Is Bush the worst president ever?

[Member2019]

so when I'm told Clinton set the terrorists free and Gore ignored Bin Laden, I think, ooh, someone's trying to influence the next election. But when Michael Moore tells me Bush allowed the Bin Ladens to leave for Saudi Arabia during the no fly time after 911, I also think, hmmm, doesn't sound too believable. But my own gut instincts are much more along those lines than "we're all in danger of terrorists and thank god Bush is keeping us safe."

I think people will spin the facts into what they want. I try to consider why something happens, from the perspective of the person who made the decision. I, unlike them, have the benefit of hindsight after their decision.

Clinton felt the US had no legal justification, let alone executive right, to Bin Laden when he was offered. I'm sure he very much regretted that decision from 1998 on-ward, as well as the countless terrorist incidents that occurred prior because of Al-Quieda. The Clinton administration just didn't "put it all together" before 1998, so I can't blame him for that.

As far as Michael Moore, it's very true that Bush let countless members of the Saudi royal family leave the country immediately after 9/11. But understnad there had been several incidents from 1998 on-ward where the lives of the Saudi royal family had been threatened, because of the ancestory of Bin Laden. But if you look at the context that they do not fund or associate themselves with Bin Laden -- quite the opposite (Saudi interests are constantly under attack from Al Quieda because of the US' strong ties with them) -- it made perfect sense.

Again, people will spin it as they see fit. Personally, I get tired of the rhetoric counter-rhetoric.

 

[alexios]

Not by far....I personally think Filmore or Grant was.

 

[EvaForU]

well..Clinton was not friend of Bin Laden or Talibans like Bush Sr. was...

Clinton fought for social care to poor people...and bush stopped that project...

If you only think about war against al-qaeda when you talk about presidents...you are quite wrong...how about what bush jr. did in New Orleans???? he was hidden like a rat...is that being a good president????

Kisses:

EVA

 

[om3ga]

As I said earlier in this thread, I'm no fan of Bush, but he isn't the worst president imo.....



(but Tony Blair might make my list as one of the UK's worst Prime Ministers)

 

[Member2019]

Not by far....I personally think Filmore or Grant was.

Grant was a serious "do nothing" President. He was a self-aware man, accepted he was in the bottom half of his graduating class from West Point, and maybe that's why he rose in the ranks. There is something to be said about honest gentlemen even if they aren't the sharpest.

But yeah, you could have gone to bed before his Presidency and woke up after it and thought you hadn't slept a moment. At the same time, he succeeded Andrew Johnson, and was probably just what the country needed. I don't think Andrew Johnson was a bad President either, and his impeachment had more to do with political views and his refusal to "punish the south" than the majority North wanted.

 

[Member2019]

New Orleans ...

how about what bush jr. did in New Orleans???? he was hidden like a rat...is that being a good president????

I've avoided this topic, but I'm really tired of hearing about New Orleans. Every engineer can tell you what the root cause was. And I think it was a 100% politically correct load of bullshit when the Army Corps of engineers finally admitted it was their fault.

It was never their fault. They laid out the specifications of the levies and said they could not take anything more than a directly category 1, possibly an indirect category 2. They were designed for sub-15' waves, not an indirect category-4 hit.

And the ultimate problem was that everyone was in denial!

The fact of the matter is that people didn't get the fuck out when they should have. I live 60 miles in-land in Orlando and I head to Georgia anytime anything larger than a category 2 is going to hit central Florida. For those of you that don't live within 50 miles of the ocean in the southeast US, I recommend you stop blamming W. It's clearly the combined fault of the locals and their government.

New Orleans has been hit before -- it's just been almost a half-century. They've had "close calls" but this was inevitable You can't do much about people who don't heed the mandatory evacuation warning. So, again, people who didn't get out have no excuse. While I still have pity, they should blame themselves. Especially when the evacuation was mandatory several days before it hit.

In fact, the smartest thing W. did is put the Coast Guard in charge right away. It wasn't the FEMA chief's fault either, FEMA is never funded well enough and even the Coast Guard has not well maintained (at least it wasn't before Katrina -- that's now changing).

And before you judge me, I worked for a company that was the primary communications in and out of New Orleans. We saw the devistation first-hand. You can't throw money at a problem 2-days before it hits and get any better results. People were just complacent and did not get the fuck out -- and that was on them.

The US Coast Guard excelled, and are finally getting recognized for this. God knows they had absolutely no infrastructure and capbility before Katrina, but they sure as hell improvised in no time.

 

[lordvader1]

Re: New Orleans ...

I've avoided this topic, but I'm really tired of hearing about New Orleans. Every engineer can tell you what the root cause was. And I think it was a 100% politically correct load of bullshit when the Army Corps of engineers finally admitted it was their fault.

It was never their fault. They laid out the specifications of the levies and said they could not take anything more than a directly category 1, possibly an indirect category 2. They were designed for sub-15' waves, not an indirect category-4 hit.

And the ultimate problem was that everyone was in denial!

The fact of the matter is that people didn't get the fuck out when they should have. I live 60 miles in-land in Orlando and I head to Georgia anytime anything larger than a category 2 is going to hit central Florida. For those of you that don't live within 50 miles of the ocean in the southeast US, I recommend you stop blamming W. It's clearly the combined fault of the locals and their government.

New Orleans has been hit before -- it's just been almost a half-century. They've had "close calls" but this was inevitable You can't do much about people who don't heed the mandatory evacuation warning. So, again, people who didn't get out have no excuse. While I still have pity, they should blame themselves. Especially when the evacuation was mandatory several days before it hit.

In fact, the smartest thing W. did is put the Coast Guard in charge right away. It wasn't the FEMA chief's fault either, FEMA is never funded well enough and even the Coast Guard has not well maintained (at least it wasn't before Katrina -- that's now changing).

And before you judge me, I worked for a company that was the primary communications in and out of New Orleans. We saw the devistation first-hand. You can't throw money at a problem 2-days before it hits and get any better results. People were just complacent and did not get the fuck out -- and that was on them.

The US Coast Guard excelled, and are finally getting recognized for this. God knows they had absolutely no infrastructure and capbility before Katrina, but they sure as hell improvised in no time.

True, how bout firing the blame thrower at Ray Nagin. He could have used school buses and public buses to get people out of there. I don't see how the President can be held responsible for a Hurricane. You can also blame the citizens themselves. They had days to leave beforehand and didn't and don't give me shit about how poor they were and that they couldn't get out because of this and that. They had cars or access to public transportation if it were available. Bout time people start taking the blame for themselves instead of taking the easy road and blaming the President.

 

[FullMoonWolf]

Re: New Orleans ...

True, how bout firing the blame thrower at Ray Nagin. He could have used school buses and public buses to get people out of there. I don't see how the President can be held responsible for a Hurricane. You can also blame the citizens themselves. They had days to leave beforehand and didn't and don't give me shit about how poor they were and that they couldn't get out because of this and that. They had cars or access to public transportation if it were available. Bout time people start taking the blame for themselves instead of taking the easy road and blaming the President.

So, I guess the old,weak and sick were just suppossed to heed the warning and jump on a bus?

Please. I traveled with my church group down there in February of this year to assist those people to get their lives back. I don't care how many "days you were warned", most of those people had noone to come to their aid and help them evacuate. Look at all the ederly that were purposely left behind to die. This storm showed nothing but the "new ugly" side of America.

Why is it when we invade a f ' ing country we have all the resources at our disposal immediately, but when it comes to helping out here in the USA first, we have SHIT! Why did it take three whole days, almost four, to send those poor people provisions, but the government and military can set up an entire base in a foreign country in a matter of hours! Beds, color Televisions, clean showers, hot meals, you name it.

Talk about denial.

 

[ckjedi66]

Our current president is a fucking retard, im so glad i didnt vote for him, i cant wait til his dumbass is out of office and we can start bringing our boys home instead of sending them to be slaughtered in a foriegn land

 

[Member2019]

Re: New Orleans ... listen ...

So, I guess the old,weak and sick were just suppossed to heed the warning and jump on a bus?

Listen, we're not talking about just the few "old, weak and sick" -- we're talking about very healthy people who didn't get out.

Please. I traveled with my church group down there in February of this year to assist those people to get their lives back ...

And my company had dozens of people directly assisting the US Coast Guard. They saw thousands of people rescued in the thicket of the disaster -- much, much closer than most of your church groups could go.

We were all from Florida and most people we helped rescue admitted they should have gotten out. It really was denial -- too many people of New Orleans didn't realize that this was not a hurricane to "hope wouldn't come close enough."

Talk about denial.

No, people in New Orleans who could get the fuck out but did not were the overwhelming problem.

It wasn't just the old, sick and weak. I agree with regards to the fewer old, sick and weak, the local governments failed them. But that had nothing to do with the federal.

 

[washingtonyrk]

Definitely the worst ever - even worse than Nixon.

He's not intelligent - as the unwinnable War On Terror attests - and he's also only interested in one thing, bending the world to America's (or rather his) will, principally by seeking to control the World's oil supply, especially in the Middle East.

Cast your mind back 60 years and the USA was loved in Europe, even as recently as in the Clinton years, America was respected round the world.

But not now.

Yes, America is the most powerful nation in terms of the military, but it's just plain wrong to abuse that power.

The illegal invasion of Iraq was an abuse of that power and now, like a child watchnig a car crash, he talks about who won and who lost in the dreadful Israel/Lebanon conflict.

I have a lot of progressively-minded American friends and I know all Americans aren't rednecks like Bush, but I'm afraid he's done lasting damage to America's image around the world.

It's a real shame.

 

[Member2019]

Actually, Clinton is a redneck, W. is a cowboy

He's not intelligent - as the unwinnable War On Terror attests - and he's also only interested in one thing, bending the world to America's (or rather his) will, principally by seeking to control the World's oil supply, especially in the Middle East.

Can you name an American President who didn't?

Now with that said, if we're "all about the oil for America and America only," how come we're involving companies from all the coalition partners and the cost of American gasoline is so high? Yes, some of that is due to world competition, refineries, new additive restrictions, etc..., but the price of a barrel of oil is still high. And we could by-pass OPEC and just "take control" of all Iraqi reserves, bringing down costs of gasoline to under $2, possibly $1.50 (but never close to $1.00 again because of increased world consumption outside the US, refinery, additive restrictions, etc...).

But are we doing that? No.

So while I won't argue with the comments that W. is dumb, has the wrong focus in many areas, etc..., I rather tire of the fact that people don't realize the US is not just sucking Iraq dry. Quite the opposite!

Cast your mind back 60 years and the USA was loved in Europe,

And the US pretty much realized at that point that Europe's control on the world had to go. That's when Europe stopped liking us.

even as recently as in the Clinton years, America was respected round the world.

No, I disagree. Yes, America was more "tolerated" under Clinton than W., but the "tolerance" of the US died with the end of the Cold War. All of those actions of American national security interest -- what many people call American imperalism -- were now laid far more to bear as "why should we continue supporting the US now that the Soviet threat is gone?"

That, more than anything, had to do with the loss of "tolerance" of what America does. And like Monroe and Teddy in the new centuries and new world order before them, W. is pissing everyone off with radical changes in American policy that go even further.

Yes, America is the most powerful nation in terms of the military, but it's just plain wrong to abuse that power.

And yes, we've been doing that for 60 years in the minds of most people. Once the Cold War was over, Clinton really pissed a lot of people off too (again, I think people forget that). W. just took it to the next level, defining a completely new doctrine for a new century and new world much like Monroe and Teddy did.

I'm not saying I agree with it, understand that (I never voted for W.). I'm just saying for anyone who really does remember Clinton and for anyone who has studied American history, this is nothing new.

The illegal invasion of Iraq was an abuse of that power and now, like a child watchnig a car crash, he talks about who won and who lost in the dreadful Israel/Lebanon conflict.

Like it or not, W. has a doctrine and he's sticking to it. Some would argue that it causes no more of a mess than Clinton's constant washing back'n forth on different situations -- being gung ho on Somalia and then castrating the UN Security Council on Rowanda.

But in reality, W., like Clinton, just made a lot of mistakes and learning as he goes. W.'s decisions and mistakes have just involved far more troops than Clinton's, which is why more responsibility for lives falls on his hands.

But let us not forget the Reagan years. In fact, 98% of the commentary I see on Lebanon are utterly ignorant of the history in the Reagan administration. Why, all of the sudden, W. is to blame for what has already been a problem for 25+ years is beyond me.

I have a lot of progressively-minded American friends and I know all Americans aren't rednecks like Bush, but I'm afraid he's done lasting damage to America's image around the world.

Bush isn't a redneck, he's a cowboy. Clinton was actually a redneck -- whites-only golf club membership carrying and all. Rednecks make good politicians because they are the "do as I say not as I do" whereas cowboys tend to be too damn headstrong and "we're all going to wrestle up this cattle together" all while both the cattle and help are mowing down everything in their path.

Now I'll fully admit that Clinton made better decision in 1994-1998 than W. But if you want to go down the cowboy v. redneck avenue, understand that at least W. says something and sticks by it -- whereas Clinton was a heavy "do as I say not what I do" sexist and racist. Yes, the media tells you otherwise, but in all honesty, I wish people would "wake up" to the type of person Clinton was (and still is) outside of his politics.

 

[Dirty Sanchez]

As for the Dirty S quotes, maybe those things did happen, but we don't know that, we don't really know anything,

WTF!!! Are you fucking kidding me?? Are you fucking retarded!!!??!?! They DID happen. There is more then enough evidence to prove they happened.

It is fucking disgusting that people cry about the Bin Ladens leaving the country after 9/11 when Clinton and Gore let known terrorist do what ever the fuck they wanted when they were in power.

Listen. I strugle with you. Either you are the dumbest person on the planet, or you are a 13 year old acting like he is an adult. Either way, you are a joke. If I ever saw you, I'd punch your dumb ass in the face. People like you are the problem with the world. Brave men fought and lost their lives to allow idiots like you the chance to prove your stupidity every day.

 

[Dirty Sanchez]

Definitely the worst ever - even worse than Nixon.

He's not intelligent - as the unwinnable War On Terror attests

So that means we don't fight it and allow another 9/11? I guess people are quick to forget how many people lost their lives in WW I and WWII. Yet, looking back on it, those were wars worth fighting.

- and he's also only interested in one thing, bending the world to America's (or rather his) will, principally by seeking to control the World's oil supply, especially in the Middle East.

Coming from a guy one drives a V8. When Americans stop buying 200hp cars, then they can stop crying about "Bush's war for Oil".

Cast your mind back 60 years and the USA was loved in Europe, even as recently as in the Clinton years, America was respected round the world.

Actually. American is hated as much now as it ever has been. Just beacuse you are only old enough to pay attention now doesn't mean they are hated more the ever before. People have always hated the USA. DO you recall how many terrorist attacks happened on Clinton's watch?

Yes, America is the most powerful nation in terms of the military, but it's just plain wrong to abuse that power.

I really don't get this logic. Are you saying the Police shouldn't target gangs or drug dealers because it is an abuse of power? The US is a World force. Deal with itl. If they don't do anything, people complain. Of they do, people complain. Stop hugging a tree and open your eyes to the REAL world.

The illegal invasion of Iraq was an abuse of that power and now, like a child watchnig a car crash, he talks about who won and who lost in the dreadful Israel/Lebanon conflict.

This is when I know you are an idiot. First, Isreal is a democratic state that was protecting it self from a know terroist group that has acknowledged they want to destroy Isreal.

Second, how can you sit there and say the World was better off wath Iraq the way it was? Are you ignorant or just plain stupid? With that kind of ignorance, if you were alivem I'm sure you thought Hitler was "just a little guy with an ego"/

I have a lot of progressively-minded American friends and I know all Americans aren't rednecks like Bush, but I'm afraid he's done lasting damage to America's image around the world.

First, Bush isn't a "redneck", your ignorant thinking makes you a "redneck" though. He is a cowboy that is willing to be man enough to say NO. Second, no "damage" has been done. The next guy (and if American is smart, it will be a guy instead of a house wife senator from New York) will change public opinion

It's a real shame.

Yes it is. Millons of people have given their lives to allow you the privilage to have the freedoms you now enjoy, and you can't even thank them.

 

[Member2019]

It is fucking disgusting that people cry about the Bin Ladens leaving the country after 9/11 when Clinton and Gore let known terrorist do what ever the fuck they wanted when they were in power.

Countering with rhetoric doesn't help the original rhetoric. Don't go there. Yes, the Clinton administration was naive early on, but by 1998, they knew the threat. In fact, one could argue that W. was lax his first 8 months in office, as he reversed a number of policies against Al Quieda that Clinton implemented. Some have suggested that not using the intelligence from Able Danger was as much of W.'s fault at Clinton's.

Again, responding with counter-rhetoric to rhetoric might be popular among the "two popular sides to an argument," but it's probably the main reason why the original discussin is quickly lost.

 

[Member2019]

Our current president is a fucking retard, im so glad i didnt vote for him, i cant wait til his dumbass is out of office and we can start bringing our boys home instead of sending them to be slaughtered in a foriegn land

Like Kerry said he wouldn't do? Americans and non-Americans alike should realize that while you might not like what W. has done, we're all stuck with it -- and that includes the next administration. Kerry was not going to bring the troops home and virtually every Democrat in Congress knows that's not an option at this point.

Like it or not, the Bush Doctrine is here to stay. Some things might be dropped, but you're fooling yourself if you think some things are going to go away if a Democrat gets in. And many people forget all of the things Clinton did from 1998-2000, including many of the Executive Orders from Clinton that W. used.

People focus too much on pre-1998, before the Clinton Executive orders on terrorism and the economy started tanking in 2000. There were already many things in motion before W. got in. W. just took it to the next level by deploying hundreds of thousands of troops, which he does bears responsibility for alone on that fact, I agree.

 

[FullMoonWolf]

Judging by the political posts that crop up on this board, I say we start a petition to get the word "United" removed from USA. Its obvious this country is being torn apart from the inside-out. As long as the republicans, democrats and the mass media keep this country in a constant state of fear, we will always be at war with someone.

 

[Legzman]

Judging by the political posts that crop up on this board, I say we start a petition to get the word "United" removed from USA. Its obvious this country is being torn apart from the inside-out. As long as the republicans, democrats and the mass media keep this country in a constant state of fear, we will always be at war with someone.

ha ha!!! that is so very true dude!:thumbsup:

 

[Chrism86354]

yes definetly

 

[negator]

he's the one i like the least of the presidents i've know in my life. but we won't know for another 50-60 years if he was "worst ever". even between hoover, grant, and nixon it's hard to label "worst ever". they always get blamed for stuff that isn't their fault. what they must have to be "good" in the eye of the beholder is the ability to create an emotional connection with the beholder. my mom still thinks nixon is the greatest president ever, he got us out of vietnam, an emotional war for her. myself, i can't forgive the way he shattered the illusion of the president being honorable, an emotional point for me. i dislike dubya and i feel he is corrupt (rove,haliburton), confused (stem cells,talks to god), and dangerous (hard-on for saddam since day1). but the wording of the poll, i had to vote no. truman had low popularity ratings in his day, but i believe his actions have stood the test of time. if, in 50 years, the middle east becomes dotted with democracies and leaves the dark ages, i think bush might be painted in a different light. right now though, i'm hating him a little.