Hello

Recently their has been a rash of protest goion in the nation and abroad...My debate to you is, Should bush listen to the world Bush is only obligated to listen to the People of the USA



*Edited for speach clairification (spell check dosent work for webtv) *

I think they should do a comprehensive, scientific poll of the American people (not just 1500, or 3000 or such) they should poll at LEAST 1 million people (considering the population of America is close to 300 million, a few thousand is hardly representative of the opinion of ALL of America)

what would happen if you poled say, 150 million voting age Americans? is it possible that the majority might just say NO to war? I know it would take a while to poll 150 million, but it would really be worth it, as it would be a better example of what Americans are thinking.

Frankly, I'd say he's not listening to either the world OR the people in the U.S.

While it may not be cogent to merely do what protesters want, and change your position because of them, the fact that we are witnessing the largest anti-war movement in history, before the war has begun, should be an warning that gives cause for serious thought - if not ideologically, then at the very least in terms of thinking about re-election.

The truth is, I imagine, that Bush may have dismissed the protests out of hand, but I would bet that there is some very serious thought going on behind the scenes, thoughts about what kind of propoganda to distribute, and what kind of spin to give the public.

And just in case anyone thinks I'm being blanket partisan with this, I should say that I believe any administration would be thinking along the same lines...

Yes we should be listening to the protests of the people around the world. Isn't part of the solution to 9-11 that of self-analysis. While terrorist attacks are not acceptable at any time, have we done something that has legitimately created anti-americanism around the globe or in certain parts of it?

And aren't we opening up future problems if our war on terrorism triggers an extremely heightened wave of anti-Americanism?

Bush should be listening to what people outside the United States have to say. Going to war would not just effect the people in the United States (and its few allies) and Iraq. It would effect the entire world economically. Can this area of the world support a war? The people living in it do not think so. The Arab community generally feels this way from what I saw from the speeches in the UN. Why are we not listening to them?

Statistically speaking, a million would be serious overkill. If the sample is truly random - and I admit that many samples are not - the margin of error for even a few thousand would be infinitesimal. A skewed sample of a million could well be less informative than a scientifically valid sample of ten thousand.

Bush should not be listening to polls. Of course, he should listen to all advice and guidance, but at the end of the day, he should act how he thinks best.

I voted for Bush. and I think he's dead wrong on this Iraq mess. But he was voted in, so THAT poll has already been done. If we want to lead by polls, get rid of the executive branch of government and replace it with www.vote.com.

Just my 2 cents...

The president should not act based solely on polls, but nor should he ignore polls entirely. Leadership is a delicate balance between principle (past), representing one's constituency (present) and thinking ahead (future). Like a tripod, remove any of these supports and the whole thing falls over. Polls are an important part of the "present" equation, and should therefore be given serious consideration.

Bush (and all future prezs) shouldn't make a decison based on polls but should take into consideration where the country stands on a certain issue

Like to say if 90% of Americans say Stem Cell Research should be discontinued, he will know how the country stands on the issue of Stem Cell Research & he couls use that knowledge as a means to try & persuade Americans why he thinks it should continue

How would he know how 90% of the country feels about stem cell research, if not through polling?

How can we take any of these people serious ? While they have the right to protest, they don't have any right to disrupt anyone else's life. It's impossible to take any of them serious when they vomit on the flag because, " the war makes us sick". This country was founded on freedom, and I respect others freedom of speech and opinion, but when they go to such extremes, I view them as nothing more than radicals. Where were they when the World Trade Center was attacked ?? How many innocent (not all American) lives were lost there ? Why weren't they vomiting then ??? It certainly made me sick. What makes me even sicker is the same protesters won't hesitate to hide behind the same great flag they're vomiting on for protection when their freedom of speech is threatened. It's time to back our country.

Before you can "take the country back" you'd better have an clearer idea who has it.

I can assure you that a raggedy group of radical protestors do not.

Right. Who's gonna take theseViolent Protesters seriously

I mean, who would take take seriously someone who would smash a McDonalds window, trash Rumsfeld's property in New Mexico, etc?

I thought we Americans were more mature than that

I read that FOX article, and it only alludes to several hundred violent protestors. Now, you're right, these people should be ignored. But how much of the protests to do these people really represent? If these protests are covering the country (and the world) in every city then I would think that there at least THOUSANDS of people involved and only the disruptive minority is being recognized.



How do you know they weren't protesting, or holding a vigil, or doing something? My sister has protested this war, but she also donated blood to be sent to NY immediately after 9/11.

I am SO sick of these fools protesting! They're always saying this crap about "not in our name". Fine, we'll wage war in the name of the United States of America, which these anti-american FREAKS obviously do not want to be a part of!

CTE, name-calling doesn't qualify as constructive debate.

I was at 4 major (+100,000) protests, about 20 minor protest and several mouthly protest meetings over the course of the past year or so, and I for one never "vomitted on the flag," nor did I see anyone do so. In fact, the only thing I saw being held more than the American flag was "No war in Iraq" signs. In fact, I at several I was carrying one myself for several of them. At every protest I have been to there has been no violance or flag-burning (or vomitting.) There have been very few violent protests anywhere, and if you think violent protestors make up the majority of them you need to get informed. If the protesters really wanted violance, cities would be in flames now.


Some of you people have serious misconceptions are protestors and protesting. You are ignorant and should not be posting in a topic you know absolutly nothing about. Your rediculous ad hominems against people you have never met nor truly know anything about are a waste of bandwidth. You do not know if these people are anti-American, because you've never spoken to them. I have been involved with dissent groups for years and years and years, and I know for a fact that those who truly do not like the country of America or it's people leave. If they love the country but hate the government, they stay. If you can't tell the difference between your government and your country then you're a fascist, and I doubt that's what you are, so wise up. Your baseless accusations reflect badly upon you and certainly don't make a serious point. Please, stop wasting our time and America's Debate's bandwidth with your far-right drivel.

Rattlesnake, DO NOT speak on behalf of America's Debate.

ALL people are welcome here to share their views if they are within our Rules and Guidelines.

Your rant against ad hominem attacks was itself an ad hominem attack. Pot meet kettle.

Telling people not to discuss something because they never met the people involved is completely off base. That would mean none of us should discuss the war in Iraq unless we are soldiers or policy makers. Nor we should not discuss education issues if we are not a teacher or student. (See where I'm going with this?)

You can express your passion without being so snide and insulting.

So if I went around posting about how everyone who was conservative were Nazis and wanted to kill all the black people, without using any proof to back up my accusations, it would be all right, and would no one be justified in calling be ignorant? How about if I said that soldiers were murders and I hoped they died? Hell, even if you thought that was true, it would still be "rude," wouldn't it?


These people, who are personally insulting me, my family and my friends, know nothing about these protesters. They have not only not met these people, they have not listened to their views or even done anything besides see them on the news. If you're going to let them flame me, then don't expect them not to flame them back. This is not the first time I've heard this kind of drivel, on this forum or others, and it's starting to grate on me. I have lots of respect for people who are willing to deate, but if they're just going to fling baseless acussations then they don't deserve my respect.

All I said was DO NOT speak on behalf of this forum. If you felt they were "inflaming" you, you should have reported the post rather than reply.

Since you took it off topic, I am closing this.

Rules and Guidelines