July 2, 201016 yr Author Bush was treated very unfairly. There was nothing he could have done much like there isn't anything Obama can do.The problem is that Obama didn't feel that way about Bush.
July 2, 201016 yr Bush allowed people to die?? You're kidding, right? Any proof of that? Nope, he didn't do his job. WHo knows some of the folks that needed aide may have live.
July 2, 201016 yr Bush was treated very unfairly. There was nothing he could have done much like there isn't anything Obama can do. :thumb: Glad to see there are a couple on here that understand it.
July 2, 201016 yr If his opinion were from a different perspective I suspect that he would get a PM that his post was deleted for a rule 8 violation. Just saying... Not at all. Nor would he have gotten in trouble for using the words "rear", "posterior" or "rump."
July 2, 201016 yr The problem is that Obama didn't feel that way about Bush. Yet, since former President Bush is not a senator under President Obama, we simply don't know and it, IMO, is an unfair comparison.
July 2, 201016 yr But there are those on the right who have chosen to show the same level of respect toward Obama that the left showed to GWB. Which is the same level of respect that the right showed President Clinton. It's a cycle that just continuously gets worse.
July 2, 201016 yr Author Yet, since former President Bush is not a senator under President Obama, we simply don't know and it, IMO, is an unfair comparison.I disagree, I think it's a fair comparison. It was mere hyperbole from Obama and he now doesn't care for the same directed toward him.
July 2, 201016 yr Bush was treated very unfairly. There was nothing he could have done much like there isn't anything Obama can do. :thumb: I happen to think Bush was treated unfairly on a lot of issues during his presidency. Have Obama's words come back to bite him? Yeah, probably, but that's what politicians do. Full of doublespeak. It's nothing new at all. As for that congressman, I'm as impressed as I can be from a 1:21 YouTube clip.
July 2, 201016 yr Author As for that congressman, I'm as impressed as I can be from a 1:21 YouTube clip. I'm sure Senator LeMieux will be pleased.
July 2, 201016 yr I disagree, I think it's a fair comparison. It was mere hyperbole from Obama and he now doesn't care for the same directed toward him. You think it's fair to draw a conclusion that Obama did something that Bush wouldn't have, had Bush been a senator and Obama the president?
July 2, 201016 yr One big difference between Katrina and the oil spill ... the Bush administration had several days of advance warning about Katrina. Anyone that knew the situation knew a Category 5 hurricane hitting a city that's below sea level could be a prescription for a disaster, but the Bush administration didn't respond very much until after the storm hit. The Obama administration certainly had no advance warning about the oil spill. And let's face it ... if the Obama administration had taken charge of the process after the same spill, his same critics would be crying about government interference and the financial cost of such an undertaking.
July 2, 201016 yr One big difference between Katrina and the oil spill ... the Bush administration had several days of advance warning about Katrina. Anyone that knew the situation knew a Category 5 hurricane hitting a city that's below sea level could be a prescription for a disaster, but the Bush administration didn't respond very much until after the storm hit. The Obama administration certainly had no advance warning about the oil spill. And let's face it ... if the Obama administration had taken charge of the process after the same spill, his same critics would be crying about government interference and the financial cost of such an undertaking. Let's not kid ourselves and act like President Bush had enough of a warning to do anything that would've made much of a difference. Neither Bush nor Obama deserve blame for their respective disasters, I don't understand why that's so dang hard for so many of you all to grasp.
July 2, 201016 yr Let's not kid ourselves and act like President Bush had enough of a warning to do anything that would've made much of a difference. Neither Bush nor Obama deserve blame for their respective disasters, I don't understand why that's so dang hard for so many of you all to grasp.I still think that the Bush administration could have made a quicker, better response to Katrina, given the advance warning. I was driving through Mississippi on the Saturday after Katrina hit, six days after she hit the shoreline. There were still National Guard units on the side of the highway gathering to deploy, something that could have been done days earlier.
July 2, 201016 yr Author You think it's fair to draw a conclusion that Obama did something that Bush wouldn't have, had Bush been a senator and Obama the president?Sorry, I guess I misunderstood your original post.
July 2, 201016 yr Author One big difference between Katrina and the oil spill ... the Bush administration had several days of advance warning about Katrina. Anyone that knew the situation knew a Category 5 hurricane hitting a city that's below sea level could be a prescription for a disaster, but the Bush administration didn't respond very much until after the storm hit. The Obama administration certainly had no advance warning about the oil spill. And let's face it ... if the Obama administration had taken charge of the process after the same spill, his same critics would be crying about government interference and the financial cost of such an undertaking. Yet you lay no blame at the feet of those that didn't heed the warning themselves. Obama should have acted much quicker than he did. He now has a sore tookus.
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.