06-26-2012, 08:46 PM
0
We were doing really well financially during the first six years of Bush. The war aside, what he did at home to keep jobs and money flowing was what kept us in good financial shape in the private sector. I don't understand why he caved like he did in the end and I always said he did too much to appease the opposite side and try to be bi-partisan.
the war is a separate issue but I believe he forced himself into it to a degree. He sent inspectors into Iraq because of Saddam's past history and boastings about weapons and what not. Saddam did not cooperate and made it impossible to know the truth. If he had no weapons, why give inspectors such a hard time? It would have been over that much faster and all would be good. Bush had to keep his "or else" promise. If he didn't we'd be a laughingstock. He did and he's hated for it. It was a no win situation for him on that.
Personally, my finances have always done better during a republican presidency than a democratic with one exception, the second term of Clinton's administration.
the war is a separate issue but I believe he forced himself into it to a degree. He sent inspectors into Iraq because of Saddam's past history and boastings about weapons and what not. Saddam did not cooperate and made it impossible to know the truth. If he had no weapons, why give inspectors such a hard time? It would have been over that much faster and all would be good. Bush had to keep his "or else" promise. If he didn't we'd be a laughingstock. He did and he's hated for it. It was a no win situation for him on that.
Personally, my finances have always done better during a republican presidency than a democratic with one exception, the second term of Clinton's administration.
I have no idea what you're talking about so here's a bunny with a pancake on it's head