« Football ticket prices | Main | Anniversary for peace »

September 13, 2006

Blair’s announcement

Since the president’s buddy Tony Blair has announced he will leave office next year because his British countrymen realize things are going to heck and will vote his party out, I see no reason why Bush and his cronies shouldn’t follow suit immediately.

Bush and his reckless policies are not only leading to the deaths of hundreds of our brave young men and women in the unnecessary quagmire of Iraq. They are also putting every American in greater economic, political and military danger than we have probably ever been in.

It certainly would be best if Bush would join Blair and leave now instead of in two years, so we could get our country back on the road to earning the world’s respect and gaining greater prosperity and true safety for all Americans.

John Hetlinger
Shawnee

Comments

CRD

"on the scene as the world faces the very real threat of terrorism."

Yes. Because invading Iraq has helped quell the threat of terrorism, rather than the opposite.

As for:
"And, by the way, the U.S. economy is roaring, with treasurey revenues exploding. Tax cuts work every time."

Sheesh. Reality, meet Mark Robertson.

The following indicators illustrate key differences in economic policy and economic performance under President Clinton and President Bush:

Job creation. President Bush has the worst job creation record of any President in over 70 years, with just 3 million net new jobs added to nonfarm payrolls. In contrast, payrolls expanded by 22.7 million jobs under President Clinton. Job creation averaged 237,000 jobs per month under President Clinton, compared with 45,000 jobs per month under President Bush.

Unemployment. When President Clinton left office in January 2001, the unemployment rate was 4.2 percent—3.1 percentage points lower than when he took office. The unemployment rate in August 2006 was 4.7 percent—0.5 percentage point higher than when President Bush took office. The number of unemployed people fell by 3.3 million under President Clinton but has risen by 1.1 million under President Bush.

Wages and income. Real (inflation-adjusted) average hourly earnings have grown less than half as fast under President Bush as they did under President Clinton. Moreover, real wages have declined since 2003. Real median household income has fallen by $1,273 during the Bush Administration, whereas it grew by $5,825 under President Clinton.

Other measures of economic well-being. The
poverty rate fell by 3.5 percentage points under President Clinton and the number of people in poverty declined by 6.4 million. Under President Bush, the poverty rate has risen by 1.3 percentage points and 5.4 million more people are poor. The number of people without health insurance fell during the last two years of the Clinton Administration but has grown by 6.8 million under President Bush.

Fiscal responsibility. Federal budget deficits have cumulated to $1.3 trillion so far under President Bush. The budget deficit shrank and turned into a surplus under President Clinton who achieved a cumulative surplus of $62.9 billion during his time in office. Public debt as a percentage of GDP has increased by 4.4 percentage points under President Bush, compared with a reduction of 16.4 percentage points under President Clinton.

http://jec.senate.gov/democrats/Documents/Reports/BushIsNoClinton01sep2006.pdf#search=%22unemployment%20clinton%20bush%202006%22

Kansasdog

Mark said "Disagreement with policy is not the problem. It is the deliberate attempt by some liberals to undermine the very serious war on terror, often for perceived political gain, that poses a threat to our safety, and the safety of our brave military."

I give you that, but on the other hand...

Agreement with policy is not the problem.It is the deliberate attempt by some conservatives to overstate the very serious war on terror, often for perceived political gain, that poses a threat to our safety, and the safety of our brave military.

Mark Robertson

Thankfully the world has had President Bush and Prime Minister Blair and a few other great leaders, such as P.M. Howard of Australia, on the scene as the world faces the very real threat of terrorism.
As President Bush has said, we are safer, but not yet safe.
Honest historians will be kind to President Bush and Prime Minister Blair, because they faced and are facing the very real threat of terrorism, regardless of mostly worthless poll numbers.
Their choices have been and will be difficult, but they have made them, and defended them with just one thing in mind, the safety of the citizens in their countries, and the world as well.
Preemption will have been proven to be a major factor in eventually winning the war on terrorism. Thankfully the world has had at least a few leaders in office dumb enough to see this and the will to take such action.
Disagreement with policy is not the problem. It is the deliberate attempt by some liberals to undermine the very serious war on terror, often for perceived political gain, that poses a threat to our safety, and the safety of our brave military.
And, by the way, the U.S. economy is roaring, with treasurey revenues exploding. Tax cuts work every time.
Also, if one wants to see disastrous leadership, check out the movie "The Path to 911." (I know, don't tell me, it's right wing fiction.) Thankyou.

Mark Robertson
Independence

Joe Barone

To One-Sided: The Star printed John's letter and your comment. That doesn't seem so one-sided to me.

Kansasdog

Can we add the UK to the list of nations that we have conquered in the war on terror?

CRD

"I suspect that a good portion of the world will never be happy with us, no matter how many of our officials would resign."

Probably not, but we should ask ourselves whether Bush has made the world safer for Americans, particularly with his ill-advised excursion into Iraq and allowing Al Qaeda to proliferate, even as he has advocated a lessening of our own civil liberties.

I don't really care about keeping other nations "happy with us," but the fact that so many are so pissed off (particularly in contrast to the general good will that was evident right after 9/11) is just one indication among many of Bush's staggering incompetence as a leader.

Kate

Mr. Hetlinger doesn’t say how far down the chain of succession we should go in order to earn the “world’s respect”, but I suspect that a good portion of the world will never be happy with us, no matter how many of our officials would resign. If Mr. Hetlinger is interested in “greater prosperity and true safety for all Americans,” it seems to me that his suggestion would have the opposite effect.

kcstar_is_one_sided

Kansasdog is a funny guy.

Kansasdog

one-sided supports the terrorists and hates freedom and America

kcstar_is_one_sided

tomw - nice to know you do too.

tomw

I would be thrilled if this administration left early, but Blair's departure is in line with the British system. Our's is just a little different.

one-sided-Nice to know you listen you O'Reilly.

kcstar_is_one_sided

He is a Nazi Dictator and will never leave. He will also track me down for writing this and throw me in a secret prison and torture me by playing Red Hot Chile Peppers music. I will then lose my mind and plan vast conspiracies with others who have been brainwashed. Our conspiracies will be so well planned that no one will ever come forward to state that they were part of a hidden conspiracy, just like 9/11.

Stifled Freedom

John, I agree, but he will never leave until he is thrown out. He might not leave then. He will stay for no other reason than to continue pursuing a theocrazy for America.

These are the ego maniacs that we elect.

 
About KansasCity.com | About the Real Cities Network | Terms of Use & Privacy Statement | About Knight Ridder | Copyright