world

Obama, ex-presidents praise 'resolute' Bush at library opening

99 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© 2013 AFP

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

99 Comments
Login to comment

that we've changed it a bit from Bush

Bush = Torture by the US is in. Obama = Torture is out. In vs. Out: the difference is night and day to any honest and reasonable person with eyes to see.

If this was truly the case President Obama would not have continued to have third countries take them at all

That statement is based on a false premise. (Do reasonable people make such obviously false premises?) It presumes that no third nation could hold a prisoner at the U.S.'s behest without torturing them. However, note that if torture occurred, it would be in violation of U.S. policy under President Obama. Under Bush and Cheney, the torture would be smiled upon, and its results greeted with "Keep up the great work." It's a day and night difference.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The difference is night and day to any honest person.

I fail to see the clear difference and the boorish tiresome personal attacks you indulge in to smear another persons character not reflect well on you at all. It is unfortunate that you feel compelled to indulge in it.

Obama may proclaim it in principle but his actual actions have done nothing to truly prevent it from occurring with suspects we are interested in. If this was truly the case President Obama would not have continued to have third countries take them at all and would have banned the practice and that would be a clear night and day difference. He kept the practice and put out public relations pablum that we've changed it a bit from Bush to make sure that the jailers in Djibouti are on their best behavior when we're not around to look in them.

From the Washington Post:

The three European men with Somali roots were arrested on a murky pretext in August as they passed through the small African country of Djibouti. But the reason soon became clear when they were visited in their jail cells by a succession of American interrogators.

http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-01-01/world/36323571_1_obama-administration-interrogation-drone-strikes

Wiki Djibouti:

Torture is banned by the constitution. However, reports of its use continue to flow to the outside world. Reporters Without Borders claims that Dirir Ibrahim Bouraleh died from injuries sustained under torture by Sergeant Major Abdourahman Omar Said from 23 - 27 April 2011.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_Djibouti#Torture

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Forget about Jeff will be next candidates. Grandma Bush yelled at Republican big shots. "find edible candidates. 2 Bush are enough'. Well, Republicans want next election. Why trying to have Bush? Democrats and many organizations are trying to recruit Hillary Clinton, although Hillary says she is not interested, Both Gops and Dems, believe Hillary will be the candidate for Dem. Just Bush name might win some states. Hillary has to keep eyes on her husband than becoming the US President, maybe.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I fail to see how a policy that is sending terrorism suspects to third countries for detention and interrogation, but pledges to closely monitor their treatment to ensure that they are not tortured is completely rejecting torture at all.

First of all, one must reject torture in principle. Bush and Cheney did not; Obama has. The difference is night and day to any honest person. Let us not forget that completely innocent people -- cases of mistaken identity -- were kidnapped off the streets in free nations and imprisoned and tortured by the Bush regime.

What are we going to do if the third country...

First of all, the third country is not taking those people in for free. Payment tends to be a powerful incentive, and it takes far less effort not to torture than to do so. Additionally, most of those "black sites" have U.S. personnel on hand to interrogate the prisoners of interest and to monitor their well-being. It saddens me to think that Americans would follow the criminal orders to allow torturing, passed down to them from their higher-ups. I am thankful that they are no longer taking orders from criminals at the top.

According to who?

Can you name another US president who can't set foot in most of the free nations of the world -- certainly not most European nations -- without the threat of being arrested?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Nevertheless, the difference between a policy that regards torture as acceptable and a policy that completely rejects torture is quite a flagrant one.

I fail to see how a policy that is sending terrorism suspects to third countries for detention and interrogation, but pledges to closely monitor their treatment to ensure that they are not tortured is completely rejecting torture at all.

What are we going to do if the third country that we've parked their sorry carcasses at so that we don't have to bother with reading em their rights or providing them any protections at all cross the line and engage in it?. Send em a nasty letter to tell them to cut it out?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"criminals like Bush and Cheney"

According to who? You? Or the Taliban?

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

...is the continous sterling shining example of the U.S Government and it politicians.

Putting criminals like Bush and Cheney into office, it's no wonder the right-wing expects government to lie to them.

Nevertheless, the difference between a policy that regards torture as acceptable and a policy that completely rejects torture is quite a flagrant one. The former being criminal behavior.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

"The Obama administration will continue the Bush administration’s practice of sending terrorism suspects to third countries for detention and interrogation, but pledges to closely monitor their treatment to ensure that they are not tortured, administration officials said Monday."

And I have to say that when it comes to "pledges" and keeping them the first thing that pops into everyones mind is the continous sterling shining example of the U.S Government and it politicians.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

I'd have to say the foreign policy disagreements aren't exactly flagrant.

"...closely monitor their treatment to ensure that they are not tortured."

I'd have to say the difference between a policy that regards torture as acceptable and a policy that rejects torture is quite a flagrant one. The former being criminal behavior.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Obama, who had flagrant foreign and economic policy disagreements with Bush."

From Yabits post:

"The Obama administration will continue the Bush administration’s practice of sending terrorism suspects to third countries for detention and interrogation,

I'd have to say the foreign policy disagreements aren't exactly flagrant.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Renditions continue under Obama, despite due-process concerns

Rendition is not equal to torture and therefore does not sink to the same level of criminality.

"The Obama administration will continue the Bush administration’s practice of sending terrorism suspects to third countries for detention and interrogation, but pledges to closely monitor their treatment to ensure that they are not tortured, administration officials said Monday."

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/25/us/politics/25rendition.html?_r=0

0 ( +1 / -1 )

or tries to endorse or justify the practice of torture, then one could claim he shares the same type of criminality that Bush shares with other leaders

Renditions continue under Obama, despite due-process concerns

The three European men with Somali roots were arrested on a murky pretext in August as they passed through the small African country of Djibouti. But the reason soon became clear when they were visited in their jail cells by a succession of American interrogators.

http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-01-01/world/36323571_1_obama-administration-interrogation-drone-strikes

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

"Obama, who had flagrant foreign and economic policy disagreements with Bush."

I'll give the article credit as it was smart enough to make sure it used had as "past tense" in the sentence instead of has in the "present tense" for complete accuracy.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

I wonder if Switzerland will also charge and arrest Obama with being an accessory to the crimes if he visits there

As the article states: "Obama, who had flagrant foreign and economic policy disagreements with Bush." Perhaps the most flagrant foreign policy disagreement had to do with Iraq, which Obama opposed from the outset. So the "accessory to crimes" is something concocted purely in your imagination.

When the day comes that President Obama's administration outright lies to the American people in order to justify a full-scale invasion of a sovereign nation that had nothing to do with attacking the United States or its neighbors, or tries to endorse or justify the practice of torture, then one could claim he shares the same type of criminality that Bush shares with other leaders who have lied in order to blitzkrieg and occupy other sovereign nations, and who have subjected prisoners and often-innocent detainees to the practices of torture.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

The problem with Obama is that he gets into a mode of wanting to "get along" so badly -- as with his attendance to open Bush's library -- that he's willing to blind himself to the sheer criminality of the acts of his predecessor in favor of continuing the "Good 'ole boys" club aspect of the White House alumni.

When a person can't visit a freedom-loving country like Switzerland because he's afraid of being arrested, it sure sounds as though many more than just myself think he's a criminal.

I wonder if Switzerland will also charge and arrest Obama with being an accessory to the crimes if he visits there.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

[Obama] paid respect to a man that made that made the groundwork easier for him

If by "groundwork" you mean the extremely deep sinkhole that was the economic meltdown, and two wars charged to the credit card, you might have a point.

Why you even think Bush is a criminal is beyond me.

When a person can't visit a freedom-loving country like Switzerland because he's afraid of being arrested, it sure sounds as though many more than just myself think he's a criminal.

What the world will look back on is how this current President put us in such a financial mess that destroyed this great nation.

Those of the world who are deaf, dumb and blind perhaps.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

The problem with Obama is that he gets into a mode of wanting to "get along" so badly -- as with his attendance to open Bush's library -- that he's willing to blind himself to the sheer criminality of the acts of his predecessor in favor of continuing the "Good 'ole boys" club aspect of the White House alumni. I am reasonably confident that he will look back on this back-slapping with some regret, much as former Justice Sandra Day O'Connor now regrets her role in Bush v. Gore.

Obama did the right thing. He paid respect to a man that made that made the groundwork easier for him especially the war on terror. I heard Bush and Obama talk on occasion on this subject and Bush gave Obama many recommendations on terrorism. Why you even think Bush is a criminal is beyond me. I think Obama is more of a criminal for adding to our national debt and not curtailing spending. Debt that we can never pay back, that in itself is a crime. What the world will look back on is how this current President put us in such a financial mess that destroyed this great nation. Bush wasn't perfect. but at least he loves his country. And please don't start with Bush vs Gore. Good God, had Gore won. that would have really been a disaster.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

This article definitely has some liberals grinding their teeth, ha ha!

yabits - Sounds like you're not very happy with our president right now.

"( Bush ) orders a full-scale invasion of a country under false pretenses...

Uh, the hapless U.N. couldn't verify that Saddam didn't have WMD due to his cat and mouse games.

"... which murders over 100,000"

Coalition troops didn't kill anywhere near 100,000 people, including terrorists. The vast majority of the deaths were Muslim on Muslim violence.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

leading an almost identical American foreign policy

One orders a drone strike that might kill up to a dozen or more. The other orders a full-scale invasion of a country under false pretenses which murders over 100,000, makes refugees of over a million, and drives a nation into constant fear and violence.

And this is declared to be "almost identical." The craven dishonesty and self-delusion of the right-wing is truly a wonder to behold.

with leading an almost identical American foreign policy, though those most rabid on the left would disagree.

And yet, two examples were just provided -- Gosztola and Nader in order -- who did agree that the policies bear too much resemblance. Right-wing extremists cynically and disingenuously use comments of those towards the extreme left to support their claim. It is the moderates who disagree, citing much different approaches in Libya and Syria as examples of how they are far from "almost identical."

The problem with Obama is that he gets into a mode of wanting to "get along" so badly -- as with his attendance to open Bush's library -- that he's willing to blind himself to the sheer criminality of the acts of his predecessor in favor of continuing the "Good 'ole boys" club aspect of the White House alumni. I am reasonably confident that he will look back on this back-slapping with some regret, much as former Justice Sandra Day O'Connor now regrets her role in Bush v. Gore.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Ha! Arguing over which president is the least bad war criminal.

I don't consider either man to be a "war criminal" with leading an almost identical American foreign policy, though those most rabid on the left would disagree. For example Obama's policy of expanding our undeclared and clandestine war in Yemen if it had been carried out under G.W would have really raised "war criminal howls" and duly reported by a hostile media toward him and his administration but since Obama came on the scene the coverage now slants to being seen as "wise and prudent" by President Obama to carry out what exactly what Bush said in an interview with Bret Hume

BUSH: " I know I would rather fight them there than here, and I know would rather fight them there than in other remote parts of the world, where it may be more difficult to find them."

HUME: Such as?

BUSH: Well, such as Yemen or -- you know we're chasing down al Qaeda types and former remnants of the Taliban regime in the wild regions of Afghanistan and parts of Pakistan.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,98006,00.html

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Ha! Arguing over which president is the least bad war criminal.

Wonderful nation....

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

he hasn't allowed himself to sink to the level of a war criminal, causing the massive loss of innocent human lives his "club-mate" and predecessor did.

Ralph Nader Says Obama Is A 'War Criminal' Who Has Been 'More Aggressive' Than George W. Bush

In an interview with Politico, the former presidential candidate and leftist political activist said that Obama's policies have been "more aggressive" and "more illegal worldwide" compared to Bush's.

“He’s gone beyond George W. Bush in drones, for example. He thinks the world is his plate, that national sovereignties mean nothing, drones can go anywhere,” Nader told Politico.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/25/ralph-nader-says-obama-is-war-criminal-worse-than-george-bush_n_1914154.html

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Honoring his predecessor today, Obama reminds us that on foreign policy, he's accepted much of the Bush doctrine

It's always eye-opening and amusing when someone on the right-wing shamelessly clings to the opinions of someone well over on the left, in this case, those of Bradley-Manning-defender Keven Gosztola, in order to try to make one of their desperate attempts at a point.

Suffice to say that while Obama has continued many of Bush's policies -- for which Gosztola rightfully criticizes him -- he hasn't allowed himself to sink to the level of a war criminal, causing the massive loss of innocent human lives his "club-mate" and predecessor did. Obama can still travel to free Europe, new and old, and be welcomed and toasted there -- rather than have to face risking arrest as a criminal.

It is a fact that Bush can't travel to Europe without risking arrest (which he deserves), as much as it is a fact that the Arab League and the UN invited the United States to help avert disaster in Libya. It's obvious that opinions differ on how closely the policies of the two men actually match -- but it is clear that one has to get way over on the left to claim a relatively close one.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Obama, who had flagrant foreign and economic policy disagreements with Bush.

Obama’s Bush speech highlights their similarities

Honoring his predecessor today, Obama reminds us that on foreign policy, he's accepted much of the Bush doctrine

That is partly because Sen. Barack Obama did not know what it would be like to be the most powerful man in the world. It is also because Obama has bought into many of Bush’s counterterrorism policies and that has helped Bush’s legacy in ways that many of his supporters probably never imagined.

Thus, Obama has done what Bush could not do: He has taken policies that were unpopular or reviled and transformed them into something legitimate and acceptable. He also has made the “war on terror” more permanent by abandoning the phrase “war on terror” and relying on covert operations that involve targeted assassinations by drones or the outsourcing of detentions and interrogations to unsavory characters that national security agencies have allied themselves with (like, for example, in Somalia).

Accepting much of the Bush doctrine was a necessary requirement for being accepted as a member of the “club,” and, for Bush and his cabal, Obama’s preservation and even expansion of policies is the real “mission accomplished.”

http://www.salon.com/2013/04/25/obama_embraces_the_worlds_most_exclusive_club/

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Obama, who had flagrant foreign and economic policy disagreements with Bush.

And yet another foreign policy matter -- Libya -- that highlights the stark and "flagrant" differences between the two:

"Obama acted only after both the United Nations and the League of Arab States invited the United States to help avert disaster...Legally and constitutionally, Obama's Libya policy is on firm ground." (Written by one of the US's top constitutional scholars.)

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2011/06/bomb_away_mr_president.html

Did the Arab League and the United Nations invite President Bush to launch his illegal invasion of Iraq?

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Obama, who had flagrant foreign and economic policy disagreements with Bush

Defending the first war launched on his watch, President Barack Obama declared Monday night that the United States intervened in Libya to prevent a slaughter of civilians that would have stained the world's conscience and "been a betrayal of who we are."

"To brush aside America's responsibility as a leader and - more profoundly - our responsibilities to our fellow human beings under such circumstances would have been a betrayal of who we are," Obama said. "Some nations may be able to turn a blind eye to atrocities in other countries. The United States of America is different. And as president, I refused to wait for the images of slaughter and mass graves before taking action."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/28/obama-libya-speech-_n_841311.html

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Obama, who had flagrant foreign and economic policy disagreements with Bush

And one foreign policy matter -- Syria -- that highlights the stark differences between the two:

"Obama's Syria Subtext: I Am Not George W. Bush: The president refuses to be rushed on military intervention, saying the U.S. needs a clearer intelligence picture it can confidently take to the international community."

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/04/obamas-syria-subtext-i-am-not-george-w-bush/275430/

The Bush Library dedication ceremony paints a clear picture of how executives "make nice" in front of the public. This stuff is standard operating procedure in large corporations, where every demotion and firing has nice words and abundant smilies on the official memo to the employees. In the political world, imitation is the sincerest form of flattery -- and taking an opposite tack the clearest form of rebuke.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Like Obama, former Democratic presidents Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter chose to skip over controversy...

Yes, that's what political correctness and bureaucratic decorum demands.

Meanwhile, a former Bush official reminds us: "Don't reassess W.'s legacy without remembering the grave charges levied against him." Charges serious enough to prevent an American president from traveling to neutral Switzerland for fear of being arrested.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/04/former-state-department-official-team-bush-knew-many-at-gitmo-were-innocent/275327/

Heckuva job, Bushie.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Obama Security Strategy Backs Away From Pre-Emptive War, Stresses Diplomacy

Broad Powers Seen for Obama in Cyberstrikes

A secret legal review on the use of America’s growing arsenal of cyberweapons has concluded that President Obama has the broad power to order a pre-emptive strike if the United States detects credible evidence of a major digital attack looming from abroad, according to officials involved in the review.

Mr. Obama is known to have approved the use of cyberweapons only once, early in his presidency, when he ordered an escalating series of cyberattacks against Iran’s nuclear enrichment facilities.

Pre-emption always has been a disputed legal concept. Most recently Mr. Bush made it a central justification for the invasion of Iraq in 2003, based on faulty intelligence about that country’s weapons of mass destruction. Pre-emption in the context of cyberwar raises a potentially bigger quandary, because a country hit by a pre-emptive cyberstrike could easily claim that it was innocent, undermining the justification for the attack. “It would be very hard to provide evidence to the world that you hit some deadly dangerous computer code,” one senior official said.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/04/us/broad-powers-seen-for-obama-in-cyberstrikes.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

Obama Security Strategy Backs Away From Pre-Emptive War, Stresses Diplomacy

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/05/27/obama-security-strategy-backs-away-pre-emptive-war-stresses-diplomacy/

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

“I believe that freedom is a gift from God and the hope of every human heart,” Bush said, reprising an argument familiar from the days when the failure to find weapons of mass destruction put his Iraq policy on the line.

George Bush 2013

America will remain the anchor of strong alliances in every corner of the globe. And we will renew those institutions that extend our capacity to manage crisis abroad, for no one has a greater stake in a peaceful world than its most powerful nation. We will support democracy from Asia to Africa, from the Americas to the Middle East, because our interests and our conscience compel us to act on behalf of those who long for freedom.

Barack Obama Inaugural Address to the Nation Jan 2008

0 ( +1 / -1 )

But turning serious, he made an impassioned case that his controversial policy of pre-emptive war and regime change in Iraq was born of principle.

War has been around for millenia. And so have the principles for not engaging in it pre-emptively. It is well said that truth is the first casualty of war. Pre-emptive war is thus forced to surrender truth before the first shot of aggression is fired. No honorable nation will engage in it -- not the least of reasons being because it takes otherwise loyal and decent people and makes them co-participants in a great crime.

“I believe that freedom is a gift from God and the hope of every human heart,” Bush said, reprising an argument familiar from the days when the failure to find weapons of mass destruction put his Iraq policy on the line.

Mr. Bush, God did not make you, or America, His messenger to deliver freedom to the world, and it is the grossest form of sacrilegious arrogance and ignorance to assume so. A messenger was sent, and the "principles" of pre-emptive war are as diametrically opposed to his message as one can get. And his "failure to find weapons of mass destruction," proved that he and those who support him have sworn themselves in the service to the father of lies.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

... he is a good man,” Obama said.

I will state also that President Obama is a good man though I do not agree with the vast majority of his policies or his views on governance. President Bush and President Obama besides being entrusted as a President of the United Stats also both share another common bond on what provides for them true inspiration.

Obama Salutes Wounded Warriors' Bike Riders

President Barack Obama has cheered on 22 injured service members who spun their way around the South Lawn of the White House in specially built bikes, part of a Wounded Warrior Project's Soldier Ride to raise money and attention for their cause.

The riders, including two brothers and a blind female Army captain, rode bicycles of all shapes, some hand-cranked and others tandem. The president sent them off with a horn blast.

The riders were in the midst of a Washington area tour. Obama called it the most inspiring White House event.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/20/obama-salutes-wounded-war_n_1441912.html

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Readers, enough of this nonsense. Please focus your comments on what is in the story.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Bush, Hussein, et. al. While there are differences of degree, they are of the same kind.

Otherwise, it comes across as "Fuhrer dances with wounded Wermacht officer."

And also U.S military members in your view are the same as Nazi Wehrmacht officers.

Pathetic

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Saddam invaded two countries...........Iran in the 80's

...with US support. (We hope the picture of Rumsfeld shaking Saddam's hand will be on full display in Bush's library.)

Whenever a leader resorts to lying to a nation to get it to invade another nation, we are talking about the worst type of political criminal.

Bush, Hussein, et. al. While there are differences of degree, they are of the same kind.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Whenever a leader lies to a nation to get it to invade another nation, we are talking about the worst type of political criminal.

Saddam invaded two countries...........Iran in the 80's and Kuwait in the 90's yet Bush is Hitler

Pathetic

0 ( +1 / -1 )

You know it doesn't matter who is at fault. All that matters is WHO IS GOING TO FIX IT ! It seems that every country now a days is playing the blame game. Just stop blaming people and fix it.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The Iraqi people never did anything to the American people, true.

Then, invading their country and throwing it into chaos, with over 100,000 dead was a criminal act. Resolute, yes, but still criminal.

But Saddam...was a threat and we had EVERY right to neutralize that threat.

This is key. As with a previous famous war criminal whose name has been brought up, before his army attacked one of the neighboring countries, his propaganda machine went into work preparing the population to accept the Big Lie that the country being targeted represented an existential threat to the German people, and that the Reich had every right to neutralize that threat.

With Bush and Iraq, we are not talking about a neighboring country, but one that was over 6,000 miles away and was well contained with "no-fly zones" and weapons inspectors on the ground. And, as events proved, no supplies of WMD whatsoever. Whenever a leader lies to a nation to get it to invade another nation, we are talking about the worst type of political criminal.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Germany doesn't dedicate libraries to its former leaders who ordered and oversaw crimes committed against humanity. It's pathetic that the United States does. The library itself is an attempt to whitewash history.

Yeah, yeah - Bush is Hitler, we've heard that lame talking point already. Put down the pipe and realize that Al Qaeda, the Taliban, and religiously inspired Islamic jihadi's are the real enemy of world peace.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Germany doesn't dedicate libraries to its former leaders who ordered and oversaw crimes committed against humanity. It's pathetic that the United States does. The library itself is an attempt to whitewash history.

It's pathetic that one would willfully lower their I.Q to room temperature to actually compare former President Bush to Hitler and it's beyond disgraceful to then go ahead and blithely smear former U.S Army officer Melissa Stockwell the U.S female soldier to ever lose a limb in combat as a German Nazi soldier in the Wehrmacht.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

I wasn't a big fan of Bush's domestic policies, expanding the role of the Federal government in K-12 education and expanding the welfare state, but he did a solid job in foreign policy. 9/11 did change everything and it took a new manner of dealing with the world. Despite huge criticisms of Bush's war on terror policies Obama's are essentially the same. Guantonimo, the Patriotic Act, the wiretap program, and the black sites (see Benghazi compound). The one big difference being that he still runs around like an idiot trying to convince people that Islamic inspired terrorism is nothing more than work place violence. Oh, and he wants us to believe that obliterating people without a trial via drone strikes is more humane than water-boarding. Obama is so constrained by his ideological blinders that he is incapable of seeing religiously inspired hatred for the serious threat that it truly is to peace and political stability in the world. Bush's public approval ratings are on par with Obama's now because at least half the country see's that Obama is seriously naive in the area of foreign affairs. It is really sad seeing Assad, Putin, and the Chinese running circles around the US president.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

The misery and suffering of the unjustified invasion of Iraq has fallen squarely on the Iraqi people, who never did anything against Americans. The people of the United States might believe they can escape His Justice, as some render honors to King Herod the son, but such beliefs are delusional.

Just making that kind of a statement is so over the top childish. The Iraqi people never did anything to the American people, true. But Saddam did. He was a threat and we had EVERY right to neutralize that threat. He was warned, he had enough time to follow the UN and to let the inspectors search his country. He chose otherwise and the rest is his fault, sorry. I personally, sleep good every night. His fault, bottom line. Whether you think so or not, The person that was the criminal, got what he deserved.

Germany doesn't dedicate libraries to its former leaders who ordered and oversaw crimes committed against humanity. It's pathetic that the United States does. The library itself is an attempt to whitewash history.

Yes, Exactly! Germany would never do that and shouldn't do that. To even make a correlation between Bush and Hitler shows that you really don't know anything about history. Hitler believed that Jews and NON-Germans were inferior and needed to be systematically destroyed, because the Aryan race was the supreme and ONLY race that deserved to rule the world in God's image. Death camps, gas chambers, public hangings and shootings, using peoples skins as leather to make handbags and you think Bush and Hitler are the same? What is wrong with you??! I really want to say something else, but I know the mods would delete it, so I will refrain from it. Bush isn't even close to Hitler. Bush eliminated a tyrant and rightfully so. Bush helped to keep our country safe. And that is good enough for me.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

how pathetic.

Germany doesn't dedicate libraries to its former leaders who ordered and oversaw crimes committed against humanity. It's pathetic that the United States does. The library itself is an attempt to whitewash history.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Otherwise, it comes across as "Fuhrer dances with wounded Wermacht officer."

Bush is Hitler, how pathetic.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Dancing With a Wounded Warrior

It might mean something if it said, "Meeting with wounded Iraqis." Otherwise, it comes across as "Fuhrer dances with wounded Wermacht officer." Some may forget that Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld are war criminals who should be arrested and prosecuted, but not everyone.

The misery and suffering of the unjustified invasion of Iraq has fallen squarely on the Iraqi people, who never did anything against Americans. The people of the United States might believe they can escape His Justice, as some render honors to King Herod the son, but such beliefs are delusional.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

I just read above that someone on this thread blamed George Bush for Hurricane Katrina! That is one of the dumbest comments ever.

Really, realist? You accuse people of claiming George W. Bush controlled the weather, and not the government response to the destruction of lives and property the storm caused -- and just using "Katrina" as shorthand for the whole fiasco?

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

I just read above that someone on this thread blamed George Bush for Hurricane Katrina! That is one of the dumbest comments ever. Its as dumb as saying that Obama got the ( now totally discredited) Nobel Peace Prize for what his peace efforts have achieved!

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Its a pity George W Bush is not President of the USA right now. Obama is destroying the country. Roll on 2016, and hopefully Sarah Palin will become President and sort out whatever is left of once great America.

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

One thing I have long admired about American politics is the graceful way past presidents act. Also, past and current presidents do their best to treat each other with respect. Once they have experienced the presidency, it seems that they finally understand the incredible pressures and stresses the office causes those who enter it. They may still remain politically active, but I dont think they ever take shots at each other. I am happy to see President Obama carrying on that good and noble tradition.

It's a pity that JT readers can't show the same decency. THis isnt the time or place to refight the finished battles of the Bush presidency, or Obama's.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

It might have been more appropriate for him to visit those missing limbs, one of the most common legacies of his wars - but, then, most of these have not been rehabilitated sufficiently to do what W would do anyway, which is to ride a bike.

A picture is truly worth a thousand words.

Dancing With a Wounded Warrior

Former President George W. Bush dances with Wounded Warrior Melissa Stockwell, the first female to ever lose a limb in combat. She was a participant in W's 100 kilometer mountain bike ride and completed the entire ride.

http://nation.foxnews.com/george-w-bush/2012/10/12/dancing-wounded-warrior

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Is it true that the library will have 30 signed copies of My Pet Goat?

0 ( +2 / -2 )

In short, the Republican leadership had to spike the intelligence to start a war on false pretenses. I can think of few crimes worse than this. Torturing people comes close.

And the Democratic had to deflate the jobless numbers to legitimize that the economy is strong, sound and robust under false pretenses.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

So, it wasn't Barney Frank or Chris Dodd who were primarily at fault.

Here we go again, liberal denial. Yes, it was primarily Frank and Dodd, why you liberals want to call a Cheetah a Tiger beats the heck out of me.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

We won't be able to get anything done when the party that claims they want to lead, and are actually put into a leadership position, tries to pass the buck to the minority party when a major problem happens on their watch.

But the party in charge doesn't want to accept ANY accountability or responsibility for NOT having a budget for the longest time, to constantly blame Bush for everything, NEVER, EVER admitting to ANY wrongdoing, to spend, spend, spend our children's future and to put us deeper into a financial abyss, over 16Trillion and counting. I have never seen a liberal that did not love a tax, not to mention, with this Presidents healthcare crap that will further put us into deeper debt by adding 6 Trillion more.

In this case a watch that began in 1994 and continued with one of their own in the White House from 2001 -- right up until the economy started to go over the cliff in 2007.

You are talking about Clinton, yes, this is true. But like I said, if you want to blame the Republicans, please thank your fellow Democrats for allowing Bush to invade Iraq.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

So that means, it was the Dems fault for NOT stopping Bush from going to war in Iraq, Ok, gotcha! Now it all seems clear.

Shifting the subject away from Bush's economy, I see.

Yes, well, some Democrats were at fault for taking Bush and his "team" at their word regarding the WMD. Had there been no talk WMD and smoking guns/mushroom clouds, they never would have supported a war just to throw Iraq into chaos and civil war.

In short, the Republican leadership had to spike the intelligence to start a war on false pretenses. I can think of few crimes worse than this. Torturing people comes close.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

The blame rests primarily on the financial institutions for their improper management of risk, over-lending, and hilariously awful securitization practices and market discipline, not any politician or party.

So, it wasn't Barney Frank or Chris Dodd who were primarily at fault.

But hold on there a second: Financial institutions have been around for quite a long time. And, for decades, government regulation kept them on a very short leash, limiting the kinds of things they could do. Is it just a coincidence that the easing of regulations during the 70s through the 90s set up the conditions you described?

If it's not just a coincidence, then government was most certainly involved, if only because of benign neglect. But it was far worse than that: Financial companies were paying off politicians to get regulations that they considered were "holding them back" removed -- most notably, Gramm-Leach-Bliley, which repealed Glass-Steagal.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Maybe one day we'll be able to move beyond childish party lines and actually get something done in Washington.

We won't be able to get anything done when the party that claims they want to lead, and are actually put into a leadership position, tries to pass the buck to the minority party when a major problem happens on their watch. In this case a watch that began in 1994 and continued with one of their own in the White House from 2001 -- right up until the economy started to go over the cliff in 2007.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Your misunderstanding of the causes of the financial collapse is clearly demonstrated.

Well, that is your own PERSONAL opinion and history is showing that you and most of the liberal ilk are wrong, but nevertheless, I do respect YOUR opinion.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

@yabits

If Republicans were in control of Congress and they let Dodd and Frank run wild, it was still their fault.

So that means, it was the Dems fault for NOT stopping Bush from going to war in Iraq, Ok, gotcha! Now it all seems clear.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

@yabits

I know the truth hurts. Listen, it doesn't what YOU personally think or believe, the facts are the facts and if you know more than the facts or the historian, please, make your case on the major networks, for I am sure they would be dying to get that story out. But I doubt you would or could prove that beyond a shadow of a doubt.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

If Republicans were in control of Congress and they let Dodd and Frank run wild, it was still their fault.

This, right here. This is why I hate American politics. Republicans and democrats, both, are just plain reproachable. "If it's good, it's our fault. Even if we didn't do it, we let it happen. If it's bad, it's their fault. Even if they didn't do it, they let it happen." Demonize the opposition by vomiting half-truths (or usually non-truths) and further polarize an already polarized nation. Makes me puke. Maybe one day we'll be able to move beyond childish party lines and actually get something done in Washington.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Mr. Bush remains the greatest U.S. president of the 21st century.

Yes, Katrina says "Heckuva job, Bushie."

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

He always said that History will be the final judge and that is proving to be right.

Bush will need historians who are suffering from Alzheimer's. I regret to see those for whom it has taken hold already.

The same with the housing crisis, Chris Dodd and the ever big mouth Barney Frank were the big culprits...

There's what I mean. No conservative has ever been able to explain how any Democrat -- Dodd and Frank among them -- could have their way with a Congress that enjoyed a Republican majority since 1994. Heck, the Democrats have a majority now and the Republicans are still able to block them on most things.

The Time link didn't link to anything related, but no matter. If Republicans were in control of Congress and they let Dodd and Frank run wild, it was still their fault. (But of course, the Dodd/Frank excuse is used by those who are in extreme denial of reality.)

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

Bush was a fool. He took a budget surplus left to him by Clinton and started the country on the path to its current dysfunction. You can draw a line from the sequester directly back to all the tax cuts Bush enacted as soon as he took office.

Let me help you out. Before you go on wanting to beat that same old Bush destroyed America. Let me allow you and jump start your brain on where it all started. The same with the housing crisis, Chris Dodd and the ever big mouth Barney Frank were the big culprits that were the main cause for the downward spiral, yes, Bush was to an extent a part of it, but the whole thing started to fall apart under the Dems

http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1877351_1877350_1877322,00.html

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

It is nice he wants to maintain relationships with veterans - he has created so many of them. It might have been more appropriate for him to visit those missing limbs, one of the most common legacies of his wars - but, then, most of these have not been rehabilitated sufficiently to do what W would do anyway, which is to ride a bike. The sobriety thing does not really cut it.

That was a weak and pathetic cheap shot! If I were to say that Obama jumped up the drone program and wiped out many families and should visit the grieving families, you would think or have no objection since they are terrorists and since Obama is a liberal, it's ok, but Bush being a conservative, sending out troops and many of them losing limbs is something unfathomable. This is the kind of loony hypocrisy from the left that drives me crazy. In case you didn't know, we have an all voluntary military and you are told before you sign that you might be called for military service where you might have to enter conflict anywhere in the world. The men and women know this before they sign up and choose to join. They knew the risks, putting that on Bush is totally irresponsible. The same outcome could happen to ANY President. Look what happened under Clinton in Somalia. That was a very sad moment. not one of his finest hours, but Clinton did what he thought was right. One thing about Bush is that he put a lot of emphasis and care and time to be with the troops and hang around the troops and veterans and never forgot their service and still doesn't which is totally different from Obama.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

It seems that most people have a problem with bush getting into the war. Though he had every right to. they bombed America and if he hadn't the repercussions would have been worse than if he did get involved.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

"Dubya is an embarrassment to the nation"

Not according to Barack Obama. What's up with that?

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Bush was a fool. He took a budget surplus left to him by Clinton and started the country on the path to its current dysfunction. You can draw a line from the sequester directly back to all the tax cuts Bush enacted as soon as he took office.

Want further proof he's a fool? "The Iraqis are manufacturing weapons of mass destruction." So we invade and overthrow the government of Iraq with no idea what to do once we succeed. 'Nuff said.

"Dubya" is an embarrassment to the nation.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

Bush doesn't put on any pretenses!

Well, aside from the pretense of ability to govern the nation (and that is a rather large one to ignore - akin to the popular claim that W prevented terrorist attacks on America except for that, uh, kinda big one), praising W for lack of pretense is like praising a dog for his inability to brag: They both quite lack the ability to comprehend the consequences of their decisions.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Bush: "There was a time in my life when I wasn't likely to be found at a library, much less found one"

Har! Good one, Mr. ( former ) President! As Obama said, Bush doesn't put on any pretenses!

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

Barack Obama: "He ( George W. Bush ) doesn't put on any pretenses... he is a good man"

This must really grind ther teeth of liberals, ha ha!

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

It is nice he wants to maintain relationships with veterans - he has created so many of them. It might have been more appropriate for him to visit those missing limbs, one of the most common legacies of his wars - but, then, most of these have not been rehabilitated sufficiently to do what W would do anyway, which is to ride a bike. The sobriety thing does not really cut it.

Uber Liberal CNN Reporter Piers Morgan

Piers Morgan?! What's next - Bob Woodward? Please, Sail.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

W is astoundingly conspicuous in his inconspicuousness.

Uber Liberal CNN Reporter Piers Morgan in jis own words:

I’ve just returned from the W100k in the Texas panhandle, George W. Bush’s 2nd annual 100 kilometer mountain bike ride with 20 Wounded Warriors. As someone in this business for nearly 10 years, I admit that I often get jaded from working behind the scenes. The unfortunate reality is that in the modern age of news and politics, everybody’s getting a little more trained, a little more polished when it comes to dealing with the media; it makes getting authentic moments all the more difficult. So you can imagine my surprise this weekend when we were permitted to have truly intimate access to one of the most powerful men in the world, President George W. Bush.

Whatever you think of President Bush, this was a case to simply stand back to try to understand this man and what makes him tick. I can tell you honestly, American veterans light him up.

There is was one veteran suffering severe PTSD who was bouncing in and out of counseling, had significant drinking and drug problems, and suicidal thoughts. Only two months ago, his closest fellow Marine, who had gotten him into counseling in the first place, killed himself. Rather than continue his spiral down, this young man was able to pull himself up, return to intense counseling, get involved in a biking charity for veterans, and concluded his address by telling President Bush that it’s been a month and a half since his last drink and the President’s sobriety has been a huge inspiration to him. President Bush bear-hugged him like a son as the rest of the room crumbled in tears.

As President Bush said in our interview, he doesn’t intend to lead a public life, but he wants to maintain a relationship with the veteran community. I can testify to his authenticity. Each President finds his own way in their post-POTUS years. Clearly, the man is keeping a toe in the policy world, but you can tell that the press never sang a siren song for him. Now that he’s left D.C. and doesn’t have a book to sell, he doesn’t have to talk to anyone he doesn’t want to. He’s his own damn man now, doing the things that are important to him.

There’s not much we can all agree on politically these days, but as I harken back to our interview with the Second Lady, Dr. Jill Biden, in January, supporting our servicemen and their families should be one thing we can all agree on. It’s rewarding to see men and women from the highest levels in the Bush and Obama administrations driving this point home together.

http://piersmorgan.blogs.cnn.com/2012/05/03/a-day-spent-behind-the-scenes-with-george-w-bush-no-big-handlers-guiding-every-shot-just-the-president-and-slow-cooked-ribs/

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

Former president George W. Bush said Thursday he's enjoying being away from politics ....

Sail, please clue me in to any recent former president who has remained involved in politics (as opposed to issues), but all have involved themselves in some aspect of American society. W is astoundingly conspicuous in his inconspicuousness.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

What I like most about this article is that many (mostly annoyed liberals) people can't stand this deserved dedication to the President. If they could only steal the moment and yet, that will never happen. The only thing they can do instead of recognizing his achievements on being tough on terror and keeping us safe, they want to focus on the dominated mindless, liberal, puppet media to turn the peoples perception against him, it worked for a bit, but his overall approval rating is up 47%! That is great, history will show opposite of what the liberals are claiming to have been nothing more than petty political BS

I'm retired military their young man, I did 20 years, and have served above and beyond... And I am NO liberal by any stretch of your feeble imagination, George Dubya was doing mediocre, and I had no major grievances until he set out to implement wolfowitz's pnac, and set out to use every bold faced lie under the sun as a pretext to invade Iraq... I was ALL for Afghanistan (that's where Bin laden was at that time)... And after that, he was Full Speed ahead, I am the decider, I am Above the law...

So Enjoy your "Can Do No Wrong" Bush "War-Criminal-In-Chief Library... The problem is you right wing extremist, cannot see the forest from the trees...

And You're welcome for you're Freedom...! You didn't earn it, but we gave it to you anyway...!

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Watch now while he crawls back under his rock.

Former president George W. Bush said Thursday he's enjoying being away from politics and won't get involved in current debates about his successor or Washington.

"I will not be criticizing President (Barack) Obama," Bush told a Veterans Day tribute audience. "As a matter of fact, we wish him well. We're all Americans, and we want to succeed."

He said he didn't miss Washington, "all the politics, all the name calling ... the spitballs."

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/politics/2010-11-11-bush-meets-with-veterans_N.htm

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

the people raging on against former president Bush remind me of the people who Raged against Nixon and continue to rage against Nixon. They found a target to demonize and pour all their paranoia and vitrol into.

And for the Record, All the political controls Nixon wanted, President Obama has. But you would never hear them mention that.

Get a Life, people. The man is out of office and does not influence public policy anymore. Sheesh

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

@Laguna "the watercolors he made of himself showering"

To be fair to Dubya, those images were obtained by hacking. I doubt he ever wanted such embarrassingly bad artwork seen by the public. He has tried to compensate recently with portraits of terriers, which show more polish but lack the high concept of seeing a 60-something dude washing away the sweat after a hard day watching baseball.

The town of Crawford is reportedly returning to ghost town status. The last restaurant closed recently, and Laura Bush made an unscheduled visit to calm locals' fears that the "White House of the West" is up for sale. If Bush had cared about rural Texas more, he would have heeded the locals and installed his library at Baylor in Waco. I guess the glitzy sheen of Dallas won out in the end--how much fun is it to clear brush all day, anyway.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

And Bush gave more money to Africa than ANY other President, so yup, he does care about Africa.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/30/AR2006123000941.html

Regardless, he won't go the way Carter and our current are going so...

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

Can't!

C'mon, W cared about education and supported treating disease in Africa, bass! That deserves credit, doesn't it?

(Actually, not with the those who currently control the GOP. Yeah, you'd better wait another 40 years.)

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Can't! Wait another 40 years and then we shall see. Maybe not me, but the rest of the world will.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

He always said that History will be the final judge and that is proving to be right.

Oh? Care to cite a single example?

And Sail, it's a Presidential Library. All former presidents get them. Watch now while he crawls back under his rock. (Really - Carter at his age is running around with a hammer, GHWB still pops up here and there, Clinton can't help popping up everywhere - but W? What aside from the watercolors he made of himself showering have you heard regarding the man of late?)

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Mr. Bush remains the greatest U.S. president of the 21st century.

Couldn't have said it better myself!

-8 ( +0 / -8 )

Mr. Bush remains the greatest U.S. president of the 21st century.

RR

-9 ( +1 / -10 )

Bush has been making himself scarce - and that includes withholding criticism (he was not nearly so reticent while in office) - as he is terrified of history. No doubt he would like people to forget him until his demise frees him from the need to listen to the lengthy scathing indictments his presidency deserves.

Bush said, he is NOT afraid of what his critiques think of him, liberal or conservative. He always said that History will be the final judge and that is proving to be right. Liberals WANT Bush to shiver and fear and sorrow over something that he thought to be the best thing for the country and rightfully, so.

Even Republicans fail to defend him from accusations that he is an idiot, and there is a logical reason for this: If the disaster that was the result of eight years of the Bush presidency can be pinned on him being no more than a swaggering fool, attention can be drawn away from the very policies that made those eight years so disastrous; but to assume he were an intelligent man would indict the policies themselves.

Well, Bush was/is an intelligent man, yes, he butchered the English language, but unlike Obama, the man wrote mostly his own speeches and never made excuses, if you guys don't like him, it's fine, but the man is simple, not complicated and doesn't pretend to be something that he is not. Nothing wrong with his swagger, that's his trademark and Obama has his with his chin in the air and over confidence, it is who these men are, whether you can accept it or not, none of us can change them.

-6 ( +1 / -7 )

No doubt he would like people to forget him until his demise frees him from the need to listen to the lengthy scathing indictments his presidency deserves.

That sure does explain why there was a dedication today to formally open up to the public his personal 226,000-square-foot library Presidential Library and historical archives so people can go ahead and forget all about him.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

...Bush was a Saint and history will show that....

Bush has been making himself scarce - and that includes withholding criticism (he was not nearly so reticent while in office) - as he is terrified of history. No doubt he would like people to forget him until his demise frees him from the need to listen to the lengthy scathing indictments his presidency deserves.

Even Republicans fail to defend him from accusations that he is an idiot, and there is a logical reason for this: If the disaster that was the result of eight years of the Bush presidency can be pinned on him being no more than a swaggering fool, attention can be drawn away from the very policies that made those eight years so disastrous; but to assume he were an intelligent man would indict the policies themselves.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

@madverts

It's a shame Bush couldn't display in office the decency he has out if office. He's the one and only Republican as far as I can see that hasn't been furiously working against Obama since his election.

Bush was always decent, I think you are confusing decency with weakness which is what most liberals want Bush to be. As Sailwind pointed out, Bush never criticized Obama, Bush was always diplomatic about criticizing past Presidents. He always thought it was bad taste and beneath the Presidency to do so. Obama should have paid attention to that and he could have been a better leader. But liberals loved that for more than 4 years, Obama could play the Bush game for his lack of accomplishments and now that has gotten so old. People are wising up, they know that Bush is NOT the problem and in hindsight never really was.

-8 ( +1 / -9 )

It's a shame Bush couldn't display in office the decency he has out if office. He's the one and only Republican as far as I can see that hasn't been furiously working against Obama since his election.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

“He’s comfortable in his own skin. He knows who he is. He doesn’t put on any pretenses ... he is a good man,” Obama said.

If President Obama would have also included also a very gracious man he'd also been right on the mark.

George W Bush refuses to criticise Barack Obama in first public speech

"I love my country a lot more than I love politics," Mr Bush said in Calgary, Canada. "I think it is essential that he be helped in office."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/5013747/George-W-Bush-refuses-to-criticise-Barack-Obama-in-first-public-speech.html

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

A great President, as most Americans knew and as many others are now learning how good of a job he did considering what he was left by his predecessor and now history is showing the nil accomplishments of his successor. Americans hope Jeb Bush is ready to take up the baton in 2016 if we have a country left.

I totally agree and I for one will most definitely go there. I think Bush was one of our better Presidents, miss the man very much, I think he did what he had to do given the situation, yes, there were things that sometimes annoyed me about him, but he was overall an effective and decisive, strong, resolute and unwavering. You can thumb me away, don't care, but compared to what we NOW have in the WH, Bush was a Saint and history will show that and I know it bothers most liberals, but Oh, well... Bush deserved it and if he were running, I'd gladly give my vote again for a 3rd time. May him and his family be blessed and I really hope his brother and or nephew run or at least have a bigger role in politics. At least Bush loved his country and he showed it! 2016 Bush/West

-8 ( +1 / -9 )

"The tough part will be deciding which Doug Kershaw song , "Diggy Liggy Lo" or "Cajun Stripper" to blast at his campaign events."

I'm hearing more like Jerry Reid singin' Amos Moses. I love that track. Not only a Cajun but also named after a man of the cloth....

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Hey, that was a good one about not knowing what a library was before he opened his own.

@LAcajun, by 2016 Jeb will have been out of office for a long time, maybe six years? That's getting into Romney territory. Romney tried to morph from Bostonian broker to Midwestern small businessman, so I'm counting on Jeb to do something similar.

If Jeb does make a run for it, he could buy up a crawfish farm in Louisiana and sell bait on the side to shore up his "man of the people" image. The tough part will be deciding which Doug Kershaw song , "Diggy Liggy Lo" or "Cajun Stripper" to blast at his campaign events. Hire Bobby Jindal as his regional campaign coordinator, and have weekend lock-in Katrina-themed fundraisers at the Superdome, with police gangs taking target practice on civilian "suspects"...

Hunter S. Thompson would enjoy the spectacle of a Bush/Paul ticket in 2016.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

Unbelievable. Just. Unbelievable.

0 ( +4 / -4 )

A great President, as most Americans knew and as many others are now learning how good of a job he did considering what he was left by his predecessor and now history is showing the nil accomplishments of his successor. Americans hope Jeb Bush is ready to take up the baton in 2016 if we have a country left.

-5 ( +5 / -10 )

“He’s comfortable in his own skin. He knows who he is. He doesn’t put on any pretenses ... he is a good man,” Obama said.

despite all these good qualties I got the Nobel Peace Prize : Obama.

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

“He’s comfortable in his own skin. He knows who he is. He doesn’t put on any pretenses ... he is a good man,” Obama said.

Translation: "He's too incurious to engage in self-reflection; he is too inflexible to evolve; he is too simple to be anything but simple; and I'm flat-out lying here."

1 ( +7 / -6 )

Worst. President. Ever. Two failed wars, near depression, Katrina, letting OBL attack the USA after being warned many times in advance, torturing for no reason, turing the rest of the world against the USA, and on and on and on. Worst. President. Ever. Obama is still digging out from the damage bush and his band of losers inflicted on the country.

3 ( +9 / -6 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites