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

I thought he ran on an opposite platform in 2004. How disappointing.

2007-09-17 05:56:52 · 17 answers · asked by Dirk von Pelvis 1 in Politics & Government Other - Politics & Government

17 answers

You know... People who are pro Bush, didn't vote for him.

People who did vote for him, now hate his guts.

2007-09-17 06:01:13 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2 2

First, I have to tell you, I did not vote for Geo. W. Bush. I do not support much of anything he has done. I thought he was on the right track immediately after 9/11 when he made his "Bin Laden, Dead or Alive" speech. It reminded me of Theodore Roosevelt and the slogan "Pedecaris alive or Raisuli dead". (And before history buffs get all defensive...I know Pedecaris was a male, and not even a US citizen, but I am talking about a FEELING, here) Maybe some of us baby boomers are still waiting for John Wayne to come to the rescue....I don't know. But I digress. What I meant to say is: I disagree whole heartedly with Bush, but I deny that he is a coward. There is not a cowardly bone in that man's body. Perhaps a little cowardice (or at least caution) would have served our country better, but the man has not the good gumption to be afraid.

2007-09-17 13:10:33 · answer #2 · answered by claudiacake 7 · 0 0

He isn't. President Bush is second best hope we have for our country, the first being a revival. Let me ask you this: would you rather we have our troops in Iraq keeping the terrorists there or would you rather we draw out our troops and leave the terrorists free run to do whatever they want? Would you rather be speaking German right now? Would you have rather we let the Germans take the world during WW II or would you rather we fought it? My point is that its the same thing. We leave the terrorists and they go on building nuclear weapons without any hindrance, and what direction do you think they're going to point them? We left the Germans and they would've gone on to take the world.
And where the frink did cowardly come from? You think its easy to send troops into a foreign country while everyone attacks you from your own country? How much easier would it be for him to just pull out and succumb? But he doesn't. He stands. And that's considered cowardice? Not in my book. Look, don't blast Bush with false accusations, okay. He's got enough on his plate as it is. I'm not saying he's perfect, he makes mistakes like all of us, but overall he's the best there is if you're a freedom-loving citizen and aren't all that thrilled about worshiping Alla and speaking Iraqi. Now, if you or anyone else on here would like to tell me a valid accusation or explain to me why he is a flip-flopper, please contact me and I will gladly strike it down for you with more facts. My email is zage_mereel@yahoo.com.

2007-09-17 14:09:41 · answer #3 · answered by Z. Mereel 2 · 1 1

George Bush, from his list of campaign promises:

I will not leave problems or debt to future presidents or generations...

I will not engage in nation building overseas, as it has been shown not to work...

We will fully fund research into alternative fuels...

and here's a beaut, he actually said in 2000, because he was running against Gore: I believe that excess carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is a real problem that we must deal with...

What amazes me is the sheep who follow the man seem to be able to pretend he never said any of these things.

That's why they had to make such a big deal out of this stupid flip-flop thing in 2004. They always use criticisms that might be applied against them and project them on to opponents.

Hence, islamo-fascists. Say what you will about islamics... they are crazy and extreme; but the issue isn't fascism. It's religious fanaticism.

But the best defense, as far as Republican strategists, is to twist the meaning out of words, and accuse the enemy of what you yourself do.

Thumb me down now, oh teenage Bush freaks.

2007-09-17 13:04:50 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

To hear the cons when one of their people changes their mind because of new facts or information they are gallant and keeping up with the desired plan. That is not a flip flop. When their opponent does exactly the same thing it is a flip flop. The cons are hypocrates as they consistantly show every day.

2007-09-17 13:32:01 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

This is what is wrong with a lot of people who bash Bush, they really can't or don't explain what they mean. Bush, as well as many other presidents have made mistakes, but I don't know of any topic where he's flip-flopped like the liberal politicians we have in the Congress right now (we vote and support the war, just kidding get them out now, it's what my constituants want so I can get elected president).

2007-09-17 13:03:27 · answer #6 · answered by Mrs. Morals 1 · 0 2

No, I think he has tried to do the best he could, but he let his advisers get the best of him. He had a hard start and I feel he thought he was doing what he though was right, but it was not good enough. I feel he should have listened to his generals and gone with their advise. I feel I could have done better, but that is here nor there. I believe that your military ad visors are there for a reason and your political ad visors should stick to politics, he let them get to close. Being President is one of the hardest things that anyone can ever imagine, but it takes good common sense and that is in short supply these days. I would run for president with $1.00 dollar in my war chest. If the people believe in me, then I will do them no wrong.

2007-09-17 13:24:19 · answer #7 · answered by schneider2294@sbcglobal.net 6 · 0 1

"I'm not so sure the role of the United States is to go around the world and say, 'This is the way it's got to be.'"
George W. Bush in debate with Al Gore 2000

2007-09-17 13:09:13 · answer #8 · answered by wyldfyr 7 · 0 0

HILLARY CLINTON IS THE ULTIMATE FLIP FLOPPER. There are endless nubmers of clips of hillary supporting the war and saying we need to go in there and now she's acting like the she never acted that way. She is like this on every issue. Liberals don't have any plans or take any stances on anything, they just attack what others are doing. I would challenge anyone to name one thing liberals are doing? BTW, global warming is a crock of SHHHH

2007-09-17 13:02:54 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1 3

Opposite to what? At least make a point if your going to attempt to Bush bash. I mean you could have at least thrown in a tasteless joke or something.

2007-09-17 13:02:14 · answer #10 · answered by Jerbson 5 · 1 2

fedest.com, questions and answers