History Licking Its Chops to Judge George Bush
America's
most accurate news organization interviews History
“And if you think I’m going to miss my shot to examine the bastard’s
denial of climate change through the lens of contemporary scientific
consensus, then you’ve got another fucking thing coming,” the
perpetually growing branch of knowledge added.
History went on to say that it had already sized up numerous aspects of
the Bush legacy for in-depth scholarly appraisal, admitting that it was
eager to “have its way” with Bush’s stances on stem cells, drilling in
the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, the near doubling of the national
debt . . . .
More at the link
The Onion, funny stuff.
ReplyDeleteNice one Eli.
We'll see how a_ray disagrees with my post out of spite, because he just cannot control himself.
ANON@7:35,
ReplyDeleteNo problems agreeing with you on those rare occasions when you are right.
How can history harry those already immortalized in bronze?
ReplyDeleteWho is George Bush?
ReplyDeleteThe average value of who is 42.
ReplyDeleteI pretty much feel the same way about Obama. He's a product of our time. He's bent to the will of the American people. And the people are totally bent the wrong damn way. I think history will judge this period of time very harshly.
ReplyDeleteStopped clocks are right twice a day.
ReplyDeleteA Noony Mouse, on the other hand, ...
History will agree with me that Bush was far from the worst president. He's third, after Buchanan and Pierce.
ReplyDeleteI'd actually put Bush as worse that Pierce, though not Buchanan. My favorite Buchanan quote:
ReplyDelete"No state can secede from the Union...unless it wants to."
Buchanan probably bears more responsibility for the Civil War than any other President. One could argue about whether Harding and Coolidge rival Bush and Buchanan as well.
The worst President in history is very likely to be the next Republican who gets in.
ReplyDeleteRegards, Millicent
W was without a doubt the worst two-term president, those other guys were one and done...
ReplyDelete"I'd actually put Bush as worse that Pierce, though not Buchanan. "
ReplyDeleteI agree with this...
"One could argue about whether Harding and Coolidge rival Bush and Buchanan as well."
Coolidge merely fiddled while Rome burned (or, at least, our economy).
Buchanan proactively took steps that led the country closer to division. That makes him worse, IMO.
Harding was corrupt, but otherwise his administration was a mixed bag. Especially considering he and his colleagues were explictly trying to walk back the party from the progressivism that had marked much of its history.
Mixed bag from Wiki:
"Harding signed the first child welfare program in the United States and dealt with striking workers in the mining and railroad industries, including supporting an eight hour work day. The unemployment rate dropped by half during Harding's administration.[7] Harding also set up the Bureau of the Budget that helped curb and keep track of excessive federal spending. Harding advocated an anti-lynching bill to curb violence against African Americans; however, the Solid South Democrats and one prominent Republican blocked the legislation. In foreign affairs, Harding spurned the League of Nations, and officially ended World War I, having signed a separate peace treaty with Germany and Austria. Harding was the first president who successfully promoted and implemented a world Naval disarmament and urged U.S. participation in a proposed International Court."
Apparently Harding coined the term "Founding Fathers", a term much associated with dinosaurs who want to roll the world back to 1776. That's a black mark, I guess.
> worst president
ReplyDeleteCandidate Nixon's undermining the 1968 peace talks -- and LBJ's decision not to reveal that before the election -- rank high with me.
Yet the vast majority of environmental and conservation laws which have had such an impact on our natural resources were passed under Nixon's administration.
ReplyDeleteNEPA, ESA, NFMA, Clear Water/Air Acts. Creation of the EPA.
Also toyed with negative income tax for the poor, made an offer on national healthcare that teddy kennedy could and did refuse (leading to no action until obamacare).
He was also dishonest, broke the law, bombed cambodia, leveled Hanoi, lied about his "secret plan to end the war", undermined 1968 peace talks, etc.
While opening detente (compare with Reagan's "evil empire" approach), opened relations with China ...
I hated Nixon and he deserved the impeachment and convictino he was going to get if he'd stayed in, but in retrospect there were a lot of positive accomplishments under his administration.
Of course, many Russians say the same about Stalin...
Can you name one good thing that Buchanan, for instance, did?
> one good thing that Buchanan
ReplyDeletedidn't, anyhow:
he didn't last as a candidate
Presidential IQ:
ReplyDeletehttp://cseweb.ucsd.edu/users/gary/iq.html
places G.W. Bush quite far down.
During the Bush years, after the lies about Iraq, the illegal wiretapping, the suppression of the costs of the Medicare prescription drug benefit, and incidents like the quick reversals of the public statements of people like John J. DiIulio Jr. and Richard Clarke, I don't think it's unreasonable to see the Bush Admin as a collection of gangsters and thugs that was unique in our history. And that doesn't even touch the vote suppression in Florida in 2000 or Ohio in 2004. In comparison, Buchanan was simply a venal, lazy man.
ReplyDelete"I don't think it's unreasonable to see the Bush Admin as a collection of gangsters and thugs that was unique in our history."
ReplyDeleteDisagree. Just a collection of thugs killing millions by proxy, but less than during the Reagan administrations and en then there was Nixon and before that the Truman Doctrine.
A dynasty, dienasty, of sorts, that.
"In comparison, Buchanan was simply a venal, lazy man."
ReplyDeleteAfter being elected, but before being sworn in, he secretly pressured the southern majority on the Court to broaden the scope of Dred Scott and to rule that the federal government could not ban slavery from the territories, rather than narrowly on Dred Scott's status.
That's not the mark of a lazy man. That's the mark of a man using his newfound power to minimize the influence of the North and rub their face in it.
Jeffrey Davis lives in an alternate universe. The Medicare plan was chanpioned by Kennedy and has nothing on Obamacare in hiding costs.
ReplyDeleteObama is worse than Bush. He has kept all of the Bush policies on the WoT that you hate and has screwed the economy even worse, which we may never recover. Just look at workforce particpation numbers, people on food stamps, poverty levels, deficit and debt. The record is dismal.
But hey you hang on to your hate, let it consume you and please continue to project that upon all those that you meet and disagree with.
"Just look at workforce particpation numbers, people on food stamps, poverty levels, deficit and debt. The record is dismal."
ReplyDeleteThanx to Bush, Bernanke et cetera. Strange how people always expect a Democrat to be some sort of wizard who could clear a Republican mess in an eye wink, and if he can't then of course he's the loser who done it all.
So, the mess is slowly clearing with Obama. Unfortunately he cannot work the wonder of ousting the neoconpolitburo still quite in place.
Obama is in his 5th year.
ReplyDeleteI am sorry your God and Idol is such a failure and you feel compelled to blame someone else for his obvious failures.
Check your health plan for mental health coverage and seek some soon.
Looks like some anonymous replier agrees to everything I said. Not a single argument left, just a wee bit ad hominem.
ReplyDeleteThank you for your appraisal, anonymous, now learn to communicate such a little clearer, as in "Thank you cRR, you are so right again".
re:anonymous @8:00 and the charge that I'm living in another universe.
ReplyDeleteWell, since you're anonymous how can we tell?
None of your points refute anything I said. In particular your point about Obamacare is void for vagueness. As for Obama himself, I've referred to him as Trojan Horse Republican for years.
You seem to be in ignorance of how laws are passed in this country. For years, no law has passed in this country without Republican approval: Republicans control the House and they've displayed a willingness to filibuster minutiae in the Senate. If you object to government fiscal policy, vote out the rascals who pass it. The president only administers the law, he doesn't create it.
But I suspect you know that and you're just bellyaching for effect.
"The president only administers the law, he doesn't create it."
ReplyDeleteTrue and who controlled both houses of Congress from January 2007 - January 2011?
I am not inclined to try to disprove your false assertions, it is up to you to prove them.
As for mine with Obama care and Medicare part D.
Try here
http://reason.com/24-7/2013/02/06/obamacare-exchange-subsidies-to-cost-233
and here
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-03-13/a-model-medicare-program.html
"The result: Medicare Part D has cost more than 30 percent less than initially projected by the Congressional Budget Office in 2004 -- $304 billion compared with $449 billion"
Ouch that is going to leave a mark!
Like I said, you live in an alternate universe.
cRR,
ReplyDeleteI tend not to agree with false information, such as what you provided.
Blaming Bush for econmic conditions in 2013 is ignorant.
And would you guys make up your minds? Davis seems to think the President is powerless when it comes to the economy and yet you all blame Bush for the fiscal crisis in 2008. Further the Democrats controlled both houses of Congress from January 2007 - January 2011.
The religious right has nothing on you guys as far as devotion to a "God".
Gosh, a chiche' spouting troll !
ReplyDeleteHow quaint.
Wow an empty meaningless comment that adds nothing to the topic of the post.
ReplyDeleteHow typical.
who controlled both houses of Congress
ReplyDeleteThere is no 'control', each representative has a vote. As much as you want it to be, we don't advocate authoritarianism is Amurka.
It would be nice if there was some representation and mutual agreement.
Really KT?
ReplyDeleteAnd what universe are you existing in?
Oh your that KT, the one who hates the military and claims that anyone who servers is responsble for the deaths of millions of innocent civilians. You ranted on and on about the military and your disdain was unrestrained. All the fellow Rabett posters of course said nothing to you about your apparent hatred for all people who chose to serve.
ReplyDeleteEven politicians like Brian sat by idle. I am sure Brian will be glad to discuss his tolernace of your views on a blog he is a contributer and moderator of during his possible 2014 re-election campaign.
Always devolves to Rubbish Run.
We're allowed to criticize Amurka in Amurka. That includes its employees, beneficiaries, citizens, taxpayers, employers, the military and veterans. Even its civil servants.
ReplyDeleteAs I said, enjoy your authoritarian fantasies.
"Ouch that is going to leave a mark!"
ReplyDeleteSounds like you don't believe in the crime of attempted murder.
Yes KT and I am allowed to criticize you. And you enjoy your alternate universe.
ReplyDeleteJeffrey,
Wrong again, I see a pattern.