1
   

George Bush's Legacy

 
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Aug, 2008 08:22 pm
@Robert Gentel,
That's one hell of a table.

You think their numbers accurate?

(Just off to look at the site)
Robert Gentel
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Aug, 2008 08:37 pm
@dlowan,
Quote:
You think their numbers accurate?


The implications are often unfair, regardless of the accuracy of the numbers. Bush is not responsible for a lot of that.
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Aug, 2008 08:39 pm
@Robert Gentel,
Aha????

Dunno about you, but I think the insured/uninsured is down to him...

I think the dollar stuff is a whole lot of stuff coming home to roost...I'd be interested to hear what you think about the trade deficit.

I think the view of the USA has a lot to do with him.

He's certainly been on watch for a lot of bad military decisions....
Robert Gentel
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Aug, 2008 08:42 pm
@dlowan,
Not sure if that's a question (edit: ahh, you edited more in. I was responding to "aha??") but if you are going for specifics one example is that Bush is not responsible for high gas prices. The prices should be higher.

So listing the gas price in the chart is an implication that is not fair. But it is, of course, common partisan attack. Like this image I've seen in countless places:

http://img244.imageshack.us/img244/3977/gaspriceseb1.jpg
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Aug, 2008 08:45 pm
@Robert Gentel,
Yes, it was a question, and I'd be interested to see you do a detailed breakdown.

I agree about petrol prices...though I am concerned about the huge effect they are having here on poorer people...but for global good, yes, they should be higher.

I am still thinking about other things on the chart.

I note that is a strongly partisan site.
Robert Gentel
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Aug, 2008 08:48 pm
@dlowan,
I don't have time to do each, but I think a good chunk of them (perhaps the majority even) say more about the economic periods than anything he did. Big economic trends almost never boil down to one guy, even if it's someone as ambitiously wrongheaded as Bush.
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Aug, 2008 08:50 pm
@Robert Gentel,
Fair enough, and I agree to a fair extent.

But, if/when you do have time, I'd be interested to at least see what, if anything, you DO ascribe to Bush.
0 Replies
 
Ramafuchs
 
  -1  
Reply Fri 22 Aug, 2008 10:50 pm
@Robert Gentel,
Here is a bit of nonsense.
"History can be very harsh and subjective. It seems that the significant accomplishments of U.S. President Bill Clinton will be unfortunately overshadowed by his personal indiscretions while in office. Historians will never shy from emphasizing that he was the second U.S. president to be impeached by the House of Representatives. Clinton's legacy, as a result, has been sadly tarnished.

How will historians judge the legacy of U.S. President George W. Bush? And, as he approaches the end of his second term, is it possible for him to influence or redefine this legacy?

The answer to the first question is not a favorable one. "
Raja Kamal is associate dean at the Harris School for Public Policy Studies at the University of Chicago.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 12/08/2021 at 10:05:30