Bush is Bad

Divided, we fail

Published on November 21, 2007 By joe-pro-photographer In Politics

In my last political posting, I suggested Bush was one of the worst Presidents in history. My reasoning was straight forward: no matter what your position on the war in Iraq, his handling of the planning up to war, the execution of the war itself, and the poor after-thought about the conflict's aftermath, make him a nominee for Lousy Prez.

So, many more conservative bloggers took me to task on the intelligence leading up to the war. "No," they write, "hind sight is 20/20, and it's easy to see the intelligence was wrong after the fact."

The problem is,from the beginning, Bush forced the intel to fit his agenda. It's not me who says this, it's a chorus of people from both the right and left. David Kay, former head of the Iraq Survey Group, couldn't believe the lack of intel on WMD's when he started looking for WMD's after the conflict began. And although he had no intel, was given a rag-tag group to look for WMDs, he still thought the wMDs probably existed. As he dug into the reports, he understood how everyone was duped.

The Bush Administration relied on Iraqi exhiles to support the WMD beliefs. Some of these folks hadn't been to Iraq since the first Gulf War. Their intel was more than 10 years old. One was later arrested for accepting money from SH himself, under the oil for food program. He had been a regular visitor at the White House.

A leader doesn't take facts and fit them to his agenda. A leader evaluates facts and reacts to the facts. A leader inspires others to come forward and voice their opinion, even when that opinion is different from theirs. A leader evaluates his team, and watches for power hungry people who can't run their department (read: Rumsfeld), a leader works with the minority and incorporates their concerns, where possible, into his agenda. A leader works within the Constitution. A leader unites and inspires.

Bush did none of these. (Though whether he stepped out of the bounds of the Constitution is open to debate). He took a "you're with us or you're against us" approach.

The uniter turned out to be the ultimate divider.

Comments (Page 4)

joe-pro-photographer

on Nov 22, 2007

My first comment is snippy, sorry: Are you in the oil lobby?

No I am not - why would you ask such a question to my post?

Don't get huffy. You articulate the position of the oil industry. I can say this pretty honestly, I've photographed for oil lobbyists. That's not to say their positions (or yours) are wrong. One thing I've learned about Capitol Hill, usually people have good reason for feeling the way they do. I'd like technology to get us out of the current oil catch-22. Until it does, I think you are en pointe.

joe-pro-photographer

on Nov 22, 2007

My first comment is snippy, sorry: Are you in the oil lobby?

No I am not - why would you ask such a question to my post?

joe-pro-photographer

on Nov 22, 2007

sorry, this got posted twice.

joe-pro-photographer

on Nov 22, 2007

Basicly to sum them up, the Clinton administration had knowledge of four hijackers and their plans, yet did NOTHING. Yet somehow Bush is the worst president here?

Hmmm. This thread is on Bush, not Clinton. What do you think saves Bush from the worst ever title? What are his best accomplishments? How do they rank historically with his peers?

danielost

on Nov 22, 2007

I'm asking the same question. I can't seem to get it moved. Frankly, it's kinda nice,

it is in personal computers because you created it from another thread, to make sure it doesn't happen you have to post from the title page. ie if you want it in politics you have to go to the main page and click on politics and then create post.

Ranger375

on Nov 22, 2007

You assume I am huffy and I am not. You did not however answer my question.

Ranger375

on Nov 22, 2007

The troops don't have to validate the reason for being there.

When you have bullets from an AK-47 flying past your head by someone hiding behind a child I must disagree with you - the soldiers involved do go through a process of validation - they are not robots they are humans - and with the firepower you hold in your hands and the destruction it causes with sometimes unintended consequences you better know why you are there.

All soldiers are treated as robots when it serves the writer and as human when it serves the writer. One of these positions is correct one is not.

Astyanax

on Nov 22, 2007

Hmmm. This thread is on Bush, not Clinton. What do you think saves Bush from the worst ever title? What are his best accomplishments? How do they rank historically with his peers?

I was implying that if Clinton had prevented the 9/11 attack like he should have, we wouldn't be at war. Therfor there would be less of a Bush sucks attitude.
All Clinton had to do was his job, is it asking much? Then listening to his and other reactions to how Bush conducted things was pathetic, talk about hypocrisy.

danielost

on Nov 22, 2007

you know what i find interesting is when they attack bush and when you bring up that the other side did the same thing. it becomes we are not talking about them we are talking about bush.

john ligtenberg

on Nov 22, 2007

It Is saudi Oil that is dictating Policy in the Middle East bush is appeasing them and proffitting from oil The biggest danger is Islam which is at war with the Known Civillized World that includes us Jews we are no. 1 on their hit list. 6 Million of us were killed by the Nazis Now anew form of Nazism has arizen Islam are we going like lambs to the slaughter again? no way! as for amarican money that we get we give it back in technology And buing american arms so the arms manufactures can keep people employed and make a profit in War. as for Israel most people know Israel has the Bomb
but has never threatened to wipe out another country out. Only Islam does that Any whay enough of that I did not want to go on the bandwaggen but had to reply to Skybright I enjoy Skinning an love nothing better than to live in this world doing this I am exited about all the New Stuff coming from Stardock Keep Up the good work! Israeli
John

Ranger375

on Nov 22, 2007

I am not going to address all of your points - and I am not in disagreement with most of your approach I would just like to add my opinion based on real experience for us to ponder.

Listen to Powell, and hit them with a tidal wave that permits no insurgent to raise a gun.

Have you ever eperienced a B-52 bombing run or a 130 Gunship opening up - your analogy is on point - a tidal wave. That is what we did and much more - the problem is to think you can fully suppress any enemy is just not going to happen without going nuclear.

Take a page from Venezuela and buy off a few of my enemies.

Only works until someone else comes up with more money or more importantly an ideology that transcends money.

Build an air tight intel case

No such thing - never has been and never will be - intel is an art not a science. (I have many years experience in black ops experience - haven't come close to establishing "air-tight intel".

Lead by building consensus and bridges, both domestically and internationally.

Consensus - the most illusive of all - usually always leads to a diluting of your original intent and tactic which is okay if you can live with that.

Build a coalition of leadership

Oxymoron

Astyanax

on Nov 22, 2007

you know what i find interesting is when they attack bush and when you bring up that the other side did the same thing. it becomes we are not talking about them we are talking about bush.

The reasons they are attacking Bush are mostly because of the war, which would have been prevented if Clinton did his fucking job. Is it that hard to understand?

joe-pro-photographer

on Nov 22, 2007

When you have bullets from an AK-47 flying past your head by someone hiding behind a child I must disagree with you - the soldiers involved do go through a process of validation - they are not robots they are humans - and with the firepower you hold in your hands and the destruction it causes with sometimes unintended consequences you better know why you are there.All soldiers are treated as robots when it serves the writer and as human when it serves the writer. One of these positions is correct one is not.

I agree with you on both fronts, really. I think it's well said. Thanks.

danielost

on Nov 22, 2007

The reasons they are attacking Bush are mostly because of the war, which would have been prevented if Clinton did his fucking job. Is it that hard to understand?

i know but clinton didnt want to upset our enemy. and we are now thinking of putting hi back into office

joe-pro-photographer

on Nov 22, 2007

I was implying that if Clinton had prevented the 9/11 attack like he should have, we wouldn't be at war. Therfor there would be less of a Bush sucks attitude.All Clinton had to do was his job, is it asking much? Then listening to his and other reactions to how Bush conducted things was pathetic, talk about hypocrisy.

Now, that is spin. Unfortunately, I don't think one persons ineptness justifies another persons incompetance.

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!