This guy obviously hasn't polled the leftards who frequent this site! Hahah!

The author is right. The left despised and hated Bush, then when they assumed power, adopted every single major policy position of the Bush Administration. There's a reason you don't see the vitriolic headlines railing against the Patriot Act, wiretapping, the Middle East wars, the gargantuan deficit spending, the bank bailouts--it's because now Obama is doing all of them.

Never misunderestimate the power of stupid peolpe in large numbers.

yeah sure we are starting to miss him right?

...

I think I just threw up a little there.

So, absence makes the heart grow fonder?

Who could have foreseen that...

Of course, TIME heals all wounds. Hey, there's ANOTHER great prediction!

There always was (and still are) some who favored Mr. Bush, but if it's any indication of reality: the recent 'Miss Me Yet' billboard hardly drew resounding affirmatives. Maybe folks are just holding back for fifty years to pass so they can properly evaluate his legacy.

None of which addresses the point that Obama seems to be continuing a lot of Bush's policies. Wonder how that came to be?

"Bush seems to be continuing alot of Bush's policies...."

What I'm reminded of at this moment are the several journal stories I've read about how damned effective Bush's war on terror got AFTER Bush was gone and Obama took over.

Obama already appears to have the better record. In one year.

"None of which addresses the point that Obama seems to be continuing a lot of Bush's policies. Wonder how that came to be?
#7 | Posted by American1st at 2010-03-09 08:12 PM"

That's a good, valid point/question. Maybe you should start a thread about that so it could be on topic? However, as long as you brought it up:

FWIW, I'm personally disappointed/disgusted with some of the 'Bush policies' being continued. What you might perceive as partisan complacency now that the country has 'changed horses' could just as easily be interpreted as a realization that it is easier to initiate a policy than it is to reverse it. As such, it shouldn't be too surprising to encounter more vindictiveness towards those who create a policy than for those who haven't reversed it (yet).

I feel confident that in your political experiences you've had opportunites to experience exactly what I'm talking about. As such, the reactions of folks then (and now) shouldn't be too difficult to understand.

"Obama already appears to have the better record. In one year."

The key word is "appears"... Everything was in place long before Obama wrote legislation removing troops from Iraq immediately.

Obama already appears to have the better record. In one year.

#8 | Posted by Zed

Only if the record is tied to a pissing away money contest.

Never misunderestimate the power of stupid peolpe in large numbers.

we learned that in 2000 and 2004. And don't misunderestimate the power of stupid people in small numbers-see the Bush Administration. From the gaping hole in NYC to the gaping hole in the economy to the Iranian puppet government in Iraq, it's all on them.

Never misunderestimate the power of stupid peolpe in large numbers.

#12 | Posted by northguy3

Most of the people in large numbers I know spell it P e o p l e.

"The key word is appears...."

No, the key word would be "reality", that thing that makes it "appear" that he's kicking a bit of ass.

It's reasonsoble to ask, accepting the premise that "all the machinery" to seriously tackle terrorism was in place during the Bush years, why Bush, uh, never got the car to start in eight years?

No, the key word would be "reality", that thing that makes it "appear" that he's kicking a bit of ass.

#14 | Posted by Zed at 2010-03-09 09:15 PM

I know Zed... When the enemy was killed under Bush's watch he was a murderer, when they are killed under Obama's watch he is a hero. Had Bush not been elected, Saddam would still be in power and the sanctions gone, the Taliban would still be in control of Afghanistan and destroying all artifacts and applying Sharia law. We probably would have had at least two or three more 9-11's. Gore would have been the exact same appeaser as Clinton, Kerry would never have had the balls to retaliate.

No, the key word would be "reality", that thing that makes it "appear" that he's kicking a bit of ass.

#14 | Posted by Zed at 2010-03-09 09:15 PM

But enough about Zed's rambling partisan inanity, Bush was a disaster, and any effort to keep him remembered as such should be made.

"Obama's kicking ass along with the status force agreement set in Iraq...."

Didn't say a damned word about that. Referring to the body count of terrorists in other parts of Muslim Asia and the even greater number now imprisoned.

"But enough about ZED's rambling partisan inanity...."

You know, for some people it's rambling partisan inanity to assert Hawaii is one of the United States.

The cure for this is just to keep up with the news, fella. It is, after all, future history.

"When the enemy was killed under Bush he was a murderer...."

Just saying more terrorists are dying. Because they are. It's just what's happening.

Republicans continue to portray Obama as hapless. The only way they can do that here is to lie about it. Which, of course, they are.

"If Bush hadn't been elected..."

Ah, the halcyon days of a presidency that never could get out of it's own way. Was just reading today about the hugely successful ethnic cleansing Bush presided over in Iraq, which started with the Christians.

Did you know that 3% of all Iraqis used to be Christians? Almost a million people, and they be gone.

Republicans continue to portray Obama as hapless. The only way they can do that here is to lie about it. Which, of course, they are.

#19 | Posted by Zed at 2010-03-09 11:01 PM

Where did I lie about Obama? I am glad he is smart enough to let the military do it's job. I just don't go all Chris Matthews over him.

Did you know that 3% of all Iraqis used to be Christians? Almost a million people, and they be gone.

#20 | Posted by Zed at 2010-03-09 11:06 PM

As well as Saddam. Of course the Christians will return.

Of course the Christians will return.

#22 | Posted by crispee_oc

CRISPEE, Christians are still being killed merely because they are. As recently as last week in Mosul.

Those who couldn't get out have to practice in secrecy lest they become targets.

Didn't say a damned word about that.
#18 | Posted by Zed at 2010-03-09 10:58 PM

Referring to the body count of terrorists in other parts of Muslim Asia and the even greater number now imprisoned.
#18 | Posted by Zed at 2010-03-09 10:58 PM

"It's like ZED is a Bushy in an alternate reality...."

This is interesting for a couple of reasons. The first being few would have critiqued Bush for either of his wars if he had successfully pursued them.

The second being it emphasizes you guys are willing to deny reality to make Obama look like a failure.

The fact is, I'm not ignoring my standards, you're ignoring yours, The fact is, if these things Obama is doing in 2010 had happened in 2007, you'd applaud them as enormous accomplishments.

In fact, had these things happened in 2007, there's a large chance a Republican would now be president.

"Of course the Chrisitans will return...."

There is no evidence the Christians are returning to Iraq. There is no evidence the Sunni diaspora from Iraq is ending.

There was CIVIL WAR and widespread ETHNIC CLEANSING in Iraq while Bush was in control of that country.

This still amazes me. I can't recall the like of it in American history. If you want to know what Bush will be remembered for, I've just told you.

"Gore would have been the exact same appeaser as Clinton, Kerry would never have had the balls to retaliate."

Utter bull shit and it is quite probable that either of those two would have read the PDBs and prevented 9-11 in the first place. Even if they failed to prevent it they still would never have cynically used that tragedy to justify an invasion of Iraq as the Bush administration did do.

it is quite probable that either of those two would have read the PDBs and prevented 9-11 in the first place.

First off, it's not "the PDBs" but rather is "the PDB (singular)".

Secondly, and for more importantly, the PDB you cite contained zero actionable intel. ZERO!

The plans were in place long before Bush ever took office and he received nothing that he could have reasonably acted on during his first 9 months that would have likely prevented 9-11.

Bush was a lousy president, but let's have some perspective.

The second being it emphasizes you guys are willing to deny reality to make Obama look like a failure.

The fact is, I'm not ignoring my standards, you're ignoring yours, The fact is, if these things Obama is doing in 2010 had happened in 2007, you'd applaud them as enormous accomplishments.

In fact, had these things happened in 2007, there's a large chance a Republican would now be president.

#25 | Posted by Zed at 2010-03-10 07:34 AM

I've also consistently rated Bush a complete failure and Obama mediocre. Just so we're clear (in case you're confused), mediocre is better than complete failure. Hopefully you were just ignorant of my stance on Obama vs. Bush and not trying to lie about it.

The difference between Bush and Obama was that Bush didn't need to buy votes for the right to go to war with Iraq. The Democrats stood firmly by his side.

"Utter bull shit and it is quite probable that either of those two would have read the PDBs and prevented 9-11 in the first place."

First of all it would only have been Gore. Like I have asked many times over when some fool brings up the PDB, aside from the fact there was nothing actionable and it being any different than the other multiple PDB's, what would you or Gore have done to prevent 9-11? Close down all the airports? Stop all commercial commerce? Have the Air Force escort every flight? Basically destroy the economy and scare americans from flying under a threat of an attack?

First of all it would only have been Gore. Like I have asked many times over when some fool brings up the PDB, aside from the fact there was nothing actionable and it being any different than the other multiple PDB's, what would you or Gore have done to prevent 9-11? Close down all the airports? Stop all commercial commerce? Have the Air Force escort every flight? Basically destroy the economy and scare americans from flying under a threat of an attack?

#31 | Posted by crispee_oc at 2010-03-10 11:32 AM

"Bush could have at least followed up on it."

How? It never stated when the attack was going to occur, nor what is any different than the other PDBs. Should he have intiated racial profiling of all ME men at airports? Signed an executive order? Keep in mind the mood of the country after the election and outcome. The fact the previous administration restricted agencies from communicating with each other was a huge reason the attacks happened.

How?

#33 | Posted by crispee_oc at 2010-03-10 12:53 PM

#33...
Good point.

#33...
Good point.

Oops, #34...

#31 | Posted by crispee_oc

So, did Bush actually do ANYTHING to prevent 9/11?

"So, did Bush actually do ANYTHING to prevent 9/11?"
#37 | Posted by donnerboy at 2010-03-10 07:55 PM

A better question is what should he have done?

A better question is what should he have done?

He didn't have any actionable intel, so I don't know what he should have done differently.

He has plenty of failings as POTUS, but this criticism doesn't hold water IMO.

mediocre is better than complete failure

yes,but obama has over 2 more years to go and he's almost topped bush in just his first year