Bush The Liberator

Sweet Emotion

unifiedscene wrote:

I don't think he's stupid per se. But I do think he does not truly understand the implications of his actions upon the world. I think he truly believes that what he has been doing makes the world a better place because it is God's plan. That is why he's been so effective and managed to get reelected... he has that true believer quality that made people believe in him against their own interests and better judgment.

George Bush is a damned fool and criminally so. He found god at an AA meeting and still doesn't grasp what exactly the role of religion ought to be in one's life. What does it say that he's only ever been a dry drunk and that he's been drinking again for years.
He manipulated the zealots with his bullshit Compassionate Conservative nonsense. He was neither. His motivations had nothing to do with America,
except for the access to the military and the treasury- both of which he's devastated. He's a piece of shit human being.

jeffbr

_outlaw wrote:

I hate it when people say that. He knows exactly what the fuck he's doing, quit acting like he's 'out of touch with reality'.

bushie wrote:

Bush added that every day during his eight-year presidency he had consulted the Bible and drawn comfort from his faith.

Someone who uses any book of mythology to guide their daily lives and destroy a nation is out of touch. I don't care what mythological stories you believe in, don't use them to guide a nation.

g under p

unifiedscene wrote:

I don't think he's stupid per se. But I do think he does not truly understand the implications of his actions upon the world. I think he truly believes that what he has been doing makes the world a better place because it is God's plan. That is why he's been so effective and managed to get reelected... he has that true believer quality that made people believe in him against their own interests and better judgment.

Yes through a stolen and computer manipulated election in 2004.

Peace

angelica

jeffbr wrote:

Someone who uses any book of mythology to guide their daily lives and destroy a nation is out of touch. I don't care what mythological stories you believe in, don't use them to guide a nation.

everyone uses their own personal mythology to guide them through each day. The thing is they all think it's "real".

unifiedscene

g under p wrote:

Yes through a stolen and computer manipulated election in 2004.

Peace

Maybe. But even so, he's one of the worst we've ever had... it shouldn't even have been close enough to steal.

Byrnzie

unifiedscene wrote:

Nothing "acting" about it. I think Dick Cheney knows exactly what he's doing, as did Rumsfeld. I think they also knew they had the perfect puppet in Dubya... a man so delusional and simple-minded that he could help sell unconscionable actions to the American public with his dim-witted, down-home hokum.

I think Bush is a true believer, and truly believes he has been some force for good in the world. It's the men behind him that know exactly what he's doing and don't care.

Well said.

Byrnzie

_outlaw wrote:

Him being a puppet doesn't mean he doesn't know what he's truly doing. Bush isn't as stupid as you guys think he is.

I disagree. I think he really is as stupid as I think he is. He's a patsy...a dupe.

g under p

unifiedscene wrote:

Nothing "acting" about it. I think Dick Cheney knows exactly what he's doing, as did Rumsfeld. I think they also knew they had the perfect puppet in Dubya... a man so delusional and simple-minded that he could help sell unconscionable actions to the American public with his dim-witted, down-home hokum.

I think Bush is a true believer, and truly believes he has been some force for good in the world. It's the men behind him that know exactly what he's doing and don't care.

True and in believing this he truly feels he's done no wrong. I don't even think terribly bad about our economic situation well atleast he won't have to deal with solving this nightmare.

Peace

saveuplife

His legacy is completely linked to 9/11 and Iraq/Afghanistan. I do think he will be remembered as handling 9/11 relatively well. But, overreacting afterwards. If Iraq/Afghanistan are vibrant democracies in 10/15 years (i.e. Germany/Japan), his legacy will be positive. That said, I think the chances of that occurring are very small. Therefore, I don't think he will have a positive legacy. But, it's more wait and see with him then any president in recent memory due to what occurred during his tenure.

Kann

saveuplife wrote:

His legacy is completely linked to 9/11 and Iraq/Afghanistan. I do think he will be remembered as handling 9/11 relatively well. But, overreacting afterwards.

That's a big understatement.

If Iraq/Afghanistan are vibrant democracies in 10/15 years (i.e. Germany/Japan), his legacy will be positive. That said, I think the chances of that occurring are very small. Therefore, I don't think he will have a positive legacy. But, it's more wait and see with him then any president in recent memory due to what occurred during his tenure.

Whatever Iraq/Afghanistan become, I don't think anyone will forget in 10/15 years the hundreds of thousands of deaths and fleeing populations. 60 years ago we didn't have mass media, or internet to document exactions like it's done today.
I think the more time passes, the worse his record will get. And everyone will remember W as the stereotype of what a president shouldn't be.

saveuplife

Kann wrote:

That's a big understatement.


Whatever Iraq/Afghanistan become, I don't think anyone will forget in 10/15 years the hundreds of thousands of deaths and fleeing populations. 60 years ago we didn't have mass media, or internet to document exactions like it's done today.
I think the more time passes, the worse his record will get. And everyone will remember W as the stereotype of what a president shouldn't be.

We'll see. My thinking is that Obama will remain in Iraq and increase the presence in Afghanistan. Who knows what else will occur during his Presidency. That will be the most realistic Presidential comparison. If Obama doesn't pull everyone out within the next 2 years. He's giving a figurative stamp of approval to the Bush foreign policy. Personally, I believe that's what will occur.

That said, I don't think Iraq and Afghanistan will be thriving democracies in 10 to 15 years.... so I don't see the Bush legacy being positive. Obama is another story and obviously, we need to give him time.

Smellyman2

saveuplife wrote:

His legacy is completely linked to 9/11 and Iraq/Afghanistan. I do think he will be remembered as handling 9/11 relatively well. But, overreacting afterwards. If Iraq/Afghanistan are vibrant democracies in 10/15 years (i.e. Germany/Japan), his legacy will be positive. That said, I think the chances of that occurring are very small. Therefore, I don't think he will have a positive legacy. But, it's more wait and see with him then any president in recent memory due to what occurred during his tenure.

By doing what siiting in the classroom and doing nothing? What did he do after that?

Biggest myths of his presidency is he "handled" it well. He just happened to have the world behind him and fucked THAT up.

unifiedscene

Smellyman wrote:

By doing what siiting in the classroom and doing nothing? What did he do after that?

Biggest myths of his presidency is he "handled" it well. He just happened to have the world behind him and fucked THAT up.

The people were desperate for a leader to rally around. All Bush had to do was not resign, essentially, and people would have been happy. Of all the candidates running in 2000, he responded worse than any.

saveuplife

Smellyman wrote:

By doing what siiting in the classroom and doing nothing? What did he do after that?

Biggest myths of his presidency is he "handled" it well. He just happened to have the world behind him and fucked THAT up.

He did rather well in my opinion remaining calm, despite what was happening. That footage of him infront of the classroom showed he didn't freak out and run out of there. He remained calm, took in the info and exited slowly. IMHO that was important. I know Michael Moore disagrees. But, everyone is entitled to their opinion and IMHO Michael Moore would hate him no matter what he did. Once he took in what occurred, I also think he did well in his addresses and the speech at ground zero was well done. ON net, I think the majority of America agrees with my take... he did well handling 9/11.... yet, he over-reacted as time went on.


His legacy will be tied to Iraq and Afghanistan.

MrBrian

All this talk of how History will judge Bush, what about how history will judge the American public?

After 9/11 many many many Americans decided to line up and blindly follow Bush. That's just fact.

The flags came out, bumper stickers with 'pride' and 'america' were stuck on cars.

Any criticism someone had of American policy was considered 'anti american' or 'pro terrorist'

It was like the act of 'thinking' was looked at as a negative thing. "How dare you question our government!...we lost 3.000 people!"

Anyone remember how sport stadiums filled with fans cheered when they announced that America started the attack on afghanistan?

Or when some Americans called for 'peace and understanding' they were booed!

Sure now it's easy for people to bad mouth Bush, but at the start. He had your support and you asked no questions! Again, not everyone, but a very very large majority of people.

saveuplife

double post

unifiedscene

saveuplife wrote:

yet, he over-reacted as time went on.

That could be the understatement of the century. And it's impossible to say he handled it well without saying Iraq was a good idea. That was part of him "handling" it and I think everyone agrees that was a complete disaster. He squandered the good will and cooperation of the world with the way he handled it. Yes, he reassured people immediately after, but as I said, anyone could have done what he did in the immediate wake of that day. Clinton would have done well, Gore would have, McCain would have, Obama would have. Any leader with calm and a pulse would have reassured Americans that day. Bush gets no credit for simply doing better than curling up in a hotel room crying. His handling was a disaster.

But I agree with you that him sitting in the classroom is meaningless. Nobody knew what was going on at that moment and Michael Moore would have crucified him no matter what he did. I'm glad he didn't run screaming from the room and terrify a roomful of schoolchildren.

digster

saveuplife wrote:

He did rather well in my opinion remaining calm, despite what was happening. That footage of him infront of the classroom showed he didn't freak out and run out of there. He remained calm, took in the info and exited slowly. IMHO that was important.

Although I don't necessarily disagree, I must say that's a pretty low bar we're setting for our elected leaders there. "He didn't run out of the room screaming and barking orders in front of the children when we were attacked!" I mean, that's it? I know that's not all you were saying, I'm just saying myself.

RolandTD20Kdrummer

saveuplife wrote:

He did rather well in my opinion remaining calm, despite what was happening. That footage of him infront of the classroom showed he didn't freak out and run out of there. He remained calm, took in the info and exited slowly. IMHO that was important. I know Michael Moore disagrees. But, everyone is entitled to their opinion and IMHO Michael Moore would hate him no matter what he did. Once he took in what occurred, I also think he did well in his addresses and the speech at ground zero was well done. ON net, I think the majority of America agrees with my take... he did well handling 9/11.... yet, he over-reacted as time went on.


His legacy will be tied to Iraq and Afghanistan.

Sir...the country is under attack...

Oh. Ok...drool.... Ima sit here and finish this neato book, I would hate to potentially scare these children by getting up and leaving for important business, besides there's children to bomb and murder in Iraq now...

fuckin unreal...

digster

unifiedscene wrote:

That could be the understatement of the century. And it's impossible to say he handled it well without saying Iraq was a good idea. That was part of him "handling" it and I think everyone agrees that was a complete disaster. He squandered the good will and cooperation of the world with the way he handled it. Yes, he reassured people immediately after, but as I said, anyone could have done what he did in the immediate wake of that day. Clinton would have done well, Gore would have, McCain would have, Obama would have. Any leader with calm and a pulse would have reassured Americans that day. Bush gets no credit for simply doing better than curling up in a hotel room crying. His handling was a disaster.

I must say that Bush, in looking back, did not seem that remarkable in his handling of the crisis and its' immediate aftermath, both in private and in public. Giuliani, for example, despite my extreme dislike for him and some of his policies, did handle the immediate aftermath of the situation very well. Speaking as a New Yorker, he hit a note of calm, grievance and optimism that was very necessary in the days afterwards. Bush, on the other hand, looking back, didn't really do that for me.