PDA

View Full Version : GDG Question for the Dems GDG



Matt McKenzie
11-05-2008, 07:32 AM
Well, it's over. Congrats to those who voted for Obama. It is a historic milestone and a testament to the idea that there is opportunity for anyone in this country, for sure. Something I've been wondering for some time and would like answered. We've been hearing for what seems like forever that "8 years of failed Bush policies" are what we need to change. Can someone please list those policies for me so that I understand exactly what I can expect to change over the next 4 years? There have been many decisions by the Bush administration that I haven't agreed with, but I suspect that they are not the same decisions that the liberals speak of. Please avoid regurgitating the campaign talking points and just explain to me which policies are the bad ones.
Thanks,

Lady Hunter
11-05-2008, 08:24 AM
Doling out monies to faith base coorperations is one.

Matt McKenzie
11-05-2008, 09:40 AM
That was a pretty short list. Specifically, to which faith-based corporations did he dole out monies and what was the disastrous result?
Thanks,

precisionlabradors
11-05-2008, 10:52 AM
are you really open to hearing or will an answer get your scoff? if the latter, i won't waste my time.
________
Teen italian (http://www.fucktube.com/categories/1036/italian/videos/1)

Nor_Cal_Angler
11-05-2008, 11:33 AM
I think he was being serious...and should you choose to reply...

you have to be prepaired for a retort...

most any answer will be debatable(ed) depending which side of the fence you are on...

unless you or anyone else can come up with absolute examples that are undisputable then be prepaired.

I would suggest that by your response: ..."an anwser..will get your scoff"..you can not provide undisputed areas of failure..and you should choose to not anwser. It's only gonna get everyones goat.

But hey sometimes thats the fun in a question!!

NCA

Franco
11-05-2008, 12:30 PM
Two issues (policies) brought down the Republican Party. First is the War in Iraq. Iraq is not the central front against Islamic terrorist. With no WMD to be found we should have gotten the hell out. Bush took his eye off the real terrorist and went after a personal vendetta. Second, the collaspe of the brokerage houses was because of all the Deregulation pushed through by Republican lawmakers. The collaspe of Fannie and Freddie was due to the Democrats. However, the Dems were able to convince many that it was all the Republicans fault. And lets face it, the Republicans ran a weak candidate. In today's media age, no one can win without great camera appeal.

Nor_Cal_Angler
11-05-2008, 12:50 PM
AHHHHHH

but Booty..this is the slippery slope I was talking about..

1) the war as you put it...I dont see it as a failed policy (matter of fact I dont think a War can be seen as Policy)..those men and women that went to war and are still at war have made me feel SAFE...I would rather fight 1000 there than 1 here..so to that end the war is a success in my eyes.

2) the collapse....different view points...deregulation happend Before Bushes watch...it goes back further than that. some say as far as Carter I dont know about that but I do know about Clintion (more to my era). Problem is Bush and his administration didnt do anything to curb it and the Dems poured gas on the bon fire...but is that a Policy..no it is not. Because his admin did nothing is not the same as creating a policy.

Everyone is gonna see it different, regards

NCA

Matt McKenzie
11-06-2008, 07:38 AM
It sure is interesting to hear the crickets chirping when I ask for finite examples of failed Bush policies. There are quite a few folks that frequent this board that have echoed the old "Bush is a terrible President", "Bush got us into this terrible mess", "eight years of failed Bush policies" rhetoric, but I am seriously trying to learn exactly what those policies are. The propaganda worked. It was an excellent and well-executed strategy. Most people in this country believe that Bush is a bad President and that he has put the country in a worse position than when he took over. But if you ask them, they can't tell you why. They start with the war in Iraq, but usually know almost nothing about it. Then they go to the economy, but can't explain the President's role in it. Then they say he supports torture, but can't explain his position or policy there, either. Then (if they are on the left) they get angry and start attacking his inability to inunciate properly or just go straight to name-calling. Someone please explain to me what "eight years of failed Bush policies" means.

Jim Scarborough
11-06-2008, 07:59 AM
How about his numerous policy decisions concerning global warming/climate change. The Bush Clean Air Act actually produced dirtier air than was allowed under Clinton. The Bush Clean Water Act meant dirtier water. The first campaign promise he broke in 2001 was his promise to lower CO2 emissions. He spent seven years deriding climate change as voodoo science, only admitting the severity of the problem on his way out the door. Under his leadership, the U.S. went from a world leader on this front to a poster child for bad climate policy.

His most famous policy decision, now called the Bush Doctrine, was one to start a preemptive war. This was a first in U.S. history, and a decision that most in this country have come to regret. From this Bush Doctrine has come policy decisions to allow torture, to hold prisoners in Guantanamo without trial or due process, to allow the federal government to wiretap citizens' phone conversations without oversight or constraint.

Bush policies, pushed by Dick Cheney, have also undermined the separation of powers delineated in the U.S. Constitution, with the executive branch of government usurping the constitutional responsibilities of the Congress.

There are many, many more examples of policies, both foreign and domestic, that the next president will have to deal with in trying to correct the mess Bush and Cheney are leaving behind. Most Americans, both Democratic and Republican, are glad to see an end to the Bush Administration and the misguided policies they spawned.

JDogger
11-06-2008, 08:34 AM
Google failed Bush policies and start reading. Perhaps you would like to cite some of his shining sucess's?

JD

Matt McKenzie
11-06-2008, 08:52 AM
"The Bush Clean Air Act actually produced dirtier air than was allowed under Clinton. The Bush Clean Water Act meant dirtier water. The first campaign promise he broke in 2001 was his promise to lower CO2 emissions. He spent seven years deriding climate change as voodoo science, only admitting the severity of the problem on his way out the door. Under his leadership, the U.S. went from a world leader on this front to a poster child for bad climate policy."

Please give empirical evidence or some factual explanation of how these two acts produced dirtier air and dirtier water. I would like to know more. As far as being a poster child for bad climate policy, how am I worse off because of it?

"From this Bush Doctrine has come policy decisions to allow torture, to hold prisoners in Guantanamo without trial or due process, to allow the federal government to wiretap citizens' phone conversations without oversight or constraint."

How many people have been tortured and how were they tortured? What is your recommendation for dealing with the enemy combatants held at GITMO? How many innocent US citizens have been wiretapped while having phone conversations with innocent foreigners? And again, how are we worse off? On the positive side, we are better off because these policies as part of an overarching strategy have prevented additional terrorist attacks on US soil since 9/11. I suspect that after today, when Obama gets his first real security briefing, he will have a very different perspective on foreign policy and you may find that his foreign policy positions during the primaries will fall by the wayside when he's the one forced to make the decisions.

"Bush policies, pushed by Dick Cheney, have also undermined the separation of powers delineated in the U.S. Constitution, with the executive branch of government usurping the constitutional responsibilities of the Congress."

Which responsibilities have been usurped and how? I have a copy of the Constitution here right now. I would like to know which powers have moved from Article I to Article II.

"There are many, many more examples of policies, both foreign and domestic, that the next president will have to deal with in trying to correct the mess Bush and Cheney are leaving behind. Most Americans, both Democratic and Republican, are glad to see an end to the Bush Administration and the misguided policies they spawned."

And again, this is a generality and an opinion. Not a single fact in that paragraph. Actually, I'm not sure we could find a fact in the whole post. What is the mess? Why are "most Americans" glad to see Bush go? As I said before, they've been repeatedly told that Bush is bad, but they cannot express why.

I guess I should give up. Bush is stupid. Cheney is evil. America is the bad guy. We need Obama to help improve our image in the world so that everyone will like us and stop trying to punish us for all the terrible things we've done. The Iraqis and the Middle East would be much better off if we had left Saddam in power. Then the Iranians wouldn't want to eliminate Isreal, North Korea wouldn't be developing nuclear weapons, Russia wouldn't be rattling sabers and China wouldn't be the next big threat. All of this is due to eight years of failed Bush policies. I sure hope the next four can fix it all.

precisionlabradors
11-06-2008, 08:58 AM
i would love to do it, but choose not to waste my time. if you want to know, start reading. it's not hard to figure it out. you're a republican...do it yourself. don't wait for someone else to do it for you.
________
Vaporizer-Info (http://johan-luis.tumblr.com/)

Nor_Cal_Angler
11-06-2008, 09:45 AM
and your a democrat your supposed to be providing the information for everyone....lets be FAIR!!!!!

two way street.

NCA

Hoosier
11-06-2008, 09:53 AM
i would love to do it, but choose not to waste my time. if you want to know, start reading. it's not hard to figure it out. you're a republican...do it yourself. don't wait for someone else to do it for you.

See lazy!!!!

Matt McKenzie
11-06-2008, 09:55 AM
Nice. I got two "I know, but I'm not going to tell you" answers. I remember that from third grade.

precisionlabradors
11-06-2008, 10:18 AM
Nice. I got two "I know, but I'm not going to tell you" answers. I remember that from third grade.

because it's a waste of time. bush sucks and you know it.

i reiterate the challenge, if you would like to waste your time, to post up a summary of all of his shining successes.
________
W124 (http://www.mercedes-wiki.com/wiki/Mercedes-Benz_W124)

precisionlabradors
11-06-2008, 10:20 AM
and i am lazy....or maybe busy at work...one of the two. but yeah, when i get a little time off i either use it in laziness or training my dogs...for the most part. it's not worth wasting my time to tell you how bad bush sucks.
________
Asatru (norse paganism) dicussion (http://www.religionboard.org/asatru-norse-paganism/)

Nor_Cal_Angler
11-06-2008, 11:04 AM
Bruce,

those polls are great, but they DO NOT show how he has had FAILED policies.

I can disapprove with someone for a mirid of reasons...

for example: (this is not the case for me, just an example) I disapprove of Bill Gates and Microsoft's monopoly of the IT marketplace, but it is impossible to say that his or Microsofts policies regarding the IT marketplace have FAILED..they and he have been EXTREAMLY succesfull...

Show me a poll of people who feel his POLICIES failed....and then you got something.

Those polls only show that people (and sometimes myself) DISAGREE with him, not that he has FAILED with policy.

I'll give you an E for effort...but thats all

NCA

YardleyLabs
11-06-2008, 11:41 AM
Well, it's over. Congrats to those who voted for Obama. It is a historic milestone and a testament to the idea that there is opportunity for anyone in this country, for sure. Something I've been wondering for some time and would like answered. We've been hearing for what seems like forever that "8 years of failed Bush policies" are what we need to change. Can someone please list those policies for me so that I understand exactly what I can expect to change over the next 4 years? There have been many decisions by the Bush administration that I haven't agreed with, but I suspect that they are not the same decisions that the liberals speak of. Please avoid regurgitating the campaign talking points and just explain to me which policies are the bad ones.
Thanks,

What I would call Bush's failed policies fall into two basic categories: policies that failed to meet their stated objectives, and policies that were aimed at meeting objectives with which I completely disagree. While I would hope that an Obama administration would reverse the latter, it is not fair to call them failures. The second issue in responding to your question is that some of Bush's more egregious failures -- most specifically almost everything he did during our first four years in Iraq and Afghanistan -- have more recently seen reversals in Bush's own approach. Does one judge based on the current policy, the original policy, or by the overall cost and effect of all policies attempted over the term of his presidency?

To start, I would say that Bush is on the verge of the greatest success of his administration -- he is about to leave the White House as part of a peaceful transition and the country is still here. There have been times over the last 7+ years when I would not have bet on either outcome.

However, focusing on his failures:

1. Tax cuts: He succeeded is passing the cuts and they did reduce my tax bill and the tax bills of other relatively high incomes families. I do not believe that they stimulated the economy, they were not offset by revenue growth generating new tax revenues, and they directly contributed to record deficits that are a big contributor to our current economic problems.

2. Department of Homeland Security: Bush actually began by opposing Democratic efforts to create this department. He then reversed himself and fought for the department to be created in a manner that created massive patronage opportunities and massive opportunities for bureaucratic failure. The reality has reflected both and the consequences of incompenent management were seen in confusing messages from the department on security issues, a downgrading and politicization of FEMA that contributed directly to the problems following Katrina, etc. A lot of money has been spent in evolving ths new department with few benfits so far and not too many more likely in the future.

3. Foreign Policy: The fundamental objective of foreign policy is to promote a stable world environment in which America and Americans can thrive in a world populated by other nations and peoples with their own equally legitimate interests. No nation in history has ever been able to sustain a position of world dominance and we will not either. Our relationships with the world must therefore provide a framework that we can live with whether we are dominant or not. America's wealth and power make it an understandable lightening rod attracting opposition. Despite this our image overseas has generally been good and the respect of other nations has made them more willing to welcome us as a trading partner, as a military and diplomatic ally, and as a political and moral leader. When Bush drew his line in the sand and said that other countries either supported us in all we did or that they were our sworn enemies -- a fair (I believe) paraphrasing of his post 9/11 comments -- Bush began tearing down all the sympathy and support that we had following 9/11. His confrontational policies, his unprovoked invasion of Iraq, his arrogance in dealing with all others have damaged our moral authority and our alliances and left us much weaker than we were when he took office. The administration relied on the apparent belief that our military power was enough to guarantee our position in the world. Instead we have proven that our military and economic resources are not sufficient to back up all of our threats making us less able to achieve our objectives through force and with fewer friends to help us gain support through persuasion.

4. Liberty and Civil Rights: In the name of security and the exigencies of war, the administration has done more to undermine our civil rights than was ever done during the Cold War, World War II, or other conflicts that were fundamentally more threatening than what we face today. Without going into all details, it is clear that most of the secrecy barriers and unreviewable executive powers assumed by the current administration will collapse in the near future under the weight of repeated court decisions ruling that there is no legasl basis for most of the authorities Bush has claimed under his theories of the 'unified executive."

5. Moral authority: One of Bush's biggest issues in his original campaign was that he was going to restore morality to the white house. In fact, he did the opposite. He gave us a white house identified with lawlessness, torture, and acts that we would call war crimes if they were carried out by any other country against us. In place of transparency in government, he has given us an unparalleled level of secrecy designed not to protect our secrets from foreign enemies, but to protect the administration from citizen oversight and criticism (e.g., everything having to do with Cheney, prohibitions on journalists photographing war casualties, etc.).

6. Incompetence: This administration has been characterized by more incompetence than any administration in the post WWII period with the possible exception of the Carter administration. Over and over again the administration has staffed functions with cronies without regard to ability, has handed out contracts to friendly companies without competition or oversight, has decided based on its "gut" and without regard for any fact-based analysis, etc. The pursuit of what Scott McCleland calls the "permanent campaign" where issues are sold rather than discussed and all criticism -- whether valid or not -- is rejected as a partisan attack insulates and protects this incompetence.

7. The War in Afghanistan: After a brilliant beginning, the administration failed to commit the resources needed to finish the job. The result has been a dragging on of the war in Afghanistan without stabilization of the country and with increased instability in neighboring Pakistan.

8. The War in Iraq: This conflict was mismanaged from the beginning because it was started for bad reasons and the military strategy was based on wishful thinking and poor analysis concerning the implications of "regime change". While the administration likes to say that this is attributable to intelligence failures that were not its fault, this doesn't hold water. Many people at the time said that the war would cost more and last longer than the administration believed. The administration attacked these critics mercilessly. It pushed through the authorization for war by stating that the president needed this authority to be able to be effective in diplomatic efforts to avoid war. In fact, the disclosures of his own staff have made it clear that the sole intention was to gain public support for a war that the administration had decided was desirable even before the events of 9/11. Generals who fought for a larger force were replaced with those that supported Rumsfeld's belief that a smaller force could do the job. For all its statements that it has followed the recommendations of the generals on the ground, the reality has been that it has installed generals who said what the white house wanted to hear. It then adopted orders to prohibit even retired officers from voicing their criticisms. To compound all of these failures, the administration then refused to take any actions to pay for the cost of the war, saddling us with debts that will haunt us for years.

9. Medicare drug program: After first opposing the creation of a Medicare financed drug benefit, the administration then elected to support it, insisting on a program that was designed primarily to benefit the pharmaceutical companies (a bias clearly understood in the marketplace where stock prices immediately rose dramatically when the program was passed) and sold that policy with cost estimates that were massively understated.

10. Distorted Science: The administration has repeatedly interfered in scientific studies conducted under Federal auspices to force conclusions to conform with ideological positions without regard to facts. Examples of this arise in many areas including the decision that CO2 was not a pollutant, findings that global warming did not exist (until they finally decided it did), findings that arsenic was not harmful, etc.

I will not go further since I do have to earn a living despite Obama's election.:rolleyes: This sampling should provide sufficient grounds for attacking my reasons for believing that Bush will be remembered in history as our worst President since Reconstruction.

Matt McKenzie
11-06-2008, 11:46 AM
I suppose I should have addressed the question directly to Joe S. or Jeff Goodwin. They are the only Dems I have seen here who can objectively, constructively and rationally make an argument about thier positions and opinions. I looked forward to a healthy and civil discussion, but all I got was "Bush sucks because Bush sucks". Oh well. I guess that's how we get a country led by Obama, Pelosi and Ried. I'm done now.

Jeff must have posted while I was writing. Thanks, Jeff. I knew you would come through for me.

YardleyLabs
11-06-2008, 11:49 AM
I suppose I should have addressed the question directly to Joe S. or Jeff Goodwin. They are the only Dems I have seen here who can objectively, constructively and rationally make an argument about thier positions and opinions. I looked forward to a healthy and civil discussion, but all I got was "Bush sucks because Bush sucks". Oh well. I guess that's how we get a country led by Obama, Pelosi and Ried. I'm done now.

Jeff must have posted while I was writing. Thanks, Jeff. I knew you would come through for me.

How can you be done when I finally responded????:D:D

Every now and then I actually have to take a break from posting to work and play with my dogs.

Jim Scarborough
11-06-2008, 12:31 PM
Bruce,

those polls are great, but they DO NOT show how he has had FAILED policies.


Show me a poll of people who feel his POLICIES failed....and then you got something.


NCA

Polls indicate that only 9% of Americans feel the country is headed in the right direction. This should certainly serve as a "poll of people who feel his POLICIES failed..."

I think we got something.

Matt McKenzie
11-06-2008, 12:49 PM
How can you be done when I finally responded????:D:D

Every now and then I actually have to take a break from posting to work and play with my dogs.

Your post was well thought out and you expressed your opinions well. Some of your points I disagree with completely, a couple were a little vague, but most gave me food for thought. I'll respond when I have had time to digest it. Perhaps some of our peers can learn from your approach.

Losthwy
11-06-2008, 05:12 PM
It took me back when I read in an earlier post, "the war...I don't see it as failed policy". The war was a HUGE foreign policy blunder on many levels. Took valuable resources away from Afghanistan and the real war on terrorism, gave Al Qaeda a new cause and life, destabilized the region, increased distrusted of the U.S. not only in that part of the world, but across the globe. Not to mention the economic consequences the war has had on our economy. And no I don't feel any safer because of it, and that line from the administration "fight them there so we don't have to fight them here" is hogwash in regard to Iraq.

code3retrievers
11-09-2008, 07:42 PM
Polls indicate that only 9% of Americans feel the country is headed in the right direction. This should certainly serve as a "poll of people who feel his POLICIES failed..."



If I were polled 6 months ago I would have said we were moving in the wrong direction. I felt the country was leaning left and I do not approve.

The dems are now in full control, let's see if they can fix it or make it worse. I noticed the 9% is just slightly below congress approval rating.

It's all in the way you look at it.

M Remington
11-09-2008, 08:09 PM
This is so easy, Sarah Palin could pass this test!

Not in any particular order. . .

1. Tax cuts when we had a budget surplus. You can't cut taxes and spend. So Clinton's surplus became Bush's deficit.
2. Going to war for reasons he didn't know (it took him several tries before he could find a reason that was true).
3. Brownie's response to Katrina.
4. Signing statements.
5. Tapping people's phones.
6. Never vetoing a bill until the Democrats took over the house and senate.
7. Spending every weekend at Crawford (the President was never in town when a crisis hit).
8. Faith-based initiatives.
9. Letting Karl Rove slander good Americans who differed with Bush's policies.
10. Commuting the sentence of Scooter Libby.
11. Allowing his people to go to the bed of an ailing Attorney General to get his signature to commit crimes.
12. Torturing prisoners of war at Abu G.
13. Taking his eye off of Osama Bin Ladin.
14. Hiring Justice Department employees who made one's political ideology a major qualification for employment and continued employment.
15. Giving the German Prime Minister a back rub during a state meeting.
16. Going socialist when the banking industry began experiencing problems.
17. Making Dick Cheyney his VP.

I'm sure there are many others, but these are the first that came to mind.

Chris Meyer
11-09-2008, 08:30 PM
Those sound a lot better than some of Nobama's plans. I'd take things like phone tapping over gun loss. I've got nothing to hide.

M Remington
11-09-2008, 08:33 PM
I've followed this election closely, and have never heard Obama mention taking guns away. Can you enlighten me on this one?

In the priorities area, I'd rather lose my guns than my right to privacy (I don't have anything to hide either).

subroc
11-09-2008, 08:45 PM
After 9-11 I don’t believe the nation was attacked by terrorists.

He freed 2 nations, one from a dictator the other from an oppressive government.

After hurricane Katrina when the democrat mayor and governor failed to protect their citizens, his efforts evacuated a major city in approximately 7 days. He took the blame to give cover to the democrats. He provided so much cover for the failed mayor that he was re-elected. Amazing.

He attempted to fix Social Security but was stymied by left wing ideologues in congress that chose to put party over the nation.

He appointed two fine justices to the Supreme Court.

He worked with democrats to create no child left behind.

He created a prescription drug program.

He funded aids programs in Africa at the highest rates ever by an American president in an attempt to eradicate and treat the disease.

History will look kindly on President George W. Bush, in much the same way it looks kindly on President Harry Truman.

Cody Covey
11-09-2008, 08:58 PM
I've followed this election closely, and have never heard Obama mention taking guns away. Can you enlighten me on this one?

In the priorities area, I'd rather lose my guns than my right to privacy (I don't have anything to hide either).
Do you really think that you are being tapped while talking to your mom about thanksgiving dinner? To think so is ignorant and a bit conceded if you think you are that important :) If he takes away your right to a gun you can be sure that your gun will be taken away whether you are a terrorist, criminal or law abiding citizen.

EDIT: Obama supports "gun control" which will take away a lot of our guns and he hasn't made a big deal about it because he knows how most of the country feels about taking away our guns. Doesn't mean that he hasn't mentioned it. Hell it was on his transition website for a while before he took it down

M Remington
11-09-2008, 09:07 PM
But if I'm doing some research and go to the Al Jazeera website, should the government be able to intercept my internet transmission?

I wouldn't be surprised if there were J. Edgar Hoover like dossiers on people who protested against the Bush presidency.

Cody Covey
11-09-2008, 09:08 PM
should you be flagged yes damn right you should. Should the FBI come to your house for something as simple as looking at a couple wiki articles..no and it hasn't and wont happen...

M Remington
11-09-2008, 09:11 PM
should you be flagged yes damn right you should. Should the FBI come to your house for something as simple as looking at a couple wiki articles..no and it hasn't and wont happen...

If it's looking at articles about something on the internet, we start down a slippery slope. Then, we get another president in office who takes it a little further. Eventually, our right to privacy erodes.

A hypothetical. . .

If I buy 5 assault rifles in one week should I go onto some sort of watch list?

Cody Covey
11-09-2008, 09:41 PM
By having a government we may eventually have our right to privacy erode...because it may happen is a bad argument that it is happening. IF you have ties a crime ring or terrorist organization and buy 5 assault rifles yes you should go on a list...this list is not a criminal conviction it's just taking a little preventative measures so that if the person on a list happens to take it further the intelligence will be there to prevent another 9/11 or other terrorist act.