Honestly people with no idea what actually goes in side a government are the ones most likely to bitch about 'BUT BUT BUUUUUSH'.
His chief mistakes were lack of sufficient pr management, and being a president at the economic cycle that was bound to become a bubble and pop before he was out of office.
However, as we are slowly finding out, his management of strategies and overall policies in regards to the middle east, post 9-11 events and other factors were actually realistic and well thought out with vast positive implications. People who got hit the hardest by his policies, namely those who despise America for what it is while cheekily ignoring their own glaring problems and spreading their legs for saddam like dictators on a daily basis, are the same ones bitching about 'human rights' and 'hypocrite' whenever he did things.
Granted, our former president did have his short comings. However, the words of condi rice and unspoken agreement of such sentiment by powell all begin to ring more and more true as days go by: History will vindicate our former president.
Obama is the polar opposite of bush in every regard, and that includes not even having the balls to do something, anything, when he needs to. Bush may or may not have been courageous, but obama certainly has none. Obama got hit with a hard dose of reality when he came to the office and kept most if not pretty much all of bush's policies, especially the foreign ones.
Everyone by now knows that obama is just a spoiled ass child in the international stage.
The russians think he is a joke. All the naivte of jfk and none of even his modicum of charisma or will power.
The chinese laugh at obama. All the weakness of clinton and none of his political savvy.
The rest of the world are shaking their heads wondering who the hell in their right mind would place this eternal graduate student on the most powerful office on earth.
Let this be a wake up call to all the self- proclaimed 'educated' peoples. There is nothing easier to manipulate then those who are too smart by only half, and nothing easier to toy with then those who are hollow and weak inside.
George Bush made difficult choices that were necessary. Obama the boy doesn't know anything about anyone, save for his delusional sense of moral high ground (because his skin happens to be half black).
Above all, it is clear he is opposed to and against the very identity of america itself and would like to see it changed to suit his whims.
Perhaps he should ask the chinese the indians or malays to do the same, and see if they give him anything other than a finger, and rightfully so.
It's time this boy got put in his place.
Spent trillions on meddling in the business of other countries. Ruined our economy and set us up for more US hatred around the world. He turned a world that was sympathetic after 9/11 to a world of fear/disgust at our actions afterwards.
Liberty was sacrificed under Bush, economically and socially.
I await your response about how bad Obama is. Completely ignoring the fact that Bush spent trillions on his own pursuits.
Typical sentimental demagoguery without addressing the facts at hand. 'Spent trillions' sounds much, much worse then 'money invested to keep global economy stable by not allowing hostile and dictatorial regime to strangle it'. The profit generated by these ventures, and the fall of a dictator with tin pot dreams of imperialism, was most definitely worth the cost.
Of course, your kind fails to remember that you were clamoring like headless chickens for 'humanitarian causes' when kurds were being gassed and electric bills were spiking during the build up to iraq invasion of kuwait (oh wait, no. It was all mouth and no action while you were sucking your thumb and waiting for the hawks to declare war while you keep playing the saint). Nor do you acknowledge the finding of chemical weapons manufacture and storage facility in Sargat, northern iraq. You also forget that with the equipment US had and relatively mediocre arsenal or weapons saddam possessed, the political fall out of obviously justifying the WDM clause of the invasion would have been far greater than any meager casualties he could have inflicted.
Also, much of those trillions eventually found themselves back to US treasury with variety of trade deals and oil rights, not to mention the overall cost would have been much greater in the long run had US done nothing.
As usual, you fools just don't bother to see the alternative, and cry about perceived 'injustices'.
'Liberties'? What, are you that afraid of the TSA and the patriot act, latter of which not only obama has resigned, but strengthened?
Economy was sacrificed? What nonsense is this? I suppose you are a firm believer that presidents are in control of the economy, and that carter is as much to blame for the late 70s depression as much as clinton and bush are supposed to be given credit/criticism for their economic cycle conditions?
Here's a hint: the housing bubble was not caused by some imaginary monstrous war cost the middle east generated. The war cost seem significant at a glance, but remember running a national treasury and balance is somewhat more complex then running your personal account book. Many profits and revenues fly under the radar. Many are left undisclosed. In fact, the benefits of the war such as secured trade routes, greater control of resources, and other factors would be in the long run a positive benefit than having done nothing.
Also, enough with your sniveling comments about 'raising hatred' against US. They can go fuck themselves - it is not their place to mouth off about how their feelings should be dictating our actions. We are as beholden to them as they feel are beholden to us - that is, nothing. Get the picture?
Anyone can 'feel' anything. No one said your feelings or sentiments can legitimize your actions. A rapist or a thief can easily 'feel' justified and completely convinced of their motivation and actions. If the world is 'outraged', perhaps they should find a different way to express their impotent, petty frustrations at being unable to deal with even their neighbors without having a pissing contest on the global stage.
The main nexus of 'complaints' against US boils down not to any justifiable reaction or reason, but a very simple impulse that no one wants to admit but is obvious: 'I want to be the big cheese, and I dislike you for being something that I, I! want to be, and (somehow) deserve to be.'
Let's compare obama to bush. Bush spent as much as he did looking at the greater picture. If it was not for the housing crisis and somewhat mediocre handling of the post invasion iraq, his presidency would be considered a success with both healthy growth in economic stage and having correctly exerted american influence to maintain stability when it was needed (not that US expects gratitude for it).
Let compare that to obama, who spent at least double the amount bush loaned, in half the time, and still have not managed to drag the economy out of recession and mediocre 'recovery'. Everyone knows the economic condition, created by housing bubble and destruction of middle class jobs chiefly by democratic naive politicians who espoused 'my brother's keeper' attitude, is the end result of clinton policies that successive presidents, especially democrat ones, did not change.
Now, you better start giving some answers about how you think you know any facts about 'trillions' spent by bush vs. obviously larger 'trillions' misspent by obama with little effect in half the time he was president.
The world may have disliked or hated bush, but when he spoke, they had to pay attention. No one wants, or needs to pay attention to obama. This is fucking politics and global power struggle, not a fucking book club meeting.
Just how naive and spineless are you to make the superficial arguments you did?
Also, I noted that instead of arguing my points about obama, you decided to shift blame and smear bush when you got hit in the soft spot about your boy. Very weak, very transparent.
Poll
