It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

98% Of Historians Call Bush Presidency A Failure

page: 6
14
<< 3  4  5    7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 16 2008 @ 08:53 PM
link   
We all know the difference between the red states and the blue states. I diddnt see many blue states. Bush took out the taliban, and one of the worlds worst dictators. I would sa saddam was a failure...




posted on Apr, 16 2008 @ 08:56 PM
link   
reply to post by jasonhb
 


I dont think he has gotten rid of the taliban yet.

America helped the taliban and gave them the weapons to kill people.


I think Bush has done to much damage. so lets hope we dont go killing more people and start another war.



posted on Apr, 16 2008 @ 10:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by pavil
However, I would venture most supporters of any of Bush's policies have given up trying to reason with the majority of the "Bush Haters".


Yeah, it's hard to debate when you don't have a leg to stand on.

All the Rummy-Bush supporters all just went *poof* and up and vanished! If I didn't have a life, I'd search through the ATS archives and make a compilation thread of all the so-so-wrong and now vanished Bush supporters and their threads. I would call it, 'How could they be so wrong? And where are they now?"




Remember, you always have to have someone to blame for the way things are.


Deep. What the hell are you talking about?

[edit on 16-4-2008 by rizla]



posted on Apr, 16 2008 @ 10:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by mind is the universe
I dont think he has gotten rid of the taliban yet.
America helped the taliban and gave them the weapons to kill people.


The Reagan administration turned a blind eye to the sale of the poison gas to Saddam, which Saddam then used to gas Kurdish children. Then Reagan let him buy more!

What's even 'better', Bush then used the gassing of the Kurdish children (using our poison-gas, mind, which Reagan let him buy) as a justification for invading. Now that's value! (unless you were one of those Kurdish children gassed to death).



posted on Apr, 16 2008 @ 10:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Drewdatt
 


Ah,Mr Bush is only 2 percent below Clintons best! Go George!



posted on Apr, 17 2008 @ 12:13 AM
link   
here is my list of the worst presidents in the modern era:

1.LBJ

2.Nixon

3. Ford

4.Bush sr.

5.W.

I think W. is the biggest war criminal to be in office since LBJ and Nixon.



posted on Apr, 17 2008 @ 12:24 AM
link   
I had a hang nail this morning, probably bushes fault...



posted on Apr, 17 2008 @ 04:01 AM
link   
Who cares what a bunch of historians say? I have lived during the Bush administration and know for a FACT that he's been a great president. My neighbor down the street that I hated lost their house and the annoying teen from across the street got sent to Iraq. My life couldn't be better! All the crybaby liberals like to make things up to make people turn on Bush.

I think it's great that the average age of soldiers is 20...these kids can't even drink yet but are being taught how to be responsible!



posted on Apr, 17 2008 @ 05:05 AM
link   
reply to post by burdman30ott6
 



Originally posted by burdman30ott6
reply to post by The Nighthawk
 


Where has this 1 million Iraqis dead due to the war figure suddenly appeared from? That is at least 10 times the most scathing estimate I've recently seen and that was from a site firmly against the war. You weaken your argument when you either invent numbers or simply use someone else's inflated, invented numbers happily because they fit whatever argument you're trying to make.


Thank you for the correction. However, this is ATS, and the facts, though interesting, are irrelevant. Sensationalism is what sells.



posted on Apr, 17 2008 @ 05:14 AM
link   
reply to post by grover
 



Hey grover

What's the difference between these two sequential posts you made, six minutes apart??


Originally posted by grover
Sadly they are wrong. bush minor's presidency has been quite successful for his owners. For the rest of us, its a disaster however.




Originally posted by grover
Sadly bush minor's presidency has been very successful for his owners.... for the rest of us, we got screwed.


Are you just grieving out loud? Or are you using the saturation method to turn your opinion into fact?


You're a riot!



posted on Apr, 17 2008 @ 05:32 AM
link   
reply to post by mind is the universe
 




Originally posted by mind is the universe
logictruth you have to be the only person who ive seen defend bush..


says it all really.


Anyhoo Saddam was the only guy in the middle east to stand up to George senior Bush. George bush just wanted his head on a plate. suferiority complex kicking in. And Saddam was already crippled when your recent president went in and literally blew up the country killing thousands of people. No weapons of mass destruction. Your recent president broke the UN treaty. His war was on "terrioism", and supposedly getting those who were "responsible" for 9/11 was also out the window. He lied to your nation on war on terroism by going into Iraq. Now the middleeast is going to be nuked..


What about the 17 UN Resolutions that Hussein broke over a 12 year period? What about the weapons inspectors he threw out of Iraq?

You need to check your history.

reply to post by The Nighthawk
 



Originally posted by The Nighthawk

Originally posted by logictruth
ok ok name some war crimes hes committed.


Then you admit Bush is a criminal and therefore needs to be prosecuted.


No, he didn't. Stop making up facts.



Originally posted by The Nighthawk
This will be my last post for the day, as I have better things to do than castigate the likes of you.


Originally posted by logictruth
no i do not admit that.


Yes, you just did. You said "ok, ok some war crimes were committed".

No, he didn't say that. YOU DID.

Stop making up lies.




Originally posted by The Nighthawk
And thanks to Bush, that way of life is here in America now. Look up "free speech zones" and the amount of surveillance carried out against legitimate protesters.

Free speech zones and crowd surveillance and infiltration were around way before Bush was president.



Originally posted by The Nighthawk
Over a million Iraqis are dead because of our invasion and the resulting civil war.


Prove your allegation. With solid facts.



posted on Apr, 17 2008 @ 08:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by rizla
Yeah, it's hard to debate when you don't have a leg to stand on.

Thank you for proving my point why I should debate. You are right, you are correct and there could be no way your side could be wrong. Moving on.




Deep. What the hell are you talking about?



It's not deep, just an observation. So your side loses TWO presidential elections and you have to resort to HE STOLE THE ELECTION!!!!! both times to explain your weak candiates and campagins for those elections. Nevermind that Gore didn't even carry his home State or Kerry had obvious flaws, it's the big bad Republican party's fault they lost.
No wonder why you don't know what I'm talking about.
I would have thought your side would have been on guard for the second "stealing" of a Presidential election and been able to prevent it given how "obvious" it was.

You are so blind in your rage against Bush that you fail to see your own candiates and party's weaknesses. What "change" is it that you expect to see if your side ends up winning?



posted on Apr, 17 2008 @ 11:34 AM
link   
reply to post by jasonhb
 


That would be more impressive if Bush hadn't awarded the Taliban with $43m in May of 2001...



posted on Apr, 17 2008 @ 11:36 AM
link   
Ok, hasn't been said yet, so:

Just what is the matter with the 2% who think Bush is not a failure?

Just what would it take to convince them? Total economic meltdown, the world in flames, torture okayed, the Constitution trashed, the US with only Israel and the UK as allies?

Not that we're not already 3/4 of the way there already...



posted on Apr, 17 2008 @ 12:08 PM
link   
reply to post by gottago
 


They don't care. They're frightened children scared of the Arab bogeyman, looking for any John Wayne caricature they can find to go and kick the bad guys' butts for them. They don't care about the cost, in money or morals, to the American people or the people we kill in the name of "justice". No amount of evidence will convice them Bush and Co. have done anything wrong. Their moral compass is so screwed up, and their perception so blinded by hatred of progressive liberal virtues, that they'll just sit there and defend the criminals to their dying breath. The incontrovertible fact that Liberal concepts such as the New Deal saved this country from the brink of economic extinction and created the middle class becomes a footnote to be twisted and turned around by right-wing revisionists paid by the rich elite. The apologists throw the word "Elitist" at Liberals, not even knowing what it means--the Elitist seeks to raise the Elite above society, leaving the rest in slavery and poverty. Liberals seek to even the playing field, with the basic belief that everyone is Elite if they're free to reach their full potential (that includes freedom from economic bondage). Liberalism is anti-Elitism. But, again, they don't care.

There's no point debating with these people anymore. The rift in this country between "right" and "left" is impossible to bridge at this point. I'll just keep on doing my part, stumping for the Progressive Left to save this country from the predatory Right-Wing Elite.



posted on Apr, 17 2008 @ 12:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Nighthawk
reply to post by gottago
 


I'll just keep on doing my part, stumping for the Progressive Left to save this country from the predatory Right-Wing Elite.


Way to go about rebuilding those bridges. I am impressed.



posted on Apr, 17 2008 @ 01:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by pavil

Originally posted by The Nighthawk
reply to post by gottago
 


I'll just keep on doing my part, stumping for the Progressive Left to save this country from the predatory Right-Wing Elite.


Way to go about rebuilding those bridges. I am impressed.


They can't be rebuilt. This country is effectively in a state of what I call "Cold Civil War". The ideologies of both sides are so dead-set against each other (and, frankly, probably should be) there is no going back. There's no room for compromise. And let it be known that progressives didn't start this: Right-wingers did. We were busy making this country great, and they spent all their time finding ways to convince the American people to vote them in and tear it back down.



posted on Apr, 17 2008 @ 02:11 PM
link   
reply to post by The Nighthawk
 


Spoken like a true "Progressive". There is plenty of middle ground, sorry you see it that way. Even if you do get into the White House you probably will have to deal with a House or Senate that is from the other side. Another 4 years of Gridlock is a sure way to a one term Presidency. Pelosi would be proud of you.



posted on Apr, 17 2008 @ 03:04 PM
link   
98% huh? You kind of wonder about those 2%. I guess they have good company with the 1 out five dentists who do NOT recomend flouride to prevent tooth decay.



posted on Apr, 17 2008 @ 03:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by pavil
reply to post by The Nighthawk
 


Spoken like a true "Progressive".


Like I said, we didn't start this.


There is plenty of middle ground,


Where?


sorry you see it that way.


Do you know how many death threats progressives get from whacko right-wingers every single day? You do know about death threats made by right-wing radio hosts against Democratioc candidates, right? How else should I see it?


Even if you do get into the White House you probably will have to deal with a House or Senate that is from the other side. Another 4 years of Gridlock is a sure way to a one term Presidency. Pelosi would be proud of you.


Actually we're well on our way to taking a full, filibuster-proof majority, thank you.




top topics



 
14
<< 3  4  5    7  8 >>

log in

join