BERLIN (Reuters) - Editorial writers around the world have been taking their final printed whacks at George W. Bush, accusing the president of tarnishing America's standing with what many saw as arrogant and incompetent leadership.
Some newspaper editorials, for all their criticism, suggested historians might just be kinder later on than those now writing first drafts of history. A success often cited by those seeking a silver lining was the United States' freedom from further homeland attacks following September 11.
Bush's successor, Barack Obama, will be sworn in as the 44th U.S. president on Tuesday.
"A weak leader, Bush was just overwhelmed in the job," said Germany's Sueddeutsche Zeitung under a headline: "The Failure." "He confused stubbornness with principles. America has become intolerant and it will take a long time to repair that damage."
Editorials hit out at Bush for two unfinished wars, for plunging the economy into recession, turning a budget surplus into a pile of debt, for his environment policies and tarnishing America's reputation with the Guantanamo Bay detention center.
Bush was given credit in some editorials for defending the United States against terror attacks after September 11, 2001.
Israel was most complimentary, of his intentions if not necessarily of his achievements.
"Of all the U.S. presidents over the past 60 years, it is hard to think of a better friend to Israel than George W. Bush," the Jerusalem Post daily wrote during Bush's final visit.
Last week columnist Caroline Glick wrote Bush "recognizes Israel and the U.S. share the same enemies and they seek to destroy us because we represent the same thing: freedom. But Bush never learned how to translate personal views into policy."
Canada's Toronto Star was categorical in its condemnation.
"Goodbye to the worst president ever," it declared. "Bush was an unmitigated disaster, failing on the big issues from the invasion of Iraq to global warming, Hurricane Katrina and the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression."
"Bush leaves a country and an economy in tatters," wrote the Sunday Times in London. It said America's national debt and unemployment nearly doubled on his watch.
Britain's Daily Mail said he entered office with a budget surplus of $128 billion but exits with a $482 billion deficit.
"He leaves the world facing its biggest crisis since the Depression, the Middle East in flames and U.S. standing at an all-time low.
"How will history judge George W.? Have we, perhaps, to quote his own mangled malapropisms, 'misunderestimated' him?
The Seer wrote:Left leaning "news" sources print negative Bush stories and opinion...
Some of the sources mentioned are liberal, but Caroline Glick is a far-right columnist. The Sunday Times, the Daily Record and Le Monde are all considered to be somewhat centrist. The Daily Mail and the Sydney Morning Herald are conservative. You might want to know what the fuck you’re talking about before you start working your dicksucker in lockstep. Bush is widely despised by folks from left to right.
Joe in PB wrote:
Yeah I'm the dumbass
schmick, speaking about Larry Nassar's pubescent and prepubescent victims wrote:
They couldn't even kick that doctors ass
Seems they rather just lay there, get fucked and play victim
PSUFAN wrote:I'm sure all of it is totally off-base, right, Seer?
No, just NOT newsworthy!
What's the next post, m2 is a tool?
Uh - his term is ending. When is this going to be more newsworthy?
BTW - a lot of what is being discussed actually portrays W in a more positive light than you might think...but since you're dismissing it all unseen as lefty bilge, you'll never know, I guess...
King Crimson wrote:anytime you have a smoke tunnel and it's not Judas Priest in the mid 80's....watch out.
In my "voting life", I was more disappointed with his father. I was content with Clinton - despite a few things - and with Bush I was glad he was at the helm as opposed to Al Gore and John Kerry. I found him to be inspirational after 9-11 and accepted him as my President that day. I believed his course of action was simply the execution of a decade old policy of removing Saddam and was in large part necessary due to the impotence (and blatant corruption) of the United Nations. It was motivated on the worldwide belief of what Saddam had, what Saddam did his best to convince the world he had, and a sober risk assessment conducted by professional men and women - whose responsibility it was to make a decision one way or another.
Until Obama proves me otherwise, he has my full trust that he will execute his Oath of Office with the same responsibility and concern for the United States. The fact he actually wanted this job, amidst the circumstances, compels me to accept him as my president with hope and optimism. It takes guts to do this job. All the men I've mentioned have guts.
I disagree with his party's platform - almost completely - but I think the President is often called to break from party platform when the best interests of the country are at stake.
Because the Canadian press is full of horseshit, I have decided not to move there. Besides, the economy around here should be rebounding quicker than anywhere in the rest of the country. Thanks America !!!!
The Seer wrote:Left leaning "news" sources print negative Bush stories and opinion...
Some of the sources mentioned are liberal, but Caroline Glick is a far-right columnist. The Sunday Times, the Daily Record and Le Monde are all considered to be somewhat centrist. The Daily Mail and the Sydney Morning Herald are conservative. You might want to know what the fuck you’re talking about before you start working your dicksucker in lockstep. Bush is widely despised by folks from left to right.
Yes, but the right has legitimate reasons to despise him. You sissies only rip him for the good things he did.
He did something good?
Joe in PB wrote:
Yeah I'm the dumbass
schmick, speaking about Larry Nassar's pubescent and prepubescent victims wrote:
They couldn't even kick that doctors ass
Seems they rather just lay there, get fucked and play victim
Tom In VA wrote:I was glad he was at the helm as opposed to Al Gore and John Kerry.
Ditto.
I know Bush has come across as a clown many times and made some bad decisions, but I also believe he was a deeply caring, moral man with integrity. After Clinton made a mockery of the White House, that's what was needed.
People can loathe and despise him all they want, but he did the best he could. There's only so much that one man can do and the folks who think Obama can walk on water are about to find that out.
As for being the worst President ever, of the ones I've witnessed during my lifetime, I still believe that title belongs to Jimmy Carter.
He prevented another attack for over 7 years by standing his ground on Guantanamo and the PATRIOT Act. He also appointed some decent judges and kept taxes relatively low. He removed Saddam Hussein from power in roughly 3 weeks.
On the other hand, you liberal douchefaggots should love him for pouring more money than any other President ever has into the never ending worthless shithole of Africa and various other futile causes you liberals love to waste money on, like the "Palestinians." You should love him for declaring Islam a "religion of peace," inviting a Muslim Imam to do an invocation at the Republican convention and doing absolutely NOTHING to prevent faggots from marrying.
Isn't that what you want is to marry your boyfriend?
I think I like this troll.
Might I just add that I believe he also had some solid ideas on immigration reform and free trade... ideas that never went anywhere due to his unpopularity and preoccupation with Iraq. Hopefully, Obama can pick up the ball and run with some of those ideas.
War Wagon wrote:I also believe he was a deeply caring, moral man with integrity.
He put his hand on the Bible (:rolleyes:) and SWORE himself to an oath... which he violated at the forst opportunity presented to him, which was one of literally HUNDREDS of instances of him violating said oath.
So I guess my question for your retarded ass...
How does that equate to "integrity"... when you violate an oath you SWORE to?
One of the things W SWORE to uphold wrote:The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
This isn't even up for debate. It was GROSSLY violated, beyond even the most feeble attempts at argument.
Not sure it was the "forst," but I could easily list dozens and dozens more, without even breaking a sweat.
But you voted for him a second time, even though he LIED about the Oath... because you fucking hate America.
He prevented another attack for over 7 years by standing his ground on Guantanamo and the PATRIOT Act. He also appointed some decent judges and kept taxes relatively low. He removed Saddam Hussein from power in roughly 3 weeks.
On the other hand, you liberal douchefaggots should love him for pouring more money than any other President ever has into the never ending worthless shithole of Africa and various other futile causes you liberals love to waste money on, like the "Palestinians." You should love him for declaring Islam a "religion of peace," inviting a Muslim Imam to do an invocation at the Republican convention and doing absolutely NOTHING to prevent faggots from marrying.
Isn't that what you want is to marry your boyfriend?
I think I like this troll.
You're easily amused, Whitey. Oh look, there's a shiny coin over there.
And tell that shit troll I'm not a Liberal, I'm a Libertine. And ask him which of his other nics was previously abused here so badly that he had to come back with "middle finger".
War Wagon wrote:And while we're on the subject of parting shots... will Keith Olbermann, John Stewart, Bill Mayer, etc. just go the fuck away now?
Their whole reason for existance will no longer be around. They'll be like a viagara engorged penis w/o a nearbye vagina... totally useless.
You mean like when Rush Limbaugh disappeared 8 years ago?
Joe in PB wrote:
Yeah I'm the dumbass
schmick, speaking about Larry Nassar's pubescent and prepubescent victims wrote:
They couldn't even kick that doctors ass
Seems they rather just lay there, get fucked and play victim
War Wagon wrote:I know Bush has come across as a clown many times and made some bad decisions, but I also believe he was a deeply caring, moral man with integrity.
People can loathe and despise him all they want, but he did the best he could. There's only so much that one man can do and the folks who think Obama can walk on water are about to find that out.
Fukken YEP. Dude compromised his approval rating to stand by his principles and do what he felt was best for America even if it meant tough decisions. We already know that Barry Soereto or whatever his Kenyan-born name is caves to the public outcry. Case in point, when he got Rick Warren to talk today, all the queers got up in arms because Warren is against fags getting married. So what do pussy Obama do? He immediately tags that openly pole-smoking pastor to ALSO be at this liberal circle jerk today. PUSSY.
The fact that Bush is a solid individual is why so many people don't like him. Character makes them uncomfortable because they have none. The only people who beg and get on board with a vague "change" idea is loser liberals. Wouldn't you if you were one of them? Their lives are so fukken miserable that they are always wanting to rearrange America and have some random politician with no experience whatsoever to "change" their lives. It will never work, because no politician period can change a cold, miserable heart that 90% of all cokk-sucking, AMerica-hating libfukkos have. I feel kind of sorry for them- with Bush chilling in Texas now as a former President, the libs don't have a scapegoat on whom to blame their shitty lives.
Tom In VA wrote:I disagree with his party's platform - almost completely - but I think the President is often called to break from party platform when the best interests of the country are at stake.
While I have heard President Obama speak of bipartisanship on numerous occaisions I am leery of Congress actually letting Govern closer to the center.
War Wagon wrote:I know Bush has come across as a clown many times and made some bad decisions, but I also believe he was a deeply caring, moral man with integrity.
People can loathe and despise him all they want, but he did the best he could. There's only so much that one man can do and the folks who think Obama can walk on water are about to find that out.
Fukken YEP. Dude compromised his approval rating to stand by his principles and do what he felt was best for America even if it meant tough decisions. We already know that Barry Soereto or whatever his Kenyan-born name is caves to the public outcry. Case in point, when he got Rick Warren to talk today, all the queers got up in arms because Warren is against fags getting married. So what do pussy Obama do? He immediately tags that openly pole-smoking pastor to ALSO be at this liberal circle jerk today. PUSSY.
The fact that Bush is a solid individual is why so many people don't like him. Character makes them uncomfortable because they have none. The only people who beg and get on board with a vague "change" idea is loser liberals. Wouldn't you if you were one of them? Their lives are so fukken miserable that they are always wanting to rearrange America and have some random politician with no experience whatsoever to "change" their lives. It will never work, because no politician period can change a cold, miserable heart that 90% of all cokk-sucking, AMerica-hating libfukkos have. I feel kind of sorry for them- with Bush chilling in Texas now as a former President, the libs don't have a scapegoat on whom to blame their shitty lives.
That’s pretty funny. A racist, pedophile Radio Shack clerk bagging on other people’s “shitty lives”.
Joe in PB wrote:
Yeah I'm the dumbass
schmick, speaking about Larry Nassar's pubescent and prepubescent victims wrote:
They couldn't even kick that doctors ass
Seems they rather just lay there, get fucked and play victim
Goober McTuber wrote:
That’s pretty funny. A racist, pedophile Radio Shack clerk bagging on other people’s “shitty lives”.
Dude, I live in a fukken bachelor pad in Charlottesville right near the beautiful UVA campus. Saturday night I'm hanging out on the porch wearing Poplin khakis from Jos A. Bank and a signature Merino wool sweater, drinking a Heinekin brew-ha-ha
and having another patented G-pad grill out. When one of my buddies was heading out I said, "Make sure you hide your cash under your mattress, dude! We got that fukken 'groid coming into the White House!"
Sucks NOT to be me. Arguably the most handsome dude in all of C-Ville taking smoke breaks outside of Radio Shack while wearing shades and not even bothering to look at the skanks who pass me by.
Sudden Sam wrote:And this: deeply caring, moral man with integrity as a description of Bush cracked me up. My god, WW. You can't possibly believe that...can you?
For that kind of dialog we would need to establish a baseline as to what you think "deeply caring, moral man with integrity" means.
I'm open to the probability that he is more deeply caring, more moral, and has more integrity than me - for starters. And people such as yourself and other anonymous folks on message boards aren't that much further ahead of me in that department, so, I don't think it's much of a stretch to view Bush and President Obama as "deeply caring, moral [men], with integrity".
I'm open to discussing things if you're open to it. Of course if you're saying those things to sound cool and really really really super duper smart and hip on a message board, that's fine too.
That's odd -- Bush's outgoing aides are citing a "character vacuum" as one of Bush's biggest problems... but then I log in here, and the posters tell me that all those people working in the White House must be wrong, because a couple of shittrolls said he does in fact have "character."
