1

This would be a little more convincing if the right wing hadn't gone completely bat@#$& insane over Clinton's marital problems in his second term. Heck, they actually impeached the guy, as if he lead us into a war on bogus premises or something.

I don't support impeaching Bush, but look to your own house before you start whining about the rhetoric on the other side.

2

Heck, they actually impeached the guy, as if he lead us into a war on bogus premises or something.

WiPE Tactic #307 -- Dismiss an actual conviction of perjury ("everybody lies about sex") in favor of unsubstatiated claims of "lying". Bonus: Claim that Bush "lied" when he made claims about Iraq having WMD while ignoring the fact that Clinton made the same claims.

3

Joe,
I'm usually a fan, but this was not one of your better writings. I understand it was "tongue-in-cheek", but this comes across as whiny to me. There are more effective ways of pointing out the absurdity in the WiPE's mentality.

4

Brian but this comes across as whiny to me.

Slapdash, sloppy, sophomoric, I could accept. But whiny? Pointing out that people want to kill our President is whiny?

5

The hatred of Bush is just that-hatred of him personally. That's why the WiPES' arguments are so weak-they're lame justifications of their loathing for a Southern, evangelical, awkward-speaking dude. It's intense snobbery turned into bumper sticker-quality thought.

6

Speaking of politics...

While I’m a registered Republican, I vote for candidates instead of parties. I don’t always vote for conservatives. Personally, I think Jesus would hate much of what the Republican party stands for… and I think many Republican candidates simply PRETEND to hold conservative values simply to gain votes.

I asked my ex-wife what makes her vote for a candidate. She replied “whether or not they’re pro-life”. I then pointed out to her that Republican Presidents have held office for a total of more than 20 years since Roe-v-Wade, yet abortions are still legal. In fact, a Republican was in office when Roe-v-Wade originally came to be.

The point is that some issues aren’t going to change, and we should focus on issues we believe in that can actually be changed by those for whom we vote.

7

Joe,

Get used to it. When President Bush does step down in January of 2009 and is replaced by Mitt Romney, you will hear the exact same things for eight more years.

Donny,

We're well on our way to overturning Roe V. Wade, fortunately. Thanks to George W. Bush we've got Alito and Roberts on the Supreme Court and we might get one more before the President steps down in 2009. And when Romney takes over in 2009 for 8 years we'll probably get to 6 or 7 judges on the Supreme Court who once again believe that it is the place of the representatives to make laws, not the place of the judiciary.

You can bet its not going to happen with Democrats in power, or with Hillary as President.

8

Satire is really, really tough. It might have worked well if the target had been an emulation of the left wingnuts instead of just the attitude. But, then again, I don't dare even attempt satire.

Collin

9

What I don’t get is why they judge you so harshly.

Waterboarding is repugnant.

Even the most monetarily-ignorant WiPEs who can’t bring themselves to admit that the economy is in good shape would have to admit your dad was worse. High gas prices? Carter wins hands down. Government spending? Kennedy and Johnson beat you out again.

Bush's economy is in fact worse: the number of people employed - employment participation - is barely changed from the dot com crash. (Forge the "unemployment rate" - that stat has been cooked since Reagan). Carter? He was right about energy policy. Reagan undid it.

Did they forget Clinton, a man who was convicted of perjury?

No he wasn't. That's an outright falsehood. In fact, Clinton's statements couldn't even get an indictment for perjury, since they were materially irrelevant to a litigation.

Did you forget that false witness was a sin?

This is why the religious right has been bankrupt: they simply have no morality.

They equate blastocysts and brain dead people with born, concious human beings.

They think that keeping gays from getting married is a bigger threat to America than providing for troops in a military action.

They're out of touch and evil.

And you're part of the problem, Joe Carter.

Look in the mirror: the vitriol you pose against us should be direct at your actions.

10

Well, it's all about a loss of power, isn't it? We are about to leave an historic bite of time wherein the Republican party (as opposed to actual conservatives) held the majority in most venues of political power in this country.

In the leftist world view, since they are correct because they feel correct and feel good about being correctly correct, losing so badly must mean that there is a vast, evil conspiracy. One might name the devil as a vast right-wing conspiracy.

And the conservative majority in this country exists because they have been duped by the nefarious Rovian conspiracy operating out of the bowels and torchlit recesses of Washingtonian catacombs.

So the left are victims. Victims of the conspiracy. In Judaeo-Christian society, victims are to be served, and the mantle of victimhood provides the perfect vehicle to stultify debate. The comment about Clinton exemplifies this perfectly; it wasn't that Clinton was a lying adulterous purjurer who was disbarred as well as being impeached, he was a victim of the evil forces that applied the law Clinton himself signed into law to victimize him. And all his genuflecting acolytes by extension.

11

This has been on my mind lately. There are some ominous statements in the liberal press which do seem to sanction physical harm to Pres Bush.

The UK article you quoted was not backed by the Guardian newspaper, although it is very anti-Bush.

If you want to find writers with a more positive viewpoint read Andrew Roberts (http://www.andrew-roberts.net/) and Melanie Phillips who writes for the Daily Mail.

Pete Ingleton UK

12

As you point out, previous presidents have made many of the same mistakes as G.W. I suspect it is his failure (perhaps inability) to learn from history that encourages the claims of Worst.President.Ever.

13

Didn't anyone else find this funny? I mean is a sort-of sad way? Maybe I'm not ready to kill myself if so and so actually wins here, there are bigger things in life.

14

Joe:

You are so right. It has been dispiriting. The irrationality of the hatred for Bush makes any attempt to discuss issues on this blog like slogging uphill in a mudslide.

What is amazing is the hatred for the man in spite of the fact that he has done so much of what liberals and Democrats love: i.e. increase federal spending. The man is not conservative. He has done some conservative things regarding the war and tax cuts and Supreme Court appointments. But failure to veto any spending should make the libs happy.

I'm convinced that his speaking like an evangelical (Jesus is his favorite "philosopher") and the belief that he is beholden to the religious right has caused BDS more than any other single thing. They hate conservative Christians. It is just like during the Clinton affair. The only thing worse than a lying, sociopathic philanderer is a conservative Christian.

15

I was amazed to read this morning that Ask.com
had put your open letter up as news!
As to the projecting other side of the fence,
the weeds, er... the WiPEs it would not
matter now. It's too late, they are aware
of the breathing, functioning, taking up of
space President Bush. Stepping down or
becoming a member of the list on the non-
breathing, is immaterial, the disease
the other side harbors is incurable.

16

"I'm usually a fan, but this was not one of your better writings. I understand it was "tongue-in-cheek", but this comes across as whiny to me. There are more effective ways of pointing out the absurdity in the WiPE's mentality."

So, Brian: Are you a Democrat? Or do you actually have words to back up your..er..words. What are those more effective ways of pointing out the absurdity of their mentality?

Besides, I tend to think that this post was a long sigh of sadness and dispiritedness, rather than an attempt to point out absurdity. The absurdity of some of the people who post on this blog is all too apparent to anyone who reads and posts here.

17

WiPE Tactic #307 -- Dismiss an actual conviction of perjury ("everybody lies about sex") in favor of unsubstatiated claims of "lying". Bonus: Claim that Bush "lied" when he made claims about Iraq having WMD while ignoring the fact that Clinton made the same claims.

There was a conviction for perjury? Where and when?

18

I'm confident that I can see exactlty where the comments for the post are going. You guys know who you are don't make me call you out by name. Oh, I can't help myself. Kevin T Keith will appear with his turgid prose attempting to convince us how stupid Bush supporters are. Gryph will set his gay outrage level to 11 regarding the president.
Lets start a pool. How many people will mention the number killed in Iraq and the cost of the war so far? Which solons of the blog will mention how much smarter they are than the president. Or will they take the opposite tack and talk about how clever and manipulative the president is?
My contempt for the likes of the cowards who snipe here makes their BDS seem tame by comparison. I'm calling you all out 3:00 behind the gym by the bike racks. It's on.

19

There was nothing whiny about it. It was clever and creative as Joe so often is. Despite the tongue-in-cheek nature, it was one of the few things I've read recently that almost made me think Bush is any good at all. Almost. As a disaffected (and former) Republican, I can't bring myself to like Bush. I simply don't understand why liberals don't love this guy...my best guess is because he beat them at their own game... giving away the farm, using the military in ways it was never designed to be used, preferring collectivist rights over the rights of individuals, no desire whatsoever to get out of the UN, etc.

It was a nice try, Joe. I think you did an excellent job of showing anti-Bush Democrats their hypocrisy. But as for myself, while I'm agnostic on the question of whether Bush is our worst president ever, I don't discount that he's one of the candidates.

20

Dear Joe, as you may know I am not a Republican Party member. But this is good... and I have the answer for you as to what could motivate the seeming insanity of these GWB WiPEs:

Symbolism

It goes without saying that a symbol usually isn't the thing it stands for. And to many, if not most, of the WiPEs I've come across GWB stands for --get this-- old time religion (OTR). Not kidding.

What particularly upsets these people is that OTR justifies all its actions in the name of an old time deity. So, they can stand a Kennedy or a Johnson or a Clinton who purger or escalate war in the name of pure secular value. But someone who does it in the name of Jesus to put down nonJesus folk... this they cannot stand. This is OTR. This is GWB. This is the SYMBOL.

In the war of symbols, you must fight symbol with symbol. This exceeds PR and image. This is on the Jungian level. Much deeper.

21

I really love it when you feed your trolls. You're so much better at it than I could be.

22

Yeah Joe

Definitely whiny in tone. Of course, I often feel like whining about it when every concievable action of the Federal government is personally ascribed to the action of President Bush and/or his puppet master Karl Rove. I mean stuff no President would ever know about or pay attention to if he did.

So, I am alright with you whining. Embrace the whine. Kick back with that nice glass of fine whine and enjoy the warm fire.

23

By most standard metrics, Joe, Bush is indeed the worst president of all time. He beats a long and shabby list to win that distinction, too.

What criteria do they use to make such assessments?

Plenty. Let's start with the easy one: "If George Bush worked for you, would you fire him?" He is not good at his job. I am not impressed with his performance and neither are 70% of my fellow Americans. Bush, to be competent, must do a few basic things well. He must be a good speaker, he must represent us well to other countries. He must hire competent individuals. He should show foresight and make correct decisions.

Let's grade him. On speaking - F. A failure. The list of Bush howlers fills Joke-a-Day calendars. Worse, his diction is wooden, and his syntax is that of an elementary schoolchild. He does not understand complex vocabulary, his sentences are short, stubby little things. Compare the language Bush uses to that employed by, oh, Thomas Jefferson.

On representing America - F. Look, I'm willing to hand out C's and D's if possible, but in this one we're talking a total, abysmal failure. Most of world now distrusts us, we've squandered our moral authority in our brutal treatment of captives, and instead of showing leadership on the world stage in confronting the dangers of climate change we plug our ears. Our foreign policy is bellicose and, as in the case with Iraq, idiotic. The decision to invade Iraq will go down in the history books as the worst miscalculation ever made by any president to date. The only saving grace in it is that it offers our private contractors with lucrative payback. In diplomacy, he sends a shrill, angry black woman to lecture Arabs for gawdsake, and he gives the German chancellor a nice comfy backrub, offending an entire nation with his lack of decorum.

On the economy - D. His decisions have led to unprecedented collusion between business and government that have favored large Republican contributors at the expense of ordinary citizens. Medicare reform, CAFTA, off-shoring and outsourcing, privatization of military functions, giveaways to big pharma... The list goes on. While you point to the Dow or Nasdac for evidence of growth, you won't really find any. Most portfolios have only made it back to 2000 levels - we've only recovered at the end of a long downturn and the fundamentals are extremely poor for sustained stock gains. The real estate bubble will continue to drag on us.

But to really gauge the health of the economy, look at housing and fuel costs compared to 5 years ago. Look at your benefits, your health premiums. Most Americans find that it's taking two breadwinners and that wages have been stagnant or trailing inflation. And if you're getting ready to enter college or send your child to one, I pity you the tuition expense. The cost of tuition has continued to rise about 20% annually over the period we're looking at, shutting out many from the American dream, weighing down others with decades of debt (now serviced at new, higher rates).

Look at the explosion of "payday lenders" in your neighborhoods, look at the general sense of anxiety across the nation. And the government continues to cut taxes and increase spending. If you're an evangelical, I guess you get the luxury of skipping down the street, secure in the knowledge that we can rip past the 9 trillion dollar debt mark and gallop all the way to 45 trillion (projected by 2050 if we continue business as usual), because Jesus will make it all OK. If you're an intelligent person, you'll feel uncomfortable because you can't spend money you don't have indefinitely. The debt will come due.

Government spending - F. Your figures are wrong, Joe. Under Bush the size and cost of government have grown some 30%. It's the most expensive government of all time.

On hiring good people - F. "Heckuva job, Brownie." Donald Rumsfeld. Katherine Hughes. His SCOTUS picks. Over and over, he shows a preternatural ability to select the absolute worst person for the job (with the exception of Colin Powell, heh). He likes cronies and yes-men, people who keep him in a secure bubble where the news is always good and the sun is always shining.

Isn't it curious that the places the President can travel and meet other Americans are very few in number? In order to shield him from mass demonstrations and screaming, howling crowds, his handlers can only take him to military bases, an Indiana suburb, a small town in Texas, the final holdouts of the Bush base.

And, ultimately, he isn't bright. I'm sorry, Joe, I know that you are more than comfortable with a mediocre, incurious man leading us, a man who doesn't read books and who only occasionally uses "The Google," but I'm not. I expect our President to be a very sharp mind, a charismatic speaker, and tireless student of national and world affairs. On that score? Bush - F. Compared to him, Nixon wasn't that bad at all.

24

"WIPE" or realist? I am sorry you occasionally have to be subjected to books telling the truth about the Bush administration. I would suggest two books by John Dean: "Worse Than Watergate" and "Conservatives Without a Conscience".

I don't accept your premise that people who question this current authoritarian administration are rabid hate filled people.

Bush is one of the worst presidents ever.

25

My name is Kal and I must confess that Bush drives me insane. I also hereby affirm that I breathe with my mouth closed.

I try not to control the hate/disdain/disgust/revulsion. I even pray about it. Prior to Bush, I've never had these reactions to someone that I've never met.

Some of the reaction is visceral. There's something to the way he lectures, swaggers, and smirks that provokes rage that has no basis in reason.

On a more substantive level, he conflated Iraq and 9/11 in a disingenuous manner. FDR told America that we have nothing to fear but fear itself. The message I hear from Bush is that Americans have to be afraid, very afraid.

His torture policy or lack of torture policy has cost America moral high ground that it can ill afford to lose. There was little compassion, conservative or in the immediate aftermath of Katrina.

Finally, on Constitutional grounds, I believe he is being dismissive of legitimate slippery slope arguments. The accumulation of and hoarding of power in the executive branch that this administration has furthered through signing statements and other extra-constitutional actions lays the ground for a future amoral and corrupt individual to create a tyranny. By the way, in addition to breathing with my mouth closed, I affirm that I don't see black helicopters. I just believe that Republicans would not willingly have given the power to a Democratic President that they have given to Bush.

26

I'll get on board the "Joe's post was sloppy, slapdash and sophomoric" wagon, not because I think this post is sloppy, slapdash and sophomoric, but because I want to see if I can say that to a Marine and live. :)

I had the same reaction yesterday when reading the post on Platonism and saw a commenter compelled to spew Bush hatred.

I heartily agree that some conservatives (that I personally know) went out of their minds with Clinton-hatred. I challenged them just like a challenge those out of their minds with Bush hatred.

Folks, it IS a sickness. It is not okay to be so consumed with hatred. Civility is still possible when you disagree with someone's policies. But if one hates, as Joe points out, a President's very existence, that person is sick.

27

I agree with nbpundit - every Republican president since Nixon has been the W.P.E. - and also the most stupid man on earth. One has only to remember the vitriol spewed about President Reagan during his term in office to understand that what the current Bush is experiencing is only a matter of degree, not type. One of the disadvantages of the rise of conservative media is that the mainstream media WiPEs no longer feel the need to pretend to any sort of balance.

28

I’m frustrated because I can’t visit a Borders or Barnes and Noble without having to wade through all the idiotic Bush-bashing books.

When Clinton was in office there seemed to be a new book claiming he was the anti-Christ hitting the bookshelves each week.

Get over it.

29

I originally wrote a longer reply, but what really mattered was the conclusion: We're going to keep having WiPE-types on both sides of the aisle, operating at dispicible volumes, until we elect some people who really love America and are in service to her. Period. Then, the arguments become more reasonable. Then, the actions of the country are more in accord with the professed beliefs of most of its citizens. Then, America becomes an example of how to be in the world.

30

Andre' -- how do you know who really loves American and is in service to her?

Why do we need a certain kind of person in office before people will become more reasonable? Everyone is responsible for their own behavior, regardless of who's President, what their mother did to them, or whatever. Individually we must be the way we want America to be.

31

Bush's ineptitude is an emergent phenomenon. Taken individually, none of his actions or policies make him the worst president. However, taken together, they paint a grimmer picture.

Think of it this way. Imagine that you could score every president on some set of objective measures. Now rank each of those scores (0.0 being best and 1.0 being worst). Next, assign a subjective weight to each measure according to how important each is to you. Multiple the rank scores by their weights and add them up. Sort the presidents by their aggregate score. Depending on the measures chosen and the weights assigned, Bush may indeed rank at the bottom.

The point of all that math was to point out that Bush may indeed be one of the worst presidents this country has had, and one could say so without be entirely hyperbolic and/or foaming at the mouth.

For the record, while I have insufficient data (e.g., knowledge of history) to make a good, rational explanation for it, my gut feeling is that Bush is probably one of the worst presidents we have ever had. On the other hand, my cynical nature leads me to quite confidently expect someone worse will come along.

NOTE: No keyboards or other inanimate objects were harmed in the production of this comment, such as by drooling foam on it or typing with murderous rage.

32

Heh. I thought it was an excellent post. Quite amusing. Although, I guess if you're a lefty and it pisses you off enough to comment about it, it must be good.

Then again, I was also of the opinion that Clinton should have stepped down when he was impeached for lying under oath while under investigation for sexual harassment charges- I mean- when he was having those "marital problems".

;o)

33

The problem with having President Bush resign is that Dick Cheney would then assume the presidency. Only having Karl Rove himself be president would inflame the WiPE's more than having a President Cheney.

The only solution is for Cheney to resign, Bush to appoint Kos or Howard Dean Vice-President, and then let W go back to Texas.

34

While I do not clame Bush has WiPE status (there are way too many Presidents vying for that claim), I have been extremely dismayed at Jorge's performance, especially in areas of immigration and personal privacy. A Constitutional leader, Mr. Bush is not.
Given the atrocious similarities between the Reds and the Blues, I find that one of the only major issue that helps me distinguish between the two is the issue of firearm use and ownership.
All that aside, I would be much happier of both sides of the aisle would stick to the issues at hand, with less Kos and less Limbaugh commentary-by-division.

35

I asked my ex-wife what makes her vote for a candidate. She replied “whether or not they’re pro-life”.

From my experience with the pro-life movement, a lot of pro-life activist groups have developed a "tunnel vision" that their method/tactic is the Only Christian Way.

National Right to Life Committee is tunnel-visioned into "Elect a Republican President who'll appoint a Supreme Court that'll overturn Roe v Wade" and only that.

American Life League is like NRLC except a lot more in-your-face. I severed ties with them during the Bork nomination, when their telemarketers cold-called me and threatened me with hellfire & damnation if I didn't give them money to confirm Bork. (The words used were "If you don't support us and we fail to get Bork confirmed, GOD WILL 'HOLD YOU ACCOUNTABLE' FOR ALL THE BABIES THAT WILL BE ABORTED BECAUSE OF YOU!")

Operation Rescue (tactic: blocking abortion joints with sit-ins) had developed this attitude that "If You Don't Join Our Rescue And Go To Jail With Us, YOU'RE NOT *REALLY* CHRISTIAN/PRO-LIFE!"

The only pro-life group I support these days is Human Life Alliance of Minnesota (HLA), which not only has a great tactic (paid pro-life advertising inserts in local/college papers), but has never attempted to high-pressure me.

36

Worst Post Ever

;-)

37

Danny - to vote for the candidate rather than the party is a very naive approach. Ours is a two party system and the party in charge runs the show. If you're constantly flipping around in the affiliation of the people you send to represent you, you'll almost never see constructive change because you're simply helping to rotate committee chairmen. Like much of the rest of the world, our political system is composed of many different factions, but they have already grouped themselves into two camps. Pick the one you agree with most and go with them ALWAYS.

And you're right that Roe hasn't yet been overturned, but sending members of a party that clearly opposes abortion into positions of power has had a clear effect on the culture.

38

I guess my phrase “Bush-Chenney-Rovianism” (in a comment responding to another commentor) crossed your threshold of tolerance and got me on the list of the banned. I guess my point is made.

39

President Bush is one of the worst president ever and I say this without any blind hateful rage, or desire to "have the terrorists win". I voted for Bush in 2000 and have previously voted straight republican, but facts are facts. I invite readers of this forum to take a look at some of those books Joe mentions in his post and put aside all partisan preconceptions.

For an even handed presentation of the facts showing why this is true I would recommend two books by John Dean: "Worse Than Watergate" and "Conservatives Without a Conscience".

40

whatever works. let's get that creep out of our whitehouse.

support our troops; indict gw bush for war crimes.

41

Catnapping huh? That's instructive and appropriate
for it must describe what you were doing when you posted your inspired and sane comment. Definitely a revelation direct from La-La land!

42

Is there any question at this point? Worst. President. Ever.

43

Worst Post Ever

;-)

44

Where do I sign the petition Joe? I'm not hopeful, though, as W. has stated that he intends to "stay the course" even if his only supporters are Laura and his dog. The good news is that Laura is sounding a little shaky.

What's the name of the fallacy where you find a small group in the camp of your opponents who advocate some extreme measure and then assume all or most of your opponents share that view? That's what you're doing and I think you know it. I no more support anyone who calls for assasination of a political leader than you support Fred Phelps or people who blow up abortion clinics.

45

Actually, if your "whatever works" approach is meant to remove G.W. - please, PLEASE vote green. History will record this as a turning point and it's good to note who is in favor of turning away.

46

Your blog is just great. So direct and clear in communication. I wish you contribute some thing to our start-up. You have a great opportunity to speak yourself at our site.

My name is Mark Johnson, and I've been visiting your blog for last six months.

I’m a recent UC Berkeley Political science grad and I along with some fellow Princeton alums have been working hard to launch our own internet startup called Rizzleweb.com.
Rizzleweb is basically an online political community where people can log on and write performance reviews\comments for congressmen, senators, the president, and various other local and state officials across the country. I was hoping that if it would not be too much trouble you could place a link of our site on your blog. If this is not possible (which we completely understand), we still hope you will check out our site, and post some reviews.
Your contribution will encourage us to put more effort in improving our website.
Mark Johnson
www.Rizzleweb.com
markjohnson2020@hotmail.com

47

Joe, having President Bush resign won't be doing the WiPE's any favors. They'd be stuck with a President Dick Cheney, and that would just drive them into even more conniption fits.

48

Joe,
your post really scares me. If for no other reason than I think your right. I work in the medical field where I meet alot of highly educated and highly paid liberals. I can talk to them about anything except Bush. Then the tension is palpable. They believe anyone that does not see like them is a liar or stupid.

Bush, to be fair, is only a scapegoat. They hate us. I mean conservative believers who have not caught up to progressive thought. We continuelly slow down the march toward a European style atheistic society. Anybody who supports traditional Judeochristian values on a national level is HATED by them. Dobson, Limbaugh, Dr. Laura......... Watch out Joe. You are next.

Take a look at how many no-bid contracts the Clinton administration gave to Halliburton. This is public record. But again reason has no place in this discussion.

49

Sorry for the delay in comments being posted. Yesterday I tweaked my spam filter and it ended up blocking everything except spam.

I thought it was odd that such an inflammatory post was receiving so few comments. ; )

50

Hedgy says:

Gryph will set his gay outrage level to 11 regarding the president. Lets start a pool. .

Actually I don't have a great deal of "gay outrage" toward Bush. The GOP has been so generally hateful toward gay Americans for so long, my expectations were low to begin with. President Bush has come out in favor of civil unions, an acceptable compromise (for me) on the issue of gay marriage. I can live with that, although I wish he would have at least asked Congress to take up the issue. On gays in the military he is a wash. To his credit, he has not revoked the Clinton administration policy of not asking recruits what their sexual orientation is. To his detriment, he has not gone to Congress and asked them to remove the law that makes it illegal for gays and lesbians to serve in the military. I find that it is also a mark against his handling of the War on Terror. Its simply stupid to be throwing way talent like intelligence analysts who speak Arabic and Persian simply because they are gay.

I fully supported the President on his decision to invade Iraq. Saddam was a snake, he had to go sooner or later. I still support his decision, he did the right thing. His Administration however has really screwed up the aftermath.

I am comfortable now with the label of being a "Bush-Hater". What pushed me over the brink was his Administrations approval and use of torture, as well as the kidnapping and outsourcing of torture to places like Egypt and Saudi Arabia. Secret prisons, Guantanamo, these are not examples of America at its finest. The dissolution of the right of Habeas Corpus was the final cherry on the top of that vile cake. And the Christians either stood silent or even supported these things. Shame on you.

It may well take generations to undue the harm he has done to America and what used to be our traditional values of respect for human life.

You see, I not only want the Government out of my bedroom, I want them out of my life as much as possible. I just don't think Government is the solution for all our problems the way Evangelicals do.

51

I don't really hate Bush...it's more like that well known christian saying "...hate the sin, love the sinner".

While, I'm at it I think I'll mention the number killed in Iraq and the cost of the war so far: About 3000 brave loyal american soldiers are dead and about 20,000 injuried; 30,000 to about 500,000 innocent Iraqis are dead; and innocent people routinely rounded up with many being tortured.

I am a christian-the cost of this war is not some trivial thing-Iraqis are real people, not just characters on a TV show, and I am sure the Lord thinks their lives are just as precious as ours.

I love America, it's a great land, however, if we are evangelicals, we should all realize where our true allegiances are. It's certainly not with the United States of America. Furthermore, I certainly don't think the kingdom of God is being advanced by the republican party or any of those self-righteous "values voters" political action committees.

Here is a provocative question for everyone: How is the United States different than the Roman Empire of Christ's time? And how did the early christians relate to the Empire of their day? Hint read Colosians where Paul describes Christ as the head of all creation using the same language that was used to describe the Roman emperor. The early christians died rather than worship the emperor. I wouldn't say that the american christians of our day are worshipping George W. Bush and the republican party, but sometimes it seems they come close to it.

And please don't misconstrue what I am saying. I am in no way saying that Democratic leadership of our country would fix everything. However, I hope that christians would wake up to what is going on and see that the republican party is not the party of moral values.

John Wyatt

52

John Wyatt:

I hope you didn't think what you wrote was profound. It certainly isn't anything new for any of the thinking Christians here: i.e., our allegiance is to something bigger than the USA. You're preaching to the choir here. It's not the religious right whose religion is politics. We go into the voting booth knowing that every last one of those checkmarks on the ballot is a choice for the lesser of two evils. It's the religious left who believe politicians are Saviours. All you need to do is observe the difference between a Democrat political rally and a Republican political rally. The Dems sound like a hell-fire and brimstone preacher, pumping up the faithful. I refer you to the Paul Wellstone funeral for starters: "For Paul...for Paul... for Paul!!!!"

I used to be a liberal Democrat, but the more knowledgeable I became it became clear that the Dems favored things I opposed and opposed things I favored. Some issues, like abortion, are completely beyond comprehension. How anyone can defend it is beyond me. Likewise, how anyone could defend Bill Clinton was beyond me.

It's simply a matter of Republicans saying that they support more of my issues.

53

News flash, folks: not everyone who thinks Bush, et al., are inept and/or creepy is a loony liberal. I experience no painful cognitive dissonance as someone who is pro-life and pro-family but does not trust or like most of the Republicans in Washington. The Kosite WiPEs are straw men and making fools of them does not make GOP a good organization or Bush a good president.

54

JD,

I don't really think I'm preaching to the choir here. I see a lot of demonizing people with opposing comments, and sarcasm. Exchange the word "jew" for "liberal" in some of these comments, and excuse me, but it sounds like Nazi Germany.

Yes, Democrats are not saviors, however, I'd like to see some evangelicals speaking out against Ann Coulter and her book, GODLESS, and the fear mongering of the Bush administration. Does Ann Coulter represent your christian values? Are we really so scared of terrorist that we have to renounce our traditional constitutional values?

55

"[T]o vote for the candidate rather than the party is a very naive approach." - stone

versus:

"Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost." - John Quincy Adams

I prefer the latter. Anyone else?

56

John Cole over at Balloon Juice just bailed on Bush and he lists some very interesting reasons why. Give it a read at:

http://www.balloon-juice.com/?p=7551

Nothing shrill, nothing unhinged there, just a man who woke up and realized the truth.

57

john wyatt:

So now we sound like Nazis? Aren't you demonizing?

You've seen plenty of evangelicals on this blog speaking out against Ann Coulter. Joe himself has advocated boycotting her books. He thinks she's going to pull a David Brock and reveal herself as a flaming liberal after she milks the conservative market with all her vitriol.

I don't happen to be one of them. But that's just because I enjoy sarcasm like all Nazis.

I think that by now, at this point in the discussion, at say Daily Kos or MyDD one of us would have called the other some vulgar name beyond a Nazi comparison.

I think liberals are joined, in their essence, by a hatred of all things Christian. I think the Democrat party is the party of liberalism. I think there are many good liberals who don't feel that way, but they support a party which supports an anti-Christian philosophy. I think there are Christians who have an axe to grind with the religious right, for whatever reason, and therefore, vote Democrat. I have spoken with Christians, better men than I, who have determined that envy is an acceptable sin. If you can accept envy as an acceptable sin, then the Democrat party is your party: "We don't want no stinking tax cuts for the rich." Sorry for the rambling. I gotta go.

58

Sorry, guys, but too many Americans just don't know enough history to judge the WPE award (nor the best, for that matter). Like it or not, history WILL judge Bush... about 25 years from now. Any sooner is premature; just ask Harding (universally mourned and beloved at the time of his death, and now a finalist for the WPE), or Truman (couldn't get elected dogcatcher in 1952, and now a guy you might want for the sequel to Mt. Rushmore). Reagan's reputation has improved markedly with the end of the Cold War (please, let's not start a whole thread on that--if you disagree, at least admit that the fears that he would blow us all to kingdom come, or that detente was the only possible solution, were not exactly on the money after all), and Nixon's 49-state landslide in '72 was completely wiped out by Watergate. And don't even get me started as to what the history books will say someday about the Clinton years--THAT legacy won't be written for a long while, either. But from a purely objective standpoint, to name Bush the WPE based on a snapshot of today (or recent days) is, first of all, to place a guy who won twice below all the single-termers; which is hard to do with a straight face. That places him worse than his dad, worse than Carter, worse than placeholder Ford, who never was even elected to national office, and all of those guys got fired after 4 years or less. Further back, it makes him worse than the barely-breathing William Henry Harrison, the "accidental" John Tyler, the impeached Andrew Johnson, and even worse than Buchanan and Pierce.

All that said, he's not my favorite right now. (My current 3 favorites--not the "best" designation which always seems to fall to Washington, Lincoln, and FDR, but the guys who I wish we had at this time and who have monopolized my reading of late--are Truman, Reagan, and Teddy Roosevelt). But to judge Bush (or Clinton, for that matter) yet without the evidence of what the next generation brings is foolish.

One last point (and I know I'm running on, but I've got the time ,which is rare). I sure wish we could get back to a slightly less bitter time in politics. I think that the decline may have begun in 1988 with the Willie Horton ad and its cousins; I know for sure it was bad by '92 and has been poisonous since 2000. But I recall when Reagan passed his economic plan back in the early 80s, a phone call by Tip O'Neill, where he said, "congratulations, old pal. We disagree about your program, but you passed it. Great victory. Now it's up to you to make it work; for the good of the country, I hope it does." Especially for those of us who do NOT think politics is the end-all of life, an attitude like that would do much to restore my faith in the process.

As always, thanks, Joe.

59

JD,

Dude, don't call yourself a Nazi!

Normally, I would vote republican and have in the past (I did vote for Bush in 2004). As a christian I don't look to either party as a champion of christians values.

However, I am now voting Democrat becuase I find the Iraq war immoral, disgusting, and do not appreciate all the murder, mayhem, and carnage done in my name (some may even say it's being done in the name of christianity since Bush is represented as being an example of a christian leader by many evangelicals). Also, I vote democratic because Bush is undermining our traditional constitutional manner of government with his executive power, signing statements, and ignoring laws.

I vote democratic to check the excesses of the current authoritarian administration. Maybe after this bunch is out of power for awhile, I'll vote republican again.

John

60

Note to jd: It's the "Democratic Party," not the "Democrat Party." You've been listening to Rush Limbaugh too long. If you don't believe me, go to www.democrats.org

The ungrammatical "Democrat Party" is used by some Republicans to try to smear Democrats, but it only makes those who use the expression sound stupid.

61

Correction: I voted for Bush in 2000, but not in 2004.

62

Joe: You're giving the vapors to all the right people. As has been pointed out earlier, though, the level of discourse here compared to someplace like dKos or MyDD, etc. says a lot about the two sides of the political divide. Great post!

63

the last two posts by john wyatt and ex-preacher go a long way towards proving the point of Joe's post. One masquerades as serious discourse about serious things. The other simply takes the opportunity to call me stupid. It is truly dispiriting.

64

This was satire?

My question is similar to FD's.

What are the objective criteria to measure a sitting President's performance domestically and internationally?

G.W. Bush has two more years, it doesn't matter what liberals, conservatives or disinterested parties think. Nor does it matter who 'wins' the midterms.

So, what are the accepted measurements of performance?

Second term Presidencies:

"Of the 42 individuals who have been President of the United States, 15 were elected to two or more consecutive terms of office. Another 4—Theodore Roosevelt, Calvin Coolidge, Harry Truman, and Lyndon Johnson—succeeded to office on the death of a President but were then elected to a full term in their own right. One, Grover Cleveland, served two nonconsecutive terms. The fact that the secondterm experiences of these 20 men were overwhelmingly unhappy is undeniable. The reasons, though, vary greatly."
American Heritage

65

JD,

I am just presenting my thoughts here. Joe Carter is providing an open forum for people to share their thoughts and that's all I'm doing. [Thank you Joe, you are doing a good thing].

How am I masquerading? What point of Joe am I proving?

Not being sarcastic-I'd really like to know what you are thinking. If you'd like to email me directly feel free - jwyatt1963@yahoo.com

John

66

Joe, I'm a little disappointed you stooped. Also what is the point of resurrecting Kennedy or Nixon? They're dead, Bush is in office now.

The idea that liberals unthinkingly hate conservative ideas is ridiculous. We're not helping to stem the vitriol by posts like this, or Rush Limbaugh's name-calling. I should know, because on a regular basis I am engaging in the difficult job of convincing liberals that traditionally conservative ideas are good. Refraining from throwing back the same junk helps people to listen to your ideas, even when they are behaving badly. Jesus was firm, and he spoke the truth without hesitation, but he also met people where they were, and he spoke it with love and compassion, even when it wasn't what someone wanted to hear.

The hatred of Bush is just that-hatred of him personally. That's why the WiPES' arguments are so weak-they're lame justifications of their loathing for a Southern, evangelical, awkward-speaking dude. It's intense snobbery turned into bumper sticker-quality thought.
Posted by: John Salmon

It's easy to dismiss liberals by saying that they're snobs. Maybe they are, but that's not engaging their arguments.

It makes me sad to see that neither side of the aisle is above hypocrisy, but sadder still that few recognise it.

67

Bush is reckless, incurious, incompetent in the areas he promises to concentrate on, stubborn in the wrong areas, scornful of the Constitutional standards America was founded on, takes God's name in vain by cynically using Christian terminology to win supporters but governing as if the Beatitudes had never been spoken (torture? "extraordinary rendition"?), and his pride is setting him up for quite the fall. Not only does the emperor have no clothes, he can't even keep his innards in.

68

Ravine opines: "Is there any question at this point? Worst. President. Ever."

Actually not only is there a question I have an answer. Not true. In fact Bush is one of the best Presidents the country has ever had. He has kept the economy afloat despite the bursting of Clinton's failed bubble economy closely followed by the worst terrorist attack in history. That alone is a feat that deserves respect. He has increased military spending after Clinton gutted it. He has placed solid decent people in the courts and swung the Supreme Court towards a far more conservative bent with a real prospect of over-turning RvW in the near future and ending the holocaust of abortion.

He has taken the fight to the terrorists on their own territory and has killed more than half the leadership of Al-Qaeda and captured some of the worst terrorists in the world. And yes there is still much more to do, but he is acting rather than taking Clinton's approach of doing NOTHING NADA ZILCH because he was too busy screwing an intern instead of caring on damn bit for the nation and people he swore to protect.

So not only not the worst, he's one of the best and beats any lame ass Demoprat you can care to name.

Worst Pres in history? Clinton. Lied, screwed, sold out to the Chinese communists at every chance he could get. Did NOTHING against Islamic terrorists despite eight years of attacks.

http://www.amazon.com/Betrayal-Administration-Undermined-American-Security/dp/0895263173

Have a nice day :)

69

Angela,

I appreciate you comments. And I agree, many conservative ideas are good, and frankly, I would like to be able to vote republican again some day.

Part of the problem of the problem in our country today is the current administration is not truly conservative. Barry Goldwater was a conservative, the Bush administration is a "right-wing authoritarian" regime. John Dean's book, "Conservatives Without a Conscience" discusses this in a balanced and non-partisan way.

Americans should be able to find common ground and tolerate people with opposing viewpoints.

John Wyatt

John Wyatt

70

Shawn, your entire comment is a masterpiece of inanity, but I will address one part only:

"He has placed solid decent people in the courts and swung the Supreme Court towards a far more conservative bent with a real prospect of over-turning RvW in the near future and ending the holocaust of abortion."

It really doesn't matter how many conservative Catholics Bush packs the court with before the end of his lamentable administration: overturning Roe v. Wade will merely shift authority to the states; it will not end "the holocaust of abortion." Many states will continue to allow the practice. People unfortunate enough to live in conservative states will have to travel to get an abortion or they will get one on the black market. It's not going away, Shawn.

Have a nice day :)

71

Ok, I'll ask. If he's not the worst president ever, then who is?

And please don't say Bill Clinton. The guy is a disgusting pig, but he's not nearly the worst.

Also, stating that Bush is the best ever is sheer lunacy. Every heard of Abraham Lincoln, George Washington, Ronald Reagan, Teddy Roosevelt, and Thomas Jefferson? I could go on....

72

So much hate and ugly, but that's where we're called to be.

73

If you think bookstores are bad, check the "new book shelf" at your public library. Librarians are 274:1 liberal to conservative (based on a survey done in the 2004 election). That makes the NYT look like they're in Rove's pocket.

74

Political Critic - I agree, Lincoln was a GREAT president.

1. Stood firm during an Unpopular War. (Lincoln's War was MUCH more costly)
2. Called unfair filthy names by his enemies in the Press (back then the press was openly partisan, now they try to act like they aren't)
3. Media loved a Senator from Massachusetts (Sen Everett). They loved Sen Everett's speech at the dedication of the Gettysburg Cemetary, they hated Lincoln's (happens to be known as the Gettysburg Address)
4. An incompetent general ran against him.
5. Lincoln eliminated habeas corpus and ignored the Supreme Court. (Bush only wants to interrogate terrorists- who have no rights)
6. His Christian faith kept him strong.

I'm so glad that you appreciate the greatness of Lincoln. Bush is much more generous to his enemies.

If you were alive back then, you would have been a Copperhead.

Winston Churchill:

“… If you will not fight for right
when you can easily win without bloodshed;

If you will not fight
when your victory will be sure and not too costly;

You may come to the moment
when you will have to fight with all odds against you and only a precarious chance of survival.

There may be even a worse fate.

You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves.”

(Churchill had to fight Hitler during WWII AFTER Chamberlain appeased Hitler.
Appeasement caused WWII and the Holocaust because Liberals did not stand up to Hitler.)

John Stuart Mill:

“War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things:
The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feelings which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse.

A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight;
Nothing he cares about more than his own personal safety;
Is a miserable creature who has not chance of being free,
Unless made and kept so by the exertions and blood of better men than himself.”

75

who told you how to think like that?

76

Visit my webpage!!

77

Visit my webpage!!

78

Visit my webpage!!

79

Visit my webpage!!

80

Visit my webpage!!

81

Visit my webpage!!

82

Visit my webpage!!

83

Visit my webpage!!

84

Visit my webpage!!

85

Visit my webpage!!

86

Visit my webpage!!

87

Visit my webpage!!

88

Visit my webpage!!

89

Visit my webpage!!

90

Visit my webpage!!

91

Visit my webpage!!

92

Visit my webpage!!

93

Visit my webpage!!