Democrats have had a field day criticizing President George W. Bush.
It is almost a hatred they have had for Bush and they haven’t let up in expressing their bitterness in their efforts to weaken his presidency. They make fun of him whenever they can, and yet he was able to maintain his composure and not resort to name-calling and assigning ugly classifications to those who opposed his legislative agenda.
This nation paused Friday to remember the vicious and deadly attacks on New York City’s World Trade Center, the Pentagon and the crash of a hijacked plane in a Pennsylvania farm field on 9/11.
For a relatively brief period of time afterward, the nation was united. There were all kinds of displays and actions showing the spirit of America and the commitment to make sure similar attacks would never happen again on American soil.
For a time, Bush enjoyed the highest public approval ratings of any U.S. president in history. But it didn’t last long. His critics thought he and his advisers were imposing too many limitations on “freedoms” of Americans. Bush called for crackdowns on many fronts and enlisted the help of those in England and other friendly nations. Little things like inspecting airline passengers and luggage, or listening in on phone calls of suspected individuals angered many and this anger grew stronger each year.
But as was pointed out time and again at Friday’s remembrances, this country has not been attacked since 9/11.
During the ceremonies commemorating the crash into the Pentagon, news network announcers thought a U.S. Coast Guard boat patrolling the Potomac River fired on another vessel cruising the river. No such action occurred. This took place only a short distance from the Pentagon.
Gen. Richard Myers, former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, was interviewed and asked if he had any idea of what could have happened and whether it was possible someone in a boat may have been trying to commit a deadly action.
The general said he didn’t know what might have happened, but pointed out that prior to 9/11 and the creation of the Homeland Security agency there would not have been any security patrolling the Potomac only a short distance from the White House and the Pentagon, or all other ports and major rivers in America.
Prior to 9/11, this country was naked for attacks with little awareness or appreciation of the seriousness and commitment of those who hate the United States and will do whatever they can to kill Americans.
This hatred has been building for years. It didn’t start with Bush, but when this nation was attacked he didn’t hesitate to take what he thought were the necessary actions to protect American citizens. He also made a pledge to hunt down and destroy those responsible for the attacks.
The united feeling among all Americans faded as 9/11 faded over time. Growing numbers of Bush critics engaged in a constant campaign to criticize the president for his actions, policies and laws intended to minimize the chances for more attacks.
Now we have officials in Washington who have said those in President Barack Obama’s administration are not to use the terms “war” or “terrorists” when referring to conflicts in Iraq, Afghanistan or elsewhere.
Be that as it may, the fact is Bush and those in his administration and many Democrat and most Republican members of Congress called for and approved measures which have made this country much safer.
However, it would and could be a deadly mistake to let up or weaken these measures. The world has changed and there are many who want to destroy this country in one way or another. Some by non-military means but which would weaken this country from within.
At least for a short time Friday, Americans should have recognized and appreciated the actions taken by Bush to protect this country. This isn’t going to change the feelings of Bush haters but it should shed some light on the shallowness, bitterness and meanness of some of these critics, as well as those who want to blame Bush for all the trouble this nation faces today.
Comments
LJWorld.com doesn’t necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full policy. Also, read about banned accounts and harassing comments.
Hydra (Roger Ford) says…
What an an irrelevant article! Bush was a failure as an oil man, a failure as a military man and a failure as a president. I have to admit he was a very sucessful liar.
maddog1960 (anonymous) says…
yes, I remember he sat listening to children read books as our citizens died and than later hiding in a bunker in Neb. What a great man.
weeslicket (anonymous) says…
another "confused and wandering" editorial
grimpeur (anonymous) says…
Good grief, this sucks. Shrub got a sympathy bump after 9/11, then his "ratings" slumped back to the sad levels his impotent and failed presidency earned. America is weaker and less-respected in world because of Bush's handlers' strong desire to go to war in Iraq, and by the way they failed to hunt down and destroy any of the Saudis responsible for 9/11.
Bush was a warp resident and the author's apology for the miserable failure is unsurprising and typical of the sad sack elefink homers who continue to defend a presidency best left unmentioned except as a cautionary tale.
corduroypants (anonymous) says…
Dolphie, you're doin' a heck of a job.
kugrad (anonymous) says…
Too bad he didn't follow through on protecting the usa before 9/11. We now know that the Bush administration totally ignored warnings about the use of aircrafts as weapons.
What I object to about Bush/Cheney is the way they used the tragedy of 9/11 for political purposes starting on 9/12. They used it relentlessly to push their domestic agenda and they did so without shame.
mancityfooty (Corey Williams) says…
TomShewmon (Tom Shewmon) says…
"Obama is still blaming Bush for all our problems?"
Wow, Tom. The only other person who even mentioned Obama was the Dolphin when he said this:
"Now we have officials in Washington who have said those in President Barack Obama’s administration are not to use the terms “war” or “terrorists” when referring to conflicts in Iraq, Afghanistan or elsewhere."
Where was it said that "Obama is still blaming Bush for all our problems?" ODS, Tom. It takes a big man to admit it. But, I guess that's not you.
mancityfooty (Corey Williams) says…
Let's go to the transcript of the speech, Tom. The one instance where Obama mentioned Bush:
"I know that the Bush administration considered authorizing demonstration projects in individual states to test these ideas. I think it's a good idea, and I'm directing my Secretary of Health and Human Services to move forward on this initiative today."
How did he spend it blaming Bush?
bad_dog (anonymous) says…
"...with the uber disgusting Pelosi's frozen botox gaze looking on..."
Admit it Tom-you've got a thing for her. Too bad it's apparently unrequited love.
Katara (anonymous) says…
This hatred has been building for years. It didn’t start with Bush, but when this nation was attacked he didn’t hesitate to take what he thought were the necessary actions to protect American citizens. He also made a pledge to hunt down and destroy those responsible for the attacks.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I am not sure what hatred Dolph is referring to but Bush failed to keep his pledge and Bush made it clear that the pledge he made was not priority.
"I don't know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don't care. It's not that important. It's not our priority."
- G.W. Bush, 3/13/02
"I am truly not that concerned about him."
- G.W. Bush, repsonding to a question about bin Laden's whereabouts,
3/13/02 (The New American, 4/8/02)
Boosh (anonymous) says…
TomShewmon (Tom Shewmon)....
shouldn't you be in the D.C. right about now?
BryanFoster (anonymous) says…
What a horribly biased article. The author belittles the anger on the left towards Bush without even mentioning the chief reason for the anger - the ginned up justification for attacking Iraq and his campaign of deceit to develop and sustain the impression of link between 9/11 and Sadam in the minds of the citizenry. – Disgusting!!
ok (anonymous) says…
Way to bash a President who is faced with bigger burdens than any other president in recent (modern) history without giving him enough time to TRY to get things accomplished. A liar? A food? A fraud? You people are crazy. Let's give the man a little time to get some things done and only then judge him.
Pywacket (anonymous) says…
Keep dreaming, Dolph. With his disastrous misdirection of our military forces into Iraq, not to mention his arrogant and undiplomatic comments every time an ally didn't line up in lockstep with his illogical actions, he failed to capitalize on a worldwide outpouring of support and sympathy following 9/11. Not only did he alienate our allies, he also undermined American rights and freedoms and stirred the enmity of extremists who had nothing to do with 9/11 but who now (galvanized by Bush's actions) pose at least as much of a threat as the architects of that day's atrocities--who, by the way, have yet to be brought to justice, in case you've forgotten. Bin Laden, anyone?
He's spread our military too thin by concentrating on empire building in Iraq (total disaster) instead of steadfastly sticking on the trail of bin Laden & Co. Iraq formerly was hostile to the Taliban and vice versa--now it is a safe haven for that and many other extremist groups who have used the instability of the new government there to lay inroads.
Any aspect of our lives that is now "safer" is due to many of the obvious commonsense adjustments in travel regulations, better communication between FBI, CIA, and the US armed forces, and similar changes that would obviously have happened under any sitting president, and pretty much happened in spite of King George.
He is considered by historians around the world, the global intellectual community, allied governments and enemy factions alike to have been the worst president in American history, and with good reason.
It is not surprising that tone-deaf, dyed-in-the-wool right wingers would take up for him and attempt to put counter spin on something that should just be allowed to finish swirling down the toilet. If they did not do this, they'd have to take an inward look and ask themselves what was wrong with them that they actually voted for the incompetent buffoon--and introspection has never been a strong point of ultraconservative wingnuts. So keep spinning it, Dolph & Friends. Pretty soon, in your little mental shrine, you'll be picturing his grinning mug right next to that other flaxen-spun icon of misguided wingers everywhere--Ronnie Ray-gun himself.
ok (anonymous) says…
Obama created the problems with the debt facing this country, the two wars we're fighting, etc.??? Give me a break.
jonas_opines (anonymous) says…
"For a time, Bush enjoyed the highest public approval ratings of any U.S. president in history. But it didn’t last long. His critics thought he and his advisers were imposing too many limitations on “freedoms” of Americans."
He just put freedoms in quotes. Awesome!!
Found a cool graph on Bush's popularity ratings throughout his presidency. It might be presumptuous, but it could Almost look like the Iraq War was started due to falling poll numbers reflecting domestic problems, when the only thing that ever got him high approval numbers was his handling of war and terrorist-related matters. Nah, that's just way too cynical, isn't it?
http://www.hist.umn.edu/~ruggles/Appr...
Boosh (anonymous) says…
jonas_opines (Anonymous) says…"It might be presumptuous, but it could Almost look like the Iraq War was started due to falling poll numbers reflecting domestic problems, when the only thing that ever got him high approval numbers was his handling of war and terrorist-related matters. Nah, that's just way too cynical, isn't it?"
cynical? maybe almost logrythmic ;-)
corduroypants (anonymous) says…
Pywacket bringin' it strong!
mike_blur (Mike Blur) says…
Nutjobs like Dolf and right_thinker conveniently forget that the anthrax attacks--which the Bush administration assigned a patsy for--occurred after 9/11.
Oh, and "keeping us safe after 9/11" is akin to locking the barn doors after the horses have left.
ksjayhawk74 (anonymous) says…
"Prior to 9/11, this country was naked for attacks with little awareness or appreciation of the seriousness and commitment of those who hate the United States and will do whatever they can to kill Americans."
Naked for attacks... hahahahahah!!!!!!
This is seriously some of the worst writing I've seen that was actually published.
All I will say to counter this article is, Hurricane Katrina.
Marshalus (Michael Stanclift) says…
After the headline, I quit reading.
What was Bush doing BEFORE 9/11, or on 9/11?
RETICENT_IRREVERENT (Ronaldo Ignacio) says…
Coincidence that Swine Flu, the worrisome new virus — which combines genetic material from pigs, birds and humans in a way researchers have not seen before — with no reported A-H1N1 infections of pigs — and that possesses certain transmission “vectors” that suggest that the new flu strain has been genetically-manufactured as a military biological warfare weapon was discovered in Mexico just after Obamas visit?
I think not...
TheGreatOz (anonymous) says…
Hurricane Katrina? What's Hurricane Katrina got to do, got to do with it?
smitty (anonymous) says…
Fresh manure(given enough time) turns to valuable compost theory? Well yeah, but only after it destroys/burns up whatever it was applied to originally.
beatrice (anonymous) says…
And here I thought Dolph was going to write an article on Sept. 12 thanking President Obama for having now kept us safer than President Bush had during his first term.
bad_dog (anonymous) says…
"I wonder what Nancy Pelosi thinks about those thousands of 'astroturfers'?"
Yet another thinly disguised plea for love from Tom.
Maybe that's why he stopped posting under the *Nancy Boy* username-just couldn't take the constant reminder of her rejections.
ScottyMac (anonymous) says…
"Freedoms" of Americans. Classic.
Perhaps it belongs here:
http://www.unnecessaryquotes.com/
yourworstnightmare (anonymous) says…
Calling those opposed to the Bush administration's policies "Bush haters" is nothing but a convenient dodge.
It is true the Bush did some things after 9/11 that made out country safer. Some of the airport security measures were necessary, and massively reorganizing the government to form Homeland Security hasn't been a complete failure (except, notably, Katrina and manipulation of threat levels for political reasons). Fighting the taliban in Afghanistan was also a good move by Bush, but was poorly executed
On the balance, however, Bush's war of choice in Iraq did not make us safer and in fact made us less safe. It made his other efforts listed above ring hollow, and dragged down the war against the taliban in Afghanistan.
Also, the demonstrated examples of Bush using the terrorist threat to further his domestic and Iraq policy was reckless and stupid, and we are still paying the price and will be for a while.
So, go ahead and call those with reasonable arguments against Bush's policies "Bush haters". It only shows how impenetrable to reason, polarized, and extreme in your ideology you are, Mr. Simons.
bad_dog (anonymous) says…
"I wonder what Jeanine Grrrawfullow thinks about a hundred thousand 'teabagging rednecks' now?"
Probably wondering why # 100,001 is sitting at home beating his keyboard...
You really like to demonize women don't you?
dudedog12 (anonymous) says…
It is hard to understand with todays tech. that we cannot find 1 person. They can sure find you when you have taxes due or a parking ticket. If enough reward was offered, someone would reveal his where abouts.. We just don"t want to find him.
camper (anonymous) says…
Sad to see an editorial come out on September 12th, and the first order of business in the piece was to take digs at the Democrats. Near the end it does say:
".....many Democrat and most Republican members of Congress called for and approved measures which have made this country much safer"
That is a fact. The Republicans and Democrats came together to make quick decisions that were felt necessary under extraordinary circumstances.
camper (anonymous) says…
Barry, there is no doubt that Darwin was a good pitcher, but I'm not sure why you must mention him in each comment. Here are some of Danny Darwin's career stats:
Games 716 / W-L 171-182 / Saves 32 / ERA 3.84 / Shutouts 9
bad_dog (anonymous) says…
"that in no way means I “demonize women”."
So why do you feel compelled to disparage their appearance or for that matter raise it at all in the context of political issues? And you certainly do *demonize* Pelosi. I don't care for her either-particularly her inflated sense of self-importance since becoming Speaker, but that has nothing to do with her physical appearance. You quite literally can't mention her without some OCD reference to her appearance. Yet another one of the many reasons you have zero credibility.
Stain (anonymous) says…
Bush ignored specific warnings "Bin Laden determined to strike within U.S." and 3,000 died as a result.
3,000 died under his watch. Thousands more died because of his ill-conceived and poorly managed wars, rushed into without planning.
Bush has gotten 1.5 million people killed - at least 7,000 of them Americans.
Agnostick (anonymous) says…
Jill Carroll, a journalist for the “Christian Science Monitor,” was kidnapped in January 2006, by Muslim extremists; six or seven months later, in August, a crack team of Marines captured the kidnappers. Carroll returned home to America.
Osama bin Laden helped orchestrate, finance and inspire the World Trade Center bombings on September 11, 2001. eight years later, bin Laden still has not been found. On numerous occasions, he has released video and audio messages to taunt our government and military, as well as inspire terrorists across the globe.
Bush swore to make bin Laden's capture a priority. Why is bin Laden still free?
How can anyone--including Mr. Simons--think that having our troops bogged down in an Iraqi civil war allows them to go after terrorists, especially the leaders of Al Qaeda, in countries other than Iraq?
A distinction must be made between two very different operations, with different objectives:
1) The War on Terror (which began October 7, 2001, in Afghanistan)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline...
2) The Iraq Invasion/Incursion/Liberation/Democratization
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003_inv...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_War
Two different things. Only “relationship” between the two is that #2 is a gross distraction from #1.
The terrorist's “informational war” gets plenty of help from America, for every day that we ignore Osama Bin Laden and allow him onto Al-Jazeera with another videotaped episode of “Total Jihad Live!” It's been many months since a message has been received from Bin Laden--we're probably overdue.
Two-dimensional dualistic extremists like right_thinker, consumer1, Marion, and even Mr. Simons, see only two options here:
1) Bow down before Bush and Rove, and question absolutely nothing they do—acknowledge all their words and actions as “perfection”
2) Anyone who does not follow option #1 is obviously a traitor, coward, terrorist sympathizer
This is the Supreme Lie of Neoconservatism.
I still support the War on Terror, as I always have. I have very little support for the current situation in Iraq. It is still, as it has been from the start, largely a bogged-down mistake.
If we are truly fighting an enemy—international terrorists of Middle Eastern descent—that has little or no allegiance to a single nation, then why should we get bogged down in a single nation?
[more]
Agnostick (anonymous) says…
Afghanistan was a good operation, IMHO. We swooped in, cleaned out the Taliban. From what I remember reading in some of the news magazines at the time, our army did some very, very innovative things in the hills of Afghanistan. Problem is, we got distracted by Iraq, and we left before the job was done. We left before we took care of Bin Laden. He slipped through our fingers at Tora Bora, and instead of going back to the drawing board, coming up with new ideas, keeping up the pressure on him--we walked away. President Bush may have signed the paperwork on all this, but I think he was largely pressured into these things by Cheney, Rove, and Rumsfeld.
I don't buy into the “nation-building" myth. The Berlin Airlift happened *after* World War II, not during.
The moment I really, really lost all respect for the Iraqi Quagmire (as well as the "Four Clowns" mentioned above), was what's become known as the First Battle of Fallujah. Everybody remember this?
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontli...
Four Americans were ambushed, killed, and their mutilated, burned bodies were hung from a bridge. I've said it before, and I'll say it again: The moment those photos hit the web, we should've given all American troops, personnel, and civilians 24 hours to get as far away from Fallujah as they could; then, we should've firebombed the whole damn city. I'm not talking nuclear weapons, but the fiery Hell-On-Earth kind of roasting the Allies gave to the city of Dresden in February 1945.
The moment that we chose not to do that, was the moment when I knew this "war" wasn't about fighting terrorism or defending America--the Iraqi operation has been about war profiteering, more than anything.
I think we will begin winning the WOT on a very specific, single day: The day when a mother or sister or brother looks under a young man's bed, or in his closet… finds his terrorist training materials… and immediately turns him into the local authorities, in an effort to save the young man (or woman) from a deranged suicidal mission. The day this happens, we will begin winning the WOT. Not one day sooner.
Furthermore, if we intend to "Keep America Safe," then let's get really serious about it, and tighten up our borders. Rather than send our National Guard troops overseas, we would've been smarter to erect guard towers in high-risk areas of our borders, and given soldiers orders to "shoot to kill" anything or anyone that tries to cross.
I appreciate the work of Mr. Simons and his staff, in putting out this newspaper and web site. I'm grateful for the opportunity to post m opinions, ideas, rantings, and ravings, here, "on their nickel." I do not, however, subscribe to the false patriotism that his the hallmark of neoconservatism... that Mr. Simons has championed in this, and other editorials.
Agnostick
agnostick@excite.com
Stain (anonymous) says…
Bush started 2 wars that have lasted longer than World War II with no "winning" in sight. Against small, poor countries no less.
I don't think anybody needs to be bragging on his behalf.
Agnostick (anonymous) says…
A final thought...
I don't know what source Mr. Simons might've gotten his information from, regarding the retirement of the words "war" and "terrorist" in the Obama administration, but I do know this much:
The United States of America has not signed a formal declaration of war against any nation since June 5, 1942:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declarat...
Yet another reason why I have little or no respect for Bush, Cheney, Rove, and Rumsfeld.
--Ag
RogueThrill (anonymous) says…
hahaahahahahaahahahaahah.
This is like a verbose be3 post.
jumpin_catfish (anonymous) says…
Bush made mistakes but he protected our homeland period! Deal with it haters!
gogoplata (anonymous) says…
He didn't swear an oath to "keep us safe" he swore and oath to uphold the constitution that he referred to as "just a GD piece of paper".
beatrice (anonymous) says…
jumpin-c:"Bush made mistakes but he protected our homeland period! Deal with it haters!"
You mean, besides that time when he sat reading to children for 7 minutes on 9/11 after being told "The nation is under attack," correct? I mean, okay, so he didn't actually protect the homeland against the largest single attack on the homeland ever -- but besides that ...
Is that what you mean? Since we haven't had an attack that even comes close to that under Obama, then I guess you must think Obama is a super hero, correct?
Tom - is there really a difference between not questioning anything Obama does and hating absolutely everything he does? Either is extreme and ridiculous. You really do need to relax Tom, you are sounding more and more shrill with each passing day. Since the Republicans don't have any strong leaders right now you may well have to deal with an Obama presidency for another 7 1/2 years. At the rate you're going, I'm not sure your heart can take it Tom. Take a break, go out fishing, take the wife and kids to a show, go to a friends house and play poker. Just relax a bit. I'm worried for your health.
Of course, you probably won't really have to seek help until after Socialized "Obamacare" has taken over the health care industry, and by then you will probably have to wait for 10 hours in line behind a bunch of illegals just wanting to get their hands on prescription drugs to see a doctor of someone elses choosing ... and by then, it just might be too late. So take care of yourself now Tom, while you have a chance.
kugrad (anonymous) says…
I can see someone liking George W. Bush, but I can't see how one can characterize President Obama as a "liar" or a "radical" unless one is pretty far out of touch with reality. I mean, "radical?" Geez.
RiverCityConservative (anonymous) says…
Initially President Bush II wanted to call the response to the 9/11 attacks a "Crusade." These guys fumbled in so many ways during those years following 9/11, but there are few Democrats who had the guts to stand up against the administration in those days. Russ Feingold and Dennis Kucinich are two names that come to mind as stalwart exceptions to the weakness that is the general rule among Democrats. Hopefully, President Obama can continue working to inspire them to greatness, which requires being able to stand on principles and deliver results. One thing, though, that I do disagree with on this blog thread is the assertion by some that there was something nefarious about Bush II and Cheney's reactions to 9/11. I believe they were simply incompetent and then spent most of the rest of their time in power trying to hide the truth about their mistakes. That is too often the normal course of events for an American president.
witchfindergeneral (anonymous) says…
"This hatred has been building for years. It didn’t start with Bush, but when this nation was attacked he didn’t hesitate to take what he thought were the necessary actions to protect American citizens. He also made a pledge to hunt down and destroy those responsible for the attacks."
True, but at what cost? An unnecessary and bloody war, violations of the Geneva Convention, the erosion of constitutional rights, the establishment of an American gulag at GITMO, etc. constitute a very high price--both in in terms of international reputation and government resources--for "safety." The unnecessary war (Iraq) Bush started to dismantle a government with alleged ties to terrorism put many American soldiers in mortal danger and thousands paid (and continue to pay) for our "safety" with their lives.
This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.
camper (anonymous) says…
I think this editorial wrongly implies that it was only the Democrats that were highly critical of Bush's post 9/11 legislation. From what I remember, the strongest opposition to "limitation on freeedoms" really came more from the Libertarian minded people. Otherwise, Republicans and Democrats were probably evenly split regarding matters like wire tapping and airport security.
Agnostick (anonymous) says…
Not add any more fuel to driedoregano's fire, but the end of his 8:15pm post rings true. To this day, I am only aware of two videos or films of American Airlines Flight 11 hitting the north tower of the World Trade Center.
One film came from the producers of this movie:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9/11_(film)
and the other one is from this guy:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pavel_Hlava
sunny (anonymous) says…
lmao! You stupid idiots! What are your thoughts on accorn? Your Hussein is going down with them.
This is going to be good!
sunny (anonymous) says…
and?
Mixolydian (anonymous) says…
Bush is gone. Stop commenting here and go self-publish a Bush bashing book. Boldly take that Kevin Groenhagen of the left mantle by the Rocky Mountain Oysters.
All I know is that his stimulus promised no more than 8% unemployment.
How's that Hope and Change working out for you?
Cult of personality.....And an inexperienced Harvard grad (remind you of someone?) personality that drinks Bud Light?
God help us.
JHOK32 (anonymous) says…
My dear Mr. Simons: You Republicans are still grasping for air after the last ship has sank. Bush was warned repeatedly that this type of terrorist attack might happen & he repeatedly did nothing to prevent it. It would have cost too much money to install safety devices on the cockpit doors the airline lobbyists complained.......and we dare not cut into our beloved profits now should we? Well, whatever money we saved by not installing safety devices on cockpit doors ( which we damn sure have them on now don't we!), the country lost 3000 innocent lives that day, some dying horrible deaths jumping out of 100 story buildings or burned up alive, or both. We now have lost another 5000 of our sons, daughters, fathers, brothers, even mothers in Iraq and Afghanistan. The total bill so far is in excess of 1 $Trillion dollars & climbing.......We could have spent that money helping our own fellow-Americans get healthcare and paid for Obama's entire nation-wide healthcare plan with less money than we've spent on bombs which have killed tens of thousands of Iraqi citizens.
So keep on bragging about what Mr. Bush did Mr. Simons, & are we not all in blissful joy for that precious money Mr. Bush saved the airline industry by not installing the safety devices on the cockpit doors in the first place!
Mixolydian (anonymous) says…
driedoregano (Anonymous) says…
fahrenheit 9/11:
========================
Michael Moore for a cite?!? Hate to break the news to you.....that's not dried oregano you're smoking......and I should know.
jonas_opines (anonymous) says…
Jesus H. Christ Oregano, spam much? Just give us a damned link so we can click on it if we want.
akuna (anonymous) says…
Tom Shewmon is evidence of why the radical right will always have a base. Completely and utterly blind to the truth.
corduroypants (anonymous) says…
I seem to recall that we were attacked while the previous "dope" was President. But, in fairness, that brush wasn't going to clear itself.
KS (anonymous) says…
I have never read so many posts by so many intelligence experts and Monday morning quarterbacks. You know, if we would just put the folks in Lawrence in charge, all would be well. Incredible how smart some folks are. Just wished they could convert all that hot air into something positive.
grammaddy (anonymous) says…
Don't give Bush credit for protecting us after 9/11because it did not happen. The whole point of 9/11 was to destroy us economically and take as many lives as possible. This is why the WTC was chosen as a target. After that there was no reason to attack us again since it was clear that Bush would help destroy our economy by sending us into an unwarranted war against Iraq. I think Dolph Simons needs another look at the history of the last 10 years.
grammaddy (anonymous) says…
And them came Katrina....
bad_dog (anonymous) says…
"Two-dimensional dualistic extremists like Agnostick, porch-person, yourworstnightmare, and even bad-dog, see only two options here:
1) Bow down before Obama and Pelosi, and question absolutely nothing they do—acknowledge all their words and actions as “perfection”
2) Anyone who does not follow option #1 is obviously a traitor, coward, teabagger"
Find one post, one utterance, one single word where I've ever offered the slightest scintilla of support for Pelosi, Tom. It won't happen because it doesn't exist. You obviously have zero reading comprehension capacity. You must still rely on others to read your autographed copy of "My Pet Goat" to you.
Even if it were true, it's better to be only two dimensional than a sadly mistaken, completely delusional sycophant. Take your spoon and pot and go beat it on the porch some more.
Made_in_China (Paul R. Getto) says…
Bush I is irrelevant now. He was sincere, just misguided. We are now stuck with one quagmire and one declining presence in Iraq as it redescends into madness. President Bush did what he thought was right given the circumstances; it may or may not have contributed to our security. To argue one way or the other, particularly about attacks or the lack therof, is merely imputed causality. The President left us an expensive legacy; We shall see how it all plays out in the coming years.
admireed (anonymous) says…
Good Grief! Bush did nothing right. Don't you remember?
JohnBrown (anonymous) says…
I especially like the part where Dolph said: "but when this nation was attacked he didn’t hesitate to take what he thought were the necessary actions to protect American citizens. He also made a pledge to hunt down and destroy those responsible for the attacks."
Seven minutes sitting motionless while we were attacked (including my family) is hardly "not hesitating". And we all know Bin Laden is still on the run, so Bush didn't "hunt down and destroy those responsible".
He failed to uphold the Constitution, he spent most of our wealth attacking the wrong people, and used the rest to shore up an economy that failed on his watch. Worst of all, he spilt our nation's blood and accomplished nothing with it. Bin Laden and Al Qeda are still out there.
lounger (anonymous) says…
G.W. Bush is an A*s-a well Known A*s. He fumbled the whole thing and sent troops/our country in the wrong direction. He ignored his job (the economy, envornment, so on) and pretended to know how to handle this. Good we have a real man in office now.....
simeau (anonymous) says…
step outside the box and realize all these Presidents are just yes-men doing the dirty-work of the global elite.
The takeover of america is a virtual fait-accompli, by infinitesimal increment. The agenda has been published, if you care to read their own works. The works of Carroll Quigley are a good place to start. So don't go off an an anti-conspiracy-theorist rant - it just shows your ignorance. most americans are just like the aphids in an anthill, hanging around until it is time for lunch.
you are the lunch meat.
some items on the agenda: Global Government (UN on steroids) meaning the end of American Sovereignty (if it ever existed); Global eugenics (various engineered pestilences), Global war (duh);
How do they dumb thee down? let me count the ways: GMO foods, high fructose corn syrup,
glutamates including MSG, aspertame, flourides, thimerisol, rx ad infinitum, ritalin, public "education" as operant conditioning, atmospheric aerosols (google it) including salts of aluminum and barium; elevator music, television trance downloads, video games, spectator sports, secrecy including compartmentalization, hierarchy, and need-to-know; displacement of the family by the state, disinformation, doublespeak, psy-ops, sensory overload and intellectual overwhelm (have you read all 60-million statutes in the US Code?). Selective Reporting, altering the historical record,
just do your own research, and do not compromise the truth.
the arrogance of the elite is only exceeded by the ignorance of the masses.
9070811 (anonymous) says…
Shut up, Dolph. Your "newspaper" sucks. And this editorial is a piece of poop.
beatrice (anonymous) says…
militant: "When the US gets attacked again while this current dope is president, the liberals still won't get it."
Yes, the self-made, not just riding on daddy's coattails, Harvard law graduate is a dope. Yes, if attacked again liberals won't get how some still believe it necessitates our army to be sent into a country that didn't have anything to do with attacking us to stop future instances of 11 guys brandishing box cutters while in our country.
Yes, I believe some people would be happy if we got attacked like this again, just so they could point fingers and yell "Socialist!"
Pathetic un-American whiners.
svenway_park (anonymous) says…
driedoregano: so the LHS practice fields improvement is a part of that same Cheney-NORAD, etc etc etc led conspiracy?
KS (anonymous) says…
You guys on the left are so disgusting. If you don't like the newspapr, print or internet edition, please don't read it or comment. Get a life.
Machiavelli_mania (anonymous) says…
Dolph, The "protection" that Bush provided was extremely mafia-like. I don't want that kind of "protection" oppression.
Machiavelli_mania (anonymous) says…
Svenway park, what does the lawrence athletic field have to do with this story? You are sorely abusing this forum and another poster.
merrill (anonymous) says…
The Republican party has become irrational and has no solutions to any national problem.
Where was GW,Cheney,Rice and Rummy when they were suppose to be preventing 9/11/01?
The culprits had been living for two years a few blocks from Gen Haydens' NSA headquarters. The FBI knew they were there but no one would authorize the FBI to pursue these delightful people. The authorization must come from the top....Bush,Rice or Rummy.
Here's a pattern:
Who has history with financial institutions going south such as the savings and loan scandal? Republicans!
About the Bush/Cheney/Greenspan/Bernake fraudulent home loan scandal:
http://www.dollarsandsense.org/archiv...
About the Bush/Reagan Savings and Loan Scandal(home loans)
http://rationalrevolution0.tripod.com...
crime against democracy : pnac's policy document, "Rebuilding America's Defences," openly advocates for total global military domination. Many PNAC members held highest-level positions in the George W. Bush administration. http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?...
merrill (anonymous) says…
Lehman Bros the largest financial collapse in USA history, during the Bush admin, with Jeb Bush and cousin George Walker on the Lehmann Bros payroll at the time of collapse.
The Reagan/Bush Home Loan Savings and Loan scandal wrecked the economy and stole millions of retirement plans. Thus sending millions of retired golden agers scrambling back in the work force to supplement their medicare and social security.
The Bush/Cheney home loan scandal plus wreckanomics again wrecked the economy thus destroying retirement ooportunities and losing 8 million jobs between 2007 and May 2009.
Again millions will be and are thankful for medicare and Social Security.
Bush/Cheney lied about WMD's to the world and launched the Bush/Cheney Iraq war of choice which is costing the USA trillions of dollars as we speak further wrecking the economy. Bush/Cheney have killed more than 4,660 USA soldiers as a result of their lies and irrational decision. Iraq war was described as the greatest strategic blunder in the history of the USA by General Odom.
Left_handed (anonymous) says…
Sorry, but by any objective standard James Earl Carter is the worst president in American history. He's also the worst ex-president in American history. At least he's consistent.
jimmyjms (anonymous) says…
"He's also the worst ex-president in American history."
Yeah, they hand out that Nobel prize to idiots all the time.
Right?
Dolph, this piece is poorly written, terribly sourced, and biased beyond belief.
Tell me why I get your paper again? That $8 a month is just about $8 too much for drivel like this.
shockchalk (anonymous) says…
Great piece! Thanks for having the courage to write the truth...............it always frustrates the far-left Pelosi-praising sheep when you use the truth. They just hate facts. That could be the reason they love Obama's new health plan. Another trillion dollar disaster that our children will have to pay for.