Is Bush Competent?

Remove all ads!

Is Bush competent?

So far I have looked at all Bush has done, and I am not entirely satisfied. Let alone, not knowing that the Berlin Wall has fallen, he also has his dad's buddies back in the white house. Not only that, they call a country a Rogue state, even though they have the capability of firing a missle practically anywhere in Asia. Not the smartest of moves.

and slightly beside the point. He claims his favorite childhood book is The Very Hungry Catapillar, however the book was not even published until AFTER his college graduation. And now is the reprieve of the Texas guy who raped and murdered his stepdaughter. However, according to Texas state law, a murder does not recieve the death penalty. It has to be an aggravated murder, hence the rape. However he is reprieving someone who deserves the death penalty, where was he with the other 200 or so death rowers? They still died without sufficient evidence of an aggravated murder, and Bush steps in to help the felon of an open and shut case.

So I ask again, is Bush competent to lead the country?

 

The question is more like:

Is Bush competent to lead the world?

That certainly is what he appears to be trying to do, and to that I have to chime a resounding: NO!

 

No. Bush is not competent to govern America. He's by no means competent to rule the world. And US is neither entitled to nor competent to rule the world. Period. It's time they realise they have the same rights as any other state.

 

Is Bush qualified to run the US? No, but there never has been and never will a person who is. No one person "runs" or rules the US. We have 3 branches of government, judicial, legislative, and executive. Now is Bush qualified to be the leader of the executive branch. YES! He is because he realizes his limitations, and he gets the right people to do the right jobs.
Historically, America's great leaders were great delegators. Bush is like all great managers, he surrounds himself with people smarter than himself. Rice, Powell, Rumsfeld, and Cheney, that is a collection of incredible intellect, will, and (I know this one will fan the flames!) integrity.

Besides that, don't let the good ol' boy attitude fool you. Everyone who spends any time with President Bush always ends up saying that they are surprised by his incredible intelligence, clarity of thought, and focus. That includes quite a few liberal writers who generally have nothing good to say about any Republican.

You are more than welcome to disagree with his policy, but don't underestimate his intelligence. Or on second thought, keep on underestimating him, it is to his advantage.

And picking on him because of a children's book, and when it was published. PLEASE! If that is the best you can do I am extremely pleased. It is possible that he didn't really care what the question was and just wanted to prop the book, or he may have not heard the question completely. It is not like that is a question on which the answer has any effect on the world.

 

The real function of the US president is not to set policy - the party does that. The president's main function is to be a cheerleader for the party policies and get people behind them so they can happen. As much as I disliked the government policies during the Reagan era, I have to admit that he was probably the best cheerleader this country ever had.

Would I dislike those policies as much today? Who knows? I've gotten significantly more conservative as I've gotten older, as well as more analytical regarding what I hear on the news.

 

No. He is not competent. It is enough to realize this when you look at his stats/history:
-Has had to retake school
-Has the lowest IQ of all the previous presidents (this has been proven).
There is also a lot of proof in his speeches, i.e. constant repetition of "Weapons of mass destruction".
In fact, why EXACTLY does Georgy want to invade Iraq.
He says something like because they are a danger, cause Saddam Hussein is a dictator, and the have weapons that might be misused.
All right, even if all of this WAS true (I doubt it is) then how is it their business to attack? Or from the more practical view: What's in it for Georgy? Is he doing it because he has a good heart, is a hero, and wants to rid the world of a scum, erm,... NO.
One possibility is that George Bush II has tasted war (Afghanistan) and now he wants more. Furthermore, he wants to follow in the footsteps of his father. - just a theory, but it seems likely. One war has just been finished and now he wants another. What is that?
Another important factor: oil
George Bush II wants oil. He wants money. So do all those in favor of war.

One thing that truly makes me wonder: if there are SO many people against war with Iraq, then why is the US already mobilizing troops? They're gonna attack even if 98% of Americans were against it.
Therefore, even though many countries are democracies only the people in charge make decisions. All we can do is vote for who will BE in charge. That's it.
In fact, I'm surprised George Bushy is still in office. Why haven't you kicked him out yet?

 

That's not how the American system works. A politician can't be deposed outside of the regular election cycle unless something illegal has been done. Like him or lump him, we've got him for sure until November, 2004.

It's really interesting to hear so many people who aren't American sound off about American politics. Makes me wish I had more time to follow the news from a wider variety of sources. It's also interesting to hear from people who are much younger than I am, then think back on how my views have changed over the years.

[ January 16, 2003, 20:18: Message edited by: Rallymama ]

 

I have no idea. What the media tells us is quite biased and critical of our (being U.S.) elected officials.

 

Matthew G.,

Sources please?

On the second one, you bought into an urban legend: bush IQ

Since you don't define competent, I can't answer the question. If you mean in the legal sense, then yes he is competent.

 

Matthew G,

I failed 2 classes in school, does that make me stupid?

Before you answer that, you should know that I passed the Mensa test in the 1980's, have never tested below 145 on an IQ test, and have made the Honor roll my last 7 consecutive semesters.

People of high intelligence are easily bored and have a short attention span when dealing with rudimentary topics or unintelligent people...

 

Darkwolf: Perfectly right. I know what you feel. It was also destructive for my psychic when I realised the teachers are plainly less intelligent, less smart and neither get nor *see* things. My damned numerical highschool ending maths note (2=D, almost fail), needs to be multiplied by 73 to give my supposed (long time no test) IQ. Namely 146 IQ with the right brain hemisphere bigger (wisdom based ). I just *saw* beshrewed conditional probability, analitic geometry, equations, evidences etc. They didn't like it. Screwed my marks. Once I got failed with the least mark possible because I divided square blank paper into two columns. Was that discipline? Lessons in humility? Whatever. So many a time have I had to *prove* things to them to hear 'ah, yes, yes, right'... And all of them were all the time picking at my grammar & syntax which were just too complex for them (esp. in a language like Polish)...

Heheh, guess what I'm having now with 'law in cases' at university.

 

Well...he is pretty stupid like using the word "securatize" and the part about his favorite childhood book (see top post).

 

If only one word answers were permissable here, it's all he deserves really. But no I don't think he is competent at all. He wants to finish daddy's war, and he's probably playing the I won America a war card for the next election too. He will probably even claim that if they win an invasion of Iraq that thanks to him, america owns more oil. Politicians are not the sort of people I respect in any way until they do something to actually earn it. Get Clinton back, at least he knew his arse from his elbow.

 

Competence doesnt matter when you already rule supreme and squishes all opposition while brainwashing your population. It is a moot question.

 

I used to think that US were the best place in the world to be given a great military power over others, if anyone was to receive such a power. Now, I don't. Obviously Bush is too dumb to come up with this on his own, so all we have to ask is who are his puppetmasters. But with what's going on with Irak and US:s reasons for starting the war that is obviously coming.. Well let's just say that while the other part of me hopes that the US will get a couple of real nice Tsar Bombas going off in their own borders, the other part of me feels pity for the US people who have to pay for the stupidity of Bush (+ his puppetmasters ) and his cohorts.

 

Jack Funk: ah. I didn't know it was made up. Thanks for pointing that out for me.

Darkwolf:

I agree with you on that. But George Bush is doubtfully one of those people.

The opinion of people worldwide (or at least of those I know here in Poland, I'm assuming its similiar to that of everyone else) is that the US shouldn't stick their noses in something that's none of their business. i.e. the US sent a letter to the European Union encouraging them to accept Turkey as a member because bla bla bla. You don't see the EU sending Powell a letter saying they should accept Afghanistan, Columbia (that way you'll end the drugs problem, blabla), Puerto Rico, or what have you as one of their states.

 

Just a short word here to irritate the masses and get myself flamed: yes it is our business. There is no such thing as NOYB anymore; it's been a global economy for at least half a century. The march towards globalization is not only taking place in the economy, but in other facets as well, including police activity -- and people holler nearly as loud when we don't get involved. The fact is, being the lone superpower left automatically puts us in a position of authority relating to national squabbles. It's not a question of us getting involved; it's only a question of to what degree and in what manner we should be involved.

EDIT: just realized that there was a topic about this and this is the wrong place to post. Sorry...

[ January 17, 2003, 21:10: Message edited by: Capstone ]

 

I just saw a hillarious thing on the new. Bush is rattleing on about ow he wants to attack. He refueses to give weapon inspectors any more time saying "How much time is it going to take for Bush to disarm?" Jee? Whats he gonna disarm?

 

Personally? I don't think so.

However, if he was truly incompetent, he'd no longer be president now, so he must be doing something right.

 

Not realy, he just pretty much gave the UN the finger