Video of former Pres. G.W. and Laura Bush welcoming troops home.

[John Schmidt]

If you go to this site, there is a video from Aug 18, 2010 of Former President George W and Laura Bush at DFW Airport.  They made a "surprise" visit to help welcome home about 145 troops.  If you watch carefully, you will see Pres Bush put a "challenge coin" in his right hand, when he shakes hands with the troops he "transfers" the coin to them.  Very touching welcome home to the troops.  Hope you enjoy watching this as much as I did.

No political statement of any kind here, just a moving gesture on their part.

http://action.afa.net/Detail.aspx?id=2147497560

[Grumpy]

Very touching, shows he cares. Never see Obama doing a good deed.

[Stanley Steamer]

 

[Gear Jammer]

 

[big d]

i was unfortunate to have met bill and hillary when they werre first moving to chappaqua new york and saw first hand what a B!tch hillary truly is. would like to shake G.W.'s hand for if nothing else being a huge supporter of this great country and the troops. GOD BLESS AMERICA and all who support it.

[Scanner]

If you believe him, he spent 3 TRILLION dollars, 4500 dead Americans, 32,000 wounded...to help Muslims establish democracy? 

Yeah. He was something alright. 

I have no idea how he sleeps at night.

[fudgie]

If you believe him, he spent 3 TRILLION dollars, 4500 dead Americans, 32,000 wounded...to help Muslims establish democracy? 

Yeah. He was something alright. 

I have no idea how he sleeps at night.

So tell me smarty, what the hell would you have done after they took out the towers, Pentagon and planes? Shake their hand. Bullshit.

[sugerbear]

or maybe bow to them and thank them for killing our innocent civilians.

oh and while your bent over................kiss their a$$s too. stfu

oh no wait your "president" has already done that. i guess you can have sloppy seconds.

[big d]

he may need a little while to think about it brian cause he is too worried about being politically correct like the rest of the left wing. it is ok for any left leaning people on this sight to attack G.W. at will, but calls anyone that questions what the current president is doing names and spouts what the general main stream media says to without thinking for himself. WE as AMERICANS have the RIGHT to question the government and not be called racist just because we disagree with what they are doing. that is what freedom and democracy is all about.

[fudgie]

he may need a little while to think about it brian cause he is too worried about being politically correct like the rest of the left wing. it is ok for any left leaning people on this sight to attack G.W. at will, but calls anyone that questions what the current president is doing names and spouts what the general main stream media says to without thinking for himself. WE as AMERICANS have the RIGHT to question the government and not be called racist just because we disagree with what they are doing. that is what freedom and democracy is all about.

  Well said!

[fudgie]

or maybe bow to them and thank them for killing our innocent civilians.

oh and while your bent over................kiss their a$$s too. stfu

oh no wait your "president" has already done that. i guess you can have sloppy seconds.

    

[Scanner]

 
What would I have done? I would have had them kill Bin Laden at Bora Bora.

I would not have gone to Saudi Arabia - by the way Laden is Saudi and so were 17 of the 19 hijackers- and had my picture taken walking through the gardens holding hands with the Saudi King like Bush did.

And I sure as hell wouldn't have diverted the effort to get Laden and sent our army into Iraq. None of the hijackers were Iraqi.   

But then I'm not an idiot and Bush is.

[valkmc]

he may need a little while to think about it brian cause he is too worried about being politically correct like the rest of the left wing. it is ok for any left leaning people on this sight to attack G.W. at will, but calls anyone that questions what the current president is doing names and spouts what the general main stream media says to without thinking for himself. WE as AMERICANS have the RIGHT to question the government and not be called racist just because we disagree with what they are doing. that is what freedom and democracy is all about.

I am not left wing and I don't like the current polices of the president we now have, but Bush can shake all the hands he wants. He was the worst president we have had since Carter. He and his buddies lied to the American public about weapons of mass destruction, ran the public debt up and was showed up as a leader during 9/11 and it's after math by Giuliani. When he left office the economy was a mess. I am not one for blaming him and I usually don't care about what he did but when I hear him being praised for shaking hands of soldiers I can't help but think they as well as most Americans would have been better off if he had not been president.

[Sludge]

What would I have done? I would have had them kill Bin Laden at Bora Bora.

Was OBL on vacation there?  You do know that Bora Bora is in the French Polynesian islands...

Tora Bora is where I think you meant.  I actually think the bastard is entombed there.  No videos have surfaced since then.  Think of this from the militants perspective.  With OBL dead, if they can convince the world that he is still alive, then they have a robin hood figure that cant ever be killed.  A folk legend in the mid east.

So far as Iraq... I can see arguments on both sides of that.  I personally think it was a reach, and may yet have been good.  Time will tell.  I wont go in depth as to what I think the war was about but to put it in quick and simple terms...

I think it was all about nation building.  Taking a country, which for mid east standards was quite secular compared to some of its neighbors, that had good education systems in place, good infrastructure, and plentiful natural resources... and INJECTING a western style republic, along with its institutions, into the mid east.  Specifically, to bring about long term change to the region. Think of the pressure a successful secular republic with a happy population would cause on the neighbors with the monarchy in Saudi, the clerics in Iran...

... and we got rid of a thorn in the side (Saddam Hussein) at the same time...

[Scanner]

"Taking a country, which for mid east standards was quite secular compared to some of its neighbors, that had good education systems in place, good infrastructure, and plentiful natural resources... and INJECTING a western style republic, along with its institutions, into the mid east.  Specifically, to bring about long term change to the region. "

You mean by killing several hundred thousand of the citizens and completely destroying the infrastructure...yeah, we brought long term change to the region alright.  We will pay the price for decades.

Killing several thousand Americans and ruining our economy was just...collateral damage.

[RainMaker]

Did anyone notice Daryl "Moose" Johnson of the Dallas Cowboys and Fox Sports behind the President? 

Talk about picking a bad day for a sports celebrity to go and shake hands with the troops. 

[John Schmidt]

A few thoughts to consider re: former President Bush;
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
January 3rd, 2007 was the day the Democrats took over the Senate and the Congress:

At the time:

The DOW Jones closed at 12,621.77

The GDP for the previous quarter was 3.5% (it now is around 1.5% or below)

The Unemployment rate was 4.6% (it's now 9.6% at least and most economists say the true figure is upwards of 18-19%)

George Bush's Economic policies SET A RECORD of 52 STRAIGHT MONTHS of JOB CREATION!

Remember the day...
January 3rd, 2007 was the day that Barney Frank took over the House Financial Services Committee and Chris Dodd took over the Senate Banking Committee.

The economic meltdown that happened 15 months later was in what part of the economy?
BANKING AND FINANCIAL SERVICES!!!

THANK YOU DEMOCRATS for taking us from 13,000 DOW, 3.5 GDP and 4.6% Unemployment... to this CRISIS by (among MANY other things) dumping 5-6 TRILLION Dollars of toxic loans on the economy from YOUR Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac FIASCOS! (BTW: Bush asked Congress 17 TIMES to stop Fannie & Freddie - starting in 2001 because it was financially risky for the US economy).

And who took the THIRD highest pay-off from Fannie Mae AND Freddie Mac????

OBAMA

And who fought against reform of Fannie and Freddie???

OBAMA and the Democratic Congress

So when some one tries to blame Bush...

REMEMBER JANUARY 3rd, 2007.... THE DAY THE DEMOCRATS TOOK OVER!" Bush may have been in the car but the Democrats were in charge of the gas pedal and steering wheel they were driving.
Set the record straight on Bush!


"It's not that liberals aren't smart, it's just that so much of what they know isn't so" -Ronald Reagan
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Here's an opinion piece by Chuck Green who writes "Greener Pastures" for the Denver Post Aurora Sentinel...one of the more liberal papers in the country. Additionally, Mr. Green is a life long Democrat...so this is rather a stunning piece...

Obama is victim of Bush's failed promises
Greener Pastures Column --   5/ 15/10

Barack Obama is setting a record-setting number of records during his first year in office.
Largest budget ever. Largest deficit ever. Largest number of broken promises ever. Most self-serving speeches ever. Largest number of agenda-setting failures ever. Fastest dive in popularity ever.

Wow! Talk about change.

Just one year ago, fresh from his inauguration celebrations, President Obama was flying high. After one of the nation's most inspiring political campaigns, the election of America's first black president had captured the hopes and dreams of millions. To his devout followers, it was inconceivable that a year later his administration would be gripped in self-imposed crisis.

Of course, they don't see it as self-imposed. It's all George Bush's fault.

George Bush, who doesn't have a vote in congress and who no longer occupies the White House, is to blame for it all.

He broke Obama's promise to put all bills on the White House web site for five days before signing them.

He broke Obama's promise to have the congressional health care negotiations broadcast live on C-SPAN.

He broke Obama's promise to end earmarks.

He broke Obama's promise to keep unemployment from rising above 8 percent.

He broke Obama's promise to close the detention center at Guantanamo in the first year.

He broke Obama's promise to make peace with direct, no precondition talks with America's most hate-filled enemies during his first year in office, ushering in a new era of global cooperation.

He broke Obama's promise to end the hiring of former lobbyists into high White House jobs.

He broke Obama's promise to end no-compete contracts with the government.

He broke Obama's promise to disclose the names of all attendees at closed White House meetings.

He broke Obama's promise for a new era of bipartisan cooperation in all matters.

He broke Obama's promise to have chosen a home church to attend Sunday services with his family by Easter of last year.

Yes, it's all George Bush's fault. President Obama is nothing more than a puppet in the never-ending failed Bush administration.
If only George Bush wasn't still in charge, all of President Obama's problems would be solved. His promises would have been kept, the economy would be back on track, Iran would have stopped its work on developing a nuclear bomb and would be negotiating a peace treaty with Israel.  North Korea would have ended its tyrannical regime, and integrity would have been restored to the federal government.

Oh, and did I mention what it would be like if the Democrats, under the leadership of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, didn't have the heavy yoke of George Bush around their necks? There would be no ear marks, no closed-door drafting of bills, no increase in deficit spending, no special-interest influence (unions), no vote buying (Nebraska, Louisiana).

If only George Bush wasn't still in charge, we'd have real change by now.

All the broken promises, all the failed legislation and delay (health care reform, immigration reform) is not President Obama's fault or the fault of the Democrat-controlled Congress. It's all George Bush's fault.

Take for example the decision of Eric Holder, the president's attorney general, to hold terrorists' trials in New York City. Or his decision to try the Christmas Day underpants bomber as a civilian.

Two disastrous decisions.

Certainly those were bad judgments based on poor advice from George Bush.

Need more proof?

You might recall that when Scott Brown won the election to the U.S. Senate from Massachusetts , capturing "the Ted Kennedy seat", President Obama said that Brown's victory was the result of the same voter anger that propelled Obama into office in 2008. People were still angry about George Bush and the policies of the past 10 years. And they wanted change.

Yes, according to the president, the voter rebellion in Massachusetts was George Bush's fault.

Therefore, in retaliation, they elected a Republican to the Ted Kennedy seat, ending a half-century of domination by Democrats. It is all George Bush's fault.

Will the failed administration of George Bush ever end, and the time for hope and change ever arrive?

Will President Obama ever accept responsibility for something...  - anything?

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Like I said in my original post, it was not a political statement. But now.....apparently it's impossible to take something at face value for once. Did I like or approve of everything G.W. did, heck no. But that's no different than any of the rest before him, all of them (ALL OF THEM, PEOPLE) have done things that the general populace disagreed with. Yet, we/I helped vote them into office, be they democrat or republican(only a fool votes a straight party ticket) and I've voted in more general elections than the majority of you. Does that make me any more qualified or knowledgeable....NO, and neither does it make the rest any less so.

[RoadKill]

I think STFU was the correct response. Most "lib's" are deaf or can not understand acronyms that do not describe themselves
# P.E.T.A.
# U.N.
# ALP: Atheist Lovers Party
# BOP: Boring Old Party
# CARP: Cut And Run Party
# CLAP: California Liberal Activist Party
# COP: Congress Owning Party
# GAP: Gay Awareness Party
# HIP: Hollywood Ideas Party
# LIP: Leaving Iraq Party
# LISP: Latino Immigration Supporters Party
# PEP: Pro Evolution Party
# POP: Party On Party
# RAMP: Republicans Are Mean Party
# SAP: Save America Party
# SCAMP: Social Conservatives Are Mean Party
# SCRAP: Stem Cell Research Advocacy Party
# STEP: Save The Environment Party    ETC......

[Sludge]

LOL thats pretty funny Roadkill 

Scanner, whether I agree with the policy I stated above or not (I didnt tell you which),  I think thats the game in play.  The results of the policy are yet to be determined.   History will judge but probably not in our lifetimes. My thoughts are that its a crap shoot and the odds are long on success.  Thats just my gut feeling.

As far as quoting the thousands of American dead... I suggest before you open your mouth, that you consult the DOD statistics for the past 50 years.  Its not that much really.  We were losing more to training in the mid to late 80s than to combat today.  Its a fact.. look it up.  I personally know 13 who died in my 6.5 yrs in the Marines.  I buried 2 roommates, guys I lived with, due to helo crashes.  It doesnt hit much closer to home than that.  I kept flying.  It was a sobering realization of the danger we faced, but we all strapped it on again the next day. 

That was in peacetime.  Their names dont adorn any wall.  They arent remembered by anyone but those of us present at the time, yet they laid their lives on the altar just as freely.  28 died in one month (if memory serves me correctly) just testing the Osprey during the 90s. 

The point is, there are casualties ALL the time in the service.  You put your life in harms way regardless to one extent or another.  Train hard Fight hard. 

Sry, its a pet peeve of mine that folks dont remember ALL the dead that served and gave.  War or not. 

So, dont quote dead to me.  I signed up for the job and they did too.  Have you written such a check for your life to the US Gov?  If not, then your really not qualified to comment on that particular figure.

As for ruining the economy... I think you need to examine the roots of the housing bubble for that.  SUB PRIME LENDING WAS CREATED BY LIBS!!!!!!!  As for the bailouts, I was against ALL of them.  Its odd that when libs are in charge of the legislature they arent held accountable...   

Clinton gets held up as a golden boy.  Like he was all freaking PRO business and sh|t.  He was just lucky.  He was the one presiding when the dot com bubble hit.  It was a natural progression of the technology.  The WILD speculation that followed it was also natural.  It burst as his term ended, and the housing problems from the sub prime lending were just warming up.  Spending was reduced in the Clinton years, but he had a conservative legislature. 

To give credit where its due... the republicans left all their conservative principals during the Bush years.  Partly I blame this on public perception post 9-11.  They were expected to fight the enemy, fix the nation, ... and they let their vices get carried away.  ALL politicans love to spend money and in this instance, they were WRONG.   

The wars were and ARE a continuing expenditure.  To me the need for them is still unsettled in my mind.  I see good arguments on both sides.  My gut instinct tends to be with more of an emphaisis HUMINT, and surgical strikes and less nation building.  However, I made what I believe to be the game plan evident in the my previous post.

[9Ball]

A few thoughts to consider re: former President Bush;
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
January 3rd, 2007 was the day the Democrats took over the Senate and the Congress:

At the time:

The DOW Jones closed at 12,621.77

The GDP for the previous quarter was 3.5% (it now is around 1.5% or below)

The Unemployment rate was 4.6% (it's now 9.6% at least and most economists say the true figure is upwards of 18-19%)

George Bush's Economic policies SET A RECORD of 52 STRAIGHT MONTHS of JOB CREATION!

Remember the day...
January 3rd, 2007 was the day that Barney Frank took over the House Financial Services Committee and Chris Dodd took over the Senate Banking Committee.

The economic meltdown that happened 15 months later was in what part of the economy?
BANKING AND FINANCIAL SERVICES!!!

THANK YOU DEMOCRATS for taking us from 13,000 DOW, 3.5 GDP and 4.6% Unemployment... to this CRISIS by (among MANY other things) dumping 5-6 TRILLION Dollars of toxic loans on the economy from YOUR Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac FIASCOS! (BTW: Bush asked Congress 17 TIMES to stop Fannie & Freddie - starting in 2001 because it was financially risky for the US economy).

And who took the THIRD highest pay-off from Fannie Mae AND Freddie Mac????

OBAMA

And who fought against reform of Fannie and Freddie???

OBAMA and the Democratic Congress

So when some one tries to blame Bush...

REMEMBER JANUARY 3rd, 2007.... THE DAY THE DEMOCRATS TOOK OVER!" Bush may have been in the car but the Democrats were in charge of the gas pedal and steering wheel they were driving.
Set the record straight on Bush!


"It's not that liberals aren't smart, it's just that so much of what they know isn't so" -Ronald Reagan
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Here's an opinion piece by Chuck Green who writes "Greener Pastures" for the Denver Post Aurora Sentinel...one of the more liberal papers in the country. Additionally, Mr. Green is a life long Democrat...so this is rather a stunning piece...

Obama is victim of Bush's failed promises
Greener Pastures Column --   5/ 15/10

Barack Obama is setting a record-setting number of records during his first year in office.
Largest budget ever. Largest deficit ever. Largest number of broken promises ever. Most self-serving speeches ever. Largest number of agenda-setting failures ever. Fastest dive in popularity ever.

Wow! Talk about change.

Just one year ago, fresh from his inauguration celebrations, President Obama was flying high. After one of the nation's most inspiring political campaigns, the election of America's first black president had captured the hopes and dreams of millions. To his devout followers, it was inconceivable that a year later his administration would be gripped in self-imposed crisis.

Of course, they don't see it as self-imposed. It's all George Bush's fault.

George Bush, who doesn't have a vote in congress and who no longer occupies the White House, is to blame for it all.

He broke Obama's promise to put all bills on the White House web site for five days before signing them.

He broke Obama's promise to have the congressional health care negotiations broadcast live on C-SPAN.

He broke Obama's promise to end earmarks.

He broke Obama's promise to keep unemployment from rising above 8 percent.

He broke Obama's promise to close the detention center at Guantanamo in the first year.

He broke Obama's promise to make peace with direct, no precondition talks with America's most hate-filled enemies during his first year in office, ushering in a new era of global cooperation.

He broke Obama's promise to end the hiring of former lobbyists into high White House jobs.

He broke Obama's promise to end no-compete contracts with the government.

He broke Obama's promise to disclose the names of all attendees at closed White House meetings.

He broke Obama's promise for a new era of bipartisan cooperation in all matters.

He broke Obama's promise to have chosen a home church to attend Sunday services with his family by Easter of last year.

Yes, it's all George Bush's fault. President Obama is nothing more than a puppet in the never-ending failed Bush administration.
If only George Bush wasn't still in charge, all of President Obama's problems would be solved. His promises would have been kept, the economy would be back on track, Iran would have stopped its work on developing a nuclear bomb and would be negotiating a peace treaty with Israel.  North Korea would have ended its tyrannical regime, and integrity would have been restored to the federal government.

Oh, and did I mention what it would be like if the Democrats, under the leadership of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, didn't have the heavy yoke of George Bush around their necks? There would be no ear marks, no closed-door drafting of bills, no increase in deficit spending, no special-interest influence (unions), no vote buying (Nebraska, Louisiana).

If only George Bush wasn't still in charge, we'd have real change by now.

All the broken promises, all the failed legislation and delay (health care reform, immigration reform) is not President Obama's fault or the fault of the Democrat-controlled Congress. It's all George Bush's fault.

Take for example the decision of Eric Holder, the president's attorney general, to hold terrorists' trials in New York City. Or his decision to try the Christmas Day underpants bomber as a civilian.

Two disastrous decisions.

Certainly those were bad judgments based on poor advice from George Bush.

Need more proof?

You might recall that when Scott Brown won the election to the U.S. Senate from Massachusetts , capturing "the Ted Kennedy seat", President Obama said that Brown's victory was the result of the same voter anger that propelled Obama into office in 2008. People were still angry about George Bush and the policies of the past 10 years. And they wanted change.

Yes, according to the president, the voter rebellion in Massachusetts was George Bush's fault.

Therefore, in retaliation, they elected a Republican to the Ted Kennedy seat, ending a half-century of domination by Democrats. It is all George Bush's fault.

Will the failed administration of George Bush ever end, and the time for hope and change ever arrive?

Will President Obama ever accept responsibility for something...  - anything?

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Like I said in my original post, it was not a political statement. But now.....apparently it's impossible to take something at face value for once. Did I like or approve of everything G.W. did, heck no. But that's no different than any of the rest before him, all of them (ALL OF THEM, PEOPLE) have done things that the general populace disagreed with. Yet, we/I helped vote them into office, be they democrat or republican(only a fool votes a straight party ticket) and I've voted in more general elections than the majority of you. Does that make me any more qualified or knowledgeable....NO, and neither does it make the rest any less so.

please, don't confuse the issue with facts.....

[MP]

The 3 Trillion dollar cost is wrong.  The govt reported this week that the total cost to date is in the 800 billion range.  That it is LESS than the "stimulus" that is being doled out right now.

It is a lot of money, but no where near 3 Trillion.

MP

[Scanner]

The 3 Trillion dollar cost is wrong.  The govt reported this week that the total cost to date is in the 800 billion range.  That it is LESS than the "stimulus" that is being doled out right now.

It is a lot of money, but no where near 3 Trillion.

MP

3 Trillion is on the low end of what it will cost in the long run.  And you would rather spend trillions on muslims than a stimulus for America?  I think your priorities are off....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_cost_of_the_Iraq_War

[fudgie]

And I sure as hell wouldn't have diverted the effort to get Laden and sent our army into Iraq. None of the hijackers were Iraqi.   

Hittler did nothing to us but look what we did to him.

[Scanner]

And I sure as hell wouldn't have diverted the effort to get Laden and sent our army into Iraq. None of the hijackers were Iraqi.   

Hittler did nothing to us but look what we did to him.

uh...yeah...right...I forgot about "Hittler"....thanks for your always valuable insight and input.   

[MP]

The 3 Trillion dollar cost is wrong.  The govt reported this week that the total cost to date is in the 800 billion range.  That it is LESS than the "stimulus" that is being doled out right now.

It is a lot of money, but no where near 3 Trillion.

MP

3 Trillion is on the low end of what it will cost in the long run.  And you would rather spend trillions on muslims than a stimulus for America?  I think your priorities are off....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_cost_of_the_Iraq_War

And here is the direct quote from that source:    As of February 2010, around $704 billion has been spent based on estimates of current expenditure rates[1], which range from the Congressional Research Service

$704 Billion, far from 3 trillion.

They get to 3 Trillion by estimating lots of costs and interest in the future.

Well then, admit the cost of the stimulus is thus about 4 Trillion, and the health care will be even more.

Your own source says you are misleading.

MP

[Skinhead]

But then I'm not an idiot and Bush is.

Don't sell yourself short Scanner, I think your an idiot.