Closed Thread
Page 4 of 9 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... LastLast
Results 25 to 32 of 68

Thread: Is president bush doing a good job?

  1. #25
    Newbie Bio-link may be famous one day Bio-link may be famous one day Bio-link's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    clinton NC
    Posts
    96
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Re: Is president bush doing a good job?

    yes he is alot better than clinton anyway


    The brighter a light shines, the thicker the shadows fall

  2. #26
    Newbie panic! at the disco may be famous one day panic! at the disco may be famous one day
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    im not a guy MI
    Posts
    3
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Re: Is president bush doing a good job?

    i dont think bush is doing a good job.... only because the war was point less.

  3. #27
    Astonishing Zeffervelli may be famous one day Zeffervelli may be famous one day Zeffervelli's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    524
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Re: Is president bush doing a good job?

    Jees, think you have enough facts, I agree, he is better than clinton, but we need a new president, thats what everyone says at my school.

  4. #28
    Newbie Badlywornshoes may be famous one day Badlywornshoes may be famous one day Badlywornshoes's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    In a cardboard box. With hand-drawn windows.
    Posts
    75
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Re: Is president bush doing a good job?

    Quote Originally Posted by Zeffervelli
    Jees, think you have enough facts, I agree, he is better than clinton, but we need a new president, thats what everyone says at my school.
    For three years in college I majored in political science and global studies. This stuff is my forte.

  5. #29
    Newbie whitefoxdemon may be famous one day whitefoxdemon may be famous one day whitefoxdemon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    in a dark, lonely place
    Posts
    94
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 3 Times in 2 Posts

    Re: Is president bush doing a good job?

    I think George Bush has done an awful job. Under his leadership we have entered in a pointless war that is just eating up all our hard earned cash. Gas prices have risen at an extrodinary rate and he's not helping in anyway. It is my opinion that soon we shall have another great depression. Maybe in five to ten years. He has not handled national crisis very good like when hurricane Katrina hit it took a long, long time for any form of assitance from the government to arrive. I don't see how he way able to win his second election.

  6. #30
    Devoted Otaku Defend Your Castle Champion rock on may be famous one day rock on may be famous one day rock on's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    USA nebraska
    Posts
    530
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts

    Re: Is president bush doing a good job?

    he did some good things like what nvm he hasnt done anything right so far


    92% of teens moved to rap. I am one of the 8% rebelions

  7. #31
    Newbie dekester22 may be famous one day dekester22 may be famous one day
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Federal Way, WA
    Posts
    33
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Re: Is president bush doing a good job?

    Quote Originally Posted by Badlywornshoes
    EXCELLENT!!! A political challenge! *cracks knuckles*
    Enjoy my thesis.

    PART 1

    20 reasons Bush and the Bush administration has fist-f*cked our economy:

    1) The national deficit as of April after Bush's reelection: $8,407,057,651,820.76. Because of Bush's penchant for killing towel heads and stealing oil, you, the average American, will be paying this back in the form of taxes for a LONG, long, time. Broken down, this means that every American will pay the government AT LEAST $30,000.00 in their lifetime.
    As a percentage of GDP, the budget deficit is nothing. We are at historical lows, and we are in a better spot than the rest of the world when it comes to having the ability to withstand debt. Also, maybe you want a government that hordes all of your money and runs on a profit, but I don't. I don't want a government that has stockpiles of "surplus". That money belongs to us - THE TAXPAYERS - and should be stockpiled in our bank accounts or under our mattresses. lol

    Quote Originally Posted by Badlywornshoes
    2) We are spending $200 billion dollars PER MONTH in Iraq. We shouldn't even be there in the first place.
    You might want to check those figures again. Maybe you meant to write "million"? It certainly is not $200 billion per month. Do the math. That figure isn't right.

    As far as being there, you're right. If the UN wasn't an emasculated piece of spineless garbage, this would've been dealt with back in the 1990s. Unfortunately, 19 UN Security Resolution later and the coalition (lead by the US and Great Britain) decided enough was enough.


    Quote Originally Posted by Badlywornshoes
    3) Think you are immune to paying any of this? Think again. The IRS has made more audits since 2004 then it did in the entire 90s decade alone.
    Audits of average, every-day people are actually lower than before. More audits have been conducted on businesses and on people filing returns with a large amount of deductions.


    Quote Originally Posted by Badlywornshoes
    4) Unemployment trends you speak of began with Clinton, not Bush. The unemployment rate dropped from 4.6 percent in the first quarter of 1998 to 4.2 percent in the second quarter. Under Clinton, in 1999, the United States had a projected federal budget surplus for the first time since 1969. By 1998 it was a $70 billion budget surplus. He remained popular through and beyond the end of his terms in office.
    No, the unemployment trends I spoke of started after the stock market crash in 2000-2001 and after 9/11 which rocked our economy and put tourism and the airline industry on the brink of oblivion. The ability to turn that into an economy as boisterous as it has been deserves a lot of credit. The tax-cut package that was passed played a significant part in the turn-around.
    As for the "projected surplus", it was only that - a projection. There was no actual REAL DOLLARS in surplus. And, I refer back to my comment earlier in this thread about government running a profit. That is not a good thing. That is our money, not the government's.


    Quote Originally Posted by Badlywornshoes
    5) We may be statistically employing the greater majority of people, but they are not getting good jobs. Most people have had to settle for substandard jobs and a fiercely competitive job market for even jobs as regular as working at McDonalds. These are people with college degrees.
    BS. Take a look at the census reports when they come out each month. Everytime there is growth in average pay. That means the jobs coming back are higher than they were before. Another indicator, have you heard the ads for job-placement companies on the radio lately? They are on all the time. That is significant because they were on all the time in the late 90s and then nothing during the first few years of the 2000s. Now that unemployment rate is so low, companies are turning to job-placement companies to find new hires and/or temps. The job-placement companies have the ability to spend on advertising again because their industry is booming again. These are REAL JOBS, not summer jobs, man. You and your Democratic Underground talking-points are sad, sad, sad. Get your head out of the sand, and pay attention to the real world. Are you really trying to spin the fact that we are at statistical unemployment - as if that's a bad thing?


    Quote Originally Posted by Badlywornshoes
    6) Fuel prices skyrocketed under Bush because Bush is a power-hungry oil-grubbing ^&#%!@(.
    Certainly he has made money from oil prices, but so have every single politician. So have lots of people. The oil companies are PUBLICLY TRADED - this means that you and I and anyone else can purchase their stock. When their profits go up, your return on your investment goes up.
    And what more can a President do to lower fuel prices? He's asked Congress to open up drilling in order to bring more product to market. The Democrats in the Senate filibustered. They don't understand the simple economics equation. When you increase supply, price of a product drops. When you decrease demand, price of a product drops. The President has offered ways of increasing supply and decreasing demand. It's up to CONGRESS to get this stuff done - not the President.
    And I certainly don't fault a company for making a profit. And the oil company's profit margins are only in the 6% range, which is not very high. The amount of money they are profiting is enormous, but their return on investment is not due to the huge sums they payout in order to get their product to market.


    Quote Originally Posted by Badlywornshoes
    7) Under Bush, there is no social security.
    I'm not sure what you mean by this. There still is Social Security. People are still getting the same checks they've always been getting. New retirees are getting their SS checks just like they should. The problem is with the Congress to pass something that will help to resolve the long-term outlook of SS. The long-term outlook of SS isn't good, but that's not Bush's fault. It's been a problem for a long, long, long time, and its up to Congress to fix it.


    Quote Originally Posted by Badlywornshoes
    8) Bush's "tax cuts" program, if enacted, will lead to fiscal armageddon.
    Bush's tax cuts were enacted, I think you are trying to say if they are made permanent. Looks like you need to brush up on your current events. Oh, and the tax cuts were responsible for the fast economic turnaround after 9/11. That event had the ability to really throw us into chaos. We were on the verge of collapsing into Depression Era numbers, but the tax cuts spurred on business investment and spurred on consumer buying. The tax cuts are the reason why unemployment is at historical lows now and why the stock market is nearing all-time highs.


    Quote Originally Posted by Badlywornshoes
    9) Enjoy low unemployment rates while you can, cause they are headed up, not down. Right now we're dealing with over-capacity, under-utilization, inadequate demand. We have factories that are running at 75% capacity right now, equipment that is not being utilized, unemployment at 6%, and it may be going up.
    Statistically and historically speaking, there seems to be a greater chance that unemployment will go up and not down, but only because there isn't much lower we can go. However, economic indicators do not point to any major increase (if any increase at all) in the unemployment rate. Unemployment isn't at 6%, its at 4.7%. Again, you need to brush up on your current events. Also, the jobs that have increased the most lately are in financial services, health care (as always), and MANUFACTURING! You can get all of this by clicking here http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm




    TO BE CONTINUED....

  8. #32
    Newbie dekester22 may be famous one day dekester22 may be famous one day
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Federal Way, WA
    Posts
    33
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Re: Is president bush doing a good job?

    CONTINUED…


    Quote Originally Posted by Badlywornshoes
    10) As of May, 2005, there have been 893,000 jobs created over the first 52 months of the Bush presidency - a gain that is due solely to the 917,000 jobs created in the government sector that offset the 24,000 jobs lost in the private sector. Since the Great Depression, no other president who served at least 52 months has overseen a net loss in private sector jobs through this point. In addition to lack of job growth, real weekly and hourly wages have declined since the start of the recession. At a time when middle-class Americans are experiencing stagnant wages and vanishing benefits, CEO pay continues to rise. Do not readily believe that unemployment is REALLY low. It's just being redistributed.
    Dude, its May 2006 now. I can't quote you the job numbers from a year ago, but the unemployment rate was hovering around 5% back then. The private sector jobs are in total INCREASE during the Bush Presidency. You can take your year-old negative talking points and give them back to John Kerry. Just like him, they aren't useful anymore.


    Quote Originally Posted by Badlywornshoes
    11) President Bush and the GOP-controlled Congress are moving to extend corporate tax breaks, allow oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, and limit lawsuits against corporations — including a settlement of asbestos litigation that has driven 70 companies into bankruptcy. The pro-business momentum is accelerating, analysts say, in part because the steps are easier to take in the lower-publicity atmosphere of a non-election year. A bipartisan deal, moreover, which allowed some of Bush's long-stalled judicial nominees could also be a boon to US corporations. Janice Rogers Brown, a conservative, anti-regulation judge from California, will serve on the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, where most cases that affect government regulation are heard. Early in Bush's second term, Congress passed a law sought by banks and credit-card firms that makes it harder for individuals to declare bankruptcy. Another new law shifts most class-action lawsuits from state to federal courts, a move aimed to reduce huge verdicts against corporations.
    The same Janice Rogers Brown who came from a dirtpoor family and his risen to the Federal Bench. This woman is an inspiration to every young child in America who is living on meager means and might think there is no hope. She is proof of the American Dream. This same woman who is vilified by the left and was FILIBUSTERED by Democrats in her nomination to a federal judgeship. The Democrats in Congress have absolutely no shame.
    As for the class-action lawsuits being moved to federal courts, that is in order to stave off the number of FRIVOLOUS lawsuits. Legitimate lawsuits will still be heard in court and will still have the ability to compensate the complainant of any damages that are due. But it helped to control the frivolity that has plagued our courts - and still plagues our courts today.

    Quote Originally Posted by Badlywornshoes
    12) The Bush administration's budget for the 2006 fiscal year will cut non-defense discretionary spending, including education, veteran's health care, law enforcement, and environmental protections. In all, President Bush's fiscal 2006 budget plan calls for elimination of or drastic cuts from 154 programs. Funding for the Iraq war, however, was recently increased. A House subcommittee approved an initial $45 billion for military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan next year, two weeks after Congress approved $82 billion for this year's costs of the conflicts. Although President Bush argues that it is too early to request money for the wars during the 2006 budget year, which starts Oct. 1, with no timetable for withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq and Afghanistan, war costs are certain and many lawmakers are reluctant to wait for his request.
    Wait, so you are upset that the budget deficit is so large (in terms of dollars, without taking into consideration percentage of GDP) and now you are upset with Bush because he wants to cut some domestic programs? You can't have it both ways.
    Also, once again your information is about a year old. We are into the 2006 budget already, and have seen proposalsl for the 2007 budget. Spending on K-12 Education under Bush has inreased every year. He spent more on Education during his first 4 years in office that Clinton did in his entire 8 years. Bush is increasing Title I spending and proposing a new program to help at-rish high schoolers.


    Quote Originally Posted by Badlywornshoes
    13) When Bush announced his National Energy Policy on May 17, he vowed to fund research into "new, clean coal technologies." Although the administration has been handing out $250 million a year as an incentive for companies to develop technologies that reduce sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide emissions, the General Accounting Office-the independent research arm of Congress-has repeatedly found this "Clean Coal Technology Program" wasteful and mismanaged. A 2001 report, for example, found eight clean coal projects suffering "serious delays and financial problems" and two of them in bankruptcy. Perhaps most importantly, the new technologies are doing little to actually "clean" coal. The Energy Department's own evaluations of clean-coal projects have shown that many new "clean coal" technologies are actually 40 percent less effective in removing sulfur dioxide emissions than the more conventional smokestack "scrubbers"-the technology required under the laws the administration has so diligently weakened.
    And he has asked Congress to pass laws to allow drilling for new oil in Alaska and off-shore Califoria, Florida, and in the Gulf of Mexico. All of this has the great potential of increasing supply, which would allow for lower prices at the market. It also would reduce some of our dependancy on foreign oil. But the Democrats in Congress filibustered and so we are yet again without the ability to drill for new oil in the US. Meanwhile, China in consortium with Cuba will be drilling just off of Florida for potential sources of fuel. Way to go Democrats!! You are letting China and Cuba beat us to the source. Now, if we want to purchase that fuel source, we'll get to pay them for it INSTEAD OF PAYING OURSELVES FOR IT!!!!


    Quote Originally Posted by Badlywornshoes
    14) When Bush won reelection last fall, he declared that he had earned plenty of "political capital" that he intended to "spend." Six months later, however-according to Republicans and Democrats alike-his bank account has been significantly drained. In the past week alone, the Republican-led House defied his veto threat and passed legislation promoting stem cell research; and Senate Democrats blocked confirmation, at least temporarily, of his choice for U.N. ambassador. In addition, Bush's approval ratings in public opinion polls rank at the lowest level of his presidency. In the most recent Washington Post-ABC News poll, taken in May, 47 percent of Americans approved of Bush's performance, tying the lowest marks he ever received in that survey. Similarly, just 31 percent approved of his handling of Social Security, an all-time low in the Post-ABC poll, while only 40 percent gave him good marks for his stewardship of the economy and 42 percent for his management of Iraq. Other polls have recorded similar findings, with Bush's approval rating dipping as low as 43 percent in a Pew Research Center Survey.
    Dude, what year are you stuck in? By the way, Bush has nothing to run for, so the approval ratings don't mean anything. I'm sure he would like them to be higher, but really, what do they mean? He's not trying to win approval so that he can run for re-election. He's trying to establish a Democracy in Iraq, hunt down international terrorists, stave off concerns at home about gas prices (about which he can do literally nothing - its up the Congress to get something done in that regard), and carefully navigate the extremely sensitive issue of immigration reform. He's got a lot on his plate, and the average American would crumble under similar circumstance.


    Quote Originally Posted by Badlywornshoes
    15) In the 2005 State of the Union address, Bush said that more Americans are going back to work and that the economy is growing and healthy. The numbers don't necessarily support this assumption. Job growth over the last 18 months has fallen short of administration predictions by 1,703,000—more than one-third fewer jobs than the president's Council of Economic Advisers said would be created. Present employment levels show only 119,000 more individuals working than when Bush took office in 2001, which is effectively a decrease in employment rates, as the total civilian labor force grew by more than two million workers in 2004 alone, according to the Department of Labor. Additionally, the most recent data from the Census Bureau show that the average income for middle-class households has dropped by $1,525 since its peak in 2000. The labor force participation rate—the percentage of people either working or looking for work—fell in Jan. 2005 to a seasonally adjusted 65.8 percent, the lowest rate since 1988.
    Just because the predictions were high doesn't mean there hasn't been job growth. We have the highest number of citizens employed than ever before in our history. We are at historical unemployment lows. We have net increase in average pay during Bush's Presidency. How is that BAD? I'm not sure what Utopian society you think we should be living in with 100% employment where everyone is making $1mill per day, but this real world information is pretty darn good.


    TO BE CONTINUED...

Closed Thread
Page 4 of 9 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Whats realy good
    By LowKey in forum The Thread Vault
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: Sep 08, 2005, 03:48 PM
  2. AMD Sempron processor, any good?
    By Meiwaku in forum The Thread Vault
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: Sep 06, 2005, 04:44 PM
  3. What Does It Take To Make A Good Manga Story?
    By Ted Turtle in forum The Thread Vault
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: Apr 22, 2005, 11:40 AM
  4. Any good anime series
    By Jet in forum The Thread Vault
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: Nov 16, 2004, 12:42 AM
  5. good classical music
    By iazndragoni yan in forum The Thread Vault
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: Nov 12, 2004, 08:50 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts