May 6, 2011

"VINDICATION: When the loudest critic of your policies achieves his greatest success because of them."

The George Bush motivational poster.

37 comments:

franglo said...

Has no one bothered to mention the fact that the Bush administration ended the Bush administration's policies on interrogation before the Obama administration got a chance to?

Why do you think interrogation policy was the only reason liberals didn't like Bush?

I wanted a democrat in office for a lot of reasons.

Also-- the "loudest critic" of Bush's policies-- which policy would that be? the policy of going into Pakistan unilaterally to kill Osama Bin Laden, which as this blog has pointed out, Obama explicitly made part of his campaign? How does that make him a critic?

Scott M said...

From the comments,

We all know there isn't an issue out there the right won't try to politicize, even when they look so small and insignificant doing it.

Headsmack.

Scott M said...

Dejack your political modem for a second, franglo, and admit it's funny if nothing else.

Fred4Pres said...

franglo. What time is it where you are? Because it seems like you have already started partying. Thank God It's Friday!

madawaskan said...

Here Come Cowboys

Harem pants and cowboy hats.

Euro weenies and the law.

I think I even see Obama in there.

blake said...

If only he hadn't expanded on W's financial policies...

Fred4Pres said...

I am not a big fan of water boarding. I think it crosses a line.

But that said, the enhanced interrogation techniques done by the CIA on high value detainees like KSM, were not the same as the abuse at Abu Ghraib.

Col Herrington outlines in this interview with Hugh Hewitt the proper interrogation that should be done. Agressive, psychological, building raport over time, etc. In fact it was a combination of waterboarding a few high value detainees and then the Col. Harrington approach (which is really the United States approach since WWII) which resulted in this intelligence.

And the Obama Administration could have captured OBL and done the Herrington approach, if you will. But they did not. They killed him. Because they did not want to have to deal with civil liberty issues of detaining him.

I have no problem with killing OBL. He was a bad guy and the world is better off without him. But let's all recognize why he was killed. It was easier that way.

EDH said...

Reminds me of my winning entry in the Freakonomics Six Word Motto for the United States:

"Our worst critics prefer to stay."

Or, for Bush...

"Our worst critics take the credit."

NotYourTypicalNewYorker said...

“VINDICATION: When the loudest critic of your policies achieves his greatest success because of them.”

Obama and the rabid left owe G.W. Bush a very large apology.

Waiting....(crickets)

granmary said...

Truest statement I have heard in a long time.I am also getting the biggest kicks watching the libs praise Obungler for what they would have foamed at the mouth over if any republican had done the same.

Terrye said...

franglo:

Please, they never would have found Osama Bin Laden if it had not been for the work done by the previous administration in terms of intelligence gathering. BTW, Obama said he would first ask the Pakistanis to give up Osama before he went in there..unless there is some lying going on, he did not consult with anyone, he just went.

But there is one big difference between the two men..Bush is a decent man with a sense of loyalty to the people around him. Obama on the other hand is allowing Holder to go on with indictments against the very CIA people who helped find Osama. They served their purpose, under the bus they go...thump thump.

windbag said...

Already linked to it on facebook. Since Bush gets all the blame for Obama's failures, it's hardly fair to not give him the credit when it's due. I thought liberals were all about fairness?

Carol_Herman said...

So, was Obama worried he'd be accused of "losing" Osama and letting the trail run cold?

Something motivated him to surround himself with a lot of his own team members.

I think the Situation Room photo will be as long lasting as the one of Nixon, alone, exiting the White House. By helicopter. And, turning around, suddenly, and making his famous "V" sign.

Meanwhile, there had to be boots on the ground! (I'd have had cars stacked up like taxis!) ... Given that the neighbors all had their electricity and phone lines cut beforehand. And, the alley was never used as a way to get into the compound! Somewhere, there was a hole blown up in the wall!

As to Obama? He was backed into the wall. And, yes. He is, too, in the Situation Room photo!

Oh, by the way. Obama's left eye was missing when the corpse went plop into the sea.

And, the Paki's were in there! They're the ones who tampered with the scene. Because they're the ones who sold the photos to Reuter's.

You mean you thought it was difficult ... in a house that had children present ... NOT to find a green squirt gun?

Gosh, it's so easy to fool journalists.

And, if I were in charge? Those taxis wouldn't make the dogs that came go back up in helicopter rides out, either.

TAXI! (You think you have to be driving a cab in NYC to be ubiquitous with being a cab driver?) You wouldn't think twice if you saw cabs in NYC.

Carol_Herman said...

Gosh. Obama. Osama. Not quite interchangeable. But so easy to do. My Freudian slip is showing.

Phil 3:14 said...

It is ironic that the supposed object of this praise chooses to sit quietly on the sidelines.

While I feel the Bush hatred of the last 10 years went way over the top, I have to wonder if some on the right are praising him more in opposition to Obama than in sympathy with Bush.

I mean, after all, he wasn't a true conservative right?

Original Mike said...

"I thought liberals were all about fairness?"

Only for our enemies. Hell, I'm surprised Obama didn't give Osama a head start.

Phil 3:14 said...

PS Listened on NPR today regarding Pakistan and heard John Kerry's comments as head of the Senate Intelligence committee.

Why does he bother me so much? If ever there was an opportunity for the left to defeat Bush, it was 2004. "Mission Accomplished" was not turning out so well; no WMD; not the "Uniter" as promised etc

But the Dems nominated Kerry. Did they not see that Kerry was a non-starter? Were they blinded by the "distinguished, well-educated, long experience liberal and has also been in the military" theme?

Terrye said...

Phil:

I think Bush was a conservative. I know some conservatives who do not even think Reagan was a true conservative, but George W. Bush never pretended to be anything or anyone he was not.

And while people can complain about his fiscal policies, he was downright frugal compared to the current bunch. In fact in 2006 when the Democrats took control of the House, Bush had been President for 6 years and the budget deficit was $167 billion. We run that in a month now.

MadisonMan said...

they never would have found Osama Bin Laden if it had not been for the work done by the previous administration in terms of intelligence gathering.

Why is administration singular?

Terrye said...

And Phil...enough with the Mission Accomplished stuff. I mean really, it is the same tired old thing year after year. At least Bush actually gave Obama some real intelligence, good intelligence, that helped him find Osama, unlike the intel Bush inherited from Clinton concerning Iraq. And Bush was not hated by the general public the way the left likes to think. In fact when they found Saddam, Bush got a 15 point bump that lasted for 17 weeks. So far Obama has not gotten that kind of a bump from Osama's death.

Maybe they picked Kerry because he did not suck as bad as the other guys...

blake said...

As for Bush being a conservative, he really wasn't. He was a nice, liberal Christian President.

He was personally socially conservative, sure, but he didn't do that much about it. (Maybe kicked up the porn busting a notch or two from Clinton.)

He wasn't fiscally/limited powers conservative compared to any President in history, except Obama.

Which may explain some of the support there.

But, credit where it's due.

TWM said...

Hey, now, I linked to this is a comment on an earlier post. So, like, I'm taking credit anyway :P

edutcher said...

I love it when a plan, etc.

franglo said...

Has no one bothered to mention the fact that the Bush administration ended the Bush administration's policies on interrogation before the Obama administration got a chance to?

Because they only used them on a select few who would yield the intel worth the effort

Why do you think interrogation policy was the only reason liberals didn't like Bush?

The reason the Lefties hated Dubya was because he didn't let them steal the '00 election.

Interrogation was just a phony issue. Franglo perhaps hasn't heard that even Pelosi Galore signed off on that nasty "interrogation policy".

Also-- the "loudest critic" of Bush's policies-- which policy would that be? the policy of going into Pakistan unilaterally to kill Osama Bin Laden, which as this blog has pointed out, Obama explicitly made part of his campaign? How does that make him a critic?

Maybe because he spent 2 years pumping himself up walking around telling anybody who would listen, "I was against it fi-i-rst, I was against it fi-i-rst", whatever it was. Zero had no policy of raiding into Pockestan, he was the one who wanted to bow and scrape before these cutthroats.

And if franglo actually believes Little Zero invented going into forbidden places on spec ops, somebody should tell him there's a bridge in Brooklyn for sale.

PS Thanks to franglo, I'm really starting to believe this was all Panetta's show.

Phil 3:14 said...

blake;
Maybe kicked up the porn busting a notch or two from Clinton.

That got me laughing. What program was that? And is there a "porn-bustometer" in existence that I'm not a aware of?

Julius said...

Yeah right... "vindicated"....

And all it took was the evisceration of freedom in this country to the point that, for instance, TSA agents grope the genital area of our young children in the name of "security".

Oh, that, and it also took the complete distraction from the approaching super-Titanic-sized economic disaster... How many million jobs did W's lack of oversight destroy... jobs that have still not been recovered? How many billions-- or is it trillions?-- were paid in bailouts due to Bush's administrative incompetence?

Being the Chief Executive of America is not a one task job. Killing Osama does not vindicate Bush, nor Obama, because they've both failed miserably in almost every other respect.

Terrye said...

blake:

I don't know if I agree with that or not. When Reagan left office the government was bigger than it was when he got there and he was not afraid of deficits. He supported amnesty as well. And yet, people tell me all the time that he was the perfect conservative.

And of course the left keeps telling us that Bush was far right, not conservative. I consider him a social conservative and center right on other issues. He was strong on law and order as well. As a Governor he was considered conservative. Maybe the terms change over time.

Phil 3:14 said...

Julius;
Yeah right... "vindicated"....

And all it took was the evisceration of freedom in this country to the point that, for instance, TSA agents grope the genital area of our young children in the name of "security".


Not a great example since the "groping" regimen began under the present administration.

(or maybe the Clinton administration?)

Terrye said...

Julius:

What a load of crap that was. For one thing, most of the groping as been taking place under Saint Obama...and as for millions of jobs lost, the economy was doing pretty well until the Democrats got control of Congress...and speaking of Congress...just exactly what did the Democrats do to stop that freigh train? At least Bush is on record trying to reign in Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae...meanwhile folks like Maxinne Walters were saying, if it ain't broke don't fix it.

Ignorance is Bliss said...

Carol_Herman said...

Gosh. Obama. Osama. Not quite interchangeable.

Not quite. One is a foreign born Muslim bent on destroying America, and the other is dead.

*ducks*

peter hoh said...

Osama was tripped up by Medicare, Part D?

Clyde said...

Sweet!

Don't Tread 2012 said...

@Julius

"Oh, that, and it also took the complete distraction from the approaching super-Titanic-sized economic disaster... How many million jobs did W's lack of oversight destroy... jobs that have still not been recovered? How many billions-- or is it trillions?-- were paid in bailouts due to Bush's administrative incompetence?"

Did you run out of room for liberal talking points? Not only is this opinionated bullshit, there is no mention of any democrat or liberal within 50 miles of DC here. Should we cue the crickets?

Ever heard of Barney Frank? Chris Dodd? Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac? Tell me the Bush admin didn't try to stop this train wreck, and you instantly ruin any imaginary credibility you have assigned yourself Julius. That's just ONE example -

Liberals - people that know so much about so many things that SIMPLY AREN'T SO!!!

AprilApple said...

"I can hear the liberal cries of outrage, so to recap: The interrogations of KSM (which included waterboarding) and the interrogation of Hassan Ghul (held in “black site” prisons) were key to identifying the courier; the president then authorized military action in a foreign country without going to the United Nations or informing the host government; the military action was unilateral, and we did not consult with our allies; Congress was not informed of the military action; and it increasingly appears that no serious effort was made to treat Osama bin Laden as a criminal (reading him his rights, etc.). The monitoring of Abu Ahmed al-Kuwaiti’s phone call was a result of an extensive global wiretapping system. Furthermore, as Charles Krauthammer notes, the helicopters used in the raid came from Bagram and Jalalabad; if we had withdrawn from Afghanistan on the antiwar Left’s timetable, we would have had no bases from which to launch this operation."

Eat it, hypocrites.

AprilApple said...

Julie -
When Bush was president, unemployment was at or around 5%. Under obama/democrat rule- it's 9%.
During the Bush years, our debt, in time of war mind you, was in the billions. Under the new hope and change democrat Obama/Pelosi social-welfare state - our debt is in the trillions. Or are you unaware?

Marshal said...

"I mean, after all, he wasn't a true conservative right?

5/6/11 5:05 PM"

Bush's error was believing you could compromise with liberals. He thought agreeing with Democrats to spend more on their alleged top priorities was true partisanship and would help the country. He learned compromise with Democrats only earns hatred in return.

So his domestic policy wasn't particularly conservative, although you can see by comparison with Obama that however bad a Republican is there's a Democrat gleefully waiting his chance to be ten times worse.

Marshal said...

"How many million jobs did W's lack of oversight destroy... jobs that have still not been recovered? How many billions-- or is it trillions?-- were paid in bailouts due to Bush's administrative incompetence?"

Sad that people simply blame everything on people they hate, but its easier than thinking hard. For people like Julius, thinking hard isn't an option, so we should temper our reaction and ignore rather than berate. It's similar to a three year-old asking a question that shows he can't understand the answer, just smile and move on.

blake said...

Phil 3:14--

Not an expert but I think Clinton didn't care at all about porn (versus the Reagan/Bush era where the FBI spent a lot of time on it) and then in W's administration, there was some sort of onerous documentation reg. Don't think it was around for more than a few years.