Lit.Org - a community for readers and writers Advanced Search
 




Average Rating
10

(2 votes)


RatingRated by
10JEANNIE45
10The Alienist

You must login to vote

George W Remains in Office


After three gruesome debates, a billion dollars for his campaign, and a very close race for Presidency, George W. Bush was re-elected into one of the most prestigious offices in the United States: President of the USA. Winning by a mere three million votes, President Bush took office for yet another four years with a lot to prove to the American people. But how did President Bush win yet another close victory?

I think the answer is simple- President Bush is a very simple man who any average person can relate to. His speech is the same thing- simple words and short answers which are understandable by a chimpanzee. The fact that George W. Bush can't properly use and manipulate the English language may be one of the smartest political ploys in the history of the United States, helping the lowest common denominator to identify with him.

Not many people would agree with the way the President had applied himself after the September 11th attacks, but many people had no clue what a new President would contribute to the political conflicts that the United States is involved in.

So now the question remains why Kerry lost the election. What did he lack? He didnít lack courage, because that was shown through his service in Vietnam. Certainly not will, because he showed that in Iowa. And he proved that he was more intelligent than Bush in the debates, so what was the reason that he lost?

John Kerry was not simple, like President Bush who had one message to send across, while John Kerry, on the other side of the spectrum, had a dozen points to get across. Bush ended too short without explaining himself; Kerry went on and on, until everyone forgot what he was talking about.

Thatís how Bush is still President today. He connected with the average common people, which is no problem, but didnít convince intellectuals in the country.

On Election Night of 2004, it started off with President Bush claiming more states than the senator from Massachusetts. Soon enough, it came down to four states. By mid-afternoon, Senator Kerry seceded from the Presidential race, giving the presidency to Bush.

Of course, all the democrats in the United States are disappointed in Kerryís decision, but it took an added weight off of the senator and his wife.


Iím sure that most democrats will also hope that the President wonít make any mistakes in his second term and hopefully heíll make the right choices and restore Americaís place in the world.

Good luck Bush.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is an article that I wrote last night (11/20/04) about the election and is going to be used for my school newspaper, The Roar.

I hope you enjoyed it.

-James


Related Items

Comments

The following comments are for "George W Remains in Office"
by Searching4Ever

Well-said.
The Republicans know that their collective IQ simply isn't that high: like their president, they're just not that smart. They're more manipulative than intellectual. You said it right when you said that Bush is their man primarily because they identify with his lack of intellect. That's why he's not really the president; he's the stand-in for his father, and now the bastard GHW Bush has a third term! This is really what it's come to: if Kerry had acted like an idiot, he would've won the election because most Americans are anti-intellectual. I've said it before and so have many other people.

Americans are the intellectual white trash of the earth.

( Posted by: The Alienist [Member] On: November 23, 2004 )

OH MY!
Such things you say! It is time to rise above these ridiculous finger pointing childish responses. Speaking the way you do adds to the ignorance of the american people. I am not a republican nor am I a democrat, because of comments such as those above. I believe in the goodness of all people, and all people should begin pointing out the good things they see in others. The government will always be THE GOVERNMENT, Lets just be happy we are free to make a choice.
-Lisa

( Posted by: scryer [Member] On: November 23, 2004 )

Wagh.
What I said was the truth, or there wouldn't be 100,000 dead Iraqis, plus the millions who died of starvation, mostly children, during the embargo against Iraq before this war.

If Americans can't control their government or their military - and they don't control either one - they're exactly what I said they are.

We've been beating up on innocent Third World people for stuff we don't need for a very long time, and the average American has benefitted in no way from this, only the rich.

We now have over 9,000 kids come home screwed up physically and mentally from this, and of course nearly two thousand dead. It's all for nothing.

But George Bush and his dad and their friends are becoming very powerful and rich, because most Americans just can't see through to why the Republicans manipulated them into putting two rich oilmen in the White House.

I'm pretty much done with trying to help wake up the masses in America. We're just going to have to tear this nation in half with another civil war, and this time, sociopolitical IQ is going to be the dividing line, not blue or grey.

( Posted by: The Alienist [Member] On: November 24, 2004 )

It is always for blood
In the end war is desigined for you got death. Unfortunately it is something humanity has not outgrown yet, and verbally attacking the president of the united states is not going to change that fact...the only way to change it is to show you have risen above it. Instead of insensitve statements aimed at belittling others, we should try to strengthen our society through understanding. I am sure that the families who lost people in the 9/ll tragedy feel less compassionate toward third world countries at the moment. Inflamitory comments only weaken the tie that binds...tearing down is different than building up.
I do respect your view, I just don't agree with it. You are however a very powerful writer, try to use your skills more constructively, as writers we have to show more compassion for everyone, and not use personal attacks to do so.

-Lisa

( Posted by: scryer [Member] On: November 24, 2004 )

Thanks for the Compliments
Hey guys. Thanks for the comments. I'm not going to argue with anyone, because with me posting this on the site, it was my last intention to start a fight and join in on debates. My article was accepted into the school paper and will be published sometime in December after editing and what not for the paper.

I do have to say, however, that Bush IS a simple man. Maybe I shouldn't have put that he was understandable by a chimp, but I think that's the truth. Sorry for any conflicts with my writing.

-Jam

( Posted by: Searching4Ever [Member] On: November 24, 2004 )

Blah blah blah
Folks, let's stop beating ourselves up over the elction, okay? If Keryy had won, we would have swallowed that bitter pill and gone on with our lives because it's America and he won. We did it both times the immoral Clinton was voted in. Bush won, what's done is done, and whether you like it or not, he's still president. SO WHAT?! Give him the respect he deserves, he's still the president, YOUR LEADER. And Mike Savage brought up something that really rings true; the election is like a horse race. When the second horse loses by a nose, he still lost! He didn't win because he was close. First place is still first place, deal with it and stop complaining. When something new comes up, then talk about it. The election is OVER! Why talk about it now? He won fair and square. Don't get your panties in a ruffle, there will be another chance at taking the White House. Until then, find something else to complain about.

( Posted by: TheGreatSage [Member] On: November 24, 2004 )

great Sage
Hmmm,

Respect bush deserves??? Clinton Immoral??

What does Bush deserve respect for exactly? The mismanagement of our budget? Destroying environmental laws? Alienating our allies? Using 911 for his own political gain? Rounding up over 5000 people following 9-11 as a public relations stunt---none of which have ever been convicted of anything.

Destroying the USDA---ya know the people you look over the quality of your meat. Underfunding the IRS so that the only people they can audit are the poor.

How about gestapo-ing governmental employees who've blown the whistle, such as the NY ombudsman who said Whitman lied when she told NY-ers it was safe to go back into manhattan even though the asbestos levels were the highest ever recorded.(Over time, as many people may very well die from this than the actual attack itself.) She broke into Martin's office, stole his files and padlocked his door.

Oh yes, Bush invaded Iraq by lying to the american people about Saddam's terrorist connections, paid Chalibi millions of dollars to fabricate evidence of WMD programs, and ignored his own people who told him that it would be a mistake to invade Iraq.

Sure, Clinton cheated on his wife, but by an real moral standard, Bush makes him look like an angel. At least the women Clinton screwed, were consenting...Can bush say that?

Pythagoras

( Posted by: Pythagoras [Member] On: November 25, 2004 )

I tell the truth.
What I said is absolutely true, whether people feel offended by it or not.

George W. Bush is murdering your sons and daughters, America, and they're dying and coming home screwed up for ABSOLUTELY NOTHING.

( Posted by: The Alienist [Member] On: November 25, 2004 )

dang dems!
Why do you *hate* so much? I mean, come on! Republicans didn't hate Clinton, we just disliked him. Everything you listed Pythagoras are all regurgitated talking points, lies, and half truths. I'll bring up one lie you listed P, Saddam did have terrorists connections, for example: he paid the families of suicide bombers 25 grand, and he trained terrorists. This isn't terrorists related? This is all fact!!!!

Don't respect the president because you agree with him, respect him because he is your president. Check your facts Dems.

( Posted by: TheGreatSage [Member] On: November 25, 2004 )

Why?
Why on earth would you respect someone just because of his position? That makes no sense -- it's one of those absurdities that democracies were intended to avoid (check out the words of Paine, Lincoln, and Jefferson for context).

( Posted by: Viper9 [Member] On: November 25, 2004 )

Respect
Confucius has a great saying -- that there are three levels of respect. There is the level of respect which should be accorded to all human beings, the elevated level of esteem granted to those who prove themselves competent and worthy through their actions and the complete lack of respect which is accrued through mindless behaviour.

( Posted by: hazelfaern [Member] On: November 25, 2004 )

Respect
Respect is to be earned through virtuous action, through behaviour. You do not deserve respect because of your position or class or job or the mere fact of your existence. If you want it, earn it. You can have the most important job in the world, and if you don't use that position to achieve good in the world, you don't deserve respect.

But you'll get from those who worship position, and those to whom you pander. Sadly.

And by "you," I don't mean "you as in Claire"!

( Posted by: Viper9 [Member] On: November 25, 2004 )

Dems search 4 ever
are you saying that 60 million American voters who likely own property and pay their taxes and work for a living are not intelligent?(Shame on you alienist for associating your liberal elite with our white trash roots. If your side had been smart by half as much, they would have voted for Bush too.) Are you saying that sixty million Americans are too smart for the other 60 million?
Get a grip.The dirty little secret on the arts and croissant side is the Pres. cut their funding and they have to go find a real job instead of sucking on the public tit. WAWAWAWAAAA. Get over it. Jeb Bush will get elected next time out. Ah! A true dynasty is born. Kiss my rebel white trash ###.

( Posted by: williamhill [Member] On: November 25, 2004 )

searching 4 feedback


Your honest opinion is well-expressed, and if reaction here is any indication, may well be the most-discussed item in your upcoming school newspaper.
As for my two cents: Yes, Saddam did support some terrorists but we were willing to look the other way and continue to support him so long as he served our purposes by supressing Iranian influence in the region. Iraqi freedom was not an issue until he became an unreliable ally. His status as tyrant, thug, terrorist supporter and user of chemical weapons has been known to and accepted by our government since the early 1980's.

What is the status of Kuwaiti freedom we fought for in Gulf War One? Monarchy restored, democratic reforms forgotten.

Accept and embrace the controversy that will inevitably follow expressions of opinions such as you have offered. It shows you're being read, and noticed.

( Posted by: drsoos [Member] On: November 25, 2004 )

clarification re Claire
I just wanted to clarify that I was NOT attacking Claire. My comments were directed toward Shrub, in particular. Claire is cool to me (and really, coolness to me is what matters in this world of ours, right? Right?)

"And thus he became overwhelmed by scornful silence . . ."

( Posted by: Viper9 [Member] On: November 25, 2004 )

great Sage
Ummm...Great Sage...you are misusing my words. I didn't say that saddam had no connections to terrorists, I said that bush lied about Saddam's connections to terrorists.

Bush and his administration has said that Saddam's links to al Queda are "bulletproof," and that Iraq is the geographical base for terrorism. Both of which are either lies or misrepresentations of fact. The 10/04 CIA report has said that they could find to evidence that saddam was linked to islamic terrorists and the 9/11 commission has said that saddam had no operational relationship with al queda.

As for my other points being democratic talking points, to that I say, I wish they were. They would have done well to have focused on those things.

Did not ashcroft falsely round up 5000 americans for public relations reasons? Has bush not cut the funding to the EPA, USDA, IRS, and OSHA? Did Whittman not gestapo Martin and expose hundreds of thousands of americans to unsafe conditions for political purposes? Didn't bush pay chalibi (a discredited world figure) millions of your tax money to fabricate evidence?

Where are the errors in my comments?

This is why I say Bush doesn't deserve respect. In fact, he should have been impeached.

Pythagoras

( Posted by: Pythagoras [Member] On: November 26, 2004 )

WilliamHill
I am not saying that the other 60 million people that voted for Bush are stupid in their entirely. I'm just saying that they were stupid for voting for Bush, that's all. I'm not saying you're stupid in anyway, but to believe that Bush is god-like, has made no mistake is absurd.

He's sent some one-hundred-thirty-thousand kids to war for what reason? To disarm Iraq, which we did. What else did we accomplish? We accomplished in the killing of over three thousand innocent people, Americans and Iraqis alike.

Bush is a terrible leader and I'm just devistated that he has been reelected for office, and like someone else said, he should've been impeached.

And who would fight a war that has no meaning? If the draft is renewed, hell, I'll go to jail before I serve in a war that's run by a lunitic that's finishing his father's work that has no purpose.

-Jam

( Posted by: Searching4Ever [Member] On: November 26, 2004 )

what?
Okay, so if you didn't say that Saddam had no connections, then what does, "Bush invaded Iraq by lying to the American people about Saddam's terrorists connections," mean anyway? Just because he isn't have a cup of tea with Osama every wednesday doesn't mean he isn't supporting and funding terrorism. We had here a young Hitler in the making, we snuffed him out. What exactly does he have to do before he is deemed a threat by you people? Does he have to be parading bombs through the street like the Soviets? If you're a police officer and you know some THUG who doesn't like you is going to rape and murder your wife but you don't know where and when, and you can't arrest him, are you supposed to sit and twiddle your thumbs or are you going to take some action and do whatever you can to save your family? You tell me, that's a moral dilemna that only you can answer personally.

And what is with this impeachment crap that you democrats keep on throwing? You've fired all the bullets so now your throwing the gun. Just because he doesn't agree with you, you're crying impeachment.

Concerning respect, W has been voted in by 51% percent of the American people, so he should be respected because he is the candidate that the people chose. Did you know he was the first president since Reagan to recieve over fifty percent of the vote? He should be respected because the people want him to be our president and not that stiff, couldn't make a clear decision if my life depended on it, but did I mention I was in Vietnam? FOOL, Kerry.

( Posted by: TheGreatSage [Member] On: November 26, 2004 )

Responses.

"Don't respect the president because you agree with him, respect him because he is your president. Check your facts Dems."

Not good enough, and the first election was stolen. There's also evidence there was interference in this one, which is being investigated. If he DID get elected the second time, the first time's still a fraud and he kept what he stole through fearmongery and those idiotic one-issue voters who were afraid of gay marriage... just like those who resisted Black citizenship were warned repeatedly that Black men would marry and rape their daughters.

Republinazi insanity.

And as for associating liberal elite with right-wing white trash... they're the same roots, largely.

The Dems and Republicans work for the same people, the corporate masters. They're both false.

( Posted by: The Alienist [Member] On: November 27, 2004 )

wait just a minute
What did I say about checking your facts? First of all, your right when it comes to tampering with the election . . . when it comes to the democrats. You probably don't know this, but here in Colorado, there were over twenty-thousand democratic votes already in the voting machine, and that's not including the pre-election votes. Concerning the first elction, there were five-million absentee ballots from soldiers that were counted in New York and California, and everyone knows that the military is full of Republicans. When it comes to Florida, if you're too stupid to put a needle all the way through a piece of paper, then you shouldn't vote. It's not that hard. Then the democrats make a big fuss over Florida, something only liberals would do because they just love to protest. The conservatives just shrugged their shoulders when JFK stole the White House. We would have won if the dead weren't voting democratic. Yet Nixon didn't fight it because he didn't want to tear the nation to pieces, like what you liberals did in 2000. You are such sore losers. Your hobbies are accusing conservatives of various conspiracies and handcuffing yourselves to things to get things changed. Apparently that't the only way you know how to get things done, by complaining and throwing temper tantrums like spoiled five year olds. When it comes to resisting black citizenship, it was the democratic Governor George Wallace who blocked the doors to that college in Alabama with his own body to prevent blacks from entering. It was republicans who after the Civil War wanted to give black families forty acres of land and a mule and democrats fought that tooth and nail. It was the democrats who suceeded from the Union because they wanted to keep slavery. It was a republican president who down south and back handed you so hard we knocked you into a coma. It's democrats who tell these bald-faced lies that it was the Republican party who wanted to keep segregation when it was in fact the doing of the democrats. Then there's the whole issue with the right being richer when on average the democrats in the senate and the house are far richer than the Republicans. If there was something funky going down with the elections that would have in any way benefited the president then you bet that Michael "I'm on my third desert" Moore would have shouted it from the roof tops for he had a camera man watching polling booths all around America. It was the democratic party illegally heckling voters at voting locations to vote Kerry. They were right in our faces when they should have been hundreds of feet away from the voting location according to law.

You have absolutely NOTHING on the Republican party except for lies and half truths. You lost get over it, and the more liberal you become the less likely it will be that you will take the White House. America and the world are moving to the right, it's time to move on as well.

( Posted by: TheGreatSage [Member] On: November 27, 2004 )

How exciting for you
How exciting for you, a fourteen year old boy, to incite such a response in so many people. How very cool is that?

I also have to commend you for trying to offer a balance and non-combative, party-bashing article. Kudos to you and not to others much older than yourself who may struggle with this.

I also agree with your take on why Bush won and Kerry lost. How refreshing for it to be something as simple as their ablity to communicate on a level most people understand.

Again, if you are truly 14 years old, you write very smoothly and present your information in a well-thought out, comprehensive manner.

Yes, I have read a lot of writing by kids your age. You know what I'm talking about - you are there to see it first hand.

Keep up the good work.

Felicia

( Posted by: feliciastone [Member] On: February 7, 2005 )





Add Your Comment

You Must be a member to post comments and ratings. If you are NOT already a member, signup now it only takes a few seconds!

All Fields are required

Commenting Guidelines:
  • All comments must be about the writing. Non-related comments will be deleted.
  • Flaming, derogatory or messages attacking other members well be deleted.
  • Adult/Sexual comments or messages will be deleted.
  • All subjects MUST be PG. No cursing in subjects.
  • All comments must follow the sites posting guidelines.
The purpose of commenting on Lit.Org is to help writers improve their writing. Please post constructive feedback to help the author improve their work.


Username:
Password:
Subject:
Comment:





Login:
Password: