Toronto Escorts

Top Ten Worst Things about the Bush Decade

WoodPeckr

Protuberant Member
May 29, 2002
47,043
6,051
113
North America
thewoodpecker.net
Excellent analysis of the massive damage done in the last decade.

Or, the Rise of the New Oligarchs

By Juan Cole

December 22, 2009 "Information Clearing House" -- By spring of 2000, Texas governor George W. Bush was wrapping up the Republican nomination for president, and he went on to dominate the rest of the decade. If Dickens proclaimed of the 1790s revolutionary era in France that it was the best of times and the worst of times, the reactionary Bush era was just the worst of times. I declare it the decade of the American oligarchs. Just as the end of the Cold War and the fall of the Soviet Union allowed the emergence of a class of lawless 'Oligarchs' in Russia, so Neoliberal tax policies and deregulation produced American equivalents. (For more on the analogy, see Michael Hudson.) We have always had robber barons in American politics, but the Neoliberal moment created a new social class. At about 1.3 million adults, it is not too large to have some cohesive interests, and its corporations, lobbyists, and other institutions allow it to intervene systematically in politics. It owns 45 percent of the privately held wealth and is heading toward 50, i.e. toward a Banana Republic. Thus, we have a gutted fairness doctrine and the end of anti-trust concerns in ownership of mass media, allowing a multi-billionaire like Rupert Murdoch to buy up major media properties and to establish a cable television channel which is nothing but oligarch propaganda. They established 'think tanks' like the American Enterprise Institute, which hires only staff that are useful agents of the interests of the very wealthy, and which produce studies denying global climate change or lying about the situation in Iraq. Bush-Cheney were not simply purveyors of wrong-headed ideas. They were the agents of the one percent, and their policies make perfect sense if seen as attempts to advance the interests of this narrow class of persons. It is the class that owns our mass media, that pays for the political campaigns of 'our' (their) representatives, that gives us the Bushes and Cheneys and Palins because they are useful to them, and that blocks progressive reform and legislation with the vast war chest funneled to them by deep tax cuts that allow them to use essential public resources, infrastructure and facilities gratis while making the middle class pay for them.

Here are my picks for the top ten worst things about the wretched period, which, however, will continue to follow us until the economy is re-regulated, anti-trust concerns again pursued, a new, tweaked fairness doctrine is implemented, and we return to a more normal distribution of wealth (surely a quarter of the privately held wealth is enough for the one percent?) It isn't about which party is in power; parties can always be bought. It is about how broadly shared resources are in a society. Egalitarianism is unworkable, but over-concentration of wealth is also impractical. The latter produced a lot of our problems in the past decade, and as long as such massive inequality persists, our politics will be lopsided.


10. Stagnating worker wages and the emergence of a new monied aristocracy. Of all the income growth of the entire country of the United States in the Bush years, the richest 1 percent of the working population, about 1.3 million persons, grabbed up over two-thirds of it. The Reagan and Bush cuts in tax rates on the wealthy have created a dangerous little alien inside our supposedly democratic society, of the super-rich, with their legions of camp followers (sometimes referred to as 'analysts' or 'economists' or 'journalists'). The new lords and ladies are the Dick and Liz Cheneys and the people for whom they shill. They are the Rupert Murdochs and the Richard Mellon Scaifes, and they are guaranteed to own more and more of the country as long as more progressive taxation (i.e. pre-Reagan, not pre-Bush) is not restored. They are the ones who didn't want a public universal health option, did not want the wars abroad to end abruptly, did not want the Copenhagen Climate convention to succeed. They are driven by pure greed and narrow profit-seeking for themselves. They always get their way, and they always will as long as you poor stupid bastards buy the line that when the government raises their taxes, it is taking something away from you. It is the alliance of the Neoliberal super-rich with the new lower middle class populists led by W. and now by Sarah Palin that produces clown politics in the US unmatched in most advanced industrial countries with the possible exception of Italy.

9. Health and food insecurity increased for ordinary Americans. Health care costs skyrocketed. Most Americans in the work force who have health care are covered via their employers. 'From 1999 to 2009 health insurance premiums increased 132%" for the companies paying most of the costs of coverage to their employees. Euromonitor adds, "Average private health insurance premiums for a family of four in 1999 were US$5,485 per annum or 7.2% of household disposable income. 2008 premiums were estimated at US$12,973 per annum or 14.8% of average household disposable income." By Bush's last year in office, food insecurity among American families was at a 14-year high. About 49 million Americans, one in six of us, worried about having enough food to eat at some points in that year, and resorted to soup lines, food stamps, or dietary shortcuts. Some 16 million, according to the NYT, suffered from '“very low food security,” meaning lack of money forced members to skip meals, cut portions or otherwise forgo food at some point in the year.' Hundreds of thousands of children are going hungry in the richest country in the world. From being a proud, wealthy people, our social superiors reduced us to the estate of third-world peasants, so as to make sure their bonuses were bigger.

8. The environment became more polluted. The Bush administration was the worst on record on environmental issues. Carbon emissions grew unchecked, and the threat of climate change accelerated. In fact, Bush muzzled government climate scientists and had their reports rewritten by lawyers from Big Oil.

7. The imperial presidency was ensconced in ways it will be difficult to pare back. But note that its powers were never used against the oligarchs (unlike the case in Putin's Russia), but rather deployed to ensure the continued destruction of the labor movement and the political bargaining power of workers and the middle class, and to harass and disrupt peace, rights and environmental movements. A part of this process was the abrogation of fourth amendment protections against arbitrary search, seizure and snooping into people's mail and effects, and of other key constitutional rights under vague and unconstitutional rubrics such as 'providing material aid to terrorists,'(rights which seem unlikely ever to be restored).

6. The Katrina flood and the destruction of much of historic African-American New Orleans, and the massive failure of the Bush administration to come to the aid of one of America's great cities. The administration's unconcern about the unsound dam infrastructure, about climate change, and about the fate of the victims are all a wake-up call for what all of us have in store from the small social class that Bush served.

5. The Bush administration's post-2002 mishandling of Afghanistan, where the Taliban had been overthrown successfully in 2001 and were universally despised. The Bush administration's attempt to assert itself with a big troop presence in the Pashtun provinces, its use of search and destroy tactics and missile strikes, its neglect of civilian reconstruction, and its failure to finish off al-Qaeda, allowed an insurgency gradually to grow. It should have been nipped in the bud, but was not. Once an insurgency becomes well established, it is defeated militarily only about 20 percent of the time. Eight years later, the Neoconservative thrust into Central Asia (in search of hydrocarbon leverage, or in a geopolitical pissing match with Russia and China?) of the early years of this decade has bequeathed us yet another war, this time one that could destabilize neighboring Pakistan-- the world's sole Muslim nuclear power.

4. The Iraq War, which the US illegally launched a war of aggression that killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, displaced 4 million (over as million abroad), destroyed entire cities such as Fallujah, set off a Sunni-Shiite civil war, allowed Baghdad to be ethnically cleansed of its Sunnis, practiced systematic and widespread torture before the eyes of the Muslim Middle East and the world, and immeasurably strengthened Iran's hand in the Middle East. All this on false pretexts such as 'weapons of mass destruction' or 'democratization,' for the sake of opening the Iraqi oil markets to US hydrocarbon firms-- a significant faction of the oligarchic class. Cost to the US in American military life: 4,373 dead as of Dec 15 and 31,603 wounded in combat. The true totals of war-related dead and injured are higher, since 30,000 troops who were only diagnosed with brain injuries on their return to the US are not counted in the statistics, according to Michael Munk. The cost of the Iraq War when everything is taken into account will likely be $3 trillion.

[Cont.]
 

WoodPeckr

Protuberant Member
May 29, 2002
47,043
6,051
113
North America
thewoodpecker.net
3. The great $12 trillion Bank Robberry, in which unscrupulous bankers and financiers were deregulated and given free rein to create worthless derivatives, sell impossible mortgages to uninformed marks who could not understand their complicated terms, and then to roll this garbage up into securities re-sold like the
Cheshire cat, with a big visible smile of asserted value hanging in the air even as their actual worth disappeared into thin air. Having allowed the one-percent oligarchs to capture most of the increase of the country's wealth in recent decades, Bush and Paulsen now initiated the surrender to them of nearly a further entire year's gross domestic product of the US, stealing it from the rest of us by deficit budget financing that will have the effect of deflating our savings and property values and relative value of our currency against other world currencies. That is, we are to be further beggared for sake of the super-rich. And while the banks and bankers are held harmless, the hardworking Americans who have lost and will lose their homes are extended virtually no help. While 500,000 American children will go hungry at least some of the time this year, the Oligarchs at Goldman, Sachs, will get millions in bonuses, on the backs of the ordinary taxpayers. It seems likely to me that the creation of a pool of vast excess liquidity for the super-rich by the Reagan-Cheney tax cuts was what impelled them to develop the derivatives, since they had too much capital for ordinary investment purposes and were restlessly seeking new gaming tables. The conclusion is that until we get our gini coefficient back into some sort of synch, we are likely at risk for further such meltdowns.

2. The September 11 attacks on New York and Washington by al-Qaeda, an organization that stemmed from the Reagan administration's anti-Soviet jihad in the 1980s and which decided that, having defeated one superpower, it could take down the other. Al-Qaeda's largely Arab volunteer fighters had confronted the Soviets over their occupation of a major Muslimm country, Afghanistan. Bin Laden was himself a Neoliberal Oligarch, but he broke with the Gulf consensus of seeking a US security umbrella, thus creating a fissure within his powerful social class. Al-Qaeda viewed the US as only a slightly less objectionable occupier, though they were willing to make an atliance of convenience in the 1980s. But they were increasingly enraged and galvanized to strike, they said, by the post-Gulf-War sanctions on Iraq that killed 500,000 children, the debilitating Israeli occupation of the Palestinians, and the establishment of US bases in the holy Arabian Peninsula (with its oil riches that Bin Laden believed were being looted for pennies by the West, aided by a supine and corrupt Saudi dynasty). Al-Qaeda was a small fringe crackpot group of murderous conspiracy theorists, since most of what they considered an American 'occupation' of Muslims was no such thing. The leasing of Prince Sultan Air Base in Saudi Arabia was comparable to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan? They intended to make themselves look like a world-historical force, and the US new Oligarchs, who no longer had the international Communist conspiracy with which to scare the American public into letting them have their way, were happy to buy in to the hyping of al-Qaeda, as well. But the catastrophe was not only the attacks, deadly and horrific though they were, but the alacrity with which Americans rsurrendered their birthright of yeoman liberties to a Bonapartist regime that ran roughshod over law, the constitution, the Congress, and anyone, such as Ambassador Joe Wilson, who dared oppose it.

1. The constitutional coup of 2000, in which Bush was declared the winner of an election he had lost, with the deployment of the most ugly racial and other low tricks in the ballot counting and the intervention of a partisan and far right-wing Supreme Court (itself drawn from or serving the oligarchs), and which gave us the worst president in the history of the union, who proceeded to drive the country off a cliff for the succeeding 8 years. And that is because he was not our president, but theirs.

Juan Cole is President of the Global Americana Institute. Visit his website http://www.juancole.com
 

binderman

New member
Mar 20, 2008
365
1
0
ahahahahahha

People who write lies like that commonly have ‘doctrines,’ but he is a one to have ‘visions’ as well.. The most exalted of these, conjured up after all pretexts for denial, is the vision of that there are no threats..

Where to begin, lets just do two

5. The Bush administration's post-2002 mishandling of Afghanistan, where the Taliban had been overthrown successfully in 2001 and were universally despised. The Bush administration's attempt to assert itself with a big troop presence in the Pashtun provinces, its use of search and destroy tactics and missile strikes, its neglect of civilian reconstruction, and its failure to finish off al-Qaeda, allowed an insurgency gradually to grow. It should have been nipped in the bud, but was not. Once an insurgency becomes well established, it is defeated militarily only about 20 percent of the time. Eight years later, the Neoconservative thrust into Central Asia (in search of hydrocarbon leverage, or in a geopolitical pissing match with Russia and China?) of the early years of this decade has bequeathed us yet another war, this time one that could destabilize neighboring Pakistan-- the world's sole Muslim nuclear power.

4. The Iraq War, which the US illegally launched a war of aggression that killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, displaced 4 million (over as million abroad), destroyed entire cities such as Fallujah, set off a Sunni-Shiite civil war, allowed Baghdad to be ethnically cleansed of its Sunnis, practiced systematic and widespread torture before the eyes of the Muslim Middle East and the world, and immeasurably strengthened Iran's hand in the Middle East. All this on false pretexts such as 'weapons of mass destruction' or 'democratization,' for the sake of opening the Iraqi oil markets to US hydrocarbon firms-- a significant faction of the oligarchic class. Cost to the US in American military life: 4,373 dead as of Dec 15 and 31,603 wounded in combat. The true totals of war-related dead and injured are higher, since 30,000 troops who were only diagnosed with brain injuries on their return to the US are not counted in the statistics, according to Michael Munk. The cost of the Iraq War when everything is taken into account will likely be $3 trillion.


1. Honest people are aware of threats from sources with the objective of destroying civilization and committing mass genocide by wiping places off the map.

Left wing powers conquered much of the world with extreme brutality. With the rarest of exceptions, they were not under attack by their foreign victims. The murderous overthrow by socialists to implement their designs, being just one of them. Why is it not surprising, therefore, that left wingers should be utterly forgetful of one the worst attacks in the in the recent years? .. New York was attacked. People were torn to pieces, and so on, and the attack killed many people. They were civilians..



2. Forces counter in response to the real atrocities for which they’re responsible and which continue to this day. It may matter little to them there, and virtually no one over there cares. But that doesn’t imply that it doesn’t matter to the victims.



3. Saddam’s weapons mostly came from countries that OPPOSED the Iraq war. According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, 57% came from Russia, 13% from France and 12% from China. Just 1% came from Britain and America .



4. The main opponents of the Iraq war – which the author is in allegiance – supplied over 80 times as many weapons as the main advocates of the war.



5. The American intervention in Afghanistan saved lives. UNICEF figures indicate that the deaths of 112,000 children and 7,500 pregnant women will be prevented every year as a result.

America had been the largest supplier of food to Afghanistan for a decade and provided two-thirds of food aid after 9/11, saving the country from famine. The UN Global Ambassador on Hunger wrote that there was “no starvation this winter in Afghanistan,” thanks to “a humanitarian assistance budget wisely provided by the Bush administration.” The head of the World Food Program in Kabul said that “it was clear that a possible famine had been averted.”
 

papasmerf

New member
Oct 22, 2002
26,531
0
0
42.55.65N 78.43.73W
and as Obama falters in comes woogy with a bash Bush thread.

Woody is a useful idiot for his DNC (in medical terms, dnc is the procedure to circumvent the no government sponcered abortions)
 

james t kirk

Well-known member
Aug 17, 2001
24,026
3,867
113
and as Obama falters in comes woogy with a bash Bush thread.

Woody is a useful idiot for his DNC (in medical terms, dnc is the procedure to circumvent the no government sponcered abortions)
Bush destroyed your economy, not Obama. Obama is having to try and pick up the pieces and prevent the second depression. He has no choice.

As to abortions, I exposed you for the hypocrit you are some months ago when I asked you (repeatedly) if you were willing to have your tax dollars go towards supporting all the unwanted babies that would result in a ban on abortion. You would not even say that you would be willing to put your money where your pro-birth mouth is. Therefore, you get to shut the fuck up about abortion just like the rest of your neocon hypocrit bullshit slingers.
 
Last edited:

papasmerf

New member
Oct 22, 2002
26,531
0
0
42.55.65N 78.43.73W
Bush destroyed your economy, not Obama. Obama is having to try and pick up the pieces and prevent the second depression. He has no choice.

As to abortions, I exposed you for the hipocrit you are some months ago when I asked you (repeatedly) if you were willing to have your tax dollars go towards supporting all the unwanted babies that would result in a ban on abortion. You would not even say that you would be willing to put your money where your pro-birth mouth is. Therefore, you get to shut the fuck up about abortion just like the rest of your neocon hipocrit bullshit slingers.

And I told you months ago if the children are unwanted there are families that will adopt them. No need to become wards of the state. You just have a myopic view of people.
 

y2kmark

Class of 69...
May 19, 2002
19,073
5,442
113
Lewiston, NY
Number Eleven ...

From a thread in the Lounge:
Soundscan Top 50 Album Artists Of The Decade:

01 Eminem 32,241,000
 

james t kirk

Well-known member
Aug 17, 2001
24,026
3,867
113
And I told you months ago if the children are unwanted there are families that will adopt them. No need to become wards of the state. You just have a myopic view of people.
And I told you months ago that there are not enough prospective adoptive parents to handle millions of unwanted children that would result from an abortion ban, and thus there would be a glut of children with no homes, or nowhere to go.

In fact, if you google children available for adoption in the USA - there are hundreds of thousands waiting to be adopted right now. (They are not designer pink babies - so no-one wants them.)

You just have an unrealistic view of people.

So the fact remains, you don't want to put your money where your politics lay, therefore, your position is naught.

Here, I just googled, "American Children Awaiting Adoption"

http://www.adoption.org/adopt/photolisting-of-american-children-for-adoption.php

There's over 100,000 kids awaiting adoption in the USA right this minute. You should prove your point an adopt one.

Now add millions.

Good luck with your position that adoption can simply and easily handle millions of unwanted children.
 

JohnLarue

Well-known member
Jan 19, 2005
16,747
2,392
113
Woody is a useful idiot for his DNC (in medical terms, dnc is the procedure to circumvent the no government sponcered abortions)
I question the term useful in this context
An idiot - yes
A useful idiot?
Lets see

Woodpeker is useful as
1. A poster-boy for birth-control
2. An example to kids of what happens when you use drugs or when cousins marry.
3. As an illustration of how a little knowledge is so dangerous
4. Why it is so important that mental patients continue to get their meds
5. An illustration of who would be formulating policy should the Communists every get control.
6. An example to kids of what can happen if you grow up thinking the world owes you and do not work hard for what you want
7. An example of what happens when you formulate your opinions based upon pre-conceived hatred and a lack of logical balance in your thinking

Conclusion
A some-what useful idiot
However the costs to society far exceed his useulness
 

papasmerf

New member
Oct 22, 2002
26,531
0
0
42.55.65N 78.43.73W
And I told you months ago that there are not enough prospective adoptive parents to handle millions of unwanted children that would result from an abortion ban, and thus there would be a glut of children with no homes, or nowhere to go.

In fact, if you google children available for adoption in the USA - there are hundreds of thousands waiting to be adopted right now. (They are not designer pink babies - so no-one wants them.)

You just have an unrealistic view of people.

So the fact remains, you don't want to put your money where your politics lay, therefore, your position is naught.

Here, I just googled, "American Children Awaiting Adoption"

http://www.adoption.org/adopt/photolisting-of-american-children-for-adoption.php

There's over 100,000 kids awaiting adoption in the USA right this minute. You should prove your point an adopt one.

Now add millions.

Good luck with your position that adoption can simply and easily handle millions of unwanted children.
you should next look at the rules for adoption.

Look you and I will never agree on the issue of abortion and frankly I am fine with that. I would not wish to live in a world were everyone was in total agreement.

I do not insist you come over to my way of thinking nor do I belittle you for your view. I wish you could do the same.
 

Tangwhich

New member
Jan 26, 2004
2,262
0
0
you should next look at the rules for adoption.

Look you and I will never agree on the issue of abortion and frankly I am fine with that. I would not wish to live in a world were everyone was in total agreement.

I do not insist you come over to my way of thinking nor do I belittle you for your view. I wish you could do the same.
That's a fair point, but you still didn't answer his question.
 

trufflepiggy

Member
May 12, 2008
46
0
6
And the worst............
There was such a backlash to the liberal bull thet O was elected.

Does anybody blame Saddam for the problem in Iraq. Twelve years of sanctions........... courtesy of Clinton.

Don't I seem to remember some fianancial changes made under Clinton leading directly to the current problems.

Stealing elections (withoput the aid of ACORN) ? All Gore had to do was to win his home state and he didn't. What might his homies know that you don't.

You are free to dislike Bush, but please be real about it.
 

WoodPeckr

Protuberant Member
May 29, 2002
47,043
6,051
113
North America
thewoodpecker.net
Don't I seem to remember some fianancial changes made under Clinton leading directly to the current problems.
LOL!!!!!!!
You of course fail to report those 'changes & Deregulations' WERE rammed through Congress by the nutzy neocons led by Nutty Newt with HIS Contact On America, when these LOONS were in control of Congress!....:rolleyes:

It IS these 'changes' that helped destroy the US economy that Obama has to now repair!
 

WoodPeckr

Protuberant Member
May 29, 2002
47,043
6,051
113
North America
thewoodpecker.net
actually i did

i just did not give him the answer he wanted to hear.
NO JAJA, you hypocrite!
You again dodged the question!!!!....;)
 

WoodPeckr

Protuberant Member
May 29, 2002
47,043
6,051
113
North America
thewoodpecker.net
Nope!
Now you're obfuscating just like frenchy does!....:p
 

Tangwhich

New member
Jan 26, 2004
2,262
0
0
Na

I just did not anwer yes or no to a question that has no yes or no answers.
I fail to see how that is so. Essentially the question has become, if abortion is banned, does the state support the unwanted children if adoptive parents cannot be found?

I'm not picking on you, but it's a reasonable question and I'd like to know your opinion.
 

papasmerf

New member
Oct 22, 2002
26,531
0
0
42.55.65N 78.43.73W
I fail to see how that is so. Essentially the question has become, if abortion is banned, does the state support the unwanted children if adoptive parents cannot be found?

I'm not picking on you, but it's a reasonable question and I'd like to know your opinion.

I expect you realize that abortion will never be banned and D and C's are being done to circumvent the Federal Funding issue. That being said the question has no meaning other than as an argument.

Now on the the argument or question. I have no option but to pay the taxes required of me by law.
 
Toronto Escorts