List Good things the current President has done while he is in office here.

2456

Comments

  • PaperPlates
    PaperPlates Posts: 1,745
    macgyver06 wrote:
    Bush doesnt have a good say on how the economy is. our free market and economists and the industries, and the people feeling comfortable and buying do.

    So I'll assume you're one of the few who doesnt credit Clinton for the good economy during his turn??? ;)
    Why go home

    www.myspace.com/jensvad
  • Cosmo
    Cosmo Posts: 12,225
    hippiemom wrote:
    This was a really good thing.

    Unfortunately, it's the only one I could come up with.
    ...
    That was about it for me, too. I only wish that he had heard of Jacques Cousteau prior to 2006.
    But, he DID show some strength in the days after the September 11, 2001 attacks... and going after the Bin Laden crew. But, that was a no-brainer... I believe any President would have done the same.
    Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
    Hail, Hail!!!
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    ledvedderman wrote:
    Is Timothy McVeigh a terrorist to you? If he is, isn't this mad milk man from the other day?


    McVeigh yes.

    the milk man? he is a mentally ill guy who had inner demons against women and who knows what. did he terrorize the amish community? um yes he did.
  • macgyver06
    macgyver06 Posts: 2,500
    jlew24asu wrote:
    so you wouldnt be blaming bush if we were in a recession?

    i would blame him for not putting a plan into action..such as raising federal reserve limits... that is HIS JOB
  • ledvedderman
    ledvedderman Posts: 7,762
    jlew24asu wrote:
    McVeigh yes.

    the milk man? he is a mentally ill guy who had inner demons against women and who knows what. did he terrorize the amish community? um yes he did.

    Would it be fair to say that McVeigh was a "mentally ill guy who had inner demons about the way the Federal government handled the Waco situation"
    E8toX.gif

    http://www.reverbnation.com/brianzilm
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    macgyver06 wrote:
    i would blame him for not putting a plan into action..such as raising federal reserve limits... that is HIS JOB


    he did put a plan into action in early 2002 when we were in a recession. what has the market done since then? hmmmm


    so you blame or would blame him for a recession but not praise him for an effective plan.


    cant we be fair about it? im sure you thought Clinton was a genius during his time even though the ecomony soared under a stock market bubble which voilently bursts in 2000
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    ledvedderman wrote:
    Would it be fair to say that McVeigh was a "mentally ill guy who had inner demons about the way the Federal government handled the Waco situation"


    he had a much bigger beef with the government than just waco. what are you getting at?
  • ledvedderman
    ledvedderman Posts: 7,762
    jlew24asu wrote:
    he had a much bigger beef with the government than just waco. what are you getting at?

    You stated that you had a pretty good idea who the terrorists were? I could be wrong, but to me, that's implying that middle eastern men are the terrorists you were thinking of. I was trying to show that there is no way anyone can know who the terrorists are.
    E8toX.gif

    http://www.reverbnation.com/brianzilm
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    ledvedderman wrote:
    You stated that you had a pretty good idea who the terrorists were? I could be wrong, but to me, that's implying that middle eastern men are the terrorists you were thinking of. I was trying to show that there is no way anyone can know who the terrorists are.


    excuse me allow me to be more clear. I was refering to islamic terrorists. they seemed to be more organized and dedicated then the Tim McVeighs of the world.

    and to keep in line with this thread. Bush has prevented them from attacking us again on our soil.
  • TheVoiceInside
    TheVoiceInside Posts: 361
    jlew24asu wrote:
    excuse me allow me to be more clear. I was refering to islamic terrorists. they seemed to be more organized and dedicated then the Tim McVeighs of the world.

    and to keep in line with this thread. Bush has prevented them from attacking us again on our soil.


    What good is it to be protected inside your house if you cant even go outside.
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    TheVoiceInside wrote:
    What good is it to be protected inside your house if you cant even go outside.


    I feel just as protected outside as I do inside. even in the 61 story office tower I work in. thanks to Bush.


    who is stopping you from going outside anyway?
  • ledvedderman
    ledvedderman Posts: 7,762
    jlew24asu wrote:
    excuse me allow me to be more clear. I was refering to islamic terrorists. they seemed to be more organized and dedicated then the Tim McVeighs of the world.

    and to keep in line with this thread. Bush has prevented them from attacking us again on our soil.

    Prove it. Show me how he has made us safer, because to be honest, I feel a lot less safe these days.
    E8toX.gif

    http://www.reverbnation.com/brianzilm
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    ledvedderman wrote:
    Prove it. Show me how he has made us safer, because to be honest, I feel a lot less safe these days.


    proof? no attack since 9/11. thats my proof. its just like the economy example.

    god forbid we had been attacked lets say 3 times since 9/11, Bush would be an asshole for not making us safer.

    good economy - not becuase of bush
    bad economy - all bushes fault

    no attacks since 9/11 - not because of bush
    post 9/11 attack in US - bush didnt protect us.
  • TheVoiceInside
    TheVoiceInside Posts: 361
    jlew24asu wrote:
    I feel just as protected outside as I do inside. even in the 61 story office tower I work in. thanks to Bush.


    who is stopping you from going outside anyway?




    What i was trying to say was, that yeah there havent been any attacks on US soil since 911. but because of Irak people around the world are pissed at America. So you might be safe at home but abroad people hate you. it is isolatioalism. type of thing paranoid poeple do.
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    TheVoiceInside wrote:
    What i was trying to say was, that yeah there havent been any attacks on US soil since 911. but because of Irak people around the world are pissed at America. So you might be safe at home but abroad people hate you. it is isolatioalism. type of thing paranoid poeple do.


    6 months ago I travelled to italy, amersterdam, and london. I didnt feel threatened at all.

    remind me not to travel to pakistan, I might agree with you.
  • ledvedderman
    ledvedderman Posts: 7,762
    jlew24asu wrote:
    proof? no attack since 9/11. thats my proof. its just like the economy example.

    god forbid we had been attacked lets say 3 times since 9/11, Bush would be an asshole for not making us safer.

    good economy - not becuase of bush
    bad economy - all bushes fault

    no attacks since 9/11 - not because of bush
    post 9/11 attack in US - bush didnt protect us.

    Sorry man, I don't think "no attacks since 9/11" classifies as him making us safer. It was 8 years before he took office since we were attacked, it's been five. I think the Intelligence Estimate that came out last week shows that the War in/on Iraq is making us less safe.
    The idea of actual attacks not happening makes us safer isn't anything near what you think. He is doing things that in the long run, make us less safe.
    E8toX.gif

    http://www.reverbnation.com/brianzilm
  • Cosmo
    Cosmo Posts: 12,225
    jlew24asu wrote:
    Our country has not been attacked since Sept 11th. would you argue Bush had NOTHING to do with that fact?
    ...
    I think the logic involved here is paramount to the logic, "Mexico was never attacked by Muslim Fundamentalist... therefore, America should be more like Mexico".
    Both statements are invalid.
    Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
    Hail, Hail!!!
  • TheVoiceInside
    TheVoiceInside Posts: 361
    ledvedderman wrote:
    Sorry man, I don't think "no attacks since 9/11" classifies as him making us safer. It was 8 years before he took office since we were attacked, it's been five. I think the Intelligence Estimate that came out last week shows that the War in/on Iraq is making us less safe.
    The idea of actual attacks not happening makes us safer isn't anything near what you think. He is doing things that in the long run, make us less safe.


    yes in the long run, after he is out of office and cannot be blamed for anything.
  • ledvedderman
    ledvedderman Posts: 7,762
    TheVoiceInside wrote:
    yes in the long run, after he is out of office and not be blamed for anything.

    I'm pretty sure he will get blamed for a lot of things once he is out of office, and he deserves it
    E8toX.gif

    http://www.reverbnation.com/brianzilm
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    ledvedderman wrote:
    Sorry man, I don't think "no attacks since 9/11" classifies as him making us safer. It was 8 years before he took office since we were attacked, it's been five. I think the Intelligence Estimate that came out last week shows that the War in/on Iraq is making us less safe.
    The idea of actual attacks not happening makes us safer isn't anything near what you think. He is doing things that in the long run, make us less safe.


    look, I by no means am happy with the whole Iraq thing. we may never well be fucked in the long run, I dont know. time will tell. my point is Bush has made us safer here at home. actual attacks have been prevented.

Categories