B-Rob

I’m not trying to make Bush anything but what he was as president, but the worst president in modern history was Carter, hands down. He is also the worst former president.

I was never a big fan of either Bush, no conservative was, but they were better than the alternative available at the time. Dukakis or Gore – please, give me a break.

What was September 11th? Chopped liver. That did take one or two dollars from the budget and put a couple of bucks in the deficit. That ‘into the future surplus’ budget fantasy is simply liberals’ inability to see the economy as anything but static, and it is, in reality, anything but static.

You are asleep at the wheel or still have your head where the sun does not shine. Have you looked at the deficit lately and who spent all that stimulus money that only stimulated short -term government jobs?

Were you too young to remember the screaming by Republicans and Conservatives about Bush’s drug bill?

Stop rewriting history. I’ll give you this though; there is no comparison between Obama and Bush, but not for the reasons you think.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

@B-Rob:

Bush’s predecessor left him a balanced budget; Obama’s did not.

That, is a myth.

http://www.craigsteiner.us/articles/16

http://www.sbstatesman.com/2.870/the-clinton-surplus-myth-1.35974

Like or Dislike: 0  0

@ bill-tb –

“New York becomes the biggest terror target on the planet … How cool is that.”

I think you must have been asleep the last 16 years. It already is.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

@ Red 73 –

You forgot some other distinctions, too:

Bush’s predecessor left him a balanced budget; Obama’s did not.

Bush expanded entitlements by signing a drug bill that added to the deficit; Obama has not.

Bush’s predecessor left office with an economy that was on the edge of recession; Obama’s predecessor left office with an economy more than a year into recession.

Comparing the hand Bush was dealt to the hand that Obama was is comparing apples to water bottles: sure, they are both solid and contain water. But the comparison ends there.

C’mon — let’s face facts. Bush SUCKED as president. I tend to believe it is because he selected too many “good Republicans” who were loyal governors but incompetent managers. It happens. But he has NO EXCUSES for running the deficits he ran, then handed off to Obama. Add in the fact that he overreacted on Iraq (because 9/11 happened on his watch) and you have an easy explanation for much of what went wrong with his presidency. He is, in effect, the GOP’s Jimmy Carter. No amount of Obama bashing will make Bush look any better.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

@ Patvann

You wrote:

“Yes moose, and that is why Bush and bi-partisan group of our Reps, under direction from our Supreme Court established the rules to establish and administer that justice. Those rules were then voted on by the full House and Senate, and was passed overwhelmingly. Bush then signed the Bill, and directed the military to carry it out.”

This is simply false and misleading. False because the Supreme Court did not provide any “direction” on that legislation; that is simply not its role. In addition, you conveniently failed to mention that that same Supreme Court ruled the statute unconstitutional, in part. So why you think it is “better” to try these people under a still-untested military tribunal statute, as opposed to the regular bread and butter federal criminal statute, is beyond me.

I repeat — I do not recall a hue and cry from conservatives when Bush tried the other al Queda members and 9/11 conspirators in federal court.

WHY HAVE YOU CONSERVATIVES CHANGED YOUR MIND ON WHETHER IT IS A GOOD IDEA?

You keep ducking my question, but I am going to keep asking it. Your refusal to answer points out the obvious: it is the right wing that is politicizing this thing, not Obama.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Were any of the Gitmo prisoners Mirandized?? If not do they walk in NY?

We get it. Obama is not Bush. Here are nine differences:

Bush had 4% (7% at end of term) unemployment – Obama has 10.2%.

Bush was decisive about sending troops – Obama is not.

Bush increased the debt – and Obama outdid him by 10 times.

Bush was more of a free marketer – and Obama is more of a socialist.

Bush never bowed to a foreign leader – Obama so does regularly.

Bush never apologized for America – Obama so does regularly.

Bush respects the troops – Obama does not.

Bush is a church going Christian – Obama is not.

Bush made errors of judgment – Obama has a well thought out plan of destruction for America.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

While I agree the intent is to embarrass Bush, and America, the terrorist will see the Chinese fire drill trials as a way to get headlines …

Can’t wait until we can put Obama on trial.

Our Dear Reader is sure a BowWow.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

These trials to be held in New York have nothing to do with the terrorist. These trials are to convict the Bush Administration of what ever crimes Obama and Holder believe they have committed. This is plain old politics rearing it’s ugly head with destruction of our country as it’s real objective. These trials will make a Chinese fire drill look like it’s organized.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

New York becomes the biggest terror target on the planet … How cool is that. Every two bit al Qaeda type will want to join the show, not just in the city, but the ‘burbs as well. Get your name in lights.

Remeber what one al Qaeda wanna be did to WDC?

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Yes moose, and that is why Bush and bi-partisan group of our Reps, under direction from our Supreme Court established the rules to establish and administer that justice. Those rules were then voted on by the full House and Senate, and was passed overwhelmingly. Bush then signed the Bill, and directed the military to carry it out.

Maybe you can explain to all of us how this process, and it’s results are “Un-American.”

Obama and Holder have now usurped that authority without consulting the House or the Senate.
THAT action is the definition of UnAmerican, because of their unilateral action in ignoring the law made by the House, Senate, and signed by a president, and OKed by the court.

As a side-note, hundreds of cases, if not thousands were carried out in a similar manner during and after WW2. Those cases were used as a model for the first version of tribunals, and after small changes, we have established the present version…

Do you not find it in the least bit strange that not all of the illegal combatants are being brought to civil-court?
Ask yourself why only these 4 men?

Ask yourself why military tribunals are still going forward for the others if they are so “UnAmerican?

If under the right scenario or technicality, KSM and friends are found not guilty, will they be set free?

No. They won’t…

Why?

Because Obama has the option of keeping these combatants under lock and key even if they are found not-guilty!

Is that “American” enough for you?

Like or Dislike: 0  0