Posted on 11/05/2012 8:46:35 PM PST by WilliamIII
One of the most telling aspects of the 2012 presidential campaign now racing to its end is the matter of the vanishing former two-term Republican president. His name is so seldom mentioned by his party's nominee and other stalwarts as to take on the characteristic of a toxic distant uncle.
That other GOP two-termer, Ronald Reagan, continues posthumously to enjoy the stature of political sainthood among the faithful. But the 43rd president, who is the son and namesake of the 41st, has been neither seen nor heard from in the blizzard of speech-making and television advertising by and in behalf of party standard-bearer Mitt Romney.
Yes, the missing person in the picture would be George W. Bush, now seemingly under party house arrest back in Texas as Mr. Romney runs as far away as he can get from Mr. Bush and his White House tenure. Memories of the junior Bush economic hangover haunt not only President Barack Obama, still struggling to recover from it, but also the Republican who wants Mr. Bush's old job.
(Excerpt) Read more at articles.baltimoresun.com ...
Economy under W. Bush was fine until the democrat socialists took over both the Senate and House due to the Nov., 2006 election. Bush was basically stripped of any power, even moreso than other presidents who in their 7th and 8th years in the White House faced both the Senate and House in the opposition party hands. Check the economic numbers before the Nov. 2006 election and also remember that while Bush was trying to better regulate Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the democrat socialists were pushing on us Jimmy Carter’s “Community Re-Investment Act.” ..... And with W, our allies were confident in us and trusted us, and our enemies or potential enemies knew that Bush believed in defending ourselves and our allies. ... Like any president or any man, W was flawed. But he had America’s best interests at heart, and under relentless siege from a media and opposition party intent every day on ruining him, he kept a quiet and humble dignity that is totally absent in the current Oval Office occupier.
Economy under W. Bush was fine until the democrat socialists took over both the Senate and House due to the Nov., 2006 election. Bush was basically stripped of any power, even moreso than other presidents who in their 7th and 8th years in the White House faced both the Senate and House in the opposition party hands. Check the economic numbers before the Nov. 2006 election and also remember that while Bush was trying to better regulate Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the democrat socialists were pushing on us Jimmy Carter’s “Community Re-Investment Act.” ..... And with W, our allies were confident in us and trusted us, and our enemies or potential enemies knew that Bush believed in defending ourselves and our allies. ... Like any president or any man, W was flawed. But he had America’s best interests at heart, and under relentless siege from a media and opposition party intent every day on ruining him, he kept a quiet and humble dignity that is totally absent in the current Oval Office occupier.
Do they expect Romney to run on Bush’s record because Obama has chosen to run on Clinton’s?
... the muslim voice, obama’s people, globally, was a huge weapon in removing him from office... cuzz he took 9-11 to them.
Then Obama’s people here pushed the costs of the war into the lime light.
Bush did what was necessary to let the muslims know security of America was his number one priority.
Now we have one sorry SOB who sides with his folks and kin, the Al Quaeda, the MB and global muslims, the UN... all traditional enemies. Now tell me the difference!
Economy under W. Bush was fine
Nope, the “good economy” under Bush was an illusion - the result of an unsustainable housing bubble that he helped inflate, with easy-lending policies to poor people who shouldn’t have been buying homes. The bubble was bound to burst, and when it did - by 2008 - we almost had another 1929.
No.
Bush more than ten times advised congress to increase regulation of the gses.
Once Barney frank and Chris Dodd took over the bubble burst. Obama was also a huge recipient of Fannie election money.
Remember Clinton the rapist is hugely popular.
Obama who allowed an ambassador to be murdered is and will be more popular than bush.
It’s a a sham and we ought to defend the good and criticize evil but we play along.
I won’t.
When did Reagan insinuate himself into foreign policy or denigrate any democrats after he left office. You gripe that he stays away from campaign events precisely because the campaign should not be about him. It is the left that would love him out there to link Romney to the man they call Satan and wanted murdered. So why is so important to you that Bush be out there, what’s your game?
Clinton started the housing bubble....
Bull Shit
I’ll put you down as a Bushbot.
The RATagandist "media" made Bush’s unpopularity possible.
W never got out from under the thumb of his father, who adopted Bill Clinton.
W never got out from under the thumb of his father, who adopted Bill Clinton.
Don't know about you, but I considered George W. a huge improvement on Bill Clinton. And preferable, by far, to the likes of Algore and John Effin' Kerry.
And Bush vs Obama? No contest.
The RATagandist “media” made Bush’s unpopularity possible.
The media slimed Reagan, but it didn’t matter because people saw that he was a great president.
GW Bush hurts the GOP still today by eschewing the Conservative base for voter groups that will never vote GOP
Bush pushed Open Borders and Illegal Alien Amnesty (even after 9/11)....pushed the North American Union nonsense (the EU for North America)...got passed Medicare Prescription act ($75 billion in added spending)..and refused to stand up to repeated attacks by Liberal politicians and media
GW Bush was bigger liberal than Romney ever was.
And Bush vs Obama? No contest.
Bush’s deficits were the biggest ever — until Obama’s.
Bush’s eight years accomplished next to nothing for conservative reform in Washington. Instead, more spending and big-government programs. What a wasted opportunity for the GOP. I don’t care if he was better - or not as bad as - Obama. As a Republican, he was a disaster.
He had a lot of opportunities, but in his own words - it wasn't being Presidential.
He chose to be dignified, above the fray, and let the lies stand. His choice, not mine.
Oblowhard = Hoover II
You’re an idiot. You can’t explain the GOP victory in 2010, and you can’t explain why Democrats extended Bush’s tax cuts, renewed Bush’s Patriot Act, and kept Gitmo open.
Bush’s national missile defense system still protects us, and partial birth abortion is still banned.
Democrats had a super-majority in Congress and the White House for 2 full years after Bush was gone. If Bush was unpopular, they could have repealed everything.
There was no viable opposition.
Instead, the nation wanted Bush’s achievements to stand.
They are still in place today.
Dubya’s retired. It seems to me that in order to be the elephant in the room, you have to be, you know, in the room. And speaking of party brands, after a run of Jimmy Carter-Fritz Mondale-Mike Dukakis-Bill Clinton-Al Gore-John Kerry-and-now-Barack Obama, it’s something of a wonder the Democrats’ brand image in this country hasn’t settled around the level of Union Carbide’s in Bhopal in 1985.
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.