By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General - George W Bush Great President oor Greatest President?

Final-Fan said:
@ slimebeast: Bush, along with a new administration in S. Korea at about the same time, actually antagonized N. Korea and reversed progress that had been made. So I disagree with respect to that country at least.

Huh? The US convinced the N Koreans to lay down it's nuke program years before Obama was even considered a President candiate.



Around the Network
Final-Fan said:
HappySqurriel said:
George W Bush was a below average president who was in charge in times of above average difficulty and had a devoted group of opponents within the media who held him to a very high standard.

srsly?  Bush got as close to a free ride as any modern president has gotten from the media.  

Are you joking? He was demonized by the media and still is today.



"We'll toss the dice however they fall,
And snuggle the girls be they short or tall,
Then follow young Mat whenever he calls,
To dance with Jak o' the Shadows."

Check out MyAnimeList and my Game Collection. Owner of the 5 millionth post.

Well, I guess I was exaggerating, but unless someone lied to me the Bush administration got the New York Times to hold off on breaking the warrantless wiretapping scandal until it wouldn't endanger the 2004 elections. That's unheard-of!



Tag (courtesy of fkusumot): "Please feel free -- nay, I encourage you -- to offer rebuttal."
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
My advice to fanboys: Brag about stuff that's true, not about stuff that's false. Predict stuff that's likely, not stuff that's unlikely. You will be happier, and we will be happier.

"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts." - Sen. Pat Moynihan
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The old smileys: ; - ) : - ) : - ( : - P : - D : - # ( c ) ( k ) ( y ) If anyone knows the shortcut for , let me know!
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I have the most epic death scene ever in VGChartz Mafia.  Thanks WordsofWisdom! 

Slimebeast said:
Final-Fan said:
@ slimebeast: Bush, along with a new administration in S. Korea at about the same time, actually antagonized N. Korea and reversed progress that had been made. So I disagree with respect to that country at least.

Huh? The US convinced the N Koreans to lay down it's nuke program years before Obama was even considered a President candiate.

I'm talking about like back in 2000 or thereabouts, there was a lot of progress being made, people crossing the border for work, S. Koreans funding/operating (?) a factory in N. Korea, stuff like that (I'm fuzzy on the details), but then a new S. Korean administration decided to say "screw you NK!" and shut things down, and the Bush administration was not exactly helping the situation.  So this could easily be seen as inciting or at least encouraging the N. Korean bad behavior of that decade.  

Or so I've heard.   



Tag (courtesy of fkusumot): "Please feel free -- nay, I encourage you -- to offer rebuttal."
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
My advice to fanboys: Brag about stuff that's true, not about stuff that's false. Predict stuff that's likely, not stuff that's unlikely. You will be happier, and we will be happier.

"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts." - Sen. Pat Moynihan
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The old smileys: ; - ) : - ) : - ( : - P : - D : - # ( c ) ( k ) ( y ) If anyone knows the shortcut for , let me know!
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I have the most epic death scene ever in VGChartz Mafia.  Thanks WordsofWisdom! 

outlawauron said:
Final-Fan said:
HappySqurriel said:
George W Bush was a below average president who was in charge in times of above average difficulty and had a devoted group of opponents within the media who held him to a very high standard.

srsly?  Bush got as close to a free ride as any modern president has gotten from the media.  

Are you joking? He was demonized by the media and still is today.

Yep pretty much although was one-sided as well.  Of course sounds very familiary to what's going on today which is also one-sided.  Point is either the media isn't doing their job or some are louder than others. 



Around the Network
Final-Fan said:
Well, I guess I was exaggerating, but unless someone lied to me the Bush administration got the New York Times to hold off on breaking the warrantless wiretapping scandal until it wouldn't endanger the 2004 elections. That's unheard-of!

As a guess, someone lied to you ...

Heading into the 2004 elections many major news organizations were doing anything in their power to make George W. Bush look bad; and CBS took it to an extreme level when Dan Rather accepted fabricated documents to slander George W. Bush, and wouldn't retract the story even after the documents were proven to be fraudulent. In the wake of the Dan Rather scandal (pretty much) every major news organization started actually checking facts and ensuring their story was correct before running it. It is extremely likely that any delay from the New York Times was from fact checking rather than from any efforts from the President.



HappySqurriel said:
Final-Fan said:
Well, I guess I was exaggerating, but unless someone lied to me the Bush administration got the New York Times to hold off on breaking the warrantless wiretapping scandal until it wouldn't endanger the 2004 elections. That's unheard-of!

As a guess, someone lied to you ...

Heading into the 2004 elections many major news organizations were doing anything in their power to make George W. Bush look bad; and CBS took it to an extreme level when Dan Rather accepted fabricated documents to slander George W. Bush, and wouldn't retract the story even after the documents were proven to be fraudulent. In the wake of the Dan Rather scandal (pretty much) every major news organization started actually checking facts and ensuring their story was correct before running it. It is extremely likely that any delay from the New York Times was from fact checking rather than from any efforts from the President.

Yea but as my point still stands... this happened on both sides as well.  It's just we are going to remember the ones that came on the winner's side more than that of the loser. Same how it happened this past election.  The issue is the media needs to stop getting so involved in it personally (or at least the loudest ones).  Or hit the root of the issue and stop having the ignorant people listen to without questioning it or as Green Day dubbed "American Idiots". 



HappySqurriel said:
Final-Fan said:
Well, I guess I was exaggerating, but unless someone lied to me the Bush administration got the New York Times to hold off on breaking the warrantless wiretapping scandal until it wouldn't endanger the 2004 elections. That's unheard-of!

As a guess, someone lied to you ...

Heading into the 2004 elections many major news organizations were doing anything in their power to make George W. Bush look bad; and CBS took it to an extreme level when Dan Rather accepted fabricated documents to slander George W. Bush, and wouldn't retract the story even after the documents were proven to be fraudulent. In the wake of the Dan Rather scandal (pretty much) every major news organization started actually checking facts and ensuring their story was correct before running it. It is extremely likely that any delay from the New York Times was from fact checking rather than from any efforts from the President.

Hmm ... looks like you may be partly right.  

http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2006/08/14/times/index.html

It sounds like although the Times dragged its feet somewhat on this story, they would have been pushing the envelope to get it out before the election.   And it sounds like the Bush administration's interference was the usual, "What?  Illegal?  Nooo...", instead of political pressure.  

But they could easily have done it in time to screw Bush if they'd wanted to.  



Tag (courtesy of fkusumot): "Please feel free -- nay, I encourage you -- to offer rebuttal."
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
My advice to fanboys: Brag about stuff that's true, not about stuff that's false. Predict stuff that's likely, not stuff that's unlikely. You will be happier, and we will be happier.

"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts." - Sen. Pat Moynihan
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The old smileys: ; - ) : - ) : - ( : - P : - D : - # ( c ) ( k ) ( y ) If anyone knows the shortcut for , let me know!
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I have the most epic death scene ever in VGChartz Mafia.  Thanks WordsofWisdom! 

Final-Fan said:
HappySqurriel said:
Final-Fan said:
Well, I guess I was exaggerating, but unless someone lied to me the Bush administration got the New York Times to hold off on breaking the warrantless wiretapping scandal until it wouldn't endanger the 2004 elections. That's unheard-of!

As a guess, someone lied to you ...

Heading into the 2004 elections many major news organizations were doing anything in their power to make George W. Bush look bad; and CBS took it to an extreme level when Dan Rather accepted fabricated documents to slander George W. Bush, and wouldn't retract the story even after the documents were proven to be fraudulent. In the wake of the Dan Rather scandal (pretty much) every major news organization started actually checking facts and ensuring their story was correct before running it. It is extremely likely that any delay from the New York Times was from fact checking rather than from any efforts from the President.

Hmm ... looks like you may be partly right.  

http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2006/08/14/times/index.html

It sounds like although the Times dragged its feet somewhat on this story, they would have been pushing the envelope to get it out before the election.   And it sounds like the Bush administration's interference was the usual, "What?  Illegal?  Nooo...", instead of political pressure.  

But they could easily have done it in time to screw Bush if they'd wanted to.  

Not likely.  Afterall as previously mentioned... Rather already rushed one story proven false... if the times rushed another story... it could of destroyed the story and nobody would of believed it was happening... and it likely would still be something unknown.