The legacy of 'W'?

[jsarno]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

I'm not looking to bash him, that's far too easy anyway.

I'm going to take your word for that.

I'm honestly looking for some debate here as to what his legacy will be, and what has he actually done a good job with? I'm sure there's gotta be something.[/QUOTE]

How about these:
1- he has helped to lower interest rates to the best in history.
2- He has helped the economy to one of the most successful in history.
3- He has had VERY good unemployment rates all the while lowering taxes for everyone including the poor.
4- He has hit his objectives and stuck to his word, something we commonly criticize presidents for. (read my lips, no new taxes comes to mind)
5- His unwaivering support for the protection of this country.
(Apparently he is a genius too cause he started this war all by himself, and he has fought this war all by himself. But that is sarcasm, not an actual good job)
6- He prevented Nuclear war between India and Pakistan.
7- Getting Lybia to give up its WMD programs and renounce terrorism.
8- Getting North Korea to shut down it's nuclear reactor.
9- Decapitating Al Quaeda's top leadership and preventing another massive attack on US soil.
10- Boosting Aid to Africa by three times the current aid...and vowed to double it again by 2010.

I'll start with those.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by jsarno

I'm going to take your word for that.

I'm honestly looking for some debate here as to what his legacy will be, and what has he actually done a good job with? I'm sure there's gotta be something.

How about these:
1- he has helped to lower interest rates to the best in history.
2- He has helped the economy to one of the most successful in history.
3- He has had VERY good unemployment rates all the while lowering taxes for everyone including the poor.
4- He has hit his objectives and stuck to his word, something we commonly criticize presidents for. (read my lips, no new taxes comes to mind)
5- His unwaivering support for the protection of this country.
(Apparently he is a genius too cause he started this war all by himself, and he has fought this war all by himself. But that is sarcasm, not an actual good job)
6- He prevented Nuclear war between India and Pakistan.
7- Getting Lybia to give up its WMD programs and renounce terrorism.
8- Getting North Korea to shut down it's nuclear reactor.
9- Decapitating Al Quaeda's top leadership and preventing another massive attack on US soil.
10- Boosting Aid to Africa by three times the current aid...and vowed to double it again by 2010.

I'll start with those.[/quote]

On the flipside what do you think he's done poorly?

[jsarno]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

How about these:
1- he has helped to lower interest rates to the best in history.
2- He has helped the economy to one of the most successful in history.
3- He has had VERY good unemployment rates all the while lowering taxes for everyone including the poor.
4- He has hit his objectives and stuck to his word, something we commonly criticize presidents for. (read my lips, no new taxes comes to mind)
5- His unwaivering support for the protection of this country.
(Apparently he is a genius too cause he started this war all by himself, and he has fought this war all by himself. But that is sarcasm, not an actual good job)
6- He prevented Nuclear war between India and Pakistan.
7- Getting Lybia to give up its WMD programs and renounce terrorism.
8- Getting North Korea to shut down it's nuclear reactor.
9- Decapitating Al Quaeda's top leadership and preventing another massive attack on US soil.
10- Boosting Aid to Africa by three times the current aid...and vowed to double it again by 2010.

I'll start with those.

On the flipside what do you think he's done poorly?[/QUOTE]

Well, I am supposed to be the pro side, you're supposed to be the con side. There are enough people here to give the negatives that I don't need to...but since someone is going to bring it up anyway, I will say this one thing:
I am not thrilled with his lack of support for alternative fuels. In fact, if I remember correctly he took away 50% of the funding to research. I firmly feel that oil is America's downfall, and if we rely on corn for our fuel, we'd have the market cornered. We are the #1 producer of corn in the world, and we could have the other countries by the balls, but Bush has too much loyalty to the oil companies.

OK, Since I gave a con of Bush in good faith, Matty, what do you think Bush has done correctly.

[jsarno]

Originally Posted by jsarno

On the flipside what do you think he's done poorly?

Well, I am supposed to be the pro side, you're supposed to be the con side. There are enough people here to give the negatives that I don't need to...but since someone is going to bring it up anyway, I will say this one thing:
I am not thrilled with his lack of support for alternative fuels. In fact, if I remember correctly he took away 50% of the funding to research. I firmly feel that oil is America's downfall, and if we rely on corn for our fuel, we'd have the market cornered. We are the #1 producer of corn in the world, and we could have the other countries by the balls, but Bush has too much loyalty to the oil companies.

OK, Since I gave a con of Bush in good faith, Matty, what do you think Bush has done correctly.

OK Matty, still waiting for you here. I was good enough to post 10 things Bush has done right by your asking, you made no comment about them...then you asked for the bad things...which I did in good faith and asked you what you think Bush has done correctly and I still have not seen any response. I thought we were having good banter, but you didn't respond to my comments.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by jsarno

OK Matty, still waiting for you here. I was good enough to post 10 things Bush has done right by your asking, you made no comment about them...then you asked for the bad things...which I did in good faith and asked you what you think Bush has done correctly and I still have not seen any response. I thought we were having good banter, but you didn't respond to my comments.

Sorry I got sidetracked by that little distraction.

Honestly I don't think he's done anything very well. I think he's been a complete disaster between 9/11, the war, the economy ( gas prices through the roof), and Katrina, just to name the major issues.

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Sorry I got sidetracked by that little distraction.

Honestly I don't think he's done anything very well. I think he's been a complete disaster between 9/11, the war, the economy ( gas prices through the roof), and Katrina, just to name the major issues.

I agree that his foreign policy (i.e., Iraq) has been a total failure. I don't think, however, that he has been a total failure as a domestic president. The economy has been pretty good; it's not as good as it was during the internet boom, but the economy during the internet boom wasn't as good as it seemed. I don't really fault Bush for Katrina. If you pretty much demolish a city, it's going to take a while to fix it. I also applaud the basic concept of No Child Left Behind. Finally, I have no problem, in fact I support, his tax cuts. I don't care for the Dems slogan "but they're tax cuts for the rich." Those rich guys are already paying more than their share of the budget.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by Sheriff Gonna Getcha

I agree that his foreign policy (i.e., Iraq) has been a total failure. I don't think, however, that he has been a total failure as a domestic president. The economy has been pretty good; it's not as good as it was during the internet boom, but the economy during the internet boom wasn't as good as it seemed. I don't really fault Bush for Katrina. If you pretty much demolish a city, it's going to take a while to fix it. I also applaud the basic concept of No Child Left Behind. Finally, I have no problem, in fact I support, his tax cuts. I don't care for the Dems slogan "but they're tax cuts for the rich." Those rich guys are already paying more than their share of the budget.

My main gripe with Katrina was their painfully slow reaction time and their lack of a plan. It's not like this was any sort of huge surprise, it was bound to happen some day. I'm not totally blaming Bush because there probably should have been a plan of action in place a long time ago, but since it did happen on his watch he has to be held responsible to a degree.

Plus, and I admit this is a personal gripe of mine, I can't stand how the guy can't even speak correctly, and he comes off so damn smug I just want to strangle him. And as far as charisma and that "it factor" when it comes to leadership, the guy is so completely lacking it's downright embarrassing.

[jsarno]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Sorry I got sidetracked by that little distraction.

Honestly I don't think he's done anything very well. I think he's been a complete disaster between 9/11, the war, the economy ( gas prices through the roof), and Katrina, just to name the major issues.

This is why I thought this would be a bush bashing thread. If you really think he has done nothing right, you're not looking, or prefer just to focus on the negative. I have mentioned several things that he has done well, you could have regurgitated one of them.

PS- 9/11 everyone thought he handled very well, the war was a decision that Dems decided to go to, the economy is in GREAT shape (yes gas prices suck but not really his fault) and Katrina was the fault of thoughless morons that couldn't lift a finger to get themselves out of the way. I think he has given too much to rescue the idiots that didn't want to leave. All those morons on their roof bitching about being rescued should have been left. No one, and I mean no one can convince me that they didn't have time. I was sitting here watching it on tv, and as soon as it passed Florida the projected path was right into New Orleans. Even if you waited just to be sure, 2 days before hand they KNEW it was coming. If 48 hours isn't enough for you to realize that you live 10+ feet BELOW sea level and need to evacuate, then you're a dee, dee, dee and I'm not concerned about your safety. I'm not going to be concerned about you if you choose not to be concerned about youself.
Why would Bush send people in early when it was dangerous? Why put others in danger for the stupidities of others? And what the "armed bandits" making life difficult...shooting helpers? Bush did the right thing by waiting, and has done too much to date. I know that is not the politically correct thing to say, and it's not the dems view, but I am not going to apologize for it. Where was all that help when Charlie hit Punta Gorda / Fort Myers? Where was all that help when Andrew hit? The problem there is the people in New Orleans have a poor me attitude and since they are "poor" they feel they should be heard and lay there until someone helps. The people in Florida are deemed as "having money" so they take care of themselves. But fact is, Punta Gorda was full of trailer parks too. Just goes to show you that Florida is full of republicans (Lee county is 80% republicans) and New Orleans is full of Democrats. DO you think it is a coincidence? I don't. Republicans are taught to fend for themselves while Dems have been taught if they can't take care of themselves (or don't want to) then someone will do it for them. Of course that doesn't apply to EVERY person, but it applies as an in general statement.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by jsarno

This is why I thought this would be a bush bashing thread. If you really think he has done nothing right, you're not looking, or prefer just to focus on the negative. I have mentioned several things that he has done well, you could have regurgitated one of them.

I'm not bashing at all, I'm honestly looking to see what you guys have to say. I do focus on the negatives because there are so prevalant, I'll admit that. I'm not denying that he has probably done some good things, I just think the bad far outweigh the good to such a degree that it pretty much washes out what little good things he has done.

[12thMan]

Originally Posted by jsarno

This is why I thought this would be a bush bashing thread. If you really think he has done nothing right, you're not looking, or prefer just to focus on the negative. I have mentioned several things that he has done well, you could have regurgitated one of them.

PS- 9/11 everyone thought he handled very well, the war was a decision that Dems decided to go to, the economy is in GREAT shape (yes gas prices suck but not really his fault) and Katrina was the fault of thoughless morons that couldn't lift a finger to get themselves out of the way. I think he has given too much to rescue the idiots that didn't want to leave. All those morons on their roof bitching about being rescued should have been left. No one, and I mean no one can convince me that they didn't have time. I was sitting here watching it on tv, and as soon as it passed Florida the projected path was right into New Orleans. Even if you waited just to be sure, 2 days before hand they KNEW it was coming. If 48 hours isn't enough for you to realize that you live 10+ feet BELOW sea level and need to evacuate, then you're a dee, dee, dee and I'm not concerned about your safety. I'm not going to be concerned about you if you choose not to be concerned about youself.
Why would Bush send people in early when it was dangerous? Why put others in danger for the stupidities of others? And what the "armed bandits" making life difficult...shooting helpers? Bush did the right thing by waiting, and has done too much to date. I know that is not the politically correct thing to say, and it's not the dems view, but I am not going to apologize for it. Where was all that help when Charlie hit Punta Gorda / Fort Myers? Where was all that help when Andrew hit? The problem there is the people in New Orleans have a poor me attitude and since they are "poor" they feel they should be heard and lay there until someone helps. The people in Florida are deemed as "having money" so they take care of themselves. But fact is, Punta Gorda was full of trailer parks too. Just goes to show you that Florida is full of republicans (Lee county is 80% republicans) and New Orleans is full of Democrats. DO you think it is a coincidence? I don't. Republicans are taught to fend for themselves while Dems have been taught if they can't take care of themselves (or don't want to) then someone will do it for them. Of course that doesn't apply to EVERY person, but it applies as an in general statement.

Why do you constantly say these people didn't want to leave New Orleans, and furthermore insist that they're stupid? I'm of the opinion, it was that same indifferent attitude that caused the entire response or lack thereof to be handled so poorly. Exactly what were they supposed to do, gas up the SUV, load it up with Avian, and check into the nearest motel? No, it wasn't that simple. We failed, plain and simple. And I've got news for you, that's not Left wing rhetoric attacking Bush - that's reality.

You defend Bush and his handling of Katrina, yet as we approach the two year anniversary of Katrina, many of the wards are still desolate, many of the residents are still displaced and New Orleans, by and large, remains a shell of its former self. You say that Bush should not put people in harms way, yet he didn't drag his feet awarding no-bid contracts to a handful of contractors, one of which is Halliburton; It's indefensible.

And what is this Republicans are taught this and Dems are taught that? Are you serious? I thought this was the United States of America. When I pleage alligence to the flag (before they took it out of school, that is) it was to the United States of America; Not to the GOP or to the Democrats. What, in the blue states they teach from different texbooks than the ones in the red states? In the blue states they have different family values than they do in the red states? We've been so conditioned to separate ourselves in red states and blue states that when someone says I'm a Republican or a Democrat we assume certain things about their political views, social values, and , perhaps, their work ethic. For instance, we assume Republicans are more conservative in their religous views than Democrats, yet it was Jimmy Carter who was the first to introduce the language of evangelical Christianity into modern national politics, but the Republicans were better positioned to mobilize the vote.

My point is, these generalizations (like your reference about Lee county v. New Orleans), if we're not careful, could border along the lines of racial attitudes and tendencies and further divide us. Don't you see this is the very mindset that is driving a wedge between us?

[Crazyhorse1]

Originally Posted by jsarno

This is why I thought this would be a bush bashing thread. If you really think he has done nothing right, you're not looking, or prefer just to focus on the negative. I have mentioned several things that he has done well, you could have regurgitated one of them.

PS- 9/11 everyone thought he handled very well, the war was a decision that Dems decided to go to, the economy is in GREAT shape (yes gas prices suck but not really his fault) and Katrina was the fault of thoughless morons that couldn't lift a finger to get themselves out of the way. I think he has given too much to rescue the idiots that didn't want to leave. All those morons on their roof bitching about being rescued should have been left. No one, and I mean no one can convince me that they didn't have time. I was sitting here watching it on tv, and as soon as it passed Florida the projected path was right into New Orleans. Even if you waited just to be sure, 2 days before hand they KNEW it was coming. If 48 hours isn't enough for you to realize that you live 10+ feet BELOW sea level and need to evacuate, then you're a dee, dee, dee and I'm not concerned about your safety. I'm not going to be concerned about you if you choose not to be concerned about youself.
Why would Bush send people in early when it was dangerous? Why put others in danger for the stupidities of others? And what the "armed bandits" making life difficult...shooting helpers? Bush did the right thing by waiting, and has done too much to date. I know that is not the politically correct thing to say, and it's not the dems view, but I am not going to apologize for it. Where was all that help when Charlie hit Punta Gorda / Fort Myers? Where was all that help when Andrew hit? The problem there is the people in New Orleans have a poor me attitude and since they are "poor" they feel they should be heard and lay there until someone helps. The people in Florida are deemed as "having money" so they take care of themselves. But fact is, Punta Gorda was full of trailer parks too. Just goes to show you that Florida is full of republicans (Lee county is 80% republicans) and New Orleans is full of Democrats. DO you think it is a coincidence? I don't. Republicans are taught to fend for themselves while Dems have been taught if they can't take care of themselves (or don't want to) then someone will do it for them. Of course that doesn't apply to EVERY person, but it applies as an in general statement.

Nobody was shooting helpers or raping anyone. All of that was disproved after the crisis. Nor were there "armed bandits." Do you ever read the news? By the way, the economy is not great. Right now, we are in absolutely horrendous debt that some economists think could eventually bankrupt us. Also, unemployment is down, but so is income for most American workers. Close to 40% of Americans working full time are failing to earn a living wage. Try a book or two on the economy.

Thanks

[Crazyhorse1]

Originally Posted by jsarno

This is why I thought this would be a bush bashing thread. If you really think he has done nothing right, you're not looking, or prefer just to focus on the negative. I have mentioned several things that he has done well, you could have regurgitated one of them.

PS- 9/11 everyone thought he handled very well, the war was a decision that Dems decided to go to, the economy is in GREAT shape (yes gas prices suck but not really his fault) and Katrina was the fault of thoughless morons that couldn't lift a finger to get themselves out of the way. I think he has given too much to rescue the idiots that didn't want to leave. All those morons on their roof bitching about being rescued should have been left. No one, and I mean no one can convince me that they didn't have time. I was sitting here watching it on tv, and as soon as it passed Florida the projected path was right into New Orleans. Even if you waited just to be sure, 2 days before hand they KNEW it was coming. If 48 hours isn't enough for you to realize that you live 10+ feet BELOW sea level and need to evacuate, then you're a dee, dee, dee and I'm not concerned about your safety. I'm not going to be concerned about you if you choose not to be concerned about youself.
Why would Bush send people in early when it was dangerous? Why put others in danger for the stupidities of others? And what the "armed bandits" making life difficult...shooting helpers? Bush did the right thing by waiting, and has done too much to date. I know that is not the politically correct thing to say, and it's not the dems view, but I am not going to apologize for it. Where was all that help when Charlie hit Punta Gorda / Fort Myers? Where was all that help when Andrew hit? The problem there is the people in New Orleans have a poor me attitude and since they are "poor" they feel they should be heard and lay there until someone helps. The people in Florida are deemed as "having money" so they take care of themselves. But fact is, Punta Gorda was full of trailer parks too. Just goes to show you that Florida is full of republicans (Lee county is 80% republicans) and New Orleans is full of Democrats. DO you think it is a coincidence? I don't. Republicans are taught to fend for themselves while Dems have been taught if they can't take care of themselves (or don't want to) then someone will do it for them. Of course that doesn't apply to EVERY person, but it applies as an in general statement.

Guess what, big guy. Florida has many more democrats than republicans and you don't have any idea what people from New Orleans feel, much less documentation of any such thing. Also, New Orleans was not "full" of trailor parks by any standard I know of and the dems don't teach poor people to avoid taking care of themselves, even as the republicans break our budget with gifts to the rich (see below). Also, under Clinton, FEMA performed as brilliantly in Florida as FEMA performed poorly in New Orleans under Bush, who had deliberately downsized it into ineffectiveness. And while we're discussing reality here instead of a good old boy version of it, here's the House of Representatives report on the consequences of Bush's great tax policy.
http://www.majorityleader.gov/docupl...STAXREPORT.pdf

[FRPLG]

I am not a Bush basher but I am going to respond to some of these:

Originally Posted by jsarno

How about these:
1- he has helped to lower interest rates to the best in history.

Yeah so he has exactly zero control over this. Giving him credit is silly. He has absolutely no impact on interest rates. Totally market and Federla Reserve driven.

2- He has helped the economy to one of the most successful in history.

Presidents get too much credit for this both ways, good and bad. The first Pres Bush got too much heat for the bad economy and Cliton and Bush both get too much credit for the good. Presidents have very little effect. Bush maybe more than others because of the tax cuts but that is debateable.

3- He has had VERY good unemployment rates all the while lowering taxes for everyone including the poor.

Well yes unemployemt is lower. See above. Same thing. As for lowering taxes, that is a weird one. Yes he lowered taxes and yes he lowered taxes mostly for rich people. That is because rich people pay most of the taxes in this country. He didn't really lower much in taxes for poor people because they don't pay much to begin with.

6- He prevented Nuclear war between India and Pakistan.

All by himself?

9- Decapitating Al Quaeda's top leadership and preventing another massive attack on US soil.

Al Queda is as strong as ever. There's not much he could have done either way. To destroy terrorists group like that will take decades at least.

[12thMan]

Originally Posted by FRPLG

I am not a Bush basher but I am going to respond to some of these:

Yeah so he has exactly zero control over this. Given him credit is silly. He has absolutely no impact on interest rates. Totally market and Federla Reserve driven.

Presidents get too much credit for this both ways, good and bad. The first Pres Bush got too much heat for the bad economy and Cliton and Bush both get too much credit for the good. Presidents have very little effect. Bush maybe more than others because of the tax cuts but that is debateable.


Well yes unemployemt is lower. See above. Same thing. As for lowering taxes, that is a weird one. Yes he lowered taxes and yes he lowered taxes mostly for rich people. That is because rich people pay most of the taxes in this country. He didn't really lower much in taxes for poor people because they don't pay much to begin with.

All by himself?

Al Queda is as strong as ever. There's not much he could have done either way. To destroy terrorists group like that will take decades at least.

Good points, especially about monetary policy.

[jsarno]

Originally Posted by FRPLG

I am not a Bush basher but I am going to respond to some of these:

Yeah so he has exactly zero control over this. Giving him credit is silly. He has absolutely no impact on interest rates. Totally market and Federla Reserve driven.

Presidents get too much credit for this both ways, good and bad. The first Pres Bush got too much heat for the bad economy and Cliton and Bush both get too much credit for the good. Presidents have very little effect. Bush maybe more than others because of the tax cuts but that is debateable.


Well yes unemployemt is lower. See above. Same thing. As for lowering taxes, that is a weird one. Yes he lowered taxes and yes he lowered taxes mostly for rich people. That is because rich people pay most of the taxes in this country. He didn't really lower much in taxes for poor people because they don't pay much to begin with.

I will comment on these together since they are so closely related.
If you use those as a negative against the presidency, then they have to be a positive if they do a good job. Fact is, Bush has policies in place to help stimulate the economy and the interest rates. Sure it's not him 100%, but you can't deny he has helped the situation.

All by himself?

Considering India and Pakistan have been arch rivals since 1947 and no one has done anything about it, and had nuclear capabilities that were ignored by previous presidents (especially clinton), and India tested their first Thermonuclear weapon in May of 98 to no comments, I'm going to say yes. Sure he didn't act alone in this, but he made it a priority and put a stop to a 50 year problem. I'm sure those ill feelings are still there between the countries, but Bush and Bush alone made it a priority, and I for one and glad he did or Pakistan would have been wiped off the planet by now.

Al Queda is as strong as ever. There's not much he could have done either way. To destroy terrorists group like that will take decades at least.

Ummm what? Under Bush's term he has wiped out over 90% of the top terrorists, and a lot of them were members of Al Queda. If you think it's gettign stronger, it's likely because you had no idea how big this orginization was, which is all the more reason to thank Mr. President Bush. While you provide valuable counterpoints to most of my comments, this one was off base. Al Queda is weaker than it ever has been and will continue to weaken as long as we don't give up on the war on terror.