Bush 4 more years

Will you keep Bush Jr. in the Whitehouse when time comes for re-election?

  • Yes. Definitely. He’s done a great job handling 911, War in Iraq and all the tax cuts.
  • Yes. But it depends on how he does with the economy.
  • Not sure. He hasn’t proven worthy of being re-elected. Too early to tell.
  • Heck no! I never wanted him there in the first place.
  • I voted for him, but he has disappointed me. Not again.

0 voters

Now that the war is over in Iraq. His next tasks are to reform the American economy and hopefully put a stop to the middle east conflicts. Will you put him back into the Whitehouse again given the choice?

Can’t vote, but overall, yes I think I would if I were an American. However, I think that Gore would have done better, but can’t see what natural leader the Democrats have now.

Interesting… you are one of the first (and prob. only) non-Americans I have spoken to who’d want to put him back in the Whitehouse if they could vote. What are the justifications? His tax cut proposals, some experts say, are bogus and would ruin the US economy even fruther, not to mention his utterly senseless foreign policy.

NOt to defend Bush per se, but it is not actually totally senseless policy, but one based largely on Wolfowitz’ Premption Doctrine (he is in the hawks camp) which was surfaced in the early 90s under Bush Sr. and was an idea for post Cold-war era role for the US, and also based on the 9-11 attacks and its consequences, namely that containment was not enough to defend and stop attackers from reaching US soil.

But the dangerous and flip-side of that is how far one can go with Premptive Strikes, and how, in the wrong hands, it could be justified for other actions. Would the US go around the globe and create a new world order in their ‘democratic’ image and overthrow all regimes considered dangerous: N.Korea, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Iran, etc.? Wielded too strongly and the US will not just create unwilling allies, but perhaps a new alliance of enemies.

The Axis of Evil… famous words. So in a way, wouldn’t the policy guarantee U.S. a lot more enemies than pre-Iraqi war? Now that the Arab nations plus those previously known (and unknown) extremist groups will have that much more hatred towards U.S. policies in the Middle East. I don’t think they care much about what U.S. does to N. Korea or, say, Palestine (just for argument’s sake).

Thanks for bringing up “Wolfowitz’ Premption Doctrine”. I’ll have to read up on that. Perhaps my opinions of his decisions are biased because of the lack of the knowledge behind this decision making process. I certainly would like to think so. Then again, that makes 10+ million people all over the world “biased” too (granted, not all of them know what exactly they are protesting… maybe just going with the flow). And combine that with all the commercial interests that apparently have family ties to the Bush/Chaney dual, it just makes the whole thing look suspicious.

There was a FrontLine special on this yesterday. really revealing. it also said that axis of evil was originally written as ‘axis of hatred’ and is a biblical reference. apparently bush likes that kind of rhetoric.

That came to my mind too, ie creating more enemies in the act. But perhaps, fall of Iraq (2nd use of premption) cuts 2 different ways. for the small terrorist cells, i could see them gaining more momentum and support. but for whole states and regimes, who are much more obvious and visible target, iraq can be seen as a warning. all those authoritarian states in m.e and elsewhere, e.g. saudi arabia’s clan/sheikh (?) regime, who is an US ally and allegedly stabs US in the back too, will realize that harbouring and funding anti-US groups may not be worth the price of losing their own power and wealth thru an US invasion (who now can and openly is willing to do it all alone)
of course, if bush goes all out and uses premption in one too many places, then i could see a real counterforce building up. As is often said by media pundits, those regimes out there, in reaction to iraq, will either disband their wmd or just accelerate it.

[quote]Thanks for bringing up “Wolfowitz’ Premption Doctrine”. I’ll have to read up on that. [/quote] yah check out the frontline special. the internal bureaucratic struggle between hawks (rumsfeld, etal.) and the realists (powell, etal) is quite an eye-opener. Apparently the doctrine has been adopted in some National Security Memorandum. I forget the name. Maybe it’s in that whitehouse link Rascal provides.

all the commercial interests that apparently have family ties to the Bush/Chaney dual, it just makes the whole thing look suspicious.[/quote]

not a big fan of those texan corps. real shady to me


the problem for the people who dislike bush is there aren’t really any alternatives. all the democrats who pose real threats are moderates who supported bush’s foreign policy more or less. all the hardcore anti-war people are going to vote for the fringers like dean or maybe even nader again.

myself, i’m a mccain guy, but no republican is going to be able to challenge bush when he runs again.

Flipper… you have spoken the words… Now that Gore is out of the picture completely for sure (and joins Apple Computer as a board member), the chances of Bush Jr. winning again seems greater than it should be…

I don’t vote, being lazy and unpatriotic, but thought you’d be interested to know that the Republicans are sending out trial balloons about running Jeb Bush in 2008. And who knows, after him maybe Jorge Bush.

Hillary Clinton pretty much guarantees a loss for the Democrats. Too many Americans hate her. Not sure how they feel about Lieberman, or some lesser-known candidate like California governor Gray Davis.

Jesus Chr*st… Not another Bush in the Whitehouse! Two is enough.

As much as I am not happy with the Bush administration, I can’t imagine what worse situation the US would be in if the democrats were in office right now… As for the next election I may end up voting for an independent party, I’m getting fed up with both the Republicans and have always disliked the Democrats…

Arnold Schwarzenegger for president!

Certainly, he is more eloquent.

Didn’t Nostradamus make a prediction about three brothers coming to power before the end of the world? Many thought it could be a reference to the kennedy’s. Maybe it was about the Bush’s :shock:

my buddies all like him cuz they feel they have something in common with the president. they all drink and drive.

OUCH! Hope they didn’t graduate at the bottom of the class and relied on daddy to success. :wink:

Did your buddies also graduate from Yale and then receive an MBA from Harvard Business School? Bush did…and he was in school at the same time Gore was. And you know, Gore’s pappy was ALOT more powerful than Bush’s. Gore failed out of both Divinity :shock: and Law School at Vanderbilt. He never did get a graduate degree but everyone thinks he’s some kind of highly educated intellectual while Bush is an uneducated yahoo, unable to tie his own shoes.

Alot of people complain about the American media unless it confirms their own petty prejudices. :unamused:

I didn’t vote last presidential election (still feel guilty about that). But for f**ks sake–the miserable choices we had back then! I was rooting for McCain, but he actually spoke consistently on the issues during his campaign–doom for any candidate.

I would have rooted for Gore except that I was convinced he’d given in completely to the China lobby. The guy’s a total sellout to democracy in this region.

As for the economy, I know that Bush isn’t any more responsible for the poor state its in than Clinton was responsible for the stock market in the
'90s. But this war, combined with the huge price tag it has and the ill-will it’s generating against us around the world (and in the US) is going to make him what his father was–a one-term President. There are just too many vulnerable points to the man that other politicians would love to take aim at.

As far as Bush’ education and business record, he’s a flop in both worlds. Please don’t even try to speculate whether he could have gotten into Yale without his family name. And at least Gore went to Vietnam (though protected the whole time), while Bush was protecting Texas from an invasion from Mexico. And his business record is extremely bad. Only good thing he did was buy into a baseball team.

Let’s hope for better choices in 2004.

A military “journalist”. :unamused: