You are not logged in. Please register or login.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
- Communist China
- Rep: 130
Re: Bush reputation starting to rebound
Yeah I mean compared to Buchanon, Grant, Pierce (although sympathy for him because his son died on the trip to DC, and he went a bit alcoholic), Harding, Hoover, etc. Bush looks really good. I think there are probably 7 or 8 Presidents that are clearly worse than Bush, and another 10 or so that you could argue were worse.
Re: Bush reputation starting to rebound
James wrote:Axlin08 wrote:The only difference was Reagan had higher approval ratings, but those started to tank towards the end.
Actually another difference is Reagan didn't have a near 2nd Great Depression under his presidency, whereas Bush did.
He inherited a massive cluster fuck from Carter that was on the verge of bringing this country to its knees and within four years presided over one of the biggest economic booms in world history.
Even though I don't like Obama, he does deserve more time because you cant turn around an economic crisis overnight. The country is vastly different than it was then, which makes digging out of the hole even more difficult.
Even though the dems did hate Reagan, at least they were willing to work with him to a certain degree. The partisanship in Washington has reached vomit inducing levels to where government is in virtual gridlock.
Bush isn't a wart on Reagan's ass. There's no comparison, and never will be either. Reagan is one of our iconic leaders, and we've run out of those types.
Bush's response to 9/11 was to do pin prick strikes on Afghanistan and drop a few daisy cutters, then marched towards Baghdad. Reagan would have nuked Afghanistan without putting troops on the ground, ignored Iraq saving lives and hundreds of billions of dollars, and you would have went the rest of your life without hearing about Al Qaeda. He would have probably done surgical strikes throughout the African continent as they have terror camps all over that place(even Bush considered doing this right after 9/11), which would have ignited a massive civil war on that entire continent.
A nuclear response to 9/11 would have created instability on the world stage(maybe even igniting WWIII), but you can bet your ass he would have risked it in the aftermath of thousands of American citizens being killed in the U.S. In hindsight, its amazing that Bush didn't push the button. It was the first time in history since WWII where there was a valid reason for the use of nuclear weapons(although you could make a case for Vietnam).
Had he been president in the 2000s, I don't even think 9/11 would have happened. The guy's presence on the world stage was a huge deterrent to all enemies. The guy was always considered a war monger, yet had the most peaceful two term presidency that century. It was the attitude. He put off a "don't fuck with us" vibe and people weren't willing to take a chance in calling his bluff. The few times countries attempted to, it led to the deaths of people close to those doing it.
Re: Bush reputation starting to rebound
Yeah, but in Bush's defense, Reagan's presidency, at least post the "feel good" Carter-era, was people were fine getting tough. Capitalism was also made sexy throughout the U.S., quite possibly by the guy to the left of my post. Reagan's big Republican philosophies were "in".
Bush entered in a different attitude. First out of the gate, he was called an "illegal" president, and actually fought by Democrats to get him out of office by obsessive and ridiculous recounts. So the love immediately was not there, then 9/11 happens, and the guy never really had an "up" moment in his entire presidency from that far out.
Bush unfortunately had to deal with a "touchy, feeley, baby boomer" generation which if he even used the word "justice" was labeled a racist.
Do you really think Bush would've ever been allowed to pull all of the shit you're talking about? He was labeled a warmonger just for the shit he did do. Imagine your scenario... he'd probably be a dead man right now.
Bush will be an icon, if he's not already. I could've sat in that office... any man who sat in the White House through 9/11, two wars, the end of Iraq as the world knew it, is gonna be remembered. No different than people tying Reagan in with the Berlin Wall falling, Roosevelt with WWII & Pearl Harbor, Lincoln with abolition and the Civil War, etc.
Right now we don't see it, because we're too close to it. Lincoln was LARGELY unpopular president during his tenure. History tells the rest of the story, trust me.
- NY Giants82
- Rep: 26
Re: Bush reputation starting to rebound
I think Bush will be remembered much more favorably than he was when he left office. And you can pretty much forget him being able to get anything done in his last two years in office, considering the fact that both houses of Congress at that time were controlled by the Democrats. I think he made strong decisions that weren't always popular, but in the end will be looked at as being correct.
Also have to factor in WHO will write the history books...
But he's no Reagan.
Re: Bush reputation starting to rebound
PaSnow wrote:Axlin08 wrote:The only difference was Reagan had higher approval ratings, but those started to tank towards the end.
Actually another difference is Reagan didn't have a near 2nd Great Depression under his presidency, whereas Bush did.
He inherited a massive cluster fuck from Carter that was on the verge of bringing this country to its knees and within four years presided over one of the biggest economic booms in world history.
I was actually referring to how they left office, not how they entered. In actuality, Bush did enter amid the dot com bust, so they economy was a little shaky at the time.
Axlin08 Bush won't be an icon. That's a reach. The guy sat thru 9/11, but Guiliani did a better job handling it & overcoming it than Bush did. He "sat" thru 2 wars?? He fucked up 2 wars is more like it. Remember he listened to & chose Donald Rumsfeld & Cheney who started the whole clusterfuck. I still recall Rumsfeld saying oil would be more affordable. So that's it, we're going to fuck up a country for years & kill innocent US & Iraqi for oil prices??? Point blank: They thought we'd be in & out. 6 months max. They thought it would be just like Desert Storm 91. Then Afghanistan & Al Qaedi was put on the back burner for several years. Iraq wasn't about 9/11. Then suddenly it became not about WOMD but about Saddam & genocide from the 80's?? Iraq was a bad executive decision, made by Bush. He's not FDR in the same way Nixon isn't remembered for leading us thru Vietnam.
NYG Clinton had a Republican congress since 94, but I think Bush knew the country was disliking him so he kindof accepted being a lame duck. Still, it's hard to discount an entire 2 years of a Presidency, that's 25%.
Re: Bush reputation starting to rebound
Oh I agree on that. No way Bush handled Afghanistan & Iraq with the grace that FDR handled Germany & Japan... no way.
I'm saying that alot of history happened during this time-period (2001-2008) and Bush will be remembered, not forgotton.
Re: Bush reputation starting to rebound
James wrote:When looking at the Bush legacy, you also have to take into account he wasn't a real president. He was a virtual puppet for Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Wolfowitz. This isn't conspiracy crap. Go read the manifesto 'Project for a New American Century' written in the 90s. Those psychos followed that like it was the Bible, and we're actually lucky they even left after two terms.
Also. he was a terrible communicator, and its laughable he called himself a "uniter, not a divider". In crisis, Reagan(and even Clinton) were able to console the entire country through tough times. This guy stood up there with a smirk on his face during times of trouble.
He should have been impeached for his handling of the Katrina crisis. Not likely as I'm unsure what incompetence would fall under in the constitution, but he showed during that crisis that he was never fit to even stand in the Oval Office.
Don't remember the book, but back when his dad was president, the Queen of England was visiting and having dinner with the president. A drunk W walked over to her and was crying about being the "black sheep" of the family.
Ten years later this moron is the leader of the free world.
Well, actually Cheney was but it all falls on W because technically he was president.
Having said all this, I don't think W was as intellectually inferior as people like to claim. He was governor of Texas and spoke fairly well during that period, and I also remember him on ESPN on Roy Firestone's show(this was before he was in politics) and he was doing an interview fishing and showing Roy various areas of Texas. He actually came across as a really cool guy, and was always surprised this footage was never used by his campaign during elections.
I think he tried to emulate Reagan with the "common man" thing so the country could relate to him, but he failed on many levels. Clinton did this as well, but it worked because he was very intelligent and also naturally likable.
- NY Giants82
- Rep: 26
Re: Bush reputation starting to rebound
NYG Clinton had a Republican congress since 94, but I think Bush knew the country was disliking him so he kindof accepted being a lame duck. Still, it's hard to discount an entire 2 years of a Presidency, that's 25%.
And only then did Clinton move from the left towards the center. And that is when he governed successfully.
Bush was different. He had both houses of Congress under Democratic control, AND he was a lame duck. Thats a recipe for disaster.
Re: Bush reputation starting to rebound
I always thought George H. Bush should get more respect. He was the guy when Cheney, Rumsfeld and Schwarzkopf wanted to invade Iraq during Desert Storm he said no. Huge.
It also kind of pisses me off that all the Regan revisionist have pretty much brainwashed everyone into forgetting about the recession, massive debt, and general fuck up he caused that made Bush have to raise taxes breaking his "read my lips" promise. Bush just got caught holding the bag, imo.
And I'd much rather hang with Clinton than Dubya.
