View source for Is Bush good for America

{{msg.hdr.debate}}
==Overview==
This page is a [[structured debate]] on the issue of whether [[George W. Bush]] is good for [[America]], both in his past actions and in the anticipated outcome of his policies and leadership style.

Although he theoretically will be succeeded by a new president in [[2008 US presidential race|2008]], the outcome of this debate will remain important in determining the desirability of supporting any candidate with ties to Bush or to the [[neoconservative]] group to which he belongs (and which has continued to support him throughout his presidency).

This debate is currently open for counterpoints (arguing in support of Bush). Even if you are against Bush, it is helpful to document pro-Bush points so that they can be countered; it is much easier to dismiss an argument if you can think of a point which the argument does not address, and this debate currently does not raise ''any'' anti-Bush points. See [[Issuepedia:Reinforcement by Contradiction]].

==Debate==
{{arg.mainpoint|Bush is not good for America.}}
: {{arg.point|[[Is Bush trustworthy|Bush is generally untrustworthy.]]}}
: {{arg.point|Bush is an anti-patriot; his actions have been horribly destructive of many core American values. His policies and leadership style will continue to wreak havoc as long as they continue to be applied.}}
:: {{arg.point|He has allowed and encouraged the subornation of American will, might, and ability by a gang of thugs who are primarily interested in transforming our society &ndash; using the latest disinformation techniques, brushed off and updated somewhat from their totalitarian origins &ndash; into a neofeudal corporate fiefdom.}}
:: {{arg.point|Bush's mania for secrecy has been extremely harmful to the pursuit of rational solutions to America's problems, has encouraged corruption within his government, has led directly to much of the "dissent" he so condemns, and is strongly indicative of a personal lack of honor and trustworthiness.}}
:: {{arg.point|Bush's management of the [[US-Iraq War|Iraq war]] has been immensely harmful to the military.}}
::: {{arg.point|[[US military readiness|Military readiness levels]] have plummeted &ndash; and not only due to the intense level of involvement in the war, but to bad management and corruption on top of that.}}
::: {{arg.point|Bush's continued demand for more troops when our existing troops were greatly overextended has led to lowered recruitment standards (allowing ex-felons to join) and increased cost-per-recruit ($20,000 rapid-deployment bonuses). Neither of these happened under Clinton, despite US involvement in several areas of foreign conflict.}}
:::: {{arg.info|One general has reportedly said "Bill Clinton's U.S. Army could beat our present force with one hand tied behind its back."}}
:: {{arg.point|Bush's budget management policy has been one of heedless spending on questionable projects while cutting taxes for the rich &ndash; and yet the [[neocon]]s still persist in [http://davidbrin.blogspot.com/2007/08/economic-falsehoods.html spreading the myth] of Bush's fiscal responsibility.}}
::: {{arg.point|Bush took a federal budget which was turning out surpluses to help pay down the national debt and has run it back into previously-unseen depths of deficit &ndash; despite many rosy predictions of further surpluses.}}
: {{arg.point|Bush is fundamentally [[Bush II anti-democracy|anti-democracy]], and does not even bother to deny it.}}
: {{arg.point|Bush's actions violate both conservative and liberal values; it is not clear that he has any personal values beyond the acquisition of power.}}
:: {{arg.info|This includes religious beliefs, with the exception of a few carefully-chosen "wedge issues".}}
:: {{arg.point|His vast wastrel spending is certainly not conservative in nature, and none of the things he spends upon are causes espoused by any of the other parties.}}