Bush: History Will See Him As An Effective President!

[Balloon guy 158]

Courage and Consequences / Karl Rove's Book on Bush's White HouseI've just got this book as a present ( $30 a book?? Really? I would have waited for a library book drive to get it)Because of it's political nature, directly it's touting the Bush successes in the 8 years he ran the office, I thought this political forum was better than the entertainment forum.I of course recognize that anyone can say anything, but some of the success Bush had were forgotten by me, and others I didn't know they were successes because of the non-stop harping by the left and it's media outlets who don't care about facts, only about making Bush look bad at any cost ( including the safety of this country (commies))So I will begin to list the things Bush did that were a success and we can debate whether my slant is more or less true than your slant.1.Tax Cuts for the Rich.When Bush took office in Jan 20, 2001, the federal government was taking a bigger rake on our income than any year since 1944.Adjusted for inflation, the government in 2001 collected twice as much income tax revenue as they did in 1981.Bush got his tax cut package passed in congress which included:Child Tax credit doubled from $500 to $1,000 a yearReduced married couples tax penaltyThe death tax was to be slowly phased out by 201031.2% of the income tax cuts went to families making $40,000 a year or less56.5% to families making less than $75,000The wealthiest received a lower percentage than anyone elseA family making $40,000 a year received a 96% income tax cutA family making $200,000 a year received a 9% tax cutBefore the Bush tax cuts, the wealthiest 20% paid 81.2 % of all income taxAfter the Bush tax cuts, the wealthiest 20% paid 84.3% of all income taxes7.8 million of the lowest wage earning families no longer paid any income taxAs we see today in the Obama administration, cutting taxes is what the government does to stimulate growth.After the Bush Tax cuts ( even factoring in the 9-11 and Iraq war drains ):We had 52 straight months of job creations, 8 million new jobs.From 2000-2008 the GDP grew by 18.5%Real after-tax income per capita increased by 11%The US economy grew from $9.7 trillion in 2000 to $14.5 trillion at the end of 2008 ( after the beginning of the housing crash )That $4.5 trillion growth is larger than the entire Japanese economy. Bush did it in 2 terms.The government also had a big upturn, with income from collecting taxes increasing by 20% over his 8 years.In Clinton's last budget, non-security discretionary spending grew by 16%. By the end of Bush's 2nd term, it was held below the rate of inflation.His federal deficit average was 2%, close to the 1.7% average since WWIIAnd EVERY SINGLE alternative budget the democrats proposed during the Bush administration called for higher spending.For them to criticize Bush for spending, while they were asking to spend considerably more, is hypocritical.Next No Child Left Behind

[CaneBrain 95]

History will judge him solely by the Iraq War and how Iraq turns out (not a good sign for him). Historically, the idea that anything he did economically will outweigh the economic collapse of 2008 is silly. Just overcoming his public speaking woes would be amazing enough.GREAT THREAD!

[Balloon guy 158]

History will judge him solely by the Iraq War and how Iraq turns out (not a good sign for him). Historically, the idea that anything he did economically will outweigh the economic collapse of 2008 is silly. Just overcoming his public speaking woes would be amazing enough.GREAT THREAD!

I am not saying that these things should outweigh the war Iraq, only giving voice to what the man did right.The question are:Did he cause the 7.5 year boom after Clinton's recession?Did he cause the housing collapse?

[CaneBrain 95]

I am not saying that these things should outweigh the war Iraq, only giving voice to what the man did right.The question are:Did he cause the 7.5 year boom after Clinton's recession?Did he cause the housing collapse?

My view would be that the things Bush and his administration did that CAUSED the 7 year boom ALSO CAUSED the housing collapse. That's neat.And the title refers to how history will see him. 30 years or more down the road, all we remember is the big stuff and that is the War and the economic collapse. It may not be completely fair, but the odds of history seeing Bush as an effective president are miniscule. throw in more unfair stuff (like the fact that journalists and historians/academics trend to the left) and those odds get worse.

[Balloon guy 158]

My view would be that the things Bush and his administration did that CAUSED the 7 year boom ALSO CAUSED the housing collapse. That's neat.And the title refers to how history will see him. 30 years or more down the road, all we remember is the big stuff and that is the War and the economic collapse. It may not be completely fair, but the odds of history seeing Bush as an effective president are miniscule. throw in more unfair stuff (like the fact that journalists and historians/academics trend to the left) and those odds get worse.

But maybe because of NCLB, the journalist of tomorrow will actually have critical thinking skills and ethics and will not ask the DNC what to write?

[CaneBrain 95]

But maybe because of NCLB, the journalist of tomorrow will actually have critical thinking skills and ethics and will not ask the DNC what to write?

That will happen right after Fox News and the GOP stop coordinating their movements on a daily basis. Also, NCLB sucks.

[akoff 0]

My view would be that the things Bush and his administration did that CAUSED the 7 year boom ALSO CAUSED the housing collapse. That's neat.And the title refers to how history will see him. 30 years or more down the road, all we remember is the big stuff and that is the War and the economic collapse. It may not be completely fair, but the odds of history seeing Bush as an effective president are miniscule. throw in more unfair stuff (like the fact that journalists and historians/academics trend to the left) and those odds get worse.

At least you admit it, it is the first step to recovery. Next will be when you get a productive career and stop sucking blood from the rich guys!!

[CaneBrain 95]

At least you admit it, it is the first step to recovery. Next will be when you get a productive career and stop sucking blood from the rich guys!!

Actually, I am willing to see both sides of the coin and admit the weaknesses of my party of choice which is why I am superior to all the conservative iced tea party drinkers on this forum who still want to go back to defending George Bush.Also, I have a productive career that involves sucking blood from rich guys. Best of both worlds.

[JoeyJoJo 18]

Also, I have a productive career that involves sucking blood from rich guys. Best of both worlds.

Sucking blood from rich guys is a good thing?

[custom36 4]

But maybe because of NCLB, the journalist of tomorrow will actually have critical thinking skills and ethics and will not ask the DNC what to write?

Lol, what? No. NCLB was/is a terrible idea. It was terrible when he enacted it as governor of Texas, it was terrible when he signed it as President, and it was a disaster when he and his party decided not to fund it. I say that as a student at the time they were enacted and as a teacher now.

[Balloon guy 158]

Lol, what? No. NCLB was/is a terrible idea. It was terrible when he enacted it as governor of Texas, it was terrible when he signed it as President, and it was a disaster when he and his party decided not to fund it. I say that as a student at the time they were enacted and as a teacher now.

I will get to NCLB, I also was in your camp thinking it was awful, but we will discuss that after we hash out how Good Bush's tax cuts were for everyone in the world.As I said in the OP, I know my info is slanted ( mostly from currently reading Rove's book.I am cool with having my 'facts' corrected if they are in fact wrong.

[Balloon guy 158]

Sucking blood from rich guys is a good thing?

It's the only way to get a merit badge from the Democrat version of the Boy scouts.

[Balloon guy 158]

Actually, I am willing to see both sides of the coin and admit the weaknesses of my party of choice which is why I am superior to all the conservative iced tea party drinkers on this forum who still want to go back to defending George Bush.Also, I have a productive career that involves sucking blood from rich guys. Best of both worlds.

I will give Cane this, he is much more realistic of his party than many are on my side.Confuses me how he can still be so wrong...but he is honest.Which is like a dangerous position when merit badge time comes up.

[mk 11]

I really don't believe YOU believe half the shit you post.If I asked you if you would support a president who presided over the largest overall increase in inflation-adjusted federal spending since LBJ, even after excluding spending on defense and homeland security, but still maintained Republican status, if in name only, what would you say?If I asked you if you would support a president who, when campaigning to become president said, "I don't think our troops ought to be used for what's called nation-building... Maybe I'm missing something here. I mean, we're going to have a kind of nation-building corps from America? Absolutely not." but then proceeded to invade a country in the Middle East and attempt a regime change which resulted in exactly the kind of nation-building project he had dismissed in the aforementioned debate, what would you say?If I asked you if you would support a president who effectively gave Congress a blank check for his ENTIRE presidency by failing to veto a SINGLE BILL of any kind, be it for domestic spending or foreign policy, thus overseeing one of the largest expansions of the size and scope of the federal government in our nation's history, what would you say?

[JoeyJoJo 18]

If I asked you if you would support a president who, when campaigning to become president said...but then proceeded in exactly the kind of project he had dismissed in the aforementioned debate, what would you say?

Request to all who reply: let's not make this about broken campaign promises.

[mk 11]

Request to all who reply: let's not make this about broken campaign promises.

The point is absolutely NOT about broken campaign promises; it's about pretending to be a conservative and then using the resources of our country (i.e. taxpayer dollars) to bomb other countries into the stone age and then rebuild them back out of it.

[Balloon guy 158]

I really don't believe YOU believe half the shit you post.

WELL I DO...um...

If I asked you if you would support a president who presided over the largest overall increase in inflation-adjusted federal spending since LBJ, even after excluding spending on defense and homeland security, but still maintained Republican status, if in name only, what would you say?

I would ask if the increase in government tax revenue co-incised with the increase in spending? If the Gov gets an extra $trillion and they spent an extra $trillion, that would only be wrong if you can make the case that the government didn't have larger costs.etc. Factor in a war and I don't see how this is the zero sum game you are implying.

If I asked you if you would support a president who, when campaigning to become president said, "I don't think our troops ought to be used for what's called nation-building... Maybe I'm missing something here. I mean, we're going to have a kind of nation-building corps from America? Absolutely not." but then proceeded to invade a country in the Middle East and attempt a regime change which resulted in exactly the kind of nation-building project he had dismissed in the aforementioned debate, what would you say?

Did the regime change policy come about because of changing conditions like 9-11? Or are you saying that we should never support the idea of changing a murderous terrorist loving regime for a democracy because they are of equal value?

If I asked you if you would support a president who effectively gave Congress a blank check for his ENTIRE presidency by failing to veto a SINGLE BILL of any kind, be it for domestic spending or foreign policy, thus overseeing one of the largest expansions of the size and scope of the federal government in our nation's history, what would you say?

They don't record threats of veto, which happened a lot. As I already stated, the dems wanted more spending, Bush got less.

[JoeyJoJo 18]

The point is absolutely NOT about broken campaign promises.

Right, that's why I said that. I just had a flash of a bunch of replies like, "Well Obama said he wouldn't do this, but then he did anyway, so nyah nyah nyah."And nobody wants that.

[Balloon guy 158]

The point is absolutely NOT about broken campaign promises; it's about pretending to be a conservative and then using the resources of our country (i.e. taxpayer dollars) to bomb other countries into the stone age and then rebuild them back out of it.

Like Japan?And Germany?

[CaneBrain 95]

Sucking blood from rich guys is a good thing?

Maybe they should stop screwing each other over for money so I (my boss really) don't have to step in and fix it and take a cut for my (my boss') troubles.Also, BG, we exchanged an ******* (Saddam) for Iran increasing their influence. The idea that democracy will definitely take hold in iraq now (especially after we mostly leave) is, um, flawed.

[Balloon guy 158]

Maybe they should stop screwing each other over for money so I (my boss really) don't have to step in and fix it and take a cut for my (my boss') troubles.Also, BG, we exchanged an ******* (Saddam) for Iran increasing their influence. The idea that democracy will definitely take hold in iraq now (especially after we mostly leave) is, um, flawed.

Persians > Arabs

[LongLiveYorke 38]

If I asked you if you would support a president who effectively gave Congress a blank check for his ENTIRE presidency by failing to veto a SINGLE BILL of any kind, be it for domestic spending or foreign policy, thus overseeing one of the largest expansions of the size and scope of the federal government in our nation's history, what would you say?

But Bush did use his veto. He veto'd the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act. Unfortunately, this was one of the worse vetos in memory.

[Balloon guy 158]

But Bush did use his veto. He veto'd the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act. Unfortunately, this was one of the worse vetos in memory.

I was going to get to that, so let's finish the argument that Bush's policies influenced the greatest economic boom in history vs But he started a war debate first.

[CaneBrain 95]

Persians > Arabs

I hope you are right for our sake (and Israel's).

[CaneBrain 95]

I was going to get to that, so let's finish the argument that Bush's policies influenced the greatest economic boom in history before causing a giant economic collapse vs But he also started a bad war debate first.

that's better.