« the voice of shaft and soul man silenced forever | Main | apparently i'm a redneck »

Monday, 25 August 2008

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Eric

Since you said that it was against the same people he originally ran against - I will give you my answer:

Hmmmm.

Same candidates?

Then I have to say yes, as Gore is too much of a scum-sucking lying hypocritical dipshit to be allowed office.

heidianne jackson

eric, we've discussed this before - you really shouldn't hold things in so much and/or sugarcoat them. it's really bad for your system...

nanc

of course i would and i'd STILL be apologizing for choosing the lesser of two evils. he still is - that's the only choice we had - much like today.

Jungle Mom

YES! I think history will prove him to be a much better president than he is given credit for bing today.

The Griper

you might like to turn that question around on your daughter, heidi. ask her,
given everything geo. bush now knows about the years of his presidency and he were given a 'second chance', does she think he would (still have or otherwise) made the same decisions?

her answer might be very interesting.

JMK

It IS a fine question, especially considering the very mixed bag that G W Bush has been, although time may show that he made some of the most pragmatic compromises domestically and was still able to meet most of his foreign policy objectives.

Like Nixon, in retrospect, I believe Bush Jr., will look much better than he does right now.

So, I'll also say YES.....Bush over Gore is a no-brainer (Gore being the brainless choice), as Gore's "defining moment" was when he stood behind G W Bush in one of the televised debates and puffed himself up, when Bush turned and laughed at him, he hulked back to his podium - it was a "Dukakis in an over-sized helmet" moment for Gore, and Bush over Kerry was really no choice at all - Kerry stood for nothing and unravelled before the nation like a cheap suit.

As poor as Bush has been on the border issue and wanton social spending and not curbing earmarks and entitlement spending (no one else has done that either), he was/is lightyears better than the two rivals (Gore and Kerry) the Democrats put up against him.

Mustang

Bush over Gore/Kerry every time. But I think the more important question is this: Why isn't the United States able to field truly qualified candidates for the world's most important position?

I suspect the answer to that question is that "we the people" do not demand honor, integrity, selflessness, and love of country from our politicians.

Angel

I say you raised a fine kid Heidi!..and what Mustang says..says it all!:)

heidianne jackson

thanks all!

Otto -  American Interests

Gore/Kerry is no comparison ... I believe that W will be judged more kindly by history than he is by his contemporaries...

G-Man

Considering the alternatives... HELL YES I'd vote for him again.

heidianne jackson

from mr. j:

the presidency appears to be a thankless job nowadays, with everyone second guessing every decision a president makes like armchair quarterbacks watching the superbowl - claiming how "they could do a better job". It is easy to pass judgement from that position, no acutal "skin in the game" or "risk" as it were so no consequences. Now imagine actually being the president and faced with the tough decisions he has faced over the course of his two terms, not an enviable position from where I sit.

It is not an exact science to pick and choose a president, at least not for me, but you have to arm yourself with as many facts about the person as you can, and then let your instincts tell you what you should do. That is how I came to vote for him each time, and nothing today tells me that was a bad decision. My instincts tell me that any of the other choices we had, if elected, would have this country in a much worse place by now. I had a bad feeling about the "other" candidate choices then and still do so. Nothing either of these candidates have done since has left me feeling like I made a bad choice.

I made the best choice available, bottom line, that is all we can do at election time.

James

NO, I'D BE RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT.

Jessica

I agree with mr. j.

We did the best we could with what we had. I am not sorry I voted for Bush twice, although I don't agree with some of his decisions, I would have disagreed MORE with Kerry's! Being the President is a tough job, thankless for sure, and you're never going to please anyone. I recall something about Bush that was spoken by former Governor Zell Miller at the 2004 RNC. He talked about how he had knocked on the door of Bush's soul and there was always someone home. He talked of how Bush stood by his convictions. That's true, one thing you can't say about Bush is that he's wishy washy or backs down from a fight. He has remained steadfast and consistent in his fight against radical Islam and terrorism, never changing his mind when his ratings fell terribly.

So the answer is...yes.

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner