NVlinns-1,
You need to get over yourself. 'Prolly' is online slang that dates back to the birth of the internet in irc chat channels. You can find it in the urban dictionary; it's not an unintentional misspelling as your ignorance of its etymology would have it.
You appear to set the bar pretty low for everyone due to your palling around with low IQ people, and it appears to have rubbed off. Of course we can't believe everything we read on the internet, we are each responsible for evaluating the information, taking into consideration source, logic, and empirical evidence as you appear to understand. Although you don't seem to grasp the subtleties and nuance of intentional exaggeration (aka sarcasm) of someone claiming Bush has an IQ of 40. This exaggeration was also intentional, but I'll leave it up to you to see if you can figure out why.
Even the most cursory reading of GWB's life and decisions would reveal someone whose lack of intelligence made him wholly unqualified to take the office of POTUS. Throw all politics aside and just use common sense and what we know to be true from what we have experienced the past 8 years. What we find is an incurious man, uninterested in the details of governing to the point of negligence.
You want facts?
For starters, 911 happened on his watch. It's well known now that Bush and other members of his administration had been warned repeatedly in CIA briefings beforehand of Al Qaeda's plans to hijack planes, with warnings coming even from the CIA director of the time George Tenet himself. Bush and others in his circle like Rice and Ashcroft blew this off and by refusing to even consider it a possibility to look into, well what does that tell you about his competence? Instead, he spent 40% of his pre 911 days on vacation.
The horrific part is that this continued uninterest in any details of governing became a recurring theme throughout his presidency and he was even re-elected! He was told repeatedly of the lack of WMD evidence in Iraq and as we know from the Downing Street Memos, he had decided to invade Iraq regardless of this fact instead choosing to sell the war to the American people based on a lie. He incompetently pursued his 'war of choice' instead of going after our immediate enemy Bin Laden who is still at large. He put absolutely no forethought into planning for the following occupation of Iraq, leading to widescale disaster. He didn't have the slightest inkling of what the consequences of his actions might be, due to his ignorance of *beep* history, and that he was ultimately empowering Iran. He then pressed for war with Iran EVEN AFTER he knew the NIE concluded that Iran had shut down their WMD program in 2003, but the report had not been released to the public yet.
The way he responded and the personnel he appointed to FEMA that dealt with Katrina was of utmost incompetence. He made appointments based on party loyalty rather than competence, leading to his horse association appointment of 'Heckuva job Brownie'. Cronyism, and the obvious corruption that follows from this, were rampant in his administration in this regard. Billions of taxpayer dollars spent in Iraq just disappeared due to the extent of corruption and lack of oversight on contracts there, to the nobid contracts awarded here where Halliburton and the rest overcharged for services.
And due to his lack of attention to details, they were left to his cabinet to deal with and they dealt with them poorly due to infighting and his failure to care enough to resolve disputes between his top level officials.
Again, we see the final result of injury from his insulting incompetence by his failure to pay any heed to the very obvious warning signs behind the current global economic crisis, including ignoring the warnings he was given by congress members of an impending housing bubble and mortgage crisis that manifested before our very eyes. It was HIS appointments such as SEC chair Chris Cox and the latter's utter lack of oversight (just like his boss) to properly police the securities industry leading to the Madoff scandal. It was HIS decision to give a virtual blank check of 700 billion to his treasury secretary to bailout financial institutions with no strings attached. And don't for a minute try to offload blame on a dem congress or Clinton. Democrats supported the bailout, but it is the PRESIDENT that is responsible for ensuring the details of an arrangement where strings are attached WITH TEETH and not a blank check. Clinton did away with Glass-Stegall because of his proactive approach with working very closely with the Fed and acting on the prevailing wisdom of economists of the time, especially Alan Greenspan, that unfettered market forces would police itself but he always had an eye on the markets and the details to ensure its upkeep and smooth sailing. Bush didn't have such capacity to even understand underlying economic principles like the Laffler curve to know what details and warning signs in the market to look for, not that he would even have the slightest interest in them if he did. Nope, instead he was like Nero and Hoover in the respects of fiddling while Rome burned.
How much more evidence or 'facts' do you need that this man was incompetent and outrageously unqualified as a manager, much less the leader of the free world?
Seriously, your pitiful defense of using the divisions in popular opinion at the time of Abraham Lincoln and FDR's administrations as examples simply does not apply here. Both of the presidents you describe emphatically and unquestionably won the wars they were managing, and the competence they displayed as Commander in Chief in conducting their wars was recognized and praised each in their respective times. Without finishing either the wars in Afghanistan or Iraq, and instead making the US a global pariah and a target for a new generation of Jihadists Bush has only increased the threat of terrorism. FDR's New Deal was massively popular and well received during his kadministration for stimulating the economy out of the Great Depression. Even mentioning GWB in the same breath as presidents like Lincoln and FDR is insulting to every educated American. GWB doesn't have even a hint of the managerial skills and competence that those greats had. There might have been disagreements with their opinions on issues of the times for them, but there was never a question of outright competence. From the facts we have, it's more appropriate to compare Bush with Warren Harding; lazy, incompetent, and corrupt.
reply
share