• Seems like a lot of people are having an issue logging into chat since we updated. Here is what you need to do: Logout of the chat and forums, clear your cache and cookies. Log back in to the forum, then login to the chat with the same user/pass you use for the forums.

What did Bush ever do bad?

  • Thread starterRoSquirts
  • Start date

RoSquirts

Slut Lover!
Beloved Member
Oct 2, 2007
1,019
1
38
sexysquirter.com
To me, this is one of the worst things Bush has done to undermine our system of government and establish a far too powerful executive branch.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/15/washington/15signing.html?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

He has done more to undermine our system of government than any domestic or international terrorist groups, left wing liberal socialists, right wing whackos or even Alexander Hamilton getting his way.

"Mr. Bush has used the signing statements to assert a right to bypass more than 1,100 sections of laws. By comparison, all previous presidents combined challenged about 600 sections of bills. "
 
i aint no bush luver but he aint to blame for all this shit you point at nancy polcie and the other liberal bitches in congress that fucked all this up.
 
Will & Eve said:
It's just a variation on "Executive Orders" which were used largely for the same goal.

I don't like either one but I don't see one as worse than the other.

And I could take the rest of the afternoon listing what Bush did that was bad, so don't think I'm defending him.

It's much more than a variation of executive orders. It's saying that the executive branch can ignore laws passed by the legislative branch bypassing judicial review. In constitutional and legal theory, executive orders are directives intended to execute the laws passed by the legislative branch.

Legally and constitutionally the difference is immense. and proponents of strict or even loose constitutional theory should be appalled.
 
bigjj71 said:
i aint no bush luver but he aint to blame for all this shit you point at nancy polcie and the other liberal bitches in congress that fucked all this up.

I'm very impressed by your comprehension of the issue.
 
bigjj71 said:
i aint no bush luver but he aint to blame for all this shit you point at nancy polcie and the other liberal bitches in congress that fucked all this up.

Honestly, there is a little bit of blame for everyone to go around. Yes, Reaganomics and it's proponents allowed the free market to go minimally checked, Greenspan himself hummed to their beat for two decades plus, Clinton himself did very little in the way of putting effort to pressure change mainly because at that time the system's dire consequences weren't too apparent yet. Sadly to say it takes a horrible situation for the neocons to actually admit that the minimally checked free market system is not a good idea. HOWEVER, the situation now is NOT bad enough to get them to admit to this much more has to happen it seems. And the liberals are sadly using this affair to their advantage to take office much in the same way that Bush/Cheney used september 11th to wield executive supremacy virtually unchallenged. Obama, while I love him like family and I think he would honestly do the best job that could be done and I trust, I do admit that he's using this crises in the same way. BUT THAT IS POLITICS AND IT ISN'T DIRTY AS MCCAIN'S VP USING OBAMA'S ETHNICITY AND THIN CONNECTIONS HE HAD WITH PEOPLE OVER WHOM HE HAD VIRTUALLY NO CONTROL, TO IGNITE AN OLD HATRED! I 'WHOLE HEARTEDLY' AGREE WITH THE GEORGE WALLACE ANALOGY!!! Yes, i know i'm drifting.
In the case of Bush I realize even Will doesn't like him so we can agree on that. There is an old saying an educated fool thinks he knows everything while an educated man of wisdom thinks he knows very little. This is Bush.. thinking that he can run America as though it were a quickie mart, with supreme authority and somehow convinced that he is mentally qualified to do so.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
blkoralslaveboy said:
Honestly, there is a little bit of blame for everyone to go around. Yes, Reaganomics and it's proponents allowed the free market to go minimally checked, Greenspan himself hummed to their beat for two decades plus, Clinton himself did very little in the way of putting effort to pressure change mainly because at that time the system's dire consequences weren't too apparent yet. Sadly to say it takes a horrible situation for the neocons to actually admit that the minimally checked free market system is not a good idea. HOWEVER, the situation now is NOT bad enough to get them to admit to this much more has to happen it seems. And the liberals are sadly using this affair to their advantage to take office much in the same way that Bush/Cheney used september 11th to wield executive supremacy virtually unchallenged. Obama, while I love him like family and I think he would honestly do the best job that could be done and I trust, I do admit that he's using this crises in the same way. BUT THAT IS POLITICS AND IT ISN'T DIRTY AS MCCAIN'S VP USING OBAMA'S ETHNICITY AND THIN CONNECTIONS HE HAD WITH PEOPLE OVER WHOM HE HAD VIRTUALLY NO CONTROL, TO IGNITE AN OLD HATRED! I 'WHOLE HEARTEDLY' AGREE WITH THE GEORGE WALLACE ANALOGY!!! Yes, i know i'm drifting.
In the case of Bush I realize even Will doesn't like him so we can agree on that. There is an old saying an educated fool thinks he knows everything while an educated man of wisdom thinks he knows very little. This is Bush.. thinking that he can run America as though it were a quickie mart, with supreme authority and somehow convinced that he is mentally qualified to do so.

Barney Frank and to a lesser degree Chris Dodd should be investigated for their role in this mess. Frank, in particular, is strongly rumored to have had a relationship with a high-ranking official at Freddie Mac when a lot of the regulation issues were being bandied around the hill back in the late 90s, early 2000.

Clinton, Bush, et al...all wear the same "golden straight jacket" of globalism and so-called "free trade". If you want to learn more on the subject I suggest you look up a journalist named Greg Pallast. He wrote a book called "The Best Democracy Money Can Buy" which lays down the wood on both sides of the political aisle, but squarely points the most blame at their corporate masters who have convinced most of our high-ranking political officials of the efficacy of a globalized system of trade which is, in actuality, driven solely out of greed and increasing profit margins by outsourcing and exploiting cheap foreign labor markets at the expense of our own middle class. The bottom line is that our leaders were duped and anyone who blindly buys into globalism doesn't really understand (or want to understand) what is going on. As Upton Sinclair said, "It's difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it". As we are now feeling the effects in what is probably going to be a long and protracted recession (that will remind people of the 70s/80s recession rather than the relatively tame '91/'01 recessions), it is becoming more and more evident that even to proponents of free trade, unregulated free markets do not function correctly in the long-term.
 
Hello,The things mention here are but the tip of the ice berg of things this adminasration has done to this country in past 8yrs.What I can,t understand is where are we going to get the 700billion for this bail out borrow it, from whom?, if we print it I heard on the media the other day our dollar will be worth around 3-4 cents,they already borrow a billion a day to fight the war,I,m wondering when the country,s were borrowing from are going to want there money back, i,m confused ,ty
 
blkoralslaveboy said:
BUT THAT IS POLITICS AND IT ISN'T DIRTY AS MCCAIN'S VP USING OBAMA'S ETHNICITY AND THIN CONNECTIONS HE HAD WITH PEOPLE OVER WHOM HE HAD VIRTUALLY NO CONTROL, TO IGNITE AN OLD HATRED!

Thin connections???? Read below an article by Jeff Jacoby in the opinion section of today's Boston Globe. (not exactly a right wing rag)

When guilt by association is fair game - The Boston Globe
 
SaltandPepper98 said:
Thin connections???? Read below an article by Jeff Jacoby in the opinion section of today's Boston Globe. (not exactly a right wing rag)

When guilt by association is fair game - The Boston Globe

Well why the hell would you use a conservative, pro-bush pro-reagan article to make the connection? to me that is no different than using the bible to research homosexuality, or Fox News website to research Brian Moore or socialism, but you want to go there? Ok.

Lets talk about Todd Palin and his membership with the Alaskan Independence Party?? Who's founder Joe Vogler HATED AMERICA??? Vogler is said to have things like:
"The fires of hell are frozen glaciers compared to my hatred of the American Government and I won't be buried under their damned flag!"
AND
"I'm an Alaskan not an American I've got no use for America or her damned institutions."

Introduction to the Alaskan Independence Party

Sad, really.
 
People really need to learn that opinion pieces in then news or newspapers are just that - opinion pieces. Theay are not news, not necessarily factually true. You might agree or disagree but that's your privilege. Still doesn't make them factual correct.

Pointing out that the liberal Boston Globe printed this opinion piece could just be taken as minor proof that the liberal media does print non-liberal opinions,lol. I won't even bother to argue the stale and in some cases false assertions in this opinion.
 
Ro, I was merely questioning the assertion of Obama's "thin" connections. Even you have to admit that his connections to socialism, Bill Ayers, the "Reverend" et al are much more than "thin."

For the record, I would classify myself for the most part as an old time Jeffersonian Democrat. What amazes me is how many people not only don't know where they stand in the political spectrum but how each political position, left of center or right of center, affects them.

Now I am out of this thread as I have neither the time nor inclination to put up with the screamings and rantings.
 
Are you fucking kidding ? Bush destroyed America ! We are in the worst shape, we have ever been in. Started the war in Iraq, costing us billions. Giving away all of our Social Security to his pet projects. Why do you think we had to bail out all the banks and car companies. He should be shot for for ruining our country ! There is no doubt, he will become known, as the worst President, we have ever had !
 
$4 a gallon gas.You think that Bush and his Texas friends didn't do this?
 
jiminny1941 said:
Are you fucking kidding ? Bush destroyed America ! We are in the worst shape, we have ever been in. Started the war in Iraq, costing us billions. Giving away all of our Social Security to his pet projects. Why do you think we had to bail out all the banks and car companies. He should be shot for for ruining our country ! There is no doubt, he will become known, as the worst President, we have ever had !

Destroyed America? Worst shape we have ever been in? Giving away Social Security?

The whole world is in a recession. It happens. It's a part of economics. A world economy that has been built on a weak foundation of credit over the past 50 years is the culprit, here. Unfettered growth can't be sustained forever. Eventually, the economy needs to "sleep". As was alluded to in a previous post, Barney Frank and his Democratic cronies chose to ignore the Bush administration's warnings that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were going rogue and were in serious danger of buckling under the weight of their own bad loans. I could spend all night trying to explain economics and the issues that caused the situation of the day, but I wont. It's interesting to me, but boring as shit to most people.

I remember the Democrats being AGAINST the prescription drug bill. Why on Earth would a party that is supposed to have the people's interest at heart try to block this landmark legislation? It's simple... Because they wouldn't get credit for it! They realized that most elderly people vote and that if the Republicans (or Communists or Whigs or Vulcans or whoever) got this passed, then they would likely lose "street cred" with their constituents for a variety of reasons.
 
jiminny1941 said:
Are you fucking kidding ? Bush destroyed America ! We are in the worst shape, we have ever been in. Started the war in Iraq, costing us billions. Giving away all of our Social Security to his pet projects. Why do you think we had to bail out all the banks and car companies. He should be shot for for ruining our country ! There is no doubt, he will become known, as the worst President, we have ever had !

The quicker the name, "George Bush" is forgotten the better for all mankind. You are so right that he was a wicked man; and he finally HAD TO ADMIT that there were no hidden weapons in Iraq. His father should have taken out Sadam Hussein when he had the chance - then the second war would have not been necessary. As the years go by, George will notice all the mistakes he made, with hindsight,all of the things he should have done different.
 
The worse thing he did, along with my former leader Blair, was to take us into Iraq and turn the one sympathetic Arab nation there was into a hellish pit that will make the world a more dangerous place for the next few generations.
 
This is the danger of allowing one person to be President, a form of dictatorship with ability to fire off a salvo of rockets carrying nuclear warheads if he "loses his mind".
 
Why do American Presidents have to keep finding new wars to fight to enable them to be re-elected (because they appear strong Leaders) ?

Obama is being pushed into "appearing strong" over Afganistan to prove he is not a weak Leader. I have confidence that he will do what is best for America in the longer term.

America is well advanced with research into major Health Issues, but is near the bottom for providing cost-effective Health Care. What has happened to the car industry, needs to happen to Health.
 

Users who are viewing this thread