Opinions on Bush(the 2nd).

[captain.crazy]

I knew I shouldn't have replied to your post in sections. It always appears to provoke hostility, and indeed, seems to be drawing out the snide, holier-than-thou crazy.captain. I wonder why it does that? Maybe because it looks like one is trying to pick apart your argument, or something?

Anywho, here goes:

...

Save it. You wrote in blue, I won't waste the time trying to determine which comments you made this time from the ones that you made last time. You will just have to figure it out for our self.

As for coming across as "holier than thou..." Sorry about that... just trying to fit in, that seems to be the tone around here... and you aren't guiltless of that.

[thegreekdog]

I think Bush II gets a bad rap. Is he borderline stupid? Maybe. But it's a lot more about his accent and the fact that he can't speak well. Last time I checked, national policy had little to do with being able to speak clearly.

Did he get us involved in an uncessary war? Well, yes, but everyone (including our current Secretary of State) believed it was necessary at the time.

Did he ruin the economy? Unless he's a superhero, no. It takes a lot to ruin an economy.

Is he anti-gay marriage and anti-abortion? Yes. But, last time I checked gay marriage is becoming a reality and abortions are still legal. So, he really didn't do anything about that.

So... why again was he a bad president?

[Pedronicus]

Please do not vote in this if you are not Amearican. Thank You.

Sorry pal, but Bush's failures affected people outside of America. So I voted.
It's fairly obvious from your terrible spelling, that you aren't the sharpest tool in the box.
It makes sense why you think he's wonderful.

When he was voted into a second term I was scratching my head as to how this fuckwit got voted in again.
The religious, gun tooting, American fuckwits have a lot to answer to, for giving him another 4 years.

[Snorri1234]

I think Bush II gets a bad rap. Is he borderline stupid? Maybe. But it's a lot more about his accent and the fact that he can't speak well. Last time I checked, national policy had little to do with being able to speak clearly.

Stupid? Nah, he's just a fundamentalist.

Did he get us involved in an uncessary war? Well, yes, but everyone (including our current Secretary of State) believed it was necessary at the time.

Excusing him because he fucking wilfully lied to everyone isn't exactly a smart thing to do.

So... why again was he a bad president?

Because he broke the law.

[jay_a2j]

So... why again was he a bad president?

He is responsible for the Patriot Act, which believe it or not is bad news for everyday Americans. But it is not just Bush, Obama is picking up where Bush left off. This is one of those "see I told you so" situations but I won't be the least bit happy when I have to say it.

[thegreekdog]

Oh yes, good point - I hated the Patriot Act. Forgot about that one.

I'm confused - when did President Bush lie about Iraq? Did Congress lie too? If so, are they the worst Congress ever?

Like I sort of indicated, Bush gets a bad rap because he can't speak English properly. That's pretty much the only reason. Most people don't care about the Patriot Act (although they really really should). People get fired up about the Iraq War, but if Bush lied, then so did Congress... or else Congress acted without all the facts; either way, the blame can't be entirely placed on Bush. I'll probably get a vehement response in that regard. The large volume of people that I know that voted for Obama were voting against Bush because either (1) he's stupid, (2) he's going to outlaw abortion, or (3) he got us involved in Iraq. #1 is valid, if intelligence has anything to do with policy, #2 is just wrong, and #3, while absolutely correct, can accurately describe a number of Congresspeople who are currently still in office.

So, why is he the worst president ever?

[jay_a2j]

So, why is he the worst president ever?

Because he wasn't working for the American people, he was working for the new world order. Now Obama is working for the same people.

[Neoteny]

I won't say he's the worst ever, but I voted awful. His science policies were crap, for the most part, though I will note that Obama did recently praise Bush's policies on preparations for disease epidemics and such.

[thegreekdog]

I won't say he's the worst ever, but I voted awful. His science policies were crap, for the most part, though I will note that Obama did recently praise Bush's policies on preparations for disease epidemics and such.

I can imagine he had horrible science policies, although I'm unfamiliar with any of them.

[InkL0sed]

Oh yes, good point - I hated the Patriot Act. Forgot about that one.

I'm confused - when did President Bush lie about Iraq? Did Congress lie too? If so, are they the worst Congress ever?

Like I sort of indicated, Bush gets a bad rap because he can't speak English properly. That's pretty much the only reason. Most people don't care about the Patriot Act (although they really really should). People get fired up about the Iraq War, but if Bush lied, then so did Congress... or else Congress acted without all the facts; either way, the blame can't be entirely placed on Bush. I'll probably get a vehement response in that regard. The large volume of people that I know that voted for Obama were voting against Bush because either (1) he's stupid, (2) he's going to outlaw abortion, or (3) he got us involved in Iraq. #1 is valid, if intelligence has anything to do with policy, #2 is just wrong, and #3, while absolutely correct, can accurately describe a number of Congresspeople who are currently still in office.

So, why is he the worst president ever?

What does Congress have to do with a vote for the President?

[thegreekdog]

Oh yes, good point - I hated the Patriot Act. Forgot about that one.

I'm confused - when did President Bush lie about Iraq? Did Congress lie too? If so, are they the worst Congress ever?

Like I sort of indicated, Bush gets a bad rap because he can't speak English properly. That's pretty much the only reason. Most people don't care about the Patriot Act (although they really really should). People get fired up about the Iraq War, but if Bush lied, then so did Congress... or else Congress acted without all the facts; either way, the blame can't be entirely placed on Bush. I'll probably get a vehement response in that regard. The large volume of people that I know that voted for Obama were voting against Bush because either (1) he's stupid, (2) he's going to outlaw abortion, or (3) he got us involved in Iraq. #1 is valid, if intelligence has anything to do with policy, #2 is just wrong, and #3, while absolutely correct, can accurately describe a number of Congresspeople who are currently still in office.

So, why is he the worst president ever?

What does Congress have to do with a vote for the President?

Nothing. Except that we (and by "we" I mean Democrats, liberals and some libertarians) lambast President Bush but we (and by "we" I mean Democrats, liberals and some libertarians) do not lambast the Congress. This seems rather hypocritical to me.

[Snorri1234]

Oh yes, good point - I hated the Patriot Act. Forgot about that one.

I'm confused - when did President Bush lie about Iraq? Did Congress lie too? If so, are they the worst Congress ever?

He knew that the info he was giving to justify invading Iraq was flawed.

He fucking knew it and yet he still acted like it was good and that Saddam was totally gonna nuke the shit out of everyone or something.

So, why is he the worst president ever?

Giving the ok-signal to torture?
Illegal wiretapping?



I mean, I don't know if he's the worst. But honestly I fail to see why anyone could ever defend what he did.

[thegreekdog]

I'm certainly not defending what he did. However, he has one of the worst (if not the worst) approval rating ever. I do question that. I also question that there are many people I know (and many people I don't know) that dislike him for things other than those having to do with the Patriot Act.

I think people are getting what he thinks or how he acts with what he actually did.

Two examples:

President Clinton was highly intelligent, an adept politician and liar, and a womanizer. He was lambasted for having an affair with an intern. None of these things had anything to do with him balancing the budget. Yet people think he was a bad president SOLELY BECAUSE HE HAD AN AFFAIR AND LIED ABOUT IT.

Allen Iverson is/was an incredible basketball player. He also was involved in many scrapes with the law. His scrapes with the law had nothing to do with whether he was a great basketball player. Yet people think he's not a Hall of Fame basketball player SOLELY BECAUSE HE HAD SOME RUN-INS WITH THE LAW.

in both of these cases, it's hard for people to separate their thoughts on the individual from the individual's performance in his job. I think this is also the case with President Bush.

[Frigidus]

Don't forget No Child Left Behind, that's sort of a landmark failure.

[thegreekdog]

Don't forget No Child Left Behind, that's sort of a landmark failure.

Why? Because it did not do what it was intended to do or because it hurt the US public schools?

[Snorri1234]

I'm certainly not defending what he did. However, he has one of the worst (if not the worst) approval rating ever. I do question that. I also question that there are many people I know (and many people I don't know) that dislike him for things other than those having to do with the Patriot Act.

I think people are getting what he thinks or how he acts with what he actually did.

Two examples:

President Clinton was highly intelligent, an adept politician and liar, and a womanizer. He was lambasted for having an affair with an intern. None of these things had anything to do with him balancing the budget. Yet people think he was a bad president SOLELY BECAUSE HE HAD AN AFFAIR AND LIED ABOUT IT.

Allen Iverson is/was an incredible basketball player. He also was involved in many scrapes with the law. His scrapes with the law had nothing to do with whether he was a great basketball player. Yet people think he's not a Hall of Fame basketball player SOLELY BECAUSE HE HAD SOME RUN-INS WITH THE LAW.

in both of these cases, it's hard for people to separate their thoughts on the individual from the individual's performance in his job. I think this is also the case with President Bush.

I see your point but I don't think it applies to bush because people are actually judging him on his acts. Yes I understand that his approval rating is influenced by other factors, but that doesn't matter. I haven't seen anyone here say Bush was bad because he slept with an intern.

[thegreekdog]

I understand what you're saying. And I believe President Bush was a bad president, but not as bad as he's being made out. I think I've made my point, but he didn't single-handedly ruin the economy, though he gets blamed for it. He didn't single-handedly involve us in Iraq, though he gets blamed for that too (and last I checked, we're still there). He's regularly lambasted for the Patriot Act and Gitmo, as well he should, but our current president hasn't changed either of those things.

So, I guess my overarching point is that we judge him for stuff that either he had no effect on or that his opposition either supported or continues to support. So, the only stuff we have left to differentiate him from his opposition are social issues such as abortion and gay marriage, on which he did nothing and his intelligence. I guess I just don't understand the pure hatred and vitriol of the average American towards President Bush. I mean people really hate him. I haven't seen this kind of hate since President Clinton got a BJ from an intern.

[Frigidus]

Don't forget No Child Left Behind, that's sort of a landmark failure.

Why? Because it did not do what it was intended to do or because it hurt the US public schools?

Both, in a way. It has worked out that it trains students to take tests rather than actually learn, but considering it focuses so much on test taking it is hardly an unforeseeable consequence. It pushed public schools even further in the wrong direction...as if they weren't in enough trouble as it is.

[Snorri1234]

I understand what you're saying. And I believe President Bush was a bad president, but not as bad as he's being made out.

Depends on who you're listening to. Some people try to pin nearly everything on him and make him out as the devil incarnate while others say he was an ok president who was justified in doing everything he did.

Evidence points to him being closer to the former, but we don't know everything yet though.

I think I've made my point, but he didn't single-handedly ruin the economy, though he gets blamed for it.

I think he gets blamed more for not doing anything about it, which to be fair isn't that horrible.

He didn't single-handedly involve us in Iraq, though he gets blamed for that too (and last I checked, we're still there).

No, the entire Bush-administration helped. Still, with regards to Iraq I completely back the "Bush was a horrible, horrible evil person"-viewpoint.

He's regularly lambasted for the Patriot Act and Gitmo, as well he should, but our current president hasn't changed either of those things.

Yeah but at least he doesn't say it's good nor does he say he won't do anything about it. Unless you're saying that Obama having not closed Gitmo completely or revoked the patriot act in his first few months means he completely supports those things....

[thegreekdog]

I think he gets blamed more for not doing anything about it, which to be fair isn't that horrible.

I think he also gets blamed for the first round of bailouts too, but yes, I agree with you.

No, the entire Bush-administration helped. Still, with regards to Iraq I completely back the "Bush was a horrible, horrible evil person"-viewpoint.

Do you view Hillary Clinton as a "horrible, horrible evil person" too?

Yeah but at least he doesn't say it's good nor does he say he won't do anything about it. Unless you're saying that Obama having not closed Gitmo completely or revoked the patriot act in his first few months means he completely supports those things....

All I know is that people voted for him because he said he would get out of Iraq. People thought he would close Gitmo and people thought he would try to repeal the Patriot Act. He hasn't done those things. I'm not criticizing him for not doing these things, but I'm not going to praise him or say he's different from President Bush in that regard until he actually does something.

[InkL0sed]

Several points:

While I don't think the members of Congress are excused for their role in voting for the war, the reason why what Bush did was worse is that Bush and crew lied to go to war (and had been looking for a reason to invade from the beginning), while the members of Congress were duped, as well as pressured by the mood of the times to make heads roll. That doesn't excuse them, but it's certainly on a different level of "horrible, horrible evil".

[thegreekdog]

Several points:

While I don't think the members of Congress are excused for their role in voting for the war, the reason why what Bush did was worse is that Bush and crew lied to go to war (and had been looking for a reason to invade from the beginning), while the members of Congress were duped, as well as pressured by the mood of the times to make heads roll. That doesn't excuse them, but it's certainly on a different level of "horrible, horrible evil".

Wait, what? Bush lied? Who did he lie to? Did he lie to Congress? Where did we get this information?

[Snorri1234]

No, the entire Bush-administration helped. Still, with regards to Iraq I completely back the "Bush was a horrible, horrible evil person"-viewpoint.

Do you view Hillary Clinton as a "horrible, horrible evil person" too?

No. She didn't know that Bush and his friends made up shit and lied to make a likely case for invasion.

All I know is that people voted for him because he said he would get out of Iraq. People thought he would close Gitmo and people thought he would try to repeal the Patriot Act. He hasn't done those things.

So wait.....you claim that Obama ordering that Gitmo be closed within the year means he won't close it? Either you're being extremely critical and completely at odds with your view of Bush, or haven't watched the news.

Or you just fail to realise that it's pretty difficult to close a prison full of suspected terrorists.

[thegreekdog]

No. She didn't know that Bush and his friends made up shit and lied to make a likely case for invasion.

First, I never heard that he lied (maybe I'm living under a rock). I would like to read about that though if you have a link or something (if not no big deal). If he did lie, I think some onus should be on Congress for not independently verifying anything. Don't they have some control over the spies who provide the information?

So wait.....you claim that Obama ordering that Gitmo be closed within the year means he won't close it? Either you're being extremely critical and completely at odds with your view of Bush, or haven't watched the news.

Or you just fail to realise that it's pretty difficult to close a prison full of suspected terrorists.

I'm just cynical. I think he closes Gitmo, but those guys aren't going back to Iran/Pakistan/Afghanistan. We shall see though.

[neanderpaul14]

Or you just fail to realise that it's pretty difficult to close a prison full of suspected terrorists.

Actually it would be quite easy to close Gitmo. It's right on the water, naval base = lot's of ships, and I'm sure they could find a few tons of concrete to make some nice over-shoes for them all.