The Bush Legacy

[nativetexan]

So what is your final take on GW? Please keep your responses thought out and factual.

[wtnhunt]

Think there will be pretty broad range of critiques in the coming years on this topic, might see some pretty varied replies here.

Pretty simple really in my opinion, Bush like most presidents was faced with different situations than what others have been faced with, he met those situations/challenges and made difficult decisions that were not always the most popular and as a result his favorability/approval rating suffered. Easy for the critics to say what they would or might have done differently, but no way to really know what might be different had the popular decisions been made. This country has not seen another terrorist attack on our soil though and in that respect I think his presidency has been successful. Had he waivered I do believe that might not be the case.

[JJL]

20 years from now will be the time to write and discuss the influences of Bush 43.

For now let it suffice to say that the Country is alot better off that if Gore or Kerry had been elected.

[Tominator]

20 years from now will be the time to write and discuss the influences of Bush 43.

For now let it suffice to say that the Country is alot better off that if Gore or Kerry had been elected.

Good assessment IMHO. The country stayed safe, some capitalistic "controls" went too far.

[Missilelock]

I have bben asked a few times, whenever I speak up in favor of Gw, "what did Bush ever do for you"- my short answer is He never did anything against me.... I still have my same American rights that I had when he took office. I love the country I live in & the Christian principles it was founded on & I dont think GW tried to take any of that away from me. I sure gotta hope Obama will do as well, but I dont have very high hopes.

[colorado bob]

I usually don't post on a thread about politics, But I have on this one. George W is the worst president in my lifetime. I'll be glad when 1/20/09 comes. CB

[stevebeilgard]

I usually don't post on a thread about politics, But I have on this one. George W is the worst president in my lifetime. I'll be glad when 1/20/09 comes. CB

i couldn't hardly disagree more. jjl had it right. he was much better than gore or kerry. the country is better off with him. i'm not optimistic about obama, but i hope he does well. and bob must not have been around for carter..

i don't like bush. mccain was even worse than bush. i did vote mccain because i believe he'd be waaaaay better than obama. in 3 years it will be one simple question: are you better off now than before obama got into office? i hope the answer is yes, but i know better. :(

[colorado bob]

Steve, your entitled to your opinion. Answer your own question---Are you better off now than when Bush took office? Answer is a resounding NO. We went to heck in a hand basket under him.

As far as if Gore or Kerry would have been better or worse----Who knows. But it would have been different.

I voted for W the 1st go round but not the 2nd.

I was around for Jimmy.

Best one in my liftime-----from JKF to present. Most are mediocre.

Obama has a big hole to come out of----We all better hope he does well. CB

Edited December 31, 2008 by colorado bob

[MUDRUNNER]

I personally thing GW did a decent job.In my lifetime, I can't remember any other president that had the magnitude of things to deal with that GW did.With 9-11,Katrina, and the war, he's had an uphill battle almost constantly.It's hard to really say what Gore or Kerry would have done differently and how things would have turned out.There's no doubt that there were some mistakes made, but overall I would consider his presidency a success also. I believe I read somewhere that out of his 8 years in office 6 of those years showed postitve economic growth....that doesn't seem too bad to me.

[wtnhunt]

Steve, your entitled to your opinion. Answer your own question---Are you better off now than when Bush took office? Answer is a resounding NO. We went to heck in a hand basket under him.

As far as if Gore or Kerry would have been better or worse----Who knows. But it would have been different.

I voted for W the 1st go round but not the 2nd.

I was around for Jimmy.

Best one in my liftime-----from JKF to present. Most are mediocre.

Obama has a big hole to come out of----We all better hope he does well. CB

Are you saying Jimmy Carter was the best President in your lifetime here? Interesting opinion if that is what you are saying.

Obama does have some serious hurdles and I agree we had better hope he does better than most of us expect, however given his record I am a bit skeptical, maybe he will surprise us all. I do foresee a burden being put on the working class for the programs that he intends to help the not working class, which in my opinion may send us further into trouble.

Think people need to remember why the economy while Clinton was in office had done what he was given credit for, it had everything to do with what took place in tech, and maybe not really quite so much to do with Clinton himself. Also need to remember that the market hit all time highs while Bush was in office and recovered pretty nicely over time after it took hits from 9/11/2001. After the market recovered it was not until this election year that the market really took its biggest hits(people are concerned and have little confidence, wonder why, future maybe?), of course the housing bubble burst that in my opinion the liberals allowed to happen by not listening to John McCain 3 years ago. That probably has not helped the economy either, people seem to be pinning that on Bush too. Really is unfortunate that the media helped people with deciding to blame Bush for anything and everything that they could think of that was going wrong, do not hardly think that helped matters in this country. Never in my lifetime can I remember so much negative media bias any president was faced with.

I also agree with MUDRUNNER, Bush was faced with issues other presidents had not been faced with. Hard to assume how Gore or Kerry might have handled those issues. I do believe that Bush probably handled the issues he was faced with in the way he felt best served the entire nation, not one group. With that said, I think he was the better man for the job of the options we had to choose from.

[JJL]

The bottom line is simply this.....................

If you're NOT better off than you were 8 years ago.............YOU screwed up.

8 years ago O'Bama was a "community organizer".........Now he's the President of the United States.............He's not complaining one bit................He did pretty well for himself under Bush.

8 years ago I was a go to work everyday kind of guy and my net worth was around $75,000. Now I'm a work smart everyday kind of guy and my net worth is over $1,000,000........

Is G. Bush responsible for this..........NO. I AM.

The same thing will happen during the O'Bama administration. The game will just be played a little different. The question you have to ask yourself is..........."Am I willing to change in order to play?" I am and expect to excell at it once again.

If you are going to sit on your butts and whine about how tough it is.............Welcome to the club of 95% of the rest of the country............losers.

They can take my money. They can take my rights. They can TRY and take my guns. But, they cannot take my SPIRIT..............and that's why it'll be fun to play..... Even if I lose, at least I played.

You want to complain about taxes...............loss of freedoms.............loss of rights................quit complaining and start doing.

Lesson # 1...............................Money is CHEAP...............I just signed another mortgage at 4.25%.

CHEAP money equals OPPORTUNITY for those who have a set. Where you spend it separates the men from the boys.

[goodnottygy]

Bush Legacy

The 1st Bush was not bad. I think that the 2nd Bush has sent our country down the toilet. Our country is broke and we are in a recession. Russia went broke fighting terrorism, now here we are. Haliburton is doing well, with no-bid contracts. Oil companies have done well. But the rest of the country is going down the tubes. We were misled to go into war, and now our country is bankrupt because of it. I would hate to be the one trying to fix what has been screwed up in the last 8 years. That isjust my opinion, but you asked for it! It is all in good fun, though. I am not big into politics, but I am not happy with things the way they are now, compared to 8 years ago.

[Gator]

I just love how everybody blames big oil, and Haliburton. Lets talk about Haliburton for a second. Unless I am wrong, I bet ya'll are referencing the fact that their subsidiary, Kellogg, Brown, and Root are the civilian contractors that are in Iraq, correct? How many of ya'll know that they were also involved when CLINTON sent troops on a peacekeeping mission into Croatia and Bosnia back in '95? Yes, they were in those two places, along with Hungary setting up and maintaining Base camps. But NOOOOOO, Cheney is responsible for that this time around, isn't he, since he used to be the CEO of Haliburton. Makes me sick when people talk about this, because I know for a FACT they are clueless.

Big oil, now there's another one. Is it THEIR fault that oil prices got as high as they did? I mean, they WERE drilling ALL OVER the place looking for gas and oil pockets. Yeah, they were making money at the same time, but do you know what it costs to even drill nowadays? ALOT, will into the millions for 1 well. And do you realize how many people are employed when drilling is good, ALOT, IF they want to work. There's rigs that were running that they couldn't fully man because they didn't have the people to work it. And now I wonder, since oil prices have bottomed out, just how many of those same people are out of work? But no, noone probably gives a rats *** about that, all they care about is the price of gas now. Now I wasn't happy to see oil at $140 a barrel, way to high IMO, and now I REALLY don't like seeing it at $34 a barrel.

[nativetexan]

The 1st Bush was not bad. I think that the 2nd Bush has sent our country down the toilet. Our country is broke and we are in a recession. Russia went broke fighting terrorism, now here we are. Haliburton is doing well, with no-bid contracts. Oil companies have done well. But the rest of the country is going down the tubes. We were misled to go into war, and now our country is bankrupt because of it. I would hate to be the one trying to fix what has been screwed up in the last 8 years. That isjust my opinion, but you asked for it! It is all in good fun, though. I am not big into politics, but I am not happy with things the way they are now, compared to 8 years ago.

If this is all you have based your opinions on, then you NEED to get big into politics. We are not Russia either. Russia has been on the brink for decades. The USA has not. Oil, Oil, Oil...who cares. Much more to this country than oil. In case you haven't been watching, the housing crisis was started by Clinton, in which the people screwed themselves by overpurchasing. The auto industry screwed themselves because they pay HIGH wages to their union labor and the American car market sucks. The finance industry..screwed themselves...BECAUSE they had crooked people in charge. Now they all want bailouts. Bush had NOTHING to do with any of that. It is not his responsibility. This is a capitalistic country. If a business fails, it should, and be buried like the rest so a new one can rise. The war...I have preached enough about that, as well as everyone here has too. Terrorism, and countries that harbor such individuals who support it, should be FORCED to not do it. If that means that we will be there until the turn of the century, then so be it. This war is about people trying to force their way of life on us and others..violently. The United States was founded on the principles that you are free to create your own life, and to escape those that wish to conform you to another. We are retaliating against such individuals. It's what we do. I am glad that you have come here and reminded us of one more great reason why people voted for Obama. "Because I don't like the way things are going, and I am not big into politics." Ever look past 4 feet in front of you? There is a much bigger picture out there....

[Dawg]

So what is your final take on GW? Please keep your responses thought out and factual.

One thought...one opinion........He did good.

[goodnottygy]

I am not against Haliburton being involved ... but am STRONGLY against giving them a blank check! I am glad to see cheap oil. I drive 80 miles a day to work. Oil prices drove inflation, which in turn started or recession.

If you do not think that Cheney is not loyal to his former company, you have blinders on! One question... how many people were on the plane that attacked the U.S.? Now, how many were from Saudi Arabia?

[Gator]

Read what I said about Haliburton, and their involvement in Bosnia. They are doing the same thing in Iraq as what they were doing there, and guess who was President then, Clinton. Cheney may have been CEO then, I don't know, but he sure as heck wasn't VP either. And I drive 110 miles a day for work, and guess what, I work in the oilfield services area, so I am seeing how this is affecting us, and am worried about what the future holds for me and my fellow employees.

And FWIW, the "planes" didn't attack the US, the hijackers did.

[wtnhunt]

I have preached enough about that, as well as everyone here has too. Terrorism, and countries that harbor such individuals who support it, should be FORCED to not do it. If that means that we will be there until the turn of the century, then so be it. This war is about people trying to force their way of life on us and others..violently. The United States was founded on the principles that you are free to create your own life, and to escape those that wish to conform you to another. We are retaliating against such individuals. It's what we do. I am glad that you have come here and reminded us of one more great reason why people voted for Obama. "Because I don't like the way things are going, and I am not big into politics." Ever look past 4 feet in front of you? There is a much bigger picture out there....

This is something that is so very true. Some people just do not understand the repercussion of what allowing those terrorist to run rampant and not give the people of those countries the opportunity to stand on their own and gain the strength to root out those terrorist would have. It is just my opinion, but I also firmly believe it is better to fight them there than it is to have them here on our soil murdering innocent women and children here.

how many people were on the plane that attacked the U.S.? Now, how many were from Saudi Arabia?

Welcome to the forums. There was more than one plane, and there were Americans on all of those planes, some were heroes and rather than cower, they took control and charged the enemy crashing that plane before it hit its intended target. Of course those heroes sacrificed their own lives to save others. Time and time again in American history men and women have stood up and made sacrifices for others. I have all the respect and honor for those folks, and respect what our men and women are doing and have done in Iraq, Afghanistan, and all over the rest of the world. Whether we agree about war or not, the freedoms that our troops are bringing to those people do allow them the choice in whether to continue on with the muslim way of life or whether to break away from it. Under a tyranical dictatorship what choice do those people have, and is it really feasible to think/believe that the extremist terrorists would just be happy and not want to harm us for being complacent and leaving them alone?

[nativetexan]

I am not against Haliburton being involved ... but am STRONGLY against giving them a blank check! I am glad to see cheap oil. I drive 80 miles a day to work. Oil prices drove inflation, which in turn started or recession.

If you do not think that Cheney is not loyal to his former company, you have blinders on! One question... how many people were on the plane that attacked the U.S.? Now, how many were from Saudi Arabia?

Al Qaeda sticks to no particular nationality. This is not about nationality, its about radical Islam. It's about a global terrorist organization that trained (and were allowed to) in a select few countries. You can "conspiracy theory" all you like. I prefer facts myself. Showing facts tends to make you not look like a horses rear when the truth does come out and judgement is passed. This is why it is called the Global War on Terror. All nations are involved who might be affected. Not just the U.S. In fact, of the countries listed below, many of them are currently or have been battling some form of terrorism for quite some time. Not just from Al Qaeda either. Simple fact is, people are fed up with terrorism and its time to put a stop to it no matter the cost. The cost would be far greater to let it thrive. So I don't buy into oil conspiracies. You want to blame someone about high gas prices? Blame OPEC and the democrats for not letting us drill on our own soil because of a polar bear or a pretty view. You tell me now what makes more sense?

• United States: 250,000 invasion—144,000 current (8/08)
  
• United Kingdom: 45,000 invasion—4,100 current (9/08)
  
• Australia: 2,000 invasion—~350 current (12/08)
  

TOTAL INVASION DEPLOYMENT

• ~297,000 troops
  

CURRENT DEPLOYMENT BY COUNTRY

• Romania: 730 peak—501 current (11/08; deployed 7/03)
  
• El Salvador: 380 peak—200 current (8/08; deployed 8/03)
  
• Estonia: 40 troops (12/08; deployed 6/05)
  
• Singapore: 175 offshore (12/08; deployed 12/03)
  

APPROXIMATE TOTAL DEPLOYMENT AS OF 8/08

• 151,000 troops (incl. ~6,500 non-U.S.)
  

APPROXIMATE NUMBER OF CONTRACTORS AS OF 2/08

• 161,000: 53% (~85,300) Iraqi, 17% (~27,400) American, 30% (~45,500) Other
  
  • Including 20–30,000 mercenaries as of 12/07
    

NATO Training Mission – Iraq

Countries involved with the NATO training mission, NATO NTM-I

• Bulgaria: 485 peak (deployed 5/03-withdrawn 12/08)
  
• Moldova: 24 peak (deployed 9/03-withdrawn 12/08)
  
• Albania: 240 troops (deployed 4/03-withdrawn 12/08)
  
• Ukraine: 1,650 peak (deployed 8/03-withdrawn 12/08)
  
• Denmark: 545 peak (deployed 4/03-withdrawn 12/08)
  
• Czech Republic: 300 peak (deployed 12/03-withdrawn 12/08)
  
• South Korea: 3,600 peak (deployed 5/03-withdrawn 12/08)
  
• Japan: 600 troops (deployed 1/04-withdrawn 12/08)
  
• Tonga: 55 troops (deployed 7/04-withdrawn 12/08)
  
• Azerbaijan: 250 peak (deployed 8/03-withdrawn 12/08)
  
• Bosnia and Herzegovina: 85 peak (deployed 6/05-withdrawn 11/08)
  
• Macedonia: 77 peak (deployed 7/03-withdrawn 11/08)
  
• Latvia: 136 peak (deployed 5/03-withdrawn 11/08)
  
• Poland: 200 invasion—2,500 peak (withdrawn 10/08)
  
• Kazakhstan: 29 troops (deployed 9/03-withdrawn 10/08)
  
• Armenia: 46 troops (deployed 1/05-withdrawn 10/08)
  
• Mongolia: 180 peak (deployed 8/03-withdrawn 09/08)
  
• Georgia: 2,000 peak (deployed 8/03-withdrawn 8/08)
  
• Slovakia: 110 peak (deployed 8/03-withdrawn 12/07)
  
• Lithuania: 120 peak (deployed 6/03-withdrawn 08/07)
  
• Italy: 3,200 peak (deployed 7/03-withdrawn 11/06)
  
• Norway: 150 troops (deployed 7/03-withdrawn 8/06)
  
• Hungary: 300 troops (deployed 8/03-withdrawn 3/05)
  
• Netherlands: 1,345 troops (deployed 7/03-withdrawn 3/05)
  
• Portugal: 128 troops (deployed 11/03-withdrawn 2/05)
  
• New Zealand: 61 troops (deployed 9/03-withdrawn 9/04)
  
• Thailand: 423 troops (deployed 8/03-withdrawn 8/04)
  
• Philippines: 51 troops (deployed 7/03-withdrawn 7/04)
  
• Honduras: 368 troops (deployed 8/03-withdrawn 5/04)
  
• Dominican Republic: 302 troops (deployed 8/03-withdrawn 5/04)
  
• Spain: 1,300 troops (deployed 4/03-withdrawn 4/04)
  
• Nicaragua: 230 troops (deployed 9/03-withdrawn 2/04)
  
• Iceland: 2 troops (deployed 5/03-withdrawal date unknown)
  

Also, the first part of what you wrote really makes no sense. Kinda lost here in what you mean.

[nativetexan]

There was more than one plane, and there were Americans on all of those planes, some were heroes and rather than cower, they took control and charged the enemy crashing that plane before it hit its intended target. Of course those heroes sacrificed their own lives to save others.

Dang straight. Those people certainly weren't thinking of themselves. Which unfortunately we see (or hear about) fewer of each day in the American people. The selfish have spoken and put their "leader" in charge. The media has spoken and lied to put their leader in charge. The whole thing just makes me nauseous.

[colorado bob]

. The selfish have spoken and put their "leader" in charge. The media has spoken and lied to put their leader in charge. The whole thing just makes me nauseous.

You have been drinking too much "Kool-Aid". The was in Afgan is about finding & killing Al-qaida. The was war in Iraq is NOT, it is Bush's. They were not Iraq, Bush1 & Clinton has Saddam bottled-up---with the no fly zone & blockades. Bush WANTED to invade. He & the neo-conservates made the case for weapons of mass destructions. They got what they wanted from the facts, twisted it & had reason for the war. They knew & lied in about the "yellow cake" in the state of the union address just before the war.

[goodnottygy]

Well said Colorado Bob! Bush 1 should have finished the job the first time we were in Iraq. Then Bush 2 fabricated and distorted the facts to get support to invade Iraq. 9-11 had no Iraq people on those planes. Many were Saudis. So we attack Iraq instead of Saudi Arabia??

Now , Bush 2 spent so much money , that we are broke and owe money to communist China. I always thought "conservative" meant to be tight with money. If a liberal spent this much money, put our country in this shape, you would talk nonstop about those spending liberals. By the way, I am not a liberal. I voted for McCain, but I could have never voted for Bush, and never either time. Saudi Arabia does not like us, but they sure like our money.

I am not a fan of Obama, but he has a big hill to climb us out of because of Bush 2. So lets give him a chance... we have no other choice.

[nativetexan]

You have been drinking too much "Kool-Aid". The was in Afgan is about finding & killing Al-qaida. The was war in Iraq is NOT, it is Bush's. They were not Iraq, Bush1 & Clinton has Saddam bottled-up---with the no fly zone & blockades. Bush WANTED to invade. He & the neo-conservates made the case for weapons of mass destructions. They got what they wanted from the facts, twisted it & had reason for the war. They knew & lied in about the "yellow cake" in the state of the union address just before the war.

Um...not well said. I can barely understand it.

They got what they wanted from facts and twisted it? Explain...

Yes, Bush Sr. and Clinton had Saddam "bottled up." That was solely for the purpose of keeping Iraq from invading another country. Ask the Kurds if Saddam had WMD's. Bottling him up does not control what Saddam does inside his own country.

Again, I don't feel the need to repeat myself over and over about the Saudi Nationals that were involved in 9/11. It is obvious that there is no understanding from either of you what the Global War on Terror is about. It isn't about toppling governments unless those governments approve terrorism as method of dealing with the world or their own people, and allow their soil to be used as a training ground or a place to carry these acts out. If this is the case, then yes, world powers should engage that government and bomb it into oblivion if need be.

As far as the other thread, I will not give Obama a chance. I'll be on the defensive, and as I have said so many times ad nauseum, it's not just Obama, it's everyone else in the party too.

So slap your Bush Lied/War is not the Answer stickers on your cars and carry on with whatever undocumented "conspiracy theory" you wish. One thing I like about War is not the Answer stickers is that those that have them on their cars, usually have no other answer.

I am active duty military. I believe in what we are doing and not through indoctrination. I have seen progress. It's the right thing because we are American's, and we will not be ruled by fear. Nor should any other country.

Maybe if you school yourselves up a bit on the THREAT that is in this world, you might have a different way of thinking. I'll make it easy for you..Here are some links...

http://www.fbi.gov/congress/congress07/mueller011107.htm

http://www.nps.edu/Library/Research/SubjectGuides/SpecialTopics/TerroristProfile/TerroristGroupProfiles.html

http://www.state.gov/s/ct/rls/fs/37191.htm

[Dawg]

Well said nativetexan!!

[oldksnarc]

At the time he was portrayed as a doddering fool - but history now remembers Reagan as a great communicator and statesman and credited as being single-handedly responsible for ending the Cold War and tearing down the Berlin Wall.

I believe history will look back and see that Bush 43 wasn't as bad as everyone made him out to be. History will realize he inherited the forthcoming 9/11 and wasn't responsible for it - but he stood tall and reacted the way he should have and kept us from further attack and harm - will the Messiah be able to say the same?

History will realize he wasn't solely responsible for global warming, Katrina, Gustav, or the Tsunami.

History will recognize that he freed the peoples of two nations from oppressive regimes and that, while WMDs have not been publicly been admitted to having been found, they were and so were the tens of thousands of bodies of Sodom's (spelling intentional) own contrymen who died at his hands. Even if WMDs were never found the dead of Iraq dictated our going in and removing Sodom from power. I would venture to say we will soon find ourselves in Africa - not because of WMDs but rather because of the same genocide we saw in Iraq - only this time for and because of color.

Speaking of and as a side note: I understand that because of differences of faith Muslims consider us infidels. But, how many times throughout history have we infidels come to the aid of Muslims (Bosnia, Croatia, Afghanistan and Iraq as a few recent examples) yet they despise us so much?

History will realize that while the housing and financial collapse occurred on his watch they were actually the result of the CRA (community reinvestment act) which were 30-year old democratic policies enacted under Carter and Clinton requiring lenders to loan to those who couldn't make the payments and which ultimately came crashing down around our ears and for which Bush 43 was blamed for.

History will realize that up thru Bush 43 we enjoyed the protections under the 2nd Amendment - until they were either legislated (or failing that - taxed) away.

Yes, Bush 43 made mistakes. But, he's human and never put himself up as anything but - unlike our (or the media's) new Messiah. And, B-43 was willing to take a stand and did what he thought was right rather than do what was popular. He had substance - something we won't be seeing for a while.

Edited January 5, 2009 by oldksnarc