Posted on 06/08/2009 6:58:16 AM PDT by meandog
For the record, you're being so patronizing and using strawman (i.e. "false") attacks (hagiographs? LOL!) that have nothing to do with anything, that it's difficult to take you seriously, Kenny Bunk.
Want to try again?
The fact that Bush's VP chose not to run, and that the man who was nominated ran against HIM, not against Obama, was a huge factor in the election.
Do you deny that?
(No more phony arguments now.....)
The incarnation of George Washington, Abraham Lincoln and Ronald Reagan all rolled into one wouldn't have stood a chance after GWB announced "we have an ack-ker-nomics cry-sis" exactly one month before the election. Prior to that he was, if you'll remember, leading zero in the polls by 8 percentage points at one time.
Give him a medal for his 'service' but courage to survive is the most I can ever grant him. He is just as self serving as the next liberal down the line.
The worst liberal is, IMO, one in sheep's clothing: George 'DUH-Pew-Yew' Bush and his "Read My Lips" old man are classic examples!
"Unpopular" BECAUSE of the lying MSM, the wimpy Republicans, the Democrat caused economic crisis.....
NOT the primary factor, or even close, Mr Miller.
I know you really, really want President Bush to be the cause of what happened in November, but you have to completely ignore that vast historic evidence in order to make your argument.
I have no doubt that you will continue to do so, but your persistence doesn't increase the validity of your claims.
“I know you really, really want President Bush to be the cause of what happened in November, but you have to completely ignore that vast historic evidence in order to make your argument.”
Actually, the above poster was correct when he said that you constantly use straw man arguments. Most weak debaters use this technique.
You purposefully, and lazily ignore that I just commented that I agreed with the factors that you mentioned. However, it is you who consistently ingore the reality of a Pres. that was a poor communicator and had no resolve to sell the American people on a costly war. You lack proper argumentation technique.
Bush sycophant or not, you need to properly address the full argument.
Where were you? Pres. Bush defended the WOT in nearly every speech he gave. The problem, it seems, is that too many people are too busy talking to listen.
I'll gladly contrast her with the hildabeast in any category you wish.
The problem was that he was a poor communicator.
It didn’t help that he failed to go around the press to the American people, directly.
Try to avoid the pitfalls of other posters in attacking me personally, and deal with the media worship of Obama, the economic crisis, the non-stop lying of Bush haters, the lack of a VP candidate, the incredible weakness of the 'moderate' McCain and his campaign against Bush and not Obama.....
Until you factor ALL of the issues, your persistence in blaming Bush's PR for that which it was, at very best only partially responsible, and factually, very minimally, makes your argument less than weak. It is indefensible.
I have addressed the full argument. It is you who have chosen to center on Bush and not the plethora of factual evidence refuting your narrow focus of blame.
Do you deny that?
Hell, no. But tell me, how in his precarious state of health, bruited about in the MSM for 8 years, was Cheney supposed to run? In particular, I believe he had absolutely no wish to do so.
But, can you deny, in his de facto role as party leader, that W might have done something to end the Democrat cabal that pushed McC in open primaries, before he became the candidate? Or even put forward, or endorsed, another candidate? This, as you well know, is not exactly an unheard-of tactic.
In re your hero, GW, we only have one major difference: you (apparently) wish to absolve him of all responsibility for the present FUBAR Situation, and I cannot. SOME portion of it has to go back to his shortcomings in office, either perceived (management of which perception was also his responsibility) or real.
The mantra "Bush's Fault," has a bit of truth to it. "How much?" is the question.
Forgive this convoluted sentence. I hope its meaning is clear.
(FR needs an edit feature....)
“Interesting that you call me a weak debater when you have not even begun to address the historic factors in the election”
Actually, when there is agreement on a point in a debate, there is certainly no need to debate that point.
We have agreement there there were many factors that led to the Dem route. Your reluctance to find any blame on the sitting US President is astonishing. Emotionalism from a liberal or a conservative is still emotionalism.
I really don't think that President Bush should have controlled the election process, do you? What do you suggest he might have done to keep Democrats from crossing over to vote for McCain? What would have been an appropriate action, short of something illegal, or some form of abuse of power, that would have had any effect?
Just for the record, President Bush IS my hero, and I make no apology for that. But one thing that my admiration and respect has done over the years, is kept me from being swept away by the emotions of many on this forum, kept me from the Bush blaming groupthink that I've seen so much of here, and kept me accutely aware of what the man was really doing, vs what was reported that he had done. I think that gives me more insight into the facts of the situation, and shouldn't necessarily lead to the derision (that you have willingly offered).
As far as "absolving him of all responsibility" let me clarify that for you. I agree that his characteristic humility and lack of self-defense has contributed to his negative poll numbers. Where I disagree with many of you, is in thinking that humility and lack of self-defense are flaws in his character.
In other words, yes, his relative (not total, by any means) lack of self-defense against his rabid accusers, factored into his low approval numbers. But, no, in historical perspective, he is not wrong in not wasting his time to defend himself. The numbers will change over time as the truth is revealed, and the fact that he didn't think it was his responsibility to correct the errors while he was actively working to protect America, is not something I consider to be a flaw.
You forgot the barg-gag-hurl alert lol.
...Country Club Republicans will destory the Party to be accepted and be seen as enlightened...
...I’ll await her comments on Palin and her treatment from the DC GOP. (crickets)??
New York Times thinks so too click here /Sarcasm off
“I like to watch her, I think she’s doing great!’’ adding, “I hope she’ll discover, and I think she has, that she really does have a podium and that people do watch her, from all over the world. And she can be such a great example, and is, for people everywhere,” --Laura Bush on Michelle Obama
I would counter your attack on me by saying that many posting here have any unhealthy emotional disdain for President Bush.
I have, in all my posts, been completely rational and have used facts in my arguments. Check the posts of others here, and you will see what you accuse me of doing is what those opposing my POV have indeed done.
btw, your "agreement" was not really agreement, was it? "Other factors?" They were the prime factors.
I don't believe we agree, because you center the blame on President Bush while relegating the more significant factors as "other."
That's not agreement, and to be a good debater, you should address the vast difference in our arguments. Instead, you have ignored it.
Either you don’t understand, or you are attempting to deflect the wrong issue.
Ugh. What a revision of history.
Bush mentioned the War EVERY single time he made a speech. EVERY SINGLE TIME.
You weren't paying attention.
***Part 2 of the GMA interview, Laura Bush Tells the “Heart Truth,” and it shows some of the beautiful new house.
http://abcnews.go.com/Video/playerIndex?id=7782196
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.