Forums | MacLife

Chickenhawk wrote:

Come on bush, you have one year left, don't quack too loud. You're going to end up in the history books as worst president evar, despite what half assed attempts to rectify that you try.

Based on getting what he wanted through Congress, he'll go down as one of the most successful.


Ponder that for a minute.

Chickenhawk wrote:

Farmerkev wrote:

Chickenhawk wrote:

Come on bush, you have one year left, don't quack too loud. You're going to end up in the history books as worst president evar, despite what half assed attempts to rectify that you try.

Based on getting what he wanted through Congress, he'll go down as one of the most successful.


Ponder that for a minute.

But he's not a Football Quarterback. He's not evaluated on how much of his legislation makes it through congress, he's evaluated on how successful those programs and policies were towards their stated goal, and how much they benefited the people of this country.

The economy has grown.
The US hasn't suffered another terrorist attack.
There is some evidence that schools are getting a tiny bit better.

I could go on but the point is made. Regardless of our personal feelings about the man, future historians will look at the numbers and trends.

Chickenhawk wrote:

Farmerkev wrote:

The US hasn't suffered another terrorist attack.

I suppose you would like to buy a rock I have which keeps tigers away.

Maybe you should get one that keeps bad analogies away.

Kev's right about one thing -- there's no reason to believe that Bush can't continue to get whatever he wants out of Congress as he has up till now. God knows we can't count on the Democrats to stand up to him.

All bets, therefore, are off.

Farmerkev wrote:

Proost wrote:

[
So when I buy the next year 5 new cars, 2 more houses it tells you there is a growth in my wealth but in reality I have this huge debt!

And of course this man is overrated, he's just following a policy made a long time ago, his father did the same.

Everyone can see these politics are not for us!/the people but about economic interests, controlling the world resources and making 1 world order where the elite has control to protect their own wealth at any  cost.

You wealth may not have grown, mine has tremendously. We though aren't the economy, just infinitesimal pieces of it. I was talking about the US economy which has continued to grow in spite of some major setbacks like the 9-11 attack and basically losing one of our major cities in a hurricane.
It helps to get an idea of how Bush will be judged when you remember how disliked several other past presidents were and how history judged them in later decades after the emotions died down.

I was not talking about my wealth. I am talking about american wealth. America is not getting richer at all under bush although it may seem so for you and many others today. The dollar is falling, there is a giant debt, only the richer got richer.

Defending the american way of life is sure worth many smurf worldwide I guess but all these debts must be payed back sooner or later, even by you so you think now everything is nice and you don't complain right now but after bush you get the real mesh. It's like getting sober.

Last edited by Proost (2008-01-13 6:54 pm)

I think the numbers of people in abject poverty has grown considerably of late.

I predict more growth; tent cities will probably boom.

Ribtorus wrote:

I think the numbers of people in abject poverty has grown considerably of late.

I predict more growth; tent cities will probably boom.

There are tent cities in the suburbs these days. Check out Riverside. Welfare reform sure has worked out great.

The Bush years have been a wholesale mortgaging off of America's future prosperity to enrich a tiny elite. The economic numbers bear that out.

Growth doesn't occur magically from tax cuts, as Republican mythology would have you believe. If that were the case, North Korea and Bangladesh would be economic powerhouses. It comes from investment in things that improve productivity, like education and infrastructure. The government has been too busy slashing rich people's taxes and giving out sweet contracts to political allies to worry about those little things.

Farmerkev wrote:

Proost wrote:

[
So when I buy the next year 5 new cars, 2 more houses it tells you there is a growth in my wealth but in reality I have this huge debt!

And of course this man is overrated, he's just following a policy made a long time ago, his father did the same.

Everyone can see these politics are not for us!/the people but about economic interests, controlling the world resources and making 1 world order where the elite has control to protect their own wealth at any  cost.

You wealth may not have grown, mine has tremendously. We though aren't the economy, just infinitesimal pieces of it. I was talking about the US economy which has continued to grow in spite of some major setbacks like the 9-11 attack and basically losing one of our major cities in a hurricane.
It helps to get an idea of how Bush will be judged when you remember how disliked several other past presidents were and how history judged them in later decades after the emotions died down.

New Orleans is a "major city" ?

Historians won't be kind with President Bush for the economy built on debt, that created a 6 month recession.

after-life wrote:

Ribtorus wrote:

I think the numbers of people in abject poverty has grown considerably of late.

I predict more growth; tent cities will probably boom.

There are tent cities in the suburbs these days. Check out Riverside.

Family had friends in Riverside, and family in San Diego.
That's nothing new to southern California. A lot of it has to do with illegal immigrants (IE the people occupying the temporary homes) and those who lost their livelihood to the drug issues that ravage much of southern California.

Southern California is also one of the top destinations for runaways - LA County in particular, but they then bleed into the other counties.

There have always been Tent cities in Berkeley, as long as I can remember. It's one of the most liberal cities in California. They've been in Oakland for as long as I can remember as well.

Last edited by resedit (2008-01-13 10:26 pm)

Farmerkev wrote:

Proost wrote:

[
So when I buy the next year 5 new cars, 2 more houses it tells you there is a growth in my wealth but in reality I have this huge debt!

And of course this man is overrated, he's just following a policy made a long time ago, his father did the same.

Everyone can see these politics are not for us!/the people but about economic interests, controlling the world resources and making 1 world order where the elite has control to protect their own wealth at any  cost.

You wealth may not have grown, mine has tremendously. We though aren't the economy, just infinitesimal pieces of it. I was talking about the US economy which has continued to grow in spite of some major setbacks like the 9-11 attack and basically losing one of our major cities in a hurricane.
It helps to get an idea of how Bush will be judged when you remember how disliked several other past presidents were and how history judged them in later decades after the emotions died down.

Until this year. Which has a major problem brewing from unregulated lending processes. Which have been building for the last 5 years.

Farmerkev wrote:

JakeTheTall wrote:

New Orleans is a "major city" ?

Historians won't be kind with President Bush for the economy built on debt, that created a 6 month recession.

I'd say anything in the top 50 by population is one of our major cities. It being a world wide tourist attraction and a major port adds to it's importance.

Our economy has been built on debt for decades, long before Bush.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't there a massive surplus right when Bush came into office?

spike wrote:

Farmerkev wrote:

JakeTheTall wrote:

New Orleans is a "major city" ?

Historians won't be kind with President Bush for the economy built on debt, that created a 6 month recession.

I'd say anything in the top 50 by population is one of our major cities. It being a world wide tourist attraction and a major port adds to it's importance.

Our economy has been built on debt for decades, long before Bush.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't there a massive surplus right when Bush came into office?

There was a small surplus for a couple of years.