40469 Members
185 Forums
183447 Topics
1568413 Posts
Max Online: 3699 @ 05/13/08 12:57 PM
|
|
|
#1517297 - 09/08/08 07:39 AM
Re: George W. Bush
[Re: sparcebag]
|
Sr FishingMN Family
Registered: 01/10/02
Posts: 503
|
Compared to the Kerry II the Dems are running this election.....
I'd vote for GW for a third time! WOW???? That's exactly the way I feel with choices the Democratic party continuously parades infront of the nation during election time. With the last two choices for the top seat I'm beginning to think they really have no interest in winning......LOL Think about that. Everyone claims GW is a moron and has ruined not only tha United States, but the rest of the world as well..... ......and he won twice! LMAO
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#1517337 - 09/08/08 08:13 AM
Re: George W. Bush
[Re: chub]
|
Sr FishingMN Family
Registered: 12/04/02
Posts: 642
Loc: Sherburne Co, MN
|
GW is great, and he protected America. Thank you GW and the troops.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#1517444 - 09/08/08 09:24 AM
Re: George W. Bush
[Re: Swill]
|
FishingMN Family
Registered: 01/13/08
Posts: 152
Loc: Grand Rapids, MN
|
I would be interested in your reasoning behind that conclusion. It is my view that the Bush Administration has made the U.S. far more vulnerable on security issues, econonomic issues, and less able to count on multi-lateral responses to international crises.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#1517474 - 09/08/08 09:49 AM
Re: George W. Bush
[Re: basslkjohn]
|
Sr FishingMN Family
Registered: 01/10/02
Posts: 503
|
I would be interested in your reasoning behind that conclusion. It is my view that the Bush Administration has made the U.S. far more vulnerable on security issues, econonomic issues, and less able to count on multi-lateral responses to international crises. As far as security, it's hard to argue like the rest of this stuff. One can say, we took the fight to the enemies back yard and drew them into the kill zone of an ambush. Another side can argue all we are doing is creating more people over there that don't think too much of us.... etc. One can argue that all the effort should have been focused on Afghanastan, another can argue that all the troops that have served for the last twenty years could have been there combing the countryside and still not found Bin Laden. It isn't a numbers game. Chase the tail..... And realisticly, when have we been able to count on Multi-lateral response in international crisis? Other than a few core allies, I'm not sure we've ever had an overwhelming majority of the world on our side for much of anything. I could be wrong, but nothing comes to mind at the moment. As for the economy, blunders have been made by nearly each and everyone of us from GW, down to you and I. Guess I see it as driving a car with carppy loose stearing. Sometimes it goes straight as an arrow, then it starts to wander, and your fighting it. You can sometimes kind of steer it in the right direction, but due to 10,000 other factors, other than who's hands happen to be on the wheel, it's going to go off course. (the people wanted cheaper goods and services, higher ROI's, they went over seas to provide that. people wanted to buy things on credit..., buy into ARM housing loans, wars, natural disasters, a changing world and marketplace, sky rocketing energy prices). Maybe I'm completely way off base, but I tend to think, no matter who was sitting at the helm, things wouldn't have turned out much different.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|