Home     Contact Us    
Main Board Job Seeker's Board Job Wanted Board Resume Bank Company Board Word Help Medquist New MTs Classifieds Offshore Concerns VR/Speech Recognition Tech Help Coding/Medical Billing
Gab Board Politics Comedy Stop Health Issues

Serving Over 20,000 US Medical Transcriptionists

The big "O" aleady the worst and he hasn't been....

Posted By: sam on 2009-04-03
In Reply to: WAS. GEORGE. W. BUSH. - Bar none!

there a year yet. The next would be Jimmy Carter. Read up on the economy under HIM. Obama doesn't give two hoots about what "we" want. He is pushing through his personal agenda at lightning speed and the worst of it is he really believes this will work...kinda like Caesar fiddling while Rome burned around him. Well, they say ignorance is bliss and he must be one deliriously happy camper right about now.

Complete Discussion Below: marks the location of current message within thread

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu

Other related messages found in our database

Exactly, hasn't shown us one way to pay for any
At least she hasn't EVER put down her country
SO far he hasn't proven anything
Yes, why hasn't anything been mentioned about that?
She had the meeting yesterday with them. I didn't hear a thing about it.
What makes you think he hasn't?
If they want to believe the worst, let them.
Toxic, just toxic.
He hasn't been officially charged

so it's all just hearsay at this point.  This is all a witch hunt pure and simple, however, everytime dems open up Pandora's box they are the ones who really get burned by it.

I'm not saying people who do something illegal and are found guilty shouldn't be punished Dem. or Rep. alike, but when people start opening up other people's closets they better be darn sure their's are squeaky clean....

How do you know the recruiter hasn't been to Iraq?
How do you know where he has been?  As punishment, he should be sent to war.  In other words, off with his head!  My, the mask is off now, isn't it. You know the mask.  The one where you pretend to hate the war but support the troops. 
Democrat hasn't won the presidency yet.
Mostly because I can't wait to see what you all have to say when the country is still in shambles with a Democrat behind the wheel. I can't believe you all actually think a Dem in office will help. Entire Congress is Dem right now. What has it done lately?
Hasn't McCain only been in Congress also?
What executive experience does he have? From your answer, Palin seems more qualified than McCain even.
blaming someone you know nothing about for something that hasn't happened
Good question...why hasn't he? However,
adopted by a Kenyan man which makes him a Kenyan by law and because this man was Muslim, he was also Muslim, even though we already knew that because his mother brought him up Muslim. ANyway, he cannot be a citizen of this country after being adopted by this man from Kenya. He then has to go through immigration dept and their entire process to apply for US citizenship, which he has no papers to prove that either.

It has been nasty, hasn't it? On both sides...
McCain certainly would not have been my first choice either, but I voted for the candidate that I thought was the better of the two--I actually prefer a more conservative candidate than McCain. I do think that it is a shame that everyone has become so mean. I have tried not to be that way to anyone, although I guess some people see me as "rabid." What can you do? I at least know that I am not a name-caller or a racist, regardless of what others might think. Perhaps it will cool down. At any rate, have a good night!
I agree. It is a disgrace that he hasn't done it before now! nm
Yeah, or he just hasn't got a clue!
How come it hasn't worked for the last 8 years?
Messiah of MT Stars - tells us oh revered and feared of the freak forum!
Oh, please. She hasn't been drawn and quartered.
Including smart Republicans who absolutely do NOT want to see her as president.
Of course in your book it's old news; he still hasn't
bush the worst

Maybe not the worst in US history...
US Grant had lots of problems with the whole Teapot Dome scandal brought on by his best friends - great General, poor President. The list goes on and I'm sure one day Bush will be added to it, but I'm not sure he deserves the title of Worst.
ACK! My worst nightmare!
That was just mean, LOL.
Even the worst of ideas

and plans that don't and won't work can be presented eloquently and there certainly will be people dumb enough to believe that those ideas and plan will actually work.  This is all a bunch of fluff to get elected.  Obama does give hope....it is called FALSE HOPE! 


This is washington at its worst
What an absolutely lying piece of garbage this guy is. The dems want to pass all their little pork projects at the tax payers expense. He certainly is not going to be paying any in taxes for this...WE ARE!!! I'm sick of crooked politicians getting up saying... the American people don't care. The American people want this or don't want that, when it's a blatant lie. News flash...he doesn't care about the American people. He should be among the top to be thrown out of DC. Talk about the ol BP rising today.

Joe Biden hasn't had invasive melanoma...

McCain has.  And you think McCain's mind is still sharp?  If it is, it hasn't been coming across that way lately, especially last week.  He better come across as sharp this week and at the debates.  Speaking of McCain's health, I'm going to post something up at the top about that. 

Respectable? Hah! He hasn't even earned trust yet!

Give it a few months for the media orgy/love fest to end then the scandals will begin (quite a few already).The dems are already at each other throats....this is gonna be good!

Hasn't healthcare been "unionized" for decades (sm)

now?  It's been used as a bargaining chip by unions when negotiating a new contract.  Just imagine how discontinuing healthcare from employers would help everyone!  Vendors could sell their products for less.  The insurance obligation would be placed somewhere else, maybe someplace it belongs, and the employees wouldn't have to pay a "co-pay" to their insurers.

Like Obama, I believe that if you like the healthcare you have, then you can keep it.

I've been very ill for 3-1/2 years now, and not only do I NOT qualify for regular health insurance, I also don't qualify for Mediaid.  When my social security disability claim comes through, I believe I'm not eligible for Medicare for something like 2-1/2 years after being approved.  So that's 2-1/2 YEARS to deny someone who was approved based on ILLNESS!  Isn't that kind of crazy?

If the option of an insurance plan that I can afford is "on the table," then I'd snatch it up as quickly as I could, while being perfectly agreeable with you keeping your own policies.

Some of us are falling through the cracks.

VOTE FOR BUSH--As the worst!!!


An overwhelming 338 of 415 historians polled by George Mason University
said Friday that George W. Bush is failing as a president. And fifty of
them rated Bush as the worst president ever, ranking him above (below?)
any other past president - even those you've never heard of who were
also really awful. Why do these misguided, obviously-socialist,
ivy-smoking and - of course -American-hating intellectuals feel that Bush isn't
doing his best?

Well, they look at the record ...

# He has taken the country into an unwinnable war and alienated friend
and foe alike in the process;
# He is bankrupting the country with a combination of aggressive
military spending and reduced taxation of the rich;
# He has deliberately and dangerously attacked separation of church and
# He has repeatedly misled, to use a kind word, the American people
on affairs domestic and foreign;
# He has proved to be incompetent in affairs domestic (New Orleans) and
foreign (Iraq and the battle against al-Qaida);
# He has sacrificed American employment (including the toleration of
pension and benefit elimination) to increase overall productivity;
# He is ignorantly hostile to science and technological progress;
# He has tolerated or ignored one of the republic's oldest problems,
corporate cheating in supplying the military in wartime.

Quite an indictment. Perhaps it is too early to evaluate a president -
or is it?

The Worst President in History? sm

The Worst President in History?

One of America's leading historians assesses George W. Bush

George W. Bush's presidency appears headed for colossal historical disgrace. Barring a cataclysmic event on the order of the terrorist attacks of September 11th, after which the public might rally around the White House once again, there seems to be little the administration can do to avoid being ranked on the lowest tier of U.S. presidents. And that may be the best-case scenario. Many historians are now wondering whether Bush, in fact, will be remembered as the very worst president in all of American history.

From time to time, after hours, I kick back with my colleagues at Princeton to argue idly about which president really was the worst of them all. For years, these perennial debates have largely focused on the same handful of chief executives whom national polls of historians, from across the ideological and political spectrum, routinely cite as the bottom of the presidential barrel. Was the lousiest James Buchanan, who, confronted with Southern secession in 1860, dithered to a degree that, as his most recent biographer has said, probably amounted to disloyalty -- and who handed to his successor, Abraham Lincoln, a nation already torn asunder? Was it Lincoln's successor, Andrew Johnson, who actively sided with former Confederates and undermined Reconstruction? What about the amiably incompetent Warren G. Harding, whose administration was fabulously corrupt? Or, though he has his defenders, Herbert Hoover, who tried some reforms but remained imprisoned in his own outmoded individualist ethic and collapsed under the weight of the stock-market crash of 1929 and the Depression's onset? The younger historians always put in a word for Richard M. Nixon, the only American president forced to resign from office.

Now, though, George W. Bush is in serious contention for the title of worst ever. In early 2004, an informal survey of 415 historians conducted by the nonpartisan History News Network found that eighty-one percent considered the Bush administration a failure. Among those who called Bush a success, many gave the president high marks only for his ability to mobilize public support and get Congress to go along with what one historian called the administration's pursuit of disastrous policies. In fact, roughly one in ten of those who called Bush a success was being facetious, rating him only as the best president since Bill Clinton -- a category in which Bush is the only contestant.

The lopsided decision of historians should give everyone pause. Contrary to popular stereotypes, historians are generally a cautious bunch. We assess the past from widely divergent points of view and are deeply concerned about being viewed as fair and accurate by our colleagues. When we make historical judgments, we are acting not as voters or even pundits, but as scholars who must evaluate all the evidence, good, bad or indifferent. Separate surveys, conducted by those perceived as conservatives as well as liberals, show remarkable unanimity about who the best and worst presidents have been.

Historians do tend, as a group, to be far more liberal than the citizenry as a whole -- a fact the president's admirers have seized on to dismiss the poll results as transparently biased. One pro-Bush historian said the survey revealed more about the current crop of history professors than about Bush or about Bush's eventual standing. But if historians were simply motivated by a strong collective liberal bias, they might be expected to call Bush the worst president since his father, or Ronald Reagan, or Nixon. Instead, more than half of those polled -- and nearly three-fourths of those who gave Bush a negative rating -- reached back before Nixon to find a president they considered as miserable as Bush. The presidents most commonly linked with Bush included Hoover, Andrew Johnson and Buchanan. Twelve percent of the historians polled -- nearly as many as those who rated Bush a success -- flatly called Bush the worst president in American history. And these figures were gathered before the debacles over Hurricane Katrina, Bush's role in the Valerie Plame leak affair and the deterioration of the situation in Iraq. Were the historians polled today, that figure would certainly be higher.

Even worse for the president, the general public, having once given Bush the highest approval ratings ever recorded, now appears to be coming around to the dismal view held by most historians. To be sure, the president retains a considerable base of supporters who believe in and adore him, and who reject all criticism with a mixture of disbelief and fierce contempt -- about one-third of the electorate. (When the columnist Richard Reeves publicized the historians' poll last year and suggested it might have merit, he drew thousands of abusive replies that called him an idiot and that praised Bush as, in one writer's words, a Christian who actually acts on his deeply held beliefs.) Yet the ranks of the true believers have thinned dramatically. A majority of voters in forty-three states now disapprove of Bush's handling of his job. Since the commencement of reliable polling in the 1940s, only one twice-elected president has seen his ratings fall as low as Bush's in his second term: Richard Nixon, during the months preceding his resignation in 1974. No two-term president since polling began has fallen from such a height of popularity as Bush's (in the neighborhood of ninety percent, during the patriotic upswell following the 2001 attacks) to such a low (now in the midthirties). No president, including Harry Truman (whose ratings sometimes dipped below Nixonian levels), has experienced such a virtually unrelieved decline as Bush has since his high point. Apart from sharp but temporary upticks that followed the commencement of the Iraq war and the capture of Saddam Hussein, and a recovery during the weeks just before and after his re-election, the Bush trend has been a profile in fairly steady disillusionment.

The Republicans' worst nightmare --

Honest voting machines.


Iraq Progresses To Some Of Its Worst

WASHINGTON, Dec 29 (IPS) - Despite all the claims of improvements, 2007 has been the worst year yet in Iraq.

One of the first big moves this year was the launch of a troop "surge" by the U.S. government in mid-February. The goal was to improve security in Baghdad and the western al-Anbar province, the two most violent areas. By June, an additional 28,000 troops had been deployed to Iraq, bringing the total number up to more than 160,000.

By autumn, there were over 175,000 U.S. military personnel in Iraq. This is the highest number of U.S. troops deployed yet, and while the U.S. government continues to talk of withdrawing some, the numbers on the ground appear to contradict these promises.

The Bush administration said the "surge" was also aimed at curbing sectarian killings, and to gain time for political reform for the government of U.S.-backed Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki.

During the surge, the number of Iraqis displaced from their homes quadrupled, according to the Iraqi Red Crescent. By the end of 2007, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) estimated that there are over 2.3 million internally displaced persons within Iraq, and over 2.3 million Iraqis who have fled the country.

Iraq has a population around 25 million.

The non-governmental organisation Refugees International describes Iraq's refugee problem as "the world's fastest growing refugee crisis."

In October the Syrian government began requiring visas for Iraqis. Until then it was the only country to allow Iraqis in without visas. The new restrictions have led some Iraqis to return to Baghdad, but that number is well below 50,000.

A recent UNHCR survey of families returning found that less than 18 percent did so by choice. Most came back because they lacked a visa, had run out of money abroad, or were deported.

Sectarian killings have decreased in recent months, but still continue. Bodies continue to be dumped on the streets of Baghdad daily.

One reason for a decrease in the level of violence is that most of Baghdad has essentially been divided along sectarian lines. Entire neighbourhoods are now surrounded by concrete blast walls several metres high, with strict security checkpoints. Normal life has all but vanished.

The Iraqi Red Crescent estimates that eight out of ten refugees are from Baghdad.

By the end of 2007, attacks against occupation forces decreased substantially, but still number more than 2,000 monthly. Iraqi infrastructure, like supply of potable water and electricity are improving, but remain below pre-invasion levels. Similarly with jobs and oil exports. Unemployment, according to the Iraqi government, ranges between 60-70 percent.

An Oxfam International report released in July says 70 percent of Iraqis lack access to safe drinking water, and 43 percent live on less than a dollar a day. The report also states that eight million Iraqis are in need of emergency assistance.

"Iraqis are suffering from a growing lack of food, shelter, water and sanitation, healthcare, education, and employment," the report says. "Of the four million Iraqis who are dependent on food assistance, only 60 percent currently have access to rations through the government-run Public Distribution System (PDS), down from 96 percent in 2004."

Nearly 10 million people depend on the fragile rationing system. In December, the Iraqi government announced it would cut the number of items in the food ration from ten to five due to "insufficient funds and spiralling inflation." The inflation rate is officially said to be around 70 percent.

The cuts are to be introduced in the beginning of 2008, and have led to warnings of social unrest if measures are not taken to address rising poverty and unemployment.

Iraq's children continue to suffer most. Child malnutrition rates have increased from 19 percent during the economic sanctions period prior to the invasion, to 28 percent today.

This year has also been one of the bloodiest of the entire occupation. The group Just Foreign Policy, "an independent and non-partisan mass membership organisation dedicated to reforming U.S. foreign policy," estimates the total number of Iraqis killed so far due to the U.S.-led invasion and occupation to be 1,139,602.

This year 894 U.S. soldiers have been killed in Iraq, making 2007 the deadliest year of the entire occupation for the U.S. military, according to ICasualties.org.

To date, at least 3,896 U.S. troops have been killed in Iraq, according to the U.S. Department of Defence.

A part of the U.S. military's effort to reduce violence has been to pay former resistance fighters. Late in 2007, the U.S. military began paying monthly wages of 300 dollars to former militants, calling them now "concerned local citizens."

While this policy has cut violence in al-Anbar, it has also increased political divisions between the dominant Shia political party and the Sunnis the majority of these "concerned citizens" being paid are Sunni Muslims. Prime Minister Maliki has said these "concerned local citizens" will never be part of the government's security apparatus, which is predominantly composed of members of various Shia militias.

Underscoring another failure of the so-called surge is the fact that the U.S.-backed government in Baghdad remains more divided than ever, and hopes of reconciliation have vanished.

According to a recent ABC/BBC poll, 98 percent of Sunnis and 84 percent of Shias in Iraq want all U.S. forces out of the country. (END/2007)

Here's the stark truth about the war. 

Can someone explain to me please why in all communications about the war in Iraq, both for and against, they never speak of how many Al Qaeda are being eliminated during this continued fighting in Iraq?  Considering that this would be the ONLY plausible reason why we should continue with it, if we were actually making headway against Islamic extremism and the Al Qaeda network?  Furthermore, why in the last six months or so has the media started referring to the "insurgents" as Al Qaeda with no clarification whatsoever? 

This is very telling isn't it?  If we are not fighting the terrorists anymore, why is our military still putting their lives on the line?

I believe this is because they are no longer there, considering that there was a very small faction there to begin with.

Considering that the Bush administration is losing what is left of their reputation continuing this war against AL Qaeda in Iraq, is it so far fetched to see media manipulation in the fact that now all of a sudden the American media is sprouting headlines about Al Qaeda being the cause of Bhutto's death without any proof whatsoever but based on wishful thinking and supposition?  When in reality Musharraf has the most to gain from her death?  Especially if it is lauded that Al Qaeda is behind her death, this lends to solidity that Bush will not withdraw US funds from Pakistan if it is thought that Al Qaeda is behind Bhutto's death, perhaps Musharraf asking for MORE funds and getting them from the Bush administration to fight Al Qaeda (supposedly) in Pakistan.

Manipulation at its highest level.

She or McCain is the worst thing that
could happen to this country.  If she or McCain gets in the WH, we are done, gonzo, and the middle class' problems will be magnified.  Get ready people.  There is something in the air with the Clintons.  Scary stuff, and not at all democratic society we knew before 9/11/01.  Obama took all of them by surprise, that the people are in some way rebelling from the present way things are done in Wash. Now they don't know what to do about him.  Scary.for Obama too.
This is not just distraction politics at its worst.
Hurricane country does not need to be getting its instructions in sound bytes between hours of distractions. The time to start preparations is NOW, not the day before the hurricane.
Thank you - Intolerance is the worst religion of all
Why do you always expect the worst? You call sm
yourself an independant and I have not seen anything to convince me that is true. You spew such venom toward anything that the democrats do and keep repeating false information that you have heard somewhere, probably FOX news, I could be wrong, without ever investigating to any depth yourself to see if it is 100% true or not. Spin doctors spin in both parties, I think you need to recognize this and think and investigate for yourself if you truly consider yourself an independent.
Okay. On his worst day, Obama is 10 times the
And his best days are 'way, 'way BEHIND him.
Racist Propaganda at its Worst! (nm)
Because so far I'm still allowed to express my honest opinion. He hasn't taken that away from us

Those are his words, and what is scary is that I think he believes it. It's bad enough we've got enemies who believe they're in a religious war. With each passing day, I'm starting to think HE believes he's in one, too. If that's the case, we're in more trouble than anyone could have thought.

My post was about HIM, not about you. But it isn't the first time a Bush groupie has PERSONALLY attacked a poster for expressing their opinion about BUSH. Now, how do you think that makes YOU look? Maybe it's YOU who should grow up or at least WAKE up and see what he's doing, not just to us but to the entire WORLD.

As long as we all still have freedom of expression, I'll continue to express my views, whether you like them or not.

And I hope you keep posting. Nobody can prove my point for me like a Bush groupie, and I do appreciate the help!!

my 401K from a previous employer hasn't lost much
but it's in low risk investments, a lot of bonds, and so when things get better, it probably won't rise as quickly as other 401k's. I'm a chicken.
Pelosi is the worst speaker ever. A divider. The
This post is an example of the worst kind of damage
This kind of ignorant, self-righteous, utterly uninformed, breathtakingly bigoted and hate-filled pronouncement, void of any depth or evidence of intellectual capacity, is exactly the kind of divisive belief system and world view W created with his "you are either for us or against us" war on terror. Islam is a monotheist religion, just as Christianity is. The kind of politicized Christianity you have expressed is of the sort that was the driving force behind the Crusades...bloody terrorism in its very worst manifestation. Politicized religion in any form has NOTHING to do with God and the brand that you are promoting here is every bit as much of a terrorist act as a suicide bombing. Moslems pray to the same God that Christians pray to and no amount of hateful bigotry you try spread will change that fundamental truth. As long as you hold this kind of hate in your heart, you will always be a very isolated, fringe element of our society. If you are truly a person of faith, pray to God to to fogive you for this blasphemy, to enlighten you and to purge you of the ignorance and hate you harbor.
No, I think Carter was the worst president in history.
Carter = worst president ever...yes, I agree with you.

Oh my gosh - the Clinton years were the worst
I have never seen such horrible horrible times as the Clinton years. It was awful, awful, awful. DH and I both worked full time. We both had excellent salaries but we could never get ahead. We didn't live life in the rich lane - a 1 bedroom apartment (no washer dryer) in a hole-in-the-wall complex. A Ford Taurus (so not a fancy car). I don't own any diamonds or furs and my clothes were bought at the local Walmart, Sears or stores like that. No children, no college education to pay off and we had absolutely nothing. Clinton's tax increases raised our taxes so high that we were paying out 38% in taxes and even then at the end of the year we always owed an extra $2000. Everyone kept telling us to buy a house and get all these great "benees". In SF? Right! We couldn't afford to go out to eat never mind buy a house and when we did try to apply for a loan we were turned down. On top of that my family and friends back east were losing their jobs (thank you NAFTA). Family freinds were losing their homes because they lost their jobs and they were starting to live in their cars. My dad took in a couple he knew because they were living in a campground and winter came and it got too cold to stay in their tent. It wasn't until Clinton got out of office that our taxes went down, we were able to save some money, get a better place to live, and go out to eat with family and start to enjoy life a little more. The economy may be bad now, but we're in better shape than we were when Clinton's were in. Now we're terrified we're going to be back into the same exact sitaution. We're certainly not in great shape here, so anything worse would put us in a bad situation but luckily we rent so can move if we have to. But the economy needs a lof of work. We have no health insurance (unless you want to call having a policy that you have to pay 10K/year first before the insurance company will pitch in), DH is out of work and we just take one day at a time. All I know is most everyone I know (family, friends, and acquantances of my family) say they may have thought Clinton to be a good looking guy, but they have been better off financially since he left office.
The one, single thing that took the worst toll on US
This confirms our worst suspicions. Certain pubs factions
What plantet do you come from? I am so sure he could have just vaporized without "announcing" his destination and the reason for his absence. See post directly above for a more plausible explanation. Your mean comments do you speak well for our concept of family values, diminish your party's credibility on that subject by leaps and bounds and make you look very small.
thanks, Marmann, I miss JTBB, hasn't post since yesterday evening, you o.k?..nm
Not the worst...Jimmy Carter holds that dubious honor....
Mr. Democat Jimmy Carter. Check out the economy while he was in office...and what Obama is doing will make that look like a walk in the park. Oh, but the rest of the world will love us....LOL. Ya kill me. LOL.
Immelt rated "one of the worst" CEO's and booed yesterday
You, my dear are the worst offender, it is apparent from your posts all you read are the tabloids.