GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum

GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum (https://gfy.com/index.php)
-   Fucking Around & Business Discussion (https://gfy.com/forumdisplay.php?f=26)
-   -   GW Bush is the Best President in the last 100 years (https://gfy.com/showthread.php?t=982242)

$5 submissions 08-12-2010 08:15 PM

GW Bush is the Best President in the last 100 years
 
I wonder if a historian would write that in say 20 years? How about 50 years? 100? :winkwink::thumbsup

PornMD 08-12-2010 08:22 PM

It would have to be 2100 before someone would say that because it'd be hard to say Clinton was worse than him. We need to see at least a full term by Obama and probably the aftermath as well to know where he stands. People saying he's really good or really bad are kidding themselves...it hasn't been enough time to judge what he's done or the effects of what he's done. It doesn't LOOK good but still, will wait and see.

fatfoo 08-12-2010 08:26 PM

I went to New York in September 2009 and some man impersonated George Bush in a funny voice behind my back. Somehow, it was a comfort in the cold night.

sortie 08-12-2010 08:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by $5 submissions (Post 17411793)
I wonder if a historian would write that in say 20 years? How about 50 years? 100? :winkwink::thumbsup

Why not, it's not like the world will be free from idiots who can still write at that time.

:1orglaugh

Ron Bennett 08-12-2010 09:24 PM

U.S. Presidents, as with most all politicians, are mouthpieces for the rich elite - they are ones who truly make policy. And hence, with that in mind, it's no surprise much of Obama administration policies / stances are so similar to that of the Bush administration.

Choosing candidates, especially at the national level, is akin to choosing between Coke and Pepsi - nearly the same, not much difference; no real change. So saying a particular U.S. President is the "best" or "worst" is a pointless exercise ... keeps the population occupied / fighting among themselves while the rich elite operate by their own rules with impunity.

Ron

kane 08-13-2010 12:16 AM

You can't cast judgment on Bush until the situation in Iraq plays itself out fully. He attacked a country that didn't attack us for reasons only known to him. He claimed that it would lead the middle east into democracy. If, 20,30, 50 years or however long from now, he is right and the middle east is a democracy and there is relative peace then the sins of economic collapse will be forgotten and he will be the remembered as the guy who had the guts to start the ball rolling.

If not he will be remembered as a terrible president who started a war for no real reason and oversaw one of the largest economic collapses in modern times.

BergyK 08-13-2010 12:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ron Bennett (Post 17411897)
U.S. Presidents, as with most all politicians, are mouthpieces for the rich elite - they are ones who truly make policy. And hence, with that in mind, it's no surprise much of Obama administration policies / stances are so similar to that of the Bush administration.

Choosing candidates, especially at the national level, is akin to choosing between Coke and Pepsi - nearly the same, not much difference; no real change. So saying a particular U.S. President is the "best" or "worst" is a pointless exercise ... keeps the population occupied / fighting among themselves while the rich elite operate by their own rules with impunity.

Ron

Well said.:thumbsup

seeandsee 08-13-2010 12:48 AM

what will be noted for best? best stupidity of man kind?

tony286 08-13-2010 09:10 AM

Last 100 yrs, you got FDR. I know that right have been rewriting history.The man was elected to four terms.

Pics Traffic 08-13-2010 09:12 AM

I think he's the best prez of all times.

Caligari 08-13-2010 09:14 AM

Quote:

GW Bush is the Best President in the last 100 years
and 2010 is the best year for the adult biz ever.

Vendzilla 08-13-2010 09:16 AM

My favorite was Harry Truman
man was a class act
Didn't take offers after his presidency for speaking or selling products, didn't want secret service, didn't even get a pension from being the president till later

Amputate Your Head 08-13-2010 09:17 AM

Quote:

GW Bush is the Best President in the last 100 years
GW can barely tie his own shoes.

tony286 08-13-2010 12:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vendzilla (Post 17412764)
My favorite was Harry Truman
man was a class act
Didn't take offers after his presidency for speaking or selling products, didn't want secret service, didn't even get a pension from being the president till later

Went back to live at his mother in laws house after leaving the white house.Talk about humbling and because of him, the president gets a pension(Harry was probably one of the last nonrich guys to become president). Because he wasnt a rich man, he left the presidency he didnt have much. He worked in a men's clothing store before politics.

Chosen 08-13-2010 01:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by $5 submissions (Post 17411793)
I wonder if a historian would write that in say 20 years? How about 50 years? 100? :winkwink::thumbsup

I seriously doubt it...

brassmonkey 08-13-2010 02:17 PM

do you have a crack habit? how much you burn in that glass dick? :helpme :1orglaugh j/k nice title to get that attention. :winkwink:

Penthouse Tony 08-13-2010 03:55 PM

The people that liked Bush will always say Regan was better. So unless the 100 year window doesn't include Regan's years I don't think Bush has a chance to be seen as best. Bookmark this thread and check it in 90 years. :)

Rochard 08-13-2010 06:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by $5 submissions (Post 17411793)
I wonder if a historian would write that in say 20 years? How about 50 years? 100? :winkwink::thumbsup

I'm not defending Bush in any way shape or form. I think he was horrible.

But the truth is you can't judge a sitting President. You just can't. Just now we are starting to feel the full effects of the past eight years. That healthcare bill they passed - we won't see that for the next four years. This is the way our government works, they do what they want to do, but it's the next administration who pays for is.

Look at President Truman who took office only when President Roosevelt died in 1945. Look at everything he did, and then note that when he left office he had the lowest approval rating ever - 22%. The truth was his policies weren't liked at the time, but did a world of good - Fair Deal, Berlin Airlift, Civil Rights, Korean War, NATO, Marshall Plan.... Now after history has judged him, he ranks as one of the top ten US Presidents.

Bush... Maybe we'll look back at him differently. He made the US the only world super power. That's right. China? They can't do shit to us. Sixty percent of all oil produced in the Middle East doesn't go to the US, it goes to China. Six billion fucking Chinamen and not a single one in the Middle East.

Bush might have handed us the worst economic situation ever, but he also guided us through the defining moment of our lifetime - 9/11. We are quick to forget that.

We'll see in twenty years or so how we feel about it.

jackknoff 08-13-2010 09:00 PM

Subverting the Congress and Senate into war based on false premises is treason. History will judge him as such.


Jack

Poindexterity 08-14-2010 12:18 AM

sure, why the hell not?

but who the hell wants to sit and figure out what their least stinky turd they ever pooped out was?

123not it.

gloryholeprincess 08-14-2010 01:28 AM

Leave Jefferson out of that blanket statement. :) He tried to keep the banks at bay, way back then. :thumbsup
Piper
Quote:

Originally Posted by Ron Bennett (Post 17411897)
U.S. Presidents, as with most all politicians, are mouthpieces for the rich elite - they are ones who truly make policy. And hence, with that in mind, it's no surprise much of Obama administration policies / stances are so similar to that of the Bush administration.

Choosing candidates, especially at the national level, is akin to choosing between Coke and Pepsi - nearly the same, not much difference; no real change. So saying a particular U.S. President is the "best" or "worst" is a pointless exercise ... keeps the population occupied / fighting among themselves while the rich elite operate by their own rules with impunity.

Ron


Raf1 08-14-2010 03:26 AM

he would have to be one of the few "insiders" that made serious money during the Bush years.

$5 submissions 08-14-2010 03:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rochard (Post 17414169)
I'm not defending Bush in any way shape or form. I think he was horrible.

But the truth is you can't judge a sitting President. You just can't. Just now we are starting to feel the full effects of the past eight years. That healthcare bill they passed - we won't see that for the next four years. This is the way our government works, they do what they want to do, but it's the next administration who pays for is.

Look at President Truman who took office only when President Roosevelt died in 1945. Look at everything he did, and then note that when he left office he had the lowest approval rating ever - 22%. The truth was his policies weren't liked at the time, but did a world of good - Fair Deal, Berlin Airlift, Civil Rights, Korean War, NATO, Marshall Plan.... Now after history has judged him, he ranks as one of the top ten US Presidents.

Bush... Maybe we'll look back at him differently. He made the US the only world super power. That's right. China? They can't do shit to us. Sixty percent of all oil produced in the Middle East doesn't go to the US, it goes to China. Six billion fucking Chinamen and not a single one in the Middle East.

Bush might have handed us the worst economic situation ever, but he also guided us through the defining moment of our lifetime - 9/11. We are quick to forget that.

We'll see in twenty years or so how we feel about it.



Good call bringing up Truman. That's how columnist Charles Krauthammer views GWB. Kane raises a good point. It all depends how the Middle East turns out. Similar to Truman it was several years before people could objectively look at the impact of his policies.

HD Content 08-14-2010 04:33 PM

This kind of reminds me of a windshield wiper on a ducks ass

Naechy 08-15-2010 03:26 AM

i just can`t agree

Vendot 08-15-2010 03:38 AM

It would have to be a historian that had been dropped on his head as a baby, later had a frontal lobotomy, was high on crack and stoned on hashish......

Dirty Dane 08-15-2010 03:59 AM

Clinton lied about sex. Bush lied about weapons of mass destruction. I do not know what's worse.

DaddyHalbucks 08-15-2010 04:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jackknoff (Post 17414417)
Subverting the Congress and Senate into war based on false premises is treason. History will judge him as such.


Jack

Crazy talk. The Clinton Administration believed Saddam had WMD, so did Congress, so did our allies.

DaddyHalbucks 08-15-2010 04:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dirty Dane (Post 17416596)
Clinton lied about sex. Bush lied about weapons of mass destruction. I do not know what's worse.

Bill Clinton, like Richard Nixon, abused his power for personal gain.

There is no evidence that Bush did that. GWB tried to protect his country.

epitome 08-15-2010 04:31 PM

This month's Vanity Fair has an excellent article on how any President is damned if he do, damned if he don't. No one will ever be able to keep campaign promises because of how dysfunctional Washington has become.

Overload 08-15-2010 04:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rochard (Post 17414169)
China? They can't do shit to us. Sixty percent of all oil produced in the Middle East doesn't go to the US, it goes to China. Six billion fucking Chinamen and not a single one in the Middle East.

ehh? cant do shit? they can STRANGLE YOU TO DEATH! without their money the US wud be 3rd world country! YOU live on debts BIG TIME and owe china 300 BILLION bucks!!! you can live without them? TRY IT! :2 cents:

$5 submissions 08-15-2010 04:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaddyHalbucks (Post 17417596)
Crazy talk. The Clinton Administration believed Saddam had WMD, so did Congress, so did our allies.

The Johnson administration did the same thing with the Gulf of Tonkin resolution

MaDalton 08-15-2010 05:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by $5 submissions (Post 17411793)
I wonder if a historian would write that in say 20 years? How about 50 years? 100? :winkwink::thumbsup

possible, i always said "Idiocracy" is in reality a documentary


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:30 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
©2000-, AI Media Network Inc