Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Why Bush was so bad at the end of his term.
Unknown

Posted on 05/02/2012 8:13:03 AM PDT by Sen Jack S. Fogbound

This may have been around before but it is worth reading it again!

This tells the story, why Bush was so bad at the end of his term.

Some people aren't aware of all of this. Don't just skim over this, please read it slowly and let it sink in. If in doubt, check it out.

The day the democrats took over was not January 22nd 2009, it was actually January 3, 2007... the day the Democrats took over the House of Representatives and the Senate, at the very start of the 110th Congress.

The Democrat Party controlled a majority in both chambers for the first time since the end of the 103rd Congress in 1995.

For those who are listening to the liberals propagating the fallacy that everything is "Bush's Fault", think about this: January 3rd, 2007 was the day the Democrats took over the Senate and the Congress. At the time:

The DOW Jones closed at 12,621.77 The GDP for the previous quarter was 3.5% The Unemployment rate was 4.6%

George Bush's Economic policies SET A RECORD of 52 STRAIGHT MONTHS of JOB GROWTH Remember the day...

January 3rd, 2007 was the day that Barney Frank took over the House Financial Services Committee and Chris Dodd took over the Senate Banking Committee.

The economic meltdown that happened 15 months later was in what part of the economy? BANKING AND FINANCIAL SERVICES!

Unemployment... to this CRISIS by (among MANY other things) dumping 5-6 TRILLION Dollars of toxic loans on the economy from YOUR Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac FIASCOES!

Bush asked Congress 17 TIMES to stop Fannie & Freddie - starting in 2001 because it was financially risky for the US economy.

And who took the THIRD highest pay-off from Fannie Mae AND Freddie Mac? OBAMA And who fought against reform of Fannie and Freddie? OBAMA and the Democrat Congress So when someone tries to blame Bush.. REMEMBER JANUARY 3rd, 2007.... THE DAY THE DEMOCRATS TOOK OVER!" Budgets do not come from the White House. They come from Congress, and the party that controlled Congress since January 2007 is the Democrat Party.

Furthermore, the Democrats controlled the budget process for 2008 & 2009 as well as 2010 & 2011. In that first year, they had to contend with George Bush, which caused them to compromise on spending, when Bush somewhat belatedly got tough on spending increases.

For 2009 though, Nancy Pelosi & Harry Reid bypassed George Bush entirely, passing continuing resolutions to keep government running until Barack Obama could take office. At that time, they passed a massive omnibus spending bill to complete the 2009 budgets.

And where was Barack Obama during this time? He was a member of that very Congress that passed all of these massive spending bills, and he signed the omnibus bill as President to complete 2009.

If the Democrats inherited any deficit, it was the 2007 deficit, the last of the Republican budgets. That deficit was the lowest in five years, and the fourth straight decline in deficit spending. After that, Democrats in Congress took control of spending, and that includes Barack Obama, who voted for the budgets.

If Obama inherited anything, he inherited it from himself. In a nutshell, what Obama is saying is "I inherited a deficit that I voted for and then I voted to expand that deficit four-fold since January 20th." There is no way this will be widely publicized unless each of us sends it on!


TOPICS: News/Current Events; Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: vanity
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140141-144 next last
To: dragnet2

It doesnt look like you are capable of answering questions, but If Im wrong maybe you could answer the question I posed to Tom Guy in #77
I want an explanation of why any and all leftists foam at the mouth when anyone mention Bush?

It seems strange that you consider yourself the exact opposite of a leftist yet you too are foaming at the mouth...Please explain


101 posted on 05/02/2012 3:09:56 PM PDT by woofie (It takes three villages and a forest of woodland creatures to raise a child in Obamaville)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: what's up

The Tax Cut was one of the few right things. But as for the War on Terror or simular actions? It had been ongoing since Desert Storm. Clinton had our troops deployed remember? Oh and lets not forget The Help was never given the troops. Same End Troop Strengths as 1996 all through the Bush two terms. Bush had the Golden Chance to be Reagan Two on national defense and wasted it.


102 posted on 05/02/2012 3:10:02 PM PDT by cva66snipe (Two Choices left for U.S. One Nation Under GOD or One Nation Under Judgment? Which one say ye?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: TomGuy
Bush gave us good judges...Bush attacked the enemy...Bush saw us thru 911 like obamey and toon could never do...Bush got us thru major crisis like Katrina and yet our economy was doing pretty well up until rats invaded...

Bush always supported America and our troops, in an honest way...not a shallow showy false way like bamey....

get real folks....but enjoy your obamey and holder 2nd term....

freeper world ain't what it used to be....where we fought the enemy not each other....

103 posted on 05/02/2012 3:11:05 PM PDT by cherry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: vette6387

wow....you came in just in the last election cycle....handy when you can do that...


104 posted on 05/02/2012 3:12:08 PM PDT by cherry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: cherry
Ditto that.

Leni

105 posted on 05/02/2012 3:13:26 PM PDT by MinuteGal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: dragnet2

Haha, nothing to refute me? Didn’t think so. Its tough being a liar when people know the truth. And all you Bush liars run away or attempt limp insults, when reality gets thrown in your faces. The people who re-elected Bush Governor and President know he was a real leader. In fact he should be King.


106 posted on 05/02/2012 3:13:48 PM PDT by Deb (Beat him, strip him and bring him to my tent!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: Ditter
excuse me, but first ladies have no vote...none...despite what the hitlery and moochelle people want you to think...

but keep thinking of ways to justify voting bamey in again and holder too...keep working at it...

you will get the blame....and most of us who want to get rid of bamey and holder will not like it so much when you come back after re electing your messiah and complain and bitch....

107 posted on 05/02/2012 3:15:40 PM PDT by cherry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: bmwcyle
Why would he have vetoed the "bailouts"? Again, I'm assuming you mean TARP. He supported TARP. He advocated for TARP to SAVE THE ECONOMY!!!

As of April 6th (according to the Wall Street Journal) all the major banks had paid back their loans...with interest...providing a PROFIT of $16 billion to the government.

Geez, people, read something besides each other's posts.

108 posted on 05/02/2012 3:20:51 PM PDT by Deb (Beat him, strip him and bring him to my tent!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]

To: cva66snipe
But as for the War on Terror or simular actions?

There were no "similar actions". The reason we call it a "War on Terror" is because Bush took the offense and made it a real war. Clinton had badly undermined our military and it was obvious to every thinking person in the 90's that the next President was going to have a MAJOR task on his hands.

Bush was up to the task. He took the offense after 9/11 and never let up. Everyone was saying at the time that it was inevitable that another major attack was coming to the US. Guess what? It didn't and we have George W. to thank for that.

Bush was relentlessly sniped at (and still is today by many on the right as well) but he never gave in and our security today is due directly to him. Yes, he was Reagan II as you put it. And coming decades will show that he remade the Islamic World so that we could live in safety. I don't take it for granted...many do.

109 posted on 05/02/2012 3:24:03 PM PDT by what's up
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: Sen Jack S. Fogbound

Bush lost the support of Congressional Republicans because they were cowards and beaten down over the wars by the MSM. He didn’t help himself by standing by idly while the press and lefties continually lied about what he was doing in the WOT. A wasp thing. Bush family has no streetfighter genes at all but that doesn’t make them bad people, it just makes them punching bags.

I think he acquitted himself pretty well defending America and insisting on doubling down in Iraq despite the lack of public support from Congress.

Spending wise he did not acquit himself well but tax wise he did OK.

George W Bush is a good American but like all of us he falls far short of perfect. However, he was a vast improvement on Clinton and orders of magnitude better than the current crowned prince.

If he was running against Obama I’d vote for him without hesitation just as I will vote for Romney without hesitation over Obama. I voted for Santorum in the primary but I won’t be taking my football and going home. The game of life continues.


110 posted on 05/02/2012 3:26:49 PM PDT by jwalsh07 (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cherry
What are you talking about? You think I want to reelect obozo? I want obozo out of the WH and I have said so over and over again. I think you have me confused with someone who refuses to vote for Romney.... or whatever you are ranting about.
111 posted on 05/02/2012 3:27:32 PM PDT by Ditter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: dragnet2

: )


112 posted on 05/02/2012 3:27:49 PM PDT by stephenjohnbanker (God, family, country, mom, apple pie, the girl next door and a Ford F250 to pull my boat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: Deb
As of April 6th (according to the Wall Street Journal) all the major banks had paid back their loans...with interest...providing a PROFIT

Yep.

113 posted on 05/02/2012 3:30:20 PM PDT by what's up
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: Deb

Wrong....cooked books.

Same with GM....they owe us 50 BILLION.


114 posted on 05/02/2012 3:30:32 PM PDT by stephenjohnbanker (God, family, country, mom, apple pie, the girl next door and a Ford F250 to pull my boat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: what's up

GMAC still owes about 15 billion alone. Not to mention the deadbeat mother ship GM. AIG is still out a bundle. Many medium and small banks will never repay their gifts at taxpayer expense. European banks bailed out by TARP are not even on the books. Not to mention the FED handing out money to the huge banks at zero while they make billions off the float. That scam is ongoing at the expense of small savers.


115 posted on 05/02/2012 3:41:37 PM PDT by jwalsh07 (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: Deb
In fact Bush should be King.

Why settle for that?

Make him your Messiah Debbie!

You can set up a shrine with candles, maybe a plastic steer with horns..Set up the shrine on your apartment balcony Debbie, overlooking the Bush kingdom.

Get one of those Bush bobbleheads for your dashboard.


116 posted on 05/02/2012 3:58:07 PM PDT by dragnet2 (Diversion and evasion are tools of deceit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: Deb
Yes, Bruce Bartlett is a charter member of what is becoming a very very large and ever growing Bush Haters Club. I had been warning the DC Chapter early on and for a long time that he was constantly chipping away at the conservative brand. I didn't want to hate the guy. But it was just too much.

Comparing Bush to the alternative buckets of $hit (algore, Obama, Kerry) does not prove that he was a great President. My momma would have fought the WOT as vigorously. Bush's legacy IS Obama.

117 posted on 05/02/2012 4:03:27 PM PDT by BufordP ("Drink me if you can't take a joke." --Kool-Aid)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: what's up
There were no "similar actions". The reason we call it a "War on Terror" is because Bush took the offense and made it a real war. Clinton had badly undermined our military and it was obvious to every thinking person in the 90's that the next President was going to have a MAJOR task on his hands.

I wasn't a war it was a State Department micro-managed C.F. that endangered troops lives to REBUILD Iraq. War? What do you think it is? here are your rules soldier. You can't do this, this, this, and this, and this. If the enemy nations civilians don't like you they can go to the State Department and have you, your platoon, your actions in a hostile area second guessed by the town friendly Islamics. Military investigators will aggressively investigate as well. Sec of Defense will not stop persicution of troops. SEC of Defense lacks the fortitude to act and back up his troops. But answer me this then. If Bush made such wise choices why did Obama keep Gates?

War is not fighting under limited ROE's. It is not limiting targets too minimize damage to enemy nation. War is the absolute no holds barred act of going in with whatever military force needed and taking out the nations military, ALL Infrastructure which could even remotely be used for military use by them ever again by them. It means persons in that nation are going to die as well. It means not repeating the same type of warfare that has been used against us since Korea by the enemy. Rather in war you must all with prejudice destroy any and all suspected havens for the enemy and suspected enemy. If they are embed within the civilian population then all pay for it just as all did in Japan and Germany.

By night three of air strikes the Iraqi War was another nation building project at our expense. That is wrong.

Bush chose the worse person for Sec of Defense not once mind you but twice. Ever hear the term Hollow Carter Military? Want the name of the man who in part started the breakdowns that lead to it? Donald Rumsfeld. He was Gerald Ford's Sec of Def. The military under Ford's last tenure was pretty much like the Carter years. The breakdown was underway by Rummy policies like the AWOL to Civilian policy which he tried unsuccessfully to put into policy again under Bush. It began the cheapening of Honorable Discharge.

I'll explain it. Some vets of the 1975-1978 era who served say a year and got out two years and got out etc most were not under Honorable terms. They deserted. Why did they do so? Because after 31 days all they had to do was report to another command, turn themselves in for a General Discharge and their obligation which they were not drafted to do ended. they were free to go. I am not making this up it happened considerably and as a result desertions ran high and discipline and morale was low.

Bush was up to the task. He took the offense after 9/11 and never let up. Everyone was saying at the time that it was inevitable that another major attack was coming to the US. Guess what? It didn't and we have George W. to thank for that.

By not destroying Iraq enemies know several things. The U.S. Taxpayer will rebuild not infrastructure it destroyed in air strikes it will also rebuild the military STRONGER than before. We can rebuild Iraq's but not our own? That is morally WRONG!!! The next radical cleric, the next charismatic thug, even Iran can walk in and YIPPIE they have a better armed and trained by the United States force for terrorism than before. That is not the purpose of war.

Bush was relentlessly sniped at (and still is today by many on the right as well) but he never gave in and our security today is due directly to him. Yes, he was Reagan II as you put it. And coming decades will show that he remade the Islamic World so that we could live in safety. I don't take it for granted...many do.

Bush for bringing in Poppy's advisers and Poppy's and Ford Era people rather than Reagan people was a continuation of Ford and Poppy. He was no Reagan on any issue except tax cuts.

We would be far more secure today and terrorism would be low risk had we simply leveled Iraq and left it in smoldering ruins for nations like Iran too see as a warning. That is war. That is how it is supposed to be done. That is how it was done till Korea.

118 posted on 05/02/2012 5:17:22 PM PDT by cva66snipe (Two Choices left for U.S. One Nation Under GOD or One Nation Under Judgment? Which one say ye?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: Deb

Oh, shut up you vapid pubbie wench. Bush and his daddy have ruined the GOP brand.


119 posted on 05/02/2012 5:19:27 PM PDT by TADSLOS (Conservatism is not a party slogan, but a mindset guided by core values and walking the walk.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: Deb
None of the amazing victories were EVER covered.

That's correct, 100% correct.

But the only victory that really matters is final victory. To Bush, final victory meant more than just disrupt the Taliban. His goal was to transform the Middle East; to turn dictatorships into democracies. The thinking was that democracies do not engage in terrorism. They do not wage wars of aggression.

That was a noble goal, to be sure. But by 2006 it was clear that Iraq and especially Afghanistan were not going to become peaceful democracies.

It's very much like with Vietnam. Our troops were NEVER defeated in the field, yet we lost the war. Sadly, same will happen here. It was obvious by 2006, and nothing significant has happened since then - under Bush or Obama - to reverse course.

120 posted on 05/02/2012 5:21:29 PM PDT by Leaning Right (Why am I carrying this lantern? you ask. I am looking for the next Reagan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140141-144 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson