2007-01-22 18:31:25 · 15 answers · asked by Just trying to help 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Someone asked if I had a brain would I be a republican. Of course not. They don't have any, I would be totally out of place.
2007-01-22 18:36:55 · update #1
That's a possibility ,It kind of reminds me of this. Why should i spend my money when i CAN spend yours.he can take our son's and daughters i could say more but his heart would not be listening .
2007-01-22 18:43:09 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
I guess we'll never know for sure, won't we? The interesting thing is, presidents who got us into or prolonged major/extended wars in recent history all had daughters and no sons: Truman (Korea) had one daughter, Margaret. Lyndon Johnson (Vietnam) had Lynda and Luci. Nixon (Vietnam) had Tricia and Julie...
On the other hand, presidents who had sons seemed not to want long/big wars: Dwight Eisenhower who was a great general in a war many considered a just one (WWII) and who had a son in the service, ran for president on a peace platform and brought the Korean War to an end in 1953. John F. Kennedy, who had a son also named John, wanted only limited involvement in Vietnam and was debating the wisdom of a deeper engagement there when he was killed. G.H.W. Bush (Bush 41), who has several sons , including our current president, and grandsons, limited and terminated the Gulf War in just a few weeks.
You might have something there!
2007-01-23 02:59:44 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
No,
Recently all the action has been laid on leaders about their youth... and how that would change their politics. Sorry, it won't. Their children have always stood outside the boundaries... so they don't care. The truth is... if Bush had sons, they would be in Harvard where they don't belong, and lower class kids would die so they could have their understanding of opera.
2007-01-23 03:47:51 · answer #3 · answered by DavisWalk 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yeah, name calling helps!! You're just trying to help....WHAT?
The question isn't loaded, hypothetical or not.... It does however overlook one salient point!
Our armed forces choose to ENLIST. If Bush had sons & they chose to serve our country in that way they might also be in harm's way!!
How about you? Ever done anything along the lines of "Ask what you can do for your country"? Just curious, not saying your opinion isn't valid if you haven't.....and my thanx if you have!
I chose to serve & am proud of having done so! Doesn't make my opinions more valid. Please try to stop the hate mongering , someone needs to start, & your name here says you care.
Edit for Conway: Just curious because of your response. Do you have a son or daughter serving in the military in Iraq?
2007-01-23 02:53:01 · answer #4 · answered by SantaBud 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Yes, because there is no mandatory draft. Furthermore even if a draft became mandatory he would find a way around it. For example not letting what ever branch his sons belonged to be deployed.
2007-01-23 02:46:15 · answer #5 · answered by wondermom 6 · 2⤊ 3⤋
Bush does not care about anything but coke and war
2007-01-23 02:35:44 · answer #6 · answered by anonbealove 3 · 3⤊ 2⤋
What evidence do you have that is is exploiting young men. This is a strange question.
2007-01-23 02:58:58 · answer #7 · answered by Tropical Weasel 3 · 1⤊ 3⤋
i think he would. i don't like bush, but as are leader he has to do what he feels is right.
2007-01-23 02:55:24 · answer #8 · answered by monreda 4 · 3⤊ 1⤋
That's a really good point. I never thought about that. Except I don't think he gives a crap about his girls either.
2007-01-23 02:34:55 · answer #9 · answered by alwaysmoose 7 · 4⤊ 2⤋
War and oil is one of his hobbies. Have son or not, it will not change his politics.
2007-01-23 02:40:39 · answer #10 · answered by tiwi 1 · 2⤊ 2⤋