What Bush Got Right

I am quite surprised at how the discussion has changed. There seems to be quite a lot of speculation on who was the WORST president. I'm a liberal, but I strongly believe that what Bill Clinton did was wrong. Lying about his situation was just as bad as the act. When I say this, I don't feel like I'm conceding to conservative opinions. I'm stating my own. I read about and then though about it. It is too bad that his presidency will be forever tarnished by that scandal. He did have a more successful administration then GWB.

Aside from his marvelous work with AIDS in Africa, GWB has been terrible for America in every way. When you read this long list of charges in this post, it is hard to believe that the checks and balances we learned about as kids didn't stop at least some of the assaults on liberty. The executive branch was never intended to wield greater power than the other two either.
He was wrong.

Getrealjones: Liberals really don't hate conservatives. We just disagree with them. On the other hand, conservatives seem to want to exterminate liberals from the planet. It has something to do with their elitist, Authoritative, look down you nose at other people tendencies. When I listen to Rush or Sean, or Bill O. I think tthey must be either very stupid or very dishonest. I think it is the latter. They couldn't possibly believe all the things they say. It is almost like a modern day carnival show. (Like the movie about the clown in the dunk tank that insults people.)

I think we'd all like a hero as president, but we just keep getting regular people--who are capable of very bad behavior. If GWB really started a war, got all those people killed and spent billions of dollars, just so he could hang on to power for a second term, privatize social security, unload public school and every other government operation to the private sector, expand the power of the executive, and be viewed in history as a great war president, he really does deserve to go to jail. For a long time.

I really don't hate conservatives. I just think they are wrong about everything.

I must add that Zakaria's article is completely disingenuous. I think everyone should read the Huffington Post, or Daily Kos or The Left Coaster instead.

K

Why blame Bush.The people,Republicans Democrats and all., were scared into giving him a second term.They became puppets at the hands of the oil & arms lobby.
A lesson can be learnt even now.Choose a Prez and a few good senators with basic values and an honesty of purpose.The US is too valuable to be left to midgets

That Bush has demonstrated some ability to recognize his own stupidity is almost sad. Hopefully he will be provided with counsuling and powerful drugs to help him sleep at night and tolerate his own existance in the light of day. That he, of all people, is lecturing China on human rights and Russia about the evils of naked military aggression is surely a sign he his a poor student of his own recent history at best and completely dellusional

On the rhetorical front, you may well be corrrect. That is, the current policie(s )in Iraq "is less vulnerable to easy attacks". However, running the most important foreign policy apparatus in the world is not primarily about improving the debate situation internally for the incumbent or his potential Republivcan successo;r.
Even though tactical improvements of a potentially short term nature may have occurred, the proof that the policies have failed is that the Iraqui government has invited us to get out as quickly and as seemly as face will allow. The improvement in Aftghanistan is merely prospective. The new augmentation of troops and resources may help our dire situation there but long term troops and winning the hearts and minds of Afghanis with aid and Green Beret Vietnam era tactics are doomed to failure politically. Why is that? Because Afghanis are even less culturally penetrable by the west than the Iraquis. No western army or series of logistically superior invaders have succeeded. And there are no current indications that they will in the future. The better policy might be to declare, as usual, victory, get ou and leave a substantial aid program run by NGO's who are staffed by volulnteers many from outside the U.S.

On the rhetorical front, you may well be corrrect. That is, the current policie(s )in Iraq "is less vulnerable to easy attacks". However, running the most important foreign policy apparatus in the world is not primarily about improving the debate situation internally for the incumbent or his potential Republivcan successo;r.
Even though tactical improvements of a potentially short term nature may have occurred, the proof that the policies have failed is that the Iraqui government has invited us to get out as quickly and as seemly as face will allow. The improvement in Aftghanistan is merely prospective. The new augmentation of troops and resources may help our dire situation there but long term troops and winning the hearts and minds of Afghanis with aid and Green Beret Vietnam era tactics are doomed to failure politically. Why is that? Because Afghanis are even less culturally penetrable by the west than the Iraquis. No western army or series of logistically superior invaders have succeeded. And there are no current indications that they will in the future. The better policy might be to declare, as usual, victory, get ou and leave a substantial aid program run by NGO's who are staffed by volulnteers many from outside the U.S.

From NoQuarterUsa.net...Larry Johnson........

Obama's Impending Pearl Harbor »
By Larry Johnson
Email: larry_johnson@earthlink.net
Site: http://NoQuarterUSA.net

After a very productive time (working, not playing) in Hawaii, I believe that the Japanese attack at Pearl Harbor is an apt metaphor for what awaits Barack Obama if he becomes the Democrat's official nominee. Michelle's "whitey" tape and the controversy over his birth certificate are the least of his concerns. Opponents of Obama and some proponents of McCain have acquired information that will rapidly erase any memory of the audacity and perfidy of John Edwards.

The surprise attack by the Japanese should not have caught the US fleet at Pearl Harbor unawares. There were advanced warnings that people in key positions ignored or shrugged off as unimportant. Well, guess what boys and girls? Similar warnings are now in the hands of the Democratic leadership and they are choosing to ignore the flashing red lights that signal danger ahead.

Just today, courtesy of the Rocky Mountain News, we confirmed that Barack aka Barry Soetoro Obama was a citizen of Kenya since 1963. Barack has yet to stipulate when he renounced or relinquished that citizenship. That will be a distracting issue in the upcoming campaign. Americans don't want to elect a Kenyan as President. It is that simple.

But then there is the Indonesian problem and his Hawaiian birth certificate. Read the rest @NoQuarterUsa.net

NOBAMA!!!

The Washington Post's David Broder:...It's Particularly A Moment Where John McCain Can Claim To Have Been Prescient.... NBC's DAVID GREGORY: David Broder, is this a 3 a.m. moment for foreign policy for these candidates? WASHINGTON POST's DAVID BRODER: It is and it's particularly a moment where John McCain can claim to have been prescient. Because in his basic foreign policy speech two months ago and in an interview that I did with him last week, he draws a very sharp line when it comes to Russia. He says these people are being aggressive and imperialist. There is no confusion, in his mind, about the character of the Putin-Medvedev government and he is prepared, I think, to make the case that this is a demonstration of exactly what he has been arguing for. (NBC's Meet The Press, 8/10/08)

NOBAMA!!!

From another blog....too good not to share..................

To that blank slate that was Obama in 2004 you can now add the Pandora???s box of Tony Rezko, Allison Davis, Alexi Giannoulias, Kwame Kilpatrick and a long list of members of the Illinois Combine; Nadhmi Auchi, Aiham Alsammarae, Rashid and Mona Khalidi, and Edward Said; Revs. Jeremiah Wright, James Meeks, and Otis Moss III and Father Michael Pfleger; Louis Farrakhan, the Nation of Islam and the 1995 Million Man March; Malik Zulu Shabazz and the New Black Panther Party; William Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn, Marilyn Katz, Carl Davidson, Mike Klonsky and others from the SDS days who are clinging to his coat tails; Jodi Evans; Hamas and other admirers like Hugo Chavez, Fidel Castro, Muammar al-Gaddafi, Kim Jong-Il, and the Communist Party USA; and the list goes on.

Let???s not forget the ever-growing list of controversies: Rezko house and lot; lobbyists, bundlers, and overseas contributions; Odinga family and violence in Kenya; Soetero family and Muslim schooling in Indonesia; Dunham family in Kansas and Hawaii; and the mysteries of his birth certificate???is he Barry Soetero? Barack Obama Jr. or someone else and was his name ever legally changed????and rumors about his possible dual or mixed citizenship.

NOBAMA!!!

So this is the lesson? That the US should embrace multilateralism under the umbrella of international law?

Fareed, I'm disappointed in you. Bush's biggest mistakes have been the erosion of constitutional guarantees, the centralization of power in the hands of the executive, the creation of a police state, and expansionary monetary and fiscal policy. The Iraq fiasco in historical terms is just a blip by comparison. Multilateralism will not restore habeas corpus, protect against search and seizure, and prevent warrantless wiretapping. Diplomacy will repair the balance of power so that we have more than a rubber-stamp congress and a judiciary that guards the constitution. Internationalism will not guarantee that our children will be able to travel freely in this country without being subjected to suspicion and interrogation (and possible detention without trial - Bush's laws allow this). Alignment of the IMF with the "new world order" [your words] will not finance the massive 4 trillion dollars of national debt this country has undertaken under Bush, nor will it tame the unprecedented inflation that is about to come in order to fund it.

So I am afraid that the wool is being pulled over citizens' eyes here. Yes, the Bush administration has become more pragmatist in the area of international affairs, which is a good thing. But the Bush's administration and the Congress - Republican and Democrat have committed heinous treason against their oaths to defend the Constitution against enemies both foreign *and domestic*.

I don't have a problem with living in a multi-cultural, international world. But I cannot stomach living under the tyranny of a "unitary executive". The time is soon coming when we Americans must decide whether we will say with our ancestors "give me liberty or give me death", or whether we would rather just have another beer and watch football. With a press that betrays us like this, I am not optimistic.