George W. Bush Joins Facebook

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Guide community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.

liquidchild

Distinguished
Apr 1, 2010
79
0
18,580
0
Regulas, you do realize that Fascist and socialists are the farthest points on the political spectrum? That would be like a gay man screaming anti-gay talk and putting laws in affect that take human rights away from the gay community....wait...oh ya gay republicans are coming out of the woodwork. I now understand how you dolts can think such things..your own party is full of Hypocrisy, so you assume others are as well.
 

tokenz

Distinguished
Mar 11, 2006
206
0
18,830
0
[citation][nom]regulas[/nom]Idiot, Bush was and will go down as a much better president than the Marxist hack we have in there now. This was on the news and was said not to be from him. Bush would be the only reason I would want to join Facebook, NOT.[/citation]

Wasnt george bush voted the worst president ever already? And of course he wont update it. No one wants to read the rambling mess that comes out of his mouth (and im not talking policy's, I cant understand anything he says. Its like listening to someone that english is their second or third language). Obama might not be much better, but at least you can tell he graduated high school.
 

ta152h

Distinguished
Apr 1, 2009
297
0
18,930
0
[citation][nom]regulas[/nom]Obama is a Socialist wannabe along with all the other liberal hacks in DCFact: The Nazi party were Socialists and liberal environmentalists too.[/citation]

Please don't discredit those of us who dislike Obama and the left wing liberals for rational reasons, with your incessant stupidity.

Besides, if you like George W. Bush, you should love Obama. Everyone thought he was the worst president ever, but now there's some debate going on about it.
 

ta152h

Distinguished
Apr 1, 2009
297
0
18,930
0
[citation][nom]killerclick[/nom]Nazis were no more socialist than the Democratic Republic of Korea is democratic.And the Nazis are hated not because they were left or right wing or conservative or liberal, rather because of their militarism, nationalism, racism and xenophobia, that caused them to start illegal wars and prosecute minorities. Sound familiar?[/citation]

They weren't Xenophobic, and Prussians were militaristic before the NAZI party took over.

What was an illegal war back then? What was a legal one? The United States was legal in attacking Spain because our ship blew up? Actually, the United States broke a lot of international laws before we entered WW II. The reason the Germans attacked was because an area 99% German was declared a free state, contradicting the "virtues" of the Treaty of Versailles, and they wanted it back.

I'm not implying they would have stopped there, mind you, as their occupation of Czech was a move that was not related to consolidating German areas under German, and had already happened.
 

ravewulf

Distinguished
Oct 20, 2008
394
0
18,930
0
[citation][nom]regulas[/nom]Obama is a Socialist wannabe along with all the other liberal hacks in DCFact: The Nazi party were Socialists and liberal environmentalists too.[/citation]
*Sigh* I hate it when people comment on things they don't know anything about. Take a look at these:

http://www.politicalcompass.org/analysis2
http://www.politicalcompass.org/usprimaries2008

On the first page, read the definitions and look at the relative positions of Stalin, Hitler, and Gandhi (for base references and comparison).

Notice all of the guys who are considered the worst of the worst are always towards the authoritarian/fascism end.

Now look where Bush is on the lower part of that page. Compare that to positions of politicians in the 2008 primary on the second link I gave.

Personally I am in the moderate libertarian left quadrant (a little bit to the right and a little more libertarian than Gandhi).
 

ta152h

Distinguished
Apr 1, 2009
297
0
18,930
0
[citation][nom]ltgrunt[/nom]Does G.W. even know about this? As in, is this something his publicist dreamed up, or is it just something that a completely unrelated fan did? If it's an official thing then I guess that's neat in some small way, but if it's just a fan page made by some random nobody, then who cares?On the politics side, pretty much everyone who's griping about "Socialism" this and "Marxist" that has absolutely no idea what those terms mean or what those things really are. For instance, Regulas is mistakenly assuming that just because the Nazis used the word Socialist in their title (National Socialist Party) that they actually were Socialist; they were not Socialist, and they were in fact a flavor of Fascist, which is on the far-Right side of the political spectrum. Assuming that the title is in any way accurate and not just an attempt to garner attention when Socialism was popular among growing dissent movements in Europe is a frequently made mistake.Also, I am invoking Godwin's Law - you lose "teh Internets" for having such a poorly formed argument that you had to rely on Nazis to try to make a point, Regulas.[/citation]

You know less than he does. Socialism is an economic system. Don't confuse it with a political one. They aren't the same thing.

Germany was not a purely capitalistic state, as the government had a lot of influence and control. It was far more efficient than any economic system the "democratic" countries had, but, obviously, prone to abuse. Under a great leader, like Bismarck (and, nominally, Wilhelm), totalitarianism is the best and most efficient form of government. Under an aggressive leader, it's potentially a disaster, especially with a country that was wrong, and had a strong militaristic tradition.
 

tommysch

Distinguished
Sep 6, 2008
648
0
18,930
0
[citation][nom]regulas[/nom]Obama is a Socialist wannabe along with all the other liberal hacks in DCFact: The Nazi party were Socialists and liberal environmentalists too.[/citation]

You just failed...
 

blurr91

Distinguished
Jan 9, 2004
171
0
18,630
0
[citation][nom]TA152H[/nom]You know less than he does. Socialism is an economic system. Don't confuse it with a political one. They aren't the same thing. Germany was not a purely capitalistic state, as the government had a lot of influence and control. It was far more efficient than any economic system the "democratic" countries had, but, obviously, prone to abuse. Under a great leader, like Bismarck (and, nominally, Wilhelm), totalitarianism is the best and most efficient form of government. Under an aggressive leader, it's potentially a disaster, especially with a country that was wrong, and had a strong militaristic tradition.[/citation]

Efficient doesn't mean "good" for the people. Our government was designed to be very inefficient to protect our freedom. An efficient government can declare a policy without debate, implement it, and see results tomorrow. The problem is people have little rights under that government.

We like our inefficiency. We know our government is inefficient. That's why government should stay out of our lives as much as possible. Government is a necessary evil and should be kept as small as possible.
 

ravewulf

Distinguished
Oct 20, 2008
394
0
18,930
0
[citation][nom]blurr91[/nom]Efficient doesn't mean "good" for the people. Our government was designed to be very inefficient to protect our freedom. An efficient government can declare a policy without debate, implement it, and see results tomorrow. The problem is people have little rights under that government.We like our inefficiency. We know our government is inefficient. That's why government should stay out of our lives as much as possible. Government is a necessary evil and should be kept as small as possible.[/citation]
I agree with part of this. The government should for the most part stay out of people's lives (violent crimes, theft, etc being exceptions), but they should prevent (aka regulate) corperations from abusing people (workers and customers) and resources (evironmental ie. BP oil spill, economic ie. the big banks, etc).

That's my rather simplified views. I'm not going to go on a huge rant about stuff, just want to keep it simple and basic.
 

killerclick

Distinguished
Jan 13, 2010
459
0
18,930
0
[citation][nom]ravewulf[/nom]I agree with part of this. The government should for the most part stay out of people's lives[/citation]

So you're pro choice, pro gay marriage and pro flag burning? Or does government staying out of people's lives just apply to gun ownership?
 

ravewulf

Distinguished
Oct 20, 2008
394
0
18,930
0
[citation][nom]killerclick[/nom]So you're pro choice, pro gay marriage and pro flag burning? Or does government staying out of people's lives just apply to gun ownership?[/citation]
Pro choice: yes

Pro gay: Lol. Well I am gay, so yes

Pro flag burning: Personally I don't agree with it, but I see no real reason to prohibit it (ie it's not actually causing harm to anyone or anyone's property other than the person who got the flag for that purpose).

Gun ownership: This one is a tricky subject no matter what side you are on. Primarily I feel that the government should make sure those who want to own a gun are mentally stable (no psycho killers, please) and haven't committed violent crimes in the past. There are other conditions such as not allowing guns near public places where there are children (ie schools, amusement parks, etc). Having a gun for recreation/self protection is perfectly fine with me. For those who are paranoid about the government: do you really think you would stand a chance against the military or a swat team if they actually were after you? I mean, come on. One guy vs a swat team or even a sniper? Unrealistic to the extreme.
 

ravewulf

Distinguished
Oct 20, 2008
394
0
18,930
0
[citation][nom]killerclick[/nom]So you're a left-leaning liberal who hates Obama and likes Bush? That's a new one...[/citation]
Is that directed at me? You didn't put in who you were replying to.

If yes: I am a left leaning liberal who HATED Bush, and is frustrated/disappointed with Obama. He promised change, he gave nice speaches, but he didn't deliver. Watered down and compromised everything before the real discussions even started. = Caving in to every critism from the right and more often than not ignoring the left and the people who elected him. He's more center-right than anything.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
I Streaming Video & TVs 0
M Streaming Video & TVs 5
I Streaming Video & TVs 0
G Streaming Video & TVs 0
Marshall Honorof Streaming Video & TVs 8
G Streaming Video & TVs 0
G Streaming Video & TVs 10
exfileme Streaming Video & TVs 15
G Streaming Video & TVs 36
exfileme Streaming Video & TVs 1
exfileme Streaming Video & TVs 17
exfileme Streaming Video & TVs 21
JMcEntegart Streaming Video & TVs 17
G Streaming Video & TVs 14
JMcEntegart Streaming Video & TVs 58
exfileme Streaming Video & TVs 9
JMcEntegart Streaming Video & TVs 35
Marcus Yam Streaming Video & TVs 50
exfileme Streaming Video & TVs 53
JMcEntegart Streaming Video & TVs 79

ASK THE COMMUNITY