Only a Liberal…

I think the wording of a poll question is critical to really understanding the “I want the President to fail” debate. Do you want the President to fail in general, or do you want policies you disagree with to fail? Most partisan invertebrates answer this question with blind emotion, and I reserve a special place in hell for these morons. President Clinton passed welfare reform. Although I strongly dislike him in general, I did not want him to fail at doing that simply because he’s a poopy head.
Regardless, this hypocritical outrage at Rush Limbaugh for wanting Obama to fail is ridiculous. In August of 2006, a Patterico poll found that 51% of Democrats did not want Bush to succeed. The majority of these 51% simply hate George W. Bush, and failure increased the chances of a Democrat in 2008. They are entitled to do so, but don’t shower us with all this outrage that you liberals didn’t have in 2006. Its amazing to see the idiotic, ignorant comments on sites like Huffington Post:

Al Eisele: The Republican Party, America’s second oldest political party and a force in American politics and government since the time of Abraham Lincoln, died on March 1. It was 155 years old.

James Moore: The more people that hear Limbaugh articulate his disdain for the success of America the better will be the country’s chances of rejecting his hateful ideology and getting back on the path to prosperity.

Jill Brooke: Who were the undisputed champs of CPAC? Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh — two unmarried people without any children.

I feel like I’m taking crazy pills. Limbaugh said on numerous occasions that America wanted to fail, yet Moore claims Limbaugh has “disdain for the success of America.” Flat-out, shameless liar. Mr. Eisele WISHES from the depths of his soul that the Republican party died as a result of Rush’s speech, but wishful thinking will get him nowhere. Jill Brooke flat out changed the subject, showing that her opinion is as worthless as an Obama campaign promise. Check out that link and see more comments in a substance vacuum from scholars like Alec Baldwin and Michael Moore.
Rush has said on numerous occasions that he is specifically referring to the liberal/socialist policies that Obama is putting into place and planning for the future. That is what he wants to fail: not America. Getting mad at Limbaugh without addressing the substance of his argument is intellectually cowardly. “Us vs. Them” bullshit is getting worse everyday; I am so sick of it.

If you want either President to fail at everything, you are an idiot. Please stop voting and reproducing; you are too dumb to live. If you want them to fail at doing specific things that you ideologically disagree with, you are normal.  Get the facts before you form so-called “strong” opinions.

I have been absolutely enamored with the blind hatred of President George W Bush… it really is quite amazing, especially since it comes from people who are so quick to condemn judgment of anyone. My attitude is he is a politician who panders, jukes, and says things he doesnt mean to be powerful and liked by as many people as possible. I asked myself, “Is this guy really the anomaly the liberal left claims he is? Why do they hate this man so much?” And I found the website whywehatebush.com. Ok, great I’ll get my answers…

The first statement on their homepage at the very top says “Bush stands against everything that America stands for.” Really? Everything? You’d think by luck he might stand for SOMETHING that America stands for. I think one of the things you can say about Bush is he is VERY pro-American, and some people might have some good arguments why that might be bad if overdone. Then my eyes dart over to some numbers… ok, they have some actual stats that show President Bush really is evil…

FACT: BUSH OIL
1999 - $19 BARREL
2006 - $70 BARREL

Now, hold on a minute… if I recall, he didnt take office until early 2001… what do oil prices in 1999 have to do with him? I looked up the numbers, in 2000 the price was $28, 2001 it was $23… we’ll call it $25. Evidently, $19 sounded better to them. So does a $55 increase in a barrel of oil prove he’s evil? I suppose if he’s responsible for it and there are no other factors that contribute. I’d stipulate the President of the United States doesn’t have the slightest effect on oil prices other than with policies he approves, like if he allowed drilling in Alaska or the Gulf of Mexico, prices would go down. So if Bush is credited with astronomical gas prices, is he also credited with all the electronics price decreases during his office? One might argue he has no effect on that stuff. I AGREE.
Below that there is a list of 11 things that explain why they hate Bush. #1 is vague, but #2 says,
“Bush and his cabal of henchmen lied to the American people about Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq, and they continue to obfuscate the truth while their companies cash in, Iraqis suffer and American soldiers die.”

Aside from the He-Man-esque “henchmen” comment, this is just silly. I have heard this echoed for years as the quintissential crime committed by Bush, that he LIED about WMD. If he lied about it, EVERYONE ON EARTH lied about it. And I quote,

“Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime … He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation … And now he is miscalculating America’s response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction … So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real…” — Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003

“In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members … It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons.” — Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002
So it is clear and unarguable that hating Bush for the WMD issue is IRRATIONAL if it is only pointed at Bush. There is an ENDLESS list of quotes like this at freerepublic.com and elsewhere.

Now I realize that this website is not the best criticism to analyze, but it is representative of the layman. I will get to the slightly more intellectual comments soon… one more bullet from this site:

“The Bush Administration has manipulated the media to the point of undermining the Constitutional guarantees of a Free Press.”

Are you kidding me? Do people really believe the media SUPPORTS President Bush due to his control? It’s so patently absurd as to be laughable. And if there was a SHRED of truth to this statement, Bush would have been EASILY impeached and removed from office.

That brings up another point… Bush is the worst liar in history according to the liberal left. He does nothing but lie, lie, lie. Let’s look at this rationally… we all agree that there are a substantial number of Americans who hate George W Bush, and want him out of office, including a majority of congressmen. If they have all this evidence that he lied, why have they been unable to get rid of him?