Madeline Albright: Bush 'One Of The Worst Presidencies In History'

[sandorski]

Even if Iraq turns out alright one day, it's too late for that to rub off on Bush. Historians are not blind, they'll see the disaster of the situation and whichever President fixes Iraq(either directly or simply pulling out) will be who gets credit for Iraq turning out well.

 

[Noobtastic]

Originally posted by: Martin
I think he'll be seen as worse than Nixon, so while maybe not the worst president ever, definitely the worst one in a long, time.

Worse than Nixon?

How???


Our expansive media is going to permanently engrave any slight negative demonstrated by a President. I'm sure the next Prez will end up being booed, just because they're too many opinions.


I'm sure Lincoln would have been universally hated had there been a media similar to our current one.

 

[Jadow]

she's just a failed 75 year old ugly virgin lesbo bltch. her opinion means squat. After all, she's one of the people who caused 911 by being soft on Al Quada.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: Jadow
she's just a failed 75 year old ugly virgin lesbo bltch. her opinion means squat. After all, she's one of the people who caused 911 by being soft on Al Quada.

Question for you, the one who posted such lies and nonsense:

Who was doing more against Al Queda, Clinton/Clarke in the nine months preceding Bush, or the Bush administration in the nine months following his taking office, before 9/11?

Cite your sourses and facts for your answer, no lie without facts is welcome.

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: Noobtastic

Originally posted by: Martin
I think he'll be seen as worse than Nixon, so while maybe not the worst president ever, definitely the worst one in a long, time.

Worse than Nixon?

How???


Our expansive media is going to permanently engrave any slight negative demonstrated by a President. I'm sure the next Prez will end up being booed, just because they're too many opinions.


I'm sure Lincoln would have been universally hated had there been a media similar to our current one.

There are some things Lincoln should have been universally hated for...

Bitching about the free press is a long, proud tradition...but it's better than the alternative. In many ways, I think the press has to view the government as the adversary...without that kind of attitude it's hard to keep an eye on the government when it's really necessary.

 

[Noobtastic]

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: Noobtastic

Originally posted by: Martin
I think he'll be seen as worse than Nixon, so while maybe not the worst president ever, definitely the worst one in a long, time.

Worse than Nixon?

How???


Our expansive media is going to permanently engrave any slight negative demonstrated by a President. I'm sure the next Prez will end up being booed, just because they're too many opinions.


I'm sure Lincoln would have been universally hated had there been a media similar to our current one.

There are some things Lincoln should have been universally hated for...

Bitching about the free press is a long, proud tradition...but it's better than the alternative. In many ways, I think the press has to view the government as the adversary...without that kind of attitude it's hard to keep an eye on the government when it's really necessary.

I'm not bitching about the free press, rather, challenging the tendencies of defining a president with absolutes.

What is this, 4th grade?

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: Jadow
she's just a failed 75 year old ugly virgin lesbo bltch. her opinion means squat. After all, she's one of the people who caused 911 by being soft on Al Quada.

This is a well thought out opinion made by an obviously educated person, and it is very valuable.

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: Noobtastic

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: Noobtastic

Originally posted by: Martin
I think he'll be seen as worse than Nixon, so while maybe not the worst president ever, definitely the worst one in a long, time.

Worse than Nixon?

How???


Our expansive media is going to permanently engrave any slight negative demonstrated by a President. I'm sure the next Prez will end up being booed, just because they're too many opinions.


I'm sure Lincoln would have been universally hated had there been a media similar to our current one.

There are some things Lincoln should have been universally hated for...

Bitching about the free press is a long, proud tradition...but it's better than the alternative. In many ways, I think the press has to view the government as the adversary...without that kind of attitude it's hard to keep an eye on the government when it's really necessary.

I'm not bitching about the free press, rather, challenging the tendencies of defining a president with absolutes.

What is this, 4th grade?

I wasn't suggesting YOU were bitching about the press, but certainly a lot of people seem to. I agree that their coverage of the President (and almost everything else) tends to be based on large, simple ideas...but I don't know if you can blame the press that much. News coverage used to be intelligent and nuance, and the audience decided they wanted infotainment. Hell, we're in the period of a rapid rise in folks like Bill O'Reilly dominating the air waves. If I was a news director or an editor, I wouldn't want to risk trying to challenge my audience either.

 

[Noobtastic]

Bill O'Reilly isn't the problem.

 

[Perknose]

Originally posted by: Noobtastic
Bill O'Reilly isn't the problem.

He isn't important enough to be the problem. He is a world class douche bag, however.

 

[Noobtastic]

Originally posted by: Perknose

Originally posted by: Noobtastic
Bill O'Reilly isn't the problem.

He isn't important enough to be the problem. He is a world class douche bag, however.

No disagreement here...

 

[StageLeft]

Originally posted by: Jadow
she's just a failed 75 year old ugly virgin lesbo bltch. her opinion means squat. After all, she's one of the people who caused 911 by being soft on Al Quada.

It actually makes me sad that people think like you do, I am being totally serious. We need to stop this cycle of partisan rhetoric and somehow find a way for the rest of the people to be able to critically look at this country without an unfounded party loyalty.

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: Noobtastic
Bill O'Reilly isn't the problem.

I didn't say he was. He is more a symptom of the problem than anything else. The idea that the media in any form forces ideas down anyone's throat is silly, they are just giving the audience what they want. Currently, they want ass clowns like Bill O'Reilly and infotainment instead of real substantive news. You were blaming the media for how the President is presented in absolute terms, my point was that the media isn't leading the charge on that...the problem is people who don't want to deal with anything more intellectually challenging than absolutes.

 

[Starbuck1975]

I just find it ironic that so many from the Clinton Administration, and Carter to a lesser extent, feel the need to bash the Bush Administration...whose legacy exactly are they worried about I wonder?

I don't recall members of the Reagan Administration, or Bush Sr.'s Administration, coming out of the woodwork to bash Clinton.

Granted, Republicans had their little sex scandal witch hunt, which was just as bad.

I personally think it is poor form for members of previous administrations to criticize current administrations. How would Albright have held up under the complexities of a post 9/11 world I wonder.

Hindsight is 20/20...doesn't mean that Albright isn't entitled to an opinion, but there were plenty of foreign policy blunders on her watch as well.

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: Starbuck1975
I just find it ironic that so many from the Clinton Administration, and Carter to a lesser extent, feel the need to bash the Bush Administration...whose legacy exactly are they worried about I wonder?

I don't recall members of the Reagan Administration, or Bush Sr.'s Administration, coming out of the woodwork to bash Clinton.

Granted, Republicans had their little sex scandal witch hunt, which was just as bad.

I personally think it is poor form for members of previous administrations to criticize current administrations. How would Albright have held up under the complexities of a post 9/11 world I wonder.

Hindsight is 20/20...doesn't mean that Albright isn't entitled to an opinion, but there were plenty of foreign policy blunders on her watch as well.

Are you kidding? This isn't a Democrat only thing, members of the other party (whoever that might be) from previous administrations seem to love nothing more than to poke at the folks currently doing the job. Republicans were equally as guilty during the Clinton years, with everyone from Reagan's barber on up sounding off on Clinton's foreign policy.

Nor do I think it's in bad taste for them to do so. This isn't just pointless noisemaking...these people generally have a lot of experience and know what they are talking about, I for one don't think it's a good idea to stop listening to them just because they aren't in power any more. If there's one thing I hate about politics, left right or center, it's all the sacred cows wandering around dictating what you can and can't say and who can and who can't say something. The value of an idea should rest entirely on the idea itself, the only thing I find in bad taste is arbitrary, self-serving and partisan rules about where those ideas are permitted to come from.

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: Starbuck1975
Hindsight is 20/20...doesn't mean that Albright isn't entitled to an opinion, but there were plenty of foreign policy blunders on her watch as well.

That's an understatement.

 

[WHAMPOM]

Originally posted by: Noobtastic
Bill O'Reilly isn't the problem.

Symptom is the word you struggle for.

 

[MaxisOne]

Originally posted by: techs

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Damn Bush! If he had only sent Colin Powel to give Saddam a basketball the whole war could have been averted...

Maybe.
Giving Kim Il a signed basketball got the N. Koreans to actually stop making nukes. Of course when Bush jr. became President he instituted the wildly successful policy of making ineffectual threats which resulted in N. Korea not only making more nukes, but actually testing one.
Seems to me basketball diplomacy worked.
And since Saddam was not actually making a nuke when we attacked, Colin Powell could probably have just given him a Pee Wee Herman bobble head doll and the US could have saved a hundred thousand live and trillions of dollars.
Game, set and match to basketball diplomacy.

SIMPLY BRILLIANT !!!