Bush 43's library about to open up, interesting articles by 2 liberals

[Jim in CT]

The Bush 43 presidential library will soon be dedicated, and as such, many folks are revisiting his legacy. Of course, I was a big Bush fan, though I'm rational enough to admit he wasn't flawless, for example...the federal response to Katrina was inexcusable (though state and local leaders deserve even more blame, it could have been handled if the mayor & governor had a clue); the strategy in Iraq and Afghanistan was short-sighted and flawed. And he failed to make meaningful reforms to social security and medicare. The economy collapsed on his watch, but no one can tell me what Bush did to help cause that...

I can't give him sufficient credit for his response to 09/11. And for what he did in Africa with AIDS, if there was any fairmess in the world, he would have won the Nobel Peace Prize. Bush's AIDS relief plan, PEPFAR, saved more than one million lives. That's staggering, absolutely staggering.

I miss him more and more every day of these last 4 long, long years.

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/...can-president/

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/...george-w-bush/

[Nebe]

It is unfortunate that because he was a puppet for a bunch of greedy warmongers that everything else is brushed under the rug... But then again he let himself be a puppet to a bunch of war mongers.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Nebe

It is unfortunate that because he was a puppet for a bunch of greedy warmongers that everything else is brushed under the rug... But then again he let himself be a puppet to a bunch of war mongers.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

OK, I'll bite...who exactly were these warmongers for whom Bush was a puppet? The Koch brothers? The Board of Directors at Halliburton?

If I remember correctly, Hilary Clinton and Joe Biden (1) were in the Senate when the wars were launched, and (2) both voted in favor of the war in Iraq.

So that begs the question...if those Senators allowed themselves to be pushed into war by greedy warmongers, how come Obama selected them as his VP and SecState? Same for his current SecState, John Kerry...

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

though I'm rational enough to admit he wasn't flawless, for example...

You left out the rapid deterioration of civil liberties of US citizens under the Patriot Act (not to mention the illegal warrantless wiretaping), the abuse of Executive Privilege and burning the economy-candle from both ends by starting two wars while also pushing for massive tax cuts.

You often point out the economic irresponsibility that comes from the Left. However, I find the Bush tax cuts during time of war to be just as irresponsible.

Let's also not forget that the explosion of our national debt started at the end of Bush's first term, not to mention he pushed for the first wave of financial bailouts.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by JohnnyD

You left out the rapid deterioration of civil liberties of US citizens under the Patriot Act (not to mention the illegal warrantless wiretaping), the abuse of Executive Privilege and burning the economy-candle from both ends by starting two wars while also pushing for massive tax cuts.

You often point out the economic irresponsibility that comes from the Left. However, I find the Bush tax cuts during time of war to be just as irresponsible.

Let's also not forget that the explosion of our national debt started at the end of Bush's first term, not to mention he pushed for the first wave of financial bailouts.

"You left out the rapid deterioration of civil liberties of US citizens under the Patriot Act (not to mention the illegal warrantless wiretaping),"

I didn't leave that out...see my comment about how much I admire his reaction to 09/11, which covers this. I don't see that I've lost a single liberty, I just have to put up with some tolerable inconveniences.

I have seen you refer to the quote "those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither libetry nor security". What that quote means, is, those who don't want to be blown up by terrorists, deserve to be blown up by terrorists? I don't buy it. I don't view the constitution as a suicide pact. Maybe that's the start of a slippery slope, but I just don't see that I'm less free than I was before 09/11.

If you want to say that he over-reacted, many would agree with you. Not me.

"burning the economy-candle from both ends by starting two wars while also pushing for massive tax cuts."

Good points. Bush didn't help the debt, that's for damn sure. You seem to have left out though, that one large reason was that he had to build a massive anti-terror infastructure, literally from scratch. It's also worth noting that government tax revenue hit an all-time high after his tax cuts. I don't think you can simply say that if he raised taxe rates by X%, then tax revenue would have increased by the same X%. Maybe the tax cuts were stimulative?

"not to mention he pushed for the first wave of financial bailouts."

Also a valid point, and something I disagreed with at the time, and still do. Although I'm not a macro-economist...Also, remember that the vast, vast majority of those bailouts have been repaid. So while I didn't like TARP, the fact is, it didn't cost us a ton of money.

I guess the point of this post was to point out the enormous, and alnost completely untold, story of what he did in Africa. Libertals don't like to concede that, nor do they like to concede that he's a genuinely good man.

I was proud to serve under him, and thrilled as hell that I didn't have to serve under the current Mao-ist President.

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

?

If I remember correctly, Hilary Clinton and Joe Biden (1) were in the Senate when the wars were launched, and (2) both voted in favor of the war in Iraq.

And they voted based on the intelligence (or in this case lack of intelligence) that was shared with them. Whether it was Rice w/Aluminum tubes, Cheney's office w/yellow cake or Powell w/anthrax, etc., the intel was all wrong.

Either the admin. lied, were bumbling idiots (which I don't think was the case) or had preconcieved notions of what they would find and ignored or didn't look in depth at what they saw that didn't fit those preconcieved notions. (which is what I think happened).

My vote for him was wasted and I view it as my biggest voting mistake.

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

I guess the point of this post was to point out the enormous, and alnost completely untold, story of what he did in Africa. Libertals don't like to concede that, nor do they like to concede that he's a genuinely good man.

You constantly say that yet people here give him praise for that.

Did you even read anything about the ceremony today?

"Mr. Obama praised Mr. Bush for his resolve after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, his compassion in fighting AIDS in Africa and his commitment to overhauling the immigration system. Treading lightly over their disagreements over Iraq and other issues, the president said his predecessor had fought for what he thought was best for his country.

Mr. Carter, who was a fierce critic of Mr. Bush and the war in Iraq during his presidency, praised not only the AIDS program but also recalled how Mr. Bush had helped stop more than two decades of war in Sudan. “George W. Bush is responsible for that,” Mr. Carter said."

I guess people only see what they want to see.

[PaulS]

Here is another quote

“We know President Bush the man,” Mr. Obama told the crowd in front of the brick-and-limestone center on a bright, sunny Texas day. “To know the man is to like the man. Because he’s comfortable in his own skin. He knows who he is. He doesn’t put on any pretenses. He takes the job seriously but he doesn’t take himself too seriously. He’s a good man.”

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

And they voted based on the intelligence (or in this case lack of intelligence) that was shared with them. Whether it was Rice w/Aluminum tubes, Cheney's office w/yellow cake or Powell w/anthrax, etc., the intel was all wrong.

Either the admin. lied, were bumbling idiots (which I don't think was the case) or had preconcieved notions of what they would find and ignored or didn't look in depth at what they saw that didn't fit those preconcieved notions. (which is what I think happened).

My vote for him was wasted and I view it as my biggest voting mistake.

"Cheney's office w/yellow cake "

Can you elaborate? Lots of yellowcake uranium was found in Iraq.

[Nebe]

PaulS for the win!
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Nebe]

Did you guys know Bush has taken up painting?? Aside from dog portraits he has done a few portraits of himself in the shower and the tub. It doesn't take an art critic to come to the conclusion that inside he feels dirty and needs to clean himself. His a very good painter btw. It could be the one thing he will be successful at.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[JohnnyD]

I'm not going to really go point by point because I think the topic is very much a "agree to disagree" type of situation. However...

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

"not to mention he pushed for the first wave of financial bailouts."

Also a valid point, and something I disagreed with at the time, and still do. Although I'm not a macro-economist...Also, remember that the vast, vast majority of those bailouts have been repaid. So while I didn't like TARP, the fact is, it didn't cost us a ton of money.

The banks paid us (the American Taxpayer) back with our own money. Banks literally took money out of the taxpayer's left pocket and then put it into their right pocket - borrowing money at a lower rate while also fulfilling the requirements placed on them through TARP. This is completely confirmed by the TARP Inspector General.
http://www.sigtarp.gov/reports/congr...o_Congress.pdf

The US Treasury were pretty much the only ones claiming they'd earn a profit on TARP. Zero Hedge has couple great articles the sum things up.
Myth Buster: TARP Bailout May Realize A Positive Return for Taxpayers? | Zero Hedge

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

You constantly say that yet people here give him praise for that.

Did you even read anything about the ceremony today?

"Mr. Obama praised Mr. Bush for his resolve after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, his compassion in fighting AIDS in Africa and his commitment to overhauling the immigration system. Treading lightly over their disagreements over Iraq and other issues, the president said his predecessor had fought for what he thought was best for his country.

Mr. Carter, who was a fierce critic of Mr. Bush and the war in Iraq during his presidency, praised not only the AIDS program but also recalled how Mr. Bush had helped stop more than two decades of war in Sudan. “George W. Bush is responsible for that,” Mr. Carter said."

I guess people only see what they want to see.

"You constantly say that yet people here give him praise for that."

I follow politics closely, and I look at a lot of different outlets, from Foxnews to MSNBC and everything in-between. In my opinion, Bush hasn't gotten nearly the credit he deserves. Many people have no idea what he did.

Good to see Obama mention that. I also remember Obama's inauguration speech, with Bush standing 10 feet away, and Obama said nothing positive whatsoever.

"I guess people only see what they want to see"

Obama and Carter are 2 people, who said very nice things about Bush at one event. If you think that refutes the notion that deranged Bush-bashing is a favorite hobby of the media and the left, I respectfully disagree.

Eben thinks Bush was pushed into war by greedy warmongers. Where do you suppose he got that notion?

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

Here is another quote

“We know President Bush the man,” Mr. Obama told the crowd in front of the brick-and-limestone center on a bright, sunny Texas day. “To know the man is to like the man. Because he’s comfortable in his own skin. He knows who he is. He doesn’t put on any pretenses. He takes the job seriously but he doesn’t take himself too seriously. He’s a good man.”

Again, if I stated that no one in the Democratic party has ever aid anything complimentary about Bush, your rebuttal would make sense. One statement by Obama, while certainly gracious, doesn't mean there is no deranged hatred of Bush by the majority of liberals.

Obama also stated that Bush was "unpatriotic" for raising the debt ceiling. And Obama has incessantly blamed Bush for everything bad that has happened in the last 4 years. Maybe you hadn't noticed that.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Nebe

PaulS for the win!
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Still waiting for you to inform us who the greedy warmongers are, who pushed Bush into war?

And as another example of Bush-bashing, you can infer from his painting that he feels dirty inside. Must be nice to be a mind-reader. Can you tell from the way he signs his name, that Bush was responsible for the Holocaust?

You can't argue with hard evidence like that...

[Nebe]

I got that notion from reading the news. Furthermore if you remember after 9-11, the bush administration started to make connections to Iraq and wage a case for war. Every time they were shot down, they came up with more evidence. It was all planned..

Your a fool if you think that the intelligence that was used in regards to proving Iraq was a threat to US safety was legitimate. The only threat to the us that Iraq posed was that they were going to sell their oil based on the price of the euro and ditch the US dollar.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Again, if I stated that no one in the Democratic party has ever aid anything complimentary about Bush, your rebuttal would make sense. One statement by Obama, while certainly gracious, doesn't mean there is no deranged hatred of Bush by the majority of liberals.

But you're the one who frequently starts threads about which basically say you saw/heard/read about 1 liberal doing something and then you attribute that to all liberals. I've pointed that out frequently in the past.

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Must be nice to be a mind-reader. ..

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

One statement by Obama, while certainly gracious, doesn't mean there is no deranged hatred of Bush by the majority of liberals.

Isn't this an example of mind reading?

[Nebe]

I'm checking out of this thread. No sense focusing on the past.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

But you're the one who frequently starts threads about which basically say you saw/heard/read about 1 liberal doing something and then you attribute that to all liberals. I've pointed that out frequently in the past.

You have pointed it out frequently in the past, and I disagree each time you say that (or at least most of the time). I might point out one or two examples that illustrate a pattern. But I understand enough about math to know that one observation does not establish a pattern.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Nebe

I'm checking out of this thread. No sense focusing on the past.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I'd really, really like to see your news source that says that Bush sent me to war because he was ordered to do so by a greedy warmonger.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

Isn't this an example of mind reading?

In this thread, we have someone stating that Bush got pushed into war by a greedy warmonger, and that Bush's self-portraits illustrate a self-loathing.

I am not reading minds, when I say that some here have an un-supported dislike of the man. I am re-stating what actually took place.

I did like Obama's comments, and I give him credit for that. I'd like to see Obama as gracious in front of a wider, and more politically diverse, audience.

[PaulS]

Nebe, I liked that paper you wrote and sent me. Your theory that sees the agrarian peasantry, rather than the working class, as the key revolutionary force which can fundamentally transform capitalist society towards socialism was interesting. I liked your views about the industrial-rural divide as a major division exploited by capitalism, identifying capitalism as involving industrial urban developed "First World" societies ruling over rural developing "Third World" societies.

Although your theory is critical of urban industrial capitalist powers, it views urban industrialization as a required prerequisite to expand economic development and socialist reorganization to the countryside, with the goal being the achievement of rural industrialization that would abolish the distinction between town and countryside.

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

"You left out the rapid deterioration of civil liberties of US citizens under the Patriot Act (not to mention the illegal warrantless wiretaping),"

I didn't leave that out...see my comment about how much I admire his reaction to 09/11, which covers this. I don't see that I've lost a single liberty, I just have to put up with some tolerable inconveniences.

I have seen you refer to the quote "those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither libetry nor security". What that quote means, is, those who don't want to be blown up by terrorists, deserve to be blown up by terrorists? I don't buy it. I don't view the constitution as a suicide pact. Maybe that's the start of a slippery slope, but I just don't see that I'm less free than I was before 09/11.

Interestingly relevant article I just read...
America Made a Pact With the Devil After 9/11, Let's Not Do It Again After Boston - Reason.com

[RIJIMMY]

y'all are missing the point. Opening a library in Texas? thats like opening a barber shop at a baldness convention.

[Nebe]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

I'd really, really like to see your news source that says that Bush sent me to war because he was ordered to do so by a greedy warmonger.

Here is one of them.

Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran - YouTube
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by PaulS

Nebe, I liked that paper you wrote and sent me. Your theory that sees the agrarian peasantry, rather than the working class, as the key revolutionary force which can fundamentally transform capitalist society towards socialism was interesting. I liked your views about the industrial-rural divide as a major division exploited by capitalism, identifying capitalism as involving industrial urban developed "First World" societies ruling over rural developing "Third World" societies.

Although your theory is critical of urban industrial capitalist powers, it views urban industrialization as a required prerequisite to expand economic development and socialist reorganization to the countryside, with the goal being the achievement of rural industrialization that would abolish the distinction between town and countryside.

Don't know how this got into a thread about the Bush library, but it sounds very interesting. It deserves a thread of its own. Could Nebe's paper or a synopsis of it be shared with the rest of us?

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Nebe

Did you guys know Bush has taken up painting?? Aside from dog portraits he has done a few portraits of himself in the shower and the tub. It doesn't take an art critic to come to the conclusion that inside he feels dirty and needs to clean himself. His a very good painter btw. It could be the one thing he will be successful at.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Bush a "very good painter"--that must mean he is a "liberal," being artistic, and creative, and such.

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by detbuch

Could Nebe's paper or a synopsis of it be shared with the rest of us?

It read like it was a cut and paste from Wikipedia on the def. of Maoism.






or my post read that way

[scottw]

Originally Posted by detbuch

Don't know how this got into a thread about the Bush library, but it sounds very interesting. It deserves a thread of its own. Could Nebe's paper or a synopsis of it be shared with the rest of us?

or go to the wiki page on Maoism...none are original thoughts