i began to have concerns about the bush administration only a few months into 2001 when he and gonzales began gutting the 1978 presidential records act. as enacted by congress, the act was intended to ensure public access to non-classified presidential papers within a reasonable period of time (12 years) after a president left office. (as it now stands, a sitting president can indefinitely block the release of a former president's documents; as can the former president--or his or her designees)

at the time, i believed it was only a matter of bush trying to protect reagan, bush's father and their associates, some of whom were already back in the whitehouse.

it's only now--in the wake of 5 years of concerted and focused effort on the part of gonzales and george bush--that the real motivation has become clear. our first president named george did everything in his power to prevent the presidency from becoming a monarchy; his namesake clearly intends the opposite.

there was more...

in may 2001, bush announced that the us was no longer willing to comply with terms of the 1972 anti-ballistic missile treaty.

in july 2001, the administration effectively killed the 1972 international biological & toxic weapons treaty by refusing to agree to enforcement provisions. the us became the only country to reject this next stage of the treaty which was the results of 7 years of international negotiations.

sadly, only a few short months later america would find itself on the receiving end of an anthrax attack. within a year, north korea would openly begin work on icbms and nuclear weapons with which to arm them. iran clearly intends to do the same.

as far as iraq goes, all the arguments for and against invading the country were moot. even before they moved into the whitehouse, bush and his associates intended to invade that country and change the regime.

in that sense, those who claim bush does what he says he'll do aren't wrong. they are, however, conveniently ignoring other promises he's abandoned such as lowering power plant carbon dioxide emissions levels (as he stated he'd do during the 2000 campaign) to hunting down bin laden (in that regard, bush has been as effective--and currently appears to be putting an equal amount of effort--as oj simpson in tracking down his ex-wife's 'real' killer).

And the Kennedy assassination records were to have been fully declassified in 1989 or so.

in july 2001, the administration effectively killed the 1972 international biological & toxic weapons treaty by refusing to agree to enforcement provisions. the us became the only country to reject this next stage of the treaty which was the results of 7 years of international negotiations. sadly, only a few short months later america would find itself on the receiving end of an anthrax attack. within a year, north korea would openly begin work on icbms and nuclear weapons with which to arm them. iran clearly intends to do the same.

Nice non-sequitor there, kb. Suggesting that Korea and Iran would have abided by those treaties shows you are an optimist of the first order.

And you apparently aren't aware of the world-wide manhunt utilizing the US Military, the CIA and the intelligence services of multiple foreign nations that OJ is paying for with his protected assets and book profits - I know it's a diversion of resources in the OBL hunt, but the money's good and he will find that guy.

As you can see there are some here who support Bush and some who don't. You can also see that those who do support Bush admit to not supporting 100%. They were willing to admit what they found wrong or what policies they didn't like. You can also notice that those who do not support Bush just plainly don't support him at all. Not one thing that Bush says or does is good for them.

I support Bush because he shows strength and leadership. He's not afraid to put his name on the line for what he believes in. I believe we did a good thing in Iraq cause, as far as I can see, the world sees us as the most powerful nation and with power comes great responsability. And since everyone expects us to bare the most responsability when it comes to giving money to those who need it the we also have the responsability of helping those who need more than just money, like the Iraqi people. Sure there are other countries who are as Iraq was, but sometimes it takes just one to show the others we mean business. At least that's how I see it. I don't believe the lost of our soldiers was in vein, if Iraq can raise to be a better nation than even I would have been willing to give my life for them.

I have to believe that Bush is not looking to destroy the US with what he does, I have to believe that there has to be something good behind some of the things most people, and sometimes me, think are failiers. I can't possibly imagen why anyone would want to go down in history as the worst President ever to exist.

It's up to you to make up your mind on what you believe in, but don't do it simply because you are , lets say democrat, and just feel like you have to hate him because he's republican, or simply because you somehow hate him, or because the media says he's bad even though they tend to obscure or only write what they want you to read.

BTW, you are in high school? If so, you are very well educated in politics compared to me. I feel ashamed of not understand politics that much. I have learned a lot from this site but still have a long way to go.