Posted on 06/15/2004 9:25:09 AM PDT by areafiftyone
President Bush certainly didn't score any points with his conservative base on Monday when he praised Bill Clinton to the hilt during the unveiling of the impeached president's White House portrait.
"President Bush was more laudatory and more passionate about Bill Clinton than he was about President Reagan [during Friday's memorial service]," contended nationally syndicated radio host Michael Savage Monday night.
When Bush spoke about Reagan, said Savage, "we got empty homilies. We got less than empty homilies - we got a Mr. Rogers job."
But at the Clinton portrait ceremony, Savage said, "Today we actually got a passionate President Bush. He was almost animated to be around Bill Clinton. The guy looked happy."
Though the Bush-Clinton lovefest left many of the president's fans fuming, Mr. Clinton's obvious enjoyment of Bush's kind words also raised eyebrows inside Sen. John Kerry presidential campaign, which only 24-hours earlier had been assured that Clinton would come out swinging this week against the White House.
"Maybe [Bush and Clinton] have a mutual interest in a Democrat not winning this November," said MSNBC host Chris Matthews, noting that a Kerry loss would pave the way for Mrs. Clinton's 2008 presidential campaign.
Protagoras, I've never heard liberals say that. Most liberals aren't big on the word "sin."
I have heard Christians I've known and respected throughout my life use the phrase, long before I even knew what a liberal was. I hope you aren't intending to denigrate good Christians because they refuse to fill their hearts with bitterness and hatred. Good Christians aren't "liberals."
By all means classy and classic Bush "strategery."
Clinton will look mighty small pissin' in the Cheerios of the man that complimented him on his service.
Do you have a link perchance?
Savage is a loser who thinks "conservatives" are all classless louts.
What would Reagan have said?
Believe the term is "Damning with Faint Praise."
Well said, Miss M!
Nope..............LOL.
I thought his speech was less than complimentary as he praised Clinton's disposition but said nothing about his so-called accomplishments. It sounded as though it was abject praise, but read another way it was damnation through omission of praise for Clinton's handling of real issues or programs
And that's even worse, insulting that great lady. He's not fit to carry her handbag.
Remember, we have NO ONE ELSE!!!
You make me laugh!!!!
God bless you FRiend!
You are exactly right. Bush did exactly what he should have and to do less would have reflected badly on the entire party. Savage has lost it.
Here's a link to what I was talking about, regarding freepers commenting on Savage going off on Thatcher's way of speaking:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1153513/posts
See, your screen name says it all. :-) And W is NOT trash.
Maturity, class, graciousness and yes, intelligence, often involve not saying what you REALLY WANT to say!
Yeah, Bush should have berated and scorned Clinton at the unveiling of Clinton's portrait. Right. Thank God I don't know any "conservatives" who are so stupid they are peeved at Bush for doing the politically smart, and classy, thing.
I am part of President Bush's Conservative base. When he speaks of Clinton and maintains his dignity, it does not bother me one bit. In fact it is admirable, because it is more than I can do.
Savage is not his real name either.
Your Uncle Osgood is utterly hilarious ("She looks mean to me...but I like my women mean." I'm still laughing! This sounds like something from a Faulkner novel.
Bill had an affair, do you know how he handled his daughter when he faced her?
An Affair? I'm sure he can't even begin to count the "an affairs" he had.
bump.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.