Posted on 06/08/2009 6:58:16 AM PDT by meandog
Former first lady Laura Bush said while her husband, George W. Bush, does not think it’s appropriate for a former president to criticize his successor, she understands why former Vice President Dick Cheney has.
“That’s his right as a citizen of the U.S., and I think he also feels obligated and so I understand why he wants to speak out,” Bush said in an interview with ABC’s “Good Morning America.” “On the other hand George feels like as a former president that he owes President Obama his silence on issues and that there’s no reason to second guess any decisions he makes.”
The former first lady also approves of Obama’s Supreme Court nominee, Sonia Sotomayor, saying “she sounds like a very interesting and good nominee.”
“As a woman I’m proud that there might be another woman on the court,” Bush said. “So we’ll see what happens, but I wish her well.”
Asked about the infighting within the Republican Party, Bush said while she and former President Bush “talk about it a lot,” it’s “probably not that bad.”
“I think it’s just a very typical political cycle,” she said of the GOP’s shrinking status. “It’s like creative tension within a party for people to talk about what it is they – how they want to be represented
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
Reagan didn't have to...his actions in office spoke volumes against what Carter was whining about at the time. Besides he was followed by Bush I and, by the time Clinton got in, Reagan couldn't speak as he was suffering from Alzheimer's. If you'll remember, when Bush I left office, he kept threatening to, "I'm going to say something about this" with what the Clintonestas were doing but he never did. I expect the same from his son as the acorn never falls too far from the tree. Oops, wrong metaphor, as an oak implies strength...I should have said the seed doesn't sail too far from the dandelion weed.
I’m really tired of your nonsensical rants.
Nobody here has any idea why you expend so much time and energy defending Bush’s indefensible passive acceptance of socialism, and the misrepresentation of material facts, but to argue that because the constitution lacks a specific instruction for each and every logical duty that he ignored, that he was thus justified in doing so, is to ignore the purpose of the constitution.
It is clear to most here that Bush’s dismantling of the Republican party, and disregard of basic principles of republican government are a major factor is the election results, both Presidential, and congressional.
You fail to note that President Reagan also had the same hostile media to deal with, but did not settle for losing a single debate. Bush wanted to lose the debate; it cannot ever be denied again.
Save your replies for those that limit themselves to your adolescent analytical level.
Post 162 - unsolicited ad hominem attack
Post 169 - really nasty post, riddled with false accusations
Post 185 - Vile word
Post 187 - yet another vile word.
Now PLEASE leave me alone. So far you have said nothing of merit regarding the topic of the thread and have made multiple false accusations and personal attacks against me.
I lost my head and returned fire once (dumb), and I am sorry I did.
Now stop.
“...his actions in office spoke volumes against what Carter was whining about at the time...”
There goes your argument. If Bush was out speaking, it would be classified as “whining”.
I’m not a huge Bush fan, but I often these days lament the death of the eleventh commandment.
“The former first lady also approves of Obama’s Supreme Court nominee, Sonia Sotomayor, saying “she sounds like a very interesting and good nominee.
“’As a woman I’m proud that there might be another woman on the court,” Bush said. “So we’ll see what happens, but I wish her well.’”
Just as race sometimes trumps everything else I suppose gender does also.
I just wish the Bushes would go away and ALL of them (including Laura) keep their mouths shut. We’ve had more than enough of them.
I guess you don't have to make sense, and you can say whatever you want and anyone questioning you is "adolescent."
Forgive me for expecting to be able to ask legitimate questions and get legitimate responses. Forgive me for intruding in your world of ultimate authority. I bow to your superiority in all things.....
(I had forgotten how personal the attacks on this forum were, and how frequently and baselessly they were leveled).
169 was only false in your mind. - I checked with others.
185 nonsequitur. You said attacks not vile words as you call them I understand you are scared of words since your President W could not use them to great purpose.
187 Another nonsequitur wasn't even to you.
Try to argue a point for once you have launched into attacks to just about everyone on this thread. You sent me the baby head insult and on and on and on. Go look in the mirror and ask "What would Jesus do?" He certainly did not belittle or degrade people like you do (Hey neither did your precious W now that I think of it. maybe Jesus is too tough a target; you should strive be more like W and just keep silent.).
OH and REMEBER and REVIEW the record. You posted to ME first with an insult. Try reading the first part of my tag line. It's Latin so I know you can't but the internet can help you translate it - wow isn't it interesting that a person you think was dropped on their head can read and write Latin. The Lord works in mysterious ways.
I agree. If, right after 9/11, GWB had marshaled our national mood, involved citizens in a home-defense structure, created shared sacrifice and patriotic war effort activities we would have crushed the disloyal internal opposition for decades. The world's impression of American single-mindedness of purpose would have had our foriegn enemies suing for peace rather than hoping for regime change and America's predictable return to weakness (now underway!). More allies would have scrambled on board our anti-Jihad bandwagon, helped us overthrow Iran, Syria and North Korea, and the WOT would already be all over but the shouting! And Obama would still be a community organizer.
I hope that was humor? - He was followed by his Vice President.
The reason that President Bush should be speaking out now, is because of his inexplicable failure to do so during his time in office. WMD for example; the people should have been told authoratively that those weapons had been moved to the Bekaa Valley for use against Israel (still there), and why the move had been allowed. He should have explained the 16 tons of semi-refined uranium found in Bagdad when Sadam fell. The media should have never been allowed to lie.
Exactly the kind of adolescent pout that I expected.
You have no facts, nor understanding, and you attack those that do, and then accuse them of attacking you.
What are you, 13 years old? Are you crying?
Robin Roberts just had to try to get the much loved and well respected former First Lady's stamp of approval for all things Obama. Robin is stupid enough to think she succeeded but she failed to recognize that with her gracious response Mrs Bush did no such thing. Thus demonstrating exactly why she remains so popular. Roberts never suspected that she was not in charge of that interview.
I'm not crying. I think your behavior is absurd, and I'm feeling sorry that you're so insecure that you feel the need to lash out in such an odd and inexplicable manner.
I'm sorry I tread on your holy ground and dared counter your divine wisdom, and won't do it again.
So unless your worship wishes to continue to discuss the issue being discussed here, I'm not interested in anything further you have to say.
The record stands. I repeat.........NO more. Lies are still lies no matter how often you repeat them.
(Maybe you should find more honest friends....)
Please elaborate.
Or she could say the opposite and ignite a backlash from dems (and more cowering from repubs) to make sure she’s confirmed.
Personal.
What are you, 13 years old? Are you crying?
Personal.
nonsensical rant
Personal.
I'm really ready to end this, ed. You believe you can say what you'd like about me and its not "personal." That's fine. I've been around six decades, and I can take anything you dish out.
The double standard is clear. If one admires President Bush, it is fair game to say whatever one feels like saying to that person, and there is no fault in it. But should one who supports President Bush attack another person's argument, it is out of bounds.
In my two years away, I had forgotten this blatant double standard, and the level of whining when one responds to said attacks.
It's OK. I entered your little world of authority, and you felt the need to remove me. Consider your effort successful.
I was debating his argument, disagreeing with his comments, and it led to a series of insults of me personally that had no bearing on anything I had said.
I guess this is expected and accepted around here, but I just want the facts out there before I leave this thread in an effort to avoid any further mindless insults....
I'm sure the President would have been happy to 'hand over the power of his office to someone who would continue his policies'. Unfortunately, it was not he alone who got the Republican party to the point that regular voters didn't want to trust them with the economy, which was first and foremost in their minds at the time of the election. The Republicans in Congress had spent beyond what even the President wanted, and not being one to throw the baby out with the bath water, and not having a line item veto, he didn't want to turn down the full budgets, so they went on through. That, combined with the, what I consider suspicious, timing of the bank and investment house failures, served to turn even some Republicans toward the Democrat party, though they've never been known to be penurious with taxpayer dollars, so I don't know what they were thinking.
The average voter only knows what's shown on the nightly news, or what they read in the newspapers. If all they get it negativity toward all Republicans, they begin to think that maybe the Republicans don't have the answers, so they'll try the Democrat this time. We also had a candidate who was less than enthusiastic about the basic principles of the Republican Party. It's the nature of the political cycle. Unfortunately, that coincided with That One's rise, and his fawning, slobbering coverage by the MSM, so that people didn't even LISTEN to what he said he was going to do, they just felt good listening to him, and besides, voting for the cool black guy would assuage their white guilt.
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.