"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.
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.
and your a democrat your supposed to be providing the information for everyone....lets be FAIR!!!!!
two way street.
Originally Posted by precisionlabradors
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.
Originally Posted by Hookset
i reiterate the challenge, if you would like to waste your time, to post up a summary of all of his shining successes.
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
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
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?
Originally Posted by Hookset
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.
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.