It's Still Bush's Fault

bobbyboyle

Just Browsing
Joined
Aug 31, 2010
Posts
245
Media
0
Likes
0
Points
51
Sexuality
50% Straight, 50% Gay
Gender
Male
I'm not sure what the American consensus is (if there is one?) regarding drone use, but at least elsewhere most people approve of it, provided they don't bomb too many shepherds of course.
As an aside to this little point, there was a documentary looking at this issue (can't remember if it was This World/Dispatches/Unreported World/other). I was shocked by the level of the US's flat out denial of civilian casualties and insistance that the correct targets were killed despite overwhelming evidence otherwise. If the intelligence was sound I'd be all for them, but after that piece I'm not so sure.
 

D_Fiona_Farvel

Account Disabled
Joined
Nov 27, 2007
Posts
3,692
Media
0
Likes
71
Points
133
Sexuality
No Response
I never voted for bush or obama so its not my fault.
it isn't a question of fault. We all engage in the democratic process and share in moments of success and failure equally - even if we didn't vote for a representative or support a particular policy.

There's only one way to opt out of responsibility.
 

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
:wink:Too bad the President doesn't believe in sharing failure equally.

It's been 3 years and he's still blaming Bush?
 

D_Fiona_Farvel

Account Disabled
Joined
Nov 27, 2007
Posts
3,692
Media
0
Likes
71
Points
133
Sexuality
No Response
:wink:Too bad the President doesn't believe in sharing failure equally.

It's been 3 years and he's still blaming Bush?
Bush and all longstanding representatives who assisted in the institution of his era's failed policies are partially to blame and could be for decades to come - it would be unreasonable to deny it. Beyond what President Obama inherited, the extent of his blame, if any, needs time to develop and the opportunity to reflect on where his policy specifically failed. Which, again, will not be until he at least ends this term, maybe longer.

I do not believe anyone is suggesting President Obama has not had missteps, merely there are too few policies outside of continuing issues to make that judgement.
 

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
The Bush tax cuts alone eclipse any total spending that Obama has done. And yes those tax cuts were spending because we didn't have the budget for them... so we actually had to borrow money because of it.

But we don't bring this up --- no no no no no! THOSE tax cuts are necesssary to stimulate the economy so it's really THEIR stimulus and money well spent. And don't touch all that Corporate Welfare! Hit grandma and the vulnerable first!
 

dazedandconfused

Just Browsing
Joined
Mar 14, 2006
Posts
357
Media
0
Likes
0
Points
161
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
But we don't bring this up --- no no no no no! THOSE tax cuts are necesssary to stimulate the economy so it's really THEIR stimulus and money well spent. And don't touch all that Corporate Welfare! Hit grandma and the vulnerable first!

But this is one of the fundamental problems with this debate. Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid need to be reformed. But every time someone brings this up, the "grandma has to eat dog food" argument starts...
 

travis1985

Expert Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Jun 22, 2011
Posts
835
Media
1
Likes
103
Points
288
Location
Coeur d'Alene (Idaho, United States)
Verification
View
Sexuality
50% Straight, 50% Gay
Gender
Male
Yes, I guess it is still Bush's fault. Everything that happens for the next hundred years will be attributed to Bush. Unless something good happens, in which case Barack Obama single-handedly did it himself and then personally gave homemade candy to orphans who then joined hands with him and sang Let There Be Peace on Earth.
 

earllogjam

Expert Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2006
Posts
4,917
Media
0
Likes
179
Points
193
Sexuality
No Response
It's a shame that people have such short memories. Zippy W. will go down as the worst president in US history yet many would re-elect his party into office in a heartbeat. The very same party responsible for our current meltdown.

Insane sadomasochism.
 

B_VinylBoy

Sexy Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2007
Posts
10,363
Media
0
Likes
68
Points
123
Location
Boston, MA / New York, NY
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
:wink:Too bad the President doesn't believe in sharing failure equally.

It's been 3 years and he's still blaming Bush?

What's the point on sharing the blame equally when the people responsible for the problem didn't contribute to it on the same magnitude? If we're talking about the deficit, according to an article from the Boston Globe which sources data obtained from the US Treasury and various non-partisan financial sources, more than $9 Trillion of the $14.3 Trillion dollar debt that our nation faces was done under Republican rule and $6.1 Trillion was under Bush II which includes the wars in Afghanistan & Iraq, lots of defense spending and $1.8 Trillion in tax cuts. That's more than double than the contributions of Reagan and Bush I combined.

Obama's current contribution to this? Only $2.4 Trillion, which includes $1.1 in stimulus spending and tax cuts. And many people believe that he should have spent more on the stimulus. Numerically speaking, he shouldn't be sharing anything equally with Bush.
 

FuzzyKen

Sexy Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2006
Posts
2,045
Media
0
Likes
97
Points
193
Gender
Male
First, I need to start out by stating that I dislike the actions of and the Presidency of George W. Bush with a passion. Eventually history will show him to be one of the worst and least qualified individuals to ever reside at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

Now, that being said George W. Bush did not do this without help. If various Congresspersons and Senators had not slowly undermined all of the laws enacted during and after the 1929 Depression to protect the American citizen, George W. Bush would not have been able to do the damage he did. Attempts to remove the protections given the American people started in the 1950's under Dwight D. Eisenhower, but, these early attempts were for the most part not successful. It was not until after the election of Richard Milhouse Nixon that the entities wanting removal of the safeties began to have much of any success. Instead of doing anything that would be really noticeable, the removal and undermining was a very slow and methodical effort done under the guise of promotion of economic growth. I would in fact be quite certain that those promoting this actually thought that they were trying to do something good and none had the concept that what they were doing was in fact to set the stage for the second largest (as of right now) world wide economic depression in world history. Because it was quiet and done in very slow subtle ways, it is actually factually possible that subsequent Presidents after Nixon were probably not aware that this was happening either.

Where Bush gets the blame 100% is in fact to me far more narrow. He gets the blame in that in his rush to help out the "Billionaire Boys Club" he totally ignored the obvious in that he approved bail outs and rewards without extreme oversight and control as well as sufficient investigation to clarify what had happened to make these bailouts necessary in each case.

Yes, in reality we can reduce this deficit by an incredible amount by removing troops from the middle east, by removing the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy, and by re-examination of taxation on multi-billion dollar corporations who have increased profits exponentially during the second worst economic times in history at the expense of the American People.

Actually we can change things for the better very quickly if we want to.

1.) Remova all Banking Services and Operation involving American people from Foreign shores. Bring back those jobs to this country and do it by force and do it now. This is one of the largest security issues we face and it is never talked about.

2.) Security and Exchange Laws need to be amended to eliminate speculation on commodities which could endanger the Security of the Nation. These would include all energy forms period.

3.) I believe in import tariffs. This is the one place that the United States has been extremely foolish. Most of the countries that are kicking our rear ends are doing so because those same countries tax goods imported from the United States.

Let's say that for example China places an 18% tariff on American Imported Goods. The United States in turn then places an 18% tariff on Chinese goods Imported into the United States. We just mirror the tariffs of the country in question. That will encourage Americans to purchase American Made goods rather than cheap knock offs made overseas.


4.) The Tsunami in Japan should have told us something when the largest three American Automobile producers in this country were in danger of shutting down production because so many parts for their cars were being made overseas that they only had about six weeks worth of parts here.

What do you think of your Chrysler, Ford or GM car having so many of it's components being sourced from foreign shores?

This was tried in the U.K. and as a result the U.K. lost a great deal of it's finest automobiles when outsourcing led to the sale of Rolls Royce to BMW, Bentley to Volkswagen, Jaguar to Ford who sold it to Tata of India, Range Rover to Ford and so on and so forth. This hurt the U.K. a great deal.

Failure is neither the property exclusively of George W. Bush (as much as I would like to blame him) nor is it the property of Barak Obama either. You need to look no farther than the United States Congress and Senate.

Remember: The United States Government is based in three branches

Executive: Which is the President who can only enforce laws on the books and work as an administrator of what is there. His job is not the creation of legislation.

Legistlative: Which is the United States Congress and The United States Senate are the ones that make the laws for others to enforce.

Judicial: is the highest court in the land who must review all of the judgments of lower courts to see that the United States Constitution is being upheld. They are sworn to uphold it and not to re-write it for a political party.
 

oralslut464

Experimental Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2011
Posts
228
Media
0
Likes
22
Points
53
Location
Missouri
Sexuality
60% Gay, 40% Straight
Gender
Male
I personally think Obama would LOVE to be a dictator for the US. I know it is not his job to creat legistlation, but I don't think he knows that. To be a constitutional scholar - he is a pretty dim bulb when it comes to the constitution.
 

B_VinylBoy

Sexy Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2007
Posts
10,363
Media
0
Likes
68
Points
123
Location
Boston, MA / New York, NY
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
I personally think Obama would LOVE to be a dictator for the US. I know it is not his job to creat legistlation, but I don't think he knows that. To be a constitutional scholar - he is a pretty dim bulb when it comes to the constitution.

What's ironic is that many of his opposition continually demand for Obama to "lead", by means of putting together plans for possible legislation so that they can position themselves to be against it. It's pretty obvious that Obama knows the roles of the Presidency as well as the roles of the House & Senate when it comes to creating legislation. He tells Congress what he wants and it's up to them to produce something that he would deem worthy to sign. That's what all presidents are supposed to do, and have done since Washington. That has nothing to do with being a dictator, since if he was then he wouldn't have to consult with anyone else nor try to come up with bipartisan solutions or compromises.

But whatever. Seriously, I don't even know why I'm wasting my time saying this. :rolleyes:
 

houtx48

Cherished Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2006
Posts
6,900
Media
0
Likes
308
Points
208
Gender
Male
I personally think Obama would LOVE to be a dictator for the US. I know it is not his job to creat legistlation, but I don't think he knows that. To be a constitutional scholar - he is a pretty dim bulb when it comes to the constitution.
What do you base this on?
 

FuzzyKen

Sexy Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2006
Posts
2,045
Media
0
Likes
97
Points
193
Gender
Male
I personally think Obama would LOVE to be a dictator for the US. I know it is not his job to creat legistlation, but I don't think he knows that. To be a constitutional scholar - he is a pretty dim bulb when it comes to the constitution.

Unfortunately I will have to disagree on this point. I question your statement and I quote. "I know it's not his job to create legislation, but I don't think he knows that." Nixon could not legislate, Reagan could not legislate, George H.W. Bush could not legislate, Clinton could not legislate, and neither could George W. Bush. It stands to reason that unless there was some major constitutional amendments between Bush II and Obama that Obama can't do it either. The only thing any President can do is to either sign something or veto it. Obama is well aware of that and his speech after the "agreement" reflected that knowledge.

The fact is that most Presidents are not always the best constitutional scholars. Barak Obama looking back at history and sad to disappoint you is one of the better ones. In spite of years of experience with Public Service and a Law Degree Richard Nixon was not very good in that area, Ronald Reagan was slapped on the wrist by his own advisors several times on constitutional issues too. George W. was also not gifted in this area. The difference between Presidents on this issue is that some open their mouth and insert their feet to prove their problems.

If you think Obama is bad I cannot even begin to imagine the work that would be necessary to keep either Michele Bachmann or Sarah Palin under control as to what their own power actually was. Though this is a frightening thought, the main job a President has is as an administrator and that is it. In reality his personal opinions on very important issues have little weight because he does not have the power as has been said to do any more than sign or veto whatever comes across his desk. If he cannot get a consensus he has the power to force negotiation. Forcing negotiation and discussion and arriving at a good decision as has been proved again and again are two very different things. He does have limited power under what is called an "executive order", but Presidents historically hate this power and will not use it because it can be political suicide.
 

D_Percy_Prettywillie

Account Disabled
Joined
Jul 6, 2011
Posts
748
Media
0
Likes
22
Points
53
What's ironic is that many of his opposition continually demand for Obama to "lead", by means of putting together plans for possible legislation so that they can position themselves to be against it. It's pretty obvious that Obama knows the roles of the Presidency as well as the roles of the House & Senate when it comes to creating legislation. He tells Congress what he wants and it's up to them to produce something that he would deem worthy to sign. That's what all presidents are supposed to do, and have done since Washington. That has nothing to do with being a dictator, since if he was then he wouldn't have to consult with anyone else nor try to come up with bipartisan solutions or compromises.

But whatever. Seriously, I don't even know why I'm wasting my time saying this. :rolleyes:


I agree with you, as we do most of the time, but especially on the last part of what you said- it is a complete waste of time even bothering to argue the point.


Since last December we've had three major political "showdowns;" the Bush Era tax cuts and loopholes for the exceptionally well off, the budget, and most recently the debt ceiling. The Democrats (specifically the White House) has taken it on the chin in all three instances. Even "Obamacare" wasn't what they were hoping for. The wealthy still get their tax breaks and corporations still have tax laws on the books with loop holes big enough to float the USS Ronald Regan through. The budget, with its 38 billion in cuts, wasn't good enough for the Republican Speaker of the House to depend on his own party to pass (it took democrats... who weren't even getting what they wanted but became increasingly desperate for "compromise.") And the debt ceiling... no revenue increase but plenty of cuts across the board.

And yet still, people who say baseless, idiotic, things like "I bet Obama would love to be dictator" aren't happy. They've won every major showdown they've had since last year but that's not good enough because nothing ever will be.

It boils down to this; some of us just want better government, not no government. Trying to argue with those people, who are essentially advocating anarchy without even being aware enough to realize it, is as you said, a complete waste of time.





JSZ
 
D

deleted15807

Guest
It's a shame that people have such short memories. Zippy W. will go down as the worst president in US history yet many would re-elect his party into office in a heartbeat. The very same party responsible for our current meltdown.

Insane sadomasochism.

Yep there isn't one thing Bush II did that the wacko Republican/Tea Party wouldn't do all over again even after driving the country over the cliff that will take a decade at least to undo. Never mind America wants it all undone in two years.
 

Horrible

Experimental Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2011
Posts
424
Media
6
Likes
2
Points
51
Location
Texas
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
It's a shame that people have such short memories. Zippy W. will go down as the worst president in US history yet many would re-elect his party into office in a heartbeat. The very same party responsible for our current meltdown.

Insane sadomasochism.

Bahahaha, GW may be remembered for his inability to clearly convey his thoughts, for being a terrible orator maybe. But GW will be remembered as a patriot, a true American, and a strong leader. Barack Hussein Obama will go down as the largest failure of commander in chief in history thus far, with jimmy Carter running a close second.

You must be touched to think that the democrats are not responsible for the current economical situation we are in.