What would you do in Bush's position?

Question

Everyone seems to have an opinion about the way the country should be run. At the same rate, everyone is quick to point to their political figures and say they are the ones to blame for all the turmoil. There are thousands of issues to deal with on a daily basis, but the most popular seem to be War, Immigration, and Social Security Reform. Although more than the majority are not satisfied with his decisions, President Bush has done what he has seen fit best for the country.

I have read through political rants about Democrats this, Republicans that and how the town stinks of Liberals. I am just curious, if placed in the hot seat with only seconds to make a decision, what would you do if you were the leader of the United States of America? Would your decisions be based on popularity or political influence?

I'm not referencing anything. The question is.. with all the problems Bush has tried to solve, what would you do in his position.

Rorya.. I would like to thank you for not reading and reposting exactly what I stated. President Bush has done what he has seen best fit. It's not an assumption.. it's a fact. Just because I didn't put he like this "HE" doesn't mean it doesn't have the same intention.

Answer 1

He has done what he's had to do with what he's had to work with. I don't agree with all of his decisions, but I do respect the fact that the job as President is a tough one. I also realize that the American public does not know everything that the President does, and that he has to do what he feels is right. By electing him, we've entrusted him to use his best judgement. Regardless of my opinions of Bush, I would much rather have a president do what they feel is right, not what is popular. He can be trusted to keep his word - regardless of agreeing or disagreeing. If he says he's going to do something, he does it. I don't think I could have done any better in his shoes.

Answer 2

I'm sure THIS question will draw a lot of fire, but your explanatory narrative really contains a key concept that few people understand and appreciate: the economy, terrorists, immigration issues -all of these thing- really don't care WHO the President is; they are simply the sum total of all that has passed before. But media attention or finger-pointing by political adversaries makes them SEEM as though they are all about "right now."

And thus, a distinction must be made between the President's power to DO something (that power being very great) and the President's power to actually accomplish anything (that power being very limited). I can think, offhand, of only 2 cases in recent history is which what a President actually did -in terms of a simple act- had any permanent influence that played out globally and really changed history. One was Carter's Camp David accords between the Egyptians and Israelis -which permanently resulted in a more moderate stance by major mid east Arab states. The other was Reagan's Star Wars initiative, which forced the Soviet Union to spending at such enormous levels that their economy collapsed and with it, in time, The Berlin wall.

One of the "gotcha's" of your question is the restriction "...with only SECONDS to make a decision...". That leaves out immigration, the economy and social security, all of which are the result of much time and discussion. And that leaves in only crisis situations, such as terrorist attacks. W has only been tested three times in terms of that kind of immediacy, that I know of: 9/11, of course is the biggie -and its hard to fault him for action taken then. The other was the decision to bomb a restaurant where Saddam was thought to be dining -good decision, but negative outcome. The other -which everyone has forgotten about- was the capture of an American spy plane by the Chinese; and George made the immediate -and correct- decision to NOT blow everything up in retaliation.

But if you mean that I had just, say, 10 seconds, to somehow decide the direction we'll take on major issues, then the very first thing I would do is to change the rhetoric about the "war" in Iraq; specifically, engage the American people in a dialog that aimed to eliminate the misconception that the war on terror (or conditions that promote it) -whereever it may be engaged- CANNOT BE "WON" within the ordinary meaning of winning and losing. The White House, its supporters and its opponents ALL speak in terms of "winning," whereas the most realistic expectation that we can hope for and achieve is to gain a measure of control we didn't have before. It is no different than winning the war on "termites." We may wipe out concentrations of them here and there, and work to identify colonies and create conditions that don't encourage termites -but we never "win," there is no "finish line." Say what you will about the wisdom of an enagegment in Iraq or the prospect of a democratic and peaceful presence in that area - what we get to do is kill bad guys and be a direct presence in that part of the world. Say what you will, but no major Arab state has cut off our oil or otherwise taken action against us; say what you will, but the French are getting ready to elect new leadership that is very friendly towards us ...you get my drift. The problem is that the media and aggressive politicians have created a "win-lose" context that is completely inappropriate to the reality -and, worse yet, so has the WH itself. That needs to be changed, and a major news conference to announce and define the change along the lines that Henry Kissinger might take CAN be done in a few seconds -and that is exactly what I would do with my few seconds.

Answer 3

The war and Social Security reform are valid decisions even if one disagrees with the execution. However, I must take issue with the President's stand on Illegal Aliens. The President is, at least technically, the top law enforcement official in the country. He has failed to do his job by not enforcing existing laws in this respect and is acting to subvert immigration laws with this latest proposal. For this, he is to be seriously admonished.

The President has sworn to uphold the constitution and the laws of the United States. In this respect he has failed.



.

Answer 4

As there is no way to ever win against terrorists and fanatics when this is based upon religion - I would be as decisive as Ronald Regan and drop them a nuke. That region of the world wants one desperately and so we would deliver their dream. The fact that it is armed and explodes is just a bonus to all the peaceful peoples of this world. This war is the reason that religion and politics do not mix and why we are a free country today. Separation of church and state must be absolute or religious fanaticism breeds, grows, and threatens the country and the world. Let's get this over with and Bomb Now.

Answer 5

I think he's done pretty good actually. He doesn't seem to change his mind due to popularity issues.
Most Americans really don't have the facts so they can't really be good armchair quarterbacks. The news isn't a good source of information because they are a business trying to get profits and make money on sensationalising issues.
On the other hand, it's sad to see someone trying to get votes based on what seems to be a mob rule -get the soldiers back home regardless of the need for them to be there Clinton- I think it's a dangerous way to manage the security of our country. Pulling out before the job's done is never a good idea for many reasons.

Answer 6

If I would be George W. Id probably try to make as many friends as possible with the Democrats since practically run the Congress, then when I have them on my side, I would keep subsadizing a war in Iraq with their help.

Answer 7

i would quickly tell all iraqis that they need to STOP killing our soldiers and we will stay and help rebuild the country, if they dont stop we will leave, secondly i would expand social security, remove alcoholism and drug addiction as disabilities since 1.they are not they come on from making a bad decision so you shouldnt get money for making a bad decision next i would expand SSDI for disabled induviduals and create a faster processing mechanism to push claims through the system much faster. i would also begin to remove funding from military research and other non vital military funds, and put the forces at the boarders watching for incoming dangers. i would begin to liquidate the nations oil supply and pump money into a project to assist people in trading in their old gas cars for ZEVS (zero emissions vehicles) totally electric cars. by liquidating the nations oil reserves and turning it into cash and cash equivilants (gold) the nation can secure its economy, oil is too volatile to be held as a "security" for the countries cash, gold is very secure way to create a fallback for the dollar if the world economy crashes, gold never stops moving, without gold there are no computers, no jewlery, no phone lines, no telecom, no electronics. as another environmental reform i would begin to create funds to do a incandescent to CFL exchange program where people could bring their old bulbs to exchange them for new power saving CFLS, it would help the nations energy grid by reducing light induced stress.

Answer 8

First off, I disagree with your assumption that Bush "has done what he has seen fit best for the country", his agenda is to cause what is best for HIS friends and interests............

Before you write this off as a liberal rant, you need to know I am an independent who feels the same way about democrats, the electoral process, lobbyists and the military induztrial comples- all buying influence over the naive american public...........

I would:
1. pull out of Iraq in a delberate way with an unannounced time table for withdrawal.
2. hold business accountable for tax evasion by claiming headquarters in far countries, with no actual business there
3. simplify the tax code and make all pay an eqaual share , flat tax
4. create millions of jobs for un-employed and underemployed by expanding main roads in most cities
5. invest heavily in tax credits for oil-free autos
6. provide a national health care program for poor and infirm only, greatly expanding the need for more medical professionals and growing jobs, (studies show to eliminate the current "emegency department doctor visits SAVES money on the system), the beneficiares of the guaanteed healthcare would have to give work back for medical care instead o current system of being a revolving door in the E/R's of this country........
7. Work with canada to find cheaper way to release shale oil to cover us from a middle east dependence until oil-free car is mass produced ( west canada oil find was only lartge find in last 30 years but it is imbedded in rock and needs to be released in some inexpensive way)>
8. re-grow the military to pre-clinton levels so not to over- burden the less skilled guard and reserve
9. change campaign process to allow donated time from networks for top 10 candidates of a given party (off -set by ads etc) and STOP THE POLITICAL INDEBTEDNESS SYSTEM OF FRAUD AND LOBBYISTS IN WHICH 'DONORS' OWN THE ELECTED CANDIDATE
10. invest 100 TIMES the current amount on research. into new technologies which free mankind- cheap energy, cleaner environment, medical research , etc.

Answer 9

The biggest single mistake made by Bush was the decision to invade Iraq. That wasn't a spur of the moment decision. It was one made months before he even issued his ultimatum to Saddam and his sons to leave Iraq.
None of the other issues you've reference required split second decisions and decisions that were made were inordinately influenced by politics.

Answer 10

give the iraqi people the choice to leave so we can clean up the mess or go down with the enemy...bring our soldiers home.....then not nuke but daisy bomb all the way to the borders....don't ask me why but it wouldn't surprise me if Osama isn't hiding right under our Soldiers feet.....We're gonna haveta clean and rebuild anyway why not start out fresh....Plus Americans are convinced the WMD's aren't there but they are hidden well...remember Insane Hussien didn't survive all those years by keeping things out in the open