Posts Tagged ‘Bush’
Remember Armstrong Williams? He was the columnist and radio host allegedly paid by the Bush administration’s Education Department to write columns in support of No Child Left Behind legislation. Other columnists were also found to be getting paid to support Bush admin policies.
Is Ellie Light Barack Obama’s Armstrong Williams? Light has gotten letters to the editor published in papers across the country recently that slavishly spout Obama propaganda. Is she getting paid to do this by the Obama administration? At the very least, this episode shows the laziness of reporters and editors across America who are so willing to print pro-Obama talking points they don’t even care to verify who’s writing them.
Interesting piece by Jay Cost over at RealClearPolitics about what Obama does now after getting b—- slapped by the Bay State last night.
Does he continue to do the same thing, hoping against hope that somehow, someway doing the same-old same-old will yield a different result? Or does he recognize that he has made mistakes, try to learn from them, and ultimately make adaptations?
Early White House response indicates a “stay the course” tack. Funny, wasn’t Bush lambasted by libs for a similar posture? Not the same issue at stake, I know, but still.
Cost says that at this point, there’s no way to know what Obama will do since he has such a puny political history. His advice?
Let’s hope that this untested, young, inexperienced fellow the country elevated to the highest office in the land has the good sense to recognize the message the Bay State sent last night, to understand that messages of similar intensity will be sent in November, and to direct his staff to make necessary changes.
I actually hope none of this happens because Obama would likely be toast in 2012 if he continues on his current path. Part of me thinks that this administration, from The One on down, is so deeply entrenched in a left-wing view of the world and this country, they really still believe that the electorate is leftist and wants his big-government statism. They are so firmly encased in the idea that the country is still mad at Bush and that it’s their job to be the anti-Bush at every turn, they will fail to notice that the country is shifting to anti-Obama. If they want to survive, it’s time for the hardliners in the White House to turn off the M(es)SNBC echo chamber and take a peek at the real world. But, again, if Scott Brown’s victory won’t breach their cocoon, nothing will.
Ran across this post at Homeland Security Watch regarding why America should help Haiti recover from the quake from a security perspective. The punchline? Because Bush ignored Katrina victims and because all Bush did was ruin our image abroad and because other countries just hate us for our consumption and competition, we need to help Haiti as a PR stunt.
America cannot afford to ignore the plight of people so like those who suffered from the poor response to Hurricane Katrina in 2005. As the nation seeks to rebuild its image abroad, it is becoming clear that the moral authority of the United States and its people rests not upon our ability to project power but on our willingness to extend protection. Put another way: This is a question of compassion, not competition.
Distinctions between homeland security and national security, hard power and soft power blur and fade to insignificance in the face of such a catastrophe. At a time when we have become better known and even resented for our preoccupation with competition and our relentless consumption, this is a time for America and Americans to display the sort of uncommon and uncompromising compassion our unparalleled liberties afford us.
First of all, the response to Katrina was not as poor as conventional wisdom would dictate. The idea that the response to Katrina was an utter failure was largely a political tool used to bludgeon Bush, because, you know, everything wrong in the world is his fault.
Second, the ability to extend protection is not detached from the ability to project power. Large parts of the world are relatively peaceful and much of global commerce works because of the U.S.’ power to keep thugs and tyrants from wreaking havoc. Other countries benefit but leftists just whine about American aircraft carriers and bases being in places where they think they shouldn’t be.
Third, only in the leftist mind is America only a competitive nation with little regard for compassion. Remember the ’04 tsunami? It wasn’t China or France who ponied up the bulk of relief funds (displays best in IE). And Saudi Arabia and Iran aren’t footing the lion’s share of the Haiti relief bill, either. Most Americans are compassionate people and giving people who take it as a given that you extend help when other people are suffering, even if you don’t get anything tangible in return. But to leftists, America won’t help unless we get a decent ROI. Nonsense. I’d like to see how the books of the world’s top charitable organizations would look without American giving.
Fourth, American competitiveness leads to the prosperity that allows the United States to be a giving nation that can help others. The author gives a nod to our liberties affording us compassion. Yeah, like the liberty to compete in a market system and create wealth to the point that a certain percentage of it can be given away without a second thought?
As usual, the United States is stepping up to help out more than any other single nation in a situation where we will get little to nothing in return. And as usual, liberals have to figure out a way to bash the very American values and privileges that give us the ability to do so.
The classless Nancy Pelosi described George Bush leaving Washington thusly: “It was like a 10-pound anvil was lifted off my head.”
Now, if only she can do something about the 10-pound anvil that is her head.
Is George Bush leaving a parting gift for Obama in the form of the second half of the $700 billion bailout? According to The Washington Post, Bush is moving to request the funds this weekend and threatening a veto if Congress refuses to write the check. Apparently this is so King Barack doesn’t have to wait a single day after his coronation to start dropping money from the sky.
DiFi isn’t too keen on Obama’s selection of Leon Panetta to head the CIA.
“I was not informed about the selection of Leon Panetta to be the CIA director,” Feinstein said. “My position has consistently been that I believe the agency is best served by having an intelligence professional in charge at this time.”
Yes, well my position has consistently been that I believe the country is best served by having an experienced professional in charge at this time.
Panetta doesn’t have the experience we’d expect for CIA Director. So what? Barack Obama doesn’t have the experience necessary to be president, but that isn’t going to stop him.
Obama really didn’t have a lot of choices when it came to filling the spot anyway, given that he’s too afraid of pissing off his leftist base by appointing someone with connections to the evil George Bush’s terror-fighting initiatives. It seems that in order to find someone who’s actually qualified, Obama would have had to pick someone with real experience combating terrorists. But apparently in Obama’s calculus, stanching leftist hysteria over mythical “torture” and “domestic spying” outweighs keeping the country safe.
Colin Powell has some words for Republicans: Go along to get along.
Powell is the latest to join the ranks of pseudo-Republicans admonishing the party after this year’s election loss for, essentially, not being enough like Democrats.
Powell told CNN that his party’s attempt “to use polarization for political advantage” backfired last month.
What polarization? Is he referring to John McCain’s refusal to use Obama’s racist pastor Jeremiah Wright against him? McCain was once the darling of Democrats and the leftwing media, lauded for reaching across the aisle to get things done. And Powell thinks he’s too polarizing? If anything, he wasn’t polarizing enough.
CNN also reports that Powell said the GOP must see what is in the “hearts and minds” of African-American, Hispanic and Asian voters “and not just try to influence them by… the principles and dogma.”
Yes, we must not let silly little things like principles get in the way of pandering.
“I think the party has to stop shouting at the world and at the country,”Powell lectured. Translation: Republicans need to tow the Democrat line or shut up.
Isn’t it interesting that Powell was once derided as a Bush lackey who lied to the UN about WMD? Only when he’s sticking it to his own party and endorsing Barack Obama does he earn the good graces of the elite media.
I used to have some respect for Powell, but he has revealed himself to be a gutless, pandering and truly shallow figure.