Thread: Is president bush doing a good job?

CONTINUED....

Originally Posted by Badlywornshoes

7.) LIE #7: "We have seen intelligence over many months that they have chemical and biological weapons, and that they have dispersed them and that they're weaponized and that, in one case at least, the command and control arrangements have been established." -- President Bush, Feb. 8, 2003, in a national radio address.

TRUTH: Despite a massive nationwide search by U.S. and British forces, there are no signs, traces or examples of chemical weapons being deployed in the field, or anywhere else during the war.

Apparently you missed the report by MSNBC on May 17, 2004 stating that an IED containing the nerve-gas Sarin exploded in Iraq which was targeted at US forces.
Apparently you missed the Associated Press report on April 21, 2003 about the material and equipment that was discovered in Baghdad that is used for the manufacturing of chemical weapons.
Apparently you missed the report in April 2003 on Mustard gas and Cyanide found in the Euphrates River.
And apparently you missed the report of finding stockpiles of Chemical agent Antidotes. Now, why would the Saddam Loyalists' need to stockpile chemical antidotes if they didn't have any chemical weapons?

Originally Posted by Badlywornshoes

8.) LIE #8: "Our conservative estimate is that Iraq today has a stockpile of between 100 and 500 tons of chemical weapons agent. That is enough to fill 16,000 battlefield rockets." -- Secretary of State Colin Powell, Feb. 5 2003, in remarks to the UN Security Council.

TRUTH: Putting aside the glaring fact that not one drop of this massive stockpile has been found, as previously reported on AlterNet the United States' own intelligence reports show that these stocks -- if they existed -- were well past their use-by date and therefore useless as weapon fodder.

So did they exist or not? Since UNSCOM reported on the stockpiles being accounted for, I guess the answer is that they did exist. Since they were locked in facilities within Iraq, it is quite obvious that Saddam could gain access to them. This is why it was such a significant thing when he kicked the inspectors out of his country in the late 90s. We should've sought to forcibly remove him from power then.

Originally Posted by Badlywornshoes

9.) LIE #9: "We know where [Iraq's WMD] are. They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south, and north somewhat." -- Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, March 30, 2003, in statements to the press.

TRUTH: Needless to say, no such weapons were found, not to the east, west, south or north, somewhat or otherwise.

It was Rumsfeld's attempt at lightning the situation. He uses humor sometimes. But the fact remains that Iraq had WMD in the 80s and 90s. The fact remains that not all of the accounted-for WMD in the 80s and early 90s was accounted for during the middle 90s and late 90s when all the hullaboo of Saddam failing to comply with UN Security Resolutions was beginning to come to a boil, and right before he kicked out the weapons inspectors. While it is true that there have not been stockpiles of nuke-tipped missiles, there have been other forms of WMD found in Iraq.

Originally Posted by Badlywornshoes

10.) LIE #10: "Yes, we found a biological laboratory in Iraq which the UN prohibited." -- President Bush in remarks in Poland, published internationally June 1, 2003.

TRUTH: This was reference to the discovery of two modified truck trailers that the CIA claimed were potential mobile biological weapons lab. But British and American experts -- including the State Department's intelligence wing in a report released this week -- have since declared this to be untrue. According to the British, and much to Prime Minister Tony Blair's embarrassment, the trailers are actually exactly what Iraq said they were; facilities to fill weather balloons, sold to them by the British themselves.

Then why the need to desert them during the invasion of 2003? If they weren't used for nefarious reasons, why were they obliterated on the inside and left deserted?
In fact a report released by the CIA stated biological-weapons production "is the only consistent, logical purpose for these vehicles". The report also went on to say that no evidence of weapons-grade biological agents were found within the trailers. This is why you see information like what you posted as "truth" - that the trailers were declared NOT for biological weapons. What you are posting is a spin of the truth. They weren't declared NOT for that use, simply that no "stockpiles" were found. But again, the analysts believe that the only purpose of those such vehicles would be for helping in the manufacture of biological agents.


You rely much too heavily on the propaganda from extreme left-wing anti-Bush liberals for your information. You may want to actually try to do some extensive research of your own into what is really happening in the world.

Originally Posted by Badlywornshoes

PART 3

REACTIONS

1. Despite what Michael Moore says, this whole incident was blown way out of proportion by the loony lefties. The hero of the left John Kerry said that when he first heard of the attacks on 9/11 he stood motionless, unsure what to do FOR 45 MINUTES!!! Is that the guy you'd rather have? HAHAHA

I don't think Kerry's the President of the United States, last I checked, Bush was. Kerry has no reason to be obligated to react in less than 10 seconds. Besides, even if Bush was "shellshocked" (lol), he had about 10 black suits in that classroom who each had taken an oath to get Bush to safety and brief him immediately about the situation. But don't get me started on the conspiracy theories that Bush himself is tied to the 9/11 assaults.

Yes, Bush is President. And as President, I don't expect him to run panicked from a room of children to whom he was sitting with during storytime. I think the reaction time of Bush was appropriate. To nit-pick otherwise shows just how petty the left really is. The use of John Kerry's reaction by me was simply to show that even the Democratic Presidential candidate stood dumbfounded when seeing and hearing the news of the attacks. We are all human, and we all would take at least a few minutes to compose our thoughts into rational actions.

Originally Posted by Badlywornshoes

2. Yeah, Ray Nagin and his water-logged buses had nothing to do with that. [/sarcasm] And did you see what Nagin said about his plan for future hurrican evacuation? He said he's going to utilize the buses. Hello? Ray? The buses where part of the evacuation plan the first time, you just forgot to get them ready and to actually use them. And, yet Bush gets the blame? Please. That's just being ignorant.

Bush appointed him. A horse rancher. 'Nuff said.

I wrote RAY NAGIN - as in MAYOR RAY NAGIN of NEW ORLEANS!?!?! You might've heard of him - he was just in the news for winning RE-ELECTION. Last time I checked, Presidents don't appoint Mayors. You may be a PoliSci major, but you are going to be hard pressed for getting that degree when you don't even know who Ray Nagin is or how Mayors get into office. LOL

Originally Posted by Badlywornshoes

3. Please advise how much Iraqi oil we've taken since we ousted Sadam. I would like to know.
Also, Bush has been pushing for increased drilling in America and off-shore American waters. He's also been pushing for alternate fuel sources. Congress, lead by the Democrats in the Senate filibustering the measure to drill in Alaska, have nixed any plans for drilling in America or offshore. Why? Maybe the democrats are the one's in the pockets of the Arab oil cartel.

I answered this question adequately in my magnum opus about the economy above. But Bush's half-arsed attempts at lobbying for off-shore drilling are not even remotely comparable to his dealings in Iraq and Afganistan. Also note that we (under Bush senior) put Saddam in power.

You are really flunking this PoliSci stuff, man. Saddam came to power in 1979. A quick check of the history book shows you that good ol' Jimmy Carter - as in Democrat Jimmy Carter - was the President.

And you failed to answer how much oil we've taken out of Iraq. But I will answer it - ZERO. There goes your theory that we invaded Iraq for their oil.

Originally Posted by Badlywornshoes

4. More Michael Moore propaganda bs. When he's in Crawford, he's still working. He's got offices there, conference room, he meets with his advisors everyday when he's there just like he would do when he's in residence at the White House.

Bush: "Shhh! Now just watch this drive!" *hits golf ball*

Can't debate me, so you type a non-sequitor. Nice dodge.

Originally Posted by Badlywornshoes

5. Care to provide examples of the middle class being non-existent? If the gap was widening every day then shouldn't the obliteration of the middle class have happened already? Maybe it's not as dire as you make it out to be. Nah, that couldn't be because then you wouldn't be able to rant against Bush about it. haha

I didn't say it would happen tomorrow. But it will definately happen over the course of the century. Karl Marx himself predicted this. You can pretend to ignore it all you want, but it will come to your doorstep and bite you in the arse.

~Shigure

You said-
the division between the rich and the poor widens daily, to the point where soon the middle class will no longer exist

Now to me, when you throw out phrases like "gap widens daily" and "soon middle class will no longer exist" that is fear-mongering. You are trying to tell the world that the sky is falling. Don't back-pedal now and say that "soon" mean within 100 years. You were meaning sooner than 100 years, and you know it.

And it won't come to my doorstep. I am perfectly content in the very existence of the middle-class.

Life is too short, you shouldn't be filled with so much hate for one man.
-----------------------------Double Post Merge---------------------------------------------

Originally Posted by Badlywornshoes

For three years in college I majored in political science and global studies. This stuff is my forte.

Based on your posts to this thread alone, I would be embarrassed if I were you to announce to the world that you are a PoliSci major. And, since you don't even know who Ray Nagin is, I wouldn't say this was your "forte" at all.

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.
2) We are spending $200 billion dollars PER MONTH in Iraq. We shouldn't even be there in the first place.
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.
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.
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.
6) Fuel prices skyrocketed under Bush because Bush is a power-hungry oil-grubbing ^&#%!@(.
7) Under Bush, there is no social security.
8) Bush's "tax cuts" program, if enacted, will lead to fiscal armageddon.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
16) The Bush administration's proposed budget for FY 2006 slashes spending on key domestic programs. Major areas of decreased U.S. governmental spending include Medicaid, the Department of Education, the Department of Housing and Urban Development, the environment, and farm subsidies. Places where the budget is seeing larger expenditures include border, airport, and seaport security, anti-terrorism programs, and food and drinking water safety. The budget proposal counts on Bush's tax cuts remaining in place, reinforcing the intent to make them permanent. The new budget does not include the cost of privatizing Social Security, which could reach into the trillions, or the continuation of U.S. military presence in Afghanistan and Iraq.
17) For the third time in three years, Congress will have to raise the federal debt ceiling, thus increasing the government's borrowing authority by as much as $800 billion. According to the Washington Post editorial board, "the Treasury Department has been doing the governmental equivalent of scrounging for spare change in the couch cushions to pay its obligations." This latest hike in the debt limit will amount to a grand total of more than $2 trillion during Bush's first term. "The deficits [the government] racks up year after year impede economic growth, burden future generations and force the United States to rely on foreign governments and investors," the Post reports. "Meanwhile, as the government has to pay more interest on its debt, it has less for health care, education and other programs." In his first State of the Union address, Bush spoke of his plan to pay off over the next decade the entire $2 trillion debt held by the public at that time. He said, "We owe it to our children and grandchildren to act now." As it stands today, the debt is on track to reach the $6.5 trillion mark by 2011.

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.
2) We are spending $200 billion dollars PER MONTH in Iraq. We shouldn't even be there in the first place.
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.
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.
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.
6) Fuel prices skyrocketed under Bush because Bush is a power-hungry oil-grubbing ^&#%!@(.
7) Under Bush, there is no social security.
8) Bush's "tax cuts" program, if enacted, will lead to fiscal armageddon.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
16) The Bush administration's proposed budget for FY 2006 slashes spending on key domestic programs. Major areas of decreased U.S. governmental spending include Medicaid, the Department of Education, the Department of Housing and Urban Development, the environment, and farm subsidies. Places where the budget is seeing larger expenditures include border, airport, and seaport security, anti-terrorism programs, and food and drinking water safety. The budget proposal counts on Bush's tax cuts remaining in place, reinforcing the intent to make them permanent. The new budget does not include the cost of privatizing Social Security, which could reach into the trillions, or the continuation of U.S. military presence in Afghanistan and Iraq.
17) For the third time in three years, Congress will have to raise the federal debt ceiling, thus increasing the government's borrowing authority by as much as $800 billion. According to the Washington Post editorial board, "the Treasury Department has been doing the governmental equivalent of scrounging for spare change in the couch cushions to pay its obligations." This latest hike in the debt limit will amount to a grand total of more than $2 trillion during Bush's first term. "The deficits [the government] racks up year after year impede economic growth, burden future generations and force the United States to rely on foreign governments and investors," the Post reports. "Meanwhile, as the government has to pay more interest on its debt, it has less for health care, education and other programs." In his first State of the Union address, Bush spoke of his plan to pay off over the next decade the entire $2 trillion debt held by the public at that time. He said, "We owe it to our children and grandchildren to act now." As it stands today, the debt is on track to reach the $6.5 trillion mark by 2011.

I do not think hes doing a bad job but hes not doing such a good job either. I do think we had no choice but to vote for him because the other nominees were not that good either and we really cant change a president during a war.

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.

we are going the way of russia there i said it if everyone else

is to afraid to. yep we are all going to be street wondering folk

who cant afford a cup of water