Is Bush The Worst President Ever?

[eclectics]

Continuing your theme here, maybe the economic boon we had during the Clinton years was due to Reagan's tax cuts.

Thanks for admitting we had a Clinton boon . A lot of conservatives dispute that. Clinton's fiscal responsibility might have something to do with it. So if I understand you correctly, piling up a huge deficit was acceptable (thanks to Reagan's tax cuts) in order to have a economic boon? First of all, ain't no boon happening with this guy and our deficit is at record levels! And while we are on the subject, please indulge me and answer a question. I always assumed being a conservative meant embracing fiscal responsibilty. Considering W's track record, may I ask why you guys think he is the best thing since sliced bread? I never did understand. Could you could explain why mortgaging the entire farm and leaving the mess for the next guy is okay with you?

 

[DawnCt1]

If the next three years are like the last five, he will certainly be considered among the worst presidents. I actually find that some of you who voted for him are now disillusioned encouraging. If all his majority were talking about his "leadership" and defending him by bringing up Clinton and poor old Jimmy Carter, I would be more worried about our country.

What president in modern times has even had the courage to tackle the issue of Social Security. I suppose you think that its a fine idea for the youth of America to inherit the SS burden so that half the country works to support the other half. Why is it so "foreign" to consider that a portion of those SS taxes be put aside and be "owned" by the contributor?
What President in modern times has sincerely and with results tackled the issue of the Palestinian question? Israeli's have recently left Gaza and turned it over to the Palestinians.
Who could have foreseen another democracy in the middle east (besides Israel) in our life time?
North Korea is set to resume its six party nuclear containment talks in November because the president refused to bargain with them unilaterally. Of course they were allowed to proliferate because Madelyn Halfbright trusted and did not verify. I think if you can tear yourself away from the negative focus that the 24/7 news media is spewing at you, you will be able to see for yourself that we are in momentous times that have been moved in the right direction by this president.

 

[jimmiej]

You can call it a myth but I believe it. I think he just happened to be president when the Soviet Union fell, he certainly didn't dismantle it himself.

He may have lowered tax rates but like Bush, the rich benefited the most. JMHO.

Hello!!! The rich pay more!!!

 

[DawnCt1]

Thanks for admitting we had a Clinton boon . A lot of conservatives dispute that. Clinton's fiscal responsibility might have something to do with it. So if I understand you correctly, piling up a huge deficit was acceptable (thanks to Reagan's tax cuts) in order to have a economic boon? First of all, ain't no boon happening with this guy and our deficit is at record levels! And while we are on the subject, please indulge me and answer a question. I always assumed being a conservative meant embracing fiscal responsibilty. Considering W's track record, may I ask why you guys think he is the best thing since sliced bread? I never did understand. Could you could explain why mortgaging the entire farm and leaving the mess for the next guy is okay with you?

You need to look at the deficit as it relates to the GNP and NOT in dollars and cents. Deficits are acceptable, particularly when we are trying to recover from natural disasters and engaged in a war on terrorism. A war that was neglected for 8 years before. Despite 8 major hurricanes and natural disasters, the unemployment rate is at 5%. That is considered full employment. For college grads, that rate is 2.8% Compare those rates to Germany for example, who is experiencing the highest unemployment rates since WWII. France's is over 11%. What could Bush have done differently? I would preferred a lot more vigilance on the boarders. He has listened. Hopefully that will be accomplished. I think the perscription drug plan is an overzelous attempt to appease the left. I do understand however that it is less than what the liberals in Congress would have passed so perhaps I can be partially grateful. In my opinion, it wasn't necessary except for a very small minority of the elderly.

 

[MossMan]

I always assumed being a conservative meant embracing fiscal responsibilty. Considering W's track record, may I ask why you guys think he is the best thing since sliced bread? I never did understand. Could you could explain why mortgaging the entire farm and leaving the mess for the next guy is okay with you?

Yeah, being a conservative I pretty confused about that myself. Here I was a Republican because I believed in fiscal restraint. But then my Republican President decided to go on a spending spree that hasn't stopped to this day. Bush is going to go down in history as the worst spender of all time. OF ALL TIME. This totally flabbergasts me. What happened? It's not that Bush spends a little too much. He spends more than the worst of the Democrats. Basically everything I thought I was working for by supporting the Republicans was flushed straight down the toilet.

But then what do you expect. Bush is a leading candidate to become the worst president of all time. And you don't get this kind of honor without doing some terifically horrible things.

 

[DawnCt1]

You can call it a myth but I believe it. I think he just happened to be president when the Soviet Union fell, he certainly didn't dismantle it himself. He may have lowered tax rates but like Bush, the rich benefited the most. JMHO.

He didn't???!!! Who helped him?? Do you think that Gorbachov really envisioned dismanteling his own empire because he wanted to be a nice guy? The Soviet Union was starving. They could either spend money on defense and aggression or they could feed their people. They knew that they could not keep up with the arms program that we embarked upon after the election of President Reagan. They were terrified of Star Wars and they knew they couldn't win. I would suggest that you read Reagan's War and learn how close we were to selling this country out to the Soviets. The arms deals that Carter would have pursued and planned to pursue had he won a second term were indeed frightening. I am glad that I didn't know it at the time. I wouldn't have slept at night!
With regard to the "rich benefitting most". You do understand that families that paid taxes under President Clinton have been completely taking off of the tax rolls. They pay no income taxes. Everyone benefited by having their taxes decreased. As a result more tax dollars were collected. That's what happens when you lower tax rates. It stimulates the economy, gives people a reason to work, to invest and to prosper.

 

[eclectics]

You need to look at the deficit as it relates to the GNP and NOT in dollars and cents. Deficits are acceptable, particularly when we are trying to recover from natural disasters and engaged in a war on terrorism. A war that was neglected for 8 years before. Despite 8 major hurricanes and natural disasters, the unemployment rate is at 5%. That is considered full employment. For college grads, that rate is 2.8% Compare those rates to Germany for example, who is experiencing the highest unemployment rates since WWII. France's is over 11%. What could Bush have done differently? I would preferred a lot more vigilance on the boarders. He has listened. Hopefully that will be accomplished. I think the perscription drug plan is an overzelous attempt to appease the left. I do understand however that it is less than what the liberals in Congress would have passed so perhaps I can be partially grateful. In my opinion, it wasn't necessary except for a very small minority of the elderly.

Nice try Dawn, but your facts don't jive. GW managed to spend Clinton's surplus BEFORE 9/11 even happened. So maybe Jimmiej doesn't have to answer my question. Apparantly conservatives are okay with a huge deficit as you said "Deficits are Acceptable". Sorry, but us crazy madcap Democrats still prefer a surplus!

 

[Kimberly]

There was a time when I thought that nor Bush nor Kerry would have been better over one another. I actually did not even vote in the last election because I believed it was pointless to vote on the lesser of two evils. Kerry's wishywashyness prevented me from actually going out and voting for him, but it seemed that he at least had a goal oriented mind for our nation, economically, environmentally, and politically. Bush is like a 5 year old with a hammer, who feels it's his duty for him to finnish the job his father started in Iraq.

I am a republican (albeit a liberal one, I'm very middle of the road) too, and I honestly don't like him at all. Is he the worst president ever? Probably not, but I'd go as far to say he's in the worst five.

 

[marybet]

Hello!!! The rich pay more!!!

Come to Alabama, the rich are taxed at a lower percentage than the poor. Maybe their total bill is higher, but the percentage is lower.

I am glad you got such a laugh from my response, your replies usually just leave me .

 

[DawnCt1]

. He spends more than the worst of the Democrats. Basically everything I thought I was working for by supporting the Republicans was flushed straight down the toilet.

.

And the Democrats are still whining that he isn't spending enough. I believe its Ed Markey, Democrat that wants the federal government to spend $3.5 billion to buy analog to digital converters so those with analog tv don't miss the football games on Jan. 1 2009! It's the Democrats that warned Coburn that if he didn't withdraw the Coburn bill that was introduced to take the pork out of the highway bill that everything he every proposed would be crushed!

 

[jimmiej]

Thanks for admitting we had a Clinton boon .

Actually, what I said was:

the economic boon we had during the Clinton years

I believe a Republican congress along with the after-effects of the Reaganomics made Slick Willie look good. JMO.

So if I understand you correctly, piling up a huge deficit was acceptable (thanks to Reagan's tax cuts) in order to have a economic boon?

As I'm sure you are aware, the demos spent wildly during the 80's. Revenue to the govt. went up after Reagan's tax cuts.

First of all, ain't no boon happening with this guy and our deficit is at record levels!

Been playing with the crystal ball again I see.

And while we are on the subject, please indulge me and answer a question. I always assumed being a conservative meant embracing fiscal responsibilty. Considering W's track record, may I ask why you guys think he is the best thing since sliced bread?

Just because I'm a conservative doesn't mean I support EVERYTHING President Bush does.

Could you could explain why mortgaging the entire farm and leaving the mess for the next guy is okay with you?

I think our economy is doing pretty good considering the huge hit 9/11 was.

 

[DawnCt1]

Come to Alabama, the rich are taxed at a lower percentage than the poor. Maybe their total bill is higher, but the percentage is lower.

I am glad you got such a laugh from my response, your replies usually just leave me .

Isn't Alabama part of the United States?? How is it that they are under a federal tax law that doesn't apply to the other 49 states??

 

[KarenC]

Continuing your theme here, maybe the economic boon we had during the Clinton years was due to Reagan's tax cuts.

Too bad Ronald Reagan raised taxes more times than he lowered them...actually, Reagan figured out tax cuts don't raise revenue and adjusted his policy to bring government receipts and expenditures in line. George W is too stubborn to admit his efforts failed. We just rolled over $8 TRILLION in federal debt. Fully 1/4 of the debt the US Government has incurred was added since Bush 43 became President.

 

[DawnCt1]

Nice try Dawn, but your facts don't jive. GW managed to spend Clinton's surplus BEFORE 9/11 even happened. So maybe Jimmiej doesn't have to answer my question. Apparantly conservatives are okay with a huge deficit as you said "Deficits are Acceptable". Sorry, but us crazy madcap Democrats still prefer a surplus!

Clinton's "surplus" never existed. It was projected. Frankly, I have major problems with any government, state or local having a surplus. The government should be in business to meet its payroll, not make money. It should tax no more than is needed. If there is a surplus, there is a problem. The people are being taxed too much. Any "surplus" should always be returned to the citizenry.

 

[marybet]

Isn't Alabama part of the United States?? How is it that they are under a federal tax law that doesn't apply to the other 49 states??

I should have added that it is the state income tax, not the federal. Alabama has a very regressive tax system.

 

[DawnCt1]

I should have added that it is the state income tax, not the federal. Alabama has a very regressive tax system.

So that is President Bush's fault how???? You are sounding a bit like Mayor Nagin.

 

[LoraJ]

He didn't???!!! Who helped him??

http://hnn.us/articles/5569.html

Did Reagan bring the USSR to its knees? This question will be debated among historians for a long time to come. There are many variables to sort through, including the culminated contribution of a cast of characters, from nearly two decades of Democratic presidencies (Harry Truman, John F. Kennedy, Lyndon B. Johnson, and Jimmy Carter) to Mikhail Gorbachev and the Russian people themselves. Under Truman many mechanisms for fighting the Cold War were put into place, including the policy of containment (1947), the Central Intelligence Agency (1947), the National Security Council (1947), and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (1949). Inside the Soviet Union there were many, many brave dissidents and writers acting as goads for freedom, including Boris Pasternak, Vassily Grossman, Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, and Andrey Sakharov. The most important question hovering over this discussion should be obvious: Would the Soviet Union have ended when it did if there had not been a reformer like Gorbachev in the top position?

 

[jimmiej]

Come to Alabama, the rich are taxed at a lower percentage than the poor. Maybe their total bill is higher, but the percentage is lower.

That may be true in Alabama (You didn't provide a link), but as you know it's true for federal taxes. Even so, that's a good argument for a flat tax. Everyone pay the same %, with a salary floor.

 

[jimmiej]

Clinton's "surplus" never existed. It was projected. Frankly, I have major problems with any government, state or local having a surplus. The government should be in business to meet its payroll, not make money. It should tax no more than is needed. If there is a surplus, there is a problem. The people are being taxed too much. Any "surplus" should always be returned to the citizenry.

Preach it, Dawn!!! You're my hero!!!

 

[Randomeve15]

I would say bush is a bad president.