No. of Recommendations: 23
Just took a look at the web site for the George W. Bush Presidential Center. It will be dedicated on Thursday, April 25.

http://www.bushcenter.org/

When you look at Bush's record of expensive and embarrassing misadventures in Iraq and Afghanistan coupled with the largest economic collapse since the Great Depression, it's seems a little ironic that "Economic Growth" is the first item on the Center's activities.

Seems Bush still has a sense of humor about the nation he damaged so greatly.

intercst
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 3
So you think 9/11 could not have happened under a Gore Presidency? No housing crisis?

Post 9/11 Gore would win Afghanistan like Bush and now Obama didn't?

Yeah, you need to go to a library alright and spend lots and lots of time there.

Willy
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
I can't get past the irony of the name itself "The George W. Bush Presidential Library".

Does anyone think Bush the Lesser ever did anything in a library?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
<<Does anyone think Bush the Lesser ever did anything in a library? >>


Maybe smoke a little weed?

intercst
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
I can't get past the irony of the name itself "The George W. Bush Presidential Library".

Does anyone think Bush the Lesser ever did anything in a library?



wasn't he in the school's library when he was reading the Goat story on 9-11?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
I can't get past the irony of the name itself "The George W. Bush Presidential Library".

Does anyone think Bush the Lesser ever did anything in a library?


wasn't he in the school's library when he was reading the Goat story on 9-11?


___

He was doing that in part to support his wife's Literacy campaign.

Now compare that to Obama on the campaign trail instead of tending to the unfolding events in Benghazi and the subsequent coverup of same.

Change, indeed.

Willy
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 4
Dumbest. Thread. Ever.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
He was doing that in part to support his wife's Literacy campaign.

Now compare that to Obama on the campaign trail instead of tending to the unfolding events in Benghazi and the subsequent coverup of same.

Change, indeed.

Willy


___________________________

The Benghazi coverup and now a terrorist attack under the prez watch...not to mention all of the rest of the prez failures, millions of Americans out of work, no jobs to be had and on and on. The prez and mooch will have a lot of vacation photos to display though.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
You might know that I have bad feelings about Bush as President. But when you talk about economic failures and make fun of Afghanistan's success or failure, and you support Obama?

I know it's not fun to make fun of Obama, who went to the very same esteemed liberal university Bush did. But you really should use nerf balls when throwing things inside of your glass house.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
Two things I hope are in there:

1) Dubya's "Alfred E. Neumann" picture

2) His skit about not being able to find any WMDs -- and a death toll of how many went looking for them.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
<So you think 9/11 could not have happened under a Gore Presidency? No housing crisis?

Post 9/11 Gore would win Afghanistan like Bush and now Obama didn't?>

Of course no one can know for sure, but I believe 9/11 was less likely to have happened under Gore because he probably would have heeded the warnings about Bin Laden's plans.....also possibly because OBL might have realized that the American response would have been vastly different under Gore than it was under Bush. I think Bin Laden was smart enough to foresee fairly clearly our response under Bush. He (OBL) didn't expect to defeat us militarily but instead to force us to spend lots and LOTS of money going to war, since everyone knew Bush was looking for an excuse to do so. I do NOT think (of course I don't know, nor does anyone else for sure) that we would have gone to war at all under Gore even if 9/11 had happened on his watch, so you wouldn't be asking the question of a win in Afghanistan.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 7
"Dumbest. Thread. Ever."

Nah, it still has a while to go before it reaches the idiocy of the threads claiming the MSM isn't covering the Gosmell trial.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
"Dumbest. Thread. Ever."
---
Nah, it still has a while to go before it reaches the idiocy of the threads claiming the MSM isn't covering the Gosmell trial.


Not even close to as dumb as the thread on how Bill Ayers inspired Tamerlan Tsarnaev.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
[ Does anyone think Bush the Lesser ever did anything in a library? ]

"wasn't he in the school's library when he was reading the Goat story on 9-11?"

That's right - in the elementary school. I stand corrected - he HAS been in a library!
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
<So you think 9/11 could not have happened under a Gore Presidency? No housing crisis?

Post 9/11 Gore would win Afghanistan like Bush and now Obama didn't?>

Of course no one can know for sure, but I believe 9/11 was less likely to have happened under Gore because he probably would have heeded the warnings about Bin Laden's plans.....also possibly because OBL might have realized that the American response would have been vastly different under Gore than it was under Bush. I think Bin Laden was smart enough to foresee fairly clearly our response under Bush.


heeding warnings might have had an effect
OBL wouldn't have expcted a different response ... doubtful there would have been a different response
Afghanistan wasn't Bush's idea --it was OUR idea --our need for revenge

Iraq was ..and maybe Afghanistan could have been 'won' if US'd stayed focused .... but i doubt it.



[ the Soviets couldn't win.... a century(?) earlier the British couldn't win ...
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
" Nah, it still has a while to go before it reaches the idiocy of the threads claiming the MSM isn't covering the Gosmell trial. "


Except only dummies think that the issue involved zero coverage.

Before the low level of coverage was pointed out, the media was fine with giving this significant story as little coverage as possible because the story goes against the media's preferred narrative.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Nah, it still has a while to go before it reaches the idiocy of the threads claiming the MSM isn't covering the Gosmell trial.
_____________________________
In a HuffPost Live segment today on the issue, host Marc Lamont Hill made clear where his theoretical thinking lay:
“For what it’s worth, I do think that those of us on the left have made a decision not to cover this trial because we worry that it’ll compromise abortion rights. Whether you agree with abortion or not, I do think there’s a direct connection between the media’s failure to cover this and our own political commitments on the left. I think it’s a bad idea, I think it’s dangerous, but I think that’s the way it is.”
Strong words from a host on a left-leaning outlet.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/wp/2013/04/1...
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Just wait until The One has a building put up in his holy name.

It will be a home for the lazy, low information voters who just wants they free stuff. And it will cost plenty. And paid for by taxpayers. His legacy.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
You mean the guy who had a better GPA than our current Sec. of State?

Lol.

We can only assume that Bush's GPA is betther than Obama's until Obama releases his.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 5
So you think 9/11 could not have happened under a Gore Presidency?

There is a 63% chance that 9/11 would have happened under a Gore presidency. The Republicans distracted the FBI for a decade in the 1990's looking for a "blue dress", so chances are they wouldn't have caught the Saudi airplane hijackers in time either. However there is a 37% chance that they would have, given that there wouldn't have been a 9 month hiatus in any attention to terrorism as happened in the Bush administration between his inauguration and 9/10.

No housing crisis?

There is a 92% probability that there would have been a housing crisis, the mortgage industry having gone off the rails, abetted by the lax standards of the bond rating agencies, coupled with Easy-Al's laissez faire Fed policies. The difference during that administration would have been slight: Bush actually approved and did most of the things that were necessary at the height of the crisis.

Post 9/11 Gore would win Afghanistan like Bush and now Obama didn't?

Bush was actually within millimeters of "winning" in Afghanistan, and then pulled focus, troops, and resources to move over to Iraq. Had someone else been President that seems unlikely, as the President would not have been in thrall to a hard core cabal of neo-cons, who had Iraq in their sights for over a decade, 9/11 or not. Therefore there is a 96% chance that the conflict would have ended long before a changeover in administration.

Yeah, you need to go to a library alright and spend lots and lots of time there.

This information comes courtesy of Mr. Peabody and the Wayback machine, which allows the exploration of alternate universes. As ridiculous as that sounds, it is one of the premier exhibits (minus Mr. Peabody) at the new Bush Presidential Library. Not kidding:

Rewinding History, Bush Museum Lets You Decide

In a new brick-and-limestone museum, visitors to an interactive theater will be presented with the stark choices that confronted the nation’s 43rd president: invade Iraq or leave Saddam Hussein in power? Deploy federal troops after Hurricane Katrina or rely on local forces? Bail out Wall Street or let the banks fail?

The hypothetical exercise, which includes touch screens that let users watch videos of “advisers” before voting on whether they would make the same choices that Mr. Bush did, revisits the most consequential moments of his administration.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/21/us/politics/hitting-rewind...
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
"Except only dummies think that the issue involved zero coverage."

Did you hurt your back moving those goalposts?

"Before the low level of coverage was pointed out, the media was fine with giving this significant story as little coverage as possible because the story goes against the media's preferred narrative."

The "media's preferred narrative" is called ratings.

As was mentioned many times before, the most avid pro-choice supporters want increased coverage because it shows what happens when abprtion is politically threatened and shoved into the dark alleys done by hacks.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
There is a 100% chance you are full of it.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Did you hurt your back moving those goalposts?

Funny that you have the lack of intellect to say this after you read the lexisnexis report of the true lack of coverage. But denial and ignorance is all some have in their weapons of debate.

the most avid pro-choice supporters want increased coverage because it shows what happens when abprtion is politically threatened and shoved into the dark alleys done by hacks.

If you can get someone to read to you, you will find that others in this thread have stories from lefty news writers who said that they avoided the story because of it's negative impact on the image of abortion. So your pretend debate about this is over.

Newsflash! This happened when abortion is not politically threatened. This happened when the ultra-lefties are crying for less regulation on late term abortion.

I am pro-choice, but I also think that a baby having their neck snipped after being born inside a toilet after a "doctor" pitosin'ed the mom so that she gave birth a few weeks early and had the nurses watch as the baby tried to crawl out of the toilet, ain't a pretty picture of abortion in America. Maybe this happened before RoeWade...but we know it happened in the "ultra right to choose" environment that we live in today.

This has obliterated any loosening of the restrictions of late-term abortion, and that, as a pro-choicer, is a good thing. To those who think the above scenario is a right of a pregnant woman, you no longer matter in this debate whether you are a man or <gasp> a woman.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
"Seems Bush still has a sense of humor about the nation he damaged so greatly."

Lots to laugh about as a result of the current President's "achievements" :

Pork-u-lus, cash-for-junkers, Solyndra, keeping lobbyists out of the White House (not), etc.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
When you look at Obama's record of expensive and embarrassing misadventures in Libya and Afghanistan coupled with the worst unemployment and weakest economic recovery in modern times, it seems a little ironic that "Job Growth" was supposedly his primary objective in both elections.

Seems Obama still has a sense of humor about the nation he damaged so greatly.



There, fixed that for you.

VQ
(wonders if the presidency will someday be once again about leadership and solutions, instead of about speeches and blame-laying).
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
For what it’s worth, I do think that those of us on the left have made a decision not to cover this trial because we worry that it’ll compromise abortion rights. Whether you agree with abortion or not, I do think there’s a direct connection between the media’s failure to cover this and our own political commitments on the left. I think it’s a bad idea, I think it’s dangerous, but I think that’s the way it is.

If only the Lefties here could be so honest.

VQ
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
You mean the guy who had a better GPA than our current Sec. of State?

Lol.

We can only assume that Bush's GPA is betther than Obama's until Obama releases his.


Yes. Clearly Obama'e record is questionable, he got in by affirmative action, he entered as an international student, or all 3.

But he speaks well, therefore he is "highly intelligent".

VQ
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
The "media's preferred narrative" is called ratings.

Oh, I see. That's why the most popular cable news outlet is Fox News, with more viewership than CNN and MSNBC combined.

Sheesh.

VQ
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
The mortgage/financial collapse wasn't Bush's fault, he was just the man in the office when it happened, but it would have happened regardless of who was in there.

Why does the left keep blaming this on Bush when you know full well he didn't cause it?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Why does the left keep blaming this on Bush when you know full well he didn't cause it?
_______________________________

Because they know there is no a media to correctly point out they are acting as idiots, and that in fact the media will work with them to make it appear it was somehow his fault.

Kind of like the idiots that keep saying Obama got Bin Laden. as if any Republicans that might have been in office would not have made the decision themselves and done it with ease, to allow intelligence and the military to complete it's efforts.

Blaming stuff on Bush is beautiful it makes it at worst bi=partisan and papers over that one party is calling for change from then and the other complicit then wants to deny what happened was largely political and go back to the well.

There are lots of other reasons all bad as well.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
The mortgage/financial collapse wasn't Bush's fault, he was just the man in the office when it happened, but it would have happened regardless of who was in there.

Why does the left keep blaming this on Bush when you know full well he didn't cause it?


Why? Because they don't want to face the truth. And because they're so blinded by their partisan hatred they can't see straight.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Why does the left keep blaming this on Bush when you know full well he didn't cause it?

Because it is a lefty wet dream.

In fact, Bush was essentially the only administration that recognized the risks and tried to do something about it, though rebuffed by Congressional democrats.

VQ
Print the post Back To Top
Advertisement