Today on Blogcritics
Home » Canadians Complaining About the American President

Canadians Complaining About the American President

Please Share...Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Facebook0Share on Google+0Share on LinkedIn0Pin on Pinterest0Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

I don’t know what to think about the American president. For all his flaws and negative qualities, George W. Bush does not deserve all the blame. Yes, he sent Americans into a war that they’ll prolly lose, but it was a war that even Bill Clinton has said he would have supported on many occasions throughout his book tour. The peace process in the Middle East involving Israel and the Palestinians was pretty much FUBAR before he even took office. As well, he wasn’t even in office when the North Korean and the Iranian nuclear proliferation problems started to arise or when outsourcing jobs to India and other foreign countries who can get away with low minimum wage laws became a serious problem.

Now don’t get me wrong, I’m surprised that the guy can tie his own shoes, let alone have the capacity to be President, but he should not be the reason behind everything wrong with the world. He wasn’t given a shiny world to deal with when he became President. However, he has done very little, if anything to clean the world up. His defiance towards the Kyoto Accord, the international outcry towards his plans for the militarization of space, and his imposing of negative foreign policy upon so-called “friendly nations”.

Many people cry about America imposing it’s will upon the world. However, whenever they can, they cry for America’s assistance. You can’t have it both ways. The Iraqi’s may want America out of their country, but considering the damage done to the infrastructure of the country (some of the damage done by America and some done by the resistance movement in Iraq), they must remain to help clean up the damage caused by themselves and others. NATO or the UN will not help out due to the outcries of the French and German governments about America’s involvement.

But then again, who’s a far greater threat to the security of the world: George W. Bush or French President Jacques Chirac. Chirac will not allow UN peacekeeping forces to be sent to Iraq to help out in keeping the peace and repairing the damaged infrastructure nor will he allow a greater contingent to help out in Afghanistan (that’s the good war folks), where elections are trying to take place, but the only area that seems secure to have them is Kabul, despite pleading from Afghani Interim-President Hamid Karzai. Chirac, seemingly destined to limit America’s voice in international affairs, told Bush that it was none of his business if Turkey is ever admitted to the European Union. Chirac’s mindset right now is very dangerous and if his top priority is to undermine Bush in the international area, he’s not fighting a good fight. In a time where Islamic extremists have declared a war against the Western Hemisphere and it’s values, this is a time where Chirac shouldn’t second guess the Americans over every single issue. Maybe Iraq was a bad idea, but what sinister motives could America have for aide to Afghanistan and Turkey’s acceptance into the European Union.

Another question people should be asking is if John Kerry is a suitable person to be elected president. I don’t really know that at this time. For what I’ve read about John Kerry, all I really know about the guy is that he’s not George W. Bush. It might help him win the election, but it does not comfort me that this is the platform that he’s running on. He backed the war in Iraq. He’s not the most liberal guy out there. He doesn’t support free health care, and he does not support gay marriage (although he does support civil unions), and he has not said anything about outsourcing jobs. However, he does support lowering the costs of tuition of college (but not eliminating it), the raising of minimum wage, and the implementation of the Kyoto Accord. The problem with all that is that I only found all this out after looking on John Kerry’s website. After reading countless issues of Time, The Economist, The New Yorker, watching countless news shows, and reading around on the ‘Net, I knew nothing about the guy except that he wasn’t Bush.

Yes, Bush is an idiot. A blooming idiot. There are countless people that should replace him as President. John McCain, Al Gore, Bob Dole, Bill Clinton (if they re-write the Constitution), Hillary Clinton, Bill Bradley, Howard Dean (sorry, but I like the guy), or Jon Stewart would all be great alternatives to Bush. John Kerry doesn’t seem right to me though, but I don’t think sticking with Bush is a great idea either. However, Bush is not the source of all the bad in the world. There is still Osama bin Laden, Kim Jong Il, Jacques Chirac, Rosie O’Donnell, Bill O’Reilly, and Rupert Murdoch roaming the earth. I almost feel bad for Bush. He seems to be the ultimate fall guy in this, although some of this is his doing. What I’m trying to say that the guy isn’t scum, but he’s pretty damn close.

About James Gore

  • http://nightdragon.diaryland.com Mark Edward Manning

    James Gore: “His defiance towards the Kyoto Accord …”

    The U.S. isn’t the only country. Australia and Russia refuse to ratify it too. The Kyoto Treaty is pseudoscience scare-mongering anyway, but its popularity and that fact that world opinion is that the U.S. should sign it shows that you can sell anything so long as it is seen to be saving the world.

    “Many people cry about America imposing its will upon the world. However, whenever they can, they cry for America’s assistance. You can’t have it both ways.

    True. As P.J. O’Rourke once noted, the people who hold anti-American rallies outside the embassy and those waiting in lines for a visa to the U.S. are often interchangeable.

    ” … nor will he [Chirac] allow a greater contingent to help out in Afghanistan (that’s the good war, folks).”

    Good ol’ Chirac – the heart and soul of Old Europe … Michael Moore and his idiot fans certainly don’t think Afghanistan was justified or “good,” and there are quite a lot of them out there, which is downright horrifying.

  • http://www.foliage.com/~marks Mark Saleski

    so apparently toeing the right/conservative line on everything is equivalent to exercising independent thought?

  • http://www.resonation.ca Jim Carruthers

    That Black Jacques Chirac! Is there no end to his nefarious shenanigans? Remember when he kept building a dam, and Bugs Bunny had to keep blowing it up so he could take a shower?

  • http://www.resonation.ca Jim Carruthers

    Monseuir Manning rights: Michael Moore and his idiot fans certainly don’t think Afghanistan was justified or “good,” and there are quite a lot of them out there, which is downright horrifying.

    Dude, could you like point to a fact, or are you just shoveling coal for Satan? And if you are serving the Dark Lord, put your back into it, because this is just a lazy effort, and He is not pleased. Ask yourself, what have you done to improve the heroin trade in Afghanistan this year, you lazy slacker. While it has increased, it is not enough.

  • http://nightdragon.diaryland.com Mark Edward Manning

    Jim C.: “Monseuir Manning rights…”

    Hello there, Jim. I believe the appropriate phrase here is “Monsieur Manning writes,” not “rights.” Unless you were being satirical by writing “rights” (’cause I am right, both politically and factually), in which case I tip my hat to you. If not, then I can only guess public education in Canada is as bad as it is in “Murrica.”

    As for the opium business in Afghanistan, that’s a red herring people conveniently use to put the Afghanistan war down. Warlords in Afghanistan have not automatically been put back into power — there is a highway planned to run the length of the country, built and paved under the auspicies of the U.N., not the U.S. (and Afghanistan these days is a U.N. responsibility as Iraq soon should be). That highway will go a long way toward uniting Afghanistan and cutting down on warlord tribalism there.