Skip to comments.Bush to Blame for Public Unease With Obama Plan to Attack Syria, Liberals Predictably Claim
Posted on 09/02/2013 8:26:37 PM PDT by barmag25
Liberals owe former President George W. Bush a huge debt of gratitude. Without him, they'd have so little to talk about when things don't go their way.
Bush is once again proving helpful to left wingers at a loss to explain limited public support for President Obama's apparent plan to attack Syria after its alleged use of chemical weapons against civilians. (Audio after the jump) As heard on two liberal radio shows yesterday, Bush is obviously the reason why Americans aren't baying at the moon for war in yet another Middle Eastern country, especially in the absence of congressional approval and UN acquiescence, two pre-conditions for armed conflict that apparently apply only to Republican commanders in chief.
(Excerpt) Read more at m.newsbusters.org ...
you’re kidding, right!?
they’ve gotten around to blaming Bush already!???????????
I’m going to bed.
These idiots are hopeless.
TO hell with it all.
Do not give what is holy to dogs, and do not throw your pearls before swine, or they will trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you to pieces.”
someday it will be amusing to hear what Bush thinks about these idiots always blaming him for everything they themselves muck up
even 5 years after he retired to his ranch
he must have some interesting insight or observation on this utterly weird phenomenon
This would be funny if it wasn’t so sick and disgusting.
As far as I’m concerned, Bush volunteered by never fighting back.
Very good point.
Sorry left... bush was one of you and of the progressive left. We only have to look at obama’s track record to see that EVERY SINGLE MILITARY ACTION THAT HE HAS TAKEN IS A FAILURE. Now we have gays and leftard activists propelled to a super class within the Military... our Military is gutted and all because of obama... the world stands on the brink of WW III and obama is the cause!
If youd like to be on or off, please FR mail me.
They already do. Everything that goes wrong with the liberal ideology is Bush's fault.
“We’re going to blame Bush forever.” - Madeleine Albright
The liberal claim is the liberal claim, which they make regardless of the reality that foreign nations act, as we do, in what they percieve to be their “national interest” not some utopia spirit of moral rectitude our politicians claim from time to time, and there by leftist nations like France do not have any more moral rectitude for siding with Obama in the Syrian issue than did France have for opposing GW Bush in his effort to unseat Saddam. So, the liberal case is none other than the usual liberal hypocrisy - any political position that serves them either politically or ideologically.
That is separate from the issue of whether or not WE SHOULD act military against Assad - NO MATTER WHAT MR OBAMA’S REASONS OR ACTIONS ARE, OR ARE NOT.
The simple reason to NOT act is that a stalemate - the status quote ante before the Saudi supported Sunni Islamist putsch that masqueraded as a “Syrian Spring” - IS preferrable to MANY unknowns, and much we are soundly led to believe we will not like, to come from the core of the on-the-ground groups who would control Syria if Assad was completely deposed.
We were WRONG to ever be covertly joined in the regime change agenda against Assad. Like Afghanistan in the 1980s - where it was never in our long term interests to help boost the sucess of many of our partners that worked against the Soviets - it was wrong to tie American foreign policy to Middle East interests outside Syria now running their own agenda for a Syria we would in fact like less than we do now.
See my tagline.
You mean, if only Bush hadn’t invaded Iraq, everyone would be gung ho to play Globo-social-worker every time the Middle East is on the fritz and they show it on TV? We owe him a debt of gratitude, then.