1. President Bush was famous for lacking “intellectual curiosity”, while President Obama has been called “the smartest guy ever to become President.” Which one reads more books, Bush or Obama?

2. Bush was often considered to be in the grip of Big Oil. In contrast, Obama was a Harvard educated lawyer. Which industry contributed more than five times as much as the other to politicians: the oil & gas industry or lawyers/law firms?

3. Bush’s Christian faith was at the core of his political identity, and he was considered to be in the grip of the “religious right”, while Obama is considered more open-minded. In fact, Obama has said, “my faith is one that admits some doubt.” Which one refers to Jesus more in public speeches?

4. Bush was criticized for excessive federal spending and running up huge deficits. Bush’s deficit in 2008 was the largest in history. In fact, President Obama said,

“It’s a little hard for me to take criticism from folks about this recovery package after they’ve presided over a doubling of the national debt… What I won’t do is return to the failed theories of the last eight years that got us into this fix in the first place.”

Whose deficit was more than triple the size of the other’s: Bush’s 2008 deficit or Obama’s 2009 deficit?

Ah, yes, a post-Bush era Bushism, God bless him!

While Bush’s speech was mostly eloquent and free of the language gaffes he admits he is famous for, he said he regretted appearing in front of a “Mission Impossible” sign during a televised address in 2003. The controversial banner referring to the U.S. mission in Iraq, actually said “Mission Accomplished.”

Last Thursday, about 300 protesters in Montreal brought on the effigy-burning and shoe-throwing, like it was old times again:

Read the rest of this entry »

Federal officials have said it is unlikely that Canada can supply sufficient doses of vaccine quickly enough, but that problem has nothing to do with [this administration's] refusal to allow imports of cheaper Canadian drugs, as the ad suggests.

Ahhh, the duplicity and hypocrisy of time….

Bookworm Room offers a study in contrast between the Decider-in-Chief and the Waffler-in-Chief who yearns for his glory days of being able to simply vote “present” in his handling of Afghanistan. He certainly talked up a good game….up until the moment when it matters the most.

Lucianne.com:

Every now and then
we like to run this picture

Sure, left wingers can come up with talking points, and soundbites, but over the past few weeks I’ve noticed that there are 10 core questions that most on the far left cannot seem to answer with any substance. Pass em on, try em out, and enjoy the mindfreak.

1. If all the world hated America because of George W Bush’s 2003 invasion of Iraq….then why was America attacked on Sept 11, 2001; 2yrs before that invasion?
2. Why has Al Queda been trying to exterminate every American for the past 17yrs?
3. Did you want Bush to fail in Iraq, or did you want America to succeed?
4. Given that Osama left Afghanistan in 2001, and Al Queda was largely destroyed in Afghanistan in 2002, how did the Bush Administration “take its eye off the ball [Afghanistan] by invading Iraq” in 2003?
5. What caused the great recession of 2007?

Read the rest of this entry »

And he answers the “blame Bush” theme still so prevalent in the Obama Administration!

On CNN’s State of the Union program on Sunday (transcript), White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel was questioned about the Obama Administration’s indeciviseness in Afghanistan. Attempting to change the subject, Rahm fell back on the standard “blame Bush” defense suggesting that Afghanistan was just another mess that they had to clean up.

You have literally got into a situation, is there another way you can do this? And the president is asking the questions that have never been asked on the civilian side, the political side, the military side, and the strategic side. What is the impact on the region? What can the Afghan government do or not do? Where are we on the police training? Who would be better doing the police training? Could that be something the Europeans do? Should we take the military side? Those are the questions that have not been asked. And before you commit troops, which is — not irreversible, but puts you down a certain path — before you make that decision, there’s a set of questions that have to have answers that have never been asked. And it’s clear after eight years of war, that’s basically starting from the beginning, and those questions never got asked.

And what I find interesting and just intriguing from this debate in Washington, is that a lot of people who all of a sudden say, this is now the epicenter of the war on terror, you must do this now, immediately approve what the general said — where, before, it never even got on the radar screen for them. That — everything was always about Iraq.

Amazing. As if no one will realize what a pack of lies that is.

Well, Dick Cheney realized it and in an address to the Center for Security Policy on Wednesday Cheney responded (transcript) (video of entire speech):

Read the rest of this entry »

When a liberal rag tells Obama and company they need to get ahold of themselves:

The Obama administration really needs to get over itself.

First, the president and his aides go to war with Fox News because the network maintains a generally anti-Obama slant.

Then, an anonymous administration aide attacks bloggers for failing to maintain a sufficiently pro-Obama slant.

These are not disconnected developments.

An administration that won the White House with an almost always on-message campaign and generally friendly coverage from old and new media is now frustrated by its inability to control the debate and get the coverage it wants.

They should listen.

But noooooo. The Mao lover, and Obama aide, gives a rundown on the administrations modus operendi: Read the rest of this entry »

Remember this little nugget from January of 2007 from one Nancy Pelosi?

After years of historic deficits, this new Congress will commit itself to a higher standard: pay as you go, no new deficit spending. Our new America will provide unlimited opportunity for future generations, not burden them with mountains of debt.

And as the Democrats railed against Bush and his deficit they don’t utter a peep about this:

WASHINGTON – What is $1.42 trillion? It’s more than the total national debt for the first 200 years of the Republic, more than the entire economy of India, almost as much as Canada’s, and more than $4,700 for every man, woman and child in the United States.

It’s the federal budget deficit for 2009, more than three times the most red ink ever amassed in a single year.

Nope….now it just ain’t that big a deal Read the rest of this entry »

U.S. President Barack Obama smiles after making remarks on regulatory reform in the East Room at the White House in Washington October 9, 2009. Earlier in the day, Obama was awarded the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize. REUTERS/Jim Young (UNITED STATES POLITICS)

Apparently, SNL’s skit was premature. Maybe President Obama hasn’t actually accomplished the following:

1. Closing Gitmo (same as Bush)
2 Outlawing torture by revoking Bush’s EO that said much the same thing
3. Withdrawal from Iraq (thanks to Bush)
4. De-escalation of war in Afghanistan (campaigned that it was the necessary war and now dithers as more American soldiers have lost their lives in Afghanistan this year, than in the previous 7 years)
5. peace between Israel and Palestine
6. Olympics in Chicago
7. Supporting democratic movement in Iran
8. Supporting democracy in Honduras
9. nuclear disarmament

But, hey, so what?! At least he’s now won the Nobel Peace Prize for non-accomplishment; and delivered a presidential promise to use this award as a rallying “call to action”. It’s the thought and rhetoric that counts, right? Basically, he’s being awarded for what he may accomplish in the future (Even supporters are questioning, “Why?”). If his pretty words actually inspires us to achieve peace, enhances international relations, then some day in the future, maybe the award will have been earned. Here’s a novel idea: Why not award the prize to him THEN?!

I’m not trying to be funny, here; I wouldn’t want to be accused of siding with the terrorists.

Read the rest of this entry »

Adiba, 17, of Kabul, showed her support for Afghan presidential candidate Ashraf Ghani Ahmadzai at the bidding of her teacher as he met with women from the Malal group at his home in Kabul, Afghanistan, on Aug. 12, 2009. Although she planned to vote on Aug. 20, she had not decided which candidate would get her vote.
Nikki Kahn-THE WASHINGTON POST

This is indeed the dawning of the Age of Barack Hussein Obama….mmm…mmm….mm:

The anti-war group Code Pink, which rose to prominence with high-profile protests against the Iraq and Afghanistan wars over the past seven years, is softening its stance against the war in Afghanistan over concerns that a troop withdrawal could harm women’s rights in the country.

“We would leave with the same parameters of an exit strategy but we might perhaps be more flexible about a timeline,” Code Pink co-founder Medea Benjamin told the Christian Science Monitor. “That’s where we have opened ourselves … to some other possibilities. We have been feeling a sense of fear of the people of the return of the Taliban. So many people are saying that, ‘If the US troops left the country, would collapse. We’d go into civil war.’ A palpable sense of fear that is making us start to reconsider that.”

The apparent shift in policy comes in the wake of a week-long trip to Afghanistan by Code Pink members, where activists were surprised to find a lot of support among women’s rights activists for maintaining the US and NATO presence in the country.

They are just now awakening to this fact? Where were their brains at for the previous 8 years? Angelina Jolie “got it“, in regards to safeguarding Iraq on humanitarian grounds. Why couldn’t they?

Was opposition to the war all about political opposition to President Bush and not about promotion of peace and human rights (let alone democracy)? Read the rest of this entry »

“The Department has an Urgent Operational Need (UON) for the capability to strike hard and deeply buried targets in high threat environments. The MOP is the weapon of choice to meet the requirements of the UON.” It further states that the request is endorsed by Pacific Command (which has responsibility over North Korea) and Central Command (which has responsibility over Iran).

link to official USAF request to speed up procurement of special bunker buster bomb

Former President George W. Bush embraces President Barack Obama, the 44th President of the United States, after Obama’s inaugural address at the inauguration ceremony in Washington, January 20, 2009.
REUTERS/Jason Reed

Suck it up, liberals…What’s been good for the goose, is good for the gander.

Democrats have been licking Obama’s Copenhagen wounds by barking at conservatives for “cheering” the political Olympic-sized debacle as a rooting against America. Republicans are now being accused of “being unpatriotic“, because they want the president’s policies to fail.

Some of the Copenhagen criticism against conservatives has merit (I’m glad Obama suffered politically for this ill-conceived trip). Much of it is just plain warped, however, as there are also honest reasons why all Americans should be happy Chicago lost the Olympic bid to play host:

the U.S., dodged a bullet:

The common rejoinder to spiraling costs is that the Olympics make money for host cities. But the record is somewhat spottier than boosters admit. Athens and Beijing lost billions. Montreal, which hosted the games in 1976, took 30 years to pay off its loans. Los Angeles and Seoul made a tidy profit. Atlanta and Sydney broke even. It also depends on how you count: Is building a stadium factored into the cost? How about improving the subway? Expanding the housing stock? All this can leave a city with new and gleaming infrastructure — or a bunch of costly new houses no one wants to buy and stadiums no one wants to use.

Also read this from WaPo.

Chicago’s lucky it lost.

Democrats have been distorting the fierce opposition to their party’s push for healthcare reform (teabaggers and townhall protesters as uninformed scaremongers, birthers, conspiracists and racists…”the mob”…).

Democrats have been lamenting about how “Hope” and “Change” are being derailed because those “mean, racist Republicans” stand in the way as the “if he’s for it, we’re against it” Party.

Isn’t this what Democrats did to President Bush for 8 years of opposition? Personal as well as policy attacks? Distortions and smears?

Read the rest of this entry »

History-like hindsight-is supposed to be 20:20, but the deliberate partisan, political divide regarding the invasion of Iraq makes that hard.

It’s not a new phenomenon. Long ago it was said that the true story of a war can’t be told until the last of its veterans has passed away, and only a few months ago did the last World War One veteran go to his great reward. For decades after the Civil War (and some would argue even today) the debate raged on, and the healing of Southern Reconstruction didn’t really start culturally until the unity of the Spanish-American War turned foes into brothers-in-arms.

Conspiracy theories-often fueled by politics-still rage over the 911 attacks, the invasion of Iraq, whether or not Roosevelt deliberately allowed the Pearl Harbor attack to happen, whether or not the U.S. Navy knew the U.S.S. Maine had a boiler explosion and wasn’t sunk by a mine. People still think that the Lusitania was set on a suicide mission to get the United States into World War One. These myths will always remain, and it’s good that they do because they spark investigation and a search for understanding of these world changing events. The relationship between the 911 attacks and the invasion of Iraq is interesting in that both have a long list of conspiracy theories attacked to each, and yet the abstract, more indirect relationship between the two events is dismissed out of hand. To that end, even if one believes the relationship between Iraq War and 911 attacks is a conspiracy theory, it’s worthwhile to examine if for no other reason than harvesting a better understanding. Read the rest of this entry »

The Obama administration told a judge late Monday that it will continue to withhold information regarding past detainee policies for national security reasons, a decision assailed by the American Civil Liberties Union, which had been seeking Bush-era documents “including a presidential directive authorizing CIA ‘black sites,’” CIA inspector general records, Justice Department Office of Legal Counsel documents about the CIA’s use of “enhanced interrogation techniques.”

In the ACLU’s Freedom of Information Act lawsuits, U.S. District Court Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein of the Southern District of New York had ordered the Obama administration to either turn over various documents pertaining to detainee policies by August 31 or provide justification for withholding them.