The Year of Moving Forward

The Year of Moving Forward
At our 4 person wedding reception in DC

Wednesday, July 9, 2008

What Has Bush Done For Us

One of the persistant right wing trolls ended a comment on Thomas Gave Birth ... with:

"Bush has saved us in so many ways."

I laughed all night long. Although what Bush has done to this country is not funny. But that someone thinks he has "saved" us is.

Here are some of the ways Bush has saved us.

Katrina



Iraq



Climate Change

From CNN

Jason Burnett, former EPA official, says Dick Cheney (aka Bush) pushed for major deletions in congressional testimony on the public health consequences of climate change, fearing the presentation by a leading health official might make it harder to avoid regulating greenhouse gases. Follow the CNN link for the rest of the story.


The Economy



Need I continue? Let me know how you think Bush has saved us. Or not. I will post your suggestions.



I still have faith that we can survive until Obama takes office, but much more of Bush and we are goners. And for those few who do not see that John McCain is Bush 3, he certainly is using the same tactics of (trying to) controlling who can attend his Town Hall meetings. Here McCain's people order the removal and threat of arrest of a 61 year old librarian with a McCain=Bush sign at an event in Denver a couple of days ago.


15 comments:

David said...

omg...now who's laughing? Everyone is laughing at you Joe.

You don't realize that it is the DEMOCRATS who have caused the gas prices to skyrocket. Not Bush. Their efforts to save the spotted owl and a few trees have kept us from drilling right here at home. That is why we are paying $4 a gallon.

Bush has kept the war away as another blogger has mentioned. Obama simply wants to be dimplomatic. But like the blogger said, you cannot talk to terrorists. He is going to put more American lives in danger by bringing all our troops home. You can't even understand that.

You say you think we can survive until Obama takes office. You better be asking if we can survive after he takes office.

What is so funny is that gay liberals like yourself think Obama is the savior. This guy hasn't even served a complete term in the senate. I'd love to be a fly on the wall when he gets his very first classified briefing from the Pentagon. He's gonna crap in his pants and will not know what to do.

I wouldn't be laughing if I were you. Obama = death of our nation and freedom as we know it.

Anonymous said...

Amen David says


AMEN

James said...

You go David. You are exactly right with your comments. If Obama is elected, we may not make it another four years. Terrorists around the world can't wait to see that liberal, do-nothing, unqualified dude become president. They are going to be all over us.

Iraq has met all but three of 18 original benchmarks set by Congress last year to measure security, political and economic progress, according to a report by the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad.

Obama is going to come in here, bring all the troops home, and then we are SCREWED.

Good comments David.

Joe said...

These comments are great.

Know why?

I said before this blog is for education and entertainment. I provide the education. Yall provide the entertainment.

Fortunately the rest of the country does not believe as you three do.

Oh Brother said...

Ya'll are saying the same thing that people said when Bush was elected both times (same thing can be said for Clinton, Bush #1, Reagan, Carter, etc. etc.). "OMG we will be destroyed with this guy in office" "We won't make it 4 years", etc. Well, we had a mediocre president for 8 years (there were both positive and negative aspects to his presidency. Its just that not partisan believe will accept it) and we are surviving.

I am sure we can weather Obama's presidency (if he is elected). The kind of paranoia in these posts would be laughable if it were not so sad. Our government is separated into branches for a reason. We have checks and balances in place to insure that one individual will not destroy this nation of ours.

Jason said...

Folks need to look here to see GW Bush's major accomplishment:

http://projects.washingtonpost.com/fallen/

As for ANWR oil, the highest estimated production (900,000 barrels a day) would reduce our dependence on imports by 4%.
900,000 barrels is 1.2% of the daily world oil market.

So drilling in ANWR would add to domestic oil production. But 1.2% is literally a drop in the barrel, and will have minimal effect on the price.

By the most liberal estimates, it could reduce the price by 50
cents/barrel.

Wayne said...

David ignores the fact that Bush has run the country (into the ground) for the last eight years. Poor David has to go back twice that period of time to dig up something that will shore up his point, since any point in the last eight years is hardly supportive of how wonderful Bush is.

Anonymous is, well, anonymous. Who cares what he or she thinks.

James is like every other Obama detractor I see - plenty of things to complain about, but odd, isn't it, how they have nothing positive to say about McCain?

oh brother makes the point I was making when Bush was selected: surely we can weather this. Too bad that turned out to be wrong, and if McCain is elected, it will just be another four years of the same ol' same ol'.

Jason, add to that that ANWAR drilling (or ANY drilling) won't produce a result for the next ten years, and it is as you say, a miniscule one. Consider too, that McCain's proposal to drop taxes on gasoline for the period of the summer 2008 will do nothing other than benefit the oil companies. It will not bring the cost of gas down. Even McCain is backing away from this.

James and David, a challenge: why don't you tell us how wonderful McCain will be, how he will see that people like you and me aren't screwed over, and what he can do that Obama won't do? That's what's lacking in your arguments.

james said...

Oh I agree, McCain is not much better. But he does have a few advantages.

Experience. Sure he's old, but he's at least been around enough to know how things really work in Washington.

Military background. This is major. Obama has no clue how to oversee a military, and we will be attacked at home again if he is elected. He is going to bring the war on terror to us. You liberals don't seem to understand. You want us to all get along, and that is never going to happen. Terrorist hated us long before either Bush was put into office. But we have to be on the offensive, not the defensive.

Obama wants to give health benefits to illegal aliens. I mean, come on. Yesterday he said that Americans needed to 'learn Spanish'. Jesus, please.

So, I cannot tell you how wonderful McCain will be because honestly, I don't think he will be wonderful. But I'll tell you this, Obama will be horrific. Open your eyes.

"Change!"....Change what? PLEASE give us 1 example. Funny how he has yet to do that.

bhamdaniel said...

Hum? How has bush, "saved me?"
Let me count the ways.
-277,967;
-277,966; -277,965; -277,964....................

bhamdaniel said...

Oh, wait, I forgot about all those illegal wiretaps, of whom I am no doubt one. So that's...
-334,612 -334,611 -334,610.................. ------------------------------------- .

bhamdaniel said...

And, sorry to go on and on, but all you Democrat & Obama bashers had lots more to say than I would even think of writing; since I doubt some of you would get anything true or factual out of it anyway.But, help me out here, okay? YOU tell ME just who your choice(s) for the worst U.S. Republican President would actually be? Would ANY of them at all whatsoever even be a Republican? ANY? Nixon? Hoover? Coolidge? Harding? Eisenhower? Oh, just maybe even the sacred Mr. bush? Or is just an assumption that it's okay for a Republican to be pardoned by another Republican for serious crimes in order to avoid time in Federal prison be okay by you? Or to plunge the nation into the worst social and fiscal depression, ever? Or to fire some of the greatest heroes of WWII? Or to invade a small island to, "rescue," 15 American students? Shoot unarmed civilians and students during protests? Assassinate the first DEMOCRATICALLY elected President in South America? Pander to every Big Business lobby? Or just relegate all Democrats to eternal hell, since they might just support social justice, freedom of expression and relgion, civil rights for all? And don't even DARE to attribute a runaway deficit to ANY Republican, even when the last time that we actually HAD a balanced federal budget and, "YES," even a SURPLUS to oh my, a Democrat?!? Can you at all ever for just one moment be objective? Or would that too be the work of the devil? Is it okay to lie and mislead a nation into an invasion of another country? Why could we win two (2) world wars in four (4) years and still be in Iraq six years, later or, " may have to be there for another 75-100 years." WAKE-UP, PLEASE!!! bush/McCain are an embarrassment to our nation and especially to any school teacher trying to teach good English speech, or debate, or mathmatics, or the misuse of the language, national affairs and diplomacy, good manners and fairness above all else! And bush/McCain is your choice for the presidency of what was once the greatest nation on earth?!? Oh, yea, and just why can't that hated man of all time, Osasma bin Laden be found? Is that too much to ask of your president who gave us his, "Wanted: Dead or Alive," or the now infamous, "Mission Accomplished!" "and how many deaths will it take 'til he knows that too many people have died?"

Joe Openshaw said...

James, I love it how you say "You liberals don't seem to understand. You want us to all get along, and that is never going to happen."

OK, so us liberals want peace...sort of what Jesus wanted. You conservatives say never...sort of the opposite of what Jesus wanted.

Jason, Wayne, BhamDaniel...thank you. I knew there were some wise folk out there.

Funny, too, how when I was in high school, we were urged to take a foeign language and most took Spanish. Now we are criticized for advocating learning another language, when in truth, it would benefit anyone working in a global economy to learn one.

And James, as a public health (soon to be) graduate, I think anyone on US soil should have health benefits because access to health care is a moral issue not a benefit for the privileged. Not a particularly popular postion, probably, but my position neverthless.

oh brother said...

"Shoot unarmed civilians and students during protests?"

Uh, I don't think any Republican presidents shot any unarmed students.

I mean, Cheney shot someone, but that guy was armed and I don't believe he was protesting anything. And Cheney wasn't serving one of his temporary president stints at the time. So I wouldn't think that one counts.

Neither party has done much good for this country for some time. They talk about what's crappy about this country and how they are going to fix it and then they get elected and don't do jack.

Unfortunately we are tied into a two party system that prevents us from having much choice in who we have as president. We have, at times, had as many as 13 candidates running for the office of president. Granted most had no chance but usually of these 3 or 4 had a good chunk of the vote. We had options then and multiple parties to choose from. Now we are stuck with candidates that are thrust upon us by two massive parties that choke out any decent third or fourth party candidate (you have to have the parties support to get any sort of real funding). It creates an us vs. them kind of atmosphere where we feel that we need to pick our "team" and stick with them no matter what.

It is sad because we find ourselves defending candidates or officials that really don't need to be defended sometimes and attacking those of the opposite party even when they deserve some credit (even if it is rare).

We currently have two candidates that have a history of service to this country (Obama may not have been elected long but he has worked a long time to better his community and McCain has both the military and civil service history). I don't trust that either one of them with be the great hope that this nation wants right now but I don't think that either one will "destroy" this country either. Again, we have checks and balances in place to prevent this.

oh brother said...

"Funny, too, how when I was in high school, we were urged to take a foeign language and most took Spanish. Now we are criticized for advocating learning another language, when in truth, it would benefit anyone working in a global economy to learn one."

I agree with you Joe. When I was in school (not that long ago) we had to take a foreign language. I was the oddball and took French but most people took Spanish. Everyone thought it was cool to take a foreign language then. Why it freaks people out now to learn Spanish I will never know.

If you ever visit any part of the world most people you encounter in the larger urban areas speak both their native language and English. Why should we as Americans not learn a language that we will more than likely encounter at some point in our lives.

Bhamdaniel said...

My dear, "brother," you are of course correct in that Nixon himself did not actually send the troops to Kent State or to Pennsylvania Ave. It was the Gov. of Ohio who mobilized the National Guard that killed innocent students. But it still boils down to, "...tin soldiers and Nixon's coming...you better watch children what's that sound, everybody look what's going down." And yes also we have to live under a mostly two (2) political party system. But to quote Lillian Hellman, " I will not cut my conscience to fit this year's fashion." or maybe this year's, "fashcionista," - bush-light.