George W. Bush's dreadful 9/11 speech
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
President Joe Biden was silent during Saturday's 9/11 commemoration events. So were former Presidents Barack Obama and Bill Clinton. Former President Donald Trump visited a New York City police precinct and fire station, where he made a few impromptu remarks.
The only president who delivered a formal speech on 9/11 was former President George W. Bush. And it was terrible.
In two ways. First, Bush's speech was as much about decrying today's political divisions as it was about remembering the events of Sept. 11. But Bush showed an astonishing lack of self-awareness of the role his own actions played in creating those divisions. And second, Bush helped widen those divisions by endorsing a Rachel Maddow-esque argument that an equivalence exists between the plane-hijacking, murderous terrorists of Sept. 11, 2001, and the Capitol rioters of Jan. 6, 2021 — a comparison that has no basis in fact but has done much to sour the national debate.
Bush spoke at ceremonies for Flight 93 in Shanksville, Pennsylvania. It was the site of perhaps the most heroic of many heroic acts by Americans on Sept. 11. The passengers who fought back against the hijackers sacrificed their own lives to save the victims the terrorists were targeting. In the process, they likely also saved the Capitol, or perhaps the White House, from attack.
Bush praised their courage. He praised the courage of Americans who volunteered for the armed forces in the years that followed. And he praised the selflessness of Americans who helped one another at the time. There was great unity in that moment, Bush said. "In the weeks and months following the 9/11 attacks, I was proud to lead an amazing, resilient, united people," Bush said. But now, those days seem far, far away, and a "malign force" is at work in American life:
When it comes to the unity of America, those days seem distant from our own. A malign force seems at work in our common life that turns every disagreement into an argument and every argument into a clash of cultures. So much of our politics has become a naked appeal to anger, fear, and resentment. That leaves us worried about our nation and our future together.
How could our politics have become so angry? Bush pointed to one reason, in the briefest way possible, just a moment earlier. Hailing Americans who joined the armed forces, he added, "The military measures taken over the last 20 years to pursue dangers at their source have led to debate." Well, yes they have! But rather than elaborate, even a little, Bush instead went on to assure veterans that their service was not in vain.
What Bushed skipped was, first, his failures in the war in Afghanistan, and second, his failures in the war in Iraq. In Afghanistan, Bush failed to find and bring to justice Osama bin Laden, Ayman al Zawahiri, and Mullah Omar. And with the major 9/11 player Bush did capture, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Bush failed to deliver justice through a military commission trial and execution. The architect of 9/11 remains alive and well today, imprisoned at the U.S. detention center in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
Also in Afghanistan, Bush set the war on a track of nation-building that was sure to fail and did, not only during Bush's presidency but during Obama's and Trump's, until Biden clumsily put an end to it.
In Iraq, Bush started a major war by mistake. He will always maintain that in the big picture it was the right thing to do, but in his memoir, Bush admitted that he remains troubled by what he did. "The reality was that I had sent American troops into combat based in large part on intelligence that proved false," Bush wrote. "I had a sickening feeling every time I thought about it. I still do." The war in Iraq resulted in the deaths of 4,431 American military men and women, with 31,994 wounded.
These were terrible and enormously divisive developments. They helped shape presidential campaigns in 2004, 2008, 2012, 2016, and 2020. Opposition to the war in Iraq became a litmus test for Democratic candidates. Along with the devastating economic collapse at the end of Bush's second term, the war left the Republican Party troubled and without direction until Trump improbably won the GOP presidential nomination by breaking with the war support of predecessors Bush, John McCain, and Mitt Romney.
But in Shanksville, Bush spoke as if there had been a period of post-9/11 unity that lasted until somehow, mysteriously, the unity disappeared and gave way to today's poisoned politics.
Bush's second jaw-dropper was his oblique comparison of the 19 terrorists who hijacked four commercial jetliners on 9/11 with the rioters who descended on the Capitol on Jan. 6. Speaking of 9/11, Bush said, "Many Americans struggled to understand why an enemy would hate us with such zeal." Then:
And we have seen growing evidence that the dangers to our country can come not only across borders, but from violence that gathers within. There is little cultural overlap between violent extremists abroad and violent extremists at home. But in their disdain for pluralism, in their disregard for human life, in their determination to defile national symbols, they are children of the same foul spirit. And it is our continuing duty to confront them.
Bush did not explicitly say so, but he appeared to be referencing Jan. 6. And he used the rhetorical trick of denying that there was "cultural overlap" between the 9/11 terrorists and the Jan. 6 rioters before outlining areas of such overlap. They were similar in their "disdain for pluralism," Bush said, their "disregard for human life," and their "determination to defile national symbols." In these, Bush argued, not only was there cultural overlap between the two groups — they actually came from "the same foul spirit."
With that, Bush joined a group of commentators, mostly but not entirely on the left, who maintain that 9/11 and 1/6 are similar. And they do so in the face of the obvious, enormous differences between the two. The Sept. 11 attacks killed roughly 3,000 people, brought down New York's tallest skyscrapers, destroyed part of the Pentagon, crashed four passenger jetliners, resulted in two wars, and changed U.S. foreign policy for decades. The Jan. 6 riot led to the natural-causes death of one Capitol Police officer, the shooting death of one rioter at the hands of police, the "acute amphetamine intoxication" death of another rioter, and the natural-causes deaths of two more. Had the 9/11 attackers survived, they would have been charged with mass murder. Most of the Jan. 6 rioters have been charged with "Parading, Demonstrating, or Picketing in a Capitol Building." Parts of the Capitol were ransacked, but not seriously enough that Congress could not meet and finish its election certification work on the night of the riot. The riot was appalling, and the participants deserve punishment, but it was simply nothing like Sept. 11. To visualize the difference, imagine that on the night of the 9/11 attacks, there was a convention that went on as scheduled at the World Trade Center.
The bottom line: There is simply no comparison in scale, act, motivation, or anything else between Sept. 11 and Jan. 6. And yet now, a former president suggests that those two enormously dissimilar events were actually similar, both coming from "the same foul spirit."
In its style, Bush's brief Shanksville speech — it ran less than ten minutes — resembled some of the most memorable of his presidency. In public, Bush could be embarrassingly inarticulate off-the-cuff, but during his White House years, he delivered a few set-piece speeches, often penned by senior aide Michael Gerson, that soared in rhetoric and ambition. In Shanksville, Bush's words did not soar, but they had a quality similar to his older speeches.
Despite his failures, Bush will always deserve credit for preventing another 9/11-style attack on the United States. In the 2016 campaign, defending his brother from attacks by Trump, former Gov. Jeb Bush said simply that George W. Bush "kept us safe." That was no small accomplishment, even in a presidency beset by disasters, some of which were created by the president himself.
And now, the press-shy former president is back in the news. At least in the short run, the Shanksville speech could become one of Bush's most quoted. Democrats will certainly cite it and press Republicans to agree with the Republican former president. Trump supporters will denounce it. But everyone should read it to learn how a former president sees not only his time in office 20 years on but the events he helped shape, whether he wants to face them or not.
Tags
Who is online
77 visitors
I just couldn't let this pass. The GOP is saddled with this self destructive, mass of contradictions who began the federal deficit monster that can never be rectified.
How could he compare 9/11 with 1/6 ? Is he really that stupid?
How can people compare Biden's anthill of lies with Trump's mountain of lies ? Are they really that stupid?
This is evidently the offending passage
disdain for pluralism
check. A University of Chicago study in April concluded that white grievance was a major motivator for the Jan 6 riot. Fear of "replacement" by non whites, a conspiracy theory, was identified as the single greatest signifier for participation in the Jan6 event.
disregard for human life
obviously the Jan 6 event was on a completely different scale than Sep 11, but the rioters at the Capitol fought against the police in a way that could have easily led to a mass casualty situation. There were also pipe bombs planted as part of the attack.
determination to defile national symbols
smashing windows and doors at the national legislature is definitely a defilement of national symbols, as is carrying a confederate flag through the halls of the Capitol building, and standing at the podium in the US Senate chamber and spouting conspiracy garbage.
the same foul spirit.
"the same foul spirit" can cover a lot of ground. a punch to the nose can come from the same foul spirit as a car bombing.
-
Bush said nothing wrong.
The same applies to the BLM riots.
A whataboutism about whataboutism.
Classic
I think you need to reread the definition again. You seem confused about it.
Nope, not at all.
No, John, the offending passage was highlighted in the article.
yup, always has been. looks like it's time to repair the family legacy, since the family dynasty ended 5 years ago. no place to go but up, now that he has been relieved of the title of worst president in US history by trump. having a cast of rogue nixon era relics in his inner circle was his biggest failure as POTUS. thankfully, most are dead now.
Sorry, Biden already laid claim to worst President ever in just 8 short months.
Deal with it.
Ridiculous.
Nope, the worst 'president' in history waddled out of the White House on 1/20/21.
Not as ridiculous as your non-stop spin doctoring the last five years
No spinning involved or needed.
Every idiotic lie that Trump has told is on video. How does one spin that?
Making that comparison is, by definition, a false equivalence.
really? what "definition" pray tell?
No matter how much you milk the issue searching for some kind of relevance, the two events were not equivalent
Please point out the words in that paragraph that are declaring an equivalence.
The one in ANY dictionary when read without a TDS triggered, hyper biased mind.
Terrorism. International and domestic terrorism is what Bush discussed. And I am tired of right-wing apologists smoke-screening the issue.
Point blank: Do you think the January 6, 2021 incident at the Capitol in D.C. was an act of patriotism or insurrection?
Answer the question directly or just 'tap-dance'!
The liberal mind is such a strange place. So angry, so biased, so kooky, so disconnected. If other peoples opinions bother you so much i suggest you not frequent discussion sites like this where people voice their opinions all day long. That said:
Neither but if those are the only two choices it's much closer Patriotism than Insurrection IMO. I recall another little incident in 1776 where the powers that be called it an insurrection but is considered an extreme act of patriotism by anyone but the most triggered liberal. That said and again, neither.
Now answer my question.
Do you consider all the acts of rioting, looting, violence and destruction of property by groups like blm and antifa in the summer of 2020 to be acts of patriotism or simple acts of criminal activity? Just like your question you only have two choices. Answer the question.
Antifa and BLM could have committed criminal acts in which they should be in jail already. I don't give a damn about violent protest that results in people going to jail justifiably.
As for your reply to my question: Gotcha! The "people's capitol" is not your run of the mill business or corporation for that matter, if it was then we would not be looking to it for national leadership (and expenditure of billions of dollars as well as tax collection and law making) we would focus our attention elsewhere; that you attempt in vain to cover 1/6/2021 foolishness with a whataboutism says a great more about you.
You won't be "smothering" anything this time, though!
I see you, Sparty On. One privileged dude speaking up for other privileged dudes and dudettes. Do you follow my drift? Your white privilege card is just flashing like a railroad crossing signal!
Nah, like usual, you gots nothing. Nothing!
I've "tried" to cover for nothing, i've tried to "smother" nothing, you see "nothing" of consequence here as you try to spin another web of disinformation and lies.
I can simply this for you. You're just another dude looking for a free lunch.
Nothing more.
www.nytimes.com /2021/04/06/us/politics/capitol-riot-study.html
Fears of White People Losing Out Permeate Capitol Rioters’ Towns, Study Finds
Alan Feuer 6-8 minutes 4/6/2021
Counties with the most significant declines in the non-Hispanic white population were the most likely to be homes to people who stormed the Capitol.
April 6, 2021
When the political scientist Robert Pape began studying the issues that motivated the 380 or so people arrested in connection with the attack against the Capitol on Jan. 6, he expected to find that the rioters were driven to violence by the lingering effects of the 2008 Great Recession.
But instead he found something very different:
Most of the people who took part in the assault came from places, his polling and demographic data showed, that were awash in fears that the rights of minorities and immigrants were crowding out the rights of white people in American politics and culture.
If Mr. Pape’s initial conclusions — published on Tuesday in The Washington Post — hold true, they would suggest that the Capitol attack has historical echoes reaching back to before the Civil War, he said in an interview over the weekend. In the shorter term, he added, the study would appear to connect Jan. 6 not only to the once-fringe right-wing theory called the Great Replacement, which holds that minorities and immigrants are seeking to take over the country, but also to events like the far-right rally in Charlottesville, Va., in 2017 where crowds of white men marched with torches chanting, “Jews will not replace us!”
What was this "patriotism" based on? Where is ANY evidence that the 2020 presidential election was stolen? Any?
The entire purpose of the event Jan 6 was to "stop the steal". What steal?
Patriotism? LOL . A bunch of racist jagoffs.
It's been over 600 people arrested - over 600 domestic terrorist scum.
So what? You should stop trying to paint small flowers with a roller brush John.
That is a fools errand as well
The only real joke here are the people who are calling it an insurrection.
Total joke
That's exactly what it was.
The total joke is those who deny it.
You are just babbling. I dont really give a damn what people call it. They went there intending to stop the steal by intimidating the Congress. What "steal"? You have no damn answer for that.
The study was done in April and used the number that had been arrested at that time.
If chants of hanging the Vice President, beating law enforcement nearly to death, the erection of gallows, and teams of sleazebags roaming the halls of Congress with wrist restraints isn’t considered an insurrection, then you must have some seriously warped ideas of what is.
Nah, what is babbling to you is just another opinion. Something you clearly have difficulty with here.
Nothing new there. Some liberals just seem to have a need to hammer all opposing viewpoints
Which is really just a very chronic inferiority complex .... nothing more.
Tell me what this opposing viewpoint is. Can you do that?
We had an election , certified by all 50 states. Not a shred of credible evidence that the election was "stolen" was presented. Prior to Jan 6 , Trump had lost 60 court cases related to the election. The state electors had made their report to Congress.
BUT because Trump continued to cry and whine and rant about it, 50,000 people showed up at the Capitol building on Jan 6.
What the fuck were they doing there? Its a simple question I expect you to be able to answer.
These scum also shit and pissed there too.
Sounds scary. How did this country survive such harrowing, hardcore threat to it's survival? How indeed ........
Certainly not from AOC who lied about here whereabouts during the riot on Jan 6th.
Jan 6th "insurrection" is just another liberal dog whistle. Nothing more..
Why were the rioters even at the Capitol on Jan 6 ?
Racism.
Conspiracy theories.
Cult worship of Trump.
I'm sure this is a complete waste of time but i'll make one pass at it.
That it wasn't an insurrection. It was a riot of pissed off people. Just like the hundreds, possibly thousands of organized riots that happened all over the country during the summer of 2020. Most of which got a total free pass from the mass media and the left. Unlike Jan 6th.
This is an easy one. If there wasn't a problem with election fraud. Why did the left fight truly "independent" investigations into election fraud in 2020. And make no mistake, few of any truly "independent" investigations into the 2020 election occurred. Certainly you can give me a good answer to why that was? You can do that right? Right or wrong many people questioned the election and congress could have quelled at lot of that angst by simply allowing independent investigations into the same. They chose not to do that and got what they got because of it. Simple.
50,000 people? 50,000? Lets put this into perspective. 50,000, that's say 1000 people per state show up to protest the election. Most of whom were reportedly peaceful like many protests but regardless, about 2/100th's of the US population shows up at the capital to protest and the protest turns violent. Imagine that. We watched that happen hundreds if not thousands of times in 2020 alone.
They were there to protest John. Simple answer to a simple question. Now i sit back to watch you spin your yarn. Enjoy it as i might for the creative writing it will undoubtedly be, it's doubtful i'll agree with much of it at all so i leave you to your normal devices.
Nah, most were there just to protest.
That you don't like their reasons to protest is absolutely meaningless.
Pissed off about what?
Please quote Donald Trump asking for an "independent" investigation into anything. Donald Trump literally wanted Republican state legislatures in swing states to unilaterally declare him the winner of the election.
And why should there be independent investigations of elections, based on conspiracy theories? It is ludicrous.
I can't explain it any simpler John but you keep spinning your yarn.
I've said everything i need to say here on this topic.
What you say is woefully inadequate.
They were there at trumpturd's incitement of his mob.
Now the BLM protests - were mostly protests - those who looted and vandalized were not protesters - they were criminals.
That also doesn't take into account all the outside agitators/instigators from the alt-right at the protests.
Right back at ya buddy. Right back at ya
Just like everything else.
Damn just when I thought you popped back into reality you had to add this.
Pathetic insult noted.
Sparty On, let me ask a follow-up question inquiring minds would like to know:
Would you think the January 6, 2021 incident at the Capitol in D.C. had it been carried out by ANTIFA OR BLM an act of patriotism or insurrection or both or neither?
Well Sparty On, you've gotten yourself caught in a 'thicket' here.
@ 2.1.5 you replied to my question (along with a piggy-backed weak insult)— "Neither." Meaning it was not patriotism or insurrection. Today, you say its a "total joke" to call it an insurrection.
Care to get your untrue narrative straight, please. I'll wait . . . .
Partisan hackery on full display.
Sparty On knows this is "UNSAT." It's like watching someone squirming to keep their job by toeing the line with pat answers and personal insults. (Mustn't neglect to read and mention the insults.)
Nope, far from it. You are wrong again.
Stop trying to put words in my mouth.
You accomplish nothing but making yourself and your advisors look even more sophomoric.
Only in your mind CB and well, in the minds of some of your advisors.
Neither of which do i care the slightest about.
Yeah, that's sputtering. And yes, caught red-handed acting as a partisan hack with a toxic perspective.
More weak insults. It's all me, S O. You might need me to have advisors, but it is just me, reading, writing, and a computer. As for the rest of whatever you wrote: you're stalling. Do take time to get your untrue narrative straight about 1/6/2021 patriotism or insurrection.
Still waiting. . . .
You may have missed this in an effort to move one. Here's a friendly reminder:
Well Sparty On? What say you?!
Nope
Nope again
You can move on any time you want.
I'll move on when i chose to move on .... or not.
Your sophomoric insulting style is amusing at some more basic level .....
Please, you're manipulating yourself at this point! That is not any kind of direct answer to the question asked point blank. I know why you can't answer it, because your answer would condemn you (only to your "colleagues") one way or another.
Here it is' front and center' yet again:
Would you think the January 6, 2021 incident at the Capitol in D.C. had it been carried out by ANTIFA OR BLM an act of patriotism or insurrection or both or neither?
Nope, you're still all wrong
And your line of questioning is still deliciously sophomoric. You think you've "caught me" here already when you really haven't. You think you're going to "catch me" with this latest question. You aren't so i'll pop your bubble right here and now and we can be done with this rambling mess of a conversation if one can call it that.
Never once have i defended the unlawful actions of Jan 6th. Never once did i defend the unlawful actions of antifa or blm throughout the summer of 2020. I support lawful, peaceful protests. I don't support unlawful violent protests. That is an all encompassing statements made without any exclusions or reservations. It applies equally to everyone regardless of race color, creed or location of protest in the USA.
So there you go CB, you have a nice day now ya hear!
All talk and chatter. You did not answer the question!
Simple: Try again.
There is your answer---AGAIN.
Bye.
BUH-BYE!
January 6, 2021 incident was much closer to patriotism you wrote, Sparty On. There you've said it! You've called the capitol offenders "patriots" and their act "unlawful."
"Unlawful patriots."
Stop tap-dancing and commit to a proper answer. Patriots do not commit unlawful acts, Sparty On. (Unless, you are invoking special privilege for the offenders. What kind of privilege would that be I wonder?)
We see you.
And to be clear, as I don't want to put words in your mouth, do you wish to be clear? Can I safely take for granted if ANTIFA or BLM had carried out the January 6, 2021 attack on the Capitol in D.C. you would consider ANTIFA and BLM patriots?!
From Sparty On, post 2.1.45
Sorry, "Door #2. My questions are specially for and to Sparty On! I do think it rather "sophomoric" that it is a team effort to carry his 'load,' nevertheless. I'm over here carrying all my loads myself! Getting stronger all the time too!
Repeatedly asking the same questions which have been answered over and over and over again must be a heavy load for you to bear.
I'd stop if I were you.
What I managed to garner from his statement is that he is for lawful, peaceful protests no matter who is doing it, and against violent, unlawful protests no matter who is doing it. No politics about that. No racial implications in that. No class distinctions made in that.
Pretty damn hard work trying to convince anyone he meant something different unless you are reading something different than what is posted here.
Is that what you are doing?
Why are you trolling me? I do not accept any response from you on behalf of Sparty On. Is that clear enough?!!
I will leave you with the facts I provided to you.
Hopefully, they will have some impact at some point in time.
Toodles!
Don't be sorry, be thankful that another member pointed out the error of your comment that i didn't answer your question.
You have answered nothing and at this point it is obvious that you don't plan too. Nice try, having team members play intercept. Apparently, simple direct questions require sponsorship.
Anyway. I can see you so clear now that it's like you are an open book to me. I will read and study well.
No, had either or both ANTIFA OR BLM scaled and sacked the Capitol building - you would not and do not consider either group as patriots.
So cut the bull patty and 'damage control' speak on NT. Technically, you're among online friends here; being untruthful is not something we require. "Speak Your Mind!" See?
Yes, Bush is that stupid. He's nothing but a war criminal.
I don’t disagree. However, Donald Trump was the best thing to ever happen to him, since Trump makes Dubya look positively brilliant.
I didnt say they were equivalent, and neither did Bush.
Bush is like Carter. Both were really nice guys that wanted to please everyone; neither were strong enough individuals and leaders to be good presidents. Both were also easily manipulated by stronger willed individuals within their administrations.
I think Bush really regrets some of the decisions he made in his presidency; and has tried to make amends. He has also been a very good ex-President (to bad he had to be President to get that title); again like Carter.
That being said; Bush is not (and never has been) a strong speaker. He could just have easily been talking about BLM and Antifa rioters as the Jan 6th rioters. The TDS sufferers are quick to draw the line between Bush's comments and the Jan 6th rioters; while completely excluding their side which has done the exact same thing. Destroyed federal property; assaulted and injured federal officers; and threatened/intimidated politicians.
Bush should do us all a favor and stay out of the political realm; and concentrate solely on helping injured veterans. All he has managed to do is deepen the divisions in this country and given Pelosi and the Democrats more ammunition in their highly partisan Jan 6th investigation.
name the BLM and antifa members that breached the US Capitol building and tried to obstruct the constitutionally mandated certification of a presidential election by a joint session of congress.
How about the BLM and Antifa members that have destroyed federal property; assaulted federal officers; and threatened politicians? Which is what I mentioned. They obviously don't count in leftist land.
Reading is fundamental.
That is just Portland. There are far more examples out there across the US. Google is your friend.
There is are two big differences between BLM/Antifa and the Jan 6th rioters. The Jan 6th rioters left on their own accord; it was a one off event. BLM and and Antifa never go away. Look up how many consecutive days BLM/Antifa rioted it Portland and Seattle. How long were several city blocks in Seattle taken over by those so called "mostly peaceful protesters"?
Also, the Jan 6th protesters are being held for months w/o charges being filed. They are being hunted down by the federal government, left, and media. And they are going to be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Unlike the BLM/Antifa rioters that are being released w/o charges by the POS partisan DOJ. Nice two tier justice system the Biden administration has going on. It really exemplifies what this country stands for./S
The really sad thing about that comment is you really appear to believe Jan 6th was worse than an entire summer of rioting, looting, threatening behavior, destruction of public/private property, etc happening all over the country.
Very sad .....
Very sad and pathetic and deplorable that all you have is whataboutism and projection, deflection, and denial.
And gaslighting. He who gaslights a lot.
I don't think there's anything particularly objectionable to what Bush said. The January 6th riot and all of the rioting, looting and murdering that took place during the BLM riots of 2020 were toxic, stupid behavior. There's no place for it. Bush erred in bringing it up on 9/11.
Why are people still trying to defend neo-liberalism? Neo-liberalism is why we're in this mess. Pluralism, nation building, and amoral profiteering is not a foundation upon which to build 'unity' or, even, civility.
Somehow these neo-liberal apologists are confusing national resolve following the Sept. 11 attacks with 'unity' (whatever that means). The United States was united in a single purpose -- find those responsible and bring them to justice, alive or dead. The United States did not go into Afghanistan on a mission of benevolent charity. But the political lies began before the search commenced. Our national resolve to seek justice depended upon a 'coalition of the willing'. Neo-liberals hijacked our national resolve in pursuit of their owned flawed ideological goals and proceeded to badly divide the country. Americans became the enemy of political government. Political government is so distrusted that conspiracies began to emerge in quick order. And the last 20 years have only affirmed that distrust in political government is warranted.
Disunity begins in Washington D.C. That's what the riot on Jan. 6 was about. The riot did not threaten or attack the people of the United States. The riot threatened political government that is responsible for disunity in the United States.
Neo-liberalism is as complete a failure as is socialism. George W. Bush may doublespeak all he wishes but there's no hiding that neo-liberalism cannot and will not work. The Bush administration compared Americans to terrorists for eight years to defend neo-liberal policies, priorities, and misadventures. 'You're either with us or against us' is not a message of unity or resolve. And serving freedom fries to malign the French was deliberately intended to be divisive. At least George Bush is consistent.
Post of the day so far.
Spot on!
Not at all.
It's his usual nonsense.
Speaking of doublespeak and outright nonsense and gibberish.
A nonsensical deflection. Neo-liberalism is largely the economic policy of free market capitalism. January 6th was the result of two things (1) the Republican 25 year project cultivating a base of obsequious coprohagists; people who will eat up any bullshit Republicans feed them. And (2), the continuous pushing of the Big Lie that his election was stolen by the most corrupt President we have ever had.
The disunity evidenced by January 6th was caused by Trump’s Big Lie and the politicians who supported it. The Big Lie should have been shut down hard and fast by Republicans, but they were/are too gutless and/or opportunistic to take a righteous stand. We're at a place now where 2/3 of Republicans think the 2020 election was stolen without the slightest shred of evidence. How do we survive when the Republican party is crazy.
A comment straight out of a PoliSci 101 class. Complete with 25 cent words and all.
As is usually the case with comments like this you have misread most of the tea leaves and underestimated your perceived antagonists intentions and intelligence.
The prime error .... underestimating your opponent.
Close but no cigar. Liberal institutionalism (neoliberalism) advocates pluralism, multiculturalism, and multilateralism regulated by a technocracy. Unfettered trade governed by multilateral trade agreements and technocratic regulators is NOT free market capitalism.
At one time neoliberal ideology was claimed (by opponents) to be about establishing a One World Order which, BTW, really was a goal of the United Nations. Of course, opposition to neoliberal ideology tended to exaggerate what that goal really meant which is typical of politics.
The obsequious coprophagists can't give up their Orange Man Bad politics. Democrat dung beetles are still rolling their balls of dung because their neoliberal candidate lost. And their newly elected neoliberal is botching up everything. And like any good neoliberal screwup, the blame is being directed toward Americans. Neoliberal technocrats can do no wrong, after all.
Yeah, the four years of lies, half truths, spittle-spewing outrage, and twisting everything into an Orange Man Bad polemic had nothing to do with it.
After four years of rolling dung balls, Trump lost but Republicans overall won the 2020 election. Democrats lost the census. And now that the neoliberals are back in charge absolutely everything is falling apart. Care to guess who the scapegoats will be?
Excise the 'rot.' Or, keep feeding that party hard cold facts and figures until they get better or 'bust open' from care. Either way, truth will have its outcome!
"The disunity evidenced by January 6th was caused by Trump’s Big Lie and the politicians who supported it. The Big Lie should have been shut down hard and fast by Republicans, but they were/are too gutless and/or opportunistic to take a righteous stand. We're at a place now where 2/3 of Republicans think the 2020 election was stolen without the slightest shred of evidence. How do we survive when the Republican party is crazy."
Every one of them is complicit in 1/6/21.