Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

George Bush did NOT keep us safe for eight years.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
Stinky The Clown Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-01-08 02:24 PM
Original message
George Bush did NOT keep us safe for eight years.
Has everyone forgotten 9/11?

Has everyone forgotten the (unsolved, I might add) anthrax attacks?

Has everyone forgotten how low our esteem has sunk world wide?

Has everyone forgotten that our hatred quotient has risen while he was in charge?

Has everyone forgotten the ongoing, internally perpetrated attack on our liberties and privacy and constitutional rights?

Has everyone forgotten ......... ?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Parche Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-01-08 02:25 PM
Response to Original message
1. who said he did?
:shrug: :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stinky The Clown Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-01-08 02:26 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. It is among the latest right wing talking points
It followed on after the "we're a center-right country" bullshit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sfam Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-01-08 02:30 PM
Response to Reply #2
5. As I pointed out in my thread on this, pretty much this is an acknowledgement...
that there is nothing of merit that they can count to as an accomplishment of the Bush administration, so they are left with something we have previously taken for granted with the vast majority of Presidents - that the President was at least competent enough that most of us lived through the term.

Its just that in Bush's case, 3000+ civilians didn't live through it...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spinbaby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-01-08 02:28 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. Probably just some fat clown on the radio
The same one that thinks the Walmart stampede proves there's no recession because people still have money to shop.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Winterblues Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-01-08 02:27 PM
Response to Original message
3. How about the Washington sniper
I would call that terrorism...I guess he doesn't consider americans overseas as being "us"...How many contractors have been killed or injured in Iraq or Afghanistan?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stinky The Clown Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-01-08 02:31 PM
Response to Reply #3
6. Ya know ..... I was gunna list the sniper, but I reconsidered
Technically, it was a federal matter because he crossed state lines, but the fact is, it was really a local issue (greater DC area) and a local crime.

But yeah .... that one could have gone either way. Since we don't need it to show what a fuckup Idiot Son is, I left it as a local thing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
90-percent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-01-08 02:34 PM
Response to Reply #3
7. Contractor death count
is in the vicinity of 600 to 800, if I remember correctly?

These poor bastards are really off the world radar for the Iraq War casualty count, much like the some say upwards of a million to a low of maybe one hundred thousand Iraqi civilians that were collaterally damaged to death from our benevolent peace keeping mission in their country for the last five years.

The good news is that you can pull down over $100,0000 per year as an overseas contractor in a war zone. the bad news is that you may not live to collect it.

PLUS

A BIG PLUS HERE:

Didn't Bush make some decree with the current Iraq government that Blackwater types could be stripped of their immunity for prosecution of war crimes or violating the laws of Iraq?

These guys were running around with what they thought was a license to kill, and then, whoops, Bush pulled another fast one. More correctly, a fast betrayal. If he screw over our troops, why wouldn't he also screw over his own mercenaries?

-90% Jimmy
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sfam Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-01-08 02:57 PM
Response to Reply #3
10. It really sucked living in the DC area back then, but this wasn't George's problem...
I'll blame Bush for quite a bit, but I don't think the Sniper case is among them. After all, the pieces of shit who did this ended up only interested in extorting the area for money - this hardly qualifies as a Presidential concern.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fireweed247 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-01-08 02:36 PM
Response to Original message
8. He let(planned) 911 happen
So now we are supposed to be happy they haven't done it again.

They might have done it again, but they already got everything they wanted with the first attack.

It sure was mighty brave how Bush ignored "Bin Laden determined to attack' on his month long vacation. Equally amazing how he managed to have NORAD stand down with no air force interceptors sent for over an hour. His buddy Rumsfeld really deserves an award. He is the only person in the world who had no idea the attacks were taking place until a plane hit the pentagon. Wow, I feel so protected.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JohnnyBoots Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-01-08 02:40 PM
Response to Original message
9. One word: Katrina.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Oeditpus Rex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-01-08 03:17 PM
Response to Original message
11. The flaw in the logic:
It presupposes that further attacks on the U.S. were planned, but foiled. There have been, of course, attacks in other parts of the world, which points out the Americentrism in the claim — "As long as we haven't been attacked, everything's all right." But then, we already knew that about the RWers.

Also, if this credit can be given to W, it can also be given to every president from FDR to Ford, as there were no acts of war or terrorism on American soil from the Battle of the Aleutian Islands in 1943 to the seize of the U.S. Embassy in Tehran in 1979. (And, remember — that includes the hottest time of the Cold War, when a great many Americans feared an attack by the Soviet Union was imminent.) But, since the RWers' criteria apparently discounts attacks not within the borders of the 50 U.S. states, that credit can be extended through to Bush the Elder.

Anyway, the premise boils down to "We haven't been attacked while W was president since the last time we were attacked while W was president."



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RetiredTrotskyite Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-01-08 03:45 PM
Response to Original message
12. Safe?
The only time this country is gonna be even remotely safe is the day that asshole leaves office! He couldn't even keep the oath he took to defend the Constitution!

Safe? Let's see: 2,900+ dead on 9/11
5,000+ dead in the Iraq war
? dead of various natural disasters


Oh yeah, he kept us real safe for 8 years.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spanone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-01-08 03:52 PM
Response to Original message
13. yep, according to recent history george w bu$h* was president in 2001
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon Apr 29th 2024, 02:34 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC