Every time I see a conservative express surprise at something like this I just want to fly to their town, drive to their house, knock on the door, ask the maid if they are home, make small talk with their wife, accept their gin and tonic, look at the books in their library, smile politely upon their entering the room, then grab them by the shoulders and shake them while screaming "I TOLD YOU SO!" for at least twelve hours.

hehehe... nice touch, Auguste. But you forgot to mention walking around to the rear door, like all the peasantry and beggars are supposed to do.

I don't really see that there's much to complain about. I'm glad that it amounted to nothing.

I couldn’t have said it better. Its always nice when people get played by the people they thought were on their side.

I've been saying all along, it’s all a farce.

the unequivocal notion

jesus christ. did this fool think that retarded bush boy actually gives a shit about homeless darkies? these people are more delusional than i suspected.

Drunken Cheerleader:
This is now the second post that I've seen from you in the past few days where you make some racial comment about an African-American (Sec of State Rice isn't "soul sista number one"). One thing that any rational person, whether you like the current President or not, cannot accuse Bush of is being a racist. So, if you're calling homeless African-Americans "darkies" because that's what Bush would say, then you very clearly have no idea what you're talking about. It seems to me that you, and not President Bush, are the racist or you enjoy playing the proverbial race card.
The Democrats have a former KKK member representing them in the Senate, so don't try to say that Republicans must be the racists, or that every Republican is a racist, or whatever crap statement you were trying to make.
Your two racist comments, along with your broad overgeneralization of the South seems to tell me that YOU are the one who's intolerant.

You mean Chicken George lied? No way, Jesus wouldn't like that.

And just because Rush and George are junkies, doesn't make all Repubs junkies.

It's always kind of funny to hear conservatives playing the race card. But yeah, Bush isn't racist. Do you want a cookie for that, 50 years after Brown vs. Board of Education?

I miss the days when conservatives could just be honest and say the poor isn't a big priority for them. This business of pretending private charity will do the job -- or that people are actually better off without help -- is just irritating.

What happened in this country to minorities is a disgrace. I think that most rational Republicans will say that. But how can you blame Republicans for what happened in this country prior to Brown? Racism wasn't, and isn't, confined to one of the two major parties in this country. Not every Republican is a racist bigot, just like every Republican doesn't totally disregard the poor and less fortunate. Along the same lines, there are racist Democrats and there are Democrats who do nothing for the poor.

Classifying yourself as a Democrat doesn't entitle you to automatically assume that every person not in your party pisses on the homeless and hates the poor.

And, I'm not the one playing the race card. I guess if you call yourself a Democrat, it allows you refer to African-American women as "soul sistas" and homeless people as "darkies"? That, Tony, is playing the race card. Pointing out racist comments, to my knowledge, is not.

Bush only sees the color of money.

Bush has substituted racism with the elitism he tries to get talk radio to brand others with.

Look at his pioneers and rangers list.

Name a single philanthropic issue AWOL ever took part in a priori.

That's pretty funny, AWOL. Where was your boy Clinton during the Vietnam conflict? Canada, Mexico, has he ever definitively said? But, to answer your question, off the top of my head, I can't name a single philanthropic issue that Bush was, or is, involved in. I'm sure that if I did some research, I could find something. But, the difference is, I don't know and keep up with every single thing about Bush, Clinton, Reagan, and FDR. I don't care that much. When Clinton was president, I didn't sit in a chat room all day telling other like-minded people how horrible Bill Clinton was and what an awful president and person he was. I didn't go out looking for real, and imaginary (Dan Rather), stories about him, because I had a life. Speaking of Clinton, why don't you name some great, philanthropic issue that the all mighty Clinton participated in. I'd love to hear it. Remember, a priori. You accuse Bush of being an elitist, and you use phrases like "a priori" instead of "off the top of your head."

And, while the issues or questions that you raise in these blogs may be legitimate questions, all of your credibility goes out of the window when you compare, repeatedly, an American President's administration to Adolf Hitler and the Nazis.
Disagreeing with policies is one thing, but to compare this President to the most vile and atrocious person who has ever lived is a bit ridiculous. If you would all tone it down and quit comparing certain Americans to Hitler, Stalin, the Gestapo, then maybe your points would be taken a bit more seriously.

Speaking of Clinton, why don't you name some great, philanthropic issue that the all mighty Clinton participated in. I'd love to hear it.

Hey, Regular Reader:

Check this out:

http://www.clintonfoundation.org/programs-hs-ai.htm

BigDaddyRich:
That's great that Clinton is involved in HIV/AIDS awareness. But, I have two points. First, did the Clinton Foundation start before Clinton became President, or is this something that has started since 2001? EVERY former President, from Carter to Clinton, is involved in some type of philanthropic organization. My question was more geared towards Clinton's philanthropic spirit before he became President (notice my use of past tense: "participated in"). Second, once Bush leave office in 2009, I'm sure that both he and his wife will be involved in something similar to Clinton. Until he leaves office and DOESN'T start some sort of philanthropic organization, it's not really fair to compare his philanthropy, or lack thereof, with a former President's, because all a former President has is time, and every one of them becomes involved in something like Clinton.

I sniffed the troll out. Bush isn't racist, Clenis(tm) is evil.

AWOL is putting it nicely. He deserted. He was told where to go and did not. That proves intent.

You really don't wanna open that door around here.

As for Hitler- don't take my word for it about Prescott Bush, take Roosevelt's. Really he should have used word for word excerpts of speeches Hitler used that someone took notion to google and make part of a commercial comparing the two.

By the way Clinton was a Rhodes scholar, see also Wesley Clark. Bush was working DUI numer ?wha? during those days so he's much better. And his dad was a war hawk no less.

Hitlery Clinton would agree with you (/Limbaugh)

Bush senior , post POTUS, became a lobby man for Carlysle

Clinton's got nothing on that.

And since we can agree the powerful all have skeletons (skull and bones) we can just put the entire debate where it belongs- merit.

Bush is the worst President of the modern era by far. The largest biggest ever attack on American Soil, and he reads goat stories, 52 warnings before hand no less.

His tax cuts mirror Hoover/Coolidge days and have us poised upon a deficit fit to become great depression. Tax cuts during war time no less.

He's a wartime president. Oh wait he isn't, I forgot- mission accoomplished. Flip-flops are fine for Republicans.

History speaks- FDR got after Prescott for his dealing with Adolph and Japan.

Substitute Palestenian for Jew and ask yourself who is being moved off their land into Ghettos? Palestine is the new Warsaw yet we've got the nerve to tell everyone else how to run countries to the point of invasion?

Jesse Helms renounced his KKK memberhsip? Strom the bomb? Robert Byrd did so, renounced it. Some men admit mistakes and try to better selves.

The closest Bush has come to apology is having HIS WIFE say he should not have said "bring it on".Off the top of her head no less.

Nice to see who has the cahones in the family.

I didn't say that KKK members, past or present, weren't in the Republican party. I pointed out the fact that Robert Byrd was a member of the Klan. Just because he renounced his membership, do you really believe that he didn't secretly support the Klan? Bush has renounced all of his demons (alcoholism, whatever else), yet you people still toast him like he's a drunk today. But, when one of your guys renounces something bad, all is forgiven. It was just a mistake, right???
And your OPINION that Bush is the worst President in modern history is just that, OPINION. Your skewed views of politics won't allow you to sit back, wait, and evaluate his Presidency 20 or 30 years from now - which as any Presidential historian will tell you is how to judge a President. Maybe you will be right in the year 2030. Maybe Bush will end up being the worst President since JQ Adams. But, you can't say that while he is sitting and be taken seriously.
As for your hero Clinton, what did he do to stop Osama and al Quada? In 1993, the WTC was hit, what was his response? In 1998, several US embassies in Africa were hit, what did Clinton do? In 2000, the USS Cole was hit, what did Clinton do? When bin Laden was captured by a middle eastern country and offered to Clinton, what did he do?
You can fairly criticize Bush for his failure to take al Quada seriously, but the former President Clinton not only took them lightly, but he emboldened them. They started out small, and when they realized that Clinton wouldn't do anything, their plans grew. Talk all you want about Bush's failure to fully appreciate the threat, but Clinton deserves as much blame as Bush.

As for Bush's tax cuts only going to the rich, I wish Democrats would just give this one up. As a married college student with student loans out of the ass and no job, my tax refun went up all 3 years that my college coincided with Bush's presidency. My spouse's taxes went down, so we received more money - and I promised my spouse wasn't making $200,000 - the magic number Kerry claimed. We weren't the poorest people in the world, but we sure as hell weren't, and aren't, in the top 1% of the income bracket. Give me a break.

And the next generation their student loans go down and tuition rates go up because of said tax cut.

Really you just don't see past the short term do you? Of course not you are a republican. Short term, short learn curve mentality, turning to the right so damned much you run a circle.

Not a very broad bearing at that.

Gee Mr. Murder:
Did you know that tax cuts have sunset provisions in them? But, that's beside the point.
So, are these tax cuts bad because of what they do to the future, or because they only help the rich? Please make up your mind. Are you willing to say that these tax cuts don't just help the rich?
The national debt is a problem, without a doubt. There is a school of thought that says that in a time of economic downturn, tax cuts to EVERYONE will keep the economy going. The less money people pay in taxes, the more they will spend on non-necessities. The more money is spent on discretionary items, the more products have to be made - which helps with jobs.
Now, whether you subscribe to that theory or not - and I'm sure most of you don't - is up to you, but it is a legitimate theory. And, in the case of the last 4 years, it seems to have worked. Economic downturns are inevitable, like it or not. A government's economic policy will dictate how long and bad the downtown affects people. Congress at any time can repeal these tax cuts, even if and when the sunset provisions are removed.

And please, don't tell how narrow minded I am. You're the one who unequivocally stated that Bush was the worst President in modern times. How narrow minded is that? Only a close minded person would make that kind of ridiculous remark about a SITTING President.
Even though I couldn't stand Clinton as a person, at least I wasn't close minded enough to say or think, while he was President, that he was doing a bad job. The economy was good (no thanks to him) and the country was safe (or so we thought).

It's only 5 years after his Presidency that one can realize that his inaction against repeated al Quada attacks has helped lead this country to where it stands today. Yeah, blah blah blah, Bush didn't act on intelligence that blah blah blah. If Clinton would have taken bin Laden when he was captured, or done something the 3 times that al Quada attacked us while he was President, there wouldn't have been any intelligence to report. That, Murder, is taking a historical approach, albeit a short one, on how a President did. Look back in the year 2013, and then say how bad Bush was - you'll sound a little less narrow minded.

1. Timely
   
2. Strategery
   
3. Webb wins
   
4. Huh?
   
5. Bunnypants in Bagdad
   
6. Outage
   
7. Filthy Lucre Watch
   
8. Playing the numbers
   
9. My letter to Countdown
   
10. Jefferson's Nigerian Scams