President Bush – The “Worst Ever”, Until Compared to Every Democrat Hopeful

It’s not an uncommon left wing screech to call Bush the worst president ever. They generally don’t go into detail, because to do so would require thinking and extremists on the left are often too emotional—or too lazy—to think. The proof is rooted in bumper sticker statements like “Bush lied, kids died”, “No war for oil”, or something that contains the words “impeach”, “Hitler” or “Nazi”.

Since many of these moonbats actually run major newspapers and television newsrooms (like Pinch Sulzberger and Ted Turner), they have managed, through a daily public media pounding of this president since he announced his candidacy in 2000, to cast his presidency as a failure, a disaster, and a catalyst for America becoming universally despised by the rest of the world.

Then the Democrats put up the likes of Howard Dean, John Kerry, Hillary Clinton, and Barack Obama, and people realize that Bush hasn’t been so bad after all.

Howard Dean’s popularity soared as he campaigned on the Internet…then he started making appearances and his popularity dropped almost as quickly as people saw what a maniac he was. Until his days became preoccupied with trying to end the current Democrat infighting…at which he is failing miserably…he could not open his mouth without bilious vitriol towards anything Republican pouring out of it.

Screaming things like “We want our country back!” at the top of his lungs was a trademark of Dean’s campaign. It wasn’t hard to find photos of him looking enraged. And he was the Democratic frontrunner in 2004…because much of the American left sees Bush and Republicans as the enemy, not Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda. And Dean made no bones about sharing such views. He even once said that bin Laden was “innocent until proven guilty”…an allusion to the popular belief among the conspiratorial left that it was Bush that was responsible for 9/11.

Once Dean’s perpetually enraged public persona became better known and his screech after his Iowa loss rendered him unelectable (and by the way, what did Vermont see in him?), John Kerry rose to the front runner spot on the strength of his having served in Vietnam. And Kerry ran into the typical problems of appealing to both the hardcore left and then to actual Americans.

Initially, Kerry’s problem was having supported military action in Iraq. Plenty of weapons of mass destruction quotes could be found with his name next to them. So in response to Dean’s rising popularity with the anti-anything-Bush-ever-did left, Kerry then voted against funding for armor and weapons for the soldiers that he voted to send into combat. This helped him win the support of the left, but it tied him in knots in the general election, driving him to his now-famous words “I actually did vote for the $87 billion, before I voted against it.”

That quote, combined with efforts of the Swift Boat Veterans, sunk John Kerry. Having served in Vietnam and then coming back and opposing the war in Congress might have been admirable had he not trashed his fellow soldiers, calling them rapists and vicious murderers. John McCain may have spent some extra time in the Hanoi Hilton courtesy of John Kerry. Once America got a good look at the real candidate and not the projected “war hero” in 2004, they decided to stick with the “worst president ever” by a 3% margin in the popular vote, 2 percentage points larger than the margin of his father's defeat in 1992.

It says something about Democrats that of the four presidential hopefuls mentioned here, the woman is the bravest politically. Maybe not publicly…she has never had to actually dodge sniper fire or anything…but at least she will take on her political opponents in no-holds-barred fashion, which made her extremely popular with the left until she started taking swings at Barack Obama. Had Hillary been running against a Republican, the sniper fire lie would have been instantly washed down the memory hole.

But despite, and partly because of, her political determination, Hillary is also by far the least charismatic of the four. She comes across as a power-mad, undeterred, scowling witch whose husband can’t cheat on her enough. Her rare laughs are obviously phony, her tears even more so. People on the right are well aware that she and her more charming husband will have their people steamroll anyone who stands in their way…and people on her own side, like Juanita Broaddrick, Gennifer Flowers, and Paula Jones, also knew this very well.

It is also revealing that the Democrats’ best chance this fall is someone as pathologically dishonest as Clinton, who is plagued by more scandals just from her husband’s administration than the rest of the candidates combined in their entire political careers.

Besides the perjury and obstruction of justice, besides the sexual harassment and credible rape charges—all of which turned out to be true and against which this hardcore feminist defended her beyond-chauvinistic husband—there were the despicable pardon sales to raise money for her Senate campaign. Terrorists now know that they can blow buildings up in America, so long as they have the cash to contribute to Hillary’s political aspirations.

In a sane world that should have been the last nail in her coffin in politics. But with the help of the media, she fights Republicans, who are considered the true evil, so Democrats not only tolerate her but revere her.

Hillary’s 2008 chances now are much improved with Barack Obama’s campaign deflating like a popped balloon. This spectacle might not be so ugly to watch had Obama not been cast as a sparkling, messianic beacon of “hope” for America, but idolatry always results in disappointment. Now that his pastor Jeremiah Wright has openly and very publicly reiterated his “God d--- America” ideology without an ounce of reservation, Obama has been forced to denounce his pastor of 20 years, the same pastor that less than a month before Obama said he could no more disown than he could disown the black community.

Conservatives have rightly pounced on this. Newt Gingrich asked on Sean Hannity’s show when Obama is going to make his statement disowning the black community, now that he has disowned Reverend Wright. Rush Limbaugh has stated that Obama’s speech is an insult to America’s intelligence.

For Obama to suddenly say that Reverend Wright does not represent how he thinks, now that his campaign is being destroyed by the good pastor, is such an obviously political and disingenuous statement that it demolishes any credibility he had as a new kind of anti-politics politician. It is patently clear that only now when Wright is sinking Obama’s campaign, after twenty years of his attending Wright’s parish, does Obama see fit to denounce him.

It is doubtful that people are buying this. You don’t get married by, and have your kids baptized by, and call a spiritual mentor, someone whose views you call appalling and contradictory to everything you’ve ever done in your life. Reverend Wright brings to mind the joke about two men approaching each other on the street in Harlem. One says “Good morning, motherf---er!” and the other responds “Good morning, Reverend.”

Obama’s denouncing Wright is not likely to be a big help. Not only has he disowned the black community by his own standard, but the shine has now been fully removed from his aura. Not just by Reverend Wright, although he’s done quite a job of it, but by his association with unrepentant terrorist Bill Ayers, who bombed the Pentagon in the past and is now (surprise!) a professor teaching students how to be radicals. Obama has yet to disown Ayers, but he may have to when the issue comes up again.

And Obama's wife Michelle is not as adept at hiding her anger (not black anger, but liberal anger) with a country that has allowed her to make $300,000 a year after her husband was elected to the Senate. America, shockingly, hasn’t been too bad to the Obamas.

This my fellow Americans is your Democratic Party today. That Clinton and Obama are the best the Democrats can put up in an election that they are strongly expected to win betrays a glaring problem in their party. John McCain may yet defeat one of them in a year where the country is going strongly Democrat and with little support from his Republican base.

Richard Nixon once said that “you run to the right to win the nomination, and then you run to the center to win the election”. Ronald Reagan believed no such thing and no politician ever ran to the right of him. Both won huge electoral victories, partly because they were running against the likes of George McGovern, Jimmy Carter, and Walter Mondale (and let’s not forget Mike Dukakis…a candidate so weak Reagan’s legacy was enough to beat him). So maybe the key to winning a presidential election in America could just be “don’t go anywhere near the left.” Take heed Republicans.

The Democrats will certainly, in the coming election campaign, paint a McCain presidency as “four more years of Bush”.

Given that we’ve not been attacked since 9/11, the economy has for the most part been roaring, the unemployment rate is the lowest it’s ever been in this country, home ownership even with the foreclosures of late is still very high, for the first time in many years Americans aren’t working for the government until June every year, and most of all that he refuses to back down in a fight against the most hideous thugs that this world can offer, despite constant wailing from caterwauling idiots—so that 4,000-plus of the greatest Americans shall not have died in vain—“four more years of Bush” would be a gigantic leap better than anything the Democrats can offer.

For all the cries about Bush’s handling of Iraq and everything else, no one…no one…has offered up any better ideas. And that goes with most of the issues relevant to Americans, from Social Security to taxes. Even as awful as Bush and McCain both are on illegal immigration, the Democrats still won’t offer a viable alternative.

And until they do, the left’s gnashing of teeth about the “worst president ever” still sounds like kicking and screaming from reactionaries who behave as if power was owed to them.

Operation Chaos – Utter Political and Broadcasting Brilliance

In my early twenties, I had the fears that many people had about the environment. I was reading the stories about our being on the edge of an apocalypse just as we were finally achieving peace with the Russians (which, as I now know, was actually the victory of America and Ronald Reagan over the suddenly hapless Soviet Union). And I believed all of it.

And then, for the first time, I starting hearing a compelling guy on the radio whose show was exploding in popularity, explaining the whole environmental movement and what it was about. I couldn’t believe how much wasn’t being reported about things like acid rain and tree destruction. I have been a huge fan of Rush Limbaugh ever since.

People can say what they want about Rush. He has become possibly the most powerful figure in American politics of the last fifty years. Because of Rush Limbaugh, there is Sean Hannity, Ann Coulter, Laura Ingraham, the Drudge Report, Townhall, Fox News. It took one radio host to show broadcasting and publishing businesses everywhere that there was a big market of people disgusted with left-wing media bias. That bias still exists with the large majority of newspapers and networks in a huge way, but it is growing smaller by the day. The New York Times is preparing for huge layoffs for the first time ever.

When Democrats like Harry “The War Is Lost” Reid tried to take Rush’s “phony soldiers” comment out of context to actually demand that his stations reprimand him…after Reid himself had just called our fighting men and women losers…Rush took Reid’s letter, signed by most all the Democrats in Congress, and sold it on ebay for $2 million. He took the money, matched it himself, and donated the $4 million to the Marine Corps Law Enforcement Foundation. He also asked Harry Reid to put in a contribution of his own, which Reid refused to do (despite having the financial ability to do so thanks to his slimy land deals while senator). Rush turned a government attack on a private citizen into a complete and utter embarrassment for a shamefully behaving political party.

Similarly, since the media gleefully pronounced Rush’s irrelevance after moderate John McCain secured the Republican presidential nomination, Rush has begun Operation Chaos…and he has landed such devastating blows on the left wing media and the Democratic Party that they still don’t know what has hit them. I have been watching Operation Chaos unfold and I don’t think I have ever had more fun following politics.

Rush is encouraging conservatives who won’t be voting in the meaningless Republican primaries to cross over and vote for Hillary. This will keep her in the race, thus continuing the battle between the two, encouraging the Clintons to “bloody up” Obama politically, since the Republicans are too wimpy to do it. It will also expose Democrat racism, drain them of cash, and cause utter chaos within the party up to the convention in Denver.

I was at first annoyed that Rush was discouraging his audience from putting Hillary away for good. But I was so, so wrong. It has been a phenomenal success. More and more, Obama is now seen not as a charismatic, uniting leader, but as an extreme left wing radical with, to say the least, disturbing associations. The “Drive By” media is desperately trying to get Hillary out of the race, knowing it will slow down criticism of Obama. Howard Dean is actually looking like the relatively sane voice in his party, which is no small achievement. And Obama himself is showing his true colors, calling rural Pennsylvanians who don’t support him God-clinging, gun-toting morons as only an elitist liberal can.

Obama spent triple the money in the battleground commonwealth of Pennsylvania and not only lost to Hillary but got creamed. And more and more he is being seen as unelectable. There is no way any of this could have happened had he locked up the nomination by now. The media would be studiously ignoring Jeremiah Wright, Bill Ayers, and Cling-gate--dismissing them as overblown attacks from the right-wing hate machine--were none of them in the tank for Hillary, or at least someone who stands a better chance against John McCain.

The greatest part of all is watching Rush taunt them. He isn’t doing any of this behind the scenes. He is open, honest, and clearly describing what is going on. Rush sometimes even informs the liberal operatives listening to his show what he’s going to do next. Like he always says, he knows these people like every square inch of his glorious naked body. And with Operation Chaos, he is proving it. He is demonstrating, with media sound clips every single day, how the left would rather choke on cement than give him credit for having so much influence.

He has even openly advised the Obama campaign that they could put a stop to all of it simply by acknowledging Operation Chaos. And Obama and the Democrats continue to cut off their nose. Rush knows full well that their egos and arrogance won’t ever, ever, EVER allow them to admit that he has gotten the best of them.

It is brilliant politics, and historic radio.

It has to be the most fun he could ever have been having in his whole career. For years the "tolerant" and "understanding" left wing media and Democratic Party have attacked him mercilessly, genuinely attempting to destroy his life for not falling in line with them. Now he is shoving it up their arrogant, elitist asses so hard that liberals are struck dumb not knowing what to do.

Don’t mess with Rush.

God Bless you Mr. Limbaugh. You have made politics an absolute blast lately.

What Is “Keep America Strong”?

I grew up in a Republican household. My father believes that Rush Limbaugh is too liberal, and my mother remains mildly conservative despite remaining a subscriber to the Philadelphia Inquirer (for which I, her pain-in-the-butt political son, frequently give her a hard time). I won’t say I had such values drilled into me, even though I was raised Catholic and subsequently pro-life.

I remember once as a kid complaining to my older brother about having to say the Pledge of Allegiance in school. My brother was rightly concerned by my saying this, and informed my father, who gave me a lecture on why we said the Pledge. He didn’t get angry with me, he simply gave me a history lesson.

I don’t remember what he said. I wish I did, and I will ask him, because I sometimes questioned whether it is right to force a child to swear allegiance to a religion or to a country. America, it seems to me, was founded on principles that would appear on the surface to reject such indoctrination, for lack of a better word.

As I have gotten older and considered having children of my own, I appreciate that I was forced to do certain things like attending church and saying the Pledge of Allegiance. I stopped going to church for about fifteen years when I no longer had to. But I returned.

It wasn’t that I missed it or that I felt guilty about not going. What happened was that I was reading a Norman Vincent Peale book and he talked about things that helped people to live longer, and going to church was one of those things. Because of that, I now go to church every Sunday.

Even if you are forcing yourself to spend an hour a week in church, you are sitting in God’s home. You are taught that you are a sinner but that Jesus loves you anyway, and that he took the beatings so you wouldn’t have to. You can look at the figure of the man who allowed himself to be crucified and confess your shortcomings. It teaches humility. It teaches you to understand something bigger than yourself. It surrounds you with people of the same mindset, people that want to be better.

You know that, for the most part, if you needed help, you are with people who would be there.

Similarly, I am grateful that I was taught to appreciate the greatness of the country that I live in. My fourth grade teacher, Miss Meany, was tough and I didn’t always like that. But she also told us realities of the Soviet Union and what happened to parents of children who told government agents that they had been complaining about not having enough food. It is hard to imagine a teacher teaching the ugly realities of life in Middle Eastern dictatorships today. More often, children are taught to have nightmares of what will happen to the world if their parents continue to drive SUVs.

Like Tom Brokaw, I would rather it not be about left and right and would rather it be about solutions. But unlike Tom, I see the left vs. right as being about perpetuating problems vs. finding solutions.

Ann Coulter recently pointed out that Republicans used to run on the strength of fighting the Cold War; now that the Cold War has been won, Republicans have lost it as an issue. George W. Bush won the 2004 election on fighting terrorism; he has done such a great job that the Republicans have, for now, lost that as an issue as well. Democrats run on poverty and education; having been in charge of both for over 40 years and having made both problems worse, they can continue to run successfully on the issue. If Roe v. Wade is overturned, Republicans may never win again.

Liberals look at America and see what is wrong, apologize for it, and give anyone afflicted other people’s money to make up for it. Conservatives look at what’s right with America, never apologize for her, and encourage their afflicted fellow countrymen that they are in the best place in the world to fix their own problems. And that they should be happy to have the government out of their lives rather than in them.

I’d rather be on the side of solutions, and on thinking positive for my country. And doing my part to ensure that this country remains great as it has always been in my lifetime.

More to come. And God Bless the United States of America.