Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

how will historians define the two bush presidents?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
mopaul Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-16-04 07:01 AM
Original message
how will historians define the two bush presidents?
i know, it's still too early to write the history books, but how do you think historians will remember bush's 41 and 43?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Ruffhowse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-16-04 07:04 AM
Response to Original message
1. The Wimp, and the Chimp
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nimrod Donating Member (999 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-16-04 07:05 AM
Response to Original message
2. Let's just hope...
...They appear as small incompetent belches in the timeline rather than chapters 3 and 5 of "The Fall of the United States".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NuttyFluffers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-16-04 07:07 AM
Response to Original message
3. tweedledee and tweedledum?
who knows? but i doubt it would be glowing (outside of GOP hagiographies)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cooley Hurd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-16-04 07:12 AM
Response to Original message
4. I have no doubt that Chimpo will go down in American history as...
...worst president ever. The way we still hang our heads in shame because of slavery, of the genocide of Native Americans, of the Japanese internments, we will be hanging our heads in shame about the last 3.5 years of our history for centuries to come.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dudley_DUright Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-16-04 07:24 AM
Response to Reply #4
7. ...of the Japanese internments...
Unless you are wing-nut-case Michelle Malkin (and here groupies).

http://dneiwert.blogspot.com/2004_08_08_dneiwert_archive.html#109219067601454226
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cooley Hurd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-16-04 07:30 AM
Response to Reply #7
12. Saw her on Bill Maher Friday...
...and she's definitely a nut-case. :thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vogon_Glory Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-16-04 08:39 AM
Response to Reply #12
17. If We Interned by Ethnicity, Wouldn't Malkin Have to Be Interned?
If the US were to resume interning by ethnicity, wouldn't Michelle Malkin herself have to be interned because of her own racial background?

Think about it. The rash of terrorism in the Malaysian/Indonesian/Philippine area a couple of years ago involved East Indian terrorists, not just Wahabbis from the Arabian Peninsula. I believe that Malkin herself is Filipino in origin, very closely related to the very same racial populations causing ruckuses in Indonesia and the southern Philippines.

During the Franco-Algerian War, the insurgents used women as couriers and to plant bombs. Today, al Quaeda is supposedly thinking of recruiting women for their own terrorist operations.

Today, there are undoubtedly thousands of Philippine Islanders and also Indonesians living in the US. Many have grown up here in the US and/or speak flawless American style English--just like Michelle Malkin does. Women from such backgrounds could just as easily be Muslim as well as Christian, and some could be recruited into terrorist organizations. It would be no difficult feat to get some of these terrorists to dress in secular western fashion--just as non-terrorist Michelle Malkin does.

If one was to argue for internment by ethnicity or racial background (I do not), wouldn't that argue for Michelle Malkin herself being interned as a security risk?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Spinzonner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-16-04 07:23 AM
Response to Original message
5. Well, if we include Reagan, since he was addle-brained

and Bush I was really running the store:

Worst, Worser, and Worsest

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dob Bole Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-16-04 07:23 AM
Response to Original message
6. Losers!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NewJeffCT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-16-04 07:24 AM
Response to Original message
8. Hastened the decline of the US that started under Reagan
Reagan was the one that ran up the deficit so high, turned the US into a debtor nation, shifted the tax burden from the wealthy to the middle class, extended the life of the Soviet Union, and generally divided the US along racial & regional lines.

Bush 2 did all of that while bloating the size of the government to such an ungainly size that we will have no choice but to make drastic cutbacks in the future all the while not arrogantly accepting blame for anything that has gone wrong - at least Reagan was man enough to take the blame for Beirut and admit to Iran-Contra.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mopaul Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-16-04 07:29 AM
Response to Reply #8
11. many feel that reagan was just bush's tool
and that bush 1 was actually running things. and still is
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
indepat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-16-04 08:22 AM
Response to Reply #8
15. Reagan inherited a national debt of some $1 trillion and a $13+ trillion
debt is projected by 2014 according to the CBO, with annual interest on that debt then projected at $687 billion, all thanks to a trickle-down mentality and the neocons willingness/determination to transfer trillions of dollars from the Federal treasury to the wealth of the already-wealthy. Just imagine the calamitous results in the next ten years when large numbers of the baby-boomer generation have begun to retire, the crushing debt-service and a depleted lock box, all by design IMHO: Reagan started the decline and fall of the American empire, Bush I continued it, and Bush II has fast-tracked it. Americans will truly reap what the neocons have sown and will get what they seem to want. But we should not be too concerned over this fiscal dilemma, for the neocons have possibly trashed the environment, world order, the rule of law, occupied nations, and international law, treaties and goodwill more than they have trashed the fiscal integrity of the Federal government and our economy. The damage done IMHO is so incalculable and inalterable that Kerry could do little to change the course of our destiny, especially if he were to inherit a Repuke-controlled Congress, so should the people want four more years, four more years, the people will have earned their just rewards.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
terrya Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-16-04 07:25 AM
Response to Original message
9. Domestically, advancing the interests of the corporate interests...
and the ultra-wealthy.

Nothing more than that. Historians will correctly perceive that 41 and 42 cared nothing except that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
baldguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-16-04 07:29 AM
Response to Original message
10. Worst. Presidents. Ever.
Worse than Coolidge, Worse than Fillmore. Worse than Harding.

People named "Bush" will change thier name so as not to be associated with them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WI_DEM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-16-04 07:43 AM
Response to Original message
13. Father and son both rejected by voters for a second term
(at least that is what I'm hoping). Both overly obsessed with Iraq. Under both the economy experienced recession and huge budget deficits. Under both the US went to war. Poppy managed to get a strong coalition for his war--chimpy could not. Under Bush, Jr. US prestige in the world fell to an all-time low. Poppy continued the cover-up of the arms for hostages scandal by his midnight pardons and Chimpy will do the same in regards to the lies of his administration. Both retired to enjoy prosperous retirements thanks to big oil and the Saudi Government.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mr.Green93 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-16-04 08:01 AM
Response to Original message
14. two little bushs flanking a tower of greatness
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NewJeffCT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-16-04 08:41 AM
Response to Reply #14
18. good one, but
I think Clinton only stemmed the tide in the decline that Reagan started. Bush 2 has undone all the good, fiscally sound policy that Clinton had and then some. As another poster said, Reagan & Bush 1 started the decline, but Bush 2 fast-tracked it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bacchant Donating Member (747 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-16-04 08:25 AM
Response to Original message
16. Dumb and Dumber
W lends credence to the claim that his dad and mom were first cousins.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
0007 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-16-04 08:46 AM
Response to Original message
19. Bad & badder
Edited on Mon Aug-16-04 08:50 AM by 0007
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
drdigi420 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-16-04 08:46 AM
Response to Original message
20. dumb and dumberer
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bpilgrim Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-16-04 09:02 AM
Response to Original message
21. George H. W. Bush - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_H._W._Bush

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
George H. W. Bush
White House Portrait
Order: 41st President
Term of Office: January 20, 1989–January 20, 1993
Predecessor: Ronald W. Reagan
Successor: William J. Clinton
Date of Birth: Thursday, June 12, 1924
Place of Birth: Milton, Massachusetts
First Lady: Barbara Bush
Profession: businessman
Political Party: Republican
Vice President: J. Danforth Quayle
Order: 43rd Vice President
Term of Office: January 20, 1981–January 20, 1989
Predecessor: Walter F. Mondale
Successor: J. Danforth Quayle
President: Ronald W. Reagan


George Herbert Walker Bush (born June 12, 1924) was the 41st President of the United States (1989-1993). Previously, he had served as ambassador to the United Nations (1971–1973), director of the CIA 1976–1977, and the 43rd Vice President of the United States under President Ronald Reagan (1981–1989).

His son, George W. Bush, is the 43rd President of the United States. As a result he is sometimes referred to as "former President Bush", "the Elder Bush", "Bush the Elder", "Bush Senior" (incorrect), "Bush 41", or "the first President Bush" in order to avoid possible confusion between his presidency and that of his son. During his term of office he was known simply as President George Bush, without any initials, as his son had never held elective office and was not especially well-known to the public. Technically speaking, for official protocol, his son is "The President" and he is "President Bush". This will not change until his son leaves office. (Note that, because the son doesn't have "Herbert" in his name, the former President Bush and the current President Bush are not "senior" and "junior" but rather just father and son with very similar names.)

more...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 19th 2024, 09:15 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC