• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's 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!

One year on, Obama cites struggle with Bush legacy

Renae

Banned
Suspended
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
50,241
Reaction score
19,243
Location
San Antonio Texas
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
MADISON, Wis. (Reuters) - A year after his historic election, President Barack Obama sought to remind Americans on Wednesday the biggest problems he is grappling with -- from the economy to the war in Afghanistan -- are the legacy of his predecessor, George W. Bush.

With his approval ratings down from once-lofty levels and Tuesday's Democratic election losses raising questions about his political clout, Obama held no special ceremony to mark the anniversary of his election as America's first black president.

He instead traveled to Wisconsin to appear before a friendly audience in a school gymnasium and promote education as a pillar of his economic recovery efforts.

Obama was elected on a promise of sweeping change after eight years under Bush, but many Americans are increasingly expressing impatience that his pledge has yet to bear fruit.

He used the preamble of his speech to insist his administration had indeed had important successes and also to remind Americans of the litany of daunting challenges he inherited when he took office in January.
One year on, Obama cites struggle with Bush legacy | World | Reuters

I don't recall one year in Bush whining about Clinton, Clinton whining about Bush, Bush whining about Reagan or Reagan whining about Carter....

Obama needs to man up, and let go of the Bush Pacifier he's been leaning on. It's not impressing anyone. A Leader leads, inspires and takes on challenges head on, not whine about why it's so tough because of other people.
 
This is even wearing thin with the liberals now. It's becoming more and more pathetic.

The country, including many in his own party, are recognizing how dangerous Obama's policies are to our future. I think more than a few in his party are starting to question is real intentions.

History will one day be very kind to Bush. Obama is headed for footnote status, or worse.
 
One year on, Obama cites struggle with Bush legacy | World | Reuters

I don't recall one year in Bush whining about Clinton, Clinton whining about Bush, Bush whining about Reagan or Reagan whining about Carter....

Obama needs to man up, and let go of the Bush Pacifier he's been leaning on. It's not impressing anyone. A Leader leads, inspires and takes on challenges head on, not whine about why it's so tough because of other people.
sure, bush whined. he said he inherited a recession.
 
Bush says he inherited recession - Aug. 7, 2002

When I took office, our economy was beginning a recession," Bush said in a speech at a Mississippi high school. "Then our economy was hit by terrorists. Then our economy was hit by corporate scandals. But I'm certain of this: We won't let fear undermine our economy and we're not going to let fraud undermine it either."

whine whine whine whine.

Inventing the 'Clinton Recession' - BusinessWeek.com- msnbc.com

Instead of using the accepted start date of March 2001, the CEA announced that the recession really started in the fourth quarter of 2000 — a shift that would make it much more credible for the Bush administration to term it the "Clinton Recession." In a subsequent press conference, Mankiw said that the CEA had looked at the available data and "made the call."

More whine whine.. its all Clintons fault.

Bush and his cohorts blamed Clinton for everything from 9/11 to the 2008 recession for god sake. The refused to accept blame for anything during the 8 years in office lol.
 
Meh, not surprised. I think politicians try to blame everyone and thing other than themselves. And you'll of course get a lot of people forgiving Obama because "Bush did it". When Bush was in office it was "Clinton did it". It's good to see no one's grown up and demanded any amount of real accountability from government. Yay.
 

That's a whine in your little mind?
But I'm certain of this: We won't let fear undermine our economy and we're not going to let fraud undermine it either."

Looks like Bush is saying "Hey bad things happened, but we're gonna move forward"... yeah know, taking charge...

Where as Obama blames his LACK of progress on his Agenda on Bush... There is a difference, but you can't see that.

Inventing the 'Clinton Recession' - BusinessWeek.com- msnbc.com



More whine whine.. its all Clintons fault.

Bush and his cohorts blamed Clinton for everything from 9/11 to the 2008 recession for god sake. The refused to accept blame for anything during the 8 years in office lol.

And this... was not Bush speaking, and is a correction to the start of the economic downturn at the end of 2000/start 2001 being discussed...

Really, that's all you got son?
 
One year on, Obama cites struggle with Bush legacy | World | Reuters

I don't recall one year in Bush whining about Clinton, Clinton whining about Bush, Bush whining about Reagan or Reagan whining about Carter....

Obama needs to man up, and let go of the Bush Pacifier he's been leaning on. It's not impressing anyone. A Leader leads, inspires and takes on challenges head on, not whine about why it's so tough because of other people.


You don't remember Bush whining about Clinton?

Hmmm....wonder why.

There isn't much to whine about when you inherit a country at peace, strong with allies, and a budget surplus.
 
:2funny::2funny::2funny:

Funniest thing I've read in months!!!

Considering you have such a poor grasp on history, I would imagine you would.

Nixon, hated at the time, but was later seen as not a monster after emotions were no longer involved. Bush will be treated the same way, the over emotional and irrational hate spewing at him will die off and cooler heads will judge his actions on their merits and History will not have the animosity you and your ilk do. Is that to say he'll be seen later as a Reagan-esque leader of greatness? No, but he certainly will move ahead of where he is now.
 
Being a recovering Politician and student of History all my life I can assure you without any fear of contradiction that to fight a battle that has long since ended or to fight against history is a lost cause. The prudent thing to do is to look to and propose solutions for the future and you will never be successful in the long run making unrealistic, unfulfillable, or empty promises of change with no logical plans or workable new ideas as Obama has become famous for.
Obama's tactic has so far been to make a new empty promise the minute the last failed idea comes to light, and it's wearing thin even within his circle of disciples.
A short study of History will bear this out.
 
Considering you have such a poor grasp on history, I would imagine you would.

Nixon, hated at the time, but was later seen as not a monster after emotions were no longer involved. Bush will be treated the same way, the over emotional and irrational hate spewing at him will die off and cooler heads will judge his actions on their merits and History will not have the animosity you and your ilk do. Is that to say he'll be seen later as a Reagan-esque leader of greatness? No, but he certainly will move ahead of where he is now.

If you say so......:rofl
 
One year on, Obama cites struggle with Bush legacy | World | Reuters

I don't recall one year in Bush whining about Clinton, Clinton whining about Bush, Bush whining about Reagan or Reagan whining about Carter....

Obama needs to man up, and let go of the Bush Pacifier he's been leaning on. It's not impressing anyone. A Leader leads, inspires and takes on challenges head on, not whine about why it's so tough because of other people.

It's been one year. It's time for Obama to start using this little thing that we all call "Personal Responsibility".

You're "Honeymoon" is officially over Obama.
 
There isn't much to whine about when you inherit a country at peace, strong with allies, and a budget surplus.

All created and controlled by a Republican congress. Billy just sat in his chair with a box of cigars and ole Monica to keep him busy.
 
Meh, not surprised. I think politicians try to blame everyone and thing other than themselves. And you'll of course get a lot of people forgiving Obama because "Bush did it". When Bush was in office it was "Clinton did it". It's good to see no one's grown up and demanded any amount of real accountability from government. Yay.

There is a lot of truth in what Obama states, and what Bush stated, and there is responsibility that Obama has to accept and what Bush had to accept. Government policy is a mixture of the past and the present, with a lot of consistency from one administration to the next.

Americans (or people in general for that matter) have difficulty understanding the role of history in shaping the present and the limitations our institutions and informal institutions place upon leaders and their decisions.
 
Considering you have such a poor grasp on history, I would imagine you would.

Nixon, hated at the time, but was later seen as not a monster after emotions were no longer involved. Bush will be treated the same way, the over emotional and irrational hate spewing at him will die off and cooler heads will judge his actions on their merits and History will not have the animosity you and your ilk do. Is that to say he'll be seen later as a Reagan-esque leader of greatness? No, but he certainly will move ahead of where he is now.

It's certainly possible, though the proper student of history would be a bit wary of making any predictions. Furthermore, our interpretations of leaders also just merely changes, not necessarily because of new evidence and newer models of analysis, but also because of our contemporary political judgments or biases.
 
Last edited:
:2funny::2funny::2funny:

Funniest thing I've read in months!!!

Lincoln was not considered great during his time.

Once the emotional BS is removed and 50 years of time is past, the historians of the future will look back and OBJECTIVELY analyze the decisions made and the result of those decisions.

I wouldn't expect a liberal to understand. You think history began the day you were born. LOL
 
There is a lot of truth in what Obama states, and what Bush stated, and there is responsibility that Obama has to accept and what Bush had to accept. Government policy is a mixture of the past and the present, with a lot of consistency from one administration to the next.

Americans (or people in general for that matter) have difficulty understanding the role of history in shaping the present and the limitations our institutions and informal institutions place upon leaders and their decisions.

While the past certainly has influence on the present, we cannot excuse future transgressions by the sins of the past. Nor is living in the past a way to move forward.
 
While the past certainly has influence on the present, we cannot excuse future transgressions by the sins of the past. Nor is living in the past a way to move forward.

Exactly.

Bush acknowledged the conditions he inherited. Obama chose to blame his predessor for the transgressions of the entire world.

Obama paints himself into so many illogical corners, that he has to play the Bush card again and again.

Once you hear "Bush", you know he's out of answers. People are starting to realize that, especially the independents and blue dogs.
 
You don't remember Bush whining about Clinton?

Hmmm....wonder why.

There isn't much to whine about when you inherit a country at peace, strong with allies, and a budget surplus.
Those were projected surpluses that never existed.
 
Exactly.

Bush acknowledged the conditions he inherited. Obama chose to blame his predessor for the transgressions of the entire world.

Obama paints himself into so many illogical corners, that he has to play the Bush card again and again.

Once you hear "Bush", you know he's out of answers. People are starting to realize that, especially the independents and blue dogs.

Well, like I said, he has both. There was truth that he inherited a great deal. However, Obama certainly has arguably a bit more freedom in at least some of his choices than Bush had.
 
Lincoln was not considered great during his time.

Once the emotional BS is removed and 50 years of time is past, the historians of the future will look back and OBJECTIVELY analyze the decisions made and the result of those decisions.

I wouldn't expect a liberal to understand. You think history began the day you were born. LOL

In 50 years we can more objectively view the past, but like I said, that is also a bit of a misnomer, as our analysis of the past is also built upon the presumptions of how we view society and the character of the decisions that are made. There is a reason why Marx impacted the study of history dramatically, and brought analysis of class structures and the struggles of classes to the forefront of historical analysis for many historians. As a result, liberals do understand history quite a bit, because many of them were some of the best historians we have had.

Later on, our political ideology and national morality will later shape how we judge presidential administrations. Over the past several decades, Presidents who were slaveholders have been keenly analyzed in ways never before thought of, where many of us in this country now think of them as beyond redemption!

There is a story in how we study history. It is not set in stone.
 
Lincoln was not considered great during his time.

Once the emotional BS is removed and 50 years of time is past, the historians of the future will look back and OBJECTIVELY analyze the decisions made and the result of those decisions.

I wouldn't expect a liberal to understand. You think history began the day you were born. LOL

What did GWB accomplish that could even remotely even by the most stretched standards we viewed as a success?
 
One year on, Obama cites struggle with Bush legacy | World | Reuters

I don't recall one year in Bush whining about Clinton, Clinton whining about Bush, Bush whining about Reagan or Reagan whining about Carter....

Obama needs to man up, and let go of the Bush Pacifier he's been leaning on. It's not impressing anyone. A Leader leads, inspires and takes on challenges head on, not whine about why it's so tough because of other people.

None of the people you mentioned left their successor with a United States that was in bad shape as it is now.
 
What did GWB accomplish that could even remotely even by the most stretched standards we viewed as a success?

War on Terror

No Child Left Behind

Economic Bailouts

Aid to Africa

etc.

These will be of the many things that could stand to evolve through time and could be judged success, mediocre, meaningless, or failure.
 
War on Terror

No Child Left Behind

Economic Bailouts

Aid to Africa

etc.

These will be of the many things that could stand to evolve through time and could be judged success, mediocre, meaningless, or failure.


Are you serious?

War on Terror - has been a total disaster. Starting a war that we had no business in?

No child left behind - another disaster across the board. More children than ever have been left behind under this program.


Economic bailouts - Do I even have to respond to this one.

Aid to Africa - ok...but hardly what you can hang a legacy on.
 
Back
Top Bottom