PDA

View Full Version : Was Bush a Good President?



the afro ninja
05-29-2008, 11:59 PM
LAWL. Just wanted to see who exactly might like Bush.

Worst. President. Ever.
More vacation days than any other president and he never actually won an election. Both times were rigged. T_T

Lets join hands and celebrate the fact he won't be around this time.

Shanto
05-30-2008, 02:29 PM
He only wont be around this time IF Mcaine loses. Mcain is his third term

Guest.
05-30-2008, 02:49 PM
Stop ****ing making fun of him, already. You dumb assess are only doing this to jump on the band wagon. He wasn't good, he wasn' bad.

Nodd
05-30-2008, 03:19 PM
Stop ****ing making fun of him, already. You dumb assess are only doing this to jump on the band wagon. He wasn't good, he wasn't bad.

Everything you say isn't automatically fact.
All things considered, I do not think he was a very good president.

notmaggot
05-30-2008, 03:28 PM
i think he was a horrible ****ing president. im not saying that to jump on the band wagon. its my opinion.

Gray
05-30-2008, 03:34 PM
I CHOSE JIMI HENDRIX CUZ ITS SOOOOOOOOOO RANDOM!!!!!:Happy: :Happy:

Kitsune
05-30-2008, 04:13 PM
No. I wouldn't have done a better job, he did okay with education. He sucked with the war shit, he's a bad liar and speaker.

He deserves little praise.

Not jumping on the bandwagon either. Just don't accuse people of conformity when the majority dislikes him. That's no way to get anyone on your side. All you're doing is making everyone say "Oh and I'm not bandwagoning" in their posts. Maybe people actually DO find him a bad president. I have reasons for my opinions.

Chimaera
05-30-2008, 09:16 PM
Give the black guy a shot/

Upps
05-30-2008, 09:18 PM
I think he wasn't a good president...from one side when he was a president he pretty much made a war, and lied alot, from the other side well...No.

Ash
05-31-2008, 02:15 PM
he never actually won an election. Both times were rigged. T_T

They weren't rigged you idiot, the electoral college ellected him.

Remember, the US isn't a democracy, it's a Republic. (In a democracy we elect officials, and in a Republic we ellect people to ellect officials)

Even if a candidate wins popular vote, the electoral college is the actual decider of the ellection.

Of course, it's a bit more complicated than just that, but that's the basic idea.

Jeremy
05-31-2008, 03:04 PM
No, he was a terrible president.

Exile
05-31-2008, 03:29 PM
I think for what we've gone through in the last 8 years, he did a good job.

We have to remember he's had to deal with the biggest terrorist attack in the US's history, Hurricane Katrina, California starting on fire, rising gas prices and the entire economy basically falling apart because of it, and probably a bunch of other issues I can't currently remember right now. He's probably had one of the most stressful terms a president's had to go through in decades.

For that reason no matter what decision he chooses to make towards these issues that've come up, he's obviously going to draw criticism from a lot of people. For the most part, though, he could have done a lot worse as a president.

Smashdood
05-31-2008, 03:41 PM
I think he made a lot of blunders, definitely, but the crappy leaders of a lot of high government bureaucracies/cabinet/Congress sure didn't help his image. Also, Ben Bernanke.

Partisan politics is becoming more of a hindrance than a help to our government; Bush's 2 terms prove this pretty well.

Dragon⁰⁷⁷
05-31-2008, 03:44 PM
I think for what we've gone through in the last 8 years, he did a good job.

We have to remember he's had to deal with the biggest terrorist attack in the US's history, Hurricane Katrina, California starting on fire, rising gas prices and the entire economy basically falling apart because of it, and probably a bunch of other issues I can't currently remember right now. He's probably had one of the most stressful terms a president's had to go through in decades.

For that reason no matter what decision he chooses to make towards these issues that've come up, he's obviously going to draw criticism from a lot of people. For the most part, though, he could have done a lot worse as a president.
True. It's not the Iraq war that pisses me off about Bush. It's Hurricane Katrina. His response to it (or lack there of) was pathetic and embarrassing.

Infected
05-31-2008, 05:42 PM
Bush was a terrible president. Bush is a idiot with power basically. He doesn't give two ****s about us, and never will. He only cares about how much stuff he can fit in his pockets. I can't even believe how he got elected the second time. A bell should've rang in everyone's head saying, wait, we have enough mistakes done already by this bastard, lets vote democratic for the other guy.

Ash
05-31-2008, 07:18 PM
Infected, READ MY POST.

Infected
05-31-2008, 07:38 PM
Infected, READ MY POST.

Ohhhh.. my bad. lol.

Kitsune
05-31-2008, 08:03 PM
I think for what we've gone through in the last 8 years, he did a good job.

We have to remember he's had to deal with the biggest terrorist attack in the US's history, Hurricane Katrina, California starting on fire, rising gas prices and the entire economy basically falling apart because of it, and probably a bunch of other issues I can't currently remember right now. He's probably had one of the most stressful terms a president's had to go through in decades.

For that reason no matter what decision he chooses to make towards these issues that've come up, he's obviously going to draw criticism from a lot of people. For the most part, though, he could have done a lot worse as a president.
It's true that it's a stressful job, but he has to know how to handle these things when he takes on such a stressful job, like a leader should. Shit always hits the fan in a country as big as the U.S. War ends up happening, crisis breaks in the world at least every year, and systems in America always end up failing, and the president is always somehow to blame for all of this. It really sucks that such judgment passes, but again, in taking a job like this, knowing your position is vital in my opinion.

It's true that he could have done a lot worse, but the point is he could have done much better than much worse. He isn't on the equilibrium of good and bad, but veers toward the bad side of performance. However, there have been much worse presidents even at less stressful times.


Worst. President. Ever.
More vacation days than any other president and he never actually won an election. Both times were rigged. T_T
Harsh claim among over 40 presidents.

Those two claims don't even give a reason for a BAD president, let alone the worst.

Exile
05-31-2008, 11:32 PM
It's true that it's a stressful job, but he has to know how to handle these things when he takes on such a stressful job

There isn't exactly a presidential protocol during unexpected floods, fires and terrorist attacks.

My point is that even if he reacted in the best way possible, there would always be a shitload of people whining about what he did because that's the way of thinking now -- everything he does is wrong.

Dinomut
06-01-2008, 03:15 AM
I think for what we've gone through in the last 8 years, he did a good job.

We have to remember he's had to deal with the biggest terrorist attack in the US's history, Hurricane Katrina, California starting on fire, rising gas prices and the entire economy basically falling apart because of it, and probably a bunch of other issues I can't currently remember right now. He's probably had one of the most stressful terms a president's had to go through in decades.

For that reason no matter what decision he chooses to make towards these issues that've come up, he's obviously going to draw criticism from a lot of people. For the most part, though, he could have done a lot worse as a president.

have you heard of the new book called "What Happened"? It talks about how only a few weeks after 9/11, Bush had already made the decision to try to pin it on Iraq, with no evidence at all to support his theory. He ruined Katrina, and as you can see in China, with their earthquake and all, he did a terrible job. China has actually managed the disaster well and is providing almost full aid to the affected. Bush and FEMA failed while Bush was chilling at his ranch. He caused the death of tens of thousands of people by invading Iraq for no reason, as we can all now see. There was no evidence that Saddam had weapons at all. He's ruined America's reputation for 8 years.

There is no possible argument that can even begin to suggest that Bush handled the disasters that met him well. He and the entire Federal government has failed everyone.

The only possible way that he could have done worse would have been if he... wow i actually have to think... maybe if he died and Darth Chaney was president. Now that would be hell.

Myself
06-01-2008, 05:13 AM
I CHOSE JIMI HENDRIX CUZ ITS SOOOOOOOOOO RANDOM!!!!!:Happy: :Happy:

YOU ARE A COCK GOOD SIR. z

ThatGuy
06-01-2008, 07:15 PM
At no rate is Bush a good president, but he is definitely not the worst. He often gets bashed because of things he didn't even do, but was done by his administration.
Also, people seem to pin the war is squarely because of Bush, but a president can not simply just invade countries at will. Also, Clinton was actually the one to begin action in Iraq, one month after the Iraq Liberation Act. The war also received report by many congressmen and senators, including Hillary Clinton.

I do not support him, I do not like him, but get ****ing educated. He is not the worst president ever, and I don't think he hates black people.

Exile
06-01-2008, 07:48 PM
have you heard of the new book called "What Happened"? It talks about...

Sorry, but quite honestly I've stopped paying attention to the individual people or small groups of them that publish information about what they think happened during disasters, as much as I've stopped caring about people who argue against certain points when their information relies on that type of information. This was mainly thanks to the many Youtube videos that convinced a large number of idiots that Bush was to blame for 9/11.

So yeah, I find your claims to be completely ridiculous.

ThatGuy
06-01-2008, 08:59 PM
...It talks about how only a few weeks after 9/11, Bush had already made the decision to try to pin it on Iraq, with no evidence at all to support his theory.
As I said, we had already been bombing Iraq for three years prior to 9/11, it was a reasonable conclusion to make.


He ruined Katrina, and as you can see in China, with their earthquake and all, he did a terrible job. China has actually managed the disaster well and is providing almost full aid to the affected. Bush and FEMA failed while Bush was chilling at his ranch. He caused the death of tens of thousands of people by invading Iraq for no reason

We were currently at war, with 9/11 occuring not long before, and did not have many men, supplies, or money to spare. Also, where the hell are you getting these numbers? There were only about 2,500 casualties, as compared to the nearly 456,000 casualties in China. Though the percentage may be lower in China, that is still an enormous number. What happened it New Orleans may have been bad, but it has been exaggerated.


There was no evidence that Saddam had weapons at all
This is false


There is no possible argument that can even begin to suggest that Bush handled the disasters that met him well.
This is true


He and the entire Federal government has failed everyone.
This is ridiculous

Dinomut
06-01-2008, 09:00 PM
Sorry, but quite honestly I've stopped paying attention to the individual people or small groups of them that publish information about what they think happened during disasters, as much as I've stopped caring about people who argue against certain points when their information relies on that type of information. This was mainly thanks to the many Youtube videos that convinced a large number of idiots that Bush was to blame for 9/11.

So yeah, I find your claims to be completely ridiculous.
It was written by Scott McClellan, Bush's White House Press Secretary at the time of every disaster I talk about. It's not what he thinks happened, it's what Bush told him and what he saw during his job there. Also, I was talking about Iraq, not Katrina. I exaggerated when i say the government failed everyone. And yes, if you've been following the CIA documentation disclosures, there was no ground to suggest Saddam had WMDs. Actually, before the war, Saddam actually offered Bush to search Iraq for nukes.

Also, there is no argument over whether FEMA did well or not about Katrina. That's set in stone that they did badly. Bush even apologized.

ThatGuy
06-01-2008, 09:03 PM
It was written by Scott Mclellen, Bush's White House Press Secretary at the time of every disaster I talk about. It's not what he thinks happened, it's what Bush told him and what he saw during his job there. So now, kindly read the rest of my post.

Oh, it was written by a politician.
So then we must immediately accept it as fact.

Exile
06-01-2008, 09:07 PM
I love how politicians are only credible when they're confirming conspiracies about other politicians.

Dinomut
06-01-2008, 09:11 PM
Wow it seems the tables have turned. Now you're the conspiracy theorist talking about how Scott McClellan lied about Bush in his book. It all fits into place, except for one problem: why would he lie? He's republican, he worked for Bush, he always supported him, so why lie about him to ruin his credibility? thats what makes this book so much different from everything else. Theres nothing in it for McClellan, in fact theres a bunch of things he'll lose from releasing the book, but it makes him more trustworthy.

Exile
06-01-2008, 09:16 PM
I'm not being a conspiracy theorist, I'm simply saying that most conspiracies rely on the fact that politicians are corrupt, but now that there's a politician confirming some ridiculous claims, it's suddenly reliable information?

Either way we're getting off topic. Most of the reasons you claimed for hating Bush were either very indirectly caused by him or not affiliated with him at all.

MonsterBreath12
06-02-2008, 12:49 PM
Hes Tha Mos|t Awsumest Predosbnt In Tha Horele ****ing World.

the afro ninja
06-02-2008, 07:17 PM
Harsh claim among over 40 presidents.

Those two claims don't even give a reason for a BAD president, let alone the worst.

I respect him as a President, but that doesn't mean he's a good President, he sucks ass. Across 43 Presidents, You have to take into consideration the time period. Right now, I'm not going to complain about Andrew Jackson sending Native Americans away from their lands. It's FAR over. I am also being extremely brief and not referring my sources at all. I just want to see if there's a Bush Loving Faggot in SPPF. Lol, actually I respect others' thoughts, but it's funny to listen to them sometimes.

stare
06-02-2008, 07:25 PM
Jimi Hendrix?!? =O

Yea I do respect Bush, he's had a F***ing hard 2 terms, but he completly sucked balls lol