Saturday, August 13, 2005

George W. Bush has disgraced the White House

The Associated Press (emphasis added):

The war in Iraq and the soaring price of gasoline are drowning out a succession of positive reports on the economy, putting President Bush on the defensive at a time when he could be basking in good economic news.

Despite months of economic growth, tame inflation, resurgent job growth and an unemployment rate near a four-year low, public approval of Bush's handling of the economy is at the lowest levels of his presidency.

That has left his supporters perplexed over why Bush hasn't gotten more credit for the improving economy.

Later, the same article found at least part of the answer in an interpretation of poll data by Andrew Kohut, director of the Pew Research Center (my emphasis):
Americans are far more negative about their personal finances than the government data cited by Bush would suggest.

Despite the job-creation figures and a relatively low unemployment rate of 5 percent, "people continue to tell us the job market in their local communities is not particularly good," Kohut said.

"Since we know that unemployment is not very high, the only inference we can draw is that they are complaining about the quality of jobs that are available."

Ahh...maybe Bush's "supporters" aren't asking the right questions? Or maybe they pre-select Bush supporters for their own poll samples.

As Mixter recently raged, most Americans would agree:
He's a liar. A big, fat liar. He lied to get our country into this war. He lied to Congress, he lied to the American people, he lied to our troops, and he lied to Mrs. Sheehan.

Bill Clinton was a wretched husband and a pig for what he did with Monica Lewinsky in the Oval office (ugh, who needs to be reminded of the visuals). Bill Clinton lied about his personal failings, under pressure from unpopular Republicans desperate for any political advantage, but Bill Clinton's lies didn't hurt anyone.

Once Republicans had their man in the White House, he too lied. George W. Bush's public failings as a leader, in stark contrast to Bill Clinton, caused the deaths of over 3,000 Americans on September 11th, and the deaths of 1,846 Americans in Iraq for a war that was premeditated, pre-emptive, and thoroughly unjustified.

Sadly, I think most voters hoped for something different. I think most of George W. Bush's supporters voted for something other than what they got. I can forgive them, because they were lied to.

Now Americans are finally beginning to realize the horror. Now Americans are beginning to wonder who has truly disgraced the Office of President. Now Americans see a man who, barely able to contain his contempt for democracy, smirks while signing an energy bill that gives away billions of taxpayer dollars to oil companies like Exxon-Mobil - a company that last year recorded a world record $25 billion profit in one year - while doing nothing to bring down gasoline prices. Bush could have done more to help working Americans and his own approval ratings if he just bought a bunch of gasoline and gave it away...oh, but that wouldn't have boosted the revenues of his pals in the oil business.

Hint to the clueless: I'd rather have a president who can't keep his pants zipped up, than a president who intentionally, mercilessly, sent 1,846 Americans to their deaths, who caused grave injury to over 13,000 Americans, who killed 20-30,000 non-combatant Iraqi men, women, and children, and who by his actions has injured the global reputation and safety of Americans for generations to come.

3 Comments:

At 8/13/2005 09:50:00 AM, Blogger The Gnat's Trumpet said...

So, Clinton's failure to act against al Quaeda had nothing to do with 9-11, huh?

And America wasn't hated before George Bush was elected president, right? It was, I experienced it first hand, in England of all places when I went back to visit (I was born in England, but sound American) in the early nineties.

I also have a Greek stepfather and I happen to know first hand as well from conversations with him and others I know from Greece that the Greeks hated America long before Bush.

It has nothing to do with who is president. I don't understand what causes it, but it probably has more to do with jealousy and the knowledge that without the United States, a great many of the things that are enjoyed in European countries in particular, but also around the world, would not be possible. It's funny how people react to their benefactors.

It also probably has to do with fear of the unknown. I spent my first ten years of life in England, and first moved to the United States in 1978 (long before Bush, you know), I remember the United States being feared in England then, and that led to my unfounded fear of moving here, a fear mind you that was soon proven to be groundless by experience. That was during the Carter administration by the way (if you recall), a president I sure you believe to more thoughtful, intelligent and wise than our current president, however the United States was hated then as well.

Although I reject your premises as well, even if they were true they wouldn't support your conclusion.

Why not just state in every post, I hate Bush and everything that happens in the world is his fault? That would be no less accurate than your typical conclusions.

 
At 8/13/2005 10:45:00 AM, Blogger PRB said...

...Greeks hated America long before Bush. It has nothing to do with who is president. I don't understand what causes it, but it probably has more to do with jealousy and the knowledge that without the United States, a great many of the things that are enjoyed in European countries in particular, but also around the world, would not be possible. It's funny how people react to their benefactors.

Maybe your Greek friends were aware of this piece of history. To quote:

United States President Bill Clinton has admitted the US was wrong to back the military junta which took control in Greece in 1967...Mr Clinton said it was time for the US to admit it erred 30 years ago by allowing Cold War strategy to outweigh concern for Greece's democratic government.

If Greece had supported a dictatorship in the U.S. during my lifetime, I wouldn't necessarily see Greece as my "benefactor." But you might ask your stepfather about that and see what he thinks.

 
At 8/13/2005 12:14:00 PM, Blogger Schroeder said...

Paul: cha ching!

gnat boy, let's make a deal...

You do some homework and come up with just one reason that I agree with why Bush has worsened animosity toward the United States around the world, and I'll agree to your premise that some of that hatred is unjustified.

By the way, I too lived in England for about eight months. That was during the Reagan administration. I can't say for certain if the British hated the United States before Reagan (and I do mean the policies of the United States, for which all Americans must claim responsibility), but I can say for certain that a huge segment of the British population was extremely resentful of Reagan's generally belligerent approach to foreign policy, whether justified or not, whether it worked or not. There is a different approach to foreign policy that Europeans generally prefer to the swagger and shoot approach of people like Reagan and Bush, Jr. It's an approach that is far less costly in lives and treasure, and far more effective in promoting international solidarity and peace. It requires a respect for national sovereignty, and negotiated solutions to problems. Does it take time for these endeavors to produce fruit, yes. But Europe, far more than the United States, has been forced to recognize the unacceptable cost of war.

Have any family or friends killed over their in Iraq gnat? Would you like to? Do you think it would be worth it? Would you sacrifice yourself?

When you can answer these questions honestly, I'll pay more heed to your views.

Until then, pay a little more attention to what's going on around you.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home