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

I believe he will, but would like to see the opinions of others.

2007-11-07 22:54:51 · 15 answers · asked by gortamor 4 in Politics & Government Politics

BTW, I am 50, from the North of Ireland, and did not vote in your elections - so has naught to do with being a 'sore loser'.

2007-11-08 00:06:44 · update #1

15 answers

Yes.

Iraq war.

Plunging dollar.

Attorney General.

3 Trillion dollar deficit.

Most secretive Administration.

The Plame affair.

Election irregularities in 2000 and 2004.

The shame of Cheney.

Breaking our armed services.

Landing on an aircraft carrier pretending to be what he will never be...an honest to God warrior and vet.


OH, I almost forgot...Abu Gharaib and torture.

2007-11-07 23:02:44 · answer #1 · answered by Thomas B 3 · 6 3

George Bush point blank refused to listen to the warnings internationally and internally on 9/11. Bush refused to respond on the warnings on Hurricane Katrina when told the levees had been breached. Bush has alienated the world with his policies and changed world perception on the US after 9/11 from sympathy to the worlds bully. Bush is not an intelligent person and generally lets his country down when he speaks. Finally Bush made the mistake of invading Iraq which is probably the biggest military blunder the US has had since Vietnam and has made the world a more dangerous place!

2007-11-10 05:04:36 · answer #2 · answered by stuartie74 2 · 2 0

Well, he obviously will be by you. But most people over the age of 50 will remember Jimmy Carter as probably the worst of the 20th Century.

Why do you think so? Did he not spend enough on education? Did he not spend enough on a Prescription Plan? Because he didn't stick it to big business enough? (The same big business that a considerable number of Americans work for). Is it because he had the gall to go after people that either attacked us or posed an unacceptable risk? That he had the nerve to rush to take out Saddam after Saddam jerked around the US and the UN for 10 years, violating more than enough resolutions to gives us plenty of authority to go in a kick his tail.

How old are you? Are you even old enough to remember the full 8 years of Clinton? Do you remeber the first Gulf War? Saddam should have been hung then for what he did to Kuwait. The fact that the UN let him go is a crime in itself.

I belive history will show Bush to be ahead of the power curve on confronting terrorism. I believe it will show that he was right to go after Saddam. I believe we will find that Saddam moved his chemical weapons to Sryia. If you don't believe Saddam had them, then what did he gas the Kurds with? What did he gas the Iranians with? Do you think he just disposed of everything after the one use? Why did he keep no records of their disposal?

Is he the worst because he took the path of confrontation instead of the total ineffectiveness or ineptness of the last 2 Democrat Presidents?

Your judgement is based on your inability to deal with the fact that your guy lost. Stop being a sore loser. You want Bush to be judged the worst in history. That's a long time. But you don't even know the history of the last 25 years. That is about how long this has been going on.

2007-11-07 23:25:26 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 4 5

Not one of you left wingers look at the big picture, all you can do is blame ,blame , blame, and then tell not even half of the truth. This is all about Iraq...You all know he had weapons of mass destruction...we know this because he had them twice and worse than that used them twice...as president it is your job to pertect us citizens and you must assume from the past he still had them...Question you should be asking is what happened to them, oh I forgot you know the answer...we had 8 years of clinton who did nothing when un weapon inspectors kept getting kicked out. If Clinton would of done his job we wpuld not be in Iraq now. Any canidate that will say Bush lied to go to war (for polictical reasons )are not fit to hold that office. Who do you think we are fighting in Iraq anyway. It is Alkida, you remember 911, what Bush has done here is having alkida form alot of countrys coming into Iraq so we don`t have to go to different countrys to fight them but like I said you left wing nuts do not see the big picture

2007-11-08 00:13:40 · answer #4 · answered by charlie s 5 · 1 3

History will show that GW Bush's Administration had many of the problems that were the combined problems of several prior presidents:

1. Deficit spending over-inflating the national debt (Reagan and George Sr.)
2. Unnecessary wars, not declared by Congress (L. Johnson and Nixon)
3. Suspension/infringement of American rights (Nixon)
4. A corrupt vice-president, facing possible impeachment proceedings (Nixon)

And these are only a few of the problems.

2007-11-07 23:13:35 · answer #5 · answered by MenifeeManiac 7 · 4 4

no i don't!!!.....i prefer to give the man a bit of credit for actually thinking it through and turning 9/11 to a possible advantage and pay back for all the American lives lost. he was in charge of the most power full country in the world. it would have taken him 10 seconds to ask the American peoples permission to wipe a couple of country's 'we all know to be guilty' off the face of the earth......he didn't. he calmed the situation down and reasoned it all through. and saved a possible huge middle east conflict. adding to that i would also say that America is trying to deal with the most murderous poisonous hate filled people in the entire world. they are barbaric cave dwellers who have no respect for human life.( how would you!! deal with these people?) after 9/11 Bush..America could have been forgiven for nuking the entire middle east......i think George Bush and the American people deserve some credit for the way they handled the whole situation.

2007-11-08 00:51:11 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 3

No, Clinton.
He did nothing to stop the rise of Al Queda. Too busy concentrating on interns.

2007-11-08 20:28:44 · answer #7 · answered by jonnnboy 4 · 0 2

I think yes, because he only thinks in the individual enrichment of his country, he is remembered not signed the Protocol of Kyoto, what will be the future of the world?

2007-11-07 23:05:08 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 5 3

Yes. Because his policies made the whole world dislike him and he was seen as very unilateralist in foreign policy

2007-11-07 22:58:59 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 4 3

If somebody is better than him to win this title. gimme a call

2007-11-07 23:43:40 · answer #10 · answered by BUSH/ISRAEL =warcriminal 5 · 4 2

fedest.com, questions and answers