) good comeback c2!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
** Total: +3 **
This post has been edited by Baseballl: 10 May 2005 - 07:07 PM
#5
Posted 12 May 2005 - 01:20 AM
The poll was not an internet poll, as you mistakingly think. Many polling companies like this one, Gallup, periodically poll a few thousand American adults. Associated press just did one, which was the one that I spoke of. Please research your 'facts' before stating them for me to debate. (+2)
About the badbadbush thing... so you like bush, but you don't have a biased opinion about him?
I would like to tell you a bit about Bush being a 'flip-flopper'. As you may know, that's what Bush used as a major argument against Kerry in the previous year's elections. However, he himself could be labeled as a 'flip-flopper. (+1)
On 3/3/01 Bush pledged not to touch the Social Security budget. Later, on 2/6/02, Bush diverted 1.4 trillion Dollars in Social Security surplus to other causes. On 11/15/02, Bush said he would not give North Korea any options but to disarm. On 6/23/04, he clearly stated that they would be giving North Korea incentives to disarm. Here's the big one: on 5/29/03, he clearly states that the US has found WMD's. You may remember the whole UN meeting with Colin Powell ignoring his notes and starting to talk freely. Poo, the whole thing. On 2/7/04, he says they still haven't found WMD's. Great President, this guy. (+5)
Source: http://www.americanp...WJcP7H&b=118263 (+5)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
** Total: 13 **
This post has been edited by Baseballl: 12 May 2005 - 06:57 PM

#6
Posted 12 May 2005 - 02:08 AM

Actually, Fully automatic weapons cannot by any means be attained by the public. Now, semi-automatic weapons can be, but you must apply for a permit (legally) and a man (unless mentally insane) with a criminal record is not going to apply for a permit, he's going to go through a black market or somthign like that. Someone with a criminal record CANNOT attain a permit. And only a crazy person (or straw purchase) without a criminal record doesn't go and get one of these guns to comit crimes with. I mean it's not like criminals just wake up and say "I'm gonna rob a bank today" No, they are life-long criminals. (+3)
In my opinion your websites have not been conclusive with the facts, and therefor you Have not provided 100% factual Information gainst bush and have no facts against President Bush.
My sources
http://visualintensity.com/john-kerry/ (+5)
http://www.wrongdiag...irth/deaths.htm (+5)
http://www.gerberlife.com/ (+5)
I stayed up very late mounting that defense.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
** Total: 24 **
This post has been edited by Baseballl: 12 May 2005 - 07:10 PM