Bush: Bad president? Or WORST president EVER?

[Mr. Clandestine]

Rebgirl, will you marry me?!? :computerlove1:

(Oh wait, you're engaged and I'm married... dammit. Ce la vie. Regardless, it's nice to see that not everyone is so easily influenced by liberal media bias in this country. Thanks for having my back. Stay informed, and maybe I'll find ya in the next life. :jointsmile

[carinia]

Hahaha.. taxes. Taxes should stop being looked at as a way to redistribute wealth and instead be looked at for what they are - to run government services.

I appreciate the millions for africa.. but where were the millions for the Boxing day Tsunami (350 million pledged, barely 190 actually sent)? The turkey earthquake(Sorry, dont have my national geographic for those numbers)? Hell, even Katrina. There have been *several* disasters worldwide in the last 8 years, and we have been in the bottom of the donation pool. Hell, even China sends more money than we do, wtf.

And honestly, i dont care about the voting alternatives. I honestly wish Gore had won, at least wed have a respectable focus on world issues and climate change. That beats any rhetoric Bush can spit out anyday. Whenever someone asks me if things would be any better with Kerry or Gore, I gotta ask if things could be any WORSE.

Anyway, he has done a couple good things like visiting little league games. But the damage hes done far outweighs any benefits he might have had.

[rebgirl420]

Haha thanks.

Don't get me wrong though. I'm not a huge fan of Republicans either (at least lately, I'm not religious in ANY way and I hate it when they push their religious agenda on me, aka gay marriage bans and anti-abortion legislation). I'm much more of a Libertarian than anything (personal freedoms are very important). It's just that the left really, really pisses me off sometimes. At least 25-45% more than Republicans usually do.

[carinia]

(personal freedoms are very important). It's just that the left really, really pisses me off sometimes. At least 25-45% more than Republicans usually do.

Lol Reb, I seriously agree with you there, even if I dont sound like it.

[rebgirl420]

Hahaha.. taxes. Taxes should stop being looked at as a way to redistribute wealth and instead be looked at for what they are - to run government services.

I appreciate the millions for africa.. but where were the millions for the Boxing day Tsunami (350 million pledged, barely 190 actually sent)? The turkey earthquake(Sorry, dont have my national geographic for those numbers)? Hell, even Katrina. There have been *several* disasters worldwide in the last 8 years, and we have been in the bottom of the donation pool. Hell, even China sends more money than we do, wtf.

And honestly, i dont care about the voting alternatives. I honestly wish Gore had won, at least wed have a respectable focus on world issues and climate change. That beats any rhetoric Bush can spit out anyday. Whenever someone asks me if things would be any better with Kerry or Gore, I gotta ask if things could be any WORSE.

Katrina and those other natural disasters are not george Bush's fault though. Thank FEMA and all of those other "oh so needed extra government expense" organizations. We gave LA and the other states effected by katrina money. And what did they do? Spent it on porn, jewelry, and other non important things. These people want nothing but handouts. The government is not supposed to support your ass. You live in hurricane territory and you don't have insurance?! YOU DON'T DESERVE A DAMN DIME OF MY TAXES!

And Al Gore and his mystical climate change crap. He spews out this information and gets a nobel peace prize (which lost my respect after they gave it to Yasser Arafat! But this is all theory! THEORY! The changes might not even be made by humans! Mount St. Helens exploded and blew as much crap into the atmosphere than you could even begin to imagine! Theres scientific proof that Al Gore and his chummy U.N. panel don't know a damn thing. Global warming may just be real, but blaming it on human beings is jumping the proverbial gun. I missed the Clinton's attemps on trying to "fix" global warming.

[rebgirl420]

Lol Reb, I seriously agree with you there, even if I dont sound like it.

Haha it's okay. All is fair in love, war and politics!

[Mr. Clandestine]

It's just that the left really, really pisses me off sometimes. At least 25-45% more than Republicans usually do.

:S2:

Libertarians are alright in my book, and I'm kinda tired of the "one party supremacy" idea anyway. I always stand by my convictions, but feel that power would be misused far less if these hot topics were left in the hands of individual states. I cringe after thinking of what might be possible if either of the Dem candidates reigns in our nations highest office. Maybe one day it'll be the Libertarians who level the political playing field in these respects.

[rebgirl420]

:S2:

Libertarians are alright in my book, and I'm kinda tired of the "one party supremacy" idea anyway. I always stand by my convictions, but feel that power would be misused far less if these hot topics were left in the hands of individual states. I cringe after thinking of what might be possible if either of the Dem candidates reigns in our nations highest office. Maybe one day it'll be the Libertarians who level the political playing field in these respects.

Yeah, George Washington warned of a two party system. And this is why. The founding fathers wanted the individual states to rule on issues such as abortion, gay marriage, drugs, prostituation, and other "hot topic" issues. The main federal government was only there so if you needed to band together during a time of war or other national crisis you would have a main centralized system (and to print money).

And we can only hope the two party system fades. But currently everyone is so concerned with parties and gaining and losing power I don't see it happening soon.

[dragonrider]

On the taxes issue: If you are going to spend it, then you need to collect it from somewhere.

I don't know how the Democrats get labeled as tax-and-spend and somehow the Republicans get to CLAIM to be fiscally responsible. It doesn't hold up. If you look at the history of the national debt, it goes up most dramatically during Republican administrations. Reagan and Bush senior spiked the debt through the roof with the Reagan tax cuts and increased defense spending. Clinton got it under control again and set us on a course to a balanced budget and an actual SURPLUS for the first time in something like 40 years. Then Bush came along and gave the surplus away to his rich friends and added another $3 trillion to the debt, on top of the surplus he gave away.

When Bush was pushing his tax cuts through Congress, I actually remember him saying that the tax cuts were to be paid for with the surplus. Someone asked how they would be paid for, and he said something like, "Surplus means more than you need, so we are giving it back to the American people with these tax cuts." Apparently he gave the surplus back along with $3 trillion extra borrowed from the Chinese. It's not really a tax cut if you have to pay double for it later because of the interest, is it? It's a current tax cut paid for with a future tax increase. Haven't any of these people in our government ever had a credit card or a mortgage? It costs more when you get a loan to buy it!

Republicans are great at giving away tax cuts they can't afford and then spending like they still have the money --- that's not fiscally responsible. It's actually the opposite of responsible. Maybe Democrats are tax-and-spend liberals and Republicans are borrow-and-spend conservatives --- but really, what is conservative about that? It's not conservative at all. It's actually the opposite of conservative.

Both parties seem good at spending, but Democrats are better at actually paying for the things they buy. Maybe the Republicans figure they can put it on the tab and the Democrats will pay for it later. Then the Republicans can slam the Democrats for raising taxes to pay off the loans the Republicans took out. I think people are begining to see though it, and the Republicans have lost their credibility as fiscally responsible.

Also, I don't personally care that much about how taxes are distributed. It makes sense to me that people who make more should pay more, but I'm pretty much on board with the idea that no one should have to pay much more than a third of what they make. I just think the government should pay for what it spends money on, instead of driving us further and further into the hole. You either have to raise the taxes or lower the spending in order to balance the budget, and if you can't stop the spending, that means higher taxes now, or EVEN HIGHER TAXES LATER.

[dragonrider]

This is a benchmark to see how things change over time. Right now there are 25 answers to the poll.

Worst: 10
Bad: 7
OK: 2
Good: 5
Best: 1

So, 68% of people responded with an unfavorable rating of Bad or Worst. And 24% responded with a favorable rating of Good or Best. And 8% responded with a nuetral rating of OK.

I'm not exactly sure how polling agencies come up with their "approval ratings," but this 24% rate of favorable repsonses is pretty close to what they report these days, isn't it? I think Bush's approval rating has been around 30% lately, and this is not far off considering the small number of people responding.

Time for another benchmark:

Right now there are 47 answers to the poll.

Worst: 19
Bad: 16
OK: 6
Good: 5
Best: 1

So, 74% of people responded with an unfavorable rating of Bad or Worst. And 13% responded with a favorable rating of Good or Best. And 13% responded with a nuetral rating of OK.

Uh, oh! Looks like Bush is slipping in the polls! This could be real trouble for him if the canncom members are abandoning him.