Is Bush The Worst U.S. President Ever?

Originally posted by Fishy
Okay ordering Pizza was a bullshit example, but it just shows that until 18 you can't do a lot of things you can do after you are 18... And unless 16 year olds get the same rights and duty's as adults then they shouldn't be allowed to vote.

and the 18 number is probably based on something. And even if it isn't, I couldn't care less, its still to young because a lot of 18 year olds are idiots and vote for the party that has the cutest guy/girl leading the party.

Well at least that can keep Hilary outta office! Anyway every president in some way shape or form had some incident while they were in office that created contraversy except Abe Lincoln cuz the man could never tell a lie and that was from his own mouth!

except Abe Lincoln cuz the man could never tell a lie and that was from his own mouth!

😂

Abe is great, no debate.., Washington rocks as well.

Anyways there was a president that ran away from the white house during the war of 1812.

Bush is the worst in a while.

True Clinton had amjor flaws but atleast the country was stable and we were not so much in debt.

To those who this apply to: Age is no measure of reason- nor logic, nor knowledge as some people here prove clearly enough. What a sad world this is these days when mispronouncing one or two words during an hour long speech can actually affect people's opinions of them- or when people know how old you are and assume you are immature because you are younger...

Originally posted by The Black Ghost
To those who this apply to: Age is no measure of reason- nor logic, nor knowledge as some people here prove clearly enough.

But wisdom, logic, experience and maturity can only come with time. To argue contrary is silly. Your comments display that you not only have an only basic grasp of politics and human nature, but also a very loose idea of reason, logic and the processing of information. The mastering of these skills comes only with time, and the exercising of those skills over said period of time.

Originally posted by The Black Ghost
What a sad world this is these days when mispronouncing one or two words during an hour long speech can actually affect people's opinions of them

If that were the case I would agree. However, the repeated abuse of the english language, a continuing pattern of exhibiting a lack of comprehension as to the meaning of words and basic sentence structure and the inability to form a clear and concise thought is what has affected people's opinions of Bush. If you can honestly say that you don't agree that he has made a large amount of ridiculous comments, unintelligible statements and just plain massacred the english language then you are blinded by opinion or just have not been paying attention.

Originally posted by The Black Ghost
or when people know how old you are and assume you are immature because you are younger...

If you choose not to be seen as immature, then don't behave as such, and take the time to study and formulate your arguments as opposed to saying things such as:

I beleive there is a short and bogus history to why people hate Bush: ]

1) He is republican- many democrats hate him right away.

2) Hes Texan, has a Texan accent, and messed up while saying like two words during a speech.

3) He became president just before 9/11- many people blamed him of all people.

4) He speaks freely and openly about his own opinions on gay/strait marriage, abortions, and religion. Finally.

5) War in Iraq made him look unpopular and still does. People blame him for the soldiers deaths and say Iraq was a personal vendetta for his own sake. Many claim he was lying and making up data about WMDs and terrorists, etc... bogus.

6) People hate the Patriot Act and the wiretapping and security network he emplaced for good purposes.

Feel free to bash me all you want but thats the lineup of stuff people say he is bad for. In my mind its a pretty bad list to be hating someone for.

Originally posted by The Black Ghost
To those who this apply to: Age is no measure of reason- nor logic, nor knowledge as some people here prove clearly enough. What a sad world this is these days when mispronouncing one or two words during an hour long speech can actually affect people's opinions of them- or when people know how old you are and assume you are immature because you are younger...

Indeed.

Even sadder that they believe that a President can summon level 5 hurricanes to kill all the black people he doesn't like.....

Or that he would allow 9/11 to get support to go to Iraq....

When it not only killed thousands of people, hit an economic target, then hit the PENTAGON, which held the nations defense leaders and plenty of generals and such that he would need for the war in Iraq, and..................... oh yeah, flight 93 was headed for the F*CKING White House before it crashed, so he would have also lost his home, half of his employees, and his little doggie.....

Anyone who seriously believes that he planned 9/11 or new EXACTLY what would happen, needs their head examined.

I brought this up in another thread:

There are people out there who want to kill us (lone nutcases and organized killers alike) and who threaten us to do so every day.

Who knows how many try and are caught?

My point:

Bush (or any other pres.) can't just shut everything down when they get a threat. They cant' close wall street, the Bay Bridge, etc.... every time someone says that they will blow it up.

Even with exact info. (which it is doubtfull that he had) of where, when, what flights they left from.... etc.....

It wouldn't matter. If we closed everything, evacuated people, and searched the airports,...... they still would have hit us.

We would have delayed it, not prevented it.

They would have tried again and succeeded.

Lastly, Bush needed no dramatic attack to invade Iraq.

In 1998 Clinton knew that Saddam Hussein was presuing WMD, which is why there was a series of surgical strikes against factories in Iraq.

He has said so in the press, that his administration believed that Saddam either had weapons or was trying to make them.

Considering that we found that he had the capability to make them, that hardly makes the war waged on "false pretenses".

Not to mention that he tried to kill Bush the First.

We know he did.

That's a good enough reason to go after him. What kind of pussies have we become?

No other country would allow us to attempt to assinate their leader, and if you or I even threatened such a thing we would be arrested.

Actually trying and failing would be treason, which is punishable by death.

Bush didn't "need" 9/11 to go into Iraq, as evidenced by the overwhelming majority of Democrat's who voted FOR the war.

Get off his dick.

Well better to draw out your enemies on their turf then let them come to the US and fight.

Thanks for that one. Well if no one is going to beleive me because my age disvalidates any point I make then maybe someone will listen to you at least...

Originally posted by sithsaber408
Even sadder that they believe that a President can summon level 5 hurricanes to kill all the black people he doesn't like.....

Indeed, that is ridiculous, with that I agree.

Originally posted by sithsaber408
Or that he would allow 9/11 to get support to go to Iraq....

When it not only killed thousands of people, hit an economic target, then hit the PENTAGON, which held the nations defense leaders and plenty of generals and such that he would need for the war in Iraq, and..................... oh yeah, flight 93 was headed for the F*CKING White House before it crashed, so he would have also lost his home, half of his employees, and his little doggie.....

Anyone who seriously believes that he planned 9/11 or new EXACTLY what would happen, needs their head examined.

I do however believe that Bush was compliant and acted poorly, though I would never claim the stupidity as to which Deano seems to dictate his life, I do believe that Bush bears a significant responsibility for the fiasco that was 9/11.

Originally posted by sithsaber408
Lastly, Bush needed no dramatic attack to invade Iraq.

In 1998 Clinton knew that Saddam Hussein was presuing WMD, which is why there was a series of surgical strikes against factories in Iraq.

He has said so in the press, that his administration believed that Saddam either had weapons or was trying to make them.

Considering that we found that he had the capability to make them, that hardly makes the war waged on "false pretenses".

Then why all the games? Why the axis of evil? Bush did indeed needed the events to play out as they did because one cannot declare war on another country under the suspicion that they might do something with technology that they might possibly be developing though no hard evidence supports those facts.

Originally posted by sithsaber408
Not to mention that he tried to kill Bush the First.

We know he did.

That's a good enough reason to go after him. What kind of pussies have we become?

Actually, no it's not.

Originally posted by sithsaber408
Bush didn't "need" 9/11 to go into Iraq, as evidenced by the overwhelming majority of Democrat's who voted FOR the war.

Those votes were made by a nation that was misled by misinformation, misdirection, being stuck in the grip of terror after suffering from 9/11 and alot of flag waving.

Do not use the fact that Dems voted for the war to support your point, for they were duped into voting it by believing what they were told, and they now acknowledge that fact.

Originally posted by sithsaber408
Get off his dick.

Perhaps you should get your nose out of his ass.

Originally posted by KharmaDog
You are comparing thousands of deaths, and conspiracey ramblings (not to mention totally unconfirmed allegations) with the deaths and torture of millions?

You have no grasp of perspective and a tenious grasp on reality at best.

no that would be you who has no grasp on perspective or for that matter reality.conspiracy theorys are what the media brainwash people like into believing people are when they dont blindly accept the governments version and can think for themselves and have seen the proof from sites such as rense.com that show documentation all of that is true.the vietcong did not torture americans and,Nixon did because the bastard extended the war.He shot and killed thousands of americans NOT the vietcong.deal with it.

It's crazy when we live in a world where most of us would prefer The Joker as President.

Same psychopathic tendencies, but smart, witty and a damn good model American.

Joker for prez!

Originally posted by soleran30
Well better to draw out your enemies on their turf then let them come to the US and fight.

By that logic, do you think that the U.S. should also attack Iran, Korea and every other country that harbors ill will towards them?

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
LBJ wasn't a bad president. A war fell his lap and he handled it the best he could. Kennedy had a plan for Nam and Johnson misinterpreted it.

I agree with most historians on JFK; he was a mediocre president, but because he was capped, he's made out to be some kind of god.

Johnson sucked royally as a president.He handled the war horribly.He reversed kennedys withdrawal plans to completely withdraw from vietnam by 1965.

Originally posted by Red Superfly
It's crazy when we live in a world where most of us would prefer The Joker as President.

Same psychopathic tendencies, but smart, witty and a damn good model American.

Joker for prez!

I wonder if he was a registerd democrat or republican. 😆

I can't be bothered to respond to the rest of the nonsense in your post, so I'll just attend to this one:

Originally posted by sithsaber408
Bush didn't "need" 9/11 to go into Iraq, as evidenced by the overwhelming majority of Democrat's who voted FOR the war.

...based on the fabricated 'evidence' of WMDs provided by...Bush! Yay!

Originally posted by sithsaber408
Get off his dick.

Don't be over-protective of the things you love. It can cause obsession.

Originally posted by KharmaDog
Indeed, that is ridiculous, with that I agree.

I do however believe that Bush was compliant and acted poorly, though I would never claim the stupidity as to which Deano seems to dictate his life, I do believe that Bush bears a significant responsibility for the fiasco that was 9/11.

Then why all the games? Why the axis of evil? Bush did indeed needed the events to play out as they did because one cannot declare war on another country under the suspicion that they might do something with technology that they might possibly be developing though no hard evidence supports those facts.

Actually, no it's not.

Those votes were made by a nation that was misled by misinformation, misdirection, being stuck in the grip of terror after suffering from 9/11 and alot of flag waving.

Do not use the fact that Dems voted for the war to support your point, for they were duped into voting it by believing what they were told, and they now acknowledge that fact.

Perhaps you should get your nose out of his ass.

Deano does not bear stupidity at all On Bush's knowledge of 9-11.The people that say he bears stupidity on that are clueless about 9-11. Deano knows the facts that Bush knew it would happen and did nothing about it.perhaps YOU should do the same and listen to the truth Deano says about that. 🙄

That was fabricated evidence and total bullshit on someones part for coming up with that ploy about Bush being able to stop 9/11 but he didnt.
Thats the face of liberalism talking... and the voice of people who hate Bush and would go to any measure to find a way to make him look bad. And I gathered my own evidence on this- Im not being fed my own opinions.

Besides, if we don't rely on Bush, who else is going to have the balls to dive into the sandpit that is Iraq/Babylon and find the unedited, untouched, Necronomicon?!?!

Originally posted by sithsaber408
Bush didn't "need" 9/11 to go into Iraq, as evidenced by the overwhelming majority of Democrat's who voted FOR the war.

Gen. Wesley Clark admitted that he was told on 9/11 that the current administration was going to use the events of that day to invade Iraq.