Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 02-27-2009, 12:19 PM
 
1,336 posts, read 1,532,889 times
Reputation: 202

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bideshi View Post
One odd mistake Bush made was the Harriet Myers nomination to the SC attempt. She was clearly not qualified for that position and I really don't know what he was thinking at the time.
I can't believe you misread the Miers nomination. It was purposely done to get Alito confirmed. Here's how it went. After John Roberts, Senate Democrats like Kerry promised a war if Bush nominated another strong conservative. So in a brilliant move, Bush put up Miers who he knew was questionable. He baited Democrats into challenging Miers based on qualifications, so when he pulled Miers and nominated the highly qualified Alito, Democrats couldn't say anything for fear of looking petty. Thus, Alito sailed through with nary a whimper. That was just brilliant strategy. It was vintage George W. Bush.

 
Old 02-27-2009, 12:52 PM
 
Location: Democratic Peoples Republic of Redneckistan
11,078 posts, read 15,086,202 times
Reputation: 3937
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eeeee22895 View Post
I can't believe you misread the Miers nomination. It was purposely done to get Alito confirmed. Here's how it went. After John Roberts, Senate Democrats like Kerry promised a war if Bush nominated another strong conservative. So in a brilliant move, Bush put up Miers who he knew was questionable. He baited Democrats into challenging Miers based on qualifications, so when he pulled Miers and nominated the highly qualified Alito, Democrats couldn't say anything for fear of looking petty. Thus, Alito sailed through with nary a whimper. That was just brilliant strategy. It was vintage George W. Bush.
Karl Rove,is that you tooting your own horn???
 
Old 02-27-2009, 01:11 PM
 
Location: Texas
989 posts, read 2,499,131 times
Reputation: 698
Quote:
Originally Posted by sickofnyc View Post
Cheney was actually running the show. Bush was a facade for Cheney and Rumsdfeld's evil agenda.
Wow...Amazing!!!

Thanks for posting that brilliant insight!
 
Old 03-01-2009, 10:37 PM
 
1,336 posts, read 1,532,889 times
Reputation: 202
My wife and I were debating about how Bush would be treated in the history books. She's says he'll be treated fine. I'm not so sure. Although Bush did nearly all the right things over his 8 years, he may well get the Herbert Hoover treatment because of this downturn, depending on how bad it gets. The unfortunate thing for Hoover is he did mostly the right thing by not intervening except for his unfortunate error of raising taxes on the rich. But because FDR destroyed the economy, all the blame reverted back on Hoover.

Bush is in a more unfair position. The genesis of the economic problems were none of his doing and he did everything he could to reform Fannie Mae and stop the Democrats. But with the help of the MSM, the blame was somehow affixed to Bush, and that has become the media's narrative even though Obama bears much more of the blame for causing the crisis early on. How Bush is treated as with Hoover, will depend on how badly his successor bungles his job. The media will be happy to blame all of Obama's failings on Bush.

If you have people like Doris (Plagiarize) Kerns Goodwin doing this history, Bush will get trashed. Maybe in 100 years when things can be seen in perspective, and people are perhaps a little smarter, Bush will get the Top 10 legacy he deserves.
 
Old 03-01-2009, 10:39 PM
 
Location: Long Island,New York
8,164 posts, read 15,148,915 times
Reputation: 2534
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eeeee22895 View Post
My wife and I were debating about how Bush would be treated in the history books. She's says he'll be treated fine. I'm not so sure. Although Bush did nearly all the right things over his 8 years, he may well get the Herbert Hoover treatment because of this downturn, depending on how bad it gets. The unfortunate thing for Hoover is he did mostly the right thing by not intervening except for his unfortunate error of raising taxes on the rich. But because FDR destroyed the economy, all the blame reverted back on Hoover.

Bush is in a more unfair position. The genesis of the economic problems were none of his doing and he did everything he could to reform Fannie Mae and stop the Democrats. But with the help of the MSM, the blame was somehow affixed to Bush, and that has become the media's narrative even though Obama bears much more of the blame for causing the crisis early on. How Bush is treated as with Hoover, will depend on how badly his successor bungles his job. The media will be happy to blame all of Obama's failings on Bush.

If you have people like Doris (Plagiarize) Kerns Goodwin doing this history, Bush will get trashed. Maybe in 100 years when things can be seen in perspective, and people are perhaps a little smarter, Bush will get the Top 10 legacy he deserves.
Bush did a fantastic job,but then they told him he was leading the Americans and not in charge of sabotaging them....oooops!
 
Old 03-02-2009, 07:07 AM
 
Location: SE Arizona - FINALLY! :D
20,460 posts, read 26,340,545 times
Reputation: 7627
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eeeee22895 View Post
My wife and I were debating about how Bush would be treated in the history books. She's says he'll be treated fine. I'm not so sure. Although Bush did nearly all the right things over his 8 years, he may well get the Herbert Hoover treatment because of this downturn, depending on how bad it gets. The unfortunate thing for Hoover is he did mostly the right thing by not intervening except for his unfortunate error of raising taxes on the rich. But because FDR destroyed the economy, all the blame reverted back on Hoover.

Bush is in a more unfair position. The genesis of the economic problems were none of his doing and he did everything he could to reform Fannie Mae and stop the Democrats. But with the help of the MSM, the blame was somehow affixed to Bush, and that has become the media's narrative even though Obama bears much more of the blame for causing the crisis early on. How Bush is treated as with Hoover, will depend on how badly his successor bungles his job. The media will be happy to blame all of Obama's failings on Bush.

If you have people like Doris (Plagiarize) Kerns Goodwin doing this history, Bush will get trashed. Maybe in 100 years when things can be seen in perspective, and people are perhaps a little smarter, Bush will get the Top 10 legacy he deserves.
"That's the signpost up ahead - your next stop, the Twilight Zone!"

LOL

Ken
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:23 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top