|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Kepler
Joined: 24 Sep 2007
|
 Posted: Sun Jun 22, 2008 6:56 am Post subject: Bush, One of America's Greatest Presidents? |
 |
|
| Quote: |
BUSH'S AMERICA: 100 PERCENT AL-QAIDA FREE SINCE 2001Wed Jun 11, 7:58 PM ET
In a conversation recently, I mentioned as an aside what a great president George Bush has been and my friend was surprised. I was surprised that he was surprised.
I generally don't write columns about the manifestly obvious, but, yes, the man responsible for keeping Americans safe from another terrorist attack on American soil for nearly seven years now will go down in history as one of America's greatest presidents.
Produce one person who believed, on Sept. 12, 2001, that there would not be another attack for seven years, and I'll consider downgrading Bush from "Great" to "Really Good."
Merely taking out Saddam Hussein and his winsome sons Uday and Qusay (Hussein family slogan: "We're the Rape Room People!") constitutes a greater humanitarian accomplishment than anything Bill Clinton ever did -- and I'm including remembering Monica's name on the sixth sexual encounter.
But unlike liberals, who are so anxious to send American troops to Rwanda or Darfur, Republicans oppose deploying U.S. troops for purely humanitarian purposes. We invaded Iraq to protect America.
It is unquestionable that Bush has made this country safe by keeping Islamic lunatics pinned down fighting our troops in Iraq. In the past few years, our brave troops have killed more than 20,000 al-Qaida and other Islamic militants in Iraq alone. That's 20,000 terrorists who will never board a plane headed for JFK -- or a landmark building, for that matter.
We are, in fact, fighting them over there so we don't have to fight them at, say, the corner of 72nd and Columbus in Manhattan -- the mere mention of which never fails to enrage liberals, which is why you should say it as often as possible.
The Iraq war has been a stunning success. The Iraqi army is "standing up" (as they say), fat Muqtada al-Sadr --the Dr. Phil of Islamofascist radicalism -- has waddled off in retreat to Iran, and Sadr City and Basra are no longer war zones. Our servicemen must be baffled by the constant nay-saying coming from their own country.
The Iraqis have a democracy -- a miracle on the order of flush toilets in that godforsaken region of the world. Despite its newness, Iraq's democracy appears to be no more dysfunctional than one that would condemn a man who has kept the nation safe for seven years while deifying a man who has accomplished absolutely nothing in his entire life except to give speeches about "change."
(Guess what Bill Clinton's campaign theme was in 1992? You are wrong if you guessed: "bringing dignity back to the White House." It was "change." In January 1992, James Carville told Steve Daley of The Chicago Tribune that it had gotten to the point that the press was complaining about Clinton's "constant talk of change.")
Monthly casualties in Iraq now come in slightly lower than a weekend with Anna Nicole Smith. According to a CNN report last week, for the entire month of May, there were only 19 troop deaths in Iraq. (Last year, five people on average were shot every day in Chicago.) With Iraqi deaths at an all-time low, Iraq is safer than Detroit -- although the Middle Eastern food is still better in Detroit.
Al-Qaida is virtually destroyed, surprising even the CIA. Two weeks ago, The Washington Post reported: "Less than a year after his agency warned of new threats from a resurgent al-Qaida, CIA Director Michael V. Hayden now portrays the terrorist movement as essentially defeated in Iraq and Saudi Arabia and on the defensive throughout much of the rest of the world, including in its presumed haven along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border."
It's almost as if there's been some sort of "surge" going on, as strange as that sounds.
Just this week, The New York Times reported that al-Qaida and other terrorist groups in Southeast Asia have all but disappeared, starved of money and support. The U.S. and Australia have been working closely with the Philippines, Malaysia and Indonesia, sending them counterterrorism equipment and personnel.
But no one notices when 9/11 doesn't happen. Indeed, if we had somehow stopped the 9/11 attack, we'd all be watching Mohammed Atta being interviewed on MSNBC, explaining his lawsuit against the Bush administration. Maureen Dowd would be writing columns describing Khalid Sheik Mohammed as a "wannabe" terrorist being treated like Genghis Khan by an excitable Bush administration.
We begin to forget what it was like to turn on the TV, see a tornado, a car chase or another Pamela Anderson marriage and think: Good -- another day without a terrorist attack.
But liberals have only blind hatred for Bush -- and for those brute American interrogators who do not supply extra helpings of bearnaise sauce to the little darlings at Guantanamo with sufficient alacrity.
The sheer repetition of lies about Bush is wearing people down. There is not a liberal in this country worthy of kissing Bush's rear end, but the weakest members of the herd run from Bush. Compared to the lickspittles denying and attacking him, Bush is a moral giant -- if that's not damning with faint praise. John McCain should be so lucky as to be running for Bush's third term. Then he might have a chance. |
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ucac/20080611/cm_ucac/bushsamerica100percentalqaidafreesince2001 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 22, 2008 7:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
Harry Truman was about as unpopular as Bush is when he left office.
I don't think Bush is Truman but no one can say what people will be saying about Bush 30 or 40 years from now.
Bush has made more than a few mistakes but he was also dealt a tough set of cards to work with. You can't blame him for the fact that China and India use much more oil among other things.
Clinton was a pretty good president but he was also a lucky president since he just happened to be around to see the failure of the Soviet Union and the effect of the internet on US productivity and the stock market. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 22, 2008 2:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The OP reminds of the petulant child who has just been rebuked and goes into a 'if I was dead then they'd love me' daydream. I suspect he saw that Newsweek poll with Obama 51- McCain 36. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pligganease
Joined: 14 Sep 2004
Location: The deep south...
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 22, 2008 3:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| We invaded Iraq to protect America. |
At the risk of sounding like a moonbat...
Edit: It's Ann Coulter!?!?
Bwahahahahahahahahahaha! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 22, 2008 4:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It appears there has been a veritable plethora of Defend the Legacy of Bush articles lately. Here's one RCP dug up from England, although it isn't nearly as hysterical in tone:
History will say that we misunderestimated George W Bush
I suspect that historians of the future will instead see Bush's decision to insist upon a "surge" of reinforcements being sent into Iraq, combined with a complete change of anti-insurgency tactics as configured by General Petraeus, as the moment when the conflict was turned around there, in the West's favour.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2008/06/22/do2201.xml
The writer did make one good observation: "Presidents are seldom remembered for more than one or two things; the rest slip away into a haze of historical amnesia. With Kennedy it was the Bay of Pigs and his own assassination, with Johnson the Great Society and Vietnam, with Nixon it was opening up China and the Watergate scandal, and so on."
With 7 months still to go, it is amusing to see two articles defending what has been generally seen as a failed presidency. Far be it from me to say what people 50 years from now will say about Bush, but I would be highly surprised if he is able to get out from under the charge of incompetence. It's one thing to disagree with a president's choice of policies and then realize later he was right; it's another issue altogether to be commonly viewed as incompetently executing policy after policy. I don't think people forgive that as easily.
PS: There's a factual mistake the writer made: "The New Republic, a hugely influential political magazine, writes that his historical reputation will be as bad as that of President Harding, the disastrous president of the Great Depression." He must have meant Hoover, not Harding. In all fairness, the writer is probably one of those Brits who are challenged by the letter 'h'. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jkelly80
Joined: 13 Jun 2007
Location: you boys like mexico?
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 22, 2008 4:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ann Coulter's views are not worth discussing. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 22, 2008 5:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The OP really was Ann Coulter. I was right when I said 'petulant child'. Score one for me.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bacasper
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pligganease
Joined: 14 Sep 2004
Location: The deep south...
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 22, 2008 5:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
How do you extrapolate the "many" from the views of one nutty hag? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 22, 2008 5:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| That one isn't a nutty hag. It's a nutty Brit interfering in our internal affairs. But your principal point stands. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pligganease
Joined: 14 Sep 2004
Location: The deep south...
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 22, 2008 5:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
| That one isn't a nutty hag. It's a nutty Brit interfering in our internal affairs. But your principal point stands. |
I assumed he was knee-jerking to the OP. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jajdude
Joined: 18 Jan 2003
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
spliff
Joined: 19 Jan 2004
Location: Khon Kaen, Thailand
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 22, 2008 6:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
You gotta admit it's true. Bushes war against terrorism has crippled al-Qaida and victory in Iran will seal the deal for their fate. But, not just in Iraq, this administration has benefited humankind throughout the globe. "W" has stated on numerous occasions that he doesn't care what the world thinks of him but, what's most important to him, is to not waver from his convictions...gotta respect a guy like that even if you don't like him or what he stands for. It takes guts and I think that will be what he is remembered for. Hats off to GWB!
IMHO, his attack on Iraq was brilliant. No one else would have even considered it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jkelly80
Joined: 13 Jun 2007
Location: you boys like mexico?
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 22, 2008 6:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| spliff wrote: |
| victory in Iran |
How do you propose we go about this 'victory'? With what troops? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bacasper
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 22, 2008 6:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Pligganease wrote: |
How do you extrapolate the "many" from the views of one nutty hag? |
Ann Coulter, Philip Atkinson, and all the people at the Family Security Foundation are more than "one nutty hag." And those are the only ones who have actually come out and said anything (besides spliff). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
