should george bush's bio be called "clueless"?

Answer 1

yes

Answer 2

Yes. Here is a good example:
Here is his stance on stem cell research:
"This bill would support the taking of innocent human life in the hope of finding medical benefits for others." - George "chimp" Bush
Yet he supports nuclear weapon research funding: Again takes human life and offers NO benefit to preserving human life.
He considers a 4 day old frozen (probably stay frozen forever), embryo left over from IVF "human life" yet he orders bombings in Iraq that takes away grown human children of some mothers.
So where does he come up with his moral guidelines? Go figure.

Answer 3

You would think a man who is able to become the president of the United States would be so much more articulate and seem more wise. He doesn't come across as being either, and that causes many people to question his ability to grasp the current situation of the world.

It's our fault, yours and mine, for not taking the time to vote. While it is questionable that he actually won the last election, we accepted him as our president. Now the word is suffering his cowboy diplomacy of shoot first and ask questions later.

I think Mr. Bush has a powerful political machine behind him, and they are the people who enable him.

Answer 4

Bush made his false statement about the bio-labs, he also began rewriting the history of the Iraq War to make his invasion seem more reasonable.

On July 14, 2003, Bush claimed that Saddam Hussein had barred United Nations weapons inspectors from Iraq when, in fact, they were admitted in November 2002 and given free rein to search suspected Iraqi weapons sites. It was Bush who forced the U.N. inspectors to leave in March 2003 so the invasion could proceed.

But faced with growing questions about his justifications for war in summer 2003, Bush revised this history, apparently trusting in the weak memories of the American people and the timidity of the U.S. press. At the end of an Oval Office meeting with U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan, Bush told reporters:

“We gave him (Saddam Hussein) a chance to allow the inspectors in, and he wouldn’t let them in. And, therefore, after a reasonable request, we decided to remove him from power.”

In the following months and years, Bush repeated this claim in slightly varied forms as part of his litany for defending the invasion on the grounds that it was Hussein who “chose war,” not Bush.

Meeting no protest from the Washington press corps, Bush continued repeating his lie about Hussein showing “defiance” on the inspections. Bush uttered the lie as recently as March 21, 2006, when he answered a question from veteran White House correspondent Helen Thomas.

“I was hoping to solve this (Iraq) problem diplomatically,” Bush said. “The world said, ‘Disarm, disclose or face serious consequences.’ … We worked to make sure that Saddam Hussein heard the message of the world. And when he chose to deny the inspectors, when he chose not to disclose, then I had the difficult decision to make to remove him. And we did. And the world is safer for it.”

The significance of this lie about the inspectors – when judging Bush’s proclivity to lie – rests on the fact that he can’t simply blame his advisers when cornered. Bush was fully aware of the U.N. inspectors and what happened to them.

The two trailers came in handy, even though the evidence was always clear that the equipment was to produce hydrogen for weather balloons, not biological agents.

Despite the field report debunking the bio-war claims – sent to Washington on May 27, 2003 – the CIA and the Defense Intelligence Agency issued a misleading “white paper” on the alleged bio-labs on May 28.

Bush began citing the trailers as the conclusive WMD proof on May 29, 2003. “Those who say we haven’t found the banned manufacturing devices or banned weapons are wrong,” Bush declared, referring to the mobile labs. “We found them.”

By June 1, 2003, after simply reading the “white paper,” I was able to post an analysis showing how shoddy and flimsy the CIA/DIA claims were. At the time, I was not aware of the field report, which had been stamped secret and shelved.

Answer 5

Should you bio be down syndrome?

Answer 6

Yes. Suits it to a T.

Answer 7

"Clueless" is too brief. "Clueless, Incompetent, and Ignorant" sounds better.

Answer 8

I'll bet he's really hurt that you think that.