Bush Derangement Syndrome
In today’s least surprising news, The Washington Times reports that various Democrats are preparing to run in 2010 on platforms of re-re-iterating just how downright mean and nasty the 43rd POTUS was (and evil! Mustn’t forget to include evil!).
Yeah, this one’s gotten old, already.
We’d better get used to it, though. As with so many things, the United Kingdom provides a window to the future for what lies ahead for US conservatives. Despite having been in power there for 12 years now, the Labour Party still runs against opponents whom they defeated all that time ago, barely cognizant of how the Conservative Party has changed in the interceding years.
But why stop with President Bush? There’s no statute of limitations, is there? So why not make it party policy to equate modern Republicans with Herbert Hoover, thus drawing a straight line between the Great Depression and its modern variant (in that inimitable Democratic way of making nonsensical mental leaps that would make even Rep. Alcee Hastings proud)?
Oh, that’s why: because it’s stupid.
This either speaks to the stupidity of the politicians (in rehashing an exhausted tactic from yesteryear) or the stupidity of the electorate (in potentially falling for this alleged “strategy” so soon after its last deployment), but I’m not sure which. Let’s split the difference – there’s plenty enough stupid to go around.
Forget the so-called personal anecdotes, character-assassination pieces and Democratic/media hysteria.
Those who know President Bush almost unanimously portray him as charming, personable and a history buff. The first MBA president (Woodrow Wilson – the man who segregated Washington D.C., let it never be forgotten – was the first with a PhD), he had a higher GPA at Yale than John Kerry. He also had substantial private sector experience, the success of which I’ll leave up to you.
He did make mistakes. Some quite large. And he knows that the Left will cravenly denounce them at every opportunity.
So it reveals the dignity of the man that he won’t criticize President Obama, because the president “deserves my silence.” Remember that, creatures of the Left, or has your selective-amnesia kicked in once again?
That’s called civility (n. ci·vil·i·ty).
Former Presidents Clinton and Carter, please take note.
Unfortunately for President Bush and us, however, it is now official Democratic Party policy to blame him for anything that goes wrong anywhere until 2067.
Cross-posted at The Green Room.
September 22nd, 2009 at 12:37
I actually prefer that the Democrats take this approach. It’s just plain stupid and they deserve the results. When Bush proposed further regulation of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac it was the Democrats that stood in his way. When the financial collapse was beginning it was the Democrats that were in the majority in both houses of Congress. And their oversight was where?
Now that they are the majority of the legislative and administrative branches of government, whatever nonsense they used as an excuse for inaction before will not bamboozle the voters again.
I don’t know that the Republicans can take back the majority of seats in Congress but they will certainly gain enough leverage to keep the Dims in check and force bipartisan solutions. I look forward to that happy day.
ithitsthefan´s last blog ..President Barack Newspeak’s NON Tax
September 22nd, 2009 at 13:51
Track: I that story on Drudge this AM and thought it astonishing. But I’m wondering whether those districts that will run on BDS “energy” would go Dem anyway out of sheer laziness and lack of ideas, i.e., they’re already gerrymandered as Dem?
I suppose that’s a good a point you make about Britain and the conservatives and all, but does Britain have the equivalent of a Middle America, a place where things have to play in Peoria?
chickenlittle´s last blog ..Rock Band Rocks!
September 22nd, 2009 at 13:55
oops! “I saw” not “I that”
chickenlittle´s last blog ..Rock Band Rocks!
September 22nd, 2009 at 14:25
[...] Track-a-’Crat: This either speaks to the stupidity of the politicians (in rehashing an exhausted tactic from [...]
September 22nd, 2009 at 15:14
ithitsthefan – very astute view, I like it. Let the Democrats expose their vapidity by running against someone who’s no longer in office. That’s a winning strategy, if ever I heard one.
chickenlittle – thank you for the traffic you’ve sent this way (your site’s been added to my blogroll). Thoughtful comment, too. There’s nowhere in the UK that acts as a political barometer (of, if there is, I’ve never heard of it). Since the mid-1990s, though, there’s been no need, such has been the level of public contempt towards the Tories. That, at least, is finally changing…
Love the mental image that you’ve conjured in my mind of such lazy Democrats that they simply pull out all the all signs and play recordings of their speeches/demagoguery from preceding years!
September 22nd, 2009 at 19:14
Right, W was born with a silver spoon, that he abused throughout his life. Kerry, Obama, Clinton, weren’t they all from more humble beginnings? Didn’t they have to work extra hard, particularly Obama? Haven’t they succeeded without the insiders helping hand, the same hand the cons are furious to maintain, and pass to their own children? W always took the easy way out, and here and now our country flounders, not necessarily because of him but because of the voters who voted for him. And now you want Palin? The not really so beautiful queen that has coasted through life on her mediocre looks. Please, cons, try substance next time, not superficial. We barely survived W. We certainly will not survive Palin. Thanks.
September 22nd, 2009 at 19:49
Track – While although not a fan of GW in the slightest, smashed the conservative movement to smithereens), I can see your point here. It is the height of lunacy for the Dems to bring Bush back from the grave, so to speak. It shows their vacuous ideology. It shows their hand. It shows their lunacy. Their boy, by the way, has already done more damage to the republic in 8 months than GWB did in 8 years.
left coast rebel´s last blog ..9/12 Protest Count – The Number of Protesters from Zac Moilanen at Indiana University
September 22nd, 2009 at 20:49
RayGun Says: Your comment is awaiting moderation.
September 22nd, 2009 at 19:14
–
Damn, Trac, what’s the deal? Are you censoring me again?
September 22nd, 2009 at 20:50
Michael Medved played a clip today of Jimmy Carter, during the Democratic campaign, calling Barak Obama a Black Boy. Lol…
The Kid´s last blog ..Obama was Going to Hit the Ground Running
September 22nd, 2009 at 21:05
Ray, no idea at all why the site’s still doing that to your comments – it’s never happened to anyone else before.
No-one here’s said anything about support – or otherwise – for Palin as president. She’s infinitely more capable than Biden, though.
And what’s all this about Obama succeeding “without the insiders helping hand?”
He’s nothing but an insider! He’s the ultimate insider! He’s been groomed by shadowy figures for decades! He’s the most pure incarnation ever, anywhere, of the manufactured politician!
September 22nd, 2009 at 21:17
“He’s been groomed by shadowy figures for decades!”
–
Good God, Track, is he the Anti-Christ?
September 22nd, 2009 at 21:18
Now, now with the hysteria, Ray!
I’m talking about his Harvard enrollment, etc…
September 22nd, 2009 at 21:26
“Now, now with the hysteria, Ray!
I’m talking about his Harvard enrollment, etc…”
–
Poor black kid with Muslim father, having all these insider connections… Sounds fishy to me. Or maybe You Know Who is involved, or maybe the Trilateral Commission? Who are his groomers again?
September 22nd, 2009 at 21:55
(Deep breath) Khalid Al-Mansour, Jeremiah Wright, Father Pfleger, Bill Ayers, Bernadine Dohrn, Frank Marshall Davis, Mike Klonsky, Rashid Khalidi, and so on, etc, ad finitum…
Any of those names ring a bell, Ray?
September 22nd, 2009 at 22:06
If the likes on your list groomed Obama, and he won the presidency, you cons have a lot to worry about. If that paltry list can defeat the big business list of the banking/wall-street crony’s on the right, then you are all in deep …
Maybe you cons need to call in your key player?
September 22nd, 2009 at 22:11
That’s merely the tip of the iceberg, Ray, the lunatic icing on top of the moderately mental cake.
As much as I enjoy our evening sparring, approving your comments is killing me!
Bed time now – same place, same time tomorrow?
September 22nd, 2009 at 22:13
If they keep up the racism mantra and start in on the Bush lied business, it could be a good year for the GOP.
Hythloday´s last blog ..Biden Threatens Nation With a New Era of Bipartisanship
September 22nd, 2009 at 23:22
It’s the Jerry Springer administration.
Sonic Ninja Kitty´s last blog ..“Most Wanted”s End Up Turning Stomachs
September 23rd, 2009 at 08:07
Sorry Track, I was not being a very considerate troll and had already gone to bed.
I put in email address, so now maybe posts will go through automatically once you ok it again.
September 23rd, 2009 at 08:54
So – being born into a wealthy family and using that wealth and position to further your life is a bad thing?
Then how do you explain the rampant lovefest over Teddy Kennedy (and the Kennedy’s in general)? If you want to talk about someone who used and abused his family’s wealth and power – to the great detriment of a certain campaign worker in 1966 – then I’m all ears.
Clinton, Obama, etc… yes they may have come from humble means and rose to the top. But you have to ask yourself at what price to the people around them? Just because they rose above their circumstances doesn’t make them saints.
Just as someone with wealth and power isn’t automatically a demon.
Kris, in New England´s last blog ..Schooling
September 23rd, 2009 at 17:51
“So – being born into a wealthy family and using that wealth and position to further your life is a bad thing?”
—
Hmmm, “furthur your life”… never mind.
Ok, I think that W and Palin, for example, didn’t experience what they needed to early in life, to help them build character. They seem to lack any depth, and maybe it’s not their fault. Again, I don’t blame W and Palin for who they are, I blame people that follow them, for who they aren’t.
W and Palin, they seem to be more interested in “replenishing the coffers”, as W so eloquently expressed.
I never paid much mind to Kennedy, but he seems to have devoted his life to public service. Helping the poor, like Carter and others.
September 24th, 2009 at 10:08
Oh yes, Teddy Kennedy is a saint. The fact that he let a person drown to save his own skin is something to be glossed over, allowed to become a footnote to his illustrious story.
Sure he devoted his life to public service. Would that he could have devoted some of that devotion to saving Mary Jo Kopechne.
And you think Obama isn’t “replenishing his coffers”? Interesting how capitalism is a dirty word for conservatives, but for liberals it seems to be an OK thing to pursue.
Just ask Michael Moore.
Kris, in New England´s last blog ..Qu’ils Mangent de la Brioche*