Are you kidding? Trick question?
This is for people that make over 250K a year. Right?
2006-10-30 08:58:40
·
answer #1
·
answered by LatexSolarBeef 4
·
7⤊
2⤋
Judging from your question, you are apparently not an avid Bush supporter. Try and be gentle with me as you ponder the following:
First and foremost, GWBush has responded to the inevitable and long overdue need to try and crush the demented ideology of the Islamic terrorists.
Source: "The world is a dangerous place, not because of those who do evil, but because of those who look on and do nothing." A Einstein
Second: His policies have maintained a steady and stable economy despite a major war and the economic hardships presented by the events of 9/11.
Source: Wall Street and U.S.Labor Dept.
Third: He has based his policies and agendas on America's security - not political gain or his own personal legacy - and he has not wavered in his objectives and decision to try and bring a government to the Far East that answers to the people, rather than the other way around. He has done this despite "public" polls, far left rhetoric and incessant criticism from his opponents.
Source: Personal opinion and observation
2006-10-30 09:13:51
·
answer #2
·
answered by LeAnne 7
·
2⤊
3⤋
The Iraq Survey Group, apart from a few stockpiles, did not find the large quantities of weapons that the regime was believed to possess.
On December 14, 2005, while discussing the WMD issue, Bush stated that "It is true that much of the intelligence turned out to be wrong.
National Intelligence Estimate (a consensus report of the heads of 16 U.S. intelligence agencies) asserted that the Iraq war had increased Islamic radicalism and worsened the terror threat.
Bush’s tax cuts for the wealthy, reckless spending and fiscal irresponsibility have produced a record budget deficit. This lack of leadership reduces flexibility to respond to future American crises, jeopardizes an already shaky dollar currency, interest rates will skyrocket, raises prices, weakens banks, lessens private sector spending and lowers future national income. He has sacrificed long-term economic growth for political purposes and to please his beloved wealthy base. The nonpartisan Tax Policy Center calculated that 53% of Bush’s tax cuts in 2001 and 2003 went to the highest earning 10% of Americans.
President Bush argues that his cut in tax rates stimulate the economy. Only temporarily. So how far did his cuts trickle? Not much. Also, his lack of fiscal discipline illustrates no plan for long-term economic growth. Currently the growth rate is slow nothing to crow about. Despite a record high DOW, job growth in September was very poor and a significantly below average growth for the third quarter, only 1.6 %.
Enron received $254 million after the Bush tax cut. Bush cut job training money and ignored the unemployed. Bush was intentionally building a case for war with Iraq without regard to the facts.
With over $400 billion in deficit this year and for years to come, how do they pay for that deficit? First, by taking the Social Security surplus that comes in every month and endorsing the checks of working people over to me to pay for the tax cuts. But it's not enough. So they have to go borrow money. Most of it they borrow from the Chinese and Japanese governments. Sure, these countries are competing with us for good jobs, but how can we enforce our trade laws against our bankers? I mean, come on!
2006-10-30 09:00:53
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
6⤊
1⤋
He, more than anyone else in history, has given hope and encouragement to all those who are mentally challenged, slow, and otherwise incapable of putting together a complete sentence that makes sense. If he can become President with a brain that's about the size of an amoeba, there is hope for everyone who has a learning disability.
And, hey, guess what? Can't think of a 2 or 3 - there's a shock!
2006-10-30 09:10:31
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
5⤊
2⤋
in my view, we've not engaged in a justifiable conflict through fact WWII. i replaced into at the instant informed by potential of an clever chum of mine, that the U.S. now no longer has the choose to win a conflict. I spoke back, and believe, that we do have the choose to win a conflict it rather is properly worth it, yet that we lack the stable sense to no longer work together in a conflict that may not precious. This conflict we are in now, in Iraq, isn't a conflict we would desire to constantly have ever fought. Say what you will, Saddam did no longer have weapons of "mass destruction" he replaced into no longer in cahoots with Al Quedae. It replaced into in easy terms a conflict of decision,that replaced into planned long earlier 9/eleven. The meant effect replaced into plenty distinctive from what occurred. It replaced into meant to "democratize" the middle east and make Israels safer. It has performed no such element.
2016-12-28 08:24:32
·
answer #5
·
answered by ? 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
He separated us from the Global community.
Removed the burden of the Bill of Rights
Converted the US Agriculture & Global trade based ecconomy into a Industrial War Machine and Corporate profiteering based economy.
Inniated the 14 steps of Fascism
Oops that's 4
Go big Red Go
2006-10-30 09:23:38
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
2⤋
he was asleep at the switch on 9-11
he told America that those responsible for the destruction and death of nearly 3,000 people in the World Trade Centers and the Pentagon would be brought to justice
he invaded Iraq, toppled Saddam, but let Osama bin Laden remain free to continue to train Taliban terrorists
2006-10-30 09:05:24
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
2⤋
1- Greatly improved the English language
2- Has turned himself into a gold mine for late night comedy.
3- Protected us from the evil plans of fishes.
It's unfortunate he missunderestimated the nucular capacity of North Korea.
2006-10-30 09:02:39
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
9⤊
2⤋
1. He bravely fought against the wave of gay support and tolerance, and stemmed moral decadance, caused by "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy" by campaigning against Gay Marriage issues
2. He got Mexican Americans and illegal immigrants everywhere to vote for him in 2004, thereby garnering their support to pursue illegal immigrants and treat Mexican Americans as illegal immigrants
3. He helped curb the minority treatment and religious oppression suffered by white, wealthy Christians in this country.
2006-10-30 10:13:45
·
answer #9
·
answered by thehiddenangle 3
·
0⤊
4⤋
Selecting textualists like Alito and Roberts to the US SUpreme Court;
Tax cuts for all;
Lowest unemployment rate in decades;
Nearly 7 million jobs created since 2003;
Largest number of people who own their own homes, especially among minorities;
Overthrowing Saddam Hussein, and consequently assisting in the drafting of two constitutions and free elections and Khadafi relinquishing his WMDs;
Overthrowing the Taliban in Afghanistan;
No terror attacks on US soil in over 5 years;
John Bolton to the UN;
Rebuilding the minitary after it was gutted by Mr. Clinton;
Implementing pro-life policies to protect unborn babies;
Signing the Patriot Act and the Border Fence bills.
_________
Figures the libs would give me a bunch of thumbs down. Don't cry!
2006-10-30 09:06:12
·
answer #10
·
answered by C = JD 5
·
1⤊
7⤋