Blame Bush -- Tony

It's going to be tough for me to address these issues w/o sounding biased simply because:

1. I'm a former Intel Analyst, and I KNOW how difficult it is to work with intel
and
2. Because one issue I do agree with conservatives on is "self responsibility".

But let me give it a go.......

1. The Bush tax cuts:

I'm ASSuming here that Eric is referring to our current dismal economy, and that the Bush tax cuts are to blame?? I don't have time to go gather bogus statistics and skewed numbers, so I'll just give my opinion.

Why is the economy in a predicament? Irresponsible people for one; both individuals and businesses. The housing bubble is the number one reason the economy is in the tank. "Housing Starts" are a leading economic indicator and when they start to plummet, speculators do the rest.

The question is why did the bubble pop? For a bubble to pop, it must first be blown? The housing bubble started to inflate during Bush's first term in office as a result of both the rebound of the dot com bust and as a result of both the Bush tax cuts and the war. The war generated tons of employment for people, which in turn allowed them to spend more, which in turn lead to the hiring of more retail employees, etc..... With all these new employees, the economy was strong, people were feeling good and people began to take the next step in the American journey, buying houses. At first this was great, but like anything else, people got greedy, people got stupid, and like always, others began to suffer. Lenders who gave loans to unqualified buyers are to blame. Buyers who are ignorant enough to buy over their heads are to blame. Not tax cuts or the Bush administration. From what I’ve read, Bush has signed several bills to provide relief to those fools who made stupid decisions.

What's funny is that I "qualified" for a mortgage almost double what I actually bought, but I knew I wanted to keep my mortgage payment less than 30% of my total income. I'm not an economy major, in fact, I failed 9th grade, 10th grade, and 11th grade. I graduated high school by the hair of my chin. I'm still working on my bachelors degree at night. Does it take a money strategist to make a good decision, no, it takes common sense.

So, I think the opposite is true about the Bush tax cuts. I think they did a great job of getting the economy stirred up and producing. And I don't think raising taxes to fix the problems of the housing industry and other areas is the solution.

2. & 3. The war in Iraq and Afghanistan:

Again, I'm going to come across as impartial on this too, because I work for USCENTCOM, I work first hand on equipment in the war zone. Everyone I work with has been in Iraq and AF many times and 99% of them agree that we did a good thing and that the people of Iraq and Afghanistan are much better off than before. In fact the only people I hear saying the war was a disaster and that Iraq and AF are in worse condition are:

1. Spoiled rotten college kids who haven't been out of their parents houses, much less overseas.
2. Hollywood celebrities who are so far out of touch with reality that they think everything in life is a movie script.
3. Uninformed people who genuinely want what's best for the world but only get their info from the mainstream media.

I can't blame group #3. They are a large group who have real concern. Unfortunately, they don't have a way to get real information to base their decisions on.

Think about this:

If you had to make a decision on what car drives the best and you had a choice to get information from two sources:

A. A group of professional drivers who have driven all the cars, and have years of experience rating cars.

OR

B. A group of people who have never actually seen the cars in real life and get their info from the manufacturers themselves (who have their own motives).

Who would be the best group to make an informed decision??? Be honest.

I'll base my opinion facts I've gained from people who've actually been there and facts I know first hand.

Now, I've addressed the war in the past, in various emails and stuff. Below is an old email I wrote about why we are at war:

****************OLD EMAIL START*****************

".......People get confused and they question the President because Bin Laden attacked us, NOT Iraq. Well, this is what people aren’t grasping. After 9/11, we vowed to go after all terrorist, not just Bin Laden. Why, because terrorist have been attacking us since Clinton was in office, Bin Laden is just the biggest. Everyone agreed with that (including Kerry and Edwards). So the first plan of action was to go into Afghanistan and get Bin Laden and get rid of the Taliban. Two goals:

1. Find Bin Laden, utilizing Special Forces and Afghan fighters.

2. Get rid of the Taliban and establish a democracy using brute force and large forces of American soldiers.

We haven’t found Bin Laden, but we did get rid of the Taliban and establish a democracy, so this part of the mission was complete. We still have special forces in Afghanistan looking for Bin Laden today. We pulled our troops out of Afghanistan because they weren’t needed anymore, the Afghans took control.

So the next logical step in the war on terror was to go after the country that posed the greatest threat. And according to numerous intelligence reports, Iraq with WMD posed the greatest threat. See this quote from a “meet the press” interview with Sen. Edwards.

-----------------start quote---------------------------

“…MR. RUSSERT: I think what confuses people, Senator, is that there seems to be a difference in rhetoric and emphasis. Back in October of 2002, you voted to authorize the country to go to war. In fact, you said this about Saddam: "I think Iraq is the most serious and imminent threat to our country." "The most serious and imminent threat to our country."

And you underscored it by saying this:

(Videotape, CNN "Late Edition," February 24, 2002):

SEN. EDWARDS: And I think Iraq and Saddam Hussein present the most serious and most imminent threat.

(End videotape)

MR. RUSSERT: "Most serious and imminent threat." Were you just dead wrong? …”

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6200928/

------------------end quote----------------

Yes, Iran has nuclear capabilities, yes North Korea the same, HOWEVER, based on negotiations failing, and intelligence, and the country’s leaders, Iraq posed the greatest terrorist threat to the US. Saddam is killer and has committed genocide. A Saddam with WMD was a great threat. THAT IS WHY WE WENT INTO IRAQ.

So to summarize, the biggest issue people have is “Iraq didn’t fly planes into WTC, Bin Laden did” and Kerry keeps saying Bush diverted troops. HE DIDN”T, the same special forces that were looking for him initially, are still looking for him, PERIOD. We vowed to rid the world of terrorist and Iraq was the next step in that process, and that is why we went in there. With a democratic Iraq it builds yet another ally in our fight.

The Extremist hate us. They kill women, children, etc…they kill their own people. They have been attacking us since the early 80’s, just nothing was done about it. Now, Bush is doing something, and if he hadn’t they would be even more emboldened and have stronger attacks. Now they are on the defensive in their land, not on the offensive in our land.

AND THAT IS WHY WE WENT INTO IRAQ? …”

***************************OLD EMAIL END************************************

Now, that's an old email from a few years ago, but it still stands true. The part that Eric mentions about "Bush knew the intel was wrong" confuses me. First, I haven't seen anything in the media that says this, so Eric please provide your source for this. And secondly, how did Bush know it was wrong? If he did "know" it was wrong, did everyone else "know" it was wrong too?

Surge Delay - THIS IS WHERE I AGREE WITH ERIC!!!
Bush was wrong for delaying the surge troops, absolutely wrong. It's a good thing we are not voting for Bush this election huh! If only we had a candidate who DID support the surge from the beginning, who, in fact, recommended the surge. Wait! I can't McThink of who is McRunning against McObama. Who is that again??

I digress. This post is about why Bush is evil, not about who is the best candidate. So I guess if Bush can be hated because he didn't support the surge, that's a valid argument???

**ADD ON

One more thing I thought of. If you are a fan of the North winning the Civil War, you are a fan of surge tactics. I wrote a paper on Ulysses Grant a while back and while reading his military biography, I found that his idea to "send more American young men early" to end the war sooner was what lead to the North winning. He thought is was best to sacrifice a lot of lives up front than to prolong the war.