• Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!

    You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!

Inauguration day is coming up. Any last thoughts on the current reign?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Jam Stunna

Writer of Fortune
BRoomer
Joined
May 6, 2006
Messages
6,450
Location
Hartford, CT
3DS FC
0447-6552-1484
G-Dub is the exact opposite of Clinton. Clinton was a mediocre president in good times, so he looks alot better than he actually was. G-Dub was a mediocre president in bad times, so he looks alot worse than he actually was.

Things like 9/11, Katrina and the financial crisis gave him the opportunity to carve out a place in history as a great. He just wasn't up to the task.
 

Darxmarth23

Smash Champion
Joined
Jul 6, 2008
Messages
2,976
Location
Dead. *****es.
Yeah...

I mean there are somethings that he did well. But the things we the people focused on were not handled properly IMO.

He did what he could in what he thought was the right thing to do. For that i give him props.

His farewell speech was gracious.

I think thats big coming from a democrat.
 

GoldShadow

Marsilea quadrifolia
BRoomer
Joined
Jun 6, 2003
Messages
14,463
Location
Location: Location
G-Dub is the exact opposite of Clinton. Clinton was a mediocre president in good times, so he looks alot better than he actually was. G-Dub was a mediocre president in bad times, so he looks alot worse than he actually was.
I think that's an understatement.

GW was a legitimately bad president in bad times. In fact, he created most of the "bad times" himself. While there will be some disagreement about whether Clinton was a good president or a mediocre one in good times (I happen to think the former), I think we can unequivocally agree that GWB was an all around bad president.

Everybody in his cabinet (Cheney, Rice, Powell, and others) were more qualified than he was. Bush was like Palin, where Palin was clueless and everybody around her played damage control. Bush had no idea what he was doing (and still doesn't), and his cabinet and VP had the role of damage control.
 

Omis

my friends were skinny
Joined
May 22, 2008
Messages
2,515
Location
including myself in your posts
There was so much wasted potential when it came to carving a legacy for himself. Bush plain and simple dod not know what to do when the going got rough.
 

Jam Stunna

Writer of Fortune
BRoomer
Joined
May 6, 2006
Messages
6,450
Location
Hartford, CT
3DS FC
0447-6552-1484
I think that's an understatement.

GW was a legitimately bad president in bad times. In fact, he created most of the "bad times" himself. While there will be some disagreement about whether Clinton was a good president or a mediocre one in good times (I happen to think the former), I think we can unequivocally agree that GWB was an all around bad president.

Everybody in his cabinet (Cheney, Rice, Powell, and others) were more qualified than he was. Bush was like Palin, where Palin was clueless and everybody around her played damage control. Bush had no idea what he was doing (and still doesn't), and his cabinet and VP had the role of damage control.
The three major disasters of his presidency were entirely beyond his control. You can't blame a man for terrorists, hurricanes or bad decisions on the part of private sector business. You can only blame him for how he reacted to them.

Yes, it is his fault that he let the Neo-Cons and Cold Warriors of his administration lead us into Iraq, I won't argue with you there. All I'm saying is that if Bush had been President from 1993-2001, he still wouldn't be a great president, he just wouldn't be nearly as bad.
 

DtJ Jungle

Check out my character in #GranblueFantasy
BRoomer
Joined
Jul 29, 2008
Messages
24,020
Location
Grancypher
Yes. Bush was thrown into a very difficult situation in 2001. I think he handled all of it poorly, and he needed to leave office in 2004. However, I do have to admire the fact that he kept true to what he believed in, unlike many politicians with their flip-flopping on issues to keep lobbyists happy.

Overall, not a good president. But he had his bright moments.
 

Aesir

Smash Master
Joined
Dec 10, 2006
Messages
4,253
Location
Cts inconsistant antagonist
People don't realize that our last four presidents, Reagan-W.Bush have been anything but great. (Also this is a first for American politics, we have a president who isn't a Clinton or a Bush as a President or a VP) I would also argue it's because of last four presidents why the economic crisis was allowed to happen in the first place, but that's for another debate I think.

A lot of his down falls came from his own poor decisions, combine that with the unfortunate disasters that struck this country you get the last 8 years.
 

GoldShadow

Marsilea quadrifolia
BRoomer
Joined
Jun 6, 2003
Messages
14,463
Location
Location: Location
The three major disasters of his presidency were entirely beyond his control. You can't blame a man for terrorists, hurricanes or bad decisions on the part of private sector business. You can only blame him for how he reacted to them.
9/11 could have been prevented by better collaboration between intelligence organizations; better security, and by acting on various warning signs that it was going to happen within the intelligence community. Then there was the whole Afghanistan thing, which had nothing to do with 9/11. The country was left worse off without the Taliban. Failure to capture bin Laden was also a major failure; despite the fact that every intelligence agency was working overtime to find him, which is embarassing. We could have nabbed him in Tora Bora back in 2002.

There were numerous issues regarding our troops overseas. They were not as well-armed or armored as they should have been, resulting in many deaths. Many soldiers had to improvise to properly fortify themselves and their vehicles. Many soldiers had to buy their own body armor. Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld himself acknowledged it, and was not remorseful. The President, if he was going to send troops into battle, should have made sure they were properly equipped.

There were numerous other disasters; notably the Iraq War, starting it under false pretenses of WMD, and the failure it became (must've heard the word "quagmire" a hundred thousand times on the news and in the papers). There was the Abu Ghraib incident; there was Guantanamo Bay.

Bush's poor economic decisions also sent the US national debt spiraling downward and sent the country into a recession. It may not have been entirely Bush's fault, but no one can argue that he wasn't a major player in the matter.

His poor treatment of regimes like North Korea, as well as his inability to properly deal with borderline-dangerous governments such as Iran's (labeling them the "Axis of Evil"? Seriously? That was just a bad move) have only alienated these countries further.

Katrina was also not out of Bush's hands; it was very much within them. Hurricane Katrina was a complete Bush failure, not just his response to it. The administration was warned several times of the possibility for such storms, and that they should have provided resources to strengthen the levies.

Then there was the giant failure that was the response to Katrina. To add to this is the fact that the head of FEMA, the woefully incapable Michael Chertoff, was nominated by Bush.

Let's not forget the fact that he was a horrible president in terms of science, medicine and civil rights; abortions, stem cell research, funding for science and education. All were cut to unacceptable levels of funding. There's also the big gay marriage fiasco.

And let's not forget that he made most of his decisions based on what God told him. The President of the US, a secular nation (in name at least), should not be making his decisions based on what "God told him to do".

However, I do have to admire the fact that he kept true to what he believed in, unlike many politicians with their flip-flopping on issues to keep lobbyists happy.
There's nothing admirable about sticking to a position that is clearly wrong or at odds with the entire country. Even worse is the fact that Bush is completely oblivious to it. He has never for a second thought he was wrong, and at least from what I can tell, feels absolutely no remorse about any of his decisions.




Okay, all that said, Bush did a couple good things (I can probably count them on one hand). The only one that stands out is ousting and capturing Saddam Hussein.
 

Jam Stunna

Writer of Fortune
BRoomer
Joined
May 6, 2006
Messages
6,450
Location
Hartford, CT
3DS FC
0447-6552-1484
Don't forget about his initiative to fight AIDS in Africa. That saved an untold amount of lives.
 

illinialex24

Smash Hero
Joined
May 23, 2008
Messages
7,489
Location
Discovered: Sending Napalm
The three major disasters of his presidency were entirely beyond his control. You can't blame a man for terrorists, hurricanes or bad decisions on the part of private sector business. You can only blame him for how he reacted to them.

Yes, it is his fault that he let the Neo-Cons and Cold Warriors of his administration lead us into Iraq, I won't argue with you there. All I'm saying is that if Bush had been President from 1993-2001, he still wouldn't be a great president, he just wouldn't be nearly as bad.
You can blame the fact that he reacted very very poorly to the first two. 9/11 had a good initial response but underestimating the situation before hand and dragging Iraq screwed us over. And Katrina was hurt because most of our equipment was where? In a country it shouldn't have been in: Iraq.
 

Jam Stunna

Writer of Fortune
BRoomer
Joined
May 6, 2006
Messages
6,450
Location
Hartford, CT
3DS FC
0447-6552-1484
I suppose I do like him alot more ever since I had to do a report on him, at least on a personal level. I mean, he was still a very bad president and the complaints against him are well-founded and accurate. If you dislike him, that's fine. I just hate it when people treat him like he's Satan.
 

DtJ Jungle

Check out my character in #GranblueFantasy
BRoomer
Joined
Jul 29, 2008
Messages
24,020
Location
Grancypher
Yeah, he's not a bad person at all. He did make alot of mistakes, no one can deny that., and with the circumstances, its pretty easy to say that he might have one of the worst presidencies in the last 50 years. But he did do a few good things that he deserves some recognition for
 

IDK

Smash Lord
Joined
Mar 28, 2008
Messages
1,708
Location
Yo Couch
He did a few good things, and put our economy in the trenches, and our country amongst the most hated in the world. His good deeds are drowned in the deep sea of his bad ones. I will hate the fact that my country elected George W. Bush two terms in a row, and my kids will be embarrassed that my generation did it.
 

DtJ Jungle

Check out my character in #GranblueFantasy
BRoomer
Joined
Jul 29, 2008
Messages
24,020
Location
Grancypher
Like I said, he shouldnt have been elected to his second term. He definitely didn't deserve that. But really, after the mess he had put us into, what would have been practical to do at that point? That was at the poing where you couldnt pull troops out because we were so entrenched in everything. I think anyone who would have been elected in 2004, just like Obama in 2008, is screwed because he's left with this mess.
 

Crimson King

I am become death
BRoomer
Joined
Jan 14, 2002
Messages
28,982
*shrugs* Bush was just following in the tradition that we are somehow the world police. He desired to spread democracy when we, ourselves, are not a democracy. It's all just bull**** in the end really.

I will say, overall, Bush came off pretty well during 9/11, but that whole situation was as long as he said anything and took action, then he would look good. Of course, it was dragged on for so long that Americans became desensitized to the whole thing, but overall, I think he did a good enough job with that part.
 

Amide

Smash Lord
Joined
May 4, 2008
Messages
1,217
Location
Maine
The reason why we're in Iraq now isn't the same reason why we were in Iraq five years ago, and that's just silly. He racked up a tremendous amount of debt, and his pro torture stance makes us just as bad as the "enemy." It's not his fault the economy is so bad, but it seemed he didn't know how bad it was.
 

Firus

You know what? I am good.
BRoomer
Joined
Apr 7, 2008
Messages
7,681
NNID
OctagonalWalnut
3DS FC
0619-4291-4974
I'd pretty much have to agree with Jam Stunna -- I think he was a mediocre president in bad times. He did make some bad decisions, but overall I imagine that with time he'll be looked back on more fondly.

I'm almost glad to see him go, though. I'm sick to death of hearing everyone talking about how stupid Bush is and blah blah blah. If they legitimately had reasons for disliking him, that would fine (like people in this topic). But there are a good number of people who hate Bush because everyone else does and they just want to be...cool or something, I don't know. I hate people who have such strong opinions on politics but don't have legitimate reasons for having them.
 

Hive

Smash Lord
Joined
Sep 12, 2006
Messages
1,605
Location
Mountain View, ca
Bush was an idiot.... but seeing him go I don't think will save this government from being any less ******** :( at least with him there people knew enough to ignore him.
Obama I hope will do better... but somehow I get the feeling that over the next 2 years his popularity will drop pretty fast as well....
I think its the gov. as a whole that's the problem right now... the cia, the legislative, the legal system.... are pretty corrupted... I know this is a cynical view I guess... I guess I really just don't like any of the presidents we've had so far, sorry... ^^
 

Hive

Smash Lord
Joined
Sep 12, 2006
Messages
1,605
Location
Mountain View, ca
lol :D
Aslo, way to go in turning this into a scifi ♥ I hope its one of those aliens like in dead space, that would be pretty fun ^^
 

Aesir

Smash Master
Joined
Dec 10, 2006
Messages
4,253
Location
Cts inconsistant antagonist
What happened to this guy? And what alien took over Bush's body since then?
Yeah I've seen videos like that before frankly the way he talks I could see myself voting for him. Would I have? probably not LOL.

There was a lot of talk on whether or not he's suffering from some sort of mental illness, compare his speech 10 years ago to today and you'll see what I mean. He was a very good debater and seemed almost unifying in a way.

I wouldn't be surprised if he ended up having a mental illness he did abuse drugs and alcohol a lot in his younger years not only that he allegedly had a stroke during is Presidency.
 

aeghrur

Smash Champion
Joined
Jun 7, 2008
Messages
2,513
Location
Minnesota
My god Alt4, lol, I've never seen him like that, and if I did, I don't remember it, cuz I was only 7 then. :(
He seemed like a good guy then... or a good politician anyhow. Now... crap, he's the thing he was against. >_>

:093:
 

The 5th Horseman

Smash Ace
Joined
Mar 11, 2008
Messages
626
Location
Tampa, Florida
Bush = Fail...
He did do some good, but the bad did outweigh the good. I think he has no thought process what so ever. He acts before he thinks about the consequences of an action. I can't wait till he is out of office... I just hope that Obama and fix his screw ups...

Bush hater +1
 

Pr0phetic

Dodge the bullets!
Joined
May 11, 2008
Messages
3,322
Location
Syracuse, NY
*shrugs* Bush was just following in the tradition that we are somehow the world police. He desired to spread democracy when we, ourselves, are not a democracy. It's all just bull**** in the end really.

I will say, overall, Bush came off pretty well during 9/11, but that whole situation was as long as he said anything and took action, then he would look good. Of course, it was dragged on for so long that Americans became desensitized to the whole thing, but overall, I think he did a good enough job with that part.
Id like to say i completely agree with this statement, the U.S. has always played the role as "the big brother" for the world. However, it is currently too costly. Its not that Bush is a horrible, dumb guy. He just got carried away, his decisions werent very thorough, but he is a decent leader. And yes like how all the news channels are saying, he kept us fairly safe.
 

adumbrodeus

Smash Legend
Joined
Aug 21, 2007
Messages
11,321
Location
Tri-state area
I do believe that congress is still lower.
Congress is ALWAYS lower because it's a faceless "entity" as opposed to a single person. Basically people blame congress for just about everything that happens that goes wrong in general because it's easy.


But then there's the "MY congressman, he's a stand-up guy" attitude.


Aka, people generally like their congresspeople, and tend to have pretty good overall opinions of anyone in congress they are familiar with (discarding fiercely partisan people), BUT those same people dislike congress as an entity.


This is the reason why the approval ratings of the individual congresspeople are far more telling then those of congress as a whole.
 

RDK

Smash Hero
Joined
Jan 3, 2006
Messages
6,390
Congress is ALWAYS lower because it's a faceless "entity" as opposed to a single person. Basically people blame congress for just about everything that happens that goes wrong in general because it's easy.


But then there's the "MY congressman, he's a stand-up guy" attitude.


Aka, people generally like their congresspeople, and tend to have pretty good overall opinions of anyone in congress they are familiar with (discarding fiercely partisan people), BUT those same people dislike congress as an entity.


This is the reason why the approval ratings of the individual congresspeople are far more telling then those of congress as a whole.
What? I openly admit that my congressman sucks.

If pro- is the opposite of con-, then what could possibly be the opposite of pro-gress...?
 

RDK

Smash Hero
Joined
Jan 3, 2006
Messages
6,390
Sample size=1 does not an argument make.
He stated that most (implying a majority) of people think of their congressman in a positive light. I was showing him that his assertion is probably not true, because I know a ton of people who think their congressman is useless.

And by the way, a sample size of 1 opinion does make a difference; a group as a whole is nothing but a bunch of individuals. There's no such thing as the "collective".


Re-gress.

There's a joke about progressives and "regressives"
Or maybe its Con-gress.
Seeing as how we're currently talking about Congress....

:)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom