Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Why Bush was so bad at the end of his term.
Unknown

Posted on 05/02/2012 8:13:03 AM PDT by Sen Jack S. Fogbound

This may have been around before but it is worth reading it again!

This tells the story, why Bush was so bad at the end of his term.

Some people aren't aware of all of this. Don't just skim over this, please read it slowly and let it sink in. If in doubt, check it out.

The day the democrats took over was not January 22nd 2009, it was actually January 3, 2007... the day the Democrats took over the House of Representatives and the Senate, at the very start of the 110th Congress.

The Democrat Party controlled a majority in both chambers for the first time since the end of the 103rd Congress in 1995.

For those who are listening to the liberals propagating the fallacy that everything is "Bush's Fault", think about this: January 3rd, 2007 was the day the Democrats took over the Senate and the Congress. At the time:

The DOW Jones closed at 12,621.77 The GDP for the previous quarter was 3.5% The Unemployment rate was 4.6%

George Bush's Economic policies SET A RECORD of 52 STRAIGHT MONTHS of JOB GROWTH Remember the day...

January 3rd, 2007 was the day that Barney Frank took over the House Financial Services Committee and Chris Dodd took over the Senate Banking Committee.

The economic meltdown that happened 15 months later was in what part of the economy? BANKING AND FINANCIAL SERVICES!

Unemployment... to this CRISIS by (among MANY other things) dumping 5-6 TRILLION Dollars of toxic loans on the economy from YOUR Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac FIASCOES!

Bush asked Congress 17 TIMES to stop Fannie & Freddie - starting in 2001 because it was financially risky for the US economy.

And who took the THIRD highest pay-off from Fannie Mae AND Freddie Mac? OBAMA And who fought against reform of Fannie and Freddie? OBAMA and the Democrat Congress So when someone tries to blame Bush.. REMEMBER JANUARY 3rd, 2007.... THE DAY THE DEMOCRATS TOOK OVER!" Budgets do not come from the White House. They come from Congress, and the party that controlled Congress since January 2007 is the Democrat Party.

Furthermore, the Democrats controlled the budget process for 2008 & 2009 as well as 2010 & 2011. In that first year, they had to contend with George Bush, which caused them to compromise on spending, when Bush somewhat belatedly got tough on spending increases.

For 2009 though, Nancy Pelosi & Harry Reid bypassed George Bush entirely, passing continuing resolutions to keep government running until Barack Obama could take office. At that time, they passed a massive omnibus spending bill to complete the 2009 budgets.

And where was Barack Obama during this time? He was a member of that very Congress that passed all of these massive spending bills, and he signed the omnibus bill as President to complete 2009.

If the Democrats inherited any deficit, it was the 2007 deficit, the last of the Republican budgets. That deficit was the lowest in five years, and the fourth straight decline in deficit spending. After that, Democrats in Congress took control of spending, and that includes Barack Obama, who voted for the budgets.

If Obama inherited anything, he inherited it from himself. In a nutshell, what Obama is saying is "I inherited a deficit that I voted for and then I voted to expand that deficit four-fold since January 20th." There is no way this will be widely publicized unless each of us sends it on!


TOPICS: News/Current Events; Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: vanity
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-144 next last
If this is all true then it is no wonder what happened!
1 posted on 05/02/2012 8:13:13 AM PDT by Sen Jack S. Fogbound
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Sen Jack S. Fogbound

For later.


2 posted on 05/02/2012 8:15:49 AM PDT by Envisioning (Call me a racist........, one more time..........)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sen Jack S. Fogbound

The BEST thing you could say about Bush was he was ineffective.


3 posted on 05/02/2012 8:16:03 AM PDT by DManA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sen Jack S. Fogbound

Btt


4 posted on 05/02/2012 8:19:15 AM PDT by mnehring
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sen Jack S. Fogbound

Unfortunately,it is ALL true!I don’t know what happened to”W”?He just seemed to lose interest??


5 posted on 05/02/2012 8:25:46 AM PDT by bandleader
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sen Jack S. Fogbound

You are forgetting or ignoring the sharp left turn GWBush made early in his 2nd term.

Recall that he had 3 defeats for Comprehensive Immigration Reform during his presidency.

Recall that he tried to put Harriet Miers on the Supreme Court.

GWBush became his own worst enemy by going against his own party.

Shortly after the Dems took over Congress, recall GWBush saying that he finally had a Congress he could work with on illegal immigration.

Recall that he ran for his 2nd term on reforming Social Security and immediately dropped any reform at the first Congressional opposition.

Recall that GWBush’s first piece of legislation he signed was Kennedy’s education bill — No child left behind.

Recall that GWBush signed McCain’s Campaign Finance Reform Act into law.

==

Thus, many of us say: NO MORE BUSH PRESIDENTS. NOT NOW. NOT EVER.


6 posted on 05/02/2012 8:28:15 AM PDT by TomGuy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bandleader

1 6-year term would be a better scenario. Every 2term president has been pretty bad the last 2 years


7 posted on 05/02/2012 8:31:39 AM PDT by napscoordinator (VOTE FOR NEWT!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Sen Jack S. Fogbound

When war wasn’t over in Iraq, Bush had next to no political clout and needed to keep his head down to prevent full blown rebellion from the GOP.


8 posted on 05/02/2012 8:36:19 AM PDT by Berlin_Freeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sen Jack S. Fogbound
If this is all true then it is no wonder what happened!

Right on. Bush was overwhelmed and could literally do nothing. This was the beginning of the communists takeover of America. Right now we can see how far this communists party (Democrat) has taken us and it will continue for the rest of King Obama's term. If he is reelected, America is finished.

9 posted on 05/02/2012 8:38:02 AM PDT by Logical me
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DManA

Absolute BS...and dead wrong to boot


10 posted on 05/02/2012 8:39:25 AM PDT by woofie (It takes three villages and a forest of woodland creatures to raise a child in Obamaville)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Sen Jack S. Fogbound

It reads like one of those spam emails, but this one is good.
BUMP


11 posted on 05/02/2012 8:40:01 AM PDT by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TomGuy

No President is perfect.

That said-the ‘imperfect’ President Bush loved the U.S.

The criminally imperfect “O” never did and never will!


12 posted on 05/02/2012 8:43:48 AM PDT by SMARTY ("The man who has no inner-life is a slave to his surroundings. "Henri Frederic Amiel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: bandleader
I don’t know what happened to”W”? He just seemed to lose interest??

Personally, I think that by 2006 Bush knew that there would be no victory in Iraq and no victory in Afghanistan. There would be no real "mission accomplished." That must have to have been very demoralizing to him personally.

It's very much like how LBJ must have felt about Vietnam in 1968.

13 posted on 05/02/2012 8:44:51 AM PDT by Leaning Right (Why am I carrying this lantern? you ask. I am looking for the next Reagan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: woofie

Back acha bush lover.


14 posted on 05/02/2012 8:44:51 AM PDT by DManA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Sen Jack S. Fogbound

And it was America that let Bush down by electing rat face Democrats (social communists) in power. Bush must have felt America just didn’t care and probably lost feelings so why bother, it must be what America wanted. And it continued happening for the next four years.


15 posted on 05/02/2012 8:46:21 AM PDT by Logical me
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sen Jack S. Fogbound

Its all true and I’ve yet to hear any news outlets talk about it.


16 posted on 05/02/2012 8:56:05 AM PDT by hope
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SMARTY
That said-the ‘imperfect’ President Bush loved the U.S.

And Mexico (massive influx of illegals).

And Canada, as he pushed the North American Union and the International Highway.

Then, he bought that plantation in Central or South America.


17 posted on 05/02/2012 8:56:48 AM PDT by TomGuy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: DManA

“The BEST thing you could say about Bush was he was ineffective.”

And the WORST thing you could say about him is that that “ineffectiveness” led us to Obama! At the end of the day, Bush was NOT a good president, and sadly, I have to say that I voted for him twice.


18 posted on 05/02/2012 9:00:22 AM PDT by vette6387
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Sen Jack S. Fogbound; Deb
Of course it's true. W has always gotten an undeserved bad rap for the second term. The Congress was atrocious but the Senate was just as bad. Combine the fact that "your side" had the likes of Snowe, Collins, Graham, Specter, McCain, Murkowski, Lugar, Bond, Hutchinson, Voinovich, etc., it was a losing proposition.

110th Congress: You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy.

'Ethics' - Stephanie Tubbs Jones
Financial Services - Bwarney
Foreign affairs - Tom Lantos
Judiciary - John Conyers!
Oversight & Govt. Reform - Waxman!!
Ways & Means - Charlie 'felon' Rangel!!!!

19 posted on 05/02/2012 9:01:25 AM PDT by Servant of the Cross (the Truth will set you free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TomGuy
I never heard of Harriet Miers before Bush put her up and since then all I have heard was she was a mistake. Please tell me what was wrong with Harriet Miers?
20 posted on 05/02/2012 9:04:41 AM PDT by Ditter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Logical me

Exactly.


21 posted on 05/02/2012 9:04:41 AM PDT by TribalPrincess2U (Anyone not wanting an ID or purple thumb to vote isn't worthy of voting privilege.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Sen Jack S. Fogbound; ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas; DoughtyOne; calcowgirl; Gilbo_3; Impy; ...
RE :”January 3rd, 2007 was the day that Barney Frank took over the House Financial Services Committee and Chris Dodd took over the Senate Banking Committee. The economic meltdown that happened 15 months later was in what part of the economy? BANKING AND FINANCIAL SERVICES!

This GWB revisionism never dies. Yep, in this fantasy world Bush was fighting to keep his economy booming but Dems passed all these laws over his veto for 15 months until the economy collapsed.

Back to Planet Earth:
The Bear stock market started September 2007 NOT September 2008 a year later. That's why GWB worked with Pelosi to pass a stimulus #1 in early 2008. The final collapse and market run happened a year later in Sept 2008.

Bush bragged about CRA type housing risky loan policies to minorities that he promoted. He gave speeches bragging about it easy to find on the internet.

Yes, Dems took over the House in 2007 but with a 51 seat dem Senate caucus (includes 2 independents) when it takes 60 to pass mostly anything Dems accomplished nothing without GWBs blessing, major accomplishments :
1) Bush/Pelosi stimulus #1,
2) The 2007 Energy Act and
3) the Bush/Paulson TARP are the most significant.

The crash was a result of bubble that was started back in 2002 and 2003. By 2007 it was little late to reform home loans as prices were at their peak of the bubble. How about 2006 when Rs had a clear majority?

Trying to revise GWB history just makes Republicans look silly.

22 posted on 05/02/2012 9:09:41 AM PDT by sickoflibs (Romney is a liberal. Just watch him closely try to screw us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sauropod

.


23 posted on 05/02/2012 9:09:41 AM PDT by sauropod (You can elect your very own tyranny - Mark Levin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DManA

Bush didn’t have subversives backing and protecting his every breath either.
It makes a big difference in what he was able to do.

True, I disliked his borders stance but look what we have now.
I’ll take Bush any day.


24 posted on 05/02/2012 9:09:46 AM PDT by TribalPrincess2U (Anyone not wanting an ID or purple thumb to vote isn't worthy of voting privilege.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: TomGuy; BufordP

C’mon now. Buford is his biggest fan.


25 posted on 05/02/2012 9:10:56 AM PDT by sauropod (You can elect your very own tyranny - Mark Levin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Sen Jack S. Fogbound

Not for nothing but, GWB never vetoed anything from the RAT Congress, in his 2nd term the disregarded advice from Dick Cheney and relied on RINOS. One thing that will never be forgotten, is that he never fought back against diatribes from bums like Reid, Schumer, Kerry and the rest of their ilk. And what was the end result......Obama!!


26 posted on 05/02/2012 9:17:16 AM PDT by kenmcg (How)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TomGuy

” Then, he bought that plantation in Central or South America.”

Do you have details ? I never heard of this, Tom.


27 posted on 05/02/2012 9:20:05 AM PDT by stephenjohnbanker (God, family, country, mom, apple pie, the girl next door and a Ford F250 to pull my boat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Sen Jack S. Fogbound

Quite a number of exasperating missteps and bad appointments really sunk Bush’s second-term. For me, the very day that Bush came out and disparagingly called the border Minutemen “vigilantes” while pushing for amnesty, well, from that day forward, I never uttered a single word in his defense ever again, on any issue, at any time. I had supported him and voted for him, but at that moment, he was pretty much dead to me.

The only good lesson this taught me (along with the GOP backstabbing of Palin) is to maintain a intense wariness, and no longer just have that instinctual ‘default’ position that a “Republican” will generically share my beliefs and values. In fact, after three decades of voting GOP, I’ve really a gained a deep, deep, overriding pool of mistrust in the Republican Party because of all of this.


28 posted on 05/02/2012 9:20:55 AM PDT by greene66
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ditter
Please tell me what was wrong with Harriet Miers?

Pro-abortion.

29 posted on 05/02/2012 9:23:23 AM PDT by aimhigh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs; Sen Jack S. Fogbound; ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas; DoughtyOne; calcowgirl; Gilbo_3; ...

” The crash was a result of bubble that was started back in 2002 and 2003. By 2007 it was little late to reform home loans as prices were at their peak of the bubble. How about 2006 when Rs had a clear majority?”

Correct. I warned FReepers repeatedly in 2006(plenty of time to bail if they had just listened)that RE was in a massive bubble, and it would be a TRILLION dollar bloodbath.
Maybe you can find them. I don’t know how to do it.


30 posted on 05/02/2012 9:29:39 AM PDT by stephenjohnbanker (God, family, country, mom, apple pie, the girl next door and a Ford F250 to pull my boat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: greene66

” Quite a number of exasperating missteps and bad appointments really sunk Bush’s second-term. For me, the very day that Bush came out and disparagingly called the border Minutemen “vigilantes” while pushing for amnesty, well, from that day forward, I never uttered a single word in his defense ever again, on any issue, at any time”

Same here. That was just too much.


31 posted on 05/02/2012 9:33:01 AM PDT by stephenjohnbanker (God, family, country, mom, apple pie, the girl next door and a Ford F250 to pull my boat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Sen Jack S. Fogbound

He still held a vote pen that he did not use.


32 posted on 05/02/2012 9:36:24 AM PDT by bmwcyle (I am ready to serve Jesus on Earth because the GOP failed again)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: vette6387

Yea ... Gore and Kerry would have been SO much better. /s


33 posted on 05/02/2012 9:41:32 AM PDT by Servant of the Cross (the Truth will set you free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: vette6387

Yea ... Gore and Kerry would have been SO much better. /s


34 posted on 05/02/2012 9:42:40 AM PDT by Servant of the Cross (the Truth will set you free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: aimhigh
I have heard that Laura Bush was pro abortion, don't know if that was true or not. I also heard that he put Miers up knowing she would be shot down and then put up the people he really wanted to win. The next one Roberts (I think) got through easily. Maybe that was a plan.
35 posted on 05/02/2012 9:52:11 AM PDT by Ditter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Ditter
I never heard of Harriet Miers before Bush put her up and since then all I have heard was she was a mistake. Please tell me what was wrong with Harriet Miers?

There were numerous threads and thousands of posts regarding that issue at the time.

You might try doing a Google search on bush+miers+supreme court on site:Freerepublic.com.

Here is a starter: Krauthammer: Withdraw Miers Nomination
36 posted on 05/02/2012 10:02:17 AM PDT by TomGuy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Envisioning

Bookmark


37 posted on 05/02/2012 10:04:55 AM PDT by EmilyGeiger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Envisioning

Bookmark


38 posted on 05/02/2012 10:05:37 AM PDT by EmilyGeiger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: bmwcyle
He still held a vote pen that he did not use.

A President, during a time of war, has a huge responsibility to keep the Country united. That would automatically limit the use of a veto pen. That, and after consulting with the GOP Senate (Snowe, Collins, Graham, Specter, McCain, Murkowski, Lugar, Bond, Hutchinson, Voinovich, Lott, etc. - with 'friends' like this, who needs enemies?), he realized he did not have a snowball's chance in Hades of ever having a veto upheld.

39 posted on 05/02/2012 10:07:29 AM PDT by Servant of the Cross (the Truth will set you free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: TribalPrincess2U

Obviously ineffective is preferable to actively hostile to the country’s interests.


40 posted on 05/02/2012 10:09:53 AM PDT by DManA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs
Back to Planet Earth:
The Bear stock market started September 2007


I recall in the spring of 2007, the Bush economics team hitting the newstalk programs and saying how sound the economy was.

I thought it strange at the time that they were harping on the soundness, as there were no rippples about a bad economy at the time.

They were trying to head off disaster and get themselves to the election so they could pass the buck -- they failed by a few months.

Two months later, the cracks started to show. Four months later, we were bombarded with several economic crises that needed 'immediate' bailouts or armageddon would happen.

My Congressman voted for the first bailout. I sent him a scathing letter that centered on the question: Where will it stop, once the bailouts start?

He responded with some hand-penned comments in agreement on his 'official' reply. As I recall, he never voted for another bailout.

Team Bush knew in the early spring of 2007 that big economy problems were about to hit.
41 posted on 05/02/2012 10:12:32 AM PDT by TomGuy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs
To futher change the shades of gray...

The Bear stock market started September 2007 NOT September 2008 a year later.

Yes, it peaked in Sept 08'. Rahbini Dr Doom made his call on CMO's etc the same weekend, I remember the posting here, trying to figure out what the heck he was talking about... Those of us that got out around then or shorty their after ( Thank you Glenn Beck ) faired ok....

Bush bragged about CRA type housing risky loan policies to minorities that he promoted. He gave speeches bragging about it easy to find on the internet.

Yes, and at the same time GWB. McCain, Chris Shay's etc were on a screed to reform Fannie and Freddie numerous times only to get blocked by the likes for Bwanney Fwank and Maxine Waters and the Rest of the Black Caucus.

The crash was a result of bubble that was started back in 2002 and 2003. By 2007 it was little late to reform home loans as prices were at their peak of the bubble.

The Clinton / Gingrich / Lott passing of the last fiancial reform act in 99' changed the home exemptions up to 250k single and 500k married if you lived in for 2 years. I want to know how many in the House and Senate became flippers with that one.. Na this had no effect on the housing market... Ya think? IMHO it was the reason all the over 50 crowd empty nesters starting flipping and probably one of the major reasons for the housing bubble It was tax free money!

IMHO all homes are a capital asset and if ya like the 15% rate, treat them as such and make long term 1 year as well. Then all capital endeavors are on an equal footing, it is your abilities that would determine your gains in a given market / endeavor...

42 posted on 05/02/2012 10:27:33 AM PDT by taildragger (( Palin / Mulally 2012 ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs
Trying to revise GWB history just makes Republicans look silly.

Speaking of looking silly ......

The 110th Congress (and Senate) was elected on November 6, 2006 and effectively took control of the House of Representatives the following day. Every legislative act and the economic meltdown that you reference occurred after this date. W, certainly too gracious in bending to the ignorant American electorate who willingly put liberal democratic socialists in power, only attempted to limit their legislative actions since he had no other course of action. The GOP Senate (see references above at #19 and #39) was feckless and complicit with the liberals. No chance for any veto by W holding up.

And with regard to the critical Banking and Financial Services reform ....

President George W. Bush and GOP Rep. Baker were all over that ... in 2004! The libs called them racist and successfully resisted the needed reform because the feckless and cowardly GOP Senate rolled over.

43 posted on 05/02/2012 10:54:59 AM PDT by Servant of the Cross (the Truth will set you free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: bandleader

He probably got war weary. Not from the fighting in Iraq but from the politics surrounding Iraq. Cindy Sheehan. The “die-ins” in Times Square. The constant drumbeat of negativity.

A person only has so much fight in them and I think Bush reached his limit during the heights of the Iraq war protests. After that, he had no stomach for the fight.


44 posted on 05/02/2012 11:07:24 AM PDT by Personal Responsibility (Obama 2012: Dozens of MSNBC viewers can't be wrong!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: DManA

Ineffective isn’t the word for 0bamaao.


45 posted on 05/02/2012 11:29:58 AM PDT by TribalPrincess2U (Anyone not wanting an ID or purple thumb to vote isn't worthy of voting privilege.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: bandleader

W was overwhelmed by Nazi Pelosi and her never-ending references to “The failed Bush Administration” and the relentless media harping on that theme

And the Media is trying to do it again to help Obama


46 posted on 05/02/2012 11:31:44 AM PDT by Mr. K (If Romney wins the primary, I am writing-in PALIN)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs

Sept 11 2003.

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/09/11/business/new-agency-proposed-to-oversee-freddie-mac-and-fannie-mae.html?scp=2&sq=bush%20oversight%202003&st=cse

New Agency Proposed to Oversee Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae


47 posted on 05/02/2012 11:43:45 AM PDT by 1066AD
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Sen Jack S. Fogbound
Bush's problem was that his false claim of conservatism hit its shelf life in his first term and reached a state of putridity when he signed TARP into law.

A nice, civilized guy who likes compassion more than he likes conservatism and the Constitution.

48 posted on 05/02/2012 11:54:35 AM PDT by TADSLOS (Conservatism is not a party slogan, but a mindset guided by core values and walking the walk.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sen Jack S. Fogbound; TomGuy; sauropod
John Derbyshire: Eight Wasted Years
...Margaret Thatcher used to talk about the “ratchet effect.” When the Left gets power, she said, they drive everything Left; when the Right gets power, they slow the Leftward drive, perhaps even halt it for a spell; but nothing ever gets moved to the Right. U.S. politics in the 21st century so far bears out this dismal analysis. What does the Right have to show for eight years of a Republican presidency? I supported George W. Bush in 2000 because I thought he had a conservative bone in his body somewhere. I supported him in 2004 because I thought him the lesser of two evils. At this point, I wouldn’t let the fool park his car in my driveway. Bruce Bartlett was right, every damn word...
Bill Gertz interview on Hannity and Colmes
Gertz: Well he casts himself as a compassionate conservative and I argue that he's neither. That his administration is neither. He's done tremendous damage to the conservative movement...

49 posted on 05/02/2012 12:20:30 PM PDT by BufordP ("Drink me if you can't take a joke." --Kool-Aid)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Sen Jack S. Fogbound
So true. A great man was hate-bombed for seven years to insure no positive legacy would survive.

The only thing Obama "inherited" was the bin Laden intel.

50 posted on 05/02/2012 1:04:55 PM PDT by Deb (Beat him, strip him and bring him to my tent!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-144 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson