Does "Bush bashing" bother you?

I honestly dont know who you're talking about here.

There's quite some people with very strong opinions on Bush around here, but the stronger they tend to veer towards Bush-bashing, the less likely they are to have been a great fan of Clinton either. Just check the number of people who voted Green around here.

I have yet to see one impassioned defence of Bill Clinton here; rather, the "well, I didnt like Clinton either, but thats not the issue we were talking about here" answer seems to be pretty staple. And yet, the "but Clinton did it too" argument seems to be honestly seen by many on the right as some kind of sufficient retort to any specific complaint about Bush. Its another thing I dont get.

LOL

I don't believe in calling a man's family names just because I don't like the man. Whether it be Bush, Clinton or somebody else.

BBB
If Bill Clinton was doing the stupid things George Bush is doing, I would be bashing the hell out of him, too. I bashed Clinton for the stupid things he did while he was president.

BBB

LOL, BBB.

I was just joking about Clinton.
I actually admired his wit and intellect. I also thought amongst the
battles with the women in his life, he did some good leadership.

Really, there's not a whole lot wrong with a healthy man, who loves sex and women. He could have been more moral, or at least more discreet.

(I wonder why no one reports anything on Bush? Maybe because the Democratic party have the country's interests at heart, and not Bushies sex life.)

Bush has been granted the teflon treatment by the media. There is plenty to criticise, but it doesn't get picked up on by reporters. But, for sure, most liberals are focused on his policies, not his personal life.

Edgar
Why do you suppose liberals focus more on how Bush "swats flies" rather than the unzipping of his fly?

BBB

Because we understand what's important and in the national interest, rather than just being nasty for the sake of being nasty. Because we understand that the nation's intersts come before petty partisan politics?

I imagine it bothers the righties as much as Clinton Bashing bothered me. But, as Americans we have to right and the responsibility to speak up against what we think is wrong. I actually see very little Bush bashing on this site. It's more people speaking up about the faults of his politics. If that's what you call Bashing than I'm sorry. I for one won't stop until he is out of office and exposed for the lies and atrocities that he has committed.

Who'se the better man, Bush or Saddamn? I think it's about equal...

You better settle back for more Bush folks. we got his brother here and he is even a better politician than dubya. In fact I met him when he was running for governor and he's got charisma to spare. Plus the Cuban vote.

I think W Bush will pretty much ruin Brother Bush's chances. Especially if Bush gets 4 more years. He's done a lot of screwing up in 3 years. He can screw up quite a bit in 8.

No, people will tire of the Bush clan.

I'm not going to list names for you, but again, pick any self-avowed Bush hater, and you probably have one of these.

But let's assume it's not an absolute but a leaning these people have. Consider the Bosnia/Iraq comparison. Can anyone really complain that Bush didn't have UN approval and simply brush aside the fact that Clinton didn't even consult the UN before taking his action? Can anyone legitimately gripe that the US shouldn't be "in the business of regime change" regarding Iraq, but fail to make the same complaint about Bosnia? These are clear examples of the bias of which I write. These people don't care about "regime change", they don't like Bush. They don't care about the US acting without UN sanction, they don't like Bush. Get it?

Now, to the person out there thinking, "Hey, I complained about Bosnia too, and just as loudly!" Well, good for you. Then I'm not talking about you. The rest of you have ZERO credibility.

Re: BBB

What position did you take on his choice to take preemptive, unilateral action in Bosnia to effect regime change in a nation that posed the US no threat and in which we had no national interest whatsoever?

jackie writes:


You have to be kidding! Look at the hateful posts all over the internet related to the antics of Bush's young daughers. Look how they attempted to paint Bush as a 'draft dodger', a 'drunk', a "conniving oil baron' yadda yadda. Do you honestly expect us to believe for a minute that the 'anybody but Bush' crowd wouldn't attack like rabid dogs if they could uncover any sort of sex scandal?

I would be the first to say GWB is no saint. I don't know any saints or of any saints anywhere. But maybe, just maybe, GWB does live by certain standards and a sense of decency and morality in his personal life that gives his enemies little ammunition to attack.

Some of us find a man who does not cheat on his wife to be rather attractive.

Bosnia was a NATO operation. Not a go it alone spit in the worlds face action as that in Iraq. Now Bush with tears in his eyes is begging for the UN.s help. And he is getting a diplomatic spit in the face. Unfortuneatly we the citizens of the US are bearing the brunt of Bush's folly.

(CNN) -- Americans appear divided over how well President Bush is handling his job as president, while support for his Iraq policy is slipping, according to a recent poll.
In addition, the CNN/Time poll showed that Bush didn't pick up significant support for his handling of the economy despite the robust March jobs report announced last week.
The telephone poll of 1,005 adult Americans was taken Thursday night. It had a margin of error of plus or minus 3 percentage points.
It shows that 49 percent of those polled approve of the way the president is handling his job, while 47 percent do not.
The poll was taken after national security adviser Condoleezza Rice's testimony before the commission investigating the attacks of September 11, 2001. It also followed increased violence in Iraq. (Full story)
The approval rating for Bush's terrorism policy dipped from 58 percent in a CNN/Time poll taken two weeks ago to 55 percent now, within the margin of error.
A steeper decline can be seen in support for the president's handling of Iraq.
In the March 26-28 poll, 51 percent approved of Bush's handling of the war. In the most recent poll, 44 percent said they approve.
The economic numbers were virtually unchanged, with 41 percent expressing approval and 54 percent disapproval, both down 1 point.
On April 2, the Labor Department reported that the economy added 308,000 nonfarm jobs in March -- more than six times the growth reported one month earlier. (Full story)
When asked how things are going in the country, 51 percent answered "well" and 48 percent said "poorly."
Those numbers were significantly different from February, when 60 percent said things were going well and 39 percent said they were going poorly.

Can the results of this poll be considered Bush bashing?

Stating the results of the poll is not Bush bashing. But the poll results are most certainly the result of Bush bashing. The very young, the very naive, and the hold-overs from the anti-institutional, anti-traditionalist 60's and 70's are easily swayed by negative propaganda and refuse to even consider anything that doesn't support it.

What's negative in propaganda aimed at exposing a corrupt, inept, president?

When that president is thought by many of his supporters to be "annointed/appointed by God," any criticism is tantamount to blasphemy.