Tag Archives: George Washington

Karl Rove Ranks Bush’s Presidency Somewhere ‘Up There,’ Just Below Washington, Lincoln, Reagan, FDR

Karl Rove just can’t seem to get it right on certain issues.   After all, he wrongly predicted the 2012 election would go to Mitt Romney then had a rather embarrassing display on Fox News on election night when he didn’t believe that Obama had won.  Not to mention that many American citizens and foreign nationals around the globe believe Mr. Rove is a war criminal.

So this from the guy who hasn’t gotten anything right since the 2000 election?  I think Rove has been around too long and all the big money deals with deep pocket donors contributing to his various PACs may just be taking its toll on poor Karl.  Not to mention that the Hague wants to have a little talk with Rove’s colleagues from the Bush administration: Cheney and Rove, Rice and Rumsfeld about the “war” in Iraq.  In fact none of the above can travel to Europe at this time…

The Huffington Post

Former President George W. Bush isn’t quite a George Washington or an Abraham Lincoln, his former campaign strategist Karl Rove admitted to ABC News on Thursday, but according to Rove, he’s not too far off.

“The greats, you can’t touch: George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Ronald Reagan, FDR,” Rove said in Dallas at the dedication of the George W. Bush Presidential Center. “But yeah, I’d put him up there.”

Rove’s claim came after an aggressive defense of Bush’s legacy, which he said history would view favorably more quickly than most thought. Bush left office in 2009 as themost unpopular outgoing president in the history of Gallup polling. Rove pointed to arecent poll that showed his popularity at 47 percent to argue that Bush was already experiencing a turnaround.

Rove also said that Bush deserved more positive treatment, claiming that he “kept us safe after 9/11″ and “tackled the big issues of trying to reform Social Security, Medicare, immigration, education.” He also defended the Iraq War as “the right thing to do.”

(Watch Rove’s entire interview at Yahoo News.)

Bush’s recent return to the main stage has highlighted the controversial decisions that he made as president, renewing a dormant battle between his supporters and his opponents. While Rove has been one of Bush’s most vocal defenders, writing a column in the Wall Street Journal this week jabbing back at his former boss’ critics, Bush himself has consistently maintained that his legacy doesn’t need defending.

In an interview published in USA Today last week, Bush declared that “there’s no need to defend myself” on issues like the Iraq War.

“I did what I did and ultimately history will judge,” he said.

That said, nobody has ever said you can’t attempt to nudge history into your corner. On Thursday, former President Bill Clinton ribbed Bush on that point, saying that his impressive facility was “the latest, grandest example of the eternal struggle of former presidents to rewrite history.”

 

1 Comment

Filed under George W. Bush Administration, Karl Rove

White House responds to secessionists, impeachment advocates and beer aficionados

Thank you Wonk Blog!

The Washington Post – Wonk Blog

You may have heard how the White House has rejected a petition to build a Death Star (“The administration does not support blowing up planets”). But it’s not the only fringe idea that’s prompted an official response from the administration, which promised to reply to any “We the People” petition that gathered more than 25,000 signatures. Here are a couple of choice replies:

Secession? We’ve been through this already, folks.

As President Abraham Lincoln explained in his first inaug(David James /Disney/Dreamworks)ural address in 1861, “in contemplation of universal law and of the Constitution the Union of these States is perpetual.” In the years that followed, more than 600,000 Americans died in a long and bloody civil war that vindicated the principle that the Constitution establishes a permanent union between the States. And shortly after the Civil War ended, the Supreme Court confirmed that “[t]he Constitution, in all its provisions, looks to an indestructible Union composed of indestructible States. (Response to ”Deport Everyone That Signed A Petition To Withdraw Their State From The United States Of America,” which the administration didn’t quite address in its response.)

Thanks for letting us know you want to impeach the president! No, really.

Believe it or not, petitions like the one you signed are one of the reasons we think We the People is such a valuable tool. There are few resources that do more to help us engage directly with people about the issues that matter to them — especially people who disagree with us. So let us use this opportunity to set the record straight…Here’s the important thing, though. Even though this request isn’t going to happen, we want you to walk away from this process with knowledge that we’re doing our best to listen — even to our harshest critics. (Response to “We request that Obama be impeached for the following reasons.)

Want the White House’s own beer recipe? Here you go!

To be honest, we were surprised that the beer turned out so well since none of us had brewed beer before. As far as we know the White House Honey Brown Ale is the first alcohol brewed or distilled on the White House grounds. George Washington brewed beer and distilled whiskey at Mount Vernon and Thomas Jefferson made wine but there’s no evidence that any beer has been brewed in the White House…Like many home brewers who add secret ingredients to make their beer unique, all of our brews have honey that we tapped from the first ever bee-hive on the South Lawn. The honey gives the beer a rich aroma and a nice finish but it doesn’t sweeten it. (Response to “Release the recipe for the Honey Ale home brewed at the White House,” which includes the recipes at the bottom.)

You can read the rest of the White House’s responses to citizens petitions here.

3 Comments

Filed under The White House

2nd Amendment

I’m bookmarking the following site.  I really appreciate its historical facts

Cognitive Dissidence

Thanks to the vast right wing echo chamber, it appears that we cannot have a real debate on guns until we first make clear what the Founders had in mind when they authored the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution.

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Unfortunately, the right wing echo chamber has been hard at work trying to convince people that the 2nd Amendment was written to protect people from their “tyrannical Government”!   Studying the Founders, we realize that is wrong and just plain silly!

We also know that Founders wanted every man to be part of a “well regulated militia” instead of have a standing army.  They wanted everyone to band together to protect out country when the time came, instead of having a standing army.  Standing armies scared them:  Thomas Jefferson himself called them “an engine of oppression.”

Later, in an 1814 letter to Thomas Cooper, Jefferson wrote of standing armies: “The Greeks and Romans had no standing armies, yet they defended themselves. The Greeks by their laws, and the Romans by the spirit of their people, took care to put into the hands of their rulers no such engine of oppression as a standing army. Their system was to make every man a soldier and oblige him to repair to the standard of his country whenever that was reared. This made them invincible; and the same remedy will make us so.”

Had the early framers of the Constitution embraced a standing army during times of peace, then there would be no need for a regulated militia, and thus no need for the 2nd Amendment.

 Need some more:

In fact, during that first gun debate, the state of New Hampshire introduced an amendment that gave the government permission to confiscate guns when citizens “are or have been in Actual Rebellion.” To those early legislators in New Hampshire, the right to bear arms stops as soon as those arms are taken up against our “we the people” government.

Just ask the ancestors of those who participated in the Whiskey Rebellion. In 1794, armed Americans took up guns against what they viewed as a tyrannical George Washington administration imposing taxes on whiskey. President Washington called up 13,000 militia men, and personally led the troops to squash the rebellion of armed citizens in Bedford, Pennsylvania. No Army. No right to have guns to overthrow the oppressive US government.

Need some more let’s look  at the 1794 Whiskey Rebellion:

On August 1, 1794, President George Washington was once again leading troops. Only this time Washington was not striking out against the British but rather against fellow Americans. The occasion for this was the Whiskey Rebellion. Various efforts had been made to diminish the heated opposition towards the tax on distilled liquors. However, there was only one man who has derived the best course of action. That man, President George Washington, deserves all the credit and recognition for his actions concerning the Whiskey Rebellion. In September 1791 the western counties of Pennsylvania broke out in rebellion against a federal “excise” tax on the distillation of liquor. After local and federal officials were attacked, President Washington and his advisors decided to send troops to assuage the region. On August 14, 1792, under the militia law, Henry Knox (secretary of war) had called for 12,950 troops.

The Founders who had just overcome the British to form our own country, had no interest in the people that they governed doing the same thing to them.  So when there was that possibility George Washington squashed it quickly!

http://youtu.be/dBtZ6go_R4g

So its time to listen to people like General McChrystal:

 “I spent a career carrying typically either an M16 or an M4 Carbine. An M4 Carbine fires a .223 caliber round which is 5.56 mm at about 3000 feet per second. When it hits a human body, the effects are devastating. It’s designed for that,” McChrystal explained. “That’s what our soldiers ought to carry. I personally don’t think there’s any need for that kind of weaponry on the streets and particularly around the schools in America.”

By the way, Hitler encouraged the ownership of guns….he didn’t take your guns!  

Comments Off

Filed under Gun Control Debate

GOP California Lawmaker Opposes Texting And Driving Fine Because It’s Not What ‘The Founders Intended’

 

George Washington, who probably didn’t have much of an opinion at all about cell phones

It’s past ‘silly season’ on the current political calendar but a lot of GOP politicians didn’t get the memo.  I’m now wondering if these people even know that what they’re saying is hilarious?

Think Progress

A California state legislator railed against a proposed $10 “texting and driving” fine increase in an appropriations committee hearing Wednesday, arguing that “policing ourselves” is “what the founders intended.” If passed, the bill wouldincrease the base fine for texting and driving from $20 to $30, with the $10 increase to be used for a public awareness program. Assemblyman Tim Donnelly (R-59), however, warned that such an increase would cause George Washington to roll over in his grave:

DONNELLY: And I think the fact that you might cause a death, someone else’s death or your own, is such a powerful prohibiter of that, that we really don’t need to be increasing the fine. And I don’t think we need to have the cops pulling people over and giving them texting tickets. I see the cops driving down the street texting. So when a cop is driving down the street texting, and then he’s going to give me a ticket for texting, I think it’s wrong. And I think ultimately, there’s a great consequence to that kind of behavior. And as intelligent, rational human beings who live in a free society, is it too much to ask that we just police ourselves? It just seems that’s what the founders intended. And I feel like this is just more of a nanny state government that costs us a lot of money, and ultimately abridges more and more liberties to the point that – is the government going to tell me where I can go next? Or how many miles I can drive?

Watch it:

For the record, drivers distracted by their cellphones killed an estimated 16,000 people from 2001 to 2007. So this law has nothing to do with some kind of “nanny state” effort to protect people from themselves, and everything to do with eliminating a dangerous activity that kills thousands of innocents every year.

Donnelly is right in one respect, however. There can be no doubt that the founders did not foresee liberty-squashing texting and driving laws, for the same reason their vision of American government says nothing about the Internet, space shuttles, automatic dishwashers, the Industrial Revolution, iPads or the short-lived professional baseball career of Michael Jordan.

Assemblyman Donnelly, for his part, has not yet explained how he thinks Thomas Jefferson would have regulated the nuclear power industry.

 

6 Comments

Filed under Politicians

Rush Limbaugh Outraged Obama’s Thanksgiving Declaration Thanks Native Americans

Mediaite

President Obama’s “wildly distorted” version of Thanksgiving– where the pilgrims and Native Americans traded food and wealth during a cold winter– has greatly upset Rush Limbaugh. In fact, Limbaugh was so shocked the president would thank Native Americans for their “rich culture,” he thought the White House’s official Thanksgiving declaration was a hoax.

Compared to George Washington’s 1789 declaration, Limbaugh argues, Obama’s is practically sacrilege. Decrying “the myth of the first Thanksgiving,” Limbaugh read an excerpt of the President’s declaration, adding personal touches in places like “Native Americans’ rich culture continues to add to our nation’s heritage” (here he inserted “at their casinos and reservations.” Then he repeated several variations of “this has got to be a parody” to himself incredulously as he mulled over the text, which he followed by interpreting President Obama’s comments: “We were the invaders… we were incompetent idiots, we didn’t know how to feed ourselves, so they came along and showed us how, and that’s what Thanksgiving is all about.”

Speaking with a caller, Limbaugh clarified what the real story of Thanksgiving is about: “the true story of Thanksgiving is how socialism failed,” he tells the caller, noting that “the Indians didn’t teach us capitalism” and “we shared our bounty with them… because we first failed as socialists.” The caller, David, seemed thrilled with that explanation, but it sounds like the sort of thing American history scholars may have a bit of a problem with.

The audio from today’s radio show below:

Comments Off

Filed under Right Wing Extremism, Right Wing Myths and Falsehoods, Right-wing disinformation campaign, Right-wing Media, Right-Wing Propaganda, Right-wing Race-baiting, Rush Limbaugh

Glenn Beck Admits Lying: ‘I Thought It Would Be A Little Easier’ (VIDEO)

Glenn Beck

Image via Wikipedia

Huffington Post

After being called on a white lie he told during his Restoring Honor rally, Glenn Beck admitted Thursday that he stretched the truth because he “thought it would be a little easier.”

Beck had claimed that he held George Washington’s handwritten first Inaugural Address in his hands at the National Archives, but a spokeswoman at the institution said he did no such thing. Keith Olbermann, Ed Schultz and others called him out for the fabrication.

Thursday on his radio show, Beck copped to the lie. (RELATED: Lies By Prominent Americans.)

“I thought it would be a little easier in the speech,” Beck said, than to go into the following elaborate explanation (via Mediaite):

Yesterday I went to the National Archives, and they opened up the vault, and they put on their gloves and then they put it on a tray. They wheeled it over and it’s all in this hard plastic and you’re sitting down at a table and you can’t, because of Sandy Berger, I had a long conversation with him about this, you can’t actually touch any of the documents, these are very very rare. So what they do, they have it in this plastic thing and they hold them right in front of you, you can’t touch them but then you can say ‘can you turn it over,’ and then they turn it over for you and then you look at it. I thought it was a little clumsy to explain it that way.

Comments Off

Filed under Uncategorized