• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

If it wasn't for the war in Iraq, liberal-left Americans would LOVE Bush

Mensch

Mr. Professional
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 12, 2010
Messages
3,715
Reaction score
751
Location
Northern Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I was just reading up on some CBO stats and I was considering the differences between Bush and Obama's domestic shop-till-you-drop spending. I hear from so many different people on the left, whether they be respectable men like Obama or so-so men like Bill Maher, that republicans are hypocrites for criticizing Obama's hefty spending exercises while Bush "started the mess." If Bush started the process of bailing out banks, and Obama accelerated this process, is Bush wrong because he somehow didn't spend enough?

Bush, as president, dealt legislation that spent more on prescription drugs for seniors than any previous president. More direct spending on education (of course coupled with some heavy testing). More direct spending on welfare programs, despite what so many people argue. He also tilted the tax burden MORE towards the wealthy...and here's the CBO to prove it:

Historical Effective Federal Tax Rates:1979 to 2005

From 2000 through 2005, income Taxes paid by the wealthiest 20 percent increased from 81 percent of all income tax revenue to 86 percent despite no change in income distribution. This resulted from low-income tax cuts removing 10 million filers from the income tax rolls.

Despite his verbal stupidity, his hawkish war policies, or his hyper-Christianity, liberals should love this guy for getting the ball rolling for Obama. Hell, if he didn't...there would be no one to blame for TODAY's massively increased deficit spending. And of course, when you have someone you can always blame, you're able to divert attention elsewhere.

BTW, I am NO fan of Bush or the republican party.
 

tacomancer

Christian Capitalist Social Democrat
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
44,212
Reaction score
24,368
Location
Akron
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
Its possible. I didn't get started becoming angry at Bush until he started going overboard after 9/11.
 

spud_meister

Veni, vidi, dormivi!
Dungeon Master
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 6, 2009
Messages
36,134
Reaction score
21,531
Location
Didjabringabeeralong
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Communist
Despite his verbal stupidity, his hawkish war policies, or his hyper-Christianity, liberals should love this guy for getting the ball rolling for Obama. Hell, if he didn't...there would be no one to blame for TODAY's massively increased deficit spending. And of course, when you have someone you can always blame, you're able to divert attention elsewhere.

Of course, the deficit would not be as bad if Bush hadn't been as fiscally liberal, so it's more or less a moot point.
 

samsmart

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 7, 2009
Messages
10,315
Reaction score
6,468
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
I was just reading up on some CBO stats and I was considering the differences between Bush and Obama's domestic shop-till-you-drop spending. I hear from so many different people on the left, whether they be respectable men like Obama or so-so men like Bill Maher, that republicans are hypocrites for criticizing Obama's hefty spending exercises while Bush "started the mess." If Bush started the process of bailing out banks, and Obama accelerated this process, is Bush wrong because he somehow didn't spend enough?

Bush, as president, dealt legislation that spent more on prescription drugs for seniors than any previous president. More direct spending on education (of course coupled with some heavy testing). More direct spending on welfare programs, despite what so many people argue. He also tilted the tax burden MORE towards the wealthy...and here's the CBO to prove it:

Historical Effective Federal Tax Rates:1979 to 2005

From 2000 through 2005, income Taxes paid by the wealthiest 20 percent increased from 81 percent of all income tax revenue to 86 percent despite no change in income distribution. This resulted from low-income tax cuts removing 10 million filers from the income tax rolls.

Despite his verbal stupidity, his hawkish war policies, or his hyper-Christianity, liberals should love this guy for getting the ball rolling for Obama. Hell, if he didn't...there would be no one to blame for TODAY's massively increased deficit spending. And of course, when you have someone you can always blame, you're able to divert attention elsewhere.

BTW, I am NO fan of Bush or the republican party.

Then why don't more conservatives appreciate Obama for continuing the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan? Why don't more conservatives appreciate Obama for trying to cut taxes on the middle class and shift more of the tax burden away from them? Why don't more conservatives applaud Obama for not abusing the powers of his office during the BP oil spill? Why don't more conservatives applaud Obama for how he let the private sector deal with it? Why don't more conservatives celebrate Obama for not passing any major legislation that increases gun control? Why don't more conservatives sympathize with Obama for not repealing the PATRIOT Act and allowing America to retain the tools they need to ensure our national security?

Instead, Obama is being demonized as the worst President in history and the single source of why the U.S. is going down the crapper.

So both sides can play this game.
 

Aunt Spiker

Cheese
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 20, 2009
Messages
28,431
Reaction score
16,987
Location
Sasnakra
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
Its possible. I didn't get started becoming angry at Bush until he started going overboard after 9/11.

So you're angry with Obama, now?

Because his spending far outdoes Bush's spending - he's like a spoiled compulsive comfort shopper with Daddy's credit card let loose on the American Mall. . . and nothing he's spent has done anything.

"1500 dollars for a leather bustier - I didn't care, - it lifts and separates"
YouTube - CitiBank Identity Theft Commercial

I was pissed with Bush - and I'm pissed with Obama.
Equal-Hate in a Can.
 
Last edited:

tacomancer

Christian Capitalist Social Democrat
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
44,212
Reaction score
24,368
Location
Akron
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
So you're angry with Obama, now?

Because his spending far outdoes Bush's spending - he's like a spoiled compulsive comfort shopper with Daddy's credit card let loose on the American Mall.

"1500 dollars for a leather bustier - I didn't care, - it lifts and separates"
YouTube - CitiBank Identity Theft Commercial

The spending has never really bothered me from either president. I think its too high, but I don't think its the trap that many fear it to be.

Also, I don't hold the view point that all spending is equal. I generally applaud infrastructure spending as it will help make us more wealthy (like a capex project), while I dislike spending that has no return.
 
Last edited:

Aunt Spiker

Cheese
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 20, 2009
Messages
28,431
Reaction score
16,987
Location
Sasnakra
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
The spending has never really bothered me from either president. I think its too high, but I don't think its the trap that many fear it to be.

I'll revisit this thread in 20 years to laugh at you when you're complaining about it all.
 

tacomancer

Christian Capitalist Social Democrat
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
44,212
Reaction score
24,368
Location
Akron
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
I'll revisit this thread in 20 years to laugh at you when you're complaining about it all.

In 20 years, I will probably be living in another country if my current plans come to fruition. Once I finish paying off everything (4 years at current rates), the next step is to save up enough money to be independent and able to take risks that won't ruin me (about 12-15 years if I invest all of my wife's teaching salary), then I will probably move to Canada or Australia. Why stay on a sinking ship?
 
Last edited:

liblady

pirate lover
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 7, 2009
Messages
16,164
Reaction score
5,060
Location
St Thomas, VI
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Progressive
In 20 years, I will probably be living in another country if my current plans come to fruition. Once I finish paying off everything (4 years at current rates), the next step is to save up enough money to be independent and able to take risks that won't ruin me (about 12-15 years if I invest all of my wife's teaching salary), then I will probably move to Canada or Australia. Why stay on a sinking ship?

i'll be gone in about 16 months......but to the tropics.
 

tacomancer

Christian Capitalist Social Democrat
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
44,212
Reaction score
24,368
Location
Akron
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
i'll be gone in about 16 months......but to the tropics.

I have lost faith in the long term viability of this country. We have a load of problems and nobody is being serious about actually fixing them. The US will probably survive, but in a much diminished capacity and I don't want to be here for the fall-out.
 
Last edited:

Aunt Spiker

Cheese
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 20, 2009
Messages
28,431
Reaction score
16,987
Location
Sasnakra
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
In 20 years, I will probably be living in another country if my current plans come to fruition. Once I finish paying off everything (4 years at current rates), the next step is to save up enough money to be independent and able to take risks that won't ruin me (about 12-15 years if I invest all of my wife's teaching salary), then I will probably move to Canada or Australia. Why stay on a sinking ship?

But you said it didn't bother you.
 

tacomancer

Christian Capitalist Social Democrat
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
44,212
Reaction score
24,368
Location
Akron
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
But you said it didn't bother you.

I was speaking about other trends I see going on in the country that I believe are far more problematic, such as growing anti-intellectualism, narcisism, and few other things. My plan is to gain enough savings that I can bug out if necessary, but I may stay, depending on how things work out.

The debt is higher than I would like, but it doesn't bother me as much as some other issues I am far more interested in such as education and societal welfare. Personally, I think we shouldn't have more than 20% debt in GDP after spending on a recession and 0% in a normal economy.
 

Aunt Spiker

Cheese
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 20, 2009
Messages
28,431
Reaction score
16,987
Location
Sasnakra
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
I was speaking about other trends I see going on in the country that I believe are far more problematic, such as growing anti-intellectualism, narcisism, and few other things. My plan is to gain enough savings that I can bug out if necessary, but I may stay, depending on how things work out.

The debt is higher than I would like, but it doesn't bother me as much as some other issues I am far more interested in such as education and societal welfare. Personally, I think we shouldn't have more than 20% debt in GDP after spending on a recession and 0% in a normal economy.

Oh trust me - that's not an "American Only" thing.
You'll just trade one thing for another if you nation-hop around.
 

samsmart

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 7, 2009
Messages
10,315
Reaction score
6,468
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
I have lost faith in the long term viability of this country. We have a load of problems and nobody is being serious about actually fixing them. The US will probably survive, but in a much diminished capacity and I don't want to be here for the fall-out.

 

tacomancer

Christian Capitalist Social Democrat
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
44,212
Reaction score
24,368
Location
Akron
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
Oh trust me - that's not an "American Only" thing.
You'll just trade one thing for another if you nation-hop around.

You may be right.
 

MKULTRABOY

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 5, 2009
Messages
10,621
Reaction score
2,104
Location
In your dreams...
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
Where exactly would you plan on going out of curiosity. I also want to leave the country eventually when I'm done with college and have a chance at employment overseas. Sometimes I feel like I wouldn't even look back.
 

Aunt Spiker

Cheese
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 20, 2009
Messages
28,431
Reaction score
16,987
Location
Sasnakra
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
You may be right.

On the other hand - many have gone abroad and loved it. Yet others went abroad and just missed the US even more.
It depends on why you're gone, who you are, and where you go - and the experiences you have.
 

Mensch

Mr. Professional
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 12, 2010
Messages
3,715
Reaction score
751
Location
Northern Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Its possible. I didn't get started becoming angry at Bush until he started going overboard after 9/11.

I know. That's my point.

I sympathize with that, however I don't imagine democrat presidents are any wiser in foreign policy issues. Nor is any democrat president a dove president. Obama is accelerating the war in Afghanistan, and what are your thoughts? Do you criticize that decison, or support it? Obama promised the end of Gitmo in a year, and that has not exactly happened. As samsmart pointed out, he also has not reversed the 9/14 executive order that gives the president nearly unlimited power to wage a covert and shady war on terror. How is Obama any better than Bush in that regard?
 

tacomancer

Christian Capitalist Social Democrat
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
44,212
Reaction score
24,368
Location
Akron
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
I know. That's my point.

I sympathize with that, however I don't imagine democrat presidents are any wiser in foreign policy issues. Nor is any democrat president a dove president. Obama is accelerating the war in Afghanistan, and what are your thoughts?

I support the war in Afghanistan, due to the country's culpability in 9/11, so I have no problem with it. On a practical level, I think their culture is yet too primitive to support any sort of modern and peaceful government though, so I am still equivocating on how much good we are actually doing.

Do you criticize that decison, or support it?

See above.

Obama promised the end of Gitmo in a year, and that has not exactly happened.

My understanding is that Obama had every intention (and still does) of ending Gitmo, but it has proven to be more complicated than originally thought. I think he should just bite the bullet and send them to a federal prison some where. I have seen multiple stories of towns with empty prisons that would love the work due to unemployment.

As samsmart pointed out, he also has not reversed the 9/14 executive order that gives the president nearly unlimited power to wage a covert and shady war on terror. How is Obama any better than Bush in that regard?

That one is a real problem. Any war should be fought with a maximum of transparency that does not endanger the mission.
 
Last edited:

Mensch

Mr. Professional
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 12, 2010
Messages
3,715
Reaction score
751
Location
Northern Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Of course, the deficit would not be as bad if Bush hadn't been as fiscally liberal, so it's more or less a moot point.

I disagree. How is it a moot point when it serves as justification to accelerate government spending at the federal level? When criticized about higher deficit spending, the current White House only has the previous administration to fall back on. They criticize the critics for not being more hard on Bush, while intentionally diverting the attention away from the well obvious fact that the current admin. has uped the ante.

Now, I know the recession is a tough one. But it is not exactly like the Great Depression. And we've been told time and time again that this recession has been the worst recession since the Great Depression. Does that justify Depression-era spending? Even If you were debating a Keynesian, I would still have to argue that no, it does not. Spending 83% of our GDP on government liabilities is absurd.
 

Mensch

Mr. Professional
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 12, 2010
Messages
3,715
Reaction score
751
Location
Northern Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I support the war in Afghanistan, due to the country's culpability in 9/11, so I have no problem with it. On a practical level, I think their culture is yet too primitive to support any sort of modern and peaceful government though, so I am still equivocating on how much good we are actually doing.

WOW! I would keep your xenophobic, ethnocentric thoughts to yourself. Obama would never say anything like that, and neither would I.

My understanding is that Obama had every intention (and still does) of ending Gitmo, but it has proven to be more complicated than originally thought. I think he should just bite the bullet and send them to a federal prison some where. I have seen multiple stories of towns with empty prisons that would love the work due to unemployment.

And what is your thoughts on the civil trials in NYC? Shouldn't they be military tribunals?



That one is a real problem. Any war should be fought with a maximum of transparency that does not endanger the mission.

Hmmm. Obama has no intention of reversing this order or doing anything about reversing the Patriot Act, and yet people on the far left (and I'm not saying you are) continue to call Bush the war-mongering fascist. Obama has not reversed the fundamental laws and decrees that make this war on terror what it truly is- just another goverment failure.
 

Mustachio

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2010
Messages
3,824
Reaction score
1,807
Location
Minneapolis
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
I was just reading up on some CBO stats and I was considering the differences between Bush and Obama's domestic shop-till-you-drop spending. I hear from so many different people on the left, whether they be respectable men like Obama or so-so men like Bill Maher, that republicans are hypocrites for criticizing Obama's hefty spending exercises while Bush "started the mess." If Bush started the process of bailing out banks, and Obama accelerated this process, is Bush wrong because he somehow didn't spend enough?

Bush, as president, dealt legislation that spent more on prescription drugs for seniors than any previous president. More direct spending on education (of course coupled with some heavy testing). More direct spending on welfare programs, despite what so many people argue. He also tilted the tax burden MORE towards the wealthy...and here's the CBO to prove it:

Historical Effective Federal Tax Rates:1979 to 2005

From 2000 through 2005, income Taxes paid by the wealthiest 20 percent increased from 81 percent of all income tax revenue to 86 percent despite no change in income distribution. This resulted from low-income tax cuts removing 10 million filers from the income tax rolls.

Despite his verbal stupidity, his hawkish war policies, or his hyper-Christianity, liberals should love this guy for getting the ball rolling for Obama. Hell, if he didn't...there would be no one to blame for TODAY's massively increased deficit spending. And of course, when you have someone you can always blame, you're able to divert attention elsewhere.

BTW, I am NO fan of Bush or the republican party.

How about Bush's environmental policies, like redefining the language of the clean air act and the clear water act. How about when Bush vetoed embryonic stem cell research? Or his attempt to fundamentally change social security? Or his response (or lack thereof) to hurricane Katrina? Or the fact that his lawyers bocked the possibility of a statewide recount in Florida after the election? And no child left behind? And the patriot act? Or the fact that he appointed two conservative supreme court judges? Oh, and wiretapping without warrants through the NSA.

Yeah, I don't think there's much about that presidency that liberals "would" love.
 
Last edited:

Mensch

Mr. Professional
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 12, 2010
Messages
3,715
Reaction score
751
Location
Northern Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
How about Bush's environmental policies, like redefining the language of the clean air act and the clear water act. How about when Bush vetoed embryonic stem cell research? Or his attempt to fundamentally change social security? Or his response (or lack thereof) to hurricane Katrina? Or the fact that his lawyers bocked the possibility of a statewide recount in Florida after the election? And no child left behind? And the patriot act? Or the fact that he appointed two conservative supreme court judges? Oh, and wiretapping without warrants through the NSA.

Yeah, I don't think there's much about that presidency that liberals "would" love.

I've heard it all before. The question is, how will Obama be any better or wiser? Why isn't Obama reversing the 9/14 order? Why isn't he trying to reverse the Patriot Act? Why is Gitmo still open? Why are we fighting a harder, longer war in Afghanistan? Is it truly any different than the war on terror? Making a greater enemy out of the people of Pakistan, and lingering in Afghanistan like the Soviets- how is he doing any better?
 

ZGM

Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2010
Messages
122
Reaction score
7
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Even if Bush wasn't behind the 9/11 attacks, he's still a creep.
 
Top Bottom