The Legacy of President Bush

[FMJeff]

Vernon Reid mentioned this on the Ron & Fez show, I thought it was an interesting observation. The only positive legacy of the Bush administration is for the first time in this country, a black man and a white woman both have strong chances to become the next President of the United States. His failures made that possible.

What do you think?

You know, it's funny, with all the bad things going on in this country, I look to Hillary and Obama with a strong sense of optimism. We've come along way. I mean, its historic, really...a black man and a white woman may be our leader. Hey, even McCain is a strong break from previous presidents...not your typical Republican conservative.

And for the first time in our history...a black, blind NY Governor. I shake my head in amazement.

[ChrisTheCop]

Just throwing out the Bush threads, see if any of them stick?

[FMJeff]

two different topics.

[Franklyn]

I agree and am surprised by your comments Jeff. Your right that the outrage of the last 8 years gave way to this historic election.
I think Bush's legacy over time will be that of a gun slinger. I think that America will forgive his war after another 8 years of Harmony and hope. I think he will eventually be looked at as a hero for the Republicans if they (or anyone else) can pull this war out.
Now in world history he is likely to be looked at as a dictator, a liar and instigator of war and fear.

[scottinnj]

I can see the argument. One thing is when I take off my Republican glasses, take a step back and look at this current election cycle as a whole, I'm quite proud of my countrymen. The level of participation is way way up, which means more and more people are getting involved and trying to make a difference.

[Franklyn]

I can see the argument. One thing is when I take off my Republican glasses, take a step back and look at this current election cycle as a whole, I'm quite proud of my countrymen. The level of participation is way way up, which means more and more people are getting involved and trying to make a difference.

THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT MAKES ME PROUD!!!! Well said.

[scottinnj]

But I still get to jab FMJeff with some Republican humor though, right?

(Although I'm still voting for Obama in November if he wins the big D nomination.)

[Franklyn]

OH yes, please have fun, lol.

[K.C.]

Bush will go down as easily one of the five worst presidents in this country's history.

Iraq will be his legacy and the fallout that ensues after it...although they'll try everything they can to blame Iraq's inevitable failure on the next President, especially, if it's a Democrat.

But for people who look closer, this will be remembered as almost a neanderthal presidency...a complete and utter resistance to any and all progressive change, combined with the undoing of years of previous change.

And I never thought I would ever seen an American administration openly dispute the credibility of Science.


It's almost impossible to believe this guy at one point actually had like a 90% approval rating at one time during his presidency (9/11).


I guess if I had to point to one positive thing he did in the last eight years, he effectively checked Hugo Chavez from growing his power base in Latin America. But that's about it.

[TooLowBrow]

i never get this. if he were THAT bad, wouldnt he have inspired more anti sentiment against him? people wanted clinton out of office more than this guy

[K.C.]

i never get this. if he were THAT bad, wouldnt he have inspired more anti sentiment against him? people wanted clinton out of office more than this guy

I would say there's way more anti-Bush sentiment than there ever was anti-Clinton sentiment.

The problem is that it's not as mobilized as the anti-Clinton sentiment because there's still really no strong opposition party to the Republicans in this country

Democrats have never recovered from the demonizing of the word 'liberal' in this country, and their choice to run away from it, and so they pander and never take firm stances. So as a result, there's no strong opposing force to Bush...so instead of people mobilizing against him, there's just a lot of apathy, because people don't see the alternative.


It's kind of interesting, because being the alternative is what got Bush elected in the first place. Believe it or not, back in 2000, Bush was an excellent candidate as an opposing force to rally around for people who were tired of the Clinton administration. He gave people clear, concise points (even though he never acted on any of them once he got elected...remember the whole "we won't nation build" speech?) and embraced the fact that he a very right-wing conservative. People saw the candor as endearing.

It's why Obama's done so well so far. He doesn't try to necessarily run from being liberal, although you're starting to see the cracks in his image and the calculated politician underneath. But there's an air of authenticity about the guy's positions...similar to Bush in 2000 (although for much different reason), that you just don't get with a Hillary Clinton or most people on either side of the aisle.

[A.J.]

What this Administration should be touting is its efforts in Africa with AIDS relief, anti-malaria efforts and the establishment of the Africa Command. Africa has long been over-looked and Bush has greatly expanded the efforts begun there by Clinton. It isn't the "sexiest" foreign policy but it's important and will pay dividends down the road. Unfortunately, it will be overshadowed and lost due to the debacles Afghanistan and Iraq.

[TheMojoPin]

i never get this. if he were THAT bad, wouldnt he have inspired more anti sentiment against him? people wanted clinton out of office more than this guy

Several reasons, the main ones being that the Democrats never had enough control of the Legislative Branch like the Republicans did under Clinton and that their attempts it impeach Clinton actually backlashed on them to some degree. The Democrats weren't able or able to afford the same.

[TheMojoPin]

What this Administration should be touting is its efforts in Africa with AIDS relief, anti-malaria efforts and the establishment of the Africa Command. Africa has long been over-looked and Bush has greatly expanded the efforts begun there by Clinton. It isn't the "sexiest" foreign policy but it's important and will pay dividends down the road. Unfortunately, it will be overshadowed and lost due to the debacles Afghanistan and Iraq.

Very good point. As much as I can't stand the guy, this is very true. I believe he's also actually been there now way more than any other president in our history. That's the kind of quit action that can pay huge dividends down the line...it's how you go a long way to cutting off the appeal of extremist rhetoric before it even has a chance to spread.

[Furtherman]

i never get this. if he were THAT bad, wouldnt he have inspired more anti sentiment against him? people wanted clinton out of office more than this guy

I disagree... even hard core Republicans look at Bush and are embarrassed. Clinton may have been hated, but not as despised as GW. When is the last time you could listed to him speak and not cringe? Dumb as dirt. Just this past week he said "The answers are clear to me." NOTHING is clear to him.

[TooLowBrow]

I disagree... even hard core Republicans look at Bush and are embarrassed. Clinton may have been hated, but not as despised as GW. When is the last time you could listed to him speak and not cringe? Dumb as dirt. Just this past week he said "The answers are clear to me." NOTHING is clear to him.

everyone who i hear criticize bush is like, 'oh he sucks, our country sucks now. i wish something better would just happen'
why dont people protest this war like vietnam?
why wasnt he impeached like clinton?
will anyone pay for the lies that we are constantly told or are we too apathetic about our own country? it seems we care more about how iraq is run than about how the u.s. is.

[TheMojoPin]

why dont people protest this war like vietnam?

Millions of people around the world have protested repeatedly against this war.

why wasnt he impeached like clinton?

Read my post above. For most of his administration, the Republicans held control of the Legislative branch. They're not going to impeach their own. The Democrats' lead is one that barely exists, ad they don't have the numbers to impeach him.

[TooLowBrow]

Read my post above. For most of his administration, the Republicans held control of the Legislative branch. They're not going to impeach their own. The Democrats' lead is one that barely exists, ad they don't have the numbers to impeach him.

dont they have the majority in congress now?

[TheMojoPin]

dont they have the majority in congress now?

Dude, how many times do I have to explain this? Impeaching a president is a HUGE deal. You need a significant majority (like the Republicans in the Clinton years) or a major, clear case of wrongdoing (like Nixon) to get it done. Not all of the Democrats would vote for impeachment, and not enough Republicans would vote for it.

[TooLowBrow]

Dude, how many times do I have to explain this? Impeaching a president is a HUGE deal. You need a significant majority (like the Republicans in the Clinton years) or a major, clear case of wrongdoing (like Nixon) to get it done. Not all of the Democrats would vote for impeachment, and not enough Republicans would vote for it.

why are we fighting iraq?

[TheMojoPin]

why are we fighting iraq?

Therein lies the problem. The arguments for that are likely purposefully subjective and non-incriminating.

[high fly]

AJ is right about Bush's efforts with AIDS, though I think establishing an African command is more wrongheaded imperialism.
Bush was also right at the beginning to offer bases slated for closing to oil companies to build refineries on. He should have followed through.

Bush's presidency will be remembered as a catastrophic failure.
The Bush administration's hard-headedness prevented them from heeding an avalanche of threat warnings before 9/11. Their bullheaded insistence on "staying on message" left our country wide open despite explicit warnings that a massive attack was coming, that al Qaeda was sending people here to carry out attacks, etc.
Bush's dainty response in Afghanistan is another cloud on his presidency.
His administration refused ground commanders' requests for troops, Apache helicopters and they were slow to get American troops in theater carrying out operations. For the first time since 1942 American troops went into combat without artillery.
The result was we killed foot soldiers but nearly all of the important leaders got away and bin Laden has achieved mythical status as the man whom the greatest military maching in history could not kill.

Second, Bush will be remembered for lying us into the war in Iraq that has strengthened our enemies and separating us from our allies. Again, their hard-headedness prevented any real planning for an insurgency and they refused to listen to tons of contrary information, going to far as to set up the Office of Special Plans to cherry pick discredited intelligence reports and present them as finished, analyzed intelligence.
So far the cost has been:
4,000 Americans dead;
Over 29,000 physically wounded,including many with loss of limbs and/or eyesight and internal organs. Many have beeen horribly maimed.
Over 50,000 are deaf or suffered severe hearing loss from being near exploding IEDs
Over 80,000 have constant ringing in their ears.
Over 100,000 have needed psychological help.
Over $500 billion down the drain with more to follow.
Iran has greatly expanded its influence in the region, now that Bush has removed the counterweight for their ambitions.
International sympathy and support after 9/11 is gone.
Terrorists have gone from primitive training camps that had little more than a few jungle gyms and swing sets to having a California-sized world-class live fire battle lab staffed with slow-moving American targets.

Economically, Bush has taken record budget surpluses and turned them into record deficits.
He has never gotten unemployment below, or even to the rate he inherited.
Wages have stagnated and increasing health care costs have caused net incomes to go down for middle and lower income groups.
7 or 8 million more Americans now have to go without health care.
Poverty is up.
Bush has added over $4 trillion in deficits with no plan to pay them back.

Bush has greatly expanded the size of the federal bureacracy and increased federal spending 50%.
He has greatly increased the intrusiveness of the government into the lives of Americans and into local affairs,such as schools.

Bush's lawlessness has led to this idea of the "unitary presidency" in which checks and balances in the government are abolished in the name of "national security."
In the name of "national security" they claimed that they needed to listen in to millions of American's phone calls because apparently they believe bin Laden is on the phone with millions of Americans.
They use "national security letters" to investigate strip clubs and others where legitimate "national security" is not at stake.

[high fly]

Dude, how many times do I have to explain this? Impeaching a president is a HUGE deal. You need a significant majority (like the Republicans in the Clinton years) or a major, clear case of wrongdoing (like Nixon) to get it done. Not all of the Democrats would vote for impeachment, and not enough Republicans would vote for it.


Not now, but let's go back to Watergate.
Back then, there were 30 or so impeachment bills introduced before they settled on one. Before the hearings began and for many months afterward, there were not enough votes to impeach and convict "That" Dick Nixon.
It took hearings and congesssional investigations to get the facts out and once the facts were out the people turned and so did those who opposed impeachment at the beginning.

[A.J.]

AJ is right about Bush's efforts with AIDS, though I think establishing an African command is more wrongheaded imperialism.

How so? The African countries already fall under EUCOM's and CENTCOM's AOR.

[high fly]

Originally Posted by high fly
AJ is right about Bush's efforts with AIDS, though I think establishing an African command is more wrongheaded imperialism.

How so? The African countries already fall under EUCOM's and CENTCOM's AOR.

Yes, but they have limited resources to deal with Africa and this gives a pretext for building up more military power which will cause even more resentment for us in the world.
Plus, our military is already ridiculously topheavy.
Good grief, during the Vietnam War the Marine Corps had one Full General (until '68 when Walt was made a four-star as assistant commandant, as a favor, a sop if you will, for not making him commandant) and they had well over 200,000 troops.
Now they have, what, 4 Full Generals and about 170,000 troops.

One thing we should have learned from 9/11 is our first line of defense should be our own shores, and then radiate outward. For issues like Somalia and Bosnia/Kosovo, we need to lean on others to take care of the messes in their back yards instead of doing it for them.

[A.J.]

Yes, but they have limited resources to deal with Africa and this gives a pretext for building up more military power which will cause even more resentment for us in the world.
Plus, our military is already ridiculously topheavy.
Good grief, during the Vietnam War the Marine Corps had one Full General (until '68 when Walt was made a four-star as assistant commandant, as a favor, a sop if you will, for not making him commandant) and they had well over 200,000 troops.
Now they have, what, 4 Full Generals and about 170,000 troops.

One thing we should have learned from 9/11 is our first line of defense should be our own shores, and then radiate outward. For issues like Somalia and Bosnia/Kosovo, we need to lean on others to take care of the messes in their back yards instead of doing it for them.

True, but I see it more as a reorganization of forces than a buildup. It would ease CENTCOM's workload and you could probably draw down some forces in EUCOM since the NATO countries want to take on more responsibilty on their own. I don't know the particulars since they're still being worked out.

I agree about the Bosnia thing. For some time now the Europeans wanted to be bigger players. OK, step it up then. But aren't we still in Bosnia anyway?

[epo]

If this story plays out...Attorney General Mike Mukasey has fucked up. (http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Mukasey_US_had_attack_evidence_before_0401.html)

Mukasey argued that officials "shouldn't need a warrant when somebody with a phone in Iraq picks up a phone and calls somebody in the United States because that's the call that we may really want to know about. And before 9/11, that's the call that we didn't know about. We knew that there has been a call from someplace that was known to be a safe house in Afghanistan and we knew that it came to the United States. We didn't know precisely where it went."

The problem with Attorney General Mukasey's claim is that international calls into the United States were not protected under the law in 2001. So this leads to one of two conclusions:

A. The US Government was asleep at the wheep in 2001.

or

B. The Bush administration are a bunch of lying scumfucks who will say anything to pass their shitty legislation.

Either way...not a great place to be in historically.

[high fly]

Mukasey is putting on a display of expedience over principle.
he is saying fundamental Constitutional rights can be violated if the violator's heart is in the right place.

When this story broke, it was revealed that the telephone calls of millions of Americans were involved.

So is Mukasey sayng that millions of Americans are on the phone with bin Laden?

And what is the Bush administration solution?

Enact an ex post facto law to protect the criminals..........

[scottinnj]

So is Mukasey sayng that millions of Americans are on the phone with bin Laden?

Yes. On a 900 number sex line. He has a beautiful husky voice. So I've heard.

[epo]

Yes. On a 900 number sex line. He has a beautiful husky voice. So I've heard.

Pervert.

[keithy_19]

Yes. On a 900 number sex line. He has a beautiful husky voice. So I've heard.

Sure thing, creep.

[scottinnj]

Sure thing, creep.

You with the "I masturbate in the morning" mod quote calling me a creep-I'm feeling like a kettle right now. :clap: Stand together, or fall individually, that's what I say! :drunk:

[high fly]

Mukasey is putting on a display of expedience over principle.
he is saying fundamental Constitutional rights can be violated if the violator's heart is in the right place.

When this story broke, it was revealed that the telephone calls of millions of Americans were involved.

So is Mukasey sayng that millions of Americans are on the phone with bin Laden?

And what is the Bush administration solution?

Enact an ex post facto law to protect the criminals..........




In case anyone is interested, ex post facto laws are unConstitutional............

[keithy_19]

You with the "I masturbate in the morning" mod quote calling me a creep-I'm feeling like a kettle right now. :clap: Stand together, or fall individually, that's what I say! :drunk:

I like to sit when I...

Ya know what, nevermind.

[Recyclerz]

In case anyone is interested, ex post facto laws are unConstitutional............

http://www.iran-press-service.com/ips/bm~pix/cheney~s600x600.jpg

I'll let you know what's unconstitutional, my friend, for the next ten months (at least!).


But the real reason I bumped the thread was to post this analysis on what W has done to the US, from a macroeconomic perspective. It is from the Financial Times, which is not exactly known for its commie-symp tendencies.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/d5116a24-0952-11dd-81bf-0000779fd2ac.html?nclick_check=1

[CofyCrakCocaine]

Shit.

[epo]

When I think of his legacy, this photo seems to sum it up:

http://i261.photobucket.com/albums/ii49/j2christ/20080528__BushChestBumpp11.jpg

[TheMojoPin]

Bush is just a fan of "Homies Over Hos" by Gangstalicious.

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/df9_08TmDE0&hl=en"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/df9_08TmDE0&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

[Sue Johanson]

You Americans and your presidents.

How silly!

[angrymissy]

When I think of his legacy, this photo seems to sum it up:

http://i261.photobucket.com/albums/ii49/j2christ/20080528__BushChestBumpp11.jpg

This was hilarious on Daily Show, the other pics are even better

http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/stadium.weblogsinc.com/tmz/images/2008/05/_0001_president_bush_AP080528019609_AP_full.jpg
http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/stadium.weblogsinc.com/tmz/images/2008/05/_0003_president_bush_AP080528022975_AP_full.jpg

[epo]

Wait until the Olympic photos come in, but the first few are utterly hilarious. Here's a couple to wet your beaks:

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2008/08/09/article-0-0237E35600000578-961_468x541.jpg

http://i261.photobucket.com/albums/ii49/j2christ/bushvolleythomascoexafpgetty.jpg

[badmonkey]

Those are awesome.

[A.J.]

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2008/08/09/article-0-0237E35600000578-961_468x541.jpg

"It's good to be the King."

http://www.ladyofthecake.com/mel/world/images/goodkng2.jpg

[epo]

For some reason this one is really hitting my funny bone this morning:

http://i261.photobucket.com/albums/ii49/j2christ/bushcameronspencergetty.jpg

[Zorro]

Bush's Legacy...

"Doddering Fucking Idiot"

[Furtherman]

Wait until the Olympic photos come in, but the first few are utterly hilarious.

Did you see Bob Costas interviewing Bush last night?

Over Bush's shoulder, across the street was that big picture of Chairman Mao.

Such a great shot, I wonder if someone purposely set that up.

http://www.freedigitalphotos.net/image/s_chairman-mao.jpg

[A.J.]

One of those rare times you can say something positive about this Administration:

Bush to Protect Three Areas in Pacific (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/06/AR2009010602107.html)

[FunkyDrummer]

The Greatest Greatness of George W. Bush (http://www.truthout.org/010709J)

[Dougie Brootal]

The Greatest Greatness of George W. Bush (http://www.truthout.org/010709J)

that.... was amazing. good find.

[FunkyDrummer]

that.... was amazing. good find.

Thanks.

[NewYorkDragons80]

See: Harry Truman

[epo]

See: Harry Truman

Umm....no.

[high fly]

One of those rare times you can say something positive about this Administration:

Bush to Protect Three Areas in Pacific (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/06/AR2009010602107.html)


I would add the attempt early in his administration to get the oil companies to build new refineries. He offered to give them land on military bases being closed, but they turnned him down.


But really, I think part of his legacy will be a string of things started but never finished.

Also, he opened the door for Iranian expansion of their influence in the Gulf by removing the main roadblock to their ambitions.
Making torture a matter of policy will be something he will be remembered by, as well as the decision his administration made that they would be the ones to decide whether they were breaking the law.

9/11 will be the biggie,of course.
Beforehand, he and his administration ignored a tidal wave of reports saying a massive, catastrophic attack was on the way (I can document over 100 of them).
Afterward, the response was to use minimal force in Afghanistan, with Washington bureaucrats looking over their shoulders, preventing them from closing the escape hatch to Afghanistan.

Bush inherited a surplus and proceeded to set three new records for size of the deficiit and never was able to reduce the national debt by $2 trillion, as promised in 2000.
He inherited an unemployment rate of 4.2% and was never able to get it back to that level.



The current Vanity Fair has a nice timeline article reviewing he history of the Bush presidency, with commentary by key players....

[FunkyDrummer]

The current Vanity Fair has a nice timeline article reviewing he history of the Bush presidency, with commentary by key players....

LINK (http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2009/02/bush-oral-history200902)

[keithy_19]

I think that looking at the legacy of a president who is still in office is a bit odd. Time changes things. Speaking of his legacy now is a gut reaction.

But hey, years down the road historians may echo your sentiment.

[scottinnj]

The Greatest Greatness of George W. Bush (http://www.truthout.org/010709J)

Hack. Olbermann wannabe.

[keithy_19]

The Greatest Greatness of George W. Bush (http://www.truthout.org/010709J)

This angers me. Clinton also could have killed Osama Bin Laden. An act of war was carried out against our troops, yet did we kill thos responsible? To the extent that was warrented?

[keithy_19]

Hack. Olbermann wannabe.

Why would anyone want to be Olbermann...?

[scottinnj]

This angers me. Clinton also could have killed Osama Bin Laden. An act of war was carried out against our troops, yet did we kill thos responsible? To the extent that was warrented?

This is always what bothers me about 9/11.

The left love to say "it happened on his watch" regarding W, but ignore the Cole the embassy bombings and the original WTC attack that happened on President Clinton's "watch"

To accuse one while excusing the other is reprehensible. Questions for both sides-do you really believe Clinton/Bush intended for those attacks to occur?


Do you believe Clinton/Bush could have prevented those attacks? And if so, why do you think Clinton/Bush didn't?


Edit: What I am saying is that we are at war with a large number of terrorists, and no matter who is in office, we need to support that person and realize he is doing all he can to stop any further attacks.
Agreement/disagreement on methods is another separate argument.

[high fly]

This angers me. Clinton also could have killed Osama Bin Laden. An act of war was carried out against our troops, yet did we kill thos responsible? To the extent that was warrented?

He tried.
He deployed three different groups to get OBL, but they couldn't get him.

If it wasn't for duplicitous Pakistani intelligence, Clinton may well have gotten him when he fired 75 cruise missiles at bin Laden in August 1998...

[TooLowBrow]

Edit: What I am saying is that we are at war with a large number of terrorists, and no matter who is in office, we need to support that person and realize he is doing all he can to stop any further attacks.


but did bush do what he could to stop the 9/11 attacks? or did he maybe let them happen for an excuse to attack iraq?

[scottinnj]

but did bush do what he could to stop the 9/11 attacks? or did he maybe let them happen for an excuse to attack iraq?

If you really believe that, then I have to politely say I can't debate this topic with you. And that would be the same if it were SP1! saying (hypothetically) that Clinton allowed 9/11 to be planned and practiced on his watch because he was impeached and didn't give a shit anymore.

But you're a good guy and I like debating with you on other things so I really mean no disrespect by saying that.

[TooLowBrow]

If you really believe that, then I have to politely say I can't debate this topic with you. And that would be the same if it were SP1! saying (hypothetically) that Clinton allowed 9/11 to be planned and practiced on his watch because he was impeached and didn't give a shit anymore.

But you're a good guy and I like debating with you on other things so I really mean no disrespect by saying that.

i can respect that

[NewYorkDragons80]

Umm....no.

Explain. They both led this country through a transitional perios and left office surrounded by negative superlatives. Only time will tell, but I think his legacy will be glossed over in no time flat.

[high fly]

This is always what bothers me about 9/11.

The left love to say "it happened on his watch" regarding W, but ignore the Cole the embassy bombings and the original WTC attack that happened on President Clinton's "watch"

To accuse one while excusing the other is reprehensible. Questions for both sides-do you really believe Clinton/Bush intended for those attacks to occur?



It is foolish to treat all 3 the same.
Before 9/11, Bush had over 100 intelligence reports that a massive attack was coming and he did nothing about it.
Clinton had no such warnings before the embassy bombings, the WTC attack or the attack on the Cole.

In response to the WTC attacks, and the "Landmarks" plot that was subsequently uncovered, the following terrorists were rounded up and sent to prison:
Mahmoud Abouhalima
Mohammed Abouhalima
Ahmad Ajaj
Nidal Ayyad
Eyad Mahmoud Ismoil
Alah Jobroni
Bilal al Kaisi
Eyad Mahmoud Ismail Najim Najim
Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman
Mohammad Salameh
Ibrahim Ahmad Suleiman
Amir Abdelgani
Fadil Abdelgani
Mahmoud Abouhalima
Siddig Siddig Ali
Victor Alvarez
Ibrahim el-Gabrowny
Earl Grant
Abdo Haggag
Clement Rodney Hampton-El
Tarig El-Hassan
Bilal al-Kaisi
Fares Khallafalla
El Sayyid Nosair
Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman
Mohammad Salameh
Matarawry Mohammed Said Saleh
Mohammed Saleh

After the embassy bombings, the following were prosecuted:

Hamdan Khalif Alal
Mohammed Atef
Mustafa Mohammed Fadhil
Ahmed Khalfan Ghailani
Wadi al Hage
Abu Hafs al Masri
Ali Mohamad
Khalfan Khalis Mohamad
Fazul Abdullah Mohammed
Fahid Mohommad Ally Msalam
Fahid Muhammad
Eyad Mahmoud Ismail Najim
Mohammed Sadeek Odeh
Mohammed Rashad Daoud al-Owhali
Abdel Rahman
Mamdouh Mahmoud Salim, aka Abu Hajer
Sheikh Ahmed Salim Swedan


Additionally, in response to the attack on employees entering the CIA's headquarters, Mir Aimal Kansi was rendered to the U.S. for trial and was executed.

Other terrorists prosecuted and sent to prison during the Clinton administration for the Bojinka plot, the Millennium plot, he Oklahoma city attack and others include:

Muhammad Sadiq ‘Awda
Lafi Khalil
Ghaza Ibrahim Abu Maizer
Mohammed Rashid
Mohammed Ali Rezaq
Musa Abu Marzook
Abu Doha
Abdelghani Meskini
SamirAit Mohamed
Ahmed Ressam
Leo Nkounga
Eyad Ismoil
Abdul Hakim Murad
Wali Khan Amin Shah
Ramzi Yousef
Michael Fortier
Timothy McVeigh
Terry Michael Nichols





As for the Cole, as late as March 27, 2001, it was unclear who was responsible for it.

[TooLowBrow]

It is foolish to treat all 3 the same.
Before 9/11, Bush had over 100 intelligence reports that a massive attack was coming and he did nothing about it.
Clinton had no such warnings before the embassy bombings, the WTC attack or the attack on the Cole.

In response to the WTC attacks, and the "Landmarks" plot that was subsequently uncovered, the following terrorists were rounded up and sent to prison:
Mahmoud Abouhalima
Mohammed Abouhalima
Ahmad Ajaj
Nidal Ayyad
Eyad Mahmoud Ismoil
Alah Jobroni
Bilal al Kaisi
Eyad Mahmoud Ismail Najim Najim
Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman
Mohammad Salameh
Ibrahim Ahmad Suleiman
Amir Abdelgani
Fadil Abdelgani
Mahmoud Abouhalima
Siddig Siddig Ali
Victor Alvarez
Ibrahim el-Gabrowny
Earl Grant
Abdo Haggag
Clement Rodney Hampton-El
Tarig El-Hassan
Bilal al-Kaisi
Fares Khallafalla
El Sayyid Nosair
Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman
Mohammad Salameh
Matarawry Mohammed Said Saleh
Mohammed Saleh

After the embassy bombings, the following were rounded up and sent to prison:

Hamdan Khalif Alal
Mohammed Atef
Mustafa Mohammed Fadhil
Ahmed Khalfan Ghailani
Wadi al Hage
Osama bin Laden
Abu Hafs al Masri
Ali Mohamad
Khalfan Khalis Mohamad
Fazul Abdullah Mohammed
Fahid Mohommad Ally Msalam
Fahid Muhammad
Eyad Mahmoud Ismail Najim
Mohammed Sadeek Odeh
Mohammed Rashad Daoud al-Owhali
Abdel Rahman
Mamdouh Mahmoud Salim, aka Abu Hajer
Sheikh Ahmed Salim Swedan


Additionally, in response to the attack on employees entering the CIA's headquarters, Mir Aimal Kansi was rendered to the U.S. for trial and was executed.

As for the Cole, as late as March 27, 2001, it was unclear who was responsible for it.

i blame clinton

[scottinnj]

It is foolish to treat all 3 the same.
Before 9/11, Bush had over 100 intelligence reports that a massive attack was coming and he did nothing about it.
Clinton had no such warnings before the embassy bombings, the WTC attack or the attack on the Cole.

Well my point is that when Bush has 9/11 hung on him because it was under his watch there is an underlying implication that he did nothing in order to cause a catalyst for the invasion of Iraq, which is sort of similar to the theories that FDR knew Pearl Harbor was being threatened but did nothing in order to get the US into WWII. I just simply reject that.

The accusations of doing nothing is another argument though, and I'll definitely look forward to listening in to that one, because I'm not all the way up to speed on how lacking the Bush Administration was regarding intelligence prior to 9/11.

[scottinnj]

i can respect that

Thanks dude, I really dig jousting with you. And you're one funny poster.

[high fly]

Well my point is that when Bush has 9/11 hung on him because it was under his watch there is an underlying implication that he did nothing in order to cause a catalyst for the invasion of Iraq, which is sort of similar to the theories that FDR knew Pearl Harbor was being threatened but did nothing in order to get the US into WWII. I just simply reject that.

The accusations of doing nothing is another argument though, and I'll definitely look forward to listening in to that one, because I'm not all the way up to speed on how lacking the Bush Administration was regarding intelligence prior to 9/11.


I agree with you that Bush did not ignore the warnings before 9/11 because he was looking for an excuse to invade Iraq.
Yes, he was looking for an excuse to invade Iraq, and was obsessed with Saddam from the first day he took office.

No, what happened was Bush was determined his administration not get sidetracked on any issues other than missile defense and a couple of others, and staying on message was more important than dealing with what they were being warned about on an almost daily basis.
This can be seen in Bush's response to the August 6, 2001 briefing he got for the report, "Bin Laden Determined to Strike In U.S." Bush's response was to say, "Ok, you've covered your ass." and that was it.

I have gone through dozens of sources, particularly the 9/11 Commission Report (a lot of the good stuff is in the footnotes) and the House-Senate Joint Inquiry and have put together a timeline of all the warnings and events leading up to 9/11.
It takes 35 pages to print, and each one is mentioned only briefly.

When looked at one after the other as a whole, reports saying the upcoming attack would be "spectacular," would be on a "catastrophic level," would "shake the world," that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was sending operatives here to link up with an existing network to attack us, that there would be massive casualties, that this attack was "imminent," and so forth, it is stunning the way the Bush administration stubbornly ingored those reports.
At the CIA, they were so alarmed that they sent one report titled "Bin Laden Threats Are Real" because the other reports weren't being paid attention to.

[scottinnj]

From what I've read about the self-named "jedi knights" that were in the middle ranks of the Bush Administration's first term, I do believe the obsession with Iraq began on January 20th, 2001. I read it in one of Pat Buchanan's books.

Pat Buchanan rang the clarion call for us conservatives to oppose the invasion of Iraq. And again, I am so sorry for ignoring him.

[high fly]

There are other sources as well, Richard Clarke's Against All Enemies is one.
At the first national security meeting when they were being told of the threat from terrorism and al Qaeda in particular, all Bush and his gang wanted to know about was Iraq.
Following 9/11, even after being told Iraq had nothing to do with it, and it was al Qaeda, they still wanted to attack Iraq. That part is detailed in the 9/11 Commisssion Report - check the footnotes.

What we see is the fundamental error of beginning with a conclusion and then seeking evidence to support it and ignoring all contrary intelligence; which later led to the invasion and over 4,200 Americans dead, over 30,000 wounded, many suffering loss of limbs, eyesight and/or internal organs, over 50,000 suffered TBI, and over 100,000 have needed psychological help, nearly a trillion dollars down the drain and another trillion or two to follow, plus Iran had their main stumbling block removed so they could expand their influence in the Gulf.
This preoccupation with Iraq also impacted the effort in Afghanistan, begining in December 2001 when orders were cut to remove Task Force 11, the specially trained unit dedicated to getting bin Laden....

[JerseySean]

Several reasons, the main ones being that the Democrats never had enough control of the Legislative Branch like the Republicans did under Clinton and that their attempts it impeach Clinton actually backlashed on them to some degree. The Democrats weren't able or able to afford the same.

Actually the House was +Dem by the same margin that it was for Republicans in 98.

[high fly]

Actually the House was +Dem by the same margin that it was for Republicans in 98.


But the Democrats have never, in my lifetime, been as organized and as disciplined as the GOP...

[Gvac]

I miss him already...

[Syd]

But the Democrats have never, in my lifetime, been as organized and as disciplined as the GOP...

they are now, the DLC and DNC are cooperating for the most part and the GOP is splinteirng heavily between the christ crowd and the small government crowd

[JerseySean]

they are now, the DLC and DNC are cooperating for the most part and the GOP is splinteirng heavily between the christ crowd and the small government crowd

Yea but you saw that with the Dems in 04, it could turn quickly

[led37zep]

Wait for it....

[TheMojoPin]

Yea but you saw that with the Dems in 04, it could turn quickly

The Democrats in 2004 didn't have to shake off the stigma of 8 years of one of the most unpopular and negatively perceived administrations of all time. The Republicans basically need to make a clean break and start building up what essentially amounts to a new generation of the GOP.

[A.J.]

The Democrats in 2004 didn't have to shake off the stigma of 8 years of one of the most unpopular and negatively perceived administrations of all time. The Republicans basically need to make a clean break and start building up what essentially amounts to a new generation of the GOP.

I wish the party would rid itself of the Texas leadership (thanks to the damage done by Bush, Armey and DeLay) as well as the bible-thumpers. I want more Northeastern Republicans in charge.

[TheMojoPin]

I wish the party would rid itself of the Texas leadership (thanks to the damage done by Bush, Armey and DeLay) as well as the bible-thumpers. I want more Northeastern Republicans in charge.

It would be a nice change of pace.

[high fly]

The Democrats in 2004 didn't have to shake off the stigma of 8 years of one of the most unpopular and negatively perceived administrations of all time. The Republicans basically need to make a clean break and start building up what essentially amounts to a new generation of the GOP.

The good news is the Taliban wing of the GOP isn't letting go, and thinks the problem is they haven't been conservative enough!
They think if they had run Mitt or Fred or Huck or Tancredo, they would have won, but for that pussy McCain.

At least that is what I am hearing from Levin, Ingraham, Manatee and Limpbaugh.
They see broadening the base as selling out their cherished "core values," and they are settling in for a fight.
They haven't figured out that appealing to an even smaller portion of the electorate will not win elections...

[high fly]

I wish the party would rid itself of the Texas leadership (thanks to the damage done by Bush, Armey and DeLay) as well as the bible-thumpers. I want more Northeastern Republicans in charge.


Isn't DeLay a French word?

[A.J.]

TV viewing options are very limited here. For some reason they show old Dukes of Hazzard reruns on the "Action Channel". Besides rediscovering my love of Catherine Bach, I never really noticed how much George W. Bush sounds like Sheriff Roscoe P. Coltrane -- particularly "serious Roscoe".

[MacVittie]

To me, these pictures are the most iconic photos of Bush:

http://www.prorev.com/bush911.jpg
http://www.moonbattery.com/archives/Bush_Ground_Zero.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9d/2001_World_Series_first_pitch.jpg
http://www.whereistheoutrage.net/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2008/01/bush-flightsuit.jpg
http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/Mission-accomplished.jpg
http://www.disaboom.com/photos/storage/1000.9498.50225.Bush%20Loves%20to%20Dance.jpg

[Syd]

Yea but you saw that with the Dems in 04, it could turn quickly

It's more similar to the Democrats in 68. Plus, as was said, the Republicans are angling towards a dwindling voter base and at this rate become nothing but a state-level party when the baby boomers begin dying off.

[high fly]

TV viewing options are very limited here. For some reason they show old Dukes of Hazzard reruns on the "Action Channel". Besides rediscovering my love of Catherine Bach, I never really noticed how much George W. Bush sounds like Sheriff Roscoe P. Coltrane -- particularly "serious Roscoe".



The Deciderator has always reminded me more of Floyd R. Turbo.....

[Gvac]

The Legacy of President Bush

3 words -

Greatest

President

Ever

[epo]

3 words -

Greatest

President

Ever

Have you been drinking grain alcohol again?

[high fly]

3 words -

Greatest

President

Ever



it's a damned shame he doesn't get credit for keeping his promises in the 2000 election to keep the budget balanced and to reduce the national debt by $2 trillion........ but he'll be vindicated by history....

[A.J.]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9d/2001_World_Series_first_pitch.jpg

I don't care what anyone says: that was the best first pitch ever thrown by a President -- and not just because of the moment.

[celery]

http://www.hist.umn.edu/~ruggles/Approval_files/Approval_27267_image001.png

[TheMojoPin]

I don't care what anyone says: that was the best first pitch ever thrown by a President -- and not just because of the moment.

I'd say Obama will easily trounce him, but since it's going to be for the White Sox, I don't care how well he actually pitches...that shit doesn't count.

[Dan 'Hampton]

I'd say Obama will easily trounce him, but since it's going to be for the White Sox, I don't care how well he actually pitches...that shit doesn't count.

I don't know, for being a half black guy obama definatly has the nerdy white guy in him. His high shorts playing basketball, his inability to dance.

[ToiletCrusher]

http://www.hist.umn.edu/~ruggles/Approval_files/Approval_27267_image001.png

I am most amazed that as a nation we gave him a 50% approval rating right around the 04 election and he still got re-elected only to see this approval drop further.

[FezsAssistant]

I think in the longterm his legacy will be that he was a horrible liberal douche.

[TheMojoPin]

I think in the longterm his legacy will be that he was a horrible liberal douche.

Oh, so that's how you're trying to wiggle out of it now?

[epo]

I think in the longterm his legacy will be that he was a horrible liberal douche.

Oh, so that's how you're trying to wiggle out of it now?

It's all they have left. It's sooooo sad.

[high fly]

I am most amazed that as a nation we gave him a 50% approval rating right around the 04 election and he still got re-elected only to see this approval drop further.


Remember, there was all those Orange Alerts that scared folks.
Do you recall the last one?
It ws right after the Democratic Party's convention...

[high fly]

Then, of course there was Iraq, the operative principle being "Fraud negates consent":



they told us “you can’t distinguish between al Qaeda and Saddam,” but that claim was not based on a single intelligence report, and wasn’t true,

they told us an Iraqi intelligence officer had met with 9/11 plot leader Mohamed Atta in Prague, but that turned out to not be true,

they told us Iraq was buying special aluminum tubes that were “only suitable for nuclear centrifuges” but when we tested them they fell apart in a centrifuge, so that turned out to not be true,

they told us Iraq had unmanned aerial vehicles which could disperse chemical or biological weapons in the U.S., but that turned out to not be true,

they told us we had given UN inspectors every WMD, missile and UAV site, but that turned out to not be true,

they told us we would seek another UN resolution before we invaded, but that turned out to not be true,

they told us Saddam had mobile WMD labs, but was based on a drunk defector who had been determined to be “an out-and-out fabricator” at the time, so that turned out to not be true,

they told us Saddam would give WMD to terrorists, but the intelligence said he wouldn’t and had no history of doing so during the decades he had them, so that turned out to not be true,

they told us Iraq could launch a WMD attack on us 45 minutes after the order was given, but then it came out the single source for the allegation was a man our intelligence agencies “had no confidence in,” so that turned out to not be true,

they told us an IAEA report said Iraq was 6 months from having nukes, but there was no IAEA report, so that turned out to not be true,

they told us Saddam’s son-in-law told us they had resumed their nuke program, but that turned out to not be true,

they told us Saddam actually had nukes, but that turned out to not be true,

they told us Iraq was an “imminent threat,” even though CIA Director Tenet said the intelligence “never said Iraq was an imminent threat,” so that turned out to not be true,

they told us if we invaded Iraq we would use the “full power of the U.S. military, but then they cut 250,000 troops from the invasion plan, so that turned out to not be true,

they told us al Qaeda was “operating” out of Iraq, but that turned out to not be true,

they told us Iraq was buying uranium from Niger, but that turned out to be based on documents they knew were phony, and of course turned out to not be true,

they told us the documents were not known by senior administration officials, but that turned out to not be true,

they told us they did not know the documents were bogus before President Bush made the uranium claim, but that turned out to not be true,

they told us the CIA had cleared the claim, but that turned out to not be true,

they told us the war in Iraq would be a “cakewalk,” but that turned out to not be true

they told us the war would be virtually self-financing, but that turned out to not be true,

they told us Iraq “would not require sustained aid,” but that turned out to not be true,

they told us the war would bring down gas prices, but that turned out to not be true,

they told us invading Iraq would intimidate Iraq’s neighbors so they would not support terrorism, but that turned out to not be true,

they told us the war would inspire people in other Arab countries to rise up and install democratic regimes, but that turned out to not be true,

they published maps with pretty little icons showing scores of WMD manufacturing and storage facilities, but all we found was tumbleweeds, so that turned out to not be true,

they told us they knew where the Iraqis had moved them near Baghdad and Tikrit, but that turned out to not be true,

they told us Jessica Lynch had fought to the last bullet and had to be bayoneted to be subdued, but that turned out to not be true,

they told us fighting would continue “six days, six weeks, I doubt six months,” but that turned out to not be true,

they told us they had found Iraqi mobile WMD labs, but that turned out to not be true,

they told us the fighting would subside once we took Baghdad, but that turned out to not be true,

they told us the fighting would end after we captured Saddam and his sons, but that turned out to not be true,

they told us the fighting would abate once the Iraqis got a constitution and we turned over authority to them, but that turned out to not be true,

they told us fighting would go down once the Iraqis held elections and had “a stake in their future,” but that turned out to not be true,

they told us Iraq was the “geographic base” for terrorists who had been attacking us “for many years,” but that turned out to not be true,

they told us Bush would fire anyone who leaked the name of CIA officer Valerie Plame, but that turned out to not be true,

they told us the mission was “accomplished,” but that turned out to not be true,

they told us the insurgency was in its “last throes,” but that turned out to not be true,

President Bush told us we would “stay the course,” until he denied telling us we would “stay the course,”

President Bush told us “It is deeply irresponsible to rewrite the history of how that war began... The stakes in the global war on terror are too high and the national interest is too important for politicians to throw out false charges.”

[high fly]

I think Bush is correct that history will judge him more kindly than people do today.
History will show he was right on many occasions, such as:

Bush was right to be against the Dept. of Homeland Security.
Bush was right to be for the Dept. of Homeland Security.

Bush was right to oppose the 9/11 Commission.
Bush was right to be for the 9/11 Commission.

Bush was right to be against having NATO help us out in Afghanistan.
Bush was right to be for having NATO help us out in Afghanistan.

Bush was right to swear he wouldn't take any money out of the Social Security Trust Fund.
Bush was right to take $159 billion out of the Social Security Trust Fund.

Bush was right to be against negotiating with North Korea about its nuke program.
Bush was right to negotiate with North Korea about its nuke program.

Bush was right to be for patients being able to sue their HMOs.
Bush was right to be against patients being able to sue their HMOs.

Bush was right to be for the military coup that overthrew the democratically elected government of Venezuela.
Bush was right to support the democratically elected government of Venezuela after it overthrew the military coup.

Bush was right to be against tarrifs.
Bush was right to impose tarrifs.

Bush was right to be for cutting CO2 emissions.
Bush was right to be against cutting CO2 emissions.

Bush was right to be for cutting illegal immigration.
Bush was right to be for giving illegal immigrants amnesty.

Bush was right when he was for 527 groups.
Bush was right when he was against 527 groups.

Bush was right when he was against nation-building.
Bush was right when he was for nation-building.

Bush was right when he was against CondoLIES!LIES!LIES!zza Rice and "Whatta" Dick Cheney testifying before the 9/11 Commission.
Bush was right when he was for CondoLIES!LIES!LIES!zza Rice and "Whatta" Dick Cheney testifying before the 9/11 Commission.

Bush was right when he was against passing on deficits to the current administration and Congress.
Bush was right when he passed on deficits to the current administration and Congress.

Bush was right when he opposed having a national clearinghouse for intelligence.
Bush was right when he was for having a national clearinghouse for intelligence.

Bush was right when he was for waiting for the scientific studies to be completed before deciding whether to drill in ANWR.
Bush was right when he decided not to wait for the scientific studies to be completed when he authorized drilling in ANWR.

Bush was right when he was for limiting the growth of the federal government.
Bush was right when he increased the size of the federal government 27% in 2 years.

Bush was right to be against the federal government sticking it's noses into local classrooms.
Bush was right to be for the federal government sticking its nose into local classrooms.

Bush was right to be against extending the 9/11 Commission.
Bush was right to be for extending the 9/11 Commission.

Bush was right to make getting Osama bin Laden our number one priority.
Bush was right to say getting bin Laden was not a priority.

Bush was right to be against the UN getting involved with reconstruction in Iraq.
Bush was right to be for UN involvement in reconstruction in Iraq.

Bush was right to be against the use of secret evidence in terrorism trials.
Bush was right to be for the use of secret evidence in terrorism trials.

Bush was right to be for the states and not the federal government to decide on same-sex marriages.
Bush was right to be for the federal government and not the states to decide on whether to allow same-sex marriages.

Bush was right to be against having a cabinet-level national intelligence director.
Bush was right to be for having a national intelligence director.

[Alice S. Fuzzybutt]

Perhaps time will help Bush and he'll be seen as a good leader like Truman.



I'm sorry that's all I could come up with. I will always know him as the WORST President in my lifetime.

[keithy_19]

I'm sorry that's all I could come up with. I will always know him as the WORST President in my lifetime.

I think there's still hope someone will be as bad if not worse. And that's not me trying to make Bush seem better than he was. It's my lack of faith in the political system/government in this country, or any country.

[disneyspy]

he was a get rich quick scam artist that fucked the country by letting american companies send american jobs overseas with no penalities. if you knock out the lower paying jobs,who you gonna have buy the higher payin jobs products? the overseas markets aren't buyin our goods,he fucked the country to help CEOs make a quick buck,he will go down as the president that fucked america.

[A.J.]

he will go down as the president that fucked america.

You should have used this thread. (http://www.ronfez.net/forums/showthread.php?t=79733)

[Gvac]

History will judge him. It's far too soon to try and figure this out now.

A hundred years from now he might be hailed as a visionary and the man who began the end of terrorism.

Who knows?

[disneyspy]

i know
call me history becuse i can see the future,i've judged him in the present time cuz i wont be around in 100 years,hes a republican fool

[Gvac]

What I meant was that we tend to read history books and accept what is written as gospel. I'm sure that for every great leader any nation ever had, there was always staunch opposition.

[epo]

What I meant was that we tend to read history books and accept what is written as gospel. I'm sure that for every great leader any nation ever had, there was always staunch opposition.

Which totally makes sense, except that from the current perspective its really hard to see anytime of accomplishment by President Bush's administration.

If I had to guess, his legacy will be creating the atmosphere for a disgruntled nation to move politically to the left after a long-period of "right of center" politics.