What Bush Got Right

« Return to Article

Discuss

Member Comments

  • Posted By: burns26 @ 08/10/2008 9:26:57 PM

    Nazism was the resul of what was taught in the elite educational structures of Germany. What is being taught in our educational systems? Basically that there is no such thing as meaning or right or wrong. We came from nothing and return to nothing. That we are just cogs in a giant machine. Before anyone can claim that anything is good or bad, they must first have a basis for a moral standard. The problem with our country is that we are teaching that there is no real moral basis for anything and then turning around and saying we "ought" to do this or that we should not have invaded Iraq. On what bases are any of these comments being made?

    • Posted By: olderwiser @ 08/10/2008 9:36:28 PM

      Gosh, burns26, where can we start? I guess first, home is where right and wrong, where we came from, and moral standards are taught. Not the job of the school. They teach math, science, history, government, algebra, geometry, stuff like that.

      Now, the basis for saying that we should not have invaded Iraq, if you don't know by now, there were no WMD's. That was the reason that we invaded. It was false. Evidence is strong that the perpetrators knew that it was false. Even if they didn't, the reason for invading was invalid.

      • Posted By: Phaedrus @ 08/11/2008 12:25:13 AM

        burns26: The problem with our country is that we are teaching that there is no real moral basis for anything and then turning around and saying we 'ought' to do this or that we should not have invaded Iraq."

        olderwiser: "Gosh, burns26, where can we start? I guess first, home is where right and wrong, where we came from, and moral standards are taught. Not the job of the school. They teach math, science, history, government, algebra, geometry, stuff like that."

        Hmmmm...I think, olderwiser, you're making his point. Was that you're intention? If so, I agree with this aspect of your reply.

      • Posted By: burns26 @ 08/10/2008 10:15:46 PM

        On what basis is it wrong to invade another country for no reason?

      • Posted By: mrwnt10 @ 08/10/2008 9:50:58 PM

        Yes but there was no way for Bush or the CIA or any of us to know that! Saddam kept flitting around like he had something to hide, and we had intelligence (we no know was flawed) that told us he had WMD's and the capability to launch attacks within minutes. What were we supposed to have done? That wacko never could have been solved with diplomacy!

        • Posted By: sundrips @ 08/10/2008 10:06:44 PM

          Oh sure, thats the answer...overpower the sob then try him for something or other, but make sure he winds up dead.

  • Posted By: mrwnt10 @ 08/10/2008 9:19:31 PM

    "Now, say it. The french were right all along!! If you are my best friend and I tell you I am going to commit suicide by jumping froma 40 story building, will you jump with me??? I don't think so.. This is what happened with the french, they knew bush would commit suicide by invading Iraq."

    Obviously you didn't get the part in this article about us not going in with enough troops. Too few people know how thinly stretched our military is. We went in with too few troops not because we chose to, but because we didn't have any more troops to go in with. This is the consequence of an all-volunteer army.

    Maybe if the french came with us we would have succeeded sooner. And if you haven't been paying attention, we are succeeding in Iraq. Thanks to the surge and the sunni awakening councils and al-Sadr's cease-fire.

    • Posted By: Phaedrus @ 08/11/2008 12:16:45 AM

      Look, I'm a Bush fan, but I have to say that I don't think we went in because we were already stretched. I believe I remember that Rumsfeld was trying to make the military into something new - lighter, more agile, etc, and that the low numbers were a demonstration of his new military theories. I lay the low number issue totally at his feet. Well, actually, Bush picked the idiot, so I guess it's his fault, too.

      Having said that, I supported the Iraq invasion, and I still think it was right and is right, and I still support Bush. I do think he made some bad decisions with respect to his advisors and cabinet.

  • Posted By: burns26 @ 08/10/2008 9:12:44 PM

    "An argument is the sharing of ignorance but a discusion is that sharing of knowledge." I am tired of all the arguments. The problem is not the white house, it is the philosophical construct of the educational elite structures of this country.

    • Posted By: niteshft_1 @ 08/10/2008 9:16:09 PM

      very well put

      • Posted By: olderwiser @ 08/10/2008 9:22:11 PM

        Well, burns26, we stand ashamed in your presence. Forgive us our trespasses, but I guess you've already given us a break for our ignorance. That was a close one. You'd have really speared us if we had any sense.

        • Posted By: olderwiser @ 08/10/2008 9:26:02 PM

          And on that construct deal, I had a job in construction when I was fifteen years old. Digging foundation ditches for barracks. Yep, still did it with pick and shovel in them days. Drove by recently to see them tearing down those buildings. Got too old. Made me feel real old. That construct work is hard, I can tell you. Today, at least there is a machine to dig the ditches. Just sit there in luxury pulling handles back and forth. I can still be "older", but guess I ought to shuck the "wiser".

          • Posted By: Phaedrus @ 08/11/2008 12:10:46 AM

            Who said the pun is the lowest form of humor? This is probably the only post of yours I really enjoyed. No ad hominem activity here. Not that I dislike hominem - they go good with butter and pepper.

        • Posted By: Phaedrus @ 08/11/2008 12:08:28 AM

          Why not just reply to his comment? Why attack him?

  • Posted By: pgadia @ 08/10/2008 7:07:18 PM

    Zakaria's articles in newsweek about Pre. Bush and his foriegn policies nated all negative and same disturbed thinking. Freedom comes with a price as Mr. Zakaria's enjoying here in the West, and his native land India enjoying their success because democracies begun to root in their lives and goverments. This President may not get everything right because about the war against terorist, but all wars has ups in down before victory. Mr. Zakaria must realized that his success in the West was because he is free to write and work, but not all people around the world especially in the Middle East, they have to be given a chance to taste and experience the fruits of freedom and democratic goverments as the liberals has becomes immunes to this wonderful gifts of freedom, and it is not free it comes with a big price tag.

    • Posted By: alan.lockett @ 08/10/2008 8:16:53 PM

      Mr. Zakaria understands this very well, I have no doubt. I would point out that Mr. Zakaria is a committed globalist, a member of the Council on Foreign Relations (as are most of our leaders). He believes that the world would be better off if there were an international authority that had the power and authority to regulate states and economies. The party line is that this would lead to increased peace and stability, and hence a new world order of unprecedented prosperity that will cut across all societies in accordance with their willingness to subject their sovereignty to the international system.

      The reality is that an international system must be far removed from the people in general. Thus, while it purports to serve "the good of humanity", it cannot know what is good for individuals because there is no effective mechanism for representation of their interest. Therefore an international authority can only serve the good of the people as propounded by academics from the outside, and in such a system, the people do not have a say in what constitutes their welfare. They are reduced to sheep in the hands of their "more intelligent and educated" shepherds. A government so far removed from the people cannot be anything other than a tyranny ipso facto.

      Furthermore, since the people are merely a metaphor or abstraction to the global elites, they will not feel human empathy towards them. As a result, they will actually make the rules to favor their friends, the multinational elites who control the corporations. The people will only suffer as a result - witness the Vioxx catastrophe, or Nestle's marketing practices in Africa for examples,

      What is best for the people is to have limited central government, and to have most decisions made locally based on local needs, where the people can represent themselves.

      • Posted By: Phaedrus @ 08/10/2008 10:36:44 PM

        Your comments are well-taken. I guess, though, that your point of view depends completely upon where you think humanity is, and should be, headed. Maybe there is a reason for the amassment of world resources. Maybe there isn't. Maybe nobody really knows anything and we're all faking it.

        I have to say, though, that, whether the "elite" like it or not, if the "people" get too hemmed in, they will react by reallocating the power the "elite' think they have. It has happened time and again, and will continue to happen, technologicat advances notwithstanding.

        • Posted By: alan.lockett @ 08/11/2008 12:04:19 AM

          This is the reason our educational system is so bad. It is designed to keep people uneducated. If that sounds far-fetched, check out John Taylor Gatto's Underground History of Education. He presents the evidence in the words of the people who fashioned it - Man, Dewey, et. al.

          And in case that isn't sufficient (since you actually do have to educate some people), why, then they feel that they need surveillance powers to keep a watch on suspicious citizens.

  • Posted By: tom_Piper @ 08/10/2008 8:29:50 PM

    Maybe the real problem is not liberal of conservative, dem/repub. Maybe it is, we have all forgoten what the Constitution really is about.. Maybe we should take a Constitution study. George Mason would be weap to see what we hae done. Shame, shame, shame!

    • Posted By: Phaedrus @ 08/10/2008 11:52:12 PM

      Maybe, though, the problem is that a growing number of the residents of this country coundn't give a flying fig about the constitution. They know exactly what it says, but they did not grow up here, and do not share our values. They do not intend to share our values, and, in fact, intend to undermine them.

    • Posted By: alan.lockett @ 08/10/2008 8:42:34 PM

      Yes, quite.

  • Posted By: Tosk222 @ 08/10/2008 8:05:43 PM

    Just what is Mr. Bush supposed to do back in DC that he's not already doing in Beijing? What about the treaties, diplomacy, and multilateralism that are supposed to have prevented this, and so gushingly cherished by our leftwing friends in the States and Europe? Where's the outrage? Why is Congress not flocking back to DC themselves? Why are not bellyaching about "unilateral action" by one state against another? Where's Cindy Sheehan? Is she not around because HER son didn't die in Ossetia? Is THAT what it's all about? HER son? Are the Georgian people just not worth it? Tallk about lying idiots, ... you leftwingers could care less about a democratically elected leader. All that matters is the USA get ripped apart for whatever it does (or doesn't do).

    And for those of you who think Putin "had the sense" to go back to Moscow to "handle the situation." ... well, duh!! It is HIS situation.

    Oh, and Bill Clinton, wouldn't have cared about Georgia any more than anyone else. They're not a part of the pinko, liberal, latte-drinking, sweater-tied-around-their-necks, stand-on-the-sidelines-and-watch-while-people-lower-than-them-get-slaughtered, sixties-retread, hang-out-at-Davos-and-pretend-we-like-everybody, Euro trash demograph he so enjoyed sucking up to.

    Go check your math about what's actually happening in the Caucasus, Russia, and the Gulf and what actually did happen regarding 911 and Katrina and leave this discussion to the adults.

  • Posted By: Joe_Rocks @ 08/10/2008 11:27:49 PM

    To Ourantispam,
    Sorry to burst the bubble in your little make-believe world, but, McCain was born on a US military installation of two natural born US citizens which automatically makes him a natural born US citizen.
    Unless you're saying that the thousands of children born to two US natural citizens while stationed at an overseas miltary base are also NOT natural born US citizens. I have twin daughters that were born in Germany while my natural born US citizen wife and I (also a natural born US citizen) were stationed at an Air Force Base there. So, your "legal fact" holds absolutely no water at all.
    You are dead wrong in your assumption of McCain's legal status as a natural born US citizen.

  • Posted By: detroiter876 @ 08/09/2008 7:59:00 PM

    "It went in with too few troops, dismantled Iraq's Army, bureaucracy and state-owned factories, arrested tens of thousands of Iraqis, mistreated and tortured some of them, and used overwhelming military force against all perceived threats."
    I should have known better than to think that Newsweek could have posted an article about Bush without de-evolving into drooling neandertals. The clip pasted above is when I stopped reading. To again try to paint our troops as terrorists and torturers by cheery picking individual incidents that, for the most part, have been discounted or already ejudicated is abominal. I completely agree with your right to spew this garbage, I hope you agree with my right to cancel my subscription.

    .........and the media wonders why we're all moving to talk radio and the internet for our news.

    • Posted By: Cazador1972 @ 08/09/2008 8:22:11 PM


      "...and the media wonders why we're all moving to talk radio and the internet for our news."

      Because you don't like to hear the truth? Can you dispute ANY PART of the quote you used?

      • Posted By: detroiter876 @ 08/10/2008 8:38:01 AM

        I already did dispute the part that riled me up. Tha accounts and charges of torture by our guys have either been discounted or ejudicated, and to keep trying to paint our boys as baby eating animals is disgusting. The only incidents of abuse that have been found to be true have been dealt with and have been found to be isolated incidents, not a coordinated effort.
        It's also laughable that the author says in the same sentence that we went in with too few troops, but used overwhelming military force. Well, which is it? Besides, the military objective should be a swift, lightining strike to completely disable your opponent quickly. If I have ANY complaints it is we didn't strike hard enough or fast enough in Iraq. We were more concerned with international opinion and it cost us.

        • Posted By: Cazador1972 @ 08/10/2008 7:43:29 PM


          You didn't mentioned any of that, at least not in that caption. The problem was not that we were concerned about international opinion, the problem was precisely that we weren't and it cost us, because Europe didn't help significantly and the neighboring countries in the Middle East gave, give and will continue to give
          material support to the insurgency. No one is attacking the military, it was the civilian fairy tale planning of Rumsfled and Wolfowitz that cost many of our soldiers their lives and limbs. THAT is the criticism.

          • Posted By: detroiter876 @ 08/10/2008 11:18:25 PM

            There is a military stratagem that calls for tricking the enemy into coordinating their efforts where you can most strategically overcome them. They weren't going to coordinate their efforts in a non-muslim country, but they would have tried more hit-and-run attacks all over the world. They proved this in Spain, the Phillipines, France and right here. We gave them something to fight against, us in Iraq. We were able to contain their efforts and effectively neutralize them (see; KILL). We have wiped out their command and control personnel and contained them away from the western hemisphere. I make no apologys for our actions. Keep the muslim problem in the muslim world.

          • Posted By: detroiter876 @ 08/10/2008 11:08:02 PM

            "The clip pasted above is when I stopped reading. To again try to paint our troops as terrorists and torturers by cheery picking individual incidents that, for the most part, have been discounted or already ejudicated is abominal."
            Pretty straightforward if you had read it.

  • Posted By: willieb214 @ 08/10/2008 7:22:57 PM

    As far as i concerned the only thing that President Bush got right was to show the rest of the world that america is still the No 1 superpower. I think that the rest of the world was starting to believe that america was began to become weak. If we would have displayed that at that present time or any other time you can believe someone will jump on that opportunity to invade america. Other than that he makes TEXAS LOOK BAD

    • Posted By: ourantispam @ 08/10/2008 8:17:08 PM

      So a bully is justified because he can beat up all the other kids?

      • Posted By: Phaedrus @ 08/10/2008 11:16:26 PM

        No, but that doesn't mean that the other kids aren't afraid of her. I think that was the point.

  • Posted By: smithgirl @ 08/10/2008 11:09:53 PM

    Thank you for having the nerve to finally address something positive concerning this administration at a time when that is not the popular way. It is so refreshing to read reality rather than just negative trash talking.

  • Posted By: smithgirl @ 08/10/2008 11:05:09 PM

    How nice to finally see an article in a mainstream magazine that is not just negative, but deals with reality. I applaud you for having the nerve that so many others lack!

  • Posted By: arealpatriot @ 08/10/2008 10:25:25 PM

    Try this link for islams real plan........http://www.obsessionthemovie.com/

    • Posted By: soldout2truth @ 08/10/2008 10:35:23 PM

      Wow, thanks for adding to the realizationt that I've found in my readings... things that make you go humm..

  • Posted By: hiflyer @ 08/10/2008 10:28:33 PM

    The same sniveling drivel from Newsweek that we, the American Public, have come to expect from them. Apparently, the "crack" editorial staff at this magazine believes that we are mindless idiots that can be continuously fed "crap" journalism enough times that we will begin to believe it. No mention of the complete and utter failure of this Democratally controlled congress that has half the approval rating of President Bush as a "failure", especially considering the state of our domestic oil production (or lack thereof) and the obstruction of our own domestic oil production capability that the Democratic party continues to produce - to our pocket-books dismay. President Regan was viewed by the contemporary media figures of his time as an utter failure, only to be judged by history as one of the greatest presidents in our country's history. His strong conviction was incorrectly viewed at the time as ???inflexibility" in his policy decisions. We as Americans want our president to be resolute, but our "popular media" views this as a negative "raggedness??? that does not bend to will of their popular opinion polls. Presidential candidates lay out their positions on policy and their reasoning behind those positions. We as Americans vote every fourth November on those positions - and reasonings behind them - and trust that our elected leader will be guided by, and as such as the candidate campaigned. That is what we expect of our elected leader, not their susceptibility to be misled by mediocre editorialism such as the like of Newsweek's contribution to our societies "popular media". No successful leader, as viewed through history's hindsight, has ever used "popular opinion" polls to guide them. The most successful leaders have used their intellect, moral compass, and faith to guide them through the world's pitfalls.

    Wake up people, these people want to make your decisions for you, for your own good and the good of the greater society! Take back your government and accept your responsibility for our government and your role in it instead of senselessly accepting Newsweek???s "editorialsm" of the United States, its position in the world, and your contribution to it.

  • Posted By: hiflyer @ 08/10/2008 10:27:56 PM

    The same sniveling drivel from Newsweek that we, the American Public, have come to expect from them. Apparently, the "crack" editorial staff at this magazine believes that we are mindless idiots that can be continuously fed "crap" journalism enough times that we will begin to believe it. No mention of the complete and utter failure of this Democratally controlled congress that has half the approval rating of President Bush as a "failure", especially considering the state of our domestic oil production (or lack thereof) and the obstruction of our own domestic oil production capability that the Democratic party continues to produce - to our pocket-books dismay. President Regan was viewed by the contemporary media figures of his time as an utter failure, only to be judged by history as one of the greatest presidents in our country's history. His strong conviction was incorrectly viewed at the time as ???inflexibility" in his policy decisions. We as Americans want our president to be resolute, but our "popular media" views this as a negative "raggedness??? that does not bend to will of their popular opinion polls. Presidential candidates lay out their positions on policy and their reasoning behind those positions. We as Americans vote every fourth November on those positions - and reasonings behind them - and trust that our elected leader will be guided by, and as such as the candidate campaigned. That is what we expect of our elected leader, not their susceptibility to be misled by mediocre editorialism such as the like of Newsweek's contribution to our societies "popular media". No successful leader, as viewed through history's hindsight, has ever used "popular opinion" polls to guide them. The most successful leaders have used their intellect, moral compass, and faith to guide them through the world's pitfalls.

    Wake up people, these people want to make your decisions for you, for your own good and the good of the greater society! Take back your government and accept your responsibility for our government and your role in it instead of senselessly accepting Newsweek???s "editorialsm" of the United States, its position in the world, and your contribution to it.

  • Posted By: maninthewilderness @ 08/10/2008 9:36:15 PM

    what he got right.... virtually nothing.... an intelligent approach without hidden agendas would be a good start for someone new...

    • Posted By: morgan103 @ 08/10/2008 9:52:18 PM

      You are a complete idiot

      • Posted By: Cazador1972 @ 08/10/2008 10:26:39 PM


        And you Morgan, apparently can't make a cogent comment without insulting, which denotes the level of education of Bush himself. Who, by the way, should be in the White House or Russia right now demanding a cease fire against Georgia, a country he called an ally. But he is in China, cheering on a softball team instead of doing his job. Jesus Christ, how did we sink to this?

  • Posted By: 21stCent @ 08/10/2008 6:52:09 PM

    I want a show of hands.How many of you conservative bloggers have been traveled outside the US (Mexico and Canada excluded)in the past 12 months? Not many of you, because if you had you would have painfully discovered how negatively America is viewed. I have been to South America,Africa ,Europe and Great Britain in the pats 12 months,and universally the people I encountered questioned me about why we (the USA) have done what we have behaved so badly since George W. became President. Not one, and literally I mean one,had the least bit of respect or admiration for the current administration or it's policies.Interestingly all wondered if Obama had any "real chance" to become President and almost evryone I encountered hoped he would be elected and change America's policies and restore their faith in what a cab driver in Dominica referred to as :"the country we all know effects us the most".

    • Posted By: Phaedrus @ 08/10/2008 10:20:53 PM

      Read this blog and you can find just as many people saying the opposite about their own world travels - and just as anecdotally. Truth is, people will tell you what they think you want to hear. I work in Los Angeles and probably most people think I'm a liberal because I don't disagree - I wouldn't dare. I like my job. There is, however, a core of us that are conservative. We just don't go around recruiting. It wouldn't do any good. People here absolutely LOVE railing against the EVIL BUSH - who am I to take away their fun? :)

      In Orange County, I see the opposite. What can I say?

  • Posted By: niteshft_1 @ 08/10/2008 9:30:40 PM

    burns26, an open mind never closes, even though it has found something good.

    • Posted By: burns26 @ 08/10/2008 10:11:56 PM

      Just make sure your mind isn't so open that your brain falls out.

  • Posted By: needreba @ 08/10/2008 9:33:34 PM

    I'm not a Bush fan nor have I ever been. Say what you want about him but we have not been attacked again. Part of his problem has been the worst speech writers in recent history. During the whole weapons of mass destruction debacle instead of saying weapons of mass destruction were not found they should have said weapons of mass destruction have not been found YET. Too bad Bush wasn't smart enough to insert that one word.

    • Posted By: skyway45@comcast.net @ 08/10/2008 10:05:48 PM

      I did not post in my other comment about this. The reason we have not been hit again is because most of the Muslim world is afraid of him. They know that if they hit us hard he will hit back.

      I had an E mail exchange with a Muslim in Saudi and it was clear that they hate us and have no plans on peace. I told him they were educating a generation of Americans to hate them but he did not care. He did care when I told him that no country in the history of the world was better at killing a lot fo people in a hurry than the USA. If they kep pushing they might fing out one day.

  • Posted By: 465991 @ 08/10/2008 8:05:45 PM

    For cazador 1972 to ash bush is ignorant. PResident bush is not blame free, the problem in iraq has been boiling for years before bush was in office. Have a little respect for our commander and cheif. Even if you do not like what bush has done.

    • Posted By: Cazador1972 @ 08/10/2008 10:05:23 PM


      No, absolutly no. Iraq was contained, under an egregious embargo but contained nonetheless. This is the same as saying there is a belligerent drunk on the other side of town, we go there to pick a fight and then blame it all on him. Bush went in and hit a wasp nest with a stick and we all got stung.

      Ask the president to have some respect for the constitution and our brave men and women in the military, then we'll talk.

  • Posted By: loriw @ 08/10/2008 10:05:15 PM

    Anyone notice the Obama ad right next to the Post your Comment box. If it was any closer it would be in the Comment box. Perhaps Newsweek will try that next!

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse