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

Skip to comments.

Bush Is No Lincoln
Pajamas Media ^ | January 16 | Rick Moran

Posted on 01/16/2009 11:46:51 AM PST by AJKauf

Not lacking in brains and possessing a confidence that bordered on arrogance, President Bush would probably have thrived in less interesting times. But the challenges that emerged beginning with the attacks on September 11, 2001, right on through today’s financial meltdown of which we still haven’t glimpsed bottom, showed a man out of his depth, lacking in judgement, unable to come to grips with the forces that were reshaping the world and America. He is not without gifts. But when a president is proved wrong by events as often and as consistently as Bush, there is little alternative but to conclude that he was the wrong man at the wrong time for America....

(Excerpt) Read more at pajamasmedia.com ...


TOPICS: Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: bushhaters; goodriddancebush

1 posted on 01/16/2009 11:46:51 AM PST by AJKauf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: AJKauf
Lincoln vs. Obama

2 posted on 01/16/2009 11:54:52 AM PST by TSgt (Extreme vitriol and rancorous replies served daily. - Mike W USAF)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AJKauf

Fine. We could have done better.

Keep in mind that we only beat Gore by a few dozen votes, (and lost the popular vote). Keep in mind that we never had effective control of Congress; we had a bare numerical majority at the beginning thanks to “moderate” Repubs who always voted with the Democrats and then we lost that.

So who out there were we going to elect? With what Congress was he going to work his miracles? Then you’ve got CIA exposing its own operations on page one of the New York Times.

Broken military? Where is the political will to double it? Wars that may yet be lost? Really? We just elected a president who promised to abandon one of them. Granted, he’s backing down on his promise, but thats how he won his nomination, and its a big reason he won the election. So how do you fight a war when half your country wants to surrender? How do you fight a war when half your country wants to charge your generals with war crimes?

Bush irritates me almost continually, because he’s not a conservative. So how did conservatives do in this last election? They didn’t get more than 2% of the vote, thats how they did. So blame Bush all you want, but if you can’t elect conservatives there aren’t going to be any.

In terms of his character, Bush is as honest as the day is long. He fought a tough opponent and overturned two of their strongholds. Half the country wants to impeach him for it, but he did it. I’m mad at him for trying to find common cause with his political enemies, it doesn’t work, and it didn’t get him anything, not respect, not help on the war, nothing. And now they sit in the White House and their paid propagandists get to write the first draft of history.


3 posted on 01/16/2009 12:01:27 PM PST by marron
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AJKauf

The article is mostly fluff with very little substance. For more substance, read the comments below the article.

I agree with some of the responses - GW Bush may not compare to Abraham Lincoln, but he was much better than his opponents who could have been in that position.


4 posted on 01/16/2009 12:01:37 PM PST by Tarantulas ( Illegal immigration - the trojan horse that's treated like a sacred cow)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tarantulas

Bush is a Hoover


5 posted on 01/16/2009 12:08:19 PM PST by 4rcane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: AJKauf

I am getting sick of all this Lincoln comparison garbage.

President Bush was far better than what we did have, he was far better than what we could have had, and he’s is damn sure better than what we are now going to be stuck with, period.


6 posted on 01/16/2009 12:10:43 PM PST by Gator113 ("Noli nothis permittere te terere.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AJKauf
CONTRASTS:

o Lincoln fired War Secretary Cameron his first year in office; Bush hung on to Rummy like he was his last dollar (until the 2006 'thumpin').
o Lincoln ditched Vice President Hannibal Hamlin; Cheney's still around.
o Lincoln got rid of Generals McClellan, Meade, Hooker, Pope and Burnside until he found Grant and total war. Until Pretraeus and the 2006 "thumpin'" Bush kept Casey & Shinsheki and their limited war strategy.
o Lincoln met Democrat copperheads head on, Bush tried to appease Democrats
o Lincoln opposed RINO (radical) Republicans, Bush embraced them.
o Lincoln wanted one, undivided America for Americans, Bush wanted diversity and amnesty for those illegally entering America.
o Lincoln could write and render his speeches with articulate language that was clear. Bush has trouble pronouncing nu-clear!
7 posted on 01/16/2009 12:18:52 PM PST by meandog (The two named Bush get the bird from this hand!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AJKauf

Wh says he is? It’s the Deity-elect who likes to be compared with Lincoln and FDR.... and he hasn’t accomplished a freaking thing!


8 posted on 01/16/2009 12:20:30 PM PST by Welcome2thejungle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AJKauf

Maybe one should consider all this ‘Lincoln’ comparisons in a Civil War context. Meaning we’re on the brink of a Civil War, literally.

Bush held us together.

Obama will pull us apart. Well, push us over the edge.


9 posted on 01/16/2009 12:24:12 PM PST by griswold3 (a good story is more compelling than the search for truth)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: meandog

“Lincoln could write and render his speeches with articulate language that was clear.”

Have you ever heard Lincoln speak?


10 posted on 01/16/2009 12:40:17 PM PST by this is my country
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: this is my country
“Lincoln could write and render his speeches with articulate language that was clear.” Have you ever heard Lincoln speak?

No, but I have read the historic accounts of those who heard him speaking and I only have to re-read the Gettysburg Address to know his ability with the written word.

11 posted on 01/16/2009 1:03:53 PM PST by meandog (The two named Bush get the bird from this hand!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: AJKauf

I doubt GWB has ever thought about being like, much less tried to be like Lincoln!


12 posted on 01/16/2009 1:09:53 PM PST by lonestar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: meandog

I often wonder what his voice sounded like. Did he have a southern accent or a deep bass voice or high pitched?
Just wondering if anyone has heard a description of his voice and speech tenor.


13 posted on 01/16/2009 1:11:47 PM PST by this is my country
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: this is my country
"But whenever he began to talk his eyes flashed and every facial movement helped express his idea and feeling. Then involuntarily vanished all thought or consciousness of his uncouth appearance, or awkward manner, or even his high keyed, unpleasant voice."
--Abram Bergen in Intimate Memories of Lincoln
14 posted on 01/16/2009 1:19:08 PM PST by kenavi ("...we must reject isolationism and its companion, protectionism." GWB, 1/15/09)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: kenavi

“But whenever he began to talk his eyes flashed and every facial movement helped express his idea and feeling. Then involuntarily vanished all thought or consciousness of his uncouth appearance, or awkward manner, or even his high keyed, unpleasant voice.”
—Abram Bergen in Intimate Memories of Lincoln

Well that describes him as having a high keyed and unpleasant voice. The unpleasant part is surprising. Now to imagine him giving the Gettysburg Address in a high voice.

Thank you.


15 posted on 01/16/2009 1:34:37 PM PST by this is my country
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: AJKauf
The next time there's a Republican President, Democrats will complain that he's no George W. Bush and doesn't come close to the standard Bush set.

We all know that. That's the way it goes in political history. Republicans said that Grover Cleveland would never have done the horrible things FDR and Truman did. Then we said that FDR and Truman and Stevenson and JFK would be appalled by McGovern and Carter and Mondale and Dukakis and Clinton.

Democrats got into this later, but with a vengeance. They said that Eisenhower would never have done what Nixon did. Then they said Nixon and Ford were far better than Reagan and Bush I. Later it was that Reagan and Bush I wouldn't have been able to stomach what Bush II did.

You know that this isn't going to end with George W. Bush. Conservatives have been saying Bush is a liberal for some time. Liberals will have to wait that he's well and truly out of politics for good and the next Republican leader comes up (in the same way Hillary Clinton went from being the Anti-Christ to being the lesser of two evils, but Republicans won't fully take to the Clintons until they're finally gone).

So it's hard to take wholly seriously what's said today when you know where all this is going.

16 posted on 01/16/2009 1:51:43 PM PST by x
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marron

Very well put. I hate to appear to gush, but I don’t think I’ve seen it put so well before. Thanks!


17 posted on 01/16/2009 2:55:42 PM PST by jwparkerjr (God Bless America!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: this is my country

re: Have you ever heard Lincoln speak?

As a matter of fact I have. Several times. Over at Disney World in the Hall of Presidents. He does just fine.

I would be happy to provide you with a link to the audio of his daily appearance and you can hear for yourself!

Why are you such a skeptic?

You’re welcome.

</s>


18 posted on 01/16/2009 2:58:22 PM PST by jwparkerjr (God Bless America!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: AJKauf

No, that’s all wrong. It’s Obama that’s not Lincoln... Bush isn’t Reagan. Wait... no, he’s not Truman. No, it’s Truman that wasn’t Roosevelt.

Aw, nuts... I forget.


19 posted on 01/16/2009 3:07:57 PM PST by Ramius (Personally, I give us... one chance in three. More tea?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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