nothing will happen.  Personally, i wouldn't mind seeing them both quit, right now.

as for viruses, what can I say? Get a mac!

As for Bush and HIS axis of evil, yea we all have our hopes and dreams... but we have to wait at least 'till the beginning of next year... If only Kerry didn't look like herman munster.....

Uh...Bush is doing a pretty good job.  Think about it, there haven't been any major terrorist actions on US soil lately, have there?

Rummy's not my favorite SecDef, but he's also done a decent job.  Do you really think he ordered the mistreatmen of POWs?

If we wanna talk mistreatment, let's talk about what the Iraqis did to ours in both Gulf War I and II.

No... I don't think anyone with a brain would say that Bush or Rumsfeld were the ones who ordered the misconduct. Even GWB is smart enough to realize that would be bad. The fact that no one knew about it earlier? that's very embarrassing isn't it? The fact that the Red Cross released their reports suggesting this was anything but isolated individuals.... It adds up to a huge embarassment for the USA, regardless of who's fault it is. Bush and Rumsfeld apologized... or at least said they felt bad for the victims and their families... i suppose we should applaud them right? But did you listen to Rumsfeld's responses? He semi-tactfully dodged every question... deferred it to "oh, we're looking into that now....".

Even Republicans question things about this administration...
This is a bigger mess than ever now because of this abuse.... it's gonna take a whole lot more than "that's just not how we do things in america".

"Uh...Bush is doing a pretty good job. Think about it, there haven't been any major terrorist actions on US soil lately, have there? "

Come on Doctor you can't be serious here with that statement.

Personally I believe that Rummy shouldn't resign unless he had knowledge about these acts and condoned them before they were addressed publicly and he later condemned them.  But even then he still wouldn't resign because he would be a cold-hearted person.  I don't believe either Pres. Bush or Rummy should be blamed for them, though it seems like people are trying to do.  It'd be similar to blaming the ceo of coke for a coke bottle that exploded in your lap.  They have some control, but not total.  All I see for this is a sad irony that only a human could set up.  America goes in there to stop a man from terrorizing his people, and then we turn around and do a similar act.  Sad, sad irony.

His tax cuts didn't help me, and they really didn't seem to help any of my friends. I've heard one person say they've helped, and that's it!

Helped me and my family alot. Add six people who have been helped to your list.

Actually, the economy is starting to pick up again. I know you want to blame it on a Republican, but the recession started in the last year of Clinton's office. Bush inhereted a mess.

More over Bush really isn't helping with the whole gas issue.

What gas issue? Oh, you mean when he proposed the drilling in ANWR and the Dems in the Senate tore it down? Yeah...

If you really look at it, this is a repeat of the 1960s with Johnson. Johnson had his war with Vietnam, a war on poverty, Arabs weren't in favor of him so they withheld oil, and Johnson had his tax cuts. Bush has his tax cuts, his war with Iraq, his no child left behind act, and oil prices are suffering because of his relations with the middle east. Yeah. Bush is all bad.

It is exactly like Johnson, except we only lost 750-something people, we actually conquered the whole country, we are making huge progress, half of the population has received vaccinations, there is running water and clean food for the first time for many people, and the people are actually enjoying freedom for the first time. Oh yeah, that's the side effect. Now terrorist/extremist regimes know we mean business. Now, the war is on their turf.

Oil prices are suffering because we can't drill in ANWR. We can't do offshore drilling. Why? Because of the Porcupine Caribou and Tom Daschle. Prices would go down drastically if we could drill in Alaska and offshore, but no: Dems have to keep it in the Middle East, cuz they know Republicans will do the right thing and blacklisted by people in power, resulting in endless "Bush is making gas prices rise! Vote for me" opportunities.

Has anyone seen the website that is trying to get a referendum to impeach Bush? I really can't see that going anywhere, but I think it's funny.

 

That is funny.

I'm not too sure any President can really be rewarded or blamed for the economy. They really don't have that much of an effect.

...and the tax cuts helped me, too. I had enough  money to take my girlfriend out to dinner once. Then she dumped me. I blame the President.  

Bush did not cause the recession... I'll give you that. During his administration, when things could have been done to help stop the recession, they weren't. This IS true, whether you pin it on bush's administration or congress or what.

Say you're low on cash.... and you're in debt, but on the right track to getting rid of it slowly. Now something happens that makes your cash even lower.... say you lose your job, whatever.

Clearly the best plan of action is to spend a lot of money, put yourself in more debt, while not doing all that much in regards to getting more money (not loaned money, real income). This is what has happened under the current administration, no matter how you slice it. Even uber-republicans like Pete Hoekstra (I know, he came to my college and talked to us) are getting tired of Bush's off the wall financial policies. Who is responsible for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan? Bush. The Executive office initiated the military action, not congress. Congress may have allowed it to continue, but could they have really told him to get out? Think about it.... that's why even with a democratic president next year we won't be "out of Iraq" in a flash (assuming we're still there at that point.....).

Is the economy of the state of Michigan a result of Granholm ("that d*mn woman" as all my republican Christian elders refer to her) or a result of what Engler left? Duh. She's taking money out of education... drivers licenses are more... true enough, and it sucks.... but the money has to come from somewhere... we have to have a balanced budget legally...

Did Clinton leave an economy as bad as that? I don't think so. As I recall, recessions are common at the end of presidents' terms.

Keep paintin' Bush as a guy doing the best he can.... the 'best he can' is clearly not good enough. Sure Clinton didn't kill Osama when he could... but when Bush had knowledge that Terrorist attacks were the most pertinant threat against the US, what did he do? Seek to protect us with an ANTI MISSLE DEFENSE SYSTEM. Terrorists do not use ICBMs....

I voted the 3rd option. I think Rumsfeld and Bush will both stay in 'till the end. I'm glad too, cuz I want them to both sit through this and take all the heat they've avoided for 3 years (cuz as even the radical right can see, our "liberal news media" has made Bush teflon president II). I'd like to see Bush and his pals win the election again too so the world can shake their heads in utter befuddlement at them for another 4 years... except unfortunately, I think that administration could screw up our country even more seriously given that kind of time.....

The USA now has no credibility, if it still had any before the 'pictures' came out.... you gonna blame Clinton for that too?

Please Radical Religious Right, tell me what the Bush administration has done to help YOU these past 4 years? A constitutional amendment to ban gay LEGAL marriages? Do you think legal marriage is something sacred anyway? of course it isn't.... GODLY marriage is one thing, legal marriage is another. I'll become one flesh in God's eyes, not a notary's. Keep voting on your one issue platforms. Don't you see all a candidate has to do is SAY he's against abortion to get your vote? What has Bush done to stop abortion in his "great" 3 years so far?

I would contend that Clinton is as responsible for this recession as anyone.

The market was driven by tech stocks up until  the end of 1999.  Was Clinton responsible for this?  Well, no and, maybe.   No in that tech was selling because the dipstick population of this country thought their beloved VCR's, watches, computers, etc. would turn against them and eat them alive at the stroke of midnight, Dec 31/Jan 1.  Kinda like a plastic /semiconductor version of Animal Farm.  

Now, could Clinton have assured people that the wouldn't die on Jan 1, 0000:01 hours.  HE*& yea, he coulda.  But why would he mess up the only thing he had going for him...the economy driven by nothing he did.

Enter the federal piracy of Microsoft around the middle of 1999.  Clinton's  boys raped the mightiest ship in the Tech Fleet like Blackbeard's crew at port call.  Look it up, slick.  When did the warning bells really start ringing?  Microsoft anti-trust suit...FOR GIVING AWAY THEIR SOFTWARE.  When did it really start to sink?  January 2000.  When did Bush take office?  

Nobody could do any better with the economy Clinton screwed up.

I thought this was a thread about Rumsfeld, but it turns out to be LP's political rant and roll.

rant rant rant... roll roll roll... whatever that means :)

There is that thing about a certain event on 9-11-01.  Remember that?  Prior to this Bush was doing things, including a tax credit and a tax rebate.   Nailing Bush for not turning around a recession you admit he didn't start in a mere 9 months is balogna.   Give the man some time.

Ok, stop using 9/11 as the reason why everything's ok alright? 9/11 probably would have happened no matter who was president. To say that everything changes after that, and we have to give bush a break is not a fair thing to ask for. tax credits and tax rebates helped the rich more than the poor-ie, the people who would dump that money back into the economy. But here's the real thing. Where did that money come from? the surplus? remember that? seems forever ago since bush took office... and i know gore said "lockbox lockbox" which i don't know if I agree with either... but one thing's for sure... come september 11th, it would have been nice to have that money wouldn't it? come war time, it would have been nice to have that money wouldn't it? instead he put it into these tax rebates which didn't help the economy. you might say they should have, but reality is they didn't.... can't help you there.

"This is what has happened under the current administration, no matter how you slice it."

But I would blame investors, too, that gave money to internet start-ups as though it were a 'new economy,' ie, as though it weren't important for the companies to make money.

yea.. i agree, that was dumb... look where the .coms are now...

Ok... i don't understand where people spending money in the tech stocks and then losing out is Clinton's fault? No offense, as I wouldn't want to lose money either johnny, but if you had a bad day on the market, it's hard to blame anyone... It's not like the .coms were lying about things and covering it up.... oddly enough, like companies bush/cheney have connections to..... they told people from the beginning they hadn't made a profit yet... that's not clinton's fault that everyone bought it. If you're not gonna let me say the good economy was his doing, you can't let yourself say the 'fakeness' of that economy was his doing also.

"Keep paintin' Bush as a guy doing the best he can.... the 'best he can' is clearly not good enough."

I think you have to take into consideration that we are in a war.

This says a lot... To someone who's not fully convinced that we should be involved in war right now, I'm not sure this arguement has any stock. Wartime economies are supposed to be good... problem is, this isn't a war. There's no "war effort". If war is something that (you're saying) stresses the economy, then a president trying to help the economy would avoid starting 2 of them at all costs I'd think. If I told you in 1999 taht within 2 years we'd be involved in 2 wars, you would have laughed at me and called me outrageous.... now look. make up your mind johnny, is war good or bad for the economy? If it's good, then I guess bush is doin' a good job... too bad it's not helping any. If it's bad, then Bush chose to have these wars despite their devastating effects on the economy. Were these wars unavoidable I ask you? I think not. Even if the need to go to war was justified, we could have not gone to war as well... THIS is undeniably true.

"but when Bush had knowledge that Terrorist attacks were the most pertinant threat against the US, what did he do? Seek to protect us with an ANTI MISSLE DEFENSE SYSTEM. Terrorists do not use ICBMs...."

But North Korea does.  See the '80,000' in one crack thread where I have posted a news article that links Syria to North Korea.

That's right. North Korea is a threat to us. They have capabilities. notice we didn't start a pre-emptive war against them now did we? They seem like a more worthy target for such a war, as we KNOW they have missles pointed at us. Given Iraq and North Korea, NK is a much clearer choice to attack on the basis of need/safety. Now NK might be a more costly battle... as they actually are a threat.... i'm sure that's why we chose iraq, who we rolled over with no problem because they weren't a threat. Now they can just pick off our boys one by one... here and there...

Did you know that a NK missle has been found on American soil, apparently the result of a NK test firing?

are you trying to justify Bush's sole focus on Star Wars before 9/11?


"The USA now has no credibility,"

Tell that to Libya.

"Please Radical Religious Right, tell me what the Bush administration has done to help YOU these past 4 years?"

Wassamatta, LP.  Gotta bring out the labels to make your point?  The Bush admin has thwarted serious threats to my life and liberty. I consider him a war president, and I expect him to behave as such.

Did you consider him a War president when you cast your ballot in 1999? (if you voted for him). I know I wouldn't have, even if i was of legal age to vote then. The Bush admin has encouraged serious threats to the American People's financial well being, as well as encouraged future serious threats to our life and liberty. I'm not pleased.. I'm glad you are though. You're right, if you consider him a war president, he's doing alright... except he hasn't attacked NK and the real threats yet... just the people hiding in caves (and so far he's only found one of them...)

And the $5,000 I got back from my taxes this year- a full 25% of my annual income- certainly helped, too.

out of that 5000, how much was from the tax cuts and how much was just money back? also, i hope you dumped it into something that helps the economy... big purchases.... certainly not to church, because that doesn't help the economy at all. Or did Bush say God wanted the American people to give more money to Him...

"Don't you see all a candidate has to do is SAY he's against abortion to get your vote?"

Who says I'm voting for Bush?

Who says Bush is the only one "saying" he's against abortion?

By tossing out the R^3, I'm expressing a feeling against what I've been indoctrinated to believe all my life at Lutheran Schools: Christians are Republicans, and Democrats are not. Bush is not God's president.... even if he does get his war orders from a "higher father".