2007-03-16 00:41:29 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
GREAT
2007-03-16 00:45:11 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 3⤋
There would be no "Sydney or the Bush".
No bush mechanics
No bush carpenters
No bush lawyers
No bush bash charity car rallies
No bush pilots
No bushes to step behind
No bushes to put in the middle of a car flywheel
No burning bushes to talk to Moses
That scene in "The Kingdom of Heaven" would not exist.
We can't do without them. Bushes are essential!
2007-03-16 00:52:42 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Oh come on! There are a few sane people in California!
We are not all idiots, just most of the voters.
For the question....the world would be in serious trouble without him. Gore would have allowed the war here, not there.
2007-03-16 03:07:40 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
We probably would have had another attack on our soil. Maybe that would have been good in a sense, because it might have awakened some liberals after their loved ones were burned to a crisp.
Not that I'm that happy with Bush myself, but I'm tired of all of the whining. Who do you want in there, some Slick Willy or lunatic Gore who is ten times as worse?
2007-03-16 00:44:21 · answer #4 · answered by Joseph C 5 · 2⤊ 4⤋
Frustrated.
2007-03-16 00:43:53 · answer #5 · answered by Judge Dredd 5 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Then Vermont and California would not be alone.
2007-03-16 01:15:27 · answer #6 · answered by SGT T 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Better off
2007-03-16 00:45:17 · answer #7 · answered by AL IS ON VACATION AND HAS NO PIC 5 · 2⤊ 3⤋
then there would be an other person even worse.
2007-03-16 18:19:29 · answer #8 · answered by sana 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋