7 Responses to “Fuel for Terrorism”

1. Dan says:

   January 20, 2009 at 4:57 am

   I think not.

   When the mushroom clouds appear, because GW failed to take definitive measures to end Tehran’s Manhattan Project, —————– this Bush apologia will appear in very poor taste indeed.

   Chamberlain had the Rhineland and Austria to caution him against the Munich deal, but he disregarded their sobering influences, and embarked on his land for peace deal.

   Bush had 9/11 to prepare him spiritually, mentally and morally for dealing once and for all with Tehran’s Manhattan Project. And he caved.

   And “caved” is the only appropriate word.

   This administration came in blasting the Clinton administration for saying they couldn’t handle Saddam because they couldn’t get the international community on board. The very notion of America holding her hand because of failure of support of the UN or the UNSC was something of a farce in the early years of this Bush administration.

   How has it ended though? The Bush team assimilated the EXACT same defenses for their inaction first offered by the Clinton team in the dread aftermath of 9/11.

   Bush said he wouldn’t allow the world’s worst regimes to get and keep the world’s worst weapons.

   But what of North Korea?

   What of Iran?

   He said he wouldn’t deal with terror regimes, but then tried to install a terror regime in power in the West Bank and Gaza. Said he wouldn’t deal with them, but effectively tolerated Hezbollah setting up shop on Israel’s northern border, and Hamas setting up shop on her southern.

   I could go on and on and on.

   He came in wiht a federal budget of 1.6 trillion per annum. He leaves with it nigh unto 3.2 trillion, again, per annum. NOW that’s a per year DOUBLING of the federal budget.

   And for what? What did we get for it?

   Did we get a 400 ship Navy? No.

   Did we get an Air Force equipped and well supplied with F-22s and F-35s? No.

   Did we get an Army of over a million men, fully equipped and trained with all the modern instrumentalities of conflict? No.

   For the military, “help was on the way” was nothing more than lip service.

   TAX CUTS?

   They were sunsetted, thus always going to lapse. There’s nothing permanent there, nothing “legacy” like.

   All of the people eager to run off and rush to the barricades for the Bush tenure need to take a deep breath, take a step back, ——————— and look at the big picture looming on our near horizon.

   And that picture, ominous, dark, foreboding, with a lurid illumination swiftly gaining upon us, —————————- is the MUSHROOM CLOUD of Tehran.

   Against that lurid backdrop, the ENTIRETY of the Bush tenure will be judged, ————————- and not just judged, but DAMNED.

   YES DAMNED.

   “You have been weighed in the balance……………………….. and found wanting……………………”
2. Yehudit says:

   January 20, 2009 at 5:28 am

   ” … Why are we convinced that Bush’s presidency will be judged a success when so many people right now consider it to be a failure? …..”

   I know blaming the MSM is a tired cliche by now, but people with whom I have these conversations, who are attentive to current events, have an enormous amount of misinformation about what has gone on in this country for the past 8 years. They don’t know the economy from 2002-2006 was exceptional, they don’t know Iraq now has a representative government, they don’t know Bush made some of our alliances stronger, they don’t know anything about his aid to Africa or his attempts to set up oversight for Fannie Mae. And if you tell them they don’t believe it.
3. Yehudit says:

   January 20, 2009 at 5:31 am

   BTW could you give a shoutout to Senator McCain on the surge? He had to convince Bush and THEN Bush advocated for it and stood firm.
4. K Wick says:

   January 20, 2009 at 5:34 am

   Yes he kept as safe, EXCEPT for the biggest attack in our History. History will record the worse attack and two never ending wars. Good JOB BUSHIE
5. K Wick says:

   January 20, 2009 at 5:35 am

   and I should add prehaps a depression and doubling the nations debt. Again Good JOB BUSHIE
6. Yehudit says:

   January 20, 2009 at 5:55 am

   K Wick illustrates my first comment.
7. K Wick says:

   January 20, 2009 at 6:17 am

   Yes Yehudit
   I am totally unimformed.
   If some one spent 2002 to 2006 building a house on the sand and then in 2007 it was washed away along with everyone in it. ‘
   I would not be able to draw a lesson like you from that.

   I am also uninformed about who was in power, sitting like a stunned mullet as he learned about the magnitude of his failure to protect America on 9/11/2001.
8. BigM says:

   January 20, 2009 at 6:19 am

   Mr. Wehner, I’m with you up until you cite Bush’s “enormously successful Medicare prescription drug plan.” This maddeningly unnecessary entitlement was pure politics; once Al Gore made the promise, Bush had to follow suit or risk losing the senior vote. And did Bush win over liberal hearts and minds with it? Of course not; just read the venom from the likes of Paul Krugman. The Medicare drug plan is one big reason why, during a supposedly die-hard right wing administration, government grew and spending went through the roof.
9. Jay from Texas says:

   January 20, 2009 at 6:44 am

   Most of the posts here are arguing on some specifics over the last 8 years but that’s not how history works.

   History judges on the big issues.
   I think the first post makes a good counter point to Peter.
   If Iraq becomes the democratic counterweight to Iran and the start of more democratic governments in the Middle East then Bush will be looked on favorably by history.

   But Bush did not stop Iran (or North Korea) from getting nukes. And that will weigh heavily on his legacy, especially if Iran attacks Israel or especially if there is a nuclear terrorist attack in the US. And Obama’s response to any nuclear attacks will weigh heavily on his legacy.

   And to Yehudit’s point this recession and Katrina will always keep Bush’s historical place down regardless of how much responsibility was really his. But as Harry T said the buck does stop with the President – and like NFL quarterbacks they usually get too much credit and blame.
10. Dan says:

    January 20, 2009 at 7:09 am

    YES, we to keep our eyes on the BIG PICTURE.

    JAY from the Lone Star State pulled his punches. If the Big Apple and Washington, D.C. should get nuked by muslim terrorists, or muslim state sponsors of terror, ——————- then that dread event is going to do far more than just “weigh heavily on his legacy.”

    Recall Chamberlain.

    The British Home Office had to place guards outside his home, to shield him from British citizens who wanted to rip him limb from limb.

    YES! That happened.

    If New York City and Washington get nuked, —————– then don’t be surprised if GW should find himself alone, all alone, dealing with some red hot fellow Americans who are intent on making an example of him.

    All of us need to remember that 9/11 wasn’t an attempt to kill off a few thousand Americans.

    That attack was designed to kill off, at a minimun, 30,000 people. They intended to lop off the top of one building, and drive it down on the buildings around, and then smash over the other. Since each building held 25,000 people, the muslims were hoping for HUGE numbers of dead.

    It was the equivalent to one of our USAAF attacks against the 3d Reich, or one of the attacks our our kinsmen in Bomber Command.

    Don’t you guys recall the attempted chemical attack in Jordan in Bush’s first term? Where the muslims hoped to kill off 80,000 Jordanians.

    Our enemy is FULLY CAPABLE and fully mentally prepared to kill off vast, VAST numbers of human beings.

    And Bush has just effectively signed off on Tehran’ completing their Manhattan Project.

    History gave us our warning.

    And it was 9/11.

    And instead of dealing with muslim mayhem in toto, instead of unleashing and unloading on the foremost sponsors of muslim mayhem, Saudi Arabia, Syria and Iran, instead of that, Bush went off and advanced an indirect policy of regime change on their perimeters.

    First off, I’m privately convinced that it won’t work, or if it does, it will take too much time. And we don’t have the time, because Iran is about to go nuke.

    All of us are going to see horrors, utter horrors, and within about the next 15 years.

    So anybody inclined to go out on the plank in defense of Bush’s stewardship of our national and foreign affairs ought to climb back on board. Because Bush is most likely going to be seen as a guy given the warning of 9/11, given a nation ready, willing and rearing for action thereafter, and instead, he went to Kabul, then he went off on some diplomatic junket for a year and a half.
11. Joe says:

    January 20, 2009 at 7:16 am

    Hitchens has a thought experiment: Hitchens on why Bush really was the best choice over Gore and Kerry!

    And also explains why “war crimes” against Bush are not warranted:

    Now we know why Andrew Sullivan did not give Hitch any tongue!

    Bush did the right thing in going into Iraq and the wrong things in the first couple of years of occupation (the wrong thing was not firing Rumsfeld sooner). The surge was definitely the right thing, but at that point his presidency was starting to unravel, leaving Iran on its own. That is a mess we will all come to regret and unfortunately Obama’s instincts will be to further kick the can down the road.
12. Alex says:

    January 20, 2009 at 7:31 am

    George Bush wrecked the American economy and that is his main legacy. George Bush is the new Herbert Hoover. Thank God that the crazy Bush plan to gamble Social Security on Wall Street was spiked by the Democrats and sensible Republicans. Bush inherited surpluses, the Treasury was actually buying back the debt, but Bush leaves the biggest deficit and biggest debt in world history. Under Bush, the top 1% saw their wealth increase 11%, while the remaining 99% saw their incomes shrink.

    The Iraq surge would not have been necessary if Bush had run the war properly to begin with. Iraq war has now gone on longer than WW2 and cost hundreds of billions of dollars. Meanwhile Iran is stronger than ever.

    We can only pray that conservatives continue to praise Bush so that they continue to be drowned by his legacy of monumental incompetence.
13. Joe says:

    January 20, 2009 at 7:34 am

    Algerian Al Qaeda playing with chem or bio weapons, I feel so much better now about the future…or not
14. Art says:

    January 20, 2009 at 8:23 am

    Of course, history will also judge Bush as a torturer and war criminal, and the weight of the ideologues in his corner will do nothing to shape their judgment. His civil rights abuses, some of which have been recognized by the Supreme Court and others of which will be in the future, Guantanamo, suspension of habeas corpus, will be seen as one of the blackest episodes in American history, akin to our creation of camps for Japanese Americans in WWII.

    And Bush’s legacy clearly must include allowing, and even pushing, North Korea and Iran to accelerate their nuclear weapons programs. Most serious analysts acknowledge that Bush’s Iraq war has strengthened Iran, not weakened it.

    Bush also ended the Reagan era of conservative resurgency and curtailed Republican rule. Bush. therefore, will be at least partly responsible for guaranteeing the status quo on the Supreme Court, liberalizing abortion and stem cell rules, strengthening the labor movement, implementing universal healthcare, de-emphasizing hard power in our foreign affairs and all else the reaction to his failed presidency engenders.

    Historians will see Bush for what he is: A man of limited intellect and baseless conviction who was consequential primarily for his enormous failures in virtually every aspect of governing: from foreign policy to economic policy, from keeping America safe to protecting our constitutional principles.

    But please, keep arguing that Bush was a success. That’s a perfect platform for 2010.
15. Paul Zisserson says:

    January 20, 2009 at 8:30 am

    When I read these types of discussions, I’m reminded of a story that was told about Claire Booth Luce’s advice to John Kennedy. When he asked her advice about bring president, she told him to select his issues carefully, for presidents are judged and remembered by history with one line: Washington the father of our country, Lincoln freed the slaves; that type of thing. She was right, I believe. I don’t think anything pithy can be offered yet for W and that’s why Bush supporters—which I am not at all—can still cling to some hope that his presidency can be redeemed.
16. Alex says:

    January 20, 2009 at 8:32 am

    #15, here’s the line:

    Bush wrecked the economy.
17. KilgoreTrout XL says:

    January 20, 2009 at 8:38 am

    “History Will Vindicate George W. Bush”

    No it will not.
18. SmokeVanThorn says:

    January 20, 2009 at 8:40 am

    Send in the clowns – don’t bother, they’re (Art, Alex, K, et al) here.
19. soupcon says:

    January 20, 2009 at 9:07 am

    It’s so silly to say the economy is wrecked.Two down quarters brought upon by monetary policy mismanagement are not signs of the apocalypse.It isn’t helped by a Democrat Congress that seeks to punish growth and inhibit risk taking.

    Economic illiterates are a scourge and best left to their ignorance.
20. cavalier says:

    January 20, 2009 at 9:08 am

    Unfortunately both Yehudit and Dan make good points. While the achievements that Dan would have like to have seen in respect of F-22s, 400 ship navy, etc.. were not perhaps realistic, the failure to make much greater progress or even to note the desirability of these goals is very much to the discredit of the President. The failure to engage the MSM and his enemies on the left and in the world with much much greater vigor rather than to leave the field to them much too often have also contributed greately to a pesidency that will most likely and appropriately be seen as a failure. The touting of “increased home ownership” in lieu of aggresively pursing the heinous depredations of Fannie Freddy and their Dem (and some Republican) cohorts contributed to the weakening of the economy as did the aggresive push to weaken the Dollar. The nomination of Harriet Miers vitiates almost entirely such credit as the President might have accured for the subsequent nomination of Justice Alito. It should be noted here, too that had the Presdient defended his friends and policies with half the vigour with which he defended Miers he would have had much greater policy success and political standing.

    By all means full credit for the anti-terro measures, the decision to invade Iraq, the (very-belated yet still wise and courageous) decision on the Surge, the nomination of the Chief Justice, the tax-cuts (especially as expanded in 2003) the pursuit of sensible SS and health care reform. Still, all in all, not good.
21. soupcon says:

    January 20, 2009 at 9:10 am

    GNP is back to levels of 2006, but it’s all over but the shouting, never to return.But it FEELS like 1933, doesn’t it, and that’s all that counts, and only massive government intervention to right the wrongs created by government in the first place can soothe the chicken little’s.Oh hennypenny!
22. KilgoreTrout XL says:

    January 20, 2009 at 9:11 am

    ” ‘You can’t judge those things in real time,’ Wehner said. ‘You have to wait and let history make its judgment — and reality take hold.’ He argued that Reagan was judged harshly during his presidency but since has been treated more favorably — and he believes the same will hold for Bush.”

    -Peter Wehner, WAPO, 12/13/04, (on the negative public perception of Mr. Bush -Kilgore). http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A59795-2004Dec12.html

    Seems as if you’ve been shoveling this particular bag of garbage for quite some time, sir.

    How is it working out for you?
23. cavalier says:

    January 20, 2009 at 9:14 am

    Oh, and the failure to pardon Scooter Libby can hardly be viewed as less than either dishonorable and cowardly or at the very least the continued turning of the other cheek to his and America’s enemies, both foreign and domestic, which has and will continue to cost this coutnry so dearly.
24. Alex says:

    January 20, 2009 at 9:17 am

    #22– at least twelve trillion of wealth gone, financial system teetering, 500,000 jobs lost every month, record numbers on food stamps, industrial production decimated, record deficit, etc etc, and still you defend Bush?

    Besides the economy and Iraq fiasco, let’s not forget Katrina and the fact that Osama bin Laden is still alive and free.
25. Hurf says:

    January 20, 2009 at 9:57 am

    Is it hard for you to think of all those dead Iraqi children your boss got killed, Wehner? I mean, George must be hurting too, but…
26. btenney says:

    January 20, 2009 at 10:01 am

    Now we go into the future with an inexperienced Manchild leading a Toy Presidency, with an Imaginary Plan.
    I am not Optomistic about the Government but I expect that the Citizenry will soon pull it’s head out and demand Substance over Style
27. g says:

    January 20, 2009 at 10:17 am

    Wake up btenney, it ain’t 2000 anymore. You’ve been asleep for 8 years.
28. KilgoreTrout XL says:

    January 20, 2009 at 10:17 am

    Btenney:

    What you’ve just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent statement were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
29. Diyogee says:

    January 20, 2009 at 10:38 am

    Peter: Could it be you think we’re all too simple to realize you’re rewriting every line?

    Memories,
    light the corners of your mind
    misty, watercolor memories
    of the way things never were

    Scattered pictures,
    and the dreams we left behind
    should make us all ashamed
    we didn’t impeach him for war crimes
30. RCAR says:

    January 20, 2009 at 10:40 am

    Bush gave his last speech and I do hope I never hear another word from him again as long as he lives! He leaves office with Olmert’s boot imprint smack dab in his drunken face. The economic news is, as always, pretty awful and getting more awful. Bush squeaked into office on tracks greased by his father and a very corrupt Supreme Court. Most Americans were childishly happy with the tax cuts he handed out like candy to babies. Then, we instantly began to run up huge deficits. Our trade deficits worsened every year since LBJ. But under Bush, we run up epic debts, doubling personal and national debt while deindustrializing the nation and destroying the future value of the dollar.
    His reign ended with the entire banking system collapsing, Wall Street collapsing,alas the entire economy is collapsing.
31. lester says:

    January 20, 2009 at 11:18 am

    good bye neo cons!!
32. CFB says:

    January 20, 2009 at 11:25 am

    The ignorance of simple facts and of history in this forum is astonishing.

    Iraq is not a “fiasco.” The war is won. Even Saint Barack Obama admits that. He affirms it by retaining President Bush’s secretary of defense. All of his focus on troop withdrawal, which Bush also initiated, is a smokescreen. He is following Bush’s policy.

    Bush did not wreck the financial system. The Democrats in Congress did, with their (as it turns out, successful) attempts to buy votes from blacks and hispanics by forcing banks to lend to borrowers without adequate credit, then subsidizing the resulting bad loans. Every time Bush, McCain and other Republicans tried to bring Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac under control, they were demagogued by the race baiters in Congress. It’s on YouTube. Please take the time to inform yourself. Your ignorance is embarrassing.

    “Osama bin Laden is alive and free?” Really? How do you know? The answer is, you don’t. You merely wish it to be so in order to hang your fantasy boogey man on Bush. Get it straight: you, insane liberal Democrats, wish a homicidal maniac who murdered three thousand Americans to be alive in order to try to undermine the leader of the free world. The fact is, millions of people in Afghanistan and Iraq are now free thanks to Bush. But you can’t deal with that fact, so you resort to phantasmagoria. It really is pitiful.

    As to popular opinion and the opinions of the elites in the MSM, the man considered the greatest leader in American history was called these names by the elites of his own day (some of them in his own cabinet): The “long-armed creature.” The “low-cunning clown.” “That giraffe.” “The baboon.” A “simple Susan,” a “huckster,” a “tyrant.” “Half horse, half alligator.” The “original gorilla” who suffered from “painful imbecility.” And the “Illinois beast.”

    So please, keep spewing your vitriol. You’re in the company of giants.
33. Dan Schwartz says:

    January 20, 2009 at 1:11 pm

    An open border with Mexico, flooding the United States with 20 million unskilled people who have no desire to assimilate, instead demanding “Mexifornia.”

    Q: How does a muslim terrorist smuggle a dirty bomb into the United States?

    A: Inside a bale of pot!

    ————–

    Our whole raison d’etre for going into Iraq was our fear they would have and proliferate to terrorists weapons of mass destruction. That Saddam even fooled his own generals with one of the biggest bluffs in history is certainly no fault of President Bush.

    But then, what about the biggest state sponsor of terrorism of them all: Iran? Not only did he flush the Bush Doctrine down the toilet, and not only did he subscribe to feckless European diplomacy as the thousands of centrifuges spin away, he ACTIVELY blocked Israel from defending itself against a nuclear-armed Persian state.

    ————–

    “…to his sweeping and successful reforms in education, to his unprecedented efforts to help the continent of Africa, to his enormously successful Medicare prescription drug plan…”

    Spending money we didn’t have, borrowing it from the Chinese and the Gulf States as we mortgage our children’s future with deficits as far as the eye can see. Deficit spending and expansion of Fedzilla so profligate that in eight short years, our National Debt has gone from about a third of our annual GDP to just about our entire GDP.

    Where was the veto pen when Trent Lott, Bill Frist, Tom DeLay, John Boehner and Dennis Hastert were spending like drunken teenagers behind the wheel of a Corvette?

    In short, President George W. Bush is leaving office with America less safe, her values badly diluted, the Republican Party in smoking ruins unable to fend off socialism… Oh, and we are BANKRUPT, to top it all off.

    Where, oh where was Ronald Reagan these last eight long years?

    Dan Schwartz
    Sayreville, NJ
34. Geoffrey Britain says:

    January 20, 2009 at 1:38 pm

    Dan,

    Is it reasonable to demand that a President reform his own party? Had he attempted to do so and expended the political capital necessary, would he then have had the support for the surge?
    What remaining leverage would Bush have used to do so?

    Is it reasonable to imply that Republicans (you didn’t even mention democrats) are solely responsible for the economic deficit the country now faces?

    As for the open border, what leverage should Bush have used (besides the bully pulpit) to ‘convince’ the majority of the public and congress to abandon the competing interests that are responsible for the political ‘log jam’ of illegal immigration?

    FYI, the primary purpose of the invasion of Iraq was NOT because “was our fear they would have and proliferate to terrorists weapons of mass destruction.” That was the simplistic rationale offered to a misinformed, mentally lazy public as justification. The actual reason was the long-term strategy of introducing secular democracy into the middle east, and the sending of a compelling message to both the supporting rogue nations and the enabling nations of Islamic terrorism that the ‘rules’ of the game had changed. The left and it’s propaganda organ, the MSM, effectively undermined that message.

    Without PUBLIC and political support, Bush could do nothing about Iran’s nuclear ambitions.

    The left and sadly, a gullible, ignorant and a mentally lazy American public, shall reap what they have sown.
35. Miss Clover says:

    January 20, 2009 at 1:41 pm

    Never in my lifetime have I seen and heard so much visceral hatred and vitriol directed toward a sitting president. I mean, when has there been a mockumentary depicting the assassination of a president still in office? It was harsh to say the least.

    In all, I wholeheartedly agree with the writer that former President George W. Bush will be vindicated by history. The truth will outlast and outlive his detractors. His record will stand for itself, in spite of his current unpopularity.

    One fact about former President Bush is irrefutable – he was never indecisive. He chose a course of action and he stuck to it.

    God bless you, George W. Bush – and God bless our new President Barack Obama!
36. chuck martel says:

    January 20, 2009 at 1:50 pm

    HEY! DAN SCHWARTZ! YEAH, YOU.

    Glad you’re here. Want to ask you a question that’s been bothering me. How, exactly, do we borrow money from the Chinese? Does Dick Chaney or Hank Paulsen go over to Peking or whatever it’s called now with a fistful of mortgages and get a check? Or do they just transfer it to Bernie Madoff’s credit card balance? How does that all work? And can i do it? And if things are so screwed up here, why would the Big Red Machine want to loan us the money, huh? Wouldn’t they be smarter to loan it to some squared-away country like Turkey or maybe Argentina? Yeah, how does it all work, anyway?
37. SmallTownOhioan says:

    January 20, 2009 at 2:01 pm

    Mr. Wehner,
    I was just thinking about Pres. Lincoln and Pres. Truman this morning. Both men were ridiculed and pilloried by the media, both men made hard decisions, and both men had those hard decisions vindicated.
    You are absolutely right–it all hinges on Iraq. We need an representative democracy in the Middle East that is an Arab nation. We also need one with middle class aspirations with an oil-based economy. Iraq fits the bill in a way that Israel and Afghanistan do not.
    In the very long run, this is the only way to defeat the terrorists.
    Like you, I believe Pres. George W. Bush will be vindicated.
38. J.E. Dyer says:

    January 20, 2009 at 2:35 pm

    My regret here is that I was unable to be first in line to second Peter Wehner. Yes, history WILL vindicate George W. Bush.

    The tantrum-throwing Bush-bashers will have no input on how history judges Bush. Nothing they do or say lasts. They don’t even remember what has happened in their own lifetimes, much less the long history of man before them.

    The weird, snarling hatred of Bush is evidence not about him, but about the haters. There is no virtue in being so intemperate — and there is only animal stupidity in being so irrational: so determined to speak from abject ignorance, to dismiss fact and sober analysis. A pack of howling dogs is smarter, better regulated, and more purposeful than the Bush haters.

    I have written at length before about the concrete things Bush has achieved. He has also done some things I strongly disagreed with. But history will, indeed, vindicate him for crafting a new Western response to wahhabist terrorism and its sponsors. All future policies on wahhabi terror — a major aspect of the radical threat of our time — will be measured against his. A legacy like that is very rare, even among national leaders.
39. lester says:

    January 20, 2009 at 3:53 pm

    “My regret here is that I was unable to be first in line to second Peter Wehner. Yes, history WILL vindicate George W. Bush.”

    lol you guys are too much.
40. leah says:

    January 20, 2009 at 9:10 pm

    This President was subjected to a Soviet-style disinformation campaign (in conjunction with Hollywood’s propaganda machine) unequalled in history. It worked. Only those who read publications like Commentary would have had an inkling that facts stood in the way.
41. greg says:

    January 21, 2009 at 9:14 pm

    This is a joke, right?

    He brushes off “mistakes” as if they weren’t paid for in lives, both Innocent Iraqi and American. whoops!
42. Rick says:

    January 27, 2009 at 10:36 am

    You people who are slamming GW are illustrative of the politically ignorant voting public who has, in the light of infinite wisdom, installed a socialist, anti-American, anti-Constitution government headed by a radical, left-wing racist filled with grandiose, left-wing ideas hidden behind a façade of centrism.
    It is obvious that you, like most of the politically ignorant voting public, do not understand the limitations of the presidency placed upon that office by the Constitution. You expect the president to wave a magic wand and have Iran and N. Korea shrivel in fright. What you think GW should have accomplished would have required a declaration of war on these two countries. After 9-11, GW accomplished what should have been taken care of by Clinton. If quick results that are not considered in the light of long term effects are what you are after, you now have that promise in the form of the empty shell of liberal ideology. The damage that is about to be perpetrated on America by the socialist government now in place will not be repaired in my lifetime. January 20th, 2009 marked the end of America as we have known it since the Constitution was signed. Enjoy!
43. Robert B. says:

    January 27, 2009 at 2:13 pm

    I read all the postings so far, Only GW and a those few literate,knowledgeable people understand, you blind pathetic little liberals who voted for Obama, are to damn lazy to even look back at history and see the facts. It was Carter ( a democrat President who started the Freddie/Fannie mess and President Billy who added to this housing mess that brought the “Cards” down) You probably never been out of country, to damn lazy to get a job, or if you have one your probably a liberal attorney, because you can’t do anything else.

    This obama been in office now for 2 weeks and is already screwing up your security and well being. He has surrounded himself with a bunch of cheats, liars, and crooks, and has the liberal media slurping it up.

    Take a little extra time, and really, really delve into the facts before you spout off your mouths to prove your ignorance.

    It’s going to be a rough 4years folks .
44. 27685 says:

    January 30, 2009 at 4:58 am

    viagra
45. John Crippen says:

    February 7, 2009 at 3:30 am

    Well here’s a book on the legacy of George Bush that’ll keep you on the seat of your pants…”The Legacy of George W Bush, A Collection of Confliction Opinions.
46. michael says:

    June 7, 2009 at 5:47 pm

    To those who trash Bush, I only ask do you have a clue about anything. I have been reading through some of these comments and all I hear is Korea and Iran. I spent this past year in Korea living there. Yes it was discomforting knowing there was a madman a few hours away from my home. However, it wasnt as bad as the left-wing media made it out to be. These countries had the abilities to make nukes before Bush took office, I know that most you dont know that since you watch dickheads like Keith Olbermann and the rest of Obama’s PA team oops I mean MSNBC. Bush did what he could and with little support as he got, it certainly showed us if anything what our Allies true intentions were. I hear the world hates us because of Bush but I disagree, with the Bush part. I think they turned on us becuase he put this country ahead of the rest. With Clinton we saw our soliders and people put out to pasture to satisfy our overseas allies, Kosovo ring a bell. We saw no action when we were attacked or hurt. American Embassies, or the USS Cole were hit by Al Quada and Bill Clinton did nothing. How can people blame Bush for 9/11, did anyone read the 9/11 comission report. It clearly states that the administration was not properly warned enough for them to address this issues seriously.
    History will clear Bush of most things but he will get dinged for a lot of other things to. Greatest President in history, probably not. Worst President in history, most definitely not. He will end up somewhere in the middle but closer to the top. Obama for all his Charisma will end up the same way however it wont because what he does it will be because was the first of his race to hold that job!!