2005 Year in Review - George Bush

[Richard the Lionheart]

Enjoy!

http://jibjab.com/JokeBox/JokeBox_JJ...px?movieid=123

If the link doesn't work...just click on "2-0-5" from the list on the left.

...oh and don't forget to discuss! :wink:



EDIT: This better not turn into spam like the last one! :mdpower:

[Publius]

That was quite frankly the most humorous thing I have seen in a long, long time. Of course, I suppose it becomes somewhat less humorous when you realize all of the scandals and failures which this administration has undergone not in a term, but just one year! Simply amazing. If nothing else comes of Bush's presidency, it will at least insure that a Democrat gets elected come 2008.

[danzig]

Congrats for creating the 1 billionth thread with George Bush in it, you win a cookie. Btw this video is old funny but old and posted before!

[Richard the Lionheart]

Congrats for creating the 1 billionth thread with George Bush in it, you win a cookie. Btw this video is old funny but old and posted before!

Yes there has been another thread on this; however, that quickly turned into spam. I'm hoping that this one will actually lead to some discussion...if not...well it will be closed. :wink:

[danzig]

Yes there has been another thread on this; however, that quickly turned into spam. I'm hoping that this one will actually lead to some discussion...if not...well it will be closed. :wink:

Exactly what discussion can be made about this? It is after all a cartoon (and as I said indeed a funny one) but whats to discuss, everything in the video has been covered to death on the forums so do we need yet another thread? Are we to discuss whether its funny or not? Its artistic composition? Its use of sound?

[IamthePope]

Wow, I loved it that last time I saw It and still do. JibJab's always great fun.
This film really points out how the president is unfairly getting a bad rep. for all the problems with the world right now.

Katrina wasnt his fault but he responded with great speed and persistence to it, taking over 8 trips to the region long after the public had ceased to care, but he still takes a hit in the polls despite his efforts. Poor George. It seems he cant do anything right in the publics eyes.

The economy is in an upswing right now with amazingly low unemployment but he doesnt get credit for his decisive tax cuts. Instead people just complain about the price of oil which is entirely out of his hands.

Great progress is being made in Iraq every day. A new prime minister is being nominated today. But all people care about is the inconsequential explosion here or there. The administration is pursuing an admirable foriegn policy in regards to Iran and N. Korea but people blame the commitment of troops in Iraq for our perceived weakness on the issue as if Iraq was never a problem.

And the countless amount of legislation that the president has signed into law has gone completely unnoticed. No mention of the patriot act, the No child left behind act, or the prescription medical bill.

People focus only on the negative and fail to recognise all the good the President is doing. It's really frustrating, but at least we can laugh about it with JibJab.

[Seleukos]

The economy is in an upswing right now with amazingly low unemployment but he doesnt get credit for his decisive tax cuts. Instead people just complain about the price of oil which is entirely out of his hands.

And when our troops come back unemployment will skyrocket.

And the countless amount of legislation that the president has signed into law has gone completely unnoticed. No mention of the patriot act, the No child left behind act, or the prescription medical bill.

Those really arent good things.

[Evariste]

And when our troops come back unemployment will skyrocket.

Aren't there only around 100 thousand troops in Iraq? Will that make that big of a dent in the job market, especially considering that not all of those are reservists?

Jib-Jab's cartoon about the 2004 election that made them popular was cute, but I feel like they're just doing the same thing over and over again. Wal-Mart is a huge corporation, The president isn't that bright, he has problems to deal with, and all of this put to the tune of a folk song. It just feels like I've seen it all before.

[Richard the Lionheart]

Aren't there only around 100 thousand troops in Iraq? Will that make that big of a dent in the job market, especially considering that not all of those are reservists?

Jib-Jab's cartoon about the 2004 election that made them popular was cute, but I feel like they're just doing the same thing over and over again. Wal-Mart is a huge corporation, The president isn't that bright, he has problems to deal with, and all of this put to the tune of a folk song. It just feels like I've seen it all before.

Well it's not necessarily the "cuteness" or "humor" factor that is the main point of focus. It is the messages that each cartoon carries that are interesting.

For example, this cartoon tried to portray both sides and viewpoints.

[RusskiSoldat]

Pope: I'm going to show some self restraint and rather than respond with a one liner I'm going to ask a question to see whether it's worth arguing with you:
Is GWB one of the best presidents (say top 5) this country's had, with Reagan somewhere on top as well?

[Red Harvest]

Is GWB one of the best presidents (say top 5) this country's had, with Reagan somewhere on top as well?

Dubya will end up somewhere below Nixon...just how far below remains to be seen. Nixon at least had some checks and balances in the form of Congress, Dubya has not, and it shows.

[IamthePope]

Is GWB one of the best presidents (say top 5) this country's had, with Reagan somewhere on top as well?

I would say that when evalutating presidents you have to put them in the context of the their era, so we can only compare Bush to presidents in recent memory (no Abe Lincolns or George Washingtons). In that context I would say that Bush ranks among the top.

He's certainly passed more legislation than the Clinton administration. Foreign policy is being handled with long term focus and care that it deserves instead of the aim to satisfy to political nessicities of the moment. The economy is rebounding, and by the time Bush leaves office it'll be in better shape than when he left office.

It's tough to compare Bush to his father because his father only had four years in office (three if you take into account the time he spent with the campaign). I would say that George w. Bush has accomplished more in his time than his father did.

Reagans presidency seems similar to Bush's in many respects. massive tax cuts, hawkish foreign policy, and equally devisive. Reagan left the nation with a healthy economy but with a massive deficit, as it's looking that Bush will do. Reagan inacted long term foreign policy goals that had a dramatic change on the world as it is appearing the George Bush will do. But Reagan was commited to a much smaller government and was forced to work with a Demacratic congress. George Bush has regrettfully indulged the spending wishes of his Republican majority congress.

The legacies of presidents are very complicated. It might be a mistake to blanketly state that one presidency was better than another. I do think that Bush's presidency has been very successful though :original:

This President is one of the worst in American history, actually. In terms of jobs, economy, foreign relations, war prosecution, everything. Its fair to enter Bush in the Presidential hall of shame because he hasn't had any real positive success in any area.

or hall of Fame

[Red Harvest]

He's certainly passed more legislation than the Clinton administration.

Quantity over quality. He hasn't passed any good legislation that I can think of.

Foreign policy is being handled with long term focus and care that it deserves instead of the aim to satisfy to political nessicities of the moment.

That has got to be a joke. His foreign policy has allowed Iran and North Korea a free hand while he has us bogged down in Iraq. He let Osama escape into Pakistan. He has weakened our ability to get things done in the world.

His policy toward environmental & energy issues is the most short sighted ever and will assure him the lock on being regarded as a poor president.

The economy is rebounding, and by the time Bush leaves office it'll be in better shape than when he left office.

The stock market has still not recovered its losses from the peak in 2000 and I doubt it will do so by 2008. That is nothing to brag about.

What's more, this "recovery" has been purchased on credit...around $2 trillion of deficit spending that will be THE Dubya legacy. One should have been able to do a lot better at stimulus with $2 trillion dollars, but not Dubya.

We have lost most of our manufacturing base. Research has continued its long decline. For the first time in modern U.S. history the most educated elements of the workforce are seeing a decline in real wages. There are no real drivers for growth. Hint: deficit consumption spending is a non-sustainable model for an economy.

The trade deficit is enormous and growing. Health care costs continue to grow at double digit inflation. None of this is sustainable. And the housing bubble is showing signs of bursting, which is much of where the new "wealth" is coming from. Now that long term interest rates are rising, more of us will be taking our money out of the stock market and sticking it into fixed returns with no risk. At the same time housing speculation will fall off, and prices will decline to building cost levels.

This president has missed any chance to do anything meaningful in dealing with long term problems.

It's tough to compare Bush to his father because his father only had four years in office (three if you take into account the time he spent with the campaign). I would say that George w. Bush has accomplished more in his time than his father did.

His father was a lousy president too. Dubya may have accomplished "more" but how much of it would be classified as "good?"

Reagans presidency seems similar to Bush's in many respects. massive tax cuts, hawkish foreign policy, and equally devisive. Reagan left the nation with a healthy economy but with a massive deficit, as it's looking that Bush will do. Reagan inacted long term foreign policy goals that had a dramatic change on the world as it is appearing the George Bush will do. But Reagan was commited to a much smaller government and was forced to work with a Demacratic congress. George Bush has regrettfully indulged the spending wishes of his Republican majority congress.

In Dubya's dreams. Reagan was not divisive and he didn't cut the other party out of all decision making or run the federal govt. as if it was his own personal fiefdom. Much of the improvement of the Reagan economy was due to the Fed figuring out how to tackle "stagflation"--and this began just before Carter left office (not that I would credit Carter with the change.) Reagan tackled the number one problem by focusing on it: the Cold War. He buried the Soviet Union through beefing up the military. The greatest part of the deficit was this military build up. All other spending was relatively flat (I studied the actual budget numbers & categories before reaching this conclusion.)

Dubya is more responsible for the spending than even the GOP majority. He has had the "free candy" approach to being elected. "Here kids, free candy, vote for me!"

Dubya has not tackled ANY of the structural problems that will need to be addressed long term in our economy: runaway health care costs (his prescription drug benefit is instead structured to prop up the increasing costs, rather than reduce them), lack of research spending/investment by American corporations, accountability of corporate leaders to shareholders, dual book keeping that characterizes American business (one set of numbers for the IRS, one for reporting), a real energy policy, global warming/CO2 emissions, handling disasters.

Dubya's time will be looked at as either 8 lost years, or 8 years that we actually regressed.

[IamthePope]

Quantity over quality. He hasn't passed any good legislation that I can think of.

heres a list for those who have forgotten:

the 2001 Tax cuts
the Patriot Act
the No Child Left Behind Act
Campaign Reform Act of 2002
Investors Protection Act of 2002 ( Sarbanes-Oxley Act )
Homeland Security Act
Child Protection Act of 2003
Do Not Call Act
the 2003 Tax cuts
Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act
CANSPAM Act (prohibiting porn spam)
Unborn Victims of Violence act
Class Action Fairness Act of 2005
Bankruptcy Reform Act
Energy Policy Act of 2005
Transportation Equity Act of 2005
Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act
Re-Autherization of the Patriot act 2006

That has got to be a joke. His foreign policy has allowed Iran and North Korea a free hand while he has us bogged down in Iraq. He let Osama escape into Pakistan. He has weakened our ability to get things done in the world.

Blaming the development of Nuclear weapons in Iran and N. Korea on the US engagement with Iraq is an often made but absurd statement. Their weapon programs did not just suddenly begin when the US proposed that the Baath government should be toppled. They were in development for decades. If anything, the invasion of Iraq showed countries like Iran and N. Korea just how serious we are about preventing the proliferation of WMD's.

It is true that US forces in Iraq prevents us from effectively mobilzing a force of the size used in the 2nd gulf war but it also allows us to exert more influence on the region than if we had not invaded Iraq. Having 120,000 american soliders and god knows how many carrier battle groups next door to Iran allows us the effectively threaten military force at a moments notice. Not only that, but we can directly influence the cultural and political attitudes of the region.

Your final claim that the policy of the Bush Administration was responsible for the escape of OBL from Tora Bora is the most absurd of all. Wasn't it the Bush Administration who pressed for a declaration of war so that the USAF could begin raining bombs on OBL and the Taliban within 30 days of 9/11. It seems silly to fault Bush for "failing to capture Bin Laden" when he and the Armed services did everything within reason to acheive that.

His father was a lousy president too. Dubya may have accomplished "more" but how much of it would be classified as "good?"

see above legislation. All good :original:

[Red Harvest]

heres a list for those who have forgotten:
see above legislation. All good :original:

Most of that list is bad, not good. The few so called reforms were so watered down as to be useless. The energy stuff is a drop in the bucket/barrel 4 years late. The Patriot Act is an example of poor emergency legislation that is being abused by Dubya to do things it was not intended to do. The Bankruptcy reform act is just another bit of anti-consumer legislation--reminds me of the communications act of some years ago. The Homeland Security Act = Katrina fiasco. I'll admit on some of these it might be hard to separate the quality of the legislation from the mammoth incompetence/malice in implementing them properly--but whose fault would that be?

About the only parts I agree with are the "do not call" and "spam" stuff and I don't see that Dubya can really take credit for them. Sarbanes-Oxley didn't go nearly far enough and is essentially a face saving white wash rather than more urgently needed structural reform.

And you clearly weren't paying attention when Tora-Bora happened. Dubya let Osama slip away by not committing the forces needed...kind of like Iraq...or in a similar vein, Katrina. It was an unpardonable mistake.

Our hands are tied with respect to Iran and North Korea, and Dubya bound them himself. He blew all his/our diplomatic "capital" on an invasion under false pretenses, and failed to use enough force to secure the place. That allowed an insurgency to sprout.

I would like to know where Dubya keeps his calculator, because it sure as heck doesn't work...as the cost of his present war is headed for half a trillion dollars, and his budget deficit projections have been consistently off by 300+ billion dollars a year compared to his tax cut legislation.

If you were familiar with how the budget is structured you would no how baseless the original tax cut was. Taxes were cut in the portion of the expenditures that were in deficit even in 2000...not in the portions in surplus. Plus, the tax cut is built on other lies...the projections assume many of the cuts will be repealed shortly. However, that is politically dangerous and was never really intended to happen anyway, so the deficits appear to be a permanent fixture thanks to Dubya. Voodoo economics, part deux.

[Publius]

"Poor George" is right. Snort coke, got a posh spot in the National Guard during the Vietnam war (which he still didnt always go to), run several companies into the ground and then get elected to one of the most powerful positions in the world - some people cant get a break!
As far as the No Child Left Behind and Patriot Act, those seem to me like fairly weak arguments. No Child Left Behind has been detrimental in the extreme to the educational process (trust me, my mom is a teacher), and was a program accepted only when the federal government threatened to cut state funding. The Patriot Act is anything but, trampling over many liberties and rights which our forefathers died protecting and which we give away at a whim. And while our economy may be in an "upswing" it is going to take a little more than that to get us out of the huge financial hole which W has put us in.
As far as all of the "good" things this President has done - well, maybe he has done some good things. Maybe he has made some improvements here and there. But his positive impact on our nation has been practically nothing in comparison with past presidents, both Republican and Democrat. Maybe some get angered when something like JibJab pokes fun at our president, but at this point, I think I need something to take my mind off of the horrible direction which this administration has taken us since 2000

[Hub'ite]

Gotta love jibjab. They know how to make fun of Bush.




It'll turn into spam. +1 post for Hub'ite

[Richard the Lionheart]

Gotta love jibjab. They know how to make fun of Bush.

Actually I found it interesting because I thought they were sympathizing with Bush as well. It's true, every problem in the world does land on his desk.

[RusskiSoldat]

Could it be that they were actualy in a way neutral, and everyone of us saw that as supporting his side?

[Richard the Lionheart]

Could it be that they were actualy in a way neutral, and everyone of us saw that as supporting his side?

Yeah that's what I was thinking. From my prespective it appeared that they were representing both sides.