Only 38 percent of the public approve of the job George W. Bush is doing as president, down 3 percentage points in the past month, and 60 percent disapprove, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll. Even worse, 47 percent “strongly” disapprove — more than double the 20 percent who strongly approve, and 9 points more than Bush’s overall job approval rating. Not good.
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
- SolDevVB on Let immigrants run
- Monkeyhawk on Let immigrants run
- Regular on Open thread 11/23
- okobserver on Let immigrants run
- littlejohn on Open thread 11/23
- donndublin on Open thread 11/23
- okobserver on Let immigrants run
- okobserver on Let immigrants run
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/23
- cosmos_originally on Open thread 11/23
61 Comments
What are those 38% seeing that I am not? The good news in Iraq (see above)?
That 47% “Strong” could become a major factor in November. Maybe we can get rid of the Bush apologists in Congress and get some REAL congressional oversight.
Who in their right mind could still support him? He has damaged our country to the point it will take decades to recover. One of the happiest days of my life will be when he leaves office.
Welll…maybe the 38% approve of the fact that he hasn’t blown up Virginia? (but, the day is young).
I have tried to find something to support…but can’t.
More on Bush’s campaign techniques:
http://cnn.netscape.cnn.com/news/story.jsp?floc=ns-tos-feat-b-02&idq=/ff/story/0001/20060410/1656511345.htm
Phone-Jamming Records Point to White House
And don’t forget, these are the guys who spread the rumor that John Mccain had fathered an illegitimate child in South Carolina.
See the latest Al Franken book, _The Truth (with jokes)_ to see what Rove is really capable of in turning an opponent’s strength into a weakness.
I swear the reason Karl’s mother committed suicide was that she had a clairvoyant moment and saw what her son would become.
Good work is its own reward, or is the Shrub merely overfertilized?
From Dan Froomkin of the Washington Post:
“A government consultant with close ties to the civilian leadership in the Pentagon said that Bush was ‘absolutely convinced that Iran is going to get the bomb’ if it is not stopped. He said that the President believes that he must do ‘what no Democrat or Republican, if elected in the future, would have the courage to do,’ and ‘that saving Iran is going to be his legacy.’ ”
I personally don’t think that the world can take much more of Bush staking out foreign policy agendas to secure his legacy. With whom would be fight this war? How will we pay for it?
Bush is insane. It is time to obtain a straight jacket and a padded room for his highness.
The original source for the above quote was Hersch – from his New Yorker article.
Hersh on CNN:”HERSH: The word I hear is messianic. He thinks, as I wrote, that he’s the only one now who will have the courage to do it. He’s politically free. I don’t think he’s overwhelmingly concerned about the ‘06 elections, congressional elections. I think he really thinks he has a chance, and this is going to be his mission.”
QUESTION OF THE DAY: Can the earth survive a “politically free” GW Bush? Time to send this bastard back to Texas, ASAP.
Yeah DD
I also heard something yesterday about bush sees himself “fated” or “guided” to keep the bomb out of Irans hands. If someone can find a link I’d like to see more about that.
I said on another thread that I think this guy is a religious zealot convinced he is on some sort of divine assignment. Sounds more and more like I’m right.
Post overlap?
Or is DD just prescient?
Thanks DD.Well cooler heads may prevail……in the military of all places. I understand many in the top brass are deeply troubled with any use of nuclear weapons.
“HERSH: The word I hear is messianic. . .I think he really thinks he has a chance, and this is going to be his mission.”
Cheneyin’ great. It’s dark, and he’s wearing sunglasses.
messianic – just like David Koresh.
JR, Bush has said as much, and he believes it.
Did you ever see the “Blues Brothers” movie about their “mission?”
bush never does tough interviews. He wouldn’t even directly answer Harry Taylor the other day.
But here are some questions I would ask bush.Do you believe you are being guided by God?Does God speak to you?What does God tell you?Do you (as your faith represents it) think we are living in “the last days?”Is your first duty as you see it to the Lord and his word or to the Constitution and the country?Are you more concerned with the judgement of history or “Judgement day”
That’s just a start and I wouldn’t let him spin either.
So what?
Clinton was one of the best presidents in a long time if you go by the polls, but he lost the House, he lost the Senate. Even with his great poll numbers he couldn’t get his vice president elected president.
The case can be made that while the Clinton justice department was going after the most dangerous man alive, Bill Gates, UBL pretty much operated with impunity worldwide. Even plotting the World Trade Center bombing (again) under their noses.
Bush on the other hand had crappy poll numbers before and after going to war. Won reelection with crappy poll numbers against a smarter war hero. Has kept the House and Senate with crappy poll numbers.
Elections! Determining the leadership of the country, the only polls that matter! Democrats are losing!
Meanwhile, the liberal press that gets their panties in a wad over polls continues to lose one of the most important polls themselves! People are declining to buy their papers!
http://www.bizjournals.com/washington/stories/2005/05/02/daily39.html
http://www.mediainfo.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1762521
So in the grand scheme of things, polls are pretty much meaningless.
Hank
Back to the main point. YOu can SEE Bush’s approval dropping right on the blog. I think he has about 4 “true believers” left.
JRThis is a link to Froomkin. He summarizes several sources on this story:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/linkset/2005/04/11/LI2005041100879.html
I have sent in several questions to the WashPost discussion board asking basically: “Do you guys have any inside info on this story?” “Does Bush’s non-denial “wild speculation” denials mean anything?”
And while I’m posting about the declining “true believers” one of the 4 or so weighs in!
Hank? Re the 06 elections?
I bet bush don’t do much campaigning. He is political POISON.
I wish that was all the poison he was.
Well, it is back to “Clinton was worse” – Hank your posts are getting so predictable, that reading them is getting optional.
I love a new paraphrase from Franken:”At least self-respecting political hacks invent NEW lies once in a while.”
Thanks DD I’ll check that out.
Hey Hank? Maybe Clinton would have been able to prevent 911……if certain undersexed folks had not had a strange obsession with his sex life.
If we just could have stopped the villian, Bill Gates!
Dear DD,
Do you merely choose to ignore the point of my posts, or do you not get the point?
Hank
Hank, I’ll confess, I did not read them. (c.f., earlier post) I will show you the respect of doing so now. It could be that you are not repeating the same old tired lines. If that is true, I will come back with “hat in hand.”
DD
The World Trade Center was bombed on Clinton’s watch. He ignored it. He never went there. We treated the bombers like criminals operating independant of the terrorist network that financed and planned their attack.
My point, is that popularity does not a grat leader make. I said nothing bad or untrue about Clinton, I merely used the facts of his presidency to make a point.
Hank
I don’t know where you are going with that “point” hank
Unless you are suggesting that while bush is not popular he is a great leader?
I think that Bush will go down in history as a pretty good leader, but that was not my point.
Hank:”polls are pretty much meaningless.”
Your links indicate that the WashingtonPost is losing circulation and that Newsweek is accounting for the biggest share of that loss.
My Response:
Yes, Bush won the election. Your point?
Yes, the WashPost is losing circulation. Did you note in your article that the parent company, Kaplan is investing in internet continuing education and business certification? That in my view is a very smart move. I do work for a woman in California who owns an internet continuing education company. She is making about one million dollars years – with very little overhead. She sends me $50 gas gift cards – out of the kindness of her heart. I wonder how the WashPost website is doing. I would bet so well, that they are not concerned about their “paper” circulation numbers.
And to you last post, I agree that you point out facts about Clinton and that poll numbers alone are not an indication of leadership. I would ask you though, isn’t it true that when the numbers get to a certain point, there can be no mistaking that a presidency is in trouble? (c.f., Nixon in his final days).
A major problem in Washington is AIPAC. They had scheduled over 400 meeting with congressmen after they closed their convention back in march.
That type of “influence peddling” to members AIPAC has “dirt on” has got to stop { last year over 500 meetings were scheduled }.
Congressional members who are dirty need to be weeded out. Their votes belong to us and should not be the product of coercion.
AIPAC takes congressmen out, then photographs them or records them in compromising situations.
A congressman’s vote needs to be unencumbered.
Hank,Specifically regarding Bush, even though he says he does not read polls, that would seem to be a mis-statement of truth. I believe that polls and opinion have worked to keep Bush in line. It worries me that he may think he is “politically free”,now. Do you have any similar concerns?
Hank- Bush is a pretty good leader??What is he good at? All I see he a guy with bullet holes in both feet, and a “What me worry?” expression.
Hank, Clinton may well has presided over the bombing of the WTC. Made quite a mess, didn’t it?
On the other hand, Bush presided over the total destruction of the WTC. Tell me what Bush has done to make that right. How many people have been brought to trial for that crime? How many people have been killed that were directly involved? Please provide sources.Under Clinton, we brought the people responsible for the WTC bombing to trial and imprisoned them.
Under Bush we’ve spent billions on a silly war and accomplished what?
What a silly putitive little man we have as president.
Regarding W.’s communications with the Man Upstairs:
“Why are you burning that poor woman at the stake?”
“She’s a witch! A sorcerer! She listens to supernatural voices–and OBEYS THEM!”
“How do you know that?”
“God just told me!”
Courtesy of Mad magazine, approx. ‘77 – ‘84.
“Moses saw that though the bush was on fire it did not burn up. 3 So Moses thought, ‘I will go over and see this strange sight—why the bush does not burn up.’”
XXX,
Clinton did not bring the people responsible for the first WTC bombing to justice, UBL lives. Clinton made no attempt to get UBL and bring him to justice. UBL attacked us through the ’90s with impunity.
GWB made two very big changes after 9/11. First of all we are treating acts of terrorism as acts of war vs. criminal acts. Instead of just putting the ‘foot soldiers’ in jail, we are now going after the leaders of terrorism.
The second really big change is that we are changing our policy towards the countries that we deal with that are not democracies. In the past it didn’t bother us to deal with a dictator as long as it suited our purposes. Our official policy is to now promote democracy and capitalism.
It is not our policy to bring terrorists to trial. Our policy is to treat them like enemy combatants and kill them.
Hank
So Hank,If all you say is true, what do you think the Bush Doctrine has gained us? I don’t feel any safer, do you? You’re a good conservative, what about these thugs gains your support? Have they delivered on their ideal of smaller government? Have they done anything to decrease spending? Government has increased by something like 33% since Bush took office, and with the republicans in charge, we’ve run up the highest deficit spending in history. Is this the conservative ideal of smaller government and less spending?
“In the past it didn’t bother us to deal with a dictator as long as it suited our purposes.”
And this has changed in what way? Who is that guy in Pakistan we’re dealing with? You don’t think he’s a dictator? Or Saudi Arabia. Just calling it a monarchy doesn’t make it less of a dictatorship.
“It is not our policy to bring terrorists to trial. Our policy is to treat them like enemy combatants and kill them.”
It sure is a shame how all those stupid innocent civilians keep getting in the way.
“Our policy now is to promote democracy and capitalism”
Both?
Seems not to be working for Mexico!
Or maybe it is?
Oh the CAPITALISM part we got down SO good for Mexico that the DEMOCRACY part is irellevant since no one wants to live there!
And as to getting Osama?It’s been what…..5 and a half years now.
Lets get you on record on the next big issue BEFORE the fact Hank.Do you advocate the use of nuclear weapons against Iran? Please provide backup for your answer.
Speaking of democracy – didn’t Iran ELECT their current leader? Unlike the US-installed Shah?
Hank–
It must suck to be you.
The whole country is wrong . . . but . . . but . . . you’re STILL RIGHT!
National debt–8.5 TRILLION, historical high
War in Iraq–ongoing, three years and counting, 2,500 American soldiers killed, a quarter of a TRILLION spent
Corruption in gov’t–DeLay, resigned; Trent Lott, resigned Speaker of the House; Frist, under investigation; Lewis Libby, resigned; Randy Duke Cunningham, resigned and convicted; Gov. of Ohio Taft, under investigation; Jack Abramoff, naming names, investigation on-going
Disaster Relief–they’re still pulling bodies out of attics from Hurricane Katrina
Looming war in Iran–hey, at least he’s not Clinton
Osama bin Laden–having nails done in posh Pakistani spa
Tax breaks for the rich–see item 1.
“Polls are meaningless.” Keep telling yourself that, big boy, and keep drinking the kool-aide.
Hank, it’s a real pity that the only defense you currently have for Bush is Clinton.
Here are a few comments about how Clinton ignored Saddam:
-Of Clinton Administration’s efforts says Robert Oakley, Reagan Ambassador for Counterterrorism: “Overall, I give them very high marks” and “The only major criticism I have is the obsession with Osama”
-Paul Bremer, current Civilian Administrator of Iraq disagrees slightly with Robert Oakley as he believed the Clinton Administration had “correctly focused on bin Laden.
-Barton Gellman in the Washington Post put it best, “By any measure available, Clinton Administration left office having given greater priority to terrorism than any president before him” and was the “first administration to undertake a systematic anti-terrorist effort”
And as for GOP priorities …
http://www.kansas.com/mld/kansas/news/breaking_news/14318400.htm
E-mails show Abramoff’s donation leverageJOHN SOLOMON and SHARON THEIMERAssociated PressWASHINGTON – A Republican Party official and Jack Abramoff’s lobbying team bluntly discussed using large political donations as a way to pressure lawmakers into securing federal money for a tribal client, according to e-mails gathered by prosecutors.
The e-mails detail how Abramoff’s team worked to leverage assistance from the White House, Congress and the GOP to get a reluctant federal agency and a single Republican congressional aide to stop blocking school construction money for the Saginaw Chippewa tribe. The e-mails were obtained by The Associated Press.
Joe Biden’s comments regarding GW’s prayers (from the Real Time with Bill Maher transcript last Friday night):
“But I respect the fact that the president prays. That is totally separable from the fact whether or not the president is informed.
When I speak to the president – and I have had plenty of opportunity to be with the president, at least prior to the last election, a lot of hours alone with him. I mean, meaning me and his staff. And – and the president will say things to me, and I’ll literally turn to the president, say, “Mister President, how can you say that, knowing you don’t know the facts?” And he’ll look at me and he’ll say – my word – he’ll look at me and he’ll say, “My instincts.” He said, “I have good instincts.”
I said, “Mister President, your instincts aren’t good enough.” [laughter] [applause]
Now, if he – if he, to use the word of my friend, “conflates” prayer with guidance in how to – where to send your missiles – I don’t know he does that – if he does that, then that’s – that’s dangerous. That’s over the edge. [applause] I don’t think he does that.”
Clinton Administration on Terrorism:
– Tried to kill Osama bin Laden and disrupt Al Qaeda through preemptive strikes (efforts denounced by the G.O.P.). ((My comment: Remember “wag the dog”?))
– Brought perpetrators of first World Trade Center bombing and CIA killings to justice.
– Did not blame Bush I administration for first World Trade Center bombing even though it occurred 38 days after Bush left office. Instead, worked hard, even obsessively — and successfully — to stop future terrorist attacks.
–Named the Hart-Rudman commission to report on nature of terrorist threats and major steps to be taken to combat terrorism.
-Clinton Administration sent legislation to Congress to TIGHTEN AIRPORT SECURITY. (Remember, this is before 911) The legislation was defeated by the Republicans because of opposition from the airlines.
-Clinton Administration sent legislation to Congress to allow for BETTER TRACKING OF TERRORIST FUNDING. It was defeated by Republicans in the Senate because of opposition from banking interests.
-Clinton Administration sent legislation to Congress to add tagents to explosives, to allow for BETTER TRACKING OF EXPLOSIVES USED BY TERRORISTS. It was defeated by the Republicans because of opposition from the NRA.
-Clinton Administration increased the military budget by an average of 14 per cent, reversing the trend under Bush I.
-Clinton Administration tripled the budget of the FBI for counterterrorism and doubled overall funding for counterterrorism
-Clinton Administration detected and destroyed cells of Al Qaeda in over 20 countries
-Clinton Administration created national stockpile of drugs and vaccines including 40 million doses of smallpox vaccine.
RD, I don’t normally like long posts, but yours was awesome:)
A good read RD.I hope you didn’t type all that for Hank.
Facts don’t matter to Hank.
I posted above that with bush it’s a “mission from God” thing”.
This might also explain those who continue to support bush. That’s the bad news.The good news is that there are fewer and fewer of them.
RD,I gotta pile on. Awesome posts. You’ve laid waste to large areas of rhetoric.
P.S. I wonder where KFG is? I guess we all gotta take a break every now and then (you prob won’t see much of me the next few days, so keep those posts coming!)
RD,
Indeed. If Democrats were half as good at winning elections as they are at governing responsibly, the Repukes wouldn’t stand a chance in electoral politics.
Well done, RD!
Border guards, on alert from the White House, also intercepted a car laden with explosives driven by Ahmad Ressam in 1999. He was going to blow up a millenium celebration in LA.
Condi Rice planned to give a speech on 9-11. It was full of the dire need to implement a STAR WARS missile defense system and had not a word about Al Qaeda terrorism in it.
Also, check what she and Colon Bowels said in February of 2001–Saddam Hussein was “in a box” and posed no threat to us or his neighbors.
LeftHook, yeah, there’s more, but I figured I used enough space.
Hey, I just get tired of all the Clinton bashing when Cons are cornered. He wasn’t the best president ever. He made mistakes that even he admits to. But he did a thousand times more against terrorism than Bush has even thought about doing. BTW, I keep all that stuff handy. The opportunity always arises to educate. ;)
So here’s the last quote I’ll post on this, until I feel a burning desire to post on it again.
—-Bill Clinton, who identified terrorism as the major post-Cold War threat and acted to improve our counterrorism capabilities, who (little known to the public) quelled anti-American terorism by Iraq and Iran and defeated an al Qaeda attempt to dominate Bosnia, but who, weakend by continued political attack,could not get the CIA, the Pentagon, and FBI to act sufficently to deal with the threat. – Richard Clarke, “Against All Enemies”
RD,Simply awesome.
Well done RD. Gotta add “didn’t blame Bush 1 for Waco even though the planning for the raid took place prior to inauguration and events were in process.”
I despise shrub more than anyone but some of you clinton apologists are God damned hypocrites! There is no political hop for this country as long as you clowns engage in your petty partisan nonsense!
Viva La Raza Blanco!!
RD,Really interesting posts: This info has been held back and not readily available, I assume. Do you have links to this? My curiosity is piqued, not on the chance that what you posted is false, but the fact that I don’t remember reading about this before. This is more fodder for the ineptness of the current administration and the Republican led congress. It could be very useful as a major point in the coming elections.
Bush knew 2 days before he claimed we captured mobile chemical labs, that wasn’t the case. He classified the dissenting field report, and claimed for another year that it was true. Why do Bushies follow a liar? Why does Roberts attempt to protect him?http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060412/pl_nm/iraq_usa_labs_dc_2
RD – I remember all too well the “wag the dog” nonsense from the America-hating al-quada loving Republicans whenever Clinon tried to act against alQuada.
J, I’ve had that info for almost 3 years, saved to Notepad, but I can give you this one, as a starting point. http://www.snopes.com/rumors/clinton.htm
I think some of that came from CNN, but wading through CNN’s stuff is more time consuming than I can manage right now. I will continue to wade through my saved links for it. That could be dangerous for the more conservative here though.
Thanks RD!
Colin Powell in Cairo February 24, 2001:”He (Saddam Hussein) has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. He is unable to project conventional power against his neighbours.”
Condoleeza Rice, July 2001:”We are able to keep his arms from him. His military forces have not been rebuilt.”
You can view the video of these statements here:http://100777.com/doc/589?PHPSESSID=4a34011b5206e685d5cd78691046072e
The great thing about your last links RD is that it shows that Powell and Rice KNOW they are liars.
Ian, can you say “context”? I only voted for that man once but, compared to what we have now, he’s looking pretty damn good. At least he actually DID his job!