"You know, I truly do agree with everyone about the USA PATRIOT act (its proper title). It was an unconstitutional piece of legislation that was passed hastily without any real consideration. It was a mistake. But once again I remind you of history: Lincoln suspended Habeas Corpus. "
It was certainly not the brightest moment of Lincoln's presidency, but he did reinstate Habeas Corpus(which the suspension of only affected Maryland a few other areas in the Union) after the Civil War.
And if you are trying to compare the events and time of the Civil War with today, you are surely misguided.
"You know, I truly do agree with everyone about the USA PATRIOT act (its proper title). It was an unconstitutional piece of legislation that was passed hastily without any real consideration. It was a mistake. But once again I remind you of history: Lincoln suspended Habeas Corpus. "
It was certainly not the brightest moment of Lincoln's presidency, but he did reinstate Habeas Corpus(which the suspension of only affected Maryland a few other areas in the Union) after the Civil War.
And if you are trying to compare the events and time of the Civil War with today, you are surely misguided."
I'm just stating that both are cases where constitutional rights were taken away.
"I find it hilarious that you guys are blaming the bad economy on Bush. Do you even realize how most of this is a consequence of bad decisions during the Clinton administration regarding banks giving out loans?"
Well, technically all of our financial problems can be blamed on one person. Wanna know who he is?
1. Get up.
2. Go to your bathroom.
3. Look at your mirror.
4. Mystery solved.
It was a culmination of people spending money they didn't have and banks taking this money and putting it in stocks. The money stopped coming, the entire infastructure fell out.
Greed, ladies and gentlemen. It was greed.
"
Yes, but Clinton basically encouraged this when he passed a bill forcing banks to loan money to low income families."
thats the point, he gave the money out, knowing they were low income.
People bought houses they couldn't afford, banks went bust.
None of that is Bush's fault, he actually warned congress about it in 2002...they ignored him.
I really hate the Iraq war but the mortgage problem slimmed from Clinton, him doing this did not give loans to people who could not afford to pay them back, but he caused the skyrocketing mortgage pricing which bankrupted the entire system
Now no one can afford houses at all, even medium income people.
usually renting and mortgage pricing is stagnate, they stay around the same levels, since Clinton was in office they have steadily skyrocketed, just look.
Sure diplomats smiled but dude, You thought his approval level in America was low? He leaves his post with his country poorer and stuck in two wars with a weak infrastructure"
This isn't true, right after 9/11 we were loved by the world had over a 90% approval rating abroad especially in europe, after these wars took as long as they did, we got ridiculed. I don't agree with Iraq war but the Afghanistan war was justified."
90% approval rate? You have a source to back that up?
"Oh, and everyone says "He has protected us since 9/11" clearly forgetting that it had happened on his watch. I just find the whole thing to be complete bullshit."
......right, it happened on his watch...after all the signs and threats were IGNORED by Clinton. L2research? Moreover, airport security was NOWHERE near what it is today, and in turn, we have had seven years of threats against America from al Qaeda and other organizations...and how many attacks against US? No, they went elsewhere, like Madrid...where security is horrible. "
Sure diplomats smiled but dude, You thought his approval level in America was low? He leaves his post with his country poorer and stuck in two wars with a weak infrastructure"
This isn't true, right after 9/11 we were loved by the world had over a 90% approval rating abroad especially in europe, after these wars took as long as they did, we got ridiculed. I don't agree with Iraq war but the Afghanistan war was justified."
90% approval rate? You have a source to back that up?"
That's the biggest bullshit I've ever heard. If that's even true, 90% was obviously for empathetic reasons. Bush was in office for less than 2 years at the time of 9/11. Now other countries seem to be prancing around and graciously greeting the door to George W. Bush. He was possibly the most hated internationally over any American president.
"I find it hilarious that you guys are blaming the bad economy on Bush. Do you even realize how most of this is a consequence of bad decisions during the Clinton administration regarding banks giving out loans?"
Are you just ditto heading Rush Limbaugh? 8 years of Bush/CHeney and you ditto heads are still blaming clinton?
The patriot act is treason and it didnt "thwart terrorism" you'd have to be a complete idiot to buy that old gag. The patriot act is a treasonous document that violates the constitution. The OATH OF OFFICE clearly dictates that the president's duty is to DEFEND THE CONSTITUTION. Not to invade oil rich nations and pretend we are promoting "freedom" while we are allied w/ monarchies.
Dunno, remember seeing it a long time ago on a different site then i just did a quick youtube search for the interview.
But Clinton did try to get Osama before 9/11 happened, its just everyone was against him going into Afghanistan to do so at the time and he was so limited by what he could do. The man did everything in his power to go after Osama and he failed, but at least he tried. Straight from the horses mouth.
Who are these denialists who think Bush "handled 9/11" very well? Did you idiots forget the part when the Commander in Chief was informed of the attack? What was his response.... TO SIT AND DO NOTHING FOR 7 MINUTES.
As we say 7 minutes of indecision cost thousands of lives. More time is being spent on the recent Hudson river plane crash (in which no one died) than the time spent on investigating 9/11. How was that a good handling?
"I find it hilarious that you guys are blaming the bad economy on Bush. Do you even realize how most of this is a consequence of bad decisions during the Clinton administration regarding banks giving out loans?"
Well, technically all of our financial problems can be blamed on one person. Wanna know who he is?
1. Get up.
2. Go to your bathroom.
3. Look at your mirror.
4. Mystery solved.
It was a culmination of people spending money they didn't have and banks taking this money and putting it in stocks. The money stopped coming, the entire infastructure fell out.
Greed, ladies and gentlemen. It was greed.
"
Yes, but Clinton basically encouraged this when he passed a bill forcing banks to loan money to low income families."
thats the point, he gave the money out, knowing they were low income.
People bought houses they couldn't afford, banks went bust.
None of that is Bush's fault, he actually warned congress about it in 2002...they ignored him.
I really hate the Iraq war but the mortgage problem slimmed from Clinton, him doing this did not give loans to people who could not afford to pay them back, but he caused the skyrocketing mortgage pricing which bankrupted the entire system
Now no one can afford houses at all, even medium income people.
usually renting and mortgage pricing is stagnate, they stay around the same levels, since Clinton was in office they have steadily skyrocketed, just look.
"
The fact of the matter is that Bush didn't do shit to promote limitation of spending. Also, Guantanamo bay is one of the most unjustified acts I've seen in quite some time. How Bush can even live with himself is astonishing to me.
"The fact of the matter is that Bush didn't do shit to promote limitation of spending. "
What do you think Bush should have done? Should have have told all of the banks they had to recall all of these bad loans and seize their houses? Yeah, that would be real smart.
whackmypinata said:
"Why would your respect him? Was it the way he gave you the feeling of false promise when he gave a speech? Please back that shit up."
Sounds like every politician ever...
Frankly, the government needs to go by laissez faire, at least enough so that corporations, banks, etc. know they can't come crawling to the government when they make irresponsible business decisions.
Frankly, the government needs to go by laissez faire, at least enough so that corporations, banks, etc. know they can't come crawling to the government when they make irresponsible business decisions.
Extreme capitalism doesn't work any better than extreme socialism. Read some history. The only thing de-regulation does is make it easier for corporations to game the system.
Frankly, the government needs to go by laissez faire, at least enough so that corporations, banks, etc. know they can't come crawling to the government when they make irresponsible business decisions.
Extreme capitalism doesn't work any better than extreme socialism. Read some history. The only thing de-regulation does is make it easier for corporations to game the system."
While I believe regulation is important in some instances, the government needs to take a firm stand, first by not passing legislation that will obviously bite us in the butt down the line. Second, they need take a firm stand that they will NOT bail out corporations, and they need to make an example of that so these corporations will get their acts together.
Frankly, the government needs to go by laissez faire, at least enough so that corporations, banks, etc. know they can't come crawling to the government when they make irresponsible business decisions."
Kid, the Reagan/Bush doctrine WAS Laissez-faire. You probably are too young to remember Reagan's bullshit speech about government "can't fix the problem, government *is* the problem". Necons love that rhetoric. Unfortunately that type of rule is what got us Enron, Iraq war, Haliburton and the largest national debt in history. It's also anti-american to think that way.
in americca, the government's job is to protect it's people. Not to spread our type of government to other nations, not to police other nations (when they have a lot of oil) and not to spy on our own citizens. Just a few months back Bush/Mcain were talking about how everything would work itself out because "the fundamentals of our economy are strong" w/ this Laissez-faire approach, that was proven to be complete bunk.
What fantasy land do people live in where corporations without regulations are going to magically become kind hearted and look out for the best interests of the people? The problem here is ignorance, ignorance of history, ignorance of the laws we have in the USA, ignorance of the constitution, the bill of rights etc...
Assclowns like Joe the fake Plumber love to talk about "I don't want to take anyone else's money" and these other fox news talking points. It's meaningless rabble rousing. What about the value of 401ks and the stock market? Where is that money? It's long gone. The top 5% earners in this nation had their wealth grow over 8 years of bush. 95% of americans wealth did not grow in proportion to inflation and cost of living. So under this Bush rule we actually DID give our money to other people, unfortunately to those who are already rich, making them even richer in the process.
There has NEVER been a time in history when letting free markets govern themselves has ever proven beneficial over the long term. You get exactly what we got, short term bubbles based on speculation, cheating, lying, theft and "books cooking" All ponzi schemes eventually fail, and they did.
FIRE economics collapsed. This bogus idea that government should simply as Sarah Palin puts it "Git outta da way of business" was already in effect, and what we have is the result.
We are what we thought we were. A free market economy with little to no oversight, we let the market regulate itself. To no surprise of anyone who studies history, this resulted in the rich getting richer, the poor getting poorer, and the middle class shrinking. The numbers back it up. ALl this "8 years of economic growth" were simple measurements not taking into account WHO got the growth. In 8 years of Bush rule, people like Bush, Kerry, Cheney, Clinton etc.. all got richer. 95% of the rest of us are treading water, barely. And I'm making more money now than I ever have in my life , salary I could have only dreamed of when I was in high school. But measure it against cost of living in CA, taxes (Under bush) and inflation... I am barely any better off than I was 10 years ago making a lower salary.
"The fact of the matter is that Bush didn't do shit to promote limitation of spending. "
What do you think Bush should have done? Should have have told all of the banks they had to recall all of these bad loans and seize their houses? Yeah, that would be real smart.
whackmypinata said:
"Why would your respect him? Was it the way he gave you the feeling of false promise when he gave a speech? Please back that shit up."
Sounds like every politician ever...
Frankly, the government needs to go by laissez faire, at least enough so that corporations, banks, etc. know they can't come crawling to the government when they make irresponsible business decisions."
Preaching that everything's okay and you don't need to do anything is a terrible approach to running the government. Bush was afraid to up the taxes, typically the main ideal used during a war. Obama isn't afraid to tell the people that they need to make sacrifices, unlike Bush.
And laissez faire has been the shit that's been going on for more than the past 8 years..
"I find it hilarious that you guys are blaming the bad economy on Bush. Do you even realize how most of this is a consequence of bad decisions during the Clinton administration regarding banks giving out loans?"
Well, technically all of our financial problems can be blamed on one person. Wanna know who he is?
1. Get up.
2. Go to your bathroom.
3. Look at your mirror.
4. Mystery solved.
It was a culmination of people spending money they didn't have and banks taking this money and putting it in stocks. The money stopped coming, the entire infastructure fell out.
Greed, ladies and gentlemen. It was greed.
"
Yes, but Clinton basically encouraged this when he passed a bill forcing banks to loan money to low income families."
thats the point, he gave the money out, knowing they were low income.
People bought houses they couldn't afford, banks went bust.
None of that is Bush's fault, he actually warned congress about it in 2002...they ignored him.
I really hate the Iraq war but the mortgage problem slimmed from Clinton, him doing this did not give loans to people who could not afford to pay them back, but he caused the skyrocketing mortgage pricing which bankrupted the entire system
Now no one can afford houses at all, even medium income people.
usually renting and mortgage pricing is stagnate, they stay around the same levels, since Clinton was in office they have steadily skyrocketed, just look.
"
The fact of the matter is that Bush didn't do shit to promote limitation of spending. Also, Guantanamo bay is one of the most unjustified acts I've seen in quite some time. How Bush can even live with himself is astonishing to me."
1. That spending was more to do with Congress than the president, they promised alot of things, you know entitlements plans inorder to get elected. 2. We are still going to have detention centers like Gitmo, they are going to be spread out around the world. Your switching from openly fucking people over to secretly fucking someone over, no real change there.
"The fact of the matter is that Bush didn't do shit to promote limitation of spending. "
What do you think Bush should have done? Should have have told all of the banks they had to recall all of these bad loans and seize their houses? Yeah, that would be real smart.
whackmypinata said:
"Why would your respect him? Was it the way he gave you the feeling of false promise when he gave a speech? Please back that shit up."
Sounds like every politician ever...
Frankly, the government needs to go by laissez faire, at least enough so that corporations, banks, etc. know they can't come crawling to the government when they make irresponsible business decisions."
Preaching that everything's okay and you don't need to do anything is a terrible approach to running the government. Bush was afraid to up the taxes, typically the main ideal used during a war. Obama isn't afraid to tell the people that they need to make sacrifices, unlike Bush.
And laissez faire has been the shit that's been going on for more than the past 8 years.."
I wouldn't call a $700 billion bail out laissez faire.
"The fact of the matter is that Bush didn't do shit to promote limitation of spending. "
What do you think Bush should have done? Should have have told all of the banks they had to recall all of these bad loans and seize their houses? Yeah, that would be real smart.
whackmypinata said:
"Why would your respect him? Was it the way he gave you the feeling of false promise when he gave a speech? Please back that shit up."
Sounds like every politician ever...
Frankly, the government needs to go by laissez faire, at least enough so that corporations, banks, etc. know they can't come crawling to the government when they make irresponsible business decisions."
Preaching that everything's okay and you don't need to do anything is a terrible approach to running the government. Bush was afraid to up the taxes, typically the main ideal used during a war. Obama isn't afraid to tell the people that they need to make sacrifices, unlike Bush.
And laissez faire has been the shit that's been going on for more than the past 8 years.."
I wouldn't call a $700 billion bail out laissez faire."
I would call handing out that money to be spent without regulations "Laissez-Faire". Très laissez faire, to the point where one should be changed with criminal negligence.
"Bush didn't make the country better in any way. We are in a worse state by far than we were going in. Bad economy, less personal freedoms, yaddayaddayadda . . . I don't think he's the worst ever, but he sure as hell didn't do a lot of good for the nation.
For evidence, I point to the debt clock that needs an extra digit.
I dont think bush is to blame for the economy going to shit, the whole world is having trouble with their economy. I blame oil prices, theres less oil, it will jun out this century, bush went to war for oil, probably used more oil than they would have gained
"Who are these denialists who think Bush "handled 9/11" very well? Did you idiots forget the part when the Commander in Chief was informed of the attack? What was his response.... TO SIT AND DO NOTHING FOR 7 MINUTES.
As we say 7 minutes of indecision cost thousands of lives. More time is being spent on the recent Hudson river plane crash (in which no one died) than the time spent on investigating 9/11. How was that a good handling?"
Would you of rather had him stand up and panic? I admire the way he handled it because even when the world was starting to panic, our commander in cheif was calm. Calm people make rational decisions, people who panic tend to not. President Bush was sitting around school children reading a book, I don't think by him sitting there he was any less of a man. Leaving would of just made the children upset, and leaving in a fury of panic would of made them scared. So please tell me, how would you of handled the situation?
Also, do you expect that if he had jumped up and started walking to his car, he could of prevented the atrocity that was already in process?
"Who are these denialists who think Bush "handled 9/11" very well? Did you idiots forget the part when the Commander in Chief was informed of the attack? What was his response.... TO SIT AND DO NOTHING FOR 7 MINUTES.
As we say 7 minutes of indecision cost thousands of lives. More time is being spent on the recent Hudson river plane crash (in which no one died) than the time spent on investigating 9/11. How was that a good handling?"
Would you of rather had him stand up and panic? I admire the way he handled it because even when the world was starting to panic, our commander in cheif was calm. Calm people make rational decisions, people who panic tend to not. President Bush was sitting around school children reading a book, I don't think by him sitting there he was any less of a man. Leaving would of just made the children upset, and leaving in a fury of panic would of made them scared. So please tell me, how would you of handled the situation?
Also, do you expect that if he had jumped up and started walking to his car, he could of prevented the atrocity that was already in process? "
A man like Bush cannot handle any kind of situation, any successful attempts can be solely blamed on coincidence. The man is a moron on so many levels.
look guys there is only four dudes who can seriously understand wether or not he did a good or bad job. that is clinton, bush sr, carter, and obama. they are the only people who can understand what the job is like. you guys can all sit at you computer desks in your boxers and socks and act like you know so much about the world and so on all you want.
Log in to comment