Is Bush the worst president ever?
- Thread starter Freakybastard
- Start date
Blame W. for this? Where's Clinton's share?Freakybastard said:
FullMoonWolf
Closed Account
Rastagir said:
Dude...that's the funniest thing I've seen this morning...what the hell is he falling in? Is he in some fucked-up game of PowerBall?:rofl: :rofl:
Last edited:
member2686
Banned
LOL That's cool. There's another version of that (posted on the board here I think in the funny pics area) that has a naked babe falling too! :eek: :tongue: :nanner:
There have been far worse Presidents in American history. And there are also many American Presidents who are beloved by some and entirely despised by others.
Given what I've seen written about W., he will go down as another Monroe and Teddy. There are so many similarities, including the mainstream media (even if only newspaper at the time) absolutely hating both of them -- often seeing the American public as stupid sheep for putting up with them, much like W.
Given what I've seen written about W., he will go down as another Monroe and Teddy. There are so many similarities, including the mainstream media (even if only newspaper at the time) absolutely hating both of them -- often seeing the American public as stupid sheep for putting up with them, much like W.
Prof Voluptuary said:
Like I said I know jack **** about politics, and I really don't care to, but from what I know, hear and read, I stand by this thread. I also said I'd let the people who know about politics speak for me.
I'm neutral in the argument, but that was a really baised movie full of lies. I think most ppl are just looking to blame anything they can on Bush. Gas prices, 9/11, Katrina...... heck lets blame the cancellation of Friends on him while were at it. I agree that he is not a great president, but he is heck of a lot better than Clintion, and better than Kerry would have been.AnderZ said:
reidman said:
WOW, thats the dumbest things I ever read!
BTW Friends wasn't cancelled, do some research first especially if it's meant for sarcasm.
HoboJoe said:
That was the greatest post ever.
IMO Bush is the latest bad president. They are voted in as the lesser of two evils, and are judged by what they didn't do. All the presidents of my life, Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush, have known when to quit, one day a President won't know when to quit and will realize our greatest fears. I think Hillary Clinton will be as much if not more of a threat than Bush.
I'm 24, so I'm young, but I want a president 35 years, still young enough to have a vision of the future. Ideally a young black woman from the inner city, someone in touch with American culture and conscious of the majority.
4G63 said:
Totally agree about having a much younger president who actually has an idea about the future than these other presidents who try to be all traditional.
Times have changed and the way the US handles certain situations or issues in our beloved country is simply outdated and not how a country to be run.
ok first off bush defintaly isnt the worst president in the united states. Everyone is forgeting John Quincy Adams. He was by far the worst president in the United States. the only other president that comes along would have to be Andrew Johnson just becuse the reconstruction failed. But who say that Clinton was a bad president dont know what they are talking about. Getting a bj in the oval office doesnt make him a bad president even though he did lie when he was sworn under oath. George W is defintaly not the worst president.
People who say the movie Farenheit 9/11 (notice i say movie not documentary) is a good soucre to base your feelings about Bush is very poor souce. The movie farenheit 9/11 is labeled as a fictional film. And a crazy number liek 50% of the facts said in the film are false.
In the history of the United States any war that the United states ahve been involved in , excluding the WW1 and WW2 ( Vitenam, Spanish American, Mexican American, War of 1812, the revolution, jsut to name a few) the nation has been in recession.
People who say the movie Farenheit 9/11 (notice i say movie not documentary) is a good soucre to base your feelings about Bush is very poor souce. The movie farenheit 9/11 is labeled as a fictional film. And a crazy number liek 50% of the facts said in the film are false.
In the history of the United States any war that the United states ahve been involved in , excluding the WW1 and WW2 ( Vitenam, Spanish American, Mexican American, War of 1812, the revolution, jsut to name a few) the nation has been in recession.
4G63 said:
I don't necessarily care about a president that is a minority or a woman, although I don't have a problem with that. What I really want is a president that is actually a normal person for a change, has a concept of what reality is truly like, and cares for the difficulties that happen to normal people. I want a President that when he takes the oath of office and promises to protect the Constitution of the United Sates everybody out there can believe him and keep form wanting to laugh or cry when they watch it.
Anyone standing up for this idiot needs to sign up to go to Iraq
Im not sure that alot of 911 was planned (you know it sounds more like a conspiracy story than what im sure the real story is)
People with box cutter"s hijacked airplanes :thefinger
Are you kidding me ?
Ok back to Bush 2
#1.Id like to point out the video of him sitting there for (any more than 2 seconds is out of the question) however long it was reading to school ********.
THat alone makes him the worst of all time period.
#2. What should have happened after 911(other than disproving alot of what happened) was the country should have gotten together and what bush did was divide a nation in half.....thanks George your the man :thumbsup:
#3 Keep in mind that this is supposed to be a conservative president
Now that we have record debt it turns out that this isnt the case.
Seems like all he has accomplished making the saudi's more wealthy along with his oil buddies here and abroad.
Haliburton...after mispending they get more money :rofl:
He should not only be Impeached,Tried for ******,imprisoned but all his chronies should also be held responsable for the mess this country is in.
Say good bye to the middle class
ME
Im not sure that alot of 911 was planned (you know it sounds more like a conspiracy story than what im sure the real story is)
People with box cutter"s hijacked airplanes :thefinger
Are you kidding me ?
Ok back to Bush 2
#1.Id like to point out the video of him sitting there for (any more than 2 seconds is out of the question) however long it was reading to school ********.
THat alone makes him the worst of all time period.
#2. What should have happened after 911(other than disproving alot of what happened) was the country should have gotten together and what bush did was divide a nation in half.....thanks George your the man :thumbsup:
#3 Keep in mind that this is supposed to be a conservative president
Now that we have record debt it turns out that this isnt the case.
Seems like all he has accomplished making the saudi's more wealthy along with his oil buddies here and abroad.
Haliburton...after mispending they get more money :rofl:
He should not only be Impeached,Tried for ******,imprisoned but all his chronies should also be held responsable for the mess this country is in.
Say good bye to the middle class
ME
[ Just remember, you responded to me ]
People who don't like the President in the White House often label him the worst.
People still talk about how Clinton, H. Bush, Reagan, Carter, Nixon, LBJ, etc... are the worst. I could easily make cases how LBJ was worse than Nixon -- heck, even JFK worse than LBJ and Nixon!
In fact, the history of W. follows JFK more than any other, recent President.
Lost popular vote to Nixon in 1960. Won electoral college under shady circumstances that Nixon finally just conceeded to. Invaded Cuba when the US had absolutely NO RIGHT (unlike at least the UN resolutions on Iraq, even if you don't agree with them or think they justified anything). Brought the US to the brink of nuclear destruction by hypocritically denying Soviet ally Cuba access to nuclear weapons 90 miles away after putting nuclear weapons in Turkey right on their border. And -- God help us -- he REVERSED OVERTAXATION of the "rich" and showed that overtaxation was actually HURTING the private sector. One could argue the only thing JFK did "right" was get assassinated in office
Ironically, the circumstances under which Andrew Johnson was impeached were far more political and circumstancial than anything too. Yet just because he was impeached, people think he was a bad President. I hear the same non-sense on Clinton too. Ironically enough, totally putting his extra-marital life aside, Clinton (and especially his wife) was far more of a crook in his personal life than Nixon, LBJ, etc... Ethically you would NEVER want to go into business with the Clintons -- people who did found themselves dead under "unusual circumstances."
Let alone it is fairly much agreed that the Clinton staff (at least the original) was a good set of criminals who didn't respect the administration and White House. And they call the current administration "corrupt"? I'm sorry, but it's time people step back and recognize that politics plays a far greater role in this thread than any "real discussion."
If anything, I have to agree with some of W.'s policies, even if the execution is poor -- just like JFK. The best thing for W. would be if he was assassinated like JFK. Although it would have been better back in 2003 -- before all the blame of invading Iraq hit, much like JFK expanding the role of advisors and, later, additional troops in Vietnam.
Clinton had his bombing and Clinton has his invasions too -- and most of those were not related to US national security at all.
H. Bush and Reagan did as well, although I would argue had far more impact on US national security.
Carter has his oil prices, major military blunders, etc... -- Iran being a big one that just made us look like a laughing stock.
I've noticed that a lot of people love to feed that -- instead of actually stopping and looking at the history in all its context.
There's a reason why they don't let sports athletes into their respective Hall of Fame immediately -- because people over-weigh the NOW against the past.
If I went on a conservative board when Clinton was in office, I'm sure I'd get the same level of rhetoric.
About the only thing I can guarantee is, just like Monroe and Teddy, W. is hurting the political future of his party.
[ Please delete my other response ]
What you are actually ignorant of is leadership -- that's 100% different than politics.
Politics is the study of how to manipulate people -- leadership is not.
People who don't like the President in the White House often label him the worst. People still talk about how Clinton, H. Bush, Reagan, Carter, Nixon, LBJ, etc... are the worst. I could easily make cases how LBJ was worse than Nixon -- heck, even JFK worse than LBJ and Nixon!
In fact, the history of W. follows JFK more than any other, recent President.
Lost popular vote to Nixon in 1960. Won electoral college under shady circumstances that Nixon finally just conceeded to. Invaded Cuba when the US had absolutely NO RIGHT (unlike at least the UN resolutions on Iraq, even if you don't agree with them or think they justified anything). Brought the US to the brink of nuclear destruction by hypocritically denying Soviet ally Cuba access to nuclear weapons 90 miles away after putting nuclear weapons in Turkey right on their border. And -- God help us -- he REVERSED OVERTAXATION of the "rich" and showed that overtaxation was actually HURTING the private sector. One could argue the only thing JFK did "right" was get assassinated in office
Ironically, the circumstances under which Andrew Johnson was impeached were far more political and circumstancial than anything too. Yet just because he was impeached, people think he was a bad President. I hear the same non-sense on Clinton too. Ironically enough, totally putting his extra-marital life aside, Clinton (and especially his wife) was far more of a crook in his personal life than Nixon, LBJ, etc... Ethically you would NEVER want to go into business with the Clintons -- people who did found themselves dead under "unusual circumstances."
Which shows me you actually no very little of US history and just assumed AJ was "bad" because he was impeached. So yes, I'm not going to respect your reasoning as anything but 100% politically motivated.
Let alone it is fairly much agreed that the Clinton staff (at least the original) was a good set of criminals who didn't respect the administration and White House. And they call the current administration "corrupt"? I'm sorry, but it's time people step back and recognize that politics plays a far greater role in this thread than any "real discussion."
If anything, I have to agree with some of W.'s policies, even if the execution is poor -- just like JFK. The best thing for W. would be if he was assassinated like JFK. Although it would have been better back in 2003 -- before all the blame of invading Iraq hit, much like JFK expanding the role of advisors and, later, additional troops in Vietnam.
About the only thing I can guarantee is, just like Monroe and Teddy, W. is hurting the political future of his party. History will probably remember W. for the "Bush Doctrine" just like Monroe and Teddy, yet not the fact that their respective parties were hurt by the same administration for administrations to come. No offense but I do not see anyone else here in this thread, or others, looking at the "larger picture" of the US' history. And in the context of the question asked, that is everything!
Under certain viewpoints, Monroe, Lincoln, FDR, JFK, Teddy are some of the worst US Presidents. In fact, the two (2) worst US Presidents in my opinion were Lincoln and FDR -- they both destroyed the whole purpose of the United, autonomous, States. The best historians don't base their view of Presidents on popularity or circumstances, but what they actually accomplished that affected American (and world) history.
In this regard, Clinton will be remembered for fighting few small, insignificant wars that did nothing for US security, just like Carter and others. W., like Monroe and Teddy, will be remembered for trying enact and enforce a policy that caused the world to **** and despise the US and consider it arrogant, leaving future administrations to clean it up -- but the policy remained, regardless of the world outcry and bitching about it. You look at W. now, and you don't realize, this is not a US policy that is going to change, don't *** yourself -- hence why you aren't even looking at this question in a viewpoint other than 100% political.
I really don't like either you lefties or the righties either. Lincoln and FDR are considered the two worst US Presidents in my book because they impacted (and are still impacting) the US for centuries (to come!). I'd probably consider Andrew Jackson the best US President ever, despite his savage history, because of his stance on the US Bank and other fiscal policy. Ironically, had JFK lived, he would have been just as despised for his actions -- including his look into the US Federal Reserve and continued (almost Libertarian) fiscal policy changes.
Obviously.Freakybastard said:
People who don't like the President in the White House often label him the worst.
People still talk about how Clinton, H. Bush, Reagan, Carter, Nixon, LBJ, etc... are the worst. I could easily make cases how LBJ was worse than Nixon -- heck, even JFK worse than LBJ and Nixon!
In fact, the history of W. follows JFK more than any other, recent President.
Lost popular vote to Nixon in 1960. Won electoral college under shady circumstances that Nixon finally just conceeded to. Invaded Cuba when the US had absolutely NO RIGHT (unlike at least the UN resolutions on Iraq, even if you don't agree with them or think they justified anything). Brought the US to the brink of nuclear destruction by hypocritically denying Soviet ally Cuba access to nuclear weapons 90 miles away after putting nuclear weapons in Turkey right on their border. And -- God help us -- he REVERSED OVERTAXATION of the "rich" and showed that overtaxation was actually HURTING the private sector. One could argue the only thing JFK did "right" was get assassinated in office
Ironically, the circumstances under which Andrew Johnson was impeached were far more political and circumstancial than anything too. Yet just because he was impeached, people think he was a bad President. I hear the same non-sense on Clinton too. Ironically enough, totally putting his extra-marital life aside, Clinton (and especially his wife) was far more of a crook in his personal life than Nixon, LBJ, etc... Ethically you would NEVER want to go into business with the Clintons -- people who did found themselves dead under "unusual circumstances."
Let alone it is fairly much agreed that the Clinton staff (at least the original) was a good set of criminals who didn't respect the administration and White House. And they call the current administration "corrupt"? I'm sorry, but it's time people step back and recognize that politics plays a far greater role in this thread than any "real discussion."
If anything, I have to agree with some of W.'s policies, even if the execution is poor -- just like JFK. The best thing for W. would be if he was assassinated like JFK. Although it would have been better back in 2003 -- before all the blame of invading Iraq hit, much like JFK expanding the role of advisors and, later, additional troops in Vietnam.
Stand by what thread?Freakybastard said:
Clinton had his bombing and Clinton has his invasions too -- and most of those were not related to US national security at all.
H. Bush and Reagan did as well, although I would argue had far more impact on US national security.
Carter has his oil prices, major military blunders, etc... -- Iran being a big one that just made us look like a laughing stock.
This board is heavily left, so you're going to get a lot of fanfare.Freakybastard said:
I've noticed that a lot of people love to feed that -- instead of actually stopping and looking at the history in all its context.
There's a reason why they don't let sports athletes into their respective Hall of Fame immediately -- because people over-weigh the NOW against the past.
If I went on a conservative board when Clinton was in office, I'm sure I'd get the same level of rhetoric.
About the only thing I can guarantee is, just like Monroe and Teddy, W. is hurting the political future of his party.
[ Please delete my other response ]
No, you know everything about politics.Freakybastard said:
What you are actually ignorant of is leadership -- that's 100% different than politics.
Politics is the study of how to manipulate people -- leadership is not.
People who don't like the President in the White House often label him the worst. People still talk about how Clinton, H. Bush, Reagan, Carter, Nixon, LBJ, etc... are the worst. I could easily make cases how LBJ was worse than Nixon -- heck, even JFK worse than LBJ and Nixon!
In fact, the history of W. follows JFK more than any other, recent President.
Lost popular vote to Nixon in 1960. Won electoral college under shady circumstances that Nixon finally just conceeded to. Invaded Cuba when the US had absolutely NO RIGHT (unlike at least the UN resolutions on Iraq, even if you don't agree with them or think they justified anything). Brought the US to the brink of nuclear destruction by hypocritically denying Soviet ally Cuba access to nuclear weapons 90 miles away after putting nuclear weapons in Turkey right on their border. And -- God help us -- he REVERSED OVERTAXATION of the "rich" and showed that overtaxation was actually HURTING the private sector. One could argue the only thing JFK did "right" was get assassinated in office
Ironically, the circumstances under which Andrew Johnson was impeached were far more political and circumstancial than anything too. Yet just because he was impeached, people think he was a bad President. I hear the same non-sense on Clinton too. Ironically enough, totally putting his extra-marital life aside, Clinton (and especially his wife) was far more of a crook in his personal life than Nixon, LBJ, etc... Ethically you would NEVER want to go into business with the Clintons -- people who did found themselves dead under "unusual circumstances."
Which shows me you actually no very little of US history and just assumed AJ was "bad" because he was impeached. So yes, I'm not going to respect your reasoning as anything but 100% politically motivated.
Let alone it is fairly much agreed that the Clinton staff (at least the original) was a good set of criminals who didn't respect the administration and White House. And they call the current administration "corrupt"? I'm sorry, but it's time people step back and recognize that politics plays a far greater role in this thread than any "real discussion."
If anything, I have to agree with some of W.'s policies, even if the execution is poor -- just like JFK. The best thing for W. would be if he was assassinated like JFK. Although it would have been better back in 2003 -- before all the blame of invading Iraq hit, much like JFK expanding the role of advisors and, later, additional troops in Vietnam.
Stand by what thread? Clinton had his bombing and Clinton has his invasions too -- and most of those were not related to US national security at all. H. Bush and Reagan did as well, although I would argue had far more impact on US national security. Carter has his oil prices, major military blunders, etc... -- Iran being a big one that just made us look like a laughing stock.Freakybastard said:
This board is heavily left, so you're going to get a lot of fanfare. I've noticed that a lot of people love to feed that -- instead of actually stopping and looking at the history in all its context. There's a reason why they don't let sports athletes into their respective Hall of Fame immediately -- because people over-weigh the NOW against the past. If I went on a conservative board when Clinton was in office, I'm sure I'd get the same level of rhetoric.Freakybastard said:
About the only thing I can guarantee is, just like Monroe and Teddy, W. is hurting the political future of his party. History will probably remember W. for the "Bush Doctrine" just like Monroe and Teddy, yet not the fact that their respective parties were hurt by the same administration for administrations to come. No offense but I do not see anyone else here in this thread, or others, looking at the "larger picture" of the US' history. And in the context of the question asked, that is everything!
Under certain viewpoints, Monroe, Lincoln, FDR, JFK, Teddy are some of the worst US Presidents. In fact, the two (2) worst US Presidents in my opinion were Lincoln and FDR -- they both destroyed the whole purpose of the United, autonomous, States. The best historians don't base their view of Presidents on popularity or circumstances, but what they actually accomplished that affected American (and world) history.
In this regard, Clinton will be remembered for fighting few small, insignificant wars that did nothing for US security, just like Carter and others. W., like Monroe and Teddy, will be remembered for trying enact and enforce a policy that caused the world to **** and despise the US and consider it arrogant, leaving future administrations to clean it up -- but the policy remained, regardless of the world outcry and bitching about it. You look at W. now, and you don't realize, this is not a US policy that is going to change, don't *** yourself -- hence why you aren't even looking at this question in a viewpoint other than 100% political.
I really don't like either you lefties or the righties either. Lincoln and FDR are considered the two worst US Presidents in my book because they impacted (and are still impacting) the US for centuries (to come!). I'd probably consider Andrew Jackson the best US President ever, despite his savage history, because of his stance on the US Bank and other fiscal policy. Ironically, had JFK lived, he would have been just as despised for his actions -- including his look into the US Federal Reserve and continued (almost Libertarian) fiscal policy changes.
Last edited by a moderator:
Similar threads
