Most people hate on Bush because they have to in order to fit in with their 'click'. Its pretty sad really, when you think about it.
MOST liberals and Bush haters simply hate him because he's not a Democrat, just as they do any politition who isn't a Democrat.
MOST liberals and Bush haters can not even have a lucid coherant conversation with you about REAL issues because all they need to know is if there is a 'R' next to the name on the ballot, then they'll simply hate to hate.. you know.. those oh so tolerant people, so kind and considerate, so 'progressive' (lol) and educated.. they simply hate for hates sake. So sad.
All that said, I don't like Bush that much because he's way to liberal. He's tried to fight a politically correct war when we should have this wrapped up by now.. not being so PC and killing any and all, you know.. war.. just like WWII. He spends money like a drunken liberal. He won't do anything about the pourous borders. Also ever since he was elected to a second term he lost all his balls.. instead of being bold like he used to be he's tried to please everyone.. instead of boldly doing what is RIGHT instead of what is popular, he's taken the opposite approach.. dissapointing to say the least.
I'm looking forward to a real conservative next term!
2007-01-22 10:22:05
·
answer #1
·
answered by artrickwo 3
·
2⤊
6⤋
When did Congress declare war (since December 8, 1941)? If YOU read the Constitution, it states that Congress is empowered to declare war. Traditionally, the President as Commander in Chief can request their approval. Congress has failed to meet their responsibilities.
And who says I don't hate Congress along with Bush? Did you notice the mid-term elections? Apparently I wasn't alone.
2007-01-22 18:37:44
·
answer #2
·
answered by mike s 5
·
4⤊
1⤋
So Democrats say that Bush's lies about WMD's are the reason they voted to go to war? Do they not do their own homework before each vote? Bush's bad information at least showed he had someone do some checking, even if that information was wrong. The Democrats blindly voted 'yes', thinking that a President always gets his information correct. They knew his IQ before the war. All they talked about during the elections was how stupid he was. Did they think that would change?
2007-01-22 18:17:56
·
answer #3
·
answered by Paul H 4
·
5⤊
2⤋
Good point. I've tried to state this before, but people give me thumbs down for something that is indeed true. It's life though. every president has had a group of people that don't like him and will go against anything this president has to say regardless of whether or not it is good for the nation. Even if Bush wasn't elected as the president, Liberals would have found some other Republican to bash on. My guess is that liberals have nothing better to do but bash on the other party and have no particular solutions to anything they are against.
2007-01-22 18:36:09
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
3⤋
All those in congress who are weak (like Hillary Clinton) are backing out of their decision one by one because elections are coming up. It is all propoganda by the Democrats to get the Dems in office. That is it. President Bush is doing what he needs to do and he is doing a fine job. It is a tough position to be in and he has done everything he could do to fight terrorism. He is a good president. Reagan would have done the same thing.
2007-01-22 18:29:10
·
answer #5
·
answered by Tink 5
·
2⤊
2⤋
Congress never issued a declaration of war on Iraq.
2007-01-22 19:30:32
·
answer #6
·
answered by neooxyconservative 3
·
0⤊
2⤋
Well you said it yourself....he pushed for us to have the damn war in the first place. The proposal wouldn't have made it to Congress if it hadn't been for his dumba s s idea of diplomacy. He misled the American people to believe that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction so that he could convince Congress and the American people that we were invading Iraq for a just cause. It turned out of course that he was lying and yet he still pushes his daddy's agenda. Even though we have virtually destroyed Iraq, he is still trying to convince us that this is a war worth fighting. There have been countless American and Iraqi deaths.
He is against stem cell research because of his religious views, against a woman's right to choose whether or not she wants an abortion...He is an ignorant redneck who cares about pharmaceutical companies, the oil industry and big business. Where was he when Hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans????
2007-01-22 18:15:37
·
answer #7
·
answered by Cute But Evil 5
·
6⤊
4⤋
I hate on Bush because he was such a showboat in a losing effort to the Bears. Why point at Urlacher and dive into the endzone and then do a silly dance when you're STILL down by 2 points and about to get blown out by 300 points?
Oh, wrong Bush. I hate on that guy too.
2007-01-22 18:14:55
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
5⤊
3⤋
Actually, 126 Democrats in the House and 21 Democrats in the Senate voted against the lie-based Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002:
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2002/roll455.xml
Only SIX REPUBLICANS in the House and ONE Republican in the Senate voted against the LIE-BASED QUAGMIRE.
So, the notion that Democrats SHARE RESPONSIBILITY because a MINORITY OF DEMOCRATS BELIEVED THE LIES ABOUT WMD, is patently RIDICULOUS.
2007-01-22 18:14:50
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
7⤊
3⤋
Bush doesn't do anything well, and this is transparently demonstrable.
I want a bright and capable and progressive president, like Clinton or JFK or FDR was. These retarded Reagan wannabes are a step down the evolutionary chain from Man.
2007-01-22 18:12:07
·
answer #10
·
answered by Typical McCain Supporter 2
·
6⤊
4⤋