If you have been reading us for any length of time, you know that we used to make fun of “Dubya” nearly every day…parroting the same comedic bits we heard in our Democrat circles, where Bush is still, to this day, lampooned as a chimp, a bumbling idiot, and a poor, clumsy public speaker.
[…]
“We live in strange, strange times indeed.”
h/t Robert W.
Related – What Bush Inherited
Sasquatch:
I avoid calling people liars and racists, but I’m not beyond calling some people ignorant drooling schmegheads who’s asinine dumb-as-dirt posts deserve a swift kick in the bullocks.
And we’re hearing about this now why? Remorse or regret? That Bush no longer can run for the highest office of the land? Or that now a total putz has ruined things for everyone and now we realise that Bush wasn’t so bad after all? Well, that’s nice but we’re still stuck with the putz and his cheap wife who won’t shell out for decent toys for visiting leaders’ children.
If any of the leftist twits had any shame, they would just stop speaking and blogging altogether. For all of his faults, at least Bush has decency and the left would rather drink a bowl of hot wax then admit it- until now.
And that’s a little too late.
Hey rabbit, still tryin’ to make nice with the Hate and Death Cult, huh?
See what it gets ya?
Howzabout your spirited defense of Kate’s assertion that all leftists are anti-semites? That still comin’ along?
Bleet:
“spirited defense of Kate’s assertion that all leftists are anti-semites?”
Sorry, I’ve never contended that all leftists are anti-semites. You may be thinking of someone else. Perhaps you can provide a link.
Lot of boneheads out today.
rabbit:
bleet has proven time and time again he’s the designated bonehead.
Obama may look Like Neuman but he’s not as smart.
Here’s one of Alfred’s quotes:
“How come we choose from just two people for President, and fifty for Miss America?”
and another:
“Show me a trunk murderer and I’ll show you a sloppy packer.”
favill:
“It’s too bad, that Pres Bush didn’t continue eastward from Iraq and westward from Afghanistan, destroy Iran’s Theocratic Gov’t and emplace a democratic gov’t.”
That is a beef I have with Dubya. I appreciated how far he went, which was further than most ever would have, but he stopped short. Two points in his defence though, 1/ I can’t even begin to imagine the howling by the Dems and the media if he’d pushed on through Iran and 2/ Who could have foreseen that in leaving Iran to the next guy that he would be leaving it to a light weight like Obama. I still can’t believe that Americans could have had such a collective brain cramp.
Hey Bleet? Are you one of the exceptions?
I’m a bonehead, rabbit? More of that wonderful civility you’re espousng to the members of the Hate and Death Cult here, huh? I guess “that’s what political discourse has come down to these days”, to quote you from above.
Turns out you have more in common with the Hate and Death cultists than you might have supposed.
In any case, you seem to feel, based on your earlier posts, that this is actually a “moderate conservative” site.
If so, do you consider Kate’s earlier assertion that leftists are anti-semites to be a ‘moderately conservative’ position? You noted earlier with no specific examples, that the left has a ‘deep and ugly association’ with anti-semitism. Will you cross the rubicon and state with Kate that all leftists are anti-semites, and attest that this is the position of a moderate conservative?
Bleet, you typed “howzabout”. Don’t talk any more.
Bleet:
I did say that the hard left has a deep and ugly history of anti-semitism, but the “hard left” here means Stalinists and the like.
(1) I didn’t say ALL leftists were anti-semitic. That would be ludicrous given that there are many Jews on the left.
(2) I did say that I sometime call people racists when they are overtly so, and Stalinists certainly qualify. So does writing “F*ck The Jews” IMHO.
You shouldn’t li — I mean you should do a better job of checking your facts.
Hopefully I’m not one of the “bone heads” of which you speak. I simply called it like I see it, and provided a scrap of evidence to make my point quickly. Phantom summed it up best.
It appears rabbit that you’ve fallen into the same trap that I fell into, and that O’Reilly is in but trying to climb-out of. The trap is denying what is obvious so as not to appear, or be like those that we so loath: people with BDS. Well let me tell you something, I’m nothing like those with BDS. I’ve evaluated BO over the last year and I stand by my conclusion. The Bush = Hitler stuff you quote was baseless, and was simply a tactic, a Red Herring. Next you’re going to argue that T.McVeigh is proof that extreme Muslim views have nothing to do with terrorism. My father told me this: “You can lie to me, but don’t lie to yourself”. This is some of the best advice I’ve ever received, and it reigns true today. As long as we continue to lie to ourselves to appease those that would call us names unjustly, we are in grave danger. Does the Fort Hood massacre ring a bell?
What is becoming more obvious the more you comment it that you seem to have some liberal tendencies in your arguments and with your haughtiness. You attempt to use relativism as your argument even though you were not provoked. Except you were provoked, weren’t you? Yes, it’s becoming all to clear that you are one of those “I’m a conservative but..” types. So your argument is: yeah, yeah, Bush is an okay guy; but now you must say BO is a good guy to be FAIR; and, if you don’t do as I say, it must be because you are not as sophisticated as I.
Like I said, provide an argument why I’m wrong about Obama; or, provide an argument why Bush is the same as Obama, but please don’t tell me why you are so much better than me because you will not say what you think!
Oooh, bleet isn’t feeling the love… Let me see if I can compose a bleet sample post on this topic.
“Miss Dubya? That queer, election stealing naked table dancer whose daddy got him into the TANG, and he didn’t even bother to show up? That Bush? The drunk driving, coke head Bush that Cheney only kept around because he gave good head? The one that [on and on]….”
Or on the topic of, for example Limbaugh:
“Limbaugh? You mean that Viagra popping fudge packing draft dodging hypocrite who spends all the money he makes on gay sex tourism? That guy? The sexually inadequate headman of the white men?”
One could go on and on like this. You will notice that facts are never cited in his posts, nor are there appeals to logic. Just rejection of the take on any particular topic, followed by a rhetorical question with a crude admixture of sexual references, usually homosexual. Then he wonders why he gets no love here.
“Bush-Cheney regime”
“stolen election in 2000” (just guessing on this one.)
“Obama inherited…/…is Bush’s fault”
“War Crimes”
“torture”
“McBush”
“way of the Whigs”
“Rethuglicans”
“America hates you losers”
“Bush’s Daddy”
“National Guard”
“Beck and Limbaugh”
“sublimate the rage of [object of ad hominum] sexual inadequacies into their rant on [current topic]”
“right-wing substance abusers”
“[male figure popular on the right goes here] is gay and you guys are too much doofuses to know it, there are people who knew him in college who will swear that he [blew truck drivers for crack money/ danced naked on bars/had a boyfriend in college”
But rabbit, Kate has stated many times “Scratch a leftist find an anti-semite”. Now you’re a conservative, a moderate one like I gather you believe she is: do you concur with her assessment?
If not why do you post here? Are there not other ‘moderate conservative’ sites you can post at, where such statements, and the frequent postings of cartoons which depict racial stereotypes, are not the norm?
Are you here to convert the Hate and Death Cultists into ‘moderate conservatism’? Please advise.
That is pretty funny coming from bleet. He throws around that “racist” charge like Obama tosses billion dollar bills of other people’s money.
Google this ‘bleet racist site:smalldeadanimals.com’ , without the quotes.
I have always said..”Say what you will about Bush, but he was the right man at the right time!”
No one can say that about BO.
More of that wonderful civility you’re espousng to the members of the Hate and Death Cult here, huh?
The irony is as thick as the one who posted the comment…
Indianess:
Well thank you for that political litmus test. It’s the nature of political blogs that those who deviate in a little from the norm are often accused of apostasy. Such is life.
I suggest you reread my posts – carefully. There is nothing that is relativistic. And I hardly think that denying that Obama is an outright Marxist means I have (shudder) “liberal tendencies”.
But I actually DO have liberal tendencies in that I am a classic liberal. I plead guilty. You’ve outed me.
Apart from that, I must admit I had trouble parsing your rant.
glacierman:
The repeal of Glass-Steagall, which was promoted by a Republican Congress, had ZERO, ZILCH, NADA to do with the Wall Street meltdown. Bears Sterns and Lehman, whose problems precipitated the crisis were pure investments banks, and did no retail/commercial banking. We don’t have any G-S type restriction in Canada – all of our big banks do investment, commercial, and retail banking.
The difference is Canadian banks’ mortgages are still mostly “originate to hold” – the bank gives you the money, and holds on to the note until it matures. American investment banks at first, and then quickly followed by retail banks, moved to “acquire to distribute” with a vengeance. There, you don’t hold the mortgage any longer than you can; you buy a whack of them, package them up, and then pawn them off, quick as you can, on unsuspecting investors from Middle America (aided in no small part by the malfeasance of S&P and Moody’s). So you don’t care about the quality of the mortgage, or the mortgagee – you aren’t going to be around when the proverbial hits the fan. That’s why the mortgage market heated up so violently in the US, and less so in Canada, and why it fell so hard in the US, and less so in Canada.
“But calling him a liar, a racist, and sympathetic to terrorists is all part of the same radical partisan bullshit that had people calling Bush a Nazi.”
Except, in this case, it is true.
Horny Toad
Oh.You are a leftie alright,rabbit. You still haven’t given answers to ANY of the questions posed to you. Typical.Just spout and squirm and hope Mommy comes home soon to save you.
Justthinkin:
Where are these questions you talk of (apart from Bleet, of course, which one can safely ignore)? Really, where are they?
tim in vermont at November 13, 2009 6:00 PM
Nicely theorized, Tim. I am in awe of your verbaligious abilitiquity. And you didn’t even have to shoot stuff out of your staff!
“Well thank you for that political litmus test. It’s the nature of political blogs that those who deviate in a little from the norm are often accused of apostasy. Such is life.”
I’m not accusing you of anything that you don’t freely admit: “But I actually DO have liberal tendencies in that I am a classic liberal”.You came out swinging at me and I simply provided the basis for my statement which you have ignored, and pointed out that your tactic seems consistant with what I’d expect from a liberal. Where my critsism of you came in was when you “appeared” to be looking down your nose because I didn’t meet YOUR litmus test of “I would only call someone a racist if they had were overtly so” and you project that standard on others. Once again, what I said about BO is true. If someone doesn’t meet your standard then “apparently” they are “boneheads”. This seems a little haughty to me and something I definatly assosiate with liberal. Do you understand that it’s you that provided no basis for your argument except for your superior opinion. Get it?
All of that being said, had you considered that many people might think BO is “overtly racist” based on his aforementioned biography and public statements?
btw, you should reread your post concerning Bush/BO and you will find the “relativism” that I speak of.
Finally, there is no emotion or viterol in my comments towards BO; I don’t hate him. I have my opinion of his views and his methods; although, admittedly he has pissed me off wrt his position in Afghanistan. I do believe he is playing politics with war, with Canadian lives.
Anyways, bigones:)
Here’s betting that bleet doesn’t even know what a “classic liberal” is, which makes his emails kind of tragic, in a way. I almost feel sorry for him.
BTW bleet. Anytime you want to start discussing the issues, instead of dishing out personal attacks, you will be as welcomed back and treated civilly, I promise.
You could start by explaining why you use the term “racist”, each time you use it, or at the very least, explaining it once, and stick around to defend its use. Most of us suspect (i.e. know) that you can’t defend it. It is just a handy weapon.
’emails’ should be posts. Not having a private flame war with the boy. Sometimes my spinal cord takes over typing for me and makes little mistakes.