world

Mrs Bush, Rice: Bush presidency not a failure

74 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2008/9 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.

74 Comments
Login to comment

I guess if Laura and Condi are out on the talk show circuit GWB's ten interviews, an unprecedented number for an outgoing Prez, didn't do the trick.

Down the road, Iraq may fall back into the chaos of sectarian violence, and if that happens, Bush will wash his hands of it. That’s the premise of a new book, “Unintended Consequences: How War in Iraq Strengthened America’s Enemies,” by Peter W. Galbraith.

“The pretense that the surge is a success and that therefore the United States is winning the Iraq war,” he writes, “is the opening salvo in a coming blame game as to who lost Iraq.” [I can hardly wait, it will no doubt be "Who Lost China" redux.)

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/28/opinion/28egan.html?hp

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Laura bush and condi rice defending george bush. Defend all you want. The facts are in the pudding.

Worst economy since... well there's never been a worst economy. Can you imagine if he'd have gotten people's social security tied up in the market? And there's actually posters who defended the idiotic idea.

The george bush Memorial War in Iraq started on lies.

Giving... repeat... giving away $4,000,000,000,000.00 to the top 1% of the population.

Taking the United States into the deepest deficit in history. Not once, but yearly for the last 4 years?

But instead of me picking out his failures, somebody list his accomplishments. Come on....... give it your best shot. < :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

the U.S. Economy is far from the worst. Zimbabwe has an inflation rate over 1 million%.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

“I think the fact that this president has laid the groundwork for a Palestinian state, being the first president, as a matter of policy, to say that there should be one, and now, I think, laying the foundation that’s going to lead to that Palestinian state—I can go on and on.”

Please don't. When the hell was this thing taped? She's just making her husband's record look more ridiculous.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The worst this country has ever seen. Defend george bush some more Badsey. < :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

How much of the tax payer's money is being spent for Laura and condi to attempt to convince Americans that the blatantly obvious isn't true?

This is an absolute waste on many levels.

Taka

0 ( +0 / -0 )

As you know, he’s a natural athlete and ducked it.

lol

Natural athletes don't fall off their bikes and segways, duckie. And they certainly don't fall over while sucking on a pretzl.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

If starting 2 wars which still last under reasons proven to be false and not being able to end it while running your country into bankrupcy was the plan then Bush has not failed.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Fact that two "most influential women" rush to defend ONE MAN is itself a clear indication of failure.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"Natural athletes don't fall off their bikes and segways, duckie. And they certainly don't fall over while sucking on a pretzl."

I'm sure Cleo has never fallen off her bike. And I'm pretty sure Bush knows how to spell pretzel.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"How much of the taxpayer's money is being spent for Laura and condi to attempt to convince Americans that the blatently obvious isn't true?"

Come on, Taka313, please stop being so petty. These two ladies' comments aren't costing the taxpayers any extra money. Heck, if they'd said Bush's presidency was a disaster, you'd be applauding them.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"Fact that two "most influential women" rush to defend ONE MAN is itself a clear indication of failure."

No, but your post is a clear indication that you think Bush's presidency has been a failure. By the way, how many terrorist attacks on U.S. soil since 9/11 again?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Heck, if they'd said Bush's presidency was a disaster, you'd be applauding them.

Heck, if they'd said that, they'd be right.

I'm sure Cleo has never fallen off her bike.

Actually no, she hasn't. Not in the last 40 years, anyways. She's never started a war or had shoes thrown at her, either. But then she isn't a natural athlete.

By the way, how many terrorist attacks on U.S. soil since 9/11 again?

How many Americans killed in the Saddam Looked Funny At My Daddy War?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

By the way, how many terrorist attacks on U.S. soil since 9/11 again?

Many. Antrax attacks which left five dead, attacks on US Embassies (which is "U.S. Soil").

0 ( +0 / -0 )

( in response to my question, how many terrorists attacks on U.S. soil since 9/11? ) "How many Americans killed in the Saddam Looked Funny At My Daddy War?"

Translation: Zero. By the way, Saddam didn't just look funny at Bush Sr., he plotted to kill him, just like he killed hundreds of thousands during his murderous rule.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

how many terrorist attacks on U.S. soil since 9/11 again?

how many terrorist attacks on US soil before 9/11 again?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Hate to play both sides, but again, MANY. Terrorism has a very broad definition and due to various laws passed since 9/11, pretty much any major crime can be charged as "terrorism". Rob a bank and the bank robber can be charged with "terrorism". Before and after 9/11 there were and still are many "terrorism" related events.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Mr. 123, I'm unaware of anyone in my nation bein' charged with "terrorism" for robbin' a bank.

There's such a thing as "terroristic threatenin'" but that's been on the books for years. It has nothin' to do with global "terrorism" as you say.

What country are you from where bank robbers are charged with post 9-11 laws chargin' them with "terrorism"?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I didn't say bank robber was charged or convicted, I'm saying you can be charged because of the broad nature of the definition of "terrorism".

No one said "global terrorism", I'm just pointing out that "terrorism" has a broad definition and there have been many terrorist incidents pre and post 9/11 committed by both Americans and Foreign nationals.

Moderator: Back on topic please.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Wonder why he is a two term President? That is usually the bar that the American people set if a President is a failure or not.

He must have been doing something right for most of his Presidency to get re-elected to a second term.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

No one said "global terrorism", I'm just pointing out that "terrorism" has a broad definition and there have been many terrorist incidents pre and post 9/11 committed by both Americans and Foreign nationals.

Good point. In fact, based on the PATRIOT Act, if, in the end, it is determined that U.S. attorneys were fired for political reasons, the person(s) responsible for making that decision to fire the attorneys did so to coerce them in to dropping investigations, that person(s) could be tried with domestic terrorism.

Kind of funny how that works out. Especially in regards to legacy boy.

Taka

Moderator: Readers, please stay on topic. Posts that do not refer to Mrs Bush or Condi Rice will be removed.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

sarge,

First of all, yes it is costing tax payers money.

Secondly...and think about this one camper...if bush's legacy is a positive one, shouldn't it stand on it's own merits?

Why do bush, rove, condi and Laura have to travel the nation defending it?

And how pathetic is it that he needs other people to tell us he's done a good job. Isn't a job well done it's own reward? Talk about insecure.

Like I said earlier, this is an absolute waste on many levels.

Taka

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I would like to know if this is not a failure of the Bush's presidency then what is it? The testimonials of the two women, Mrs Bush and Dr Rice, sounds more like a joke we used when one is unbelievable, "Ask my wife if you don't believe me!".

It also reminds me of this joke where the surgeon declared that the operation was a success, but the patient died.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

It may be abit premature to judge this presidency now. From what I have been reading, the SCALE of this presidency's legacy has yet to be assessed. As posted several days ago, Pres. Bush's legacy starts Jan. 21, 2009. I would not describe his presidency as a success, nor the adjective "failure" correct. After Jan. 21, 2009, I believe the American people will have a more appropriate adjective.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

First off to be clear I am an American. SO you don't need to be saying things to me like, "In America this, or saying things like "In my country..." I know how "it is".

My point is, people have stereotypical views of things, ask someone what they think a terrorist looks like and they will give you a description of Osama Bin Liden or someone who looks like your 7-11 clerk.

But back on the subject, there is a stereotype, we are always told to "look for suspicious people" yet many of the suspicious people often reported on the news by the general public are minorities or people of color. There are countless reports of middle eastern, people of color, muslims being removed from flights simply because other passengers were not "comfortable" with them. Many of these people are just as American just as you or I, none of them are terrorists, none of them were charged, they were removed because someone felt uncomfortable because that person has a stereotype.

I have stereotypes, you have stereotypes, everyone has stereotypes. I'm just saying "terrorists" come in all shapes and sizes and we need to try to move away from those stereotypes.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The testimonials of the two women, Mrs Bush and Dr Rice, sounds more like a joke we used when one is unbelievable, "Ask my wife if you don't believe me!"

I was wondering, "Is his Mom going to hit the talk show circuit next?"

0 ( +0 / -0 )

One part of the Bush legacy that doesn't seem to be attracting much attention is his pushing through harmful 'midnight legislation' that it will likely take the Obama administration months or years to repeal. 'The only motivation for some of these rules is to benefit the business interests that the Bush administration has served,' said Ed Hopkins, a director of environmental quality at the Sierra Club.

Bush's midnight regulations will:

• Make it easier for coal companies to dump waste from strip-mining into valleys and streams.

• Ease the building of coal-fired power stations nearer to national parks.

• Allow people to carry loaded and concealed weapons in national parks.

• Open up millions of acres to mining for oil shale.

• Allow healthcare workers to opt out of giving treatment for religious or moral reasons, thus weakening abortion rights.

• Hurt road safety by allowing truck drivers to stay at the wheel for 11 consecutive hours. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/dec/14/george-bush-midnight-regulations

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Cleo: The democrats control both houses of congress so I doubt that Bush is going to get any bills approved before he leaves office. If they are executive orders, Obama can repeal them as quickly as Bushed signed them. Also, like all special interest groups, I take anything the Sierra Club says with a grain of salt.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

techall -

I don't claim to know much about the workings of the US legislative system, but according to the Guardian (same link as above), Bush can pass the rules because of a loophole in US law allowing him to put last-minute regulations into the Code of Federal Regulations, rules that have the same force as law. He can carry out many of his political aims without needing to force new laws through Congress. Outgoing presidents often use the loophole in their last weeks in office, but Bush has done this far more than Bill Clinton or his father, George Bush sr. He is on track to issue more 'midnight regulations' than any other previous president.....By issuing them early in the 'lame duck' period of office, the Bush administration has mostly dodged 30- or 60-day time limits that would have made undoing them relatively straightforward. Obama's team will have to go through a more lengthy process of reversing them, as it is forced to open them to a period of public consulting. That means that undoing the damage could take months or even years, especially if corporations go to the courts to prevent changes.

So it looks like these are laws that aren't being put through Congress but become law just the same; and reversing them will take a lot more time and effort than enacting them.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Cleo: You are right however any changes to the CFR have to be open to the public for comment before they go into effect. Obama will have to decide if it is worth the effort to prevent the changes. ha, I wrote :"Bushed": how's that for Freudian

0 ( +0 / -0 )

“I think generations pretty soon are going to start to thank this president for what he’s done. This generation will,” Rice said.

I would rank Bush on the same level as Milosevic and Pol Pot. Bush did not have much of a plan not really sure what he wanted to accomplish yet managed to create a pretty huge mess.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

the bush administration is not just a failure, it will define failure for hundreds of years. No goofy restatements of history by the bush wingnutters will change that.

bush was one of the worse if not the worse president ever. Period.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

US is bankrupt. US will need to listen to the creditors. Bush´s plan to spread freedom and to play the role as global police, park ranger failed. It was a pyramid game and when you don´t get new players to join in the pyramid the pyramid crumbles and you lose money.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I find it funny that bush's own wife and Condi have to come on here and defend the president, who is already being written down as one of if not the worst. If he did such a good job, why does his own flesh and blood have to come on the air and suggest he did?

Rhetorical question, of course. bush always has been and always will be regarded as a failure.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

As First Lady, Laura Bush has bought class and decency back to the WH.

The President-elect's angry, bitter "life partner" could learn a thing or two from her.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I love it. I have yet to see anything posted that is anything george bush can hang his hat on. No more attacks after he allowed the 9/11 attacks. I bet he can be real proud of that.

No more attacks after the 9/11 attacks that his administration allowed to happen. Oh yeah, while he was reading a children's book.

Hang your hat on that george. < :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Bush was reading My Pet Goat and 9 /11 took place on American soil yet not a single person has been caught inside America even though for doing such a job you need logistic support. It took a long time for the air traffic control to report this. The Air Force took 2 hours before they reacted usually US Airforce is ready to intercept a commercial airliner in 15 minutes. The U.S. Air Force and the missile system is supposed to intercept missiles within nine minutes yet they did nothing on 9/11. And no one asked this question and 3 minutes after the first attack when Bush was still reading My Pet Goat the media already said this was the work of bin Laden. The government put people in a trance in order for the neo cons to go ahead with plans already planned out before 9/11. That was their pyramid scheme but it didn´t work.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I have yet to see anything posted that is anything george bush can hang his hat on

Credit when it's due. Excerpt From the Washington Post last February

In a reference to Bush's domestic problems, Kikwete added: "Different people may have different views about you and your administration and your legacy.

"But we in Tanzania, if we are to speak for ourselves and for Africa, we know for sure that you, Mr. President, and your administration have been good friends of our country and have been good friends of Africa."

Although many Africans, especially Muslims, share negative perceptions of Bush's foreign policy with other parts of the world, there is widespread recognition of his successful humanitarian and health initiatives on the continent.

Bush has spent more money on aid to Africa than his predecessor, Bill Clinton, and is popular for his personal programs to fight AIDS and malaria and to help hospitals and schools.

Bush has stressed new-style partnerships with Africa based on trade and investment and not purely on aid handouts.

His Millennium Challenge Corp. rewards countries that continue to satisfy criteria for democratic governance, anti-corruption and free-market economic policies.

Bush signed the largest such deal, for $698 million, with Kikwete on Sunday.

Because of the U.S. anti-malaria program, 5 percent of patients tested positive for the disease on the offshore islands of Zanzibar in 2007 compared to 40 percent three years earlier, the Tanzanian leader said.

Bush's legacy in Africa would be saving the lives of hundreds of thousands of mothers and children who would otherwise have died from malaria or AIDS and enabling millions of people to get an education, he said.

"I know you leave office in about 12 months' time. Rest assured that you will be remembered for many generations to come for the good things you've done for Tanzania and the good things you have done for Africa," Kikwete said.

He can be pretty proud of that and so can we all.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/17/AR2008021700823_pf.html

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"I would rank Bush on the same level as Milosevic and Pol Pot."

If you were a Bosnian Muslim during Milosevic's rule, or a Cambodian during Pol Pot's rule, you wouldn't say that.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

If you were an Iraqi you would have compared him to Milosevic and Pol Pot.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

taka313: "First of all, yes it is costing tax payers money ( Mrs. Bush and Condi Rice commenting on Bush's presidency )."

Yeah? How much is it costing, and how much would the taxpayers save if they didn't make the comments?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The Bush presidency is not a failure, its just success impaired.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Yeah? How much is it costing, and how much would the taxpayers save if they didn't make the comments?

Do YOU think that bush is paying for his, "please don't hate me" tour out of his own pocket? If not, then it is coming at the tax payer's expense.

Is it necessary for the sake of the nation? Absolutely not. If it's even one thin dime, it's a dime being spent trying to salve bush's ego and has nothing to do with bettering our nation. It's bush putting bush ahead of the interests of the nation...again.

What a waste on so many levels.

Taka

0 ( +0 / -0 )

That's right, Pickles, his Presidency was not a failure. HE is!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

He answered to a higher force in his eyes, a mistake. Even on Iraq --when asked as to if he'd spoken to his father about what he thought-- Shrub told how he spoke to a bigger father. He brushed and stroked with no attention to detail, a massive oversight; he reacted, worked with and went forth with The Light on gut instincts... jeeeez. He lied. I mean he told burger king size lies that have left tens if not hundreds of thousands of people dead. Is it any wonder the States is in a, well, state? Then the economy... and he's the first Prez of the US to have a 'degree' in business! HAAAAAA! Good riddance Shrub. You may well go and fall of the wagon yet; once (if) you start to think and ask, 'What have I done?' Doubt you'll get that far though. Duh!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I'm impressed at how my george bush lovers have yet to come up with a list of achievements that george bush can hang his hat on. After 8 years his legacy is so strong that his supporters can't come up with a list of accomplishments.

Given this, I bet Laura and condi are having a hell of a time coming up with a list also.

Just go george, no bye-byes, no adious, no don't let the door hit you in the ass.... just go. < :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

adaydreamer: "his supporters can't come up with a list of accomplishments"

Despite the terrorists' best efforts, zero terrorist attacks on U.S. soil since 9/11.

Two countries liberated.

Despite the 9/11 attacks, a remarkably performing economy up until the last year of the Bush presidency when Democrat-inspired policies led to the sub-prime debacle

More done to combat AIDS than ever.

I could go on.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sarge - george bush has done more to combat AIDS. I'll give you that. he was looking for a way to clean up mhis record. Okay Sarge, (1) item on the george bush done good list.

Two countries liberated. Afghanistan isn't liberated. It's being taken over by the Taliban again.

Iraq, Sarge you can stop there. 100,000s murdered, millions of children with out parents, country's infrastructure totally destroyed, no oil like he promised, over 2 million Iraqi refuges.... More Sarge. Give me more.

So he helped Africans combat AIDS. 8 years of presidency and he combatted AIDS.

You can quit your 9/11 stuff. george bush allowed us to be attacked.

Please go on. Please Sarge go on. I've got time to read your post with your george bush accolades. < :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

My boy posts:

The President-elect's angry, bitter "life partner" could learn a thing or two from her.

First of all, the last time I saw her was when she was celebrating her husband's monumental victory. She didn't look bitter at all.

Secondly..."life partner?" That's a term most commonly used in reference to same-sex marriages. I'm pretty sure that if President-elect Obama was pulling "Tootsie" or Michelle was busting out a Victor/Victoria, it would have been reported in the press. Oh...wait a minute. I forgot about the "media conspiracy."

Anyway, I'd bet big money that any non-biased and sane source would find you far more bitter than the future First Lady.

Taka

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Bush presidency not a failure

Yeah, we'll add that to the list:

Boys are always safe with priests and always have been.

Bears don't shit in the woods.

The Pope isn't Catholic.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Now JT, find an article about the good that Laura bush has done. You won't hear a single sour note from me. She's been the only bright spot in the Whitehouse.

But you selected this article because you knew it would get responses. And it does.

From the first day in office george bush started off with finding a way to give $4,000,000,000,000.00 to the richest 1% of the population.

Then he gives a the pharmeceutical (sp) companies a windfall.

You remember when he tried to get your social security all tied up in Wall Street. Did he know what was coming and wanted to support the stock market with our benefits?

Somebody give him a package of pretzels, while he's riding his bicycle. That would be a U-Tube moment. < :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Failure might not be the right term. Let's just agree on W being the worst president in history and move on from there.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

usaexpat - No agreement here. Maybe some other george bush lover will agree with you, but not most who see his terms for what they were. < :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

adaydream, I think you misread my post. I said worst president ever I doubt any of Bush's 23% approvers would agree with me.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

usaexpat - "Let's just agree on W being the worst president in history"

I can think of several presidents who have been worse, especially the one who was president in the late seventies, but if I can't mention them here because that'll be "off topic."

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sarge, what a joke. Carter has won a nobel prize for his work including brokering peace between egypt and israel that is still valid today. Bush will win the Oil Industry Stooge of the Year award and that is about it.

No comparison at all between bush and any recent democratic president, or even his doopy read my lips Dad while he served out reagans third term.

Its to good that a smart man is now president after years of failure and corruption that were the bush years.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sailwind,

what a bunch of malarchy. Bush has not helped Africa, he has insisted on a just say no policy to sex which is driven by the rightwing zanies that run his administration. Its been all talk and very little action that has not come without christian tie downs on people who are not christian and dont care about right to life issues.

Nice try picking up the bush propaganda but like so much that gets repeated in the republican echo factory, its pure lies.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Zurcronium and Sarge: Carter was a terrible president but is a good man. I can't say the same about Bush. The other reason I rank Bush as worse than Carter is because while Carter presided over stagflation and a massive economic wave of destruction at least he in no way harmed the US moral standing in the world the way Bush has.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

USAexpat, Another thing President Carter is not given credit for is that he was honest. When the Nixon administration was exposed, people were pretty shocked and appalled at the level of corruption. Then Ford pardoned him. I remember my life-long republican parents vowing they would never vote for Ford because of Nixon's pardon. Carter was not an effective president, however, he didn't betray his nation like many people thought Nixon and Ford had.

Taka

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sarge

I can think of several presidents who have been worse,

Several huh? Show me your list of worse presidents. Show me the list of presidents that have forgotten the middle and lower classes like george bush has done.

Show me a list of presidents who gave away $4,000,000,000,000.00 to the top 1% uf the population.

Show me a list of presidents who sold the American people to the pharmeceudical companies.

Show me a list of presidents who worked their ass off to get us into a war.

Show me a list of presidents who took us into deficit situation as deep as we are right now.

Show me a list of presidents who lied to get us into a war.

You might show me a list of presidents who weren't the best, but show me a list of presidents who were worse than george bush. < :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

adaydream: don't you know the score yet? sarge just does not appear when he's been proven wrong, be it the billionth or ten-billionth time. What response could he possibly have for your post? My guess is at best he would cut and paste 'Show me a list of presidents who' and then add 'bush' and say "are great".

You know full well by now the sandbox has only four corners and allows no thinking outside of that. sarge was told bush was great, bush's wife says so, who cares what 6 billion others think?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Many of those who have already called the presidency a failure are obviously politically biased. I think much of it has come from the constant barrage of negative media coverage over the past 8 years. It only makes sense that after hearing the negative propaganda of the opposing party and of the militant propaganda machine, the bush presidency is being looked at the way it is. If people are judging the presidency purely on the war in Iraq then they are judging to quickly. God forbid, a country can come out of dictatorship and become a democracy in less than 6 years! If Iraq were to become a sucesfull democracy, setting an example for the rest of the middle east, it could be the greatest accomplishment this century. Peace in the middle east where atleast 7 nuclear armed countries exist or surround it would be a GREAT accomplishment.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Capster78, However, it's NOT just the war in Iraq. It's a combination of many things: The decaying infrastructure; the response to Hurricane Katrina; the cronyism; the erosion of civil liberties; the economy; the blatant bias toward the rich and the deregulation of environmental protections. That's JUST what I could pop off the top of my head. And then there's Iraq. It's not just about the validity of the invasion. It's about the mishandling of the occupation, including: the no-bid contracts; abu-Ghraib; allowing KBR to stay after they were found to be knowingly serving our troops contaminated water; the pallets of money that disappeared AND the erosion of our military readiness.

None of that is the medias fault. They whole "liberal media conspiracy" is a myth. Pure BS. Blame the media for reporting what's happening. How that tripe can continue to be peddled. Amazing.

And yes, peace in the ME would be a great accomplishment. Monumental. Unfortunately, we're going in the other direction. The ME is not more stable now. So it's pretty hard to hang your hat on that one.

Taka

0 ( +0 / -0 )

These discussions won't get anywhere, you're always going to have people on both sides taking things to absurdities where nothing is Bush's fault or everything is. I thought he was completely incompetent as a leader overall, but he did get much better after the 2006 midterm results came in. He started realizing what his biggest mistakes were and moderated them although not completely fixing any.

I'll give him credit for that, but he's simply failed on an wide breadth of policies including diplomatically, economically, the deficit, and the Constitution. It's amazing the slack fake conservatives give Bush just because of God, when Bush is probably the most fiscally liberal and socially fascist "Republican" in the last five decades. He makes Bill Clinton look like a fiscal conservative (which he was), and about his only real base of support are religious activists and people who care more about party affiliation than America.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

First of all, much of the blame for the Katrina response has to lay on the state government, not on Bush. While the Federal Government and FEMA were slow acting, the state government was poorly prepared for the situation. I was there before, during and after Katrina. The state government and its agencies are the first responders and they failed. You can not possibly blame bush for decaying infrastructure. It did not just decay over the last 8 years. Civil liberties? Oh, your talking about wire tapping im assuming? There has not been one case of an innocent civilian not involved in anything against the law being unjustly wiretapped. The economic situation was in full swing well before Bush took office. Bush and McCain tried stopping the situation. The loose regulation over bank lending started well before Bush took office. Everyone also seems to want to blame the government for their irresponsibility as well, that is quite convinient for them. They are also the first one's looking for handouts from the very government they blame for it as well. Abu Gharib has little to do with Bush, it has a lot to do with a few immature and mentally instable individuals. I don't see how you can possibly blame bush for the actions of these individuals. It's almost as if there is a fad going on here. Blame just about everything negative that happens on the president, rather than putting the blame on the actual source because that is the convinient thing to do and easier than actually investigating the facts. Life would be a lot less stressfull if I could blame all my mistakes on someone else as well. Again, you are judging in hindesight with the middle east. It is really easy to judge a war in hindsight. If you want to mull on the past we will never get anywhere. The fact is that we now have a winning stategy in Iraq. I don't see anyone praising Bush for that. I suspect that Obama will be the one that takes credit for work started before he took office, and little credit given where it is due.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Capster78,

Just out of curiosity, is there anything that you would hang on george bush? Is he responsible for anything as president? Who was to blame for his DUI? Was it the bartender or the cop?

Look, what I gave was just off the top of my head and what you offered would put you in the American Dodgeball Association of America Hall of Fame.

There used to be a plaque that sat on President Harry Truman's desk. It read, "The Buck Stops Here."

I'm not going to take the time to deconstruct your arguments because we've all been down that road for years.

Let's just let it go at, we disagree about whether or not george bush should be held accountable for the state of the nation during his presidency. I feel he should shoulder a great deal of the responsibility and blame for our current state. That comes with the territory, in my opinion. If one of my employees commits a crime in the performance of his/her duties, I will also take a lot of the heat. That's one of the reasons why managers get paid more than employees.

You, apparently feel otherwise, as is your right.

As for praising bush for a winning strategy in Iraq...well...first of all, in the Navy, there's a saying, "1 'oh sh*t' erases 10 'attaboys'." It doesn't work the other way. You don't erase hundreds of mistakes with one correct move. Also, failing to a lesser degree isn't success. Success (especially in Iraq) is you and I (at least me in this case) tearfully welcoming all of our troops back to the states. It's not lessening the clusterfork.

Taka

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Why don't you take off the media perscription bush hate sunglasses off for a second. It is well known that the decisions a president makes will not start to effect a country sometimes until well after his term is up. If you believe that you can judge the bush presidency based on what is happening now then you are an idiot. Many of the problems we are having are due to previous administration's. The financial crisis is a direct result of decades of loose loan practices.

So who are you going to blame for the hundreds of thousands of lives lost in mistakes during WW2, WW1, Vietnam war, Korean war, Civil war......... Wait, can you really say that there has ever been a perfectly fought war where every casualty could be accounted for by good decision making? You can not judge a war looking back on it, it is just not fair to do so.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

dip, duck, dodge, deflect and defend at all costs.

The buck stops elsewhere.

It's all really the fault "liberal media conspiracy."

Noted.

Taka

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Forgot the "of the"

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"The financial crisis is a direct result of decades of loose loan practices"

Democrat-inspired loose loan practices, I might add. And yet some people want to blame President Bush and the Republicans. Incredible...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

There are many things that need to be taken into consideration if we are gonna try and decide Bush is the worst.... Some of it required him to simply react to situations outside of his control, others were within his control...

No other Prez had to deal with a massive terrorist attack on US soil from a group with a radical agenda. Not a country, but a group. Difficult to go to war with a "group".

The financial collapse. Yes, Bush was president when it occurred, but it occurred because of policies put in place by Carter, expanded by Clinton and all attempts to regulate the industry fought off by the democrats. Yes, the right normally isn't big on regulation, but in this specific instance, they saw it coming and tried.

Trying to execute above war in a flawed manner. Right intent, wrong country. This IS the fault of Bush.

A democratic party intent on fighting him tooth and nail on EVERYTHING, regardless of 'right or wrong'. He was/is so despised that he's been a lame duck for quite a while.

Too damn many RINO's professing support. Hell, he's a RINO himself most of the time.

A right wing radio and blogosphere that, while supportive to a degree, demanded more "conservative" actions from him (as would be desired from a true conservative), thereby turning the base away from him for the most part. Another of those things that is Bushies fault.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Capster wrote:

"You can not judge a war looking back on it, it is just not fair to do so."

So I'm glad to hear there is no need for historians in Capster's world.

Or even back-deck discussions of history with my old man. I thought we had informed opinions over the years, what with me being a history major at university and dad spending decades teaching HS social studies.

"It is really easy to judge a war in hindsight. If you want to mull on the past we will never get anywhere."

Spoken like a true head-in-the-sand Bush supporter. Another quote from Capster that should be bronzed and on permanent display.

However, in one sense Capster is correct: We do not need to do any more mulling over the past where the presidency of George W. Bush is concerned. Any intelligent person knows his administration should get a big, fat "F" for most everything it did.

Case closed. Good-bye and good riddance, George W. Bush!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

former puppet of Bush now calls him a total failure, which of course he

Former U.S.-installed Iraqi Prime Minister Iyad Allawi has denounced the policies of President George W. Bush as an "utter failure" that gave rise to the sectarian venom that ravaged his country.

In an interview published on Saturday in the pan-Arab newspaper Asharq al-Awsat, Allawi found fault with American management of Iraq since the U.S.-led invasion in 2003 as well as the government of present Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki.

Allawi ruled Iraq for almost a year after U.S. occupation officials handed power to him in 2004 as prime minister of an interim government. He was selected by a council hand-picked by Washington after the 2003 invasion that toppled Saddam Hussein.

"Yes, Bush's policies failed utterly," said Allawi, describing the U.S. administration that once backed him. "Utter failure. Failure of U.S. domestic and foreign policy, including fighting terrorism and economic policy."

0 ( +0 / -0 )

These discussions won't get anywhere, you're always going to have people on both sides taking things to absurdities where nothing is Bush's fault or everything is. I thought he was completely incompetent as a leader overall, but he did get much better after the 2006 midterm results came in. He started realizing what his biggest mistakes were and moderated them although not completely fixing any. I'll give him credit for that, but he's simply failed on an wide breadth of policies including diplomatically, economically, the deficit, and the Constitution. It's amazing the slack fake conservatives give Bush just because of God, when Bush is probably the most fiscally liberal and socially fascist "Republican" in the last five decades. He makes Bill Clinton look like a fiscal conservative (which he was), and about his only real base of support are religious activists and people who care more about party affiliation than America.

bdiego, in 2006 the democrats took over congress to the great surprise of all of us. But mostly to Rove whose election magic completely ran out. The congress moderated Bush, if not for that the last two years would be more of the same incompetence and failure.

Your last point is valid. The core republicans would support bush even if he committed murder, which of course he indirectly did do in Iraq to hundreds of thousands. Since the media paints issues black and white the whole tone of politics is indeed partisan. But truth is not partisan. And the total failure of the bush administration is evident today to anyone, historians will spell it out in more detail in the years to come. Just wait till January 20 when the fear of Bush retribution will be over and more of the high crimes and misdemeanors of the bush criminal administration comes out. It will be an avalanche of truth.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites