Was 9/11 good or bad for president Bush?
537006
Here is a perfect example.  Check out page 3 of the report below.\n\nCompletely setting my political views aside if 9/11 hadn't happened there is no way that Bush would now be our president.\n\nThat being said I think whatever benefit he got from 9/11 has been eaten up in the last year or so.
191667
Indirectly I think maybe he did, with what happened with 9/11 and how Bush handled it.  I never looked at something like that.
87752
Because, Bush is all talk, no action--when it comes to helping middle and poor Americans. I'm a democrat through and through, but when I heard his speech on the radio that morning....I drowsily cheered him on...I was HAPPY he was our president, cause he was gonna protect us. But all he did was start a stupid war using 9/11 as an excuse, and secured a second term in office. He did, however, calm the country's fears for about ten minutes. New Yorkers saw that. 9/11 families didn't get much(if any) help form our govt. Bush raised their hopes, only to disappoint them. I guess the democrats came to their rescue. I guess the only republican they were truly happy with was rudy Guliani. The only people who believe the 9/11 crap he was vomitting were the people who werent there...the people who's life didn't really change because of it...who?...Rich white people, or religious elderly who're grappling with their mortality, and last but not least...the one's who believe every word of our leader and thrive in spite of fear that the infidels will attack again...unless a Texas Bush is re-elected.
863651
GW Bush is a bad president.He is conceit and a great liar.He has slandered the Sadam head of the government of Iraq.He instructed his arm forces to attack Iraq by accusing they had mass destruction weapon but in fact Iraq has no that weapon.\nThey are many innocent casualties by his attacks in Iraq and Afghanistan.There are many orphans,widows and handicapped people in Iraq and Afghanistan.They destroyed many historical buildings in Iraq and Afghanistan.Almost everyday its victims are added. in those 2 countries.Bush supported Israelis government for killing and attacking Palestian muslims and christians in Libanon and Gaza almost everyday there are many casuallties\nGW Bush is criminal of war. and a great terrorist  in this world.He should responsible fpr that.Many prisoners of war were tortured in jails by his soldiers.This act is against with mankind and humanism and the principles of human rights.He should be taken into international court for his criminal acts to other people of other countries.He is a big agressor.He could  not manage his goverment in a good governance.During his administration there are many corruptions and unemployment increased..He used many millions of dollar from the tax payers for killing other people in other countries..
4270
'bush' isn't a bad president.. we have a left wing mainstream media.. and a bunch of sheep that sit in front of the tv all day and eat potato chips and believe everything they hear about crackpot conspiracy.. the same ppl that think bush is a bad pres are the same ppl that believe the da vinci code is real.
469751
I think you should ask our genius of a president. He did a good job of letting us forget Osama by attacking a country that had nothing to do with 9/11. Also, don't forget that all the terrorists that day were Saudi's, the Bush family best friends.
974999
I hate to admit it but Bush had a pretty good speach and the world in his pocket after 9/11.  It was a moving time.BUT THEN HE BLEW IT.
1031506
He's a democrat. Had he done something about the bombing we probably wouldn't have had 9/11 because we would already be a presence in the middle east but he was too busy with interns instead of being the leader of our country. Everyone seems to forget 9/11 wasn't the first attack and yet somehow Bush is the bad guy for finally doing something about it. (steps down from soap box)
73986
Bush is a fairly good president, particulary compared to clinton...
972592
George Bush IS a great president. He is the best person we could have had in office when 9-11 hit. He's done a great job economically. Our economy is on the rise. He is also steadfast when it comes to the war on terror. I know that he cannot run for a 3rd term but if he could I would vote for him again.
982068
Bush said he doesn't care about where he is and this was only a few months after 9/11 happened. I still can't believe people would vote for him after that. It's time for a change. Remember the saying, absolute power corrupts.
1068490
Although I think Bush is a poor president in key areas, DJ seems to have some really good points.  I'll acknowledge that Bush is a man of action and that many of his actions especially right after 911 were on target.   However,\n\nWhen it comes to his overall leadership, he is missing several of the most important leadership qualities.  #1: Communication skills.  Without any doubt he will go down as the anti-thesis of Reagan who was our "great communicator"  Bush couldn't convince the devil: the qualities of an airconditioner, and he's from Texas.  He makes everyone I know cringe when he speaks - even my conservative friends can't stand this fatal flaw of his presidency.  \n\n2nd - he makes up his mind quickly and never changes it - good quality after 911 for a while, but he can't adapt and overcome.  When he's wrong - he won't admit it - ever.  (No real plan to win the peace in Iraq after the regime was overthrown - and 3 years later - still no real plan -  not willing to work with the U.N. peacekeeping forces as a legitimate transfer of power in the region)\n3rd flaw - he's appointed some inefficient lack luster people to key positions in the government - FEMA, Treasury, Attorney General, CIA, Defense, State Dept. and the Supreme Court, to name a few apparently unimportant areas.  Many of these people couldn't run a horse show let alone a key gov't agency.\n\nIt's time for new leadership - impeachment is very unlikely.  Lets get someone next time that at least knows how to speak English clearly- and that has true leadership qualities.
451494
I do.  I don't understand why 80+% of people thought he was a good president when we were going to war and dealing with terrorism and now half of the population has decided he shouldn't have gone.  Where's the consistency?  I guess popular opinion is fickle and that's why I support Bush, because he doesn't just base his decisions on popular opinion.
795771
9/11 was being planned 10 years before Bush and Chaney were in the White House!  U.S. targets were hit 8 times by Islamic terrorists while Clinton was in office. I guess that was Bush's fault too?  You are a complete idiot!
356552
There is nothing good about this man Bush. It pains me even to put President and Bush together. I never voted for him and we all know he never won the first time. I knew we were in for a world of hurt if he became president and look where we are. He is a very bad man does not care about the American people all he cares about is oil and the money he can make from this horrible situation. Shame on him!!
933931
What does 9/11 have to do with it? No Iraqis were involved in the World Trade Center attacks. \n\nThere really are not any good reasons. Sadam was a terrible person, but no more terrible than other dictators who have been supported by the US.  The Iraqis have a lot of oil, and it is true that when we got to IRaq we protected the oil fields before we protected the hospitals, power plants and waterworks. But they were already selling us the oil, so why attack to get it? It probably helped President Bush's image, but even George Bush is not a bad enough guy to sacrifice thousands of young American soldiers just to win an election. \nSo, there's really no reason at all. \nSad, isn't it?
424937
Oh my gosh, there are some misguided answers here.  Anyone who thinks that Bush knew of the 9/11 attacks before they happened and did nothing....you are putting him in the same class as Hitler, and Stalin.  If he really were like these two, do you think we would have an election in '04?  Why would he have stopped there?  The truth is that the attacks would have happened no matter who was in office.  Bush was only in office a very short time before the attacks.  Lets look instead at the 8 previous years, when the "pilots" entered the country.  Why was it so easy for them?  Because of lax security, free access to America's borders, etc.  I am not blaming this on Clinton...it is normal to loosen up security when there is a feeling of safety, and lets face it, we all felt safe.  Put the blame where it belongs...on the guys who drove the planes, and the people who put them in the pilot seat.  Bush is a very intelligent man (I realize he isn't the best public speaker), he is a man of his word, and I feel fortunate that he has been at the reigns these last few years.