America Betrayed President Bush
by Jeffrey Scott ShapiroIt’s almost hard to believe but Wednesday, January 20 marks exactly one year since President Bush left the White House.
During his last public ceremony as commander in chief, he was booed by thousands of Americans who simutaneously cheered for Barack Obama as he was sworn into office on the steps of the U.S. Capitol.

Except for a June 17 speech in Erie, Pennsylvania in which Bush defended his policies and criticized Obama’s, the former president has been remarkably silent about his successor. He has not fired back at Obama despite the new administration inappropriately blaming Bush for all of their failures.
One year after taking office however, Obama has done a total reversal on his isolationist, non-interventionist foreign policy, and is now pushing President Bush’s neo-conservative philosophy as a justification for starting a new war in Afghanistan. What the Democratic Party once criticized as an over-simplified good vs. evil argument has become the cornerstone of Obama’s reasoning.
“Evil does exist in the world,” Obama recently admitted. “A nonviolent movement could not have halted Hitler’s armies. Negotiations cannot convince al-Qaeda’s leaders to lay down their arms. To say that force is sometimes necessary is not a call to cynicism – it is recognition of history; the imperfections of man and the limits of man.”
In the wake of this stunning adoption of the Bush foreign policy doctrine, there is little, if any dissent. The same people who crucified Bush for liberating Iraq are hardly criticizing Obama for using force to promote democracy in Afghanistan.
Recent Gallup polls find that 62 percent of Americans think Obama’s war in Afghanistan “is the right thing” whereas only 39 percent of Americans think Bush made the right decision by sending troops to Iraq.
Any American who thinks that Bush was misdirected when he sent troops to Iraq in 2003 can’t possibly deny that renewing war in Afghanistan in 2009 to hunt Al Qaeda, eight years after the Sept. 11 attacks is, at the least, equally fallible.
Still, Obama is receiving the kind of public support that an American president, any president, deserves during wartime. Many anti-war activists, journalists and elected officials have been remarkably quiet, affording the new commander in chief the opportunity to launch a successful war campaign.
Very few Americans showed the same faithfulness to President Bush, including members of his own party. Republicans who favored non-interventionism to nation building abandoned Bush, and Democratic senators like John Kerry, John Edwards and Hillary Clinton who voted for the war turned against it before the 2004 elections so they would have the ammunition they needed to criticize their incumbent opponent.
America quickly forgot about how President Bush charismatically lifted our spirits during some of the darkest moments of our nation’s history when the Twin Towers collapsed. After all, even Senator Kerry admitted Bush’s handling of the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks was “terrific,” during the 2004 presidential debates.
But after President Bush successfully secured America in the wake of the Sept. 11 attacks, he was rewarded with accusations of committing human rights violations and war crimes – an incredible irony since his policies were responsible for liberating tens of millions of people in Afghanistan and Iraq. Some Americans accused Bush of lying and starting a war under false pretenses simply because our troops never found actual weapons of mass destruction.
Despite what Michael Moore implied in his film “Fahrenheit 9/11,” Congress did not base their 2002 authorization for the Iraq War solely on the premise that Saddam Hussein either had or was trying to acquire weapons of mass destruction. Their legislation reads very clearly that America’s purpose in sending troops back to Iraq was to enforce U.N. resolutions, some of which were violated in the 1990’s and probably should have been enforced by President Clinton. Whether actual weapons were found or not, the war in Iraq was legally and morally justifiable, and necessary.
In addition to enduring criticism for his war policies, millions of Americans demanded the new Obama administration prosecute Bush for his decision to indefinitely holding detainees charged with war crimes. When President Obama signed an executive order in May that reinforced that same Bush policy, the far left was mute.
Almost no one said a word. Apparently, its acceptable for Obama to indefinitely hold detainees, just not Bush.
As Obama continues to make decisions that mirror the Bush doctrine, it is becoming apparent that the former president was not ignorant or irrational in his foreign policy decisions despite the harsh criticism and disloyalty he endured. He was in fact, ahead of his time, a visionary who understood politics and warfare in the modern age of terrorism.
That is why Obama is now following his lead.
It should be obvious now, even to Obama’s most passionate supporters that shielding the free world requires more than mere words like “hope” and “change.” Bush’s detractors should be embarrassed having arrogantly thought they could do it better, and those Republicans who abandoned Bush when he needed them most should take a moment to reflect on their fortitude or lack thereof.
Americans who chastised President Bush for removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq should apologize and show him the same respect they are now showing President Obama as he neutralizes the Taliban in Afghanistan.
George W. Bush seemed to have an almost mystical understanding of what the American people needed when we needed it most. He reminded all of us of why we should be proud to be Americans at a time when there was a whisper that we brought the Sept. 11 attacks upon ourselves for promoting democracy abroad.
President Bush deserves our respect, not our betrayal.
This article also published here.






Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
296 Comments
"During his last public ceremony as commander in chief, he was booed by thousands of Americans who simutaneously cheered for Barack Obama as he was sworn into office on the steps of the U.S. Capitol."
Wasn't that despicable?
"President Bush deserves our respect, not our betrayal."
In the case of George Bush, America has unfortunately traded in its cash, for a clunker.
President and Mrs. Bush are all class. We miss you, truly. Not everyone betrayed you, only the misled.
[...] Brown’s Big Win: Boom Boom Boom… Mr. Brown Makes Thunder Jeffrey Scott Shapiro, Big Government: America Betrayed President Bush Nice Deb: Video: Scott Brown’s Victory Speech + Political Fallout Round-up Founding Bloggers: [...]
I liked Bush for keeping us safe from terrorists and making sure our troops were getting what they needed. I have to thank him for that. However, he's a Pogressive, spending out of control during his last time in office, started the bailouts. He was too nice, though, he kept his words.
W. always kept his word. He might be a progressive but he is not a lying liberal scumbag like Obama.
Americans originally supported Bush on Iraq. It was his refusal to implement a strategy to win the war that lost him support and respect. It was only after the republicans had their butts handed to them in the 2006 election, that Bush fired Rumsfeld and implemented the "surge". I think the American people would have looked past the missing weapons of mass destruction if Bush had fought to win the war from the start.
As for the near collapse of the economy and Bush throwing free-market capitalism out the window. Who are you going to blame that on? When the housing market was booming out of control, Bush was surely taking credit for the increased percentage of home owners. I guess when it crashed he has to take the blame.
As for the dramatic increase in government spending, huge deficits, and the violation of individual rights….the republicans were in charge. They get the blame for that too.
Good versus evil
"There are two sides to every issue: one side is right and the other is wrong, but the middle is always evil."
Ayn Rand
Comparing Bush to who we have now, no comparison..
Not being one of his biggest fans, I have to say, I would
rather see Bush in the Top Job then the puppet that's
there now……
I never wavered in my support for Bush's foreign policy decisions. When we invaded Iraq I recognized that it was a doctrine change and felt a twinge, but I also felt that the evidence was there that we had grounds to go. I haven't forgotten about the near decade of flaunted UN resolution violations. Bush always had my support there.
I have deep respect for George Bush because I've always felt that he was a man of deep conviction and purpose. He believed he was doing the right thing for us and his decisions were based on moral values he felt Americans shared. Now we know that not all Americans do. Especially a large swath of liberal-Americans and Democrat-Americans who spoke from a position of blind hatred for Bush, the man.
Where I lost some faith with Bush was the fact that we wouldn't speak for us. His administration could have done much more PR for all the good things they were accomplishing in the name of the United States. But they didn't. They went for quiet stoicism when we wanted them to trumpet their actions and show cause for the good they were doing. It was frustrating. But the press would have ignored and distorted it anyway…
I think history will be kind to George Bush. He still has my deep respect for being a man of character.
the thousands who disrespected the former President are now dissing their own guy…
You all have to read the left wing blogs if you want to see some 'booing'. The disregard for Obama and his minions amongst the looney left is illuminating.
Check them out if you have the stomach…
Soooo typical of the dem/lib statists though, absolutely, positively NO class at all………….
I am reminded that Winston Churchhill was hated by many after successfully beating back the Nazis, but history has vindicated him for the most part. I believe that history will one day be much kinder to Bush as well.
It is hilarious, especially since the left NEVER points out that Halliburton in general, and KBR in particular, are virtually the ONLY company that is prepared and able to handle the logistics of such an undertaking. ………
No reply, your inane and glaringly lacking comments speak for themselves……………… Hanzo
"But after President Bush successfully secured America in the wake of the Sept. 11 attacks….."
Really – and that is evidenced by 10 million illegal invaders getting in to the country? He didn't secure anything because 1) the threat was largely manufactured and he knew it AND/OR 2) he WANTED more attacks to give him more Patriot Acts and more power and more money and more war to serve his Israeli masters.
Oba$$tard is a progressive…
I miss president Bush. During his time in office I was able to work hard and acheive much sucess. While Clinton was in office I was laid off and could hardly find a job. Now after a year of Obama in office my husband and I are both in struggly industrys. What a dissapointment.
Well-said. However, we can't be too comfortable with the idea that "history" will vindicate him. Look at who writes the history books.
"Their legislation reads very clearly that America’s purpose in sending troops back to Iraq was to enforce U.N. resolutions…."
Really paint yourself in to corner with this one:
1) so we are serving the GLOBAL GOVERNMENT of the UN and you don't OBJECT to that?
2) so, when are we going to enforce the UN resolutions against ISRAEL?
List of UN resolutions being ignored by Israel:
http://www.mediamonitors.net/michaelsladah&su...
Hey pal losen the tinfoil hat because you are not getting enough blood flow to your small progressive brain.
Wow, I hope you feel better now. You aught to check the numbers on Bush's spending all 4 years of his last term compared to what the one's administration has spent in one.
We can make it up to him:
http://www.georgewbushcenter.com/site/c.fqLOI5OAK...
President Bush made a choice. Illegal Immigrants (sorry, Future Democrat Voters) vs. the Constitution he took an oath to uphold. Those who break our Laws mandated by our Constitution were more important to President Bush then were the American Tax Payers who have been flipping the Bills for this Country.
Was President Bush the best President Mexico ever had? Will Obama be even better? We Tax Payers waiting down at window 27 will have to wait and see.
And the irretrievably stupid.
President Bush WAS betrayed by Americans. Unfortunately, this betrayal extended itself to his own party. Add to that Campaign Obama's continual blatant disrepect for a sitting president (with nary a 'Hey, watch your mouth, punk, and show some respect!' from those who owed President Bush at least that much). Obama is now garnering the same low level of respect he had shown HIS president.
Obama and his minions lost my respect at that inauguration. It was despicable.
That said, George Bush lost my respect for two reasons – His inability to articulate and communicate consistently his policies and – His unwillingness to defend himself when attacked.
Politically, the lesson of GWB should be "Don't expect others to defend you when you won't defend yourself".
President Bush wasn't perfect but he was a real leader and he loved this country and its people. We miss you President Bush.
President Bush wasn't perfect but he was a real leader and he loved this country and its people. We miss you President Bush.
America betrayed President Bush? Does that mean America is now betraying President Obama?
Our presidents are not kings, and the way some folks place them on a pedestal, as if they are somehow more important than any other branch or our government, is downright disturbing. Most of the problems in this country stem from a centralization of power, and that has been possible, largely, by massively empowering the executive branch at the expense of the legislative and judicial.
Mr. Bush was inordinately guilty of wanting more power for the presidency, and we may well reap what he saw fit to sow. Obama and and his supporters truly believe more government is the answer to every problem, and thanks to the way the Right rolled over for every executive power grab made by the Bush administration, we are in a much weaker position to reign in the accumulated strength of the federal government.
That is Mr. Bush's legacy–not Iraq, not Afghanistan, not 9/11. The centralization of power.
The same problem I had with him, but it certainly didn't cause me to lose all respect. Sometimes being right isn't enough.
Cowboy, you do have a way with words!
Ask Bono which President has done the most for Africa and he will tell you that it was Bush. Even Bono apparently didn't like that Bush wouldn't toot his own horn about that.
The same liberal lame stream media that constantly screwed Bush over is the same bunch that idolize Obama and tries to re-create the nauseous 'Camelot' crap. GWB never had a prayer, but Obama sends chills up the legs of the LLSM.
Well said.
This was a good article. I actually forgot about the booing at the inauguration. Classless… but what else would you expect from smug, arrogant, sheep like Obama's supporters?
Is there a point in your incoherent rambling>
dear leader will be no better on illegal immigration…it will again be the people who keep shamnesty 2 from passing…you can bet the the dog and pony shows on the border are doing nothing to stem the real invasion and colonization of this country from the south. We have laws in OK but yet certain parts of town are filled with those who don't speak a word of English and never will. They whip out welfare cards and hubby behind whips out a wad of cash and then they both get into a new SUV and off they go laughing all the way home at how stupid America is…toss them all out now and jail and heavily fine any company who hires them including the sub-contractors who act as their agents in doing so….
True… but there was a poll recently where a sizable number actually thought things were better under Bush. Views of him are softening already, and will continue to.
Did a jew beat you up every day for your lunch money or something? Are you actually Jimmy Carter in disguise?
.
Bush kept us safe and laid out a template of what the war on terror should look like.
He also kept the economy going, kept people in jobs, put Bin Laden in a cave, created a cabinet position for DHS, and tried for 2 years to reform FMA and FMC in 2005, and respected the constitution. Democrats were screaming the whole time.
What'd he do wrong? He and other Republicans spent money like democrats.
Now we have the real thing, and they make Republicans look like penny pinchers. Yikes!!
.
They're all guilty of ignoring this very serious issue.
Make that 9 months…even more impressive
In those 9 little months Obama QUADRUPLED all the debt incurred from the inception of our country to the day Bush left office…200 years compared to 9 months and quadrupling it, hmmm…
Being a "Tea Bagger", I now am aware of the Radical Agenda to destroy public opinion of anyone who has different views from their Radical Progressives, CZars and Super Masters. I would give anything to have President Bush and Laura back!
I never betrayed my president and the people that treated Bush like that were NOT AMERICANS, they are communist/socialist cool aid drinking scum.
Obama IS NOT my president ( he's NOT AN AMERICAN, he's a MUSLIM ) and I plan on showing him the same respect they showed Bush, NONE.
And lets NOT forget the media, and others like CODE PINK ( whose members should be thrown in prison for treason ) they are as much to blame as the people that booed him.
Bush was a good president, not the greatest, but good and he is a decent human being, unlike obama and his ilk.
The Iraq war was not instigated by Bush. It was signed, sealed and delivered by an Act of Congress in 1988 (Iraqi Liberation Act of 1988) signed by Bill Clinton. Some provisions of the Act were; removal of Sadam and his govt.; replace it with a democratic form of govt.; establish tribunals to try Sadam and his henchmen for crimes against humanity; provide funding for Iraqi insurgents to undermine and overthrow Sadam's govt. (pre 9-11); the military was to provide equipment and training; and the REAL REASON WE WENT TO IRAQ; to assist Iraq's creditors in recovering payment of Iraq's public debt (the cause of all wars).
After the 9-11 attack on us, Bush simply invoked the Iragi Liberation Act signed by Clinton in retaliation.
In Hillary's supporting speech on the Senate floor, she pledged full support for the war, and assured the troops that this country would stand behind their efforts 100%.
Notice both Bill and Hillary were completely silent in the democrat's critisizm of Bush and the war. It was their idea to begin with.
Why don't you take your anti-Semitism someplace else?
Obama has made Bush out to look like a cheapskate!
Wow, John, that one just sailed out of the park! Well said!
"After the 9-11 attack on us, Bush simply invoked the Iraqi Liberation Act signed by Clinton in retaliation.
Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.
That act (not a constitutional declaration of war, by the way) illustrates quite clearly how out of control we've allowed our government to become. No one can truthfully argue that Iraq posed an imminent danger to us. Yet our government believes it has the right–no, the duty–to invade another country, depose its leader, and set up a new government. And all the while, no mention is given to the fact that our government armed the guy we're supposed to hate and tried to blame his use of chemical weapons against his own people on Iran.
Really, for an example of out of control government, that act doesn't get any better.
George W Bush did great job in Eastern Europe by making sure it got safely into the folds of NATO and European Union. Europe is a better place because of George W.
Maybe you should watch this:
<a>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMnSp4qEXNM
Every one his post can be summed up in one phrase, I am an anti-Zionist.
Dear Uncle Om
I hate Kansas, I hate you.
I’m leaving the DNC and I’m
Taking the dog.
~ Dorothy
Great, a link to an "unbiased…cough, cough" website that bashes Isreal at every turn. So you're a Jew hater, we get it. Which leads me to believe you're probably an Islamic fundamentalist in here looking for targets. Take off hoser.
I click on nothing blind.
Any thing is better then nothing, nothing is sure what we got now.
[...] Brown’s Big Win: Boom Boom Boom… Mr. Brown Makes Thunder Jeffrey Scott Shapiro, Big Government: America Betrayed President Bush Nice Deb: Video: Scott Brown’s Victory Speech + Political Fallout Round-up Founding Bloggers: [...]
The fact that Bono said it and it was still ignored goes to show you how hard the MSM tried to ignore anything positive about Bush. I do remember that. I believe Bob Geldof also had some nice things to say too. However, I also remember that Bono showed his true character with the infamous Bush Hug Snub. So Bono can kiss it.
Dark knight, baby. I think it's important to point out that Bush only implemented TARP, which has now been mostly PAID BACK. So the only way Bush really increased spending was for national defense, and I don't think a single person was against that after 9/11. Imagine if he hadn't done anything in response. Obama, in contrast, spent way more than Bush ever did on a trillon-dollar stimulus that didn't do anything.
"tried for 2 years to reform FMA and FMC in 2005"
And this failure is one of epic proportions. Want to play "connect the dots" start with upper management at the GSE's and work your way up, down and sideways.
Oh. And offshore.
The situation in Iraq changed over time and the strategy should have developed/changed to suit. He was a little behind the curve on that.
The actual war was over when that "Mission Accomplished" banner went up, but it was premature in regards altering the culture and political climate.
I have always known that America owes incredible gratitude and a BIG FAT APOLOGY to President Bush. Too many people behaved like hysterical 5 year olds screaming at the feet of the man who worked extremely hard to keep us safe, stayed dedicated to what he knew was right, no matter what the screaming idiots were saying, and behaved with the dignity and wisdom of someone worthy of the White House. He was not a perfect president, just a really really good one.
Now that Obama has learned that most of the world STILL hates us, maybe he'll behave like a grown up. Most of the world hates us and accuses us and criticizes us for ONE reason. JEALOUSY. Bush was not in a popularity contest with the world and KNEW how to deal with maniacal dictator lunatics.
Maybe Obama can for once now, drop out of the world's popularity contest, start listening to and working for the American people, and treat the rest of the world with the necessary wisdom.
Please do not ever use Bush and Obama in the same sentence. Obie doesn't deserve the honor. I personally miss GWB everyday that I have to look at the atrocity now sitting at the helm. Obie has turned the office of the President into a JOKE. Bush always had honor, conviction, and the moral compass to guide his decisions to do the right thing. Sure, the left can armchair quarterback all day long. I look at how unsafe I feel as a citizen of the US right now and I can honestly say that I never felt unsafe for one minute when Bush was in office. You can criticize the Bush administration for a lot of things, but you can't take away how the admin put America first. ____Looking forward I would like to say that I am so proud to be from the great state of Massachusetts today. We elected a man of integrity and honesty who will work tirelessly to keep this country safe. __
Upper management at the GSE's should have been frog-marched into a federal prison and not been given 8 (EIGHT!) figure compensation packages and positions like POTUS Chief Of Staff.
Really. How many US citizens realize just how much money they were paid to LOSE trillions of dollars and pounds? Individuals (not companies) managing the massive losses got payouts with seven zeros added on.
I am glad Biden was wrong in his prediction that Obama would be tested by terrorists during his first year in office. I am not sure how well he would hold up and am afraid of what he might not do.
Obviously – I would prefer we never be tested. No replies about that.
Good and often forgot points GB.
I agree. It's terrible that those ignorant, dis-respectful people boo'd him. He deserves much more credit than that.
I really miss President Bush.
Three words: prescription drug coverage.
Four more words: No Child Left Behind.
While I agree with the general mood of this post, I do feel that President Bush (either one) did not help anything anywhere! If one is going to declare war on Terrorism, it's either declared or leave it alone because it will be not be a win, otherwise! What happens, we elect a person raised in Islam; and being a retired statistician, I can accurately predict that there is a 97 1/2 % chance that will not change. However, there is a 2 1/2 % chance that his religion could change due to either the influence of Lucifer or the HEBREW, YAHSHUA, SON OF YAHWEH! In Conclusion, he most likely is Islam, or had a spiritual conversion? And, I don't see a "RIGHTEOUS" spiritual conversion on his part at all! Do YOU? I MEAN, MARXISM?
But… but… isn't that considered to be (gasp) "nation building"?!?
I'm stunned at all the support I see here for Bush. I would think the people here of all places would 'get it'. But you don't. Bush was one of the worst things that has happened to this country. And up until Obama took office he was probably the worst president in my lifetime. Bush was Big government. Obama is even bigger government. Come on people quit standing for party and stand for principals. Are you or are you not for limited government, limited spending, non intervention unless its to directly protect America? If you are then can't possibly be praising Bush! Please for the love of our country, the revolution is finally starting to happen, and you folks are settling right back down into the D vs. R routine. Its not about that, the progressives have taken over the Ds and are imbeded into the Rs. Bush was one of them.
President Bush is not and never was a Progressive. He recognized and respected the Legislative Branch prerogatives, and that members of Congress were also elected by and answerable to We the People. Aside from his requests for Defense-related spending, it was House and Senate critters, on both sides of the aisle, responsible for the "out of control" spree, and it was the failure of "We the People" to hold them accountable that let them get away with it.
The bailouts would not have been necessary if President Bush's attempts, beginning in July, 2001 and repeated several times, to rein in Fannie and Freddie, had not been thwarted by Barnie Frank, Chris Dodd, and others in Congress. Put the blame where it belongs.
Oy, vey!
Two wrongs don't make a right. I'm sick of seeing people defend one bad action by comparing it to another. Fallacy of logic.
Bush – "We have to abandon the free market principals in order to save the free market"
Really? Your so enamored with that R in front of his name that you don't care about the principals? Bush screwed America, not the other way around.
What is with all of the pro GW articles? GW was the worst thing that ever happened to the Republican party. One article even likens him to Ronald Reagan due to the people of his time smearing him. Ronald Reagan was unpopular because he strove to get rid of big government, which initially put America on a rocky road. As time passed people realized that “it has to get worse before it gets better” was more than just a cover your a** mantra. GW on the other hand, to date stands as the king of big government republicans to ever hold office. I especially find it frustrating on this site, as the articles are typically anti-big government. Stop defending GW, he was no more a Republican than John McCain. He didn’t have a mystical understanding of what the people needed. That sounds exactly like pro-big government people say. What are the Democrats doing right now? Saying that they know what we need and we don’t. Big government always uses that as justification for its unpopularity. GW is a progressive and Obama is more of the same. Republicans need to wake up and stop defending the progressives that are imbedded within the party. There are plenty, believe me, especially in the House and State Government. We, as Republicans, will never get anywhere if we choose to ignore that we, too, have contributed to this mess. Admit that we did it, clarify that it was a progressive movement within the party, decide to go back to the principles of the party, remove those who don’t, and quit defending the actions of idiots.
You're right, but it was July, 2001 that President Bush first asked to rein in Fannie & Freddie, prior to 9/11.
Goodness, gracious, sakes alive!
Yes, I believe you are right, it would be considered nation building.
Isn't that what Babblin' Biden said just last week? That we would be there for "the duration", and we would nation build………….
It's not D vs. R for me. This post was about Bush's foreign policy and his steadfastness. For that he is top notch. If you want to judge him for Big Government then you have a fair point, but you don't wage two wars for nothing. For the situation we were in he did fine. Now if you want to talk about letting Congress run amok with our dollars then, yeah, the veto pen sat in his pocket for way too long.
You can't possibly be a tea bagger and want Bush back. If you do, then you haven't done your homework. Bush represents the very thing real 'Tea baggers' are fighting against, as does Obama.
Please check your spelling and proper word usage.Oh, also, please don't attempt to read someone else's mind. I'm a Conservative first, not a Republican. I'm not enamored of Republicans, only the Truth, if you go back and reread(did you actually read it yet?) the above post in question, maybe that little, dim light bilb in your head will shine……………… Hanzo
As I've said before, there is no comfort to be had in listening to the Progs trash Obama because he isn't Leftist enough for them.
Did Reality take half of your assests when she divorced you?
Who said two wrongs do make a right? We have to work with what we've got, not much choice right now, but we're trying. What have you actually done to try to rectify the situation? It's easy to sit back and play armchair pundit, pointing the finger at everybody.You seem to assume that we have a clean slate to operate with , as if we can suddenly start off from scratch.Talk about fallacy of logic. Let's all be realists here……………… Hanzo
It's not D vs R for me , either. It's about class and love of this country vs vindictiveness and contempt for America. Bush wasn't perfect- I hated the big spending. I hated how the GOP did NOTHING after "the mandate" of 2004. Those things are what got the DNC their numbers in 2006.
But Bush didn't outright lie to us the way Obama does. He never flipped cute little "jus' scratchin' my face" birds to opponents. He didn't buddy up to terrorists and thugs, and put Maoists and Marxists in positions of power. He didn't tell those who had real misgivings about policy that gthey were essentially just part of the problem. He didn't shut an entire group of people out of the process, or stand by while his Speaker and Majority Leader called citizens "nazis", "teabaggers" and "un-American""angry mobs".
We'll complain about eating cold, leftover pizza until we're put on a diet of pea gravel.
Obama and his group are amateur hour. They prove it daily!
W was a great President. Go Brown!
There is nothing like a manure sandwich to make you appreciate liver.
George W Bush was and is a decent man. We're gonna take a little time to appreciate that and thank him, and forget about the shortcomings for now.
You want to talk about "Avatar" some more, you go on ahead.
You've obviously been inhaling the chemtrails. Why don't you go solve the JFK assasination and leave us alone . Moron!
That's sort of an empty statement. Read above. I was well aware that Bush spent too much money. However, Obama has swamped him. That is hardly "defending bad action."
One problem was that in most prior periods of war the country went on an austerity diet as to other spending priorities "for the duration." Gulf War – The Sequel" was an exception. I fault nearly every decision maker for that, not the least of whom were the voters.
I was in hopes he, dhoff, had fallen into Boston Harbor last night.
(sigh) But…………IT floates.
GW a progressive? Care to explain, this one is new to me.
Fine?!?!? Are we watching two different movies here? AQ wasn't even in Iraq, they were in Afganistan. We went to war in the wrong place. Its like he played pin the tale on the donkey and didn't even come close to hitting the donkey.
After 9/11 our borders were as porous as swiss cheese. He did NOTHING about the flood of illegals and our mexican border. In fact he went in the opposite direction. He waited until his last day before setting Ramos and Compian free, and still it was only commutation. Was a dirtbag. Bush has zero respect from me. He signifies EVERYTHING that is wrong with the republican party. He used the christians in this country and then metaphorically laughed and spit in their face. He USED them and then disposed of them. How can any conservative possibly defend this man? He was NOT a conservative.
I'm tired of picking the lesser of two evils. Until we stand on principal instead of party, we will never be free from this downward spiral. Quit justifying garbage because of some other garbage. It is a logical fallacy. And to see people actually defending the lesser of two evils while proclaiming principals that are contrary, is mind boggling.
I'm with you B K. I would have thought us conservatives would finally wake up and learn some lessons. I guess not?!?!?
Boooooring. zzzzzzzzzzz
This article was about national defense, the war on terror and the double standard applied by the looney left . If the subject of the article was deficit spending or size of government I might agree with you. Bush EXCELLED at defending the country during his 8 years! Please try to stay on topic.
VAH,
Agree with everything you say. Bush is good man of principles but not able to promote the conservative cause the way Reagan did. And let's face it, we need a very articulate and confident leader to be able to withstand the ongoing barrage of attacks from the main stream media.
Exactly how did he 'Keep us safe'? Why don't you ask all the families of the soldiers how safe he kept them fighting a war that had nothing to do with 9/11? And how he abandonded Afgahnistan where the terrorists were leaving a skeleton crew to deal with the real threat.
Bush was asleep at the wheel when it comes to Freddie and Fannie. He could have used his bully pullpit to bring attention to the matter. Truth is, he was oblivious to what was going on. And how exactly has Bush 'repected the constituiton'? Was that statement a joke? Because I didn't find it funny.
And no it doesn't make them look like penny pinchers. A crap ton of money is still A CRAP TON of money. If thats acceptable to you as well as other party first republicans, then our country is doomed. But its ok as long as one of our own does it?!?!?
The very liberal Brits dumped him after depending on his leadership to defeat the Nazis.
President Bush is probably quietly rewarded in seeing Obama slowly (too slowly) facing the reality that the Bush policies were and are the best ones! He is just too classy to say, "I told you so!"
You sound really peeved about the referendum on Obama in MA.
He increased the centralization of power while growing government and abandoning free market principals and capitalism. Do not forget, the first TARP bill was his baby. Contrary to his BS you don't 'abandon free market principals in order to save the free market'.
Nonetheless,
Progresiveness can be measured by two things; spending and taxes. Bush did OK on the tax side but did not fight hard enough or even articulate the dange of out-of-control spending. On that front, he is not different from most Republicans.
Absolutely. Those who keep blaming Bush seem to think that the Congress just stepped aside and let Bush call the shots. Ironically, most of those in Congress have now stepped aside and are letting Obama and his czars call the shots. Let's hope we're about to change all that.
How did he 'excell'? What state is our mexican border in right now after his 8 years in office, especially after 9/11. How did he protect our soldiers on the border? Ask Compean and Ramos's family. What about our ports? He was going to sell one to Dubai!!!! It wasn't until after public uproar that this got canned. I just can't beleive everyone is forgetting details and spewing rhetoric instead. He took us to war with the wrong country and left the real terrorists with a skeleton crew. His actions increased the output of terrorists around the world. We lost many brave soldiers due to make belive intelligence.
Prescription drug coverage, No Child Left Behind, the notion of creating an "ownership society" which helped fuel the housing bubble…
Need more examples?
I disagree with your argument here. Bush represented the United States as a strong leader of world affairs. Obama has been bowing and scraping all over the globe and apologizing for whatever he thinks will win him friends. Big, big difference.
Obama bows and makes nice and apologizes–and then launches drone attacks in Pakistan and Yemen. He hasn't done anything except change what is said by the president. That may be of utmost importance to you, but I judge the people in Washington by their actions.
Bush looked tough and strong… while doing the same things Obama is doing.
I suggest that you go take a class on just how our government works and also review just WHAT President Bush the younger actually said and did.
Great reply; can't add a thing to it!
W was never and is not a "PROGRESSIVE"; go look up the meaning of that word.
Not to mention the fact that when president, Clinton used Halliburton quite a lot.
Tarandfeathers……………….go back to DU or KosKids; you just don't know what you're talking about.
I'm sure that you are "sick", but not for the reason you claim.
A\\"Logic"? You dare to talk about "logic", when you have none? LOL
OK, tell me what he said and did on the spending side.
Go do your own scut work; I don't owe you the answer…………..you owe it to yourself.
But Obama has been "tested" and he failed……………….miserably.
Go back to whichever skinhead/so far right that it's a lefty site you usually post to.
Your views are so despicable and specious, that they would be "funny" if you weren't wasting bandwidth and disrupting this thread.
Fess up………………..are you thebarbarian, or just one of his pals from a KOOK site?
President Bush the younger was not ever, nor is he a "lesser of two evils" !
Let me guess, you're a Ron Paulite.
"PROGRESSIVE" was and still is just a code word for SOCIALIST.
President Bush was never a Socialist, but Obama is.
Tarandfeathers and his other "pals" here, attempting to trash President Bush and the majority of posters here, is nothing but what is known on radio talk shows as SERIAL CALLERS.
They all spew the same scripted garbage, which they really don't understand the meaning of.
Yeah well, we got him back here in Texas now, where he's welcome and loved. So, to all the Bush haters out there, this Texan says, "Screw all y'all."
Why not debate the merits of his argument instead of resorting to name-calling? That's what people usually do when they've be proven wrong.
By the way, the first tea party protest took place on the anniversary of the original Boston Tea Party back in 2008. It was a campaign rally for Ron Paul.
For those of morons who are still foaming at the mouth about Iraq and/or posting made up things about that part of the War on terror, it would behoove you to learn some actual history.
Anyone remember the Gulf War?
There was a peace treaty signed ( yes, yes, I would have killed off Saddam during that one, but we couldn't, due to the way things were written [ gee thanks...France and the UN............NOT !] and the pledges from others who kinda sort of played a part in it ) at the conclusion. As with all such treaties, should one party break any part of said treaty, all players are at war again; the treaty becomes null and void.
Prior to America going into Iraq, again, Saddam had broken 17 UN resolutions ( which the toothless UN and chicken Europeans closed their eyes to ), as well as several parts of the peace treaty. Ergo, we WERE still at war with Iraq.
I really miss him.
I'm ok with your main point Mr. Shapiro Bush was 'Borked' by the media we can all agree with that.
I supported just about everything he was about during his first six years or so,
Gottchca……………..you're just a Paulite. LOL
That wasn't "the first 'TEA PARTY' " and nobody knew about it.
The TEA PARTY MOVEMENT was actually started on T.V., by Rick Santelli and picked up by a true grassroots of every day people.
Ron Paul is a RINO, who is the GOP's version of the Dem's Kucinich.
Mr. Paul was friends with Ronald Reagan. You're highly confused about what a true conservative is. Let me guess… you voted for John McCain, right?
Teddy Roosevelt was a progressive, and his philosophy–not Reagan's or Goldwater's–is pretty much the embodiment of the modern Republican party.
No Reagan was not; it is YOU who are "confused".
Oh I know what a Conservative is; you don't.
I voted for Sarah Palin; McQueeg just happened to be on the ticket too.
Let me guess…………………………….you voted for some fringe party candidate or just dxidn't vote at all.
So Bisch was 'Borked by the MSM I get it by riddle me this Mr. Shapiro;
The posse comitatus act created in 1878 states “it shall not be lawful to employ any part of the Army of the United States to execute the laws of this nation without the approval of the congress of the United States”. In 2007 Bush paved the way for the National Defence Authorization Act which severly dilutes and obfuscates the Act of 1878 with bipatrisan support congressional support to make it possible to have our troops turned on us by executive order without even notifing congress during a "national emergency"…
Arguing with you is like arguing with a brick wall, only a brick wall is more intelligent. Have a good night, and have fun ruining the Republican party. Ass-hats like you are the reason it's gone to hell.
Oh, you've been watching Glenn Beck.
Look, it's you and your ilk whose stance ensures that Dems win, into perpetuity. Those whom you deign to back, always lose and should do.
Barry Goldwater isn't the "shining light" of a Conservative that some believe. He went quite lefty, somewhat after losing his run for the presidency.
Methinks you weren'/t even born, when Goldwater made that run.
How can you hate Bush yet love Reagan when Reagan spent more on defense than GWB?
I love Reagan and GWB because they both love Freedom.
When it comes to National Defense-CONSTITUTIONAL requirement- Ron Paul prefers dirty dealing with dictators under the premise buying off our enemy will somehow appease them.
Screw-balled 9/11 Truthers-this what Ron Paul represents.
Four day old, picked at by turkey vultures roadkill has a higher IQ than you do.
Brain dead adolescents are the ruination of this nation, along with the Dems; whom by supporting fringe parties, you give aid and comfort to. Go back to drinking that bong water.
OMG, what's our exit strategy?!?!
We're occupiers!!!
The relief efforts will never end because needy insurgents from other islands are coming in to get supplies!
We're imposing our values regarding building codes and infrastructure on the native Haitians!
LOL!
That's right. The books were being cooked at Fannie and Freddie while the Dems were in charge. Notice how there's no investigation. Instead, Fannie and Freddie are being allowed to continue offering the same programs that put this country in the toilet while everyone else is being taxed. The Dems are completely corrupt and they're trying to cover their tracks.
He's already solved it. The Zionists killed JFK. (rolls eyes)
On Iraq, the Ansar al Islam in Iraq offers contrary evidence to your your claim.
On Freddie-Frannie you must have missed the 18 times GWB warned America about the subprime loan mess.
TarandFeather, the evidence that you are full of crap is clear; you are one of those stuck-on-eternal- stupid who spent the last nine years with your head shoved-up inside John Stewart's behind..
Wait, so now Glenn Beck is the enemy of the Republican party? I missed the memo. So basically anyone who doesn't toe the line of the Republican party leadership is bad? That explains why the party is falling apart.
"I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism."–Ronald Reagan
I'm married with three kids, and I have an IQ that labels me as "gifted." Keep trying.
Reagan didn't invade the Soviet Union, which posed far more of a threat than Iraq ever did. Reagan also didn't believe in empowering the presidency to the point that the office would possess king-like powers.
Reagan knew the difference between national defense and national offense, and Bush, who was led astray by his advisors, did not.
Oba$$tardd is a Communist. Always was.
true that…true that
while i found myself agreeing with W about as often as i disagreed – i respected the integrity he brought back to the Oval Office, and how he stood by his principles, even in the face of disagreement. and even on items which he had disagreement, he would respect the will of the people. both he and his father were very respectful to the American People and the Office Of The President.
Another OMG, we are even taking theit children away from them, bringing them here and are forcing them to go to school. It's SLAVERY ! NO-Bama is enslaving the Hatian Children !
They were less smug and arrogant than stupid and entitled.
Yeah obviously you don't know anything about Ron Paul, other than the far left and far right rhetoric and misinformation. He advocates the exact opposite. I read what these two screw balls have been saying above and I'm just stunned at how ignorant they are. They don't even know the definition of conservatism. FYI- Ron Paul was the ONLY true conservative in the primaries. The GOP had fallen so far from their origin, that they had to attack Paul on a personal level because he shined the light upon their corruption and fall from grace. They didn't want the boat rocked, they just wanted their power back. They didn't want to fight for the people, they just wanted to fight for themselves. Mit Romney and McCain were two of the worst examples of conservatism. Really, this was the best the GOP could put forward? Shame on you for abandoning the true conservative principals that Regan fought for.
Bush may not have been an eloquent speaker, but he ALWAYS said what needed to be said and spoke the truth.
Oh and one last thing Sue, G.W. B. spent more money than just about every president before him (repub or dem) since the great depression. Obama is on par to far eclipse that, which is sad. But do not be confused, that is a mountain of spending that came from G.W. B.
He's the first Christian I've ever heard of who celebrated Ramadan, but not Christmas.
Wonder how long we will hear from Obama after his one term presidency?Thank God Bush knows that his days in the spotlight are done.
Can we agree they were a bunch of aholes?
And it is those who think we are throwing our vote away that are the true cause of the problems. You think we are throwing our vote away because we are voting for someone who stands on prinicipals instead of an R or D in front of their name. Because we vote for someone who stand upon policy? Who upholds the words of our founding fathers and beleives in the free market. Those that beleive in smaller government. On the contrary, I say it is people like you who throw their vote away. They claim they want those things but will not actually vote for those that follow such principals, simply because the person with the R must win. As long as people like you vote for the 'progressive lite' candidate, we will never wake up and never take our country back. We will eventually fall and lose our republic. Stand vigilant, stand for prinicipal, and quit compromising for the sake of a win for 'your team'. 'Your team' should be red, white, and blue, not just red.
But I will always address him as Mr President!
Obama no.
Didn't we kick the Brits out so we wouldn't be ruled by kings? The president is not a monarchy. I truly believe a lot of what happens is OUR fault. President Bush was by no means a Conservative. A decent man yes, perfect no.
We as Americans have the power to vote………………………………with our wallets.
Contrary? That group didn't even form until 2001. They were northern Iraqi kurd seperatists. Guess who their enemy would have been? Sadam Huessein (sp?) So the enemy of our enemy is our…wait…that didn't work out right. Hmmmm, seems we helped Ansar al Islam out. By taking out their opposition, we cleared the way for them to further infiltrate and set up shop in central Iraq. Thanks for making my point. http://www.cfr.org/publication/9237/ansar_alislam...
Oh, you mean the subcomitee headed by representative Baker? Look if Bush really wanted something investigated, it would have been investigated. He could have pulled some strings. Obama has done so much more, albeit in a negative way, in having things happen. So please show me the 18 times he warned America, and have it be earlier than 2008.
How could you possibly put me as a fan of John Stewart? Are you not listening to ANYTHING I've been saying. Or are you just in super defense mode because someone isn't bobbing the knob of the Republican brand name? You talk of evidence, I've yet to see it.
Some food for thought on all the comments made above. Why do we now keep falling for the ploy of responding to those who deny GWB's achievments while pointing out his miss-steps; only to reply ourselves and ignore the facts that he did make misstakes and also had great achievment. No President in history was without these traits. I tdoes not further debate, change a mind, but it may make us feel better. It makes better sense to talk about following the Constitution which has not been followed since about 1913! There is plenty made for discussion on these issues and it keeps us focused on what the future should hold which is a strict adherance to that shelved Document. IMHO
Just because someone breaks a condition of a treaty, it doesn't mean we HAVE to go to war!
President Bush did some things right and some things wrong. I'm confident in saying that his motivations were not of the kind portrayed by the left's evil caricature. I'd also warn against glorifying him. He did, after all, push big government programs like Medicare Part D while failing to constrain spending. His response to the financial crisis was also not based on free market principles, which even he admitted when he claimed he had to abandon capitalism in order to save it, an idea I vehemently object to.
I did not betray President Bush. The scum LIBERALS did. I love him and thank him.
Bye Bye Obama the muslim!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
LOL………………no, no, no, but it's been Beck who has been beating the drum against T.R. of late.
Good GOD, you're a simpleton.
Come on Tarry………………..tell me how many of the fringe presidential candidates you and your ilk have elected. NONE? Oh dear……………………………………………….
How about governors? NONE AGAIN? Oh dear………………………………………..
You aren't "principled"; just ignorant, stupid, and losers.
President Bush was booed by the despicable and classless CHICAGO THUGS — WHAT GOES AROUND COMES AROUND!!!
During the election when I realized that Republicans were trying to distance themselves from Bush it was then I realized the Democrats had it.
Damnit 1red, your as bad as Obama and his cronies. Can't hold an argument, so you have to get personal. Its people like you that destroyed Palin.
Tsk, tsk, tsk…………………..
You're losing it.
Who is me and my 'ilk'? Are you refering to third parties such as independents or libertarians or tea partiers? Can you please be specific. If you mean independents then your in for a rude awakening.
George Washinton was an independent.
Maine, Oregon and Texas are the only states to have elected formally independent candidates as governor: James B. Longley in 1974 and Angus King in 1994 and 1998 from Maine, Julius Meier in 1930 from Oregon, and Sam Houston in 1859 from Texas. Lowell P. Weicker, Jr. is sometimes mentioned as an independent governor, though this is not technically correct; he ran as A Connecticut Party candidate (which gave him better ballot placement than an unaffiliated candidate would receive), defeating the Democratic and Republican party nominees. Another former governor who is sometimes mentioned as an independent is Jesse Ventura, who actually ran as a member of the Reform Party's Minnesota affiliate, which later disaffiliated from the party and reverted to their original name the Independence Party of Minnesota.
There have been several independents elected to the United States Senate throughout history. Notable examples include David Davis of Illinois (a former Republican) in the nineteenth century, and Harry F. Byrd, Jr. of Virginia (who had been elected to his first term as a Democrat) in the twentieth century.
Representative Bernie Sanders was an independent member of the United States House of Representatives for Vermont-at-large from 1991 to 2007. Sanders later won the open Senate seat of Jim Jeffords as an independent. Joe Lieberman a former Democrat who ran, like Lowell P. Weicker, Jr., under a third party (Connecticut for Lieberman Party) in the 2006 election.
This doesn't mean I agree with those people, but there have been non republican and non democrats elected.
Remember what the MORON MSM did to George W. They were relentless, cruel and ABSOLUTELY STUPID. The IGNORANT SHEEP that followed the now CLOWN-IN-CHIEF were pitiful in their display of poor taste and stupidity during George W's last days in office. How this country longs for and needs a man of George W's character and leadership. Instead we got a community organizer in WAY OVER HIS INEPT HEAD! We miss your leadership President Bush!
You are right he was tested. How brain dead of me. Miserable and could have been much more miserable. I stand corrected.
So, that begs to ask the question: Who's ignorant and stupid? Lets see….you provide erronious statement. I provide facts and leave no doubt to who is who.
And Beck is wrong how?
You truly are a moron!
I'm a staunch Palin supporter ( have been one, even before she was picked to be VEEP ) and tear her detractors to shreds.
You really are a silly, assumptive, thin skinned, baby.
That's okay, we all forget/make mistakes………..but it takes someone special to admit a mistake; BRAVA.
Did you catch the news today, re Obama's highest security folks being grilled in the Senate today, vis-a-vis the underwear bomber and HIG and the truly shocking things that came out of it?
You "provide facts"?
Oh that's a laugh and a half; that is! LOL
I did not betray President Bush. His domestic policies were irresponsible and I totally disagreed with him. Especially pertaining to immigration, and the fact that he was using illegal immigrants to fuel the housing market, thus inflating the economy beyond natural limits. Spending, ear marks and corruption all contributed to the errosion and compromise of true conservative policies.
Bush did good job keeping the USA safe and re-starting the economy after 9-11. Other than that, compromise, compromise, compromise…..
you are the most insane person i've seen posting here
I think I have finally figured you out 1redcent. Your one of them. Your one of the progressives that has infiltrated the republican party and destroyed it over the last couple decades. I know this because you use the same tactics that the liberal progressives use. You have no facts and you slander and make personal attacks to try and discredit someone instead of their argument. You probably have a signed copy of Saul alinski's rules for radicals. Your a mole 1redcent. You pretend to be a conservative while shouting down all the real conservatives. I've figured you out.
I didn't. I was shoveling mud all afternoon. Truly shocking? I will have to try to find it. Do you have a link? I am so rarely shocked anymore. Sadly. Except by my own curious memory lapses : ) Jeesh!
Do you think you're clever? Cause you're not.
Give us Ron Paul and I'll be happy. You can keep the other traitor.
my president is better than your president. ha ha. all politicians are lying scumbags filled with entitlement and fail. why hitch yourself to one over another?
It's probably on FNC's web site; it was on that channel's 6:00 PM news and I bet nowhere on the other networks'.
Three were shown answering a few questions ( I wish I knew what the other questions and answers were ! ) about the Christmas bomber. I'm pretty unshockable, but yes, I was shocked; not to mention outraged and disgusted.
The underwear bomber was asked questions as though he was a petty thief, the FBI was called called in, nor asked for advice. He wasn't asked who trained him, who paid for his plane ticket, who helped him……………………………NOTHING!
The day Obama was sworn in, he made this big thing about setting up something called HIG ( a supposedly super group who were/are in charge of what to do vis-a-vis terrorists. That was a year ago and that group has yet to do much of anything and they NEVER once discussed what to do with a terrorist caught outside of a battlefield in Afghanistan!
It went downhill from there.
Sometimes, it is best to keep a great sense of humor. It has been said through the ages that "the best revenge is living well". It has also been said that "revenge is a dish best served cold."
Whatever the case, wouldn't it be great for George Bush to request that Dick Cheney be his "special assistant" for the Hatian relief effort. He could even name him " Vice President" in charge of overseeing Bill Clinton.
The left would have a coronary! Especially since KBR is probably going to rebuild the port.
(…….and for those of you who don't know, KBR is Kellog, Brown & Root. A division of Halliburton).
It's hilarious!
It might be up on FNC's website; I saw it on Fox's 6:00 PM news show and I bet that no other network showed or mentioned it.
There were three people, IIRC, all the top security people, shown being questioned by Senators about the underwear bomber.
I'm pretty shock proof, but most of the answers shocked me!
Though the perp was questioned, alone, before he got all lawyered up, it was as though he was a petty thief. Nobody thought to call the FBI, or anyone else, nor ask them to come in and help with the questioning.
On inauguration day, Obama signed an order that set up a super duper, extra security group, HIG, which was supposed to be in charge of devising plans for how to treat/what to do with terrorists. They've done just about nothing and admitted that they never, NOT EVEN ONCE, talked about, or even thought about what to do with a terrorist/s not captured on an Afghanistan battlefield, so they had no idea what the hell to do with the Christmas bomber.
And it went downhill from there.
Nobody has to try to denigrate you; you do that with every post………..all by yourself.
Good point.
Must have been a good comment for it to be deleted.
Very well said.
It may be more accurate to say that the Republicans share the blame for some of the issues you raise, but you definitely listen to bias pundits (maybe we all do). Bush did not fire Rumsfeld because he is loyal to a fault, forget the politics. The politics of the surge would not have been accepted until after all other options failed.
Re: the economy, Bush is certainly not a "free-marketeer," but he is no Obama (Socialist) or Frank (lunatic) or Dodd (drunk). I will agree, though, that spending got out of hand.
Seems somethings will never change. What I found most unsettling with the 'treatment' of President Bush was the extreme amount of hatred spoken. I have disagreed with policies of past presidents, but never felt the need to say I hate them, not even the current poor excuse for a commander in chief. Hate is unnecessary and unproductive.
I cried when I saw that. It broke my heart. That truly was the spirit of evil.
and the absolutely evil.
Dh, you need to be thinking on a much larger scale than that.
How about a list of UN resolutions being ignored by the UN?
Whatever, Alinski pawn.
1redcent, it's always entertaining to read your posts and watch you 'feed the trolls', perhaps it's time to stop annoying ourselves with Tar, aka The Pretender.
The MSM and liberals painted Bush with the "stupid idiot" paintbrush. I admire Bush for his strength in the aftermath of 9/11 and the aftermath of the media lying hits. Bush did not stick his finger in the air to see which way the wind was blowing, his own principles and his faith guided him in the difficult decisions that he faced after 9/11, instead of the fickle polls. That takes guts and self confidence and probably a lot of prayer.
How do you resolve the issue then? How many chances do you give a madman? What would your answer have been, since you surpass all of us with your wisdom and insight. Do tell
we can't win someone else's war. i'm just saying historically speaking. but we must fight for them. it's what we do. that's what the progressives hate.
the capitalistic system is what we sympathise with. it's what makes america great.
Bush didn't take credit for the surge in homeownership. As a matter of fact, he went to Congress on at least four occassions dating all the way back to the late fall of 2001 to discuss oversight and regulation to Fannie and Freddie and even discussed the impending housing bubbles burst should they not be reigned in. They didn't listen to him. Not once – but please note that the key figures who either shot him down or told people Bush was an idiot were none other than Barney Frank and Chris Dodd – two people who created the housing bubble (with the help of the CRA courtesy of Jimmy Carter and a more aggressive approach to it under Clinton) in the first palce. Get your facts straight and your head together. I am not saying Bush was A-OK on everything – he wasn't and that is obvious. But please, spare me the olberdouche rhetoric that is so stepped in lies, misconceptions and wrongful premises that you choke trying to explain any of it.
One more thing, don't ever look to a politician to "fix things" for you or "make things better". It will only show you to be a fool.
If you go back and look at the collapse it was cause by Fannie / Freddie….They were busy taking on huge loans that they knew folks could not afford. The dems allowed it to hapen. Mcain went in from of Congress and told everone there that if they did not do something then there would be a collapse. The dems were out raged and many spoke on the floor of the Senate and told Mcain he was crazy. They stood behind the loans and even went so far as to say franklin raines was doing a wonderfl job and there was no need to curb lending practives ! When it imploded bush took the fall…..But the dems were all warned and did not care. I agree he spent to much….He was not as conservative as I wold have liked..However compaed to the current admin…it was a mere drop in the bucket !
Got a chance to meet him years ago, when he was Governor of Texas. Terrific guy. We shouldn't have shared him with all those lesser states that ridiculed our values.
When is your sleeper cell going to activate you?
Right on Cowboy! I get sick of all the Halliburten Bashing. There are only three companies in the world capable of doing the huge job that is required. Haliburtun is the Only American One. Bectel is German and Schulmberger is French. When the contract was awarded to Haliburten after the Invasion in Iraq it was not because Dick Cheney had a connection with Haliburten it was because it was the ONLY U.S. company who could actually do what was required. Would it have made sense to reward the French or Germans who did not support us?
Thanks for the link.
Well said, John.
It is dead wrong for the Office of the President to lower itself to countless and baseless acusations. That is the job of the Party and the Party failed him for its own selfish interest. The ONLY Republivan President who defended himself was Richard Nixon. Democrats are the ones who first and then continued the process of swinging for every low ball. Somehow that is considered normal now. It is because the MSM, The State Dept., ETC were on a mission from day one to undermine his Presidency. Yes President Bush could have done a better job and if Tony Snow had not had cancer and could have continued as Press Sec. maybe things could have worked a little better.
While GWB did take more power for the executive it is because the Legislative branch refused to do thier job. The Executive can not take what it is not given. Why has Congress refused to declre war since WWII? The answer is simple, they want it both ways and have abicated thier responsibility. Bush did not draft or enact the Patriot Act. Bush did not draft or enact the formation of the Dept. of Homeland Security it was done after the recommendations of the 9/11 commision. Bush did not make power grabs he only excercised power given to him by a Cowardly Congress who wanted the cover to be able to say Bush was wrong.
What you also fail to understand that one of the reasons for going into Iraq was to have all the terrorists follow us there where we could fight them. Afganistan in the mountains is not an easy place to fight a war. The flat lands of Iraq are perfect for modern fast mobile warfare.
As for not declaring war no Congress has declared war since WWII. This leaves the Executive in a very dangerous position. If he does nothing he risks the safety and well being of the United States. If he takes action Congress can later say that he overstepped his authority. It is the Cowardly Congress that is to blame.
I have a sneaking suspicion that a few of his non vetos were because he was held hostage by his own Party and Congress for continued support of the war.
If you actually take Ron Paul seriously then you actually have no idea how the world really works. He is not a Conservative but he does want to return to a time when creating wealth was very difficult due to a commodity based monitary system. It is very sad that so many people could be fooled by the ignorant rants of Ron Paul.
If you adjust for inflation he isn't even close. By the way Presidents do not spend the money, congress does. The executive only spends the money that congress gives them.
Non-interventionist???
You will no doubt be voted down for this post. The truth is uncomfortable to most people, especially when it means admitting one was wrong. Republicans were wrong to blindly follow Mr. Bush, and it had everything to do with party and nothing to do with principle. Folks can argue it was all about the wars, but then how can they not be a hundred percent behind Obama? He's changed absolutely nothing; in fact, he's getting us more deeply involved in Afghanistan than Bush ever did.
If it really was all about foreign policy, Republicans should be fully behind the current occupant of the White House. But since they're not, it serves to demonstrate that they'll tolerate big government just fine as long as their party is the one in charge.
You do not grasp the reality of Foreign Policy. It is better to be feared that we might take action than having to do it. Making nice has always led to having to take action when that fails. Sometimes action can be avoided entirely if your opponent fears that you might actually do something. Remember the non-war in Lybia? That is a direct result of a Realistic Foreign Policy.
Ron Paul is not intellectually capable of understanding economics and the way the real world works. If somehow Ron Paul had had his economic policies enacted we would be and remain a third world country. You may not like how money is valued and how International Markets work but that is the Real World we live in and no amount of wishing it were not will make it any different.
Right you are, but the trolls don't know any history at all and only have heard of TR because they watch Beck.
I agree that the blind following of Bush isn't a good thing. I mean look how he put a stop to illegal immigration. Oh right, he didn't. But then, he really reduced the size of government. Erm… OK maybe not. Hmm.
There is one thing he did! He prevented any further terrorists attacks on the mainland by taking the fight to them. That's not so terrible is it?
When Congress writes a law that is conflict with a previous law the new law always takes presidence. The Executive does not pass legislation, they can write it but can not pass it by executive order. The Dept. of Homeland Security was created as a direct result of the Bi-Partisan 9/11 Commision. I was not and have never been in support of that Dept as it has been constituted. It was not created by Executive Order. The Department of Homeland Security was established on November 25, 2002, by the Homeland Security Act of 2002. It was intended to consolidate U.S. executive branch organizations related to "homeland security" into a single Cabinet agency.
George Washington…………………….you're throwing in GEORGE WASHINGTON; the first president, who most people wanted to make KING, that George Washington? ROTFLMAO
Lowell P. Weicker, that damned RINO, who was the far lefty governor, who instituted Ct. states income tax………………that POS Weiker? I knew Lowell P. Weiker, unlike you, I am fully cognizant of all of his history and for you to bring him up, is almost as stupid as then bringing up that mordant idiot,m Jesse Ventura !
Weiker, FYI….ran as an Indie because he couldn't get the GOP nominatiomn and for no other reason!
NYC mayor, doofus Bloomberg, a life long Dem became a GOPer,when he first ran for mayor, because the Dem field was enormous. He then ran as an Indie, after buying off lots and lots of people, so he could illegally run for a third mayoral term.
You GOOGLED all of those people and you knows less than NOTHING about any of them.
Keep it up; the more you post, the more of a complete fool you make of yourself !
Sir, please reread the post. it does not say Homeland was created by Executive Order. Butt that is not the point of the post anyway. The point is we do not need a standing Army, NORTHCOM to protect Washington from it's citizens…
Thanks, OnCommonGround.
Yes, yes, I know that I shouldn't "feed the trolls", but sometimes it's just too irresistible and I do enjoy poking my finger in their eye. ;^)
It's too bad that Breitbart allows trolls to stay, even when they are truly over the line, but oh well………………………………..
I'm ok with your main point Mr. Shapiro Bush was 'Borked' by the media we can all agree with that.
I supported just about everything he was about during his first six years or so,
As long as you have the strength for it, keep poking their eyes out! I have sent my complaints to Breitbart regarding a certain someone. There is only so much of one's vulgar and aggressive comments that should be tolerated.
So if I have 3 drinks in 8 years am I an alcoholic? I understand your examples, already aware of them, I just do not believe that qualifies him as a progressive.
The South had the right to secede (Tenth Amendment there were other legal reason as well ). Before Lincoln took office seven states had! After Ft. Sumter and Lincoln's decision to use military force four more states seceded! In the true sense of the definition this was not a "civil war". The most accurate terms of description depend upon which political side you were on and they are these: "The War for Southern Independence" or "The War of Northern Aggression."
For over the first year and a half of the war slavery was not the issue as could be seen in the resolution of Congress dated July 26, 1861: "Resolved, That the present deplorable civil war has been forced upon the country by the didunionists of the southern and northern States, that in this national emergency Congress, banishing all feeling of mere passion or resentment, will recollect only its duty to the whole country; that this war is not prosecuted upon our part in any spirit of oppression, nor forany purpose of conquest or subjugation,
nor purpose of overthrowing or interfering with the rightsor established institutions of those States, but to defend and maintain the supremacy of the Constitution and all laws made in pursuance therof, and to preserve the Union, with all the dignity, equality, and the rights of the several States unimpaired; that as soon as possible these objects are accomplished the war ought to cease". Slavery was far from the issue at that time. Foreign powers were incidentals as was the slavery issue. Yes Lincoln violated the Constitution but the greatest violation of it was going to war against the Sates that seceded when it was legal. Not to mention suspension of habeas corpus rights etc. These violations were at the time significant for sure but they pale in comparison to the violations which began in the late 1890's and began in more earnest intensity after 1913 throught our current times of 2009! All of these violations perpetrated by those who are most aptly described as "Progressives" (notice I did not say Republican or Democrat.)
The egregiousness of these violations pales in comparison IMHO what transpired during (you pick the label) war beginning after Ft. Sumter. In the former case we might have had two "Federal" governments alive and well instead of one Federal government on the brink of financial and social collapse because of our failure to follow the Original Constitution. As a start see this publication: "The Politically Incorrect Guide toAmerican History byThomas E. Woods Jr. Ph.D.
Oh I have the strength for it, but wish that I didn't have to do it.
Frankly, I really don't understand why so many trolls and their vile posts ( not that trolls post vile replies, some are just so moronic, that keeping them up makes the site look bad ) are allowed to stay. There are actually supposed rules for all of the Breitbart sites, yet it appears that signing on to them, doesn't mean that one is compelled to follow them; though some perfectly okay posts get deleted. *shrugs*
KBR is no longer part of Halliburton. It split off in 2005.
You sir are an ardent student of history. I did not want to get into the complicated mess of the times but you did an amazing summary. I just wanted to point out that the systematic violation of the Constituion has been going on for longer than you originally indicated.
George Bush was always "my" president. The current "boss", not so much. A true leader doesn't apologize for leading. He never was against something after he was for it. I have said many times history shall vindicate "our" president. And if you think Obamas bad how does President Hilary terrirfy you.
You can't even spell Alinsky's name right and I'm supposed to take you seriously? Without looking up the word, I don't believe you even know what a "pawn" is.
Okay, what next, are you going to pull out what you consider to be the worst name and call me a "doodoo head"?
Hmmmmmmmmmmm……you claimed that I trash Palin; I don't and never have done.
That didn't work, you you libelously called me a "progressive".
Well, that one was also a blank, so now I"m an "Alinski (SIC ) pawn"?
Strike three…………………………you're out!
A little hint: the War on Terror isn't the War Only on Those Who Committed the Atrocities on 9/11 and No One Else.
So stop using the leftist "x had NOTHING to do with 9/11" screech.
Oh come on. Refusing to go to war due to a treaty violation worked so well with the Chancellor of Germany back in the 30s. I'm sure constantly ignoring the leader of Iraq despite all his actions would have never eventually led to any sort of problem or anything.
(Note: Yes, I'm being sarcastic. Thank you very much.)
Ron paul not a conservative?!?!?! Are you on crack? You need to go look up the history of conservativism. How is Ron Paul NOT a conservative? Come on smarty pants. Give me examples as to how he is NOT a conservative. Lets see if you can put some facts where your mouth is.
Actually youv'e got that backwards. It is adjusted for inflation, because we simply didn't have enough money in the system to make an adequate comparison. And it appears that congress has given him plenty to spend and he did it with a beer in his hand and a smile on his face.
I never said anything about the definition of liberalism back in the day. I'm very aware that liberalism was essentially libertarianism in the early part of last century. The truth is that the progressives created a bad name for themselves so they began changing what they called them selves. The name they usurped was 'liberal'. Then around the late 70s, the name liberalism became tainted so they changed their name game back to progressives, all the while the world forgot their origins. Now light is being shed and they will probably try to reclaim the liberal word again.
You keep mislabeling me, I'm just returning the favor. Kind of idiotic don't you think? Maybe your finally understanding. But I doubt it.
I simply proved a point that you were factually incorrect. Which you were. Like I said further down, in case you chose not to read it, I do not necessarily agree with any of those people.
Its not leftist, its fact. Why can't you accept facts? If bush would have gone into Iraq claiming that Sadam was commiting human rights violations and slaughtering his own people, I would have totally been supportive. But it would have been a different argument and we probably would have had better support. But the reasons he claimed were essentially lies and he is the one that used one unrealted event to justify it.
Ron Paul is an economic genius. Don't even try to hack him on that. He has time and time again made people look stupid when they debate him on economics.
But again I ask, how is Beck wrong? If you watch him regularly then you would know that he has already made a similar statement about liberalism and libertarians and how one changed into the other because the progressives took over the 'liberal' name.
Finally! Something new and different in the ongoing saga that portrays the struggle of two competing political parties that, despite their differences, work together to completely suffocate any hope of free elections in the United States. Their ability to pull off this massive election fraud stems almost entirely from the windfall of operating in a country where people are so ignorant, complacent, and misinformed about the condition of their collective homestead that they don't even realize that political parties were never even mentioned in the Constitution, much less authorized to DBA (do business as) our representative government. The intended Constitutional Ideal of a Representative as a trustworthy surrogate for the collective demands of The People has been so thoroughly trampled by the fans of the party fight that most, representatives included, don't even understand what it is that representatives are hired to accomplish. Prima evidence of this can be had in almost any vote of the legislature simply by comparing the representative's vote to his party affiliation. As it splits, it splits not by rivalry on principle, nor by confrontation of the better logic, but largely, if not entirely, by party affiliation. Why? Because our representatives aren't concerned with principles, nor the better logic, nor any other element pertinent to the good faith maintenance of The People's homestead. The representatives are concerned with themselves and preserving their party's share of control, and thus their own as well, of the money siphon craftily legislated seamlessly onto The People's collective pant's pocket.
So here we are, reading yet another inspiring essay about how this half of the free election sabotage machine's last crony was so much better than that half's presiding crony and all the while the entire jest of why we talk about anything of government to begin with is completely lost to the fanatic shrieks of our tiny little football brains as they renew over and over again their pledge of allegiance to the half of their choice. Hey geniuses, pay attention. The idea is to to Pledge Allegiance to your fellow countrymen for the purpose of working together to improve your collective homestead and secure it from hostile countries, thieves, tyrants, burglars, illegal invading aliens, terrorists, and saboteurs. The idea is not to Pledge Allegiance to an entity whose primary function is that of enlarging the skim port in your butt pocket. Go back and read your government textbook and, no, you can't watch football instead. It's all together too obvious that you've been watching far too much football already. OK, you can have the score.
Democrats $231,998,434,612
Republicans $216,567,328,743
The People $000,000,000,000
Finally! Something new and different in the ongoing saga that portrays the struggle of two competing political parties that, despite their differences, work together to completely suffocate any hope of free elections in the United States. Their ability to pull off this massive election fraud stems almost entirely from the windfall of operating in a country where people are so ignorant, complacent, and misinformed about the condition of their collective homestead that they don't even realize that political parties were never even mentioned in the Constitution, much less authorized to DBA (do business as) our representative government. The intended Constitutional Ideal of a Representative as a trustworthy surrogate for the collective demands of The People has been so thoroughly trampled by the fans of the party fight that most, representatives included, don't even understand what it is that representatives are hired to accomplish. Prima evidence of this can be had in almost any vote of the legislature simply by comparing the representative's vote to his party affiliation. As it splits, it splits not by rivalry on principle, nor by confrontation of the better logic, but largely, if not entirely, by party affiliation. Why? Because our representatives aren't concerned with principles, nor the better logic, nor any other element pertinent to the good faith maintenance of The People's homestead. The representatives are concerned with themselves and preserving their party's share of control, and thus their own as well, of the money siphon craftily legislated seamlessly onto The People's collective pant's pocket.
You couldn't figure anything out, if every intelligent person who has ever lived, gathered around you and gave you tutorials for the next million years.
Yet another assumption, from a baby, who imagines that he/she is brilliant, but has the intellect of a gnat.
The specious Palin assumption didn't work, so now you're ( and that is how to spell that contraction; it isn't "your" as you spelled it ), so now it's calling me a "progressive". What's next, calling me an Obamaite? LOL
You aren't a "real conservative"; heck, you don't even understand what a conservative is.
I didn't like everything he did, but I kept the faith with him. He will always have my love and respect for what he did, for his love of country, and for his sheer courage in the face of unrelenting assaults. The weak sister currently in the WH? He can't carry GWB's lunch bag.
Doug, you're lying on the man. President Bush made several speeches articulating his policies. Your problem is that, blinded by the media like the rest of America was, you were not listening. I read every speech he made or saw it on Fox if it was run. Or I looked it up on C-SPAN. The big lie always has been that GWB is inarticulate. He's not a man of flowery speech, but he's a man of substance who did not like the spotlight and made a few verbal errors when in it. However, he did not lie to America, and he always told us what he was doing and why. America just didn't listen; then America blamed GWB for not selling his policies. BS!
Bush kept us safe, he kept his word. He spoke with class, never got into petty bashing. He spoke with dignity! He had more morals than any of those tree huggers! I am grateful that we had him as president during the 911 era. I got so tired of the "war" drum beating of the MSM during that time, it was relentless and shameful.
There were weapns of mass destruction and yet the MSM never reported the 500 metric tons of yellow cake found in Iraq. It was guarded for a long time by the US then transported by plane and tanker to Canada who bought the entire load. The US keep it secret. They were afraid that Iran, if they knew the location, would attempt to steal it. That info is on line and easy to access.
he knowingly traded his good name and suffered personal attacks on his integrity for the security of our country. the nation owes him a debt that cannot be repaid. the left can (and will) go to hell.
I was on a jobsite back in the 80`s when B&R dug a transport tunnel on the wrong side of a building, I guess if your building a port the water will keep you on the right side of things:)
Palin has not been destroyed, she has gotten tougher,smarter and will be a force to be reckoned with – no matter if she runs or simply gives us a national voice.
I have a lot of respect for GW. It takes MORE of a man to walk away from a fight than to start or acknowledge one!
[...] UPDATE: Related: America Betrayed President Bush. [...]
As long as a secularized, paganized nation has political parties, among other things, for their gods, scorched-earth, character-assassination politics will be the rule. Wrong god, Demmunists and many Republicans. Government should be a white noise, not one's reason for existing.
I was absolutely astounded not only at how vicious was the eight year attack on Bush but, at election time, how many sheeple had apparently completely bought into all of the fecal matter of the comic-book media. Unfortunately, there was nothing comical about it.
The very word Progressive does not have the same meaning anymore. Yes Teddy Roosevelt was a Progressive and if he were alive today he would be considered right of Attila the Hun. Liberal does not mean the same thing anymore as it once did. Liberals were for more personal freedoms and less government at one time, the exact opposite of today. Conservatives at one time were only for protecting the staus quo and more Government Control of Private Citizens. Why is the Libertarian Party today gaining popularity? It is because they represent the old definition of liberal.
Well said.
I so wish W could have spoken up. But if given the choice between judgment and eloquence, you can be sure of my pick.
W didn't get everything right. He certainly got most of the important things right, though, which is why I too think history will judge him well.
Good points here. Wars and other national emergencies always lead to more centralization of government power, so I'm not sure if W really deserves so much personal opprobrium in this regard.
As for the issue of "betrayal", it's pretty clear that the article isn't talking about insufficient fealty to a feudal lord, but instead about how Americans have, in a way, betrayed themselves. If you prefer to look upon the POTUS as our employee, it's our loss if we fire a manager whose most unpopular decisions are later borne out by events.
I am no fan of Obama, and I remember when BUSH tried ramming though Amnesty for illegals, then " Im going to abandon free market principles to save the free market".
I dont understand why the glorification of Bush. He stabbed this conservative in the back. I voted for him twice, and into his second term, he made me sorry. He did protect the country. That is all he should be given credit for.
Bush and Obama look very much the same to me. Progressives. Just like George Senior.
I appreciate that "Camelot" statement. I wondered, shortly after Princess was elected, if the lamers wouldn't try to Camelot-ize this drooler.
From this point foward, we need to look for REAL conservative leadership. Less government is more government.
If samll business truly is the engine of this economy, then the government needs to cut the ties that bind, and let the free market do what it does.
DId it.
Right, so here's the thing.
Obama's shown that he's keen on Bush's flawed foreign policy. And why shouldn't he be? The Democrats have traditionally been all for an aggressive foreign policy–it fits in comfortably with their aggressive domestic policy, trampling on the rights of individuals and the sovereignty of the states.
What I don't understand is how a site about the problems with big government can so freely offer praise to a big-government president and his wasteful policies. It wasn't good when Bush was preemptively wasting American resources, and it won't be good when Obama does the same thing (hell, he already has, domestically). It wasn't good when the Bush administration was taking morally dubious measures in detaining suspected terrorists without transparency or a trial, and it's no better or worse when Obama does the same thing.
I've no doubt Obama's worse overall as things stand right now (at least Bush's supreme court appointments were better), but Bush was no hero. In fact, I think he stood tall with Lincoln, FDR, and Teddy Roosevelt…as a bad, big-government president who was indifferent to the text of the Constitution.
I miss Tony Snow. RIP.
bush had the house and the senate, and because of his lack of leadership and conservative principles both were lost.
bho is the direct result of w's failures. don't blame me. even though i couldn't stand mccain i campaigned and voted for him. i knew what a disaster the obamamessiah was going to be.
but without W you never would have had O
but who's to blame for O getting elected. The republicans started the out of control spending. O promised change and lied. I couldn't stand mccain but i campaigned and voted for him.
just remember, if the republicans had been loyal to their conservative principles, O never would have gotten elected in the first place
I have never read a single article in which practically every sentence contains either a flat-out lie or misrepresentation of history. What an utter sham of a piece. I don't even know where to begin with this, but in a nutshell, please remember….Hussein does not equal Taliban. Never has, never will. We wouldn't need to be redoubling our efforts to hunt al Qaeda and root out the Taliban had your "visionary" not decided against practically everyone's better judgment to pull troops, supplies, and money out of Afghanistan in the first place in order to wage an inexcusable pre-emptive war on a sovereign nation that had absolutely nothing to do with attacking us (and by the way, there were no WMD, period. Ask those inspectors who were on the ground fulfilling the UN resolutions and had to be yanked out so we could bomb the country). Not only that, but Congress did not vote for war, they voted to give authorization to GWB to wage war as a last resort, when all diplomatic efforts had been exhausted. GWB took that vote and ran with it, against the will of the people.
And, also, it would be nice if, as a journalist, you had some idea how to properly construct a paragraph.
i was to numerous W campaign events for his re-election and he indeed brag about the increased % of home ownership.
the republicans didn't care enough to make a public stink about it either. heck they caved on even bringing it up for a vote because they didn't have the numbers for cloture.
even bill o'reilly said on the factor if any one had brought the issue to him, he would have covered it big time
Finally! Something new and different in the ongoing saga that portrays the struggle of two competing political parties that, despite their differences, work together to completely suffocate any hope of free elections in the United States. Their ability to pull off this massive election fraud stems almost entirely from the windfall of operating in a country where people are so ignorant, complacent, and misinformed about the condition of their collective homestead that they don't even realize that political parties were never even mentioned in the Constitution, much less authorized to DBA (do business as) our representative government. The intended Constitutional Ideal of a Representative as a trustworthy surrogate for the collective demands of The People has been so thoroughly trampled by the fans of the party fight that most, representatives included, don't even understand what it is that representatives are hired to accomplish. Prima evidence of this can be had in almost any vote of the legislature simply by comparing the representative's vote to his party affiliation. As it splits, it splits not by rivalry on principle, nor by confrontation of the better logic, but largely, if not entirely, by party affiliation. Why? Because our representatives aren't concerned with principles, nor the better logic, nor any other element pertinent to the good faith maintenance of The People's homestead. The representatives are concerned with themselves and preserving their party's share of control, and thus their own as well, of the money siphon craftily legislated seamlessly onto The People's collective pant's pocket.
So here we are, reading yet another inspiring essay about how this half of the free election sabotage machine's last crony was so much better than that half's presiding crony and all the while the entire jest of why we talk about anything of government to begin with is completely lost to the fanatic shrieks of our tiny little football brains as they renew over and over again their pledge of allegiance to the half of their choice. Hey geniuses, pay attention. The idea is to to Pledge Allegiance to your fellow countrymen for the purpose of working together to improve your collective homestead and secure it from hostile countries, thieves, tyrants, burglars, illegal invading aliens, terrorists, and saboteurs. The idea is not to Pledge Allegiance to an entity whose primary function is that of enlarging the skim port in your butt pocket. Go back and read your government textbook and, no, you can't watch football instead. It's all together too obvious that you've been watching far too much football already. OK, you can have the score.
Democrats $231,998,434,612
Republicans $216,567,328,743
The People $000,000,000,000
[...] America Betrayed President Bush [...]
I would take President Bush back any day. No one is perfec but. he kept us safe after the Clinton administration let us down by his bad behavior and the plot to attack us was planned for 2 years and not stopped .
What they would not tell you. Only a site did but media ignored this.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25546334
Let me add my voice to those supporting George Bush and, my support I'm proud to say, never wavered. I lost 'friends' over it and would not hesitate to do it again. Half this country wasn't worthy of Bush's leadership and many on the other side, remained far too silent in their approval. Perhaps a harsh assessment but an accurate one.
Then again, which of us has not, feet of clay?
Some sacrifices, like Bush's are so noble that none, save possibly the very youngest, may be said to be truly worthy of that sacrifice.
Oh that's rich! LOL
[...] Making? It’s Not Over Yet… BROWN WON, COAKLEY CONCEDES! Jeffrey Scott Shapiro, Big Government: America Betrayed President Bush Nice Deb: Video: Scott Brown’s Victory Speech + Political Fallout Round-up Ace of Spades HQ: [...]
Oh My! Where to begin? Where is that nut-case Sheehan? John Kerry – John Murtha with their rants on the American Military? These people are elitist, leftist, who think that they should impose European values and culture on us. Didn't our ansestors leave to avoid that? I know mine did. I knew when bho was running that if he won we wre gonna be in BIG trouble. Did people even bother listening to his speeches? "American is the greatest country in the world. Help me change her!" And he's been trying to turn us into a 3rd world country every since and doing a dang good job of it with the aid of polosi, reid, kerry, murtha and don't forget dodd and frank.
I say kick 'em all out and start over!!!
Your suppose to DRINK the Kool-aid not inhale it. Two words oh paranoid one, SEEK THERAPY! P.S atleast President Bush didn't offer Social Security cards to them Oh, thats right your POTUS needs there votes.
[...] Narcissist–Needs Time In The Naughty Blue Chair–Videos Jeffrey Scott Shapiro, Big Government: America Betrayed President Bush Nice Deb: Video: Scott Brown’s Victory Speech + Political Fallout Round-up Ace of Spades HQ: [...]
I didn't expect the media or the Democrats to keep faith with him, even after the vote authorizing force in Iraq, but I was seriously offended and let down by the refusal of his fellow Republicans to stand by him and make the case for what he was doing in Iraq. Instead they scattered like chickens. I can't say that they would have turned the tide of public opinion, but they didn't even try. Since they don't seem to care about acting like a party, by supporting each other and standing together, I don't care about donating to the NRC or their other funding bodies. I'll send money to the candidates I like and ignore the party until it starts acting like one.
If bush would have gone into Iraq claiming that Sadam was commiting human rights violations and slaughtering his own people, I would have totally been supportive.
So what you're saying is you never did any research to see what the media wasn't telling you. Saddam's human rights violations were listed as one of the reasons for invading and toppling his regime.
You also appear to be incapable of accepting the fact that the War on Terror was not solely limited to those who perpetrated 9/11 so stop using the "x had nothing to do with 9/11" bleat as an excuse for why we weren't allowed to knock down the Ba'athists in Iraq.
[...] Narcissist–Needs Time In The Naughty Blue Chair–Videos Jeffrey Scott Shapiro, Big Government: America Betrayed President Bush Nice Deb: Ann Coulter On The Dem Smackdown In MA and Video: Scott Brown’s Victory Speech + [...]
What the heck did you do???
There's a reply like every 5 minutes…
President Bush has gotten on with his life. He doesn't feel he has to defend himself against every single negative thing that's said about him. He's humble enough to realize that the world does not revolve around him. It seems so long ago now. Remember when government used to listen to the people? Even during Bill Clinton's reign – when he went too far left, the people grumbled and voted for a new Congress – he took the hint and brought it back to center, even though that's not necessarily how he believes things should be. Instead, Obummer's administration ridicules and scolds like children.
[...] Circular Firing Squad Over Coakley Loss; Freedom Left Intact Jeffrey Scott Shapiro, Big Government: America Betrayed President Bush Mcnorman’s Weblog: The Perils of Poor Judgment: A Rude Awakening Blue Crab Boulevard: Catch [...]
no, but it is funny- today, anyway…
love the man.
always have and always will.
These are some of the funniest comments I've recently read.
Jim: "he's NOT AN AMERICAN, he's a MUSLIM"
Brown Supporter: "Obama and his group are amateur hour. They prove it daily!"
Kristinb5: "at how unsafe I feel as a citizen of the US right now and I can honestly say that I never felt unsafe for one minute when Bush was in office"
The terrorists would love to see this, they don't even do anything significant for 8 and a half years, and you start shitting yourself just because your leader changed.
HAHAalgoreHAHA: "[bush] KNEW how to deal with maniacal dictator lunatics. "
Is this site a contribution based attempt to take on The Onion?
[...] [...]
Another Native American who feels the same! Excellent!
[...] Slate has a funny article on a guy dedicated to saving Bush’s legacy. He writes pieces for Big Government with titles like “America Betrayed President Bush.” [...]
You are full of bullshit…..
[...] Betrayed President Bush,” Shaprio wrote that “George W. Bush seemed to have an almost mystical understanding of what the American people needed when we needed it most” after 9/11 On FoxNews.com today, Shapiro wished Bush a happy [...]
[...] Betrayed President Bush,” Shaprio wrote that “George W. Bush seemed to have an almost mystical understanding of what the American people needed when we needed it most” after 9/11 On FoxNews.com today, Shapiro wished Bush a happy [...]
[...] Betrayed President Bush,” Shaprio wrote that “George W. Bush seemed to have an almost mystical understanding of what the American people needed when we needed it most” after 9/11 On FoxNews.com today, Shapiro wished Bush a happy [...]
You must be logged in to post a comment.