Tuesday, January 13, 2009

Bush's goodbye

Did anyone catch clips from his press conference yesterday?? It is truly amazing how oblivious he is to what he's done the last 8 years and how he can make excuses for everything and never take any responsibility for anything.

His mistakes: The "Mission Accomplished" Banner photo op. and some of his rhetoric (and understatement to say the least)

Disappointments: Lack of WMD in Iraq. (Forget that this was supposedly THE reason for going to war.)

Katrina: What he claims went wrong here was that he didn't decide whether or not to land Air Force One in Louisianna. Per Bush, "The government's response was not slow, 30,000 people were taken off of roofs after the flooding" (Although, they had no food or water for days)

And he didn't take one iota of responsibility for the Economic mess that we're in.

And he basically admitted that he okay'd torturing detainees. Have you seen footage of waterboarding? It's horrible and it's a violation of one's civil rights.

But, he won't say any of these things are mistakes. Just disappointments.

13 comments:

Cynthiaa said...

See ya bush...BYE BYE.

mommapolitico said...

Okay, Jen, just a little too weird! We blogged alomost point-for-point! The Hubby gave me grief about taking notes...I couldn't write down the idiocy spewing from Bush's mouth fast enough, so I had to pause, rewind, etc. (Hey, I'm the first to admit I'm a wonk...)
You are dead on, though, Girlfriend. The guy is in Wonderland or something. Maybe the rumor is true and he HAS started drinking again! That'd sure explain a lot!
Great post, Liberal Mom!

Monkey Girl said...

Bush is already trying to rewrite history. And guess what? It'll happen. Bush has been a royal f@%k up as our president, and I'm sure he'll never see it that way. He's an idiot...why change now?

patrick said...

Unemployment just rose to 7.2 percent nationally.

Foreclosures increased by 81% in 2008. 2.3 million people lost their homes last year.

And the U.S. Government, MY bankrupt government, is borrowing emergency funding for a Presidential inauguration?

Hey look! This is what the New York Times opined about Bush’s 2005 inauguration, a paltry affair that cost one-fourth of what Obama’s is estimated to be:

Ordinary citizens might have hoped that the overriding issue in Washington - the perilous Iraq war, with its drain on the nation’s blood and treasure - would dictate restraint. But plans for the four-day extravaganza roll forward with nine celebratory balls…

Hmm.

I’m working 7 days a week to meet my financial obligations, so unfortunately I don’t have much time to provide additional commentary. But really, what’s left to say?

150 Million Dollars.

patrick said...

Teetering on the brink of the worst economic disaster in nearly a century, the United States is hosting a $150 million inaugural celebration for Barack Hussein Obama, as reported by the Guardian of U.K:

President Barack Obama’s inauguration…is set to be the most expensive ever, predicted to reach over $150m…This dwarfs the $42.3m spent on George Bush’s inauguration in 2005 and the $33m spent on Bill Clinton’s in 1993.

Part of the spending includes emergency funding announced by the White House on Tuesday to help with the soaring costs. Most of this new federal funding will be to deal with the huge influx of people, estimated 1.5 million to 2 million.

Jen said...

You cannot even compare the damage that Bush has done with extra spending on an Inauguration. With the reference made to Barack "Hussein" Obama, I am assuming you got this from a right wing website.

Given that this is a historic event, surely some extra money can be provided, esp given the amount of people that are traveling to the area. A lot of those costs are for added security....

Sounds like sour grapes to me.

patrick said...

RIGHT WING the Guardian (UK newspaper) why, cause they chose to use his FULL name?

What I am saying Jen is that do we really need to spend all of this money since we are in a major recession? I guess you missed that point!

patrick said...

Found this interesting Jen, any feedback?

that when Obama was elected in November, every third political cartoonist seemed to use an image of a celebrating Lincoln to comment upon the milestone that had occurred. Lincoln, they told us, would have been overjoyed.

Actually, Lincoln likely would have been appalled. How could he not? He was a 19th century white man who famously said in 1858 that "there is a physical difference between the white and black races, which . . . will forever forbid the two races living together upon terms of social and political equality.''

How do you reconcile that with all those cartoons of Lincoln congratulating Obama? You don't. You simply recognize it for what it is: yet another illustration of how shallow our comprehension of history is, yet another instance where myth supersedes reality.


You can read the rest here,
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/
338/story/59958.html

Jen said...

Yes, my feedback is that no one knows how Lincoln would have reacted to Obama's election b/c he's not here to say. And honestly, is that what we're worried about at this time?

There are physical differences between white/black races. Esp from a health perspective.. there are certain disease that they are more prone to have... ie hypertension, stroke, etc. But there is no indication that the races won't ever be able to coincide together. That's just pure rubbish.

patrick said...

Nope not worried Jen. But since Obama is comparing himself to Lincoln I find it interesting.

But there is no indication that the races won't ever be able to coincide together. That's just pure rubbish.

200 plus years and we are still waiting Jen,still waiting!

Cynthiaa said...

Miss you! Don't know where ya have been.

BUT! TOMORROW IS THE DAY! AHHH!

Jen said...

Cynthia... Love that you keep on me to post. haha!
Yay, 1/20/09 is nearly here!

Monkey Girl said...

Blah.blah.blah.