HAHAHAHA!!! Looks like you're the one being played by the media. That is: being against bush = being against the troops.
I support the people that are going over there risking their lives. They don't have a choice. They belong to uncle sam.
Bush, on the other hand, can burn in hell. Too bad he doesn't pay a visit to Iraq. Maybe then, he could get to see first hand what is happening to our troops. He's a coke-head, dwi, deserter who has done nothing but try to help the rich get richer. He's succeeding. At the same time, he's also ruining our economic future as well as destroying our reputation with the world community.
It's funny that all of his cabinet members are quiting. They see what a buffoon he is and they refuse to lie, cover up and sell his propaganda.
Fire away... [/B]
From the reply, it sounds like you are a large supporter of the left wing of the DNC. You said that Bush was a coke-head, dwi, and a deserter. As left wingers go, they usually are correct on statements in a very low percentage. dwi yes, coke... no evidence, deserter... no evidence, he was a national guard pilot during the Vietnam conflict. In compared to the last president Clinton, certainly Bush has a better form of foreign policy and a better approach to a long-term better economy. If you read about presidential influence on economies, you will easily realize our economy is impacted by what presidents influence anywhere from 2 to 4 years later. Ex: Jimmy Carter and his congress in the late 70's single handedly threw our economy into a near depression. Those economic influences impacted the Regan years up until about 1983, interest rates being over 15% for a house. It was Regan who got the economy back on track, and this influenced his second term and things ran well through the next few terms until Clinton tax plans and policies came into being.
Clinton devastated the cash flow of this economy with the highest tax rates on personal and corporate America ever
. It took Roosevelt just about 10 years and the influence of a world war to correct the problems created by the great depression. The point is these things take time.
The Clinton years and their lack of any focused plan to deal with terrorism and to implement procedures at the borders as well as to empower intelligence to do the sort of job that had been done prior to his administration, directly influenced 9/11.
This president at least had the testicle fortitude to send a serious message to these cowardly bums that are influencing harm on us. The message of being capable of changing governments in Afghanistan and Iraq is a very serious one.
If you listened to various people from the left wing, you will clearly see they are trying to dwindle the amount of forces in Iraq and Afghanistan. This in itself is not supporting the troops, but increasing potential harm. Talk to anybody who has been in combat and you will find that the lower amount of troops yields increased casualties by potential attackers. When you go into a combat situation, you always want overwhelming force.