Do you think that the Bush Administration "TOTALLY SUCKS"?

[LordMaul]

Nopers.

 

[Yzzim]

Originally posted by: ThisIsMatt

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

This might 'suck,' but it sure beats Clinton/Gore any day!

Yeah lifes so much better and our country is so much more prosperous under Bush /Cheney than Clinton /Gore

Dude, like totally Red, tell it like it is! All this "cooking the books" didn't start until Bush II came into office. Before we had a totally uninflated, legit economy with Clinton/Gore. Once Bush II came into office it all turned phony.

Any the economy didn't start going down the toilet while Clinton was in office

 

[Thegonagle]

Originally posted by: ThisIsMatt

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

This might 'suck,' but it sure beats Clinton/Gore any day!

Yeah lifes so much better and our country is so much more prosperous under Bush /Cheney than Clinton /Gore

Dude, like totally Red, tell it like it is! All this "cooking the books" didn't start until Bush II came into office. Before we had a totally uninflated, legit economy with Clinton/Gore. Once Bush II came into office it all turned phony.

I detect sarcasm, but the history of the past half century shows that if you want to live like a republican (the monetarily prosperous good life), you should vote for the democrats.

<my own sarcasm>That way, the slave class is just that little bit happier to work their asses off for you, and things get done.</>

 

[Maetryx]

Okay, I got it.

He received a bachelor's degree from Yale University and a Master of Business Administration from Harvard Business School.

from whitehouse.gov

 

[FoBoT]

Originally posted by: Maetryx
(Yale I thought, but maybe it was Harvard).

Bush Sr was Both

bachelors from Yale and MBA from Harvard Business Schoool -> linky


too slow

 

[Red Dawn]

Dude, like totally Red, tell it like it is! All this "cooking the books" didn't start until Bush II came into office. Before we had a totally uninflated, legit economy with Clinton/Gore. Once Bush II came into office it all turned phony.

Neither Bush nor Clinton had anything to do with those greedy bastards ripping off investors for all their hard earned money..many of it their life savings. It's up to Bush now to make sure those who have done that are hung by their balls. They have done as much to harm this economy as any Terrorists.

That said, the economy and the country was more prosperous during Clintons Administration than Bushes. It might not be Bushes fault ( I never said it was) but to say things are better now than during Clintons Administration is a falsehood.

 

[FoBoT]

Originally posted by: Yzzim
the economy didn't start going down the toilet while Clinton was in office

oh really ? here are some dates for funny business at Xerox

most all of this stuff started in the late 90's, before Bush

The effect of the manipulation was that Xerox could count as earnings what was essentially future revenue. This boosted short-term profits and allowed the company to meet profit expectations in 1997, 1998 and 1999, though it had the effect of reducing earnings during the past two years. In 1998 Xerox reported a pretax income of $579 million, while it should have reported a loss of $13 million. On the other hand, the $137 million loss for 2001 will become a $365 million gain after the manipulation is reversed. The $1.9 billion total that will now be subtracted from revenue reported from 1997-2001 will be added to future reports.

 

[Red Dawn]

What are the odds that most of those guilty of cooking the books are registered Republicans?

 

[ThisIsMatt]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Dude, like totally Red, tell it like it is! All this "cooking the books" didn't start until Bush II came into office. Before we had a totally uninflated, legit economy with Clinton/Gore. Once Bush II came into office it all turned phony.

Neither Bush nor Clinton had anything to do with those greedy bastards ripping off investors for all their hard earned money..many of it their life savings. It's up to Bush now to make sure those who have done that are hung by their balls. They have done as much to harm this economy as any Terrorists.

That said, the economy and the country was more prosperous during Clintons Administration than Bushes. It might not be Bushes fault ( I never said it was) but to say things are better now than during Clintons Administration is a falsehood.

If Bush nor Clinton had anything to do with the bad, then I argue that Clinton had nothing to do with the prosperous economy -- that was my point, and you seem to be backing it up.

 

[UltraQuiet]

Do you think that the Bush Administration "TOTALLY SUCKS"?

No I don't. Just the opposite.
Do I agree with everything they've done? No I don't.

However as a general rule I hold the Congress a lot more accountable for the way our goverment does it's business than I do any one person, even the President.

 

[Random Variable]

The fact that so many people around the world don't like the Bush administration is not entirely a bad thing. If the Bush administrastion were popular around the world, that would mean that the United States had become weak and feeble.

 

[FoBoT]

Originally posted by: ThisIsMatt
If Bush nor Clinton had anything to do with the bad, then I argue that Clinton had nothing to do with the prosperous economy -- that was my point, and you seem to be backing it up.

in reality , the President of the US has very little to do with the US or World economy, good or bad

i have always been baffled how they get credit/blame for the economy

i am not an economist, but i don't see how anything they do has any substantial affect

 

[Red Dawn]

If Bush nor Clinton had anything to do with the bad, then I argue that Clinton had nothing to do with the prosperous economy -- that was my point, and you seem to be backing it up.

Oh I think he did..along with the Republican Congress. I also think that given the same circumstances that Bush might have presided over a prosperous economy. But that's specualtion and now the economy sucks and we as a country aren't as properous as we were under Clinton. Mind you I never said Clinton or Gore were soley responsible for our Prosperity during the last 6 years of Clinton's Presidency.

 

[ThisIsMatt]

Originally posted by: FoBoT

Originally posted by: ThisIsMatt
If Bush nor Clinton had anything to do with the bad, then I argue that Clinton had nothing to do with the prosperous economy -- that was my point, and you seem to be backing it up.

in reality , the President of the US has very little to do with the US or World economy, good or bad

i have always been baffled how they get credit blame for the economy

i am not an economist, but i don't see how anything they do has any substantial affect

I agree.

 

[UltraQuiet]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
What are the odds that most of those guilty of cooking the books are registered Republicans?

...and your point is? Certainly your not going to imply one lends itself to another. However you are probably right because traditionally the Republican party has been pro business in the sense of lower taxes, less regulations and of course the always lucrative goverment contracts. These things alone would probably dictate that heads of companies are most probably Republican. I would also be willing to be that there are more of one or the other depending on what party controlled the White House.

 

[Kadarin]

I don't think the Bush Administration totally sucks, but it could definitely be somewhat better. Ashcroft has to go, period. The whole administration is a bit too pro big-business (ok, maybe more than just a bit). I don't think Gore would have done anywhere near as well as Bush's team on dealing with the Taliban (Clinton, if you may remember, made a big national speech about committing the country to fighting terrorism when he launched that cruise missile strike against Al Quaida, but never followed through.)

I'm completely in favor of ousting Saddam, as like someone said, it's better than the alternative. Last weekend, when I was in Atlanta, I asked my friend Tom over there what he thought about us invading Iraq, and he looked at me like I was nuts for even asking. (Of course, this semi-rural town just north of Atlanta is one of those with a church every 1/4-mile, and darn near everyone's got a flag hanging out front..)

 

[Tominator]

Originally posted by: Vespasian
The fact that so many people around the world don't like the Bush administration is not entirely a bad thing. If the Bush administrastion were popular around the world, that would mean that the United States had become weak and feeble.

Well put.

 

[PsychoAndy]

It's not that bad, it could be worse. I'll go with AphexII and say "kinda sucks." My only beef has to do with Ashcroft.

And I have to add an obligatory "lol Gray Davis lol" post.

 

[Red Dawn]

And I have to add an obligatory "lol Gray Davis lol" post.

Coming from a State were Jeb Bush is a Govenor and the way Floridians embarrassed themselves and the rest of the country in the last election I think maybe you would be better off refraining from laughing at anybody.

 

[ThisIsMatt]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

And I have to add an obligatory "lol Gray Davis lol" post.

Coming from a State were Jeb Bush is a Govenor and the way Floridians embarrassed themselves and the rest of the country in the last election I think maybe you would be better off refraining from laughing at anybody.

Davis sucks and you know it Red.

 

[Red Dawn]

Davis sucks and you know it Red.

Almost all politicians, especially in California, suck no matter if they are Democrat or Republican. You replace Davis it will just be with another buffoon like the last Republican Governor, Peewee Pete Wilson, or with the Crook the Republicans have running against him now, Bill Simon.

 

[Tominator]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Davis sucks and you know it Red.

Almost all politicians, especially in California, suck no matter if they are Democrat or Republican. You replace Davis it will just be with another buffoon like the last Republican Governor, Peewee Pete Wilson, or with the Crook the Republicans have running against him now, Bill Simon.

Life in general sucks yet we forge on.....that's a lame excuse.

 

[JellyBaby]

I'm not giving them terribly high marks. Reducing what the feds. steal from our wallets goes a long way. But the atrocious farm-bill, opening access to patient's medical records to business interests, laws that push us down the road of living in a police state, random/harmful foreign policy, etc., etc. take too many points away.

 

[ToBeMe]

Originally posted by: Garfang

Originally posted by: ThisIsMatt


Gore lost, boo hoo.

Because a republican secretary of state, and a court full of republican judges, decided that he lost.

Later independent recounts in the state of Florida, not to mention the popular vote throughout the nation, say that the voters decided otherwise.

Hey................wanna show all those recounts that show Gore won????? There were 6 done total...........5 showed Bush would have won and even increased hie margin........one showed Gore could have won if they counted all the ballots which had no markings on the presidential choice as votes for Gore......... Hell even Gore himself admitted that it appeared all the manuvering from both sides was worthless since the outcome would have been in Bush's favor anyway.

As far as the popular vote, there is a reason the popular vote can not decide the winner in a national election...........if not for the electoral vote, any candidate would merely have to win the three largest population centers of the US and they would have the election and those areas would dictate whom wins every national election................not exactly a good thing!

 

[JellyBaby]

There were 6 done total...........5 showed Bush would have won and even increased hie margin........one showed Gore could have won if they counted all the ballots which had no markings on the presidential choice as votes for Gore.........

Let's hope Moonbeam doesn't discover this thread.