Since Inauguration day is coming up soon, what is your final opinion on George W. Bush's term as president? Do you think he did a decent job, or failed miserably?
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!
I think that's an understatement.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.
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.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.
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.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.
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.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.
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.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.
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.What happened to this guy? And what alien took over Bush's body since then?
It's kind of scary to see how much he's changed. I think he went senile shortly after he was first elected.What happened to this guy? And what alien took over Bush's body since then?
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.*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.
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.I do believe that congress is still lower.
What? I openly admit that my congressman sucks.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.
I am sigging that, even though we dont use signatures here in the Debate Hall.
If pro- is the opposite of con-, then what could possibly be the opposite of pro-gress...?
Sample size=1 does not an argument make.What? I openly admit that my congressman sucks.
Re-gress.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...?
Or maybe its Con-gress.Re-gress.
There's a joke about progressives and "regressives"
The "progress/congress" joke is older than time (or at the least, older than the internet).Or maybe its Con-gress.
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.Sample size=1 does not an argument make.
Re-gress.
There's a joke about progressives and "regressives"
Seeing as how we're currently talking about Congress....Or maybe its Con-gress.