Obama's approval rating back in the positive

[homer]

mrstickball said:

homer said:

Exactly. That is why I wished for those other people to elaborate, so that I could find out if they were as ignorant to the situation as me.It is sad to see that everyone I see/ talk to hates Bush, but I have yet to see him do anything that would warrant such hate. It seems like most people hate him for what happened in his presidency, even if it was out of his hands. If there are reasons for hating Bush because of things he did, please list them because I do not know anything about this subject.

Very well, I can give you a list of things that Bush did that was bad. Admittedly, you are right that most that dislike him do so because he was a Republican, or it was/is simply popular to dislike him.

Anyways:

• Starting 2 very costly wars (cost a lot of money which added to the federal deficit)
• Ratified the Patrot Act (loss of freedoms)
• The bank bailouts
• Expansion of federal government/spending
• Lack of spending political capital when he had majorities in congress/senate.

The truth is, Bush could of done a LOT of good for the nation, domestically, but did very little. With majorities in both houses, he could of done a lot more - like what Obama has done in inverse. He could of privatized Social Security (one of his goals), pushed through to drill in ANWAR/promoted energy independence, reduced government spending by vetoing horrible congressional budgets, ect....But he did none of that.

That isn't to say that I hate Bush. I generally like the guy, and voted for him twice. However, having a more nuianced position on spending issues, and wanting less government...You begin to understand that Bush was a pretty bad president in that respect. Even worse was that he had the power of the pen - like few other presidents have had - and instead focused on 2 wars in the Middle East.

1.) Was there a reason why we entered those wars? Wasn't Afghanistan funding and training the terrorists that attacked us on 9/11 or am I mistaken? If so, I believe that warranted an invasion. What about Iraq? Did we actually have reasons to believe they had "weapons of mass destruction" that they might use against us? Was Sadam Hussein cruel to his people? Would that warrant an invasion? Was it for oil?

2.) What freedoms did we lose?

3.) Wasn't the controversy here, the way the banks spent that money or am I mistaken? If so, would that be Bush's fault?

4.) Wouldn't this have to go through Congress first? If so,why aren't we mad at them too?

5.) I do not understand this part.