The Official George W Bush thread
Discuss:
1. His real "war" record...was he keeping the skys above texas safe from charlie or was he awol or something worse (sounds like desert but not as tasty). is it better to have not served in war and be pro war or is it better to be a war hero who has participated in a anti-war group?
2. his appearance (dang he does look like a monkey at times)
3. his chances at the nomination...probably pretty good at this time
4. his chances of winning re-election
5. his overall strengths and weaknesses
g
1. His real "war" record...was he keeping the skys above texas safe from charlie or was he awol or something worse (sounds like desert but not as tasty). is it better to have not served in war and be pro war or is it better to be a war hero who has participated in a anti-war group?
2. his appearance (dang he does look like a monkey at times)
3. his chances at the nomination...probably pretty good at this time
4. his chances of winning re-election
5. his overall strengths and weaknesses
g
Comments
Originally posted by ipodandimac
actually, i think he's starting to come aorund as a president. the one thing we have to understand is that he was hit with 9/11 not too far along in his presidency. honestly, i cant see al gore handling things any better than bush did. and all the security issues were problems with the FBI. granted, Iraq was a bit questionable, but we also had bad info from britain. i think bush is finally being able to focus on the economy and other things, and he's coming around. any president would have a tough time if he (or she) had to deal with a 9/11 type event. keep in mind that its easy to look back and point out mistakes, and you have to admit that we werent ready for it and that no president wouldve grounded airplanes for "terrorist reasons" prior to 9/11.
Please tell me you're not old enough to vote.
pre 9/11= bush is lame duck single term president almost a given
post 9/11 = bush almost assured re-election
till
post iraqi war when we question why we went to war, and question is we really want this man leading our country... (GW has always prided himself and sold himself as this honest man, this straight shooter...that has been tarnised quite a bit lately...maybe not so honest and his people are starting to play the "Play with Words" game about iraq and wmd and such...harkens back to way people didn't like the whole, "what is the definition of 'is'")
most likely the people will give bush a wash somewhat on the war issue, but it won't give him a boost either...so it really comes down to the economy and how people feel about it...if we are still minus 2.5 million jobs come november and the economy is stagnant, we have a democrat in office...if jobs increase so the loss is only 1.5 million over GW's first 4 years, then he likely keeps his job
time will tell
g
Originally posted by ipodandimac
actually, i think he's starting to come aorund as a president. the one thing we have to understand is that he was hit with 9/11 not too far along in his presidency. honestly, i cant see al gore handling things any better than bush did. and all the security issues were problems with the FBI. granted, Iraq was a bit questionable, but we also had bad info from britain. i think bush is finally being able to focus on the economy and other things, and he's coming around. any president would have a tough time if he (or she) had to deal with a 9/11 type event. keep in mind that its easy to look back and point out mistakes, and you have to admit that we werent ready for it and that no president wouldve grounded airplanes for "terrorist reasons" prior to 9/11.
I think any president that takes 4 years to 'start to come around' should never have run for president in the first place
Originally posted by torifile
Please tell me you're not old enough to vote.
actually i am old enough to vote. and i'm not saying that i will necessarily vote for bush, but i just think that people need to take a step back and look at things. and i know 4 years is a long time to "come around," but we had a terrorist attack in there, so, you know, that kinda doesnt help.
Iraq-- Pointless waste of vital resources that could have made America actually more secure, now shown to have been predicated on wild distortions of the facts.
Economy-- vast and growing deficit, brought on largely by Bush's tax and spending policies, looms as a real threat to the modest economic gains of late. Net job loss still huge. The plan? Make tax cuts permanent, spend more on defense, cut social spending.
Health care-- looks like stipulating that the government could not negotiate for lower drug prices from big pharm wasn't a terribly wise thing to do, since the prescription drug benefit's price has now risen from $400 billion to $520 billion.
Social policy-- gay marriage is bad, m'kay?
The vision thing-- back to the moon, and beyond! The bill will come will come due when I'm comfortably installed in a corporate consulting position!
So, all in all, I'd have to say.... uh.... no. Not comin' round.
Originally posted by thegelding
sadly...
*snip*
...time will tell
g
gelding hits his stride
Originally posted by thegelding
Discuss:
[...]
2. his appearance (dang he does look like a monkey at times)
[...]
g
I find that he looks like Sam the American Eagle from the old Muppets show. Look at George W.'s nose and eyes and you will see it too. Frightening.
Originally posted by ipodandimac
actually, i think he's starting to come aorund as a president. the one thing we have to understand is that he was hit with 9/11 not too far along in his presidency. honestly, i cant see al gore handling things any better than bush did. and all the security issues were problems with the FBI. granted, Iraq was a bit questionable, but we also had bad info from britain. i think bush is finally being able to focus on the economy and other things, and he's coming around. any president would have a tough time if he (or she) had to deal with a 9/11 type event. keep in mind that its easy to look back and point out mistakes, and you have to admit that we werent ready for it and that no president wouldve grounded airplanes for "terrorist reasons" prior to 9/11.
excerpt from the new official Bush Administration Press release 1-30-'04
Originally posted by pfflam
excerpt from the new official Bush Administration Press release 1-30-'04
Lay off. God forbid someone actually supports the President or even CONSIDERS doing so.
Originally posted by SDW2001
Lay off.
Do we have to 'lay off' for 8 years before we're allowed to criticize?
Originally posted by superkarate monkeydeathcar
i for one, think president bush should be laid off.
Is this where someone inserts a joke about our former president getting laid off?
I do have to say that no one else has grown into the presidency like Bush has, and I don't think at this point no one would be better at leading the nation.
Whom ever has the next coherent plan to put the freaking HMOs in their place, stop the export of American jobs to low contract bidders in India and China, stop the flow of illegals into the county (Hello! Giving them a semi-legal status ain't gonna stop em, more like putting out a Welcome mat...), and somehow get private colleges to bring tuition costs down gets my vote.
btw: Just because someone is a "war hero" doesn't mean they know what the freak they are talking about in regards to current policy. Yes they deserve the utmost respect for the sacrifices they and their comrades made for their country, but that doesn't mean that they have any large insight into a current ongoing war when they've been out of action for 20 some odd years. I have a cousin who is a SEAL, but when we debate, the fact that he has done immeasurable things in the name of his country and it's people, doesn't mean that he is right and I'm wrong.
btw: btw: Didn't Truman warn against the Military-Industrial complex? Have we bothered to heed this advice at all???
And it starts off with this list of seperlatives used against Bush . . . .
Bush's Desolate Imperium
By BERNARD CHAZELLE
Ah, the ease with which George W. Bush attracts superlatives! Helen Thomas calls him "the worst president ever." A kinder, gentler Jonathan Chait ranks him "among the worst presidents in US history." No such restraint from Paul Berman, who brands him "the worst president the US has ever had." Nobel Laureate George Akerlof rates his government as the "worst ever." Even Bushie du jour, Christopher Hitchens, calls the man "unusually incurious, abnormally unintelligent, amazingly inarticulate, fantastically uncultured, extraordinarily uneducated, and apparently quite proud of all these things." Only Fidel Castro, it would appear, has had kind words for our 43rd President. "Hopefully, he is not as stupid as he seems, nor as Mafia-like as his predecessors were."
Gosh it got me thinking about what would get people saying such things . .and I wondered what peple on these boards might think
Perhaps this should go in the official Bush thread?