Don’t be a putz. Your contention was “Not aware of any CEO’s who ran for President.” Bush was CEO of Spectrum 7. Spectrum 7 failed, as did every business venture that he led (of which I am aware).
As I understand it, yes, Bush’s governorship was indeed successful. I’ve not said different, nor would I, because I give credit where credit is due. But that didn’t translate very well to his Presidency, now did it? Based on the clips I saw from CPAC, both the left and the right pretty much think it was a near complete failure.
And I give credit to Obama for providing a level of leadership we’ve not seen in this country for quite awhile. Whether his economics will be successful – I don’t know, but I certainly hope so. He’s resting on well-known and legitimate theory/policy and putting it into action, but only time will tell.
The government was incompetant under the Republicans so…it should then be made bigger and given more power over the economy?
Look, Hitler provided leadership too. I’m more interested in results and it’s too early for that.
As I pointed out earlier, those were oil and gas exploration companies, IE, wildcatters. You hit, it’s lucrative, you miss, you lose money. It’s the nature of the business. He went on to invest in the Rangers and sold it for a profit.
No, he will have to run on his achievments. Where is the logic in that question?
Uh, What? That doesn’t make any sense at all. You’re saying he couldn’t gain more experience before getting elected? That would mean he was forced to run.
I’m saying it’s March. You’re talking about the experience he had before the election. We can’t go back in time, we can’t change who was elected. No one can magically increase the amount of experience he had, so why are you bitching about it as if it’s relevant in some way to what happens now?
You might be pedantically correct – Spectrum 7 did not “fail”, if by “fail” you mean “lost all of its assets”.
But let’s go through the timeline. Bush began with a company (Arbusto, which became Bush Exploration) that lost $3.1M, continued on as CEO in a merge with Spectrum 7, which ended up “deeply in debt” (how much? doesn’t say) and was sold to Harken Oil & Gas, which “posted a quarterly $23 million loss from its consolidated operations, sending its stock price on a downward spiral.”
I’m not seeing how this could be considered anything but a failure, even though Spectrum 7 had assets and was sold. When a bank fails, for instance, it is often sold to another – but it’s still a “failed bank”.
Yes, as I explicitly said above, he was successful when it came to (1) his governorship and (2) increasing his personal wealth. But honestly, your reticence in admitting that Bush was sorely lacking in the mad CEO skillz that should’ve been evident at some point over that 10 year stretch is bewildering to me – and his presidential record doesn’t do much better in supporting your “executive experience” objection.
Well, yeah, but see I’ve got this whole wide-eyed naivete thing going in my personality where I hope people have better explanations for their own behavior than that!
You seem to allow a lot of leeway when it comes to Bush’s failings. I tend to be fairly conservative by SDMB standards, but I have a lot of trouble seeing Bush as someone who should have been the President of the USA. He was a mediocre college student. Had an unremarkable career in the Air National Guard during the Vietnam War. Dabbled in a couple of unprofitable business ventures. Maybe he was an Ok governor and general manager of the Texas Rangers. I don’t know. Most of this stuff was possible due to family money and connections. He’s not someone who has ever endured any hardship, had to overcome adversity or ever had his character tested. He’s basically the likable frat-boy trying to figure his shit out with daddy’s money. You can cherry pick decisions he made that maybe panned out but overall, I think he was no more qualified to be President than Van Wilder, Frank “The Tank” Ricard or Tom “Tommy Boy” Calahan. Unfortunately in the real world, Bush can’t just throw some big bash and have all of America’s problems go away.
Because he’s been in office 2 months and done nothing to deserve threads proclaiming his leadership yet that is the theme of this thread. Since it was put in Great Debates I’ve pointed out that his leadership skill to date involved a whistle-stop campaign trip to rush a stimulus package so large nobody could read it. That’s not leadership, that’s taking AF1 out for a spin and hoping the carbon footprint crowd is looking the other way.
Leadership and experience are not the same thing, unless you want to say that Bill Clinton is a GRRRREAT leader since he had 8 years of presidential experience.
If that’s what you think then you should start to pay attention. There’s been a hell of a lot going on. Do some deeper background reading and pay attention to some of the analysis from sources other than the likes of Rush Limbaugh who’s personal agenda is at stake.
When you make a statement like “nobody could read it”, right there you’ve lost credibility. Somebody wrote it. The hundreds of staffers employed by Congress have combed through it and briefed it. They know what it says.
Most people that believe in the sanctity of the Bible have never read it but there are people that have and have made a life on briefing others on it.
Hmm…let’s see of seven actions early in his presidency, most Americans approved of five by large majorities.
Named special envoys to the middle east, Afghanistan and Pakistan–76%
Tightened ethic rules for admistration officials-76%
Limiting interrogation techniques on prisoners-74%
Instituting higher fuel efficiency standards-74%
Making it easier for workers to sue for pay discrimination-60%
Ordering the Guantanamo Bay prison to be closed-44%
Allowing funding for overseas family planning groups that provide abortions-35%
Now you may disagree (and I ‘get’ that you do) with the direction of his leadership, but the point of the OP was that he has made and continues to make major decisions and show leadership on many of the issues of this country. His appeal may indeed be populist such as his rally against the lobbyists and Wall Street—but I also think it is what most Americans want. He appears to be doing something—he appears to be a leader. Time will indeed tell if that is the correct approach, but barely a month and a half into his term is not enough time to judge that.
The stimulus package and his budget are large and I agree very scary. As a moderate I find it disengenuous at best when conservatives complain about this now after the last 8 years under President Bush.
Frankly I have been impressed with the range of decisions he has made in the first few weeks. I believe he is playing it smart by taking advantage of the honeymoon period to push major concepts as he will end up compromising on many of them in the political world. But again he is showing leadership by taking advantage of the Republican lack of leadership and lack of direction. Right now the Republicans are just looking like the party of ‘no’—it isn’t like they are putting an alternative out there to contrast President Obamas vision.
So I realize that you are unhappy your guy didn’t win–but I would trust that you can put aside your partisanship and recognize that the President is showing leadership. Now you may disagree with the direction of that leadership, but it is leadership nonetheless.
I don’t know where you have worked, but I assure you no top exec reads all of 100 page reports. That’s what executive summaries are for. I don’t know what percentage of the bill got changed at more or less the last minute, but it is not like the thing got written overnight. Have any surprises shown up?
As for experience, the campaign is over. Despite his lack of experience, he had what is widely considered an excellent transition, and is still exceedingly popular. Even though you don’t like the stimulus bill, he got it through despite Republican opposition, which the American public has been smart enough to see as putting politics before the nation.
I know if he turned water into wine you’d complain about the vintage. Time to get over it.
You’re trying to parse words in a redirected argument. The thread is about Obama’s leadership skills and I’ve listed reasons why such adulation is premature.
It was cute when the crowds yelled" O BA MA" during the election but now it’s just creepy. It looks like a Hanna Montana concert where voters get excited about blind spending. This is kind of adulation is not healthy from adult voters.
It wasn’t a 100 page report it was an 1100 page report. And one of my Senators read the first draft. He was unable to get through the final. NOBODY could. That’s the point.
Odd that you mention that because that’s what it looks like his followers are expecting.
Bush was pulled along by the same people over and over. He got a 12 mill bonus from the Rangers. It was ridiculous but the same friendlies who bailed out all his previous missmanagement were involved. They were investing in their own future. He was a well connected spoiled brat who was handed everything he ever got.
He was not a wildcatter. He was in management and got replaced in rich boy fashion. They put someone else in his job and he got a bonus . Like Molly Ivans said" he was born with a silver foot in his mouth".