RSS

Tag Archives: George W. Bush

Give Bush Credit?

So, conservatives believe we should give George W Bush some credit? OK, here goes nothing …

Thanks for appointing such extremely incompetent people to head your intelligence/national security teams; you know the ones, the folks who couldn’t have gotten a scouting report for a pee wee football team right, much less figure out if Bin Laden was a threat, and who didn’t think it was odd for a group of Arab men to want to learn how to fly jet airliners but who didn’t want to learn how to land them …

Thanks for allowing those same terrorists to attack the United States on our own soil, killing close to 3,000 innocents …

Thanks for expanding the Federal Government beyond any other previous president’s dreams …

Thanks for creating/expanding federal agencies beyond all scope – DHS and TSA…

Thanks for fighting two wars – one of which was unnecessary and illegal – without raising taxes, and for paying for those wars “off budget” thereby exploding the federal debt and deficit …

Thanks for giving the OK to US troops and CIA ops to violate our own laws, and international laws, and to torture prisoners …

Thanks for unlawfully and unconstitutionally suspending habeas corpus …

Thanks for opening secret CIA prisons in former Soviet Block nations …

Thanks for giving no bid contracts to Cheney’s homeys in Iraq and Afghanistan – Halliburton ring any bells? – and for spending $2 billion per week there …

Thanks for allowing Cheney to decide your administration’s energy policy in his secret meetings with oil executives who stripped the guts out of regulations so badly the oil industry turned around and rewarded us all with the BP Deep Water Horizon spill in the Gulf …

Thanks for your ever so inspiring leadership during one of the worse natural disasters in American history, and for appointing a horse breeder to over see FEMA … “heck of a job Bushy!”

Thanks for driving the economy off the cliff …

Thanks for those tax cuts, especially for the ones at the top, you know those top 2% who were going to use their cuts to create jobs … um, still looking, and waiting for those jobs to be created … what’s that? They created millions of jobs, problem is they’re overseas …

There ya go, credit given where it was deserved … I wish I could list a whole bunch of positives concerning the Bush presidency, but I can’t think of any … W was one of the worse presidents in American history, and that’s really saying something …

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on May 3, 2011 in War on Terror

 

Tags: , , , ,

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on February 27, 2011 in Humor

 

Tags: , , ,

Giving Credit Where Credit is Due

You know, you’re right Conservative America; President Obama should have given credit, where credit is due, to the Bush/Cheney Administration…

You guys did an awesome ginning up a non-existent WMD program…

You guys did an awesome job convincing your fellow Republicans that Saddam was tied to 9-11…

You guys did an awesome job taking your eye off the ball in Afghanistan, invading Iraq, and allowing Osama Bin Laden to escape…

You guys were absolutely epic in your execution of the war – it lasted nine long years, cost our country over $1 Trillion dollars, 4,416 American lives, and 100,000 plus Iraqi civilians dead, and tens of thousands of Americans wounded and torn…

Oh, and we should thank you for awesome job of torturing prisoners, running secret prisons in Eastern Europe and creating who knows how many terrorists …

And thanks for keeping America safe … 9-11 was an excellent example of your abilities…

Yeah, Conservative America is so right, President Obama should have given credit where credit was due…

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on September 2, 2010 in Iraq, Politics

 

Tags: , ,

Afghanistan A War of Obama’s Choosing?

While speaking at a Republican Party of British Petroleum (GOBP) fundraiser in Connecticut on Thursday, RNC Chairman Michael Steele’s comments were captured on camera and posted online. In the midst of his shilling, Steele criticized President Barack Obama and his handling of the nine-year-old war begun by Republican President George W. Bush in response to the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. He suggested the war cannot be won.

Steele said Afghanistan is, “a war of Obama’s choosing” and the conflict “is not something the United States has actively prosecuted or wanted to engage in.”

Well, let’s see, Bush invades Afghanistan in Oct 2001 in order to catch Bin Laden; gets side tracked by the bright shiny object Iraq, ignoring Afghanistan, thus allowing the Taliban to regroup and Bin Laden to escape, which then creates the absolute necessity of sending in a “surge” of troops in order to stabilize Afghanistan, push back the Taliban and maybe finally catch the man who “can run, but who can’t hide”.

In trying to place the war at the President’s feet, and in painting a picture of defeatism Steele said, “If he’s such a student of history, has he not understood that, you know, that’s the one thing you don’t do is engage in a land war in Afghanistan? All right? Because everyone who’s tried, over a thousand years of history, has failed,” Steele said. “And there are reasons for that. There are other ways to engage in Afghanistan.”

Steele quickly tried to dodge the fallout, and issued a statement Friday, saying, “There is no question that America must win the war on terror. … And, for the sake of the security of the free world, our country must give our troops the support necessary to win this war.”

He said, “The stakes are too high for us to accept anything but success in Afghanistan.”

Steele’s comments came as President Obama’s new chief in Afghanistan, Gen. David Petraeus, arrived in the country Friday to take over the war. The President, last week dismissed his previous commander, Gen. Stanley McChrystal, after he made disparaging comments about his superiors in a Rolling Stone interview.

Steele called the dismissal “very comical” but said it shows the frustration members of the military have with Obama. This might be true except for the fact that 45% of the military vote in 2008 went to President Obama. This is one of the great myths of the conservative right in America today, that the military loathes the President.

Unhappy with Steele’s words, DNC spokesman Brad Woodhouse said it was “simply unconscionable that Michael Steele would undermine the morale of our troops when what they need is our support and encouragement. Michael Steele would do well to remember that we are not in Afghanistan by our own choosing, that we were attacked and that his words have consequences.”

Weekly Standard conservative pundit Bill Kristol, has called Steele’s resignation.

“There are, of course, those who think we should pull out of Afghanistan, and they’re certainly entitled to make their case,” wrote Kristol, who has consistently supported the Afghanistan war. “But one of them shouldn’t be the chairman of the Republican Party.”

Steele has enraged congressional Republicans throughout the last year; he has predicted the GOBP won’t win House control this fall. He has also criticized fellow Republicans in a book that party leaders didn’t know he was writing until it was published. His GOBP critics were irked further when he told them to “get a life” and “shut up.”

Earlier this year, his oversight of the RNC was called into question because of lavish spending, including money to entertain donors at a lesbian bondage club in Los Angeles. That incident led to the departure of a key Steele adviser, the party’s finance chief and the top committee staffer.

Steele, has been, and ever after shall be a political joke…

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on July 4, 2010 in Politics

 

Tags: , , , ,

Ah yes, I remember …

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on April 24, 2010 in Politics

 

Tags: ,

Did Reagan Really Cut Taxes?

ronald-reagan

During today’s bloviations, Rush, while supposedly giving a eulogy for Jack Kemp, attempted yet again to sell the country on the righteousness of the supply-side genius that was Ronald Reagan. He tried to promote the idea that Reagan’s cuts brought about untold economic prosperity, and literally drove the country out of the recession that had helped propel him into office. According to Rush, Reagan’s tax cuts were revolutionary, and helped create the longest sustained economic growth in American history.

Rush, of course couldn’t just praise Reagan, he had to take the opportunity to attack President Obama, “My friends, read his books. Barack Obama’s primary objective is undoing Ronald Reagan’s tax cuts. Now why would that be? That’s all he’s doing, returning the nation’s wealth to its so-called rightful owners. He operates on the belief that every achiever in this country is a thief, that every achiever has stolen or has something that’s genuinely not his or hers — that they’ve come by it unfairly.” But wait, that’s not all, rush continued, “We’re just not going to allow it to happen. But I — there’s no question that he’s defining prosperity down. I mean, his objective is to undo the Reagan tax cuts. Now if his objective is to undo the Reagan tax cuts, I guess those are really big tent moderate ideas, huh? We know Obama is a left-wing radical. He takes a look at anything right-wing and he wants to destroy it.”

And in so defining President Obama, Rush defines himself with his own words: “We know Rush is a right-wing radical. He takes a look at anything left-wing and he wants to destroy it.”

Now for a little truth about Ronald Reagan’s “revolutionary” tax cuts; first, yes Virginia, there is a Santa Claus, and yes Ronald Reagan did cut taxes. Sort of. However, these wonderful, growth expanding, economic exploding tax cuts never fully took effect. You see, they were scaled back in 1982 by a tax increase that averaged $37.5 billion over its first four years.

Second, part of the Reagan tax cut myth is that everyone never had it so good as they did under Reagan. However, the economy actually grew slightly faster under President Clinton, and, according to Congressional Budget Office estimates, the after-tax income of a typical family – adjusted for inflation – rose more than twice as much from 1992 to 2000 as it did from 1980 to 1988.

While President Reagan managed to ram his huge 1981 tax cut through a Democrat controlled Congress, he had to follow it with two large tax increases. Fact of the matter is, no peacetime president has raised taxes so much on so many people. Yes, you heard that right, NO PEACETIME PRESIDENT HAS RAISED TAXES SO MUCH ON SO MANY PEOPLE!

The first two Reagan tax increases came in 1982. That year, he signed into law the Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act which raised taxes by $37.5 billion per year, and the Highway Revenue Act of 1982 which raised the gasoline tax by another $3.3 billion. These increases, coming only a year after his “monumental” tax cut were needed because the budget projections used to justify the 1981 tax cut were wildly over optimistic. Over all, the 1982 tax increases undid about a third of the 1981 cut; and truth be told, as a share of the Gross Domestic Product, the increase was substantially larger than Mr. Clinton’s 1993 tax increase. According to the United States Treasury Department, TEFRA alone raised taxes by almost 1 percent of the G.D.P., making it the largest peacetime tax increase in American history. Listen carefully ditto-heads, because I want you to remember, Ronald Reagan oversaw the “LARGEST PEACETIME TAX INCREASE IN AMERICAN HISTORY”.

President Reagan’s next tax increase was known as the Social Security Reform Act of 1983. Its key provision was an increase in the payroll tax that pays for Social Security and Medicare hospital insurance. For many middle- and low-income families, this tax increase more than undid any gains from Reagan’s income tax cuts of 1981. This is a tax increase that lives on, because it initiated automatic increases in the taxable wage base. Thanks to President Reagan, those with moderately high earnings see their payroll taxes rise every single year. Once again ditto-heads, thanks to who? Come on, you can say it, thanks to Ronald Reagan.

According to 1980 Congressional Budget Office estimates, middle-income families with children paid 8.2 percent of their income in income taxes, and 9.5 percent in payroll taxes. By 1988 the income tax share was down to 6.6 percent — but the payroll tax share was up to 11.8 percent. The increase in the payroll tax share outweighed, or canceled out, any benefit from lowering of the income tax share paid.

But wait! We’re not done! The following year, Reagan signed another big tax increase in the Deficit Reduction Act of 1984. This raised taxes by $18 billion per year or 0.4 percent of G.D.P. A similar sized tax increase today would be about $44 billion

OK, now wait just a darned minute! Reagan passed the historic Tax Reform Act of 1986, achieving in startling clarity his supply side goal of lowering individual income tax rates

Well, not quite. The “historic Tax Reform Act of 1986 in reality imposed the largest corporate tax increase in history. OK ditto-heads, repeat after me, “THE LARGEST CORPORATE TAX INCREASE IN HISTORY”.

With the simple stroke of his pen, Reagan raised corporate taxes by $120 billion over five years and closed corporate tax loopholes worth about $300 billion over that same period.

So, what does it all mean?

It means tax cuts during a recession do not work. They didn’t work for Ronald Reagan in 1981, and they certainly didn’t work for George W. Bush in 2001. Tax cuts during a recession coupled with increased federal spending really do not work. Reagan cut taxes and increased federal spending in order to fight, and win, the cold war. George W. Bush cut taxes and increased federal spending to fight the war on terror, and to fund his invasion and occupation of Iraq.

So, what are the differences between Reagan and Bush? Reagan understood his tax cuts were hurting the economy, and did a 180 turn and increased taxes – in spite of what Rush, Hannity, et al claim – while George W. Bush plowed straight ahead off the cliff.

Did Ronald Reagan cut taxes? Yes he did. But then he raised them. Two things to remember about the Gipper and his tax cuts:

First, Ronald Reagan oversaw the largest peacetime tax increase in American history.

Second, Ronald Reagan imposed the largest corporate tax increase in history.

Once again, Rush proves that he doesn’t know what he’s talking about.

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on May 5, 2009 in Economics

 

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Rush the Butt Boy

The newest insult escaping the lips of the “de-facto” leader of the GOP is that any member of the media who appears to support President Obama is inside the President’s “butt boy bubble”.

One has to ask, how does Rush know what a butt boy bubble is; personal experience from eight years of carrying the Bush-Cheney message to the world through the “golden EIB microphone” perhaps? Or maybe it’s because he’s started collecting his own group of “butt boys” inside the “EIB Butt Boy Bubble”? Who’s in Rush’s bubble? Georgia Republican Phil Gingrey, RNC Chairman Michael Steele, and as of last night for refusing to speak out againt the GOP “de-facto” leader’s actions, Texas Republican Ron Paul. How’s it feeling in there fellas?

Of course if there is such a place in the White House as a “butt boy bubble” then President Obama’s “bubble” is nowhere near as large as the Bush bubble was, and still is. Consider the occupants of the previous administration’s “butt boy bubble”; Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Michael Savage, Glenn Beck, Neal Boortz, Mark Levin, Bill O’Reilly, Michael Medved, and the “butt girl” member Laura Ingraham. This is just another case of Limbaugh attempting to turn everything on its head. For eight years conservative talk radio took its daily talking points from the likes of the late Tony Snow and other White House Press Secretaries, and now somehow it’s wrong, or even evil, to think the Obama Administration would try to spin anything its way.

So, this is the guy who’s the “de-facto” leader of the GOP? The Republican Party’s “spokesmouth” describing opponents with mid-school insults such as “butt boy” is supposed to endear the GOP to whom exactly? The religious right? The Independent voters? Conservative Democrats? It’s OK Mr. Steele, Rush running his mouth off like this is great for campaign contributions to the Democratic Party. Thanks a million – or two – Rush.

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on March 4, 2009 in Politics

 

Tags: , , ,

Bush Justice Department Justified Usurping the Bill of Rights

One of the on-going themes of the right-wing propagandists is that President Obama’s recovery efforts are really about usurping American’s rights and freedoms. How interesting, that trying to fix a failing economy brought on by the failed policies of the previous administration are really secret attempts to take away our freedoms. But wait a minute, what’s this I hear? The Justice Department today released a long-secret document from 2001 in which the Bush administration claimed the military could search and seize terror suspects in the United States without warrants?


The Associated Press (AP) reported that “the legal memo was written about a month after the Sept. 11 terror attacks. It says constitutional protections against unlawful search and seizure would not apply to terror suspects in the U.S., as long as the president or another high official authorized the action.”

“Another memo showed that, within two weeks of Sept. 11, the administration was contemplating ways to use wiretaps without getting warrants,” the AP story stated.

In the search and seizure memo, John Yoo wrote that “the president could treat terrorist suspects in the United States like an invading foreign army. For instance, he said, the military would not have to get a warrant to storm a building to prevent terrorists from detonating a bomb,” the story reported. “Yoo also suggested that the government could put new restrictions on the press and speech, without spelling out what those might be.”

Yoo reportedly said, “First Amendment speech and press rights may also be subordinated to the overriding need to wage war successfully,” adding later: “The current campaign against terrorism may require even broader exercises of federal power domestically.”

So, who is a threat to American freedoms and liberties? I don’t remember the right to ruin the nation’s economy as being covered in the Bill of Rights? But I do recall something about freedom of speech, freedom of the press, protection against unlawful search and seizure; sounds like the real threat to our individual liberties is coming from the right, not the left.

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on March 3, 2009 in Bill of Rights

 

Tags: , , , , , , ,