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

When pressed about Bush's shortcomings as a leader, many people on Y!A say (paraphrased), "Yeah, well he's better than Clinton." Does that really make up for Bush's failings? Why don't people analyze his record objectively, successes and failures noted?

2007-07-09 11:12:53 · 22 answers · asked by El Duderino 4 in Politics & Government Politics

22 answers

What?!? Clinton should have done what bush is doing now? Holy crap, what are you bush supporters thinking? What world are you currently living in? I live on Earth, In the United States. This country is a mess, not because of clinton, but because of bush. Poverty in the United states is the worst its ever been, outside of a depression. There is no reason for the country being as advanced as we now are, yet cant manage to keep working citizens out of poverty. Of course it helps alot when president bush sends millions of jobs over seas. It also helps poverty a lot when you pass tax breaks for the rich and 30% of the USA get no tax break. The economy has never been better for the rich, and will continue to get better for the rich as they get further tax breaks from people like Bush. But, the Majority of the country is unable to be a part of that good economy, we might as well split Rich US economy away from Majority US economy. Majority US Economy SUCKS, while rich people are doing well. Yay for rich people, too bad for the rest of america.

I supose you feel that Bush's 27-35% job approval rating is because hes getting a bad reputation? Bush has such a bad rating because he is worried about one thing, Iraq. He could care less about you, me, or our country. If president bush had a choice between pulling out of Iraq, and throwing you under a bus to continue, you'd have a mighty flat body with bus tire tracks on your chest. He may even get in the bus and back up and do it a few more times for good measure. That is exactly what he is doing to our country, and every citizen of the united states. I can see the tire tracks, why cant you? Take off the rose colored glasses, take off the blinders, really look at how much better your life has gotten in 6 years. President clinton had a 57% job approval rating during the monica situation, that was the lowest rating he had, at the end of his term he had 65%. If a reputation didnt effect his, why would it effect bush? Bush hasn't done a thing except send $500,000,000,000 over seas and flush them down the toilet along with millions of jobs. Oh wait , sorry, he also didnt get osama, but at least he got those WMD in iraq, oh wait... there was none... Well at least he killed that evil dictator that hates Iran... So that Iran can continue to spark a civil war in Iraq now that saddam is gone... Well at least the middle east is glad hes gone... Oh wait.. They now hate americans more, want us to leave, and also help those sparking the civil war.

Well done bush, why couldn't clinton have done these great things in the name of freedom. Well maybe if it really had to do with our freedom, he would have. $500,000,000,000 ... how many familys in america could that have helped? how many of the record numbers of family in poverty, and close to poverty could that have helped? How many schools could have been helped? We arent safer than we were, we are just more poor, more in debt, and more tired.

2007-07-09 11:53:09 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2 3

No, it doesn't justify Bush's shortcomings. The democrats also didn't put up people with worthy ideas to better the situation. Unless the other people are offering constructive criticism i.e. thought out solutions they are facilitating the enemy not the conclusion of hostilities.

The solution I've offered is for the 1st world press to challenge the Iragi nationals that presently live there to take ownership of the area. The US military nor the local government can't bring peace to the area if the local residents don't stand up & demand it. When gangs take over a neighborhood in the US if the residents don't force them out no matter how hard the police hit them the gang still rules. The neighborhood has to stand with the police to win back the neighborhood.

2007-07-09 21:08:47 · answer #2 · answered by viablerenewables 7 · 0 0

Like it or not, as hard as people try, Bush's shortcomings can't really be determined until he's finally out of office. I think that people simply get tired of the constant nonsensical ranting and raving and strike back.

Understand, I'm not happy with Bush, and I'm not happy that we've been fiscally irresponsible as a GOP, either. There are many things that I could waste my time raving about. But it's not over until the fat lady sings. :)

2007-07-09 18:18:22 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 3 0

No. Having said that, I have read some of your comments and questions, and I don't find you to be analyzing Bush's record objectively. We are all entitled to our opinion, you like Clinton, I don't. I don't agree with everything President Bush is doing, but I would choose him over Clinton anytime. Thanks

2007-07-09 18:56:10 · answer #4 · answered by rosi l 5 · 2 1

No it sucks.But Bush would have to be in for the next 24 years to even begin to match up to Clinton's level of evil.

Bush's biggest screwup is the continuation of totally wide open borders.A continuation of Clinton's policy due to him signing NAFTA.

If Bush had continued all of Clinton's evil policies even the Democrats would hate Clinton just as much as they hate Bush because if Bush simply parroted every Clinton policy then it would be more apparent even to thickheaded liberals and it would much easier for us to point it out to you in such a way that you would agree with us.As it is lots of Republicans are upset with Bush just for parroting that one policy of Clinton's,that open border mess.If Bush was also pushing for POLITICAL CORRECTNESS and for taking away people's guns as Clinton was then he would be even more hated by Republicans right now than he is even by Democrats.

Clinton is an evil man.I will never stop thinking it or saying it.

2007-07-09 18:50:51 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1 2

Everything Bush has doen to screw the country can be traced back to Clinton, or so the Bush Apologists think. They both were horrible, but that's no excuse for the Bush Apologist's mental gymnastics.

2007-07-09 18:24:52 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2 1

It's what's called the 'spin cycle'. Slick Willy was a pacifist compared to Curious George, the chimp with a chubby who will screw anyone as well. PNAC is the organ grinder and the chimp makes more than chump change! Slick Willy played to the tune of his own organ and played for free.

I am the Fringe and birds of a different feather still flock you together.

2007-07-09 18:27:20 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2 1

No, too many people want to slam Clinton-- he's not in power and hasn't been since 2000. Bush is accountable for what he's done (or not done).

2007-07-09 18:21:50 · answer #8 · answered by dapixelator 6 · 4 0

I believe in the record of good and bad, Clinton was a better leader and Bush is now. Clinton was willing to give America moral boosts throughout his administration. Bush's only moral boost is that we have to be better than the terrorists. It's his justification for everything.

2007-07-09 18:17:56 · answer #9 · answered by sdurio 2 · 2 3

most of the Presidents that we have had in the last 40 years have been failures at one thing or another! Just think about it!
Kennedy with the cuban missile crisis, his blatent affairs and Nixon, watergate, Carter, total failure!, Clinton and Bush are NOT alone~~~sadly!

2007-07-09 18:17:24 · answer #10 · answered by Angelbaby7 6 · 3 1

fedest.com, questions and answers