can you think of a worse person to give Advice?

Question

Does Bush actually believe people think he is doing a good job? Why would he think anyone would listen to him?

is this is like someone off the street giving advice to someone on how to do open heart surgery, except there's a small chance the person on the street might know what they are talking about.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,297938,00.html

Answer 1

the worst person in America? George W Bush ,Fool incompetent, coward

Answer 2

Most of the people on this site would be worse, to be honest. President Bush may be horrible at his job, but he's at least familiar with it in ways that someone who hasn't sat in the big chair wouldn't be.

Answer 3

Whether or not he is doing a good or a bad job depends on your point of view.

For example: We were in a recession when he took office and now the economy is stable.

So for somebody who was focused on the economy he would be doing a good job.

What are the issues that are important to you?

Answer 4

wow, are you serious? i support him, not on every issue, but i support him whole heartedly.

you need to shut up.

what point are you trying to get across by posting this? i cant exatly figure it out

stop complaining
go cry me a river, build a bridge and get over it! if you think he is doing a bad job, keep it to yourself otherwise you may just make yourself look like a moron hippie or something

the worst person to get advice from would have to be, Hillary Clinton, Al Gore, Micheal Moore, Grey Davis, or Joseph Stalin [the original, not the female version {aka: Hillary Clinton}]

Answer 5

I wouldn't break too much sweat over it. Hillary's a lot of things; But she isn't stupid. I'm sure she just rolls her eyes and mostly listens politely with little to say when Bush is on the phone...

Answer 6

Oh, just another Bush hater with the typical naive and immature bashing. I almost gave my hopes up that it would be an intelligent question. Here's an intelligent question for you.

Who are you again?

Answer 7

A deluded moron Mr. Bush is. He still thinks that we are winning this bloodbath.

Answer 8

I think the old adage of walking a day in someone else's shoes is appropriate here. Until you've actually BEEN president and had to make decisions that involve money, lives, security, economy, etc., you can't tell your behind from that crook in your arm.

The fact is we went into Afghanistan and Iraq and are on the sidelines with Somalia for reasons that the general public can't begin to enumerate or understand. The world is a giant sweater, and if you pull one string, it's going to affect the entire fabric.

I can tell you a few simple facts:

a) Europe and Japan and India buy more oil from Middle East states than the US does. This should give you some insight as to why we are staunch supporters of the Saud kings, even when they don't always do themselves or us any big favors. They keep the lights on for our friends around the world, who'd soon be our enemies if their societies were under duress in any way (such as lack of oil).

b) if you summed up what the USA spends (our tax dollars!) on the Afghan and Iraqi wars, it's SEVERAL billion dollars a month (probably close to a billion per day). NOW, if you did your research, you'd see that on Saddam's best day, he wasn't able to make a billion dollars in REVENUE (let alone PROFIT) at his maximum capacity. The truth is, the oil in Iraq is suspect, hard to get out and even harder to keep getting out. AND any oil that's not OUT of the ground is worthless. Remember that when people cry NO WAR FOR OIL. This isn't about oil, it's about both eliminating risks to the USA (Saddam and his covert support of terrorism were severe risks) while enhancing oil producing nations' ability to do something other than oil (imagine what the middle east would be like if they had no oil revenues whatsoever, forget about it!).

c) Iran, N. Korea and Syria are working VERY closely to build up, quickly, a nuclear arsenal. WHY? Because if and when they do build something viable, it will be HARDER for more diplomatic/economy driven nations to curb those nations' thirst for expansion and totalitarianism. Do yourself a favor, read up on the biographies of Ayatollah Khameini, Bashar Al-Assad, and Kim Jong Il. Then ask yourself, would you want your WORST enemy living under these men? I think we'll all agree, these men have no interest in peaceful coexistence with their neighbors, and all seek to consolidate regional power. Assad wants to be the new Saddam (they are both Ba'athists), Khameini wants to overrun Iraq and grow Shia Islam in the region (and choke off Saudi and Gulf State oil revenues with tariffs or outright takeovers) and Kim Jong Il sees opportunity across the border in S. Korea, a regional industrial powerhouse (nevermind the power he'd wield with nuclear weapons aimed at Japan). We don't need 14th century despot/warlords in this world anymore. Enough is enough.

d) lastly, demographic change is going to threaten both our allies and the American way of life. Europe touts (as does Michael Moore) a 'great' social welfare system where drugs are free, surgeries are free, doctors are free, pensions are free, etc etc. (nevermind most people in Europe will be renters, not owners of land and will be a chronically suppressed class financially, due to excessive taxation to support this social welfare system). The reason for the French riots in 2005, or the Danish cartoon hubbub or the London and Glasgow attacks of recent years, is because Europe found that original Europeans weren't breeding, but they were expecting the same benefits their parents got. What did the geniuses at the EU do? They imported cheap labor in the form of Muslim immigrants who had NO PROBLEM breeding (Original European birthrates are 1.9 per couple, not enough to sustain Italians in Italy past 2050; Muslim birth rates are well over 3.0 per couple, which would indicate a growing Muslim population in most European states that allow such workforce immigration). As Muslims outpace Christians demographically speaking, the form and nature of law, economics, culture and all of society will change, and it will change in a way more similar to Iran than to the USA. The USA's challenge is to absorb all its future immigration without having similar changes to law, economics, culture and society. As much as people bellyache about America, it is culturally rich, its laws have centuries of precedent, the voting and representation systems are mature and evolving and the security apparatus is unparalleled. If the demographic mix swings heavily away from status quo, ALL those positive attributes may be in jeopardy. More people come INTO the USA then leave. And more people come INTO the USA than any other nation on earth. That's all you really need to know about the American society. It's preferred over all others, globally.

So in considering that "W" has been in office for nearly 7 years, and has lived the presidency 24/7 for that time, I'd imagine he has access to much more information than your proverbial man on the street. And he will have access to information that will make these decisions make sense to HIM and his advisors, when they don't make sense to you or most of America, because we are simply politically ignorant of classified and top secret facts. He isn't the best president in history, for multiple reasons, but to claim he's the last person who should give advice on the presidency is simply hilarious.

Before we lambaste Bush or Clinton or anyone else who's served our country under threat of assassination, personal humiliation and lifelong security and privacy deprivation, let's be reasonable. This is a complex world, and like it or not, the USA is the leading force in the world on pretty much every issue that has any level of significance. It's not an easy job, and not every one can do it, let alone do it well. Of ALL the candidates, I think Hillary can use a lesson or two in how to be a president, what it takes, what you really can or can't do in that office, and what is expected of the person sitting in that chair in the Oval Office. She is a great campaigner and Hill politician. But once you're an executive officer of the nation, all bucks stop with you. That's VASTLY different than being a first lady, or one of 100 senators, or a partner at a po-dunk law firm. OUR LIVES are in her hands. And I think she deserves kudos for reaching out for information that will make her a more viable candidate.

Lastly, if you're American, don't ever forget that, and don't ever downplay it. This is the greatest assembly of humans under one flag in the history of the world. We've done it the right way more often than not over 230 years. Be proud of that, fix your mistakes locally and work harder to keep America the beacon of freedom and fairness for all others to aspire to.

Answer 9

sounds like you don't much care for his ideas

Answer 10

it's close, but yes I can, Rudy Giuliani, I'd rather listen to a sock puppet then him