I say this because to ask the person responsible for the worst period in American History any questions brings forth whinning CONS that the President is being hassled. Is he a man or a mouse?
If Bush is so comfortable about his actions he should be able to justify them.
2006-10-20 02:52:37 · 20 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Jesi, can I borrow your loan tinted glasses when you done with them? Jeeezzzz.
How easy is it to fool oneself?
2006-10-20 02:57:47 · update #1
Those that say the media is a Liberal media,, Have we had wholesale changes since Clinton was in power.
How about we agree that your man is the worst thing to have happened to this country... EVER.?
2006-10-20 02:59:53 · update #2
My answer is directly to Jesi on one a specific point.
Poverty in America is on the rise, big time, which s usually the case when the masses pay high taxes and the richer, the muddled middle class masses, cannon fodder come election time, get a little richer, though nt too much, thus obliging you to vote the righ way, whilist looking away from thre poverty.
There are parts of America that make poor parts of India look positively wealthy.
2006-10-20 21:29:31 · answer #1 · answered by manforallseasons 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Interesting question! It is for this reason more than any other, that the last strategy in Baghdad was such a miserable failure. Oops, the administration is using the euphemism, flawed! It was either GWB or Donald Rumsfeld who announced to the world, through the media, their plans on beefing up the Baghdad offensive by putting more boots on the ground.
I suppose their thoughts were that they would scare the insurgency into capitulating. Do they understand these people at all? Their only objective in life is to kill Americans and receive their award of 72 virgins, in death. The only thing these extra troops meant to the insurgents, is more practice fodder.
I have to compare this latest failure in Baghdad to D-Day, 1944. Do you think the end result of D-Day would have been the same, had Eisenhower gone to the press before the fact, and announced the allies plans?
Lets suggest to GWB and Rumsfeld an old slogan, that is "loose lips, sink ships." Do you think they will listen?
2006-10-20 10:08:58 · answer #2 · answered by briang731/ bvincent 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
The worst period in American History was the 1929 Stock Market
Crash which led to the Great Depression and so far, the economy is great, unemployment is 4.6%, The Stock Market is at
11,965.23 points right now, which means it is doing great, & the
President is excellant and doing great!! The "news Media" is
biased against President Bush and the USA and the NYTimes
should be brought up on charges of treason for leaking classified
information in their "newspapers."
2006-10-20 10:03:52 · answer #3 · answered by Vagabond5879 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
While President Bush is a very great person and a great President, I highly doubt that he is 'the person responsible for the worst period in American History.'
You see, there is a great power that is trying to send you a message that a very important day is coming.
But you are kinda headed in the right direction. It has been the most difficult times of our lives.
- Worst attack on our Country in History
- Worst Hurricanes in History
- Worst National Disasters in History
- Worst Tsunami in our World's History
- Economy in a recession when he took office
WOW, lots and lots of difficult times.... I would sure hate to be President during these time ... but I am PROUD to support my President during these times and appreciate him keeping me (and yes, even you) safe.
THANK YOU PRESIDENT BUSH !!
2006-10-20 10:00:23 · answer #4 · answered by ValleyR 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Political polarization is present on both sides. I think there needs to be more objectivity and critical analysis rather political posturing. Why don't we unite and blame the terrorists for their cruel and murderous acts? Why don't we blame North Korea and Iran for their continued defiance of International treaties and the common good of world peace and stability? We spend to much time blaming and focusing on our politicians rather than the actual perpetrators. And if the biased critics don't get the answers they want (on both sides of the isle), they revert to things like name calling or pictures of Calvin urinating on the object of their disdain on the back windows of their cars. If they (the critics) already know the answer, then how about offering the solution? Or, is their only objective an admission of failure?
2006-10-20 10:17:09 · answer #5 · answered by Baz 2 · 0⤊ 2⤋
The media is a crock of dung. They are also liberal biased. This President is a busy man and refuses to play the media game. I commend him for this. Actually the time he gives the media is 100% more time than I would.
2006-10-20 09:57:32 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 2⤋
It is not the responsibility of the news media to question. The responsibility of the news media is to REPORT the NEWS. Speculation is not news. It is speculation. I'm tired of reading articles about what "might" happen.
It is OUR responsibility to question.
The news media is supposed to be nonpartisan.
2006-10-20 09:57:35 · answer #7 · answered by The_Cricket: Thinking Pink! 7 · 5⤊ 0⤋
I agree that the bush regime will probably be the one that brings America to it's knees! I'm sure if the media questions him they will have to take time before the questioning to get their lies straight...one will lie the other will swear to it....
2006-10-20 10:04:53 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
the master mad hatter is ,probable very insecure and undecided so questions need to be censored.then the happy face and answers can flow,if put on the hot seat,what the hell do you think ,for Christ sake the facts speak for themselves,the dead can not.puppy
2006-10-20 17:03:57 · answer #9 · answered by CIVILIAN 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, of course they should be allowed to. The day they are not allowed to question any President is the day democracy ceases to exist in America. I would love to see a 9/11 widow ask Bush to explain not only why he hasn't nabbed Osama, but why did he say Osama isn't important to him anymore?
2006-10-20 09:57:47 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋