The 10 Most Awesomely Bad Moments of the Bush Presidency

[jundp 191]

Haven't seen any praise of Bush for anything. Not for his AIDS initiatives in Africa

I have always said this was a good thing and been happy Bush did this.

Whala...

Danno, are you saying "waaaa" like whining or "voila" like "poof there he is"?

And for whomever made the comments about NCLB (mox?) I agree wholeheartedly. Total disaster that was!

[Amby 490]

my friend's fiance wears this shirt a lot and it makes me laugh every time

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Yes, Bush is teh suXor. Get over it already.

They won't. Not anytime soon, anyway.

When Obama does something good, they'll say: "Obama's the greatest! Look at him clean up after Bush!"

When Obama does something bad, they'll also say: "Obama's not to blame. He's had a hell of a time dealing with the mess Bush left him."

Amazing, isn't it? If one wanted to talk about psychological issues, the messianic ideals given Obama would definitely qualify.

you hit the nail on the head.

Hit the nail on the head? I hardly think so. The whole "Obama is a Messiah" angle is nothing more than a feeble attempt to take attention away from the fact that Bush is an awful president and his decisions will be felt long after he leaves office. I love how the right wingers still blame Clinton for everything, yet take zero responsibility for Bush's antics.

Well it isn't totally wrong - I think that there is a lot of expectation on the Obama presidency (which I think is due, at least in a part, to the awfulness of the Bush years) and that he will have a fairly easy ride for the first few years, if not the whole first term when it comes to mistakes and missteps.

Simply put - it takes a while for disillusionment to set in.

Yea right wingers claim that Obama is treated favorably by the media & guess what... they are right. However it's kind of like a parent (the media) who favors a child (Obama) who gets straight A's in school while their other kid (Bush) gets D'd and F's, starts fights for no reason & is a general screw up. Can you really blame the parent or should the screw up clean up his act?

A good parent is supposed to love their children, regardless of what they do or how they act. We would have very little tolerance for a parent that purposefully acted negatively towards their child, so why does the media (the parent) get a free ride when showing obvious favoritism towards one child (Obama) over the other (Bush)?

Its a bad analogy.

[joelunchbox 0]

you better beat the rush and find something new to complain about, this topic has a life expectancy of less than 22 days.

Well, if you listen to talk radio, I think you will discover that the Bush mentality isn't going to go away in 22 days.

[nowhereman 1]

Yes, Bush is teh suXor. Get over it already.

They won't. Not anytime soon, anyway.

When Obama does something good, they'll say: "Obama's the greatest! Look at him clean up after Bush!"

When Obama does something bad, they'll also say: "Obama's not to blame. He's had a hell of a time dealing with the mess Bush left him."

Amazing, isn't it? If one wanted to talk about psychological issues, the messianic ideals given Obama would definitely qualify.

you hit the nail on the head.

Hit the nail on the head? I hardly think so. The whole "Obama is a Messiah" angle is nothing more than a feeble attempt to take attention away from the fact that Bush is an awful president and his decisions will be felt long after he leaves office. I love how the right wingers still blame Clinton for everything, yet take zero responsibility for Bush's antics.

Well it isn't totally wrong - I think that there is a lot of expectation on the Obama presidency (which I think is due, at least in a part, to the awfulness of the Bush years) and that he will have a fairly easy ride for the first few years, if not the whole first term when it comes to mistakes and missteps.

Simply put - it takes a while for disillusionment to set in.

Yea right wingers claim that Obama is treated favorably by the media & guess what... they are right. However it's kind of like a parent (the media) who favors a child (Obama) who gets straight A's in school while their other kid (Bush) gets D'd and F's, starts fights for no reason & is a general screw up. Can you really blame the parent or should the screw up clean up his act?

A good parent is supposed to love their children, regardless of what they do or how they act. We would have very little tolerance for a parent that purposefully acted negatively towards their child, so why does the media (the parent) get a free ride when showing obvious favoritism towards one child (Obama) over the other (Bush)?

Its a bad analogy.

I disagree... maybe not a totally accurate analogy, but not a bad one. The media is everyone's punching bag, especially the right. The problem is that the media is right more than they are wrong & generally when someone screws up the media bashing is just a form of denial. As for Bush the media & 70% of the American population are hard on him because he's an awful President... it has very little to do with bias.

[Danno 1,228]

Yea right wingers claim that Obama is treated favorably by the media & guess what... they are right. However it's kind of like a parent (the media) who favors a child (Obama) who gets straight A's in school while their other kid (Bush) gets D'd and F's, starts fights for no reason & is a general screw up. Can you really blame the parent or should the screw up clean up his act?

"straight A's"?

At least you have a sense of humor...... or were you serious?

If so, perhaps you would list some of the "A"s Obama

has scored that would inspire such love and devotion from an other wise impartial media?

(Can't wait to see this long list)

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

As I said - a bad analogy.

Edited December 30, 2008 by Paul Daniels

[DeadPoolX 9]

I disagree... maybe not a totally accurate analogy, but not a bad one. The media is everyone's punching bag, especially the right. The problem is that the media is right more than they are wrong & generally when someone screws up the media bashing is just a form of denial. As for Bush the media & 70% of the American population are hard on him because he's an awful President... it has very little to do with bias.

The funny thing about "great" and "awful" presidents is that opinion and outlook change over time. Abraham Lincoln is one such president. He was virulently despised by both the North and the South (Lincoln wasn't even on most ballots in the southern states) and the only reason he won the presidency was due to the Democratic ticket being split. He suspended many rights during his tenure and cared little about slavery. The only reason Lincoln campaigned so hard against slavery is because it gained him popularity and antagonized the South. In truth, the "Emancipation Proclamation" did little (if anything) to "free" slaves. It was a decree in the North and the South was not going to listen.

The reason I mention Lincoln is because he was hated in the 1860s. If you asked someone's opinion back then about Lincoln, I'm sure you'd find a very different picture than what we have today. The same might be true of Bush. Perhaps the change in opinion might take over a century, but it's very possible some may view Bush as a great (or at least, decent) president in the future. Only time will tell, of course.

Yea right wingers claim that Obama is treated favorably by the media & guess what... they are right. However it's kind of like a parent (the media) who favors a child (Obama) who gets straight A's in school while their other kid (Bush) gets D'd and F's, starts fights for no reason & is a general screw up. Can you really blame the parent or should the screw up clean up his act?

"straight A's"?

At least you have a sense of humor...... or were you serious?

If so, perhaps you would list some of the "A"s Obama

has scored that would inspire such love and devotion from an other wise impartial media?

(Can't wait to see this long list)

There's simply no way Obama could be given "straight A" marks. He's the president-elect right now and hasn't spent one day in office as the president. Because of this, he has yet to do anything on a national or international scale. Let's wait and see how well Obama does before we praise him for his fantastic grades.

Edited December 30, 2008 by DeadPoolX

[mox 298]

There's simply no way Obama could be given "straight A" marks. He's the president-elect right now and hasn't spent one day in office as the president. Because of this, he has yet to do anything on a national or international scale. Let's wait and see how well Obama does before we praise him for his fantastic grades.

Or condemn him.

[DeadPoolX 9]

There's simply no way Obama could be given "straight A" marks. He's the president-elect right now and hasn't spent one day in office as the president. Because of this, he has yet to do anything on a national or international scale. Let's wait and see how well Obama does before we praise him for his fantastic grades.

Or condemn him.

Good point.

[nowhereman 1]

Yea right wingers claim that Obama is treated favorably by the media & guess what... they are right. However it's kind of like a parent (the media) who favors a child (Obama) who gets straight A's in school while their other kid (Bush) gets D'd and F's, starts fights for no reason & is a general screw up. Can you really blame the parent or should the screw up clean up his act?

"straight A's"?

At least you have a sense of humor...... or were you serious?

If so, perhaps you would list some of the "A"s Obama

has scored that would inspire such love and devotion from an other wise impartial media?

(Can't wait to see this long list)

The analogy was a bit of an exaggeration, but point here is that Bush has been an awful President, he has never accepted responsibility for his mistakes & right wingers like yourself will blindly support incompetent Republicans out of misguided loyalty (in the business world people like yourself are called "yes men"). As for the long list I won't waste my time trying to make one... done that here before & all I got was nonsensical replies. Example: I've tried a few times to get a decent dialogue going about the Bush doctrine & it was like trying to teach math to a monkey... the right wingers here are generally incapable of substantive discussions.

[DeadPoolX 9]

Yea right wingers claim that Obama is treated favorably by the media & guess what... they are right. However it's kind of like a parent (the media) who favors a child (Obama) who gets straight A's in school while their other kid (Bush) gets D'd and F's, starts fights for no reason & is a general screw up. Can you really blame the parent or should the screw up clean up his act?

"straight A's"?

At least you have a sense of humor...... or were you serious?

If so, perhaps you would list some of the "A"s Obama

has scored that would inspire such love and devotion from an other wise impartial media?

(Can't wait to see this long list)

The analogy was a bit of an exaggeration, but point here is that Bush has been an awful President, he has never accepted responsibility for his mistakes & right wingers like yourself will blindly support incompetent Republicans out of misguided loyalty (in the business world people like yourself are called "yes men"). As for the long list I won't waste my time trying to make one... done that here before & all I got was nonsensical replies. Example: I've tried a few times to get a decent dialogue going about the Bush doctrine & it was like trying to teach math to a monkey... the right wingers here are generally incapable of substantive discussions.

You're on VJ. Nonsensical replies -- whether from the Right or the Left -- is par for the course.

[mox 298]

You're on VJ. Nonsensical replies -- whether from the Right or the Left -- is par for the course.

Sadly true.

[nowhereman 1]

I disagree... maybe not a totally accurate analogy, but not a bad one. The media is everyone's punching bag, especially the right. The problem is that the media is right more than they are wrong & generally when someone screws up the media bashing is just a form of denial. As for Bush the media & 70% of the American population are hard on him because he's an awful President... it has very little to do with bias.

The funny thing about "great" and "awful" presidents is that opinion and outlook change over time. Abraham Lincoln is one such president. He was virulently despised by both the North and the South (Lincoln wasn't even on most ballots in the southern states) and the only reason he won the presidency was due to the Democratic ticket being split. He suspended many rights during his tenure and cared little about slavery. The only reason Lincoln campaigned so hard against slavery is because it gained him popularity and antagonized the South. In truth, the "Emancipation Proclamation" did little (if anything) to "free" slaves. It was a decree in the North and the South was not going to listen.

The reason I mention Lincoln is because he was hated in the 1860s. If you asked someone's opinion back then about Lincoln, I'm sure you'd find a very different picture than what we have today. The same might be true of Bush. Perhaps the change in opinion might take over a century, but it's very possible some may view Bush as a great (or at least, decent) president in the future. Only time will tell, of course.

Fans of Bush often use historical examples to argue that history will look more favorably upon his Presidency & like you said only time will tell, but I just can't imagine it applying with him. You used Lincoln as an example & his decisions were very unpopular to some, but ultimately most were the right decision. Bush has simply made very bad decisions... they are unpopular because they are awful.

Edited December 30, 2008 by nowhereman

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

The yardstick of "success" for previous presidents seems to be about whether they left the country in as good or better position than they found it.

As far as Bush goes... it really speaks for itself.

9/11, Destruction of New Orleans, Two ongoing and expensive wars and most recently - a burgeoning economic collapse.

Edited December 30, 2008 by Paul Daniels