Bush, Obama clash over appeasement remarks
By Sasha Issenberg, Globe Staff
WASHINGTON -- President Bush today used a high-profile speech in Israel to attack the idea of pursuing diplomatic talks with renegade countries such as Iran, a key element of Barack Obama’s agenda, likening it to the failed appeasement of Germany prior to World War II.
"Some seem to believe we should negotiate with the terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along," Bush said in a speech to the Knesset, Israel’s parliament, in Jerusalem.
Bush did not mention the Democratic front-runner by name and the White House officially denied that Bush was referring to Obama. But White House officials indicated that the criticism applied to Obama, who has said that as president he would rely on greater diplomacy to improve relations with unfriendly nations.
Obama responded immediately and angrily, saying in a statement: "It is sad that President Bush would use a speech to the Knesset on the 60th anniversary of Israel's independence to launch a false political attack."
The intercontinental exchange between a junior Illinois senator and the sitting president confirmed Obama’s new status as his party’s standard-bearer -- and Bush’s willingness to defend his foreign policy in the midst of the campaign to replace him.
"We have heard this foolish delusion before," Bush said. "As Nazi tanks crossed into Poland in 1939, an American senator declared: 'Lord, if only I could have talked to Hitler, all of this might have been avoided.' We have an obligation to call this what it is – the false comfort of appeasement, which has been repeatedly discredited by history."
Bush apparently referred to the words of William Borah, an Idaho Republican who sought his party’s presidential nomination in 1936. Bush used the anniversary celebration to testify to a continued American-Israeli alliance against terrorism and rogue states, and implicitly to dismiss his domestic political opponents as a potential obstacle to those goals.
While Bush's remarks were consistent with views expressed by his administration before, the location and timing provoked a furor.
"I can’t imagine there’s a precedent for a sitting president to go before the legislative body of a foreign government and launch a political attack on a major-party nominee running to succeed him,” said Brian P. Murphy, a fellow in American history at the University of Pennsylvania.
The White House professed not to understand Obama's ire. “There are many who have suggested these types of negotiations with people that the president, President Bush, thinks that we should not talk to,” said press secretary Dana Perino. “I understand when you're running for office you sometimes think the world revolves around you. That is not always true. And it is not true in this case."
Obama has regularly criticized the Bush administration for refusing to engage unfriendly nations diplomatically. Last July, rival Democratic Senator Hillary Clinton called Obama’s position “irresponsible and frankly naïve” after he said at a debate among Democratic candidates that he would be willing to meet with the leaders of Iran, Syria, Venezuela, North Korea, and Cuba without preconditions.
"The reason is this, that the notion that somehow not talking to countries is punishment to them -- which has been the guiding diplomatic principle of this administration -- is ridiculous," Obama said during the debate.
Even though he was not named by Bush yesterday, prominent Democrats rushed to defend Obama throughout the day, including some who are neutral in the race.
Even Clinton, who has used the issue as a point of contrast with Obama, called Bush's remarks in Israel "offensive and outrageous."
Delaware Senator Joe Biden, a former presidential candidate, offered an expletive when first asked about it; later he described Bush’s remarks as “purely raw politics beneath the president,” and a “long-distance Swift Boating,” a reference to Republican attacks in 2004 against Democratic presidential nominee John F. Kerry's military record in Vietnam.
“For this White House, partisan politics now begins at the water’s edge,” said Representative Rahm Emanuel, an Illinois Democrat and chairman of the House Democratic Caucus. “Does the president have no shame?”
Arizona Senator John McCain, the presumptive Republican nominee who has criticized Obama’s views on diplomacy in the past as evidence of poor judgment, appeared to accept Bush’s historical analogy but refused to label Obama directly as an “appeaser.”
"This does bring up an issue that we will be discussing with the American people and that is why does Barack Obama, Senator Obama, want to sit down with a state sponsor of terrorism?" he told reporters in Columbus, Ohio. McCain delivered a speech laying the goals of his presidency that emphasized the need for bipartisan cooperation, but it was overshadowed to a degree by the long-distance dispute between Bush and Obama.
The controversy followed recent criticism of former President Jimmy Carter for meeting with leaders of Hamas, the Palestinian movement that the US State Department has listed as a terrorist organization. Although Obama has said he would not meet with Hamas until it recognized Israel's right to exist and abandoned violence, he has faced criticism from some Jewish organizations for his willingness to meet with hostile governments in the Mideast.
Obama has lost the Jewish vote to Clinton in some key recent primary contests, and polls indicate that Obama cannot count on the traditionally overwhelming Jewish support for the Democratic presidential nominee. While Kerry won 78 percent of the Jewish vote in 2004, according to one study, the latest Gallup poll shows Obama receiving 61 percent of the Jewish vote to 32 percent for McCain.
"Our electoral politics with regard to foreign policy are vicious, and always have been,” said Murphy, the historian. “But leaving the country and suggesting to an ally that our foreign policy is going to be crippled by someone in his own government -- it’s something that would have been inconceivable to earlier generations of presidents.”
Why would anyone give a damn what George W Bush has to say about foreign policy?
It seems to be a huge waste of time to try to pin down candidates on who they might meet with in various hypothetical situations. I want a president that will do the thing that makes the most sense under the circumstances & don't want him/her to be hamstrung by some stupid political phrasing during the campaign silliness
Saudi Arabia is an "objectionable dictatorship", but Bush sits down with them every other week and plays cribbage. Bush is a complete and total fraud and anbody who listens to him is lost. The media should be ashamed of themselves for continuing to honor the excrement that proceeds from his lips. He is worthless, and reprinting his words will just help to spread the disease of ignorance.
This is irresponsible on the part of Boston.com. The headline from the main page reads, "Bush says Obama favors appeasement."
But, in reading the article, 1) Bush never mentioned Obama; 2) it is unclear to whom he was referring; 3) the White House has denied Bush was referencing Obama.
The headline would be correct to read something along the lines of Obama claims slight over Bush remarks.
Also, why is there no primary article on the speech?
Gee George, kind of like your dad with Saddam Hussein, and Osama Bin Laden, or have you misremembered?...
And W's father WASN'T involved in "arms for hostages"?
We have yet another example of this sociopath intentionally creating fraudulent, smearing strawmen. "Some seem to believe we should negotiate with terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along,"
Despite the fact that repeatedly and explicitly Obama has said that he would not negotiate with terrorists.
I agree his statements are beyond comedic. Where is his straight jacket !
I guess we need to see one of those pictures of Bush the Tall with Sadam... maybe then Bush the Dumb would shut up.
Why would anyone give a damn what George W Bush has to say about foreign policy? Because he is The President of The United States. A foreign policy of appeasement and containment is what killed our fellow citizens on 9/11. If we revert back to that ideal favored by the latte drinking, brie eating, Prius driving goo goos we will be hit again. The United States and the survival of Western Civilization cannot depend on Senator Obama's fantasy land foreign policy of a President negotiating directly with terrorist leaders of Syria and Iran, as he has previously suggested. His statement is a lie. He has said he would deal directly with Ahmadinejad, Assad, Chavez, Castro and Il. They are all terrorists. Thankfully, the rest of the Country does not vote as does Cambridge.
Serioulsy now, why would anyone give a damn about what George W Bush has to say about anything whatsoever!!!!!
Hmm. You know, I was uncertain about supporting Obama. But if President Bush is getting his panties in a knot over him, he must be doing something right...
That's the GW who negotiated with Libya's Gadafhi--a dictator who, unlike Saddam Hussein, is directly responsible for terrorist deaths of US citizens.
Too bad that national political editors don't have memories that go back more than three months.
Perhaps so SJB - but likewise Sen. Obama. What experience does he have in the arena of foreign policy and why should anyone listen to what he has to say?
Now if he said, some of us want to give a big hug to the wackos I'd know he was talking about Obama. Obama's foriegn policy message should be "Hugs for the thugs"
Why would anyone give a damn what Obama has to say about foreign policy?
File Bush's speech under "Things I could do without".
It's comical to see his press secretary talk. Someone please this woman an ounce of IQ.
Hillary, your time's up...please stop wasting our time now.
I can't wait for January 20, 2009 to see all the morons leaving the White House!
It's very possible that Bush was actually talking about Carter.
But, true--why would anyone care what Bush says? Except for the people who really believe that Iraq was behind 9/11 and that Bush is making us safer. People like that probably believe him.
Obama wants to surrender in Iraq; he wants to sit down and have tea with the kook in Iran... But hes not an appeaser?
Who really knows what Obama is? He was educated as a Muslim in Indonesia til the age of 10. He's wobbly on his feet, sans teleprompter, i.e. uh, uh, uh, uh. He votes to the left of every U.S. Senators - even more liberal than Uncle Teddy.
His wife is not proud of America; and they attended a pro-Africa, anti-American church for twenty years - that's 20 YEARS without saying boo.
He is indebted to crooks like Rezko, and terrorists like Ayers; he's mentored by Sen. Turban Durbin (i.e. our troops are "like Nazis"); he's endorsed by Hamas and
wants to negotiate with enemies who hate and attack us.\
He has ZERO business experience to be chief executive. He has no MILITARY experience to command our military! But he is the liberal Messiah. Our brave Troops deserve far better than that!!
Because today we are still a free country, and the fact of the matter is is that the dems havn't had a real candadate since Truman. I was born and raised in southern Illinois and my family were devout dems. My grandfather is probably turning in his grave looking at the new socialist party fo America. The (Demacrats).
The Israeli people are themselves split over the issue of trying to negotiate with people who condone terrorists, because the underlying issue is that nobody can foresee a stable, single state, solution.
So if the people who live in the thick of this aren't throwing out talks with their enemies, how can we?
Nobody in their right mind thinks we're going to negotiate away someone's hatred, but saber rattling isn't our only tool. American foreign policy has always been a game of unintended consequences (good and bad) - I'd be interested to see what the direct route would produce (if anything).
To quote SJB, in comment #1, "Why would anyone give a damn what George W Bush has to say about foreign policy?"
Best.
Comment.
Ever.
Ha! Correlation is not causation, my friends. To anyone who thinks that Bush's foreign or domestic policies have actually made America safer, I have some elephant stampede insurance I'd like to sell you.
Obama doesn't want to "surrender" in Iraq. The battle was over 5 and a half years ago. Ever since then we've been playing babysitter and trying to hold together a society that WE DESTROYED in the first place. There is no war left to win, and no battle left to surrender. This is a peacekeeping mission, and one we've been badly botching since day one.
Iraq is a cruel, disgusting joke. George W Bush is a war criminal.
It is a shame the US does not have a mechanism for a President with Bush's approval ratings to call for early elections or simply to resign for the good of the country, or better yet to simply not to speak for the remainder of his term.
Bush will have a chance to scold his interrogators at the Hague when he is brought before them during his war crimes trial for the mass murder of over 4000 American soldiers and 100,000+ Iraqis.
Whatr a disgrace to this country the last 8 years have been.
Wow. I didn't think anyone could fit 2 dozen False News talking points in that small a space, but Kev succeeded. I especially love how he's a Muslim AND a Christian. They can't even keep the TPs straight anymore. It's hard when all of them are complete BS.
Obama in the white house, what a disaster!
You are right. He is the President of the United States. However, he is behaving like a dictator, an autocrat. What killed our fellow americans on 9/11 were two planes that went into the World Trade Center Towers, not appeasement or containment. He is not the only president to be concerned with or even attack Iraq. http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1998/12/16/transcripts/clinton.html
He is, however, the only one to do it for his own glory and stay there regardless of the desire, safety, needs, well being of the soldiers and the american people. http://gnn.tv/articles/article.php?id=761
Despite Bush's illusion's he is not Alexander the Great or Julius Cesar. He can't simply disregard our laws, ignore agreements, run ramrod over the civil liberties of the american people. The President does need to work with the rest of the world, the UN, the other branches of government. The lies need to end. We need a strong leader that isn't in office to feed his own ego. He need someone who might actually bring back respect to the office of the Presidency. "....while America shouldn't negotiate out of fear, it shouldn't fear to negotiate...."
In response to the posting: "Why would anyone give a damn what George W Bush has to say about foreign policy? Because he is The President of The United States. A foreign policy of appeasement and containment is what killed our fellow citizens on 9/11. If we revert back to that ideal favored by the latte drinking, brie eating, Prius driving goo goos we will be hit again. The United States and the survival of Western Civilization cannot depend on Senator Obama's fantasy land foreign policy of a President negotiating directly with terrorist leaders of Syria and Iran, as he has previously suggested. His statement is a lie. He has said he would deal directly with Ahmadinejad, Assad, Chavez, Castro and Il. They are all terrorists. Thankfully, the rest of the Country does not vote as does Cambridge. "
Dumb Thug Bush actually thinks he is credible! The more he says the better it is, for Obama. McCain must be cringing. Come on Dumb Thug Bush: Bring It On! Keep injecting yourself into the campaign. We Democrats can't think of a better spokesperson for the GOP and McCain!
Hey Kev,
What Military experience does George Bush have? What business experience does he have (other than big oil)? How has George W. Bush helped our troops (by not giving them the equipment necessary to fight a war i.e. Kevlar vests, armor plating for their vehicles)? Has George W. made the world a better or less stable place to live in and most importantly is America better off now or before he took office? When you answer those questions honestly, the truth hurts....
GWB not talking about Obama. He is talking to Israel, which has its own debate relative to appeasement versus hardline in the Palistinean Peace Process. Dems should get a life. Everything is not about them.
RE: Obama in the white house, what a disaster!
Posted by cameltoe May 15, 08 11
BUSH IN THE WHITE HOUSE -- IT'S BEEN NOTHING BUT DISASTER FOR 8 YEARS !!!!! THERE IS NOTHING THIS ADMINISTRATION HAS DONE IN 8 YEARS THAT ANYONE SHOULD BE PROUD OF !!!!!
I'm taking 1/20/09 off from work to celebrate to naked emperer's departure !!
I think that we should all realize that while many believe the 9/11 was a homegrown attack of sorts by the Federal Government to have a reason for launching this war, should understand that nothing George W. Bush or his administration should be held as truth. He and his administration has cost our men and women of the military their lives with this false pretense for war, caused this housing slump, as well these high ass gas prices, while he spends Billions a month on a war that was not warranted. All that happens with these terrorist is the result of the Government doing underhanded dealings with these foreign countries and Americans will not recognize that. It's like drug dealers doing dirty business with other drug buyers and when the deal goes bad, there is retalliation. We as Americans have to understand that we fall under the Government and what they do we aren't always if at any time aware of how they dictate our lives. I can't say that Obama is or isn't going to be a good president, but I can honestly say he can't be any worse than what we've had in office over the past 20-30 years. The only difference that he bestows is that his skin is dark on the outside and Americans, especially white Americans are afraid of this. If his outer exterior was white, and he had the same position as he has now, there would be no question as to him being the Nominee or even the president. Hilary Clinton is holding on because of ego, and because she is not right with a young, biracial (in her eyes - he's BLACK) man has more pull than she does. God willing, he will become the next president of the United States and he will serve his term completely, and White Racist America will have to suck it up and deal with it, instead of plotting his demise - because God is watching and they will have to answer to him.
Smart people talk with those they consider their enemies. If nothing else, it keeps them at bay and provides some insiight into their thinking. Stupid people don't talk to anyone they might disagree with. Then they send other people's children off to fight wars their willful ignorance caused.
How ironic. All of these uninformed, idiotic statements under the banner of “Political Intelligence.” Maybe this is a post for Mad Magazine? Keep drinking the kool-aid all you Obama-ites. Can't wait for the repeat of the Carter presidency. Truly the worst President in my 54 years. Think back to inflation at more than 12% in the last two years of his presidency; prime rate hit 21.5% in December 1980, the highest rate in U.S. history under any President; fuel being siphoned from cars on the street due to his fine idea of the Iranian oil embargo. And yet the Dems have all the answers. What a joke. Big, unproductive government – big taxes and the same old recycled, failed ideas. Those who forget the lessons of history are doomed to repeat it. Unfortunately the rest of us will have to tag along.
Why was Obama so care about Bush's words, if Bush didn't call names and it would be absolutely irrelevant to Obama? Because Obama knows that Bush tells the truth about his future intentions in foreign policy. There is a Russian proverb: "A thief's hat is burning" and English equivalent "A guilty mind betrays itself". It's all about Obama's response. I don’t believe Obama at all.
Does anyone care what bush says.i am sure most americans dont. and the ones who do have BDS BUSH DELUSIONAL SYNDROME.
Name one "Gorilla" type war that was resolved by the barrel of a gun?!?
Answer, very few if any. This is not an army V's army type of war and therefore it can not be treated as such. How can any solution/end even be mentioned without the word "talk" being in the same sentence, it can't!
IRA, ETA etc, talk is the only path to a permanent solution, every person killed only creates 10 sympathizers, hence it makes the problem worse.
The United States took pot shots from Islamic radicals for 23 years unit we finally made a decisive response on October 7, 2001. We lost countless lives of citizens, soldiers and allies. The foreign policies of Carter, Reagan, Bush and Clinton in dealing with Islamic extremism was to appease and contain. That is exactly why we were hit on September 11. That is cause, effect and consequence. If a President Obama believes otherwise, we will be hit again. It is a tragedy that President Bush cannot articulate his statement of September 20, 2001 on a daily basis, although today he came close. Whether they are radical caliphites, secular dictatorships of loosely knit terrorist groups, they are all different faces of the same enemy: the one that wants to chop your head off for not sharing their belief system...Spare us the moral equivelancies Senator. An American President does not speak directly with savages.
Yo Troy -
America certainly doesn't want a Black Racist as president. A white person voting for Obama is akin to a black person voting for a former member of the KKK.
I love how you republican neo con drones always bring up Carter as the worst president. Give me a freggin break! Can you see Bush building houses for the poor after he leaves office? Bush said the other day that he gave up GOLF in sympathy to the grieving mothers!! Bush, the first president ever to cut taxes in a time of war. Under his administration, these bastards have totally dismantled our government, robbed our treasury and committed torture in our names. We are a nation of LAWS and not of MEN. ABU GHRAIB, HALLIBURTON,PREEMPTIVE WAR, WALTER REED, BLACKWATER, EXECUTIVE POWER, BODY ARMOR, KATRINA, GUANTANAMO, YELLOWCAKE, WATERBOARDING.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080513/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/us_iraq_corruption
Mama:
The worst instance of "history repeating" in decades was the reelection of George W Bush in 2004. His second term was far more devastating than his first, and that's a rather amazing fact.
"Appeasement????" This has got to be the biggest urban legend to hit America. The cause of WWII was not appeasement. The direct cause of WWII was the very harsh and unfair sanctions/reparations placed on Germany at the end of WWI. Hitler came to power by attacking those sanctions...just read his book Mein Kampf.
What do these Arabs want? They want an end to occupation. Just like the Germans wanted an end of the occupation of the Rhineland by the French.
No. If you want to avert war you have to talk an negotiate. That is what history has shown
Did the US not supply arms to the Taliban. Do we not still support the brutal monarchy in Saudi Arabia. Did we not put the Shah in power in Iran. The list goes on and on. Our medling in the middle east to protect oil interests is why we were attacked.
"THERE IS NOTHING THIS ADMINISTRATION HAS DONE IN 8 YEARS THAT ANYONE SHOULD BE PROUD OF !!!!!"
That's just not true.
I remember Bush signed some law about eliminating prison rape back in 2005.. or was it 2003? Anyways, even a broken clock is right twice a day.
Personally, were it up to me, I would keep him in power for another 8 years. He needs 1) a chance to fix things he screwed up, and 2) to be front and center when all his dumbas economic decisions really start to bear fruit. 8 MORE IN '08! It has a nice ring to it.
How can anyone who has been paying attention the last 8 years argue at all in favor of any Bush's policies - economic, foreign, military, etc.? Name ONE area in which he has succeeded, other than buying off your vote with a $300 refund check which will be gone in one trip to the grocery store and gas station?! I don't get it.
All Bush has accomplished in his tough guy hard line against Terrorists is to fuel even higher enrollment rates in the very groups he claims to be defeating. Bush Sr. HELPED CREATE al Qaeda due to his alliance with Bin Laden in Afghanistan. He helped drive Saddam to power in Iraq. His policy created this mess, not Carter's. Carter wanted to not get entrenched in the quagmire that is the Middle East and turn towards reliance on domestic energy. His problem was that big oil, those Texas billionaires who continually manage to convince regular working folk that they have our interests in mind, wouldn't let that happen. Same as how traditional energy companies from the Coal and Oil industries are now funding a movement to block our ability to make energy from a FREE RESOURCE - ie wind!!! Why, because they know it will cut into their profits. And all you middle class pawns buy into their scheme under the guise of "smaller government" or "lower taxes" or "abortion" or "rights to bear arms" (why doesn't anybody ever seem to quote the entirety of that right by the way - the fact that the Right to bear arms is actually "the right to bear arms in a well-ordered militia"?) are just foolish pawns getting used for your vote.
What is going on today in our country is Bush's doing. Tax breaks for companies to send their middle class jobs overseas. Increased instability re: oil thereby driving record profits for that industry while you and I cover the bill. Going from a Billion dollar budget and trade surplus to a Trillion dollar deficit in less than a decade (Aren't Republicans supposed to be "fiscally conservative"?). Cutting taxes for the richest 2% of our country, folks who never even have to so much as wipe their nose with their Social Security checks, then turning and starting a war, then spending out of the Social Security surplus to fund that war. Effectively robbing our parents and grandparents of in many cases theri only retirement money in order to fund more Halliburton profits. Look it all up.
Not to mention foreign policy and al Qaeda. This was created completely by the same type of cowboy mentality that so many of you fawn over Bush for. If any of you ignorant racists would bother doing ANY research on al Qaeda you would see they do not exist because they hate freedom, but because we blindly support Israel and continue to invade Muslim countries, right or wrong, whenever we feel like we need to pad the coffers of Halliburton et al a little more. If you'd bother to listen to facts instead of empty rhetoric, you'd know that Terrorism can't be stomped out by killing Terrorists. And if any of you think we are scaring them - a group of people who have no problem blowing themselves up on a public bus so long as they take a handful of infidels with them - then you clearly have your head up your a$$. Terrorism breeds not like humans but like cockroaches. Attempt to stomp it out and all you do is help it spread it spawn. The only way to get rid of it is to cut off its lifesource - to get rid of cockroaches you don't do it by force, you do it by getting rid of what feeds it. You cut off their food supply by cleaning up your place. You cut off their oxygen through fumigation. You take away its ability to breed. Invading a Muslim country under false pretenses, then jailing and torturing for sport the guilty and innocent alike doesn't do anything but support bin Laden's recruitment message - which is that the US will invade, kill, and dehumanize any Muslims it sees fit in order to gain profit.
Seems to me Bush's foreign policy plays right into bin Laden's hands. And thre are some of you who are arguing AGAINST change in that realm?! Wow, you must be RICH!!
"Words, words, words. HAMLET, Act II, scene 2. line 145 Ed
Tell me this: If you get carjacked on the way home from work, what is the more appropriate way to respond? Do you try your best to both pursue justice for those who committed the crime while also being smart about becoming a victim again - ie take a different, more sensible, shorter, safer route home next time? Or do you buy an arsenal of guns, hunt down and kill everyone in the general vicinity of where you were carjacked who has the same general skin color as the person who jacked you, then continue to take the same route home as before? If you do the latter, wouldn't it make sense that people in that area who had nothing to do with the initial carjacking would be angry at you for retaliating against them for no good reason? Wouldn't it stand to reason that what you have done in fact has not made you at all safer but in fact has made your drive home more dangerous as now you have exponentially more people who not only WOULD attack you in retaliation for your blind assault, but now who may even actually seek you out to avenge your attack?
And doesn't that mean that if you do insist, for some insane reason, to continue to take the same route home, that you'd probably have to buy more guns and kill more people on your way home, maybe even making 'pre-emptive strikes' so as to avoid the possible danger of being carjacked again? And in doing so, don’t you just create more enemies, maybe even some who might hunt down your address and come attack you in your own neighborhood because you have continually gone through theirs blindly killing anyone in the area in either retaliation for your initial carjacking or trying to pre-emptively prevent another one?
You are right Mama - those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it - and all we are seeing nowadays in Iraq and in the escalating enrollment figures of al Qaeda that we saw in our own military in the days following 9/11 - people who are mad that they lost friends and family and want blood in revenge. And yet somehow we turn a blind eye to the factual evidence of why that happened and how we might prevent another attack in favor of Bush's assertions that al Qaeda committed 9/11 because they hate freedom. But countries that are truly 'freer' than us like Canada, and Sweden, and Holland seemed to escape that wrath no?
Bush’s foreign policy supports the latter, more ridiculous approach in the carjacking metaphor. But like in the example of carjacking, thanks to Bush's cowboy mentality, we are actually now less safe. Just as you would be if you pursued that line of thinking post-carjacking. You are less safe. So is your family, and yet instead of changing your behavior and getting a differen toutcome, you still insist on taking the same route home.
The only one who really benefits is the guy who is selling all the guns in that neighborhood. You wonder why we always seem to go to war when there is Texas oil money or Military Industrial money tied to the White House? It’s because that is who is making both the decision to go to war in the first place and the profit off us while we are there. And much like the Right feels they should get all the benefit of our economy without having to be responsible for any of the bills, guarantee you won’t see any children of multi-millionaires on the scrolls of military deaths in Iraq – because that is the Republican way: all the benefit, none of the responsibility. They think “As long as we can keep the poor and ignorant convinced that we are them, as long as we can roll out a Connecticut-raised Yale legacy with a downhome Southern twang (you think he used that accent at Yale?), then we have every right to any riches we can claim.” That to me is against the very fabric of what America is supposed to be. And to see all these lemmings following the Right off the cliff when the leaders are the only ones with a safety net just makes me sick.
All you people who attack 'Liberals' - certainly there are plenty of useless idiots occupying gov't jobs, but I tend to think more money for public schools, bette rhealthcare, and better-funded social services is something we should all agree on. And unlike the Military Industrialists, there does not seem to be a Public School cartel who needs young people to die in order to drive profits. And if you make more than $5 Million a year, then by all means, argue on about how much Bush has benefitted the country - ie your wallet. Anyone else who makes less than that, but argues in Bush's favor, you are nothing more than an abject fool who has been pawned into paying for Bush and the Far Right's record profits. Keep waving your flag and thumping your Bible while Bush and his friends are in your home stealing your retirement money and selling your children into war. Because as long as you play along, this madness will never stop.
One moment, as I put down my guns and bible... Please use verbs and spell check when calling others stupid and ignorant. Then, perhaps, you'll help US get it. Try getting your history from books, rather than yahoo!, Mr. Facts.
Obama replied to this stupid Bush statement (isn't that a redundant phrase) to keep it from gaining legs. It's the "pull the band-aid off quick" campaign theory.
To those cynics who keep making broad statement about how bad Obama would be as President, the rest of us may listen to you if you present an actual argument. Don't just shoot off broad vitriol and expect us to take you seriously.
"Can't wait for the repeat of the Carter presidency." or "A white person voting for Obama is akin to a black person voting for a former member of the KKK," are statements that show only uninformed cynicism. The Democrats DON'T have all the answers, but you certainly can't say that Republicans DO. (Especially after the last 7 years.)
Our government isn't working for us, but what are WE doing about it?
Bitching and moaning.
Apparently, that's the way to lead the free world, fix the economy and solve global worming.
This seems to be a Republican thing, don't sit down and negotiate with your enemys, don't sit down and discuss your "country's" quarels. Just give a warm hug...a wide stance....and have a great dinner while talking about some personal oil buisness. expletive, expletive!!!!!
JFK said it best..."Never negotiate out of fear, but never fear to negotiate."
We are not going to have a meeting of the minds with Iran's President, but ramping up for another useless, counter-productive, expensive war is not the answer either. War seem to be the only tool Bush has in his toolbox.
Obama will be a great president because he is the antithesis of Bush.
"A foreign policy of appeasement and containment is what killed our fellow citizens on 9/11."
This is the most ignorant statement I have read all day. WOW, is that dumb.
Someone get the hook, George's time is up. How long until he's out of office? It won't be fast enough!!
Israel has peace agreements with 2 of its neighbors, Egypt and Jordan. Do you know how they reached those peace agreements? The two sides met with each other. They talked. They negotiated.
Even Reagan met with the head of the Soviet Union, which he referred to as the Evil Empire. Georgey-boy is just scared to go face to face with bad guys. Chickenhawk. Go put on your flight suit and act tough, Georgey! Atta boy.
Obama and the other dems seem awfully touchy about Bush's statement. The truth stings. Obama has said that he would meet with Ahmadinejad without preconditions (despite the denials of his campaign -- it's on video). Hamas has endorsed Obama's election, and are actively working on his behalf. In response, Obama expressed understanding for why Hamas would support him. Obama's foreign policy advisors are advocating appeasement policies around the world, except when they are busy bashing our allies over free trade agreements. I guess Obama is saying, "who are you going to trust, me or your lying eyes?"
Bush will be remembered as the worst President ever to hold this post. I cannot even believe this dumb wise cracking president was elected for a 2nd term. Between Bush and Cheney the only thing I can see is that they had a well thought out plan to create wealth for each other and their oil execeutive buddies. People are worried that terrorists will destroy America, but Bush has already done the work the terrorists wish they could have done.
How much do you spend on gas a week?
Bush's statement speaking in the Knesset marking the 60th anniversary of the Jewish state was offensive and took a lot of nerve. To turn his speech into a political jab at the dems and Obama is so low and tasteless. This man will stoop to saying anything. Equating a vote for the democrats as a vote for the terrorists is unbelievable. This man has shoved every friend/donor and political hack into all areas of our government. No experience needed... less the better (Heck of a job Brownie). The only thing we ask is total loyalty the the Bush crime family. Also, speaking of appeasement, wasn't it Bush's grandfather Prescott Bush who provided the money for the Nazi war machine and the building of the death camps? On Sept. 11th, Bush's father (GHWB) was having breakfast at a Washington hotel with Osama Bin Laden's brother. Look at the Carlyle group who members are all former politicians. These bastards are making tons of money from the military industrial complex and corporate ties. They want this war to last 100 years. Anyone in the world, at this point, would endorse a sack of hammers who could beat the republican candidate for president.
Unfortunately for Americans, Pres. Bush, McCain and the Republicans prefer to speak in half-truths and distortions of the truth, preferring not to find pertinent answers or solutions to the issues facing us today, one example the Real Threat of Global Warming! They think finger-pointing and speaking in a loud voice will deflect the attention away from their failing policies -- that we will forget that they fooled us before. The Republicans will promise and say and anything to stay in power although their conservative polcies do noting to help the American people at large. Gas prices are higher than ever before, as is food (they won't even support the farmers and food is a necessary element for life), we have erroding schools, bridges and roads, jobs which go overseas or job closings, billions of dollars going to a war which should have never been waged and those dollars do nothing to help the Iraqi people who are still suffering and have very little electricity and adequate sewer facilities or the use of their own oil. We have record number of home foreclosures, medical bills which are going through the roof and thousands of people who have no health insurance at all. Every year Democratic Senators and Congressman have to fight to even get a decent minimum wage for American workers while Republicans continually give theirselves an annual wage hike, yet it is the American people who hire them to work for people and not the corporations they bail out time and time again. They pretend to be the Party of Family Values when they are really the party of special interest groups, corporations and greed! They care nothing for suffering families -- college tuition has never been so high, barring thousands of young people from attaining a higher education and achieving the American dream. Their tax code, again, benefits the wealthy and leaves out the American family. They call themselves conservatives which is a nice way of saying they are selfish and like to conserve the wealth for themselves! They make fun of the word "liberalism" like it is a dirty word when we all know liberal means to give amply and generously, something they want not to happen preferring to keep all the wealth and goodtimes for themselves and their corporate buddies. They devise wars which only weaken the fabric of our society by shell-shocked veterans weakened physically and mentally and children who have to grow up without their fathers or mothers because they are either overseas fighting a war or have died in a war when diplomacy would have been the greater action to take. These same veterans if they are lucky to come home have deplorable hospitals to come home to and a battle to get their benefits. If they suffer from mental disease they are often found homeless, as we have shut down the majority of our mental hospitals accross the United States... and yet Republicans continue to fool us that they are the Party of Family Values. Let us not be fooled again!
Remember that scene in The Godfather when Vito tells Sonny "don't ever let anyone outside the family know what you thinking again!". I think someone may want to relate that to W. His time has passed (not that it ever really got going in the first place), and whether or not Obama is the best candidate for the job of president of the once united States of America, it is unjust for our leader to sandbag anyone like that publicly on an international stage.
The United States of America does NOT negotiate with the terrorists. Never has. Never will!
I am sick of this double talker Obama character. Is he trying to change the US constitution and our way of life now?
A response to post #60...
The Constitution and our way have been changed, but it's been by Bush and Cheney. They are the ones who instituted the Patriot Act, Warrantless Wiretapping and signing statements to contradict law after law that Congress has passed.
Bush's intentions have been good, and as the saying goes, the road to hell is paved with them. Even with that huge benefit of the doubt, you could say that he thinks he's protecting America by clamping down on everybody's rights, but it's kind of like puncturing your own tires so that a thief doesn't drive off with your car.
Obama would retreat from Iraq, would negotiate unconditionally with tyrants, says that we are no better than theocracies and dictatorships so as not to offend these bozos and then has a cow when he is considered an appeaser.
I understand that Obama, like other liberals, is sooo sensitive and gets his feelings easily hurt and his esteem easily bruised but what the heck, he has to accept the fact that his view on foreign policy and attitude is appeasement.
He has repeatedly and proudly (for him) said that he would negotiate with any dictator and tyrant unconditionally.
He probably has some argument that no one has thought of before that will change Ahmadinejad's mind about destroying Israel.
Maybe he has promised the Islamo-fascist that he will allow Sharia law to be practiced in those US communities who want it. Change, Obama style!
On Friday (5/16) George Bush made a deal with the Saudis to give them enriched uranium. Fifteen of the 911 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia. Why doesn't the "Liberal Media" cover this fact? Oh I forgot, they are too concerned with who is not wearing a flag pin.
This blogger might want to review your comment before posting it.
Send your comments to masspolitics@globe.com
browse this blog
by categoryINside Boston.com