Posts Tagged ‘Bush derangement syndrome’

Being A Democrat Means Never Holding Barack Obama Responsible for Anything After Coming Unglued Over Bush For Everything

February 12, 2013

This is just too funny.  Buzzfeed should give Benny Johnson a raise or a company car or something:

7 Things Democrats Would Have Freaked Out About If Bush Had Done Them
Obama’s national security policy has continued some of the most controversial moves of the Bush administration. Silence from much of the left.
posted on February 11, 2013 at 1:44pm EST
Benny Johnson, BuzzFeed Staff

Democrats were overjoyed when George W. Bush left office in January of 2009.

7 Things Democrats Would Have Freaked Out About If Bush Had Done ThemView this image ›

Obama had promised to end Bush’s hawkish foreign policy and the “war on terror’s” detention and interrogation regime.Obama had promised to end Bush's hawkish foreign policy and the "war on terror's" detention and interrogation regime. View this image ›

But in the beginning of his fifth year as president, Obama’s record has been surprisingly similar to his predecessor’s in those areas.
But in the beginning of his fifth year as president, Obama's record has been surprisingly similar to his predecessor's in those areas.

1. Democrats fought George W. Bush’s troop surge in Iraq in 2006.

Democrats fought George W. Bush’s troop surge in Iraq in 2006.View this image ›

Obama copied it in Afghanistan in 2009.

Obama copied it in Afghanistan in 2009.View this image ›

You would think Democrats would react the same way they did to Bush’s surge policy:

7 Things Democrats Would Have Freaked Out About If Bush Had Done ThemView this image ›

But they were really more like:

7 Things Democrats Would Have Freaked Out About If Bush Had Done ThemView this image ›

2. American deaths in Afghanistan have skyrocketed since Obama took office.

American deaths in Afghanistan have skyrocketed since Obama took office. View this image ›

Actually, the death tolls in Afghanistan under each administration look like this:

Actually, the death tolls in Afghanistan under each administration look like this: View this image ›

So you would think Democrats would react like this:

7 Things Democrats Would Have Freaked Out About If Bush Had Done ThemView this image ›

But they are much more like this.

7 Things Democrats Would Have Freaked Out About If Bush Had Done ThemView this image ›

3. President Obama’s drones and special operators are working down “kill lists” of suspected terrorists.

President Obama's drones and special operators are working down "kill lists" of suspected terrorists. View this image ›

Obama even put Anwar al-Awlaki — an American citizen — on such a list.

Obama even put Anwar al-Awlaki — an American citizen — on such a list. View this image ›

Al-Awlaki [an American citizen] was killed under secret authorization from the justice department in 2011.

If Bush did this, the Democrats would be all like:

7 Things Democrats Would Have Freaked Out About If Bush Had Done ThemView this image ›

But now they are more like:

7 Things Democrats Would Have Freaked Out About If Bush Had Done Them

4. Drone attacks have risen sharply under Obama.

Drone attacks have risen sharply under Obama.

Last year, a teenage American citizen, Abdulrahman al-Awlaki, was taken out in a drone strike without a trial.

Last year, a teenage American citizen, Abdulrahman al-Awlaki, was taken out in a drone strike without a trial.View this image ›

If Bush did this, Democrats would literally hyperventilate.

7 Things Democrats Would Have Freaked Out About If Bush Had Done Them

7 Things Democrats Would Have Freaked Out About If Bush Had Done Them

In Pakistan alone, the administration has launched more than 300 drone strikes. View this image ›

Pakistani civilian casualties due to these strikes are as high as 800 according to international estimates.

So the Democrats should be like:

7 Things Democrats Would Have Freaked Out About If Bush Had Done ThemView this image ›

But they are a lot more like:

7 Things Democrats Would Have Freaked Out About If Bush Had Done ThemView this image ›

6. Obama promised to end the Bush-era torture interrogation practices.

Obama promised to end the Bush-era torture interrogation practices.  View this image ›

Image by Kevin Lamarque / Reuters

But last year the U.N. released three damning reports detailing torture in Afghan facilities under Obama’s security watch.

But last year the U.N. released three damning reports detailing torture in Afghan facilities under Obama's security watch.

Image by Andrew Burton / Reuters

When Bush did this, Democrats were like:

7 Things Democrats Would Have Freaked Out About If Bush Had Done ThemView this image ›

Now:

7 Things Democrats Would Have Freaked Out About If Bush Had Done ThemView this image ›

7. Obama was unable to deliver on his pledge to close the Guantanamo Bay detention center, which Bush had also said he would close.

Obama was unable to deliver on his pledge to close the Guantanamo Bay detention center, which Bush had also said he would close.

Image by John Moore / Getty Images

When Bush did this, Democrats were all like:

7 Things Democrats Would Have Freaked Out About If Bush Had Done Them

And…

7 Things Democrats Would Have Freaked Out About If Bush Had Done Them<

8. And…

7 Things Democrats Would Have Freaked Out About If Bush Had Done Them

But now they are much more like:

7 Things Democrats Would Have Freaked Out About If Bush Had Done Them

“We may not be so different, you and I.”

"We may not be so different, you and I."View this image ›

Image by Courtesy of the Bush Center, Houston Texas.

We could add in stuff like the debt, the deficit and the debt ceiling.  But who’s counting?  Not the mainstream media, that’s for sure.

It is amazing how hypocritical the Democrat Party and the liberals who form their core truly are.  They are bad people and bad people always prefer lies just as they are always hypocrites.  You cannot have an honest argument with people who say one thing,do another – and then say something completely different without ever having acknoweledged how dishonest they were from the beginning.

In order to have a fair and honest debate, you simply have to have both sides have integrity.  We don’t have that as long as we have liberals with any power.

Advertisements

Left Continues Whining ‘How DARE You Be Against The President!’ Chutzpah

July 17, 2010

I have to just laugh in mocking, derisive laughter every time I hear a Democrat whine about people criticizing President Obama.

After eight unrelenting years of Bush derangement syndrome (when frankly Bush wasn’t really even all that conservative), you’d think liberals would be capable of that scintilla of personal introspection that would reveal to them, “We kind of asked for this.”  But, nope.

A particularly hilarious example of this comes from liberal radio personality Bill Press:

Bill Press: Obama’s Poll Numbers Down Because Americans Are Spoiled Children
By Noel Sheppard
Wed, 07/14/2010 – 10:23 ET

Liberal talk radio host Bill Press says President Obama’s poll numbers are down because Americans are spoiled, impatient children that want everything solved yesterday.

After describing to his listeners Tuesday all the fabulous accomplishments this president has made since taking office in January 2009, Press admonished the citizenry for giving the White House resident poor grades for his efforts.

“I think this says more about the American people than it does about President Obama,” barked Press.

“I think it just shows once again that the American people are spoiled” (audio follows with partial transcript and commentary):

BILL PRESS: “Basically, spoiled — as a people, we are too critical. We are too quick to rush to judgment, we are too negative, we are too impatient. Especially impatient. We want it all solved yesterday, and if you don’t, I don’t care who you are — get out of the way.

And again, basically spoiled. To the point where it makes me wonder if it’s even possible to govern today
. I gotta tell you, I don’t think Abraham Lincoln — who certainly didn’t get everything right the first time — could govern today. I’m not sure Franklin Roosevelt could govern today, the way we are again. Just about like spoiled children. And it’s Americans, and it’s the media, and if we don’t get instant gratification, then screw you is basically our attitude.”

Noel Shepperd then replies to Press’ rant:

Yes, America, you’re spoiled.

We promised that if you elected us, things would get better for you.

When you bought into our “Hope and Change” pitch, the unemployment rate was 6.6 percent. Now it’s 9.5 percent.

On Election Day 2008, 7.3 million Americans were out of work. Now it’s 14.6 million.

And the fact that this makes you unhappy means you’re spoiled and impatient.

As Brian Maloney wrote Tuesday, “[O]nly ultra-partisan Democratic Party crony Bill Press could manage to blame voters for Obama’s failure to thrive.”

Now, as crazy as it is that Bill Press can’t understand why Americans are “impatient” with Obama on day 89 of the worst environmental disaster in American history as we circle the drain to a double-dip recession following Obama’s boast that he would keep unemployment under 8% if his stimulus was passed, that’s not what makes me laugh.

What makes me laugh is that Bill Press was as “impatient” (not to mention demagogic and hateful) about President George Bush as anyone.  He literally wrote the book, Bush Must Go, which sounds absolutely nothing like, Bush Should Stay.

Here’s Bill Press being extremely “impatient” with George Bush’s presidency in May 21, 2002:

It is not irresponsible to demand that bureaucrats do the job we pay them to do. It is not irresponsible to expect people in authority to be held responsible for dumb, and perhaps fatal, mistakes. And, finally, it is not irresponsible, even in time of war, to raise questions about the presidency of George W. Bush.

Now let’s see.  Bill Press is bitching about impatient and childish Americans criticizing Obama after only 18 months as president. When he was impatiently and childishly (by his own standard, to boot) of George W. Bush after a mere 16 months in office.

Nothing can be more cruel than to hold a Democrat to his own standards of judgment.

Given that Obama’s 2010 corresponds to Bush’s 2002, it’s hard for a reasonably intelligent mammal to understand why the left is so upset for the criticism now being given to Obama.

Take a trip down memory lane.  Call it a tale of two Bills, as Bill Sammon points out how the left was treating George Bush a year and a half into HIS presidency:

Analysis: Press Largely Ignored Incendiary Rhetoric at Bush Protest
By Bill Sammon
Published August 12, 2009
FOXNews.com

News outlets that are focusing on the incendiary rhetoric of conservatives outside President Obama’s town hall meeting Tuesday ignored the incendiary rhetoric — and even violence — of liberals outside an appearance by former President George W. Bush in 2002.

When Bush visited Portland, Ore., for a fundraiser, protesters stalked his motorcade, assailed his limousine and stoned a car containing his advisers. Chanting “Bush is a terrorist!”, the demonstrators bullied passers-by, including gay softball players and a wheelchair-bound grandfather with multiple sclerosis.

One protester even brandished a sign that seemed to advocate Bush’s assassination. The man held a large photo of Bush that had been doctored to show a gun barrel pressed against his temple.

“BUSH: WANTED, DEAD OR ALIVE,” read the placard, which had an X over the word “ALIVE.”

Another poster showed Bush’s face with the words: “F— YOU, MOTHERF—ER!”

A third sign urged motorists to “HONK IF YOU HATE BUSH.” A fourth declared: “CHRISTIAN FASCISM,” with a swastika in place of the letter S in each word.

Although reporters from numerous national news organizations were traveling with Bush and witnessed the protest, none reported that protesters were shrieking at Republican donors epithets like “Slut!” “Whore!” and “Fascists!”

Frank Dulcich, president and CEO of Pacific Seafood Group, had a cup of liquid thrown into his face, and then was surrounded by a group of menacing protesters, including several who wore masks. Donald Tykeson, 75, who had multiple sclerosis and was confined to a wheelchair, was blocked by a thug who threatened him.

Protesters slashed the tires of several state patrol cruisers and leapt onto an occupied police car, slamming the hood and blocking the windshield with placards. A female police officer was knocked to the street by advancing protesters, badly injuring her wrist.

The angry protest grew so violent that the Secret Service was forced to take the highly unusual step of using a backup route for Bush’s motorcade because the primary route had been compromised by protesters, one of whom pounded his fist on the president’s moving limousine.

All the while, angry demonstrators brandished signs with incendiary rhetoric, such as “9/11 – YOU LET IT HAPPEN, SHRUB,” and “BUSH: BASTARD CHILD OF THE SUPREME COURT.” One sign read: “IMPEACH THE COURT-APPOINTED JUNTA AND THE FASCIST, EGOMANIACAL, BLOOD-SWILLING BEAST!”

Yet none of these signs were cited in the national media’s coverage of the event. By contrast, the press focused extensively on over-the-top signs held by Obama critics at the president’s town hall event held Tuesday in New Hampshire.

The lead story in Wednesday’s Washington Post, for example, is headlined: “Obama Faces ‘Scare Tactics’ Head-On.”

“As the president spoke, demonstrators outside held posters declaring him a socialist and dubbing him ‘Obamahdinejad,’ in reference to Iran’s president,” the Post reported. “People screamed into bullhorns to protest a bigger government role in health care. ‘Nobama Deathcare!’ one sign read. A young girl held up a sign that said: ‘Obama Lies, Grandma Dies.’ Images of a protester wearing what appeared to be a gun were shown on television.”

On Sunday, The New York Times reported that a Democratic congressman discovered that “an opponent of health care reform hanged him in effigy” and was confronted by “200 angry conservatives.” The article lamented “increasingly ugly scenes of partisan screaming matches, scuffles, threats and even arrests.”

No such coverage was given to the Portland protest of Bush by The New York Times or the Washington Post, which witnessed the protest.

The media just turned a blind eye to Bush derangement syndrome.  Nothing to see here, folks.  But when anyone criticized Barack Obama, it was “OH MY JEBUS! THIS IS THE WORST AND MOST EVIL STUFF WE HAVE EVER HEARD!!!  CONSERVATIVES ARE ALL WORSE THAN NAZIS!!!”

For my part, I don’t expect liberals to be gracious or fair to the next Republican president (whom you can expect to see inaugurated on January 20, 2013, btw).  So you won’t hear me crying about it.

Why DON’T I expect liberals to be gracious or fair?  Because it’s just not something they are capable of, that’s why.  I don’t expect cockroaches to be anything other than cockroaches.

It doesn’t matter if conservatives try to tear Obama down, or whether conservatives try to do everything they can to support Obama.  Liberals will tear into the next Republican president either way.  And just as viciously.

So keep firing away, conservatives.  Because the way liberals are whining at us and to themselves, we can rest assured what we’re doing is working.

Some Liberal Historical Revisionism Corrected

February 17, 2010

I got an all-too typical comment today posted to an article I wrote:

“What would you rather do? live in depression or try to get out of it? seriously, im tired of hearing these idiots saying that Obama is the worst president.. and comparing him to Hitler… and guess what??? The New Deal helped America last time. What makes you think that it isnt going to this time?”

And I dropped a load of bricks on it as follows:

Let me take your whining in order:
1) You hypocrite: you were just FINE with eight years of hysterical Bush derangement syndrome, in which George Bush was equated with Adolf Hitler about a billion times.
Bush=Hitler

Bush=Hitler

Bush=Hitler

Bush=Hitler

You leftwing slimebags were all over yourselves comparing George Bush to Adolf Hitler.   But now all of a sudden it’s just inconvenient for you to recognize that “Nazi” stood for “National Socialist German Workers Party.”  Now you progressive liberal socialists don’t want to wear the shoe that should have been on your own damn foot all along.

Your self-righteous indignation only works in one direction, doesn’t it?

2) You seriously should quit being ignorant and learn something, such as “FDR’s policies prolonged Depression by 7 years, UCLA economists calculate”  (and see this CNN Money article as well, which links to one of Cole and Ohanian’s papers).  If you read The Forgotten Man you’d have a very different view of FDR. If you read New Deal or Raw Deal you’d have a very different view of the New Deal.

Heck, if you just paid attention to what FDR’s OWN TREASURY SECRETARY SAID you’d have a very different view:

“We have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever spent before and it does not work. And I have just one interest, and if I am wrong… somebody else can have my job. I want to see this country prosperous. I want to see people get a job. I want to see people get enough to eat. We have never made good on our promises… I say after eight years of this Administration we have just as much unemployment as when we started… And an enormous debt to boot!” – Henry Morganthau, FDR’s Treasury Secretary, May 1939

In April 1939, by the way, unemployment was 20.7%

Which pretty much puts the kibosh on the myth that FDR got us out of anything. What allowed us to get out of the depression was World War II. If we’d counted on FDR’s policies, we’d probably STILL be in the Great Depression.

But you have your propaganda and your ideology. What else do you need?

You might want your government to pay people to dig a hole, then pay other people to fill it back up again.  With the new modern method of cutting a giant hole in the road, doing a crappy job repaving it, and then having to fix potholes over and over forever after.  But that doesn’t mean the increasingly large majority of Americans who are turning against Obama want such stupidity.

Not that Obama really gave us any shovel ready jobs to begin with.

For what it’s worth, the Obama White House is actually acknowledging that Obama will leave unemployment higher than it was when he took office.

Democrat Senator Evan Bayh, who was so sick of such economic stupidity he’s getting out of politics, put it this way:

“[I]f I could create one job in the private sector by helping to grow a business, that would be one more than Congress has created in the last six months.”

Here’s the video of Senator Evan Bayh:

Senator Bayh understands that the Obama administration has sacrificed all credibility regarding its utterly failed stimulus.

And according to a New York Times/CBS poll, a whopping 94% of the American people agree with Bayh.  Only 6% of Americans believe Obama’s massive porkulus has created jobs a full year after going into effect.

To the extent that Obama’s porkulus actually has created any jobs, it has created far too few and at far too high a cost to taxpayers’ children’s children’s children’s children.  As I demonstrated, the White House’s own numbers only claim 595,263 jobs at a cost of $272 billion.  Which comes out to an astronomical $456,941 per job.

And at that rate, we can’t AFFORD for Obama to “create” any more jobs.

So when it comes to your wrongheaded thesis that the New Deal got us out of the Great Depression, that’s what makes me think “that it isn’t going to this time” when it comes to Obama’s New Deal Part Deux.

It’s decades past time that we shoved a wooden stake into the heart of liberal myths once and for all.

Another liberal myth that needs exploding is the far newer lie about who was to blame for imploding our economy in 2008.