…what does that say about the judgment of all those leftists who supported, elected and defended them all these years.
What does it say about those same people’s judgment of Obama? Nothing good.
[Update: Notice how the first poster manages to change the subject from the poor judgement of leftist to a discussion of the worst U.S. presidents. He’s good at that technique.]
20 thoughts on “If the Clintons Are Racist…”
what is to be said of those who supported George W. Bush, the worst president this nation has had, and supported him for a second term?
“What does it say about those same people’s judgment of Obama? Nothing good.”
And what does it say about Obama? What a bubbling stew. I was worrying that there was some sanity, leadership qualities, and reasonableness in the DNC and, particularly, in the Obama camp since I believe that McCain could not have won vs the Obama-Clinton ticket. So, the mirror of the “same people” in viewing Obama clarifies the steadily growing perception of vacuousness. He can’t mend the fences. He’s not astute enough to realize what needed to be done and/or not able get it together in the one area (the political arena) where we expect he has the most expertise.
what is to be said of those who supported George W. Bush, the worst president this nation has had, and supported him for a second term
It says they disagree with you.
Only if you forget President Carter.
Dear Ms. Love: You’ve given the only good reason for voting Obama into office: by electing a black president, we’ll have proved that we Americans are not racist. No more need for affirmative action or guilt. The catch of course is that such an election would prove nothing of the kind to the left, which will see America as inherently racist and evil today, tomorrow, and forever. The “Mission Accomplished” banner will continue to recede into the distance. No wonder the left jumped on that ill-starred banner, and will never let it go.
I don’t know if you saw Jacob Weisberg’s contemptible rant on this topic in SLATE on 22 August:
Shorter Weisberg: Racism is the only reason Obama could lose. If we don’t elect Obama, the world will turn up its nose at us. Of all Weisberg’s idiocies, this will rank high. Consider: no G-8 country has elected a black man head of government/head of state. But Canada, Germany, and Britain have had a woman as head of government, and France has had a woman running for head of state. Ergo, they will turn their noses up at us for rejecting Hillary. But if you told that to Weisberg, he’d give you the trademarked SLATE sneer, and tell you how stupid you were.
Shannon, you need to put “I’m a guy!” at the end of every one of your posts.
Woodrow Wilson and FDR were much worse than Bush, Carter, and Nixon.
And jeeez, don’t forget about Buchanan, who is the hands-down choice for worst U.S. president ever. Pretty much by acclamation.
It’s as if some people never learned any U.S. history. Get a little perspective here.
Steven Den Beste,
Shannon, you need to put “I’m a guy!” at the end of every one of your posts.
I’m only a guy when I write about military or technical issues. I’m female when I write about families, children or culture. At least, that what I infer from the pattern of address.
I prefer to leave matters ambiguous. That way, my ideas stand out and not me.
Only soft minds absorbed the media propaganda about Bush. The rest of us have plotted success after success, most of which were gained with bipartisan support.
1. the EP3 incident (remember China’s “cowboy” pilot almost killed our guys and gals, the CCP held them prisoner for weeks).
2. the $1.2 Trillion in tax cuts (remember Daschle with the Lexus and the muffler!)
3. formation of the the Dept. of Homeland Security.
4. African aid initiative after initiative.
5. Injection of NATO forces into Afghanistan and institution of the present Karzai government.
6. Congressional authorization to use force in Iraq.
7. Overthrow of Hussein.
8. Reformation of a functional, Republican Iraq
9. Reconstitution of France’s, Germany’s and Italy’s pro-American leadership.
10. Put the spotlight on Tehran’s nuclear program.
11. I could go on…
Look, you may not like Republicans, or capitalism, or Texans in general, but in order to say that Bush “was the worst President in US history,” you have to ignore scores of ini-your-face facts.
Which makes your brain look soft to me. Sar!
steveaz, your opinion of our president is just yours alone. Many others agree with you but many others do not. Your self-righteous bandinage will not persuade people, especially here. I suggest you move on.
correction – badinage.
another correction – that was for Lapides, not for Steveas
This is what happens when you are phyisically ill. I apologize.
Are you sure the word you want is badinage, Rachel?
Leave the general election voters alone. They get it right more often than not. And with the internet the MSM can no longer control the information flow giving voters more information choices.
After all, the voters in effect drove the surge by giving the Dems the Congress which forced Bush to make a move. If the Republicans had retained Congress we’d probably still have Rumsfeld in charge.
Is that Fred Lapides from Goodshit.phlap.net?
And say what you will – Jimmah Earl Carter holds the unique distinction of being at once the Worst President Ever and the Worst Ex-President Ever in the history of the universe. Retire the title.
Meep, don’t you know? The world does not exist until you are twenty.
“Of all Weisberg’s idiocies, this will rank high.”
Give the man time. He can easily surpass himself – after all, the post-election explanation of an Obama loss could be “it was stolen by racist Republicans” rather than just racist Republicans winning fair and square.
Lefties think Bush is the worst President in US history because he smashed their precious Vietnam syndrome. That was their whole world, their glass menagerie.
The Democrat’s supposed support of the Afghan war…the “good war”, was just a way for them to criticize the Iraq war and look credible to the average Joe. You can bet that if we never invaded Iraq, these same Democrats would be wringing their hands over the lack of genuine change taking place in this most primitive of backwoods countries, and saying things like “you see, even the richest most powerful nation in the world cannot exert its will over the poorest nation in the world because ‘war accomplishes nothing'”. Idiots like George Clooney and John Mellencamp couldn’t have said it any better in Vanity Fair or Rolling Stone.
It kills these people to know that most Americans, even if they disagree with Bush and think he’s not too bright, was actually motivated by a sincere desire to protect his country as oppposed to all the sinister conspiracy theories that they sprinkle in their arugula and goat cheese salads (with sundried tomatoes).
Well, let it be said of this Massachusetts resident, after watching Kerry mailing it in for 18 years (quick, name one piece of legislation sponsored by Kerry), that he voted for the guy who at least took the job seriously. Kerry used his time in Washington to pursue girls for fun and heiresses for profit. I have no objection to him doing so on his own time, but not on the public dime. If you actually try to read a transcript of what he says, you will see that he says one thing, and when challenged, starts out with “Not necessarily” and says the opposite. He starts a sentence, interrupts himself, and wanders off into a swamp of dependent clauses, sounding like Norm Crosby on drugs. The man is a $300 haircut on a $2 head.
Maybe we should select our presidents by a national lottery instead of a vote. The last half dozen elections have offered some pretty poor choices.
Comments are closed.