In particular his ability to cut taxes and keep un-employment at some of the lowest levels in decades while creating a very strong economy? Do you think his record on keeping terrorism at bay for the last 6 years (not 1 single attack on American soil) ?
2007-08-25 05:46:30 · 18 answers · asked by jaredshouse 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
I think he will be viewed as an absolutely terrible president who did nothing worthwhile as president and caused a great deal of harm. The effects of the foreign policies that he pursued will take decades to correct. His domestic policies will be seen as an abuse of power and blatant violations of the Constitution.
2007-08-25 06:38:55 · answer #1 · answered by tribeca_belle 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I think one history can look at the importance of the war on terror, President Bush will be looked upon as a good leader. I don't say great leader because I think there are only a few of them in our history like Washington, Lincoln, FDR, Reagan.
2007-08-25 07:24:59 · answer #2 · answered by ALASPADA 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Lincoln, Jefferson and Washington weren't xtian, they have been Deists that spoke harshly against xtianity. George W. Bush isn't seen kindly - like the three agencies (properly worth billions each and each) he bankrupt, he additionally bankrupt our u . s . a . which affected the international's financial equipment as properly. 'George replaced right into a stable xtian guy' - what's powerful approximately believing in demons and hell and reacting to existence with panic?
2016-10-16 23:08:06 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Great Leader? Yes absolutely.
Yesterday somebody asked if he would rank in the top five as being one of the best President ever. My thoughts were he probably (50 years from now) be ranked between 5-10 overall.
2007-08-25 06:04:16 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
I have no idea how "history" will look upon Bush. I only know how I will. I voted for him in 2000, but when he sought, from the federal courts, an injunction to stop the recounts in Florida I knew at that point that I would not vote for his re-election. Since Bush himself obviously does not know how to interpret the Constitution, he has no business complaining (even when his complaint is rhetorically correct) about "judicial activism."
2007-08-25 05:58:33 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
He really didn't do anything. Why would he be labeled as a great leader?
You can't say anything about there not being a "single attack on American soil" because despite what you heard... It's rather rare.
2007-08-25 05:58:54 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
Without a doubt. History has a way of weeding out BS and providing an accurate record.
2007-08-25 05:55:01 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
I doubt he will be looked on as great, within our lifetime anyway. It will depend on who is asked. Even today I bet you can't find very many people who agree on a great leader within the last 100 years. That includes FDR, JFK and Reagan. We all have our favorites.
2007-08-25 06:24:52 · answer #8 · answered by JohnFromNC 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Stop! Stop! I can't stop laughing!!! Believe what you want, but you know the truth and the facts, he will go down in history as the President who destabilized the Middle East...he's beat Carter's incompetence record by miles...
2007-08-25 06:21:33 · answer #9 · answered by Spirit 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Yes, for the above reasons and more. He stinks as a communicator, but every wartime president was spit on during his time in office, then seen differently as time went on. I for one am not happy with his stance on the borders, but feel he has done a good job overall...
2007-08-25 05:55:55 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋