Blame Bush

D

deleted15807

Guest
There's no question, even among many Republicans, that the G.W. Bush years were the worst in modern USA history.

And the sad fact is there isn't a thing G.W. Bush did that they wouldn't do again, from the ruinous wars to the budget-busting tax cuts to the disastrous lassiez-faire style of governing. They would all 'Play It Again Sam' if they could and may do if wacko Perry someone slimes his way into office. Maybe another Civil War is in the offing?

Egghead and Blockheads
 

Mensch1351

Cherished Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2006
Posts
1,166
Media
0
Likes
341
Points
303
Location
In the only other State that begins with "K"!
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
"
Yeah, the link is busted.

While I tend to agree that a lot of this mess can be laid squarely at the feet of the Bush Administration I don't care.

Expending effort to clarify who is responsible detracts from effort expended to fix the problem. I don't really care who is at fault; my vote isn't earned by fingers pointing but rather by fingers... fixing."

I Saw a movie once put out by DuPont I believe -- the title??

"What we ARE is what we WERE, when!"

We stand on the shoulders of all those who came before us -- but in existentialist America because we don't "care" about who might be responsible for the situations we are currently in -- we learn NOTHING about avoiding future mistakes of the same type.
 

dandelion

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Sep 25, 2009
Posts
13,297
Media
21
Likes
2,705
Points
358
Location
UK
Verification
View
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
Sometimes it is helpfull to see who was responsible and sometimes only what was responsible. If Bush had not been elected then chances are the outcome would have been different, but how much? Right now Obama is being criticised for not rolling back Bush. So how would a democrat president have fared with the same congress Bush had? How would a democrat president have performed with a democrat congress, as Obama had? The other side in US politics is more republican light than left. This applies to UK politics too.
 

midlifebear

Expert Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2007
Posts
5,789
Media
0
Likes
174
Points
133
Location
Nevada, Buenos Aires, and Barçelona
Sexuality
60% Gay, 40% Straight
Gender
Male

Sargon:

I've quoted your link above to the Maureen Dowd Op Ed piece in the NYTimes, again, hoping that more people will click on the link and read it. She, in my educated opinion, nails a major problem inherent in the USA mentality perfectly well. My experience during the last 20 years coincides with her estimation that the GOP and other conservatives have become champions of ignorance. A typical 20 year-old in Barcelona is better educated, better informed politically, and ready to participate fully in the stewardship of his or her city and province than a kid who may have graduated with honors from a public US school. The USA has certainly become a place where being dumb is considered attractive. I've only been back in Nevada for about a month and all I run into are illiterate (yes, they don't read because they find it boring) Barbi Doll types and young men more concerned about getting laid than achieving a successful career that may also contribute to the betterment of everyone.

Living abroad really spoils a person such as myself. I always come back to the USA expecting so much more.
 

Mensch1351

Cherished Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2006
Posts
1,166
Media
0
Likes
341
Points
303
Location
In the only other State that begins with "K"!
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
Sargon:

I've quoted your link above to the Maureen Dowd Op Ed piece in the NYTimes, again, hoping that more people will click on the link and read it. She, in my educated opinion, nails a major problem inherent in the USA mentality perfectly well. My experience during the last 20 years coincides with her estimation that the GOP and other conservatives have become champions of ignorance. A typical 20 year-old in Barcelona is better educated, better informed politically, and ready to participate fully in the stewardship of his or her city and province than a kid who may have graduated with honors from a public US school. The USA has certainly become a place where being dumb is considered attractive. I've only been back in Nevada for about a month and all I run into are illiterate (yes, they don't read because they find it boring) Barbi Doll types and young men more concerned about getting laid than achieving a successful career that may also contribute to the betterment of everyone.

Living abroad really spoils a person such as myself. I always come back to the USA expecting so much more.

Interesting that about 25 years ago, USA Today ran a piece concerning American vs. European youth (and it's probably changed somewhat by now after all these years). But what they discovered is that American Youth only saw education as a primary resource for financial gain. European youth saw education as a means to improve self! I wonder if our American obsession with money, the making of it, the keeping of it and even the spending of it, muddies our perception of what constitutes a real "quality" of life! It's probably why some in our government think that Funding the Arts is a totally frivolous expenditure!
 

D_Percy_Prettywillie

Account Disabled
Joined
Jul 6, 2011
Posts
748
Media
0
Likes
22
Points
53
"
Yeah, the link is busted.

While I tend to agree that a lot of this mess can be laid squarely at the feet of the Bush Administration I don't care.

Expending effort to clarify who is responsible detracts from effort expended to fix the problem. I don't really care who is at fault; my vote isn't earned by fingers pointing but rather by fingers... fixing."

I Saw a movie once put out by DuPont I believe -- the title??

"What we ARE is what we WERE, when!"

We stand on the shoulders of all those who came before us -- but in existentialist America because we don't "care" about who might be responsible for the situations we are currently in -- we learn NOTHING about avoiding future mistakes of the same type.


What I mean by "I don't care" isn't "I don't feel like learning." I have an opinion on who is responsible for this mess... oh, hey, I even said so, but that to me is beside the point. Blaming the Bush Administration, repeatedly, over and over again- is that teaching someone something? Are we learning from perpetually finger pointing or just adding to gridlock, further pushing out the date that Congress accomplishes something of value to the American population?

There's been nothing but finger pointing in both directions. Figuring out who is to blame has been a central focus since this mess started. Do you feel like our governmental leaders have learned since it started and are avoiding future mistakes of the same type by railing on about the Bush Administration? Can't that be unspoken at this point?

Philosophically, I think you have a point. Practically speaking? Fingering pointing in the US isn't doing anyone any good... it certainly doesn't teach anyone anything. Greasing the wheel over tea is one thing. Rolling up your sleeves to get to work is something entirely different.

midlifebear said:
The execs have abandoned the means of production in 'Mericuh for stuff manufactured for less money in other countries. Just try and find new kitchen appliances not made in Japan or China. Anyone know of an automatic coffee maker manufactured in the USA?

USA industry still has both feet firmly planted in the 1950s and the executive mindset is to import rather than retool and manufacture locally.

I don't understand this. How did this happen? No matter what you buy, a car, a television, a computer, a refrigerator, a washer/dryer... none of it was made in the US and if it was you've probably purchased something pretty crappy compared to what you likely could have gotten right around the same price. Why aren't American companies reverse engineering and then manufacturing better cars and computers and counter top microwaves? Wouldn't that help the economy? To have more factories with more workers producing goods that can be sold at even more competitive prices without all that importation excess?

Why is it so expensive to make things here? It wasn't always this way. At one point we were making things that people bought that weren't crap. What happened?




JSZ
 
D

deleted15807

Guest
The USA has certainly become a place where being dumb is considered attractive. I've only been back in Nevada for about a month and all I run into are illiterate (yes, they don't read because they find it boring) Barbi Doll types and young men more concerned about getting laid than achieving a successful career that may also contribute to the betterment of everyone.

With the fall of the Soviet Union I think America just sat back and said 'We won' and kicked back. Without a big competitor she got fat, dumb and happy. The ideological war was over and now it was time to enjoy the spoils of victory. Alas success is never final. And maybe this generation will have to be skipped before we learn you cannot succeed if you 'don't like to read'. That's my backseat view of things. And I've heard the before too 'I don't like to read'. I ask them how do you expect to graduate if you don't read? They have no answer.


Why is it so expensive to make things here? It wasn't always this way.

It sure helps that China doesn't allow it's currency to float. By manipulating it's currency it keeps its goods 'cheap'. China is in no hurry to change either as they know the bottom line would mean fewer Chinese jobs.
 

dandelion

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Sep 25, 2009
Posts
13,297
Media
21
Likes
2,705
Points
358
Location
UK
Verification
View
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
Blaming the Bush Administration, repeatedly, over and over again- is that teaching someone something?...There's been nothing but finger pointing in both directions. Figuring out who is to blame has been a central focus since this mess started..... Do you feel like our governmental leaders have learned since it started and are avoiding future mistakes of the same type by railing on about the Bush Administration?
Seems to me you yourself are a prime exponent of labouring a point.

In the Uk politicians like to do a fair amount of finger pointing and their followers follow suit. In the UK, however, there is almost always a clear cut change of government. The new government has full power to make any changes it wants. Apparently this is not true in the US. Obama when he started out had what we would regard as a hung parliament because he could not guarantee to pass any legislation he wanted. He is now well down into being a minority government reliant on the good will of his opponents to pass anything. He has always had to compromise. In this situation it is much more important to blame the other side. Firstly, you need to make it clear that you believe the compromises you are making are wrong and you are being forced to adop policies which have failed. Secondly you want to make it clear where the blame for this lies, with those who are forcing you to do this.


I don't understand this. How did this happen?[industrial decline]
Man from the US does not understand how this happened? The US philosophy is PROFIT!

none of it was made in the US and if it was you've probably purchased something pretty crappy compared to what you likely could have gotten right around the same price. Why aren't American companies reverse engineering and then manufacturing better cars and computers and counter top microwaves?
This happened in the UK too. Hell, in 1900 Winston Churchill was moaning that the US could make steam engines which were better, cheaper and could be supplied more quickly than ones made in England. In 2000 its you in the US moaning that Korea is making better, cheaper and delivered on time cars. In 1900 at least it was a bit more difficult to sent goods around the world (though the Uk grew on foreign trade too).

Somewhere about the 1970s british industry hit bottom for making rubbish and began to realise it could not rely on brand loyalty but had to make better goods than foreigners. This was all mixed up with british is best whatever it is and I would guess the US suffers from this too. It isnt best unless its really best. There is nothing new about cheap foreign labour allowing other countries to undercut home industry. Home industry has to respond by making better design and better quality and using mechanisation to replace labour. It always comes down to fewer jobs in a given industry.



Why is it so expensive to make things here? It wasn't always this way.
I can tell you the US shipbuilding industry trashed the UK because it introdiced new technology. Riveted ships gave way to welded ships. The uk shipbuilding industry had complex problems including two wars, which admittedly created great demand to replace sunk ships but also disrupted supplies and steady work and available labour so maybe it isnt quite fair to totally blame them. But how is the US shipbuilding now? It took the industry from us by adopting new technology. That is the trick.

At one point we were making things that people bought that weren't crap. What happened?
too much profit taking and not enough investment?


There is a serious issue here which the US is very hostile to. In order to make profitable goods you have to do whatever is necessary. This frequently means sacking people. The logic is that people are no longer needed to make things. Yet people still have to live. Society has to accept that for industry to continue there will be unemployment which is not the fault of those affected who must still be supported by society while this is going on.
 

D_Percy_Prettywillie

Account Disabled
Joined
Jul 6, 2011
Posts
748
Media
0
Likes
22
Points
53
Seems to me you yourself are a prime exponent of labouring a point.

A.) Talk about the pot calling the kettle black (How many threads and in how many different ways have I said what I'm about to in response to one of your posts?)
B.) I don't care what side of the Atlantic you're on, it's laboring.
C.) I think you meant example? A prime exponent? I'm sure there's a way that makes sense but I don't think that's the word you were looking for, and,
D.) The United States and Britain are TWO separate places.

I read your replies because you put a lot of time and effort into them no doubt and some of them actually contain correlations that make sense (like what you just posted) but you labor under the impression that since it either happened, happens, worked, failed, or had a specific outcome in the UK, that's what will happen, work, fail or have the same specific outcome in the United States. You don't have the proper amount of respect for the differences between our two countries to make some of the statements that you do. Here are a few examples;


Obama when he started out had what we would regard as a hung parliament because he could not guarantee to pass any legislation he wanted.

That's blatantly false. When the President was elected his party controlled both houses of Congress. It wasn't until 2010 that the Democrats lost the House (but still maintained a smaller majority in the Senate.)

He is now well down into being a minority government reliant on the good will of his opponents to pass anything.

That's not really accurate either. What we have is called divided government and it isn't all that uncommon. He doesn't have to rely on the goodwill of his opponents but he does have to compromise (or in the case of this President, make concessions) which leads me to this;

In this situation it is much more important to blame the other side. Firstly, you need to make it clear that you believe the compromises you are making are wrong and you are being forced to adop policies which have failed. Secondly you want to make it clear where the blame for this lies, with those who are forcing you to do this.

Your strategy is "Republicans are mean to me?" Play ball with them but let the country know you're doing it under duress? We've been down this road already. Health Care is exactly what you're talking about. The President proposed a plan, republicans didn't like it, there was round after around "negotiation" and in the end the President said at press conference "This isn't what I wanted but this is what we got." That was the beginning of the "Please don't take my lunch money" Presidency.

We know who is to blame for things like that. This isn't exactly the plot from the first Mission Impossible- there are only two sides. That doesn't stop them from doing it anyway, "These wars are Bush's fault!" "Obama wants to kill my grandma!" We've heard it all. We're well aware that one side blames the other. If you think Bush is responsible for the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq there's a republican out there who would find a way to make it Bill Clinton's fault and then a democrat after him who would say it was the first Bush's fault.

It goes round and round and nothing ever gets done. Everyone is irritated with the inaction and fecklessness of Congress so I don't think more thumb biting, gavel grinding, finger pointing is the answer to anything except more political theater.

The last little bit of that I'm going to respond to is this;

There is a serious issue here which the US is very hostile to. In order to make profitable goods you have to do whatever is necessary. This frequently means sacking people. The logic is that people are no longer needed to make things. Yet people still have to live. Society has to accept that for industry to continue there will be unemployment which is not the fault of those affected who must still be supported by society while this is going on.

And before I do I wouldn't mind a little clarification so I'm not under the wrong impression. In sounds... well, grim. I think most countries are averse to unemployment in large numbers. They'll need jobs to buy goods otherwise high quality or low quality, it won't make any difference- there'll be no consumer. But... I digress-

I don't mean to say there isn't any merit to some of your proposals (a steadily increased gas tax? Yes. Suddenly amping it to $10 a gallon? No) just that you don't know about (through no fault of your own of course, you're not American) the nuances that are interlaced throughout our society.








JSZ
 

D_Percy_Prettywillie

Account Disabled
Joined
Jul 6, 2011
Posts
748
Media
0
Likes
22
Points
53
I would also add, to Mensch's original point;

I think you're right about getting to the bottom of an issue. Specifically, to say "Look at this plan. This is how this plan failed and these are the specific outcomes of that failure," is important. That is us learning from past mistakes. Taking it to the next step to say "And that's why Bush is at fault" rather than "And here's my plan that addresses these failures and because of that has a greater chance of succeeding it its aims" is where the train goes off the track.

Understanding what caused an issue (whatever issue it is) and then implementing a solution that works is the optimal outcome. I think, to get beyond the state we're in, that should be the focus as opposed to just blaming the other side.



JSZ
 

dandelion

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Sep 25, 2009
Posts
13,297
Media
21
Likes
2,705
Points
358
Location
UK
Verification
View
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
A.) Talk about the pot calling the kettle black
I admit I go on about things, but Im not the one complaining about people doing this.

A prime exponent? I'm sure there's a way that makes sense but I don't think that's the word you were looking for
I meant exponent.(unless this is a word which does not translate into american)

you labor under the impression that since it either happened, happens, worked, failed, or had a specific outcome in the UK, that's what will happen, work, fail or have the same specific outcome in the United States.
No reason why not. Most sociologists or economists would say the similarities are much greater than the differences. The US may believe they are Gods own people, but they arent really. Many countries labour under this delusion. An irony that the Us does so when it abolished state religion.

When the President was elected his party controlled both houses of Congress. It wasn't until 2010 that the Democrats lost the House (but still maintained a smaller majority in the Senate.
Dont they have this thing called a fillibuster which means it is possible to block legislation for as long as you can keep talking....years in the case of politicians. Then, the parties in the US are not nearly as cohesive as in the UK. In the Uk they vote as they are told. In the US this does not seem to be true. congressmen seem to believe they have a right to disagree with their party leader. (well, more precisely UK politicians do disagree and vote against their governments, but the system is designed to provide a large majority to the winner so it doesnt matter if a few rebel)

That's not really accurate either. What we have is called divided government and it isn't all that uncommon. He doesn't have to rely on the goodwill of his opponents but he does have to compromise (or in the case of this President, make concessions)
Well perhaps he relies upon the ill will of his opponents but I dont see how I am wrong. He cannot pass legislation without agreement of the opposition. This virtually never happens in the UK. The US system is designed to creat logjams. The Uk system is designed to create dictators.

Your strategy is "Republicans are mean to me?" Play ball with them but let the country know you're doing it under duress? We've been down this road already. Health Care is exactly what you're talking about. The President proposed a plan, republicans didn't like it, there was round after around "negotiation" and in the end the President said at press conference "This isn't what I wanted but this is what we got." That was the beginning of the "Please don't take my lunch money" Presidency.
It is my perception that Obama had no choice but to compromise if he wanted any healthcare legislation. is this true or false?

We know who is to blame for things like that. This isn't exactly the plot from the first Mission Impossible- there are only two sides.
Do you know? Why are there only two side? Especially in the US system which favours independents somewhat in a narrow majority congress. You would think that independents would have quite good prospects. Or is it really the case that independents go native and become rebels within a party. Hence although there are theoretically only two sides, in practice a side cannot be relied upon to vote together. Which brings us back to the question of whether obama ever had majority.

It goes round and round and nothing ever gets done.
its what the people voted for... Maybe fundamentally the US system of government is not fit for purpose in the modern age. It tries to represent different groups but the way it does this, geographically, does not allow the views of people to be represented.



I wouldn't mind a little clarification.... It sounds... well, grim. I think most countries are averse to unemployment in large numbers.
I meant there is a faction in the US which believes giving money to the unemployed is the greatest sin you could ever commit. That is indeed grim.

(a steadily increased gas tax? Yes. Suddenly amping it to $10 a gallon? No)
My point was there does not seem to be acceptance in the US that actually higher gas prices (via tax) is a good thing. Sure, phase it in, but the principle is it is the right action.

just that you don't know about (through no fault of your own of course, you're not American) the nuances that are interlaced throughout our society.
US resistance to gas taxes is renowned the world over, and the justifications for this on grounds of distances travelled are understood. The world, however, sees this as stubborn refusal to see sense.
 

houtx48

Cherished Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2006
Posts
6,900
Media
0
Likes
308
Points
208
Gender
Male
The fact of the matter is that Obama is a skid mark on the fabric of this nation and it will be washed off in 2012.
as opposed to Buuuush who took a fat dump on the fabric and they have not manufactured enough Lysol and Spray And Wash to remove the stench and stain.
 

mikeyh9in

Cherished Member
Joined
May 31, 2004
Posts
322
Media
4
Likes
341
Points
293
Age
55
Location
San Francisco (California, United States)
Gender
Male
What amazes me is that some people (including myself) spent 8 years stating how each and every policy from the Bush administration was bad for America... unjustified (and unpaid) wars, tax cuts for the top 1%, unpaid prescription drug plan for medicare, the Patriot Act, etc. We even stated that this will destroy America at that time.

Now, as we reap the consequences of these horrible policies, people are blaming Obama.

Obama needs a backbone... he needs to implement policies for the 99% of America that are paying Bush's "class warfare".

Unless we do something massive and decisive, we will be relegated to a 2nd class country for decades to come.

And yes, it starts from the top... Bush is squarely to blame, but he had accomplices in the Democratic Party that should be ashamed.
 

dandelion

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Sep 25, 2009
Posts
13,297
Media
21
Likes
2,705
Points
358
Location
UK
Verification
View
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
The Imf takes the view that the US needs to impose a massive growth program and pay for it by greater borrowing. I am not clear whether they also think the US should be putting up selected taxes, but they pointedly remarked that US companies have recovered their pre-crash profitability whereas those on the lowest wages are still suffering (and getting worse). Is anyone in the US suggesting this should be done?
 
Last edited:

lurker37160

Sexy Member
Joined
Aug 23, 2007
Posts
526
Media
0
Likes
27
Points
248
Location
Murfreesboro (Tennessee, United States)
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
as opposed to Buuuush who took a fat dump on the fabric and they have not manufactured enough Lysol and Spray And Wash to remove the stench and stain.

If that is so, then Reid and Pelosi ate it which explains why they are both full of it. :biggrin1:
 

B_enzia35

Experimental Member
Joined
Mar 12, 2011
Posts
863
Media
0
Likes
16
Points
53
Location
Texas
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Obama just okay'd 1b for some more "green" companies. Shit if it don't work, throw more money at it!:confused:
 

Klingsor

Worshipped Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2011
Posts
10,888
Media
4
Likes
11,638
Points
293
Location
Champaign (Illinois, United States)
Sexuality
80% Straight, 20% Gay
Gender
Male
Obama just okay'd 1b for some more "green" companies. Shit if it don't work, throw more money at it!:confused:

Sure . . . because we don't *really* want to enter the 21st century, do we? Let China, Europe, the rest of the world invest in all that modern technology crap. We're standing pat here with our wood stoves, coal furnaces, and steam engines, dammit! If it was good enough for great grandpa, then it's good enough for us!