George W. Bush Approval Rating

[Greg.]

What do you think about the whole presidency of George W. Bush?

 

[celticwar17]

I think George Bush was good for 9/11. I think he lead and handled 9/11 very well. As much as some people hated him or whatever... I still think most felt that George W was a capable leader that would keep America safe. He gave a lot of people a healthy dose of patriotism/nationalism that was needed.

If we had to go to a WW3 I would choose GWB over Obama without a slight hesitation. He's more competent in that area and doesn't give off the weakness I believe Obama can give.

I don't think GWB, like a lot of conspiracy people think, was a devious man. There are so many gears in the works everywhere and WW3 is on the doorstep every other day... that the public rarely ever knows about.

I did not like his domestic policies which includes no child left behind, and overspending in many areas. No economic solutions were preemptively imposed, just to be pushed back for another president to deal with.

So I think he was good and bad....

 

[Greg.]

I think George Bush was good for 9/11. I think he lead and handled 9/11 very well. As much as some people hated him or whatever... I still think most felt that George W was a capable leader that would keep America safe. He gave a lot of people a healthy dose of patriotism/nationalism that was needed.

If we had to go to a WW3 I would choose GWB over Obama without a slight hesitation. He's more competent in that area and doesn't give off the weakness I believe Obama can give.

I don't think GWB, like a lot of conspiracy people think, was a devious man. There are so many gears in the works everywhere and WW3 is on the doorstep every other day... that the public rarely ever knows about.

I did not like his domestic policies which includes no child left behind, and overspending in many areas. No economic solutions were preemptively imposed, just to be pushed back for another president to deal with.

So I think he was good and bad....

But George W Bush was not only better for 9/11. In all the points he was a great president.

 

[Mycroft]

To my perception, Bush was more of a leader than Obama is and this was apparent primarily in his first term. In his second term, due mostly to the constant wearing down on him by the Democrats, he started trying to "go with the flow" and he made some mistakes that showed me he wasn't able or willing to lead any longer. A couple of those mistakes were his illegal immigration amnesty efforts and his Harriet Miers Supreme Court nomination. These mistakes, among others, earned him the derision of a large portion of his own Party.

But any way you slice it, Bush will always be considered a better President than Obama.

 

[pbrauer]

But George W Bush was not only better for 9/11. In all the points he was a great president.

Are you kidding me? Approximately 5000 of our troops died in Iraq NEEDLESSLY because of President Bush. Bush's tax cuts, his war in Iraq and his Medicare Part "D" added significantly to the Debt. At the end of his presidency the country was losing 800K jobs a month.
As for him being a good leader... He let Osama bin Laden escape at Tora Bora, Afghanistan.

 

[APACHERAT]

If we had to go to a WW3 I would choose GWB over Obama without a slight hesitation. He's more competent in that area and doesn't give off the weakness I believe Obama can give.

War vets miss commander in chief George W. Bush

War vets miss commander in chief George W. Bush - The Washington Post

 

[Grant]

Are you kidding me? Approximately 5000 of our troops died in Iraq NEEDLESSLY because of President Bush. Bush's tax cuts, his war in Iraq and his Medicare Part "D" added significantly to the Debt. At the end of his presidency the country was losing 800K jobs a month. As for him being a good leader... He let Osama bin Laden escape at Tora Bora, Afghanistan.

Bush brought stability to Iraq with the US and Coalition governments in place to prevent what we see there now. Bush also knew that the war on terrorists would take many years but Obama foolishly assumed that once Iraq was "stable", it would always remain that way.

As Bush said, Osama was not all that important apart from the symbolism. With OBL gone do you now see less terrorism in the world?

The US debt has achieved unmanageable heights since Barrack Obama came into office and with nothing to show for it. No one can look to anything he has done with those trillions of dollars borrowed and spent since he came into office. He has no positives anywhere.

The debate now is not whether Obama is the worst leader in American history but whether he has been the worst leader in any western democracy anywhere.

 

[iguanaman]

But George W Bush was not only better for 9/11. In all the points he was a great president.

I suggest if you want more 911's you should elect more Presidents like Bush. He was a perfect patsy for the terrorists because he didn't care about Bin Laden only Saddam Hussein, who never tried to attacked us.

 

[Perotista]

What do you think about the whole presidency of George W. Bush?

About the same as I do Obama's. Both were below average presidents and both will leave this nation worse off once out of office. Especially with the debt. Both have had their good moments, not all bad. But I firmly believe this nation would have been better off without both.

But then when I think of Al Gore being president instead of Bush II, Bush II was the least worst choice. Ditto with John Kerry. But even electing a least worst choice doesn't leave you with a good president.

 

[iguanaman]

Bush brought stability to Iraq with the US and Coalition governments in place to prevent what we see there now. Bush also knew that the war on terrorists would take many years but Obama foolishly assumed that once Iraq was "stable", it would always remain that way.

As Bush said, Osama was not all that important apart from the symbolism. With OBL gone do you now see less terrorism in the world?

The US debt has achieved unmanageable heights since Barrack Obama came into office and with nothing to show for it. No one can look to anything he has done with those trillions of dollars borrowed and spent since he came into office. He has no positives anywhere.

The debate now is not whether Obama is the worst leader in American history but whether he has been the worst leader in any western democracy anywhere.

Bush brought INSTABILITY to the entire Middle East with his ill advised invasion of Iraq and the installing of a Shia Iranian sympathizer as leader of Iraq. It has caused the rise of Sunni terrorists seeking to restore the balance between the sects.

 

[iguanaman]

War vets miss commander in chief George W. Bush

War vets miss commander in chief George W. Bush - The Washington Post

I bet they miss their legs more.

 

[Unrepresented]

George W. Bush:

1) Allowed the greatest terrorist attack in the US which lost thousands of Americans' lives.

2) Took an economy that was generating a surplus revenue and after tax cuts and deregulation managed to create the worst economic crisis of the last half century which we're still recovering from.

3) Started two wars which killed tens of thousands and wasted countless amounts of treasure and resources.

 

[Gringo allstar]

I bet they miss their legs more.

You sir put the ass in class.

 

[Gringo allstar]

I bet they miss their legs more.

What's next, there was no WMD's

 

[Fiddytree]

George W. Bush:

1) Allowed the greatest terrorist attack in the US which lost thousands of Americans' lives.

Systemic failure occuring between two administrations.

2) Took an economy that was generating a surplus revenue and after tax cuts and deregulation managed to create the worst economic crisis of the last half century which we're still recovering from.

Although one will have qualms about how one would view the surplus, and while it is true that administration policies accelerated decline, I put much of the blame on the American people.

3) Started two wars which killed tens of thousands and wasted countless amounts of treasure and resources.

Started the first war under mostly unanimous support, and would have surely been hunted for not doing this conflict. The second one will probably be seen as a waste, largely worsened by self-delusion within the administration.

 

[APACHERAT]

George W. Bush:

1) Allowed the greatest terrorist attack in the US which lost thousands of Americans' lives.

President Bush just continued with President Clinton's failed anti terrorist policies.

But Bush didn't spend eight years blaming those failed policies on Clinton that Al Qaeda wasn't a national security issue but a law enforcement issue. Or Clinton's Attorney General Janet Reno's "wall" that didn't allow intelligence agencies and law enforcement to share information with each other that prevented the dots being connected.

 

[Mycroft]

President Bush just continued with President Clinton's failed anti terrorist policies.

But Bush didn't spend eight years blaming those failed policies on Clinton that Al Qaeda wasn't a national security issue but a law enforcement issue. Or Clinton's Attorney General Janet Reno's "wall" that didn't allow intelligence agencies and law enforcement to share information with each other that prevented the dots being connected.

Not to mention Clinton deliberately declining to take out bin Laden when he had the chance.

 

[iguanaman]

President Bush just continued with President Clinton's failed anti terrorist policies.

But Bush didn't spend eight years blaming those failed policies on Clinton that Al Qaeda wasn't a national security issue but a law enforcement issue. Or Clinton's Attorney General Janet Reno's "wall" that didn't allow intelligence agencies and law enforcement to share information with each other that prevented the dots being connected.

If only he did that there would have been no 911. Bush decided that Saddam Hussien was more important than Bin Laden and chose to ignore all the warnings about an attack from Alqueada. Clinton told Bush to watch out for Bin Laden and Bush ignored him. That is the sad truth.

 

[APACHERAT]

Not to mention Clinton deliberately declining to take out bin Laden when he had the chance.

Not to forget that the Sudan offered to arrest and turn over Bin Laden in 1996 and Clinton refused the offer.

But who actually convinced Clinton to deny the offer ? No other than Susan Rice, the same Susan Rice who's Obama's National Security Adviser.

 

[VanceMack]

This is why you let History judge presidents. A large number of democrats hated George Bush before he ever took office. They responded like Gollum because the terrible nasty hobbit stole their ring of power. And if you thought democrats responded bad to losing the 2000 election, OHMIGAWD they were literally on suicide watch following the 2004 election. Some of my grad program cohort looked like the walking dead for a month. NONE of that is an even slight exaggeration. And when the dems took the house and senate in 2006? There was some bitter angry celebrating going on. Bush never stood a chance of being successful in their eyes.

The flip side to that coin is the number of die hard republicans that see no flaws or errors in Bush. They ignore the lack of spending controls. They ignore the intrusions on peoples personal liberties. They ignore his failings on handling the post war ops in both Afghanistan and Iraq.

Ask a mixed group of die hard dems and reps who was responsible for 9/11 and the fingers will immediately get pointed 50/50 at Clinton and Bush. They would both be right...but for all the wrong reasons. Ask who was responsible for the banking and housing collapses...same results. Responding to natural disasters, who was worse? Same responses. I think it speaks volumes about the typical mindless partisan hack in this country far less than what it should say about Bush. Or Clinton. Or Obama. Or for that matter, both major parties and Congress.

Bush did a good job as president. Not a GREAT job, but a good job. I think thats how history will judge him. Clinton did a GREAT job as president. In a lot of ways he took Reagans game to a whole new level. Where Reagan was great at working with the other party, Clinton was great at letting the other party pass legislation, take credit for the good parts, cast blame about the bad parts, and the country (and Clinton) by and large benefited from it. But Clinton had to deal with the beginnings of really brutally ugly partisanship throughout his last 4 years and that partisanship got amped up even higher during the Bush administration. Thats why you cant really judge the Bush presidency fairly.

 

[APACHERAT]

If only he did that there would have been no 911. Bush decided that Saddam Hussien was more important than Bin Laden and chose to ignore all the warnings about an attack from Alqueada. Clinton told Bush to watch out for Bin Laden and Bush ignored him. That is the sad truth.

Every President every day are briefed every morning except maybe Obama of a possible terrorist attack on America. 99.99% it never pans out.

It was political correctness that allowed the Clinton State Department to issue visas to the Al Qaeda terrorist and it was political correctness that allowed the eleven terrorist to board the three aircraft on the morning of 9-11-01.

 

[LowDown]

Bush was a very effective President. He led us to two wars, got his legislative agenda passed into law, and worked successfully with the Democrats except when it came to reining in Fanny Mae and Freddie Mac, and that was because those two institutions were cash cows for Democratic politicians and were being leveraged for votes for Democrats. The over trillion dollars of toxic debt infused into the financial system by those institutions is what primarily resulted in the financial crisis. If Bush had not acted to shore up the finanicial system the whole thing would most likely have collapsed. Bush officials had repeatedly pleaded with Democrats to cooperate in getting the toxic debt underwriting down, but to no avail.

Bush has always been a class act. He is and was way more presidential than either Clinton or Obama, for whom crass and ugly rhetoric, divisiveness, and blame shifting is apparently seen as "cool" by their supporters.

 

[TeleKat]

Bush was a terrible President who sent soldiers to die in an interventionist war, had little to no regard for the constitution, expanded domestic government surveillance, spent like a drunken sailor, continued the awful war on drugs, and more.

 

[Grant]

Bush brought INSTABILITY to the entire Middle East with his ill advised invasion of Iraq and the installing of a Shia Iranian sympathizer as leader of Iraq. It has caused the rise of Sunni terrorists seeking to restore the balance between the sects.

In fact people with greater access to information than you said that Iraq was stable and in fact the Obama Administrations "greatest achievement".

This may help.

Obama in 2011: ‘We’re Leaving Behind A Stable And Self-Reliant Iraq’

Watch Joe Biden Call Iraq "One of the Great Achievements of This Administration" | The Daily Caller

 

[iguanaman]

Every President every day are briefed every morning except maybe Obama of a possible terrorist attack on America. 99.99% it never pans out.

It was political correctness that allowed the Clinton State Department to issue visas to the Al Qaeda terrorist and it was political correctness that allowed the eleven terrorist to board the three aircraft on the morning of 9-11-01.

And it was GW Bush who was warned repeatedly that Alqaeda would attack with airplanes soon and did nothing to warn the nation or the airlines of the danger.

"I don't think anybody could have predicted that these people would take an airplane and slam it into the World Trade Center, take another one and slam it into the Pentagon, that they would try to use an airplane as a missile, a hijacked airplane as a missile."
-- Condoleeza Rice May 16 2002 Press Conference:

"The attack will be spectacular and designed to inflict mass casualties against U.S. facilities or interests. Attack preparations have been made. Attack will occur with little or no warning."
-- CIA Intelligence Report for President Bush, July 2001

Indeed, the administration's level of inaction was so negligent that senior intelligence officials actually considered resigning, so as not to be in a position of responsibility when the attack took place:


"Officials at the Counterterrorism Center of the C.I.A. grew apoplectic. On July 9, at a meeting of the counterterrorism group, one official suggested that the staff put in for a transfer so that somebody else would be responsible when the attack took place, two people who were there told me in interviews. The suggestion was batted down, they said, because there would be no time to train anyone else."

For a long time, the administration successfully covered up this series of events, by employing the clever strategy of revealing a small and ultimately misleading part of the truth: In April 2004, it declassified a single daily briefing, that featured the startling headline "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S.," but on closer examination did not contain much in the way of specifics regarding the attack, which took place just 35 days after the memo's printing.

Releasing this single briefing was deeply misleading, because it gave the impression that the administration had been given just one rather vague warning about the impending attack, rather than a series of much more concrete briefings, which ought to have put the government on high alert. The shocking truth, if Eichenwald is correct, is that the Bush administration was told enough in advance about the nature and timing of the 9/11 attacks that it could quite possibly have stopped them, but, for whatever reason, President Bush and his advisers chose to ignore those warnings. (According to Eichenwald, some White House neocons believed, "Bin Laden was merely pretending to be planning an attack to distract the administration from Saddam Hussein, whom the neoconservatives saw as a greater threat.")

9/11 warnings: not a surprise attack nor intelligence "failure"