That’s not a defense, it’s an indictment. The job of the president is to use his power effectively to promote his policies. Inability to do that represents complete failure at the job.
Unless you’re in the position, you cannot judge. If you persist, however, you’re just showing you’re own lack of humility and understanding.
Again, I’m not a Bush supporter, but there’s so much I don’t know that it’s nearly impossible to adequately opine on his job performance.
If it was HIS countries policies it might aceptable.
Bolding added.
Yes of course Bush had bad luck. THAT WAS HIS JOB. That’s why the armed forces and national disaster services answer to the President: so he can deal with bad luck when it happens.
Fire departments are in the bad luck business too. But you don’t judge firemen by how many fires happen while they’re on the job. You judge firemen by how well they put the fires out. Saying: “Oh well, bad luck that a fire broke out,” doesn’t remotely excuse a fire chief who screams and flails ineffectively during the crisis; or worse, exploits the fire as a pretext to burn down the houses of people he doesn’t like.
We elect a President who, when life gives him lemons, can make lemonade.
What we got with Bush was a President who, when life gave him lemons, declared war on Vitamin C.
No idea what the Hell you’re talking about. Listing stated claims that one wants to refute is pretty standard rhetorical practice.
… and calcium.
Not to be defensive of Pres. Bush, the worst president in my lifetime (and that includes Nixon and Carter), but this (FEMA contingency planning) is not something I believe is of a level that our president (any president) should be handling. This kind of planning should be in place from lifetime bureaucrats, irrespective of party, ready to be implemented in case of disaster. Where President Bush failed was in his appointment of a wholly unqualified FEMA director, and the mismanagement of the Hurricane Katrina disaster by the FEMA director falls directly in Bush’s negative column.
On the other hand, had it rained horses, we would have lauded Bush’s choice of Brown. It’s not Bush’s fault we got water and wind instead.
Bush was lucky if he wanted to be a great president. He had ample opportunity to fix some real problems. Unfortunately he was not up to the job.
The towers should have been immediately rebuilt showing that a terrorist attack will not change us. We should not have shredded the rights of our people. We should not have tortured. We should not have attacked Iraq.
He was presented unique opportunities to do some important and world changing things. He failed miserably.
Ever notice how certain individuals have a propensity for running into “bad luck” all the time?
I try not to associate with those people.
You forget that I am this man’s boss. I get to determine whether his job performance is adequate or not based on my criteria. And when he retires, I get to determine whom I choose to replace him based on the qualities I deem important. I will continue to monitor the new guy’s performance as well.
Oh right. In that case, fuck off shitheel. Smart people are talking.
Puts on glasses, attempts to blend in
In my experience there is no such thing as luck. You make your own luck. Bush handled things as though he and his chums thought government was incompetent and evil in that order.
Reagan and Bush were nearly identical, except that Reagan made his own luck a bit better by trying to get along with others. Both expanded the government so much it would have shocked FDR and LBJ. Conservatism is about talking small government and making government much bigger. Liberalism under the last two Democratic Presidents (Clinton and Carter) narrowed deficits and was far more moderate in expanding government. Modern American Conservatism has nothing to do with fiscal responsibility and hasn’t since Eisenhower.
[Takes out cranial calipers and phrenology textbook] Hold still…
Maybe you should try listening to them, then. You might learn something.
I approve of this analogy.
I hate that I’ve grown so accustomed to thinking of the President with such contempt. I didn’t like Reagan and George H.W. Bush politically (Reagan should have been impeached for Iran/Contra), but I never felt such intense anger and disgust as I’ve come to have for GWB. (Paradoxically, the man who inspires such anger also looks like an empty suit to me.)
It’ll be nice, after January 20, to be talking about the President with respect again. (Clinton disappointed me quite a few times, but I always thought we shared some important core principles.)
President Obama will make mistakes, have failures, etc., and is taking on some pretty unlucky circumstances from day one. But unless he pulls a Jeckyll-and-Hyde, I’m going to feel good having him in the White House.
In other words: I got nothing. Let me blabblabidty blah blah. Oooh, this guy looks like a good mark! Let me start some shit with him. Maybe people will stop talking about what a dismal excuse for a president Bush was and pay attention to me instead!
LOOK AT ME! LOOK AT ME! I’m a 22%er.