• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Your (dis)approval of Bush over the years

I've never liked the man. How he was ever re-elected is beyond my comprehension.
He was able to provide a viable birth certificate? :p

Originally Posted by OmahaStar:
He was not elected for the first term, which means he was never re-elected. Eight years later, people have forgotten this, and I'm not sure why.
But his inagurations were caught on film - I remember them :cool:
 
2000 He supported horrible policies so I could not vote for him.
2001 Did not support him or his policies. After 9-11 attacks willing to support him until he expanded response beyond Al Queada to include all terrorism. Since such a task is impossible I could not advocate a man that would propose it
2002 Believed he was pushing us into unjustified war that would further distract from efforts against Al Queada.
2003 Thought he had commited treason for outing of covert CIA operation and starting a war under false pretenses
2004 Wanted him in prison. Voted for Kerry.
2005 Still thought of him as trator and war criminal
2006 Glad press finally started holding administration accountable
2007 Amazed that anybody would still support him or his failed policies.
2008 Voted Obama, still consider Bush administration as traitors and war criminals.
 
Originally Posted by OmahaStar:
He was not elected for the first term, which means he was never re-elected. Eight years later, people have forgotten this, and I'm not sure why.
But his inagurations were caught on film - I remember them :cool:

Inauguration has what to do with being elected? In Bush's case, he was assigned to the office. He did not win the election the first time. You know this, of course. That's why I'm amused you even say you "remember" them.
 
Pre-2000: Gore supporter, worked on the campaign. Hated everything Bush stood for.
Post-2000: Continued to hate everything Bush stood for and disagreed with virtually every policy decision "he" "made".
Post-2001: Supported the initial moves in Afghanistan. Did not support domestic "anti-terror" moves at all. All other domestic, international and administrative policy was obviously ideologically driven, shortsighted and potentially disastrous.
Post-2003: The man should have been impeached and turned over to the ICC for due process.

That pretty much brings us up through the present.

Don't hold back. Tell us what you really think.
 
I still can't believe how lax he was on illegal immigration and especially border control after 9/11 when it was supposedly foreign nationals who committed it.:(
 
1999: Enthusiastically supported Governor Bush. Sent him letters urging him to run for president.

2000: Did my best to drum up support Bush. Supported him relentlessly throughout the Florida controversy.

2001: Thought President Bush was doing a good job. Then was blown away by his brilliant handling of 9-11.

2002: Even more enthusiastically supported President Bush when it became clear he was going to eliminate the Hussein regime. Loved the fact that the Republicans kicked ass in the off year elections. Very happy about the U.S. pulling out of the ABM Treaty

2003: Even more enthusiastically supported President Bush during the invasion and defeat of Iraq. Though disappointed with the immediate aftermath.

2004: Enthusiastically supported President Bush in his race for reeelection though my worries over Iraq started to grow.

2005: The lowest point of the Bush Admin. for me. Problems in Iraq growing, his failure to get anything done about Social Security, and his general failure to maintain political support.

Hurricane Katrina (which the president had little to do with) more than balanced out by two brilliant picks for the Supreme Court.

2006: Continued to support President Bush and was disappointed in the American people for voting the Democrats back into power.

2007: Opposed to the Bush Administrations immigration plans but otherwise supportive.

2008: Continued to support the administration and was annoyed that Republicans failed to do so. Happy to see the Bush Admin. got it right in Iraq.

Future:- Will continue to use my position and resources to help ensure that the Bush Admin. gets a favorable review by history.
 
I thought he was a mostly harmless empty suit when he was "elected" in 2000.

Since 9/11, I have come to despise his policies and his presidency. I consider him a war criminal and a betrayer of the US Constitution.
 
I thought he was a more or less harmless buffoon at first, but after 9/11 it became obvious that he's in fact a dangerously stupid, unscrupulous warmonger.
 
*shrug* I don't fundamentally expect anything good from the political process really, and that extends to any specific politician. So I can't say I disapprove of Bush more now than in 2000, since my opinion of politicians trends just above zero anyway. It's a very rare politician that I respect for what they actually do when in office (I do have a very short list though).

I do find the game behind the politicking very amusing to watch in any country though, and certainly have respect for how well any given politician plays the game. There's a strategic elegance behind the maneouvering and the day-to-day playing of the game requires a great deal of emotional intelligence. All the skilled politicians (as defined by their electability) have this. Bush wasn't a truly great player, but he certainly played the game way better than either Gore or Kerry, so "deserved" both his wins. Obama outplayed McCain pretty comprehensively from about September onwards, so deserved his win. The more skilled player wins the game in almost all elections, I think.
 
I always thought he was an idiot and he proved me right. I have republican friends who loved this guy back in 2000 now they hate him.
 
I still can't believe how lax he was on illegal immigration and especially border control after 9/11 when it was supposedly foreign nationals who committed it.:(
If I recall correctly though, the guys involved in 9-11 were here on student visas, so we can stop all the illegals we want, but that alone wouldn't stop cases like 9-11.
 
I don't know how anyone with a straight face can consider President Bush a war criminal.

Come on.

The Invasion of Iraq in 2003 was authorized by Congress. By a much larger vote than the the 1991 Iraq War was authorized by in fact.

If Congress authorizes a war then by definition it is a legal act.
 
A war based on what has become known to be exaggerated, trumped up, or even false information.

Irrelevant.

All wars are based on exaggeration to a degree.

As long as Congress voted for it, as far as the U.S. is concerned the war is by definition legal.

The Bush Admin. could've claimed that Saddam Hussein was behind global warming and it wouldn't have invalidated the vote by Congress.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top