"When we had a president whose only goal was providing handouts to the rich". Blah, blah, blah - same old false stale argument. I'm in the middle class and I got some tax breaks under Bush and his MAIN goal was to keep us all safe after 9/11, in spite of all the Dems whining and moaning over water-boarding, wire-tapping, and Gitmo. I have a favor to ask too. While we're at it, let's ask Geithner to clean out his desk and go home too!

Very prescient, Henry. Good call.
By the way, Greg Petersen (above) is %$#!.
Come to the farm sometime and I can listen to you whine, Greg, while we waterboard you. You act as though Dubya was infallible. What is the exact opposite of that? Hyperfallible?

Come on Mr. Editor, where r u? Jtb here (above comment) just threw an "ad hominem" my way. That's ok, I can take it. I've been called worse. I don't know where u live jtb, but I might have to pass on your waterboarding party. I work for one of those evil oil companies that make tons of money and I just can't get away. Besides, if I have to tell my teenagers NO one more time, they're probably going to waterboard me right here at home! I sense somehow you libs would prefer to save waterboarding for conservatives while the enemy who wants to drop an A-bomb on us gets a free pass. President G.W. Bush was not a very good president. He made plenty of decisions that I had to disagree with. He wasn't conservative enough. But , he is a decent man who did keep us safe post 9/11.

Greg, your point about ad hominems is well taken. For more about our guidelines about ad hominems, please see our "FAQ" page here:

What comments get barred?

Schwaller gets a predictable reaction from the right: Damn Daschle, laud Bush.

If Bush kept us "safe" following 9-11, where was he pre 9-1l? Frankly, count me among those who think the whole endless, borderless "global war" on "terrorism" was over-sold, principally to put into effect the expansion of power called the "unitary executive" -- and the adventurous occupation of Iraq more to do with oil and corporate plunder than anything else--and NOTHING to do with the September ll..

The "true believers" and the oil industry (note the critic's admission of involvement) will never acknowledge it, but Bush is an embarrassment to this country and all the attempts at historical revision serve only to embarrass him further.

None of that excuses a failure to pay taxes, and Daschle was right, IMO, to withdraw his nomination. It might be interesting to learn whether Daschle prepared his own tax returns or simply signed his name, but in any case he assumed responsibility. Obama, too, said "I screwed up."

Bush, in contrast, remained arrogant to the last.

With Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld, the charges are infinitely more serious: high crimes and misdemeanors that, having not been prosecuted before, must now be prosecuted after they have been correctly booted from power.

As a bit of a footnote. Schwaller's critic doesn't offer any examples of how Bush wasn't "conservative enough." Just what the critic has in mind might be interesting to hear.

Dear Greg:

If you do not believe that Dubya's tax cuts focused on the rich, then demonstrate evidence to the contrary. In fact, sixty percent of the Bush tax cuts went to the wealthiest 10 percent of Americans. Conversely, sixty percent of taxpayers received only 12.7 percent of the tax cuts.

Your pal,
Henry

Well Bob, where do I start?
Where was Bush pre 9/11?
I feel the same way. That was my first big criticism with Bush. The first thing he should have done when he took office in '01 was to retaliate and retaliate hard for the U.S.S. Cole attack. To be honest with you, Al-Qaeda started war with us in Oct. 2000, not 9/11.
The war on terrorism was over sold, OVER SOLD?
You've go to be kidding me, right? Did you just conveniently forget that over 3000 civilians were slaughtered on 9/11, more so than the attack on Pearl Harbor in '41? What's the matter with you? Unbelievable! I guarantee you that the victim's families haven't forgotten.
Bob, I'll tell you what I will acknowledge, Bill Clinton was an embaarrassment to this country. Bill Clinton and his little sexcapade with Monica in the Oval Office and then lying about it. George Bush couldn't top that if he tried.
Charges against Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld?
What in the world are you talking about? What the heck have you been smoking? I guess it's just typical bitterness run amok from the Left. President Reagan was treated the same way when he left office in '89.
Bush wasn't conservative enough?
A couple of things come to mind. Giving tons money (when it should have been zero) to Africa for AIDS prevention when we could least afford it. And then Bush was in cahoots with the Dems over that ridiculous amnesty reform bill that went down in flames. I voted for Bush twice, but in the end I was disappointed overall.
Curious Bob, what's your favorite kool-aid flavor?

Mr. Editor, two typos above.
You've got to be ..., and embarrassment.
Sorry.

Well, Greg. It's good you fault Bush for something. That's a start. As to faulting Bush for not retaliating for the USS Cole incident, do you have in mind he should have invaded and occupied Iraq?

Yes, 9/11 was horrible, and yes, retaliation against those who planned and carried out the attack is STILL necessary.

(Here, may I suggest that you read "Imperial Hubris: Why the West Is Losing the War on Terrorism" I think you'll find the author's credentials acceptable, and you'll learn something besides.)

However, in my opinion the constant drumbeat of fear pounded relentlessly by the Bush administration and allies is designedly to make us afraid and willing to accept expansion of executive power and diminished civil liberties than anything else. IF the threat were as grave and omnipresent as, say, 28 gauge Dick Cheney would suggest, our open borders to illegal immigrant workers and dopers and whatever else is free to cross would have evenuated in something: movie houses, ball games, concerts, shopping malls, etc.--wherever crowds gather.

The case against Bush's inaction before 9/11 has been amply made by Richard Clarke, among others.

Why then did Bush immediately "over-blow" and divert focus from the incident carried out by 19 mostly Saudis and NO Iraqis...on Iraq? Oh.."bad intelligence" Colin Powell's aide Lawrence Wilkerson, calls it the most embarrassing time of his career to see how the "intelligence was being fixed around the policy" was the Downing Street Memos put it. Maybe someday Powell will feel safe enough to write his own book.

What, 4200 or more US dead, some 30,000 wounded. Likely far more than the 80 or 90 thousand Iraqis dead, at least 100's of thousands wounded. No WMDs, no significant connection to al Qaeda or 9/11. And speaking of expense in Africa to fight aids being "tons" ill-spent, what would the $trillions spend in Iraq weigh? How do the "tons" compare with the bucks squirreled away by private U.S. Corporations, or the big bucks carried off by unregulated/poorly regulated "free market" screw-you artists?

Like most on the (self)right(eous)right, you are apparently fascinated with everybody else's tallywhacker and honeypot. Yes, it was tacky of Bill, and embarrassing to the country.
On the other hand, it was not illegal and not particularly relevant to the operaton of the country. The fact that he lied about the affair is predictable and human. The courts have ruled it not worthy of prosecution because it was not "material." IT was colorful, however, and gives you and Rush something to slobber over.

As to prosecuting the just-past (thank the good Lord) adminstration, the issues are far more germane. Torture and extraordinary 'rendition", violation of FISA law, defiance of the Geneva Convention, violation of international law by invading a sovereign state, wire-tapping American citizens, refusing to testify under oath and subpoena to Congress, outing a covert intelligence agent, a historic number of "signing statements" declaring a "unitary" Presidency above the law.

Among the many who have made and are making the case for careful investigation leading to likely impeachment are John Dean, former White House counsel during the Watergate Era; former Congresswoman Elizabeth Holzman; and Jonathan Turley, Constitutional Law Professor at George Washington University. You may wish (just kidding) to read what they have to say.

Already know it all? Oh.

I drank Kool Aid when I was a kid--liked the grape. I wasn't even sure they still make it, but I see you still have the habit, maybe the sour grape flavor?

Well,I'll have a Bud. How's about a clue, my friend? I see you're empty.

Bob, I think you and I have too much time on our hands if we're typing up these big long-winded comments almost everyday!
I think you're making a big mistake by downplaying Bill Clinton's adultery in the Oval Office by using the words "it was tacky". It was absolutely despicable!
Ya know what, if you and all your friends on the Left want to go on a ridiculous witch hunt against Bush and company, do us all taxpayers a big favor - use your own damn money!
Unfortunately, war is messy, ugly business. People are always second guessing each other and mistakes are always made. So be careful about criticizing the Bush administration too much. I can almost guarantee you that the Obama administration is going to have their backs against the wall and deal with Iran and North Korea harshly when they find out that talking nicely to them doesn't work.
By the way, I've always hated kool-aid, and the way you sound, someone is spiking your Bud with it while you listen to that insufferable Keith Olbermann too much!

Sooo...Greg. "Mistakes are always made" eh?

I am impressed with the amazing lack of meaningful particulars in your stream of right wing vitriol--but there were a couple of things meriting reply.

When you want those on the "Left" to do "ALL us taxpayers" a favor, I assume you've taken a head count and found everybody agrees with you, or is it primarily the sour grapes Kool-Aiders who voted your way? (And lost, big time, across this great country.)

Democracy (a democratic republic) is an ugly, messy business, too. But as Churchill observed, it beats the alternatives. And odds are quite good that the Obama administration will be at least marginally better than the farce we've endured for the previous eight years. (Rush, of course, hopes that Obama will fail. He drinks sour grapes Kool-aid, too.)

As to the task of the Obama adminstration, it is surely daunting on several fronts--at home and abroad--no thanks to the Manichean, Karl Rovian us-them, we good-you bad, mentality, and the cave in to unregulated and under-regulated capitalism.

And for downplaying anything, I'd venture the high crimes and misdemeanors of the Bush administration are considerably more "sickening" than Bill Clinton's personal sex life--even though they may make for less titillating TV and sell fewer widgets. You are free, obviously, to rate as you please.

Henry:
What's up with this Dubya business? Hasn't it gotten over used, disrespectful, and stupid? I read your resume' and it's impressive - way better than mine, so excuse me, but I would expect a litte better.
It's just this whole nonsense that conservatives only care about the rich when Reagan took office in the early '80s that is such an annoyance.
I'm not going to argue your numbers, 60/40 and so on, because it sounds like you've done your homework.
But, a part of me says what's so bad about giving the wealthiest more of the tax breaks. For the most part, they've worked harder in school and in the private sector than the rest of us. And, with more money for them to work with, they can expand their businesses, create more jobs, invest and spend more in the economy. It ought to make us all strive to join their club. To use your numbers, the other 40% of tax breaks go to poor saps like me who goofed off in school and took cushy jobs. I don't have much of a problem with that.
The other part of me says let's take the current tax code that is corrupt and convoluted and just junk it. Let's implement a flat tax where everybody, rich and not so rich, pays the same reasonable rate - ending the IRS as we know it.
And Bob, I think I'm done with you for now!