Bush handlers are changing strategies and allowing the president to — gasp! — take questions from audience members who weren’t prescreened and didn’t have to sign a GOP loyalty pledge. “In the last three months, Mr. Bush has started taking questions, some of them tough, from audiences not stacked with supporters,” The New York Times reported. “Mr. Bush typically sidesteps the hardest questions, but his answers often produce news.” Wow, the president is having to explain and defend his policies. What a revolutionary concept!
Posted by Phillip Brownlee
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/22
- Regular on Open thread 11/22
- Regular on Open thread 11/22
- Rage on Open thread 11/22
- cosmos_originally on Open thread 11/22
- Chas on Open thread 11/22
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/22
- Boxlock20 on Open thread 11/22
- satatom on Open thread 11/22
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/22
78 Comments
Yeah astounding
They let him out on a short leash and he swears he said nothing about Saddam being connected to 9/11.
And the hideous thing is that is only news story number three in the daily Bush blunders.
Bush answers those questions as though he were speaking to a group of mentally challenged adults. I suspect he answers that way because that’s the way he’s been briefed to make sure he understands the material.
Mr. President: Can’t the United States find something better to do?
Something better than bankrupting America to make Israel the crime capital of the world?
Believe it or not but there are better things to do.
He’s cool like that. :)
It’s been great watching Bush get his ass handed to him by enraged senior citizens.
I particularly like when the guy who helped to write the ABM treaty got up and pushed W on nuclear nonproliferation.
Now that he’s the lamest of lame ducks, no point hiding it: our President is a moron.
Yeah you gotta love a president that feels comfortable enough to field questions from an alleged random crowd 1 year into his second term.
Gentle people,
(with the exception of J R)
There is always the general perception that republican presidents are dumb and democrats are smart. This misconception is foisted upon the public by the democratic leadership and their willing accomplices in the mainstream media.
Other than the fact that GWB was apparently smart enough to beat the best the democrats could put up against him twice, there are other measures of his intelligence that in almost every case demonstrate that he is ’smarter’ than Algore or John (did you know he was in Viet Nam?) Kerry.
To believe that Bush is stupid, ignorant, or just plain dumb is a reflection on your susceptibility to the constant propaganda put out by the DNC and the media. In short, if you fall back on the argument that GWB is dumb, you are either disingenuous or dumb yourself.
Hank
Hank says: “There is always the general perception that republican presidents are dumb and democrats are smart.”
You know who agrees with Hank? None other than Thomas “whats the matter with kansas” Frank.
He notes that the perception of dems being the “smart kids” and the r’s being the “cool kids” works against dems. It seems in our ‘merica, we just dont like smart people.
The dems get their asses handed to them when they propose smart policy. Then voters turn around and coronate king george because he is the guy we would like to sit down with and have a beer.
And we wonder why the country is a wreck? It is thanks to voters who treat presidential elections like a vote for prom king :)
Let’s see..To quote from the Eclectic web site:Before he was 40, George W. Bush was accepted as a “legacy” student at Yale University, where he blew off classes and graduated with a GPA variously described as 1.68 or 2.0. His family’s friends pulled connections to get him into the Texas Air National Guard, and to get him accepted for flight training despite the lowest acceptable score on the test. In both cases, he magically jumped ahead of hundreds of other people on waiting lists for those positions through absolutely no merit or achievement of his own.
Smart or not, he has been depending on his parent’s money and associates to get his position in life. Who got him elected? Karl Rove. Who financed the election that spent more and stooped lower than ever before on a presidential election and ended up with 2 of the closest elections in history? Oil companies, Haliburton, etc.
He is a paper tiger, a figurehead for the special interests that put him there. This is proven by the fact that he is well into his second term before he is allowed to answer real questions on his own.
One thing I’d like the President to address in these kinds of “meet the public” things is this.
The president continues to say that sectarian/secular attacks in Iraq have not yet led to civil war. His strongest evidence seems to be something like “Iraq had a chance to degenerate into civil war but pulled back.” From this the president apparently concludes that Iraqis have made a decision (in the aggregate) about civil war, and that decision is “not for us.”
My question: Mr. President, I think every American knows by now that you are an optimistic man by nature. In fact, one reason behind your recent loss of support may be that more and more Americans are deciding your optimism is sometimes unjustified. For instance, oil revenues paying for Iraq, Iraqis will welcome us with open arms, “mission accomplished,” Katrina, etc.: these are all issues the resolution of which have all been significantly hampered, at least in part, by unrealistic expectations on your part (probably due to your overall sense of optimism).
What provisions have you and your administration made in the case that Iraq is merely waiting for the US and its military to disengage from the area before engaging in all-out civil war?
In other words, maybe Iraq has decided that civil war is “not for us” as long as the US military is in Iraq. When the US pulls out, however, then old scores will be settled. After all, this is the Arab way and its especially the Iraqi way, a way perhaps best reflected in the personality of most most effective leader of Iraq, Saddam Hussein. Iraqis take great pride in their culture of blood feuds, of bloody revenge.
Is it possible that your optimism precludes any honest assessment of this possiblity?
Dear ksfarmgrrl,
I must have missed the last ’smart policy’ proposed by the “smart kids”!
Did it have to do with their social security plan? No, they don’t have one. (Algore was going to put the non-existant funds in a ‘lock-box’!) Did it have to do with thier plan to fight terrorism? No again. We’ll just wait until they attack us here at home and then we’ll provide them with an attorney if they survive the attack.
No dear, the Prom King will get my vote every time as long as “smart kids” can only offer the failed policies of the past.
Hank
I just got thru watching Bushytail’s press conf.He made the ridicules statement”it has been proven that a democracy does not make war”That just adds to his long string of lies. And we keep him in office???
Wow I wish I could see some of these “tough questions” bush has alledgedly been fielding. I did see him get one from a kid concerned about how he was gonna pay for college. bush spund completely away from that question, never answered it, and went on the ususal tax cuts are good litany.
Now Hank, you know I can’t let you get away with that Re Social Security: “Gore wanted to put the non existant funds into a lockbox”
Uh…..Hank? Those “non existant funds” would be FICA taxes paid in by the millions by each and every American worker! See Gore had this crazy idea to “LOCKBOX” those collected taxes instead of spending them in the general budget as we do now. That’s ok though. Republicans don’t want to fix Social security, they wanna kill it.
Uh Hank? An arab 7,000 miles away who is pissed off at me well….. I just can’t see as much of a bogeyman. I don’t think I need to go “smoke em out” I don’t think I need to send other people kids to get shot at by them.
Close the borders maybe? Let Democrat plans to improve port security out of committe for a vote maybe might help…..you know, as opposed to putting the ports and their security directly IN THE HANDS of those same Arabs.
The last ’smart policy’ implemented by Democrats? OK. Not spending more money than we took in and generating a budget surplus.
As for SS, well, not presenting a ‘plan’ to solve a phony crisis counts as prudence in my book. Or does endorsing ‘prudence’ make me a conservative?
The American preference for seemingly charmingly dumb people is troubling.
Ike was seen as uncle- like to the cold intellectual Stevenson.
bush is “somebody you could have a beer with” Sheesh I wouldn’t want to have a beer with him.
Am I the only one who thinks a President should be able to pronounce the word nuclear correctly? I mean somebody has to have mentioned this to him. Or is it part of his handlers efforts to make him justaguy that makes him arrogantly embrace being an idiot?
JR, dont blame the preznit if karl’s hand up his backside doesnt move his mouth correctly.
Charly didnt pronounce everything correctly either when Edgar Bergan’s hand got cramps!
Making peace with the Arabs is the only long term way out of the mess.
I don’t hear a single mention of peace. Am I the only smart guy here?
Phillip,
Once again your title was misleading. It should have read:
“Another Bush bashing open thread, have fun.”
I gave you the bait by saying ” am I the only smart guy here?” so call me a lot of names, then let’s talk about “peace.”
I’ve been saying it for 20 years, Ed. I gather you’re trying convince people to make it happen, but just getting them to vote is a challenge (and not this crowd, of course: the Nick & Jessica folks. . .)
Find a viable candidate who has both the nerve and the money to take on AIPAC. The trail of political roadkill started with James Abourezk and continues today (Cynthia McKinney’s political ressurection offers some hope–maybe).
And, yes, I read the articles.
You’re right as usual, so, Am I having a “moment?”
For those who missed it, the press conference, in a nutshell:
“Mr. President, Iraq is still all screwed up. What are you doing?”
“We have win the fight! And it’ll be hard! It’s hard work!”
“But how?”
“Stay the course!”
“Sir, people who used to like you think you’re full of shit now!”
“War on Terrorism! 9-11! 9-11!”
“But, sir! There’s even talk of impeachment!”
“WAR ON TERRORISM! 9-11! And understand some people agree with terrorists, and that’s their right. Unless they’re terrorists.”
“But spying on Americans?”
“Democrats are playing politics! With us or against us!”
And so on. . . .
Making sense, yeah, but you’re capable of eloquence. So, not exactly.
Like I said: our President is a moron.
“Press conference.” Well, not exactly.. . whatever.
OK, so I’m working on eloquent insane brilliance.
Man, this is not going to be easy.
Hehehe! You definitely deserve some points for that one!
Listening to Bush on the radio this morning I was struck by how smoothly he turned a question about Iraq into Afghanistan. As the War President he seems to mix up his battlefields rather conveniently.
Ben, the in the “War on Terrorism” the battlefield is Planet Earth. That’s the beauty of it.
Karl Rove is a scumbag, but he’s a smart scumbag.
AIPAC is putting the United States at grave risk.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0321/dailyUpdate.html
This one will make you sick, that is if you’re an American.
http://ksgnotes1.harvard.edu/Research/wpaper.nsf/rwp/RWP06-011/$File/rwp_06_011_walt.pdf
Bush needs to answer for this.
Rage, HA HA HA! Awesome. ‘The War on Terra,’ indeed.
The assumption is that the neoconservatives know what they’re doing, when in fact they’re just a bunch of damned neurotic fools.
Or kids with loaded guns.
I like it when shrub likens illegal immigration to prohibition! Bush is actually very shrewd and has a higher iq than Kerry and JFK but the man is evil.
V.L.R.B!!
Aw, geez, CF-”Terra”–of course! Why didn’t I think of that?
“Mr. President, people have raised serious questions about Secretary Lecter’s proposal to put the food stamp program under DOD control. . .”
Damn Rage you’re on fire today.
bush reminds me of one of those old pull string dolls where you pull the string and get a randomly generated recorded phrase.
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2005/06/07/yale_grades_portray_kerry_as_a_lackluster_student?mode=PF
http://www.larryelder.com/Gore/goredubiousrecord.htm
http://quest.cjonline.com/stories/031900/gen_gorepost.shtml
Hank
******* that is hysterical. Soylent green?
Bush was before a controlled audience selected by the GOP. It was very obvious that no questions that would have to be answered honestly. Same old propaganda from the Criminal Gray House. He still has not ventured into the realm of reality.
Thanks Hank. I can read enough about those links without even clicking them.
I think the gist of your “arguement” is that so what if bush is dumb, some people say Kerry and Gore were dumb too!!!
Dif Hank?
NUCULAR
It is not surprising that Bush mixes up the battlefields of Afghanistan and Iraq. This is the same guy that fought his way through the killing fields of Alabama during the Vietnam War. Still better than Dick “I had other priorities” Cheney. Both are members in good standing of the 101st GOP Chickenhawks Brigade.
Hehehe scott. Operation Yellow Elephant in its early days?
I would attempt a discussion on SS but, based on the previous comments, there isn’t anyone on this BLOG that knows enough to carry on an intelligent discussion.
CF sees no problem, but he is an apparently inteligent person, I suspect that he is not counting on SS for his retirement!
J R probably has no idea how much he has paid into SS or what congress has done with it. He thinks that it will fit in Algore’s lock box though.
Hank
Hank, I may not be as smart as you are, but I would love to talk about social security.
Nah J R,
I’m not calling anyone dumb or stupid. I think that Algore is smart. I think that Kerry is very intelligent. I just think they are both disengenous, pompass assholes.
I also believe that by almost any way that you measure intelligence Bush is smarter.
The point that I am trying to make is merely that if you think Bush is dumb, you are a fool that falls for the propaganda of the DNC and the media.
I almost feel sorry for all you liberal Bush haters on this BLOG! Your irrational hate for Bush and your misconceptions about his intelligence prevent you from entering the political debate with any credible understanding of current events.
I still love ya, you make me look good!
Hank
And I believe that bush is an incurious, arrogant, self-important, strutting dolt convinced of his delusional fulfilment of some holy assignment by his ability to make his handlers happy.
Hank is the kind of guy that would vote for Hitler as long as he was a Republican. Bush could be caught on tape eating the flesh of young children and Hank would claim it was a joint conspiracy of liberals and the MSM. He knows Bush is smart because Rush O’Hannity tell him that every day. Only a hardcore Bushbot would claim with a straight face that Bush was more intelligent than Al Gore. It is clear within minutes of hearing them speak that they are not even in the same mental weight class. What measures are you using to determine Bush’s intelligence. It can’t be his grades at Yale, even with daddy’s money and connections he could only manage a low C GPA. It can’t be communication skills, I have heard more intelligent conversation from my dog. Maybe it is his amazing use of the English language, only a genius would make up his own words like “nookular” and “misunderestimated”, it is us poor stupid people that judge intellect by empirical standards and common sense. I am sure that Bush is smart in his own way, he does seem to be able to live an independent life and remember his own name and for people like him that means a lot, some of them never leave the institute.
Interesting comment from Paul Craig Roberts. Accurate too.
March 21, 2006
Bush Proves His Harshest Critics Rightby Paul Craig Roberts
On March 17, William Rivers Pitt wrote that Bush is “deranged, disconnected, and dangerous.” In his March 20 Cleveland speech, Bush proved Pitt right.
Bush gave a delusional speech that shows he is detached from reality. “We’re going to help the Iraqis build a strong democracy that will be an inspiration throughout the Middle East, a democracy that’ll be a partner in the global war against the terrorists.”
Has no one told Bush that the Iraqis cannot even agree to form a government?
The day before Bush’s delusional Cleveland speech, Iyad Allawi, the former prime minister of one of our make-believe Iraqi governments, said that in Iraq the casualty rate from the sectarian strife is so high that “if this is not civil war, then God knows what civil war is.”
The day of Bush’s delusional speech, Patrick Cockburn, present on the scene in Irbil, Iraq, gave a much more truthful account of the situation. Writing in CounterPunch, he reported:
“Iraq is a country convulsed by fear. It is at its worst in Baghdad. Sectarian killings are commonplace. … The scale of the violence is such that most of it is unreported. … Unseen by the outside world, silent populations are on the move, frightened people fleeing neighborhoods where their community is in a minority for safer districts. There is also a growing reliance on militias because of fears that police patrols or checkpoints are in reality death squads hunting for victims.”
Not a word of this reality from our delusional president.
The fantasy Iraq that Bush painted was only his warm-up. He went on to tell his Cleveland audience that America could not be safe unless Iraq was a democracy. What a weak, pitiful, vulnerable place Bush’s America must be. Unless a small, devastated Middle Eastern country is a democracy, America cannot be safe. Who in the Cleveland audience could possibly have believed this utter nonsense?
Bush told his audience that “the security of our country is directly linked to the liberty of the Iraqi people, and we will settle for nothing less than victory.” What victory is he talking about? Despite the huge sums of dollars paid by the Bush regime to all the leaders of all the factions, Iraq cannot form a government.
Without victory, Iraq will be “a safe haven for terrorists to plot new attacks against our nation.” Alas, there were no terrorists in Iraq until Bush invaded the country and drew them in. The problem our troops face in Iraq is not terrorists, but resistance fighters, “insurgents” in the Bush regime’s parlance. Democracies lack the dictatorial, extralegal powers to suppress terrorists. That is why Bush is destroying civil liberties in the U.S. Under Saddam Hussein, there were no terrorists and no insurgents. Bush is modeling his no habeas corpus, torture-prone, all-intrusive government on Saddam Hussein’s.
The security of Americans has nothing whatsoever to do with Iraq. Iraq cannot overthrow the U.S. Constitution, the Bill of Rights, the separation of powers, and American civil liberties. Iraq cannot illegally spy on American citizens, declare them to be “suspects,” and detain them forever without warrant or charges. Iraq cannot put American critics of the Bush regime on “no-fly” lists.
The real dangers to Americans reside in the neocon Bush administration. This delusional warmonger administration believes it has the power and the right to dictate to Muslim countries their political and social institutions. This extraordinary arrogance and hubris breeds opposition where there was none. The world is not going to obey Bush and a handful of stupid neocons.
In his speech, Bush told Cleveland that “the decision to remove Saddam Hussein was a difficult decision.” That is a lie. Bush’s first treasury secretary, Paul O’Neill, and a number of others have reported that Bush came into office intending to remove Hussein. The head of British intelligence told the British Cabinet that Bush first decided to go to war and then created the reasons to justify his aggression against Iraq.
“Before we acted,” Bush told his audience, Hussein’s “regime was defying UN resolutions calling for it to disarm. It was violating cease-fire agreements, was firing on American and British pilots which were enforcing no-fly zones.” Gentle reader, think what Bush is saying. As Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction, a fact that Bush has acknowledged, how could Iraq possibly have been violating UN resolutions calling on it to disarm?
What cease-fire agreements is Bush talking about? It was U.S. and UK planes that continued to fly over Iraqi territory and bomb Iraqis.
Do you know what Bush means by no-fly zones? He means that U.S. and UK jet fighters could fly all over Iraq, but if Iraqi planes flew over Iraqi territory, we would shoot them down.
Where did the U.S. get the right to tell countries that they dare not try to control their own air space?
Americans need to understand that terrorists are responding to America’s behavior, or misbehavior. The only successful way to stop terrorism is to alter our behavior. America is not God. It has no right, and it certainly lacks the power, to impose its will on the world.
The Bush regime cannot lead the world to democracy by tearing democracy down at home. Not since Abraham Lincoln have American civil liberties been so threatened as by the Bush regime. America even has an attorney general, a vice president, and a secretary of defense who believe in torture. How do they differ from officials in the Third Reich or Stalin’s KGB? Anyone who believes in torture is not an American. That person is outside our tradition. Yet people who believe in torture occupy our highest offices.
When we get the mote out of our own eye, then we can instruct the Middle East.
Find this article at:http://www.antiwar.com/roberts/?articleid=8737
Hank,I have heard you say that Bush is not a conservative. His large government, borrow and spend budget would tend to support your contention.
Rather than arguing if he is smarter than Kerry or Gore, isn’t a more important question – how smart are his policies. The debt ceiling was just raised to its record high.
Does your respect for Mr. Bush obligate your to favor his dumb and unfortunate policies?
We still love you too. Nothing makes us look good, however & the same could be said of GWB.
Not only does he borrow and spend, but he cuts taxes (disproportionately benefiting the wealthy) during a time of war. This is not just dumb, it is close to criminal.
Thanks.
DD,
Perhaps it would lend you a bit more credibility if you were to say to the many other posters here who are making this an issue on Bush’s intelligence and not his politices to do so…
You are absolutely right, Nathan. I was not accusing your father of making that arguement and I apologize if it appeared I was doing so.
But now that I have you button holed. I know you have stated before that being critical ofBush is not an option for you. None-the-less . . .
My opinion is that GW Bush would embody everything any self-respecting Republican would dispise. A spoiled Rich boy who never had to work for anything in his life. He governs just like that — borrow from Daddy (read Chinese), spend it all, and rack up mountains of debt. Can we really believe Dick “Reagan taught us deficits don’t matter” Cheney. I believe we are going to find out the advisability of that lesson. And, I for one, do not think it will be very pretty.
I have no problems with Bush as a person or his character.
There are certain policies I disagree with, some I think shoudl have been done differently, and others not enough of.
I still agree with the majority of what this administration is doing and has done.
Please don’t confuse my lack of publically being critical of the President with me actually thinking poorly of him as an individual.
I strongly disagree with statements like: “spoiled Rich boy who never had to work for anything in his life”
I think such statements are based very little on fact and amount to little more than the type of name calling you hear on the playground during recess in 2nd grade.
Well NathanYour disagreement with that statement does not make it any less true.
It is true.
I’m sorry, but your disagreement with it would seem to be a problem with truth. It is sometimes uncomfortable.
I am sorry, Nathan, that you are so uninformed.
I would recommend a book by Republican and Nixon strategist, Kevin Phillips entitled _American Dynasty: Aristocracy, Fortune, and the Politics of Deceit in the House of Bush_. IF you were to read this carefully researched book you would see my characterizations above are actually pretty charitable to GW Bush and ancestors.
Phillips has written a new book that came out today, I think, also critical of Bush and his policies. His conservative credentials are unimpeachable. Unlike your president’s.
Pray tell, what policies of GW Bush do you disagree with?
It’s not Bush’s intelligence I’m worried about, it’s his mental condition.
Nathan, unlike yourself, more and more Republicans are becoming embarrassed by and deserting GW Bush like he’s radioactive.
Above you said:”I think such statements are based very little on fact and amount to little more than the type of name calling you hear on the playground during recess in 2nd grade.”
I don’t hear your comments being based on fact and are instead employing the usual Bush strategy of attempting to discredit the critic rather than answering the valid criticisms. I think you can do better than that. But, maybe I am wrong.
Dear DD,
Bush’s domestic policies are indefensible for a conservative like me. His ‘no child left behind’ crap was a total cave in to the liberals in congress and then they use it to attack him. When he signed the McCain/Fiengold incumbant protection act he said he thought it was unconstitutional. How do you defend such nonsense? He’s never vetoed a bill. Many of which cause a conservative like me to want to puke.
This having been said, I don’t underestimate GWB’s intelligence. I think he is smart, moral and fairly plain spoken.
However, on 9-11 there was a change in our policy towards terrorists. They aren’t criminals, they are terrorists with no rights.
I fully support his war on terror. He needs to be even more agressive. I think the news conference today was a precursor to action that may be required in Iran. The idiots on this BLOG have no idea the signifigance of today’s news conference because of their irrational hate and ignorance. How do you debate them?
Hank
So Hanks take is that the only problem with bush is he isn’t a big ENOUGH jerk domestically.
I guess I am a whole lot less threatened by “scary terrorists” than I am by well…. I gotta be honest,,,,conservatives.Instead of worrying silly about who might be trying to attack us, how about doing something to make this country worth fighting for? Or maybe trying to do something about the fact that America is just about all sold out?
Oh thats right. They are doing the selling.
Dear J R,
God Bless ya, when I read your posts I wonder what country you’re talking about!
I’m pretty happy with the one I live in!
Hank
Ah Hank you know me,
I’d like the country to be better!! You know…..as opposed to a small number of folks being increasingly better off.
Brainless is now blaming the Iraqi slaughter on the MSM saying it’s their reporting that’s causing all the problems not the tons of bombs he’s dropping on the Iraqi kids everyday.
Brainless is somewhere between an unemployed dishwasher and the guy with the broom, who can’t figure out which end sweeps better.
That’s the real problem.
JR,
What do you mean by better off?
You have the luxary of having a TV with web TV internet access when probably more than 80% of the world could only dream of being on the internet.
You can go to the grocery store and buy any number of different fresh meats, produce, and dairy products.
Not one thing has really changed in anyones lives becuase of Bush in the last 6 years.
Students still go to school, people still go to their jobs, people are doing the same stinking thing they have been doing.
You and many other liberals make it sound like the depression times 10 in this country since Bush took office.
What part of Kansas or wichita are you in that things are so doom and gloom?
On your drive out to Lake Afton did you see bread lines, and refugees in tents or something? I must have missed them.
“So Hanks take is that the only problem with bush is he isn’t a big ENOUGH jerk domestically.”
No, JR. What I hear him saying is that he should be more aggressive in the war on terror.
I don’t know how we’re going to afford extending the war to fighting Iran. Also, I think credible news reports say out troops are over-extended as it is now. I don’t think a draft is politically or practically an alternative.
In today’s news conference Bush implied we will be in Iraq for years and years. George Will said in a recent OpEd piece that as of May 30th, we will have been in Iraq longer than our country was fighting in World War II.
If we leave Iraq it will sink into a worse civil war. I think strengthening the Iraq military (read Shi’ite militia) flames the Sunni insurgency. But they have to have a military to protect them from their unfriendly neighbors. The whole deal is a mess.
I think we should let them divide up into three states – Kurds, Sunnis, & Shi’ites governed by an over-arching Federal government which has representatives from each group to insure that their oil wealth is divided fairly amongst them. Declare victory, and get the hell out of that miserable place.
War on terror? That’s a joke, man, a joke.
There is no such thing.
Right, DD. Let’s not follow Hank’s red herring about how smart Junior is.
BTW, Hank, I don’t hear anybody in the DNC calling Bush “stupid.” I wish they would, actually.
However in the most recent poll that came out, the single most common adjective respondants used to characterize Bush is “incompetant.” “Arrogant,” “ass,” “liar,” and “jerk” also made strong showings. Last year, “honest” was number one. How the mighty have fallen . . .
What’s important is not the native IQ of President Cuckoo-Bananas, but his policies.
Know-Nothing Nathan asks how Bush has hurt us.
30,000 dollars, Nathan. 30,000 dollars for every man, woman, child, and “unborn” baby in this country.
That’s how much each individual owes to settle the national debt now approaching 9 TRILLION DOLLARS.
Since you support Bush so much, would you mind paying my share too?
Proudlib,
If you could actually show how Bush is directly responsible for the entire National Debt you might have some shred of credibility.
The debt was there before he took office and he did not create it.
There are alot more things happening economically that effect the debt and your simple minded “it is Bush’s fault” adds nothing to the discussion but your simple mind.
Nathan,
I invite you to cite for us precedent(President?) for massive tax cuts and simultaneous funding for war.
If bush inherited debt, why did he campaign in 2000 about how he was going to spent the “surplus” that was created using clinton’s economic policy?
Was he gonna spend dollars he knew didnt exist?
Nathan, prove to us you can do some research. What was the national debt when clinton left office and what is the national debt now?
How much more did the govt spend than it took in under clinton? How much under bush?
I’m tired of doing your research for you and answering your questions. How about answering some of ours?
What is your plan (only as detailed as JR’s) for iraq?
What are the FACTS about national debt?
In Today’s Eagle, even Cal Thomas is saying that the Republicans don’t deserve to be re-elected because of their borrow and spend tactics. Cal Thomas!
http://www.kansas.com/mld/kansas/news/editorial/14153589.htm
Hehehe, thanks, KFGrrl.
THAT should shut him up . . .
I guess it did PL. He NEVER comes back to answer questions that require research.
Actually, Bush Jr. DID inherent a considerably large public debt (mostly thanks to Reagan, who managed to triple it: From 1 to $3 trillion).
Clinton inherited a gaping yearly deficit from Bush I (and this was AFTER Poppy broke his “no new taxes” pledge!), and turned it into a surplus. Whatever else you can say about the man (and, I KNOW, there’s plenty), he refused to sign budgets that didn’t meet his deficit reduction goals, even shutting the gov’t down at one point (”Huh? What? Gee whillikers, I thought the Republicans in Congress favored balanced budgets!”. . .That was bullshit in 1981 and it’s bullshit now.)
Shrub and Republican Song and Dance Revue have managed to increase the public debt from 5.4 to $9 trillion in just 5 years.
Shall we request an encore? Too late: We already did. Cover your ears. . .
By the way, I did no research. I’ve just been paying attention for a long, long time. . .
Good post rage.
Concerning social security, the government wants us to die before 62 so we don’t get the chance to collect on SS. That’s why many unions are against increasing the retiring age to 66.