The Bush Bashin' Thread

[codewarrior]

OH MY GOD WHAT HAVE I DONE! WHAT HAS MY CARELESSNESS CREATED!
All because I uttered that foul word. That horrible word that starts with B and ends in ush. Oh what have I done.

*codewarrior falls to his knees weeping for those to be lost in this new wave of bashing*

P.S. I would not mind if next time Cheney goes hunting, he goes after the monkey first. Before he goes after the lawyers

[Weresmilodon]

You know, something that hit me out of nowhere when I read that was that Ush carries about the same meaning in Swedish as eww, or ick, and similar things, except its something more expected out of an grandmothers mouth then a teenagers..

(And yea, I’m tired, that's probably why I though of it. Logic thinking begone. (Not that it would have belonged in this thread anyway...))

[Sbudda]

Honestly, aside from the whole, 'God told me to xxxx', thing that he seems to do, I still kinda like the guy. In the interest of full disclosure, I am from a Red state (which inexplicably, in he US means conservative) but the guy seems like the little engine that almost could.

Seriously, as much as you may like him or not, he sure does prove that anyone in America can grow up and be President. Especially if your daddy is a rich oil tycoon.

[bbobb]

Seriously, as much as you may like him or not, he sure does prove that anyone in America can grow up and be President. Especially if your daddy is a rich oil tycoon.

Well, I'd say that Clinton proved that anybody with talent and ability, regardless of background can become President, while Bush proved that anybody with the right background, regardless of talent or ability can become President.

Hmmm.... I guess that leaves out the poor schmucks like me who have neither the background nor the talent. Good thing it's pretty darn close to the last job I'd ever want.

bbobb

[Fiferguy]

The best person to rule in anything is the person that absolutely doesn't want it. The man who wants it is the worst person for the job. It goes back to that greed thing I mentioned in the religion topic. The lust for power, money, whatever, makes it a bad thing. And it happens on both sides of the aisle, with any political party that has ever existed. PACs and Special Interest Groups have always had a larger voice because they have more money than the average schmuck, and this means that elected officials and whatnot are more keen to listen to them, since they paid to put them there. Personally, I believe the millions and millions of dollars should be cut down to about $100 per candidate. Of course, this is unreasonable. But in my fantasy world, gunpowder and electricity don't work either...

[Sbudda]

The best person to rule in anything is the person that absolutely doesn't want it. The man who wants it is the worst person for the job.

I totally agree with you there...well except for maybe one cavat. I'd like to see someone who wants to be President so he can have more power when he leaves office than when he entered. IE. wants to give power back to all of the people instead of the government.

Bah. New-q-ler.

[bigbird312]

once i was a red then a blue now and forever more i will always be a
independent voter...

was there ever such a thing as a honest truthful politician sadly in my opinion no!

1st what ever happened to We the People, For the people, By the people

2nd saddest thing of all people/voters have sold there soul's to get what they
want.

[Mark_Reed]

*Disclaimer* This borders on a personal attack. It is not meant as one. Just stating a personal belief about someone else.

Bush's policies are rarely *his* policies. He gets the flak, but a very high percentage of the time they're coming from whatever personal interest group or political activist group owns him. Bush himself is simply too stupid to come up with a lot of the things he promotes. Noone smart enough to make it to the office of the President would make *that* many completely idiotic public speaking errors. Have you ever listened to some of the human interest style questions he's asked? I recall hearing (second hand) that he was particularly proud of the rug/carpet/floor in the Oval Office because it was (paraphrased) a decision he could have full command of. Bush the man is in effect neutered by the power structure that surrounds him.

It's actually rather sad, in a third-party not-involved-in-politics sort of way. The guy is able to make it to a very successful position by sticking to the party line and making the right alliances, only to find himself a figure head for the party and the right alliances. They get the power and he gets the criticism. He'll go down in history as whatever the historians decide to paint him as (chances are it'll be generally bad with some high points) with half or more of the US hating him and a greater percentage of the world hating him... and all for decisions that he was rubber stamping for behind-the-scenes powers.

I'll leave everyone else to discuss whether or not the policies are ineffective, but as far as the individual person inhabitting the office? He's *got* to be one of the most ineffective presidents the United States has ever had. Watching the criticisms directed at Bush is rather like watching a slow motion train wreck spanning eight years. *Shudder*

As far as his personality? He seems a very likeable guy. I'd love to have him as a neighbor. Just not as the general of an army I'm a footsoldier in.
(I am not in the military. I'm speaking figuratively.)

-Mark Reed

[Spec8472]

Bush's policies are rarely *his* policies. He gets the flak, but a very high percentage of the time they're coming from whatever personal interest group or political activist group owns him.

One of the former presidents had a sign on his desk saying "The buck stops here" - and it's true.

Yes, he may be simply signing on the dotted line / doing as he is told, but he's still responsible.

Even if they've been written/approved/etc by people reporting to him - he is still ultimately responsible. You can delegate authority, but not responsibility.

[Journeywoman]

It's actually rather sad, in a third-party not-involved-in-politics sort of way. The guy is able to make it to a very successful position by sticking to the party line and making the right alliances, only to find himself a figure head for the party and the right alliances.

This expains what a US hitch-hiker once told me:
Bush has always got this look on his face saying 'Oh my God, I'm President!'

[Sbudda]

One of the former presidents had a sign on his desk saying "The buck stops here" - and it's true.

You have a very good point. It is interesting to note that America - from local to federal level (at least my local level) - hasn't had a real leader in a generation at least.

For some reason we get "leaders" who focus on what we are doing (which <i>is</i> important - for a beauraucrat); but not ever considering where we are going (which is important for a leader). Bush once made me think we had someone who could actually accomplish that...

What could be more forward thinking than overhauling the government of a Middle Eastern country and using it as a model for the rest of the region? It worked well for Japan...

But, like Georgia Tech football in the 4th quarter, they never can seem to follow the idea though to the end. That makes me a sad panda.