• 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!

Bush vs Obama

Bush vs Obama overall who did a better job on all matters.


  • Total voters
    108
This does not address my question. If "less government" is the way to go, should we live life more like those of the Natives?

I don't see your point, progress is NOT more government control of our lives
 
I don't see your point, progress is NOT more government control of our lives

If you're offering a solution of "less government," it would be nice to see some examples, other than one's own interpretation of a young America. I offered the Natives as a possibility, because many native tribes had far less of the equivalent of a "federal government" than we do now. (Much of course, of the knowledge of these structures has been lost to history, but one can only assume that such structures were there to varying extents. True anarchy is impossible whenever the world's population is greater than one.)
 
Two sides of the same coin. They have governed nearly identical to each other.
 
Two sides of the same coin. They have governed nearly identical to each other.

;That is something I have stated many times. The difference between them is the R and the D, not much else. Ross Perot once told me that if you take a couple of steps back, take off those deep red and blue colored glasses, stuff some cotton or put in some ear plugs to drown out the rhetoric, just watch how they govern you will find out there isn't really much difference. It is the rhetoric that is polar opposites, not the governing.
 
Well thats a long list of lies.

Liberals got African Americans the right to vote ? The Democrat party FILIBUSTERED the 1964 voting rights act.

The Democrats were the party that CREATED Jim Crow laws, supported segregation.

Richard Nixon created the EPA.

And a elderly person relying entirely on Social security is pretty much living in poverty.

Dixicrats.


Dixiecrat
[dik-see-krat] Spell Syllables
Word Origin
noun
1.
a member of a faction of southern Democrats stressing states' rights and opposed to the civil-rights programs of the Democratic Party, especially a southern Democrat who bolted the party in 1948 and voted for the candidates of the States' Rights Democratic Party.
 
If we were to take a closer look at the day by day acounts of these 2 administrations, clearly Obama wins. How quicky the gop forgets the mess they made. One of the dumbest things i heard on fox news was we were safer under bush AFTER 9 11. Well did it happen on the gop watch. Give me a break Obama has been cleaning up the mess bush and his war buddys made for over 5 years now.
Purple Haze Political Party - Index

Barack Obama, George W. Bush: Who Was The Worst President? [Poll]
Lets see. According to the results, liberal posters think Obama is better and conservative posters think Bush is better. Didn't see that one coming. The real question is do either of these guys stack up against the greats in American history. The answer to that is no. They don't even measure up the the mediocre. Both of these guys rank near the bottom. Its been a pretty bad 50 years--Johnson, Nixon, Carter, Bush and Obama are all bottom ten
 
As a member of the Republican Party for over thirty years...I vote Obama. Unemployment is down compared to the last year of the Bush administration, as is the deficit, gas prices, and the stock market is up. The wars are winding down, as they should be. There is a lot that is happening that is much better than my own party had to offer. Why does it take a Democrat to out-Republican Republicans on their main issues when it comes to the economy and national defence? Hell, yeah, things are better now than when that idiot Bush was in office!
 
As a member of the Republican Party for over thirty years...I vote Obama. Unemployment is down compared to the last year of the Bush administration, as is the deficit, gas prices, and the stock market is up. The wars are winding down, as they should be. There is a lot that is happening that is much better than my own party had to offer. Why does it take a Democrat to out-Republican Republicans on their main issues when it comes to the economy and national defence? Hell, yeah, things are better now than when that idiot Bush was in office!

You make me want to puke. Have you ever heard of Obamacare?
 
Nonsense.

How childish and irresponsible is it to 6 years into a administration to STILL blame the last President ?

Not really, except that it's a fairy tale in the case of the Obama administration. But in the case of Clinton and Bush it's neither childish nor irresponsible. Nor a fairy tale. Why you may ask?

Because Clinton and his administration passed on KILLING Usama bin-Laden 8 to 10 times during the last three years of his administration. That's EIGHT TO 10 TIMES when the CIA had bin-Laden in the crosshairs of a gun or a guided missile. And the Clinton Administration was too chicken**** to authorize the CIA to proceed. This according to the CIA chief of the bin-Laden desk, Michael Scheuer as he has stated repeatedly for years.

THAT CHANGED President Bush's ENTIRE presidency. And the DEMOCRATS were in lockstep with the President in going into both Afghanistan (bin-Laden) and into Iraq (for those WMDs that the democrats later claimed didn't exist).

Clinton Admits He Passed on Killing Bin Laden | FrontPage Magazine

Scheuer Says Clinton Is A Liar - Clinton's Choice - Says Killing UBL Would Have Killed Civilians - YouTube

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N5p-qIq32m8

You can ignore the liar and non-expert Geraldo Rivera. He's just sitting there for the fair and balanced bull**** part. Something akin to opening up Al Capone's vault.
 
Last edited:
If we were to take a closer look at the day by day acounts of these 2 administrations, clearly Obama wins. How quicky the gop forgets the mess they made. One of the dumbest things i heard on fox news was we were safer under bush AFTER 9 11. Well did it happen on the gop watch. Give me a break Obama has been cleaning up the mess bush and his war buddys made for over 5 years now.
Purple Haze Political Party - Index

Barack Obama, George W. Bush: Who Was The Worst President? [Poll]

History will not be kind to GW Bush, he will certainly go down as the worst president in American history I have no doubt about that. I think too that win the fog that the right-wing has created disipates hisotry will show Barack Obama to be a much better president; certainly not the answer we were all looking for, more of the same in my view, but his presidency will be seen as far superior to that of GW Bush.
 
This has got to be one of the dumbest things I've ever read on DP. How about the threat of Indian raids, or maybe just eating on a daily basis? While you sit in your comfy living room, pondering the channels you're surfing, while trying to judge people who had to actually put in a daily effort to live. And we won't get into the Constitution because I doubt you know anything about it. And the men who wrote that document knew a great deal about governments, philosophy, politics and societies (because they studied them).......something the average HS grad today couldn't even comprehend. And they predicted a great deal about their posterity. The oldest working constitution in the world of one of the youngest countries of the world that is the superpower of the world. No, you don't have a clue what they accomplished back in 1787.

Whose judging what? Regardless, there's no serious case that Native Americans represented a serious risk that required deep political and military calculation. They were more of a vague, general threat that could be taken care of at the local level by militias. European settlers pretty much freely ignored every treaty their government signed with the Natives because for the most part the rewards of encroaching on shrinking reservations outweighed the risks. When enough settlers moved in, the government simply voided the deal and sent minimal military forces to smash up whatever riots broke out.

The U.S. Constitution reflects a period where economies were mostly local and therefore municipal and state governments made the most efficient use of power and money. The 21st century is an era where population growth and changes in commerce and communication technologies mean national governments and mega corporations make the most efficient use of resources.
 
Last edited:
Whose judging what? Regardless, there's no serious case that Native Americans represented a serious risk that required deep political and military calculation. They were more of a vague, general threat that could be taken care of at the local level by militias. European settlers pretty much freely ignored every treaty their government signed with the Natives because for the most part the rewards of encroaching on shrinking reservations outweighed the risks. When enough settlers moved in, the government simply voided the deal and sent minimal military forces to smash up whatever riots broke out.

The U.S. Constitution reflects a period where economies were mostly local and therefore municipal and state governments made the most efficient use of power and money. The 21st century is an era where population growth and changes in commerce and communication technologies mean national governments and mega corporations make the most efficient use of resources.

No dude, you tried to talk up some smack about the Founders that was way the hell out of line, and I called you on it. They studied the history of governments in great detail to come up with the one we have, it wasn't just guess work like some may believe. The Constitution wasn't thrown together by the types we have in Washington today. These men were highly intelligent and well read. Don't tell me about local economies, they new all about Britain which was a world power house in military and trade. They didn't write the Constitution figuring that we were all local economies like Mayberry's dime store. That's pure bull****. And there was a reason for local militias, they could be controlled by the People unlike great standing armies like Britain. I know you think these guys could think, but you're wrong.
 
No dude, you tried to talk up some smack about the Founders that was way the hell out of line, and I called you on it. They studied the history of governments in great detail to come up with the one we have, it wasn't just guess work like some may believe. The Constitution wasn't thrown together by the types we have in Washington today. These men were highly intelligent and well read. Don't tell me about local economies, they new all about Britain which was a world power house in military and trade. They didn't write the Constitution figuring that we were all local economies like Mayberry's dime store. That's pure bull****. And there was a reason for local militias, they could be controlled by the People unlike great standing armies like Britain. I know you think these guys could think, but you're wrong.

Uh, that never ever happened.
 
Last edited:
Uh, that never ever happened.

I don't know how you expect a document written for pioneers in the 1700s (with no serious external obstacles threatening their social and economic expansion) to address the challenges of an era ruled by technological sorcery.
You're right, what I should have simply said was that you don't know what the **** you're talking about. They studied empires millennia before their time, so they knew the character of men over time, and that hasn't changed one iota! They didn't write a document for only their time. But that doesn't fits your narrative, because you want to discredit the Constitution entirely. Well I'm here to tell you that you will fail, just as others have failed."No serious obstacles"....dude, you've already failed.
 
You're right, what I should have simply said was that you don't know what the **** you're talking about. They studied empires millennia before their time, so they knew the character of men over time, and that hasn't changed one iota! They didn't write a document for only their time. But that doesn't fits your narrative, because you want to discredit the Constitution entirely. Well I'm here to tell you that you will fail, just as others have failed."No serious obstacles"....dude, you've already failed.

... you don't think that the existence of thousands of nuclear warheads and ICBMs pointing directly at them wouldn't have spurred an hour's debate on the scope of government? Or the diminishing supplies of freshwater? A global population expanding to 16,000,000 by the end of the century? People who can explode themselves to create a climate of unrelenting fear? Where satellites can can photograph your nose hairs from space?

The U.S. Constitution isn't magical.
 
Last edited:
... you don't think that the existence of thousands of nuclear warheads and ICBMs pointing directly at them wouldn't have spurred an hour's debate on the scope of government? Or the diminishing supplies of freshwater? A global population expanding to 16,000,000 by the end of the century? People who can explode themselves to create a climate of unrelenting fear? Where satellites can can photograph your nose hairs from space?

The U.S. Constitution isn't magical.

It may not be magical, but I wouldn't trust you to edit it.
 
It may not be magical, but I wouldn't trust you to edit it.

Bush and Obama domestic policies have been similar, TARP v. Stimulus, Prescription Drug v. ACA, the Patriot Act, the rise in debt, etc. Foreign policy has been a bit different, Obama got us out of Iraq, but we are back in again. Obama gave us Libya which now is a total mess and a breeding ground for terrorism training camps, better if we left Qaddafi in place. Of course the same could be said of Saddam. We are still Afghanistan, but we are talking to Iran, a good thing.

Okay, the bottom line. I think Bush left this country worse off than when he entered office and Obama is doing the same thing. Both are/did leave us in a worse position both domestically and in foreign policy than before their presidency.
 
Bush and Obama domestic policies have been similar, TARP v. Stimulus, Prescription Drug v. ACA, the Patriot Act, the rise in debt, etc. Foreign policy has been a bit different, Obama got us out of Iraq, but we are back in again. Obama gave us Libya which now is a total mess and a breeding ground for terrorism training camps, better if we left Qaddafi in place. Of course the same could be said of Saddam. We are still Afghanistan, but we are talking to Iran, a good thing.

Okay, the bottom line. I think Bush left this country worse off than when he entered office and Obama is doing the same thing. Both are/did leave us in a worse position both domestically and in foreign policy than before their presidency.

I really respect you opinions, but WTH does it have to do with the Constitution?
 
I really respect you opinions, but WTH does it have to do with the Constitution?

Nothing, but the title of this is: Bush vs Obama overall who did a better job on all matters. What I posted was my opinion on it. The Constitution is another matter.
 
Nothing, but the title of this is: Bush vs Obama overall who did a better job on all matters. What I posted was my opinion on it. The Constitution is another matter.

Oh fine, but you were responding to me like I had commented on it.
 
Oh fine, but you were responding to me like I had commented on it.

If I did, I apologize. I think Obama has definitely pushed the envelope on constitutional issues whereas I do not think Bush did. At least I don't remember him doing so which is not the same thing as saying he didn't.
 
both are pro corporate authoritarians.

one invested us in less pointless nation building, and somewhat stepped us closer to the 21st century with respect to social issues.

meh
 
Back
Top Bottom