Log In | Register
Viewers of the approximately 3 million Republican presidential debates so far have come to expect certain things. There’s the regular cast of characters, a moderator struggling to knock the candidates off their talking points, and loads of American flags.
But there’s one thing you’d be hard-pressed to find mentioned at a Republican debate.
George W. Bush? Who?
You’d think that the last Republican president — remember, that two-termer who’s only been out of the White House a scant three years — might come up frequently.
Not so. In fact, George W. Bush is the invisible man of the GOP race, the all-but-forgotten Ghost of Administrations Past. He’s its “He Who Should Not be Named,” in Harry Potter parlance.
The Most Taboo Topic at the GOP Debates: George W. Bush
Seeded on Sun Jan 22, 2012 12:27 PM EST
Article Source: AlterNet.org- Enjoy this article? Help vote it up the 'Vine.
- Public Discussion (174)
Bush deserves to be part of the discussion. From Dems’ perspective, there’s value in reminding voters that Bush is responsible for nearly all of the messes Obama is trying to clean up, and nearly all of the Republican candidates are eager to bring return to Bush-era policies — only this time, they’ll be even more right wing.
From journalists’ perspective, there’s no reason to play along with the GOP’s willingness to erase Bush from the larger discussion. Indeed, there are some pretty straightforward questions the Republican field should be forced to answer: Do you believe the Bush presidency was a success? How would your agenda differ from Bush’s if you’re elected?
CoH please
- 45 votes
No kidding. If they ever mentioned GWB, they'd turn into pumpkins.
Oh yeah, they are already pumpkin heads.
I'll guess they'll blame Obama for GWB now.
- 40 votes
It's as if the Bush years never happened! None of the Republican candidates are critical of the policies that caused our economic melt-down; they are only critical of the efforts to contain the damage. This failure to acknowledge the excesses of the last decade (all the way back to Enron) makes them seem like characters in a fantasy (like sophomoric strategists).
- 38 votes
GWB's legacy is the huge skidmark in the teapublican/teabag/teavangelical shorts.
- 46 votes
If you are a Republican, why would you want to talk about the Worst President in United States history, who also happens to be a Republican?
- 42 votes
The mere mention of Jorge sends them into a tizzy! Funny how they feel free to attack every democrat that ever existed, they could try to pin 9/11 on Clinton, pin the bush collapse in 2008 on Carter, Clinton and poor minorities, but if you bring up anything from Jan 20 2001 to jan 20 2009, they will howl your blaming BUSH!!! They are so self concious about him the will try to filibuster a debate by repeating the mantra blame bush.
- 34 votes
Bush is only 1 of several taboo topics. How about specific job creation plans? Maybe their plans for Social Security and Medicare? Or addressing our crumbling roadways and bridges?
These debates are just a right wing stroke fest as each candidate tries to show that they hate women/gays/Muslims/blacks/the poor more than the others.
- 35 votes
Mentioning GHB would be the Kiss of Death. He will go down in the history books as the third worst President in the history of the United States.
I saw a discussion the US Senate between Sen McCain and Sen Durbin where McCain blamed Obama for the Wall Street Bail Out TARP. Pres GHB created TARP on his way out the door to help his Wall Street Billionaire Buddys. Stupid at least Durbin did not tell McCain he was lieing on the senate floor.
What other President got the US into TWO wars, destroyed the economy and created the largest National Debt in the History of the United States.
- 22 votes
among Viners who support Bush, they claim that Obama made the 2008 economic meltdown worse
they refuse to admit the good that has come from the Obama administration
- 29 votes
This is what happens when for three entire years you allow the republicans to stick their fingers in their ears and scream "BLAME BUSH! BLAME BUSH! NANANANANANA CAN'T HEAR YOU!" every time you bring up his name.
It's too late I'm afraid. They should have been struck down on this from the get go.
- 18 votes
Yeah, as if their last time at the wheel got us to our destination without any problems at all. Well, I remember Bush/Cheney, and what a total mess they left.
The Republican's happy talk, is but another attempt at the one thing they are good at, propaganda. I think they refer to it as,changing the message! The pity is, so many Low Information voters eat that $h!+ up...poor saps!
- 20 votes
I liken the Republican party to the recent cruise ship disaster, the captain at the time of the disaster bailing out and refusing to go down with the ship, or take any responsibility for it's crash. The court of public opinion is that this cruise ship captain is the "Chicken of the Sea" and believe you me, this will be thoroughly investigated, the people will demand to know every detail and others will have to clean up this mess, and probably be criticized in the process. The entire cruise ship industry will be under scrutiny and there will be plenty of blame to go around, but there is one thing about this story that will never change, we all know who the captain was, and so will history.
- 19 votes
wasn't GW Bush, that lame, tongue tied, obsequious little toady to that Maniacal and Evil Darth Cheney, why would he matter or come up in conversations?
- 11 votes
Asking the candidates about the Bush Administration is absolutely necessary in my view. Each candidate needs to weigh in on the policies that were in place during that time. They need to explain how their plans are different and what they think was done wrong or right whatever the case may be. They need to be specific about their policy compared to those under GW. They need to acknowledge the unforeseen consequences of the policy(ies) and why new ones must replace some of the old time traditions of the Republican party and why others should stay in place. Unless they are willing to go there these candidates are looking for power and not solutions or the best interest of The United States and her people.
The empty rhetoric gives me no answers as to whether they have learned anything from the Bush era. Trying to determine what they would do from their empty rhetoric and dog whistles makes me wonder if they are oblivious to some of the damaging policies. Just saying that I don't understand how anyone could vote for any of them unless this elephant in the room is addressed. In my view if there is no recognition of what went wrong then history will repeat itself. This is the most concerning aspects of the current candidate list.
Other than Ron Paul there seems to be no plan beyond the status quo of the G.W. Bush era which should nauseate all Americans . Voters should demand to know or else they should boycott the primaries and the general election(grin) instead of voting for those that refuse to explore this part of history.
- 13 votes
Republican candidates won't talk about Bush because Bush's record was atrocious, and across the board the candidates are espousing the same basic principles that bush embraced.
When Republicans do talk about Bush, they generally say where he was wrong was in the "over spending". What Republicans don't talk about though is that it was the impact of Bush's other policies that the GOP still suppports which led to the "over spending". That's the fallacy of the position - Republicans act as if Bush's positions on foreign policy and the economy would have been fine had he just said no to the massive spending..... but it was Bush's positions on foreign policy and the economy which led to the need for the massive spending.
Many a Republican have claimed after the fact that Bush wasn't a "true Conservative". Except of course, that Bush doubled own on virtually every "Conservative" policy approach (agressive foreign policy, big tax cuts including substantial cuts for the wealthy and corporations, increased military spending and influence). If those policies worked, Bush would have never been in a position of needing to over spend.
- 19 votes
The Republicans won't talk about Bush policy because that is their policy for America. Anybody who thinks this was just some unfortunate accident hasn't been paying attention to the scam that's been wrapped in the flag and fundamentalism for many years coming. They have a perfect opportunity to carpetbag the whole country, for your own good of course, and blame one dude that's been in the Whitehouse for 3 years, along with food stamps, the working poor, minorities,gays,abortions, interesting, everything but white-collar crime and tax evasion. How patriotic of you.
- 17 votes
GWB legacy is one of idiocy and a war criminal. He was the president that delegated at every possible chance so he could concentrate on his cronyism.
The worst part of GWB was that we see the income inequality and bush tax's widen the inequality. If we do not address this income inequality. The america we grew up in will be one of the glorious days in the past.
Just I hope we do not have another republican President for another 30 years.
I am still trying to digest the Consumer Protection Bureau and its 2.2k pages of legislation. I hope it fixes the mess.
Dodd-Frank Act. A year after Congress passed the broadest financial overhaul since the Great Depression, the law has spawned a host of new businesses to help Wall Street comply — and capitalize — on the hundreds of new regulations.
I find it funny when we see right wingers say there is oppressive regulation. Then they come up with bogey that is not even real.
We see Germany with more regulation and unionism and higher standard of living. How do they explain that?
- 15 votes
Where were John Boehner, Mitch McConnell, Eric Cantor, Paul Ryan and the rest of our melodramatic, grandstanding deficit cutters that are so very, very, very concerned about the national debt during Bush's 8 years in office? Eagerly voting for the entire Bush spending binge that nearly doubled the national debt, while voting 7 times in the Senate and 7 times in the House to raise the debt ceiling with no major issues expressed at all.
They cannot now admit that Bush was there for 8 years and they voted for all of that spending.
- 12 votes
They were in "quiet rooms" with Cheney and energy giants, cutting deals to line their own pockets. And let's not forget the private military contracts. I can never figure why hardly anybody seems to care about this but me. I do feel this is another reason they are so desperate to regain the WH. They have perpetrated a big heist, made themselves and their buddies wealthy, signed away big land grabs for big oil, done dirty deals with China and we supplied the body bags. Bush and Cheney masterfully led the country damn near off a cliff, but they are safe and sound in their ivory towers, and now the American people can fight over the crumbs.
- 9 votes
Lola,
They were in "quiet rooms" with Cheney and energy giants, cutting deals to line their own pockets. And let's not forget the private military contracts. I can never figure why hardly anybody seems to care about this but me. I do feel this is another reason they are so desperate to regain the WH.
I'm convinced this is why they all are answering how they would deal with Iran if elected/
- 7 votes
All the GOP candidates are discussing how they would respond to Iran, and they all say they would increase the military and a couple suggest a preemptive strike might be called for. When one of the U.S. Jewish papers just wrote an article outlining 3 steps to respond to the threat of Iran, #3 was to have Mossad assassinate President Obama so a more "pro Israel" president could be elected we can see where we would be going if the GOP was in control again.
- 6 votes
It's not only Bush that needs to be discussed but the policies of Ronald Reagan as well, the mess we are in now didn't start with Bush, but, with Reagan, Bush just carried it to an extreme and it will take another three administrations determined to clean it up to get American back on its economic feet.
- 36 votes
gmross:
FR. sent.
We need to bring out the Nixon years as well.
Since 1968 we have had Nixon and Ford for eight years, Jimmy Carter for four years, Ronald Reagan for eight years, GH Bush for four years, Bill Clinton for eight years, GW Bush for eight years, President Obama for 3 years.
That is twenty eight years of rules by fools, and fifteen years of trying to fix it by reasonable men.
We need to at least let it even out to find out just how well Democrats can get this country going again !!!
They need to bring this up constantly. America used to be productive but under GOP presidents we have sold out to the enemy !!! We have failed to make conservative economic practices a staple, and have punished the poor and middle class work ethic by rewarding the wealthy and taxing the middle class and poor more heavily.
I revile the actions of the GOP/TP they remind me of the work of the devil.
- 39 votes
Agreed Cowboy, we have had too many years of Republican administrations setting the rules, we need to even things out now with at least three more Democratic presidents, along with Democratic rule in the house and senate.
- 27 votes
No, I'd say newt is more like an EVIL Huey Long, which is saying a lot.
- 27 votes
Great point! Regan was the first president to take the people fighting the regulations and put them in charge of the regulatory agencies. He undid a lot of the great work that Ralph Nadar did. I wonder if he were alive, if he would have some regrets about the policies he put in place that have lead us to this point.
There is not one agency that is trying to do the best for the American people. Their interest lie in protecting and promoting the industry they are suppose to regulate. Look out for yourself and the next time the meat or dairy industry try to tell you that you need to eat more meat and drink more milk for your health, do some research and find out why you should actually eat less meat and minimize your dairy intake. (Watch "Forks Over Knifes")
I hate to be the devil's advocate. I like crushing Republicans as much as the next liberal. But, don't fool yourself into believing that Democrats are just about the people; they have their share of corporations and uber rich that they do favors for.
- 14 votes
While I agree with you about Nixon and Ford, even those fools knew not to borrow above the rate of GDP growth, and believed in domestic investment.
- 17 votes
gmross:
Right back atcha :~)) ;~))
I like a lot of blue, being a Democrat ;~)) :~))
- 11 votes
Randy Mc...:
While I agree with you about Nixon and Ford, even those fools knew not to borrow above the rate of GDP growth, and believed in domestic investment.
Yeah, but it was Nixon who opened up China. Why in the world would one open up a country that has so many low paid laborers available unless the plan in the long term was to ship our work over there ??
It was also Nixon who took us off the Gold Standard and caused the hyper inflation we experienced during the Carter years.
Nope, I don't like any of them since Eisenhower. Just the way I see it.
- 16 votes
cowboygrandpa.
You understand the problem.
Don't try to reason with the Republicans they don't want to discuss the facts. Every time they get nailed with a LIE they say but how about this. It also is usually a LIE.
Stick to the truth. The Republicans can't stand that position.
Just look at what Gringrich, Boemher, Romney and the other teapublicans say that will define who they are and who they represent.
- 17 votes
Gotcha Cowboygrandpa, I like IKE to...Nixon Ford were merely less prolific debtors than Reagan bush ...which ain't sayin much...
- 7 votes
Grandpa, we went off the gold standard because it was economically unsustainable - there simply wasn't enough gold currently then mined to provide enough liquidity to sustain the economy, the dollar was tied to a SPECIFIC price in dollars per the Bretton Woods Confereence of the 1940's.
And here's Adam Smith's take on goldbugs and their ideology -
Corn is a necessary, silver is only a superfluity.
Labour was the first price, the original purchase-money that was paid for all things. Itwas not by gold or by silver, but by labour, that all the wealth of the world wasoriginally purchased; and its value, to those who possess it, and who want to exchange it for some new productions, is precisely equal to the quantity of labour which it can enable them to purchase or command.
Goods can serve many other purposes besides purchasing money,but money can serve no other purpose besides purchasing goods. (this INCLUDES gold as currency)
Of all those expensive and uncertain projects, however, which bring bankruptcy upon the greater part of the people who engage in in them, there is none perhaps more perfectly ruinous then the search after new silver and gold mines. It is perhaps the most disadvantageous lottery in the world, or the one in which the gain of those who draw the prizes bears the least proportion to the loss of those who draw the blanks: for though the prizes are few and the blanks are many, the common price of a ticket is the whole fortune of a very rich man.
Gold is NO different than any other form of currency, its value is NOT intrinisic, but merely measured in the amount of goods and services the may be got in exchange for it. Nor is it immutable, history is filled with stories of debased gold currency, going all the way back to the first gold coinage. Gold's usefulness as currency came from relative compactness, and some measure of quality control thru touch stones. Still, Rome experienced hyperinflation withits gold coinage in the late 300 CE period, that was just as destructive as the paper inflation of Germany in the early 1920's.
- 3 votes
I thought gold's value was set by the market which is not necessarily tied to goods and services but what people believe it's worth. But if the end comes I'd rather have a pound of gold than a pound of goods and services.
- 2 votes
I always refer to today's economic crises as "The Bush Depression." Feel free to borrow it! I hope the Democratic party will start using more catch phrases to characterize the republican debacle, so it sticks in people's minds. Far too many blame Obama for this mess -- unreal! I even heard a repugnant talking head say the other day, that unemployment has been high since the day Obama took office -- like it was low the day before! The abominable phrase "class warfare" is sneaking into the daily meme -- we've got to take back the language.
- 11 votes
ryoushi:
So what do we have as a standard now ?? Nothing of value. We have people printing money with nothing to back it.
They give us more paper and it is worth less. That way they devalue our labor and and say we are over paid. At least when we had a gold standard there was a measurement of the value of the dollars one was paid.
They did not want us to know how little the value of the paper money we have is worth. The house I grew up in cost $15,000.00 That same house in 2004 was going for $500,000.00
Wages certainly didn't increase that much, but costs skyrocketed right after Nixon took us off the gold standard.
There is enough gold, they just don't want the value of gold to be so high that the wages based on a gold standard shows how little our labor is worth. Our wages have regressed in value not increased.
- 7 votes
A higher dollar would give us a bigger trade deficit and more incentive to outsource.
GWB's legacy is the huge skidmark in the teapublican/teabag/teavangelical shorts.
So true. So elegantly written.
- 9 votes
Why is the gold standard totally wrong and evil? This would enable rich folk to just hold gold without doing economic activity and get richer. That is very bad. The rich folk would benefit without doing anything at all. Ok not so bad for the rich. Is that all? The lack of money supply suddenly means more inequality and less jobs. The gold would limit economic growth.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sWbB1s_pk8E, Research it.
Then if you go into the detail that it was de-regulation that caused the problems. They just switch off and just go back to the old talking points that gold would lower inflation.
All the reasons to keep a gold standard are a failure. Inflation is important for economy activity.
The other reason is that gold is an important metal in industry and medical purposes.
Though Obama , did he do enough with the Consumer Protection Bureau?
William Black: The finance sector is a huge parasite, it transfers wealth from the poor to the wealthy http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ISsR7ZiWlsk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o5qzJ5Bvcfk Brooksley Born is an american Hero. Where is she?
- 4 votes
johny,
Why is the gold standard totally wrong and evil? This would enable rich folk to just hold gold without doing economic activity and get richer.
A little news for you there johny, you have to keep it quiet though, shhh, the rich are already buying gold and silver like there isn't any left. Most of the rich guys and girls out there have been buying gold and silver since the late 1990's because the metals were starting to go up in price at a good clip and they knew if there was a recession again that these metals would sky rocket, well, guess what, that is exactly what has happened, right now if you bought gold and silver in 2000 you can make back 400% on your investment in either gold or silver, just by selling what you have. In 2004 I sold some gold coins I had purchased in 2001 and made a tidy profit on them, and these guys that you say would do this if we went to a gold standard are already doing it, as fast as they can.
- 5 votes
GM,
I totally agree with you, but it's difficult to be realistic about the icon of the party, particularly as he "defeated Russia"...
*gagging*
- 21 votes
What's really something about the defeat of Russia is that Russia defeated itself, it spent more on weapons than it did on domestic matters and that is what caused the fall of the USSR, not Reagan and his policies.
And I agree with the *gagging* thing.
- 20 votes
Afghanistan helped bring down Russia - does this tell you anything?
They don't want to bring up Bush or any of his record since he sent the country into a tailspin. Better to canonize Reagan as their patron saint because he reigned so long ago. Most people don't do history well - they like the easily digestible 30 second sound bites that they can parrot back - facts be damned.
- 27 votes
They don't want to bring up Bush or any of his record since he sent the country into a tailspin. Better to canonize Reagan as their patron saint because he reigned so long ago.
Well said Shelby. They tell us not to live in the past when we bring up 'He who's name shall not be spoken', yet they are only too happy to bring up the name of a dead man who was President 30 years ago.
- 20 votes
I absolutely LOVE this story b/c it finally tells the truth that Dubya IS responsible. REGARDLESS how the repubs are trying to ERASE him from the history book and shine the spotlight on Saint Reagan, the hole that was dug was by Dumbya.
I've said it before, and here it is again.
Dubya inherited a mansion from Clinton. Dumbass burns it down in a drunken frat party, then hands the husk over to Obama. Obama is trying to rebuild it but with the repubs in charge of building permits not much is getting done. Now the question is : who is it that IS, WAS AND WILL BE responsible for the fire in the FIRST PLACE?? (hint: it's NOT Obama)
Facts really hurt sometimes don't they??
- 26 votes
Wrong, the economy was heading south at the end of the Clinton administration. Bush inherited a failing economy.
Bill K. NY:
Even if what you say is true. Bush didn't help the economy he pushed it off the cliff !!!
So that means he was not only inept, he was blind and inept !!!!
All the more reason to bring up his treason to our nation. Starting a war in Iraq with no cause except to profit for his friends !!!
NO MORE REPUBLICANS or TEAPUBLICANS until they have learned from the error of their greed !!!
- 28 votes
Wrong Bill K,
The Clinton Presidency: A Historic Era of Progress and Prosperity
- Longest economic expansion in American history
The President’s strategy of fiscal discipline, open foreign markets and investments in the American people helped create the conditions for a record 115 months of economic expansion. Our economy has grown at an average of 4 percent per year since 1993.- More than 22 million new jobs
More than 22 million jobs were created in less than eight years -- the most ever under a single administration, and more than were created in the previous twelve years.- Highest homeownership in American history
A strong economy and fiscal discipline kept interest rates low, making it possible for more families to buy homes. The homeownership rate increased from 64.2 percent in 1992 to 67. 7 percent, the highest rate ever.- Lowest unemployment in 30 years
Unemployment dropped from more than 7 percent in 1993 to just 4.0 percent in November 2000. Unemployment for African Americans and Hispanics fell to the lowest rates on record, and the rate for women is the lowest in more than 40 years.- Raised education standards, increased school choice, and doubled education and training investment
Since 1992, reading and math scores have increased for 4th, 8th, and 12th graders, math SAT scores are at a 30-year high, the number of charter schools has grown from 1 to more than 2,000, forty-nine states have put in place standards in core subjects and federal investment in education and training has doubled.- Largest expansion of college opportunity since the GI Bill
President Clinton and Vice President Gore have nearly doubled financial aid for students by increasing Pell Grants to the largest award ever, expanding Federal Work-Study to allow 1 million students to work their way through college, and by creating new tax credits and scholarships such as Lifetime Learning tax credits and the HOPE scholarship. At the same time, taxpayers have saved $18 billion due to the decline in student loan defaults, increased collections and savings from the direct student loan program.- Connected 95 percent of schools to the Internet
President Clinton and Vice President Gore’s new commitment to education technology, including the E-Rate and a 3,000 percent increase in educational technology funding, increased the percentage of schools connected to the Internet from 35 percent in 1994 to 95 percent in 1999.- Lowest crime rate in 26 years
Because of President Clinton’s comprehensive anti-crime strategy of tough penalties, more police, and smart prevention, as well as common sense gun safety laws, the overall crime rate declined for 8 consecutive years, the longest continuous drop on record, and is at the lowest level since 1973.- 100,000 more police for our streets
As part of the 1994 Crime Bill, President Clinton enacted a new initiative to fund 100,000 community police officers. To date more than 11,000 law enforcement agencies have received COPS funding.- Enacted most sweeping gun safety legislation in a generation
Since the President signed the Brady bill in 1993, more than 600,000 felons, fugitives, and other prohibited persons have been stopped from buying guns. Gun crime has declined 40 percent since 1992.- Family and Medical Leave Act for 20 million Americans
To help parents succeed at work and at home, President Clinton signed the Family and Medical Leave Act in 1993. Over 20 million Americans have taken unpaid leave to care for a newborn child or sick family member.- Smallest welfare rolls in 32 years
The President pledged to end welfare as we know it and signed landmark bipartisan welfare reform legislation in 1996. Since then, caseloads have been cut in half, to the lowest level since 1968, and millions of parents have joined the workforce. People on welfare today are five times more likely to be working than in 1992.- Higher incomes at all levels
After falling by nearly $2,000 between 1988 and 1992, the median family’s income rose by $6,338, after adjusting for inflation, since 1993. African American family income increased even more, rising by nearly $7,000 since 1993. After years of stagnant income growth among average and lower income families, all income brackets experienced double-digit growth since 1993. The bottom 20 percent saw the largest income growth at 16.3 percent.- Lowest poverty rate in 20 years
Since Congress passed President Clinton’s Economic Plan in 1993, the poverty rate declined from 15.1 percent to 11.8 percent last year — the largest six-year drop in poverty in nearly 30 years. There are now 7 million fewer people in poverty than in 1993. The child poverty rate declined more than 25 percent, the poverty rates for single mothers, African Americans and the elderly have dropped to their lowest levels on record, and Hispanic poverty dropped to its lowest level since 1979.- Lowest teen birth rate in 60 years
In his 1995 State of the Union Address, President Clinton challenged Americans to join together in a national campaign against teen pregnancy. The birth rate for teens aged 15-19 declined every year of the Clinton Presidency, from 60.7 per 1,000 teens in 1992 to a record low of 49.6 in 1999.- Lowest infant mortality rate in American history
The Clinton Administration expanded efforts to provide mothers and newborn children with health care. Today, a record high 82 percent of all mothers receive prenatal care. The infant mortality rate has dropped from 8.5 deaths per 1,000 in 1992 to 7.2 deaths per 1,000 in 1998, the lowest rate ever recorded.- Deactivated more than 1,700 nuclear warheads from the former Soviet Union
Efforts of the Clinton-Gore Administration led to the dismantling of more than 1,700 nuclear warheads, 300 launchers and 425 land and submarine based missiles from the former Soviet Union.
And if you want the "success's of GWB" I can give those to you as well, by the way this is only part of what Clinton accomplished during his eight years in office.
- 32 votes
Wrong, the economy was heading south at the end of the Clinton administration.
Bush started talking the economy down during the election, and when he assumed office, he kept talking it down. He said multiple times that we were due for a correction.
The markets reacted to his bad-mouthing of the economy, it tanked, and the GOP set about using the crisis to lower wages, cut taxes on the rich, and loot the Treasury.
Your statement, Bill, was a lie. Mine is the truth.
- 27 votes
Wrong, the economy was heading south at the end of the Clinton administration. Bush inherited a failing economy.
Did fucx news tell you this? You lie!
- 18 votes
bush's greatest accomplishment!!
Republican massive miserable failure in 2008...
.AT LEAST A 50 TRILLION DOLLAR LOSS IN 2008...
Global Financial Assets Lost $50 Trillion Last Year, ADB Says... ..http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aZ1kcJ7y3LDM. ..Most notably, MGI finds that:Falling equities accounted for virtually all of the drop in global financial assets. The world's equities lost almost half their value in 2008, declining by $28 trillion. Markets have regained some ground in recent months, replacing $4.6 trillion in value between December 2008 and the end of July 2009. Global residential real estate values fell by $3.4 trillion in 2008 and nearly $2 trillion more in the first quarter of 2009. Combining these figures, we see that declines in equity and real estate wiped out $28.8 trillion of global wealth in 2008 and the first half of 2009.. . http://www.mckinsey.com/Insights/MGI/Research/Financial_Markets/Global_capital_markets_entering_a_new_eraThe
244 ACCOMPLISHMENTS of PRESIDENT OBAMA.. ..http://b4bmorenews.blogspot.com/2010/09/new-244-accomplishments-of-president.html
- 20 votes
Bill K. NY
Wrong, the economy was heading south at the end of the Clinton administration. Bush inherited a failing economy.
WRONG. The tech bubble effected only tech stocks and nasdaq, the dow and S&P were barely touched. It was also the shallowest in modern history... a loss of just .3% of GDP, compared to the 9% GDP loss we the last few months Bush was in office. Thats like comparing the east coast earthquake to the Fukushima disaster.
- 24 votes
And incase anyone out there is interested, here are some more of GWB's "accomplishments" during his eight years pretending to be president.
George W. Bush:
accomplishments as president
* Attacked and took over two countries.
* Spent the surplus and bankrupted the treasury.
* Shattered record for biggest annual deficit in history.
* Set economic record for most private bankruptcies filed in any 12 month period.
* Set all-time record for biggest drop in the history of the stock market.
* First president in decades to execute a federal prisoner.
* First president in US history to enter office with a criminal record.
* First year in office set the all-time record for most days on vacation by any president in US history.
* After taking the entire month of August off for vacation, presided over the worst security failure in US history.
* Set the record for most campaign fund-raising trips than any other president in US history.
* In my first two years in office over 2 million Americans lost their job.
*Cut unemployment benefits for more out of work Americans than any president in US history.
* Set the all-time record for most foreclosures in a 12 month period.
* Appointed more convicted criminals to administration positions than any president in US history.
* Set the record for the least amount of press conferences than any president since the advent of television.
* Signed more laws and executive orders amending the Constitution than any president in US history.
* Presided over the biggest energy crises in US history and refused to intervene when corruption was revealed.
* Presided over the highest gasoline prices in US history and refused to use the national reserves as past presidents have.
* Cut healthcare benefits for war veterans.
* Set the all-time record for most people worldwide to simultaneously take to the streets to protest me (15 million people), shattering the record for protest against any person in the history of mankind.
* Dissolved more international treaties than any president in US history.
* My presidency is the most secretive and un-accountable of any in US history.
* Members of my cabinet are the richest of any administration in US history. (the 'poorest' multi-millionaire, Condoleeza Rice has an Exxon oil tanker named after her).
* First president in US history to have all 50 states of the Union simultaneously go bankrupt.
* Presided over the biggest corporate stock market fraud of any market in any country in the history of the world.
* First president in US history to order a US attack and military occupation of a sovereign nation.
* Created the largest government department bureaucracy in the history of the United States.
* Set the all-time record for biggest annual budget spending increases, more than any president in US history.
* First president in US history to have the United Nations remove the US from the human rights commission.
* First president in US history to have the United Nations remove the US from the elections monitoring board.
* Removed more checks and balances, and have the least amount of congressional oversight than any presidential administration in US history.
* Rendered the entire United Nations irrelevant.
* Withdrew from the World Court of Law.
* Refused to allow inspectors access to US prisoners of war and by default no longer abide by the Geneva Conventions.
* First president in US history to refuse United Nations election inspectors (during the 2002 US elections).
* All-time US (and world) record holder for most corporate campaign donations.
* My biggest life-time campaign contributor presided over one of the largest corporate bankruptcy frauds in world history (Kenneth Lay, former CEO of Enron Corporation).
* Spent more money on polls and focus groups than any president in US history.
* First president in US history to unilaterally attack a sovereign nation against the will of the United Nations and the world community.
* First president to run and hide when the US came under attack (and then lied saying the enemy had the code to Air Force 1)
* First US president to establish a secret shadow government.
* Took the biggest world sympathy for the US after 911, and in less than a year made the US the most resented country in the world (possibly the biggest diplomatic failure in US and world history).
* With a policy of 'dis-engagement' created the most hostile Israeli-Palestine relations in at least 30 years.
* First US president in history to have a majority of the people of Europe (71%) view my presidency as the biggest threat to world peace and stability.
* First US president in history to have the people of South Korea more threatened by the US than their immediate neighbor, North Korea.
* Changed US policy to allow convicted criminals to be awarded government contracts.
* Set all-time record for number of administration appointees who violated US law by not selling huge investments in corporations bidding for government contracts.
* Failed to fulfill my pledge to get Osama Bin Laden 'dead or alive'.
* Failed to capture the anthrax killer who tried to murder the leaders of our country at the United States Capital building. After 18 months I have no leads and zero suspects.
* In the 18 months following the 911 attacks I have successfully prevented any public investigation into the biggest security failure in the history of the United States.
* Removed more freedoms and civil liberties for Americans than any other president in US history.
* In a little over two years created the most divided country in decades, possibly the most divided the US has ever been since the civil war.
* Entered office with the strongest economy in US history and in less than two years turned every single economic category heading straight down.
Hows them for apples.
- 28 votes
gingrich is trying to take credit for President Clinton years prosperity but this republican must be a romney supporter. If he bashes President Clinton, he would also be bashing gingrich.
Even though gingrich spent 99 percent of his time following monica lewinsky around.
- 21 votes
GMRoss- per 3.12.. what's the word I'm looking for ...??
oh yeah!
AWESOME!..
lol I love the smell of smoke as the repug spin machine short circuits from too many facts thrown at once..
- 20 votes
Wrong, the economy was heading south at the end of the Clinton administration. Bush inherited a failing economy.
Then why didn't all Bush's tax cuts for the job creators create any jobs? He had the worst job creation record of any modern President. Why didn't all those wonderful Republican trickle-down economic policies improve things. I mean they had 8 years! Oh yeah, it's because trickle-down econ doesn't work!
I'm sure you remember Regan's battle cry 'Are you better off know than you were 4 years ago?", well there wasn't a single major economic indicator that was better when W left office than when he entered. That's the record Republicans are running away from.
- 24 votes
Hows them for apples.
Arrrrrggghhh.....Apples! :-) Yum!
If Bush inherited a failing economy...(which the evidence seems to refute)....look what he did to it. He turned into the Great Recession.
Bush turned a surplus into a deficit. He turned Iraq into a mess. He allowed Afghanistan to turn into a quagmire. He turned people's jobs into unemployment. He turned the SCOTUS into a Conservative good-ole-boys club. He turned income inequality into way of life. He turned the US into a world laughing stock.
- 23 votes
bush had 8 years. They are still blaming President Clinton who created 23 million new jobs. They wanted President Obama to fix everything on his first day in office.
- 20 votes
the facts, though relevant, will have no bearing on our decisions
history is in the past, as a determining factor as to what to expect in the future, you have got to have an educated constituency, for that to be possible
why else do you think we are the most uneducated first world country, it isn't by axi-dent
- 8 votes
They still do. They expect Obama to just snap his fingers, and *POOF!* the recession is gone.
I wonder from what dreamland they are told that can EVER happen? Then there's the transferrence of everything wrong with this economy piled onto this president. It's like republicans suddenly became dumbstruck, forgot the last decade, and just woke up thinking President Obama is at fault for it all.
But NOOOOOO.......it's not the GOP-controlled congress' fault. "It's the economy, stupid" was Bonehead's mantra for about six months. Well, what has he, and his Do-Nothing congress achieved?
Not a damn thing. Yet, it's ALWAYS "Obama's fault." That little BS excuse has worn very thin.
The GOP got infused with a bunch of petulant, crybaby children in 2010, and they were supposed to be from the electorate? And the GOP controlled congress is still out of touch with America.
And the excuse remains that Bush is something not to be talked about, like the clown never existed, like the last decade never happened. Fox won't even invoke his name, they know what a failure he was. Now we have defenders of the GOP Epic Fail. "No, Bush isn't pertinent." No, it's always someone else's fault.
When the GOP can take responsibility for ANYTHING, it will be the day they begin to EARN a little respect. Until then, nothing but contempt should be shown. It's all they deserve.
- 14 votes
Believe you me, the Republican party did not want Obama to have any successes with the economy or national security, and have done everything to delegitimize his Presidency from day one. They are downright desperate to remove him, to serve as a one-man scapegoat for all of American's ills. He IS their crisis, not the economy or anything else, and they will show us all that they can buy their way back into power, with full forgiveness, and a mandate to pursue their fascist utopia.
- 12 votes
That's actually a fact that renders Obama's SUCCESSES even more impressive since it was being done IN SPITE OF the Repug obstructionism. Nothing will ever be good enough for them not to LIE about it, but a lot of us see the truth.
- 15 votes
GMGross at #21.2 -- Them apples are fabulous! Everyone on the Vine should memorize this list-- including the republicans! Suggest you make a post of it for your own column so we can clip it.
- 10 votes
Neither Bush, nor Reagan, nor Clinton, nor Nixon, nor any other past president will appear on the ballot in November. The debate should be centered around the current president, Obama.
BTW, if the economy is improving that too is because of Bush's policies. Obama has been absolved of all blame for the economy. That also absolves him of all credit for a recovery.
#4 - Sun Jan 22, 2012 1:54 PM ESTif the economy is improving that too is because of Bush's policies
More republican bull@!$%# that the public isn't buying anymore.
Bush's policies have no logical rationale behind them. Tax cuts for the rich do not create jobs. They never have. They never will.
- 20 votes
Bill K the may not be, but their empty rhetoric is. What are these candidates saying anything different than what Bush W or Reagan said?
- 14 votes
TARP did help stop the decline. He deserves some credit.
Banks got bailed out. We got sold out.
He gets no credit.
- 15 votes
Well, the banksters certainly were able to help themselves to some mighty fine bonuses, but as stingy as they were about credit in the aftermath, we may as well not have had them around, because they were flat useless to us economically.
- 7 votes
It avoided a run on the banks. It avoided a bank panic. It avoided extremely long lines of millions of people trying to withdraw their money from banks.
- 2 votes
Have to agree with Alex on this one. I'm afraid TARP was mostly a give away, but it did quell potentially major failures in the financial industry with equally potential for monumental ripples.
I will also say, I think the value of TARP was no where near the cost.
- 6 votes
What about the 1.2 trillion in secret loans?
What about how the Glass-steagall act would of prevented the Government from bailing out Goldman sacks and AIG and AIG being bailing out GOldman sacks a second time.
Yes there was panic, it was the banksters losing all the ill gotten gains and then the lie about socialism and other sound bites of cr+p.
The banks should of all been taken over by the federal government and shrunk down in size and then had the highest paid person in the bank being paid not more then 4x the US median wage. Why? So the S.O.Bs can't buy there way out out of the criminality and buy off everyone. Its not enough cash .At 4x the US median wage they can't bribe any of the S.O.Bs in the government.
Regulate executive pay, STop fund managers ( executives) voting on executive pay on behalf of 50 million 401k holders in the funds. How else do they get the big pay packages.
These Executives need to be hanged on a tree. F+cking PIgs.
- 5 votes
There would not have been a run on the banks enough to do much damage, remember FDIC? Let the big banks fail, FDIC would cover the rest and we would teach the lesson that they needed then and now, screw up and it's your dime.
- 1 vote
It avoided a bank panic.
Yes, it did. But the way it was done was so completely irresponsible that Bush gets no credit. He should have told the boards of those banks to resign immediately or face criminal charges. He should have told the CEOs of those banks to resign immediately and leave their golden parachutes folded. He should have told the banks that they were wards of the government or whatever you tell people like that, and that their every move was going to be micro-managed until they were viable institutions again.
And he undoubtedly should have said "you get a bailout -- you immediately return to loaning customers money." Instead, the banks got bailed out, we got sold out, and the economy continued to crash. So he prevented a meltdown-just barely.
- 3 votes
Sorry monster but Bush gets no credit for slowing down the decline, in fact why don't you go to your bank right now and ask for a loan? If they give it to you, what's the terms? I've had my credit reduced, interest rates on my cc sky rocket and that's with a Credit Union.
- 2 votes
Listening to Newt this morning on tv, mentioned Reagan 4 times, never 'he who shall not be named' or bush 1, nixon or ford. That's what I call selective memory.
- 18 votes
Hopefully he will mention Obama more often then any other candidate or president.
BTW, The Republican candidates are speaking to other Republicans not the general public. That will come after the primaries are over.
Bill-and he will say whatever flies for ultraconservatives. Let us hope he stays on message about Reagan and Obama after the primaries and the Liberals stay on message about the newt.
- 8 votes
Lets see how their base will allow them to tack to the center...won't happen, like 2008.
- 11 votes
How much more interesting if we have the newt against Obama instead of the mitt!
- 3 votes
Sadly it doesn't even occur to the left that Bush has not been president for over three years. Sadly it does not even occur to the left that he would be "OFF TOPIC". And why? Because rather than hold any of their own responsible for the current state of affairs they would go grave digging, if necessary, to find a scapegoat.
- 1 vote
We absolutely know W hasn't been president for the last 3 years.
We're just surprised Republicans are so reticent to even acknowledge the previous administration was a monumental failure and was Republican.
- 13 votes
Bull@!$%# G y'all just want to beat the same dead horse in the hope no one notices the one in the White House.
- 1 vote
Bull@!$%# tesla.
The one in our White House is heads above the last one, and you're just afraid to admit it's true.
Like most ultra-conservatives you choose to believe that which you hope to be true, and support every sound bite that fits within your narrow view.
So sorry I got your dander up. ;)
- 13 votes
Bull @!$%# tesla. You got that wrong.
We the voters want to know if any of them has thought about what policies caused the economic collapse. I wonder if they plan on sticking with the failed policies that were in play during that time in history. Saying he spent too much does not indicate that they are even aware that the deficits and spending were a direct result of the policies. I listen to theirdebates and speeches and it seems to me that they are unable to make this connection. I firmly believe they think they can double down on the policies that caused the calamity and life wll be sweet. None of the viable candidates have even hinted at the unforeseen consequences of some of the ir policies that have failed our country so miserably. If they can't do an honest assessment of that then they have no business running for president. They all seem to indicate that they will do the same thing that got us in this mess but they seem not to have a clue that they cost a lot of money; thy act like the policies create money. But they don't and that is where they will have no other option than to gut the entitlement programs, educationfor our children, benefits for the military and veterans and the like. The only ones that prosper in this situation are those at the top but they will suffer as well because of all the suffering of those around them. We cannot take another assault like that which was dumped on us under the policies of this GOP. They need to look for solutions not give us another bite of the dog that chewed us up and spit us out.
- 10 votes
That horse is not dead. They are still trying to create a great depression to get rid of President Obama and they are still trying to come back with the same policies to finish wiping out the poor and the middle class.
- 11 votes
The GOP create the worst recession since the Great Depression, Do nothing to get this country out, blame anyone and everyone else for their monumental failures, then blast this present administration for not getting us out fast enough.
What a farce.
All I've seen is baseless statement after baseless statement, no facts, nothing. The most laughable thing about it all is, the right can't vaunt Bush's "achievements," yet can't defend him, either!
And then come these GOP primary candidates. Just more of the same s**t that got this country into the mess we're still in. No morals or ethics. The lack of qualification is astounding. Yet, there will be the ignorant defenders. Defending the indefensible.
Like drilling a hole in water.
- 11 votes
The lack of qualification is astounding.
Thats what the glenn becks and others from the right wing nuts depend on. These right wingers are not qualified to be dog catchers. THey just work on sound bites and make up sh+t.
- 7 votes
Sadly it doesn't even occur to the left that Bush has not been president for over three years.
The shoe fits. Bush wrecked our economy, sold out the middle class, and sent thousands to their needless deaths in Iraq.
I am not likely to quit reminding you all of that any time soon. Especially since YOUR PARTY has dug their heels in foursquare to prevent us from fixing what Bush royally @!$%#ed up.
- 8 votes
If the shoe fits eh? Banks have recorded more profits in the first two years of Obama's reign than in all 8 years of Bush(Bill Moyers Journal PBS). Any other questions? Clinton began the bailout of banks during his reign, remember the great peso debacle? If you really wish to point the finger you must go back to Reagan and the first Bush. The original act/law/policy/regulations governing Wall St. was aprox. 34 pages long(again Bill Moyers PBS) The new Frank Dood law, 1300 pages or something like that. My intial statement is true sadly while you all busy blaming the last king the new king is helping Wall St. Rob us all blind. But hey what ever floats ones boat, eh?
PS your assumptions are amusing as always. I have never voted either republican or democrat EVER. I have been registered NPA since I was 18.
- 1 vote
1300 pages? Helps wall street? WHo has been fighting the implementation of ANY regulations of the industry at all ? Republicans. Who is fighting a consumer protection bureau to protect citizens against bull@!$%# products? All at the behest of Wall street and banks...Repugs Don't want Frank Dodd, they also don't want glass stegal (the act that is 34 pages, one of many passed by democrats after Hoovers disaster). Look you could blame Obama all you want, but the damage incurred in 2008 would.
You could try to obfuscate the issues like the mexican bailout?(why?) or Reagans savings and loan debacle(more expensive relative to the size of the disaster) but the fact is ...ALL bad loans That crashed the mortgage market all occured in between 2002-2006, not one sold before or after was the problem, and not one CDO before or after 2002-2006, all under the republic majorities jaundiced eye..The regulatory bill bill
submitted by Mike Oxley was killed by Frist in 2005 by frist reportedly at the behest of the bush administration, we could have avoided the 2008 crash altogether or at least cut it by more than half...Then remember Bush demanded 700 billion dollars with zero strings attached to it? "Wall Street Got Drunk" while Bush was supposed to be the designated driver?
If money isn't loosened up, this sucker could go down.
â–ªSumming up the risk to the global economy if Congressional leaders failed to approve Treasury Secretary Paulson's $700 billion financial bailout plan, at a bipartisan meeting hosted by the White House (September 26, 2008);
How bout the near 5.5 trillion $ run on banks
The Capital Markets Subcommittee Chair, Rep. Paul Kanjorski of Pennsylvania, tells C-Span how the world economy almost collapsed in a matter of hours.
At 2 minutes, 20 seconds into this C-Span video clip, Kanjorski reports on a "tremendous draw-down of money market accounts in the United States, to the tune of $550 billion dollars." According to Kanjorski, this electronic transfer occured over the period of an hour or two.
Kanjorski: "The Treasury opened its window to help. They pumped a hundred and five billion dollars into the system and quickly realized that they could not stem the tide. We were having an electronic run on the banks. They decided to close the operation, close down the money accounts, and announce a guarantee of $250,000 per account so there wouldn't be further panic and there. And that's what actually happened. If they had not done that their estimation was that by two o'clock that afternoon, five-and-a-half trillion dollars would have been drawn out of the money market system of the United States, would have collapsed the entire economy of the United States, and within 24 hours the world economy would have collapsed."
"It would have been the end of our political system and our economic systems as we know it."
http://boingboing.net/2009/02/09/rep-kanjorski-550-bi.html
As loathsome as it was, we didn't see half the banks collapse, unemployment go from 5% to 35%, we didn't lose 25% of GDP as what happened with the last republican disaster.
President Obama had nothing to do with having such a permissive, self regulting mrket that caused the crash. and everything he is doing to prevent another one is fought tooth and nail by repubs. Next he is looking to break up these banks so they won't be to big to fail, which no doubt will be attack as a communist plot to take over private business
- 8 votes
Yes he(Obama) does and every economist I have seen on PBS or heard on NPR agrees with this. The fact still remains that under Obama's leadership banks have recored more profit in TWO YEARS than in 8 years of your bogeyman Bush. That is a FACT. Deal with it. Wish I could say I was sorry that your guy is as big a loser as the GOP guys but alas, I cannot. I have been telling anyone who will listen for 30 years: At the national level there is NO NONE ZIP ZERO diference between republican policy and democrat policy. They use one another in the media to be this weeks bad guy to keep the populace divided, period. They have both profited handsomely and continue to while y'all sit around and argue semantics and cower in terror at bogeymen like Bush Cheney and Rove And Obama and Soros and Kochs and and a list of others.
"I have never voted either republican or democrat EVER."
Then stop complaining. You seem to be a GOP supporter and defender, yet never voted for them???
Randy,
One has to wonder if all the crying about regulation would exist if Glass-Steagall had never been repealed. Whomever was responsible for that should be blamed, yet what do the crybabies complain about?
Geez.....Get out the pacifiers.
- 6 votes
Hey Monkey...NO. You seem to be this and you seem to be that... OOO that is certainly note worthy. Explain how I am defending them, any of them. Go right ahead I will wait..........
It is alright if Mr.Monkey complains he said he has the right too. It is alright if anyone who agrees with Mr.Monkey's POV complains he says they have the right too.
No I do not. Annnd I notice a severe lack of explanation, yet again, from you. Could that be because you cannot explain it?
Pardon my foray into the world I am being exposed to here. But one must attempt to converse on the level of those one is conversing with.
The Republicans are like any other criminals who hold their hands up in the air and cry "I didn't do nuthin'", honest." The difference is that their white-collar theft was uninvestigated, and we have prisons full of petty criminals. Go figure, is this screwed up or what? No wonder people lose hope, we know life ain't fair, but come on, we must be stupid, too.
- 8 votes
Republicans can't help it coming out in the general election, though. It might have even been a mistake to not distance themselves from Bush during the primaries, as it will become a "new" meme in the final race.
- 16 votes
#7 - Sun Jan 22, 2012 2:09 PM ESTNot only is Bush "he who shall not be named" but none of the GOP members who supported Bush and all of his failed policies will even mention any GOP failures including the job losses & economic collapse the GOP handed over for someone else to deal with.
They live in a fantasy world where every problem happened the day Obama was elected, rather than face the truth of 8 years of failed GOP/Bush policies.
The economic problems we face didn't happen overnight because McCain wasn't elected.
The GOP had 8 years to destroy our economy after inheriting a balanced budget, a budget surplus, a booming economy and a great job market from Clinton.
The GOP has never answered for their failures. The GOP has never admitted their failures. They simply blame anyone else.
- 21 votes
#8 - Sun Jan 22, 2012 2:14 PM ESTLOL... It was Clinton's BALANCED BUDGET that destroyed the economy. Haven't you learned anything from Obama's policies?
- 1 vote
LOL... It was Clinton's BALANCED BUDGET that destroyed the economy. Haven't you learned anything from Obama's policies?
By what warped logic did you gleen this? The Budget Clinton balanced occurred only because he responsibly stepped down Bushs record deficits, he inherited high unemployment and a down economy, but not anywhere that Obama did. cutting spending after Bushs' 1.4 trillion dollar deficit would have sent us into a recession or depression. If Clinton inherited what Obama got, he'd have done the same thing. So would most repubs, though they have the luxury of not having to admit that, only Teabahggers and Hooverites let the economy go off the cliff.
- 22 votes
LOL... It was Clinton's BALANCED BUDGET that destroyed the economy. Haven't you learned anything from Obama's policies?
ROTFLMAO!!! Man, Republican logic gets more and more twisted.
was bush asleep for 8 years or was he drunk??
Yes.
- 18 votes
was bush asleep for 8 years or was he drunk??
Cheney was the real president. That S.O.B stuffed it up. Bush why? He is a good guy. Go bush. It was evil Cheney. Bush good.
- 1 vote
Ron Paul brings up the Bush administration quite a bit!
- 2 votes
#9 - Sun Jan 22, 2012 2:35 PM ESTRon Paul brings up the Bush administration quite a bit!
That hasn't helped him in the primaries yet.
- 16 votes
Ron Paul brings up the Bush administration quite a bit!
Yeah but nobody in the GOP listens to him anyway.
- 13 votes
Well, the GOP wants to pretend that Dubya's Presidency never happened...
- 21 votes
#10 - Sun Jan 22, 2012 2:43 PM ESTHe is the burning tire around their necks for the next few decades, as hoover was..
- 20 votes
Hoover, who's Hoover?
Herbert Hoover, Republican President during the stock market crash of '29.
- 12 votes
Sorry, I was being silly. All they do is attack FDR, the one left with the mess, and never mention Hoover. Just like now, even though this is current, the same thing is happening.
- 10 votes
Sorry, I was being silly.
No problem Lola.
All they do is attack FDR, the one left with the mess, and never mention Hoover.
I've seen one righty on the Vine who said that The Great Depression didn't start until 1933, and it was FDR's fault. LOL!
- 7 votes
This was hoover;
"I am convinced that through these measures we have reestablished confidence."
- Herbert Hoover, December 1929
"Gentleman, you have come sixty days too late. The depression is over."
- Herbert Hoover, responding to a delegation requesting a public works program to help speed the recovery, June 1930
"While the crash only took place six months ago, I am convinced we have now passed through the worst — and with continued unity of effort we shall rapidly recover. There has been no significant bank or industrial failure. That danger, too, is safely behind us."
- Herbert Hoover, President of the United States, May 1, 1930
Unemployment went from this to this
1929 4.7
1930 13.0
1931 23.3
1932 34.0
1933 35.3
If we used the Hoover Teabag option we'd have 34% unemployment by now...
- 13 votes
The more things change, the more they stay the same, eh Randy? The righties of today appear just as clueless as Hoover was.
- 13 votes
Hoover was a genius at organizing business to fix economies elsewhere and felt he could do the same here by lining up all the capitalists to give cash to the economic turn around, in other words he relied on the charity of the super rich. We know how that worked. Conservatism is based on the false premise that capitalists will not crap where they live, wrong!
- 11 votes
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YOXJ2qr4604 See the future GOP candidate.
Pious life of who? Can Obama make a video like this? Its a challenge. He needs funky music though.
Now look back GWB. Seem similar?
George W. Bush: A Life in Pictures
- 2 votes
I wonder who W is supporting....the rich mormon or the sex fiend??
- 17 votes
#11 - Sun Jan 22, 2012 2:50 PM ESTW and the establishment is supporting the rich mormon, not the rich sex fiend. It's his turn to take orders from Cheney, Rove, and Armey, and looks like he may be the easiest turd to shine up as Presidential, now if they can just spend enough money fearmongering to scare people to vote for him.
- 8 votes
Bush was a disaster on every area of our government, society, economy, and democracy. He moved his Party and our government toward fascism. He spent like a drunken sailor, a lot of which went to friends and cronies, while cutting Treasury income by $Trillions. He stripped our freedoms and civil liberties, and shamed our nation and democracy with torture, spying, and the removal of civil protections against tyranny.
Given all of this, and the political damage Bush caused his Party, a rational person would expect his Party to move back away from fascism, back toward the center, in the left direction. That is not what has occurred. His Party moved even more wildly and weirdly to the right, becoming ever more crazed and unsupportable.
Not only don't today's Republicans mention Bush, they omit to say that they're crazier than Bush, the lot of them. That makes them our problem, fellow Americans. That makes them a clear and present danger to our democracy, freedom, and nation.
Up with democracy. Down with fascism.
- 19 votes
#12 - Sun Jan 22, 2012 2:52 PM ESTHere is a sad thought. Shrub was doing the best job he could with the talent he personally had.
- 7 votes
Fascism needs more attention. Republicans like to spew communist/socialist/Stalinist/Maoist/etc. ad infinitum but fascism never gets mentioned. Learn what fascism is. It is not a generic insult, it is a real political and economic philosophy that is thoroughly woven into the fabric of this country. It is the only enemy that stands a chance of destroying this nation.
Generally when fascists meet democrats the democrats win because they have the backing of the people and fascists have only military theatrics which fool only themselves. Cases where fascists won against democrats are the fascist invasion of France, where democrats collapsed without a fight and in Spain where fascists won a bloody battle against democrats but lost in the end when Franco died.
Small-d democrats=people who support democracy. Fascist oppose democracy.
- 12 votes
I like GWB. Is an all american hero.
It was Cheney. Do not blame bush he was only a part time president. ;)
- 1 vote
The hardest part will be for President Obama to decide exactly how many times he should mention Bush in his debates. Enough so that the thought of his royal screw-ups and lies are at the forefront of voters' minds, but not so much that they become desensitized, like the Rodney King jury. Yes even a brutal example of police brutality like the Rodney King case can lose it's impact after 60 viewings, and GWB's brutality to the well-being of this country could lose it's impact, too. So we have to be careful. This election is too critical to the future of Americans to let another incompetent, dishonest leader get into the White House.
- 5 votes
#13 - Sun Jan 22, 2012 3:12 PM ESTThe hardest part will be for President Obama to decide exactly how many times he should mention Bush in his debates
Good point. Actually, the term he might use is "the previous administration." The hard part will be to remind voters how bad a hand he was dealt without seeming to make excuses.
- 8 votes
And without taking responsibility for the last three years of failed policies.
That's because the last three years of policies have been working despite the obstruction from Republicans.
- 15 votes
It seems that Bill K. NY doesn't want to acknowledge that the Armerican people not only still blames Bush for getting us into a recession, but also blames congressional republicans for the girdlock that's in the government right now...
- 16 votes
And without taking responsibility for the last three years of failed policies.
Exactly which of Obama's policies have failed, and why?
- 11 votes
I have not seen any good movies about Obama. I want a president that has more flag waving
:). I have not seen any pictures with Jesus and Obama together.
- 1 vote
The argument that Bush's record is not at issue and that there are new Republicans running for President would be just fine if the current crop weren't trying to restore the Bush policies.
Since the candidates won't bring up Bush, perhaps Brian Williams should. A simple question to each of the candidates: "In what way are your proposals for the economy in any way different from the policies of George W. Bush administration?" Three of the candidates might start hemming and hawing. The fourth, Ron Paul, at least can point out that he would never be stupid enough to start a war in Iraq. But, then again, it's Ron Paul.
- 9 votes
#14 - Sun Jan 22, 2012 3:14 PM ESTYeah, and love him or hate him, Ron Paul wouldn't have run up the national debt or printed money to cover it either. Ron Paul may be a little "out there" with some of his ideas but he's nowhere near as stupid as G. W. Bush or as sleazy as Cheney and he's not as crazy as he sometimes appears.
I wouldn't vote for the man but I would listen politely to his economic policy ideas.
- 1 vote
Very true Mofongo.
Some unique ideas I'll give him credit for, but then I try and explain Rand Paul, and I just cannot do it!!
- 2 votes
Bill K in NY states,
BTW, The Republican candidates are speaking to other Republicans not the general public. That will come after the primaries are over.
So, exactly what are they going to say to the general public? Given the plethora of information in regards to G.W. Bush, it doesn't appear using his eight years in office as a way to attract voters. If he was so good, they would be mentioning him every other second. The only thing they (the candidates) have is mentioning Reagan, but that's a weak argument in that things are vastly different then they were 30 years ago.
I would say the primary reason for a lack of questions in regards to G.W. Bush, is that the primaries begin in these states that hardly represent the United States. This electoral process we have is extraordinarily bad in that the initial phase of the campaign is in states that do not represent the total demographics of this country.
In addition, these debates have illustrated that these candidates are out of touch with reality. Of course, if the primaries had to focus on large states, the conversation would definitely change.
Also, the media that conducts these debates have been abysmal. Apparently, you can pretty much state anything in the debate without a moderator calling B.S.
- 8 votes
#15 - Sun Jan 22, 2012 3:40 PM ESTThey may not like to talk about him, but they sure have not learned their lesson from his disastrous, partisan rulership... in fact they have doubled down on it.
- 10 votes
#16 - Sun Jan 22, 2012 4:41 PM ESTThe disastrous partisanship was caused by the dims taking over congress in 2006.
Dems didnt take office until 2007. Your credibility goes down with each post Billo
- 14 votes
Billy billy billy,
the repunks started this crap in 1995. Please show how the dems used the filibuster and obstructed your Rpugs anywhere remotely like your boys did.
- 14 votes
Dems didn't take office until 2007.
And even then got a majority of ONE seat in the Senate. Suddenly POP! all Republican screw-ups are the Democrats fault, just like that.
- 7 votes
The disastrous partisanship was caused by the dims taking over congress in 2006.
I know I shouldn't feed but:
Hear that boys and girls? The Bush era did not exist -- except for that one part where Democrats controlled one house of congress for the last two years, that part existed. The rest didn't.
- 10 votes
Hear that boys and girls? The Bush era did not exist -- except for that one part where Democrats controlled one house of congress for the last two years, that part existed. The rest didn't.
It's not 2012. It's year 3. Time started for the righties on 1/20/09.
Isn't it strange how they think that when it's a Republican President, (reagan, dubya) it's their policies that helped the country, but when it's a Democratic President, (Clinton) it's the Republican Congress's policies that helped the country?
- 13 votes
In 2007 and 2008 the repubs were trying to avoid the great recession. Great recession? which great recession? There was NO RECESSION!!!
Criminal deception.
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/07/drs-mccain-and.html
Political PunchPower, pop, and probings from ABC News Senior White House Correspondent Jake Tapper
Drs. McCain and Gramm Put the U.S. Economy on the Couch; Gramm Diagnoses a "Mental Recession" Among U.S. "Whiners"July 10, 2008 9:56 AM
A top economic adviser to Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., -- former Sen. Phil Gramm, R-Texas, now vice chair of Swiss banking giant UBS -- tells the Washington Times that the US economy is being weighed down by the belief by Americans that the economy is bad.
"You've heard of mental depression; this is a mental recession," Gramm tells the Washington Times, adding that despite all the bad news out there US economic growth continues at a rate of approximately 1 percent. "We may have a recession; we haven't had one yet.
"The fundamentals of our economy are strong." - John McCain, Sept. 15, 2008, the day that Lehman Brothers filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy.
In the first half of 2008 and even in the second half, all the repugs were saying THAT EVERYTHING WAS PERFECTLY OK.
- 8 votes
We may have a recession; we haven't had one yet. The fundamentals of our economy are strong.
They did not know about the trillions leveraged out of the shadow banking system. Those trillions were carried on private books as derivatives designed to be outside the purview of the SEC.
For a while it seemed the plan was working. Tax cuts seemed to be producing low unemployment, rising home prices making the masses complacent, shrinking deficits, low social spending. Too bad the whole thing was based on leveraged debt. And we are still living on borrowed money and borrowed time. Economists on Bill Moyers said the feds still have not gotten the message, we are in for a still bigger collapse. That is not hard to predict. When the economy picks up, inflation will pick up and the Feds will have to raise interest rates just to roll over existing debt. By then we will have upwards of twenty trillion in debt to pay interest on. At some point this Ponzi scheme of a federal government will collapse completely.
- 2 votes
When the economy picks up, inflation will pick up and the Feds will have to raise interest rates just to roll over existing debt. By then we will have upwards of twenty trillion in debt to pay interest on. At some point this Ponzi scheme of a federal government will collapse completely.
Yea we hear that so many times. Prove it. Chicken little the sky is falling.
- 1 vote
Money has velocity. Higher velocity has the effect of creating more cash as money is released from savings. This will automatically cause inflation. The Feds will have to raise interest rates for two reasons: first, to control inflation and second, to attract investors. Since the economy IS gradually improving inflation WILL rise and the Feds will HAVE TO raise interest rates. No choice.
George W. Bush kept America safe; except for 9/11 and the anthrax attacks.
- 16 votes
#17 - Sun Jan 22, 2012 5:10 PM ESTWell luckily polling shows that the people still blame Bush for our economy, and the repubs have done everything they can to keep it from recovering. The dems need to highlight this and stop allowing the repubs to run with the narrative that it's just Obama's economy. What have the repubs done to help get jobs going? We already know that they will claim about twenty jobs bill they have proposed; but they won't tell you all of them have in them to repeal HCR, FrankDodd, many regulations and everything previously gained from the dems. And I'm sick and tired of the news media telling all that Obama's re-election will be based on the unemployment numbers. Maybe those unemployed need to remember how the repubs in 2010 demagogue them as lazy and dupe heads. And how they held up your unemployment monies for an extension of Bush's tax cuts. And how Boehner is planning on taking them hostage again over that oil pipeline deal. How caring the repubs are (sarc/)....let the unemployed remember that come election time. And news media, do not tell me what to focus on when I am voting for our next President; I will make that decision!!
- 11 votes
#18 - Sun Jan 22, 2012 7:24 PM ESTWell luckily polling shows that the people still blame Bush for our economy, and the repubs have done everything they can to keep it from recovering
Fortunately, facts support both of those points as well.
- 11 votes
Yea the idiot congress voted on In god we trust. The republicans can explain it when election time comes.
While millions of americans live in poverty.
These fools need to be impeached .
- 7 votes
I sort of had the impression that Bush the Second was sort of an unperson at the 2008 Republican Convention. As I recall he did speak---from a remote location via an overhead movie screen late at night.
Bush's last months in office by my memory were spent trying to get TARP and a bailout for GM/Chrysler going. The luck he had with those got most of its votes from the Democrats in the Senate and House; the Republicans had largely already dropped him like a rock I think.
- 4 votes
#19 - Sun Jan 22, 2012 8:07 PM ESTI'd love to hear this in a debate.
Moderator: You've talked about your plans for job creation include tax cuts for corporations and the wealthy. Since these started in 2002 [my timeline may be wrong] the economy has been anemic for a decade.
Why do you think continuing or increasing these tax breaks will have any different effect now?
- 10 votes
#20 - Sun Jan 22, 2012 10:17 PM ESTCipher-0...that would be a wonderful question to ask these republican candidates and maybe they can quote us some statistics to base it on. Oh, I forget, we have statistics already that shows just the opposite of what they are proposing. What is their problem? Can they not comprehend???? Businesses are sitting on trillions of dollars and these @!$%#z want to give them more!!!!
- 4 votes
I'd be just fine if I were never to hear the name of "W" again. His name is mud as they say. He was even less well received as I recall when he held office when shoes were sailing at his disgusting mug. It's no wonder "W"s name doesn't pop up at his shamed rethug mob rallies because as the old saying goes "What's worse than being talked about is NOT being talked about"
- 4 votes
#21 - Mon Jan 23, 2012 7:17 AM ESTAsk Al Gore about invoking (or not) a former prez during a campaign....
#22 - Mon Jan 23, 2012 8:56 AM ESTI just don't they doin't want to mention Bush he helped them get the tax cut for the rich like they wanted for ages you they would be proud of that. In the back of their minds they are wishing they never enacted I would guess but they still want it even though it hasn't created one job lke they promised Bush was totally a failure as a president.
- 5 votes
#23 - Mon Jan 23, 2012 9:22 AM ESTYa know, intellectually I knew at the outset that Republican candidates would certainly be in no hurry to summon images of G.W Bush to support their call for a return to Right Wing policy. And I really haven't paid attention throughout the debates to the almost total lack of reference to maybe our dumbest president ever. But seeing the statistics in print is an eye opener! They know the Bush administration is toxic!
And they can agree among themselves not to drag that skeleton out of the closet. Even Rick Perry and Herman Cain are that smart. But this all comes to an end after the convention when a candidate for the general election is chosen. Obama and the Democrats will certainly ask the voters to think about what eight years of Republican policy brought us. And rightfully so. It will be like shooting fish in a barrel.
Obama (I hope) will be brutal in his indictment of Bush & Cheney foreign policy and economic policy. The skeleton will come out of the closet and the forensic examination will take place. Wars and deregulation contributed to a near collapse of the global economy. Conservative economic policy has created the largest income gap of any Western nation in all of modern history.
Then, Obama can start laying out the corporate welfare entitlement programs that Republicans fear becoming public knowledge.
- State and Local tax breaks to support private businesses (hundreds of millions of dollars).
- Tax loss carry forward to socialize their bad decisions with tax writeoffs.
- Capital Gains tax rates (15%) that are less than half the rate for ordinary income (35%).
- Carried interest from hedge funds and private equity that receive capital gains rates (15%).
- Foreign sourced income that can be held offshore at a 0% tax rate.
- LIFO inventory accounting that allows manipulation (minimizing) of income for tax purposes.
If "Free Enterprise" and "Private Capital" need all of these special tax breaks that Republicans have crafted for them, just how good are these businesses, these "job creators"? They are being supported by taxpayers with huge corporate entitlement programs. In the vein of "no company should be too big to fail" and "no government bailouts" that Republicans like to rant about, should we not get government out of private enterprise completely? Should they not be left to stand on their own merits or fail in a true "Free Enterprise" capitalist system? I could support that sort of "smaller government".
I can't wait for Obama to debate the stooge from the Republicans.
- 9 votes
#24 - Mon Jan 23, 2012 11:41 AM ESTha! Who would want to bring up that debacle?
If we don't talk about it, its like it never happened, right?
- 5 votes
#25 - Mon Jan 23, 2012 11:55 AM ESTEvery so often they mention him when they make the claim that Obama seems to be accepting the same failed policies of GWB. In some ways, he is: Continued spending on bloated military, assualt on civil liberties and this War on Terror BS. It's their way of showing that GWB was right after all. Yet they themselves subscribe to the same failed policies, foreign policies, military spending, wars, de-regulating banks and corporations and ending social programs. I don't agree with anything that Bush did. Obama needs to put the Bush years completely behind us - on everything.
- 3 votes
#26 - Mon Jan 23, 2012 12:36 PM ESTVoters had the perception that President Obama achieved too much and moved the country to far to the left. That is why they elected the repubs for congress in 2010.
You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead. |
As a new user, you may notice a few temporary content restrictions. Click here for more info.
