Why do people still support Bush?

[sunshine]

I really dont understand how can people in America still support Bush. That guy has proved that he is a complete idiot again and again. I will write more later. Give your opinions.

[Guest donaltopablo]

I'd not a huge Bush fan, but I still support him. I don't like his domestic policies, but his foreign policies aren't too bad. Plus, the issues I know are big, outstanding issues - like the Isreali/Palestine conflict, most American politicans wouldn't take a stand on either. So it's hard to fault him for that. Plus, one of the major reasons people choose not to support Bush was because of the war in Iraq. Since I support the war in Iraq, I don't fault him for that either.

So do you mean blindly support his actions, or simply support him at all? If you mean support him at all, there certainly a lot of existing threads where people get into their feelings on their support or dislike for Bush's actions, both in general, and on specific topics.

[Fighting Irish]

I have to agree with donaltopablo. Bush's foreign policy isn't too bad, just the domestic economy is bad and people blame him.

[monsoon]

[Guest donaltopablo]

Welcome to the forum Fighting Irish!

I will point out that Bush was elected to office without a majority of the population voting for him.

I second the welcome to the forum Fighting Irish.

And yes monsoon, the flaws of a system where you vote for someone who does the voting, rather than the individual vote counting.

[sunshine]

This is my opinion,

Al-Qaida is the organization that attack America. After invading Afghan for about 3 weeks. Bush changed his direction to Iraq and hunt down Saddam. Saddam has nothing to do with the WTC tragedy. Second, there are no WMD. Third, since we found out that Iraq doesnt have WMD, which also mean that the reason for the attck is not valid, why do we still have American soldier staying in Iraq, burning out the tax money and let them get killed? He is decieving American days after days, cover up his stupidity actions by another stupidity action everyday.

I would not even get into gay marriage here. We all know what is his choice on that.

If you still support him, I think it is just blindly support. No offence.

[monsoon]

[Guest donaltopablo]

I definitely do not agree with his stance on Gay marriage. I don't believe I have blind faith. Bush may have been a little over zealous with the war in Iraq, but I still support it. For many reasons, but two major ones:

1. Bush wasn't the only one who felt that Saddam had WMD

2. Saddam still ones one of the worlds worst leaders

I hate to dump on this topic, but honestly, this has been discussed time and time again. There are simply people who don't have a big problem with the Iraq war (such as myself). This isn't blind following of Bush. We've certainly made our cases for our feelings, I know I have. At some point, we have to realize that we have different opinions and they aren't all based on ignorance or blind faith. In fact, you could easily make the same case for blind hate of Bush despite the fact that the two issues you mention: Iraq and Gay Marriage, both were subjects of debate and action during Clintons run. Clinton went on record that he thought we would have to deal with Saddam and Clinton did sign the Defense of Marriage Act. Neither is the extreme that Bush has taken it, but they were still similar stances on the exact same subjects.

I'm not trying to say you or anyone else here has blind hate for Bush, but it also doesn't mean we have blind support. I disagree with the timing and the way we went into Iraq, but not the Iraq war itself. Some people are going to completely disagree with the war, and even though that's not my view point, I can understand your point.

[sunshine]

See, a president cannot act by feelings, he needs to act on facts.

Wheneevr, I see the news about some young kid lose his leg in Iraq or get killed...it just make me think. "Why are we still there?" It is so sad.

[BrandonTO416]

I concur with Sunshine.

Bush's foreign policy is not sound, nor productive in the world we live in. Afghanistan was *the* hotbed of terrorism, created in part by our own screwups in the 1980's when we sold the groups in Afghanistan weaponry and training to go up against the Soviets of the time.

We created that mistake in part, then we created another mistake by letting our attention as a nation guide to Iraq.

The President was given the benefit of a doubt and turned out to be a liar. Not on some personal issue of no significance - but on one of the most important public policy issues we have faced in history.

That's why I think Bush has been a failure on foreign affairs. He successfully turned sympathy towards the USA after 9/11 into hatred by our ALLIES, let alone what others think. Feeding terrorist hatred is not avoidable entirely, but it sure doesn't help to put gasoline on a fire when a house is burning either.

However, there are those who will agree with Bush's foreign policy no matter what. There are those who don't need reasons to have went to war with Iraq, they just accept that we needed to go regardless of the facts. As if Iraq was the most clear and present danger that we faced in the middle east. So no matter how you try to argue, its not going to change their opinion Sunshine.

On domestic policy, I think most Americans do agree that his policies are negative.

[Guest donaltopablo]

However, there are those who will agree with Bush's foreign policy no matter what. There are those who don't need reasons to have went to war with Iraq, they just accept that we needed to go regardless of the facts. As if Iraq was the most clear and present danger that we faced in the middle east. So no matter how you try to argue, its not going to change their opinion Sunshine.

In my mind, if I thought our reason for war wasn't based on information that had been shared by different offices from different political views. Maybe it's been totally made up, but I haven't seen any factual information to make me believe that this wasn't most likely bad information provided to him, and the previous administration. Your opinion on this would obvious vary whether or not you believe former members of the administration who have spoken out... I think most of you know my stance on most of them.

On domestic policy, I think most Americans do agree that his policies are negative.

I would pretty much agree, at least one some of the major issues. Gay marriage being the number one thing I disagree with him on, and one of the number one things that would cause me to vote against him.

[monsoon]

[cityboi]

Welcome to the forum Fighting Irish!

I will point out that Bush was elected to office without a majority of the population voting for him.

Actually he was "selected" by a "Republican" supreme court and not elected. We know there were reports of a whole lot of votes being thrown out in Florida and these votes were in heavily democratic counties. If those votes were counted, it would have made the difference and we'd have our real president today (Al Gore). many people (minorities) were also unconstitutional turned away from the polls or discourged from voting. Bush's brother Jeb happens to be governor of Florida so I don't doubt that there was some kind of conspiracy. Its no coincidence that contraversy took place in Bush's brother's state. Usually it takes years after an incedent for people to figure out that it was a conspiracy. You would think that from past experiences that we should have learned not to trust our government.

George Bush has wreck our economy and our relationship with our allies. He has cause more people to hate the United States. He sent us on a costly war in Iraq which was a diversion from the war on terror. Many toops have died and Bush is talking about sending more troops. We already have the reserves over there. This is beginning to turn into another Vietnam and if this continues, don't be surprised if our government re-enacts the draft sending thousand of young men and women to war against their will. The war in Iraq has nothing to do with the war on terror. Bush just wanted to finish what his father didn't complete. Saddam tried to assainate his father and you know, no body messes with the Bushs and gets away with it. . Bush used the war on terror as an excuse to get into Iraq. We already know that from day 1 of his presidency, the discussion was about going to war with Iraq and this was pre 911. We need a new president because we can't continue down this path another 4 years. Its really scary when you think about it. Remeber, before Bush came into office, he had no foreign policy experiece and that is showing today big time.

[BrandonTO416]

donalto - Bill Clinton never advocated a complete takeover of Iraq through a massive military strike with hundreds of thousands of US soldiers being rotated in and out of the nation at this point.

President Bush is at fault for diverting attention away from terrorism - confusing the words terrorism and Iraq - and causing the entirely separate issue of Iraq to dominate our foreign agenda.

President Bush's only positive, believable reason for going to war with Iraq has been that he believes - or so his administration says - that creating a democratic nation in Iraq aside what the U.N. has been able to accomplish in Afghanistan will act as a beacon to the Middle East and will cause the downfall of the oppressive regimes in that region.

Bush's only legitimate plan at this point is to have this democratic "beacon" with a domino effect to occur, freeing up the middle east.

For one - I don't think this plan will work. The reason why is simple - history proves different. 1) We created Iraq after WWII. 2) Our economic ties to the Middle East are necessary to carry out our oil dependent economy. And this is always going to cause problems no matter what. The entire reason these people are infurated at the United States can be tied down to our economic dependence on this region and our having to be involved in this region for this reason.

[Guest donaltopablo]

donalto - Bill Clinton never advocated a complete takeover of Iraq through a massive military strike with hundreds of thousands of US soldiers being rotated in and out of the nation at this point.

I believe I stated in my post that Clinton obviously did not act or state, both on Iraq and Gay Marriage, to the extreme Bush did. There is no doubt Bush has been far more extreme on both of these issues than Clinton was.

Neither is the extreme that Bush has taken it, but they were still similar stances on the exact same subjects.

Yep, there it is.

[ShowMeKC]

I support Bush because he is/will be a better president than Kerry ever will be IMO.

Kerry already has the support of the dictator of N. Korea (who runs his campaign ads verbatum in his country), plus would we want a man who wouldn't turn his fellow soldiers in for war atrocities to be president?

Also Bush has made the right decisions on abortion, gay marraige and Iraq/Afghanistan.

Sure Iraq could have been a vendetta. But we still toppled an evil dictator who would jump at the chance to hurt America.

I personally think we should invade Cuba, Somalia and any other countries led by a dictator.

[JivecitySTL]

^LOLOLOLOL!

The mere fact that Bush got into office in the first place (even though he didn't win the popular vote) is evidence enough that America is full of very stupid people. I can't stand Bush. I can't stand his evil politics. I can't stand his war-monger tactics. I can't stand his ultra-conservative views on abortion, gay marriage, school prayer and gun laws. Bush is an embarrassment to the United States, and he is the reason we are so profoundly hated by hundreds of countries around the world. I can't wait to see the f*cker ousted by Kerry.

I sure wish we could have Clinton back. He was the best.

[ShowMeKC]

well, that is your opinion, doesn't make it fact

This, however IS fact:

Kerry already has the support of the dictator of N. Korea. Who runs his campaign ads verbatum in his country

[sunshine]

Bush decision on gay marriage and Iraq is wrong.

Bush decision on attacking Iraq instead of focusing on Afghan is wrong.

[Brickell]

I support Bush because he is/will be a better president than Kerry ever will be IMO.

Kerry already has the support of the dictator of N. Korea (who runs his campaign ads verbatum in his country), plus would we want a man who wouldn't turn his fellow soldiers in for war atrocities to be president?

Also Bush has made the right decisions on abortion, gay marraige and Iraq/Afghanistan.

Sure Iraq could have been a vendetta. But we still toppled an evil dictator who would jump at the chance to hurt America.

I personally think we should invade Cuba, Somalia and any other countries led by a dictator.

Please explain what the support of a leader of another country has to do with anything?

I'd like to see some sources for that claim as well.

http://sg.news.yahoo.com/040409/1/3jdy5.html

Maybe N. Korea doesn't want war as much as most of us do. Bush on the other hand...

[BrandonTO416]

KCDevin, you are insane on this issue.

There are reports Al Qaeda supports Bush - as well.

[ShowMeKC]

Why? They end up being killed by his leadership...

The leader of N. Korea knows Kerry won't attack his country, so he'd be free to make nuclear weapons secretly.

I might support Kerry if he wasn't so dishonest about Vietnam, claiming his troops commited atrocities worse than Mei Lai. And then not turning them in for it... Also I would support him if he would continue the war on terrorism and eliminate Al Qaida and the rest of the terrorist networks. Like those in the Phillipines.

I just wished people would realize that we lost Vietnam because we had a complete idiot as president. And we had people protesting against it.

Too bad JFK was killed, we wouldave won the Vietnam War.

Instead of having a single president, why don't we just split it up into several positions like for defense, etc... Kinda like the secretaries.

Politics has become too bloodthirsty and violent. I wished we could go back to like it was, in the days of Teddy Roosevelt, Franklin Roosevelt, Lincoln, etc... (basically the late 1850s - early 1950s.

[monsoon]

[ShowMeKC]

LBJ served out his term and Nixon was the one who resigned

[Scott]

Being called a "Massachusetts Liberal" by this hollow flight suit of a man... this pretend army soldier... has left me particularly happy to see his little house of cards falling. Bush was educated in Andover and Cambridge MA, and his father was born here, anyone else would be appreciative, but not W, the big bad (fake)Texan.

I feel that Bush's actions when he was in the military and the actions of his father show what kind of people they are and what kind of "fortitude" they have. He's a "War President" who wouldn't fight for his country , leaving it for the sons of the poor.

http://www.allhatnocattle.net/

I disagree with the notion that invading Iraq, essentially alone, was a good idea. Read the papers... alienating the rest of the world was a big mistake. Nothing makes my blood boil like the French laughing at our misfortune, but that's where we are.

I don't know what foreign policy anyone else is talking about but the one I see stinks. It comes down to, people will not believe their eyes about Bush because they want a Republican president and are blind to everything else, including the good of the country.