13 Reasons To Be Glad Bush Is No Longer President

[ProSense]

13 Reasons To Be Glad Bush Is No Longer President

By ThinkProgress

The five living presidents will meet in Texas on Thursday to dedicate the George W. Bush Presidential Library and Museum at Southern Methodist University in Dallas. And while Bush and his aides are using the occasion to soften the 43 president’s image and solidify his legacy, a recounting of Bush-era policies — from his deregulation of Wall Street to the invasion of Iraq — greatly undermine the new rosy narrative of the Bush years:

Authorized the use of torture <...>

Politicized climate science <...>

Ignored Afghanistan to launch a war in Iraq <...>

Botched the response to Hurricane Katrina <...>

Defunded stem cell research <...>

Required Muslim men to register with the government <...>

Reinstated the global gag rule <...>

Supported anti-gay discrimination <...>

Further deregulated Wall Street <...>

Widened income inequality <...>

Undermined worker protections <...>

Ideological court appointments <...>

Presided over a dysfunctional executive branch <...>

- more -

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2013/04/25/1913311/13-reasons-to-be-glad-bush-is-not-president-anymore/

[Lasher]

1. Free trade agreements

Thank God he's no longer around pimping more free trade agreements.

[ProSense]

2. Yup, I mean

"Thank God he's no longer around pimping more free trade agreements."

...he was no FDR, and destroying the economy, not to mention that torture thing. Good riddance.

FDR’s Comprehensive Approach to Freer Trade

by David Woolner

<...>

The driving force behind this effort was FDR’s Secretary of State, Cordell Hull, who considered the passage of Smoot-Hawley an unmitigated disaster. Hull had been arguing in favor of freer trade for decades, both as a Democratic congressman and later senator from Tennessee. Given the long-standing protectionist tendencies of Congress — which reached their zenith with the passage of Smoot-Hawley, the highest tariff in U.S. history — Hull faced an uphill struggle to accomplish this task. He also had to overcome FDR’s initial reluctance to embrace his ideas, as the president preferred the policies of the “economic nationalists” within his administration during his first year in office. By 1934, however, FDR’s attitude began to change, and in March of that year the president threw his support behind Hull’s proposed Reciprocal Trade Agreements Act — a landmark piece of legislation that fundamentally altered the way in which the United States carried out foreign economic policy.

Convinced that the country was not ready for a truly multilateral approach to freer trade, Hull’s legislation sought to establish a system of bilateral agreements through which the United States would seek reciprocal reductions in the duties imposed on specific commodities with other interested governments. These reductions would then be generalized by the application of the most-favored-nation principle, with the result that the reduction accorded to a commodity from one country would then be accorded to the same commodity when imported from other countries. Well aware of the lingering resistance to tariff reduction that remained in Congress, Hull insisted that the power to make these agreements must rest with the president alone, without the necessity of submitting them to the Senate for approval. Under the act, the president would be granted the power to decrease or increase existing rates by as much as 50 percent in return for reciprocal trade concessions granted by the other country.

The 1934 Act granted the president this authority for three years, but it was renewed in 1937 and 1940, and over the course of this period the United States negotiated 22 reciprocal trade agreements. Of these, the two most consequential were the agreements with Canada, signed in 1935, and Great Britain, signed in 1938, in part because they signaled a move away from Imperial Preference and hence protectionism, and in part because they were regarded as indicative of growing solidarity among the Atlantic powers on the eve of the Second World War. It is also important to note that Hull, like many of his contemporaries, including FDR, regarded protectionism as antithetical to the average worker — first, because in Hull’s view high tariffs shifted the burden of financing the government from the rich to the poor, and secondly, because Hull believed that high tariffs concentrated wealth in the hands of the industrial elite, who, as a consequence, wielded an undue or even corrupting influence in Washington. As such, both FDR and Hull saw the opening up of the world’s economy as a positive measure that would help alleviate global poverty, improve the lives of workers, reduce tensions among nations, and help usher in a new age of peace and prosperity. Indeed, by the time the U.S. entered the war, this conviction had intensified to the point where the two men concluded that the root cause of the war was economic depravity.

<...>

Of course, it is important to remember that the Roosevelt administration’s efforts to expand world trade were accompanied by such critical pieces of legislation as the National Labor Relations Act and Fair Labor Standards Act, which vastly strengthened the place of unions in American life. The 1930s and ’40s were also years in which the government engaged in an unprecedented level of investment in America’s infrastructure and industry — largely through deficit spending — that helped vastly expand our manufacturing base and render the United States the most powerful industrialized country in the world. Our efforts to expand trade and do away with protection were only part of a broader effort to reform the U.S. economy in such a way as to provide what FDR liked to call “economic security” for every American.

- more -

http://www.nextnewdeal.net/fdrs-comprehensive-approach-freer-trade

[niyad]

3. k and r for that handy little list. not to mention what an absolute embarrassment

he was. will never forget when he laid hands on angela merkel--just an example of what a clueless ass he was, and continues to be.

[sabrina 1]

4. So why is he being 'honored' today by so many Democrats? You can rest assured that

most actual Democrats don't need any reminder of his crimes. But how come our Democratic leadership seems to have forgotten?

Eg, there is no way I would accept any invitation to his big party to 'praise' him. It would make me sick, frankly.

The right thing for Democrats to have done would have been to let the Bush gang know they would not be 'celebrating his library' so they had time to not make such a spectacle of this country in front of the whole world.

[ProSense]

5. I'm not honoring him. n/t

[RussBLib]

6. another reason

We don't have to see that asinine, condescending self-satisfied smirk always on his face that seemed to be saying, "Don't you idiots get it?!!"

He is likely the most undeserving President. Ever.

[Scurrilous]

7. K & R

[Cha]

8. I'll raise ya.. "50 Reasons You Despised George W. Bush's Presidency"

Starting in the beginning..

1. He stole the presidency in 2000. People may forget that Republicans in Florida purged more than 50,000 African-American voters before Election Day, and then went to the Supreme Court where the GOP-appointed majority stopped a recount that would have awarded the presidency to Vice-President Al Gore if all votes were counted. National news organizations verified [7] that outcome long after Bush had been sworn in.

http://www.alternet.org/print/news-amp-politics/50-reasons-you-despised-george-w-bushs-presidency-reminder-day-his-presidential

thanks ProSense!

[spanone]

9. launched an 'unnecessary' war in iraq on lies of WMD

[lpbk2713]

10. Ah, but he did a heck of a job Brownie.

... of driving the country into the ditch.