Pajamas Media

50 Comments

1. majoriot:

While it will be easy to use Bush as a reason for our ills for quite some time, it is certainly not something people look forward to.
Trust me, once the parties are over next Jan. 20th, the hangover will last a looooonnnngg time.

Aug 8, 2008 - 2:55 am 2. Ron:

BDS withdrawal symptoms?? It definitely has more weight than Rosie-O’s premise that extreme heat cannot melt steel.

It wouldn’t surprise me should any planned terrorist attacks occur in the near future that said habits return in a nanosecond i.e. neocons and or the USA will still somehow be responsible. I also cannot see Michael Moore hanging up his BDS/Anti-American/Anti-Corporate shoes anytime soon, how else is he going to make a buck and survive? Surely he knows he could never fund his doomsayer docos and jet-setting lifestyle with govt. assistance and food stamps alone.. and why should he relegate his lifestyle to the common citizen when there’s a huge market of neurotic denial and mass hysteria to bank on?

In any event I agree, there’s the possibility that BDS withdrawal could lead to a new anxiety stricken pill popping generation unlike anything we’ve seen before. Shrinks are probably starring at boom times in their profession after Jan ‘09.

Aug 8, 2008 - 3:04 am 3. barb:

The republicans are still blaming Clinton for everything that is wrong with America, I see no reason why the democrats not do the same for Bush!

Aug 8, 2008 - 3:35 am 4. Bill Perron:

Whiners will always have something to whine about, and someone to whine about, that is what they do, whine.

Aug 8, 2008 - 4:08 am 5. Ed Wallis:

“barb,” I am in no way aware that Republicans blame Bill Clinton “for everything that is wrong with America.”

His IS responsible for lax national security measures which led to 9/11.

His IS responsible for the Chinese obtaining American security information.

…just off the top of my head while sipping morning coffee…

Please direct your discrediting generalizations targeted to appropriate sources (e.g. MoveOnToSocialism.org, etc etc).

Aug 8, 2008 - 4:24 am 6. Broadsword:

Way to go Barb! You are right, including the fak that Clinton is responsible for the fak that all(sic) reelpublicans are still blaming him for everything that is wrong, and all those thin’s that haven’t yet gone wrong. Eevil reelpublicans!!!

Aug 8, 2008 - 4:28 am 7. MarkD:

I can hardly wait for the investigations to continue. The Democrats have controlled both House and Senate for almost two years now. They’ve done nothing, which is good for the country.

Do you like the energy prices we’ve got? Well, it’s not the oil companies stopping us for drilling for oil. Think Social Security and Medicare are headed for trouble? It’s not the insurance companies selling some Ponzi scheme.

I have yet to see any politician say “We try to do too much from Washington and maybe one size doesn’t fit all.”

That command economy didn’t work so well for the Soviet Union, but this time it’ll be different. Or we’ll blame Bush.

Aug 8, 2008 - 5:55 am 8. barb:

Oh Ed, Tuesday or Wednesday was the anniversay of the PDB that was titled Bin Laden determined to strike in America”, you remember, the one Bush ignored. That must have been Clinton’s fault. And didn’t I just read that someone was just arrested for selling secrets to China? Must have been a holdover from the Clinton administration.

Aug 8, 2008 - 5:59 am 9. barb:

Oh Ed, Just this week was the anniversary of the PDB entitles “bin Laden determined to strike in the US” that Bush ignored. I suppose it was Clinton’s fault that Bush did not take action. Perhaps Bush liked this idea because it bolstered his reasons for going into Iraq. And I do believe I just read this past week of someone recently selling China secrets, must have been a holdover from the Clinton Administration. Oh and Bush sold America to the Chinese to fund his war.

Aug 8, 2008 - 6:12 am 10. Dave Jensen:

Way to go barb! It’s that sort of infallible logic that has made the democrats a veritable powerhouse for this election!
I though that after the last election all the moonbats were supposed to move to Canada. What happened?

Aug 8, 2008 - 6:22 am 11. AJ:

They’ll blame McCain. They already are, even though he’s very different from Bush. They’ve already begun to blame the next VP, calling him Cheney. These people are ungrateful, mentally unbalanced and dangerous.

Aug 8, 2008 - 7:08 am 12. Michael:

With a little luck they will have President McCain to hate.

I’m already seeing signs in the making.

Aug 8, 2008 - 7:11 am 13. The Wizard:

While President Bush has not been considered the best of Presidents, I firmly believe that history will have a different view of him than the current left wingnuts and liberal MSM. I don’t understand why people seem to forget this….No one wants to deal with the facts:

George Bush has been in office for almost 8 years. The first six the economy was fine, and then in 2006 the American public voted in a Democratic Congress.

A little over one year ago:
1) Consumer confidence stood at a 2 1/2 year high;
2) Regular gasoline sold for $2.19 a gallon;
3) the unemployment rate was 4.5%.

Since voting in a Democratic Congress in 2006:
1) Consumer confidence plummeted;
2) Gasoline soared to over $4 a gallon;
3) Unemployment is up to 5% (a 10% increase);
4) American households have seen $2.3 trillion in equity value evaporate (stock and mutual fund losses);
5) Americans have seen their home equity drop by $12 trillion dollars;
6) 1% of American homes are in foreclosure.

America voted for change in 2006, and we got it! So why not point fingers at the like so Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. Through their leadership or lack of, they have done more to destroy our enconomy than Bush.

Aug 8, 2008 - 7:22 am 14. Jay:

Clinton should have gone into Iraq the first time they shot at our planes. Iraq surrendered to us during the first gulf war. We didn’t need any more excuses or permission to restart the war. That was Clinton’s war not Bush’s war. Clinton was a disgrace and yes we can blame him for plenty. Bush made mistakes, sure, but Clinton was responsible for those over three thousand deaths. Clinton did nothing but Bosnia and misuse his cigars.

Aug 8, 2008 - 7:23 am 15. misanthropicus:

Good point, and we already have the answer (this applies if, god forbid! Glibama is elected): Why complain? We’re liked again, the global heating is relenting, the price at the pump is exactly what it should be, weather is fairer, crime is lower, everything is perfect, there is no unemployment, wages are right, prices are right, if we need to bomb Iran, that’s the right decision (long avoided by W), no cholesterol, stacking prisoners in Guantanamo is a judicious thing to do, shaking Chavez, ah, those Bush people who gave Chavez fee-pass. Bliss.
For a while, I guess, since a liberal is a liberal not by convictions empirically acquired, but by nature – so, they’ll sooner or later will start carping…

Aug 8, 2008 - 7:40 am 16. ursa major:

The Bush bashing will continue, rest assured. And when McCain defeats the empty suit Obama, the Bush bashing will ramp up to a new ferocity with the cry: “See we told you he’s Bush in disguise.”

Aug 8, 2008 - 7:46 am 17. PhilNY:

Barbs, that’s quite the BDS you have there, acute I would say. Perhaps you’re hoping Barry’s fairy dust will cure your self-inflicted curse?
Admitting you suffer BDS is admirable, always a good start. Not sure if there was an admission but this article definitely touched a nerve. I hope you get help with that, that cursed hate inside will steal all happiness away if untreated.

Also if you think the anal retentives in congress are the answer, then I’m sure you won’t mind waiting in food lines for the basic staples consuming their feel good energy alternatives. Their obstructionism may well appeal to the minds of leftist today but ultimately not the tummy of millions around the world, or the economy closer to home.

Aug 8, 2008 - 7:59 am 18. Saltherring:

Holy cow! that barb can sure deliver a knockout punch….and twice, for sure!

But seriously, as a DOD Program Manager (now retired), I recall a grossly underfunded and demoralized military during the 90’s, as Jimmy Carter II dismantled infrastructure and cut civilian and uniformed manning by literally hundreds of thousands. Intelligence units, training commands and logistics groups were hardest hit. New equipment and spare parts were virtually non-existent. Morale in every Navy Command I worked with was at rock bottom. The average sailor was well aware the contempt the Clintons had for the military. It took years for the Bush II administration to fully reverse course and undo the damage caused by years of Clinton-administration incompetence, neglect and underfunding.

Having twice experienced, during my 33-year career, Democrat administrations hell-bent on dismantling our military infrastructure and readiness, I dread the prospect of an Obama presidency. This globalized, un-American narcissist, coupled with a Pelosi/Reid Congress, could (by design or otherwise) thoroughly compromise our command and defense capabilities within a matter of months. Americans need to stop dreaming about the (taxpayer-sponsored) free stuff and start thinking security….and fast!

Aug 8, 2008 - 8:05 am 19. Jay:

The hard left is planning on trying Bush and Chaney for war crimes.

Aug 8, 2008 - 8:13 am 20. rocketeer:

I’m voting democrat this year, because i want to live in a refrigerator box and ride my bike to work since i won’t be able to pay my mortgage or the undoubtedly $10/gal gas that we’ll be seeing if their “energy” policies are implemented. I also can’t wait to wear my Jimmy Carter cardigan sweater this winter, since I’m not supposed to heat my home anymore. It’s that can’t do attitude that has made this country great!

Gack….

Aug 8, 2008 - 8:25 am 21. Jay:

rocketeer: You can camp out in your refrigerator box next to Al Gore’s new houseboat. Maybe his highness will throw a few scraps your way. You can bath in the warmth of his obese carbon footprint.

Aug 8, 2008 - 8:39 am 22. Jbl:

The Bush bashing will continue as the Dems try Bush and his administration for war crimes and then they’ll involve us with the ICC and get them tried for “Crimes against Humanity” too. They need to do that to keep us distracted from their domestic policies.

Funny, I just read this article in TIME magazine, which says McCain’s ad on Obama is calling Obama the antichrist.

I don’t subscribe to that theory myself, but it is interesting to note that TIME has in the piece identified “OBAMA HATERS”. We haven’t seen that since the press wrote about “CLINTON HATERS.”

I don’t think they’ve identified “BUSH HATERS” once in 8 years. I guess all that hate wasn’t hate. It was patriotic protest.

http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1830590,00.html?xid=rss-topstories

We will miss president Bush’s leadership. What the dems will be doing will not be leadership. But if they try Bush they’re going to be surprised at what it exposes in them.

Aug 8, 2008 - 8:54 am 23. Jbl:

Funny, I just read this article in TIME magazine, which says McCain’s ad on Obama is calling Obama the antichrist.

I don’t subscribe to that theory myself, but it is interesting to note that TIME has in the piece identified “OBAMA HATERS”. We haven’t seen that since the press wrote about “CLINTON HATERS.”

I don’t think they’ve identified “BUSH HATERS” once in 8 years. I guess all that hate wasn’t hate. It was just patriotic protest.

http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1830590,00.html?xid=rss-topstories

We will miss president Bush’s leadership. What the dems will be doing will not be leadership. But if they try Bush for “war crimes” they’re going to be surprised at what it exposes in them. Remember how in 2003 Pelosi was shown waterboarding and wondered if it would be “enough”?

Aug 8, 2008 - 8:56 am 24. Bugs:

How can we, the Bush Haters, be expected to give up bashing the Worst President Ever(tm)? After all, he single-handedly ruined America – the shiny, good America that existed before That Man stole his first election.

Knowing that dissent is the highest form of patriotism, we spoke out again and again even as Bush transformed America into the renegade were-country we now know: as he mangled our Constitution, warping it into some sort of evil Republican grimoire; as he sold our precious freedoms to his fat Skull and Bones, Big Business cronies; as he made us an international human rights pariah by jailing thousands of dissenting brown people; and as he caused one of its most respected journalists to make a complete, booger-eating idiot of himself on national TV. Unfortunately, our stupid, sheep-like fellow-citizens never listened to our warnings – hence the fascist hell-hole we live in today. People really shouldn’t be allowed to vote unless they have bachelors degrees.

Worse still, Bush never really felt our pain the way the Best President Ever(tm) always did. He never once acknowledged our deep, dissenting patriotic hatred of him. He didn’t even try to silence our angry, patriotic dissenting voices with secret wiretaps and his legions of jack-booted thugs. It’s like he didn’t even notice us. How are we supposed to get closure from a guy like that?

Aug 8, 2008 - 9:08 am 25. dynamite:

Re: “Bush haters” vs “Clinton haters” vs “Obama haters”

I searched Google news “All Dates.” Clinton and Bush are more or less matched.

The question, however, is interesting – I just wonder how you could ask it better – specifically, how you could query a search better.

Aug 8, 2008 - 9:21 am 26. dynamite:

If you compare “anti bush” and “anti clinton” however, there are a few orders of magnitude difference. Obama isn’t on the chart, even. No popular “anti Obama” position yet, given that he’s only a candidate, I presume.

Aug 8, 2008 - 9:25 am 27. narciso:

You mean the PDB that excised all the details from the December 1998 one; mentioned Abu Haf al Masri (Mohammed Atef)and Sief al Adel (Mohammed Mokkawi)which we later learn was responsible for the confrontation in Somalia.
It didn’t include the details from the Phoenix memo, outlining the flight training of Hani Hanjour & co. It didn’t mention Al Hazmi and Al Midhar, who were living without subterfuge in
their San Diego home, along with an FBI informant. Or Ziad Jarrah’s presence in Florida,
previously Hamburg. It did not include the BND intercept of Marwan al Shehhi from Yemen back in 2000. So basically there were no leads to follow up.

Aug 8, 2008 - 9:32 am 28. Andrew Ian Dodge:

In the UK after over a decade of Labour (mis)rule they still blame all their problems on “the Tories”. Whenever the government is deep in the sludge they wheel out that doozy.

Aug 8, 2008 - 9:35 am 29. Brad:

Hey there, barb-

Explain Slick Willie’s refusal to take bin Laden when he was being offered for extradition.

Look, the blame for 9/11 falls on those who did it, the f’ing al Qaeda crazy Islamic movement. Clinton’s serious cuts in intel gathering capacity in the nineties wasn’t helpful, but the bastards attacked us, hit us good, and we’ve extracted quite a bit of justifiable revenge. No one saw the method of attack coming. Hindsight’s easy.

Aug 8, 2008 - 10:01 am 30. What Will Libs Cry About? « Conservative Wisdom:

[...] 8, 2008 in UncategorizedTags: Liberals Pam Meister asks us: It’s worse than you think: George W. Bush will be leaving office in mid-January 2009, leaving [...]

Aug 8, 2008 - 10:17 am 31. John Schuh:

O yes, they will continue to beat up on Bush, especially if Obama is in the White House. Anything that goes wrong, it will because of what Bush did nor did not do. If Obama uses the military and it ends in disaster, it will be because Bush wore it out. Any push to implement the Green Agenda will be accompanied by shout that we are starting eight years late and so we must hurry, hurry, hurry to avoid disaster.
Any move to increase domestic production will be shouted down because Bush-Cheny kept alternatives sources from being explored because they were protecting BIG OIL from the loss of its “monopoly.”
We will be subjected to years of compare-contrast as the liberals try to secure their hold on government by casting blame on the Busg Administration.

Aug 8, 2008 - 10:21 am 32. BC:

The difference between Bush-bashing and Clintion-bashing is that there is no doubt (among the well-informed and non-stupid, that is) that Bush has been a wretched, incompetent liar of a President fully deserving of whatever scorn that gets heaped on him, whereas Clinton was merely a disappointment given his talents, with all the complaints and charges against him, including supposedly passing up bin Laden and dismantling the US intel and and such, being no more than parsed, crackheaded, right wing nonsense. Despite the disappointing aspects of him, most notably his womanizing, Clinton was still technically a better President than even Saint Reagan, who oversaw the Iran-Contra mess, supported the then just as murderous Saddam Hussein, oversaw of not encouraged the rise of bin Laden and his likeminded compatriots, gave the CIA a carte blanche for a series of bloody misadventures in Central America (while doing wonders for helping the cocaine traffic to this country), and covertly spying on domestic NGO’s with projects in “unfriendly” countries no matter the poverty and famine issues.

For all the years of you guys calling others “Kool-Aid drinkers,” it’s been much more the case of you maroons using that stuff to wash down your “Freedom Fries”.

Aug 8, 2008 - 1:00 pm 33. RE:

Was it Charles Krauthammer that originally coined the term ‘Bush Derangement Syndrome (BDS)’?

It’s a perfect descriptor for the mental affliction that it is. But it’s not completely new. We saw the same sort of nonsense when Reagan was in office before this disorder was fully classified and named. Once Bush is out of office we’ll see it mutate into a new variant.

Aug 8, 2008 - 1:57 pm 34. L.Carlin:

An Obama presidency coupled with Democrat majorities in the House and Senate will provide the perfect opportunity to resurrect those infamous “show trials” of the 30s.

The Conyers-Kucinich cabal along with and egged on by Ayers,
Wright, Code Pink, Moveon, Kos, Soros, Moore, Sheehan, Mckinney, et. al., will thirst for blood. And they will not be satisfied with the bullet in the back of the neck for Bush, Cheney, Rumsfield, et.al. The Left’s taste for blood will not be sated; indeed, they will ache for more, devouring conservative talk radio, the internet-blogs and any and all who have stood in their way to Marxist power.

And they will turn on their own party’s moderates, as they did with Senator Leiberman. Be very afraid, my friends.

Aug 8, 2008 - 2:33 pm 35. el polacko:

the loons have already transferred their irrational hatreds onto mccain with their ‘mccain=bush’ refrain. .. and if barack is screwing things up, it will still be bush’s fault since The One cannot err. “bush” will always be with us.. or, at least, for another four years.

Aug 8, 2008 - 3:19 pm 36. mjk:

Everytime some friend of mine blames Bush for every little thing wrong with the world, I mock them incessantly for a good ten minutes.

It may be immature, but it shuts them up right quick.

Aug 8, 2008 - 3:25 pm 37. Burning Bush:

The dollar has jumped its highest value in 8 years.
Oil is the lowest since 2006.

His holiness
/Obama has saved us all.

Those three words [off shore drilling] turned the world up side down.

Aug 8, 2008 - 5:05 pm 38. jamico:

mjk, Yes, patriotic protesters are irritating, much like the buzz of an alarm clock. I see you’ve been hitting the ’snooze’ button repeatedly. Eventually that snooze button stops working and you go back into a nice, deep, sleep. When something finally awakens you, it’s with a feeling of panic that you’re very late and there will be hell to pay!

Aug 9, 2008 - 4:17 am 39. Clock is Ticking - Politics:

[...] Clock is Ticking For those who suffer from BDS (Bush derangement syndrome ) and would blame him for everything from global warming, the direction of hurricane Katrina and their toast falling on the floor BUTTERED side down , time is running out . Pajamas Media

Aug 9, 2008 - 1:22 pm 40. Ditto:

This article is attributed to Charlie Reese is a former columnist of the Orlando Sentinel Newspaper, however it should be noted that as far as I know, all emphasis are my own. Said another way, I removed most of the multiple exclamation points, highlighted text, 36 point font sizes and other emphatic formatting because I think the article speaks for itself. On a personal note, the reason I like it is because we can all realize how silly it is to keep bashing Bush or Clinton or whoever and start solving problems. It’s a thought worthy of consideration.

Have you ever wondered why, if both the Democrats and the Republicans are against deficits, WHY do we have deficits?

Have you ever wondered why, if all the politicians are against inflation and high taxes, WHY do we have inflation and high taxes?
You and I don’t propose a federal budget. The president does.
You and I don’t have the Constitutional authority to vote on appropriations. The House of Representatives does.
You and I don’t write the tax code, Congress does.
You and I don’t set fiscal policy, Congress does.
You and I don’t control monetary policy, the Federal Reserve Bank does.

One hundred senators, 435 congressmen, one president, and nine Supreme Court justices: 545 human beings out of the 300 million are directly, legally, morally, and individually responsible for the domestic problems that plague this country.

I excluded the members of the Federal Reserve Board because that problem was created by the Congress. In 1913, Congress delegated its Constitutional duty to provide a sound currency to a federally chartered, but private, central bank.

I excluded all the special interests and lobbyists for a sound reason. They have no legal authority. They have no ability to coerce a senator, a congressman, or a president to do one cotton-picking thing. I don’t care if they offer a politician $1 million dollars in cash. The politician has the power to accept or reject it. No matter what the lobbyist promises, it is the legislator’s responsibility to determine how he votes.

Those 545 human beings spend much of their energy convincing you that what they did is not their fault. They cooperate in this common con regardless of party.

What separates a politician from a normal human being is an excessive amount of gall. No normal human being would have the gall of a Speaker, who stood up and criticized the President for creating deficits. The president can only propose a budget. He cannot force the Congress to accept it.

The Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land, gives sole responsibility to the House of Representatives for originating and approving appropriations and taxes. Who is the speaker of the House? She is the leader of the majority party. She and fellow House members, not the president, can approve any budget they want. If the president vetoes it, they can pass it over his veto if they agree to.

It seems inconceivable to me that a nation of 300 million can not replace 545 people who stand convicted — by present facts — of incompetence and irresponsibility. I can’t think of a single domestic problem that is not traceable directly to those 545 people. When you fully grasp the plain truth that 545 people exercise the power of the federal government, then it must follow that what exists is what they want to exist.

If the tax code is unfair, it’s because they want it unfair.
If the budget is in the red, it’s because they want it in the red.
If the Army & Marines are in IRAQ , it’s because they want them in IRAQ.
If they do not receive social security but are on an elite retirement plan not available to the people, it’s because they want it that way.
There are no insoluble government problems.

Do not let these 545 people shift the blame to bureaucrats, whom they hire and whose jobs they can abolish; to lobbyists, whose gifts and advice they can reject; to regulators, to whom they give the power to regulate and from whom they can take this power. Above all, do not let them con you into the belief that there exists disembodied mystical forces like ‘the economy,’ ‘inflation,’ or ‘politics’ that prevent them from doing what they take an oath to do.

Those 545 people, and they alone, are responsible.

They, and they alone, have the power.

They , and they alone, should be held accountable by the people who are their bosses provided the voters have the gumption to manage their own employees.

We should vote all of them out of office and clean up their mess!

Aug 10, 2008 - 12:45 pm 41. Brian H:

BC;
Actually, GWB has been a superb president. The nation and the world are far better off for his decisions and committed efforts.

Roll that in your cigar and smoke it.

Aug 11, 2008 - 8:06 am 42. Brian:

Bush haters?
I call ‘em S.O.B.’s…
StuckOnBush.

Aug 11, 2008 - 10:55 am 43. Dan Collins:

Is that a real paddle?

Aug 11, 2008 - 5:51 pm 44. BC:

Comments like those from “Brian H” demonstrate the sad state of curious, never mind investigative journalism, and why blog sites will never, ever be any sort of passable substitute. By any measure, Bush has been a colossal failure, especially in regards to terrorism. For one thing, bin Laden won: he and his cohorts took out the World Trade Center and about 3000 lives, shut down the stock exchange and grounded all airline traffic for about a week, spread widespread fear and anxiety, caused permanent delays and hassles at the airport, gave Bush an excuse to erode liberty and privacy, as well implement, courtesy his PNAC-laden staff, the long standing, brain dead PNAC plan to take out Hussein, supposedly because he was having a “destabilizing effect” on the Middle East. The fact that Hussein had squat to do with 9/11 or even al-Qaeda (and no, Stephen Hayes is a liar or a moron or both) was not an issue.

It’s almost 7 years later and bin Laden is still on the loose, worldwide terrorism rate are up, Afghanistan, which was the one good bust that even our worst enemies wouldn’t begrudge us, is not only still a problem, but a growing one, and Iraq….anybody who uses the word “success” with that clusterf*ck of lies, incompetence, death and destruction is probably not going to a happy place in the afterlife.

You can take that cigar and….

Aug 11, 2008 - 10:24 pm 45. RPF:

BC,

Though I have always voted Democrat (since Carter), however I am one of those Democrats that voted for Bush this last election, I will also be one who votes for McCain this time. I fully plan to vote Democrat again in the future when fellow Democrats like you, Harry Reid and the rest stop treating political opponents like President Bush as if they were the cause of all ill in this world and the number one major enemy to America.

You say it’s almost “7 long years and Bin Laden is still on the loose” as a means to belittle Bush. You say it not out of concern but as an insult and political hammer to score points? Does this show people sober mindedness and evidence that we Democrats are Security minded and get the WOT? I say it has been 7 long years that we haven’t been attacked, something all people on both sides of the aisle predicted would happen. You show little insight to what the War on Terror is all about. It isn’t about revenge it is about Security, I tell you the glass is half full routines on everything President Bush touches are tiresome and grow old and makes us Democrats appear as if we root for his failure and fear successes. Sure, we Democrats will continue to poll better on most issues then Republicans but we will in dangerous times continue to lose the Presidency because they show such a lack of understanding on issues such as the War on Terror.

Remember Clinton won during times of supposed peace after the fall of the Soviet Empire, most people get it, yes they are tired of Iraq and think there have been costly mistakes, they don’t like the risks Bush has taken, but they understand the purpose and the benefits if successful, don’t mistake this for being anti-War. They know we Democrats have shown little faith in the outcome, little faith in the surge, yet the surge is working. They know we Democrats are left with arguing about the costs in terms of money, human lives, etc, which are all very legitimate mind you, but we have also once shown the populace once again they have cause to doubt our will (Democrats) on Security issues.

For us Democrats this is Vietnam, not for Republicans. This is our test and if we Democrats continue to behave as we are, we will once again lose all credibility for a whole new generation on Security issues. I never voted for Reagan I now understand why many Democrats did, this is why may will vote for McCain.

Aug 12, 2008 - 7:10 am 46. ProgMeister:

I could go on, but my space is limited

not limited enough, though …

Aug 12, 2008 - 12:49 pm 47. BC:

“I say it has been 7 long years that we haven’t been attacked.”

Tell that to the parents of all the Americans that have died or have been badly wounded in Iraq. That 1993 World Trade Center bombing killed six people and injured 1,042. In 1998, the terrorist bombings at the U.S. embassies in Africa killed 12 Americans and injured 7. The 2000 attack on the USS Cole in Yemen killing 17 and injured 39. In contrast, on Bush’s watch, 3000 got killed on 9/11, and in Iraq the count so far is: 4139 American soldiers killed, 30,324 wounded; 500+ US contractors killed; and 129 journalists killed, 85 by murder and 44 by acts of war, including 14 by US forces. Best estimates of Iraqi casualties put them at at least 1 million.

If you voted for Bush in 2004, you were an easily suckered fool; if you to this day think that was the right thing to do, you are hopelessly and inexcusably too incompetent and uninformed to go anywhere near a voting booth come November; and if you’re planning on voting for McCain, then you’re also planning on continuing with the degradation of US strength, integrity, influence and prestige that Bush started.

Sorry, but that is what it is.

Aug 12, 2008 - 5:14 pm 48. RPF:

To the above I can only say that the 3000 who died on 911 weren’t killed by Bush and certainly weren’t his fault, unless of course you believe it was an “inside job” like many irrational people on the far left believe. The security blunders started a long time ago way before Bush and again, Bush isn’t the enemy and I simply disagree on your ascribing blame in the manner you do. Why not add Waco, Somalia, Oklahoma City, Ruby Ridge or whatever fits your fancy to Clinton’s list? Because you aren’t rational about this, and despite your declaration that I am “hopelessly and inexcusably too incompetent and uninformed to go anywhere near a voting booth come November”, I say we are both rational enough to vote, though I certainly believe I will accept whatever outcome this November, win or lose better than you will.

Aug 12, 2008 - 10:08 pm 49. BC:

To RPF: Did I say Bush killed those 3000 on 9/11? No. You made the comment “I say it has been 7 long years that we haven’t been attacked,” and simply put it into the context of the consequences of Bush’s actions (and/or inactions — let’s not forget there are indications there were a lot of screw-ups in the handing of pre-9/11 intel as well.)

The point is that you Bush defenders are essentially on crack philosophically, ethically, and factually. Iraq is going to be such a long term shame to this country, and that is a situation where the blood is all over Bush’s hands. The number of Iraqi civilian casualties is of particular national disgrace and the source of the most cynical, disingenuous lies, as well as outright denial by the bulk of the American population, especially those on the right. Yeah, we had 3000 people killed on 9/11, but that’s chump change compared to what the Iraqis have suffered since — the *lowest* numbers (from iraqbodycount.org, which Bush’s people have been quitely referencing) have them at about 90,000, while the more comprehensive and realistic surveys and samplings have them at over a million. And bear in mind that Iraq had NOTHING to do with 9/11 or bin Laden’s group. If Bush needed to invaded some other country aside from Afghanistan, it should have been Iraq’s enemy, Iran — the evidence was pretty clear that al-Qaeda and their Kurdish buds, Ansar al-Islam, were getting help from Iran, and NOT Iraq. Maybe there was a typo in the memo, eh?

With the US mainstream media so weakened by corporate control and bloggers serving up mostly dopey opinions, rumor and crap, it’s hard to be optimistic that there will be that many smart, well-informed votes made this coming September. But I can accept it — it already happened in 2004 after all….

Aug 13, 2008 - 5:51 am 50. RPF:

You regard the American 3000 as chump change compared to what Iraqis have suffered and then add that at least 90,000 dead in Iraq since we invaded, you make the predictable omission of the multiple times 90,000 tortured and killed under Saddam during a similar period of time. Of course this isn’t your concern and focus, Bush the enemy is. Where does your concern take you, content with what was happening to the Iraqis before, or just blaming the US? Is this humanitarian? Maybe you can point more and more useless fingers at the US but when someone like President Bush at least has the guts to do something and despite mistakes, on average or “technically” as you might say, no worse than any other War, he has made things measurably better for the Iraqis then pre-Saddam. You argue as if the people would be better off with Saddam, yes that is what you are arguing because that is the way it would be.

These people of Iraq have been saved and are clearly better off now than before. How better off where the Vietnamese, Cambodians and Laotians when we prematurely washed our hands of Vietnam? One can argue whether we should have gone in to begin with but that point is mute, trying to reverse history always leads to worse failures, we were in Vietnam, we are in Iraq, and we have responsibilities. What would it have been like if one of the people most politically responsible for this bailing of responsibilities had become President (KERRY)? Like I said this is a test for the left, not for the right and I don’t care how much you focus on what you think are indisputable failures, the left is failing the test even worse. We are in Iraq and the left offers to compound the failures, what are the solutions from here out? This is why the public, stupid or not, in the end don’t trust the left on such matters. By the lefts standards every War where we didn’t cut and run would be was a colossal failure riddled with unforgivable errors by the Commander and Chief… well clearly war is a failure of mankind but as long as there are humans we will have them. Liberals act as if War is an option we can always negotiate away and while you navel gaze the world moves on and shit happens, like Georgia.

Concerning Russia’s invasion of Georgia I hear Barak say “both sides better be careful” he then sticks his finger in the wind and revises his statement. Does he have a core belief or are his true beliefs masked because they are unacceptable, especially on Security matters, or does his flip flopping on such issues indicate he is less prepared to lead? This guy didn’t even have the judgment to get the hell away from Jeremiah Wright and a host of other nutcases, was his association with them due to cynical needs for street cred among blacks, money, or does he actually believe these things? All point to deep flaws. I voted for Hillary and would of supported her in the general election but in no way would vote for Barak.

You can lay 9/11 at Bush’s feat all you want but shit happens and we all argued about what to do after 9/11. The whole Congress, Democrat and Republican decided what to do and the Democrats did everything they could at first to give tepid support, then two faced support (I voted against it before I voted for it) to downright undermining the process they collectively voted to support. They can’t even admit the level of success the surge has attained because they are so politically committed to its failure. Again this is a test for the left not the right. Once the debate has ended and we have made our choice, we went into Iraq with overwhelming Congressional support. The left talks about concern for human rights yet turn a blind eye to the facts when politically expedient. You did it in ascribing Iraqis plight to Bush without acknowledging their Saddam days of a terror as being much worse, it was also done when the left callously ignored the consequences and followed Kerry’s dimwitted pronouncement that there would be no genocide when we cut support to Vietnam, tell this to the Cambodians, Laotian and Vietnamese.

The left loves to criticize action, yes War is hell but you have only bickering to offer. Barak’s “we’ll sit down and talk to the tyrants” is a joke and people know it. Barack’s “both sides should be careful” is also joke and people know it. He should win in a landslide but if he doesn’t don’t fall into your people are stupid routine as such arrogance is ugly, your arguments are one sided but then again you know this. You are indeed everything you project upon those you demean. Like the rest of the left, you need to learn to accept disagreement as something less then sinister, and also with more grace.

Aug 13, 2008 - 8:44 am

Write a Comment

Name:	(required, displayed)
Email:	(required, not publicized)
URL:	(optional, displayed)
Comments: