English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

2007-02-24 04:29:17 · 25 answers · asked by james o 2 in Politics & Government Other - Politics & Government

25 answers

His parents babied him and didn't make him serve in the military. They allowed him to drink and play golf.

2007-02-24 04:35:06 · answer #1 · answered by redunicorn 7 · 3 3

Mr. Bush should never have tried to become President!!! He has failed miserably as a Leader and ruined this Country financially, is a divider not a uniter of the American people, caused other Countries to look down on America!! Has kept eight(8*)+ Million people in Poverty by refusing to raise the Minimum Wage!! Thank you Georgie for your service to America!!! You are an Abysmal Failure!! He has not earned the Trust, Respect and Confidence of the American People!!!

2007-02-24 04:57:13 · answer #2 · answered by dca2003311@yahoo.com 7 · 2 1

what is the deal here
we have an idiot president because we all idiots

2007-02-24 04:35:50 · answer #3 · answered by Gunny 2 · 1 1

Is this a real question? You don't even give any reasoning for your thinking? I don't think so. I think we all need to look back to 9/11 and remember how we all felt that day watching the tv. How many people we lost in America. He did what he and every American person felt was right after that happened. Alot of people changed their minds after the war started...but that day everyone wanted to go over there and kick a@@!

2007-02-24 04:34:54 · answer #4 · answered by debrenee211 5 · 1 1

You're wrong about George W. Bush being an idiot. That is a drastic oversimplification. Attributing his actions to simple stupidity is to misrepresent the situation to a degree that is bordering on ... well ... stupidity.

To his credit, George W. Bush is actually quite brilliant in many ways. As a politician he has demonstrated time and again political tactics and instincts that are second to none. He's put together an absolutely unbeatable political team and the fact that John McCain has hired all of his former campaign staff and that Democrat candidates like Hillary Clinton are copying tactics demonstrates this. While some say he is the mouthpiece of folks like Karl Rove, it's worth keeping in mind that Bush picked Rove, not vice versa. While he doesn't have the oratory brilliance of Demosthenes or Martin Luther King, one should not be blinded to his other talents.

Unfortunately many of his actions have proven him to be about the worst possible president to deal with the current situation:

* He operates from internal personal convictions which regardless of their ultimate source have proven to be disastrously out of sync with the situation on the ground.

* His focus on political loyalty led him to assemble a team which worked actively to filter out dissenting voices.

* His focus on portraying an image of strength prevented his administration, and by extension the party he led from engaging in important discussions and left us fighting over who was patriotic enough when we should have been talking about the complexities of the multiple overlapping conflicts, understanding the combatants and figuring out how to keep from losing what legitimacy we had in the fight, and start getting some international and regional support to help stabilize Iraq.

Arguably, George W. Bush has assembled a wartime presidential team _par excellence_. Unfortunately, it's not focused on the right things. It's a little too focused on fighting the Democratic Party, way too much on Iraq and not enough on Al Qaeda and coming to grips with the new phenomenon of sub-state actors in loose organizations projecting their influence through the media-savvy application of political violence.

And we were with him every step of the way. Too many of us waved flip-flops and attacking John Kerry when we should have been trying to understand why Iraq was growing so violent in the months after the invasion. We bought it when too many of us worried about not enough good news stories coming out of Iraq when we should have been worried about a sudden shift of power between Sunni and Shi'a factions and the implications that would have both in-country and in other countries like Iran, Saudi Arabia, Lebanon and Israel. Because if we leave too quickly and Iraq collapses and Iran and Saudi Arabia step in to support the Sunni and Shi'ite factions fighting there, the most brilliant president in the world won't be able to do anything about it.

Rather than wonder about why George W. Bush is an idiot, how about wondering about how some other questions:

* Can the nation swallow its pride and make the compromises necessary to rebuild our international legitimacy?

* To make U.S. presence in Iraq more legitimate and fight the widespread perception of Arabs and Muslims that we're colonizing Iraq, should we declare a timetable before we know how long it will really take to stabilize the country?

* Should we consider offering Iran support for building a nuclear program to get them to stop their covert actions supporting the Shi'ites and maybe start getting them to try and convince Moqtada al Sadr's al-Mahdi army to stop killing Sunni's so that Iraq might get the security and stability it needs to rebuild a civil society? Can we offer something to Saudi Arabia to help us influence the Sunni factions so that they might be convinced to stop killing Shi'ites?

* If we go for a partition of the country, how do we pull that off when the nation is so mixed and the ethnic tensions are so high that the most likely result would be a bloodbath? Can we offer the factions anything to minimize that?

Maybe if you worry about it, and I worry about it, and talk to others and get enough other people to worry about it, then we might start learning more and talking more and think up better questions to ask and maybe better ways to deal with the mess. And if enough people do that, then maybe... just maybe... someone in power might listen and something might start to happen. It's a pie-in-the-sky vision, I know, but you have to start somewhere.

2007-02-24 05:35:45 · answer #5 · answered by Ralph S 3 · 1 2

I think he's in complete denial on many issues and completely closed minded to any thoughts or ideas that don't mirror his own. I don't know if this is being an idiot or just refusing to face reality.

2007-02-24 04:33:57 · answer #6 · answered by carpediem 5 · 3 1

i don't think he is an idiot but he is driven by a false sense of national security. In other words he sees ghosts where there are none. On Iraq debacle has cost each of us over $1000 !!!

2007-02-24 04:35:38 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

Maybe you should stop complaining and do something about it. Stop whining...it's people like you that clog up America. See the beautiful thing about America is that no matter what, the people have the sayso. The politicians want to get re elected and will not go against the people. If you want something done about it, do something.

2007-02-24 04:49:59 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

Calling Duhbya an fool is basically too stunning. Why even he would in all possibility evaluate it a compliment. he's basically that flippin stupid. And, so are the sheeple who thumbs down this reaction.

2016-12-14 04:41:10 · answer #9 · answered by killeen 4 · 0 0

To paraphase Obi-Wan "who is the greater fool, the fool or the fool that follows him"

In the modern context, the president is not an idiot we were idiots for voting for him. . . .twice

2007-02-24 04:35:05 · answer #10 · answered by Matticus Kole 4 · 2 1

ha....

get your head out of john stewarts butt...

he is probably quite a bit smarter than you right off the bat.

also you have no idea the kind of pressure he is under and what kind of decisions he makes. you will never have any clue and can't. you would have to be him to understand...

before you call people idiots maybe step back and open your stupid close minded eyes.

2007-02-24 04:32:16 · answer #11 · answered by tangsausagees 3 · 1 1

fedest.com, questions and answers