I agree with you 110%.
Especially when you add in the fact that the House and Senate are his party then how he has ignored almost 800 laws at last count = America's first USA dictator.
Btw, I think you meant to say that Hitler killed Jews not Nazis.
The way that his administration has tried to increase the power of the executive party and is STILL TRYING will definitely go down in history as a power hungry, Hitler-like madman in the oval office.
I just read today that because he didn't like the way the Supreme Court ruled against some of the things he has done as far as increasing his power, he has now decided to CHANGE the legislation so that the Supreme Court can NOT limit him.
2006-08-09 09:57:37
·
answer #1
·
answered by BeachBum 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
America will have an election for president in the near future. It is guaranteed that the currently elected president will not be president after that time. This means USA does not have a dictator. On its face your question is silly.
Also, the Nazis were socialists and fascists (admittedly a difficult marriage at best). There are no fascists in the united states. Look the word up.
And remember there's no Arab as good as a dead Arab.
Hitler was not really known for killing Nazis. He was one.
Are you suggesting that Alexander the Great was trailer trash?
Do you know of any countries that Bush has sought after? What does that mean? If you consider him a conqueror, then you have little understanding of what the word means.
2006-08-09 10:08:34
·
answer #2
·
answered by Moose C 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
I wouldn’t make him the equivalent of Hitler, just for the sheer fact that he lacks the talent or vision of the notorious Germany dictator. To compare him to Alexander the Great is even more of stretch, considering you are comparing one the most brilliant military strategists of all time with the biggest buffoon of all time.
He is not worth an assassin’s bullet. Quite frankly, I like to see him stay in office a little while longer, because the longer he maintains power, the more ridiculous he makes the right wing look. Maybe I am being a bit too overzealous when I say this, but he might have consigned much of his party to defeat come the next major election.
2006-08-09 12:00:51
·
answer #3
·
answered by Lawrence Louis 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think Bush should be up for a Nobel Peace Prize, but won't be given the politics behind the award. The free Western World should be on their knees daily thanking Donald Rumsfeld for his service to our country.
He (and the president) are true American leaders that will go down in history as two couragous leaders that knew right from wrong and did the right thing.
This all while previous presidents are still trying to figure out the meaning of the word 'is' and giving the Islamo-facist eight years to prepare. Shameful.
2006-08-09 10:04:26
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
bush is not an american .He is a result of higher education and a" c "average that makes him and others like him feel superior to the rest of america .
YOU know the people making under a million a year .
THOSE are the workers and they need to follow the leaders instructions .
WE do not have a clue what is best for us and he does .
It is only natural for him to ignor all of us .
Its like your five year old wanting to ride a bike .
YOU are scared they may fall down and get hurt so you put training wheels on and are right at there side .AFTER a short time they want the training wheels off and for you to leave them alone .they know how to ride the bike now all they need is the sidewalks and a safe place to ride the bike ..
WE all know the world is a dangerous place but we all know to well we are exploreres with the desire to go as far as we can .
The role of president should be to make sure we have a faster bike and a bigger one to move on to .BEcause in no time we outgrow that bike and need much more .
FAILing to provide the people with what we need is his problem .
He was raised on a check book and has no value for money .
HE had servents and has no value for people except what they do for him .
HE is selfish and wants credit for things that he has no way of possibly being responcible for .
HE can not be credited with creating jobs un less we also credit him with the loss of jobs .
HE has created some unussual rules for reporting un-employment figures .HE has changed polution laws and taken or tried to take credit for cleaning up the air when he gave enegy producers 25 more years to clean up what they should of started 10 years ago .
IT seems every time i turn around Bush is trying to come off sounding like he knows something .
HIS hole live daddy cared for him and daddy was a bad president so junior is to .
What more can we expect of such people who have lost touch with the common man .
2006-08-09 10:16:25
·
answer #5
·
answered by playtoofast 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
We already had a dictator, Abe Lincoln who pretty much ruled by decree during a period, and some people like to say FDR as well, who was only good as a wartime leader despite the fact that his New Deal that scerwed America over in the long-term despite its quick fix during the Depression.
2006-08-09 10:23:34
·
answer #6
·
answered by rubentolon 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
This substitute into signed into regulation by applying President Bush. because of the native land protection Act, this opened the door for something that's against what the founding fathers meant. the administrative branch substitute into in no way meant to have this means for the proper objective of warding off a(dictator, emperor, king, etc.) there's no congressional oversight in this, the only way it extremely is bumped off is by applying a president.
2016-11-04 05:39:17
·
answer #7
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
As the President that destroyed Democracy and ushered in fascism. This man who ran two oil business's to the ground managed to destroy a whole country as people all over the world hate us! They don't hate us for out freedom. They hate us because this moron cowboy uses his faith as an excuse to send off soldier's to die not to mention all the other innocent men, women and children for the love of occupying and controlling middle Eastern oil.
Bush is not souly reasonable though...He is just a mouthpiece for a silent government...
Get educated!
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1685276108250302324&q=Webster+Tarpley
2006-08-09 10:21:38
·
answer #8
·
answered by Meemers 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think you need to gain some perspective.
In spite of what you may think of his policies, he isn't actually a dictator and could not be considered one unless he took some sort of military control of Congress and/or refused to release power on Jan. 20. 2009. Now, if you want to argue that he is a throwback to the Imperial style presidents like LBJ and Nixon, I could probably get on board that train.
2006-08-09 10:00:48
·
answer #9
·
answered by Crusader1189 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes, you are right, but ...
He just had the hard job of beeing the one who blame, the one who take all the hate, and everything ! He won't run the next election, he can't!!! 8 years ! They will just change the puppet !
Lincoln and Kennedy were the only one who could be called President !
Since George Washington, Usa is runned by free-Masons, Illuminatis and Death Clan members....
And the next one will sure be the second......
2006-08-09 10:12:31
·
answer #10
·
answered by The Patriot 4
·
0⤊
0⤋