and if those are the "qualifications" that Republicans say are vauluable, should we re-think what qualifications we hold to be important?
2007-11-14 18:03:03 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
This is a guy who went broke looking for oil in Texas. Qualified is a strange description.
But if we pretend he is qualified then yes - your point is valid.
2007-11-14 18:06:28 · answer #1 · answered by Sageandscholar 7 · 4⤊ 3⤋
ALL Texas oil companies ran a ground in the 80's. One can hardly blame their failure to understand that simple fact aBUsh blunder.
Lib failure to acknowledge the huge success he had with the Rangers is their shortcoming, not his.
The man liberated two countries, crushed the Taliban, crippled Al Qaeda, put nuclear inspectors in Libya and Iran, opened talks with Iran for the first time in over a decade, disarmed North Korea and captured Saddam, who had killed more than a million of his own people and caused the bane of millions more.
His legacy will leap from the pages of history for many decades to come as a shining example of what can be achieved when our president isn't shrouded in ominous scandal after scandal.
"I like the job. That's what I'll miss the most... I'm not sure anybody ever liked this as much as I've liked it." - Bill Clinton
"I may not have been the greatest president, but I've had the most fun eight years" -- Bill Clinton
- the man didn't do anything except defer everything to his incumbent!
2007-11-15 02:40:27 · answer #2 · answered by wider scope 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Whether or not Bush is qualified to be president isn't his problem. The problem is that he is not the greatest leader in the world. Leaders lead. With 70% to 80% of the people against him, one can hardly call him a leader of the country.
How can one expect the USA to be a world leader when the country itself isn't being led?
2007-11-15 17:01:12 · answer #3 · answered by Overt Operative 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
he is qualified for failure. What are the qualifications for presidency according to cons? If you have good ideas and have a good plan for the country, why does that NOT make you qualified?
2007-11-15 02:08:01 · answer #4 · answered by Coma White 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
He's had a lot of help to get him where he is today... a LOT of help... He should NOT be in the position he is in today... Everything he has gotten or "achieved" in his life has been through the strings and wealth of his family, and nothing more. A man who is truly unlearned, boorish, and an aristocrat does not deserve my respect, nor my support.
2007-11-15 02:54:10 · answer #5 · answered by Frank 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
He would have never made it as far as he did without the Bush wealth and connections. Those just the facts!
2007-11-15 02:24:58 · answer #6 · answered by Smartie Pants 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
The only thing I see that's Pathetic is your question
2007-11-15 02:12:51 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
He ran everything he got a hold of into the ground and that includes this country.
2007-11-15 02:07:42 · answer #8 · answered by mrlebowski99 6 · 4⤊ 2⤋
Bush is so qualified to commit erroneous decisions and it was the blunder of the Americans for voting him twice as President.
2007-11-15 02:06:25 · answer #9 · answered by FRAGINAL, JTM 7 · 3⤊ 4⤋
Lets just deal with FACTS;
2 time elected GOV
2 time elected PREZ
2007-11-15 02:15:35 · answer #10 · answered by PNAC ~ Penelope 4 · 2⤊ 2⤋