RateItAll: The Opinion Network

Well, he done that, but also, let us blame Clinton as well.

It will takes many decades to repair America's bad reputation which was badly damaged by the evil George W. Bush and his KKK friends. Bush is a national disgrace who has made all Americans look evil.

Can we atleast accept something as an emperical truth? - That the world economy is just that, a world economy. The prosperity of America is tied deeply to the afordable labor and materials of the likes of China and India- as well as a plethora of multi-national multi billion dollar industry leaders.
So when when a slack jaw bumpkin says "as long as he does what's right for Amer-ca" I start to wonder. Does this mean white bumpkin America? The same kind whining that some border crosser took his job because the guy would do twice the work for half the pay? (If you did loose your job like that, try this on for size- go get an education and get a better job. really slack jaw bumkin, stupidity is its own punishment isnt it.)
So... where do we go from here.
Fact is Bush does what is right for Bush and the other millionairs that surround him. The voting right is swayed by knee jerk issues like gay marriage, abortion and scare tatics (the terrorists....- if you dont live in NYC, DC or LA, really what are you afraid of? Wisconsin could dissapear and we wouldnt notice till the corn stopped showing up!)
scary. scary. scary

I think most of this stuff on this list relates more to Kerry.

No, helmut, it's not just Europe. Or did you not see the millions of Middle easterners (the people who are supposedley thankfull that we are there helping them) burning the American flags. He always blabs on and on about national security, and yet doesn't realize that he is giving other countires more initiative to try and do something. That screams MORON!

I think by all over the world this list maker means Europe, but this is subjective. The current rift in European and American thinking about acceptable usage of power has been growing since the Cold War. At least during the early years, it was accepted that the Americans would be the force that regulated Soviet domination and that any European military only had to be powerful enough to hold off the Soviet army (in the event of an invasion) long enough for the U.S. to intervene, that is, unless the conflict resulted in a nuclear exchange, in which case a defending army, big or small, would do little good. For Americans on the other hand, the probability of a North American invasion was slim. Because of the Truman doctrine and the policy of containment, the U.S. was forced to create a military not only capable of defeating any communist threat, but also doing so on foreign soil, possibly in Europe and the Far East simultaneously. This idea caused the Europeans to become used to keeping a small army and also made them used to viewing the Americans as a regulating force against not just the soviets, but against any threat. Europeans would like us to believe that they are more civilized than we are and would only resort to the use of military might under the most extreme circumstances, but the fact of the matter is, none of them are really capable of projecting power elsewhere. I have heard said of the U.S. If you have a hammer, every problem starts to look like a nail, but the opposite is true of Europe: When you don't have a hammer, you don't wan't anything to look like a nail. As for Bush, I really don't think its as much his fault as the way Europeans and Americans have been looking at things differently for the past several years. The invasion of Panama in 1989, The Persian Gulf War in 1991, and the intervention in Somalia in 1992 all occurred during the first Bush administration, but President Clinton continued this practice in Haiti, Bosnia and Kosovo. Arguably none of these threats are as great as the ones in Afghanistan and Iraq. Bush is not completely to blame.

As long as someone is doing what's right for America, I don't care how the rest of the world feels about it. You can bet the rest of the world could care less about what we think of their decisions!

Most of the world truly is on a hypocrite trip. So many countries degrade and slanderize the U.S using lies and half-truths yet they always ask for our help or cooperation when they desperatly need something. George W. Bush has proven something to the world- that the U.S is not a paper tiger as Osama Bin Laden said under Bill Clintons reign of stupidity. And to me, the safety and security of my family and fellow citizens is worth a lot more to me than what some Frenchman with penis envy believes (lol).

Is that why millions of immigrants are moving into our country?

Oh, I wouldn't worry too much about our reputation or even Bushs part in it. Before you know it, there will be someone else occupying the White House along with a whole new group of cronies that we can love to hate. Incase you haven't noticed most opinions world and domestic tend to change about as often as the tide (or havent you noticed the correlation between care packages, cash and a real but fleeting boost in our popularity?) Sure, there are people who are terminally PO'd about Bushs approach to things and they will happily cling to that and carry it to their respective graves. And, of course, there are also those who will forever remain terminally disgusted by Clintons antics. Even Abraham Lincoln took more than his share of hits during his time in office since even he knew he couldnt please all of the people all the time. I challenge you to find one person who can. The sad fact is that out in that big, ugly world there are always going to be those who expect you to bend to their will as you simultaneously bend over and kiss where they can't. Even worse are the ones who would have everyone who does not subscribe to their fanatical religious delusions ritually disembowel his/herself. Well, call me an inflexible hard head, but I really dont give a flying fig if everyone on the planet approves of me or my country. In the long run, I believe that standing up for what you believe, saying what you mean and putting some action behind will be remembered with much more respect than timidly dancing around wringing your hands and waiting for the next popularity poll to emerge. (Scarletfeather - but, do you seriously believe that if another country were attacked in the same way we were on 9/11 that they would actually turn down help from us based on their feelings about one man? They may bark but they are NOT going to bite off the hand that feeds them so well and for so long.)

Lookie here, we didn't have to fight in Vietnam and Iraq. Since then, our foreign policies have given us a bad rep. ... Even 3rd world countries have chided us for supplyin' relief efforts of the tsunami for PR purposes. Got dat?

oh please, this is stupidity people think what they want when they want, other countries have hated america since its inception

I do think he has done much damage to how America is seen worldwide. Many here overlook his views most of the time as we think they are irrelevant, unfortunately he's in charge of a country whose people are good hearted and want to do the right thing. How therefore this man was voted for is a condundrum for the rest of the world.

I suppose like Machiavelli, he believes it is better to be feared than to be loved. Actually I have heard many of Bush's henchmen are devoted readers of Machiavelli. UPDATE: We need to have productive relations with other countries, because in the event of another terrorist attack, I seriously doubt many countries would help us, due to Bush's unilateralism.

No he hasen't. The world still sees the US as the biggest supporter of Democracy out there. And rightfully so since we are. And to those to don't agree with that around the world, why care what they think? The same countries opposed to the Iraq war (France, Russia, etc.) were the same nations with the secret business dealings with Iraq. I guess in the liberal mind, defending freedom causes a bad reputation all over the world, but Clinton's blowjobs and his lies to the Supreme Court are nothing.

If this were a real problem, characterizing its cause as George W. Bush would be pretty obfuscating. Our reputation around the world is bad? Dear, dear, whatever shall we do? I certainly hope they call on the US the next time there's a natural catastrophe, then call our efforts stingy. Then wonder why Americans want to kick the UN out of the US and set it up in Brussels or Geneva. Why we want to withhold the payment of dues and withdraw from membership. Kofi Annan enables France, Germany and Russia to bribe Saddam with $20 billion intended to go to poor Iraqi's, but Bush really sucks. What an idiot he is. But be sure to insult us when the next tsunami hits.Has that idiot been fired yet?

This is the most dangerous of his many faults.He lost us allies while causing hatred to grow exponentially.His diplomatic skills are zilch.

The reason most coutries hate us is that we could kick their rear is a war and their afraid of us.

maybe but perhaps our gluttonous lifestyle, our celebrity obsession, our lack of understand in world event, our abuse of luxury items like cars and cell phones, have done a lot to ruin our reputation too. but Bush is a moron and the civilized world knows it.

We had a tremendous opportunity on September 12, 2001, with all the world united behind us in sympathy and support. Where is all that goodwill and solidarity now?

At this point, I'm not sure that really matters. We can't risk our security over what others think. Our best friends continue to be our reliable allies. Those who differ with our handling of Iraq are understandably upset because they were doing business with Saddam (France, Germany, Russia).