Dub-yah's Legacy...

[DeepIron]

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/02/....ap/index.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7226985.stm
http://www.reuters.com/article/newsO...41480220080204

It makes me sick to know this SOB is going to draw a pension for the rest of his life after the most disasterous 8 years in US Presidential history.

[Jimbuna]

The same could be said by so many in the UK of Mrs Thatcher

[Blacklight]

It makes me sick to know this SOB is going to draw a pension for the rest of his life after the most disasterous 8 years in US Presidential history.

I couldn't agree more.

You also know that people who love G W Bush are going to attack this thread with torches, siege towers, and catapults right ? Get ready to defend the fort.. here they come.

[Tchocky]

Originally Posted by jimbuna

The same could be said by so many in the UK of Mrs Thatcher

I'd take Thatcher over GWB any day of the week.
I don't like either, but it could be argued that some of her policies were necessary. The UK economy needed a kick in the ass, she delivered, and then went batty.

I'd rather not think of GWB's legacy.

[Brag]

Originally Posted by Blacklight

I couldn't agree more.

You also know that people who love G W Bush are going to attack this thread with torches, siege towers, and catapults right ? Get ready to defend the fort.. here they come.

Look out! They're bringing John Wayne and will make him Secretary of State.

[DeepIron]

You also know that people who love G W Bush are going to attack this thread with torches, siege towers, and catapults right ? Get ready to defend the fort.. here they come.

All ONE of them?

Introducing the All New, Larger than Ever Before, Dub-Yah Suppository...


"Bend over America." ~ Dub-yah

[Sea Demon]

Yeah, yeah, yeah....Another Loserfest "I hate G.W. Bush thread". Actually, he has been a big disappointment to me also. He hasn't done really much to inspire the principles I value as a voter from the "right of center". I for one think a $3 trillion budget is ridiculous. That's not upholding Republican principles in any way. But if you see a disappointing legacy in him and are disgusted about his post presidential pension, what about the losers who make up this failed do-nothing Democrat Congress who's approval numbers are dismal compared to Mr.Bush? They basically lied to every constituent they had to get a majority in Congress, and have done nothing they promised. And what about Bill Clinton, who handed the Chinese space related technologies that have advanced their ability to launch nuclear missiles accurately. For measly campaign donations, Bill Clinton increased the Chinese ability to target U.S. military and allied civilian targets if it came to that. And there is much more disaster from Clinton's sweeping under the rug policies. And if you're speaking economically, Jimmy Carter left the U.S. worse off than when G.W. Bush will be gone. Say what you want of Bush, but he doesn't have the inflationary problems, the double digit interest rates, or a misery index.

No, Bush will get his pension, and you can cry all day about it. If the scandalous Clinton got his, the weak Bush Sr. got his, and the failed Carter got his, then quit complaining.

[Jimbuna]

Originally Posted by Tchocky

I'd take Thatcher over GWB any day of the week.
I don't like either, but it could be argued that some of her policies were necessary. The UK economy needed a kick in the ass, she delivered, and then went batty.

I'd rather not think of GWB's legacy.

I think the Bush legacy will have a far longer lasting effect on the UK and the world, than that of the iron maiden

Hell, we can't even decide if she'll get a state funeral when she dies

Who'd pay the council tax on her final resting place ?

[DeepIron]

I think the Bush legacy will have a far longer lasting effect on the UK and the world, than that of the iron maiden.

I believe your right Jim. Just look at the economic effects that are being caused in the Global community due to an impending "US recession". Subprimes tank, some big financial guns take it in the shorts and the next thing you know, Ming and Chang are out of a job in China...

My contention is that if the Bush Administration had spent half the time on the US economy that it has on it's incipid "war on terror", perhaps some of this economic woe wouldn't be happening. As it is, we're playing "clean up" on the recession issues instead of being ahead of it.

Of course, as I'm sure someone is bound to say, it's all conjectural...

[Sea Demon]

Originally Posted by DeepIron

I believe your right Jim. Just look at the economic effects that are being caused in the Global community due to an impending "US recession". Subprimes tank, some big financial guns take it in the shorts and the next thing you know, Ming and Chang are out of a job in China...

At what point is China's economy the responsibility of China? I realize we are the major players, but we should have seen it coming. These financial institutions that were giving loans to any schmuck on the street has caused alot of problems. And now we await a market adjustment. And it will come. If only we can keep the government out of providing their version of a "solution". Maybe we can learn our lessons this time around, huh?

[Tchocky]

Originally Posted by jimbuna

Who'd pay the council tax on her final resting place ?

I say we put a Dance Dance Revolution game on top :p

[DeepIron]

At what point is China's economy the responsibility of China? I realize we are the major players, but we should have seen it coming.

Precisely. My contention is simply that Dub-Yah and the "Bush League" in DC got so wound up in selling and prosecuting the "war on terror" that US domestic issues, such as those that have lead to this recession, were not addressed.

The dolts in DC appeared to forget that the world is, for the most part, no longer individual economies any longer. The phrase "Global Economy" gets bandied about quite freely these days. When something goes "ka-blooey" in the US economy, other feel the shockwaves too. How can the US claim leadership in the "Free World" when we let basic issues like economics fail?

There's more to leadership than "chasing terrorists" and bitch slapping Iran.

[Jimbuna]

Originally Posted by Tchocky

I say we put a Dance Dance Revolution game on top :p

LOL

[Sea Demon]

Originally Posted by DeepIron

Precisely. My contention is simply that Dub-Yah and the "Bush League" in DC got so wound up in selling and prosecuting the "war on terror" that US domestic issues, such as those that have lead to this recession, were not addressed.

The dolts in DC appeared to forget that the world is, for the most part, no longer individual economies any longer. The phrase "Global Economy" gets bandied about quite freely these days. When something goes "ka-blooey" in the US economy, other feel the shockwaves too. How can the US claim leadership in the "Free World" when we let basic issues like economics fail?

There's more to leadership than "chasing terrorists" and bitch slapping Iran.

Well, I can't disagree with your contentions here.....mostly. It just depends on how you view terrorism, terrorists in general, and the whole Iranian issue. I do think those things need to be confronted for various reasons. Just my opinion. But I do think Bush and the DC establishment have been stupidly avoiding domestic issues here at home. That's where I will agree with you. Totally. Bush has been derelict in his duty passing huge budgets, without determining where and how the money will come from. On the other part, when it comes to economics, we must also remember the things that truly drive economic engines of the world and why we are the leaders. It's not only about currency, and things like that. But it's mainly driven by technological innovation, national R & D, and national stability. And it's hard to dispute that the USA has distinct advantages in those areas. If nations choose to link themselves to us, and they will continue to do so, they've got to realize there will be ups and downs.

[sonar732]

I also agree that we have side stepped domestic issues.

However, it doesn't take an economic scholar to know he inherited an economy that was bound to go bust with dotcoms.