Presedent? Yes...
President? No...
2006-06-13 08:51:08
·
answer #1
·
answered by ryansharich.com 5
·
2⤊
0⤋
Leaving the illegal invasions of two neutral countries aside for the moment, it is a FACT that the three largest annual budget deficits in US history were passed during this guys first 5 years in office. Now the only way I know to achieve a balance is to cut spending or increase revenues. He, and his "conservative" lackeys in Congress refuse to cut spending, voted more funds for a luxury item (war) and have no plan to increase revenues when so many of our skilled jobs are being outsourced overseas - except to allow the invasion of the workforce by 15 million illegal immigrants.
On top of this, the Bush White House has REDUCED safety standards for mercury emissions in the air and IGNORED/Denied the existence of global warming - and thereby the need to cut greenhouse gas emissions.
During his presidency, we have established a concentration camp, approved torture in interrogation, "outsourced" interrogation of prisoners to nations which readily use torture, and authorized warrentless wiretaps on US citizens when there is a ready made forum for obtaining such warrants (the special Terrorism court).
There is so much more, but I am unwilling to take the time to go back and re-acquaint myself with it.
Oh yeah, did I mention that his administration "outed" a US undercover CIA agent out of political spite against her husband because he had the audacity to demonstrate that Bushco was lying about Iraq purchasing uranium in Nigeria?
And did I ask whether you remember how, in less than 3 years, his administration dissipated every bit of worldwide goodwill that was wished upon the US after 9/11/01?
What do you think of his presidency?
2006-06-13 08:58:39
·
answer #2
·
answered by Mr. October 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Bush had the balls to stand up to terrorism. Some people think Clinton was a good president. Any terrorism attack against Americans was met with a sigh, no return response or back up with answers of any kind.
There has not been one president in the last century who has not made their share of goofs but at least Bush had the knowledge that you need to stand up to those who desire to rule with fear.
WMD's not there, theh say? Look in Syria.
greedy for oil? Oil prices were driven up by tight supply, China and India's increase, and Congress's inability to look for other area or other sources. Can't blame that on Bush.
Yes, there are some things he has done that I couldn't agree but what president had that clean record witht he American People?
Probably none.If anyone think they could do better, put your name on the ballot. I hopw to see their credentials and see how they fair.
2006-06-13 09:21:19
·
answer #3
·
answered by n9wff 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
1) Bush a good president?
IMHO, no.
2) Someone mentioned Clinton's "impeachment"
On Saturday 19 December 1998, President William Jefferson Clinton was impeached by the United States House of Representatives, becoming only the second President in U.S. History, and the only man popularly elected as President to have been so charged.
The House voted 228 to 206 to approve proposed Article I of Impeachment (Perjury before a Federal Grand Jury), and voted 221 to 212 to approve proposed Article III of Impeachment (Obstruction of Justice).
Although the impeachment process succeeded at the level of the House of Representatives, without the Senate's confirming action in this matter, no further action was taken...
Therefore was he REALLY impeached???
Also, if they would impeach him for such trivial matters in comparison to what Bush is doing, what does that tell you about our government and who is running it? Hmmmm?
2006-06-13 09:06:22
·
answer #4
·
answered by stoptheinsanity_73 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
How are the American People a source for how Bush is a good president? His approval ratings are lower than Nixon's were when he resigned- and if Nixon hadn't resigned when he had then he would have been impeached. So either the american people aren't always the best source on the matter, or else Bush is a bad president and should be impeached.
2006-06-13 08:53:37
·
answer #5
·
answered by Annie 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Well considering all the fiascos that we delivered him in his tenure the consistence we revealed to ourselves and the safites we must contain is the only ability I see him providing and that semms fine to me. To be good is to stablize the nation under the conditions we possess and enhance the growth as rapidly as possible, though that margine is irrepressable the knowledge of fortelling its postion is clarifiable in the means which we recongize. President Bush rationalized the anemia in the middle east by waging a war against terroizem relating upon the lives he attempting to continue to deroot as they brothel there cause securing the land they share and the resources that are'nt represented by them. Thus as Americans we must have the attitudes of procrastinaters asking when we ourseleves should be sold short or this abundencies. The president directs the passive objection and enlargens the proprieties we as a nation conceal all to the objetion of extream radicals attempting to disqualify our nations dignities on the worlds level. This hast is the most monumental extravganza the president must prevail on and the world must be foiled in eny of measure which our livlyhood is disrupted and thus President bush is a Good president...
2006-06-13 09:16:35
·
answer #6
·
answered by gerald w 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think President Bush is a decent and respectable CHRISTIAN man. I think he has the best interests for his country and the rest of the world community. Anyone that says that they hate President Bush I fear has a serious mental problem. I truly believe he is a man of God and a man of his word. No President since WWII has had to deal with an attack of the kind that we faced on 9/11. It took great courage and conviction to do the things he has done to keep you and me safe.
2006-06-13 09:31:29
·
answer #7
·
answered by Jason 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
If you study American history, you will see many former presidents were labeled bad during there term of office only to have history define them as good or great presidents in later years. President Bush will fare the same. So as the old saying go's "wait and See" I think he will go down in History as a great President.
2006-06-13 09:13:59
·
answer #8
·
answered by The Old Moose 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
No, he has single handedly made a mockery of our government. He does not work for the people or follow the laws of the land that he was placed to defend. We should not be surprised by this if we pay attention to the way his past went. He got through school just like millions of people, but that is all he did. He did not try to excel in anything he did and more so did not take responsibility for it either. He works to serve his own purpose and puts the words "for america" or "for God" behind it and tries to sell it to a nation that wants its leader to do their best, but in this instance is horribly let down. It is a sad sad time for the american people and all the brave and courageous men and women who have fought for the rights and freedom of this country. He does all military a disservice by being in the office of commander in chief.
2006-06-13 08:59:33
·
answer #9
·
answered by hannahonelove 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
i don't think he's the worst we've ever had, i just think that with his personality, he would have been better suited in congress and not the presidency. i don't think he gets a fare shake, but that comes with the job and with his personality, he doesn't know how to handle certain situations and bounce back. i read an article the other day about past presidents and how people look at them 20 years later and forget the bad and remember the good, they gave Reagan and Truman as their examples and I thought that was a great point.
2006-06-13 08:54:11
·
answer #10
·
answered by tilda 4
·
0⤊
0⤋