My personal opinion of Bush is that he may be the worst president that we have ever had. The only thing I can think of that was positive is that he did a good job with Aids in Africa. I respect him for that. Besides that, though, he took an economy that was finally in the black and trashed it to the point that now we are in a recession. In addition, he put us in a war that was unnecessary and cost more American lives than the 9/11 tragedy. What's more, he has trampled on our liberties with his "anti-terrorists" tactics. He even trashed the reputation of his party. Barring some Democratic catastrophe, they have no chance in keeping the White House or recapturing either house of Congress.
These arguments did not dissuade my friend from removing her "I'm a Bushie, and Darned Proud of it" bumper sticker. Instead she countered my arguments with, "No, Bush is not the worst. Carter, Nixon, Clinton....all come to mind.We were in the black until 9/11 hit; our country just hasn't fully recovered from that. I think blaming Bush is a scapegoat. During his presidency home ownership has been at an all time high (esp among blacks), unemployment was at an all-time low, and we've had no other terrorists attacks on U.S. soil. I don't think people grasp what has been done to protect us. There are fascists out there who want to kill us. This is why I support the war on terror. After two years of fighting in the Revolutionary War, it grew quite unpopular. I doubt anyone would consider that a waste. Our liberties have been trampled by groups like the ACLU and even Congress. Bush has alienated folks in the Republican party because he is not tough enough. He has folded to the whims of special interest groups and the likes of Pelosi and Reid."
Her response is the kind of thing that keeps me an independent. When I see the Republican and Democratic talking points, I always question them for truth and accuracy. Her rebuttal reminded me that Obama is not the only one with Kool-Aid drinking followers. No offense to her, though. ;)
I will concede that Carter and Nixon were not good presidents. Carter was naive and Nixon was a crook. Nixon was bad, not just because of the crooked activities, but because he is a lot of the reason we have a healthcare crisis in this country. Clinton's job performance was fantastic, though. I can't believe any fair minded person could say, with a straight face, that it was anything other than glowing. As I mentioned in my post, personal and moral lackings aside, was it the peace or the prosperity that people such as my friend objected to the most?
However, Bush is at a whole other level of failure than Carter and Nixon - for the reasons I stated above. However, let's look at what my friend gives him credit for.
Yep, we were in the black before 9/11 - just months after Bush's first term started. Clinton put us in the black after fixing the economic mess that Reagan started and Bush, Sr. kept going.
Homeownership went up - Yes, and the reason was the subprime mortgage disaster. Blacks and Hispanics were hurt the worst with a record number of foreclosures.
Unemployment has been down and that is good, however, the confirming factor that we are, indeed, in a recession, is because in recent months we are losing thousands of jobs - 80,000 just last month and 150,000 since the end of January.
No OTHER terrorist attacks on US soil - I think this is the lamest of all "achievements" that Bushies claim. Gee, we have also had no large meteors hit the Earth, none of the seven plagues of Egypt has befallen us, and no invasions from beings from other planets, either. These things and the fact that California hasn't been detached and lost to the Pacific should encourage us all to put "W" on Mt. Rushmore. You know what? Bush has had more terrorist attacks on US soil than Richard Nixon.
The War on Terror ended, for all practical purposes when the US invaded Iraq. Bin Laden and al Quaida were not in Iraq, they were in the mountainous area around the Afghanistan/Pakistan border. The US diverted way too many resources to the mindless war in Iraq before the job was complete in the terrorist region. The War in Iraq should not be confused with the "War on Terror" - which can't really be won, by the way. We can only hope to contain it.
Comparing the Iraq war with the American Revolution has caught me speechless. I will just let it sit out there without rebuttal.
Our liberties have been trampled by tactics from the Bush administration that enables people to be bugged and have other privacy matters violated without a warrant all in the name of the "Patriot Act." New Rule: Republicans are not allowed to use the word "patriot" until the Bush administration has officially come to a close.
I am no fan of the ACLU, however, and think it has missed its "should-be" focus.
Bush has failed his own party because of all the things I have mentioned, not because of some perceived weakness. Popularity fuels a political party and Bush is one of the least popular presidents in history. If he was a stronger Bush (i.e. pursuing his failed policies more aggressively), I don't think he could survive to the end of his term. My gosh, why do you think the Republicans nominated McCain? It is because he is a maverick (by Republican standards anyway).
So there you have it, Jeff's view of the Bush presidency? What do others of you think? Give me some feedback or at least participate in the poll below (it is way down there so keep scrolling). If you do both, you get Psychosomatic Wit brownie points!
Scroll Down To Vote!
|Who is the worst president of the US since 1900?|
|Franklin D. Roosevelt|
|Harry S. Truman|
|Lyndon B. Johnson|
|Richard M. Nixon|
|George H.W. Bush (the elder)|
|William J. Clinton|
|George W. Bush (the younger)|
|Other (Eisenhower, Ford or Kennedy)|
play online casino rushmore