Is George W Bush The Most Under-Rated President... Ever?
Right now the hot man in town now is Barack Obama. Everywhere you go it's Obama this, Obama that... to me this it's very laughable that the United States may have chosen to look abd to embrace a man just because of his race and forget the merit of his character. Just look at Obama the person and what what will we find? The man hasnt yet been in office and look at the "Obama's scandals" From the favors For (and From) a Shady Chicago Businessman Antoin ("Tony") Rezko, to a man that refuses to put his hand over his heart when saying the pledge of allegiance! ( this from a President?) To the Reverend Wright controversy, and his liberal twit of a wife that couldn't find anything in America to be proud of before.
Whatever happened to leadership and honesty as Presidential traits?
Right now the hot man in town now is Barack Obama. Everywhere you go it's Obama this, Obama that... to me this it's very laughable that the United States may have chosen to look abd to embrace a man just because of his race and forget the merit of his character. Just look at Obama the person and what what will we find? The man hasnt yet been in office and look at the "Obama's scandals" From the favors For (and From) a Shady Chicago Businessman Antoin ("Tony") Rezko, to a man that refuses to put his hand over his heart when saying the pledge of allegiance! ( this from a President?) To the Reverend Wright controversy, and his liberal twit of a wife that couldn't find anything in America to be proud of before.
Whatever happened to leadership and honesty as Presidential traits?
Obama can attack George Bush all he wants to, but his attacks are as empty as his speeches are. Obama's speeches lack in substance and detail. He only speaks in sound bites and slogans designed to make the audience feel good. There is rarely if any details of HOW he will get anything done.
His speeches are about "we need CHANGE" and critical of the Bush administration.
His speeches are about "we need CHANGE" and critical of the Bush administration.
The Country is safe only because Bush don’t give a crap about his low approval ratings. The problem is that Obama he talks about "CHANGE" never quite tells us HOW he will "change" anything, and what he is going to "Change". He is not a LEADER, he only an well accomplished speaker. We need a leader with substance, not an empty suit.
The usual hot air that Washington politicians seem to have made their own. Mr Obama is no different. We’re just too politically correct to say that the only thing different about him is his color.
But this is all about George Bush, so get back to him OK
The usual hot air that Washington politicians seem to have made their own. Mr Obama is no different. We’re just too politically correct to say that the only thing different about him is his color.
But this is all about George Bush, so get back to him OK
Yes, he got us into Iraq. A unpopular war that just about every one in the US Senate and in Congress was for at the time. But for Pete’s sake, he’s the leader of the world’s only superpower. He needs to make and take decisions, even if sometimes they have nasty consequences. So let’s not blame George Bush for the war. Blame the Clintons, or Kerry they were for the war at that time. It's very easy to be a Monday Morning Quarterback and say you are against it NOW! Ted Kennedy says Iraq is Bush’s Vietnam. Well I ask YOU Ted, who's war was Vietnam?
Hillary "Herthighness" Clinton is among those who expressed such a belief as well as, Ted Kennedy, John Rockefeller, Al Gore, Carl Levin, Patty Murray, Nancy Pelosi, Joe Liberman, Barbara Boxer, Robert Byrd, Wesley Clark, Bill Clinton, Tom Daschle, John Edwards, Dick Gephart, Sandy Berger, Madeline Albright, Tom Larkin, Harry Ford, and Diane Feinstein.
We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction.”—Ted Kennedy, September 27, 2002
“There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein’s regime is a serious danger, that he is a tyrant, and that his pursuit of lethal weapons of mass destruction cannot be tolerated. He must be disarmed.”—Ted Kennedy, Sept 27, 2002
“I will be voting to give the president of the United States the authority to use force - if necessary - to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security.”—John F. Kerry, Oct 2002
“The threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but as I said, it is not new. It has been with us since the end of that war, and particularly in the last 4 years we know after Operation Desert Fox failed to force him to reaccept them, that he has continued to build those weapons. He has had a free hand for 4 years to reconstitute these weapons, allowing the world, during the interval, to lose the focus we had on weapons of mass destruction and the issue of proliferation.”—John Kerry, October 9, 2002
“We need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime. We all know the litany of his offenses. He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. ...And now he is miscalculating America’s response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction. That is why the world, through the United Nations Security Council, has spoken with one voice, demanding that Iraq disclose its weapons programs and disarm. So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but it is not new. It has been with us since the end of the Persian Gulf War.”—John Kerry, Jan 23, 2003
“There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein’s regime is a serious danger, that he is a tyrant, and that his pursuit of lethal weapons of mass destruction cannot be tolerated. He must be disarmed.”—Ted Kennedy, Sept 27, 2002
“I will be voting to give the president of the United States the authority to use force - if necessary - to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security.”—John F. Kerry, Oct 2002
“The threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but as I said, it is not new. It has been with us since the end of that war, and particularly in the last 4 years we know after Operation Desert Fox failed to force him to reaccept them, that he has continued to build those weapons. He has had a free hand for 4 years to reconstitute these weapons, allowing the world, during the interval, to lose the focus we had on weapons of mass destruction and the issue of proliferation.”—John Kerry, October 9, 2002
“We need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime. We all know the litany of his offenses. He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. ...And now he is miscalculating America’s response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction. That is why the world, through the United Nations Security Council, has spoken with one voice, demanding that Iraq disclose its weapons programs and disarm. So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but it is not new. It has been with us since the end of the Persian Gulf War.”—John Kerry, Jan 23, 2003
“As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process.”—Nancy Pelosi, December 16, 1998
Did they all lie?
I happen to believe that the only leader in the West to have admirable qualities in droves is the man in the Oval Office right now, George W. Bush.
Sure he has his faults and he's a pretty lousy speaker, but who cares? Not me. So he can't pronounce Nuclear, big freaken deal, I think that I say it the same way he does.
If you do a little research The first U.S. President we know of to say “nu-ku-lar,” and the first to be widely scolded for it, so did Eisenhower, as far back as his speech to the UN. Even Jack Bauer on TV can’t pronounce "Nuclear" and everybody loves him!
Something had to be done about Iraq and George Bush had the courage of his convictions to get in there and do what was needed to be done.
Can you remember, during his visit to New York at the site of "Ground Zero" he stood on top of a New York City fire engine, which was partially buried in the rubble, and addressed a group of construction workers. One of the workers yelled, "We can't hear you." And Bush responded, "I hear you, the rest of the world hears you, and the people who knocked down these buildings will hear all of us soon!"
And a few weeks after that they did hear from us.
And a few weeks after that they did hear from us.
Speaking at a session of Congress, Bush said, "our war on terror begins with Al-Qaeda, but it does not end there. It will not end until every terrorist group of global reach has been found, stopped and defeated." So began the war on terror. And here we are, he told us that this was not an ordinary war and it’s going to last for a long time, so what are we complaining about? How many strikes against our country has happened since? None! And how many times have they tried to hit us again? Numerous times, and I’m sure there has been plenty of times that we were not even aware of. Yes, there was a very heavy price to be paid. No question about that.
The Department of Homeland Security was created and money was pumped into the military to bring it back to the strength needed after Clinton had depleted it. .
So after seven years, America became frustrated with the cost of the war both for the loss of American lives and for the monetary cost of the war. I can understand that, sure it’s frustrating. But that’s the sign of a good President. A President that don’t look at his lowering approval ratings and his lack of support. After we failed to find the alleged weapons of mass destruction now commonly addressed as WMD’s it was cliche to say, "Bush Lied"
He went on as if he didn’t even hear the protesting and the disapproval of the Liberal Congress Surrender Monkey’s! And here we are today, finding that maybe he was right all along, and the "Bush Lied" people were the ones that were fooled! With the news about finding 550 metric tons of "yellow cake" it certainly looks that way.
I for one ALWAYS believed that the WMD DID exist.
Bill Clinton always ignored the terrorist’s and was very good at promising that the ones responsible for the "Cole" and the First World Trade Center bombing as well as Clinton's lackadaisical response to bin Laden’s bombing our embassies in East Africa in 1998.
Where was the out cry then? Why was Clinton such a hot shot President? Besides doing Monica Lewinsky, what the hell did he ever do?
I for one ALWAYS believed that the WMD DID exist.
Bill Clinton always ignored the terrorist’s and was very good at promising that the ones responsible for the "Cole" and the First World Trade Center bombing as well as Clinton's lackadaisical response to bin Laden’s bombing our embassies in East Africa in 1998.
Where was the out cry then? Why was Clinton such a hot shot President? Besides doing Monica Lewinsky, what the hell did he ever do?
With Clinton, it was ALL about poll numbers ......The truth is that in 1992 when Bill Clinton ran for President based solely on the slogan, "It's the economy, stupid," because he recognized focusing on the economy would translate into good poll numbers and good poll numbers were necessary to validate his own ego. George Bush may not have the slickness of his predecessor Slick Willie, but he is a man you can trust. A man that didn't give a crap about ratings. Ratings was something that George Bush don't give a damn about and something that the Slick one was all about.
They say this is an "Unpopular war’’ - Is there such a thing as a popular war? A war is when people get killed and property gets destroyed, that’s what they taught me in the Army. So how can a war be popular? Should it have general approval or acceptance? Aw, gee.. The people really don’t approve of the war! But did they approve of the terrorist knocking down 2 of this countries largest and most populated buildings and killing 3,000 innocent people?
What should we have done about that?
Polls show that most Americans want this long, and very costly war to be over. But they also want us to win. Sure, they want the troops home, and so do I...But they are still afraid of being attacked in our cities subways, in large crowds such as ball games and concerts and whatever. Yet when we capture one of these rotten terrorists, and question them, they think about Abu Ghraib. As if we could question them over a cup of tea.
Do you think the war in Iraqi is popular with the American people?
Would it be safer for America if we fight the Jihadists in the streets of America?, Maybe we should ask that question to Bruce “Shut Up and Sing” Springsteen, or Alec Baldwin!
When Howard Dean, Polosi, Kerry, Fonda, Moore, Soros, Reid, Franken, Kennedy, Obama and the others on the extreme left say they "speak for the majority of Americans" do you believe that they speak for you?" No soldier, and no citizen glories in war. No war is ever popular.
God Bless You President Bush, thanks for keeping us safe.




|