So... how 'bout that Bush?

[Noscreenname]

In about 9 months from now, the President of the United States will be leaving office, so now is a good time to assess his presidency.

Some people love him, some people hate him. You never really hear from the ones that love him, though. Somehow he's always been associated with hatred. I got to thinking about it a few days ago, watching the Washington National's (my home baseball team) home opener in their new stadium, where Bush himself had come to throw the first pitch. But when he came out, the crowd reaction was hardly positive- plenty of people applauded, but a lot of it was drowned out by the spiteful booing. That made me really sad. I mean, besides the disrespect for the president of their own country, what are these people teaching the kids who were watching? We tell them not to act out of hatred, but apparently that doesn't apply to the President of the U.S.A.?

I recently saw a poll that showed his approval ratings at an all-time low: about 31%. Still, this was higher than the ratings of Hoover, Truman, Johnson, Nixon, and Carter, so I hardly see where all this worst-president-ever stuff is coming from. He's made mistakes, and overall he hasn't shown very much intelligence, but I don't think he's anywhere near as bad as some people make him out to be.


So, worst president ever? Or great and underrated? Ultimately, only the Americans of the future will be able to decide this.

[Nietzsche]

Originally Posted by Noscreenname

In about 9 months from now, the President of the United States will be leaving office, so now is a good time to assess his presidency.

Some people love him, some people hate him. You never really hear from the ones that love him, though. Somehow he's always been associated with hatred. I got to thinking about it a few days ago, watching the Washington National's (my home baseball team) home opener in their new stadium, where Bush himself had come to throw the first pitch. But when he came out, the crowd reaction was hardly positive- plenty of people applauded, but a lot of it was drowned out by the spiteful booing. That made me really sad. I mean, besides the disrespect for the president of their own country, what are these people teaching the kids who were watching? We tell them not to act out of hatred, but apparently that doesn't apply to the President of the U.S.A.?

I recently saw a poll that showed his approval ratings at an all-time low: about 31%. Still, this was higher than the ratings of Hoover, Truman, Johnson, Nixon, and Carter, so I hardly see where all this worst-president-ever stuff is coming from. He's made mistakes, and overall he hasn't shown very much intelligence, but I don't think he's anywhere near as bad as some people make him out to be.


So, worst president ever? Or great and underrated? Ultimately, only the Americans of the future will be able to decide this.

...

"People are still debatin' our first presdient!"

No. They aren't. George Washington was perfect, end of story. Bush sucks. Period. End of sentence. He doesn't even have Nixon's "I went to China!" to help and smooth out his career. Instead, he couldn't figure out how to open a door, in China.

Case closed.

[Erimgard]

Let's just say, I'm not pleased with him, but I don't think Kerry would've been any better.

[sugarpoultry]

I love our president. I think people make up such crap about him...

[Noscreenname]

Originally Posted by Nietzsche

He doesn't even have Nixon's "I went to China!" to help and smooth out his career.

You know, before he plummeted in the polls, he had an extraordinarily high approval rating. Why? Because he handled the 9/11 emergency effectively and triumphantly. He drove the Taliban out of Afghanistan, so I suppose you could say Afghanistan is Bush's China.

And as long as there is such a wide variety of opinions out there, the case is far from closed. Just because you're closed minded about it doesn't mean doesn't mean public opinion will stick to what you want it to be.

[sugarpoultry]

Originally Posted by Noscreenname

You know, before he plummeted in the polls, he had an extraordinarily high approval rating. Why? Because he handled the 9/11 emergency effectively and triumphantly. He drove the Taliban out of Afghanistan

That is why I like him. Sure, America is the worlds police whether people like it or not, but ya know what, at least he's succeeding.

[Koneko]

He's not the worst we've had but I can't say that I ever enjoyed his presidency. He's kinda just doing what he wants. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the people of america have wanted troops out of Iraq for about a year or more now, and he still hasn't gotten them all out. And he's asked other countries to send troops there too?
Why sacrifice their men too?
Sorry if that sounds.. dumb.

Also. I'm not sure what politics and men spitting in a can have to do with each other but in one speech, he seemed to make that connection.

[Notsil]

He's not the best, but he's a darn good man, and more than enough to be a good leader of our nation, in my book. I don't think it would matte who we could have had in office right now, it would still be a tough time for America. Bush is doing a very good job under the circumstances, and I salute him for that.

Maybe its because I have received more leadership experience than the average person, but I see extensive parallels between him, and what it takes to get a job done. People these days just can't appreciate it, I suppose.

[Mafoofoo]

I believe that once Bush leaves office public opinion of him will rise. It's done so for alot of the presidents who left office with a moderately large amount of negative vibe towards them.

[Skull Kid]

I'm pretty ambivalent about Bush. My dad loves him. I don't, but I don't hate him, either.

I've always thought it pretty dumb for people to jump on the Bush-bashing bandwagon without really knowing a damn thing about his flaws. I'm not fond of his rather conservative leanings, nor his vetoing of the embryonic stem-cell bill, nor the general chaos of the war in Iraq - which I can admit is not just Bush's fault, but the result of various factors interacting. I appreciate the quick, successful invasion into Afghanistan, though. I don't feel as appreciative of the No Child Left Behind Act, and I hate the state of our economy.

People say so many things for and against him that it's hard to find the truth, which is something I realize I should be more proactive in seeking.

At this point, I honestly don't know what to think. We just need to solve our problems.

[FyrWolf]

Originally Posted by Nietzsche

...

"People are still debatin' our first presdient!"

No. They aren't. George Washington was perfect, end of story. Bush sucks. Period. End of sentence. He doesn't even have Nixon's "I went to China!" to help and smooth out his career. Instead, he couldn't figure out how to open a door, in China.

Case closed.

OK, had to add my two cents, I have heard people trying to get dirt on Washington. As far as my knowledge takes me, yes, he was a darn good guy, but I have personally heard people talking about him as an imbecile, vile, wicked, etc.

However, not everyone wants to get the troops out of Iraq. Here is something to remember every time you talk about "pulling out the troops". At this point, we have been at war for approximately six years. We have a volunteer army, there is no draft. Every soldier fighting right now in Iraq volunteered during time of war, with the intention of going to war to fight the injustice and evil of Osama Bin Laden and Sadaum Heusen. (I really butchered those names I think, sorry about that) Whether all of them still feel like that or not, well, there's undoubtedly a small percentage who have changed their minds. But my brother is serving in the marine corp, and is currently overseas. He's met a lot of other marines, and they all feel the same about the war, and about Bush: We need to be over there fighting this war, and Bush is doing the right thing, maybe we should be fighting over there even harder. That's what the marine corp thinks, anyway.

[Nox]

I'm glad Bush is getting out of office. The reasons are the same with those who hate him, but let me just say that he fails hardcore at trying to be like the best president ever, Ronald Regan. He messed up the economy, planned the invasion of Iraq miserably, and is pretty much a weak man who lets other people make his decisions, those other people being Karl Rove and Dick Cheny, not the American people.

I am looking forward to January 20, 2009, but only if Obama is there. That's a different story though.

[Duo]

Personally, I prefer the landing strip to fully shaved. Waxed is good too. As long as the chick doesn't have a full bush, it's a-okay.

Oh, we're talking about that Bush. He sucks too. He plunged his nation's economy further into debt than it has been in a long time, if not ever. (Not sure what the record is, but I do know that he's plunged it further into debt in his 8 years in office than it had been plunged since 1976. That's 32 years of deficits squeezed into one-quarter the amount of time.

Not only that, but he deposed Saddam Hussein (Believe it or not, Iraq was better off with him in charge) and started two foolish wars. While Afghanistan had some merit, Iraq had none. The real target should have been Saudi Arabia, but considering how good friends Bush is with the Saudi Royal Family, we all knew that wasn't going to happen.

Oh yeah, and his VP is Dick Cheney, a man who should be impeached. But I won't get into that here as this isn't a thread about him.

[FyrWolf]

Please, let us all remember that Saddam Hussein was a mass murderer, slaughtering and torturing hundreds if not thousands of his own people. If that is better than the way the country is now, then yes, the war is pointless.

[Tempest]

Originally Posted by Nietzsche

...

"People are still debatin' our first presdient!"

No. They aren't. George Washington was perfect, end of story. Bush sucks. Period. End of sentence. He doesn't even have Nixon's "I went to China!" to help and smooth out his career. Instead, he couldn't figure out how to open a door, in China.

Case closed.

Wow, that's some argument there...oh, I'm sorry, that's an opinion. Come back with a real argument and supporting evidence besides strawmen you've constructed.

Washington's presidency was FAR from perfect. He had MULTIPLE riots he had to mobilize the federal militia against (Whiskey Rebellion, Tax Rebellion, etc.) just to save this little experiment in self government.

As for Bush's legacy: I'm not passing judgment until at least...2018. You need far more hindsight to assess the long term implications of a presidential term. Hell, I'm still not even willing to judge the FIRST Bush's term.

[Administrator Breen]

He means good, but he is a bit shortsighted. The war really should end, they've been in the same situation for 4 years.

[Nietzsche]

Originally Posted by FyrWolf

Please, let us all remember that Saddam Hussein was a mass murderer, slaughtering and torturing hundreds if not thousands of his own people. If that is better than the way the country is now, then yes, the war is pointless.

...

During Saddam's reign, you could walk down Baghdad and not get shot at. You can't go from Baghdad to the Baghdad airport without someone yelling "Incoming fire!".

[Tempest]

Originally Posted by Nietzsche

...

During Saddam's reign, you could walk down Baghdad and not get shot at. You can't go from Baghdad to the Baghdad airport without someone yelling "Incoming fire!".

So that outweighs the fact that if you voted "No" on their "Election", which was merely a referendum that said "Should Saddam Hussein remain president?", you and your entire family would be kidnapped, tortured and executed? There's a REASON why the referendum that was held in late 2002 had a 100% vote for Saddam. And Baghdad is a terrible example, that's part of the green zone. You CAN walk down the streets of Baghdad and not have to worry about gunfire erupting out of nowhere. It'd make more sense if you said Fallujah however. That's not to say I support the war, far from it, but I'm just pointing out the absolutely blatant and horrible logical fallacies in your arguments.

You can walk down the street in Pyongyang, but if you say anything other than praise for the divine Great Leader Kim Jong Il you're just as dead. Security from criminals doesn't make a country stable.

[Daveigus]

IMO Bush is one of the biggest criminals out there, first of all he didn't win the elections fair he cheated.
he invaded the middle-east not because he wanted to destroy terrorists, he wanted to create chaos on those countries so he could get his hands on their oil.
and yes, iraq was better of under the reign of Houssein, sure Houssein killed a lot of people, that is just wrong but Bush killed more inocents with his useless war.
he lied about the chemical weapons being produced there..(btw why the f * ck is america the only country that may have nukes?! that does'nt make any f *cking sense!)

i think a lot of americans get lied to about lots of afairs in your country.
sometimes in my country we see things about america wich an american would never believe if i told them (i can't remember any examples now but believe me it's true)

[Maxwell Smart, Ph. D.]

and yes, iraq was better of under the reign of Houssein, sure Houssein killed a lot of people, that is just wrong but Bush killed more inocents with his useless war.

Mathematically improbable. Given the time that Saddam and his sons would have retained power and the number of deaths generally attributed to both sides, and adjusted for an annual rate, you get:

Saddam, not counting Iran-Iraq, averaged: 20,833-41,666 per year. (Between 500k and 1 million total).
Saddam, counting Iran-Iraq with the averages: 50,000-70,833 per year.
The US: high end estimate (ie. counting those indirectly caused by the security collapse in the early aftermath and things like bombings by terrorists killing civilians as well as US activity, etc.): 82,625-90,149 in all five years.
Means: 16,525-18,029 per year.

And this is not state activity. The vast majority of those deaths (and they count plainclothes insurgents as civilians) are caused by the activities of individual-individual violence rather than state (ie. US/Iraqi government) on individual violence.

Judging from all of this the invasion has saved between 14,016-271,540 lives in total.

It's a net gain for humanity, you human hating monster.

[Tempest]

Originally Posted by Daveigus

IMO Bush is one of the biggest criminals out there, first of all he didn't win the elections fair he cheated.

Source? You have no idea how the Electoral College works, do you? The procedure was followed for a disputed return, there hasn't been any solid evidence of ACTUAL tampering with votes. When a disputed return due to problems with how the polling center conducted itself arises, the courts get jurisdiction over it and ultimately the Florida Supreme Court awarded Bush the electoral votes based on the evidence they had. Its not like votes came out of nowhere.

he invaded the middle-east not because he wanted to destroy terrorists, he wanted to create chaos on those countries so he could get his hands on their oil.

Afghanistan isn't exactly...teeming with oil. Iraq's petrol infrastructure is pretty much been destroyed since the FIRST gulf war when Saddam went and blew the **** up.

and yes, iraq was better of under the reign of Houssein, sure Houssein killed a lot of people, that is just wrong but Bush killed more inocents with his useless war.
he lied about the chemical weapons being produced there..(btw why the f * ck is america the only country that may have nukes?! that does'nt make any f *cking sense!)

We're the only country that "may have nukes"?
Nuclear proliferation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Did you miss the whole "Cold War" unit in your remedial history class? There's plenty of countries that have nuclear capabilities. You're absolutely, undeniably flat wrong. Check your facts before you post next t