Poll: Did Bush do a Good job?

[Pimppeter2]

He was okay, he did the job to the best of his abilities

You cannot blame everything on him, I mean, its a whole system of checks and balances and all that crap

I think that the Government overall duruing his presidency was prety shitty

 

[BonsaiK]

Im sorry, I was just wondering what sort of people frequest the escapist.
And how he got voted in twice.
So what do you think? (Please Explain WHY)

EDIT: Please be aware that if you say Bush was always right, you are wildly outnumbered. I won't be surprised if you get flamed.

EDIT: Im somewhat surprised by the initial resuls only 3/74 said he did a good job. I though at least 10-20% would have.

EDIT: Added an OK option to the poll, sorry about that, I just assumed most would have a strong-ish opinion.

I think your poll is badly designed. Option 3 and 4 are not necessary when you already have option 1 and 2.

Bush was pretty funny but being the US President is not the time to be Mr. Funny Man. When you're the most powerful man in the world, and you have so much potential at your fingertips to change things for the better, and you don't even try... that's what really saddened me about Bush. Not that I think Obama walks on water either but at least he seems to be making some sort of vague effort to do the right thing.

Bush ran against Al Gore in 2000. Imagine how much better things would be today if Gore got in. At the very least the USA would have had some sensible climate change policy and we'd be at slightly less risk today of our cities drowning or whatever the hell he thinks is gonna happen.

 

[historybuff]

Obviously he was terrible. I thought this was already well-known.

It's because of him that for a long time, I didn't tell people on the internet that I was American. I was tired of getting jeered at for something I had no control over.

 

[moose49408]

I haven't taken the time to read all of the previous posts, so if someone has already made this point, I apologize. Does any remember what things were actually like after September 11th, 2001? The immediate reaction to that tragedy was not the paranoia and fear that ensued months later, but rather one of realization. People started being kinder to one another; they began to cherish little things in life, having been reminded of how quickly all of that can be taken away. It garnered the US massive amounts of support and sympathy from most of the rest of the world. For a few short weeks, partisanism and bickering vanished.

Over the next two years, George Bush and his compatriots destroyed all of that by trying to use it as an excuse to do whatever they wanted. They took advantage of the sympathy and good will that we had received, and the rest of the world called them on it. Anyone (regardless of political affiliation) who could squander something like that so horribly is a failure. It's just that simple. The really unfortunate aspect of all of this is that this is only one of many, many ways he failed as a president.

 

[Chester41585]

For some reason the internet is swamped with Bush-hating leftists. I think he did a good job with what was handed to him. Yeah, he made mistakes, but at least he's not totally bending the U. S. over a bench like Obama is. Hell, I've never imagined a multi-trillion dollar debt like the one we're sinking head-first into. There's no way I can logically come up with any trillion worth of anything besides skin cells and maybe semen.

The war? Afghanistan was done properly, but the "end of combat operations" and the "mission accomplished" bits were both premature and undersupported. Afghanistan should have been the big war. Iraq was a different kind of mission. Iraq would have been best left to special forces operators and surgical strikes followed by (sigh) U. N. occupation. They can't fight any wars, but I'll be damned if the U. N. can't install a working government in a carton of eggs.

Healthcare plan? I'm not very well-informed on this subject, but from hat I can gather, there's really no big deal. It's not the state-run plan that everyone is making it out to be.

Stimulus and unemployment? "Why don't I have a job and where's my check?"

Government bail-outs? Generally not a good idea. The American public is better off letting the larger companies go bankrupt. Finer trees grow in the ashes of the fallen and the old.

The Gorepocalypse / Global Warming / Green movement: All fine and dandy when everyone wants to go along with it. Especially if it's cheaper. Right now, it's only barely cheaper to make green energy. Solar power is prohibitively expensive for private citizens and (the best idea, IMO) wind turbines are often prohibited by communities. Hydroelectric power is only useful if there's enough of a source to draw energy from. The main reason you don't see HE dams in Florida is because there's no decent water sources (and a dam would create a lake that would flood a decent part of the state). Building more dams is environmentally destructive.

What the question really should be is "Will Obama do a better job?"
From what I can tell, no. He's been back-tracking on campaign promises, falling short of or failing completely in his duties as President, and has approached many of the major issues concerning the United States with lackluster enthusiasm, disinterest, or with an "I'm right, everyone's wrong" attitude.
I was optimistic of this President, but he continued failures from Day One have shown me that it's not your record that wins you The Office, but the show you put on.

 

[Ghonzor]

He wasn't bad, at least not as bad as everyone keeps screaming.

Difficult job. You do better.

On a side note: LET THE FLAMES BEGIN!

 

[jboking]

A giant pointless war on numerous fronts endorsed by him. Yeah, he was a mistake.

 

[UltraParanoia]

-Confused snip-

What the hell? Excuse me for a second, but I have to make some calls to find out which of my idiot friends came to my place while I was gone today.

 

[heyheysg]

AL GOOORRREEE!!!!

In an episode of Family Guy, Brian and Stewie traveled to an alternate universe where Al Gore won.

He did win though

 

[Shaoken]

AL GOOORRREEE!!!!

In an episode of Family Guy, Brian and Stewie traveled to an alternate universe where Al Gore won.

He did win though

And in another one Peter went back in time and ended up blowing things with Lois, which someone not only made Al Gore win, but also wound up killing Chenney, O'Rielly and Rove in a single day and all in all making the world a utopia.

 

[Lilani]

No child left behind...such a horrible, horrible system. Sure, it sounds okay on paper, but in execution...god no.

I happen to be one of those 'children who was not to be left behind' (I have ADD), and the schools do not do anything at all that helps. They don't even listen when I try to explain why something doesn't work. They're convinced I'm not trying hard enough, which is completely untrue.

What nobody seems to understand is that people with learning difficulties actually seem to have greater chances of success than "normal" people. Albert Einstein was dyslexic. So was Picasso. In fact, the majority of successful entrepreneurs have a learning disorder of some kind.

We aren't retarded.

It's not students that have ADD, dyslexia, and other learning disorders that can be worked with that makes NCLB a bad thing. It's that children whose brains are so underdeveloped or affected by their disorders that they literally cannot function beyond that of what a third grader are expected to eventually get up to the level of those without such disorders. ADD and ADHD, fine. Dyslexia, fine. Those are learning disorders, and with extra assistance and medication they can be worked with, as you've stated.

But autism and down's syndrome are different. Thousands of children have those diseases so bad, that they will never be able to function in life without full-time assistance. To expect those children to just eventually be "taught" out of those conditions is something I find both sickening and pointless. They need medical help, not a good educational system. Let's teach them what they can learn, and expect only what is reasonable.

 

[Samurai Goomba]

Bush did alright in some areas, but I hate the Patriot Act so much. But he definitely wasn't the worst President of all time. Harding sucked.

 

[Guitar Gamer]

No child left behind...such a horrible, horrible system. Sure, it sounds okay on paper, but in execution...god no.

I happen to be one of those 'children who was not to be left behind' (I have ADD), and the schools do not do anything at all that helps. They don't even listen when I try to explain why something doesn't work. They're convinced I'm not trying hard enough, which is completely untrue.

What nobody seems to understand is that people with learning difficulties actually seem to have greater chances of success than "normal" people. Albert Einstein was dyslexic. So was Picasso. In fact, the majority of successful entrepreneurs have a learning disorder of some kind.

We aren't retarded.

It's not students that have ADD, dyslexia, and other learning disorders that can be worked with that makes NCLB a bad thing. It's that children whose brains are so underdeveloped or affected by their disorders that they literally cannot function beyond that of what a third grader are expected to eventually get up to the level of those without such disorders. ADD and ADHD, fine. Dyslexia, fine. Those are learning disorders, and with extra assistance and medication they can be worked with, as you've stated.

But autism and down's syndrome are different. Thousands of children have those diseases so bad, that they will never be able to function in life without full-time assistance. To expect those children to just eventually be "taught" out of those conditions is something I find both sickening and pointless. They need medical help, not a good educational system. Let's teach them what they can learn, and expect only what is reasonable.

I can agree with you, except one one thing though...............
I came from a school who had 1/4 kids to be mentally challenged in some way, 3 quarters of the budget went to the seita's (however you spell it no pun intended) for said challenged kids. The rest of use had to make do with 10 year old equipment while the challenged ones got top of the line laptops and whatnot, they had to close down a wing because they had to house one kid in a room since he couldn't develop past kinder garden and they didn't have the money. Am I bitter? maybe a bit but that doesn't change the fact that most of the autistic kids I met there may not be socially inept and the may not be able to function well on their own but each had one thing that they were neigh genius at, not just "good" amazingly quick with, some off them had a specific thing some had a certain subject but I am currently in high school with a autistic dude who can name almost every notable military battle in history.
My point? no not all of them can develop past grade 2, but a good bunch can go years past where they would normally be but just in a certain field

 

[Lilani]

I can agree with you, except one one thing though...............
I came from a school who had 1/4 kids to be mentally challenged in some way, 3 quarters of the budget went to the seita's (however you spell it no pun intended) for said challenged kids. The rest of use had to make do with 10 year old equipment while the challenged ones got top of the line laptops and whatnot, they had to close down a wing because they had to house one kid in a room since he couldn't develop past kinder garden and they didn't have the money. Am I bitter? maybe a bit but that doesn't change the fact that most of the autistic kids I met there may not be socially inept and the may not be able to function well on their own but each had one thing that they were neigh genius at, not just "good" amazingly quick with, some off them had a specific thing some had a certain subject but I am currently in high school with a autistic dude who can name almost every notable military battle in history.
My point? no not all of them can develop past grade 2, but a good bunch can go years past where they would normally be but just in a certain field

Yes they can, it's called savant and it's quite rare. Having autism doesn't always mean they have a savant ability, it just happens every now and then for no explicable reason. I actually saw a special on two savant twins. They were in their 40s, and they couldn't live on their own. However, they could tell you the day of the week of just about any day in history. They could tell you if January 28th, 1963 was a Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, etc. just by thinking about it for a second.

What did this have to do with the argument, anyway? Regardless of whether or not they have a savant ability, they still can't live on their own or be expected to perform regular, daily tasks on the level of someone without their condition.

 

[NeutralDrow]

Wait, I got one! He started the Proliferation Security Initiative, in which the U.S. can confiscate and inspect shipping on suspicion of fissile materials (i.e. nuke stuff). That's worked really well so far (including exposing the A.Q. Khan network), to the point where it's still a major part of Obama's nuclear posture.

...still drawing a blank on anything else positive. I know there's more, but the fuckups were still the largest and farthest-reaching aspects.

 

[Korolev]

Bush wasn't evil. I don't think he sat up at night dreaming on how he was going to flambe Iraqi children. I'm sure he didn't rub his hands gleefully when planning to construct Gitmo, thinking "I wonder how many innocents we can cram into those cages ahahahahaha!"

Bush, in my opinion, was under-qualified. I seriously think he did not have the ability to run the country and that a lot of his advisors knew this and manipulated him. He was also fairly lazy, arrogant, self-assured and saw the world in an EXTREMELY simplistic way (you's either with me or ah-gainst me').

Having said all that, again, I do not think he strove to do harm. I do not think he was racist. I do think that SOME of his ideas were good, and that he did pass some good laws (such as a law to create the world's largest marine conservation area).

But he was too arrogant. In his mind, he was right and that was that. For instance, in the Iraq war conflict, I think he genuinely thought that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction. I mean, saddam had them in the 90's after all. Bush thought "Saddam has them", formed that opinion in his mind, and refused to listen to the considerable evidence that pointed out that Saddam had, in fact, destroyed the weapons a long time ago. Bush was waaaaaaaaaay too self-confident, believing in his own version of things, only looking at evidence that agreed with him.

So to sum up:

1) He did not do a very good job. Didn't do the world's worst job either, but his stuffed up a LOT
2) He wasn't evil or the devil or hitler. He was a misguided, under-qualified, simple minded bumpkin who got used by members of his administration.

 

[GonzoGamer]

And how he got voted in twice.

First of all, he wasn't voted in the first time. He was appointed to the position. That wasn't an election, it was a travesty.

*Ahem*

He won fair and square, by means of the Electoral College. Doing away with that system would be a very bad idea, because politicians would only pay attention to the major population centers, and it would be a terrible blow to the people out in the 'burbs and beyond.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not really a fan of W, but he wasn't actually an idiot, he just made himself look pretty stupid in public. Which was quite funny.

Dick Cheney, on the other hand... A chill runs up my spine whenever I see a picture of the man.

In total agreement with you about Cheney.
However, If you look back at the aftermath of the 2000 election, Gore would've even won the electoral college votes if they had finished the total recount.
Look up Bush vs Palm Beach Country. It was the supreme court that appointed Bush to office in 2000 and it was probably rigged Diebold machines that won him the 2004 election. I have a bit more faith in the American people than I do in the government.