Posted on 09/24/2006 4:43:47 AM PDT by libstripper
Since the president’s re-election, loathers of George W. Bush have had no shortage of cudgels with which to club him: a distressingly belated response to Hurricane Katrina; an experiment in warrantless wiretapping; a modest parade of indictments; a nation-building project so distant from its original intent that our troops are now caught in a proto-civil war. One can certainly understand how these developments — and Bush’s correspondingly rotten approval ratings — have emboldened the opposition. The problem is that these developments have also made the president’s critics more susceptible to rhetorical excess, and Bush, like his predecessor, already has an impressive gift for bringing out the yawping worst in those who disagree with him. Otherwise reasonable people go slightly berserk on the subject of his motives; on the subject of his morality, the hinged fall off their door frames and even the stable become unglued. This is both an aesthetic problem and a substantive one.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
How can you read this and say she's "apparently" liberal? The whole message is that his opponents are reasonable--they just SOUND wacky because his awfulness makes them so (justifiably) mad.
I guess the NYT wants to keep its last three conservative customers by printing this drivel, a weak attempt to excuse the vicious, anti-Americanism, complete with a treasonous under-cutting of our nation in time of war, that it's been promoting for the past five years. This piece boiled down to its essence says, "It's Bush's fault," as though we haven't heard that before. Even the Left knows it has gone one bridge too far now, and that even the most clueless middle-of-the-road voters are recoiling from the Left's hatred of this president, so they cobble together this CYA piece to explain their obvious mental illness when it comes to President Bush.
This isn't about Bush.
It's just the libs trying to distance themselves from sounding exactly the same as Chaves, Ahmadeajion, and the terrorist.
The thing that makes me mad is that these asshats keep us from winning the war on terror.
Expect a flurry of that in the next 6 weeks.
It's just the libs trying to distance themselves from sounding exactly the same as Chaves,...
Bingo
" The thing that makes me mad is that these asshats keep us from winning the war on terror. "
The thing that makes me mad is that these asshats keep us from fighting the war on terror.
there -- fixed it....
Nice to know that Bush-haters may get published but there is no audience for these books. Kind of like Cindy Sheehan's PEACE MOM--published a few days ago and languishing in the cellar at Amazon.
Thanks it needed fixing
....a distressingly belated response to Hurricane Katrina; an experiment in warrantless wiretapping; a modest parade of indictments; a nation-building project so distant from its original intent that our troops are now caught in a proto-civil war. One can certainly understand how these developments — and Bush’s correspondingly rotten approval ratings — have emboldened the opposition...
...provide Lapham with a blond wig, stiletto pumps and a copy of “The Fountainhead,” and I suspect he wouldn’t look much different from Ann Coulter
Even the NYT writer is exposed as a bleedin' loony... There is no civil war going on in Iraq, but the writer desperately wanted to get the phrase 'civil war' into the article in order to bash the President, so that's where the disingenuous and misleading construct 'proto-civil war' came from.
This country is not in a recession. I'm surprised that the writer didn't include something like "an economy so out-of-kilter that it's caught in a proto-recession". Can you try any harder to spread your lies, NYT???
The only reason the libs don't say "the devil was here yesterday" is that they don't believe in the devil. To them, it is much worse to say "Bush was here yesterday".
No, thank you. I never give them a "hit".
Honestly, I don't see even the remotest praise here.
Its all bash Bush in no uncertain terms. In fact, they are rude and insulting, not to mention the small fact that they are not true.
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.