Were we as bitter about Bush?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:to answer your question, yes. the anti-bush hysteria was every bit as absurd as the criticisms of Obama. People hated that man. I never understood it.

Could it be that he was evil AND stupid?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:to answer your question, yes. the anti-bush hysteria was every bit as absurd as the criticisms of Obama. People hated that man. I never understood it.

Could it be that he was evil AND stupid?

Yes, I agree. Obama is not great but he is neither evil nor stupid. Bush was definitely stupid. As for evil - it was like he just didn't give a crap what his cronies were doing to this country and the world. To the constitution. To the budget.

And the race thing is not tired. Just because half the whites in this country voted for him doesn't mean that the OTHER half aren't racists.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:to answer your question, yes. the anti-bush hysteria was every bit as absurd as the criticisms of Obama. People hated that man. I never understood it.

Could it be that he was evil AND stupid?

Yes, I agree. Obama is not great but he is neither evil nor stupid. Bush was definitely stupid. As for evil - it was like he just didn't give a crap what his cronies were doing to this country and the world. To the constitution. To the budget.

And the race thing is not tired. Just because half the whites in this country voted for him doesn't mean that the OTHER half aren't racists.

curious as to where you learned your propaganda against Bush?

[Anonymous]

The reason I brought up obama's body odor is because somebody referenced it in this thread. The presidents chronic odor problem and his general sloppyness are politically relevent. Just as relevant as President Fords alleged clumsyness, or Reagans age, or Clintons predatory evil, or Bushs' inability to speak clearly. The problem is that smelling bad and being sloppy are probably worse than the others because if you can't handle your own scent or dirty clothing or your muscles(uncoordinatin) unless you are Steven hawking you probably can't handle being president. This is a powerful political message that could swing 10% of the undecided vote. I'll try to convey this important information in a way James carville or rham Emmanuel would be proud of!

[Anonymous]

I certainly was, but didn't go to DCUM for venting. I worked for the Obama campaign.

[Anonymous]

Yes, the left (including me) was just as bitter about Bush. I think it started with the perception that he shouldn't have won the first election (i.e., if Gore had won his home freakin' state, or if Nader hadn't screwed up Florida), and that he never won legitimately (the Supreme Court (Scalia) handing him the election). Then 9/11, and WMD, and Iraq. Then the bitterness was exacerbated by our utter disbelief that he won a second term - how could that be POSSIBLE?

Imagine how the tea party will react if Obama wins a second term? It'll be the same phenomenon - they are utterly convinced he is evil and bad for the country, and don't know how anyone could have a different opinion. Good times.

[Anonymous]

OP, I have wondered somewhat about that and it will make me reflect more carefully under the next Republican president. But it's safe to say that Bush getting us into a hugely expensive war over nonexistent WMD was about the biggest mistake a president has made in my lifetime. His mistake and Obama's are not equal by a long shot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP, I have wondered somewhat about that and it will make me reflect more carefully under the next Republican president. But it's safe to say that Bush getting us into a hugely expensive war over nonexistent WMD was about the biggest mistake a president has made in my lifetime. His mistake and Obama's are not equal by a long shot.

please, everyone (and I mean everyone) making decisions was convinced there were WMD. Democrats in Congress, Russian, Israel and French intelligence. Everyone. Saddam had them in the past, and had used them in the past, so it wasn't too outlandish.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, I have wondered somewhat about that and it will make me reflect more carefully under the next Republican president. But it's safe to say that Bush getting us into a hugely expensive war over nonexistent WMD was about the biggest mistake a president has made in my lifetime. His mistake and Obama's are not equal by a long shot.

please, everyone (and I mean everyone) making decisions was convinced there were WMD. Democrats in Congress, Russian, Israel and French intelligence. Everyone. Saddam had them in the past, and had used them in the past, so it wasn't too outlandish.

Really, talk to Joe Wilson? Talk to El Baradei? Yes, I was surprised there were no WMD but I was sure that the WMD situation was nowhere near as dire as it was made out to be by Bush and Cheney. And guess who was closer to being right? Me! And other people who protested against the invasion.

BTW, I haven't mentioned (till now) the fact that he also got us into this pointless war by brainwashing people into believing that Saddam was behind 9/11. No, he never said Saddam directed 9/11. He just mentioned 9/11 and then said never again and then said we're going to take out Saddam. And guess what, millions of Americans came to believe that Saddam was responsible for 9/11 -- so of course they all supported the war. They thought we were going after the guy responsible for killing over 3000 US citizens and residents.

Biggest mistake ever. Really really stupid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:to answer your question, yes. the anti-bush hysteria was every bit as absurd as the criticisms of Obama. People hated that man. I never understood it.

Could it be that he was evil AND stupid?

Yes, I agree. Obama is not great but he is neither evil nor stupid. Bush was definitely stupid. As for evil - it was like he just didn't give a crap what his cronies were doing to this country and the world. To the constitution. To the budget.

And the race thing is not tired. Just because half the whites in this country voted for him doesn't mean that the OTHER half aren't racists.

curious as to where you learned your propaganda against Bush?

Seriously. How could PP believe that he authorized US servicemen to engage in torture? Forms of torture that we used to execute our enemies for in WWII and later. Or that his appointees ginned up intelligence that they knew was inaccurate in order to embroil us in a decades long illegal war of choice that's cost the US a trillion or so dollars. Oh, all while spearheading legislation making it legal to wiretap Americans with no judicial oversight whatsoever. Oh, and while implying that anyone with a problem with any of this was giving aid and comfort to the enemy (i.e. the legal definition of a traitor).

But, you know, Obama passed some tweaks to Medicare with only 60% of the support of the Senate, so...same thing, really.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, I have wondered somewhat about that and it will make me reflect more carefully under the next Republican president. But it's safe to say that Bush getting us into a hugely expensive war over nonexistent WMD was about the biggest mistake a president has made in my lifetime. His mistake and Obama's are not equal by a long shot.

please, everyone (and I mean everyone) making decisions was convinced there were WMD. Democrats in Congress, Russian, Israel and French intelligence. Everyone. Saddam had them in the past, and had used them in the past, so it wasn't too outlandish.

It's really sad (though a bit entertaining) to know that there are still idiots out there who swallow this stuff. Just because folks like PP refused to read or watch anything that wasn't official state propaganda---must mean *no* one knew about it!

We knew Saddam more than likely had some leaky canisters of chemical weapons. We knew with 100% certainty that he had neither an active biological, nor an active nuclear weapons program. That Glenn Beck once drew an atom on a chalkboard is not proof.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The reason I brought up obama's body odor is because somebody referenced it in this thread. The presidents chronic odor problem and his general sloppyness are politically relevent. Just as relevant as President Fords alleged clumsyness, or Reagans age, or Clintons predatory evil, or Bushs' inability to speak clearly. The problem is that smelling bad and being sloppy are probably worse than the others because if you can't handle your own scent or dirty clothing or your muscles(uncoordinatin) unless you are Steven hawking you probably can't handle being president. This is a powerful political message that could swing 10% of the undecided vote. I'll try to convey this important information in a way James carville or rham Emmanuel would be proud of!

You know I think this poster should be investigated as a potential "astroturfer". Fake oppositional posting on forums like this is a dangerous trend:

http://www.monbiot.com/2011/02/23/robot-wars/

The danger of right wing trolls is that they don't stop at mere non-funny, dense trolling. They foment true hatred and incite their followers to violence. It isn't funny, it's sick.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:to answer your question, yes. the anti-bush hysteria was every bit as absurd as the criticisms of Obama. People hated that man. I never understood it.

Could it be that he was evil AND stupid?

Yes, I agree. Obama is not great but he is neither evil nor stupid. Bush was definitely stupid. As for evil - it was like he just didn't give a crap what his cronies were doing to this country and the world. To the constitution. To the budget.

And the race thing is not tired. Just because half the whites in this country voted for him doesn't mean that the OTHER half aren't racists.

curious as to where you learned your propaganda against Bush?

Seriously. How could PP believe that he authorized US servicemen to engage in torture? Forms of torture that we used to execute our enemies for in WWII and later. Or that his appointees ginned up intelligence that they knew was inaccurate in order to embroil us in a decades long illegal war of choice that's cost the US a trillion or so dollars. Oh, all while spearheading legislation making it legal to wiretap Americans with no judicial oversight whatsoever. Oh, and while implying that anyone with a problem with any of this was giving aid and comfort to the enemy (i.e. the legal definition of a traitor).

But, you know, Obama passed some tweaks to Medicare with only 60% of the support of the Senate, so...same thing, really.

torture? please.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The reason I brought up obama's body odor is because somebody referenced it in this thread. The presidents chronic odor problem and his general sloppyness are politically relevent. Just as relevant as President Fords alleged clumsyness, or Reagans age, or Clintons predatory evil, or Bushs' inability to speak clearly. The problem is that smelling bad and being sloppy are probably worse than the others because if you can't handle your own scent or dirty clothing or your muscles(uncoordinatin) unless you are Steven hawking you probably can't handle being president. This is a powerful political message that could swing 10% of the undecided vote. I'll try to convey this important information in a way James carville or rham Emmanuel would be proud of!

You know I think this poster should be investigated as a potential "astroturfer". Fake oppositional posting on forums like this is a dangerous trend:

http://www.monbiot.com/2011/02/23/robot-wars/

The danger of right wing trolls is that they don't stop at mere non-funny, dense trolling. They foment true hatred and incite their followers to violence. It isn't funny, it's sick.

I tend to agree with you. The dead giveaway is the glowing reference to James Carville or Rahm Emmanuel. Only a wingnut of the first order could imagine that there are left-of-center folks who have anything but contempt for Rahm. Guy probably thinks Lieberman's a socialist Islamo-Nazi.

Ok, well, that and the obsessive-compulsive need to return to the president's "smell". PP's like a dog who keeps coming back to lap up his own vomit. Not pretty. It's weird how the whole "black man smells" thing is just so compelling to your average wing-nut, though. Who can possibly tease out why this is. Maybe this racist kid can explain it to us: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XDB34ag81dQ

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:to answer your question, yes. the anti-bush hysteria was every bit as absurd as the criticisms of Obama. People hated that man. I never understood it.

Could it be that he was evil AND stupid?

Yes, I agree. Obama is not great but he is neither evil nor stupid. Bush was definitely stupid. As for evil - it was like he just didn't give a crap what his cronies were doing to this country and the world. To the constitution. To the budget.

And the race thing is not tired. Just because half the whites in this country voted for him doesn't mean that the OTHER half aren't racists.

curious as to where you learned your propaganda against Bush?

Seriously. How could PP believe that he authorized US servicemen to engage in torture? Forms of torture that we used to execute our enemies for in WWII and later. Or that his appointees ginned up intelligence that they knew was inaccurate in order to embroil us in a decades long illegal war of choice that's cost the US a trillion or so dollars. Oh, all while spearheading legislation making it legal to wiretap Americans with no judicial oversight whatsoever. Oh, and while implying that anyone with a problem with any of this was giving aid and comfort to the enemy (i.e. the legal definition of a traitor).

But, you know, Obama passed some tweaks to Medicare with only 60% of the support of the Senate, so...same thing, really.

torture? please.

waterboarding has been considered torture for the last 500 years. Do you really think renaming it "enhanced interrogation" changes anything? Guess it is 1984 after all.