Were we as bitter about Bush?

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.




Defining deviancy down.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Waterboard3-small.jpg

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/11/04/damn-right-personally-ordered-waterboarding-bush/

It is kind of depressing that your average American wing-nut is so deviant, that anything short of hot-pokers through your eye-sockets isn't considered "torture." But the real legacy of the American right, and Bush, is that most of these techniques were culled out of the military SERE program. They were techniques that were designed by America's enemies *specifically* to extract false confessions from captured American servicemen. In other words, the amateurs running the executive branch under Bush ordered the professionals in the military and CIA to use techniques they knew yielded false information.

So, just to recap: not only are these assholes unequivocally war criminals, but they filled the US intelligence pipeline with a bunch of bad information while they were at it. And you wonder why folks think that the head of this slow-motion train-wreck was both evil *and* stupid.

Sure is puzzling.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
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.


No, but 'cause remember? Bush's personal lawyer wrote a brief saying it was ok. Of course, he came an ass-hair's breadth from being disbarred for it, and even his staunchest defenders in the legal community called him woefully misguided. But, you know, sometimes you just have to tell Saddam what he wants to hear.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
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


Oh my. That is a stomach churner. I don't think I lasted more than 25secs. Spot on though--future panty-sniffer.
Anonymous
yeah, it's always funny how wingnuts throw these racist insults at the president and his wife--stuff that's got a history going back hundreds of years--and can't seem to figure out why it resonates with them so strongly.

"The presidents a smelly, ape. He's always preening and trying to pull one over on the Real American voters. He's *stupid* (e.g the teleprompter idiocy) but he's *crafty* (e.g. soo good at deception)!"

The only thing that's missing is the fear he's going after our white women, though the "preening" charge kind of dovetails with that to a certain extent.

Meanwhile, they just can't seem to understand why it's okay to call Bush a chimp, but not Obama. Um, let me take a stab at that: 300 years of racist slurs calling black people monkeys on the one hand, and the fact that, well, Bush really does kind of look like a chimp on the other. Nevermind all that though, it's just so unfair!

The lack of self-awareness, of historical perspective, is staggering.
Anonymous
Oh, and just so we're clear that there's no equivalence whatsoever between the (well-deserved) vitriol towards Bush and the craziness towards Obama:

http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/02/town_hall_attendee_asks_ga_republican_when_someone_is_going_to_shoot_obama.php?ref=fpblg

Compare this to the rare yet oft-cited anonymous postings on internet forums like this one saying "Bush is a Nazi!" or other juvenalia.

Here's a sitting US Congressperson taking questions about the assassination of a sitting US President, and barely blinking an eye.

"Chimpy McHitler" indeed.
Anonymous
11:25- I could just hug you- you are so awesome.
Anonymous


Dazzling Brilliance; Keep your eyes, head and heart clearly fixated on your rear view mirror and pray that your air bag is functional. Just brilliant!

Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:Dazzling Brilliance; Keep your eyes, head and heart clearly fixated on your rear view mirror and pray that your air bag is functional. Just brilliant!

Aside from the fact that there is nothing remotely constructive about this post, not even a touch of humor, I can't even tell (nor do I care) who it is pointed at.

It might be said that my own words are just as negative, so I'll make the positive part of my message more explicit. It is that we ought to concentrate on adding to the discussion, not just throwing tomatoes. I am the OP on this thread, and my intent was not to create another arena for bashing Bush or Obama, but to look back at how we treated Bush as President in the light of what seems to me to be merciless bile directed at Obama. In order to come up with ideas about how to influence those I disagree with, I am trying to remember when I was in that position.
Anonymous
OK, that has merit.

Just one question. Did Bush ever point his finger at Clinton?

Well maybe two questions. Didn't Clinton make or fail to make moves that considerably weakened our intelligence?
Anonymous
"OK, that has merit.

Just one question. Did Bush ever point his finger at Clinton?

Well maybe two questions. Didn't Clinton make or fail to make moves that considerably weakened our intelligence?"

you could say he did not support Gore and if he had, Gore would have won and etc. and we would not hear "No one could have foreseen this"( b/c I did not read the report on my desk)
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:"OK, that has merit.

Just one question. Did Bush ever point his finger at Clinton?

Well maybe two questions. Didn't Clinton make or fail to make moves that considerably weakened our intelligence?"

you could say he did not support Gore and if he had, Gore would have won and etc. and we would not hear "No one could have foreseen this"( b/c I did not read the report on my desk)


Why bother to insert the questions when fail to address either? Giant minds at work here.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:

Dazzling Brilliance; Keep your eyes, head and heart clearly fixated on your rear view mirror and pray that your air bag is functional. Just brilliant!



"Let's not bicker and fight over who killed whom; this is supposed to be a happy time!"


I think when the drunk guy who wrapped your car around a tree last month stumbles up to you, reeking of alcohol, and asks if he can borrow your car again, a bit of retrospection is called for.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:OK, that has merit.

Just one question. Did Bush ever point his finger at Clinton?

Well maybe two questions. Didn't Clinton make or fail to make moves that considerably weakened our intelligence?


The record pretty clearly shows that the Clinton team considered violent extremist groups like Al Queda to be the main foreign threat to focus on. This effort was headed up by Richard Clarke. The second the Bush team came in, they isolated Clarke and disbanded the capacity. Wanted to focus on Saddam after all.

And, no, the answer is, Bush never pointed his finger at Clinton. He had Rice and Cheney do it.
Anonymous
OP, I will say I have been pondering this question too and I don't really know how to think about it because in my head I do think that it's hard to compare a president who made the worst foreign policy mistake in at least a generation with a president who is trying to extend health insurance coverage.

I do think that there has been a remarkable animus towards Obama since day 1, whereas with Bush it was the cumulative effect of getting us into an awful war under essentially false pretenses, plus endorsing the detention and torture, even of American citizens, as long as the "war on terror" required it, but I am also going to try and keep it in mind next time we have a R president.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:OK, that has merit.

Just one question. Did Bush ever point his finger at Clinton?

Well maybe two questions. Didn't Clinton make or fail to make moves that considerably weakened our intelligence?


The record pretty clearly shows that the Clinton team considered violent extremist groups like Al Queda to be the main foreign threat to focus on. This effort was headed up by Richard Clarke. The second the Bush team came in, they isolated Clarke and disbanded the capacity. Wanted to focus on Saddam after all.

And, no, the answer is, Bush never pointed his finger at Clinton. He had Rice and Cheney do it.



OK, so Bush did not whine about Clinton.

Obama has plenty people to whine for him but fails to maintain any proper presidential decorum, what a shock.

Didn't Clinton have an opportunity and justifiable reason to hit Bin Laden with a drone but failed to issue the order?
Forum Index » Political Discussion
Go to: