I think the above video more closely represents his biggest failure. Here’s the link to the article.
Former President George W. Bush signaled on Thursday that he sees not privatizing Social Security as his greatest failure from the eight years he served in the White House, the Chicago Tribune reports.
The unpopular Republican leader made the suggestion while speaking at a trade conference in the Windy City, where he discussed his legacy and also offered a glimpse into what readers can expect from his forthcoming memoir, Decision Points.
“I would like to be remembered as a guy who had a set of priorities, and was willing to live by those priorities,” explained Bush. “In terms of accomplishments, my biggest accomplishment is that I kept the country safe amidst a real danger.”
Bush poked fun at himself in addressing how his thoughts will be delivered in his memoir.
Guyver reminds me of the teabagger I work with. According to him the Rushpublicans have NEVER, EVER, done anything wrong or detrimental to the Nation in all of recorded history. They shit roses and every word from their mouths is straight from God & Jeebus combined. Every scandal and underhanded dirty deed they’ve been caught at is the fault of the Democrats that are in league with the Devil.
We all laugh at him behind his back, the ignorant dolt.
Thomas Jefferson wrote that, but then as president, there was considerable more interaction between church and state than would be allowed today. Jefferson had a different understanding of separation of church and state than the current state of law.
Bobbo, ODonnell did say that. Funny you would think otherwise after making such a big deal about semantics.
Page 2 of this letter does an OK job explaining things.
http://tinyurl.com/2ew7d4h
Mike: fair enough. I haven’t seen O’Donnell say that and I certainly am not going to follow her close enough to think she didn’t.
The Sup Ct decides what the words of the Constitution means. Matters not one whit what you think Jefferson said or meant or allowed. The Sup Ct decides cases brought to it, it is not a police force out there looking for violations. It matters not one whit what was common practice in some place and time or another.
Your analysis along with ODonnell’s is erroneous and childishly incompetent from the get go. That why you and she agree with one another. See the celestial harmony?
Keep posting Mike. Every 10th one has value.
37, Greg Allen,
Congress holds the purse strings, not the President. All Presidents (regardless of party affiliation) have limited influence on our economy. If their influence were THAT strong, every president would leave with a thriving economy.
About the only thing Presidents have any sort of power on to influence the economy is in their tax policies.
39, Grandpa,
And what do they owe you that makes you feel you can control a business person’s business? Change the tax policies for businesses and you’d not only bring back American companies, but you’d bring in multi-national corporations from other countries as well.
40, Thomas,
Yup!!!!!!!!!!
46, JMRouse,
Community Reinvestment Act under Carter. In 1995, the Clinton Administration implemented regulations strengthening the CRA by focusing financial regulators’ efforts on institutions’ performance in order to help meet community credit needs (mostly low-income minorities who couldn’t otherwise afford their own homes).
In 2003, Bush tried to overhaul the system by putting in more regulatory measures which got shot down by Democrats in favor of maximizing home ownership.
63, Tea Party Retarty,
The original / only reason for separation of church and state was to prevent a national church (i.e. Church of England). Liberals / Progressives have expanded on that to push an idea of a secular society, but that was not the original intent whatsoever.
64, M.C. in L.V.,
It would be a mistake to think I was thinking along those lines. I just get tired of the double standards or the ignorant belief that Presidents (regardless of party) have a strong influence on our economy.
Guyver–so simplistic when it suits your argument.
Congress is made up of members 99% of whom come from two parties and the President is the Head of the Party he ran on. He very much controls what his party does by way of legislation and oversight. Control is not absolute, maybe that has confused you.
Also don’t know what the HEY! you mean by every president would have a thriving economy if they had sufficient influence. The Presidents control is over Congress/Admin NOT the economy. If Clinton was as retarded and malignant as BushtheMalignantRetard, do you think he would have left a surplus?? Surpluses are good for the economy. BushtheMalignantRetard had more than “influence” he had control sufficient to double the debt. That was not good for the economy.
Talk about your mixed metaphors.
Well, Bush was a MISERABLE FAILURE AT EVERTHING – except GIVING THE BIGGEST TAX CUT IN HISTORY TO THE WEALTHY !!! Started two wars he couldn’t finish, got handed a budget surplus, but ended with a DOUBLING OF THE NATIONAL DEBT ! And presided over the SECOND REPUBLICAN DEPRESSION !!! (Expecting Obama to dig us out in only two years is just wishful thinking !)
So, a FAILURE ? YES, IN SPADES !!!
Yep, he’s still a dumbass.