President Bush is a competitive guy. But this is one contest he would rather lose. With 18 months left in office, he is in the running for most unpopular president in the history of modern polling.





Link:

Disfavor for Bush hits rare heights - Washington Post - MSNBC.com

It's sad to see someone who rid the world of a dictator who slaughtered over 500,000 people, who forced people to watch their children get raped right in front of them, who tested explosives on children, and one who should have been eliminated over a decade ago, yet be abused by his own people because of this righteous movement. History will smile upon Bush's efforts.

XenoSapien

Xeno, I'm sorry to say, but America ISN'T the world's police even though they do believe that and act like it at times.
Bush ordered troops into a Sovereign nation without proper authorisation and flawed intelligence.

If this action had been carried out correctly then yes he would be well regarded in history, but as he didn't he won't.
The same goes for his lacky, Tony Blair.

As I recall one of my heroes Harry Truman left office at 23% approval rating but history has been much kinder to him. That I suspect will be the same with President Bush .

The chart on this link is the daily approval rating of the President as compiled by Real CLear Politics web site RealClearPolitics - Polls - Archives

The composite average yesterday was 32.8% approve and 62 .2% disapprove. Not great but a far cry from

Quote:

---

most unpopular president in the history of modern polling

---

Jimmy Carter was around 28% when he left office and of course Nixon had sunk to about 24 % and as I mentioned a pretty damn good President Truman's low was 23 % .

BTW

Congress run by Speaker mimi Pelosi and Harry Reid is running today about 28.5 % RealClearPolitics - Polls - Archives . THAT IS AN HISTORCAL LOW !!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by XenoSapien

It's sad to see someone who rid the world of a dictator who slaughtered over 500,000 people, who forced people to watch their children get raped right in front of them, who tested explosives on children, and one who should have been eliminated over a decade ago, yet be abused by his own people because of this righteous movement. History will smile upon Bush's efforts.

XenoSapien

---

Oh really?
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/rumsfeld-saddam.jpg

Plus: Did the U.S. Help Saddam Acquire Biological Weapons
(Congressional Record: September 20, 2002 (Senate))

Quote:

---

indeed, at their meeting in 1983, Rumsfeld
Warned that Saddam's use of chemical weapons might
"inhibit" American assistance. But top officials in the
Reagan administration saw Saddam as a useful surrogate. By
Going to war with Iran, he could bleed the radical mullahs
Who had seized control of Iran from the pro-American shah.
Some Reagan officials even saw Saddam as another Anwar Sadat,
Capable of making Iraq into a modern secular state, just as
Sadat had tried to lift Egypt before his assassination in
1981.
But Saddam had to be rescued first. The war against Iran
Was going badly by 1982. Iran's "human wave attacks"
Threatened to overrun Saddam's armies. Washington decided to
Give Iraq a helping hand.
After Rumsfeld's visit to Baghdad in 1983, U.S.
Intelligence began supplying the Iraqi dictator with
Satellite photos showing Iranian deployments. Official
Documents suggest that America may also have secretly
Arranged for tanks and other military hardware to be shipped
To Iraq in a swap deal--American tanks to Egypt, Egyptian
Tanks to Iraq. Over the protest of some Pentagon skeptics,
The Reagan administration began allowing the Iraqis to buy a
Wide variety of "dual use" equipment and materials from
American suppliers.

---

CurlyBen, he did have permission; he had to fight like a dog to get it, but he DID get permission. Needkarma, Iran/Iraq forced Reagan to make a choice: At the time, Saddam was the lesser of the two evils, so he went after Iran.

XenoSapien

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by XenoSapien

Needkarma, Iran/Iraq forced Reagan to make a choice: At the time, Saddam was the lesser of the two evils, so he went after Iran.

XenoSapien

---

That's makes no sense, if they were both evil why didn't America neuter them both instead of giving weapons to one?

It doesn't have to make sense. It's fact. Iran was far more brutal and more of a problem than Iraq at the time. I don't know why America wouldn't take both out, but I'm willing to bet it had something to do with the democrat congress; imagine that.

XenoSapien

Hey excon, Reagan gave the guns to free the captive U.S. soldiers. Far better than Bill Clinton, who gave the Chinese laser-guided missile technology because they called him a 'bully' and a 'push-over'.

XenoSapien

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by XenoSapien

It doesn't have to make sense. It's fact. Iran was far more brutal and more of a problem than Iraq at the time. I don't know why America wouldn't take both out, but I'm willing to bet it had something to do with the democrat congress; imagine that.

XenoSapien

---

Your hate for the democrats blinds you. It had to do with getting someone else to do your dirty work.

Quote:

---

Reagan gave the guns to free the captive U.S. soldiers. Far better than Bill Clinton, who gave the Chinese laser-guided missile technology because they called him a 'bully' and a 'push-over'.

---

Iran-Contra was a mistake. There was no excuse to giving Iran weapons of the type they received . But you are correct about the Clintonoids although you neglected some of their more nefarious ,traitorous and cynical reasoning for doing so . The least of them being the obtaining of illegal campaign contributions ;and the worse the uncomfort that they had in the US being a lone super-power. Both were impeachable and the only reason I would have brought him up on charges.

Actually, 32% is not a record low at all. Truman had a 23% approval rating, and Carter had a 28% approval rating. And Congress currently has approval ratings well below Bush's. One poll had Congress down at 14% approval ratings.

Also, keep in mind that Ronald Reagan's poll numbers dipped as low as 41% in Jan 1983 and 46% in November 1986. He is still vewed as one of the most popular presidents in history, and left office with a 67% approval rating, and his popularity has only grown since. There was an 2006 poll that he was the most popular president in history, beating out even Lincoln, Washington and FDR.

Frankly, popularity polls are a popularity contest. They tell us what people think of Bush. But they don't answer the most important question which is whether he is right or wrong on the issues.

Ok. :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Yes, but he gave the weapons to get our soldiers back and it worked.

---

Sorry I cannot give the Reagan adm a pass on it. The facts don't add up.Hezbollah took 30 Western hostages in Beirut of which six were American. His giving them weapons only resulted in 3 getting released.

Reagan came in office partly because of the tough stand he was taking regarding the Iran hostage crisis that ended the day he took office. But his actions in this case were inconsistent with his tough stand against terrorism . Why he negotiated with them is beyond me. Also his "sale" of the weapons clearly violated the Arms Export Control Act of the time. If I think it was OK for Reagan to send weapons to an enemy then I also have to give Clinton a pass.

Now get this ; similar to Gonzalez getting Ashcroft to sign off on a program while partly incapacitated , National Security Advisor McFarlane also visited Ronnie while he was in recovery from cancer surgery to get the operation approved .

And what were the weapons sold ? TOW anti-tank missiles were one,and that was bad enough but even worse was the sale of HAWK anti-plane missiles. Anti-plane missiles given to terrorists ? Yup . Fortunately the shipment was a failure and to my knowledge they got none.

Not coincidentally after the failed delivery of the HAWKs a plane full of US personnel was downed over Newfoundland ; Arrow Air Flight 1285 . 240 casualties . A branch of Hezbollah Islamic Jihad claimed credit .

I don't know if they really downed the plane but I do know that during this time Iran was actively at war with the US. Their agents attacked and destroyed the Marine Barracks in Beirut and Reagan walked away.

By the facts during his administration and his statements of failure, Mr Bush is well on his way to becoming the worst President in the history of America.

Specially egregious is his War of Adventurism on Iraq and the horrific situation that he has created. All options whether increasing US fighting troops or gradual withdrawal or sudden withdrawal are LOSING OPTIONS. There is no positive way to handle this war going forward.

I remember when I saw him give his THIRD RATIONALISM FOR THE WAR... to protect the OIL from Jihadists... his first two rationalizations for warring were lies... weapons of mass destruction and he would attack America! Saddam was doing just fine protecting Iraq's oil from Jihadists! NOw, Bush has pretty much sealed the deal giving Jihadists/AlQuaeda a shot at gaining control of the oil if America leaves.


Like I said, the worst President in the history of America... the most on the line... the poorest response... yeah, It's Bush in my opinion for his many failures in foreign policy, three wars... and giving up the operation to find bin Laden in Pakistan. He isn't even a dufus, he's a nincompoop.