America...

[aardvark baguette]

We'll see. At least you guys aren't sanctimonious about it

[postjack]

y'all be nice to muffuletta now.

[n_maher]

We'll see. At least you guys aren't sanctimonious about it

I'm sorry you find the responses sanctimonious but I think it's laughable that the president with the lowest approval rating in history (19%, twice), who's only moment of real approval was immediately-post 911 (when he could have told us all to adopt donkeys and we would have cheered) and who currently enjoys about a 75% disapproval rating would somehow be kindly judged by history. Political views aside the man has presided over one of the worst (if not the worst) periods in US history. Do I think that either of the two people he partially defeated in elections could have done better? Hell if I know but he sucked, period.

[tyrion]

We'll see. At least you guys aren't sanctimonious about it

What is it that he Bush has done that would cause historians to forget about the bad stuff and judge him kindly over time?

[aardvark baguette]

Not forget about the bad stuff, but actually weigh the good and the bad together. Alot of what gets reported is only the negative. Its always been that way. The war in Iraq was in an upswing for quite some time before places like the NY Times reported it as such.

I think its a bit naive to assume any President will be perfect. I'm not denying the bad, but I'm also not denying the good. I've already mentioned some of the good earlier.

[Sherwood]

How about this?

[aardvark baguette]

Political views aside the man has presided over one of the worst (if not the worst) periods in US history. Do I think that either of the two people he partially defeated in elections could have done better? Hell if I know but he sucked, period.

Wars are unpopular. If it had been Kerry, I think it very likely they would have gone to war too, based on the evidence at the time. The outcome may have been different though. I get the feeling no one has considered the possibility that a war under Bush yielded a better result than a war under Kerry. Maybe he would have done better, but no one has even hinted at that possibility.

[aerius]

What is it that he Bush has done that would cause historians to forget about the bad stuff and judge him kindly over time?

9/11!!! Do you hate America? It's all the Democrats' fault anyway since they got in the way of everything, and it's not like they could do any better. If it wasn't for Bush the whole world would be overrun with Arab terrorists and illegal immigrants. And socialists! And they'll take all our guns away and tax us to death!

Yes, I've actually seen the above being written already on various right-leaning message boards. It would be hilarious if the country and the world hadn't been so fucked up by the party they support.

[aardvark baguette]

uughhh

[grawk]

The worst period in american history? You've got to be kidding me. The great depression, the vietnam war, the late 70s, the civil war all pop to mind as times that were significantly worse than today.

Aside from having a press that has battered him at every turn, things haven't been that bad. It's not Bush's fault that Katrina hit new orleans, or that the people didn't evacuate when given plenty of opportunity. It's not Bush's fault that the housing market was as crazy as it was, or that companies gave bad loans. The war in Iraq has gone on longer than it was predicted, but shit, we still have troops in Germany, Japan, and Korea.

The bad gets exaggerated because the rhetoric is so divisive. There aren't riots, there's no food shortage, there's no draft, there's nothing that would historically count as a big negative. We had a stock market correction that has more to do with how the stock market operates than any indication of real problems in the economy. Yes, American automakers are struggling. Big shock there, they've been making poor decisions and turning out poor products for 40 years. Yes, the real estate market is struggling, because too many people were convinced they could afford to buy a house when they couldn't. There was some corruption that's being dealt with. As corruption goes, it's fairly minor when viewed through the eyes of history.

[Sherwood]

Yes, I've actually seen the above being written

You've seen it being written? You've physically watched someone write this? You need to choose your company more closely.

[deepak]

You've seen it being written? You've physically watched someone write this? You need to choose your company more closely.

Ostracizing someone's grammar or wording to be a dick might fly on Headfi...

edit: ah yes the newbie invasion might not be aware that English isn't everyone's first language

[grawk]

I dunno, Aerius is fair game for anything. After all, he's the resident assfacehole. There can be only one.

[tyrion]

I've argued the Iraq war here too many times. To suggest that it was in anyway a good thing is absurd. Many thousands of innocent Iraqis died. Thousands of soldiers died and thousands more wounded. I know war is hell but it's even worse when that war didn't have to happen. Aardvark, are you young enough to serve? If you are and think it's such a great thing, get your ass out there and fight it. And if you really think Bush and his buddies are innocent despite all we've learned to date, which is the tip of the iceberg since the Republicans blocked almost every attempt to investigate the basis for the war. Let's not forget that 9/11 occurred 9 months into Bush's presidency but no one wants to blame him for letting that happen. If it were a dem, the rep would have impeached and then tar and feathered him.

As to the housing market. This is from 10/02:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eW9viaJatpo]YouTube - economic crisis president bush mortgage speech[/ame]

Then there is the Enron Loophole courtesy of Phil Gramm and the SEC changing the Net Capital Rule which was changed in '04 which may have led to the investment bank failures.

[deepak]

I dunno, Aerius is fair game for anything. After all, he's the resident assfacehole. There can be only one.

Of course, and I can ignore the grammar snobbishness at Headfi since I don't read every thread, but it's much harder to do that here.

[tyrion]

On a lighter note: [ame=http://www.theonion.com/content/video/obama_win_causes_obsessive]Obama Win Causes Obsessive Supporters To Realize How Empty Their Lives Are | The Onion - America's Finest News Source@@AMEPARAM@@http://www.theonion.com/content/xml/89632/video@@AMEPARAM@@89632[/ame]

[grawk]

nice

[Sherwood]

I've argued the Iraq war here too many times. To suggest that it was in anyway a good thing is absurd.

The majority of my Iraqi Kurdish friends disagree with you. Not to be a perennial dick, here, but there are legitimate groups of well informed people who disagree with your assessment, and I see their point.

[tyrion]

The majority of my Iraqi Kurdish friends disagree with you.

I'm happy your Iraqi Kurdish friends don't mind that 100,000 innocent Iraqis are dead because we invaded Iraq.

[Sherwood]

They're happy the 100,000 dead iraqis aren't them, certainly.

[tyrion]

They're happy the 100,000 dead iraqis aren't them, certainly.

Isn't that just great.

[Sherwood]

Is that unreasonable? People are happy that they aren't dead, tortured, or systematically abused? That seems like a valid point of view, to me.

[Sherwood]

Regardless, this is mildly semantic and clearly OT. I was suggesting that your strong point of view is countered by another equally strong point of view, as is the case for almost everything. I feel the Iraq war was, in many ways, a mistake. I have difficulty feeling that way when I see the world's largest ethnic group without a nation so overjoyed by American actions.

[mirumu]

I think if it came down to pure numbers of dead the Iraq war will ultimately have resulted in more deaths over time than not having a war, and I've certainly seen people argue this point. That said, it's never as simple as pure numbers and it's very easy to say this in hindsight. I'm no fan of Bush or the Iraq war, but I do have a degree of sympathy for the backlash he received over starting it. Even today the world turns it's back on human rights violations all too often. Irrespective of how we got here or the collateral damage caused, he and America as a whole did the world a favor removing that regime. It's clear many mistakes were made along the way and if the decision to go to war was being made today it probably wouldn't happen, but again it's easy to say this in hindsight. I think it's too early to really evaluate the results as it will take generations to really see, but all we can do now is look forward and make the best of the situation.

[swt61]

I've argued the Iraq war here too many times. To suggest that it was in anyway a good thing is absurd. Many thousands of innocent Iraqis died. Thousands of soldiers died and thousands more wounded. I know war is hell but it's even worse when that war didn't have to happen. Aardvark, are you young enough to serve? If you are and think it's such a great thing, get your ass out there and fight it. And if you really think Bush and his buddies are innocent despite all we've learned to date, which is the tip of the iceberg since the Republicans blocked almost every attempt to investigate the basis for the war. Let's not forget that 9/11 occurred 9 months into Bush's presidency but no one wants to blame him for letting that happen. If it were a dem, the rep would have impeached and then tar and feathered him.

As to the housing market. This is from 10/02:

YouTube - economic crisis president bush mortgage speech

Then there is the Enron Loophole courtesy of Phil Gramm and the SEC changing the Net Capital Rule which was changed in '04 which may have led to the investment bank failures.

While I don't agree that the Bush administration is solely to blame for not uncovering the 911 plot (Let's not forget that the Trade centers were attacked under Clinton's administration as well) , I do pretty much agree with everything else you've said.

And I'm astonished that anyone can even try to downplay the utter failures of W's administration.

Is that unreasonable? People are happy that they aren't dead, tortured, or systematically abused? That seems like a valid point of view, to me.

No denying the atrocities committed by Saddam's regime, but why the hell do we have to be the worlds police force every time? This country cannot afford to right all the wrongs in the world. And let's be realistic here, we did not go to Iraq on a mission to help the oppressed. Surely you aren't that naive. If that were our real mission there would be several other invasions in other countries that we've turned our backs on. Darfur or Rwanda ring any bells? Oh wait they didn't have substantial oil reserves.