Posted on 11/10/2010 7:01:52 AM PST by Lakeshark
George W. Bush -- plush with family money and a taxpayer-funded retirement package that few will ever enjoy -- may be at peace with his decision not to "sully the presidency" with trivial matters like, you know, defending conservatism, but as one who will be forced to help fund his retirement, I am not.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
is that old wind bag still on the air?
GAwwwwwwd I hate that title!
It sounds like he died.
Stupid argument.
I respect Bush for being gracious and continuing to maintain the decorum of the office after he left it. Let others bash his successor — as they have. His position as a former head of state requires a respectful attitude, and he’s handling it right.
He recognizes that the American electorate got us in this mess, and eventually we’ll use the ballot box to fix it.
You know, my kid can’t stand George Bush and attacks me every time I have the audacity to stand up for him.
But I like a Texan and I like a man who doesn’t attack women and I like George — just can’t help it. Thought the first comment said “plush with family” yeah the guy has a lot of family around him. I like a person that values his family. The guy can think on his feet, withstood withering criticism from obvious morons, respected our country, was led down the path by people he trusted like that dirty dog who recommended the bailout.
Yeah, I like him. Can’t help it.
Tune in next week, when C. Edmund Wright complains that Obama was treated as an “empty vessel” by the people who voted for him.
Those are Bush's words when confronted with tough questions about TARP, the war with Iraq and other issues.
I certainly didn't approve of all that George Bush, both #1 and #2 did--but if nothing more, they were a class act, and restored dignity to this nation.
Any article that starts out this obnoxiously gets skipped by me.
Note to Bush: Your next book should be a dictionary. Start with the word "gamble".
Your kids need to know that it was President Bush who kept us from being nuked by the jihadists and now that Obamao is C in C those odds are not nearly as good.
I think there's a lot of good to say about W, but this guy's points are well made and important to discuss.
What a cheap shot! When has anyone in the MSM ever pointed out Jimmy Carter's or the Clinton's (they get a doubleshot thanks to her, ahem, service in the Senate) retirement? F***ers!
I know it starts out poor. Don’t skip it. It’s good.
Good to know you’re more focused on Bush than the current occupant of the White House. So did you vote for Obama while drool trickled down your chin thinking, “I need to vote for Barack to keep Bush out of the White House”?
I did read it all—but that snaraky first sentence left a bad taste in my mouth for the rest of the article, so maybe I couldn’t really “appreciate” anything else he had to say.
"Consider that Bush is "at peace" with his decisions to take the fall for issues that were not his personal issues to take the fall for. What the 43rd president still apparently does not get is that his presidency did not and does not belong to him and him alone.
As he said yesterday on the Rush Limbaugh Show -- under some pretty stiff and repeated questions on the topic by Rush --
I've discussed this with other people in my administration, when they call me a liar should I have called them names, and my attitude was no then, obviously, and I still feel very strongly that's the way a president ought to conduct himself.
That sounds very high-minded. Perhaps it is. Or perhaps it's the feelings of a man who has forgotten just who owns the presidency. And it doesn't change the fact that when Bush was called a liar, we were called liars by extension. His presidency belonged -- and still belongs -- to all of us as well. And by "us," I mean those who supported and defended him along with sharing his values (or what we thought were his values)."
Good points. Fighting back with facts is not the equivalent of ‘name calling’ or ‘sullying’ the presidency. He should have fought back with the truth. For some reason in Bush’s mind, fighting back entailed ugliness and name calling. It’s all hindsight now but I agree with the author on this point.
That may be. However, the petulant silliness of the snippet you posted convinced me not to try to find out.
Now, why would C. Edmund Wright expect GWB to defend conservatism?
Even IF Bush tried to defend conservatism, who else would have paid attention to him? Not one conservative I know considers GWB as one of us.
Stupid argument to start a stupid article, and continued to go down hill from there.
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.