Bush-Hatred: Defining Idea of the American Left?
You’d think that with George W. Bush’s departure from the political stage, those on the left who spent the better part of the past eight years seething with contempt for the man while he was chief executive of these United States would be delighted to see the end of his political career.
Yet, they’re obsessed with the man in a manner reminiscent of a man spurned by a lover who rejected him. Years after the break-up, he continues to rant on and on (and on and on) about his ex’s faults.
I mean, if the guy were so bad, shouldn’t he be grateful the relationship is over?
Not only did the immediate past president provided exemplary cooperation with his successor in the transition (the then-President-elect said he “provided invaluable assistance” to his team), but he has refrained from criticizing his successor. He has done more than make himself scarce, he’s become silent on matters of state. Classy that, both the smoothness of the transition and the silence of his early retirement.
He’s gone now, yet all too many of his critics can’t won’t let go of their resentment. In a line in a recent comment, one of our readers revealed the depth of that resentment. He has decided that since I have called the former president “decent,” I can’t possibly have criticized him. (That should cheer my Dad ’cause that makes him a perfect father; none of his children ever faulted him. While my siblings and I all consider my Dad is a great man, remarkably decent and good-hearted, we have criticized him at various times in our lives, especially during our adolescence.)
In response to my post on how W was classier and less divisive than his successor, this reader wrote, “If you really were critical, and we both know that you weren’t, you’d be able to recognize that Bush is neither good nor decent.” It’s not enough to criticize the guy, you have to believe he was a bad man.
Well, by Levi’s standard, then, Obama has never criticized Bush. Just before the inauguration, the then-president-elect said that he thought Bush was a “good man.”
What is it about such people that they can’t find a single thing to praise about W? Even his Democratic successor has praised him (even as recently as last night). Why can’t they let go of their resentment? Why do they insist that your criticism is legitimate only if you hate the guy?
No wonder they can’t stand Ann Althouse. She isn’t sufficiently anti-Bush for their taste.
64 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
GPW, with all due respect, nobody else really give’s a rat’s rectum what Farva thinks. He’s just the latest in a string of Johnny-one-note “Bush sucks! Republicans suck! Democrats are teh awesome!” mindless drones of the gay left.
Yeah, we can shake our heads in dismay at their shallow, one-dimensional view of the world, but I don’t think their psychological disorder (pathological obsession with Bush) is anything we can do anything about. Laugh at them, I guess. But Hating Bush keeps Farva… and the rest of the collective… warm at night, and they’re not gonna give that up. Like someone once said, you can’t reason someone out of what he wasn’t reasoned into to begin with.
Comment by V the K — April 30, 2009 @ 10:18 pm - April 30, 2009
The more they hate President Bush the more conservatives realize his greatness. IMHO, President Bush has with more courage in his little finger than any of the democRat’s last 3 (Obummer, Bill Jefferson Clinton (aka BJ) & the Father of Islamo Fascism Jimma Carter).
In The Conservative Underground (Bush Group) membership has more than doubled since mid March when I started tracking Group Memberships. It was 260 and now at 559 and membership in TCU has doubled as well. It was 2700 when I joined back in March and now well over 6000 and continuing to grow.
Also, the membership in another site honoring President Bush’s legacy has picked up.
Comment by EDinTampa — April 30, 2009 @ 10:20 pm - April 30, 2009
What is it about such people that they can’t find a single thing to praise about W?
Look man, in 2003 I was an apolitical 19 year old that supported the invasion of Iraq because I was mad about 9-11 and knew from my dad’s military experience in the Middle East that Saddam was a bad guy. I was George Bush’s to lose, and guess what? He lost me. And he didn’t lose me because of the media, and he didn’t lose me because I was indoctrinated by professors, he lost me because he blew it in Iraq. And he blew it for stupid reasons, because he was lazy, and arrogant, and careless, and dismissive, and corrupt, and incurious, and insincere. And it’s apparent that the those qualities that made the Iraq war such a disaster contributed to the other disasters that manifested themselves over the course of his administration. I can’t find a single thing to praise him about because there simply isn’t a single thing.
You know how a political party loses a 19 year old forever? You make him feel smarter than the guy that you elect President. I don’t care that you don’t think you were lied to, I know when I’ve been lied to, and I don’t need you to validate it for me. I’m looking at it like this; if you could excise the Bush administration from recorded history, there would have been no 9-11, there would have been no wars in Iraq or Afghanistan, there wouldn’t have been an embarrassingly poor response to Hurricane Katrina, there wouldn’t have been this enormous financial collapse, and the United States wouldn’t have lost its reputation and moral authority around the world. If all those things not happening meant that Saddam was still playing king of the desert a half a world a way, I’d take that trade in a heartbeat.
The jerk didn’t even get the most votes. It’s like an alternate history – Marty McFly going back to 1985 only to find that Biff has married his mom and is running Hill Valley. It didn’t have to be this way.
Uh… what were we talking about again?
Comment by Levi — April 30, 2009 @ 10:22 pm - April 30, 2009
awww we lost Levi because he was naive. Now I understand.
Comment by Gene on Pennsylvania — April 30, 2009 @ 10:26 pm - April 30, 2009
I guess my view of Bush is a lot less simplistic than Farva’s. I do despise the man… I think he was a mediocre president. I also think he’s part of an out-of-touch elite that has no clue what life is like for a real American. The same think is true of Barack Obama, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Arlen Specter, John McCain, Karl Rove, and most any other big name politician you can name.
Bush claimed he stood for a lot of ideals… like national security, like free markets, … that were poorly reflected in his policies. But though I despise Bush personally, I still believe in capitalism, and I still think the USA is a great country worth a vigorous national defense; all ideas explicitly rejected by the Obamacrats.
This idea that because one hates Bush personally, one should run to the other side and embrace statism, appeasement, and loathing of the United States strikes me as infantile.
Comment by V the K — April 30, 2009 @ 10:42 pm - April 30, 2009
I guess my view of Bush is a lot less simplistic than Farva’s. I do despise the man… I think he was a mediocre president. I also think he’s part of an out-of-touch elite that has no clue what life is like for a real American. The same think is true of Barack Obama, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Arlen Specter, John McCain, Karl Rove, and most any other big name politico you can name.
Bush claimed he stood for a lot of ideals… like national security, like free markets, … that were poorly reflected in his policies. But though I despise Bush personally, I still believe in capitalism, and I still think the USA is a great country worth a vigorous national defense; all ideas explicitly rejected by the Obamacrats.
This idea that because one hates Bush personally, one should run to the other side and embrace statism, appeasement, and loathing of the United States strikes me as infantile.
Comment by V the K — April 30, 2009 @ 10:43 pm - April 30, 2009
We won the war in Iraq. It tool a while, there were successes and failures along the way. We now have an allie in Iraq against extremists in the Arab and muslim world. America freed 50 million people from tyranny. I feel good about that. America suffered 4,278 dead in Iraq. 50 since President Obamas Inauguration. A horrible loss. In WWII we lost 406,000 dead and another 600,000 wounded to free Europe and Asia from tyrants. A horribe loss by our parnets and grand parents generation.
The response to Katrina was horrible. Mostly by the local governments who should have known better and prepared better instead of waiting around for federal help. Florida which had many more and severe hurricanes is far more prepared. The feds blew it though for relying on a Democrat Mayor and Democrat Governor and have learned from that mistake. I think for probably another 10 years no polititian will forget the mistakes of Katrina and will be super prepared. But trust me, memories will fade and another lesson will have to be learned in time.
It is comical at times. Young liberals have all the answers. If America had not responded to Sadaam and he had a nuclear weapon to destroy Israel or choke off the oil routes from the middle east. They would have been a back seat driver and wondered why. Wondered why gasoline cost $10 a gallon and the US economy blew up, while they were graduating from college. They might have asked why we didn’t do more to save the last 7 million jews in Israel from destruction. All after the fact, of course. This Bush hatred will all evaporate if America is attacked during an Obama or subsequent administrations time in office. FDR and Bush 43 served when we were attacked. Everyone arguing they have better answers to those challenges are arrogant and simple minded. When you are in the middle of it, you don’t know when the next attack is coming. We all expected it within days. Obama can bring down the barriers, he can loosen the chains on the gates, he can insist on a kinder gentler CIA. It is his right as President. We should pray he isn’t naive too. We should pray 3000, 30,000 or 300,000 don’t have to pay for his mistakes.
Comment by Gene on Pennsylvania — April 30, 2009 @ 10:46 pm - April 30, 2009
Levi says: …I’m looking at it like this; if you could excise the Bush administration from recorded history, there would have been no 9-11, there would have been no wars in Iraq or Afghanistan, there wouldn’t have been an embarrassingly poor response to Hurricane Katrina, there wouldn’t have been this enormous financial collapse, and the United States wouldn’t have lost its reputation and moral authority around the world.
So if Gore had won in 2000, 9/11 attacks & Katrina would not have happened? Is that what you are saying? Is this what they are teaching you in school? You should reimburse your parents if they paid for that brilliant logic.
Comment by EDinTampa — April 30, 2009 @ 10:55 pm - April 30, 2009
#5: V: well said.
It’s one thing to dislike (or despise) a politician; it’s another thing entirely to let that dislike metastasize into a hatred of the country, its culture, values, traditions, and citizens.
Many on the left have done just that: they cheer on anything detrimental to the “American Idea” and they absolutely loathe the commoners that, in their opinion, are just too stupid to know what’s good for them.
Conservatives make their share of eye-rolling statements from time to time but for undiluted venom, I look to the left.
Bush was no conservative but if he didn’t exist, the left would simply designate another Emmanuel Goldstein to hate. It’s in their nature.
Comment by SoCalRobert — April 30, 2009 @ 11:01 pm - April 30, 2009
Levi, I was right about one thing; I had guessed you were in your 20s. Your protestations notwithstanding, you were too much influenced by your peers and professors. Someone needs an education in liberty.
Comment by GayPatriotWest — April 30, 2009 @ 11:03 pm - April 30, 2009
GPW: Did you just attempt to define the entire “Left”, and this justify all of your prejudices/opinions, from one commenter?
The more they hate President Bush the more conservatives realize his greatness. But… But.. But according to all of the other conservative websites, Bush was a terrible conservative. He embraced big spending and big government, mismanaged two wars, supported a Federal Marriage Amendment (a clear violation of federalist principles), and so on. The GOP hasn’t made any bones about this since his term ended. So which is it? Was he just so dreamy or was he a horrible conservative?
Comment by torrentprime — April 30, 2009 @ 11:15 pm - April 30, 2009
Torrentprime, the problem here is that you think because you worship your Obama and cannot find a single thing wrong with him, you assume that everyone else has the same issues that you do.
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — May 1, 2009 @ 12:10 am - May 1, 2009
Levi, are you still 19? I mean, you are one of the *most naive* leftists I have ever seen out here on GayPatriot. You swallow every single Democrat / Left talking point blindly, hook, line and sinker. You couldn’t care less about the facts. You are incredibly naive.
And yet he (or his staunch support of our military) won the Iraq war, when Democrats were ready to declare defeat. Imagine that.
Levi, I take back my “Are you 19?” question. Let me change it to: “Are you 12?” Because… you *seriously* want to believe that your truly extreme hatred of Bush, and truly extreme blind support of the Democrats, is all about your twinges of disappointment over that one issue? Only a 12-year-old approaches politics in that manner.
One of the single stupidest, most ignorant things I have ever heard anyone say on GayPatriot. Levi, do any of these ring a bell?
- USS Cole
- Khobar Towers
- East African embassy bombings
- the FIRST World Trade Center bombing, in 1993
- Somalia 1993
- Lebanon 1984
- Iran 1980
9-11 was building for years, Levi. Years. Bush was in office for seven months and Congress hadn’t even finished confirming his appointees yet. You *seriously* think that Bush caused 9-11? Shockingly stupid! Shocking ignorant! Not only wrong, but shockingly juvenile!
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — May 1, 2009 @ 12:11 am - May 1, 2009
I don’t care that you don’t think you were lied to, I know when I’ve been lied to, and I don’t need you to validate it for me.
Is anyone else amused by the sight of Levi, who makes excuses for every single documented lie of Obama’s presented to him, suddenly develop an aversion to lying?
You know how a political party loses a 19 year old forever? You make him feel smarter than the guy that you elect President.
Considering I have yet to meet a 19-year-old who wasn’t convinced that they knew better than every other adult out there, that’s hardly a convincing argument. Especially when said 19-year-old makes it obvious that he’s never worked, never held a job, never run a business, and is still being claimed as a dependent on someone else’s taxes and health insurance.
Levi doesn’t care about taxes because he doesn’t pay them, just like the vast majority of Obama voters. He demands more government spending because that’s on what he lives, like the vast majority of Obama voters. He’s a welfare child who is dependent on the government tit to suckle.
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — May 1, 2009 @ 12:16 am - May 1, 2009
Farva is a 9-11 troofer? Who knew?
Comment by V the K — May 1, 2009 @ 12:20 am - May 1, 2009
awww we lost Levi because he was naive. Now I understand.
Wake up, smart guy. You’re losing everyone.
Comment by Levi — May 1, 2009 @ 12:21 am - May 1, 2009
Levi, I was right about one thing; I had guessed you were in your 20s. Your protestations notwithstanding, you were too much influenced by your peers and professors. Someone needs an education in liberty.
Hahaha. An education in liberty? What the hell is that supposed to mean? Didn’t get this from my peers or professors either, buddy, guess again.
And before you squirm away, I’d really like to know what the difference between ‘Reagan conservatism’ and ‘compassionate conservatism’ is in terms of deficit spending. Come on GayPatriotWest, if I’m some 20 year old hollow shell filled with nothing but the whispered propaganda of my ‘peers and professors,’ why do I feel like I’ve got you on the ropes?
Comment by Levi — May 1, 2009 @ 12:32 am - May 1, 2009
Farva is a 9-11 troofer? Who knew?
Hardly. It’s just that 9-11 was not an inevitable event that definitely would have occurred no matter who was the President, that’s all. If we’d had a Lincoln or FDR caliber President (*cough* Al Gore *cough*) in office instead of one of the stupidest men in the history of the country, don’t you think things could have turned out differently?
Comment by Levi — May 1, 2009 @ 12:41 am - May 1, 2009
That’s rich. BTW, a most kids grow out of their superiority complex by your age.
BTW, you do know that history goes beyond the day you were born, right?
Comment by ThatGayConservative — May 1, 2009 @ 12:47 am - May 1, 2009
You mean Algore who put together a plan to revamp airline & airport security and then shelved it once the airlines made a $500,000 dontaion to the DNC?
I’d like to see your rational for that asininity.
BTW, you’re getting stupider by the post.
Comment by ThatGayConservative — May 1, 2009 @ 12:50 am - May 1, 2009
You have no education in Civics. Got it.
Prefers Nazi wannabe who slaughtered millions of his own people, responsible for the starvation of 500,000 children, financed suicide bombers and called for attacks on Americans and American interests. Got it.
Don’t forget, Levi. Liberals were for the war before they were against it.
Comment by ThatGayConservative — May 1, 2009 @ 12:58 am - May 1, 2009
Come on GayPatriotWest, if I’m some 20 year old hollow shell filled with nothing but the whispered propaganda of my ‘peers and professors,’ why do I feel like I’ve got you on the ropes?
Probably because your education up until now has been based less on making sure you learned anything and more on protecting your self-esteem by rewarding whatever statement you make, regardless of how stupid or contradictory it is. In your world, everyone else is always wrong and you’re always right, even if you are whining about Bush allegedly lying in one breath and excusing Obama’s demonstrated lying in the next.
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — May 1, 2009 @ 1:05 am - May 1, 2009
And before you squirm away, I’d really like to know what the difference between ‘Reagan conservatism’ and ‘compassionate conservatism’ is in terms of deficit spending.
And once again, the silly child demonstrates the incapability of his parents and professors by claiming that deficits are always bad, but then insisting that Obama’s deficits, more than four times the size of any before them, are always good.
There’s a reason the child demands welfare and higher taxes; he lives off the former and doesn’t pay the latter. Sort of like Obama’s aunt, the illegal-immigrant criminal who doesn’t pay taxes, but who gets cheap housing, free healthcare, a no-show government jobs, and welfare checks fat enough to allow her to make illegal campaign contributions to Obama and the Obama Party.
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — May 1, 2009 @ 1:12 am - May 1, 2009
Well Dan, I finally found one.
http://www.gaypatriot.net/2005/05/14/the-presidents-failure-to-follow-the-gippers-vision-of-federalism/#more-288
A whole post dedicated to ‘The President’s failure to follow the Gipper’s vision of federalism.’ You even mentioned his spending:
And while they’re at it, they should also make sharper cuts in domestic spending.
Damn, that is scathing. I guess you told me. I look at that 14-word sentence, and I look at the tea party movement, and all I can do is marvel at the blinding consistency of it all. If that ain’t a perfectly appropriate proportionate response, well I just don’t know what is!
[Levi, I devoted a whole post to finding such links. There's more than just one post and more that just fourteen words. What does it matter that it's not scathing? It's there. Have you shown me where, in his campaigns, W promised to cut spending as Obama did? --Dan]
Comment by Levi — May 1, 2009 @ 1:58 am - May 1, 2009
I guess you told me. I look at that 14-word sentence, and I look at the tea party movement, and all I can do is marvel at the blinding consistency of it all.
Considering that you denied that sentence ever existed in the first place, all you’re trying to do is avoid taking responsibility for your lying and slandering GPW.
Typical of an outmatched child who’s on the ropes and is trying to squirm away from the fact that he supports lies and “torture” when Obama practices them. Next he’ll be telling us how paying taxes is our patriotic duty while he excuses the fact that Obama’s Cabinet and Congressional leadership don’t pay them, or how he supports upholding the law except when it comes to giving Obama Party donors like Obama’s aunt welfare, cheap housing, and free healthcare at the expense of legal taxpaying Americans…..
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — May 1, 2009 @ 2:14 am - May 1, 2009
[Levi, I devoted a whole post to finding such links. There's more than just one post and more that just fourteen words. What does it matter that it's not scathing? It's there. Have you shown me where, in his campaigns, W promised to cut spending as Obama did? --Dan]
I’m just wondering why in his fifth year in office, Bush’s spending only earned a handful of quiet, polite murmurs, while in fewer than three months, Obama’s spending has generated tea parties and Glenn Beck specials and dozens of blog posts per day. The enormous chasm dividing the severity of those two responses leaves me with the impression that fiscal responsibility and big spending isn’t something that the conservative movement genuinely cares about, at least not until it can be used as a weapon when you’re in the minority. You guys only seem to have principles when you’ve had your power taken away.
And if your contention is that Bush didn’t campaign on spending cuts, the fact that he was nominated and voted for by the conservative movement only compromises your credibility that much more. How can you justify holding someone you didn’t support to a different standard than someone you did?
Comment by Levi — May 1, 2009 @ 4:19 am - May 1, 2009
Levi, Levi, Levi, you’re really grasping at straws. All you need do is take a gander at this graph. Compare the size of deficits.
It’s like comparing a guy who has a few drinks too many to a guy who has a few cases too many.
Bush overspent, but Obama’s overspending makes Bush look like a rank amateur. And recall, Obama ran for office promising a “net spending cut.” Did W do the same?
Levi, how many times do I have to tell you that I criticized W for overspending? And now, he was not nominated by the conservative movement. That movement doesn’t nominate presidential candidates.
You won’t acknowledge it, but I do hold him to a higher standard and did say on this very blog, since you’ve been commenting, that maybe we should have done more to criticize his spending.
So, what that we didn’t criticize him hard enough? Does that make Obama’s spending any less outrageous?
Do you defend Obama’s spending? So, please show me where W proposed cutting spending as Obama did. K?
And look, Levi, I know I’m not going to get you to acknowledge the sincerity of my concerns. You’re just not interested. You’d rather attack than enage, but I’ve said that before. And not just about you.
Why must you constantly belittle the blogger at a site you visit more regularly than its owner? Why are you so eager to ignore evidence and prove us hypocrites? Well, at least you make this endeavor more entertaining.
Comment by GayPatriotWest — May 1, 2009 @ 4:35 am - May 1, 2009
Levi, if we’re so wrong, please explain how Chairman Obama’s spending like a drunken Marxist is such a great idea. You’re hostile to anyone daring to demand his accountability, why don’t you tell us why he’s above it?
Can you defend the massive spending or not?
Comment by ThatGayConservative — May 1, 2009 @ 5:04 am - May 1, 2009
Well lets see,
So far in this thread alone, we’ve Levi:
Admitting he’s a 9/11 truther
Admitting that he doesn’t understand the elections process (nothing new, since he doesn’t understand the constitution)
Admitting that despite, by every measurable standard, President Bush is smarter than Al Gore (scholastic, professional, oh, and having President in front of his name) he believes that Al Gore magically could have prevented 9/11. Even though he’s admitted previously that it was the ‘Gorlick wall’ that prevented sharing of information.
He’s right about one thing. If we’d had President Gore, it would have been different.
After the World Trade Centre LA would have been hit and President Gore would have been busy trying to talk to the ‘Moderate Taliban’ to stop Al Quaida from killing American citizens.
But hey, KSM wouldn’t have water poured in his face.
Comment by The_Livewire — May 1, 2009 @ 8:11 am - May 1, 2009
LOL @ Levi
He blew it? Saddam is gone. Iraq is a functioning democracy and an ally of the US. There has never in the history of the United States been a war of comparable size or duration in which fewer lives were lost and fewer mistakes made.
Bush “lost” you because you are an historically ignorant, easily manipulated BOOB.
Comment by American Elephant — May 1, 2009 @ 8:12 am - May 1, 2009
Guys, I’m calling the fight.
Let’s get some ice on Levi’s eye.
Best wishes,
-MFS
Comment by MFS — May 1, 2009 @ 8:16 am - May 1, 2009
Oh and I should ad, he accomplished all of that, while the treasonous Democrats were doing everything in their power, including leaking National security secrets, publicly declaring the war “lost” and the surge “a failure” before the troops were even all in theater and trying to convince the American people the President lied when he came to conclusions that are exactly the same as the conclusions they independently reached themselves and are on the public record both supporting and voting for.
Were president Bush FDR, Democrats would not be controlling congress and the white house, they would be on trial and in prison for treason. Precisely where a great many of them belong.
Comment by American Elephant — May 1, 2009 @ 8:29 am - May 1, 2009
About the only thing Algore would have done is to demand that we all plant trees to offset the carbon footprints of the hijacked planes and the debris from the demolished buildings.
What’s more, I have no doubt there’d still be a big ass hole in the middle of Manhattan 8 years later for Chairman Obama to fly around.
Comment by ThatGayConservative — May 1, 2009 @ 9:03 am - May 1, 2009
If you take Farva at his word, (I don’t) then what he describes as his transformation is even more pathetic and deluded. It amounts to, “Bush did *something* I disagreed with, so now, I oppose *everything* he allegedly stands for. Also, I am going to disengage my rational mind embrace every negative stereotype, every conspiracy theory, every Keith Olberman rant that makes Bush look like the worst person in the world without any kind of critical analysis whatsoever. I will also wholeheartedly embrace and defend the agenda of his adversaries… even if I know it’s bad policy… just because that’s how much I hate him.”
That’s effed up right there. No different than Andrew Sullivan though, I guess.
A person who possesses the reason and maturity Farva clearly lacks can disagree with Bush about the war, or his conduct of the war without becoming a ranting Keith Olbermann clone, embracing conspiracy theories that the war was fought to enrich Dick Cheney, or becoming a neo-Marxist Obamacrat.
Comment by V the K — May 1, 2009 @ 9:41 am - May 1, 2009
I have no doubt there’d still be a big ass hole in the middle of Manhattan 8 years later for Chairman Obama to fly around.
And probably several more in other cities.
The main thing that would have been different under Gore is that if he had used the same or harsher interrogation techniques than were used under Bush, no one would have been calling it “torture.”
Just like the left never complained about rendition when Clinton was doing it, or eavesdropping when Clinton was doing it (“Echelon”), or bombing c-i-v-i-l-i-a-n population centers as part of a “war of choice” in Yugoslavia… like Clinton did.
Comment by V the K — May 1, 2009 @ 9:43 am - May 1, 2009
Thank God there’s no word on Farva’s “milky loads”, or whatever the hell it was.
Comment by ThatGayConservative — May 1, 2009 @ 10:36 am - May 1, 2009
And anywhere Algore happens to be standing. BOOSH!!!
Comment by ThatGayConservative — May 1, 2009 @ 10:38 am - May 1, 2009
Thank you for *THAT* imagery. Got any brain-bleach?
Comment by V the K — May 1, 2009 @ 10:40 am - May 1, 2009
GPW – Its funny that here you rail against “Bush Hatred†yet a few posts below you are caught red handed trying to manufacture anger….
Further all of you fail to addresses Levi’s main point which is:
A few months in office and you organize protests against Obama
8 years of Bush and not one protest.
Yet you still try and say your protests are about spending when they really simply Anti-Obama protests.
Instead of addressing those points, folks here fall back on the classic repub stand by:
Name calling.
Comment by gillie — May 1, 2009 @ 10:42 am - May 1, 2009
I don’t suppose the fact that in 100 days, the Obamacrats quadrupled the Bush deficits might have anything to do with why people are protesting now as opposed to under Bush enters into Gillie’s calculations at all. No, probably not.
I won’t call him an idiot, I’ll just let rational people draw that conclusion.
Comment by V the K — May 1, 2009 @ 12:03 pm - May 1, 2009
#35 – “A few months in office and you organize protests against Obama[.]
8 years of Bush and not one protest.”
Why should we have protested against Bush? You guys and your allies in the Drool-By Media were doing all the protesting for everyone and then some!
And try to think about this one, TIT boy – if something that Dear Teleprompter did is so politically repugnant to enough hard-working conservatives that they voluntarily take off one day from work and organize a massive, nation-wide protest, then don’t you think it actually MEANS something?
After all, our side doesn’t have any Rent-A-Mobs to use, now do we?
Checkmate.
Regards,
Peter H.
Comment by Peter Hughes — May 1, 2009 @ 12:17 pm - May 1, 2009
Dan – you wanted to know why no one takes the tea party movement seriously, and this is the answer. The impression among just about everybody is that you guys excused or ignored Bush’s deficits – especially relative to your reaction to Obama’s. You look like raging, unprincipled partisans upset with losing power. And this is but just one part of a pattern of behavior. When your criticism of the new President includes repeatedly announcing that he ’subjugated’ himself to the King of Saudi Arabia, declaring that he’s allowing the United States to be held hostage by pirates that can sense his weakness, and taunting him ad nauseum for reading from a teleprompter…. well, let’s just say the rest of us know how seriously to take you.
You don’t have to believe me if you don’t want to, but this is why you guys have started to get crushed in elections.
Comment by Levi — May 1, 2009 @ 12:25 pm - May 1, 2009
Why should we have protested against Bush? You guys and your allies in the Drool-By Media were doing all the protesting for everyone and then some!
You should have protested against Bush because then maybe he would have gotten the message that his supporters wanted him to cut spending. You’re not supposed to give politicians on your side blank checks, you’re supposed to hold them accountable and push them towards policies that you want.
It’s pretty depressing that in the 21st century, this concept has to be explained to an American.
Comment by Levi — May 1, 2009 @ 12:29 pm - May 1, 2009
The Obamacrats have quadrupled the worst Bush deficits and project 10 Trillion in additional deficit spending. They are also proposing massive degrees of economic control… nationalization of banks, autos, health care, and energy… never contemplated under the Bush administration as well as enacting crushing crap and trade and labor regulations.
To pretend the only thing that’s changed is the person in the Oval Office is pure idiocy… but we’re used to that from Farva and Gillie.
How can skin so thin be stretched around skulls so thick?
Comment by V the K — May 1, 2009 @ 12:44 pm - May 1, 2009
What I love about threads like this, where GPW makes it about Levi, is that it greatly exaggerates Levi’s significance… which keeps him coming back, for our entertainment
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — May 1, 2009 @ 1:15 pm - May 1, 2009
If I may ignore the Levi “I just KNOW when someone is lying to me” event and narcissistically pontificate…
My analysis of the Left I left post 9/11 is that, in terms of principles, it is woven out of Seven Threads of Utopia, all mutually re-inforcing, which address the Seven Evils of Oppression. The Seven Threads of Utopia which heal and transform are: multiculturalism, feminism, redistributionism, secularism, pacifism, transnationalism and environmentalism.
The Evils they correspondingly address are are: (white) racism, (male) sexism, (capitalist) classism, (Christian) theocracy, (military/male) violence, (nation-state) patriotism, and (human) consumerism.
GWB embodies everything they hate: a white male Christian capitalist patriotic pro-military consumer.
Regardless of his virtues and flaws, he remains the Icon of what the Left loathes. And stands, btw, in a long line of many many others like him who built Western civilization and the United States of America.
Comment by EssEm — May 1, 2009 @ 1:17 pm - May 1, 2009
Why does the Left still hate Bush?
(If I may step aside from the Levi “I KNOW when I’ve been lied to” thread and narcissistically pontificate.)
The Leftist mind: What are the great problems of the world and who is behind these evils?
Racism. By Whites.
Poverty. By the rich, and their capitalism.
Oppression of women. By males.
Imperialism and colonialism. By the Western nation-state.
Religious intolerance. By Christianity.
Violence, especially war. By the military.
Environmental degradation. By consumerism in the developed world.
So, if a Lefty wants to know who the Great Enemy of the World is, you have the elements for a profile:
A white, capitalist, male, patriotic, Christian, pro-military Western consumer.
Remind you of anyone?
Comment by EssEm — May 1, 2009 @ 1:32 pm - May 1, 2009
If you think about Farva and Gillie’s opinions, what they are actually saying is, “If you don’t complain when you catch a cold, you have no right to complain when you catch pneumonia.”
Comment by V the K — May 1, 2009 @ 3:26 pm - May 1, 2009
You want to talk about treason? What do you call blowing the cover of a CIA specialist in anti-terrorism just to protect your trumped-up case for war?
Comment by snarky — May 1, 2009 @ 4:00 pm - May 1, 2009
The TIT known as gillie just proves my point repeatedly. Liberals never can dispute what we say with facts. They only call us racists, sexist, self-loathing gays, rednecks, etc.
They can never prove they are right. If a TIT ever does try to present an argument, it is just a worn out liberal talking point such as “Bush lied, people died,” etc.
Like shooting fish in a barrel.
Regards,
Peter H.
Comment by Peter Hughes — May 1, 2009 @ 5:46 pm - May 1, 2009
What do you call blowing the cover of a CIA specialist in anti-terrorism just to protect your trumped-up case for war?
A deranged fantasy of the bongwater-drinking left.
Comment by V the K — May 1, 2009 @ 9:40 pm - May 1, 2009
A deranged fantasy of the bongwater-drinking left.
A deranged fantasy? It was the CIA that filed suit with the government to find out who outed their agent, the ‘bongwater-drinking left’ had nothing to do with it.
Everyone that’s so upset about how our intelligence agents in the field are going to feel betrayed by their government because the torture memos were released seems to forget that the Bush administration actually betrayed those same people.
Comment by Levi — May 1, 2009 @ 11:21 pm - May 1, 2009
Yes she was so covert that no one was prosecuted for ‘outing her’ and that included her outing herself in who’s who;
Comment by The_Livewire — May 1, 2009 @ 11:25 pm - May 1, 2009
Yes she was so covert that no one was prosecuted for ‘outing her’ and that included her outing herself in who’s who;
So do you think you have a better idea of who is a covert agent than the CIA? Because the CIA classified her as one, that’s why they sued the government. Are they wrong? Was the CIA just on a crusade against the Republicans because they came down with a bad case of BDS?
Aren’t you the person always complaining about people that ignore facts?
Comment by Levi — May 2, 2009 @ 12:01 am - May 2, 2009
People don’t ignore facts,
Levi ignores facts.
Comment by The_Livewire — May 2, 2009 @ 10:37 am - May 2, 2009
Valerie Wilson was a “covert” CIA Agent the way Liberace was a closet homosexual.
(Lefties don’t understand reason and logic, you have to speak to them in their native language: snark.)
Comment by V the K — May 2, 2009 @ 10:47 am - May 2, 2009
#9 Torrentprime: …But… But.. But according to all of the other conservative websites, Bush was a terrible conservative. He embraced big spending and big government, mismanaged two wars, supported a Federal Marriage Amendment (a clear violation of federalist principles), and so on. The GOP hasn’t made any bones about this since his term ended. So which is it? Was he just so dreamy or was he a horrible conservative?
Here is the response well said from one of TCU members:
Comment by Chris Johnson 10 minutes ago
I can never stand before a man of principles and begrudge him for his resolve to uphold those principles. President Bush was not the conservative I would have liked him to be but my gratitude for a prosperous and safe eight years is unwavering.
Abraham Lincoln said “I desire to so conduct the affairs of this administration that if, at the end … I have lost every friend on earth, I shall have one friend left, and that friend shall be down inside me.”
In the end he did what he felt he could live with. He made unpopular decisions because it was in his charge to due so. And, had you or anyone else stood the fire of scrutiny that he did with an unrelenting assault upon your upbringing, education, beliefs, and your person would you have stood so dignified ?
We were at a time when dignity and respect needed to be returned to the oval office from scandal that had previously been seated. And Mr. Bush certainly achieved our desired result. Our own media and left wing politicians had done their best to defeat him in that endeavor and despite what they say and do now…they won’t be any more successful than they were then when judged by history.
Some may wage the time tested argument that we lost the respect of the world stage. To them I say we built this great nation drawing great scrutiny and unfavorable sentiment from the world stage and we did so out of desire to be different from the rest of the world. I hold no umbrage for the look of displeasure upon the face of Europe towards us. We embarked upon our journey in disdain of their view of proper mannerisms in a multitude of arenas and I see no reason for us to now seek their favor.
The idea that he engaged us in an unjust war is a politicized one that has exercised the demons of 60’s era demonstrative revolutions lost. History should judge that when any entity sees the unavoidable need to engage in conflict let that entity be so wise as to pick the when…and the where.
Whether you agree with the war in Iraq or not I cannot allow it to go unsaid that George W Bush is one Texan that got his two birds with the one stone he held in his hand. Those that are unable to see that received their torment daily entrenched in the hallways and classrooms of Middle America because they did not hold the fortitude to make their tormentors stand in judgment on the playground.
I hold no ill will towards the man even if the rest of the world does. It’s not their judgment I wish this nation to stand in..it is Gods, and I feel that our previous serving president has done nothing that will render our nation unfavorable in that regard.
Winston Churchill said “Courage is rightly esteemed the first of human qualities because it is the quality which guarantees all others.” Mr. President, your courage was evident, unrelenting, and appreciated.
God Bless you Sir, and may you and your family live in peace and prosperity. Your service to our nation like that of any soldiers was taxing upon your soul, and you wear the signs of that upon your brow and in the whiteness of your hair..wear that as the badge of honor so richly deserved.
You sincerely hold the heart and the prominence of a patriot.
Comment by EDinTampa — May 2, 2009 @ 11:48 am - May 2, 2009
#9
Comment by Chris Johnson TCU 10 minutes ago
I can never stand before a man of principles and begrudge him for his resolve to uphold those principles. President Bush was not the conservative I would have liked him to be but my gratitude for a prosperous and safe eight years is unwavering.
Abraham Lincoln said “I desire to so conduct the affairs of this administration that if, at the end … I have lost every friend on earth, I shall have one friend left, and that friend shall be down inside me.”
In the end he did what he felt he could live with. He made unpopular decisions because it was in his charge to due so. And, had you or anyone else stood the fire of scrutiny that he did with an unrelenting assault upon your upbringing, education, beliefs, and your person would you have stood so dignified ?
We were at a time when dignity and respect needed to be returned to the oval office from scandal that had previously been seated. And Mr. Bush certainly achieved our desired result. Our own media and left wing politicians had done their best to defeat him in that endeavor and despite what they say and do now…they won’t be any more successful than they were then when judged by history.
Some may wage the time tested argument that we lost the respect of the world stage. To them I say we built this great nation drawing great scrutiny and unfavorable sentiment from the world stage and we did so out of desire to be different from the rest of the world. I hold no umbrage for the look of displeasure upon the face of Europe towards us. We embarked upon our journey in disdain of their view of proper mannerisms in a multitude of arenas and I see no reason for us to now seek their favor.
The idea that he engaged us in an unjust war is a politicized one that has exercised the demons of 60’s era demonstrative revolutions lost. History should judge that when any entity sees the unavoidable need to engage in conflict let that entity be so wise as to pick the when…and the where.
Whether you agree with the war in Iraq or not I cannot allow it to go unsaid that George W Bush is one Texan that got his two birds with the one stone he held in his hand. Those that are unable to see that received their torment daily entrenched in the hallways and classrooms of Middle America because they did not hold the fortitude to make their tormentors stand in judgment on the playground.
I hold no ill will towards the man even if the rest of the world does. It’s not their judgment I wish this nation to stand in..it is Gods, and I feel that our previous serving president has done nothing that will render our nation unfavorable in that regard.
Winston Churchill said “Courage is rightly esteemed the first of human qualities because it is the quality which guarantees all others.” Mr. President, your courage was evident, unrelenting, and appreciated.
God Bless you Sir, and may you and your family live in peace and prosperity. Your service to our nation like that of any soldiers was taxing upon your soul, and you wear the signs of that upon your brow and in the whiteness of your hair..wear that as the badge of honor so richly deserved.
You sincerely hold the heart and the prominence of a patriot.
Comment by EDinTampa — May 2, 2009 @ 11:49 am - May 2, 2009
Valerie Wilson was a “covert†CIA Agent the way Liberace was a closet homosexual.
(Lefties don’t understand reason and logic, you have to speak to them in their native language: snark.)
If you’re the master of reason and logic, would you please explain to me why the CIA sued the government? Were they just pretending she was covert? Help me out man, I’m just some dumb leftist.
Comment by Levi — May 2, 2009 @ 2:09 pm - May 2, 2009
#52 – “Help me out man, I’m just some dumb leftist.”
True words which have never spoken before, Levite. Congratulations – recognizing the fact that you have a problem is the first step to conquering it. Mazel tov!
Regards,
Peter H.
Comment by Peter Hughes — May 2, 2009 @ 3:22 pm - May 2, 2009
President Bush was not the conservative I would have liked him to be but my gratitude for a prosperous and safe eight years is unwavering.
WTF? Did this moron sleep through the 9-11 attacks, the war in Iraq, and the global economic meltdown? Chris Johnson sounds like he’s been locked in a cave for the past decade.
Comment by Levi — May 3, 2009 @ 12:33 am - May 3, 2009
Levi, Levi, Levi…. there is no one so dumb as a 9/11 troofer.
Bush did not create that disaster. That attack was going to happen, not because of GWB. It was planned since the failed attack on the WTC in 1993.
Bush did not cause the Katrina disaster. The mayor of that city should have got his bum kicked from here to Kingdom come because of his own racist decisions. The Governor of that state should have also received a tongue lashing because of her own failures, but I gave her a pass because she did a lot more than that lazy mayor.
Since you have absolutely no sense of history, it would seem that you are unaware of how Saddam Hussein came to power. He was not elected… and a lot of men in their parliament died of gunshot wounds when Saddam Hussein seized power.
Ever heard of the Muslim Brotherhood Levi? Most likely you have never bothered to look up the facts about that organization. If you did you would see the connection between Adolf Hitler, the Muslim Brotherhood and Saddam Hussein. However, I am ahead of myself because I have no doubt that you did not hear about the thousands of Kurds who were murdered as a result of poison gas being dropped upon them…. by Saddam Hussein. Nor would you have heard about the people in the marsh region who had their livelihood stolen from them by Saddam Hussein… and if memory serves me, they also lost their lives.
Also, Levi might not be aware of the real torture in Abu Gharib prison prior to the arrival of the Americans and allies in Baghdad. The tortures committed there were totally horrendous and it was the Baath Party that tortured their opposition. Thousands of families had members who suddenly disappeared. A lot of this has been documented because I saw a lot of the detail about the torture and the identification papers collected by the torturers. Yet, Americans under Obummer are having a hissy fit about an Al Qaida operative being waterboarded, which is not in my mind torture at all…. in fact the ones who are proclaiming it to be torture are acting very precious in my view.
You are constantly having a go at the owners of this site, and have gone as far as saying you have them on the mat… and I say you have to be joking…. your arguments are more like soft turds in my opinion… they have absolutely no substance at all.
Now, as for the stupid remarks that you and Gillie make about spending, I am wondering if you come from another planet… or just being puppets of the left. Yes, Bush had a deficit, but it was not that bad…. and there was no trillion dollar deficit when he left office. Rather, in the space of 1 month Obummer caused the deficit to reach the trillion dollar mark…. That man reminds me of a person with obsessive compulsive disorder who goes on a spending spree that continues until the fit of guilt sets in… and then the cycle begins again. On the other hand, Bush had to face several big disasters including the aftermath of 9/11 and mopping up after Katrina and other disasters. He did it all without sending your country into a huge deficit like you are now experiencing. Obummer has been signing off on massive pork bills and then afterwards he goes on TV and says “we must tighten our belts”…. to an outsider like myself that is a real joke and it shows that he has absolutely no credentials when it comes to economic management.
If I were to give Bush a rating for economic management it would be a C- because there were areas where he did not manage all that well. However, Obummer gets an F- because of his propensity to high spending and sending the country into a big spin… the outcome of this overspending is something which will be horrendous.
The Teflon president is set to fail. He will continue to fail because he came to office without any experience except that of being a street thug and organizer. He has shown a really ugly side of America to the world at large.
I am no fan of GWB and I did not want the push into Iraq to happen. However, the people of Iraq greeted the Americans and allies, and they wanted Hussein to be overthrown. I am glad that Saddam Hussein was hanged because of his crimes against humanity. I am glad that GWB had the courage to complete the job that had been start back in the early 90s. It should have been completed during that first operation.
Comment by thestraightaussie — May 3, 2009 @ 8:38 pm - May 3, 2009
#62 – Whoa! Levi just got PWN’d from Down Under!
Excellent post, StraightAussie!
Regards,
Peter H.
Comment by Peter Hughes — May 4, 2009 @ 11:14 am - May 4, 2009
[...] left town and Democrats are still blaming the former Republican President. It does seem to be the defining article of their [...]
Pingback by GayPatriot » How Much Longer Will Pelosi Survive as Speaker? — May 15, 2009 @ 2:36 am - May 15, 2009