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

and not be apologetic to fellow Americans.... especially now we know what a catastrophe he has been and created.

2007-07-24 14:42:20 · 29 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Politics

29 answers

Easy...put yourself in my place...would you vote for Gore or Kerry?

I shudder at the implications.

2007-07-25 05:01:40 · answer #1 · answered by ? 6 · 0 0

Fun to play Monday morning quarterback-- isn't it?

For argument sake, let's presume the war in Iraq is a "catastrophe" as you suggest. When George Bush was elected the second time-- these things had already happened:

In 1990, Iraq invaded Kuwait in a blatant move to control a full third of the Gulf oil supply. That required us going to war to stop Hussein from achieving his goal.


Iraq had twice massed forces on the Kuwaiti border, causing us to spend millions in moving forces into the area. They ignored agreements to disarm and allow inspectors to ensure compliance. They had broken one UN resolution after another. They have routinely fired on American aircraft patrolling the no-fly zones.

On September 11th, 2001, Al Qaeda operatives hijacked four commercial airliners and killed over three thousand Americans.

Since then, there is more than circumstantial evidence that Iraqi security agents and members of Al Qaeda are meeting. Al Qaeda agents are operating in Northern Iraq. A senior Al Qaeda leader had received medical treatment in Iraq.

There was much more than sufficient evidence and support indicating invading Iraq was the thing to do-- including support from congress and the majority of American people at the time.

I'd also encourage you to remember that part of this "catastrophe" was the removal of a powerful dictator who killed countless innocent people.

Don't sit back now after three years of indoctrination by the media and claim your superior insight clued you in from the beginning.

_______________

If you hate Bush-- fine. I'm not exactly his biggest fan anymore either. That isn't the point here in case some of you knee-jerk sheep didn't get it. Reread the question. I have no problem with the asker hating Bush. My problem is with the arrogance of sitting back now with the benefit of hindsight and acting like everyone should have known better. That's why I reiterated the conditions in the country at the time of the election. Apparently a lot of people have bad memories! If no one recalls, President Bush was seen as a strong leader after 9/11.

2007-07-24 22:04:03 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2 3

In Canada Trudeau was in power for 16 yrs with a brief period of interuption while the Conservative ruled with a minority government for - a little less than a year . Trudeau successfully pulled off a vote of non confidence and toppled the government

In those 16 yrs - after every election no one admited to voteing for him

We still vote by marking an X on a piece of paper that is phisically counted in every riding accross the nation There is no way to "fix" the ballot box in the entire nation

So for 16 yrs Trudeau ruled the Liberal party and the government - Yet no one voted for him - Or rather admitted to it -

I suspect the same thing has happened in the US with Bush -


The people who did vote for him are not going to say they did


Or maybe Bush and the elctronic voting booths you have were all fixed and no one voted for the guy - Except that hard core 20 %

2007-07-24 21:50:54 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 4 4

two words sum it up

John Kerry

When the best of the Dem's is a total moron. You have to vote the other way.
Just like this election your going to vote for the dem. because you think you voting change. In reality your going to vote for the best of the worst

2007-07-27 07:51:25 · answer #4 · answered by 51 6 · 1 0

The Democrats just did not put forth viable candidates to challenge him. Bush may not have been the best man for the job but he was the best man on the ballot.

2007-07-24 21:59:44 · answer #5 · answered by James L 7 · 2 1

The people who voted for Bush are not capable of apologizing. They don't feel they have anything to apologize for.

2007-07-25 09:11:15 · answer #6 · answered by Stephanie is awesome!! 7 · 1 0

Because try as I might I couldn't become Deaf,Dumb and Blind on election day, there for I had to vote for the guy who doesn't want socialism. You guys should run a candidate in the 08 election that doesn't want this country to become a socialist welfare state and then maybe you can get back into the White house.

2007-07-24 21:50:41 · answer #7 · answered by Mother 6 · 5 4

I am a registered Republican who voted against Bush both times I'm proud to say. Those that actually did vote for the man won't admit it now I would imagine. His "Moral Majority" backing has pretty much fallen apart so badly due to his lack of leadership that the eventual winner of the Republican primary has no shot at the presidency - all due to Bush.

2007-07-24 21:46:56 · answer #8 · answered by the lad 1 · 6 5

It's less the fault of people who voted for him that people who didn't vote at all. (I did not vote for him either time because I cannot consciously endorse someone who got under 1000 on his SATs to even mow my lawn let alone run a country.) I know many people who were eligible to vote and did not and they have no right to complain. Not to mention I live in a state where you don't even have to register, though that's still no excuse!

2007-07-24 21:50:26 · answer #9 · answered by Kris B 5 · 3 5

Because the other choices sucked: a fake war hero & a crazy hippie; what a joke you libs are!!!!
ABBH any body but hillary

2007-07-24 21:55:25 · answer #10 · answered by mike h 3 · 4 3

fedest.com, questions and answers