While Bush Fights for America, The Democrats Fight Bush

The Democrats' personal hatred towards President Bush - in light of the objective successes of his presidency - make clear the sad fact that they would rather see America fail if that failure made the president look bad.

The most urgent question after 9/11 was when we'd be hit again, not if. In over six-and-a-half years, much to the president's credit, we've been kept safe - as in zero attacks against our homeland. When Democrats try to tell us why we shouldn't applaud this obvious, major success for the American people, they reveal that their seething anger trumps the happiness they should feel. Is there any doubt that if one person had died in a terror attack since 9/11, the Democrats would have mercilessly taken Mr. Bush to task?

While Bush fights for America to be safer, the Democrats fight Bush.

Throughout the vast majority of time President Bush has been in office, the stock market has climbed to never-before-seen heights, unemployment has remained historically low, as have inflation and interest rates. What president wouldn't want those numbers? Yet, the New York Times didn't write a front-page article last week when a government report told us that 166,000 new jobs had been created.

But, they did write five front-page stories on the five days the stock market took larger than 100-point tumbles. Which again makes obvious that Democrats revel more in bad news if it makes the president look bad than in the good news that their fellow citizens, across the board, are doing better economically.

While Bush fights for the economic health of our people, the Democrats fight Bush.

We're in a difficult battle in Iraq. There is plenty of room for honest debate about the merits concerning the administrations actions post 9/11 in Iraq. But, when it's abundantly clear that the president's "surge" strategy has been stunningly effective - to the point of turning the war around in our favor - you would think the Democrats would hail that victory.

But, no! Because the "surge" could make the president look wise, and in Democrat circles, that's the ultimate no-no.

While the president fights to beat al-Qaeda and the spread of Islamofascism in Iraq and Afghanistan, Democrats fight Bush.

I was a liberal for the first 41 years of my life, jettisoning the Democrat Party after I saw the visionless response to 9/11 by the left. The rooting against the president that is the Democrats' de facto policy (just ask Dianne Feinstein and Joe Lieberman) in the face of the numerous victories he has given our country, makes me surer than ever that I made the right decision.

Comments

[Thad]

Oh hey, Seth. Sorry to keep bothering you, but I have a question.

You extoll all the wonderful things Bush has done, including his economic policy. (And who can blame you? The dollar has never been higher! Well, as long as you're talking about the Canadian or Australian dollar, anyway!)

And then you go on to explain:

"I was a liberal for the first 41 years of my life, jettisoning the Democrat [sic] Party after I saw the visionless response to 9/11 by the left."

So okay. Leaving aside the fact that you don't seem to understand the difference between a noun and an adjective, my question is this:

What exactly is it about "the visionless response to 9/11 by the left" that changed your opinion on Bush's economic policies?

Also, did 9/11 cause you to rethink any other seemingly unrelated liberal viewpoints? Did 9/11, for example, make you anti-gay? Pro-life?

Hoping you can shed some light; thanks!

[Thad]

"The most urgent question after 9/11 was when we'd be hit again, not if. In over six-and-a-half years, much to the president's credit, we've been kept safe - as in zero attacks against our homeland."

You just keep repeating that canard, Seth, no matter how many times people point out the glaring logical fallacy.

Have you noticed none of our major cities have been destroyed by hurricanes since '05, either? Are you going to credit Bush with that, too?

Anyway. That's not the point. The point is that I have a rock that keeps tigers away. Would you like to buy it?

[RobertCC]

Anyone who thinks Bush has made us safer because there have been no terrorist attacks on US soil since 9/11 is blind and uninformed. Especially if that person also thinks the Iraq surge has been a "success" and Bush has done great things for the US economy.

Bush's invasion of Iraq was a war crime and the blood of all of the people who have died and been mutilated in that war--hundreds of thousands of Iraqis and thousands of American soldiers--is on Bush's hands. The cost of this war will be in the trillions. The war has ruined America's standing in the eyes of Middle Eastern citizens and such people now hate us even more and have likely been inspired to commit more terrorist acts. To pat Bush on the back because it hasn't happened yet is nonsensical.

Mr. Swirsky clearly doesn't understand economics either. Bush cut taxes three times, twice after 9/11 when he knew the country faced enormously higher defense costs. When he then proceeded to start the Iraq war and continued his tax cuts, Bush was committing a crime not just against humanity, but against generations of future Americans who will have to pay for his criminal war. This, in addition to the crimes Bush has committed against our Constitution by illegally wiretapping, American citizens, and torturing and imprisoning many innocent domestic and foreign so called "detainees".

Mr. Swirsky sounds like one of those Americans who think surrendering constitutional rights and torturing human beings are proper actions in the "war on terror". If so, he probably does't believe in democracy either, because terrorism is never going away--it's been with us since men began fighting with each other. To condemn Bush for his criminal ways is not hatred, Mr. Swirsky. It's an expression of love of the U.S. Constitution and the rule of law that it represents.

[Lemeritus]

Seth, I hardly know how to address your panegyric to Bush & Co., so let me limit most of my comments specifically to the Iraq invasion and begin by agreeing with you... the surge does, in fact, seem to be "working". Al Jazeera quotes (without objection) Rear Admiral Gregory Smith as saying Iraqi civilian casualties are down 60% across the country, and 75% in Baghdad. I think we can all agree that that's a positive thing.

However! The short-term success of the surge should not absolve us from examining the long-term advisability of continuing an invasion which was undertaken based on lies, with too few ill-equipped troops to secure the country, and with no exit strategy then or now.

The surge is like a door left standing after a violent wind has destroyed the house it once opened into -- it's hard to admire the door under those circumstances.

I will step aside to let others discuss the stock market, unemployment and healthcare with you (though I note you did not trumpet civil liberties and the safeguarding of the Constitition). Just two additional points I'm compelled to make:

"In over six-and-a-half years, much to the president's credit, we've been kept safe - as in zero attacks against our homeland." You fail to acknowledge that the Bush Administration had the intelligence necessary to prevent 9/11 altogether, but failed to act on it.

"...the president fights to beat al-Qaeda and the spread of Islamofascism...." Islamo and fascism DO NOT go together no matter how many times the term is used (fascism having to do with corporatism, examples of which you might find closer to home). Islamofascism is a catch word that makes everyone who uses it seem really empty-headed.

[avergejoe]

"The most urgent question after 9/11 was when we'd be hit again, not if. In over six-and-a-half years, much to the president's credit, we've been kept safe - as in zero attacks against our homeland."

The reason has nothing to with bush!

He sold the American people a load of rubbish about the strength so called 'Al Quida' in order to drag us into war and start an assault on citizen liberties and enrich his buddies.

If they were so strong and so hell bent on destroying America then, they could have blown up power lines or subway tunnels or food supplies, rammed trucks into refineries, and so on.

And given uncle chertoff's Katrina efforts, we would have been in some serious shit if 'the terrorists' had been organized, even a little.

So far, we have arrested a small group of vagrants 'planning' to attack an ARMY BASE - are you serious?

The truth, and why I despise bush, is that he and his ilk have done far greater damage to this country than any terrorist could even dream to do.

[longislandlol]

I recall how Democrats donned masks and hard hats and immediately went to Ground Zero, at their own risk; Hillary braved it, as did Schumer and other Democrats--- and they did it without pushing for photo-ops like the Repubs!!

[cowboyjerkface]

Seth.....When your favorite son Bush came into office, gas was 1.45 a gallon, a barrel was right around $30. and we had a budget surplus and a dandy fine document called The Constitution to the United States. Shall I tell you what has happened to each since he's been in office Seth? Who do we blame the rise in energy on? Who do we blame for the 9 trillion dollar debt we now have been saddled with? And who do we blame for the destruction of the Constitution? I'll give you a hint...it's the guy you hoop and hollar for waving your pom poms around like the lil school gurl you are. You're truly a delusional loser Seth! The market has not rebounded as you claim, the Bush administration has a different way of recording unemployment figures...much like they have a different way of defining what a war death is and what an accidental death is in Iraq.....and yet you believe all the lies. 20% and getting smaller. How can 75% of the country be wrong and the 20% be right Seth?

[nutty4tahoe]

"....turning the war around in our favor?"

By whose barometer, Robert Novak's?

[blackmouth]

Bush was not elected president of the United States, he was appointed by the Supreme Court of the United States. What more do you need to hate Bush and all the Neocons that have destroyed this country and fueled hatered of the United States to a level we have never seen. You and all your like have been the cause of hundreds of thousands of men, women, and children to die...Needlessly...Moron.

[BlackJAC]

Better to have no vision than the blurry, doubled and tunnelled vision taken from comic books and John Wayne movies that Bush does, Mr. Swirsky. Bush has actually made things much, much worse, no matter what the Kool-Aid you've been drinking with Dennis Miller has been telling you. As Jon Stewart said, is there no foulup that you can't make seem like it was part of the plan all along?

[dijo]

Well Seth, I hear the army is still taking volunteers for the war. There is always a need for more help in Baghdad. The surge is working so well, I know you wouldn't have to fear for your life over there.
A real patriot like yourself should put his support into actions.

[brantl]

Bush isn't fighting for anybody's health of any kind, except for the rich.
Take a look at what he's done: he's raped the environmental laws (at each and every turn), he's raped citizens' protections against industry (at each and every turn), he has forwarded the petroleum-and-large-company-based -energy industry, to the detriment of the environment and energy-independence, and he refuses to do anything significant about climate change, he's started a war in a country that didn't attack us, and stuck us to a tar-baby that has caught fire, violence in Iraq, overall, has not gone down, it's just shifted out of the capital, consult the administrations own numbers if you don't believe me.

Bush is either a scoundrel, an incompetant or a first-class schmuck, or all of them. And so are you, Seth.

[drblack]

I should have mentioned that the British strategy of total withdrawal of troops from Basra has been at least as successful as Bush escalating the Iraq war.
The Brits get out and it costs no lives, and no money and it is as successful as Bush spending money and lives ...Bush as usual is completely wrong.

[drblack]

If you don't like Freedom you like Bush.
Bush has broken his oath of office and the Fisa laws.
he is a treasonous lawbreaker.
You actually believe the statistics the Fed releases?
Only the most mindless and unaware could find Bush to be much of a president or human being.
If Bush had paid attention 9-11 would not have happened.
If Bush had a clue we would have focused on the actual threat in Afghanistan instead of attacking Iraq who was no immediate threat to us.

Bush has done nothing to develop alternative energy...and Reagan actually derailed the new programs to help develop alternative energy.
If Regan had been intelligent and focused on new energy sources the mid east would be a pile of sand and the US would have a great head start in the alternative energy market.
Bush has spied and lied.
Democrats have been too much bush enablers.
The Bush administration , through its foolish policy has been the number one recruiting tool for radical religious terrorists.
Bush has also helped dumb down America with his own brand of religious extremism and superstition.
I think you should call into Rush and Bill OreallY?...leave the intelligent discourse to the progressives.

[armadillious2002]

Well, well, well - First off you talk about the booming stock market. The Dow reached 12000 just prior to bush taking office. Prior to 911 but after he took office it retreated to 7500. Then it scratched and clawed it's way back to 12000 some 6 years later.

Then you talk about jobs. Under President Clinton 22 million new jobs were created in this country. Many of them high tech - high paying jobs.

Under President bush only a fraction of that number have been created and most of them in Wal-Mart or McDonalds and the like. Our manufacturing sector has been gutted and most of our tech jobs have been outsourced overseas.

Under Clinton the percentage of Americans in poverty decreased dramatically but under bush it has grown substantially as it did under his father and all other Republican Presidents in recent history.

The budget was basically balanced when Clinton left office but immediately bush cut taxes then we went to war and he cut taxes some more. This is just 1+1=2. If you go on a massive military spending spree and cut taxes you are going to have a huge deficit - Voila!

So we borrowed money from other countries such as China to fund the war and now we are the largest debtor nation in the world.

We have lost thousands of good soldiers lives and squandered our treasury over a war that was based lies and fabrications. The war then was mismanaged as top generals were calling for higher numbers of troops from the outset and money was given to contractors such as Halliburton with no oversight.

Halliburton actually lost 7 BILION dollars that they could never account for. Meals were charged for that were never served, services promised that were never delivered on. We had the good will of the world on our side after 911 and in Afghanastan but it was all squandered on the Iraq misadventure.

Corruption in this admin. has run rampant and a new repub. criminal is uncovered almost daily now. You know - I believe I'll just remain a Democrat.