• Welcome to the Internet Infidels Discussion Board.

Pres. George W. Bush trying to be a statesman - Not doing well

Jimmy Higgins

Contributor
Joined
Jan 31, 2001
Messages
50,553
Basic Beliefs
Calvinistic Atheist
Well, W has re-entered the fray. And for a good cause. He isn't happy with the nationalism consolidating in the US and wants something done on immigration.

He had an interview on NPR, and he didn't want it to get political, like when it was noted his immigration plan was largely blocked by Republicans. Or if he was against Trump's policies... though then he pretty much said he was for the anti of all of the policies that Trump had happened to support.

The NPR interview wasn't that good, much like his Administration and Presidency. He wants to talk a greater good, but wants to generalize the problem of government in a non-partisan way, which in theory is a good idea, but in application, ignores how the GOP has become a more staunch pro-America party without an actual platform, forget about wanting to improve immigration.

He wants to paint away the problems. Which is a nice hippie way of trying to deal with a Government that has only one party interested in actually governing anymore.
 
If Dubya coulnd't be statesman like during his presidency, why would he be so now?
 
The Shrub presidency is best remembered for its lack of intellect.

I don't agree. I think that GW will be remembered as a great statesman, master foreign policy maestro, protector of the public good, and great overall president (compared to Donald Trump).
 
Well, he didn't step down after the whole WMD thing, so it's no surprise that he refuses to step off.
 
The Shrub presidency is best remembered for its lack of intellect.

I don't agree. I think that GW will be remembered as a great statesman, master foreign policy maestro, protector of the public good, and great overall president (compared to Donald Trump).

Compared to Trump is a pretty low bar.
Tom
 
Compared to Trump is a pretty low bar.
Tom

Yep. But don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them.

I'm not blaming you for anything.

But I do think that Bush II's presidential campaign and administration was when the GOP started sliding downwards into partisanship, resulting in the TeaParty taking them over.

Tom
 
Compared to Trump is a pretty low bar.
Tom

Yep. But don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them.

Neither did I. The last not-so-smart prez I voted for was Ronnie Raygun, and I'm still trying to forgive myself to this day. I'm not sure where the Raygun sits on the Dubya/Trumpo scale.

Reagan was the benevolent face of All Evil that Came After.
He killed the fairness doctrine which would have forestalled or prevented much of the social ill that afflicts us today. It would not have allowed the current state of NewsMax, OAN and FOX creating their own reality, insulating their viewers from the actual state of affairs in the USA.
 
Neither did I. The last not-so-smart prez I voted for was Ronnie Raygun, and I'm still trying to forgive myself to this day. I'm not sure where the Raygun sits on the Dubya/Trumpo scale.

Reagan was the benevolent face of All Evil that Came After.
He killed the fairness doctrine which would have forestalled or prevented much of the social ill that afflicts us today. It would not have allowed the current state of NewsMax, OAN and FOX creating their own reality, insulating their viewers from the actual state of affairs in the USA.

The Fairness Doctrine only applied to over the air broadcasts, enforced by the FCC. My guess it would get struck down by the courts if it was attempted to be applied to cable broadcasters.
 
Back
Top Bottom