Yes actually. I wrote him a letter in 2001 and another a couple months ago.
Both started by thanking him for doing what he thought was best, then explaining that we would like our freedoms back.
I explained that his nanny state is no better than the one being supported by his opponents and that the people of America do not need to lose their basic rights just for safety.
Both went on to explain that the gov't's job is to protect us from things we are unable to protect ourselves from. Yes, that does include terrorism, but not if the gov't becomes the new attacker of our freedoms in the process.
We are fighting terrorist supposedly because they dispise us brining freedom worldwide and having it ourselves-so isnt it just doing what they want when we destroy the freedoms that we once held dear just to stop them?
2007-08-12 01:40:22
·
answer #1
·
answered by Showtunes 6
·
2⤊
0⤋
How many times will you ask this question? Or do you just ask it when your medication runs out? Yes, there have been no terror attacks on US soil in the past 6 years. But since there were no terrorist attacks on US soil for more than seven years under Clinton, you'd have to say he also kept us safe, right? And since you can't actually point to anything Bush has done to keep us safe, you should probably stop saying this, right? 9 million well-paying jobs? Care to define well-paying, please? And the same unemployment rate as we had under Clinton is somehow a triumph for Bush how, exactly? I do agree that he has restored the honor and dignity that the White House used to have. Sadly, it is the honor and dignity of the Nixon White House.
2016-05-20 03:38:29
·
answer #2
·
answered by nanci 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Since you don't live in Texas you never got to hear about the terrorist that was caught by accident . He was pulled over by a sheriff in a small town not far from Killen . When the sheriff found he was on the top ten most watched list by the FBI he went to his home and found papers on the military base . Troop movements who was in charge of what . What came and went on a regular bases . Who run the towns around it and the wildlife habits around his town . He had been doing this for over a year . The sheriff is now allowed to talk about it now because of national security . This means they don't want you to know he got here from mexico by walking across the boarder . Thank Bush for for not letting this hit the national news media and stopping our local ones from talking about it now .
2007-08-12 17:06:33
·
answer #3
·
answered by knightrunner13 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
The statement "No terror attacks on USA soil since 9/11" is a 'negative proof', a logical fallacy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_proof
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burden_of_proof_(logical_fallacy)
There haven't been any earthquakes in Arizona since 9/11 either, should we be thanking Bush for that too?
Some things to consider, along with that false sense of security:
-- the relative ease in buying nuclear material (to potentially make 'dirty bombs') in our own country.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/12/us/12nuke.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
-- The "no fly" list isn't effective either because it includes the names of dead people and excludes some of the most dangerous known terrorists because the personnel checking IDs at airports aren't cleared to know those names.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/10/05/60minutes/main2066624.shtml
At least we can feel safe because a toddler was booted from a flight for saying "bye bye airplane!".
http://www.insideedition.com/ourstories/inside_stories/story.aspx?storyid=850
(I know it's scraping the bottom of the barrell, I was watching a local station for thunderstorm warnings.)
2007-08-11 18:53:45
·
answer #4
·
answered by sagacious_ness 7
·
3⤊
0⤋
If I thank President Bush for this, then I must immediately go back and thank former President Clinton for his ability to protect America after the initial Twin Tower attack. The tower didnt fall until President Bush was on watch. So that would make President Clinton even better against terrorism then President Bush. Obviously this question is designed to get under the skin of those who cannot stand Pres Bush.
2007-08-11 18:34:14
·
answer #5
·
answered by Tony A 2
·
1⤊
3⤋
The Anthrax Terrorist attacks occurred after Sep 11.
Thousands of our troops have been killed by terrorists overseas also.
The only people thanking President Bush are the terrorists.
2007-08-13 00:28:14
·
answer #6
·
answered by Darth Vader 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
In 1993 Islamic terrorists attacked the world trade center.
It was the only attack on American soil during the Clinton era.
After this attack, President Clinton kept us safe for 8 years.
President Clinton didn't need wire taps, the patriot act, cuban concentration camps, or a new Vietnam to keep America safe!
(I would encourage anyone who read your 360 blog to seek therapy, and visit the confessional at church on Sunday.)
On a more serious note if you haven't seen V for Vendetta rent it tonight!
2007-08-11 18:59:26
·
answer #7
·
answered by Robert Derek Puleo 1
·
3⤊
2⤋
Its easy to place blame on him, especially when the democratic party, as well as some republicans constantly fill the news with car bombs, suicide bombings, and all other sorts of news. These are trying times, and no one seems to think good about our president, even though we have been experiencing horrible tragedies (Katrina). People are still bringing up the damage from hurricane katrina, and how we have not put enough money into it. What do you expect?? New Orleans was basically under water.
2007-08-11 18:22:00
·
answer #8
·
answered by babsa_90 4
·
3⤊
2⤋
You're wrong, look up all the murders from illegals crossing the open borders. A 15 yr old girl, someone's daughter, was slain by illegals as was a Iraq Vet who made it back just to get shot down.
Kinda reminds me of an old slogan
'Order out of chaos'.
2007-08-11 18:39:25
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
What happened to his policies on 9/11?
2007-08-11 18:56:08
·
answer #10
·
answered by brainstorm 7
·
2⤊
1⤋