• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

"Move Over, Hoover"?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Originally posted by: Extelleron
-Fix Social Security Problem
-Get U.S. troops out of Iraq, preferrably keeping the Iraqi government stable
-Find Bin Laden
-Find a solution to the nuclear dispute with Iran without putting boots on the ground.
-Do the same with North Korea


You missed one important thing......he'd have to stand, hand in hand with Dave Cowen, and sing kumbaya with him!! 😉
 
Originally posted by: Extelleron
-Fix Social Security Problem
-Get U.S. troops out of Iraq, preferrably keeping the Iraqi government stable
-Find Bin Laden
-Find a solution to the nuclear dispute with Iran without putting boots on the ground.
-Do the same with North Korea

So, be a pacifist poster child for socialism.

Social Securty? Dems celebrated during the state of the union address over blocking any/all reform on that. Infinitely higher taxes each generation is the only thing they allow on the table to fix this inherently broken system.

Out of Iraq, yes that might be preferred. It will not be stable no matter who is our President.

Finding Bin Laden, also irrelevant to who sits in the White House.

?Solution? to nuclear proliferation. Kill those who do it, or accept them as nuclear. You?re delusional to believe that there are alternative options that yield results.

Anyways, back on the larger picture. Bush was fine until after Iraq was invaded and we screwed up rebuilding. Now nothing can fix that, and it?s a pretty sizeable mess compared to what other Presidents have done, so I?d say he?s down there but he?s not the worst.
 
What is this obsession about finding Bin Laden---he is just the front man---and removing him won't make a bit of difference and could make things worse.--nor will it vindicate GWB.

Here we dropped a house on Al-Quida's front man in Iraq---and they just replaced him with someone even more effective and democratic---his predecessor fomented mostly Sunni on Shite sectarian killing---and the new guy likes it going both ways---and the Iraqi death toll is way up now as a result.
 
Well at least he protected us from those dangerous homosexuals by getting that constitutional amendment passed.

Oh wait..

Even his base considers him a failure.
 
It all depends on if the Islamic culture is nullified for a while. Weather it be by a resolution of the conflict in Iraq or by the the middle easts internal politics. If the Jihadist and Imams stop screaming for the whole world to be under sharia then I think he will be seen quite favorably along the lines of Regan and Roosevelt. Keep in mind that sharia is fundamentally incompatible with any type of democracy. Also note that Muslims are perfectly willing as is there right to use our democracy to achieve their goal to enact sharia in our own country.


 
Originally posted by: Lemon law
What is this obsession about finding Bin Laden---he is just the front man---and removing him won't make a bit of difference and could make things worse.--nor will it vindicate GWB.

Here we dropped a house on Al-Quida's front man in Iraq---and they just replaced him with someone even more effective and democratic---his predecessor fomented mostly Sunni on Shite sectarian killing---and the new guy likes it going both ways---and the Iraqi death toll is way up now as a result.

no instead we focus on a completly different front man who was irrelevant to the geopolitical scene. But after 500+ Bil, mission accomplished *
 
Originally posted by: d3n
It all depends on if the Islamic culture is nullified for a while. Weather it be by a resolution of the conflict in Iraq or by the the middle easts internal politics. If the Jihadist and Imams stop screaming for the whole world to be under sharia then I think he will be seen quite favorably along the lines of Regan and Roosevelt. Keep in mind that sharia is fundamentally incompatible with any type of democracy. Also note that Muslims are perfectly willing as is there right to use our democracy to achieve their goal to enact sharia in our own country.

Iraq has no effect on the spread of Sharia law. I don't see how it could.
 
Originally posted by: Jaskalas
Originally posted by: d3n
It all depends on if the Islamic culture is nullified for a while. Weather it be by a resolution of the conflict in Iraq or by the the middle easts internal politics. If the Jihadist and Imams stop screaming for the whole world to be under sharia then I think he will be seen quite favorably along the lines of Regan and Roosevelt. Keep in mind that sharia is fundamentally incompatible with any type of democracy. Also note that Muslims are perfectly willing as is there right to use our democracy to achieve their goal to enact sharia in our own country.

Iraq has no effect on the spread of Sharia law. I don't see how it could.

Bush saw the establishment of a secular government in Iraq as a counterpoint to Islamic governments in the region. These governments all openly or secretly exert influence and promote the continuation of terrorist acts in countries that they have deemed are counter productive to the establishment of sharia. If its not an official policy of the government its almost certainly an objective of powerful interests in these governments. Bush had this in mind when he invaded Iraq. Jihadist know this would set them back a decade or more in their objectives. I realize quite clearly that Bush was just fronting WMDs as reason 1 to go into Iraq. Unfortunately the politics of the day don't let politicians speak clearly. I think the war has been mishandled and question if the objectives could have been accomplished some other way. All in all, right or wrong. I hope that the status quo of this democracy before 9/11/01 prevails.
 
Originally posted by: smack Down
Originally posted by: ayabe
The Rapture would have to occur, making all comparisons meaningless.

Bush is trying his best.

No, he's not. He's serving the agenda of a few people and that's why he's unable to do what's right for the nation.

He's like the CEO of a cigarette company, who simply pursues the company's interests and doesn't worry about the 'issues'.
 
To answer the question, I think if the right wing gains enough control of the media, and gets to reinvent history as it is able to be reinvented later when people are ignorant, they could convince a lot of people of another message, the George Bush who made 'hard choices' and was the leader who responded to the events of 9/11.

He already has about 25% of the nation who thinks he's wonderful, despite the evidence, amazingly.

Our larger problem is that the approximately 50% of American voters who voted for him in two elections are ready to be fooled again by the next republican.

They don't understand why Bush is a bad president, for the most part. They're still fooled by the republican propaganda; the don't understand the issues of wealth, corporatism, etc.

We desperately need for the public to become more educated, and that's not happening, the opposite is among the right.

That's why Talk Radio is so key for them - it fills all the hours they can spend on politics, less chance of any 'liberal' information getting through.
 
Originally posted by: Siddhartha
I was hoping to get some responses from some the forum's conservatives.

Real conservatives turned their backs on Bush awhile ago...

All that's left are those who share a siege mentality/fundie mindset and will rally around their man no matter what...

 
Originally posted by: Craig234
Originally posted by: smack Down
Originally posted by: ayabe
The Rapture would have to occur, making all comparisons meaningless.

Bush is trying his best.

No, he's not. He's serving the agenda of a few people and that's why he's unable to do what's right for the nation.

He's like the CEO of a cigarette company, who simply pursues the company's interests and doesn't worry about the 'issues'.

Check the sarcasm meter.
I was impling Bush is tring his best to get the Rapture to occur.
 
Is the rapture the same as global thermonuclear war?---or is GWB just confused again and he will settle for starting any war that gets a pile of people killed?
 
Originally posted by: marvdmartian
Originally posted by: Extelleron
-Fix Social Security Problem
-Get U.S. troops out of Iraq, preferrably keeping the Iraqi government stable
-Find Bin Laden
-Find a solution to the nuclear dispute with Iran without putting boots on the ground.
-Do the same with North Korea


You missed one important thing......he'd have to stand, hand in hand with Dave Cowen, and sing kumbaya with him!! 😉



Oh now were just getting plain ridiculous! 😉
 
10's-of-thousands of innocent people are dead... DEAD. bush is responsible. Nothing can salvage his disasterous performance... NOTHING.
 
Originally posted by: UberNeuman
Originally posted by: Siddhartha
I was hoping to get some responses from some the forum's conservatives.

Real conservatives turned their backs on Bush awhile ago...

All that's left are those who share a siege mentality/fundie mindset and will rally around their man no matter what...

They're responsible for him. And they stuck with him enough for him to get re-elected after four years.

The corporate interests played the right; the left tried to warn them, and they wouldn't listen, and it's their fault for falling for it.
 
Bush (or his administration) has made HIV/ AIDs in Africa a priority, and some good work has been done. that's pretty much all I can think of.
 
Originally posted by: aidanjm
Bush (or his administration) has made HIV/ AIDs in Africa a priority, and some good work has been done. that's pretty much all I can think of.

Actually, the funding had not even been disbursed until recently. Congress actually increased it over the original amount Bush requested. Bush has also used the program to push his 'abstinance' message, and set aside money for the faith-based groups to do just than. Success has come mostly from private and other help.

 
Originally posted by: Jaskalas
Originally posted by: d3n
It all depends on if the Islamic culture is nullified for a while. Weather it be by a resolution of the conflict in Iraq or by the the middle easts internal politics. If the Jihadist and Imams stop screaming for the whole world to be under sharia then I think he will be seen quite favorably along the lines of Regan and Roosevelt. Keep in mind that sharia is fundamentally incompatible with any type of democracy. Also note that Muslims are perfectly willing as is there right to use our democracy to achieve their goal to enact sharia in our own country.

Iraq has no effect on the spread of Sharia law. I don't see how it could.

except for the fact that sharia is now becoming the norm in parts of iraq.
 
i don't think he can feasibly undo the incredible multitude of decisions he has mismade. Much of what he has done, particularily in regards to the political process himself, may not be fixed within his lifetime.
 
Back
Top