http://dailycaller.com/2010/11/18/former-u-s-attorney-targeted-in-doj-report-seeks-apology-correction/

As compared to… who? Well, Reagan, obviously, the best President in my lifetime, but other than that…. help me out here.

-Every complaint I have or have heard about Bush (except for a few stark raving loony ones) applies to Obama, only more so.
-Clinton sold state secrets to the Chinese, “helped” with the Middle East peace process (made it even worse, if that’s possible), gave free crap to Korea for empty promises, and brought amazing levels of dishonor on the office of the Presidency
-Bush 41… lousy politician. Didn’t seem to get much done, really. Didn’t really screw much up, though, either (well, he did leave us with the ongoing Iraq mess). I’d take him over Bush 43 – less “compassionate conservatism” BS.
-Carter… set the bar for lousy (until Obama)

So, again, “awful” compared to what?

I had the identical take. This guy couldn’t have cared less what Bush wrote or didn’t write. The conclusion was there before the evidence – Bush is an idiot. Among his thesaurus searching he must have avoided the section covering “irony”, because his article is thick with it.

Say what you will about Bush, he proposed policies that had broad support at the time, and he did exactly what he said he would do at every turn. Invading Iraq polled as high as 77% in favor. The Patriot Act had broad support. His tax cuts were popular with just about everyone except the 32% hard core democrats. It may not be smart or leadership, but he never really went against popular opinion. He started to do something about Social Security, then dropped it when it proved unpopular. He started a very sensible (and libertarian) immigration reform, then dropped it when it proved unpopular.

The country has no one but themselves to blame for the worst of the Bush years. The vast majority cheered his dumbest decisions and threatened riots over his best proposals. He was less the “decider” than the “follower in chief”. We may not have gotten what we needed, but we got what we asked for, and probably what we deserved.

I am truly honored, delta. I even outdid my last comment that you designated the most ridiculous thing you’ve ever read online. Quite an achievement, if I may pat myself on the back. I look forward to your review of my next comment. Might want to consult a thesaurus just to liven your writing up a bit. You know, substitute “absurd” or “incredible” or “bizarre” for “ridiculous.” But it is truly an honor that my comment was so ridiculous that it caused you to reply rather than ignore it. Better any reaction than no reaction, right?

Is there a specific deco style that is being parodied by the Art Deco movie posters? A lot of them are samey in an obvious way, so I’m curious if that’s a reference to something in particular.

Apparently, all Art Deco posters must feature people standing stoically, angled 30 degrees, facing left.

We had to kill 6 to 8 million Germans and 2 to 3 million Japanese. In one German city, Dresden, between 20,000 and 25,000 mostly civilians were killed in two days of bombing. 1300 heavy bombers and 4000 tons of bombs were used. If you are willing to take these kinds of measures and using modern technology it should be doable with a much smaller ruling class.

The inability of our armed forces to deal with insurgencies in Iraq and Afghanistan would seem to disprove your claim. I would expect that a true, widespread uprising in the U.S. would be an even bigger challenge because we have a much larger population, millions and millions of whom are armed, and many of whom were trained in the same military it would now oppose. Further, I would expect a fair percentage of desertions, or at least refusals to fight, if our military was deployed against U.S. citizens.

But you are right that our technology and, I would add, prosperity, are keeping such a thing from happening. It’s bread and circuses: as long as people have a sense that they have a lot to lose–401 Ks, big-screen TVs, and so on, they are reluctant to act out against whatever they perceive as injustices by the government. Should the economy take a turn for the worse, things could get ugly.

Admittedly this is the most ridiculous thing I’ve ever read online. Nonetheless, I reply: I’d argue that in the modern era of high technology, disenfranchised serfs overthrowing wealthy overlords would no longer be feasible. With the availability of surveillance scanners, computer processors, satellites, GPS, and Predator drones, any committed overlord could put down an uprising with ease and a very small number of loyalists. As technical power and networking increases, the ability to maintain power (and wealth) in a very small set hands also increases. Political organization is the only answer.

@35 So does this.

Ah shit, Maricopa County. Even the Phoenix po pos wanted to fire the bastard.

Agreed. But it’s still a fun read for those of us who choose to view politics as a blood sport.

I wish William F Buckley were still around so that he could do a similar takedown on the Obama memoir that we will see in 2018 (or 2022).

It was interesting that the article praises Churchill for his intelligence (which he definitely had) and chastises Bush for condoning torture. Would Churchill not have done the same thing, in fact probably he did. Under Churchill cities and civilian populations were directly targeted for bombing. They were not collateral damage.

This type of article leads me to believe that the author is less concerned about tactics and more concerned about the political bent of the guy in charge.

Yes, and he only considered it because CHENEY SUGGESTED IT TO HIM FIRST. Just think about that.

“The idea came from Mr. Cheney, who offered to drop out of the race one day during a private lunch between the two men in mid-2003. ‘I did consider the offer,’ Mr. Bush writes, and spent several weeks exploring the possibility…”

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/02/bush-considered-dropping-cheney-from-2004-ticket/

Did I mention it was tax free too?

No wonder those Corps of Engineer guys were always pissed off.

I thought Bush’s worst moment was when he was accused by that singer of not caring about people of color in New Orleans. Seems like he feels a lot of his moments were the “worst”. Which is not only a fundamental failing of the English language but also a major self-reflection FAIL.

But Cheney wouldn’t let him.