Badmovies.org Forum

OK, he's given his farewell address, he's bought a house in Dallas and the ranch in Crawford, his personal effects are already packed . . .

so what will history say about the 43rd President?  Is he truly, as some have said, the worst ever?  Is he a misunderstood victim of a hostile media and fanatical critics?  Is he really fairly average, neither as good as his supporters say nor as bad as his critics insist?

The purpose of this thread is not to debate, but simply to cast your vote and add any reasons why your choice fell where it did.  I am frankly curious . . . I know how I will vote, and how some of you will.

Above all, let's not turn this into a flame war.  Post your own opinion, but don't attack others for posting theirs.  Thanks for taking part!

Since I created the poll, I will go first.  I think Bush had a real shot at greatness, and fell short somewhat because of his stubborn nature and his inconsistent playing of the political game.

But, I don't think he fell that far short.  He was dealt a difficult hand, assuming the office in a disputed election under charges of fraud and having a great burden thrust upon him on 9/11.  The one question that his presidency will ultimately stand or fall on is that of the war in Iraq.  Was it justified?  Was it successful?

Although the case for WMD violations was greatly overstated, under international law, Saddam Hussein had violated every single condition of the cease-fire he agreed to at the end of the first Gulf War.  Taking him out was indeed justified.  The prosecution of the war after Saddam was ousted was not well-handled.  Rumsfeld was a likeable and intelligent man, but he was the wrong man for that kind of conflict.  However, eventually Bush realized that, shifted strategies, and the Iraq war is today virtually won.  If Iraq does indeed become a peaceful Middle Eastern democracy, Bush may in fact be looked on pretty positively 50 years hence.  If the democratic experiment there fails, he may be doomed to the bottom ranks of the previous Presidents, with hopeless cases like Warren G. Harding, Franklin Pierce, and Andrew Johnson.

As far as the current recession goes, how long it lasts and how severe it turns out to be will also color his record.  Our media constantly exaggerates every economic downturn in their frantic desire to promote one party over the other and create an atmosphere of fear and panic.  At 45, this is the fourth recession I have lived through.  It is worse than the 1990-91 recession, but not nearly as bad as the one in the late 70's.

At any rate, such are my opinions.

Time will tell the tale.

I believe I have stated my position on this before...and got nailed hardcore....!  :bouncegiggle:

Let's just say I'm not a fan.

I voted bad, but not the worst.

I liked his tax cuts in the first term.  And he responded very well on 9/11--although I honestly believe any President would have done much the same, given the attack on our soil and the extraordinary patriotism people felt in the wake of the attack.

After that came the Iraq invasion, which I believed was a complete disaster at the time and still do (although I don;t advocate a pullout--we broke it, we bought it).  I would be shocked if a democratic nation flourished in Iraq in the future; I just can't see enforcing democracy on people to whom it's a foreign concept, and who show little signs of wanting it.

All of the political capital he gained on 9/11 was thrown away in Iraq.  He couldn't effectively govern after that, so even if his policies would have been helpful, he couldn't pass them.  I like the spirit of the attempt at social security reform, but because he was so unpopular and failed so badly at it, he may have seriously damaged the prospects of ever getting the system fixed in the future.  People are going to associate SS reform with Bush for a long time.

To recap: bad, but not the worst.  He's no Andrew Johnson, didn't disgrace the office like Nixon.

I also voted bad but not the worst.  I'm in training to be a historian, and the biggest thing I can say is that it's too early to judge his legacy.  GWB's approval ratings were never as low as Harry Truman's were at his lowest, and 60 years down the line, we consider Truman to have been a pretty good President. 

I'm not saying that GWB will be judged, 50 years from now, to have been as good as we now generally consider Truman to be.  However, I think he will be judged better than Andrew Johnson, Harding, or Nixon.

Bad but not the worst.  I thought he did a good job with 9/11, of course, we never got Bin Laden.  Hard to believe that with unlimited resources we can't get one freakin' guy.  Bad with invading Iraq to get rid of weapons of mass destruction, which didn't exist, and having no exit strategy.  Whatsoever.  Running up the debt (and/or allowing it to be run up) another 5 trillion dollars.  Gotta give credit where credit is due:  no further terrorist attacks on US soil.

Like I say, bad but not the worst.

I did not see an entry for 'most worthless piece of human s**t to have ever inhabited the oval office', so I declined to vote.

I hope they can get rid of the f**king stench left in that office.

My position would be that I'm glad yogurt-for-brains is out of the office soon.

He made me borderline embarrassed to be American, and he disgraced us before the world, and ourselves, with his idiocy and his astonishing lack of foreign policy, domestic policy, long term planning, or short-term planning.

Did I miss anything, Menard?

Lousy President, though not the worst.  I'm glad to be rid of him.

Quote from: Zapranoth on January 16, 2009, 09:13:58 PM
My position would be that I'm glad yogurt-for-brains is out of the office soon.

He made me borderline embarrassed to be American, and he disgraced us before the world, and ourselves, with his idiocy and his astonishing lack of foreign policy, domestic policy, long term planning, or short-term planning.

Did I miss anything, Menard?

Other than giving yogurt a bad name, I think you pretty well covered it.

It is a funny feeling to about to have a president who isn't a shameful disgrace.

He's got the 2nd lowest approval rating since Nixon. Do I think that he's as bad or worse than Nixon? Only time will tell.

I couldn't really stand the man.  He had plenty of chances to take something and make good out of it but screwed up every single time.   

Quote from: Doctor Menard on January 16, 2009, 08:43:10 PM
I did not see an entry for 'most worthless piece of human s**t to have ever inhabited the oval office', so I declined to vote.

I hope they can get rid of the f**king stench left in that office.

I'm witha Good Doctor. Bush is a memberf a monopoly of a corrupt oil family. Some people need to go to war with me. I ain't scared of the Bush'es.

(http://www.bloggerheads.com/images/bush_hero_flight_suit.jpg)

OK. This is the last time I get to get my shots in. George Bush Jr. is a moron. Why....on Gods green Earth would I defend or give kudos to  man who advoctes murder? If he wants revenge,cool! But,dammit! don't use public orfice to do it!!!

(yes,,,orfice!)

Yeah...I now Bonzo Goes to Bitburg has nothing at all todo with the price of eggs in China...but here it is....!

Nothing has to do with anything....in the long run.....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O8m2LpYGV0E

Oh. Yeh. I fergot to add something.


DING DONG SCHOOL HOUSE!!!!! SH!T ON a SHINGLE!!! MY MAMA'S HAIRY CANAREY!!!!

What any of this has to do with politics or anything else is immaterial. I just felt like adding those words to my opinion of Bushes term in orfice.

Quote from: RCMerchant on January 17, 2009, 12:34:06 AM
Oh. Yeh. I fergot to add something.


DING DONG SCHOOL HOUSE!!!!! SH!T ON a SHINGLE!!! MY MAMA'S HAIRY CANAREY!!!!

What any of this has to do with politics or anything else is immaterial. I just felt like adding those words to my opinion of Bushes term in orfice.

Don't be shy, RC, tell us how you REALLY feel . . . . .   :teddyr:

Exactly how many times have we been a attacked on American soil since 9/11 ... feel free to use your fingers and toes if needed.

You want worse president see Jimmy Carter, you want to trace a lot of the economic burdens of today to the past, see FDR. I don't agree with everything Bush has done but to call him the worse the President ever is to simply be poorly informed in American history.

Quote from: cheezeflixYou want worse president see Jimmy Carter

disagree.  most of jimmy carters problems were related to inflation.  reagan cleared that up within a couple years with paul volcker raising interest rates.  it was tough at first but it made for a inflation free decade or two.  Bush's mistakes are going to takea lot longet to recover from

QuoteExactly how many times have we been a attacked on American soil since 9/11

what about 9/11 itself?  the guy is on record as having not taken the threat from terrorism seriously enough.  not that it was "his fault" but it's not like there was NO WAY 9/11 could have been prevented.

yes, there have been no attacks since 9/11.  thats doesn't make up for lying us into a war that has killed and maimed thousands, Katrina, his ridiculous  "ownership society" that paved the way for the subprime fiasco, and the collapse of the dollar from which it remains to b eseen if we will ever recover.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RtnE4C9Gv5U


8 years in 8 minutes

Quote from: indianasmith on January 17, 2009, 09:30:02 AM

Quote from: RCMerchant on January 17, 2009, 12:34:06 AM
Oh. Yeh. I fergot to add something.


DING DONG SCHOOL HOUSE!!!!! SH!T ON a SHINGLE!!! MY MAMA'S HAIRY CANAREY!!!!

What any of this has to do with politics or anything else is immaterial. I just felt like adding those words to my opinion of Bushes term in orfice.

Don't be shy, RC, tell us how you REALLY feel . . . . .   :teddyr:

I didn't mean to trash on your thread ,Indiana....,I think yer pretty dam cool.  I just think GBII is a mo-mo. I actually like his dad! George Bush the First had brains. Jr. is a mo-mo.

Quote from: lester1/2jr on January 17, 2009, 11:16:22 AM

Quote from: cheezeflixYou want worse president see Jimmy Carter

disagree.  most of jimmy carters problems were related to inflation.  reagan cleared that up within a couple years with paul volcker raising interest rates.  it was tough at first but it made for a inflation free decade or two.  Bush's mistakes are going to takea lot longet to recover from

QuoteExactly how many times have we been a attacked on American soil since 9/11

what about 9/11 itself?  the guy is on record as having not taken the threat from terrorism seriously enough.  not that it was "his fault" but it's not like there was NO WAY 9/11 could have been prevented.

yes, there have been no attacks since 9/11.  thats doesn't make up for lying us into a war that has killed and maimed thousands, Katrina, his ridiculous  "ownership society" that paved the way for the subprime fiasco, and the collapse of the dollar from which it remains to b eseen if we will ever recover.

Disagree if you want while it's still a free country ... I stand by want I say. I'm not going to argue with you about it.

Look up CRA which is the seed to the mighty tree of all the economic upheaval we're having now.

As for Keith Oberbitemyass ... I won't waste a second of my life looking at that scumbag.

Quote from: lester1/2jr on January 17, 2009, 11:35:47 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RtnE4C9Gv5U


8 years in 8 minutes

I agree with Lestsr. He was,,,and is,,,a self serving a$$hole. I have a kid in Iraq......and he agrees! It's horror. f**kin horror, I respect and support our troops.....but DAMMIT! BRING OUR BOYS HOME!!!!!!

Quote... I stand by want I say. I'm not going to argue with you about it.

twell as they say,  you are entitled to your own opinoin but not your own facts. 

also, most of the subprime loans didn't even have CRA standards applied to them but yes that was a big part of the problem.

both parties and wall street colluided to make a huge disaster.  boy, didn't see that coming!!

QuoteAs for Keith Oberbitemyass ... I won't waste a second of my life looking at that scumbag.

salty language for a random clip.  I gues you aren't one of those "social conservatives"

Also, the Anthrax attack was after 9-11 and it was on US soil.

Quote from: Captain Tars Tarkas on January 17, 2009, 12:37:21 PM
Also, the Anthrax attack was after 9-11 and it was on US soil.

Not a attack and not related to Al Qaeda.
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2008/0801081anthrax1.html (http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2008/0801081anthrax1.html)

Lester, Obermann has little credibility even with some on the left, his own networked has problems with his opinions.

Awww..f**k politics. Bring the guys HOME!!! Who wants another 'Nam?

As much as everyone talks about there having been no new terrorist attacks on US soil post-9/11, exactly how many did we have before 9/11? Pearl Harbor? This is what I never understand by that argument. To me it's like saying, "Yeah, sure, Bush was in office during the biggest tragedy in US history, but nothing of that scale happened again in the 7 years following, so he did a great job of protecting us!". Then again I'm a left biased questioning right biased, so I'm sure I just don't "understand". You know, like people who have the t-shirts with the confederate flag on them that say "If I had to explain it, you wouldn't understand". :lookingup:

Quote from: AnubisVonMojo on January 17, 2009, 03:05:29 PM
As much as everyone talks about their having been no new terrorist attacks on US soil post-9/11, exactly how many did we have before 9/11? Pearl Harbor?

The first trade center incident, Oklahoma city, , there's more. . .

Quote from: ghouck on January 17, 2009, 03:18:36 PM

Quote from: AnubisVonMojo on January 17, 2009, 03:05:29 PM
As much as everyone talks about their having been no new terrorist attacks on US soil post-9/11, exactly how many did we have before 9/11? Pearl Harbor?

The first trade center incident, Oklahoma city, , there's more. . .

Oklahoma City was done my an American citizen though Ghouck, I'm talking about foreign attacks. You know, attacks that ramp up the xenophobia and patriotism, not the ones where we all start thinking that our neighbor is the next Ted Kaczynski. The '93 WTC car bomb thing counts because it was done by foreign terrorists, but does anyone else have examples of major terrorist attacks on US soil by foreign powers?

I'm going to start out by confessing that I voted for the guy twice, which at the time seemed a good idea.

I couldn't have stomached having to listen to Al Gore for any period time, plus the guy has some pretty radical ideas.

Being from a family with a military history (5 brothers plus myself served in the Navy, and my Dad was in the Army during WWII) there was no way in hell I was going to vote for someone who accepted a Purple Heart for a self -inflicted wound and pulled political strings to get himself out of Viet Nam after only 4 1/2 months into his tour. John Kerry is real slime in my book.

I think Bush did okay at the beginning of the 9/11 crisis, but I think a lot of the policies he invoked really tore at the fabric that our country is built on.  The warrantless searchs and wiretaps harken back to the paranoia of the Nixon era.  He did exactly what the terrorists wanted, he chipped away at our freedoms.

Saddam Hussein never was a threat to US, sure he did a lot of rotten stuff every dictator does, but it didn't justify getting us into a war that distracted us from what we should've been focused on.

Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 and left us with thousands of troops dead and ten of thousands of others with lifelong physical and mental problems to contend with.

I could go on and on, but I'll end with this. If Bush wasn't the worst,  he's pretty damned close.

the thing is terrorists can easily make it to iraq.  bush certainly hasn't kept them "safe"

yes, we haven't had another attack since 9/11 but there are other  criteria which we judge a president by besides that

Quote from: Trekgeezer on January 17, 2009, 04:25:48 PM
I could go on and on, but I'll end with this. If Bush wasn't the worst,  he's pretty damned close.

And coming from someone who voted for the man twice, that says more to me than all the left or right wing rhetoric in the world.

Far from good.

I used to say Mr. Bush was the worst President since Warren G. Harding and had a little daily email someone sent me as joke that counted down the days till he was out of office. But the fact that since September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks  have occurred in Madrid, London, Bali, Moscow, Israel, Scotland, India, but not again at home brings him up slightly as I do think his administration did a lot to weaken bin Laden's ability to carry out the kind of terrorism it was once assumed he and his forces could. George W. Bush could have done a lot worse in overseeing the national economy, but also a lot better. He was divisive, stifling, stubborn, disconnected, verbally lead-footed, arrogant, and theocratic. On the other hand, he was also decisive, knew his own mind, possessed self-confidence and....um...well, he had a gracious wife.

To employ the scale William J. Ridings uses in his book about rating Presidents:

Leadership qualities: F
Accomplishments/crisis management: D+/B+
Political skill: D+
Appointments: F
Character and integrity: C

Ultimately I'd sum up his Presidency with about a D+, which is a letter grade higher than I spent this decade thinking I would.

Nice subject, indy!

Quote from: indianasmith on January 16, 2009, 07:08:35 PM
...Although the case for WMD violations was greatly overstated, under international law, Saddam Hussein had violated every single condition of the cease-fire he agreed to at the end of the first Gulf War.  Taking him out was indeed justified.  The prosecution of the war after Saddam was ousted was not well-handled.  Rumsfeld was a likeable and intelligent man, but he was the wrong man for that kind of conflict...

RUMSFELD "was likeable...???" (oh cheez n crackers get me an air-sick bag)
 

Quote from: indianasmith on January 16, 2009, 07:08:35 PM...However, eventually Bush realized that, shifted strategies, and the Iraq war is today virtually won.  If Iraq does indeed become a peaceful Middle Eastern democracy, Bush may in fact be looked on pretty positively 50 years hence.  If the democratic experiment there fails, he may be doomed to the bottom ranks of the previous Presidents, with hopeless cases like Warren G. Harding, Franklin Pierce, and Andrew Johnson...

Don't forget JAMES BUCHANAN...

More than any other President, GEORGE W. BUSH proves that the Presidency of the United States is up for grabs.  One need not have any experience, or any accomplishments, or any talent, as long as one has powerful vested interests. 

I'm cutting you a lot of slack here, Indy, because I admire you, and I just don't have the energy.   :wink: Next week the world changes forever.   :thumbup: 

Quote from: Rev. Powell on January 16, 2009, 07:46:12 PM
People are going to associate SS reform with Bush for a long time.

Yes, BUSH and the SS often come to mind at the same time.   :lookingup:

Quote from: Doctor Menard on January 16, 2009, 08:43:10 PM
I did not see an entry for 'most worthless piece of human s**t to have ever inhabited the oval office', so I declined to vote.
I hope they can get rid of the f**king stench left in that office.

:bouncegiggle:  :bouncegiggle:  :bouncegiggle:

I don't agree with those presidential ranking things.  warren harding had great numbers.  lincoln and fdr have the deaths of thousands of americans on their hands ,  yet they are "great"  it's exactly that type of thinking that leads people like bush to think they can be great just by starting wars.


the fact is,  they all stink.  the goverment are nothing more than a band of thieves who take a third of our paychecks and spend it on just about anything other than what we would logically spend it on ourselves:  roads, schoolss, police.  instead we give billions to countries that hate us and subisdize stuff we don't use and the beaurcracy to run it all while our roads and schools are garbage.


the best president: none of them


the worst: all of them

First of all, Lester, your anti-government bias simply blinds you to genuine greatness.  Secondly, ER, WELCOME BACK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

And thirdly, thanks to all who voted in my poll.

I said I wouldn't debate any of your opinions about Bush, and I won't, no matter how much I disagree with them.

But I enjoyed reading them all, even the ones that made me wince!

I voted for worst ever, but I don't think he was really the WORST . . . but he is in the top 5 worst.

Quote from: ghouck on January 17, 2009, 03:18:36 PM

Quote from: AnubisVonMojo on January 17, 2009, 03:05:29 PM
As much as everyone talks about their having been no new terrorist attacks on US soil post-9/11, exactly how many did we have before 9/11? Pearl Harbor?

The first trade center incident, Oklahoma city, , there's more. . .

Still reminds me of a Simpsons quote..

QuoteHomer: Not a bear in sight. The Bear Patrol must be working like a charm.
Lisa: That's specious reasoning, Dad.
Homer: Thank you, dear.
Lisa: By your logic I could claim that this rock keeps tigers away.
Homer: Oh, how does it work?
Lisa: It doesn't work.
Homer: Uh-huh.
Lisa: It's just a stupid rock.
Homer: Uh-huh.
Lisa: But I don't see any tigers around, do you?
(Homer thinks of this, then pulls out some money)
Homer: Lisa, I want to buy your rock.

Anyway, I don't like Bush much.  I'll ignore foreign policy, and just say a few things he's done I don't like: support of torture, his terrible mishandling of environmental issues (on that level, he actually IS the worst president ever), reducing civil liberties, cutting down on privacy protections, cuts to renewable energy research, and his continuing push for abstinence-only education. 

But, I'm not sure if he'll be looked upon as the worst ever.  So I just voted for "bad".

Thanks to all who have voted thus far.  Any more takers . . . .?