Bush's Successes
Find a Conversation
| Mon, 07-19-2004 - 3:25pm |
Dear Reader,
I'm getting sick and tired of my fellow Americans
saying that the presidency of George W. Bush is a
failure. With the string of successes he's had,
nothing could be further from the truth. Let me list a
few:
1. He has successfully rid America of that troubling
budget surplus and turned it into a $500 billion
deficit.
2. He has successfully helped America's trading
partners have the highest trade surplus with us in
America's history.
3. He has successfully lowered the taxes for the
richest Americans and corporations at the expense of
99% of the American population.
4. He has successfully started another Viet Nam in
Iraq after lying to the whole world.
5. He has successfully pushed the price of gas up to
the highest level ever here in America.
6. He has successfully allowed American corporations
to dramatically increase their pollution.
7. He has successfully thrown about 10% of the
population out of work.
8. He has successfully allowed corporations to export
our best middle-class jobs.
9. He has successfully divided our country as never
before.
10. He has successfully driven our oldest allies away.
11. He has successfully united the terrorists as never
before (he said all along he was a uniter, not a
divider).
12. He has successfully broken his oath to uphold the
constitution of the United States of America.
13. He has successfully united Democrats (yay!) as
they haven't been for years (I told you he was a
uniter).
14. He has successfully driven me out of the
Republican party for the rest of my life.
You know, with a string of successes like that, it's a
wonder America is still standing.

Pages
Is it spin? Perhaps, is it entirely inaccurate? Nope.
And while something 'May be hard', doing nothing is not the answer.
As for Bush, whether or not he has 'Total control' is irrelevant. It's a flip flop, and a flip flop of a much higher scale than anything I've seen in a Bush/Cheney campaign ad sliming John Kerry.
Is it spin? Perhaps, is it entirely inaccurate? Nope. "
I thought the number was a bit higher, but not much. What ever it was, it was way too low and if dirty bombs (the concern at the time) were going to get through, it sure seemed to me that the odds were with the shipper to achieve success. It seemed like this issue just faded away for some reason.(?) Same with the railways. I guess there was something more attention getting for the media.
"And while something 'May be hard', doing nothing is not the answer."
I can't disagree with you there. I can imagine what the arguments were. Too expensive, Not enough time or man power. Need to go where the threat is originating from and keep it off our soil. No intelligence to suggest... Apply it as you will to either party, I can invision both using this type of lines, depending on how it would benefit them.
"As for Bush, whether or not he has 'Total control' is irrelevant. It's a flip flop, and a flip flop of a much higher scale than anything I've seen in a Bush/Cheney campaign ad sliming John Kerry."
It may be irrelevant I was really just asking. I don't know if the President had the control to just squash the commission if he didn't want it at that time or if it could have been pressed into place by others regardless of the Presidents wishes. When it comes to flip-flops. Flip-flops can be the result of being thoughtful in there efforts b/c a the person decided to take the time and consider a point of view that may not have been his/hers initially. Flip-flops can be b/c a person has no real convictions and is just going with the popular idea that will ultimately benefit them in the long run. Personally, I disagree that Kerry is a flip-flopper, I think that his stances are pretty clear, what I don't know is what his motivations always are, and never will. When it comes to President Bush's changes in his thought process, again, I don't know if he bent to public or political pressure, or if he changed out of a thoughtful decision making process. All I do know is in some of the circumstances, I welcomed the change.
The answer is not raising taxes, it is controlled spending and cutting out programs that are just outright wasteful. I have been around too long to be told otherwise.>
I don't know of anyone, Republican or Democrat, who would disagree with you on this. I think taxpayers have become so jaded they don't see any way to avoid congressional sneak attacks on our tax dollars.
Maybe taxpayers could get together and hire one totally honest Democrat and one totally honest Republican (already this sounds like an impossible task) to dog congress.
Anything coming up for passage that involved blatent misuse of tax dollars (the distinguished senator from the desert state of Wherever asking for 30 trillion dollars for a Whale Research Center) could sound the alarm. As reviled as the media is they know how to get info out (they've done a good job with America's Most Wanted and Amber Alerts, etc.) They could get the name, rank and sin of the wastrel senator out to the public, the public could create so much pressure - congress would have to think twice about it.
I think I drank too much coffee and my mind has wandered off to never-never land....but it sure sounds good...
But I think they all do, on all sides of the fence.
Between the cuts, and the increase in federal tax revenues from the increase in jobs, the government will have the opportunity to close the gap, as they did under Bill Clinton.
I do think that a small tax increase is needed for the highest wage earners, as I have said, but nowhere near what will be required under some of Kerry's spending plans.
Now, according to the Democratic pollsters, this country is ready to oust Bush, but all of the polls are showing a virtual dead heat. It doesnt seem that as many people are as gung-ho to oust Bush as the pollsters had hoped.
We need someone who is a well respected person but not involved in the inner circle of Washington to run, as I think the people of this country are tired of the "good ole' boys club" taking care of each other.
But hey, if you think a couple of million Walmart jobs and vauge notions of cutting where I don't believe you can cut, that's ok. We'll agree to disagree.
Now, according to the Democratic pollsters, this country is ready to oust Bush, but all of the polls are showing a virtual dead heat. It doesnt seem that as many people are as gung-ho to oust Bush as the pollsters had hoped
--
Democratic Pollsters?
I'm not even looking at the head to head polls. When MAINSTREAM polls continually show Bush's approval rating below 50, and satisfaction with the country around 40, that speaks of a country wanting change.
I had no idea every pollster I get that data from is DEMOCRATIC pollsters, hell even Fox News shows low satisfaction with the country and Bush's approval at 47.
Keep misunderestimating the Dems with no morale problems, it happened in the reverse in 2000.
No, you yourself haven't irked me, it's what you said. I'm forever hearing faithful Republicans parrot word-for-word certain lines, and you just did the same thing. I know you're an independent, so I found it more irksome. Then I see your post about O'Reilly and the Rassmussen poll and the following right-leaning comments. All polls are showing something different. In fact another site I visit is having a great discussion on what questions are being asked in these polls and of what people, how many people, etc.
BTW - I hope as an independent you don't get all your news from Fox?
As to Flip-flopper do you not believe that this title couldn't also be applied to Bush? Seems to me, especially lately, it's a very appropriate.
As I have only gotten back into the political fire because of the faults I associate with this administration, I can't say that off the top of my head I know what Kerry has done for the last 20 years. I do know he's been a Senator. I've read many people comment it's hard to make an impact on the Hill with 400+ other people. I also know that for the last 20 years Bush has been an alcoholic (untreated recovery), done drugs, rumored to have pushed a girlfriend to have an abortion while it was still illegal (Daddy took care of it), may have served in the National Guard, had many family sponsored failed businesses, traded Sammy Sosa, and his friends pushed him into politics to protect baseball - George wanted to be commissioner - and a weak governorship, such that exists in Texas was a great place for George because he couldn't hurt anything. Oops. Now a lot of this we can't verify because a lot of the records are sealed in Daddy's library and a lot of his meetings are off the record and behind closed doors. You have to sign a legal document just to hear his speeches on the campaign trail. For me, it means he's a coward and has much to hide.
Bush has nothing to show for the last three years of his life. Bush has "led" this country for almost four years and I've seen what he can do. I'm not impressed and I'm willing to take a chance on someone else. One in the hand is not worth two in the Bush if you feel what you're holding is rotten.
Also, by now you've probably read the booklet that Kerry has put out detailing his plans. If I were you I wouldn't really worry about the tax cuts and paying for health care. Unless the Democrats can gain control of the House or Senate, Kerry won't be able to do much at all money-wise and the Budget for 2005 is voted on by the current Congress. But I do believe that Kerry can bring us back international support and bring some of our troops home from Iraq. We will be able to refortify our defenses and stregthen our international relations. Out of control spending will stop, as suddenly there won't be complete Republican control and we can begin to spend on what matters rather than the large outlays of pork in the last few years. Republicans have been the kids in a candy store, and Bush has let them so that he could get what he wanted. We have weaker civil liberties (Patriot Act), we have CEO's out of control (Enron, Tyco, Halliburton, etc. (many friends of this administration)) and companies shipping more and more jobs oversees, while enjoying tax cuts from Bush. Blank checks written to contractors on no bid contracts - has the money Bush spent of the war been well spent? As a woman I'm deeply troubled by an administration that removes certian information from gov't websites - women's wages v mens - or who arbitrarily changes medical research - from "there is no link between abortions and breast cancer" to "our findings are inconclusive" (and these are only the ones we know about!). He's rewritten many environmental laws, which as a mother bother me greatly. Do you know how many kids at my daughter's daycare have asthma? I don't remember back when I was a kid a single one of my classmates having it. I work for power plants, some cleaner than others, and like anyone, they'll do what they can to make money as long as it's within the law, loosen the laws they loosen their standards to compete. I think through challenge is where we find our innovation - we're not being challenged, we're not going to innovate. I have more faith that this country can take it and doesn't need to take the easy way out. Bush has never tried anything hard. His whole life is handed to him. Don't you find it ironic that with possibly the dumbest President we have, the recommendation from the 9/11 Commission is to put an intelligence in the White House?
Sorry, I'm obviously one of those stirred to action during this campaign. For the first time in my life I really can't see the other side. Why would you vote for Bush? Maybe I'm too optimistic that Kerry can do better. I won't expect it to happen overnight but I'll sleep better thinking that Kerry won't sit idle for seven minutes while the country's under attack. Who would you rather be in charge of the little red button?
I know I'm going to get trashed for this and I welcome your opinions, but I am entitled to mine too. We're still free in this country to have them. Just make sure you sign on the dotted line first.
Pages