Disfavor for Bush Hits Rare Heights

[Axxman]

I don't hate the president. He faces the same media that every other president faces. He also has virtually all of talk radio, Fox New's prime-time lineup, several conservative publications, nearly countless internet right wing rags, and right wing bloggers cheerleading for him, spinning, and in some cases out and out lying for him. If Bush were more pragmatic and moderate, he would be much more popular. It's that simple.

Why is it that the party of "Personal Responsibility" never seems to take responsibility for any of their failures?

There are some BIG differences you list here. Peopel don't go to talk radio for news...they go there for informed opinion. People go to CNN, CBS, NBC, etc... for news, for information. If that information is tainted with bias (and it is) then people are not getting an accurate view of the news. Fox News is moderate at best and is only reputable because they allow a handful of proper conservatives on the air.

Another big difference is the use of blogs. A conservative reads a blog for informed opinion. A liberal will read a blog written by any 'ol yahoo and turn up on a forum like this spouting it as fact.

If Bush was moderate he'd be a liberal...and then I would hate him.

Who is the party of "personal responsibility"?? Who coined that phrase? I've certainly never heard a republican say that. It sounds like something a liberal said in a blog and the rest of you guys picked up on it. However, taking resposibility is a good idea and if there have been any failures of the part of the Bush Administration, I'm certain he has taken full responsibility. It should be noted though...just because a liberal see's something as a failure doesn't mean it is. I personally see Bush's low numbers as a remarkable good thing and I am PROUD to stand in the minority of Americans that are actually right about the President.

[georgesbluegirl]

Yup, and the media and so called historians said the public made the same judgement about Regan. My how that opinion has changed.

I would disagree. Conservatives, Republicans, and/or those who liked him during his presidency have a favorable opinion of him, that's true, though. Regardless, W is no Reagan. Reagan was articulate and charismatic, at least.

[georgesbluegirl]

Yup, and the media and so called historians said the public made the same judgement about Regan. My how that opinion has changed.

I would disagree. Conservatives, Republicans, and/or those who liked him during his presidency have a favorable opinion of him, that's true, though. Regardless, W is no Reagan. Reagan was articulate and charismatic, at least.

Not really. Tip O'Neil called him an amiable dunce. Reagan got hammered for using cue cards. They implied that Nancy ran the show. That's standard liberal fare for any republican. If the republicans elected Einstein the democrats would say he was an idiot. Reagan was vicously trashed during his presidency and even afterwards. I see no diference between how he was perceived and how Bush is perceived.

Perhaps I should have said that better - Reagan was more articulate than Bush is.

[kat8585]

If Bush were more pragmatic and moderate, he would be much more popular.

He's already looking like a far left Democrat in some areas, and just as hypocritical (as in fighting terrorism yet wanting open borders. Not saying this is a Democrat position. They don't want to fight terror or have a closed border). Way beyond moderate.

[forrestkc]

Yup, and the media and so called historians said the public made the same judgement about Regan. My how that opinion has changed. It will change in the same way for Bush. I notice that Carter and Johnson, however, have not been so lucky, 25 and more years after they left office. In fact, Carter's presidency looks worse wih time (though that's because he keeps on trying to redeem himself)

Bush is no Reagan, and Johnson has in many ways redeemed himself in history because of his support for Civil Rights.

Actually, you need to read up on Louisiana politics, and New Orleans in particular. There is no more corrupt and mismanaged city in the country. Bush didn't build the levees, design the evacuation plan, and the federal government cannot do anything until the state oks it. The governor delayed approving the feds stepping in.

Actually, she asked for assistance right away. Trying to place the blame for the failures of Katrina on local and state politicians is like blaming the mayor of Hiroshima for delays in rescue operations. The whole reason why we have FEMA and Federal Disaster response is that some disasters are well beyond the scope and abilities of state and local governments. You may try to put the blame solely on the local and state governments, and I think they do deserve some of the blame, but the American people put much of the blame on the incompetence of the Bush Administration, believed his administrations performance was a national embarrassment, and his approval ratings have never recovered since.

Two words. Jocelyn Elders.

Every administration makes mistakes in their appointments. The problem with the Bush Administration is the shear number of them.

You mean dosn't leak. Some would say that's a good thing.

Most would say that sunshine is the best disinfectant.

If a republican made the entire country a national park, it would still be viewed as dismal.

See: http://www.lcv.org/president-and-congress/president/

See the Clinton administrartion

True, but Bush has not had the misfortune of having 100 million dollars of the taxpayers money fiverously spent investigating him, guys like Jerry Falwell accusing him of being a murderer and a rapist, and so on.

REALLY see the Clinton administration.

I think I would rather be lied to about an affair than lied to about virtually all public policy and to get the country into a war.

My credit card bill this year was higher than the total cost of my college tuition. Though I'm against any deficit, lets see what it is as a percent of gross national product, what really counts.

The National Debt will be roughly 80% of GDP by the time he leaves office.

[forrestkc]

Yup, and the media and so called historians said the public made the same judgement about Regan. My how that opinion has changed.

I would disagree. Conservatives, Republicans, and/or those who liked him during his presidency have a favorable opinion of him, that's true, though. Regardless, W is no Reagan. Reagan was articulate and charismatic, at least.

History tends to overlook failings when a presidency's successes outweigh them. Johnson is somewhat redeemed today because of his support for Civil Rights. Reagan, whose administration was riddled with scandal and had more members convicted of felonies than any other administration before or since, also managed to accelerate the end of the Cold War, thus Reagan is redeemed in history.

The problem with Bush is that we see lots of failures, but nothing is really there to redeem his administration with.

[kat8585]

The National Debt will be roughly 80% of GDP by the time he leaves office.

It always gets me when people go on about the debt Bush ran up....by trying to protect us. And no, he never should have signed the prescription bill either. But let him try to cut other useless programs liberals love in order to save money! Or try to help the economy by cutting taxes.

[forrestkc]

The National Debt will be roughly 80% of GDP by the time he leaves office.

It always gets me when people go on about the debt Bush ran up....by trying to protect us. And no, he never should have signed the prescription bill either. But let him try to cut other useless programs liberals love in order to save money! Or try to help the economy by cutting taxes.

Actually, he increased spending by an average of 8% every year, this is compared to 3% in Clinton's budget proposals. Bush grew the fiscal size of government more than any other president since LBJ. I have to admit though, I certainly feel a lot safer now that we have wasted a half a trillion dollars in Iraq.

[forrestkc]

Bush is no Reagan, and Johnson has in many ways redeemed himself in history because of his support for Civil Rights.

Laughable. Without republican support, that bill never would have gotten past the southern democrats. But your forgetting about Viet nam. Johnson's management of that war has forever altered the way we fight wars and led to the contention we have today. Did you ever see McNamara interviewed? They had no intention of winning that war, just in getting alot of people killed. It was criminal. The "great society" of Johnson's and we have the beginnings of the nanny state that wrecked generations through dependency on entitlements.

Actually, she asked for assistance right away.

To my knowledge they wrung their hands and did not put in a formal request until it was too late.

Every administration makes mistakes in their appointments. The problem with the Bush Administration is the shear number of them.

Doubtful. I'm sure you could go down the list of any administration and make the claim that this one or that one was the worst. Political appointments are made for reasons of pandering and not competence. Thats the nature of our government.

Most would say that sunshine is the best disinfectant.

Thats on the congress. The presidency is the CIC and responsible for the security of the country. Alot of that should remian secret.

See: http://www.lcv.org/president-and-congress/president/

Global warming. Looking forward to debating the science behind that.

True, but Bush has not had the misfortune of having 100 million dollars of the taxpayers money fiverously spent investigating him,

Maybe because Clinton deserved it. I used to keep count, but I think it was 10:1 in favor of Clinton administration people who got indicted compared to Bush. And that's not counting the people who fled the country. Clinton was without a doubt the most dishonest president in modern history. In fact, he is a convicted liar.

I think I would rather be lied to about an affair than lied to about virtually all public policy and to get the country into a war.

Clinton lied about everything, and was a proven liar. As for Bush and the war, my favorite reponse to liberals when they make this claim is that Bush did what every single democratic leader said should be done, and for the reasons that they said it. Do I need to post the list of quotes by democrats?

The National Debt will be roughly 80% of GDP by the time he leaves office.

And as you know, the national debt was there before Bush.

Your are obviously a partisan conservative Republican, and I am Democrat, so I doubt there is any chance of us agreeing, thus there is no point in debating any of this. Bush is a very unpopular President, Reagan left office as a very popular President, so did Clinton. You might think that Bush will be redeemed in history, but few others do, I suppose time will tell.

[kat8585]

The National Debt will be roughly 80% of GDP by the time he leaves office.

It always gets me when people go on about the debt Bush ran up....by trying to protect us. And no, he never should have signed the prescription bill either. But let him try to cut other useless programs liberals love in order to save money! Or try to help the economy by cutting taxes.

Actually, he increased spending by an average of 8% every year, this is compared to 3% in Clinton's budget proposals. Bush grew the fiscal size of government more than any other president since LBJ. I have to admit though, I certainly feel a lot safer now that we have wasted a half a trillion dollars in Iraq.

I refer you back to my response above.

If we are safer, how was the money wasted?