If George W. Bush had......

If George W. Bush had doubled the national debt, which had taken more than two centuries to accumulate, in one year, would you have approved? 
If George W. Bush had then proposed to double the debt again within 10 years, would you have approved?


If George W. Bush had criticized a law that he admitted he never even read, would you think that he is just an ignorant hot head?


If George W. Bush joined the country of  Mexico  and sued a state in the  United States  to force that state to continue to allow illegal immigration, would you question his patriotism and wonder who's side he was on? 


If George W. Bush had put 87000 workers out of work by arbitrarily placing a moratorium on offshore oil drilling on companies that have one of the best safety records of any industry because one company had an accident would you have agreed?


If George W. Bush had used a forged document as the basis of the moratorium that would render 87000 American workers unemployed would you support him?


If George W. Bush had been the first President to need a TelePrompTer installed to be able to get through a press conference, would you have laughed and said this is more proof of how  inept he is on his own and is really controlled by smarter men behind the scenes? 
If George W. Bush had spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to take Laura Bush to a play in NYC or send her to Spain spending millions, would you have approved? 
If George W. Bush had reduced your retirement plan's holdings of GM stock by 90% and given the unions a majority stake in GM, would you have approved? 
If George W. Bush had made a joke at the expense of the Special Olympics, would you have approved? 
If George W. Bush had given Gordon Brown a set of inexpensive and incorrectly formatted DVDs, when Gordon Brown had given him a thoughtful and historically significant gift, would you have approved? 

If George W. Bush had given the Queen of  England  an iPod containing videos of his speeches, would you have thought this embarrassingly narcissistic and tacky? 
If George W. Bush had bowed to the King of  Saudi Arabia, would you have approved? 
If George W. Bush had visited  Austria  and made reference to the nonexistent "Austrian language," would you have brushed it off as a  minor slip? 
If George W. Bush had filled his cabinet and circle of advisers with people who cannot seem to keep current in their income taxes, would you have approved? 
If George W. Bush had stated that there were 57 states in the United States, would you have said that he is clueless.

If George W. Bush would have flown all the way to Denmark to make a five minute speech about how the Olympics would benefit him walking out his front door in Texas , would you have thought he was a self important, conceited, egotistical jerk.

If George W. Bush had been so Spanish illiterate as to refer to "Cinco de Cuatro" (fifth of forth) in front of the Mexican ambassador when it was the 5th of May (Cinco de Mayo), and continued to flub it when he tried again, would you have winced in embarrassment? 
If George W. Bush had misspelled the word "advice" would you have hammered him for it for years like Dan Quayle and potatoes as proof of what a dunce he is? 
If George W. Bush had burned 9,000 gallons of jet fuel to go plant a single tree on Earth Day, would you have concluded he's a hypocrite? 

If George W. Bush's administration had okayed Air Force One flying low  over millions of people followed by a jet fighter in downtown   Manhattan   causing widespread panic, would you have wondered whether they actually  get what happened on 9-11? 
If George W. Bush had failed to send relief aid to flood victims throughout the Midwest with more people killed or made homeless than in  New Orleans , would you want it made into a major ongoing political issue  with claims of racism and incompetence? 
If George W. Bush had created the position of 32 Czars who report directly to him, bypassing the House and Senate on much of what is happening in  America, would you have approved. 
If George W. Bush had ordered the firing of the CEO of a major corporation, even though he had no constitutional authority to do so, would you have approved? 

Liked this question? Tell your friends about it

10 Answers

Order by
Oldest to Newest
Newest to Oldest

Well it would have been different if Bush did it because he was not the first white president.  So, 20% of us think its fine for the Obama's to do all that ... we make up the small group who polls show still support Obama.   

As he said:  George Bush drove the car in the ditch.  So don't complain if Obama drives it over the cliff, he is only trying to fix the mess that bush left it in and he had no experience driving a car before.


ROBonYEDDA@YAHOOl.com Wisdom comes from Study, Travel & Life experiences! MY YEDDA CONCEPT IS: Good questions deserve good answers; Poor ones deserve a quick/poor answer. Dumb or silly, deserves same ... and the occasional but inevitable Idiots are best just ignored.

Czar Search

September 25, 2009
Updated: September 25, 2009

Bookmark and Share

Q: Does Obama have an unprecedented number of "czars"?

A: "Czar" is media lingo, not an official title. But our research shows that George Bush’s administration had more "czars" than the Obama administration.  


A friend of mine sent me a link claiming that Obama has more czars than any other president ever and he is trying to turn the USA into a dictatorship. Please give me confirmation so I can give it to her that she has no reason to fear. Does hiring czars allow a president to bypass Congress for approval? And does President Obama have more than any other president?


It’s meaningless to ask a question about what "hiring czars" allows a president to do, because presidents don’t hire czars. "Czar" is a label bestowed by the media – and sometimes the administration – as a shorthand for the often-cumbersome titles of various presidential advisers, assistants, office directors, special envoys and deputy secretaries. (After all, what makes for a better headline – "weapons czar" or "undersecretary of defense for acquisition, technology and logistics"?)

There’s been a certain fascination with calling Obama’s advisers and appointees "czars." Fox News host Glenn Beck has identified 32 Obama czars on his Web site, whom he has characterized as a collective "iceberg" threatening to capsize the Constitution. Beck and other television hosts aren’t the only ones crying czar, either. Six Republican senators recently sent a letter to the White House saying that the creation of czar posts "circumvents the constitutionally established process of ‘advise and consent.’ " Republican Sen. Bob Bennett of Utah issued a press release saying that czars "undermine the constitution." And Texas Republican Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison wrote an opinion column in the Washington Post complaining about the czar menace, including the factually inaccurate claim that only "a few of them have formal titles."

The habit of using "czar" to refer to an administration official dates back at least to President Franklin D. Roosevelt, but the real heyday of the czar came during President George W. Bush’s administration. The appellation was so popular that several news organizations reported on the rise of the czar during the Bush years, including NPR, which ran a piece called "What’s With This Czar Talk?" and Politico, which published an article on the evolution of the term. The latter, written during the 2008 presidential campaign, points out that czars are "really nothing new. They’ve long been employed in one form or another to tackle some of the nation’s highest-profile problems." Politico quotes author and political appointments expert James Bovard saying that the subtext of "czar" has changed from insult to praise: "It’s a real landmark sign in political culture to see this change from an odious term to one of salvation.”

Now it’s turned odious again, with Republican senators calling czars unconstitutional and cable hosts like Beck and Sean Hannity characterizing them as shadowy under-the-table appointees used by Obama to dodge the usual approval processes. In fact, of the 32 czars Beck lists:

  • Nine were confirmed by the Senate, including the director of national intelligence ("intelligence czar"), the chief performance officer ("government performance czar") and the deputy interior secretary ("California water czar").
  • Eight more were not appointed by the president – the special advisor to the EPA overseeing its Great Lakes restoration plan ("Great Lakes czar") is EPA-appointed, for instance, and the assistant secretary for international affairs and special representative for border affairs ("border czar") is appointed by the secretary of homeland security.
  • Fifteen of the "czarships" Beck lists, including seven that are in neither of the above categories, were created by previous administrations. (In some cases, as with the "economic czar," the actual title – in this case, chairman of the president’s economic recovery advisory board – is new, but there has been an official overseeing the area in past administrations. In others, as with the special envoy to Sudan, the position is old but the "czar" appellation is new.)
  • In all, of the 32 positions in Beck’s list, only eight are Obama-appointed, unconfirmed, brand new czars.

These new "czars" include the special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan; the director of recovery for auto communities and workers; the senior advisor for the president’s Automotive Task Force; the special adviser for green jobs, enterprise, and innovation at the White House Council on Environmental Quality; the federal chief information officer; the chair of the Recovery Act Transparency and Accountability Board; the White House director of urban affairs; and the White House coordinator for weapons of mass destruction, security and arms control. Or, as Glenn Beck would have it, the Afghanistan czar, the auto recovery czar, the car czar, the embattled green jobs czar, the information czar, the stimulus accountability czar, the urban affairs czar and the WMD policy czar.

Some of these new positions would have been meaningless in a previous administration. Previous presidents didn’t need an Automotive Task Force or a Recovery Act Transparency and Accountability Board. These positions are similar to George W. Bush’s "World Trade Center health czar" and "Gulf Coast reconstruction czar" in that they are new advisory positions created to deal with temporary challenges facing the administration. Others do represent new long-term concerns (urban affairs, climate change), but the act of appointing advisers to manage new areas of interest is hardly unique to the Obama administration. The Bush administration, for instance, created the "faith-based czar" and the "cybersecurity czar."

Another thing: Beck counts among his 32 "czars" three who have not been called "czars" by reporters at all, except in stories claiming that the Obama administration has lots of "czars." We’ve compiled a FactCheck.org list that discounts these positions, which seem to be "czars" only in the context of media czar-hysteria. (Our list also adds three czars Beck’s research didn’t find – a "diversity czar," a "manufacturing czar" and an "Iran czar.")

As for Obama having an unprecedented number of czars, the Bush administration had even more appointed or nominated positions whose holders were called "czars" by the media. The DNC has released a Web video claiming that there were 47, but it’s counting multiple holders of the same position. We checked the DNC’s list against Nexis and other news records, and found a total of 35 Bush administration positions that were referred to as "czars" in the news media. (Our list of confirmed "czars," with news media sources cited, is here.) Again, many of these advisory positions were not new – what was new was the "czar" shorthand. Like the Obama czars, the Bush czars held entirely prosaic administrative positions: special envoys, advisers, office heads, directors, secretaries. The preponderance of czars earned both ridicule and concern in editorials and in media, but no objections from Congress

The faked outrage coming from the right about President Obama bowing to a Saudi prince and allegedly mooning America is everywhere.  It’s shocking!  Shocking, I know.

But that outrage can only be sustained if people forget about, or aren’t reminded of, the kiss (and the hand-holding) George W. gave a certain Saudi prince not all that long ago:

You don’t believe me?  Check this out.

President George W Bush's phonetic teleprompter revealed

HOW do you keep a leader as verbally gaffe-prone as US President George W Bush from making even more slips of the tongue?
When Bush addressed the UN General Assembly today, the White House inadvertently showed exactly how - with a phonetic pronunciation guide on the teleprompter to get him past troublesome names of countries and world leaders.
The White House was left scrambling to explain after a marked-up draft of Bush's speech popped up briefly on the UN website as he delivered his remarks, giving a rare glimpse of the special guidance he gets for major addresses.
It included phonetic spellings for French President Nicolas Sarkozy (sar-KO-zee), a friend, and Zimbabwe leader Robert Mugabe (moo-GAH-bee), a target of US human rights criticism.
Pronunciations were also provided for Kyrgyzstan (KEYR-geez-stan), Mauritania (moor-EH-tain-ee-a) and the Zimbabwe capital Harare (hah-RAR-ray).

Start of sidebar. Skip to end of sidebar.

End of sidebar. Return to start of sidebar.
White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said the draft, labelled the 20th version and complete with typos and speechwriters' mobile phone numbers, had been turned over in advance to help UN interpreters who must simultaneously translate leaders' speeches into several languages.
Bush's text also had to be loaded onto a teleprompter to appear on screens in front of the podium as he spoke.
"There was an error made," Perino told reporters.
"I don't know how the draft of the speech that was not final was posted but it was and it was taken back."
"Anyone giving a major speech or delivering a broadcast, like on the morning and nightly network news, has phonetics for cues just for the possibility they're needed," she later explained.
Bush is no stranger to the occasional faux pas, and often jokes about his habit of mangling the English language.
One of his highest-profile gaffes came in May when, at a welcoming ceremony for Britain's Queen Elizabeth II, he nearly placed her in the 18th century.
At a speech during the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit in Sydney earlier this month, Bush seemed to confuse the organisation with OPEC and spoke of Austrian troops in Iraq when he meant to say Australian.

Nothing but right wing garbage

Drudge, NY Post report Obamas' NYC trip cost, ignore Bush's Crawford vacations

June 01, 2009 4:28 pm ET


Embed this video:
SUMMARY: The Drudge Report highlighted a New York Post article reporting the taxpayer cost of the Obamas' trip to New York City. But neither noted that such use of taxpayer funds for private travel by the first family is typical.

On June 1, Internet gossip Matt Drudge linked to a May 31 New York Post article using the headline, "THE $24,000+ DATE...," suggesting that the cost to taxpayers due to the Obamas' May 30 personal visit to New York City is somehow unusual. In the article, the Post reported that "[t]axpayers footed the bill for the big night on the town, which included a total of at least $24,000 for the three aircraft used to ferry the Obamas, aides and reporters to New York and back," adding that "[t]he White House declined to say how much the trip was costing taxpayers." But neither Drudge nor the Post noted that such use of taxpayer funds for private travel by the first family is typical; former President George W. Bush, for example, reportedly used Air Force One for trips to his ranch in Crawford, Texas, which he reportedly visited 77 times over the course of his eight years in office.
As Kenneth T. Walsh noted in a June 1 U.S. News & World Report article about Republican criticism of the Obamas' trip, "For many years, presidents have used government transportation, and spent taxpayers' money, for personal trips." Walsh continued:

George W. Bush, for example, traveled frequently to his Texas ranch for vacations and R&R. Bill Clinton went to Martha's Vineyard for vacations in the summer. George H.W. Bush often traveled to his retreat in Kennebunkport, Maine, for breaks from Washington.

The opposition party sometimes jumps on these trips and argues that the president is being extravagant or sending the wrong signal of self-indulgence to the country. That's what's happening to Obama now.

Similarly, during a discussion of Republican criticism of the Obamas' trip on the June 1 edition of MSNBC Live, Joe Conason, national correspondent for The New York Observer, said of the trip: "[T]his is what the presidency is." He continued: "When the president travels -- as George Bush did, as Bill Clinton did, as presidents have, you know, throughout history -- the government pays to keep them safe, to keep their communication secure. This is just -- this is part of the job."

As Media Matters for America documented, several media outlets and figures advanced false comparisons of the total costs of President Obama's inauguration and Bush's 2005 inauguration, misrepresenting Obama's as more expensive. Those outlets used figures that excluded security, transportation, and other incidental costs to federal, state, and local governments incurred in conjunction with the events in 2005, while including them in the projections for the 2009 event.

Numerous media reports throughout Bush's presidency indicate that he used Air Force One for his vacation trips to his Crawford ranch. The Los Angeles Times' James Gerstenzang reported in an April 28, 2001, article, "For Bush, All Roads Lead to Crawford," that Bush himself said he was about to take Air Force One to his ranch. Gerstenzang reported that Bush said:

"I like to get outside of Washington. I like to go to where the space is open, where I can walk around with Spot and Barney, the two family dogs. My wife loves our country, the country house we've got, and so do I, and so I beg your forgiveness for not eating dinner here tonight. ... I'm fixing to get on Air Force One and take it to Crawford, Texas."

In a December 27, 2001, Fort Lauderdale (Fla.) Sun-Sentinel article (accessed via Nexis), national correspondent Jeff Zeleny reported "[a]fter spending Christmas at the Camp David presidential retreat in Maryland, the president and first lady boarded Air Force One to travel to their ranch near the village of Crawford."

An August 4, 2006, report from Bergen County, New Jersey's, The Record, "Bush begins his vacation" (accessed via Nexis), similarly reported that Bush took Air Force One to Texas for his "10-day summer vacation at his Crawford ranch."

And on December 26, 2007, The Associated Press reported that Bush took "Air Force One to fly from his Maryland mountaintop retreat to his Texas ranch here to see in the new year." The AP included a photo with the following caption:


Photo by AP

President Bush and first lady Laura Bush wave, as they walk with Mrs. Bush's mother Jenna Welch, past Brig. Gen. Margaret H. Woodward, obscured, on their way to board Air Force One at Andrews Air Force Base, Wednesday, enroute to Crawford, Texas.

Other photographs and accompanying captions report that Bush used Air Force One to travel to Crawford. An Agence France-Presse photograph and accompanying caption from The Guardian's website:


6 August 2002: President Bush tries to persuade his dog Barney to walk up the steps to Air Force One on the tarmac at Andrews air force base, en route to the president's ranch in Crawford

Photograph: Paul J. Richards/AFP

An Associated Press photograph and caption:


AP Photo 21 months ago

President Bush, second from left, walks with outgoing White House Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove toward Air Force One at Andrews Air Force Base in Maryland, Monday, Aug. 13, 2007. Accompanying them is first lady Laura Bush, left, and Air Force Col. Margaret Woodward. The President was leaving for Crawford, Texas.

From the Drudge Report, archived at 09:41:12 a.m. ET on June 1:


THE $24,000+ DATE...

From the New York Post's May 31 article, "Obama Keeps His Big Apple Pledge" by Charles Hurt and Stefanie Cohen:

Taxpayers footed the bill for the big night on the town, which included a total of at least $24,000 for the three aircraft used to ferry the Obamas, aides and reporters to New York and back. Dinner costs and orchestra seat tickets -- at $96.50 apiece -- were paid by the Obamas.

Obama's jet, a Gulfstream 500, served as a more modest Air Force One for the day in place of the customary presidential Boeing 747.

The White House declined to say how much the trip was costing taxpayers.

From the 10 a.m. ET hour of MSNBC Live on June 1:

NORAH O'DONNELL (host): Yeah, exactly. You know, the president and Mrs. Obama took some time this weekend to enjoy dinner and a show in New York City. The first couple stopped traffic and turned heads in the Big Apple. And even though they made the trip on a smaller version of Air Force One, Republicans are pouncing -- criticizing, slamming the Obamas for putting on a show and winging it into the city for an evening out while another iconic American company prepares for bankruptcy. Those are the words at the RNC.

With me now live, Joe Conason, national correspondent for The New York Observer. All right, Joe -- cheap shot on the part of the chairman of the Republican National Committee, Michael Steele?

CONASON: Well, you know, Norah, you have to wonder whether any of these people got exercised, for example, when President Bush spent something like 40 percent of his time at Camp David, Kennebunkport, and his ranch in Crawford. I don't know how much all of that travel cost the taxpayers, but nobody on the Democratic side said, "Oh, the president shouldn't be doing this" -- even though he was doing this before 9-11, during the war in Iraq.

I mean, this is -- I don't think anybody is really angry about this. I think this is, as you suggested, a cheap shot. And I -- you have to wonder whether the president would rather break a promise to his wife or suffer a cheap shot from the RNC. And I think that's a pretty easy choice, right?

O'DONNELL: Yeah, exactly. I think this man knows when he makes a promise to Michelle Obama, he should not break that promise. It's a good point.

CONASON: Everybody knows what the right thing to do is --

O'DONNELL: Yeah, everybody knows that.

CONASON: -- in those circumstances.

O'DONNELL: Joe, let me put up on the screen some of the instances of what it cost. The travel expense estimate -- $24,000. There were three planes: one for the Obamas, two for staff and reporters -- and, of course, reporters do have to reimburse the government for that expense -- two helicopters, the motorcade into New York City, and dinner costs and orchestra seat tickets were $96 apiece. But Obamas paid for their own dinner and for --

CONASON: Right. Right.

O'DONNELL: -- those tickets. What would be the counter-argument here? Do the Republicans want the Obamas just to stay at home inside the White House --

CONASON: You know --

O'DONNELL: -- and not go out and socialize and, like --

CONASON: As somebody who lives in New York City, I mean, we here would see this as an economic development --


CONASON: -- program by the president. Twenty-four thousand in the scope of the expenses of the presidency isn't really very much. I'm glad he paid for the dinner and the tickets himself, though, because it wouldn't be much of a date if he had, you know, had the taxpayers pay to take out his wife.

So, this is what the presidency is. When the president travels -- as George Bush did, as Bill Clinton did, as presidents have, you know, throughout history -- the government pays to keep them safe, to keep their communication secure. This is just -- this is part of the job.

O'DONNELL: All right, Joe Conason. Great to see you, Joe. Thanks so much for joining us

George W. Bush is today making his final visit to Camp David as president.

He will likely miss the place: According to CBS News White House Correspondent Mark Knoller, today's trip marks Mr. Bush's 149th visit to the presidential retreat. The planned three-day stay, during which the president is being joined by family and former and current aides, will bring his total time spent at Camp David to all or part of 487 days.

Yes, that's 487 days. And Camp David is not even where the president has spent the most time when not at the White House: Knoller reports that Mr. Bush has made 77 visits to his ranch in Crawford during his presidency, and spent all or part of 490 days there.

George W. Bush is today making his final visit to Camp David as president.

He will likely miss the place: According to CBS News White House Correspondent Mark Knoller, today's trip marks Mr. Bush's 149th visit to the presidential retreat. The planned three-day stay, during which the president is being joined by family and former and current aides, will bring his total time spent at Camp David to all or part of 487 days.

Yes, that's 487 days. And Camp David is not even where the president has spent the most time when not at the White House: Knoller reports that Mr. Bush has made 77 visits to his ranch in Crawford during his presidency, and spent all or part of 490 days there.

Related Questions

Other people asked questions on similar topics, check out the answers they received:

Asked: What was john adams act that was passed ...

What was john adams act that was passed restricting citizens from criticizing the government.?

Asked: Governance Committee

Did the New York State Public Authority Accountability Act (PAAA) of 2005 stipulate the NYS public authorities had to have a governance committee?

Asked: Bonobo monkeys politics and sexuality?

Bonobo monkeys politics and sexuality?

Ask a Question... We'll forward it to people who know

More Questions

Bush After the White House

I realize that leftists are petty, vindictive, and bitter, which shows why their delusions don't matter any more than they don't. Bush gave us eight great years and ingrate Democrats just don't realize that they should cease their bitter games for their own sake.

Why isn't anybody addressing the economic problems that Bush has created

gmb28, This is something that the Republicans are not willing to discuss. And to think that Mccain voted with Bush 90% of the time and now he wants to dismiss him. He won't even bring up Bush's name because he don't want the American people to associate him with Bush. Obama has been trying to lay ...

About George Bush

Get the book Big Lies & The Hunting of a President by Joe Conason, he tells a good history of the worst business man in America. If more had known this I don't think he would have been elected once or twice, but with mostly morons voting for him, maybe they would have thought that an asset. He ...