Tag: Worst President Ever
The Bubble Boy and His Clueless Cluelessness
That’s Mr. Bubble to you: Maureen Dowd captures the very bubble-iciousness of our president’s abject unawareness that he’s cut off from the real world:
First he claimed Bush didn’t know about the Newsweek story saying he was in bubble, and now he’s forgotten it already? That’s the alluring, memory-cleansing beauty of the bubble.
“This says you’re in a bubble,” [NBC News anchor Brian Williams] told W. “You have a very small circle of advisers now. Is that true? Do you feel in a bubble?”
“No, I don’t feel in a bubble,” Bubble Boy replied, unable to see the bubble because he’s in it. “I feel like I’m getting really good advice from very capable people and that people from all walks of life have informed me and informed those who advise me.” He added, “I’m very aware of what’s going on.”
He swiftly contradicted himself by admitting that “this is the first time I’m seeing this magazine” – his version of his dad’s Newsweek “Wimp Factor” cover – and that he doesn’t read newsmagazines…
Brian struggled to learn whether W. read anything except one-page memos. Talking about his mom, Bubble Boy returned to the idea of the bubble: “If I’m in a bubble, well, if there is such thing as a bubble, she’s the one who can penetrate it.”
“I’ll tell the guys at Newsweek,” the anchor said impishly.
“Is that who put the bubble story?” W. asked. First he didn’t know about it, and now he’s forgotten it already? That’s the alluring, memory-cleansing beauty of the bubble.
Poll: After Surge to 42% Bush Fades to 38%
Sez Zogby:
President Bush’s job approval rating languishes under 40 percent, despite an upturn in the economy and a public relations onslaught defending the role of the U.S. military in rebuilding Iraq, a new telephone poll by Zogby International shows.
Just 38 percent of Americans said they approve of the job the President is doing, down from 41 percent in a national Zogby America survey conducted last month.
The survey showed Mr. Bush is most popular in the western United States, where 46 percent approve of the job he is doing, and the South, where 44 percent approve. Just 28 percent in the East and 37 percent in the Midwest and Great Lakes states give him good marks.
People were less critical of the President personally. Asked whether they had a favorable overall impression of Mr. Bush, 49 percent agreed, including 58 percent of westerners and 56 percent of southerners.
Three Questions on Iraq for Bush Supporters
Be honest (for once): Bob Geiger at the Yellow Dog Blog posted 15 questions for Bush supporters last week that were quite thought provoking – I’ve found myself mulling them over ever since. (Not the least wondering if I should suggest to Bob that 15 questions might be too tasking for the average Bush voter, but that’s another issue.)
So, which is it, did they lie or were they merely criminally negligent?
Happily, I live safely behind the walls of the West Coast liberal bastion and do not count among my friends, family or work associates a single Bush supporter. However, I’ve come up with three questions on Iraq that I would pose to a Bush voter, if I knew one:
1. Yes or No: If the number one export of Iraq were olive oil, instead of petroleum oil, would we be there today?
2. One of the reasons Bush has given us for the occupation of Iraq is that we will create a foothold for democracy among the Arabs. Wouldn’t it have been less costly in blood and treasure simply to convince the Kuwaitis to hold elections? After all, we literally saved their asses from Saddam in 1992. Becoming a beacon for democracy in the Middle East would seem to be the very least they could do in return.
3. In the run-up to the war, did Bush and his team lie when they said Saddam had weapons of mass destruction?
No? Well, then the only other option is that they screwed up – and did so, as the vice president might say, big time.
In fact, this wildly inept miscalculation has led to over 100,000 casualities, including at least 2,200 dead U.S. service members and the fatalities of tens of thousands of innocent Iraqis. It has cost us upwards of $300 billion – and we’re not even halfway done yet. The Bush misadventure in Iraq will undoubtedly go down as the most monumentally inept war effort ever undertaken. (If they were Democrats the Bush team would be pursued by the media and the GOP for gross and homicidal official negligence.)
So, which is it, did they lie or were they merely criminally negligent?
Okay, Bushists, we await your answers.
Must Be the Christmas (or Holiday) Spirit — Bush’s Approval Rating On the Rise
Early Xmas present: Today’s PollTrack from National Journal detects a sharp rise in the Worst President Ever’s approval rating. Note: nobody asked us.
After months of headlines about sinking numbers, President Bush might have something to smile about. A new CBS News/New York Times poll reports a 5-point jump in his approval rating — and it’s not the only one.
Bush’s number climbed from 35% in a CBS News poll from about a month ago to 40% in the current survey; his disapproval fell from 57% to 53%.
A few other surveys in recent weeks have recorded similar changes. A Fox News/Opinion Dynamics survey from late November put the rating at 42/48, compared to 36/53 earlier in the month. Polls released within the last week from Quinnipiac University and Time/SRBI don’t have comparison numbers from November, but both show his approval at or above the 40% mark.
CBS/Times pollsters also recorded gains in approval of the president’s handling of Iraq and the economy; numbers were statistically even on his handling of the war on terrorism and foreign policy. The poll’s right-direction indicator rose as well, gaining 4 points to hit 31%. Six in 10 still said the country is on the wrong track, down from 68% in the previous survey.
[…]
Domestic Spying: Transcript of Former Rep. Bob Barr
CNN “Situation Room,” with Wolf Blitzer:
BLITZER: Americans spying on Americans. In a story first reported today by the “New York Times” and confirmed by our own sources here at CNN, President Bush is said to have authorized the super secret National Security Agency to conduct electronic eavesdropping here at home. The president is saying only that he won’t discuss ongoing intelligence operations.
Joining us now are two conservative Republicans who have very different views on this issue. From Atlanta, the former Congressman and CNN contributor, Bob Barr, and from Capitol Hill, California Congressman Dana Rohrabacher.
Congressman Barr, what’s wrong with what the president has decided to do?
BOB BARR, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: What’s wrong with it is several-fold. One, it’s bad policy for our government to be spying on American citizens through the National Security Agency. Secondly, it’s bad to be spying on Americans without court oversight. And thirdly, it’s bad to be spying on Americans apparently in violation of federal laws against doing it without court order.
So it’s bad all around, and we need to get to the bottom of this. BLITZER: Do you agree, Congressman Rohrabacher — I suspect you don’t.
REP. DANA ROHRABACHER, (R) CALIFORNIA: No. What’s really bad is the fact that we have an evil opponent who wants to blow us up and that six months after 3,000 of our American citizens were slaughtered right in front of our eyes, that we were confronted with this challenge. I’m really sorry that we have this kind of evil enemy that wants to slaughter us, but I’m very happy that we have a president that, six months after they slaughtered 3,000 of our citizens, he decided to follow up on a lead that was given to our people by breaking up an al Qaeda cell in Pakistan, and followed through on that to make sure that there wasn’t another imminent attack, and thus probably saving many thousands of American lives. We can be proud of President Bush for protecting us.
BLITZER: Congressman Barr, what do you say?
BARR: Well, the fact of the matter is that the Constitution is the Constitution, and I took an oath to abide by it. My good friend, my former colleague, Dana Rohrabacher, did and the president did. And I don’t really care very much whether or not it can be justified based on some hypothetical. The fact of the matter is that, if you have any government official who deliberately orders that federal law be violated despite the best of motives, that certainly ought to be of concern to us.
ROHRABACHER: 9/11 is not a hypothetical. We are at war.
BARR: No, but the hypothetical is the — the other cases you were talking about.
ROHRABACHER: Bob, now that we are at war, that is not hypothetical. We have an enemy that has decided that they’re going to terrorize the American population by committing mass murder. That is not hypothetical. We are at war, and sometimes at war you —
BLITZER: No, what you were saying, Dana, is that there were other case — those are hypothetical —
ROHRABACHER: No, that’s not — Bob, you haven’t read this. No, that’s not hypothetical at all. One of the cases that was involved in this, was someone who was attempting to blow up the Brooklyn Bridge and because of these wire taps, we were able to stop that.
BARR: No, you’re wrong there, Dana. First of all —
ROHRABACHER: And by the way, how do we know who wasn’t deterred from blowing up other targets. The fact is —
BARR: Well, gee, I guess then the president should be able to ignore whatever provision in the Constitution as long as there’s something after the fact that justifies it.
BARR: Bob, during wartime, you give some powers to the presidency you wouldn’t give in peace time. BARR: Do we have a declaration of war, Dana?
ROHRABACHER: You don’t have to do that.
BARR: We don’t? That makes it even much easier for a president.
ROHRABACHER: No, you just have to make sure that the people of the United States understand that we are at war. They understand that al Qaeda slaughtered 3,000 of our citizens — more people than the Japanese slaughtered at Pearl Harbor.
BLITZER: Congressman — let me interject for a second, Congressman Rohrabacher.
ROHRABACHER: Sure.
BLITZER: Everything you say is true, but why not go through the process of either getting new legislation authorizing this or let the court orders be fully implemented? In other words, before the NSA goes and eavesdrops on Americans, get a court order?
BLITZER: First of all, let us note that all this eavesdropping on Americans were that, there were some people living in the United States, whether they’re American citizens or not — we don’t know how many are American citizens — that were involved with contacts overseas. This is eavesdropping on people who were doing international calls and the list that we got, came from what — came from an al Qaeda cell that we broke up in Pakistan.
I am very pleased that our president didn’t wait around but, instead, ran right forward immediately to try to follow up on this and find out what they were planning. I believe he probably thwarted several major attacks by doing that.
BLITZER: Congressman Barr, do you want to respond to that?
BARR: Here again, this is absolutely a bizarre conversation where you have a member of Congress saying that it’s okay for the president of the United States to ignore U.S. law, to ignore the Constitution, simply because we are in an undeclared war.
The fact of the matter is the law prohibits — specifically prohibits — what apparently was done in this case, and for a member of Congress to say, oh, that doesn’t matter, I’m proud that the president violated the law is absolutely astounding, Wolf.
ROHRABACHER: Not only proud, we can be grateful to this president. You know, I’ll have to tell you, if it was up to Mr. Schumer, Senator Schumer, they probably would have blown up the Brooklyn Bridge. The bottom line is this: in wartime we expect our leaders, yes, to exercise more authority.
Now, I have led the fight to making sure there were sunset provisions in the Patriot Act, for example. So after the war, we go back to recognizing the limits of government. But we want to put the full authority that we have and our technology to use immediately to try to thwart terrorists who are going to — how about have a nuclear weapon in our cities?
BARR: And the Constitution be damned, Dana?
ROHRABACHER: Well, I’ll tell you something, if a nuclear weapon goes off in Washington, DC, or New York or Los Angeles, it’ll burn the Constitution as it does. So I’m very happy we have a president that’s going to wiretap people’s communication with people overseas to make sure that they’re not plotting to blow up one of our cities.
BLITZER: We’re out of time, but Bob Barr, I’ll give you the last word.
BARR: Well, first of all, or last of all, this so-called plot to blow up the Brooklyn Bridge was bogus because it had to do with a group of idiots who were planning to dismantle it with blow torches.
BLITZER: That will have to be the last word and we’re going to continue this discussion down the road. Dana Rohrabacher, Congressman, thanks very much for joining us.
ROHRABACHER: Thank you.
Must See Video of Bush Drunk at Wedding in 1992
VIDEO
George Bush, high at a wedding, in 1992, six years after he supposedly gave up drinking.
Another big lie: Recent reports that George W. Bush has been drinking again are routinely dismissed in the mainstream media who carefully follow the script prepared by Karen Hughes and others that Bush quit drinking in 1986.
But the Smoking Gun has had video online since 2000 of Bush clearly quite sloshed at wedding in 1992.
Imagine for a moment that there was video of a supposedly recovered alcoholic Democratic leader who was obviously drunk six years after he or she claimed to be sober. It would lead the evening news.
The larger question is, did the president ever quit drinking? Is he still drinking now, as many suspect? If so, how much – and is his drinking the cause of his incompetent handling of his duties? Is George Bush’s alcoholism putting the nation’s security at risk?
9/11 Commission Gives Government Failing Grades
Good reasons for Homeland Insecurity: Members of the 9/11 Commission issued a sobering assessment of the Bush administration’ s and Congress’ responses to the commission’s recommendations on how to protect the nation from terrorists. In a sometimes emotional call to action, the commission delivered a report card that underscores th government’s dismal performance.
“Here we are in December of 2005 and our government has still not passed some of the basic reforms to make our citizens a little bit safer,” said commissioner Timothy Roemer, a former Democratic congressman from Indiana. “We are skating on thin ice; that ice is getting thinner and [is] about to crack.”
“If my children were to receive this report card, they would have to repeat a grade,” Roemer said. “We can’t afford to repeat the lessons of 9/11 and the losses of 9/11.”
“When will our government wake up to this challenge?” he asked.
For details on the report, click […]
Worst President Ever: Bush Vs. Buchanan
Worst of the worst: Whether through gross negligence or malfeasance (or both, probably), President Bush has driven the country into a war that has caused the deaths and dismemberments of tens of thousands U.S. service personnel and innocent Iraqi babies, children and men and women – at a financial cost of $250 billion (that we know of). No other president has anything like this besmirchment on his record.
Now the assertion that Bush is the Worst President Ever has even started to trickle up into the mainstream media. Here is Richard Reeves on the subject:
The History News Network at George Mason University has just polled historians informally on the Bush record… This is what those historians said — and it should be noted that some of the criticism about deficit spending and misuse of the military came from self-identified conservatives — about the Bush record:
- He has taken the country into an unwinnable war and alienated friend and foe alike in the process;
- He is bankrupting the country with a combination of aggressive military spending and reduced taxation of the rich;
- He has deliberately and dangerously attacked separation of church and state;
- He has repeatedly “misled,” to use a kind word, the American people on affairs domestic and foreign;
- He has proved to be incompetent in affairs domestic (New Orleans) and foreign (Iraq and the battle against al-Qaida);
- He has sacrificed American employment (including the toleration of pension and benefit elimination) to increase overall productivity;
- He is ignorantly hostile to science and technological progress;
- He has tolerated or ignored one of the republic’s oldest problems, corporate cheating in supplying the military in wartime.
Reeves also compares the failed Bush presidency with the presidency of the man who, until now, was considered by many historians to be the worst president ever – James Buchanan:
Bush Bails On Jury Duty
I’d rather be stacking the Supreme Court: Worst President Ever George W. Bush had to explain that he was too busy running the United States, fighting a global war on terror and trying not to get impeached to report for jury duty.
Bush never received the summons to appear at a court in Crawford, Texas, for jury duty on Monday and the White House only learned about it through media reports, White House spokesliar Scott “I Only Lie When My Lips are Moving” McClellan lied Thursday. Bush, whose ranch is in Crawford, is scheduled to give a speech in North Carolina on Monday.
“We have since called the court to inform them that the president has other commitments on Monday, and that he would like to reschedule his jury duty,” McClellan lied.
“One serious note: jury duty is an important civic responsibility. And it’s important that people do serve,” McClellan lied.
Last week, Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry, served as foreman on a jury for two days at a civil case in Boston.
