For those who still stick with Bush, exactly what is it that he has contributed?
Deficits, scandals on top of scandals, a war, English as a second language,
doubling the price of oil, the scorn of most of the world, and on and on. With that kind of competence, who needs naivete?
The invasion war was over Ernest, and it was a spectacular military success,
then the occupation began.
Bush said the war in Iraq was over in April 2003.If that's not naive,
With all due respect Kelly, the western world as a whole, and the US especially
suffers from naivete, both culturally and politically. It must be emphasized
that the Democratic party and its politicians suffer from every iota of naivete
as their Republican counterparts. Yes, Virginia, both Obama and Clinton are
extremely naive. McCain and Huckabee- naive. That,my friend, is why so many
political promises just never pan out. Every politician's "I'm going to change
the world" philosophy is shattered when they realize the complex demagougery and
partisanship that exists. Universal Healthcare is a pipe dream (and rightly so,
in my opinion), peace in the Middle East will never be established with or
without our presence (it wasn't there before our occupation and it won't be
there after our occupation)and the price of gas will keep going up (because that
is just what inflation does like it or not). That being said and despite media
promptings to the contrary, ours is the most admired and emulated country in the
world, simply because people want what we have and envy what we are able to
give,period. In short, no candidate for president will ultimately be able to
solve any of the problems.
There are so many factual errors in Kelly's letter and in Gus's response above
that it's impossible to comment in 200 words or less. You guys need to do some
independent thinking, not listen to spin-masters of the democrat party. Listen
to soldiers who have been there, or are there now, not to CBS/ ABC/ NBC/ CNN/
Fox who are in the business of selling "news."
There appear to be two modes of thought on this issue:Those who can
see things are not working and are advocates of change and reform.Those who can see things are not working and arecontent to do nothing
about it for political reasons.
GOP sick -The only way the U.S. could even come close to becoming going
the "New Great Communistic Country" is if democrats like Obama are elected.
(What do you think universal health care is, if not socialism at its finest?)
Communism is about as far left as you can go on the political scale, a world
away from neo-cons like Bush, Cheney, and the rest of the crew. Your concern
that they will turn the country into a Communist regime, and belief that the
Democrats will save the U.S. from liberal socio-economic policy, is completely
The writer is too kind in the assessment of the Bush Administration. Naivete is
not a word I would use with the Cheney/Bush disaster as this group has with
deliberation and willfulness perpetrated the greatest violation of American
moral standing in the world. From torture to domestic spying, from
launching a war of choice to neglecting the victims of disaster, from outing a
CIA operative to ignoring genocide in Africa, the Bush folks appear naive, but
they are simply without compassion, concern, or consience for those who are not
of their socio-economic political class.The legacy of the Bush
Administration is replete with mistakes (many which could have been avoided),
intentional violations of American law, and simple greed and selfishness.
However, I will defer to the writer and acknowledge that I would be too severe
in my view of George W. Bush & Company.
All agreed here, Kelly. We are totally naive to think that the Iraqis have any
appetite for freedom or democracy.Also, why do we naively continue to rely
on the other nations for oil. We definatley need to explore, develope and
refine our own oil supply.
Right on, Kelly. Thanks for speaking out.
So you claim that a naive president is a bad thing?I guess that
means Obama is a bad thing. I don't recall anyone as underqualifed and naive as
he is, ever getting so much love and adoration from the mainstream press.How is it that we are "paying" the insurgents not to fight? Never heard
that one before.The Iraqi army changes sides all the time? That is a
new one two.Naive seems to be the word to describe the poster, who
is only angry at Bush, but unaware of what is going on in the world. I will be glad when Bush is gone, and Hillary is president, so folks like this
will have to go away, and find something else to be angry with, while we live in
the Clinton's utopian world of government everywhere, cradle to grave, where all
things are good and great, and the earth will be made of marshmallows........
It should also be noted that Bushs friends are the ones that attacked America on
9/11 Yes it was the Saudis not IRAQIS -- Bring on OBAMA, new, fresh, possibly a
only chance to turn the tide back before USA becomes the New Great Communistic
Country. RICH and POOR and absolutely no middle class American
Kelly,How many tours have you served in Iraq to know that the surge
is not working?
Don't worry, Obama will win and you'll get the chance to see how he handles
Just another "Bush Hater" and helpless victim of the evil republicans. But a
least he thinks he's smarter than the Pentagon, the CIA, and the Secretary of
Defense.Kelly, Call Dr. Phil. He specializes in hate-filled and
DULLusional people like yourself.
We don't know the outcome from the Bush administration, Clinton's siding with
the Muslims in Kosovo, lead to succession ten year later, and a permanent enemy
in Serbia. We don't know where all that will lead next. Clinton locking up
Utah coal changed the world market and made his friends the Riyadis very rich,
but it may have pushed the US to nuclear, not a bad outcome. So Kelly, you
don't know the outcome of our Iraq policy and probably won't for decades, and
you saying it, doesn't make it so.
Yeah, and just pulling out is going make everything OK! Obama is not a genius
but he is charasmatic.