Why Bush is no Lincoln, Reagan or Roosevelt

Dole Maybe it takes a funny politician to know one. In any case, many will wonder about Bob Dole’s assessment of George W. Bush’s place among witty presidents: “I’d put him in the top 20,” the former Kansas senator told Bloomberg News. Dole’s book “Great Presidential Wit” only included the first 41 presidents, listing Abraham Lincoln, Ronald Reagan, Franklin D. Roosevelt and Theodore Roosevelt “in a class by themselves.”
Two examples of Bush’s humor, which can be self-deprecating:
When asked last month about the prospects of a recession, he said, “You need to talk to economists. I think I got a B in Econ 101.”
And after retitling Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff “the Homeland Guy,” Bush said, “Look, nobody has accused me of being Shakespeare, you know?”
Posted by Rhonda Holman

44 Comments

  1. Posted November 18, 2007 at 6:37 am | Permalink

    Bush isn’t funny, he’s just plain stupid.

  2. All B
    Posted November 18, 2007 at 7:05 am | Permalink

    Reagan was underestimated by the left wing nut press and the Demoncrats have been mis-understanding Bush since his first election. As much as the Moveon.org groupies, The Huffies and the rest of the “Main Stream” media try to take him down, history will treat this man kindly. The Bush Hatred Syndrome has so infected the press that they cannot print anything positive about even this country. Their lies about the war in Iraq and the economy are great examples. Point in fact the “news” from Iraq has all but disappeared from the front pages of the MSM because there is not enough bad news to report. Secondly, my small business that sells collectible items that no one needs is going great. In fact if this economy gets and “worse” I will have to hire more help.

  3. Podunkville
    Posted November 18, 2007 at 7:13 am | Permalink

    Not only is Bush not funny he’s dangerous. He started a War based 100% on lies in which him and his closest thug Dick Cheney should BOTH be impeached and removed from office. That soon to be $$1.5 trillion $$ mess in Iraq is exactly like Cheney described in 1994–a QUAGMIRE. All Bush wants at this point is to foist this mess off on some Democrat and let them take the blame. History will be kind to GW Bush?? History will show him as a bungling fool who is responsible for the deaths of 4,000+ US service people and maybe as many as one MILLION innocent Iraqi’s.

  4. DougT
    Posted November 18, 2007 at 9:28 am | Permalink

    Bush will be reviled by at least 1/2 the country for years to come. The reasons are many, but maybe the most important reason is that he was elected at a time the country is basically split in half, he was handed the Presidency by the Supreme Court, and then he proceeds to “rule” with right wing policies. He obviously has never heard of “leading” with moderate policies that a majority of Americans can agree with. For us indepentents or for the Democrats, that leaves a lasting impression that he is arrogant, and could care less about what we want or would like to see. Why was President Clinton so popular? Mostly because he was a leader who believed he represented ALL Americans, not just his political base. All you Clinton haters have your priorities completely screwed up! His biggest error was having sex with another woman, getting caught, and then doing what most people would do, try to lie to get out of the situation. Bush on the other hand, lies to the people of this country about another country, with the purpose to start a war that will cost thousands of lives, ruin our standing and credibility with most of the rest of the world. This administration’s spin has even resulted with many in the media being brainwashed into thinking the Iraq War is synonomus with the War of Terror. Terror is a tactic used by brutal people who choose to use that tactic to get what they want. As long as their are people who feel so strongly about what they want, who choose Terror as a tactic, there will be Terror attacks and nothing anybody does can ever stop it. The only way to combat it is with governing policies that serve “the people” and provide freedom. Sadly, many countries around the world don’t even come close, so as long as that is reality, there will be Terrorists. President Bush doesn’t have a basic understanding that as long as we are embroiled in a war in foreign lands, there will ALWAYS be people who go there to fight us! With his policies, we would constantly be at war…

  5. J R
    Posted November 18, 2007 at 9:36 am | Permalink

    Top 20?

    Yeah ol’ Bob his grip on sanity gets a little looser every day don’t it?

    bush will dwell in a bottom class all by himself. In the hall of “great men” the space claimed for his place will likely be deemed better filled with a vending machine or public toilet.

  6. Pat Herron
    Posted November 18, 2007 at 9:38 am | Permalink

    And JR will be right there with Bush.

  7. J.E. Hill
    Posted November 18, 2007 at 9:53 am | Permalink

    Bush 43 will not be treated kindly by historians, perhaps even less so than his father Bush 41. When the smoke has cleared and the files are finally opened their legacy will be one of gun- and cocaine-running, support for terrorists, lies, torture, dead American servicepeople, maimed veterans, the most colossal national debt in world history and over a million dead civillians in Iraq.

    Without a doubt, George W. Bush will be remembered as one of the worst presidents, maybe even THE worst president in history.

    The bright side is that he has single-handedly destroyed the GOP and any chance they had at their much lusted after “permanent majority”, and for that we should be truly thankful.

  8. Kev
    Posted November 18, 2007 at 9:55 am | Permalink

    He will go down in history as “the idiot” because that is what he is. Just like Nixon, despite some things he might have accomplished, went down as “the burglar”.

  9. kswolverine
    Posted November 18, 2007 at 10:55 am | Permalink

    Podunkville -

    First off, this war was not founded upon 100% lies. Saddam was a threat and needed to be removed. Second, how can you blame Bush for a million innocent iraq deaths? Have you not heard from those that are glad the US is there. Granted you will not easily find those comments in a liberal paper but branch out a little bit. Expand your mind, you might be surprised what you learn. Lastly, I doubt as you hint Bush wants a democratic to be elected just so they can take the blame for the war. Time to put down the hash pipe buddy and do some real research

  10. CapnAmerica
    Posted November 18, 2007 at 10:56 am | Permalink

    We all knew what kind of man Bush is.

    What is surprising is that Bob Dole would feel the need to whore himself out at his advanced age.

    I guess a bad habit is hard to break.

  11. Pat Herron
    Posted November 18, 2007 at 11:06 am | Permalink

    Yes, Dole is almost as big of a whore as Bill Clinton.

  12. Posted November 18, 2007 at 11:07 am | Permalink

    I thought the answer to the question would be, “Because he hasn’t been shot at.”

  13. CapnAmerica
    Posted November 18, 2007 at 11:11 am | Permalink

    Ah, Clinton:

    Eight years of peace, prosperity, a booming economy and fiscal responsibility.

    No wonder the reich-wing hates his guts . . .

  14. Pat Herron
    Posted November 18, 2007 at 11:16 am | Permalink

    No, just the taxpayers oppose Clinton.

    Hate, that’s for the Libs.

  15. jim bob
    Posted November 18, 2007 at 11:22 am | Permalink

    This is our president, he’s supposed to lead us – not make jokes at the podium to dodge important questions. Has this country gone completely stark raving mad? This is a valuable attribute of a president???

  16. Posted November 18, 2007 at 11:30 am | Permalink

    Will Rogers said something along the lines of, “Every time Congress says they’re joking, it becomes law. And every time they make a law, it’s a joke.”

    One of the reasons Bob Dole failed in his bid to be President was he took himself too seriously during the 1996 campaign. One of the reasons a lot of people liked him before 1996, and after, is that he let his natural wit guide him when the idiocy of the media struck him.

    George WMD Bush is so ill-suited for the job of President, he doesn’t know what’s a joke and what isn’t.

    Here’s a hint, Shrub: The joke isn’t just on you, it *is* you.

  17. GB
    Posted November 18, 2007 at 11:32 am | Permalink

    Ouch! That hurt.

  18. Posted November 18, 2007 at 1:42 pm | Permalink

    Reagan was a borrow and spend Republican. Bush is a borrow and spend Republican. Both fight unnecessary wars to divert from their failed domestic and foreign policies. Both keep their positions in office by using fear (Communists for Reagan, Muslims for Bush). Both are morons and both are fundy Christians who would smile if a million Americans were killed because it would bring Jesus a day closer to coming to Earth. Both gave money to countries that we’d later invade (Iraq for Reagan, Taliban for Bush). Both weakened national security by requiring our economy and infrastructure be dependent on foreign oil. About the only difference is I don’t think Bush is as racist as Reagan was.

  19. outlander
    Posted November 18, 2007 at 1:56 pm | Permalink

    “Are you willing to spend time studying the issues, making yourself aware, and then conveying that information to family and friends? Will you resist the temptation to get a government handout for your community? Realize that the doctor’s fight against socialized medicine is your fight. We can’t socialize the doctors without socializing the patients. Recognize that government invasion of public power is eventually an assault upon your own business. If some among you fear taking a stand because you are afraid of reprisals from customers, clients, or even government, recognize that you are just feeding the crocodile hoping he’ll eat you last.

    If all of this seems like a great deal of trouble, think what’s at stake. We are faced with the most evil enemy mankind has known in his long climb from the swamp to the stars. There can be no security anywhere in the free world if there is no fiscal and economic stability within the United States. Those who ask us to trade our freedom for the soup kitchen of the welfare state are architects of a policy of accommodation.

    They say the world has become too complex for simple answers. They are wrong. There are no easy answers, but there are simple answers. We must have the courage to do what we know is morally right. Winston Churchill said that “the destiny of man is not measured by material computation. When great forces are on the move in the world, we learn we are spirits–not animals.” And he said, “There is something going on in time and space, and beyond time and space, which, whether we like it or not, spells duty.”

    You and I have a rendezvous with destiny. We will preserve for our children this, the last best hope of man on earth, or we will sentence them to take the first step into a thousand years of darkness. If we fail, at least let our children and our children’s children say of us we justified our brief moment here. We did all that could be done.” –Ronald Reagan

    A little equal time for one of the greatest presidents.

  20. Posted November 18, 2007 at 2:11 pm | Permalink

    “A little equal time for one of the greatest presidents.”

    There are great Presidents, then there’s Reagan. Who else could stand by without care as AIDS spreads throughout the country? Who else could put American marines in a hostile environment with little security? Who else could give tax cuts for the rich while giving everyone else tax increases? Who else could pass on trillions of dollars of debt to future generations?

  21. outlander
    Posted November 18, 2007 at 2:22 pm | Permalink

    Who else set up the greatest economic expansion of the century by bringing down the confiscatory tax rates. Who inspired the nation with his optimism and vision, and brought down the Soviet Union without firing a shot.

    “Mr. Gorbachev tear down this wall!”

  22. The Phantom
    Posted November 18, 2007 at 2:24 pm | Permalink

    People laugh at bush, not with him. He’s the village idiot.

  23. The Phantom
    Posted November 18, 2007 at 2:26 pm | Permalink

    That ‘great economy’ that scimmed right over bush 1 and landed on Clinton?

  24. The Phantom
    Posted November 18, 2007 at 2:32 pm | Permalink

    scimmed=skimmed.

  25. The Phantom
    Posted November 18, 2007 at 2:32 pm | Permalink

    scimmed=skimmed.

  26. Al B
    Posted November 18, 2007 at 4:33 pm | Permalink

    I lost $100,000 during the Clinton Recession. I know others who lost millions. Don’t tell me about the wonderful economy during the Clinton years. I remember the day that the Clintoon adminstration filed suit against Microsoft for not making campaign donations to Bill and Hillary. That was the high for the Dow-Jones index. It and the rest of the market began their downward tumble and caused the worst recession sent the Great Depression. That lawsuit and the extremely high taxes on the middle class cost them billions. It wasn’t just sex that Slick Wille wasn’t good at.

  27. CapnAmerica
    Posted November 18, 2007 at 4:46 pm | Permalink

    Bullsh*t, Al.

    You’re living in a double-wide in Kechi with a Confederate flag in the window instead of drapes.

  28. Al B
    Posted November 18, 2007 at 6:09 pm | Permalink

    Hey CapnAmerica! Instead of hurling insults check out the facts. If you doubt what I write go check out the date during the Clinton admistration when the Dow Jones topped the market. Then check the date that Janet Reno filed the lawsuit against Micro Soft. You’ll find that they are the same date. Do some research on your own rather than believing whatever the Bush hating left wing nut media tells you. When you use foul language and the left wing nut trick of name calling you have already lost the arguement.

  29. Apophis
    Posted November 18, 2007 at 6:22 pm | Permalink

    “Bush hating left wing nut media”

    This comes from a reichwinger who obviously believes something like Faux Noise………………

    Do you also believe in the
    permanent tax cuts for the rich?

  30. economy man
    Posted November 18, 2007 at 7:12 pm | Permalink

    The economy right now (esp outside of kansas) is rather weak and suspect too.. Look who’s been in office for almost 7 years now…

  31. The Phantom
    Posted November 18, 2007 at 8:21 pm | Permalink

    Looks like in Dec 1999 microsoft was at its peak, so how did the microsoft lawsuit hurt even microsoft?http://finance.yahoo.com/charts#chart1:symbol=msft;range=my;charttype=line;crosshair=on;logscale=on;source=undefined

  32. The Phantom
    Posted November 18, 2007 at 8:26 pm | Permalink

    United States v. Microsoft, 87 F. Supp. 2d 30 (D.D.C. 2000) was a set of consolidated civil actions filed against Microsoft Corporation on May 18, 1998 by the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) and twenty U.S. states. Joel I. Klein was the lead prosecutor.

  33. The Phantom
    Posted November 18, 2007 at 8:41 pm | Permalink

    Here’s why you lost your money, in the bubble burst of 2001.

  34. The Phantom
    Posted November 18, 2007 at 8:41 pm | Permalink

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dot-com_bubble

  35. The Phantom
    Posted November 18, 2007 at 8:43 pm | Permalink

    If you want to blame anybody, blame Greenspan, he killed the market with his “irrational exuberence”.

  36. Al B
    Posted November 18, 2007 at 8:49 pm | Permalink

    So I guess we have established that the recession started in the Clinton adminstration when taxes were high. The bubble actually burst in late 1998 and into 1999. The Dow had lost several thousand points when George Bush was elected. As for the economy now, I happen to sell in states from New York to Georgia to Montana and many others in between. The only place I find a recession is on the front page of the NYT, WP and WE.

  37. Al B
    Posted November 18, 2007 at 9:06 pm | Permalink

    In December 1999 the Dow closed at 11,497.12. In September 2002 it reached its low of 7591.63. I believe Mr. Clinton was in office when the recession began. All of the Blue Dress Dems can deny the truth and ignore the facts but ya can’t change them.

  38. J R
    Posted November 18, 2007 at 9:38 pm | Permalink

    george bush spent his entire campaign talking DOWN the economy.

    Not to mention the fact that he had very powerful forces that wanted him for a cardboard cutout president. THOSE folks were more than capable of manipulating the economy.

    Real glad it’s good for ya there “Al B”

    Not so good for a whole lot of the rest of us.

    But you bushies, it’s all about you and yours aint it?

  39. The Phantom
    Posted November 18, 2007 at 9:41 pm | Permalink

    The stock market doesn’t define a recession. The recession started in March 2001, shortly after boy george took office.

  40. The Phantom
    Posted November 18, 2007 at 9:42 pm | Permalink

    2001 was the only year I lost money in the markets.

  41. Al B
    Posted November 18, 2007 at 10:20 pm | Permalink

    Let me see if I have this right. You all get your information from Wikipedia. As I understand Wikipedia, any one can post anything they want at Wikipedia. And anyone can change anything on Wikipedia that they want to change. Result is that a Blue Dress Democrat posts something about Bush causing the recession. Another Blue Dress Democrat posts and embelishment of how Bush caused the recession. And then all the other little Blue Dress Democrats post the information on other websites and it is called fact. It’s about like the NYT quoting the WP and the WP quoting the NYT and then they NYT claiming that what they originally quoted is a fact because it appeared in the WP. Unfortunately this happens way too often. I studied quite a bit of economics to get my Bachlors Degree, so I understand that the beginnings of a recession happen long before the worst of the recession. There were many other factors in 1998 and 1999 that were indicating recession but everyone believed what the mainstream media was telling them and thought the good times would never end. Well the good times did end and the Blue Dress Democrats have been doing everything they can to protect the legagy of Slick Willie.

  42. J R
    Posted November 18, 2007 at 10:30 pm | Permalink

    You sell Al B?

    What is it you sell?

    Fella I work for a living. The day and I mean the very day the SC put georgie in, management got real froggy. The bean counters positively glowed with their new found power.

    How much manufacture have we lost due to bush? WHO gave China most favored nation trading status? WHO is it that says illegal immigrants “do jobs American’s don’t want to do”? Who is it pushing SAFTA on the heels of the disastrous NAFTA?

    Answer? bush.

    But you knew that didn’t you.

    What again is it you sell? Made here is it?

  43. The Phantom
    Posted November 18, 2007 at 10:48 pm | Permalink

    The way it works is the administration leaks to, say Judith Miller, she prints it, then the administration quotes her article. And, yes it has happned alot since 2001.

  44. Posted November 19, 2007 at 12:08 am | Permalink

    Sorry, but Reagan did not cause the collapse of the Soviet economy. The Soviet Union was already in decline spurred on with competition with America. The Soviets had an economy on par with Brazil, not the U.S. So they borrowed and spent but could not maintain their Reaganistic economic policies. The ruble collapsed just as the dollar is falling now because Bush is maintaining the same economic strategy the USSR used.

    For all the Reagan fans you may not realize but the Cold War had been going on well before Reagan. Reagan just happened to take credit for the efforts of past administrations without actually having done anything.