George HW Bush VS George W Bush

Self Post ^ | 02-20-2023 | Chicagoconservative27

[DariusBane]

Critera: who sucked less. That is all.

[Jim Noble]

I voted for Perot twice, and I’m proud I did.

[Attention Surplus Disorder]

I don’t really want to get into an insult War. But W.Bush 43 was pretty exceptionally bad.

[Governor Dinwiddie]

Read my lips.

[Tell It Right]

The first Bush gave us Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, for which I’m forever grateful despite the other things Bush Sr did.

[Vaquero]

I have grown to hate them both

[factmart]

Who really cares.

[lowbridge]

They both handed the white house on a silver platter over to the democrats. The only difference is that Bush senior did it faster after only one term. Part of the reason was him breaking his famous no new taxes promise.

[C210N]

Two generations of evil.

[justme4now]

Bush 43 was the catalyst for the slow distruction of this once great nation by signing into law the “Patriot Act!”

I shouldn’t have to explain why I say that?☹️

Unless I am mistaken, at the time of signing, he, Bush said: “I am not sure this is Constitutional ... let them fight it out in court!”

POS🤬

[supremedoctrine]

As I have said very ruefully for years : JFK left us LBJ, Reagan left us Bush. Both dismal fates for the Americans who voted for the first two in each cycle.

[Parmy]

Read my lips, no new taxes!

[supremedoctrine]

are you trying to piss off 90% of FReepers off? Don’t you know where our collective head is at for a long long time now?

[skr]

Then we would’ve had Global Warming Priest Al Gore at the helm on 9/11 and thereafter. Can we say complete capitulation three times fast? No thanks!

If Gore had won, I’m not sure a Republican president would ever have been possible from that point on. The playbook was set on how to cheat by a variety of means, but G.W. Bush had Karl Rove’s down-to-the-county analysis as a foundation to fight. Yes, both of these guys are a huge disappointment, but I think they were where they were supposed to be at that time.

[hardspunned]

I have to tip my hat to all the Bushes. They were the primary factors responsible for my tagline. Other than that, the whole clan can go to hell.

[logi_cal869]

That’s a trick question, and it appears that most aren’t falling for it.

[Captainpaintball]

HW commanded the US military at its relative highest point. Slightly lesser weapons, but better quality soldiers, better culture, and far better leadership.

In retrospect, I still struggle whether letting Saddam alone was the best choice. He was a secular buffer against radical radical islam. But maybe offing him back then before the NWO knew what hit them might have turned out better.

[Cronos]

43 was better in his home policies.

his foreign policies were failures caused by 41’s failure in Iraq

When Saddy invaded K, he (Saddy) was the enemy of the jihadis, the Iranians and he blackmailed the Sauds and Qataris to send him money (so no money going to madrassas and other groups).

If Bushie hadn’t gone for GW1, then
1. no 9/11 — that was directly due to American troops on “the holy soil of Saudia” - as AlQ claimed
2. no ISIS
3. no radicalization of Mohammadens from Indonesia to Chechnya
4. no American blood or gold lost in IRaq or Afghanistan
5. possibly no Taliban either as there would be no funding from Saudia
6. No Clintoon

[Steve Van Doorn]

George HW Bush (Cabal leader) VS George W Bush (Son of a Cabal leader)

Reagan biggest weakness was trusting those who he thought he could trust. Very similar to Trumps biggest weakness.

[Steve Van Doorn]

said, "That’s a trick question, and it appears that most aren’t falling for it."

People are programmed to answer the question as given.

Try this one. Who was the better Stalin or Hitler?
I would say Both where fantastic as manipulating the masses but Hitler was better at it than Stalin.
Or many we could say Hitler was the lessor of two evils?