Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

George Bush's Legacy

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • George Bush's Legacy

    Here is a video and what I consider to be a relatively fair appraisal of the Bush Administration(relatively because if anything it gives this totally unintellectual/incompetent dolt too much credit)-in all fairness he is brighter than Sara Palin.

    The Bush Legacy - CBS News Video
    Last edited by savage1; 07-13-2011, 01:34 PM.

  • #2
    I guess this makes Obama a fantastic president.. Everything in the Obama Legacy thread does not matter now!!!!


    Savvy, were you one of the jurors in the Casey Anthony trial???
    Last edited by Spark; 07-13-2011, 02:11 PM.

    Comment


    • #3
      Spark-in all due respect, please don't put words in my mouth and no I am as outraged as any intelligent person would be in the Casey Anthony(really though, does evaluating presidencies have anything to do with a trial of this nature?).
      Back to what I started to say-I never said Obama is a fantastic president, and in fact if the Republicans put up someone of a Mitt Romney caliber, I might vote for him.
      I do stand behind my statement thought that until Obama's term or terms are completed, one cannot evaluate his Presidency and cannot use the word legacy.-the game isn't over yet.
      I would give Obama around a grade C overall while Bush would get an F- or more likely off the scale-the initiation of a self-serving War predicated on lies and half truths in themselves are enough for that rating let alone all of the other harm and hatred he inspired around the world.

      Comment


      • #4
        Savvy, one final post to you ...



        You can give Bush any score you want .. Guess what?? ... He is not the President anymore ...

        Comment


        • #5
          The Washington Redskins suck because of Mike Shannahan it has nothing to with the guys before him.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Spark View Post
            Savvy, one final post to you ...



            You can give Bush any score you want .. Guess what?? ... He is not the President anymore ...
            And you know what-Obama is the President and his term or terms are not over yet-if the Red Sox or Yankees are losing in the 6th innings by a couple of runs, should someone say they the game is over?
            And remember your post used the word legacy in describing Obama-by my way of thinking that word cannot be used until something is completed and looked at retrospectfully.
            Finally, I decided to start a separate thread about Bush rather than post it in the thread you started precisely because it was a different presidency.
            My whole point is that if you are going to cast stones at Obama when his Presidency has not even been completed, I have the right to express an opinion/show a video about the previous Presidency, which IS completed, and which is just as important as the Presidency of Obama.

            Comment


            • #7
              As far as I'm concerned blame Obama for anything but the War and deficit, McCain and Palin weren't gonna pull the troops and reduce the deficit anytime soon nor would anybody that was elected. It's a total joke to act like he's responsible for that shit after 8 years of destruction

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by BigWeiner View Post
                The Washington Redskins suck because of Mike Shannahan it has nothing to with the guys before him.
                Got it ... thanks

                Comment


                • #9
                  “The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government can’t pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government’s reckless fiscal policies. … Leadership means that ‘the buck stops here.’ Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better. I therefore intend to oppose the effort to increase America’s debt limit.”

                  Barack Hussein Obama in March 2006

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    The Elmendorf Rule

                    By Charles Krauthammer, Published: July 8

                    Here we go again. An approaching crisis. A looming deadline. Nervous markets. And then, from the miasma of gridlock, rises our president, calling upon those unruly congressional children to quit squabbling, stop kicking the can down the road and get serious about debt.

                    This from the man who:

                    • Ignored the debt problem for two years by kicking the can to a commission.

                    • Promptly ignored the commission’s December 2010 report.

                    • Delivered a State of the Union address in January that didn’t even mention the word “debt” until 35 minutes in.

                    • Delivered in February a budget so embarrassing — it actually increased the deficit — that the Democratic-controlled Senate rejected it 97 to 0.

                    • Took a budget mulligan with his April 13 debt-plan speech. Asked in Congress how this new “budget framework” would affect the actual federal budget, Congressional Budget Office Director Doug Elmendorf replied with a devastating “We don’t estimate speeches.” You can’t assign numbers to air.

                    President Obama assailed the lesser mortals who inhabit Congress for not having seriously dealt with a problem he had not dealt with at all, then scolded Congress for being even less responsible than his own children. They apparently get their homework done on time.

                    My compliments. But the Republican House did do its homework. It’s called a budget. It passed the House on April 15. The Democratic Senate has produced no budget. Not just this year, but for two years running. As for the schoolmaster in chief, he produced two 2012 budget facsimiles: The first (February) was a farce and the second (April) was empty, dismissed by the CBO as nothing but words untethered to real numbers.

                    Obama has run disastrous annual deficits of around $1.5 trillion while insisting for months on a “clean” debt-ceiling increase, i.e., with no budget cuts at all. Yet suddenly he now rises to champion major long-term debt reduction, scorning any suggestions of a short-term debt-limit deal as can-kicking.
                    The flip-flop is transparently political. A short-term deal means another debt-ceiling fight before Election Day, a debate that would put Obama on the defensive and distract from the Mediscare campaign to which the Democrats are clinging to save them in 2012.

                    A clever strategy it is: Do nothing (see above); invite the Republicans to propose real debt reduction first; and when they do — voting for the Ryan budget and its now infamous and courageous Medicare reform — demagogue them to death.

                    And then up the ante by demanding Republican agreement to tax increases. So: First you get the GOP to seize the left’s third rail by daring to lay a finger on entitlements. Then you demand the GOP seize the right’s third rail by violating its no-tax pledge. A full-spectrum electrocution. Brilliant.

                    And what have been Obama’s own debt-reduction ideas? In last week’s news conference, he railed against the tax break for corporate jet owners — six times. I did the math. If you collect that tax for the next 5,000 years — that is not a typo — it would equal the new debt Obama racked up last year alone. To put it another way, if we had levied this tax at the time of John the Baptist and collected it every year since — first in shekels, then in dollars — we would have 500 years to go before we could offset half of the debt added by Obama last year alone.

                    Obama’s other favorite debt-reduction refrain is canceling an oil-company tax break. Well, if you collect that oil tax and the corporate jet tax for the next 50 years — you will not yet have offset Obama’s deficit spending for February 2011.

                    After his Thursday meeting with bipartisan congressional leadership, Obama adopted yet another persona: Cynic in chief became compromiser in chief. Highly placed leaks are portraying him as heroically prepared to offer Social Security and Medicare cuts.

                    We shall see. It’s no mystery what is needed. First, entitlement reform that changes the inflation measure, introduces means testing, then syncs the (lower) Medicare eligibility age with Social Security’s and indexes them both to longevity. And second, real tax reform, both corporate and individual, that eliminates myriad loopholes in return for lower tax rates for everyone.
                    That’s real debt reduction. Yet even now, we don’t know where the president stands on any of this. Until we do, I’ll follow the Elmendorf Rule: We don’t estimate leaks. Let’s see if Obama can suspend his 2012 electioneering long enough to keep the economy from going over the debt cliff.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      July 12, 2011 12:30 PM

                      Obama says he cannot guarantee Social Security checks will go out on August 3






                      By Corbett B. Daly Topics Economy ,White House ,Congress






                      President Obama on Tuesday said he cannot guarantee that retirees will receive their Social Security checks August 3 if Democrats and Republicans in Washington do not reach an agreement on reducing the deficit in the coming weeks.

                      "I cannot guarantee that those checks go out on August 3rd if we haven't resolved this issue. Because there may simply not be the money in the coffers to do it," Mr. Obama said in an interview with CBS Evening News anchor Scott Pelley, according to excerpts released by CBS News.

                      The Obama administration and many economists have warned of economic catastrophe if the United States does not raise the amount it is legally allowed to borrow by August 2.

                      Lawmakers from both parties want to use the threat of that deadline to work out a broader package on long-term deficit reduction, with Republicans looking to cut trillions of dollars in federal spending, while Democrats are pushing for a more "balanced approach," which would include both spending cuts and increased revenue through taxes.

                      The Debt Limit fight: A primer

                      Democratic and Republican lawmakers are expected to hold another round of negotiations with Mr. Obama at the White House Tuesday afternoon on long-term deficit reduction, though talks have yielded little results to date.

                      Mr. Obama told Pelley "this is not just a matter of Social Security checks. These are veterans checks, these are folks on disability and their checks. There are about 70 million checks that go out."

                      The interview will air Tuesday evening on the CBS Evening News with Scott Pelley.

                      Mr. Obama's comments followed remarks from the Senate's top Republican, who said Tuesday that he did not see a way for Republicans and Democrats to come to agreement on meaningful deficit reduction as long as Mr. Obama remains in office.


                      "After years of discussions and months of negotiations, I have little question that as long as this president is in the Oval Office, a real solution is probably unattainable," Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell said in remarks on the Senate floor.



                      Still, McConnell said Republicans would "do the responsible thing" to avoid default, suggesting that a deal on the debt ceiling could be reached without a "real" deficit reduction package.

                      "The president has presented us with three choices: smoke and mirrors, tax hikes, or default. Republicans choose none of the above. I had hoped to do good, but I refuse to do harm. So Republicans will choose a path that actually reflects the will of the people, which is to do the responsible thing and ensure that the government doesn't default on its obligations," he said.

                      Mr. Obama has repeatedly said he wants a deal that would allow the U.S. to avoid confronting the issue again until after the 2012 elections and vowed on Monday that he would "not sign a 30-day or a 60-day or a 90-day extension."

                      "This the United States of America and, you know, we don't manage our affairs in three-month increments. You know, we don't risk U.S. default on our obligations because we can't put politics aside," Mr. Obama told reporters at the White House yesterday.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Fresh doubt cast on Obama's health care story





                        By: Byron York | Chief Political Correspondent Follow Him @ByronYork | 07/11/11 8:05 PM










                        Then-Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) addresses a rally in the gymnasium of Concord High School January 4, 2008 in Concord before the 2008 New Hampshire primary, where the Democratic presidential hopeful made this remark examined by Examiner columnist Byron York: "She was in her hospital room looking at insurance forms because the insurance company said that maybe she had a pre-existing condition and maybe they wouldn't have to reimburse her for her medical bills."



                        During the 2008 presidential campaign, Barack Obama often discussed his mother's struggle with cancer. Ann Dunham spent the months before her death in 1995, Obama said, fighting with insurance companies that sought to deny her the coverage she needed to pay for treatment. "I remember in the last month of her life, she wasn't thinking about how to get well, she wasn't thinking about coming to terms with her own mortality, she was thinking about whether or not insurance was going to cover the medical bills and whether our family would be bankrupt as a consequence," Obama said in September 2007.

                        "She was in her hospital room looking at insurance forms because the insurance company said that maybe she had a pre-existing condition and maybe they wouldn't have to reimburse her for her medical bills," Obama added in January 2008.

                        "The insurance companies were saying, 'Maybe there's a pre-existing condition and we don't have to pay your medical bills,' " Obama said in a debate with Republican opponent Sen. John McCain in October 2008.

                        It was a simple and powerful story, one Obama would tell many more times as president during the national health care debate. But now we're learning the real story of Ann Dunham's health coverage is not quite what her son made it out to be.

                        The news is in "A Singular Woman: The Untold Story of Barack Obama's Mother," a generally admiring new biography written by former New York Times reporter Janny Scott. According to the book, Ann Dunham, an anthropologist who spent most of her working life in Indonesia, moved from Jakarta to New York in 1992 to work for a nonprofit called Women's World Banking, which encouraged micro-lending in Third World countries. Unhappy in New York, in 1994 Dunham took a job with an American company called Development Alternatives, which had a contract with the Indonesian State Ministry for the Role of Women. Dunham returned to Jakarta to work, and Scott reports the job provided Dunham with health insurance, a housing allowance, and a car.

                        At the time she took the job, Dunham was increasingly worried about her health; she was suffering from intense abdominal pains. In November 1994, Dunham went to an Indonesian doctor who diagnosed appendicitis. As Dunham debated whether to leave the country for surgery, she called her boss at Development Alternatives. "You've got health insurance, that's taken care of," the boss told her. "We can cover the airfare."


                        Dunham decided to stay in Jakarta, where she underwent an appendectomy. But the pain did not go away, and Dunham feared, correctly, that she was terribly ill. In January 1995 she left Indonesia to go home to Honolulu, where she was diagnosed with advanced uterine and ovarian cancer. She began a regime of surgery and chemotherapy.

                        That is the time during which Obama says his mother battled insurance companies to cover her illness. But Scott, who had access to Dunham's correspondence from the time, reveals that Dunham unquestionably had health coverage. "Ann's compensation for her job in Jakarta had included health insurance, which covered most of the costs of her medical treatment," Scott writes. "Once she was back in Hawaii, the hospital billed her insurance company directly, leaving Ann to pay only the deductible and any uncovered expenses, which, she said, came to several hundred dollars a month."

                        Scott writes that Dunham, who wanted to be compensated for those costs as well as for her living expenses, "filed a separate claim under her employer's disability insurance policy." It was that claim, with the insurance company CIGNA, that was denied in August 1995 because, CIGNA investigators said, Dunham's condition was known before she was covered by the policy.

                        Dunham protested the decision and, Scott writes, "informed CIGNA that she was turning over the case to 'my son and attorney, Barack Obama.' " CIGNA did not budge.

                        In September 1995, Dunham traveled to New York for an evaluation at the renowned Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center. Returning to Hawaii, she began a new course of treatment. She died in November.

                        A dozen years later, her son turned her ordeal into a campaign pitch for national health care. But the story Obama told, Scott writes, was "abbreviated" -- the abbreviation was to leave out the fact that Ann Dunham had health insurance that paid for her treatment. "Though he often suggested that she was denied health coverage because of a pre-existing condition," Scott writes, "it appears from her correspondence that she was only denied disability coverage."

                        That's a different story altogether. One the president never told.

                        Byron York, The Examiner's chief political correspondent, can be contacted at [email protected]. His column appears on Tuesday and Friday, and his stories and blogposts appear on ExaminerPolitics.com.








                        Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://washingtonexaminer.com/politi...#ixzz1Rv8t0L2V

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          His nose just keeps growing and growing ...

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Is this what your selling me?
                            The economy was falling apart in large part because of the War. Obama took over and the deficit went up more and more people lost their jobs, therefor he's the worst?
                            Because that sounds like a joke to me. Everyone knows that deficit was going to keep going up, and everyone knows we couldn't just withdraw the troops. Now you want to vote another Bush into office? I'll pass, thanks.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              It's amazing to me the people that continue to defend him. Wake the fuck up!

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X