Jump to content

George W Bush


Thedelldays

Recommended Posts

hmmm

 

maybe..maybe not but he won a second election..with a bigger vote when everyone knew what he was all about..

I suspect that may have had more to do with the lack of credible opposition, to be fair. It was Al Gore, wasn't it, who ran against him in the last election?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The bloke was a colossal fu(k up from start to finish.

 

I agree with that. His record reads:

 

- Iraq

- Katrina - such a pathetic Federal response

- World economic collapse

- Enron links

- Democrat landslide and big majority on both Houses in 2008. Wasn't worth the 2004 victory was it?

- A horrible stain left by the 2000 election

 

He was fantastic comedy value and a lot of comedians are going to have to find new material. In many ways, I think he's great - he's decimated Neo-Con politics and the centre-right can now regain some ground at last.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with that. His record reads:

 

- Iraq

- Katrina - such a pathetic Federal response

- World economic collapse

- Enron links

- Democrat landslide and big majority on both Houses in 2008. Wasn't worth the 2004 victory was it?

- A horrible stain left by the 2000 election

 

He was fantastic comedy value and a lot of comedians are going to have to find new material. In many ways, I think he's great - he's decimated Neo-Con politics and the centre-right can now regain some ground at last.

 

 

i see what you mean

 

Iraq was/is a nightmare - but the democrats backed the invasion

Katrina - The US Constitution ensure that the Govenor is resposible for over seeing his/her state whatever the scale of issue..and the constitution is something the yanks hold very dear...he made all the money and rescources available but allowed the the state to govern itself..which is what america does..

 

as for 2000 election. would the same be said of gore won it..about the possibility of corruption etc..was very bad indeed

 

one thing of note...Bush put more aid money into africa than any other leader in history from any country...and he had the most diverse administration in history too...whether they were any good is another matter..

 

also, on another point..did you know that the US was only attacked once by muslim extremists ONCE while bush was there (albeit a huge attack) but the predicitions of more attacks were unfounded...

under clinton on the other hand...the US was attacked 6 times by islamic extremists and clinton over saw the bombing of Iraq on almost a daily basis....just that it was never really reported..

 

all in all bush was an idiot but...was funny as fook though

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i see what you mean

 

Iraq was/is a nightmare - but the democrats backed the invasion

Katrina - The US Constitution ensure that the Govenor is resposible for over seeing his/her state whatever the scale of issue..and the constitution is something the yanks hold very dear...he made all the money and rescources available but allowed the the state to govern itself..which is what america does..

 

as for 2000 election. would the same be said of gore won it..about the possibility of corruption etc..was very bad indeed

 

one thing of note...Bush put more aid money into africa than any other leader in history from any country...and he had the most diverse administration in history too...whether they were any good is another matter..

 

also, on another point..did you know that the US was only attacked once by muslim extremists ONCE while bush was there (albeit a huge attack) but the predicitions of more attacks were unfounded...

under clinton on the other hand...the US was attacked 6 times by islamic extremists and clinton over saw the bombing of Iraq on almost a daily basis....just that it was never really reported..

 

all in all bush was an idiot but...was funny as fook though

 

Have you been listening to Talksport!? They just made the exact same points on there!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i see what you mean

 

Iraq was/is a nightmare - but the democrats backed the invasion

Katrina - The US Constitution ensure that the Govenor is resposible for over seeing his/her state whatever the scale of issue..and the constitution is something the yanks hold very dear...he made all the money and rescources available but allowed the the state to govern itself..which is what america does..

 

as for 2000 election. would the same be said of gore won it..about the possibility of corruption etc..was very bad indeed

 

one thing of note...Bush put more aid money into africa than any other leader in history from any country...and he had the most diverse administration in history too...whether they were any good is another matter..

 

also, on another point..did you know that the US was only attacked once by muslim extremists ONCE while bush was there (albeit a huge attack) but the predicitions of more attacks were unfounded...

under clinton on the other hand...the US was attacked 6 times by islamic extremists and clinton over saw the bombing of Iraq on almost a daily basis....just that it was never really reported..

 

all in all bush was an idiot but...was funny as fook though

 

Fair points TDD, interesting you should mention about foreign aid because he's also spent more than Clinton on education as well. I was out in the US last year and the Neo-Cons in the Republican Party have been labelling him a "Liberal" - crazy I know - and distancing themselves from him. I just think he was out of his depth which wasn't helped by some really bad eggs around him - Rumsfeld, Cheney (Enron, Haliburton) and people that dated back from the Nixon administration.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

as for 2000 election. would the same be said of gore won it.

 

On any acceptable definition of 'Democracy' Gore did win it; the shennanigins in Florida, ( governed by Bush's brother ), and the subsequent lack of Congressional backbone demonstrate clearly just the sort of freedom and parliamentary system the US is exporting all around the world :cool:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On any acceptable definition of 'Democracy' Gore did win it; the shennanigins in Florida, ( governed by Bush's brother ), and the subsequent lack of Congressional backbone demonstrate clearly just the sort of freedom and parliamentary system the US is exporting all around the world :cool:

 

Quite right. Gore had a good campaign really.

 

Kerry was a bit pathetic.

 

Still, good riddance to bad rubbish with Dubya.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On any acceptable definition of 'Democracy' Gore did win it; the shennanigins in Florida, ( governed by Bush's brother ), and the subsequent lack of Congressional backbone demonstrate clearly just the sort of freedom and parliamentary system the US is exporting all around the world :cool:

 

He knew the way it worked going in. Its not the popular vote but the electoral college that decides it. As for what happened in Florida, don't hear too many Democrats complaining about the Senate election in Minnesota. There the Democrats have overcome a deficit of 200 or so votes to be up by a similar number after a recount. Mostly through arguments as to which ballot papers should count and which should not, much like Florida.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He knew the way it worked going in. Its not the popular vote but the electoral college that decides it. As for what happened in Florida, don't hear too many Democrats complaining about the Senate election in Minnesota. There the Democrats have overcome a deficit of 200 or so votes to be up by a similar number after a recount. Mostly through arguments as to which ballot papers should count and which should not, much like Florida.

Yes, but I don't suppose there were many state troopers physically preventing coloured voters from exercising their mandate ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The bloke was a colossal fu(k up from start to finish.

 

Good f*cking riddance. I have not one positive thing to say about that moron.

 

Yes... try as I might, I can't think of a single good attribute the bloke has. Even his 1st election victory was hugely debatable. Lost the popular vote, but won the last state on the second count, and the Governor was a cousin or something..? Bloody fishy, that one.

 

And people used to go on about Tony Blair..! F**k me, ol' TB is an intellectual giant compared to Gee-Dubbya.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

His handling of the new Orleans flood was superb.

 

 

one thing..the US constitution (i think) dictates (and the americans hold this constution dear) that the governor looks after his/her state in EVERY issue...unless it is a federal issue..

 

I believe, bush gave unlimited funds and services to the govenor for use...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes... try as I might, I can't think of a single good attribute the bloke has. Even his 1st election victory was hugely debatable. Lost the popular vote, but won the last state on the second count, and the Governor was a cousin or something..? Bloody fishy, that one.

 

And people used to go on about Tony Blair..! F**k me, ol' TB is an intellectual giant compared to Gee-Dubbya.

 

 

His brother, Jeb.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The guy used fear to justify his 'war on terror', to gain momentum during the second election and push through such ridiculous acts as the Patriot act. I hope history judges him to be as much of a scumbag as Thatcher.

 

I wouldn't hold Baroness Barmy in such high esteem as 'scumbag', in fact I think that's a slight on all devoted scumbags! I don't feel as strong as Derek Hatton about the Finchley Beach but I did note his comments the other day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

His handling of the new Orleans flood was superb.

 

As has been pointed out elsewhere, that was a state matter and this country takes very seriously what is a state's responsibility and what is a federal matter. You seem a history buff, there was a civil war over states' rights.

 

Katrina was a total **** up, no doubt, but a lot of responsibility fell on the governor and NO mayor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i see what you mean

 

Iraq was/is a nightmare - but the democrats backed the invasion

Katrina - The US Constitution ensure that the Govenor is resposible for over seeing his/her state whatever the scale of issue..and the constitution is something the yanks hold very dear...he made all the money and rescources available but allowed the the state to govern itself..which is what america does..

 

as for 2000 election. would the same be said of gore won it..about the possibility of corruption etc..was very bad indeed

 

one thing of note...Bush put more aid money into africa than any other leader in history from any country...and he had the most diverse administration in history too...whether they were any good is another matter..

 

also, on another point..did you know that the US was only attacked once by muslim extremists ONCE while bush was there (albeit a huge attack) but the predicitions of more attacks were unfounded...

under clinton on the other hand...the US was attacked 6 times by islamic extremists and clinton over saw the bombing of Iraq on almost a daily basis....just that it was never really reported..

 

all in all bush was an idiot but...was funny as fook though

 

Yes, but the programmes he supported were generally ****. In Uganda they hadd a good anti-aids program backed by the EU. Then the US came in and offered more money but they had to change the program. No more handing out condoms but education about abstination. In the end the aids situation got worse again. its often not about how much but how you spend it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, but the programmes he supported were generally ****. In Uganda they hadd a good anti-aids program backed by the EU. Then the US came in and offered more money but they had to change the program. No more handing out condoms but education about abstination. In the end the aids situation got worse again. its often not about how much but how you spend it.

 

 

oh..so are you saying he should dictate on how they run things in africa too..?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm pretty sure history will rightly be judging Dubya favorably in a decade or two....Just as Thatcher is now admired and respected around the world....

 

LOL! I didn't agree with Maggie 1987-90 when she was past it but she did make some neccessary changes - albeit very painful - in the early 1980s. I hated the comment she made about there being no such thing as "society" which she lost a lot of respect for and signalled the carnage to come such as the Poll Tax when she'd surrounded herself by muppets at that stage. Nevertheless, she certainly knew how to use the English language and to compare her to Bush Jnr is plain daft.

 

Bush Jnr leaves office with the same approval ratings as Richard Nixon at the time of his resignation in August 1974 before he was impeached. Says it all really. Even Bush's fellow Neo-Cons don't want to be associated with him and they are almost as unpopular.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

oh..so are you saying he should dictate on how they run things in africa too..?

 

No, that's what Bush did with his disastrous christian abstenence campaign and hundreds of thousands probably died as a consequence.And since when has the West not dictated how things are run in Africa?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

View Terms of service (Terms of Use) and Privacy Policy (Privacy Policy) and Forum Guidelines ({Guidelines})