So, DoorHold, even granting your dubious claim that only conservatives care about this, since when is it good to remain silent? Silence is capitulation. But perhaps that’s what you want.

yawn. Bush sucked, we all know that. Thankfully we made it through his reign of ineptness and illegality.

(Please see comments at #59.)

I was no fan of Bush, but I’m hoping we also make it through the next 4-8 years.

It’s going to be a LONG, LONG decade for the repugnant republicans.

Unfortunately, the Democrats are doing their best to make the “LONG, LONG decade” as short as possible, starting with the 2010 election.

It’s going to be a LONG, LONG decade for the repugnant republicans.

The point is that Bush’s rhetoric, IN GENERAL, is far more vitriolic and offensive than anything Obama has said.

Unfortunately, having opened with his conclusion, poor Jeff goes on to show how utterly indefensible his thesis is. This sort of rhetorical overkill is not an argument, it is a laughable parting shot of the child running crying from the playgound because he kept getting pasted in the game of dodgeball. Reread the quote. What is there to say?

Just one question–can you find a single example of then-President Bush, in his five months in office, talking about the problems he inherited–or even in the first five months after 9/11?

But, then I contrasted it to the incumbent’s recent statement. The incumbent called Republicans behind the times. President Bush faulted failing schools. Quite different rhetorical approaches.

But, yeah, well, I grant that it is a close comparison, because, I mean, well, Bush did stay Democrats were standing in the way of progress, but then I remembered the criteria I set forth in the original post. I was referring to Obama’s immediate predecessor and, um, the article you linked in comment #34 is dated 1992. I wasn’t asking you to compare Obama to Bush (41) who was then President, but to Bush (43).

As I’ve noted before, sometimes it is fun to shoot fish in barrels.

Bush is responsible for the economic crisis caused that he tried over 25 times to prevent by reforming Fannie and Freddie? When he, and Republicans and the Chairman of the Federal Reserve were ALL warning that failure to reform them would lead to EXACTLY the crisis that resulted?

How come no Democrats can name any policy of Bush’s that caused the crisis, while Republicans, Bill Clinton, Alan Greenspan, The Financial Times, Barron’s, Investor’s Business Daily, The Wall Street Journal, ad naseum can ALL name the specific Democrat policies and actions that caused the financial crisis that we are now in?

If Bush caused all this, and not Democrats (who have been in control of congress and thus the laws and purse strings for the two years preceeding the crisis) policies did not, then how come Democrat policies are making everything worse???

You are drunk on delusion. There is no point responding to someone so utterly divorced from reality. Haldol and thorazine would probably be much more appropriate for you.

And aren’t you critics the least bit disappointed that the man who promised to be a new kind of politician transcending partisanship has been perhaps the most partisan president in recent history? You may claim he reaches out to Republicans, but he does not to listen to their ideas but to get them to support his liberal agenda.

Actually, you didn’t answer the basic question:

a piece yesterday for Commentary’s Contentions, Jennifer Rubin notes that the Democratic President excuses Democrats for casting the same vote which earns opprobrium for Republicans. While the 44 Democrats who voted against Waxman-Markey (AKA Cap & Trade) did so because they were “sensitive to the immediate political climate of uncertainty around this issue,” Republican who oppose the measure were “fear-mongering” and were “16 years behind the times“.

Now, puppet Jeff, explain why Obama Party members who vote against cap and trade are right, but Republicans who do are wrong. You bashed Bush for allegedly calling his opponents behind the times. Now bash Obama’s rhetoric as hateful and partisan, like you did Bush’s.

What you don’t realize, Jeff, is that we have the number of Obama puppets like yourself. We know that anything referring to Bush will whip you into a frenzy – and then we simply point out how you syncophantically worship Barack Obama for doing exactly that which you criticized in Bush. Hypocrite gays like yourself aren’t used to having to think independently and we exploit that.

And the hilarity on it is that they don’t realize their hypocrisy. Obama has already endorsed extraordinary rendition and warrantless wiretapping, insisted that he have an escape clause in his torture “ban” that says he can use whatever he likes, and is now preparing for indefinite detention. All of those Jeff screamed were impeachable offenses before, but now, Jeff makes excuses how they’re perfectly OK because Obama is “busy” and doesn’t have time to do things right. It makes it obvious how Jeff and other Obama gays are nothing more than unprincipled puppets who endorse and support anything that Obama does.

It’s slander when you tell the truth about Democrats.

By the way, since I found a totally on-point example in answer to the EXACT question originally posed on this post (an instance where Bush described his opponents on a legislative initiative as behind the times) will the original poster honor his pledge to revise his post accordingly? Or does Bush have to use the exact same words as Obama — because obviously, his comment that I highlighted had exactly that meaning — for it to “count”? Still waiting ..

It’s like a gigantic, impenetrable monument to ignorance and stupidity. It’s breathtaking, really. I’d have to say what I like most about the exhibit is its symmetry–it’s perfectly balanced because for every criticism of Bush (i.e. failing to stop 9/11 BEFORE it happened) there are several other criticisms that cancel it out (i.e. opposition to and obstruction of every effort Bush made to prevent terror attacks AFTER 9/11). Also, I’ve gotta say I love the contrast between the Bush criticism, “ran up record deficits” with the demand that we “at least give Obama a year” to fix everything (by, FYI, running up a multi-trillion dollar deficit).

Jeff, if you could just figure out a way for all of it to fit on the back of your car, now THAT would be something to see.

Wow, you may have made the dumbest comment ever made on this blog. Well done. It really isn’t too difficult to find “true” ways to criticize a President who, in eight short years, took us from peace and prosperity to an utter and complete collapse of our economy, stock market, and housing market, ran up record deficits, eviscerated our international credibility, was in office for the largest terrorist attack in US history (and who ignored obvious signs that such attack was coming) then froze like a deer in the headlights after that attack occurred — and don’t blame Clinton unless you’d blame Bush if we end up being attacked by terrorists this September (yeah right), eroded civil liberties to an unprecedented degree with a scary big-government spying and torture program, diminished our military strength (and ability to use that strength without justifiable international skepticism) and ability to recruit to the military, undermined our credibility on matters of science or social policy by refusing to actually listen to, I don’t know, actual scientists, turned the DOJ into a total joke full of unqualified partisan hacks, handled natural disasters with total incompetence, led a disastrous and ill-advised war on false pretenses, oh yeah — demonized gay marriage and did zero to advance the cause of gay rights (I thought people on this blog cared about those issues? apparently not when it comes to GWB), all while absolutely butchering the English language in the process. All of these attacks are “true.” If the country is in worse shape in four years than the disaster Obama inherited, by all means, tear him to absolute shreds, you have every right, but more importantly, nominate a candidate who is half-way competent and can at least possibly do a better job (Romney would qualify there, Palin or her ilk, obviously not). But to expect Obama to turn around in four months the inarguable mess he inherited is a bit of a joke.

LOL…..do you think we care about our “credibility” in the eyes of Obama puppets like yourself, who are incapable of criticizing or blaming Obama for anything that he does?

When you call Obama a homophobic bigot for opposing gay marriage, when you call Obama a liar for claiming he would post bills online for five days prior to signing them, when you call him a hypocrite for hiring tax cheats and lobbyists after claiming he would do neither, and those sorts of things, THEN you might have some room to talk.

But until then, puppet, you’re just doing the usual gay left coping mechanism; silence the critics rather than acknowledge that the criticism is correct.