Is Bush the worst president, ever?

[Arrian]

I was being generous.

-Arrian

[jkp1187]

Originally posted by Arrian
I was being generous.

-Arrian

They don't deserve it.

[carnide_]

Is this for real?

Is this a real movie?
http://www.wthefilm.com/

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Yup, opens next weekend (in DC anyway).

[Velociryx]

One of the all time worst (bottom 10-ish)

Our Texans should appreciate this:

[Dinner]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
He's in the bottom 10, if not the bottom 5. He's not the worst though... at least not yet.

He still has time. He might have one last big **** up in him.

[Dr Strangelove]

What could he possibly do now?

[Velociryx]

I think the tag line for the movie says it all (I just watched the trailers). "Anyone can grow up to become president."

Uh huh.

-=Vel=-

(needless to say, I live a long ways from the Benaverse, where Shrub is apparently up for Sainthood...)

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
Che: The problem isn't that Bush cut taxes, that was a good thing. It's that he and both parties in Congress refused to cut spending as well.

Was it good so that they could invest in the stock market?

[Kidlicious]

"It was not our intention to bring malice or judgment on George W. Bush and his administration. He and his administration clearly speak for themselves," Stone said.

:snicker:

[Riesstiu IV]

At this point I'm starting to wonder if Bush was a Manchurian candidate who was purposed with ruining the US as much as possible in 8 years.

[Vesayen]

How can anyone say Bush II is superior to Clinton? I want your reasoning on that one.

[Garth Vader]

Originally posted by Comrade Snuggles

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
Which is why you've had terrorists since then, and why it happened less then 6 months into his adminstration.

I'm sorry Che, that won't fly. I don't buy it that Bush was responsible for the institutional differences.

There was one foreign terrorist attack in the U.S. under Clinton's watch. Another major one was foiled seven years later. As for 9/11 happening six months in to Bush's watch, do you know how to count? 9 - 1 =8. If you can't even do the most basic math, why should we trust your brain when it comes to anything else.

Also, why is Clinton responsible for an attack that happened one month into his presidency, but yet Bush is not responsible for one that was 8 months into his

[Zenn-La]

Clinton sucked... but... Clinton >>>>>>>>>>> Bush.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by snoopy369
You can't judge these things during, unfortunately; you must judge after the fact (quite a lot after the fact, at least 10-20 years). The politics of the current day affect the feelings too much right now to let you properly rate it.

Assessments of our past modern presidents haven't changed greatly. Nixon, Carter, and Ford are all pretty much where they were, although there has been some slight rehabilitation of Nixon. Reagan has been massively rehabilitated, but not on the basis of facts, but because of a concerted effort on the part of conservatives to do so. The problems we are facing today are largely the legacy of the Reagan era. Bush I is still considered largely to have been a failure, and only those who swallow right-wing talking points whole have said that the Clinton Presidency was anything less than some of the best years we've had in decades.

That said, in tough times, people can rise to the occasion, or sink beneath them. Bush is no Lincoln or FDR. He would be a thoroughly forgettable president, if not for the fact of 9/11 happening on his watch.