From the (changed) White House

Welcome to the official White House web page

fordstheater1-hero

“On the 200th anniversary of the birth of President Abraham Lincoln, President Obama invoked the “sense of unity that is so much a part of Lincoln’s legacy.”

Does anyone else find this offensive? Whatever your opinion was of President Bush, he proudly maintained the dignity of the office. Say goodbye to that protocol, blown away by the wind of change.

23 thoughts on “From the (changed) White House”

  1. Did anyone hear Rush’s rant about how Lincoln was so partisan, he did all he could to stifle opposition to his trying to hold the union together? Obama should learn his history better if he wants to emulate Lincoln.

  2. Did anyone hear Rush’s rant about how Lincoln was so partisan, he did all he could to stifle opposition to his trying to hold the union together? Obama should learn his history better if he wants to emulate Lincoln.

  3. I find it disturbing that Obama wants to model himself after the man who expanded the powers of the federal government in ways that are still having a negative impact on us to this day.

    Even worse, while I hate a lot of the things Lincoln did I have no doubt whatsoever about his motives or that he truly had the best interests of the nation in mind. I can’t say that about Obama. Not with a straight face.

    On the other hand, Bush disgraced us and his office every second of every day from his inauguration to his departure. We haven’t had a deserving President in decades.

  4. Matt Lincoln did what he had to do in a time of war and rebellion. He used the powers given to him under the Constitution. After George Washington, he was the greatest President this Country ever had given what he had to face especially. He was perhaps the most brilliant politician we’ve ever had as well.

  5. He failed at (or simply couldn’t be bothered with) his primary duty – upholding, defending, and protecting the Constitution of the United States.

    He first ignored, then removed, every restriction we had in place to protect the citizens from the military.

    He abolished the rights of free speech and free assembly wherever and whenever it was in his best interests.

    He could have (and should have) been tried and convicted of at least 8 of the crimes of King George which we listed as the reasons for our revolution.

    One of the ones that pisses me off the most is Abu Graib. 10% of the men required to man the prison, 3 times as many prisoners as it was designed to hold, not enough food and water for everyone, local politics creating a situation where visitors couldn’t be searched for weapons or prevented from entering any area of the prison they chose – and Bush rewarded the colonels and generals responsible while the NCO who first reported this clusterfuck is still in prison.

    I could go on. I honestly can’t think of many things he did that were not an embarrassment to this nation.

  6. Mike – I understand all that. Doesn’t keep me from not liking the outcome. Especially since he set precedents that far lesser men have used to justify their own actions, which have done enormous damage to this country.

  7. Matt doesn’t want to notice that Iraq is a free country and will only cease being so if The U. S. leaves too early or if Iraqis decide they like tyranny better, an unlikely prospect. Where is the msm in congratulating Bush for taking the troubles of Iraq off Obama’s agenda? In these past elections, less corrupt and with more citizen participation than we have, the Irani allies and the religious parties were voted out and Iraqi sovereignty parties were voted in. This is a huge loss to the terrorists and Iran. Thank you George Bush.
    Matt doesn’t want to remember that Bush had the best understanding of tyrants like Castro and told it like it was by giving the Medal of Freedom to Biscet and by inviting Val Prieto to a the White House. Bush was as clear in naming baddies as Reagan was. Thank you George Bush.
    Matt doesn’t want to remember that in the face of 9/11, hurricanes, and wars, we had a good economy with low unemployment and a healthy stock market for almost all of Bush’s years in office. Thank you George Bush.
    We have had no terrorism, not even a car bomb since 9/11. Thank you George Bush.

    All of my liberal friends constantly reminded me that we were losing our civil rights under Bush. I can see no evidence of that. The only one losing civil rights, I told them, was me. They never let me open my mouth to express an opinion.
    This hogwash about Abu G (whatever) is getting tiresome. Any of these prisoners would choose conditions there over any other alternative punishment anywhere in the world. I don’t know about you but I like those guys under lock and key.

    Matt and others like him ought to wake up. Bush was a good president who did a lot of things I didn’t like. But outside of Reagan, I can’t name another modern president who was better for us at the time he was around.
    I’m getting sick of those who don’t want to recognize Bush’s important good qualities.

  8. Bad theater. The expressions on Mrs. Obama and that doofus in the khaki-colored coat at left are so phony and saccharine they make me cringe. Very bad theater.

  9. AND how good a job did he do at abolishing the rights of free speech and free assembly? Remember that disgusting anti Israel, pro Hamas display in Ft. Lauderdale? Bush was a strong advocate of Israel self defense. Why did he allow that travesty to go on?
    This complaint about Bush having so much control is baloney. Look only at what he had to face in one of the most biased coverages of a presidency I have ever seen. He had no control over that hostility. If Bush had one quarter of the adulation the press shows Obama, how different things might have been. Where is all this control liberals find?

  10. Sure, Iraq is a free country. We finally let them select the government they wanted (which is decidedly anti-American) after 4 tries and when the political pressure to end the war became too great for the administration to stand against. Way to go.

    Bush had an excellent understanding of tyrants. But tell me, did he actually do anything about Castro? Or Kim? Or many, many others? Nope. Just the one sitting on top of a bunch of oil, with whom he could manufacture a tenuous connection with the 9/11 attacks.

    Honey doesn’t want to remember that in reality, Bush’s record regarding terrorist attacks is identical to Clinton’s. And Clinton was terrible at national security.

    And Honey also doesn’t remember that GW introduced the concept of “Free Speech Zones”. Prior to his election the only free speech zone we had was the 3.7 million square miles defined by the borders he failed to defend.

    As an aside, since you alluded to it, Katrina is one thing I don’t blame Bush for. Local and state created that mess.

  11. Where do I begin?
    How is Iraq proving to be anti American when they elected leaders who were the ones we would have chosen had Bush operatives been voting? I think the results in Iraq are better for the U.S. than anyone could have imagined. And anyone who discounts the oil provocation is making two mistakes here. One, he forgets we need oil. And two and more important, we have not taken one barrel of oil for the U.S. but allowed Iraq to exploit its own oil reserves so they can make money for themselves and help the supply of oil outside of Opec to the world, which is a good thing.
    No other President before Bush and since Kennedy, as I recall has done more to bring to light the prisoners and the tyranny that goes on in Cuba. He refused to lift the embargo in the face of much pressure because he understood, like Sharansky, that you don’t give bad actors anything until they provide the reforms needed and release their political prisoners.
    Anyone who equates Clinton’s record on terrorism with Bush’s is quite simply out of touch with reality.
    Well, at least you got it right on Katrina.

  12. Matt, you have no clue about the constitution. In times of rebellion the President has the power to suspend the writ of Habeas Corpus which he did.

    And he did imprison folks for sedition. This was not an ordinary war with a foreign government. It was a civil war.

    The future of our nation was at stake.

    What do you think Lincoln should have done? Surrendered? And WTF does Bush have to do with Lincoln and the Civil War. What are you a secessionist?

    Show me what US Laws he violated in 1861-1865. Please spare me.

    Further, what Lincoln did pales in comparison to what FDR did to the Japanese. You know, FDR, the liberal icon, who sent Jews back to concentration camps in Germany and imprisoned all Japanese citizens indiscriminately. I’ll give him credit to working with Churchill with defeating the Nazis, but he blundered by giving eastern Europe to Stalin over Winston’s objection.

    Moreover, the idea of a strong executive as we know it in modern times originated with Teddy Roosevelt …

  13. Mike – I think most of what you are responding to was comments I made about Bush, not Lincoln.

    But to answer your question, I think he should have let them secede. He had no Constitutional authority to prevent it, something he himself acknowledged. If the agreement that is the United States couldn’t be honored within the framework of the Constitution then it needed to be dissolved and something new allowed to take its place.

    By removing the right of States to secede he instantly flipped the balance of power between State and Federal governments on its head, which has lead to absolutely no good in the years since.

  14. Honey –

    Hmmm…

    Clinton administration – Attack on the WTC. 7 years of nothing.

    Bush administration – Attack on the WTC. 7 years of nothing.

    Looks pretty even to me.

  15. I will be a lady and give you the last word.
    I will leave it to reasonable people to see all that you and I have written and let them decide.

  16. Matt,

    You have gotten to the point of totally distorting reality with your empty arguments plus your bias against the Bush administration are so obvious that amazes me.

    1. Clinton administration – Attack on the WTC. 7 years of nothing.

    I give you that much. Other than a couple cruise missile attack against Osama’s camps and the warehouses in Sudan, that’s how far Clinton went after the terrorists.

    2. Bush administration – Attack on the WTC. 7 years of nothing.

    Well, here is were you argument totally straits away from reality because the following are accomplishments of the Bush administration:

    1. Removal of the Taliban regime from Afghanistan and establishing a democratic government in that country.

    2. Removal of Sadam Husein’s government from Iraq and the establishment of a democratic government there too.

    3. The physical elimination and imprisonment of many terrorists that operated with total impunity in those countries mentioned above.

    1, 2 and 3 are by far are much more than Bill Clinton and company ever did.

    4) Forcing Kadafi in Libia to give-up his nuclear
    weapons program.

    5) Preventing further terrorist attacks against the USA mainland.

    And yet you say that Bush did nothing for seven years.

    Come on, don’t make me laugh with such a stupid statement.

  17. Matt, “He abolished the rights of free speech and free assembly wherever and whenever it was in his best interests”

    First of all, since we are at war, President Bush did nothing illegal. We are at war! Why don’t you go ask Cindy Sheehan how she enjoyed all that time spent camped out by President Bush’ house in Crawford, and ask the press and internet sites who called him the most vile names about how their free speech rights were abridged.

    You fit right in with the low class crowd disgracefully booing Laura Bush during President Obama’s inauguration which truly embarrassed our country in front of the entire world. President Bush headed our country while at war, under very difficult circumstances, and carried out his number one duty, defending and protecting us citizens. Now he is gone, and I can tell you already that our future is in the hands of an amateur who doesn’t know what he is doing. The presidency is not the place for on the job training, so I suggest you get over the past 8 years and worry about tomorrow. Really, you’ve acquitted yourself quite poorly here.

  18. FreedomForCuba – When I said 7 years of nothing, I meant 7 years of no terrorist attacks. Not 7 years of doing nothing on our part. We were just as safe under Clinton’s lack of positive action as we were under Bush’s misguided actions. We are no more secure now than we were 8 years ago.

    Ziva – The only reason that most of Bush’s actions weren’t illegal (and many of them were, actually) is because of executive signing statements making them legal. Sounds a lot more like the current situation in Venezuela than the United States to me. Bush used fabricated and/or exaggerated threats as an excuse to run roughshod over the Constitution and involve us in an adventurist war that is going to cost us trillions of dollars. He made it legal to use the military to stop any form of assembly or free speech within our borders, and activated an army brigade in Savannah to carry out that mission (Obama doesn’t seem to have plans to change that, either). He changed the definition of sedition and then enacted executive orders that enabled him to act on that new definition. He drew unprecedented power to an office that was drawn up to be the weakest elected head of state in the world. He failed us at nearly every turn.

    He kept us safe from nothing. Our borders are just as porous and poorly defended as they ever were (just ask any illegal alien). Security for air travel is a joke. Cyber security is non-existent. Our relations with other nations are at an all time low – a situation that will not improve with Obama apparently planning to roll over for anyone and everyone in an attempt to make amends. And we are more dependent on other nations for our survival than we have ever been thanks to his continuation of the suicidal trade and labor policies of his father and Clinton. We are at greater risk now than ever before.

    Congress let him do it, so they are just as much to blame for all of this as he is if not more so.

    Not sure where that bit about booing Laura Bush came from. Not sure why anyone would boo her, to tell you the truth. I don’t care about her one way or another.

    Our future is in the hands of an amateur, and I’m not happy about it. But I wasn’t happy about it being in the hands of a power hungry, self-serving demagogue either. Wasn’t happy about it being in the hands of a globalist intellectual – either of them. I haven’t been happy about the Presidency in over 20 years.

  19. Matt you’re delusional; kept us safe from nothing? There hasn’t been an attack since 9/11. Here’s a reminder of the Clinton years:
    * February 26, 1993, attack on the World Trade Center: 6 deaths and 1,042 injured
    * April 19, 1995, Oklahoma City bombing: 168 deaths and over 800 injured
    * June 25, 1996, Khobar Towers bombing in Saudi Arabia: 20 deaths and 372 injured
    * August 7, 1998, attacks on American embassies in Kenya and Tanzania: 12 U.S. deaths out of a total of 223 deaths; 12 U.S. injured out of a total of over 4,000 injured
    * October 12, 2000, attack on the USS Cole in Yemen: 17 deaths; 39 injured
    * September 11, 2001, attacks in New York and Washington (occurred during Bush presidency but planned during Clinton administration): 2,975 deaths and 24 missing.

    There is much of President Bush’s policy’s I disagreed with, but I have no doubt that he is an honorable man who did his best. The fact that you are here still spewing forth from Bush derangement syndrome is proof enough that your rights have not been violated. I leave you to it.

  20. For the ultimate answer to this picture that is in this post and to all of the silliness of Obama comparing himself to Lincoln, go to Natioanl Review’s 2/23 issue and read the article Our Lincoln by Allen C. Guelzo.
    This tells it like it was about Lincoln’s conservatism, his respect for the real meaning of All men are created equal, citing personal experience that made him a capitalist and not a populist like Obama, and his restraint in expansion of powers of the federal government even under the pressure of war.

Comments are closed.