Friday, January 16, 2009

The Incurious Case of George W. Bush

Good Morning Bloggers - They call us Bush Haters and Bush Bashers, among many other insulting things, but the truth is WE are the MAJORITY OF AMERICANS who refuse to dismiss what happened over the past eight years as simply "bad luck."

I guess it somehow makes them feel better if they call us "haters," because it casts us as unreasonable malcontents who never gave Bush a chance. The truth is harder for them to swallow. It's easier for them to say "he kept us safe" while they ask us to ignore everything else. Republicans, or at least Bush supporters, seem to enjoy pixellating the Bush presidency, thus avoiding the whole picture.

Bush's farewell address, much like his last press conference, was nothing more than a farce. His supporters agree with his assertions of success, but when you pick them apart, and look at the facts, they are just as absurd as his presidency.

Last night he pointed to three areas where he feels the most pride: education, drug benefits and veterans health. The truth is many observers feel that all three areas are considered worse off today because of his actions.

No Child Left Behind is condemned by educators who feel it is a disaster, and will fail in Congress next time. The drug benefits passed by Bush and Congressional Republicans are considered a windfall for big pharmaceutical, adding billions in cost to America's heath care system, and are doomed to be scrapped in favor or true reform under Obama and the Democrats.

His final claim of success is nothing but a lie. Bush has some of the lowest approval ratings of any president according to the majority of Veteran's rights groups. Visit Project Vote Smart if you want to see for yourself. He has been considered a roadblock to improving the lives of veterans. That claim is a boldfaced lie, and is unsupportable like all the others.

Bush claimed "moral clarity" last night as one of the hallmarks of his presidency. Perhaps he believes it, but most people don't see it that way. History is strewn with the bodies and debris that resulted from leaders who claimed moral clarity.

Despots throughout time, including Hitler, believed they had moral clarity or a moral obligation to make the tough decisions. It's the nature of the decisions that disturb most observers. Stalin, Franco, Mussolini, and Pol Pot all claimed moral clarity. Their followers, even some alive today, believe they were right, and acted in the best interest of their nation.

Stalin is still revered by conservative Russians as their country's greatest leader. They think of him as their own George Washington. Moral clarity is a smoke-screen. Only fools believe in it, and Bush is a fool to claim it.

Equally disturbing was his claim about his willingness to make the "tough decisions." Again, it's absurd. It's impossible to become president without the ability to make tough decisions. The ability itself mean nothing. It's about making the RIGHT DECISIONS! We didn't hire him to simply make decisions; we hired him to make the right decisions. Again, he is being absurd.

That brings us to his claim of "safe-guarding the economy." It is another HUGE and DISTURBING LIE.

Bush FAILED THE ECONOMY by allowing the financial markets to run wild, crash and burn. I'll admit the fool finally reacted when confronted with a disaster scenario by Paulson, but the truth is they were warned months before and did nothing. I don't care what his supporters say, he was in charge over the past eight years, and his actions caused a catastrophic failure. His administration failed to enforce regulations that could have prevented the crisis. It's simply another lie. BUSH FAILED THE ECONOMY.

Finally, last but not least, I would like to refute the most annoying claim Bush and his supporters use over and over. The one about how HE KEPT US SAFE over the past seven years. It is a joke. Without real evidence of actual thwarted attacks, and that his decisions made us safer, I believe the terrorists are simply long-term planners. It's just too vague and unsupportable.

I could just as easily argue that he made us less safe because he tortured people, setting us up for an attack in the future. There is real evidence that we are threatened more now by jihadists because of the way they handled people at Abu Graib and Guantanamo.

Extremists take years to plan their attacks, especially since it takes a long time to plan and execute large-scale terror attacks. It is reasonable to assume that an attack could occur at anytime. I do not buy their assertion he kept us safe. It is my equally valid assertion HE HAS MADE US LESS SAFE!

I also want to point out that Bush deserves scorn for allowing 9/11 to happen on his watch. Real evidence, no matter what his supporters say, suggests that he, his Secretary of State, and his national security team, dismissed Clinton Administration warnings, and intelligence reports, about a pending attack by civilian aircraft. THEY DID NOTHING! It's plain and simple, George Bush was the president who allowed 9/11 to happen by not doing a better job as president.

The past eight years was not simply bad luck. It was much worse. It will be remembered as the American epitome of ineptitude and incompetence. Practically everything his administration has touched has become a disaster.

From his tortuous pursuit of his war on terror, to the millions who died in Iraq in pursuit of one dictator, to the drug lords who now run Afghanistan, to the multiple wars in the Middle East under his watch, to the people who died due to his delay in helping the victims of Katrina and the loss of a great American city, to the collapse of American justice and moral leadership, to the incredible debt, to his disastrous mismanagement of the economy, the list goes on and on, and it proves that George Bush will be remembered as possibly the WORST PRESIDENT IN AMERICAN HISTORY.

They call us Bush Haters. I'll counter by calling them Bush Sycophants, Toadies, Serfs, and Fools. They fail to see him for the true failures he represents. They look at one issue, or one small success, and refuse to see the whole picture. Their ostrich-like deniability offends the majority of us who have suffered through this idiot.

They elected an over-confident, incompetent, moral simpleton to be President of the United States. They need to learn from their mistake, and shun the Sarah Palins in favor of more well-rounded leaders. Their vote needs to be based on more than one issue. They need to be more careful next time.

Friday's Political Rant #1 - Michael


Anonymous said...

I know it has to piss you Liberals off because he out-smarted the Dems at every turn and the only thing you could say to defend your own stupidty is the man is a moron...go figure

by Michael Boh said...

You're right Anon, he "out-smarted" us, or at least his team did, to the detriment of the nation. Btw, it's easy to be outsmarted when you trust the president and they lie to you. I wouldn't exactly be proud of that fact. This isn't a game. I went to a lot of trouble to point out just how much destruction was caused by the man, and all you tell me is that he outsmarted us. I call the man a moron because of the RESULTS of his presidency, not because I have any personal first-hand knowledge. His record speaks for itself. That is undeniable. MB

Anonymous said...

Destructive politics will get you no where. Now we have someone who is going to spend all of this money to create jobs at the tune of 1.2 trillion, run the numbers it is going to cost about $200,000.00 to create each job and it will be years before there is any real return to the government.

For the sake of the country I hope it works because if not it will effect all of in ways that we may never recover from.

I did not vote for either one of the candidates, I thought one of them as a joke and the other as a bigger joke.

We have Obama defining his image because that is all important to him, trying to portray himself as Lincoln has to be one of the biggest political jokes that has been pulled on this country.

Does Obama not realize after the war Lincoln wanted to round up all of the slaves and ship them back to Africa, I guess not.