0
   

The Worst President in History?

 
 
okie
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 Apr, 2006 09:42 pm
The intel was provided by the CIA. Bush did not collect the intel. Bush interpreted the intel provided him. Congress interpreted the intel. The difference is not in the intel, but the interpretation of it. The intel was not perfect. It was obtained by satellite and other means not intimately connected to the insiders. Hey, some have even said Hussein himself was deceived about his own WMD. We still do not know everything about the WMD programs, weapons, and status.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 Apr, 2006 09:46 pm
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Apr, 2006 06:20 am
I always find it fascinating how the left believes Bush is too dumb to tie his own shoes in the morning ( a metaphor for the combined efforts of those who oppose Bush, not a direct quote so get over it already) yet at the same time believe he has masterminded soome elaborate scheme to fool the entire world into believe Saddam posed a threat and had WMD's.

So which is it folks?
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Apr, 2006 06:23 am
bush is too stupid to tie his own shoes but is the mouthpiece, face and talking puppet of those who are smart enough to launch disastrous schemes without regards to the impact on average Americans or the rest of the globe for that matter is what is being said..... you just don't get it.....
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Apr, 2006 06:32 am
So, Rove is the evil genius, or PNAC, or whoever is pulling the strings you say?

Any idea who it is so we can discuss him/her?
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Apr, 2006 06:32 am
Nor yet again wants to . . .
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Apr, 2006 06:36 am
Do any of these proposed faults of Democrats/liberals/anti-Bushites change the fact that the president is a complete and utter failure?
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Apr, 2006 06:52 am
FreeDuck wrote:
Do any of these proposed faults of Democrats/liberals/anti-Bushites change the fact that the president is a complete and utter failure?


Just so as to stop moving this thread away from the topic too far, this will be my last post on this subject. If you wish to rebut, do so on another thread.

Failure is a matter of perception. Bush and the Republican congress has failed to include the Democrats in the game. Like any wallflower, that has naturally made the Dems angry. They cry foul at every opportunity in hopes that they will be allowed back into the game. The Republicans in congress have made plenty of mistakes, and so has the White House, but to say the president is a "complete and utter failure" is nothing more than hyperbole.

If it helps you sleep at night, keep thinking that.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Apr, 2006 06:54 am
The Shrub's approval rating is at an all-time low, and doesn't seem to have hit bottom yet. His approval rating is lower than was that of Lyndon Johnson when Johnson decided not to seek re-election. By that modest standard alone, the Shrub is a failure.
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Apr, 2006 06:55 am
FreeDuck wrote:
Do any of these proposed faults of Democrats/liberals/anti-Bushites change the fact that the president is a complete and utter failure?


Nope.....but making accusations about them makes some folk feel better....kind of like pinching someone else to relieve the pain of the needle going in.
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Apr, 2006 06:56 am
Setanta wrote:
The Shrub's approval rating is at an all-time low, and doesn't seem to have hit bottom yet. His approval rating is lower than was that of Lyndon Johnson when Johnson decided not to seek re-election. By that modest standard alone, the Shrub is a failure.


in all fairness... he has learned to pronounce nuclear... baby steps set, baby steps.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Apr, 2006 06:56 am
Of course, McG is wimping out when he suggests starting a new thread--this thread has as its topic who is alleged to be the worst President in history. Discussing whether or not the Shrub is a failure is therefore germane.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Apr, 2006 07:04 am
Setanta wrote:
Of course, McG is wimping out when he suggests starting a new thread--this thread has as its topic who is alleged to be the worst President in history. Discussing whether or not the Shrub is a failure is therefore germane.


Embarrassed

I thought this was a different thread, nevermind what I said... This is the thread I thought this discussion should take place.

It's early, mea culpe...
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Apr, 2006 07:05 am
McGentrix wrote:
FreeDuck wrote:
Do any of these proposed faults of Democrats/liberals/anti-Bushites change the fact that the president is a complete and utter failure?


Just so as to stop moving this thread away from the topic too far, this will be my last post on this subject. If you wish to rebut, do so on another thread.


Did you happen to notice the thread title? I'm at a loss to think of another thread where I should rebut your post.

Quote:
Failure is a matter of perception.


That's quite clear from this thread alone.

Quote:
Bush and the Republican congress has failed to include the Democrats in the game.


That's true, but that's hardly the worst of his failures. The failure you mention is a failure of leadership which he has exhibited time and again, not just with Congress.

Quote:
The Republicans in congress have made plenty of mistakes, and so has the White House, but to say the president is a "complete and utter failure" is nothing more than hyperbole.


Then maybe you can provide me with a list of his successes. Will he leave office with this country better than how he found it? Has he handled anything well? Is he leading this country if more than half of its voting citizens refuse to follow? Did you read the article? Doesn't just the sheer number of excuses made for him indicate that he's not so competent?
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Apr, 2006 07:06 am
Sorry, McG. I posted that before I saw your mea culpa. Get some coffee and come back.
0 Replies
 
blacksmithn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Apr, 2006 07:26 am
Well, in fairness to Bush Lite, the oil companies have made RECORD profits under his administration. Maybe he forgot he's supposed to be president of the entire country and not just of his pals.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Apr, 2006 10:33 am
As long as Haliburton keeps paying Cheney, this administration will not support anything coming close to helping its citizens.
0 Replies
 
blueflame1
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Apr, 2006 10:36 am
Bush's Solution For Sky High Gas Prices: Scrap Clean Air Regulations... http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060425/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush;_ylt=AkLQhH876O8Md2JuCo7_YXKs0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA2Z2szazkxBHNlYwN0bQ--
0 Replies
 
blacksmithn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Apr, 2006 10:39 am
Yeah, I saw that and just shook my head. I've long ago given up expecting reasonable, rational responses from this administration.
0 Replies
 
xingu
 
  1  
Reply Wed 26 Apr, 2006 07:11 am
Quote:
On Waking Up Sleepless in the Middle of the Night
By John Brown

TO: The President

FROM: A former American diplomat

SUBJECT: Waking up in the middle of the night

Mr. President: Do you ever wake up in the middle of the night? Do you? Do you ever wake up sleepless in the middle of the night?

What have you done in Iraq? Do you ever realize, in the middle of the night, what you've done? Do you?

1. You've caused over 2,370 American soldiers to die in an impoverished land that never attacked us. Was that the right answer to 9/11 or the "threat" from Iraq? Do you ever ask yourself that question?

2. Because of your Iraq invasion, thousands of U.S. enlisted personnel are maimed, physically and mentally, for life. What can you tell these victims of your war? That you're honored by their duty towards you, our "mission-accomplished" commander-in-chief?

3. Your decision to go to war has led to the death of tens of thousands of innocent Iraqis. Do you have any remorse for this, Mr. President? Or was it that, for you, Iraqis only really deserved to serve as props in "shock and awe" -- your name for your made-for-TV porno/violence program at the beginning of the war, produced and distributed directly into our living rooms by the mainstream media? (Thank you, Fox News.)

4. Will you ever, ever accept responsibility for making torture all-American at Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo, and elsewhere? And the Statue of Liberty -- why, tell us why, did you allow it to be replaced by that image of an abused, hooded, helpless prisoner on a box? Aren't you the least bit concerned at how America is seen by the rest of the world because of your war -- as a brutal aggressor nation, dismissive of the opinions of mankind?

5. What about your mercenaries ("Pentagon contractors") that our tax dollars pay for? Who are they? What are they doing in their multi-thousands in Iraq, and to the Iraqis? Do you know? Or don't you care to know?

6. You said you wanted to "rebuild" Iraq -- but isn't it true that all you've really done is construct a Roman-Empire-style camp, a "Green Zone" for Iraqi collaborators (whom you now mistrust) and U.S. personnel in the heart of Baghdad that is an invitation to insurgent mortars? Haven't you -- tell the truth -- destroyed in Iraq more than you have built? Haven't you?

7. You say Iraqis now live in a land of "freedom" -- but what kind of freedom? How can it ever be like the Four Freedoms of Franklin Delano Roosevelt -- freedom of expression and worship, joined with freedom from want and freedom from fear? As electricity fails and bombs terrify citizens in Baghdad, where is the freedom you promised Iraqis, Mr. President?

8. Your occupation of Iraq has led to a bloody sectarian conflict. Why do you and your ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad now blame the Iraqis for their problems? Don't you share responsibility for the desperate situation they are in?

9. Your trillion-dollar binge of destruction in the cradle of civilization -- who will pay for it? The widows of our soldiers? Our young people, already too debt-burdened paying for their educations? Or their baby-boomer parents who may see their pensions evaporate to support your war?

10. Why can't you truthfully tell us, Mr. President, the reasons you led America into war? Was it for the WMD, for regime change, for the oil, for grand neocon visions, to avenge your father, to win elections at home? What were your real intentions? Are you afraid to tell us? Or is the truth that, deep down, you never really knew?

11. And, Mr. President, as you contemplate another war, this time against Iran, won't you ever wake up in the middle of the night, and stop more madness before it is too late?

John Brown, who writes regularly for Tomdispatch and Tompaine.com, is a former diplomat who resigned from the State Department over the planned war in Iraq, compiles the Public Diplomacy Press Review, available free upon request at the site.


SOURCE
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

HAPPY ANNIVERSARY, EVERYONE! - Discussion by OmSigDAVID
WIND AND WATER - Discussion by Setanta
Who ordered the construction of the Berlin Wall? - Discussion by Walter Hinteler
True version of Vlad Dracula, 15'th century - Discussion by gungasnake
ONE SMALL STEP . . . - Discussion by Setanta
History of Gun Control - Discussion by gungasnake
Where did our notion of a 'scholar' come from? - Discussion by TuringEquivalent
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 04/25/2024 at 11:59:01