Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Yglesias says Bush is "somewhat better than Reagan"

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-19-06 12:22 PM
Original message
Yglesias says Bush is "somewhat better than Reagan"
:wtf:

My $.02: Bush is the worst "president" in my lifetime. No. Question. About. It. (And I lived through Nixon, Ford, Reagan and Bush I. And Carter wasn't so hot in office either. But Carter and even Nixon were Henry Vs compared to this jerk.)

http://www.tpmcafe.com/node/27975

Worst. President. Ever.

By Matthew Yglesias | bio

Sam Rosenfeld's already snarked a bit on this, but seriously, what's with Harry Reid saying George W. Bush is "the worst president this country has ever had" or Hillary Clinton's similar claim that he's "one of the worst" in American history? On domestic policy, he's certainly been a bad president in the sense that I would gladly prefer Al Gore or John Kerry or Howard Dean or Joe Lieberman or Wesley Clark or Russ Feingold or pretty much whomever you like. He's somewhat worse than, say, his father. But somewhat better than Ronald Reagan. Bad -- very bad, even, if you want to get indignant about it -- but bad in a run-of-the-mill, parties- alternate-in- power, rightwingers- are-all-bad kind of way.

On other fronts, the Afghan War was necessary and it's been handled okay and despite a lot of problems with port security and related matters, we haven't had another terrorist attack. This just isn't the stuff out of which world-historical badness is made.

...

I still don't know that "worst ever" is the right thing to say, but certainly when Iraq comes into the picture you can start to see the case that Bush is super-bad. That was a big, giant, important blunder whose consequences we'll be living with for years if not decades. But then again, Clinton and Reid both . . . supported the war and don't support substantially changing Bush's war policy right now. So what can they be talking about? Who knows?

Well, now I'm playing dumb. Here's what they're talking about. They know the base is furious with Bush and they want to placate the base with occassional spurts of strident rhetoric in order to distract attention from the fact that they, like Bush, are on the wrong side of the most important issue facing the country. I think Reid's done a good job, generally, as Minority Leader and wish him well. But I also hope liberals won't fall for this bait-and-switch. The liberal blogosphere can generate all the strident rhetoric one would ever want. What liberals need from progressive politicians isn't rhetoric that's pleasing to the ears, but a combination of election strategies likely to win, and policies that will benefit the country.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
BrklynLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-19-06 12:24 PM
Response to Original message
1. He does not have to play dumb. He is an authentic idiot. The list of
reasons supporting * as the worst President ever is probably too long for this guy to comprehend.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-19-06 12:25 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. My feeling is, if you start cutting Bush slack, you should toss it
and start over. The reason we're in the mess we're in is because of all the slack Bush has been cut all his life.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BrklynLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-19-06 12:27 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. Exactly. He has been the beneficiary of lowered expectations his entire
life...especially his political life!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Drewskie Donating Member (465 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-20-06 10:41 AM
Response to Reply #1
11. ...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-20-06 09:55 AM
Response to Original message
4. kick
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hubert Flottz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-20-06 10:01 AM
Response to Original message
5. Reagan made Bush possible.
Edited on Mon Mar-20-06 10:05 AM by Hubert Flottz
Reagan's deregulation created the exporting of jobs, Enron and the Corporate Media. He paved the golden highway for the worst pResident EVER! Chancellor Bush is not a real president, nor has he ever really been elected president in a fair election and the world knows it! Some may still refuse to admit it, but that is only stupidity. Bush was a loser in 2000 and now the country is a loser too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-20-06 10:04 AM
Response to Reply #5
8. That automatically makes him the worst ever in my book as well.
There were a mess of them before the Civil War who also probably stunk nearly as bad, and we haven't been blessed with a stellar load of them in my lifetime, either. But Bush is the pits in everything from alleged personality to programs. His illegitimacy was the starting point of all horrors since.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Renew Deal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-20-06 10:02 AM
Response to Original message
6. Afghanistan was totally fucked up.
We stuck 15,000 troops in Afghanistan and 150,000 in Iraq. We didn't have the troops to go into the mountains, so we sent the Afghans instead. Some got paid off and we ended up with no Osama. Yglesis is way off here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mdmc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-20-06 10:03 AM
Response to Original message
7. I think that Ray - Gun was worse
People didn't think that he "means" his mean-ness. At least this emperor wears no clothes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-20-06 10:06 AM
Response to Reply #7
9. Reagan was a sham.
But at least his handlers knew to raise taxes when the real-world results of their ideological experiments went foul. These people don't give a shit what anyone thinks of what they're doing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mdmc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-20-06 10:27 AM
Response to Reply #9
10. I feel that BFEE were Ray-gun's handlers
w. took the Ray-gun movement to a whole other level.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vidar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-20-06 10:52 AM
Response to Original message
12. Reagan had personal charm & could read lines= far better than *.
Edited on Mon Mar-20-06 10:53 AM by Vidar
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Dec 26th 2024, 04:50 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC