Now what did George Bush have to do with that? Further, what business is that of George Bush's? You have fallen victim to the fallacy the the Government owes it to us to make everything o.k.
Tony, trust me... I have not fallen victim to the fallacy that the government owes us anything. I have lived the majority of my life in a country where the 'nanny-state' drones are killing social structures, economic structures and the way of life - I came to the US for the opportunities it offers and a sincere appreciation of hard work reaping rewards (I respect people like you!!). However, I am calling a shovel a shovel when it comes to the impact George Bush has had on the US... there may have been glimmers of success in his term, but overall, he has been BAD for the US domestically and abroad.
The executive branch of Government is responsible for 1) Defense 2) Free Commerce 3) Court System. There is no constitutional authority for the President to do anything about the economy.
Granted, there may be no constitutional authority for them to do anything with the economy... but they sure are good at getting involved in it. Besides, we all know that economic factors affect the executive branch's ability to exercise it's responsibilities with regard to defense and free commerce. The knock on effect of business closures, reduced spending, home foreclosures, etc obviously results in less being collected in taxes - thus impacting federal budgets on the area they are responsible for. To me, it may not be their constitutional responsibility - but it is in their interest to shape economic trends. Thus, recent government 'assistance' and 'bailouts' are explained.
Tony, the democrats and all the 'iconic'
rolleyes: ) figures in Congress are a hinderence to getting things done... too many interest groups and urgency to get re-elected. They forget that they are there administrators and public servants put into 'power' to serve the nation's interests - not support groups!
If you believe all those congressmen were convinced by George Bush and some false information he fed them knowingly, then we really need to oust them all if they were that stupid. Bush acted on what was given to him and did the best he could with it.
George Bush obviously didn't convince them - yes, he acted on information given to him. I am not necessarily saying that Bush lied (or Tony Blair lied) as they were 'using information given to them'. Truth on the matter, where did this information come from? There is evidence to show that there was a political effort to manipulate the scant intelligence analysis on Iraq, before it was even put before UN scrutiny. With regard to where information came from... Sadam expelled UN weapons inspectors in 1998, after which, very little information was available or passed to US intelligence agencies. Where did they get their info... an ex-Iraqi foreign minister and scientists (who both denied existence of WMD), they also got info from
exiled Iraqis (who said WMD's did exist). Who are you to believe... there was no physical evidence. Besides, Sadam was a master of propaganda and manipulation - by expelling Weapons Inspectors he set up a smoke screen for the rumor-mill of him having WMD's - if he did have a handful, he didn't want the world to know that he had '1 or 2'... his ego was happy to let the world think he had an arsenal.
my point, perhaps it wasn't Bush to blame - but there his political agenda at play. Check the dates on some of the CIA white Paper's and British Intelligence Agency White Papers, public political statements by Bush and his team affected intelligence investigations - and drafts of these papers differed from publicly released papers (which served to emphasise information that backed up public political statements).
And you need to get real about Bush's disrespect for the other countries. They have hated us for decades. They hate us when we prosper. They laugh at us an celebrate when we are harmed. This is not because of George Bush.
Tony, how far afield have you travelled? Europe? South America? Far East? Australasia?
I have lived in the UK, visited much of Europe, was educated alongside true nationals of the Far East, India, Pakistan, Australia and New Zealand (not 'my dad is scottish, or my great grandpa is from Germany' types) not once in conversation or interactions did a hatred of America pop up.
Trust me, prior to Bush the US was held in higher regard across the world. The US media has done a good job of convincing you that the world hates america.
Perhaps looking from a religious standpoint, a high percentage of muslims may have a distaste for america... in general, they hate western culture - unfortunately, with the US being at the forefront of western culture, this distaste is aimed at americans. So who celebrated when the US was harmed? Germans, French, Italians, Brazilians, Canadians, Moroccans, South Africans, Kenyans, Turks, Greeks, Chinese, Chileans, Canadians??
Radical religious factions in a handful of countries... bear this in mind, many of these countries don't enjoy the access to non-partisan, unbiased media outlets that we do (well... do we?!?!), they are not educated to think for themselves, many are illiterate... their culture and religion dictates their thought. So when the one 'leader' amongst them spouts a distorted view of their religion and gives them hope for their family, they believe it and embrace it because they don't know any better. they are told, 'your life is crap because of westerners'... and they believe it.
However, when was the last time you saw media showing positive displays from people towards america? Firstly, it wouldn't be newsworthy... secondly, in general people don't take to the streets to let us know how great something is. They will make a scene and some noise when they are unhappy about something... this spectacle will get air time.
With regard to Bush's impact on how america is perceived - he comes across as a bumbling moron... plain and simple. His arrogance and passive stance on points that affect others is regarded as ignorance... sure, he may be a christian, with principles and strong beliefs - but like it or not, he is the figure head of this great nation and he gives an impression of the american people. (and hasn't done americans any justice).
... I'm not blaming economic problems on Bush - both parties and corporate misgivings have led to this. Unfortunately, he is the 'night watchman'...
I've probably bumbled on a bit myself, and raised points that are slightly off-topic... but to insinuate that the 'good 'ole boy' did well is ridiculous. Clinton, Obama, Pelosi, Franks and the many others on the liberal side are irrelevant in judging the tenure of George Bush. To me, To defend his record and impact is like saying thanks, you did a crap job, but thanks.
Tony, like I said at the beginning of my rant - to me, you epitomize what is right about america, however, please take the blinkers off when judging this guy.
