Bush and Cheney remind us how we got into this mess

[Crabtownboy]

Yes, they remind us of how we got in this mess and "C" IMHO comes off as a little man still wanting to settle real and imagined scores. I believe they know in their hearts that history will judge them very harshly. Remember a definitive history is generally acknowledged to be impossible to write until at least 100 years after an event or series of events. By the the real results and effects will be known. We are far too close to know how all this, which they began, will play out. I predict it will not be pretty as it is already ugly.

Yes, it is an opinion piece. But isn't that what we do here on most of the time on this BB, give our opinions?

Thank you, George W. Bush and Dick Cheney, for emerging from your secure, undisclosed locations to remind us how we got into this mess: It didn’t happen by accident.

The important thing isn’t what Bush says in his interview with National Geographic or what scores Cheney tries to settle in his memoir. What matters is that as they return to the public eye, they highlight their record of wrongheaded policy choices that helped bring the nation to a sour, penurious state.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...mess/2011/09/01/gIQAboXFvJ_story.html?hpid=z2

 

[freeatlast]

I agree with you. Even though I voted for President Bush it was only because the rest were all worst in my opinion. I kinew his record in Texas and he was inmany ways like Rick Perry who is a do nothing Govenor. He was not a great president and in fact in my opinion he should have been impeached and brought up on charges of violating the constitution.

 

[Salty]

... He (Bush II) was not a great president and in fact in my opinion he should have been impeached and brought up on charges of violating the constitution.

and what would be the charge?

 

[freeatlast]

and what would be the charge?

He violated the constitution.

 

[Tom Bryant]

He violated the constitution.

How? What high crime and misdemeanor did Bush and/or Cheney commit?

 

[exscentric]

Being republican probably?

 

[Salty]

He violated the constitution.

You dont think we will accept that as an sufficient answer do you?

 

[webdog]

Yes, they remind us of how we got in this mess and "C" IMHO comes off as a little man still wanting to settle real and imagined scores. I believe they know in their hearts that history will judge them very harshly. Remember a definitive history is generally acknowledged to be impossible to write until at least 100 years after an event or series of events. By the the real results and effects will be known. We are far too close to know how all this, which they began, will play out. I predict it will not be pretty as it is already ugly.

Yes, it is an opinion piece. But isn't that what we do here on most of the time on this BB, give our opinions?

Why do we start in 2000, why don't we go back to 1999 to where the REAL problems started with the beginning of the end of the housing market?

 

[Andy T.]

Yes, they remind us of how we got in this mess and "C" IMHO comes off as a little man still wanting to settle real and imagined scores. I believe they know in their hearts that history will judge them very harshly. Remember a definitive history is generally acknowledged to be impossible to write until at least 100 years after an event or series of events. By the the real results and effects will be known. We are far too close to know how all this, which they began, will play out. I predict it will not be pretty as it is already ugly.

If it takes 100 years to sort out all the facts to write a conclusive history on a matter, then why are you so confident to "believe they know in their hearts that history will judge them harshly?"

Do you have some kind of special knowledge the rest of us don't have? I'm particularly interested how to obtain the knowledge of other men's hearts like you apparently have.

 

[InTheLight]

If it takes 100 years to sort out all the facts to write a conclusive history on a matter, then why are you so confident to "believe they know in their hearts that history will judge them harshly?"

Do you have some kind of special knowledge the rest of us don't have? I'm particularly interested how to obtain the knowledge of other men's hearts like you apparently have.

I reject this idea that it takes 100 years to have a definitive history of events. I'd say it's more like 40 years or so.

 

[Andy T.]

I reject this idea that it takes 100 years to have a definitive history of events. I'd say it's more like 40 years or so.

Yes, that is fine - but CTB said 100 years. Even if only 40 years, or 20 years, my question still stands to CTB.

 

[freeatlast]

How? What high crime and misdemeanor did Bush and/or Cheney commit?

Why the Bush Doctrine Violates the Constitution
The Unitary Executive...
http://www.counterpunch.org/2006/01/12/the-unitary-executive/

 

[Tom Bryant]

Why the Bush Doctrine Violates the Constitution
The Unitary Executive...
http://www.counterpunch.org/2006/01/12/the-unitary-executive/

From the Article:

This is a form of presidential rebellion against Congress and the courts, and possibly a violation of President Bush’s oath of office, as well.

The unitary executive doctrine conflicts with Paine’s principle – one that is fundamental to our constitutional system. If Bush can ignore or evade laws, then the law is no longer king. Americans need to decide whether we are still a country of laws – and if we are, we need to decide whether a President who has determined to ignore or evade the law has not acted in a manner contrary to his trust as President and subversive of constitutional government.

So it "possibly" violates his oath of office and it is in conflict with "Paine's Principle" Last time I checked "possibly" doesn't cut it in a court of law and the "Paine Principle" isn't the constitution.

 

[Crabtownboy]

If it takes 100 years to sort out all the facts to write a conclusive history on a matter, then why are you so confident to "believe they know in their hearts that history will judge them harshly?"

A very fair question.

1. Because we were running a surplus before GB and DC took over. That was quickly down away with by the tax cuts. This meant, IMHO, that even without the two wars the debt would not have been paid down.

2. The two wars created huge deficits. This is where they began but, unfortunately, did not end and they will not end for a long time.

3. If the tax cuts had not bee passed and the wars not started there would be no talk of the deficit. It would not be a problem.

4. All the above has saddled our children out to the 3rd and 4th generation with huge problems.

5. The starting of preemptive wars was a very dangerous precedent. We really do not know where this will lead in the future.

6. In 100 years, though I believe the effects of these poor decisions, will still be felt, they will be known with years of experience and study to guide the historians. The primary reason I believe it takes more than 40 years, as someone suggests, is that the historians who will be writing in 2060 were or are in college now and their views will be biased. In 100 years the historians who will be well known and respected then have not been born yet. Thus, they will be able to take a more balanced view of "our times".

7. The historians will, if they are honest ones, not play partisan politics, but explain what happened and why. I believe this will lead to harsh criticism of GB and DC.

Do you have some kind of special knowledge the rest of us don't have? I'm particularly interested how to obtain the knowledge of other men's hearts like you apparently have.

1. Read, read, read.
2. Observe, observe, observe.
3. Look at the past to see how we got here.
4. Go where the truth, as you understand it, leads you.
5. Do not be tied to hero worship or to a political philosophy to the extend that you are blinded to alternatives that may be better.

This is a quick answer. I hope it helps a bit to see where I am coming from.

 

[Bro. Curtis]

Al Gore says Iraq poses "grave threat" due to it's WMDs...in 1998

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fFBl0fnMUVc

Bill Clinton signs "Iraq Liberation Act of 1998"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ygQVyznw2zE&feature=related

Bill Clinton on the "Clear Evidence of Iraq WMDs....in 1998

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S0f5u_0ytUs&feature=related

More on Bubba & Sadaam....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q2iOVqYBqME&feature=related

 

[Crabtownboy]

Al Gore says Iraq poses "grave threat" due to it's WMDs...in 1998

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fFBl0fnMUVc

Bill Clinton signs "Iraq Liberation Act of 1998"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ygQVyznw2zE&feature=related

Bill Clinton on the "Clear Evidence of Iraq WMDs....in 1998

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S0f5u_0ytUs&feature=related

More on Bubba & Sadaam....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q2iOVqYBqME&feature=related

Your citations are off topic. If you did not notice we are not discussing how history will judge Clinton. That might make for an interesting thread.

Anyway, we are not discussing who warned of the war. We are discussing who started the war, who cut taxes and ran up huge deficits. Who really got us started on this downward spiral and how this will be judged in the future ... when all Bush hyper apologists will have gone to their eternal reward.

Your citations are off topic. If you did not notice we are not discussing how history will judge Clinton.

 

[InTheLight]

If it takes 100 years to sort out all the facts to write a conclusive history on a matter, then why are you so confident to "believe they know in their hearts that history will judge them harshly?"

A very fair question.

1. Because we were running a surplus before GB and DC took over. That was quickly down away with by the tax cuts. This meant, IMHO, that even without the two wars the debt would not have been paid down.

One of the reasons the tax cuts were implemented was because it was assumed there would be budget surpluses for years to come and the debt would be paid down quite a bit. Therefore it was thought that some tax relief was warranted, along with the idea that tax cuts would stimulate the economy.

The wars were what did us in (and the new prescription drug benefit.) When you are spending $300 million a day to fight two wars you are going to have budget deficits.

2. The two wars created huge deficits. This is where they began but, unfortunately, did not end and they will not end for a long time.

Yep.

3. If the tax cuts had not bee passed and the wars not started there would be no talk of the deficit. It would not be a problem.

Somewhat disagree. See my point to #1 above.

4. All the above has saddled our children out to the 3rd and 4th generation with huge problems.

Yep.

 

[Bro. Curtis]

Your citations are off topic. If you did not notice we are not discussing how history will judge Clinton. That might make for an interesting thread.

You would ignore them, like you do every time this comes up.

Your citations are off topic. If you did not notice we are not discussing how history will judge Clinton.

They refute your lie that this is all Bush & Cheney's fault. Most certainly on-topic.

 

[Crabtownboy]

[/SIZE]

You would ignore them, like you do every time this comes up.




They refute your lie that this is all Bush & Cheney's fault. Most certainly on-topic.

Have I ever said that everything is Bush's fault? I have said that much of the mess we are faced with began during their time in office.

Why are you trying to misdirect the thread away from how history will treat Bush and Chaney?

Did Clinton or Bush invade Iraq?

Did Clinton or Bush cut taxes and run up huge deficits?

Did the housing market and economy collapse during Clinton's term in office or during Bush/Chaney's time in office?

I was sure the collapse was coming and I was sure that B and C knew it and hoped it would hold off until they were out of office. It didn't and they were holding the bag when it did occur.

Remember the first bail out was under Bush.

How do you think Bush will be viewed in 100 years? Why do you feel as you do?

 

[Andy T.]

I was sure the collapse was coming

You joined here in early 2008 - I assume we can see predictions from you that the collapse was imminent.

and I was sure that B and C knew it

Really? More of this? How did you know this?