To my fellow Americans...

[Engel]

Please read this:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122584386627599251.html


Now I can't say I approve of all of Bush's policies or that he was an extraordinary president or anything of the sort but I find this article to be a good read. We as Americans have been disgraceful in our treatment of our president and amongst all this babble about "change" that needs to take place in our government, here is something that we as Americans should change. Freedom of speech is a wonderful right, and being able to disagree and argue freely is what helps to make this country so great... but I agree with Mr. Shapiro and think sometimes the disrespect can go a little too far.

 

[Anonymous.]

I supported bush all the way. When he came into office, he had to deal with so many different messes, mostly ones left behind by clinton.

 

[SkylerOcon]

I think Bush would agree with that article. The only problem is, he couldn't read it. To many big words.

 

[deepseadiva]

Yeah... I've been tired of Bush jokes for YEARS.

 

[Blackadder]

America, you suuuuuuure better apologies to your president. He's a good man. Really. Stop insulting him.

...In all seriousness, I say **** it. The guy's a ****. He's the reason so many troops, both from America and Iraq are dead. Sick of Bush jokes or not, he deserves the kicks he gets these days.

 

[Anonymous.]

America, you suuuuuuure better apologies to your president. He's a good man. Really. Stop insulting him.

...In all seriousness, I say **** it. The guy's a ****. He's the reason so many troops, both from America and Iraq are dead. Sick of Bush jokes or not, he deserves the kicks he gets these days.

LOL way to blame the president of the united states for the actions of the people fighting in iraq. yeah, real smart.

 

[Crimson King]

That article drips with that fear-mongering that Republicans love. I think the last paragraph even said that our enemies are watching us not support our president.

Fact is we haven't had a truly good president in ever. We either overly glorify them (as with Kennedy and Lincoln) or we over vilify them to comedic proportions (Bush and Clinton), and it becomes a joke when in reality they are horrible presidents and people. I am confident that for as long as I live, Bush will always remain a joke.

LOL way to blame the president of the united states for the actions of the people fighting in iraq. yeah, real smart.

What? Bush sent troops to Iraq. I really don't understand this line at all.

 

[Blackadder]

LOL way to blame the president of the united states for the actions of the people fighting in iraq. yeah, real smart.

He sent them there to fight and kill. Y'know -- do the whole "war" thing.
So, uh, yeah, I'm gonna sort of blame him for that bit.

As for some of the really strange and inhumane acts that some troops have kicked into (not that war isn't already one of them), no, I don't blame him for that. Those guys are the ones responsible for shooting prisoners and whatnot.

But for sending them off to fight in a stupid war, yes, yes I do blame him.

C'mon man -- you can't say in good mind that Bush is a even decent president. He's a dog**** one. The guy has no brain. He's DANGEROUS for your country, hell, dangerous to a lot of other countries too. Take a good look at what he's done for your country in the short time he's been in power.

He brought these Bush Jokes and **** onto him.

 

[Osco316]

"LOL way to blame the commander in chief of the armed forces for the actions of the armed forces LOL"

 

[Circus]

History will think better of him than we do. Current opinions aside, he'll be known to the history books as the President who guided us through the panic that is post-9/11 America. Don't you fret.

With that said, I think you could make the argument that certain other presidential candidates might've handled the challenges Bush was faced with in a more effective way. Maybe Gore, with his internet-inventing, plastic-recycling mind, would've come up with some ludicrously brilliant way of reacting to 9/11 that no one else would've thought of. I highly doubt it, but we'll never know.

Basically, my point is, even though Bush certainly got dealt a bad hand, you can argue that he still played poorly. It BLOWS that the country got attacked right at the beginning of his term, but that's the **** you need to consider when applying for the job. Even if he didn't foresee a terrorist attack, he still needs to know how to properly respond to one, as a leader. Many would say that throwing away billions of dollars a month in Iraq under the guise that it's part of the war on terror is the wrong way to go about it. Bush didn't need to be flawless, but he should have been the best thing we could have gotten at the time. And it just seems to most people like we could've elected someone better. Hindsight's 20/20, after all.

 

[Mic_128]

History will think better of him than we do. Current opinions aside, he'll be known to the history books as the President who guided us through the panic that is post-9/11 America.

And lead the world into the Greatest depression since World War II?

 

[GreenKirby]

*looks at who runs the link the OP posted*

Of course, they feel that Bush is being attacked to much. If Bush paid me $700 billion dollars, I would be saying nice things about him too. >_>

 

[Crimson King]

History will think better of him than we do. Current opinions aside, he'll be known to the history books as the President who guided us through the panic that is post-9/11 America. Don't you fret.

With that said, I think you could make the argument that certain other presidential candidates might've handled the challenges Bush was faced with in a more effective way. Maybe Gore, with his internet-inventing, plastic-recycling mind, would've come up with some ludicrously brilliant way of reacting to 9/11 that no one else would've thought of. I highly doubt it, but we'll never know.

Basically, my point is, even though Bush certainly got dealt a bad hand, you can argue that he still played poorly. It BLOWS that the country got attacked right at the beginning of his term, but that's the **** you need to consider when applying for the job. Even if he didn't foresee a terrorist attack, he still needs to know how to properly respond to one, as a leader. Many would say that throwing away billions of dollars a month in Iraq under the guise that it's part of the war on terror is the wrong way to go about it. Bush didn't need to be flawless, but he should have been the best thing we could have gotten at the time. And it just seems to most people like we could've elected someone better. Hindsight's 20/20, after all.

The winners rewrite history. Of course in text books he'll be seen as a good president. Lincoln is considered one of the best, but give me a day and I can produce enough quotes to show you he was one of the worst presidents of them all. Most of those quotes are suppressed by his supporters (such as how he gave a fiery speech about banning black people from ever being able to marry with whites or how, as president, he asked his general numerous times for the cost to send black people back to Africa).

Fact is AMERICAN textbooks for high schools and elementary schools will never show the true side of presidents. Ever.

 

[AltF4]

CK's right. Lincoln was an ***.

Remember that episode of Star Trek when Abraham Lincoln was brought back from the past onto the enterprise? He walked right up on to the bridge and said to Uhura "What a charming negress!" Can you believe that guy! Seriously...

 

[GreenKirby]

^That sounds like a culture issue to me.

 

[ZeroFox]

CK's right. Lincoln was an ***.

Remember that episode of Star Trek when Abraham Lincoln was brought back from the past onto the enterprise? He walked right up on to the bridge and said to Uhura "What a charming negress!" Can you believe that guy! Seriously...

What the heck??? Haha that's actually kind of funny =P

 

[Jam Stunna]

I didn't read the article, but I came to the conclusion long ago that Bush isn't a bad guy, just a bad president.

Of course it's far too early for this, but I think that in a few years historians will look back at the Bush presidency as a battle for control of the Republican party. There really were larger forces at work in the Bush administration. I'm not talking any of that conspiracy-theory "Cheney really runs the world" crap, but the ideological struggles were present from day one. In his first term, he had the Cold Warriors (Cheney and Rumsfeld) vs. the new school (Rice and Powell). Old school won, so we end up with Iraq, Cheney's Energy Task Force and the departure of Colin Powell.

In his second term, it's almost a 180 degree shift. Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz are out, replaced by Gates; Rice is promoted to Secretary of State (although there are those who say this was a golden parachute, to prevent two high-profile defections from the administration); Cheney virtually disappears to his undisclosed location. Bush of the last 4 years is a great improvement over the first four, and I think what you see there is the expulsion of the more radical elements of his administration, and him getting back to who he really is.

People fail to realize that George W. Bush is NOT a neo-con. He crushed the democratic challenger for the governorship of Texas in 1998, becoming the first Texas governor to win re-election in 50 years, I believe. He overwhelmingly carried the Hispanic vote, and you just can't do that on a platform of "conquering the world". Speaking of which, the immigration reform attempt is the perfect encapsulation of his administration, I believe. Bush wanted to take a moderate, comprehensive approach to immigration, yet he was defeated primarily by the more extreme elements in his own party. This has been the story of his presidency, but he did bring it on himself. He mobilized the base to win re-election in 2004, and it turned on him.

There are some things that are just beyond the control of any man: September 11th, Hurricane Katrina (once again: it was Karl Rove's idea to do the universally panned fly-over picture), the sub-prime mortgage crisis. Bush responded poorly to all of these disasters, yes. I wouldn't argue otherwise. But people try to place blame on him for them occurring in the first place, which I think isn't fair.

In the end, I think Bush will be looked at as a low-to-bottom tier president. Sadly for him, he was not the type of leader that could handle extraordinarily difficult times, both in foreign policy, natural disasters, domestic policy and within his own party. He's a bad president, but I wish people would stop viewing him as an evil man.

 

[#HBC | Mac]

The winners rewrite history. Of course in text books he'll be seen as a good president. Lincoln is considered one of the best, but give me a day and I can produce enough quotes to show you he was one of the worst presidents of them all. Most of those quotes are suppressed by his supporters (such as how he gave a fiery speech about banning black people from ever being able to marry with whites or how, as president, he asked his general numerous times for the cost to send black people back to Africa).

Fact is AMERICAN textbooks for high schools and elementary schools will never show the true side of presidents. Ever.

hmmm.... i'd be interested in learning more about this.

 

[tmw_redcell]

It's hard not to view him as an evil man, he practically rubs it in our faces. "Goodbye, from the biggest polluter in the world!" And his response to the discovery of secret illegal prisons was "So what?" I'm not convinced he's just a good guy in over his head.

The best part of Bush's legacy will be foreign aid to Africa.

The President is not entitled to respect. I'd hope that, when Obama comes into office, all the Republicans who end up hating him for ******** reasons will shut up because "god darnit he's our PREZUH-DENT and we should stick by 'im!" but it was obviously just a talking point.

Also as far as I can tell, the last competent president was Eisenhower and the last good person to work in a U.S. administration was Colin Powell.

 

[.Marik]

Bush was an idiot.

That's what us Canucks, you Americans, and the rest of the world thinks.

Face it, the guy left the States in a horrible mess.

 

[The Smash God Of 64]

I think Bush would agree with that article. The only problem is, he couldn't read it. To* many big words.

*Too (corrected)

It's a pity the people that do all the bashing are quite the grammatical idiots themselves. In the midst of all the stress the President of the U.S. has to endure, does an occasional slip-up in speech define whether they can handle the responsibility of that overwhelming position in which there are WAY more important issues than speaking correctly? Although I agree the government in a whole, is pretty nasty, and Bush was quite the flake the last three years or so. But everyone puts way too much emphasis on the executive branch when they don't take in to account Congress does more running of this country than the President. He's pretty much just the frontman. Like a singer in a band, even though they get all the attention, they hardly, if at all, contribute to the writing of the music. The last term Bush had, he had a democratic majority in Congress. Everyone gives so much credit to the Clinton era on economy when his whole time in office, he had a republican majority in Congress. I'm all for having some fun with every president (whether democrat or republican), just like celebrities. But there needs to be some sort of respect maintained for them, or they would have never been elected in the first place.

 

[Anonymous.]

Maybe you should all go on worldwide televison in front of millions of people, and give a big speech about world wide disasters. Lets see if you get it 100% correct lolz.

 

[derek.haines]

Everyone gives so much credit to the Clinton era on economy when his whole time in office, he had a republican majority in Congress.

The 103rd United States Congress, encompassing the first and second year of Clinton's presidency, had Democratic majorities in both chambers. It would be the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993, passed without a single Republican vote, and the expansion of the Earned Income Tax Credit that would lay the groundwork for the economic boom which is recognized by the current administration as having begun in 1995.

 

[Circus]

And lead the world into the Greatest depression since World War II?

I'm generally of the opinion that U.S. textobooks paint the past in as bright and colorful a light as possible. Like CK said.

So I can see them saying "...and during the end of George W. Bush's second term, the economy took a turn for the worse." No blame, just happenstance.

Of course, I haven't opened a history book in years, so maybe they're more critical than I recall. I just remember thinking that all of our past presidents must have been perfect human beings due to the complete lack of criticism they seemed to get in my schoolbooks.

Maybe you should all go on worldwide televison in front of millions of people, and give a big speech about world wide disasters. Lets see if you get it 100% correct lolz.

I'm basically 100% certain that his public speaking is not the main reason people are pissed at him. Everyone can laugh when someone gaffs on TV. Flubbing lines in a speech is great media fodder, but no one would actually hold that against him as a legitimate reason to call his competency as president into question.

 

[Eor]

People point out that "truman had low approval rating and now he's loved", as if that somehow means "Bush will be great too". You know who also had low aproval rating? Richard Nixon and Jimmy Carter. Neither of them are being written in as one of the greatest presidents. I think that, in the future, Bush will not be viewed as badly as he is now, but I do not think he'll be considered a "great president", at best I think he'll be considered "a mediocre president in terrible times".

 

[Marc]

Americans aren't viewed very positively here and Bush is no exception. I personally thought he deserved his second term over Kerry and was glad that he got it. In general, I'm closer to Democrats than Republicans (like most other Dutchies) though. Bush was a president in bad times and though he didn't come across as very smart, he doesn't deserve all the hate he's getting. He couldn't do much about many things, it's the Americans themselves who screwed up (especially in the financial crisis).

 

[urdailywater]

What? Bush sent troops to Iraq. I really don't understand this line at all.

I'm still taking government so I'll try at this.

Doesn't Congress decide whether or not take put troops in other countries? I know the president can draft soldiers and send them to places in the U.S. for national issues but Congress is the war maker/troops holder.


I could be wrong.

I agree with the article. No way was Bush a terrible president. The country hasn't hit a depression yet, has it?

 

[BlackFoxPariah]

I think it's natural to want to blame the highest up for today's issues. The real problem is that people don't fully understand what is going on and not all of the blame should be placed on one person when likely many people in the government had a say in it. The trend of this term has been: "Blame Bush for everything." I just think before blame is being given out at least learn who was responsible and what their exact actions are. I mean blaming the president for a hurricane doesn't make any sense and other such things.

 

[Pink Reaper]

And lead the world into the Greatest depression since World War II?

People really need something better to compare the current economic troubles to the Great Depression. When people start jumping out of buildings then we can talk.

 

[Eor]

I'm still taking government so I'll try at this.

Doesn't Congress decide whether or not take put troops in other countries? I know the president can draft soldiers and send them to places in the U.S. for national issues but Congress is the war maker/troops holder.

The president is commander in chief, but he required Congress's authorization for the war in Iraq, which he got after pushing for it.

I agree with the article. No way was Bush a terrible president. The country hasn't hit a depression yet, has it?

There is no widely agreed standards to define if a country is in a depression, but with the economy going south and no real way to rebound, then I'd say it's pretty obvious we're in a depression.

People really need something better to compare the current economic troubles to the Great Depression. When people start jumping out of buildings then we can talk.

He said greatest since the great depression, which is completely true.

 

[Thrillhouse-vh.]

Fact is AMERICAN textbooks for high schools and elementary schools will never show the true side of presidents. Ever.

For my U.S. History class last year, we had to read Howard Zinn's "A People's History of the United States" and compare that to a public high-school text book "An American Odyssey."

BIG ****ING DIFFERENCE between the two.

I totally agree with over-glorifying the presidents. Washington wanted to be called "MISTER President" to get the formal familiarity of the idea that the President could be anyone in the country.

 

[Charizard92]

... Have any of you guys FORGOT THE PAST 8 YEARS ALREADY?! Bush was a rather horrid president by almost every standard, even failing his own. Here's a rather short list on how he drove America into Hell.

1: Iraq: Oh how many reasons I can cram into this one. Now here's another list on how this sent us to Hell:
a: We entered a war we didn't need to enter in the first place
b: Energy and supplies are being diverged from Afghanistan, which we need to focus on
c: we lost Focus on Al Qaida, who WERE THE ONES WHO ATTACKED US
d: We are losing Allies
e: Over half of the World population thinks poorly of us
f: we are wasting money here, not to mention borrowing it from China, and spending more of it from Oil from Saudi Arabia

2: The environment: Once again, another list:
a: he failed to ratify the Kyoto Protocol
b: Gas mileage is still ****
c: We are more focused on getting more oil than searching for another fuel source
d: Oil Prices are kept low, WE SHOULD TAX THE **** OUT OF OIL, LIKE IN EUROPE!

3: The economy: Time for the BIG reason why The US is in hell:
a: Bush cut taxes, the first time somebody tried winning a war, via cutting taxes
b: Bush Cut taxes for the wealthy 2%, Where do ya think we should be getting our money from?
c: We're borrowing from China, To fuel a stupid war and funding our enemies

Again, Bush drove the US into Hell. Hopefully, he didn't drive it deep enough for Obama to fish it out.

Oh yeah, by the way, at this rate, a Tax increase is inevitable. We can't Cut taxes and hope we can fish ourselves out. Bush Made it so that we have to feel pain, a lot of pain.