Friday, January 16, 2009

Reflections: The Party's Over...


X

...turn out the lights.
X
X
Outgoing Chief Executive, George W. Bush, gave his farewell address to the nation last night. I wasn't tuned in, but I have seen endless clips today.

Some years back, I expressed to Robert A. George of Ragged Thots that Mr. Bush deserved to be sent walking back to Crawford on his knees, carrying his balls in his hat. If an approval rating could be expressed as a visual image, that one just might fit.
X
But, hey--no hard feelings:


X
You did a helluva job, Bushy.
X

8 comments:

Mad said...

I've never understand Lefty Bush hatred, except for the fact that Leftists are as statist and power-mad as any blathering Neocon Republican, thus they were jealous of what they perceived to be Bush-Power. I predict that The Patriot Act et al will only grow under Obama, as does Gitmo and everything else the MSM left howled about.

Alexander Cockburn (whose name I always thought would be a great nom de plume for RAG's favorite Neocon, Andrew Sullivan) best expresses my sentiment on your topic, Rodak:

I’ve always been a fan of George Bush, on the simple grounds that the American empire needs taking down several notches and George Jr has been the right man for the job. It was always odd to listen to liberals and leftists howling about Bush’s poor showing, how he’d reduced America’s standing in the family of nations. Did the Goths fret at the manifest weakness of the Emperor Honorius and lament the lack of a robust or intelligent Roman commander?

Rodak said...

That's bullshit. The empire didn't need to be taken down--it needed to confess it's sins, state its apologies, and unilaterally step down. It needed to step down and begin working in a spirit of cooperation to raise as many of the world's people up to levels of prosperity such as we have been enjoying, rather than seeking the "lowest common denominator" for the majority, while a tiny elite grows ever-more bloated.
The primary sin of the left, in geopolitical terms, is its unreasonable support of the state of Israel. I will be judging Obama primarily on how he addresses that issue.

Mad said...

Jesus, who pissed in your Cheerios this morning?

Rodak said...

Cockburn. When Bush was first a candidate, he promised a "compassionate conservatism" and a "humble foreign policy." Had he lived up to either of those items, he might have been opposed on issues, but he wouldn't have been so universally scorned (to avoid using the "h-word") as he has become.
As it is, Bush is responsible for the needless deaths of more Americans than is Osama, and for no better reason. Bush's war on Iraq is merely the obverse of Obama's coin.

Rodak said...

Ooops. I'm watching Obama on TV as I type. Obviously the "Obama" in the last sentence of my previous comment should have been another "Osama." My bad. (I could edit it out, but it amuses me that I did it, so I'll leave it there.)

Mad said...

How could Cockburn piss in your Cheerios? I didn't even provide the link; which I now correct my ngelectful error

http://counterpunch.com/cockburn01162009.html

Mad said...

my ngelectful error

Your Osama fetish is rubbing off on me ...

Rodak said...

The excerpt wuz enuff. I disagree with the slant of that. I'll read the whole thing later, though.