Why hasn't George w. Bush spoken up?, page 2
Pages: <<  1    2    3  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 1 times


reply posted on 19-10-2009 @ 11:17 AM by Jenna
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic



When do they become Obama's problems though instead of Bush's? Bush isn't in office anymore. Obama may have inherited the wars and economy, but they're his baby now.


reply posted on 19-10-2009 @ 11:21 AM by poedxsoldiervet
reply to post by genius/idoit



I think Bush remebers what it was like for him to be critized by past presidents who allowed for some of our problems (bin Laden) He also stated that he would try not to attack obama out of respect for the office and the challenges he knows the President is going through...


reply posted on 19-10-2009 @ 11:37 AM by poedxsoldiervet
reply to post by manxman2



Maybe Obama belives that the truth movement borders on lunacy, its been proven 9-11 was done by bad boys from bin Ladens group, Now I will tell you this..... Bush knew about it but diddnt prevent it kinda of like Roosvelt and WWII...



reply posted on 19-10-2009 @ 11:41 AM by buddhasystem
Originally posted by network dude
reply to
post by Benevolent Heretic



while what you said is exactly true, there was no deception when Obama bought the package. He knew what was in the box. Crying about the contents after the fact is weak.


He actually never "cried" about the contents of the box. Taking the inventory of what he's got there -- yeah, he did that, and rightfully so. Just in spirit of good accounting practices.


reply posted on 19-10-2009 @ 05:30 PM by genius/idoit
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


first of all (and I don't want to derail my own thread)but obama didn't "inherit"anything he asked for it.
second I was asking why Bush has been so silent,I hardly believe it's because he believes obama is right.


reply posted on 19-10-2009 @ 05:35 PM by genius/idoit
reply to post by Doc Tesla



In reply to your last 2 posts for the first I was on my way to work so I just googled obama blames bush and posted the page.I really didn't think it would be necessary to post individual occurrences and no I did not read 2.3 million posts
I have a couple left


reply posted on 19-10-2009 @ 09:21 PM by Frith
reply to post by genius/idoit


It could just as well be that Bush knows he's guilty of every accusation and has no defense against them. To some conspiracy theorists he's guilty of much more so he may well feel quite lucky to be out of the spotlight and especially legal proceedings.


reply posted on 19-10-2009 @ 10:28 PM by xpert11
reply to post by genius/idoit



Bush like Helen Clark choose to leave office in a very dignified manner . I hope that when the day comes for Obama to leave office that he will remember the manner in which Bush conducted himself when it came time for the handover . Really you have nothing to complain about .

Cheers xpert11 .


reply posted on 20-10-2009 @ 08:00 AM by Benevolent Heretic
Originally posted by Jenna
And when do we get to the point where Obama pointing at Bush is no longer acceptable and expect Obama to take responsibility?


Responsibility does not equal blame. The OP asked about blame. Obama will never be to blame for what Bush did, but he took responsibility on Jan 20.

Just as I took responsibility for the fixer upper when I signed the papers, I expected Obama to take responsibility on Jan 20, 2009. And he did. As I said before, that doesn't mean that he became the person who "got us into this mess".

There is one administration who started these wars. ONE. That's Bush. There's one administration who messed up the economy and set up Guantanamo and tortured people. That's Bush. That's not going to change. "Pointing at Bush" (blame) will always be acceptable as we look back on his presidency. He doesn't just shed all the things he did just because he's not in the office anymore. He still did them and was one of the worst presidents ever. That's not going to change.

Obama will make his own mistakes and his own "improvements". They will be his and not the next president's. Obama is responsible for what he does and doesn't do from here on out, until the end of his term. But it's impossible for him to be the person to blame for the things that Bush did.

We can blame Obama for what he's done so far (Upholding the Patriot Act, hiring lobbyists, supporting Goldman Sachs, etc), but we can neither blame him for what Bush did NOR can we blame him for not doing everything he's said he'd do in the first 9 months of his term, when he still has over 3 years in office to do it!

In Jan, 2011, halfway into his term, I'll be better able to judge how Obama's doing, After he leaves office, we will be able to see the full extent of what he did and didn't do to either put the country in better shape than it was when he arrived or to drive it further into disrepair. But unless you can read the future, (and I know some on ATS think they can, but I have no indication that that's true) we cannot know what Obama will do in the next 3 years and what he will be "to blame" for. But he will never be to blame for what Bush did. NEVER.

That's my opinion. If you want to blame Obama for everything Bush did, go ahead. If you want to blame Obama for things he hasn't done, go ahead. But in my world view, I don't blame someone for something unless they did it. And if they did it, they carry the blame.


reply posted on 20-10-2009 @ 09:42 AM by really
reply to post by genius/idoit


Ummmm.... so, what's the problem. You don't think Bush had a hand in all of that?
Second line.


reply posted on 20-10-2009 @ 09:56 AM by Benevolent Heretic
Originally posted by Jenna
My point is that it seems like every time Obama is talking about the economy or the wars the first thing he does is start pointing fingers at Bush.


I think that's an exaggeration. I've heard him speak plenty of times when he hasn't mentioned the past administration. You may just notice it because it rubs you the wrong way.


He's taking his sweet time deciding whether or not to authorize the troops that General McChrystal requested.


I noticed that some people are frustrated at Obama taking his time to make decisions, as if that's a fault of some kind... They think he should make bold, decisive, quick decisions. My comment is that you might want to take a look at how that worked out for "the Decider" in Chief... Obama is a thoughtful, deductive, reasoning, patient person. TOTALLY different than Bush. It's not in his nature to act like Bush. You can disagree with that, but I, for one, am thankful for it. Rash decisions have gotten this country in a lot of trouble.

Yet in the mean time, instead of making decisions or telling Congress to get their grubby paws out of defense funds, he's busy pointing fingers at Bush.


Oh, come on, Jenna. That's disingenuous. "Pointing fingers at Bush" isn't taking any time away from him making decisions or talking to Congress. Once he feels he has all the information and can make the wisest decision, he will. He can multitask better than any president we've had for a while.


reply posted on 20-10-2009 @ 01:35 PM by genius/idoit
reply to post by really



No.I don't really like Bush.I find it odd that the guy who knows the most about the job won't voice his opinion.That's all.The fact that obama in my humble opinion is bashing bush just makes me think even if it's protocol not to say anything about a new president, obama has opened the door to criticism from Bush.Know what I mean?
Pages: <<  1    2    3  >>    ^^TOP^^



Bruins goalie Tim Thomas takes stand against U.S Government
  Posted 19 days ago with 88 member flags
Romney: "I\'m Not Concerned About the Very Poor"
  Posted 10 days ago with 73 member flags
The Girl Killed by Obama: She "never saw it coming"
  Posted 4 days ago with 62 member flags
Ron Paul In Nevada - The Caucus Is Rigged!! - w/VIDEO
  Posted 6 days ago with 60 member flags

ATS Live North America is broadcasting in 48 minutes.
Today's Show: ATS Live: 96: Super powers, Falklands Woes, Stan Deyo Interview, Syria, Telepathy, The Devils Chord.