View From The Ridge…

With altitude one can gain clarity.

Posts Tagged ‘George Bush

The Treatment of Bush Has Been a Disgrace — WSJ Commentary

leave a comment »

wall-street-journal-2006-logo-125-tm

What must our enemies be thinking?

Earlier this year, 12,000 people in San Francisco signed a petition in support of a proposition on a local ballot to rename an Oceanside sewage plant after George W. Bush. The proposition is only one example of the classless disrespect many Americans have shown the president.

[Commentary]

According to recent Gallup polls, the president’s average approval rating is below 30% — down from his 90% approval in the wake of 9/11. Mr. Bush has endured relentless attacks from the left while facing abandonment from the right.

This is the price Mr. Bush is paying for trying to work with both Democrats and Republicans. During his 2004 victory speech, the president reached out to voters who supported his opponent, John Kerry, and said, “Today, I want to speak to every person who voted for my opponent. To make this nation stronger and better, I will need your support, and I will work to earn it. I will do all I can do to deserve your trust.”

Those bipartisan efforts have been met with crushing resistance from both political parties.

The president’s original Supreme Court choice of Harriet Miers alarmed Republicans, while his final nomination of Samuel Alito angered Democrats. His solutions to reform the immigration system alienated traditional conservatives, while his refusal to retreat in Iraq has enraged liberals who have unrealistic expectations about the challenges we face there.

It seems that no matter what Mr. Bush does, he is blamed for everything. He remains despised by the left while continuously disappointing the right.

Yet it should seem obvious that many of our country’s current problems either existed long before Mr. Bush ever came to office, or are beyond his control. Perhaps if Americans stopped being so divisive, and congressional leaders came together to work with the president on some of these problems, he would actually have had a fighting chance of solving them.

Like the president said in his 2004 victory speech, “We have one country, one Constitution and one future that binds us. And when we come together and work together, there is no limit to the greatness of America.”

To be sure, Mr. Bush is not completely alone. His low approval ratings put him in the good company of former Democratic President Harry S. Truman, whose own approval rating sank to 22% shortly before he left office. Despite Mr. Truman’s low numbers, a 2005 Wall Street Journal poll found that he was ranked the seventh most popular president in history.

Just as Americans have gained perspective on how challenging Truman’s presidency was in the wake of World War II, our country will recognize the hardship President Bush faced these past eight years — and how extraordinary it was that he accomplished what he did in the wake of the September 11 attacks.

The treatment President Bush has received from this country is nothing less than a disgrace. The attacks launched against him have been cruel and slanderous, proving to the world what little character and resolve we have. The president is not to blame for all these problems. He never lost faith in America or her people, and has tried his hardest to continue leading our nation during a very difficult time.

Our failure to stand by the one person who continued to stand by us has not gone unnoticed by our enemies. It has shown to the world how disloyal we can be when our president needed loyalty — a shameful display of arrogance and weakness that will haunt this nation long after Mr. Bush has left the White House.

——————–

Mr. Shapiro is an investigative reporter and lawyer who previously interned with John F. Kerry’s legal team during the presidential election in 2004.

Check out a sampling of responses received to this article here.

Advertisements

Written by Ridgeliner7

Saturday, November 8, 2008 at 9:34:38 PM

Clinton Dems Blast Obama Ties To Big Oil & Deception

leave a comment »

The folks over at Clinton Democrats site are pretty riled up over “The Chosen One’s” cozyness with Big Oil. Everyone should check out their well-sourced article there, by clicking the link above.

Let me give you a little preview of their information:

“Obama Voted For Bush/Cheney Energy Bill, Written In Secret By Industry Lobbyists”
– New York Times

OBAMA’S SUPPORT FOR BUSH/CHENEY ENERGY POLICY

“Sen. Obama voted for the 2005 Energy Bill, written in secret by Vice President Cheney and the energy lobby. Thomas Friedman referred to the bill as “the sum of all lobbies.” U.S. PIRG noted that the bill’s “heavy tilt toward big oil companies reflects the influence of Exxon Mobil and other oil companies on policy-makers in Washington, DC.”

The Washington Post editorialized that the bill was a “piñata of perks for energy industries.” Indeed, the bill contained $6 billion in subsidies to the oil and gas industry and $12 billion to the nuclear power industry.

Although Sen. Obama voted for the legislation, he has spoken as if he opposed it on the campaign trail, criticizing it repeatedly. At a presidential debate he said “You can look at how Dick Cheney did his energy policy…he met with oil and gas companies forty times, and that’s how they put together our energy policy.” He’s attributed the failure of our current energy policy to Congress’s “failure to stand up to the lobbyists.”

Sen. Obama’s rhetoric blasting the policies of Vice President Dick Cheney and energy lobbyists can be stirring. But Obama’s actions haven’t matched his words.”

Click here to read the entire article. It is very damning.

To fully understand exactly how damning Obama’s false charges are against John McCain, one has to know that both John McCain and Hillary Clinton opposed the Bush-Cheney energy bill in 2005. It is very clear Obama is the one who has consistently been in “Big Oil’s” pocket.

A little history….

On April 24, 2008, Mark Halprin writing for The Page, had this item:

Clinton Team Response to Obama Attack on Oil Prices:

Sen. Obama Attacks On Oil Companies! Really?
Clinton Campaign Responds To Sen. Obama Attacks

Senator Obama attacked Senator Clinton today for not standing up to the oil industry. Really? Senator Obama is the only candidate that voted for the Bush-Cheney energy bill and took more money from oil company executives than any other candidate last month:

Clinton spokesman Phil Singer said: “Sen. Obama might say he doesn’t take contributions from oil companies, but he took more money last month from oil company executives than any other candidate. He might say he’ll stand up to the oil companies but he’s the only candidate who voted for the Bush-Cheney energy bill that was written by energy lobbyists and has been called the best energy bill corporations could buy.

“With gas prices this high, talk is cheap. The American people need solutions.”

FACT CHECK:  SENATOR OBAMA RAKES IN OIL MONEY, SUPPORTED ENERGY BILL

  • Sen. Obama accepted more money from oil execs last month than any other candidate

TRUE: Sen. Obama accepted more money from oil company executives last month than any other candidate, while he ran an ad saying he didn’t take money from oil companies. “Sen. Barack Obama continued accepting donations from oil company executives and employees last month [March, 2008] even as he aired ads in which he stated he took no oil company money, his campaign finance reports show. Obama has taken at least $263,000 from oil company executives, family members and employees since entering the presidential race last year, including $46,000 last month. [March, 2008] At least $140,000 has come in chunks of between $1,000 and $2,300, the maximum permitted under federal law.” Obama’s [LA Times, 4/24/08]

  • Sen. Obama Voted For The Bush/Cheney 2005 Energy Bill

TRUE: Sen. Obama voted for the 2005 Energy Bill, Hillary opposed: [H.R. 6, Vote #213, 07/29/05]

  • With 2005 Energy Bill, Energy Lobby Got What They Paid For

TRUE: Washington Post: 2005 Energy Bill was ‘a piñata of perks for energy industries’: The Washington Post said, “…The energy bill, touted as a way to reduce dependence on foreign oil or moderate gasoline prices, has been turned into a piñata of perks for energy industries.” [Washington Post, 7/30/05]

  • Sen. Obama Has Acknowledged Pernicious Influence Of Lobbyists On Energy Policy He supported

TRUE: Obama: ‘You can look at how Dick Cheney did his energy policy…he met with oil and gas companies forty times, and that’s how they put together our energy policy’: “The one thing I have to remind folks, though, of – we’ve been talking about this through Republican administrations and Democratic administrations for decades. And the reason it doesn’t change – you can take a look at how Dick Cheney did his energy policy. He met with environmental groups one, he met with renewable energy folks once, and then he met with oil and gas companies forty times, and that’s how they put together our energy policy. We’ve got to put the national interest ahead of the special interest, and that’s what I’ll do when I’m President of the United States.” [Democratic Presidential Debate, 7/23/07]

It was a fine populist riff calculated to appeal to Democratic audiences as Obama seeks his party’s presidential nomination. But not only did Obama vote for the Senate’s big energy bill in 2005, he also put out a press release bragging about its provisions, and his Senate Web site carries a news article about the vote headlined, “Senate energy bill contains goodies for Illinois.” [The Politico, 3/26/07]

I guess Senator Obama, being “The Chosen One” didn’t count on anyone remembering today, in August 2008, what he voted for in 2005, and spoke out against in a Presidential Debate in 2007, yet bragged about on his Senate webpage just a few months before the debate quoted above!

Please feel free to use the information above, and that in the included links, as documentation in spreading the word about this heinous liar. I am now completely convinced that John McCain is a better choice than Obama. The shitpile of lies and untruths has just gotten too high around this man, and his campaign, like in his attack today, saying McCain is in the pocket of the oil companies, is beginning to stink like a rotten corpse.

Wright, FISA, Guns & Now Ludacris: Pattern Is Obvious

with 2 comments

No one can say the Obama staff doesn’t at least partially learn from their mistakes…..

After allowing the Reverend Wright controversy to fester and damage his campaign for months, at least the Obama Campaign reacted fairly swiftly in putting distance between the hate speech of Ludacris in his most recent video.  Problem is, they continue to want their cake and eat it too.  In denouncing the lyrics, Obama and his staff continue to praise this despicable hater.  And that lies at the center of people’s misgivings about Senator Obama.

Saying Ludacris should be “ashamed of himself” for the lyrics he used, and then praising him for being a talented artist and good businessman, they completely negate their condemnation.  This is a replay of the Jerimah Wright business, where Obama distanced himself from that haters more inflammatory statements, yet continued to say what a close, personal friend and mentor the man was.

If this was just about those two unhinged haters, Senator Obama would be entitled by any fair-minded individual, to the benefit of the doubt.  But it is pretty clear this is about character, basic fundamental character. The lack of it.

  • Obama, going after Hillary Clinton tooth and nail, hammered her unmercifully over FISA.  Obama stated dozens of times the telecoms shouldn’t be granted immunity from lawsuits, and he would join other Senators in filibustering it if necessary, during the primaries.  As soon as he was assured the nomination, barely a week after, he voted for the measure.
  • During the primary season Obama rarely missed a chance to denigrate President Bush’s No Child Left Behind program and his Faith Based Initiative.  Now Obama, post primaries, has endorsed both, and more than endorsed, called for expanding both of them!
  • He promised to abide by and accept Public Financing of his campaign, and the attendant spending limits that would mean, only to go back on his word once he captured the nomination.
  • What little Obama is on the record as saying about gun control, shows he was for it, and believed the Second Amendment permitted strict regulation and/or banning of them. Now, with it important to capturing Independent and Republican voters, he not only endorsed the recent Supreme Court ruling on the District of Columbia’s banning of handguns, he took it a step further, saying the Court’s ruling was in line with his feelings all along!  I actually looked up at that time, looking for the house I just knew was hurtling from the heavens to land on him……
  • And of course there is the “Surge”. He was against it from the beginning. Now he says that isn’t so. And of course, Obama says he isn’t prepared to say it has worked, nor would that fact, if he were to accept its truth, cause him to support it now.

Given the above, and several dozen other reversals, the pattern is clear and set.  Apologists try to paint his about-faces as Obama’s evolution of thought, or a refinement.  That is BS.  I respect anyone having a legitimate change of heart.  Senator McCain, on drilling, for instance, was straight enough to explain that what made a sensible stance when oil was thirty-five dollars per barrel, wasn’t at all reasonable or sensible when it was over $100. In my book that isn’t flipping or flopping, but evaluating policy in light of more current conditions.

From the Surge to guns, from FISA to No Child Left Behind, to even injecting racism and gender into the campaign, it is clear Barack Obama and his team are prepared to do or say anything to get elected, to sell out any supporter or friend in order to get power.

Part of the dangerous game Obama & Company are playing is giving all these shifting positions the old “wink and nod” to his hard-core supporters…..letting them perceive that Obama hasn’t really changed at all, and is merely saying what is necessary to win–to stop that horrible McCain.  Then, once in the White House, he will somehow revert back to the “Good Barack” they flocked to and supported. Such talk is rampant in the thousands of “My Barack Obama” (http://www.mybarackobama.com) website groups.  His advisors evidently believe the cult of personality they have developed around Obama will be able to ride out the eventual disenchantment and fury when most his supporters realize they have been played.

I wonder. If their gamble is wrong, people will take to the streets.

Tony Snow dies at 53 of cancer

leave a comment »

Tony Snow, the former White House press secretary and conservative pundit who bedeviled the press corps and charmed millions as a FOX News television and radio host, died Saturday after a long bout with cancer. He was 53. A syndicated columnist, editor, TV anchor, radio show host and musician, Snow worked in nearly every medium in a career that spanned more than 30 years. Snow died at 2 a.m. Saturday at Georgetown University Hospital in Washington, D.C.

“Laura and I are deeply saddened by the death of our dear friend Tony Snow,” President Bush said in a written statement. “The Snow family has lost a beloved husband and father. And America has lost a devoted public servant and a man of character.”

Snow joined FOX in 1996 as the original anchor of “FOX News Sunday” and hosted “Weekend Live” and a radio program, “The Tony Snow Show,” before departing in 2006.

“It’s a tremendous loss for us who knew him, but it’s also a loss for the country,” Roger Ailes, chairman of FOX News, said Saturday morning about Snow, calling him a “renaissance man.”

He leaves behind his wife and 3 children.

read more | digg story

Written by Ridgeliner7

Saturday, July 12, 2008 at 10:39:27 AM