Platitudes from sycophants

( – promoted by buhdydharma )

This is a combination of two posts from my Shenandoah Valley blog,

SWAC Girl never disappoints:

In this case, the President made us a safer people … holding off terrorist attacks … but warning terrorism is still looming and we must never let down our guard.

Never mind the fact that he permitted the attacks of 9/11 through inaction in the face of multiple warnings. That’s not relevant, right?

Do not permit historical revisionism on the part of the Republicans.

There is nothing – NOTHING – to thank George W. Bush for. To merely call him the “Worst. President. Ever.”  does not go nearly far enough.

He and his are criminals, and their sycophants and enablers should be ashamed of themselves.

Go AWAY, Bush. But please, be where we can find you when we come to take you away in handcuffs.

And I’m here to remind you

Of the mess you left when you went away

It’s not fair to deny me

Of the cross I bear that you gave to me

You, you, you oughta know

I should give you a bit of the back story as to why this particular SWAC Girl excursion into….well, blatant dishonesty…..bothers me so much.

This is an excerpt from a piece that originally appeared in my hometown newspaper end of last month, written, naturally, by a GOP hack: a past chairwoman of our local Republican party.

When you see the title of her piece, you will, I am sure, realize that it directly inspired the title of my previous post.

The title,in all its emetic glory, is:

“A Panegyric To The President.”

Here, then, is a small excerpt:

History should judge President George W. Bush as one of America’s great Presidents. His record of accomplishment in foreign policy, his grace in the face of unrivaled malevolence, his courage in the face of dreadful pressure, and his vision of a world made free are the stuff of greatness. Here is an abbreviated catalogue of his accomplishments and virtues:

Rather than putting you through the rest of the rectal osculations and historical revision the author offers up, I’ll let someone else pick up at that point.

Here, Ms. Bucknam, is your “catalogue of his accomplishments and virtues”.

You should watch this too, Lynn.

The only kick with this that I have is the use of the word, “legacy.” I’m uncomfortable with applying that term to the Bush presidency. It’s not a “legacy”.

Criminals have RECORDS.


Skip to comment form

  1. Are you having a Nancy Pelosi moment yet?

    Yes I lent my support to the “left” well mostly because the “right” was only a mutual platitude exchange society.  No real breathing people involved but actually the very same thing does apply to the “left”.

    What do I mean by that?

    “Left” and “right” belief systems lean upon each other to further globalization.  It is after all commerce that drives the world and we, us, the current occupants of the province of Northcomm simply gulp far too much energy for what we really contribute in the world scheme of things.

  2. Is Ms. Buckham on drugs?  How much do you think she was paid for this article?  Or is she one of those deluded Repugs that lives in their own little worlds?

    She and Anne Coulter need to get reality check-ups — they’re both living in fantasyland!

  3. Be careful when posting comments on right-wing blogs for this was a response to your comment on SWAC blog:

    His speech had that “well, I’m finished and I am outa here” appeal….

    Kestrel, although Bush wasn’t the best president (too much like Chamberlain for my tastes) he did not break any laws.

    I challenge you to name one, just ONE specific law that President Bush broke.

    A continued non-response to the above comment only reinforces the blog’s readers (and writers) belief that Bush has committed no crimes.

    Furthermore, the challenge itself is a trap. It is an attempt to play upon your anger and get you to start naming laws “we know” he has broken. Then after an exchange, his response will be something like this, “You are obviously full of hate, because in this country a man is innocent until proven guilty. The democrats have refused to investigate, so they obviously know that no laws were broken.”

    A better response would be, “In this country a man is innocent until proven guilty and Bush and Cheney have been convicted of no crimes. However, they are suspected of…(list offenses). Bush himself has even admitted to wiretapping Americans without warrants and releasing ORCON classified information (See comment #31 for detail). These allegations demand that a non-partisan investigation into these suspected crimes occur. It would seem to me that if no crimes had taken place, then Bush and Cheney would welcome an investigation in order to exonerate them from these allegations.” Surely you would agree.

Comments have been disabled.