Historians Review Bush in 50 years: HOW WILL BUSH REALLY BE REMEMBERED???

  • HndsmKansan

    Posts: 16311

    Nov 23, 2008 2:24 PM GMT
    So finally Bush is about to leave. His exit amid an economic meltdown,
    so much more events during this president's tenure.

    My question: In 50 years, (in all fairness now), do you think Bush will be viewed as a president who tried his best to deal with world events, to shape
    emerging democracies, the terrorism threat amid tubulent times?

    Will he be remembered as a failure, someone who lied to congress, manipulated events (including the Iraqi war) so he could achieve his objectives, amid blunders like Katrina?

    Or will it be a mix? A president who had real opportunities to make differences in the world and efforts were made, but results were chaotic?

    Comments?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 23, 2008 4:17 PM GMT
    Actually, I really don't think he cares how he will be remembered in that he's all about the money. He will leave the Presidency as one of the wealthiest people in the world ( because dude has been stealing a lot of money in the last 8 years)..and that's all he really cares about.
    Of course, the general public will not hear much about that feature of his Presidency, so he will not have a terrible legacy ( after the spin-misters do their thing)...he won't be remembered as a very good President, but how bad he REALLY was probably won't come to surface. If people only knew.......
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 23, 2008 4:44 PM GMT
    In the history books, he'll be known as "he who must not be named".
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 23, 2008 4:48 PM GMT
    I'm just worried that I'll be saying "gross...I'm 72." Haha just kidding. I definitely don't think that history will be kind to Bush. The Baby-Boomers will all be gone and my progressive-leaning generation will be in retirement age...so it'll won't be good for Bush's memory. Guess I'll just have to wait and see though, huh?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 23, 2008 6:13 PM GMT
    I picture the high school history teacher, trying to get the students to remember three things about every president.

    1. Inevitably the first will be that he's "Bush-2"

    2. Started a war just for shits and giggles.

    3. Depending on how the economy goes, the third might be "spent all our money doing #2."

    But given the way education is going, I suppose in reality it will just boil down to "Bush-2."
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 23, 2008 6:18 PM GMT
    I think it will depend heavily on how Obama's presidency goes. If Obama is able to turn the economy around, reform health care, end the war in Iraq, and change the situation in Afghanistan then surly W's term will be remembered as fondly as Herbert Hoover's.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 23, 2008 6:35 PM GMT
    It depends upon who's in charge in 50 years. The victors always write history.

    If right-wingers are in charge, then Bush will be a great President. If left-wingers are in charge, then he will be a failure.

    Fox News and it's conservative commentators are still proclaiming Bush to be a great and successful President. That same thing would happen in 50 years, if the likes of Fox still speak to a large segment of the US. In fact, the attempts to misrepresent and rewrite history by the Right are occurring right now.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 23, 2008 6:39 PM GMT
    One more in the endless stream of white masculine incompetence.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 23, 2008 6:39 PM GMT
    With Bush 2, we always hear about the negative. What were the positives of his Presidency? I'll admit that I liked the way he initially handled 9/11 - took it personally and was deeply impacted by it - but he squandered the global support for America by invading Iraq and then he seemed to lose his sense of humanity when the streets of New Orleans turned into canals.

    I think his place in history will be near Richard Nixon, Ulysses Grant, Herbert Hoover, and Andrew Johnson. Men who achieved great success, but were victims of their own demons or the demons of circumstance.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 23, 2008 7:03 PM GMT
    NoSuchPerson saidWith Bush 2, we always hear about the negative. What were the positives of his Presidency?


    What were the positives of the Holocaust? What were the positives of the Russian Revolution? What were the positives of the Sheffield and the Belgrano?

    I am rather sick of hearing the Cambridge Entrance Exam methodology of discussing history. And especially since you all seem to be making attacks and justifications based on what you want to tell future historians. Predictable or what?

    In truth, since we cannot answer this question, we should make *damn* sure that as much information from our digital era is *preserved* and made available to future historians so they can answer this question for themselves and unfettered from our concerns in the here and now.

    [[I'm not being entirely serious in this answer by the way ;-) --- it's a great question]]
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 23, 2008 8:15 PM GMT
    9/11 put America on it's knees, and made a few buildings crumble.

    Mr Bush. Has put America on it's knees, and the whole country is crumbling.

    Will Obama be remembered for being the first Black fella in the white House,in the top job, and not as a slave, or any of his deeds?
  • GQjock

    Posts: 11649

    Nov 24, 2008 11:05 AM GMT
    In 50 years he'll be used in the forward in a book called "How NOT to be President"
  • Aquanerd

    Posts: 845

    Nov 24, 2008 12:18 PM GMT
    "THAT'S IT!

    DO IT!

    STROKE IT!

    OH YEAH!

    SHOOT IT!"icon_redface.gif


    OH, I'm sorry this isn't a CIRCLE JERK? My bad, that's what the title sounded like. Moving on! icon_cool.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 24, 2008 12:38 PM GMT
    as the leader of the biggest bunch of financial criminals ever to live
  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19119

    Nov 24, 2008 2:21 PM GMT
    Well, I'll be freaking 100 years old and, honestly, I will probably not give a crap since I will likely be more concerned with how the HELL I'm gonna get up the damn stairs.

    That said, I truly believe in my heart that the way President Bush has been treated has been absolutely disgraceful. He's been the fall guy for virtually everything under the sun it seems, getting little if any credit for much of the good he has done as President. Has he made mistakes? Of course. What President hasn't? Has he been the President during one of the most difficult times in American history? Absolutely. Has he held his head up high through it all and forged ahead trying the best he could to do what he thought was right for America and the world. Yes, I think he has, and never once has he lashed out at his critics who so vehemently and publicly lashed out at him. So, in 50 years, I believe people will look back and see that President Bush was only human, not the devil incarnate, and that he was just another President facing challenges, some of which he handled correctly, others later proved not so much. Unfortunately, hindsight is 20/20, but when you're dealing in the here and now you can only do the best you can and hope it works.
  • DalTX

    Posts: 612

    Nov 24, 2008 3:05 PM GMT
    Worst.President.Ever.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 24, 2008 3:11 PM GMT
    A President who entered the presidency under a cloud of controversy, united the country after 9/11 then frittered away the goodwill by an ill-advised war in Iraq. If Iraq had turned out well (highly unlikely) then history might have been kinder.

    The recent meltdown in the financial markets further tarnished his reputation. The meltdown cannot be solely blamed on Mr. Bush, there is a lot of blame to go around, but history has a tendency to overlook the details and blame the leader (Mr. Hoover and the Great Depression is a good example).
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 24, 2008 3:22 PM GMT
    For many people, Bush never quite got past the messy election in 2000 and as a result, his presedency seems to have had a cloud he could never got out from under.

    By holding office during Sept 11 and the resulting wars (and controversy over Iraq) and Katrina and the financial meltdown, he had a lot of really difficult problems to grapple with; which were not (or only partially) his fault. But then no one ever said the job would be easy.

    I think history will judge him harshly, but less so than the media judges him now.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 24, 2008 4:27 PM GMT
    CuriousJockAZ said That said, I truly believe in my heart that the way President Bush has been treated has been absolutely disgraceful. He's been the fall guy for virtually everything under the sun it seems, getting little if any credit for much of the good he has done as President. Has he made mistakes? Of course. What President hasn't? Has he been the President during one of the most difficult times in American history? Absolutely. Has he held his head up high through it all and forged ahead trying the best he could to do what he thought was right for America and the world. Yes, I think he has, and never once has he lashed out at his critics who so vehemently and publicly lashed out at him. So, in 50 years, I believe people will look back and see that President Bush was only human, not the devil incarnate, and that he was just another President facing challenges, some of which he handled correctly, others later proved not so much. Unfortunately, hindsight is 20/20, but when you're dealing in the here and now you can only do the best you can and hope it works.


    CuriousJockAZ - I have no idea why you consider this man to be the fall guy. There some aspects to what has happened to the country the last 8 years that has little to do with his incompetence - I can agree in that respect - such as the event of 9/11. And even how he reacted to the situation - the whole world was angry about that day.
    1) However, lying about the "weapons of mass destruction" to justify an invasion is not excusable. AND please everyone remember our history with Iraq before we start explaining our reasoning for this invasion.
    BTW - is seeking to punish those like Osama or Saddam ANY justification to kill innocents along the way? If we waited 3 more months and really searched for the truth about who and where these perpetrators hid - would that have made our goal to deal with terrorism any less worthy?
    2) I am sure the 1000 + people that died from Katrina due to the lack of initiative from our President's staff and cabinet. Again his inability to react appropriately.
    3) I won't blame one man for our economic downfall - but again his staff and cabinet THAT HE hired have only shown incompetence and outward GREED! AND NO sympathy toward Main Street! Even today Paulson will not support $24 billion from the $700 billion bailout program to put the mortgage modification program on national footing. But yet, another bank (Citigroup) wasn't turned away.

    I do hope Obama creates a climate of change and entrepreneurship because I see little of Bush's policies or rhetoric speak to middle class America.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 24, 2008 5:55 PM GMT
    I think history will remember Bush II as the perfect symbol for half of what the US is: hubristic ("with us or against us"), ignorant (yes, one of the oldest nations on earth will great a US invasion with candy and flowers), militaristic (Afghanistan, Colombia, Haiti, Iraq, Somalia), incompetant (Katrina), theocratic (tying funds for AIDS prevention to countries that support abstinence-only sex ed.), torturous (Jose Padia), and provencial in the worst possible way ("nukeular").

    Oh, and let's not forget the spectacular coup d'etat which was the Supreme Court calling the election in 2000.

    Point is, if historians do their jobs they will spread the blame around for the mess of the past 8 years where it belongs, with Wallstreet, Congress, the Media, Corporations, Misinformed civilians, and Emperor Bush.

    (To be fair, though Nixon was no saint at least his administration strengthened environmental protection laws...can't say the same about Bush.)
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 24, 2008 7:13 PM GMT
    honestly, we're too close to all this right now...

    in 50 years, however, the spill over from his choices and how they affect the next 2-3 presidents' terms will be a case for objective analysis.

    we're all upset about the following (and more) because they are happening NOW:

    1) economy
    2) health care
    3) multiple wars
    4) international relations
    5) environmental crisis

    we can't talk about this with any authority yet. there are simply too many variables that haven't been dealt with. obama, his team, and the congress may very well have to reinvent our way of doing business for all we know. only time will reveal the full morass of this president's epic failure.

    despite saying that, it's hard to imagine that bush ii is creating a very positive legacy, especially when he puts midnight regulations into place that allow for 2x the pollution before inudstries are monitored, evaluated, or fined for dumping toxic materials into the water/soil/air. that seems completely and gratuitously stupid/evil/stubborn/despotic to me.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 24, 2008 7:26 PM GMT
    ... as a warmonger who, along with his VP, wiped his ass with the Constitution and stomped our both our enemies and allies under the heel of his cowboy boot.
  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19119

    Nov 25, 2008 3:54 PM GMT
    [quote][cite]Beefy_Artist said[/cite]
    CuriousJockAZ said That said, I truly believe in my heart that the way President Bush has been treated has been absolutely disgraceful. He's been the fall guy for virtually everything under the sun it seems, getting little if any credit for much of the good he has done as President. Has he made mistakes? Of course. What President hasn't? Has he been the President during one of the most difficult times in American history? Absolutely. Has he held his head up high through it all and forged ahead trying the best he could to do what he thought was right for America and the world. Yes, I think he has, and never once has he lashed out at his critics who so vehemently and publicly lashed out at him. So, in 50 years, I believe people will look back and see that President Bush was only human, not the devil incarnate, and that he was just another President facing challenges, some of which he handled correctly, others later proved not so much. Unfortunately, hindsight is 20/20, but when you're dealing in the here and now you can only do the best you can and hope it works.


    CuriousJockAZ - I have no idea why you consider this man to be the fall guy. There some aspects to what has happened to the country the last 8 years that has little to do with his incompetence - I can agree in that respect - such as the event of 9/11. And even how he reacted to the situation - the whole world was angry about that day.
    1) However, lying about the "weapons of mass destruction" to justify an invasion is not excusable. AND please everyone remember our history with Iraq before we start explaining our reasoning for this invasion.

    Why, Why, WHY do people harp on this as if it's fact...It is NOT fact, it's nothing but a bunch of unproven propaganda - period!



    BTW - is seeking to punish those like Osama or Saddam ANY justification to kill innocents along the way? If we waited 3 more months and really searched for the truth about who and where these perpetrators hid - would that have made our goal to deal with terrorism any less worthy?

    2) I am sure the 1000 + people that died from Katrina due to the lack of initiative from our President's staff and cabinet. Again his inability to react appropriately.

    More finger pointing and scapegoatism that is neither fair or necessarily true. Incompetance on the Louisiana STATE & LOCAL level was the biggest contributor to the Federal government being unable to get in there quickly and effectively. Also, the locals who refused to evacuate also have to shoulder some of the blame for the ultimate loss of life. Granted, there was some problems on the federal level, but lets be fair -- KATRINA was a huge natural disaster of epic proportions, and you can only prepare so much for such events, and learn from them in the aftermath.

    3) I won't blame one man for our economic downfall - but again his staff and cabinet THAT HE hired have only shown incompetence and outward GREED! AND NO sympathy toward Main Street! Even today Paulson will not support $24 billion from the $700 billion bailout program to put the mortgage modification program on national footing. But yet, another bank (Citigroup) wasn't turned away.

    I'm not an economic expert, and I would wager to bet that neither are you. Even the experts are at a loss for exactly what to do and how to do it in this crisis as in many ways we are in unchartered territory right now. Lots of blame to go around, and like it or not much of the blame can be put smack dab on the American People who have been living beyond their means off of credit cards and home equity loans, etc for decades and the chickens have finally come home to roost. Go into the homes of many of these families on so-called "Main Street" and what do you find -- flat screen TVs, kids with iPods and cell phones, SUVs in the driveway -- all bought on credit. Lots of blame to go around.

    I do hope Obama creates a climate of change and entrepreneurship because I see little of Bush's policies or rhetoric speak to middle class America.



  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 25, 2008 4:25 PM GMT
    CuriousJockAZ said[quote]Why, Why, WHY do people harp on this as if it's fact...It is NOT fact, it's nothing but a bunch of unproven propaganda - period!
    CuriousJockAZ - if you can prove to me that they didn't lie about this issue - then I will correct my point. Bush has made CONSISTENT false claims - "The non-profit and non-partisan Center for Public Integrity asserted President Bush's administration made a total of 935 false statements between 2001 and 2003 about Iraq's alleged threat to the United States. While various inert, leftover WMDs and weapons components from the 1980s and 1990s have been found, most weapons inspectors now believe that Iraq's chemical weapons program ceased production after 1991."

    CuriousJockAZ said More finger pointing and scapegoatism that is neither fair or necessarily true. Incompetance on the Louisiana STATE & LOCAL level was the biggest contributor to the Federal government being unable to get in there quickly and effectively. Also, the locals who refused to evacuate also have to shoulder some of the blame for the ultimate loss of life. Granted, there was some problems on the federal level, but lets be fair -- KATRINA was a huge natural disaster of epic proportions, and you can only prepare so much for such events, and learn from them in the aftermath.
    I never said the state and local level were not equally to blame - I was asserting the fact that over and over again this President has a tendency to wait and react instead of being proactive AND listening to those so called "experts" around him to prevent such a situation from happening.
    BTW - seems like his BROTHER - JEB BUSH - former Florida Governor had no problems with IMPLEMENTING and ORGANIZING his state to deal with 3 hurricanes in 1 year!
    I am not blaming BUSH or the LOUISIANA State/local authorities when the levies broke....I am concerned about the method of how this President dealt with the crisis - mainly due to his hiring of a FEMA director who and is INCOMPANTANT. He had a Brother - that you know would have done a far superior job - why didn't he just ask for his advice! UGHHH!
    And one last thing - a major hurricane or storm should not be considered a "local or state" responsibility - a National effort should always be ready to help when a fellow American is suffering as those suffered in Louisiana, Galveston and my former home town of Houston (Rita was horrible from a logistics point of view)


    CuriousJockAZ said I'm not an economic expert, and I would wager to bet that neither are you. Even the experts are at a loss for exactly what to do and how to do it in this crisis as in many ways we are in unchartered territory right now. Lots of blame to go around, and like it or not much of the blame can be put smack dab on the American People who have been living beyond their means off of credit cards and home equity loans, etc for decades and the chickens have finally come home to roost. Go into the homes of many of these families on so-called "Main Street" and what do you find -- flat screen TVs, kids with iPods and cell phones, SUVs in the driveway -- all bought on credit. Lots of blame to go around.


    I can't argue with that point - my Dad discussed this issue with me this morning. He said, "US and Europe are taking a hard look at Islamic Banks as a model to avoid the kind of speculative behavior that got us into this mess."
    Now that would be so incredibly ironic if policies and regulations are changed with Islamic banks as the model. LOL -

    Thanks for responding back CuriousJockAZ - Happy Turkey day!
  • NorCalJD

    Posts: 23

    Nov 25, 2008 4:41 PM GMT
    Ok, fine, CuriousJock, we'll give the Bush administration the benefit of the doubt on Iraq and assume for purposes of this discussion that he didn't lie about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Even assuming he didn't lie, his administration at best turned a blind eye to contradictory intelligence that indicated there were no WMDs. Iraq had nothing to do with Bush's 'war on terror,' and his decision to go to war was not supported by the vast majority of the international community or many in the U.S. and devoted resources that could have better been used to track down those who were responsible for the terrorist attacks (not to mention the vast amounts of money that could have better been used at home). He squandered the sympathy and good will the world felt for America post 9/11 much as he's squandered the budget surplus he inherited.

    I agree with you that there is plenty of blame to go around on Katrina and the economy, but some of it must fall at Bush's feet as well. But even if we take Iraq, Katrina and the economy off the table, I still believe Bush has been one of the worst presidents in history for how he treated the Constitution. During his administration:

    1. He captured people off the streets in foreign countries, shipped them off to a prison camp at Guantanamo Bay and subjected them to harsh interrogation techniques and imprisonment for an indefinite period of time, with no charges being brought against them, no right to counsel, no right to a trial and with no regard for habeus corpus or the principles of the Geneva Convention.

    2. He has, without a warrant, spied on U.S. citizens by wiretapping their phone, e-mail and other digital conversations (even though there was a procedure in place to quickly, quietly obtain such warrants).

    3. He has issued signing statements so sweeping that they essentially attempt to rewrite the legislation presented to him for his signature.

    4. He and his vice president have, through the positions they've taken on the above issues and others, tried to move the executive branch into such a position of authority that it destorys the separation of powers and places the executive above the law, subject to no oversight.

    His oath of office was to protect and defend the Constitution. I'd really like to hear you or someone explain how those actions don't violate the Constitution, let alone protect and defend it.