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.
No, I was pointing out the hyprocasy of the Dems that blame Bush for 9/11, yet deny any blame on the part of Obama for the current state of the economy. It's the same situation in both cases, they inherited poor situations, but at some point have to man up and accept responsibility under their watch. I guess my scarcasm wasn't obvious enough, sorry about that.
I usually catch the sarcasm, but anyway, I do not think that there is any intelligent Obama supprter that has not also been his critic, but in all honesty, the guy was left with a disaster concerning the economy and two wars, Let's not forget that The Bush family was nice enough to throw in the added bonus of detainees that nobody wants to take responsibility for. You cannot put a time limit on how long this will take to resolve. I admire Obama for his many attempts to be bipartisan. In fact, that is very frustrating as Obama is way more the Centrist than many were hoping he would be. He has even been criticized for saying that he's rather be a one term POTUS that accomplished some good things than a two term POTUS that just pandered to get votes. How ridiculous that some would prefer the opposite. He has accomplished things that many agree with and applaud him for and things that some do not agreee with, but I think that comes with the territory. To judge him after one year with all that was left on his plate, is insane. I voted for Obama, but I supported another candidate during ghe primaries. Bush had eight long years to do the damage that he did, I think tha it is only fair to at least give Obama his first term before assuming that his Presidency is a failure.
...but in all honesty, the guy was left with a disaster concerning the economy and two wars, Let's not forget that The Bush family was nice enough to throw in the added bonus of detainees that nobody wants to take responsibility for...
I don't deny that, however the original post I replied to was an attempt to place responsiblity for 9/11 on Bush (which happened about 8 months after he took office), while Obama supporters are refusing to accept any responsiblity for the economic mess that is still occuring 1 year after he has taken office.
Don't forget that under Clinton's watch the defense department was largely gutted, especially in terms of active duty manpower. One of the items Bush is so critized for is utilization of the National Guard in an overseas roll. This came about as a result of Clinton policies to do exactly that, in order to reduce expenses assoicated with a "full time" military force. It's actually a decision I largely agree with, if we are going to fund the NG, they should be utilized. In addition, under Clinton (and past administrations), information sharing between domestic and international overseas intelligence organizations was prohibited, or at least actively discouraged. Yet for all that, I don't recall Bush whining about the mess he inherited from previous adminsitrations during his SOTU addresses...though I could have forgotten it.
As for the detainees no one wants to take responsibility for, we have a perfectly valid place to keep them now...it was Obama's decison to state that he would close Gitmo a month ago..with no plan as to the disposition of the detainees. Bad idea, but I guess no one was really paying attention and it played well during the campaign.
I don't deny that, however the original post I replied to was an attempt to place responsiblity for 9/11 on Bush (which happened about 8 months after he took office), while Obama supporters are refusing to accept any responsiblity for the economic mess that is still occuring 1 year after he has taken office.
Don't forget that under Clinton's watch the defense department was largely gutted, especially in terms of active duty manpower. One of the items Bush is so critized for is utilization of the National Guard in an overseas roll. This came about as a result of Clinton policies to do exactly that, in order to reduce expenses assoicated with a "full time" military force. It's actually a decision I largely agree with, if we are going to fund the NG, they should be utilized. In addition, under Clinton (and past administrations), information sharing between domestic and international overseas intelligence organizations was prohibited, or at least actively discouraged. Yet for all that, I don't recall Bush whining about the mess he inherited from previous adminsitrations during his SOTU addresses...though I could have forgotten it.
As for the detainees no one wants to take responsibility for, we have a perfectly valid place to keep them now...it was Obama's decison to state that he would close Gitmo a month ago..with no plan as to the disposition of the detainees. Bad idea, but I guess no one was really paying attention and it played well during the campaign.
There's something very obvious to me that I guess you will not agree with, but 'll say it straight. Bush did not whine because he, Cheney and the rest of the administation did not come in to govern. It made no difference what consequences the American people or the Iraqi people suffered. The agenda was to enrich corporate interests, no more, no less. If Cheney and Rumsfeld along with Karl Rove had their way, the PNAC woud have fufilled the diabolical agenda. I consider the previous administration a bona fide crime family and have never made any bones about it. Regardless of who is ultimately responsible for 9/11, it was used as a catapult to launch an illegal war on a sovereign nation and war is a racket. Many became rich and many paid a dear price. Too many things stink about what happened between 9/11 and the time that Bush and his cronies left office. If I am disappointed in Obama, it is because he has chosen not to look back on what was perpertrated. So, to fault him for blaming Bush for anything is silly. IMO...he did not blame Bush and hold him responsible for enough.
Last edited by sickofnyc; 01-29-2010 at 01:55 PM..
Republicans what is your view of GW Bush? Would it be a good idea for the republican party to distance itself from GW Bush as he did not live up to all the promises of many republican supporters?
Of course many on the US Right feel betrayed by the Bush administration's version of conservatism, just as many Democrats felt betrayed by Carter's liberalism.
my feelings are pretty mixed..I think he made a lot of mistakes, but I also think he gets blamed for things he did not do..
More than anything, I would like to know what difference this makes now? He is no longer Pres, we are living new problems, some carried over for 8 years or longer and I, for one am tired of discussing Bush..
There's something very obvious to me that I guess you will not agree with, but 'll say it straight. Bush did not whine because he, Cheney and the rest of the administation did not come in to govern. It made no difference what consequences the American people or the Iraqi people suffered. The agenda was to enrich corporate interests, no more, no less. If Cheney and Rumsfeld along with Karl Rove had their way, the PNAC woud have fufilled the diabolical agenda. I consider the previous administration a bona fide crime family and have never made any bones about it. Regardless of who is ultimately responsible for 9/11, it was used as a catapult to launch an illegal war on a sovereign nation and war is a racket. Many became rich and many paid a dear price. Too many things stink about what happened between 9/11 and the time that Bush and his cronies left office. If I am disappointed in Obama, it is because he has chosen not to look back on what was perpertrated. So, to fault him for blaming Bush for anything is silly. IMO...he did not blame Bush and hold him responsible for enough.
It sounds like you have a pretty firm opinion, we'll have to agree to disagree.
In terms of enriching special interests, do you have an issue with Obama continuing what are essentially the same policies that Bush had? Or with Obama voting for the Bush "round 1" of "bailouts"? I did have an issue with Bush on that, and with McCain (as well as Obama) for voting for them during the campaign. Or that (IIRC correctly) Obama voted approximately 90% with Bush while he was a senator?
A great man and a great President. Bush has been pretty quiet since leaving office, with the exception of this Bush/Clinton Haiti Fund. I think he wants to respectfully let his successor do his thing. For that reason, I don't think whether or not other Republicans want to "associate" themselves with him or not really matters much.
A great man and a great President. Bush has been pretty quiet since leaving office, with the exception of this Bush/Clinton Haiti Fund. I think he wants to respectfully let his successor do his thing. For that reason, I don't think whether or not other Republicans want to "associate" themselves with him or not really matters much.
Like the cat that ate the mouse. I'd be quiet too if I just pulled off the largest heist and scam in American history and nobody has yet come knocking on my door.
Like the cat that ate the mouse. I'd be quiet too if I just pulled off the largest heist and scam in American history and nobody has yet come knocking on my door.
Ok I am pretty sure you are NOT a republican and since the OP asked for REPUBLICANS views why don't you bug off.
Republicans what is your view of GW Bush? Would it be a good idea for the republican party to distance itself from GW Bush as he did not live up to all the promises of many republican supporters?
Of course many on the US Right feel betrayed by the Bush administration's version of conservatism, just as many Democrats felt betrayed by Carter's liberalism.
Didn't like Bush- he was a liberal. He-
1. Increased federal spending and the debt
2. Increased social spending with the medicare drug plan
3. Failed the party on immigration reform and took a liberal stance
4. Failed in trade negotiations
We will get a real conservative in 2012, as Obama's failures have almost assured a reaction to the other extreme.
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.
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.
