Only a Liberal…

I have been absolutely enamored with the blind hatred of President George W Bush… it really is quite amazing, especially since it comes from people who are so quick to condemn judgment of anyone. My attitude is he is a politician who panders, jukes, and says things he doesnt mean to be powerful and liked by as many people as possible. I asked myself, “Is this guy really the anomaly the liberal left claims he is? Why do they hate this man so much?” And I found the website whywehatebush.com. Ok, great I’ll get my answers…

The first statement on their homepage at the very top says “Bush stands against everything that America stands for.” Really? Everything? You’d think by luck he might stand for SOMETHING that America stands for. I think one of the things you can say about Bush is he is VERY pro-American, and some people might have some good arguments why that might be bad if overdone. Then my eyes dart over to some numbers… ok, they have some actual stats that show President Bush really is evil…

FACT: BUSH OIL
1999 - $19 BARREL
2006 - $70 BARREL

Now, hold on a minute… if I recall, he didnt take office until early 2001… what do oil prices in 1999 have to do with him? I looked up the numbers, in 2000 the price was $28, 2001 it was $23… we’ll call it $25. Evidently, $19 sounded better to them. So does a $55 increase in a barrel of oil prove he’s evil? I suppose if he’s responsible for it and there are no other factors that contribute. I’d stipulate the President of the United States doesn’t have the slightest effect on oil prices other than with policies he approves, like if he allowed drilling in Alaska or the Gulf of Mexico, prices would go down. So if Bush is credited with astronomical gas prices, is he also credited with all the electronics price decreases during his office? One might argue he has no effect on that stuff. I AGREE.
Below that there is a list of 11 things that explain why they hate Bush. #1 is vague, but #2 says,
“Bush and his cabal of henchmen lied to the American people about Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq, and they continue to obfuscate the truth while their companies cash in, Iraqis suffer and American soldiers die.”

Aside from the He-Man-esque “henchmen” comment, this is just silly. I have heard this echoed for years as the quintissential crime committed by Bush, that he LIED about WMD. If he lied about it, EVERYONE ON EARTH lied about it. And I quote,

“Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime … He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation … And now he is miscalculating America’s response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction … So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real…” — Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003

“In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members … It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons.” — Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002
So it is clear and unarguable that hating Bush for the WMD issue is IRRATIONAL if it is only pointed at Bush. There is an ENDLESS list of quotes like this at freerepublic.com and elsewhere.

Now I realize that this website is not the best criticism to analyze, but it is representative of the layman. I will get to the slightly more intellectual comments soon… one more bullet from this site:

“The Bush Administration has manipulated the media to the point of undermining the Constitutional guarantees of a Free Press.”

Are you kidding me? Do people really believe the media SUPPORTS President Bush due to his control? It’s so patently absurd as to be laughable. And if there was a SHRED of truth to this statement, Bush would have been EASILY impeached and removed from office.

That brings up another point… Bush is the worst liar in history according to the liberal left. He does nothing but lie, lie, lie. Let’s look at this rationally… we all agree that there are a substantial number of Americans who hate George W Bush, and want him out of office, including a majority of congressmen. If they have all this evidence that he lied, why have they been unable to get rid of him?

This great country has a fever, and it aint from SUV-caused global warming. The justice system here is far from perfect, but it has been very successful at accurately identifying criminals, reducing the number of innocent people being punished for crimes they didn’t commit. It is absolutely vital that a nation have faith in the fairness of its justice system, so as not to walk on egg-shells fearing its government. This has been achieved by the concept of innocent-until-proven-guilty and due process.

The problem is when this logic is extended to areas outside of domestic justice. Crime is not a threat to our nation, it is an unavoidable nuisance in the big picture, so we have the luxury of applying due process and assuming innocence. You cannot extend this same logic to national security. The rule of law is very powerful here in the United States, so we are able to have the luxury of a slow-moving justice system. This luxury canNOT be extended to national security; that would be suicide. We believe all humans are created equal, but that does not mean all nations are created equal. Most other countries are appallingly corrupt, relative to the United States, and to operate under any other assumption is foolish and naive.

This thought process has been applied to the WMD argument of Saddam’s Iraq. Because of Bush Derangement Syndrome, the American left has inflicted a “GOTCHA” on the Bush administration, CONSTANTLY trumpeting that there were never any weapons of mass destruction.

Let’s not forget the numerous stories of UN inspectors showing up to Iraqi facilities that had recently done “housecleaning” in preparation; let’s not forget the 500 weapons munitions containing degraded mustard and sarin nerve gas. If there was an American trial to prove that WMDs are in Iraq, and the only evidence was the degraded mustard and sarin, a wily defense attorney could argue that the weapons munitions are degraded and therefore don’t classify as weapons of mass destruction. This is essentially what has happened in the national debate, and is borderline insane, but it flies as logic and a valid argument. The key here is for Americans to detach their “due process logic” from such issues and recognize the evidence. These same Americans will find cookie crumbs in their child’s bed, and won’t hold a trial to determine whether they stole from the cookie jar.

** Image from parody article on crookedpres.com.

Only a liberal would be convinced of the danger of global warming, but unconvinced of the danger of terrorism.
Global warming cannot be confirmed by the scientific method which requires the elimination of plausible alternatives. “All hypotheses and theories are in principle subject to disproof. Thus, there is a point at which there might be a consensus about a particular hypothesis or theory, yet it must in principle remain tentative.” The global threat of terrorism, mainly from Muslim extremism is certainly more confirmable since they have no desire in hiding their goals! They have told you they will kill you for not being Muslim. Why are you so able to believe in global warming but not in the imminent threat of terrorism? Simple, you’re not interested in the truth if it isn’t what you expected.