Why GWB will be one of the greatest Presidents in MY LIFETIME...

[G.T.]

Ah the far left wants to give a pass to their messiah once again and only blame one president.

Oh well these Obama drones certainly do live in the DNC matrix.

No, you missed the point.

He is excusing Bush's abysmal numbers b/c of natural disasters, bubbles bursts and recessions.

In order to be even handed, the same must apply for all Presidents.

He is not even handed, he's an obsessive fan boy.

The end.

You mean like the Obama drones are doing five years into the Obama presidency?

Please point out where Bush blamed Clinton for five years in a row for what he inherited.

Bush is no saint, but is and will always be better than Obama, regardless of the far left religious excuses for their messiah.

I don't give a fuck about your sissy little paradigms in your head, dude. neener neener they do they do

 

[healthmyths]

wow it's deep.

Let's consider the great recession Obama inherited and give his numbers the same leeway ya give Bush's, dunce.

HEY IDIOT!!!

NOT blaming Obama directly except HE did help the lawsuit in 1995 that made subprime loans acceptable...
BUT you are right! Obama's economy is still feeling the affects of the 4 gigantic disasters that occurred!

NOT ONE person would dispute that!

BUT you tell me what PRESIDENT ever said the following:
1)Obama wants higher gas prices... "I'd like higher gas prices, just not so quickly" LiveLeak.com - Obama: Id like higher gas prices, just not so quickly
2)"Under my plan of a cap and trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket." Obama: I?ll make energy prices ?skyrocket? « Hot Air
3)"I happen to be a proponent of a single payer universal health care program" Barack Obama on single payer in 2003 | Physicians for a National Health Program
So this means Obama favors 1,300 companies going out of business that pay over $100 billion taxes employing 400,000!
And this is just three!

So HOW is Obama HELPING reduce the effect of the 4 gigantic events that AFFECTED Bush's economy?
He certainly hasn't helped in reducing unemployment by making statements like the above!

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

DUMB F...K!!
YOU HAVE 3 presidents tied at 2.3% so how in the hell is that coming 2nd to last???
Kennedy ........ 5.6%
Johnson ........ 5.5%
Clinton .......... 4.5%
Reagan ......... 3.9%
Carter ........... 3.4%
Eisenhower .... 3.3%
Nixon ............ 3.1%
Ford ............. 2.3%
GHWBush ...... 2.3%
Bush ............. 2.3%
Obama .......... 0.9%
AGAIN TOTALLY IGNORING THE 4 GREATEST CATACLYSMIC EVENTS!

And of those 4 events 6 of the most devastating hurricanes and 9/11 making 7 of the MOST destructive events in US History!

YOU idiots just don't understand do you!

YOU blame BUSH for events that HE HAD NOTHING to do with!
YOu brag on FDR for what he did with a lousy single stupid uneventful depression!
YOU brag on who else??
BUT YOU totally ignore not one comment recognizing that ANY economic lagging that occurred WAS DUE TO these events!
WHY?
Is it so hard to comprehend that when almost 800,000 jobs lost directly to 9/11 in travel/tourism/direct consequences would have an impact on the economy??
NOT MY words BUT from the employment industry, CHALLENGER,Gray & Christmas..
Job losses since 9/11 attacks top 2.5 million - Computerworld

Why do you argue with the experts that state 300,000 jobs lost and $5 trillion in losses due to dot.com bust! YOU don't think that has an impact on the economy?
And AGAIN when 7 of the top 10 hurricanes destroying 400,000 jobs and costing over $1 trillion in destruction!

Is it so hard to ADMIT that IN SPITE of all these above events.. THEY HAD AN AFFECT?

YET YOU totally ignorant blind idiots.. continue to BASH a President that is treated by the FACTS better then by you blind ignorant people!

The FACT is GWB had the Largest GDP in history...in real GDP 2009 dollars... starting with end of 2000 when adjusted was $12.565 trillion.
Ending in 2008 with $14.833 trillion a $2.268 trillion increase... AGAIN ALL while confronted with the 4 most devastating economic events in any Presidency!
An 18% increase!

It so pathetic how brainwashed by the MSM you idiots are and you don't even know it!!

You have been so suckered by the people who admit their JOB WAS TO BASH BUSH but in their next breath they call Obama a God!

"MSM job is to Bash the President"...
Evan Thomas Editor of NewsWeek's quotes Well, our job is to bash the president, that's what we do." --
Evan Thomas responding to a question on whether the media's unfair to Bush on the TV talk show Inside Washington,
February 2, 2007.Newsweek's Evan Thomas: 'Our Job Is To Bash the President' | NewsBusters

MSM Job to Bash the President..."
But what about Obama ... any bashing here???

COLOR="Blue"]I mean in a way Obama’s standing above the country, above – above the world, he’s sort of God." [/COLOR]
Evan Thomas on Hardball, Newsweek?s Evan Thomas: Obama Is ?Sort of God? | NewsBusters

YOU don't for a slightest intelligent minute consider that ALL YOU"VE heard has been Bush BASHING and especially for 30 second sound bite idiots who can't conceive of bigger
contributors i.e. 4 major destructive EVENTS this is ALL you remember!

What a sorry lot of idiots who because instead of admitting THESE EVENTS made a tremendous difference... YOU continue to bash the ONLY President who ever faced them!

Sad when ignorance prevails!

YOU blame BUSH for events that HE HAD NOTHING to do with!

I blame Bush for spending too much.

 

[healthmyths]

PLUS again... G.T..
Did those 4 gigantic disaster events occur?
YOU didn't acknowledge that they HAD a direct affect on the economy on lost jobs!

 

[G.T.]

I don't give a fuck about them. I'm moreso attempting to open your eyes to your disgusting obsession because it's a pattern on this board.

You post the same thread over and over and over.

Within said threads, you post the same (now proven flawed) numbers over and over and over.

You know the fact that you continue just doesn't seem, well, healthy. Move on with your damn life for Christ's sake.

 

[Faun]

wow it's deep.

Let's consider the great recession Obama inherited and give his numbers the same leeway ya give Bush's, dunce.

HEY IDIOT!!!

NOT blaming Obama directly except HE did help the lawsuit in 1995 that made subprime loans acceptable...
BUT you are right! Obama's economy is still feeling the affects of the 4 gigantic disasters that occurred!

NOT ONE person would dispute that!

BUT you tell me what PRESIDENT ever said the following:
1)Obama wants higher gas prices... "I'd like higher gas prices, just not so quickly" LiveLeak.com - Obama: Id like higher gas prices, just not so quickly
2)"Under my plan of a cap and trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket." Obama: I?ll make energy prices ?skyrocket? « Hot Air
3)"I happen to be a proponent of a single payer universal health care program" Barack Obama on single payer in 2003 | Physicians for a National Health Program
So this means Obama favors 1,300 companies going out of business that pay over $100 billion taxes employing 400,000!
And this is just three!

So HOW is Obama HELPING reduce the effect of the 4 gigantic events that AFFECTED Bush's economy?
He certainly hasn't helped in reducing unemployment by making statements like the above!

I thought this thread is about Bush, not Obama? You said Bush was among the greatest presidents in your lifetime. And you posted a bunch of numbers trying to demonstrate that.

Well it turned out that many of your numbers were complete and utter bullshit; and it turned out that Bush actually finished dead last in terms of employment and 2nd to dead last in GDP.

That's your idea of a great president? One who can't overcome adversity and ends up in last place or near it???



That's why you come off as completely demented.

 

[Faun]

I don't give a fuck about them. I'm moreso attempting to open your eyes to your disgusting obsession because it's a pattern on this board.

You post the same thread over and over and over.

Within said threads, you post the same (now proven flawed) numbers over and over and over.

You know the fact that you continue just doesn't seem, well, healthy. Move on with your damn life for Christ's sake.

Numbers who now admits are wrong.



For how long has that imbecile been posting wrong numbers to show how good Bush was?

 

[G.T.]

I don't give a fuck about them. I'm moreso attempting to open your eyes to your disgusting obsession because it's a pattern on this board.

You post the same thread over and over and over.

Within said threads, you post the same (now proven flawed) numbers over and over and over.

You know the fact that you continue just doesn't seem, well, healthy. Move on with your damn life for Christ's sake.

Numbers who now admits are wrong.



For how long has that imbecile been posting wrong numbers to show how good Bush was?

It's pretty scary if you do the research.

He posts three threads of the same content over and over and over, like it's literally spooky.

The pipeline "math" thread.
The "Bush faced mega disasters and you give him no credit!!" derp thread.
And the "how many are REALLY INSURED!!!" math thread, of which is more bogus math on his part.


He doesn't simply post the threads once and let it live.

It's literally dozens of times, it's pretty sick.

 

[healthmyths]

DUMB F...K!!
YOU HAVE 3 presidents tied at 2.3% so how in the hell is that coming 2nd to last???
Kennedy ........ 5.6%
Johnson ........ 5.5%
Clinton .......... 4.5%
Reagan ......... 3.9%
Carter ........... 3.4%
Eisenhower .... 3.3%
Nixon ............ 3.1%
Ford ............. 2.3%
GHWBush ...... 2.3%
Bush ............. 2.3%
Obama .......... 0.9%
AGAIN TOTALLY IGNORING THE 4 GREATEST CATACLYSMIC EVENTS!

And of those 4 events 6 of the most devastating hurricanes and 9/11 making 7 of the MOST destructive events in US History!

YOU idiots just don't understand do you!

YOU blame BUSH for events that HE HAD NOTHING to do with!
YOu brag on FDR for what he did with a lousy single stupid uneventful depression!
YOU brag on who else??
BUT YOU totally ignore not one comment recognizing that ANY economic lagging that occurred WAS DUE TO these events!
WHY?
Is it so hard to comprehend that when almost 800,000 jobs lost directly to 9/11 in travel/tourism/direct consequences would have an impact on the economy??
NOT MY words BUT from the employment industry, CHALLENGER,Gray & Christmas..
Job losses since 9/11 attacks top 2.5 million - Computerworld

Why do you argue with the experts that state 300,000 jobs lost and $5 trillion in losses due to dot.com bust! YOU don't think that has an impact on the economy?
And AGAIN when 7 of the top 10 hurricanes destroying 400,000 jobs and costing over $1 trillion in destruction!

Is it so hard to ADMIT that IN SPITE of all these above events.. THEY HAD AN AFFECT?

YET YOU totally ignorant blind idiots.. continue to BASH a President that is treated by the FACTS better then by you blind ignorant people!

The FACT is GWB had the Largest GDP in history...in real GDP 2009 dollars... starting with end of 2000 when adjusted was $12.565 trillion.
Ending in 2008 with $14.833 trillion a $2.268 trillion increase... AGAIN ALL while confronted with the 4 most devastating economic events in any Presidency!
An 18% increase!

It so pathetic how brainwashed by the MSM you idiots are and you don't even know it!!

You have been so suckered by the people who admit their JOB WAS TO BASH BUSH but in their next breath they call Obama a God!

"MSM job is to Bash the President"...
Evan Thomas Editor of NewsWeek's quotes Well, our job is to bash the president, that's what we do." --
Evan Thomas responding to a question on whether the media's unfair to Bush on the TV talk show Inside Washington,
February 2, 2007.Newsweek's Evan Thomas: 'Our Job Is To Bash the President' | NewsBusters

MSM Job to Bash the President..."
But what about Obama ... any bashing here???

COLOR="Blue"]I mean in a way Obama’s standing above the country, above – above the world, he’s sort of God." [/COLOR]
Evan Thomas on Hardball, Newsweek?s Evan Thomas: Obama Is ?Sort of God? | NewsBusters

YOU don't for a slightest intelligent minute consider that ALL YOU"VE heard has been Bush BASHING and especially for 30 second sound bite idiots who can't conceive of bigger
contributors i.e. 4 major destructive EVENTS this is ALL you remember!

What a sorry lot of idiots who because instead of admitting THESE EVENTS made a tremendous difference... YOU continue to bash the ONLY President who ever faced them!

Sad when ignorance prevails!

YOU blame BUSH for events that HE HAD NOTHING to do with!

I blame Bush for spending too much.

So prove first of all "spending too much"... all you are doing is repeating the cliche! Prove that there was :
1) too much spending in building a whole new cabinet agency Homeland Security... do you think that was in hindsight wrong? I don't know but I do know MOST Americans after
seeing what happened in 9/11 and the anthrax attacks and shoe bombers,etc... we have a need.
2) Too much spending in helping the survivors of 7 of the top ten hurricanes in history ? Was that wrong to send money to New Orleans, and other areas that suffered?
3) Too much spending in freeing 28 million people that today would have had 1 million children starved IF the guy you obviously love was still in Power? YOU against saving the children because Bush spent too much???

But let's deal with FACTS OK???

• Year Revenue US Expenditures Surplus/(deficit) GDP in trillions increase/decrease
• 2000 $2.026 Trillion $ 1.789 Trillion $236.2 billion $11.216
• 2001 1.991 1.862 126.6 11.338 1.08%
• 2002 1.853 2.010 (157.8) 11.543 1.81%
• 2003 1.782 2.159 (377.6) 11.836 2.54%
• 2004 1.880 2.252 (412.7) 12.247 3.46%
• 2005 2.153 2.472 (318.3) 12.623 3.07%
• 2006 2.406 2.655 (248.2) 12.959 2.65%
• 2007 2.568 2.728 (160.7) 13.206 1.91%
• 2008 2.524 2.982 (458.6) 13.162 (0.33%)

USDA ERS - International Macroeconomic Data Set


What you are looking at is the GDP and the common measure of spending deficits as percent of GDP...

1992 6342.3 4.6% Clinton
1993 6667.4 3.8%
1994 7085.2 2.9%
1995 7414.7 2.2%
1996 7838.5 1.4%
1997 8332.4 0.3%
1998 8793.5 -0.8%
1999 9353.5 -1.3%
2000 9951.5 -2.4% Clinton
2001 10286.2 -1.3% Bush
2002 10642.3 1.5%
2003 11142.2 3.4%
2004 11853.3 3.5%
2005 12623 2.5%
2006 13377.2 1.9%
2007 14028.7 1.2%
2008 14291.5 3.2% Bush
2009 13973.7 10.1% Obama..
2010 14498.9 10.7%

US Federal Deficit As Percent Of GDP United States 1900-2010 - Federal State Local Data

 

[G.T.]

2009 is Bush's CR Pinocchio.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

DUMB F...K!!
YOU HAVE 3 presidents tied at 2.3% so how in the hell is that coming 2nd to last???
Kennedy ........ 5.6%
Johnson ........ 5.5%
Clinton .......... 4.5%
Reagan ......... 3.9%
Carter ........... 3.4%
Eisenhower .... 3.3%
Nixon ............ 3.1%
Ford ............. 2.3%
GHWBush ...... 2.3%
Bush ............. 2.3%
Obama .......... 0.9%
AGAIN TOTALLY IGNORING THE 4 GREATEST CATACLYSMIC EVENTS!

And of those 4 events 6 of the most devastating hurricanes and 9/11 making 7 of the MOST destructive events in US History!

YOU idiots just don't understand do you!

YOU blame BUSH for events that HE HAD NOTHING to do with!
YOu brag on FDR for what he did with a lousy single stupid uneventful depression!
YOU brag on who else??
BUT YOU totally ignore not one comment recognizing that ANY economic lagging that occurred WAS DUE TO these events!
WHY?
Is it so hard to comprehend that when almost 800,000 jobs lost directly to 9/11 in travel/tourism/direct consequences would have an impact on the economy??
NOT MY words BUT from the employment industry, CHALLENGER,Gray & Christmas..
Job losses since 9/11 attacks top 2.5 million - Computerworld

Why do you argue with the experts that state 300,000 jobs lost and $5 trillion in losses due to dot.com bust! YOU don't think that has an impact on the economy?
And AGAIN when 7 of the top 10 hurricanes destroying 400,000 jobs and costing over $1 trillion in destruction!

Is it so hard to ADMIT that IN SPITE of all these above events.. THEY HAD AN AFFECT?

YET YOU totally ignorant blind idiots.. continue to BASH a President that is treated by the FACTS better then by you blind ignorant people!

The FACT is GWB had the Largest GDP in history...in real GDP 2009 dollars... starting with end of 2000 when adjusted was $12.565 trillion.
Ending in 2008 with $14.833 trillion a $2.268 trillion increase... AGAIN ALL while confronted with the 4 most devastating economic events in any Presidency!
An 18% increase!

It so pathetic how brainwashed by the MSM you idiots are and you don't even know it!!

You have been so suckered by the people who admit their JOB WAS TO BASH BUSH but in their next breath they call Obama a God!

"MSM job is to Bash the President"...
Evan Thomas Editor of NewsWeek's quotes Well, our job is to bash the president, that's what we do." --
Evan Thomas responding to a question on whether the media's unfair to Bush on the TV talk show Inside Washington,
February 2, 2007.Newsweek's Evan Thomas: 'Our Job Is To Bash the President' | NewsBusters

MSM Job to Bash the President..."
But what about Obama ... any bashing here???

COLOR="Blue"]I mean in a way Obama’s standing above the country, above – above the world, he’s sort of God." [/COLOR]
Evan Thomas on Hardball, Newsweek?s Evan Thomas: Obama Is ?Sort of God? | NewsBusters

YOU don't for a slightest intelligent minute consider that ALL YOU"VE heard has been Bush BASHING and especially for 30 second sound bite idiots who can't conceive of bigger
contributors i.e. 4 major destructive EVENTS this is ALL you remember!

What a sorry lot of idiots who because instead of admitting THESE EVENTS made a tremendous difference... YOU continue to bash the ONLY President who ever faced them!

Sad when ignorance prevails!

YOU blame BUSH for events that HE HAD NOTHING to do with!

I blame Bush for spending too much.

So prove first of all "spending too much"... all you are doing is repeating the cliche! Prove that there was :
1) too much spending in building a whole new cabinet agency Homeland Security... do you think that was in hindsight wrong? I don't know but I do know MOST Americans after
seeing what happened in 9/11 and the anthrax attacks and shoe bombers,etc... we have a need.
2) Too much spending in helping the survivors of 7 of the top ten hurricanes in history ? Was that wrong to send money to New Orleans, and other areas that suffered?
3) Too much spending in freeing 28 million people that today would have had 1 million children starved IF the guy you obviously love was still in Power? YOU against saving the children because Bush spent too much???

But let's deal with FACTS OK???

• Year Revenue US Expenditures Surplus/(deficit) GDP in trillions increase/decrease
• 2000 $2.026 Trillion $ 1.789 Trillion $236.2 billion $11.216
• 2001 1.991 1.862 126.6 11.338 1.08%
• 2002 1.853 2.010 (157.8) 11.543 1.81%
• 2003 1.782 2.159 (377.6) 11.836 2.54%
• 2004 1.880 2.252 (412.7) 12.247 3.46%
• 2005 2.153 2.472 (318.3) 12.623 3.07%
• 2006 2.406 2.655 (248.2) 12.959 2.65%
• 2007 2.568 2.728 (160.7) 13.206 1.91%
• 2008 2.524 2.982 (458.6) 13.162 (0.33%)

USDA ERS - International Macroeconomic Data Set


What you are looking at is the GDP and the common measure of spending deficits as percent of GDP...

1992 6342.3 4.6% Clinton
1993 6667.4 3.8%
1994 7085.2 2.9%
1995 7414.7 2.2%
1996 7838.5 1.4%
1997 8332.4 0.3%
1998 8793.5 -0.8%
1999 9353.5 -1.3%
2000 9951.5 -2.4% Clinton
2001 10286.2 -1.3% Bush
2002 10642.3 1.5%
2003 11142.2 3.4%
2004 11853.3 3.5%
2005 12623 2.5%
2006 13377.2 1.9%
2007 14028.7 1.2%
2008 14291.5 3.2% Bush
2009 13973.7 10.1% Obama..
2010 14498.9 10.7%

US Federal Deficit As Percent Of GDP United States 1900-2010 - Federal State Local Data

So prove first of all "spending too much"...

I already showed you how much his spending grew.
If he had even attempted to control spending, I'd be less negative about his presidency.

 

[birddog]

"Figures don't lie, but liars figure!" Dimocrats represent that old saying far more than the Republicans!

 

[GHook93]

...be viewed higher than when he left because he was followed by one of the worst Presidents in history. However, he will still go down as one of the bad ones.

(1) Iraq War:
It will be viewed as a blunder.

(2) Mortgage Meltdown and Credit Crisis:
If an EDUCATED person viewed the mortgage meltdown they will realized that all the legislation and moves that caused it was started under Clinton (CRA, GLB, Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac given more power etc), however, he ignored it for short-term gains and the longer term bust.

(3) He Doubled Downed on the Upcoming Student Loan Bust:
Many people may argue it has already busted, but not quite. After Clinton boneheadedly made Fed student loans non-dischargable (which spurred in to over-drive rising college costs), Bush made private student loans non-dischargable also.

(4) Reckless spending:
The Gingrich run Congress actually balanced the budget. Bush led the country on a spending drive.

(5) Further erosion of our manufacturing base:
We fell under 10% of the workforce being in manufacturing. A healthy economy REQUIRES a strong manufacturing base. A healthy one is minimum 20% (which you want to see closer to 30%). We currently sit at 8%!!!

This is just a small, list there are many many other's and few positives to boast about!

 

[healthmyths]

YOU blame BUSH for events that HE HAD NOTHING to do with!

I blame Bush for spending too much.

So prove first of all "spending too much"... all you are doing is repeating the cliche! Prove that there was :
1) too much spending in building a whole new cabinet agency Homeland Security... do you think that was in hindsight wrong? I don't know but I do know MOST Americans after
seeing what happened in 9/11 and the anthrax attacks and shoe bombers,etc... we have a need.
2) Too much spending in helping the survivors of 7 of the top ten hurricanes in history ? Was that wrong to send money to New Orleans, and other areas that suffered?
3) Too much spending in freeing 28 million people that today would have had 1 million children starved IF the guy you obviously love was still in Power? YOU against saving the children because Bush spent too much???

But let's deal with FACTS OK???

• Year Revenue US Expenditures Surplus/(deficit) GDP in trillions increase/decrease
• 2000 $2.026 Trillion $ 1.789 Trillion $236.2 billion $11.216
• 2001 1.991 1.862 126.6 11.338 1.08%
• 2002 1.853 2.010 (157.8) 11.543 1.81%
• 2003 1.782 2.159 (377.6) 11.836 2.54%
• 2004 1.880 2.252 (412.7) 12.247 3.46%
• 2005 2.153 2.472 (318.3) 12.623 3.07%
• 2006 2.406 2.655 (248.2) 12.959 2.65%
• 2007 2.568 2.728 (160.7) 13.206 1.91%
• 2008 2.524 2.982 (458.6) 13.162 (0.33%)

USDA ERS - International Macroeconomic Data Set


What you are looking at is the GDP and the common measure of spending deficits as percent of GDP...

1992 6342.3 4.6% Clinton
1993 6667.4 3.8%
1994 7085.2 2.9%
1995 7414.7 2.2%
1996 7838.5 1.4%
1997 8332.4 0.3%
1998 8793.5 -0.8%
1999 9353.5 -1.3%
2000 9951.5 -2.4% Clinton
2001 10286.2 -1.3% Bush
2002 10642.3 1.5%
2003 11142.2 3.4%
2004 11853.3 3.5%
2005 12623 2.5%
2006 13377.2 1.9%
2007 14028.7 1.2%
2008 14291.5 3.2% Bush
2009 13973.7 10.1% Obama..
2010 14498.9 10.7%

US Federal Deficit As Percent Of GDP United States 1900-2010 - Federal State Local Data

So prove first of all "spending too much"...

I already showed you how much his spending grew.
If he had even attempted to control spending, I'd be less negative about his presidency.

Where are your facts? Produce FACTS that HE DIDN"T attempt to control spending??

So you want to see children starve? People begging because their homes destroyed? Are you that cruel??

AGAIN.. 7 of the worst hurricanes in history occurred... and YOU don't want to help those People??
AGAIN worst absolute worst attack on the USA and you don't think Bush should have helped those people that suffered out?
AGAIN you totally against any security to prevent future terrorist attacks... how irresponsible!
BUT AGAIN prove where
A) Bush DID NOT attempt to control spending!!!
B) Prove that these events didn't occur!

 

[Faun]

So prove first of all "spending too much"... all you are doing is repeating the cliche!

Umm, during his first 6 years in office, until Democrats took full control of the Congress, remind the forum again ........ how many spending bills did he veto?

 

[healthmyths]

...be viewed higher than when he left because he was followed by one of the worst Presidents in history. However, he will still go down as one of the bad ones.

(1) Iraq War:
It will be viewed as a blunder.

(2) Mortgage Meltdown and Credit Crisis:
If an EDUCATED person viewed the mortgage meltdown they will realized that all the legislation and moves that caused it was started under Clinton (CRA, GLB, Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac given more power etc), however, he ignored it for short-term gains and the longer term bust.

(3) He Doubled Downed on the Upcoming Student Loan Bust:
Many people may argue it has already busted, but not quite. After Clinton boneheadedly made Fed student loans non-dischargable (which spurred in to over-drive rising college costs), Bush made private student loans non-dischargable also.

(4) Reckless spending:
The Gingrich run Congress actually balanced the budget. Bush led the country on a spending drive.

(5) Further erosion of our manufacturing base:
We fell under 10% of the workforce being in manufacturing. A healthy economy REQUIRES a strong manufacturing base. A healthy one is minimum 20% (which you want to see closer to 30%). We currently sit at 8%!!!

This is just a small, list there are many many other's and few positives to boast about!

(1) Iraq War:
It will be viewed as a blunder.

So freeing 28 million people is a blunder?
The same people that have since being freed in 2003 Of course NONE of you Bush BASHERS EVER took time as I've done to study the economic impact of removing Saddam
when under Saddam Iraqi per person was $518! Today it is over $7,200! a 1,290% increase ! THAT is a blunder!
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/iz.html

It was a blunder to keep 2,649,000 children from starvation??
In five years 576,000 children starved BECAUSE SADDAM refused to certify WMD destruction!
Iraq Sanctions Kill Children, U.N. Reports - NYTimes.com
Using 115,000 children starved a year because Saddam refused to certify WMD destruction -- From 1995 to 2013 is 18 years!
If Saddam was still in power i.e. Bush's Liberation of Iraq NEVER OCCURRED,
from 1990 to 2013 OVER 2,649,000 children would have STARVED because of Saddam!


NOW I'll let refute these starving children enslaved 28 million people "blunders"... then I'll go ahead and tear apart your remaining "blunders"!!!

Tell me you would be happy especially at Christmas knowing YOU supported keeping a dictator that used pliers and blowtorches on his people murdering millions in the process and
if still in power over 2,649,000 children would have starved!
AND do be such a putz and BLAME on economic sanctions! Saddam had the power to abide by the civilized world's sanctions i.e. Oil for Food but used the money to build 91 palaces while
millions of children would starve...!

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

So prove first of all "spending too much"... all you are doing is repeating the cliche! Prove that there was :
1) too much spending in building a whole new cabinet agency Homeland Security... do you think that was in hindsight wrong? I don't know but I do know MOST Americans after
seeing what happened in 9/11 and the anthrax attacks and shoe bombers,etc... we have a need.
2) Too much spending in helping the survivors of 7 of the top ten hurricanes in history ? Was that wrong to send money to New Orleans, and other areas that suffered?
3) Too much spending in freeing 28 million people that today would have had 1 million children starved IF the guy you obviously love was still in Power? YOU against saving the children because Bush spent too much???

But let's deal with FACTS OK???

• Year Revenue US Expenditures Surplus/(deficit) GDP in trillions increase/decrease
• 2000 $2.026 Trillion $ 1.789 Trillion $236.2 billion $11.216
• 2001 1.991 1.862 126.6 11.338 1.08%
• 2002 1.853 2.010 (157.8) 11.543 1.81%
• 2003 1.782 2.159 (377.6) 11.836 2.54%
• 2004 1.880 2.252 (412.7) 12.247 3.46%
• 2005 2.153 2.472 (318.3) 12.623 3.07%
• 2006 2.406 2.655 (248.2) 12.959 2.65%
• 2007 2.568 2.728 (160.7) 13.206 1.91%
• 2008 2.524 2.982 (458.6) 13.162 (0.33%)

USDA ERS - International Macroeconomic Data Set


What you are looking at is the GDP and the common measure of spending deficits as percent of GDP...

1992 6342.3 4.6% Clinton
1993 6667.4 3.8%
1994 7085.2 2.9%
1995 7414.7 2.2%
1996 7838.5 1.4%
1997 8332.4 0.3%
1998 8793.5 -0.8%
1999 9353.5 -1.3%
2000 9951.5 -2.4% Clinton
2001 10286.2 -1.3% Bush
2002 10642.3 1.5%
2003 11142.2 3.4%
2004 11853.3 3.5%
2005 12623 2.5%
2006 13377.2 1.9%
2007 14028.7 1.2%
2008 14291.5 3.2% Bush
2009 13973.7 10.1% Obama..
2010 14498.9 10.7%

US Federal Deficit As Percent Of GDP United States 1900-2010 - Federal State Local Data

So prove first of all "spending too much"...

I already showed you how much his spending grew.
If he had even attempted to control spending, I'd be less negative about his presidency.

Where are your facts? Produce FACTS that HE DIDN"T attempt to control spending??

So you want to see children starve? People begging because their homes destroyed? Are you that cruel??

AGAIN.. 7 of the worst hurricanes in history occurred... and YOU don't want to help those People??
AGAIN worst absolute worst attack on the USA and you don't think Bush should have helped those people that suffered out?
AGAIN you totally against any security to prevent future terrorist attacks... how irresponsible!
BUT AGAIN prove where
A) Bush DID NOT attempt to control spending!!!
B) Prove that these events didn't occur!

Where are your facts? Produce FACTS that HE DIDN"T attempt to control spending??

You have proof he tried to control spending? Show me.

How many spending bills did he veto?

So you want to see children starve? People begging because their homes destroyed? Are you that cruel??

Cutting spending would do that? LOL!

Dubya, is that you?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

...be viewed higher than when he left because he was followed by one of the worst Presidents in history. However, he will still go down as one of the bad ones.

(1) Iraq War:
It will be viewed as a blunder.

(2) Mortgage Meltdown and Credit Crisis:
If an EDUCATED person viewed the mortgage meltdown they will realized that all the legislation and moves that caused it was started under Clinton (CRA, GLB, Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac given more power etc), however, he ignored it for short-term gains and the longer term bust.

(3) He Doubled Downed on the Upcoming Student Loan Bust:
Many people may argue it has already busted, but not quite. After Clinton boneheadedly made Fed student loans non-dischargable (which spurred in to over-drive rising college costs), Bush made private student loans non-dischargable also.

(4) Reckless spending:
The Gingrich run Congress actually balanced the budget. Bush led the country on a spending drive.

(5) Further erosion of our manufacturing base:
We fell under 10% of the workforce being in manufacturing. A healthy economy REQUIRES a strong manufacturing base. A healthy one is minimum 20% (which you want to see closer to 30%). We currently sit at 8%!!!

This is just a small, list there are many many other's and few positives to boast about!

(4) Reckless spending:
The Gingrich run Congress actually balanced the budget. Bush led the country on a spending drive.

Yes!

(5) Further erosion of our manufacturing base:
We fell under 10% of the workforce being in manufacturing. A healthy economy REQUIRES a strong manufacturing base. A healthy one is minimum 20% (which you want to see closer to 30%). We currently sit at 8%!!!

Automation will continue to reduce manufacturing employment. Worldwide.
What % of GDP is manufacturing now? What was it when Bush took office?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Why GWB will be one of the greatest Presidents in MY LIFETIME...

 

[healthmyths]

So prove first of all "spending too much"... all you are doing is repeating the cliche!

Umm, during his first 6 years in office, until Democrats took full control of the Congress, remind the forum again ........ how many spending bills did he veto?

MOST LIKELY NONE!
And how many Billions was lent to the survivors of
Dot.com bust... unemployment checks..
Recession...
9/11 unemployment rebuilding destroyed building, businesses all through loans by Federal govt. WHICH by the way were spending
but now coming back WITH interest and Obama's getting the credit as increased revenue!
How about those millions that lost homes,businesses in the 7 of the top ten hurricanes???

Why is it so hard to comprehend THOSE EVENTS COST MONEY!!!
ARE YOU one of those pompous elitist who says people don't deserve their government to help... geez you sound like a GOP!

I just don't understand your escape from the REALITIES of these disasters and their devastation on the economy, people's lives and our nation!
BUT NOT ONE peep of recognition!