Audio: Peggy Noonan lowers the boom on Bush

posted at 6:11 pm on June 4, 2007 by Allahpundit

More audio from Brian Kirsten and the Judge courtesy of Johnny Dollar. Her soft, measured speaking style softens the blows but Noonan’s clearly throwing roundhouses here, particularly when she accuses him of having exploited the goodwill he accrued from 9/11. The amnesty bill and the accusations of bad faith that have come with it are the last, indefensible straw. There’s simply no making excuses for the guy anymore. Like Noonan says, we don’t know who he is. But we do know he’s not one of us.

Don’t quit on it before it’s played all the way through. The end is devastating.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

It seems ironic to me that Bush was touting the WoT and how we have to defend against it, while leaving the borders all but wide open. Don’t those two things conflict? The Republicans have been using the WoT as a way to gain votes because they say they’re tough on national security. That stance doesn’t really retain any credibility when the majority of them are behind the open borders bill. How can you have open borders and national security? Obviously DHS is doing a stellar job of keeping track of who’s coming in.

wherestherum on June 4, 2007 at 10:49 PM

I just found out you can get back any money you donated to the RNC in the past 12 months. Stick it to them.

PRCalDude on June 4, 2007 at 10:50 PM

PRCalDude on June 4, 2007 at 10:45 PM

That depresses me. I had hope for other parts of the state. Well, not anything in or near the vicinity of San Francisco. I’ve written them off. I’ve about written LA off, too. I’m just not sure where else to go. We’re the biggest sanctuary city in the nation, overrun by illegals and gangs, and our nearly all Latino council things it’s the greatest thing ever. To top it all off, we have Special Order 40 AND we sue cops trying to do their jobs.

wherestherum on June 4, 2007 at 10:53 PM

*thinks

wherestherum on June 4, 2007 at 10:53 PM

Exploited means what it means. If she meant that she should have said that. She is a pandere trying to regain favor.

tomas

clearly you’re an argumentive waste of time. i’m sorry i even bothered reading and responding to you.

VinceP1974 on June 4, 2007 at 10:57 PM

I think every program, school or anything really that isn’t based on english should be outlawed. You have to reestablish this country for what it was built on.

This will help as much as a fence.

tomas on June 4, 2007 at 10:59 PM

This will help as much as a fence.

tomas on June 4, 2007 at 10:59 PM

How?

cmay on June 4, 2007 at 11:02 PM

clearly you’re an argumentive waste of time. i’m sorry i even bothered reading and responding to you.

You have spelled out conservatives…this is your problem. You don’t listen to others.

tomas on June 4, 2007 at 11:04 PM

You have spelled out conservatives…this is your problem. You don’t listen to others.

tomas

and what are you? (i dont want to assume)

if you’re a lefty. then please spare us.. there’s nowhere to go to escape from the same 10 cliches you people perseverate relentlessly.. you confuse “[not] listening” with sick and tired of hearing the same lies spouted for the 848989648574750th time.

VinceP1974 on June 4, 2007 at 11:07 PM

You don’t listen to others.

tomas on June 4, 2007 at 11:04 PM

Hello pot, this is the kettle.

Goodness gracious man. Stay on topic. Bush is the one who is defying 75%+ of the people in the US and calling people names. Bush is the one who abandoned respectful and reasoned debate. Bush walked away from the American people and called them a bunch of bigoted sissies. And you want everyone to stick by him for party loyalty and comity?

cmay on June 4, 2007 at 11:11 PM

I didn’t hear him say bigoted sissies…when was that?

tomas on June 4, 2007 at 11:17 PM

Conservatives…sit in the corner…until they dont’ agree with something. Then they cry like babies. Liberal always cry like babies.

Pointing out the fact that this bill would grant amnesty to 30,000 illegal gang members isn’t crying. And usually when you agree with the party you support and what they’re doing you, “sit in the corner”. And when one doesn’t like something, you protest it.

But according to Bush Bots such as yourself, you can’t rail the President because somehow that’s acting like a liberal. Liberals do criticize the president but if you haven’t noticed, for very different reasons.

V15J on June 4, 2007 at 11:22 PM

Rove says we alienate the Mexican vote by opposing this immigration bill, thus marginalizing the GOP for generations to come.

Rush says the bill would import a new Dem majority, making the GOP a permanent minority party. (Not to mention transforming society and losing the culture as we know it.)

So either way we lose?

If I gotta go out, I’m going out with Rush!

petefrt on June 4, 2007 at 11:25 PM

If I gotta go out, I’m going out with Rush!

Amen to that brotha.

V15J on June 4, 2007 at 11:26 PM

I didn’t hear him say bigoted sissies…when was that?

tomas on June 4, 2007 at 11:17 PM

Sorry to paraphrase. He and his administration has referred to opponents as not liking Mexicans, not debating in good faith, wanting to execute everyone lest it be amnesty, etc. So sorry to actually diminish the wild rhetoric that Bush and his administration has repeatedly used.

Stay on topic. Bush is the one who is defying 75%+ of the people in the US and calling people names. Bush is the one who abandoned respectful and reasoned debate. Bush walked away from the American people and called them a bunch of stupid, bigoted, blood thirsty jerks. And you want everyone to stick by him for party loyalty and comity?

There, it’s fixed. Stay on topic. Answer the question. Who is screwing who? Seems to me that the obvious answer is Bush screwed his conservative base and most of the American people. Then he called them a bunch of names. Now you want us to just roll over.

It doesn’t work that way. His political capital is gone. It’s nearly at zero and he’s spending Ted Kennedy’s now.

cmay on June 4, 2007 at 11:26 PM

I said you don’t get you way by calling for his impeachment and calling him el presidente…you ARE marginalising yourself. Nothing He say need help that.

Most of the american people are wrong about Iraq and they are wrong on this issue…for different reasons.

tomas on June 4, 2007 at 11:26 PM

This president is what he has always been, what his family raised him to be, a globalist. Being a globalist, and given the opportunity to shift the national policy towards globalism, he is doing exactly that. It’s no surprise to those who have said as much for the last 8 years, when his name first hit the radar screen as a possible candidate for 2000.

He doesn’t care that the core of the party which put him in office is deadset against his globalism, because it’s what he wants and he doesn’t have to run for office again. He sees this as a priority above even serving his office. That’s what a globalist would do.

Peggy Noonan is exactly correct in her analysis. She didn’t say a word about the bill, but about how foolishly the White House is biting the hand that feeds it over the disagreement regarding the bill.

I gladly voted for this president twice. I do not regret those votes, given the alternatives. But this president HAS betrayed those who served him best in getting elected.

As was already mentioned, Peggy Noonan took a voluntary suspension from her journalistic profession to work for the Bush campaign because she felt so strongly about avoiding a Democrat presidency.

Politics isn’t black and white. You can’t ignore the betrayal of this president because he’s “our man”. And to disagree with him on this issue doesn’t mean you are forced to disagree with him on all issues.

This nation has a better economy under this president than it would have had under the alternative. We took the fight to the Islamo-fascists in Afghanistan and Iraq under this President, when we might not have.

But there is no good reason, no legal justification, for failing to secure our borders, or to enforce existing laws against illegal entry into this nation, and our president has done EXACTLY that. What’s more, he has slandered the motives of those who are holding him accountable to those laws, and expecting better decisions regarding our society. It’s shameful, a failure of his oath of office, and it is absolutely the duty of right-wing journalists to say so.

God bless Peggy Noonan. God bless President Bush. God grant that this bill or one like it NEVER becomes law in this nation.

Romeo13, I’m right there with you. Only six Sea Service to your seven, and a few years behind you. Was at Diego Garcia when the Stark was hit by an Iraqi Mirage (1987). Did Storm, Shield, was on the first carrier out after 9/11 (Stennis). Tomcats, baby. Anyway, your comments at 7:53 are on the nose regarding Syria and Iran. It worked after 1992 to protect Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, it can work now.

Freelancer on June 4, 2007 at 11:27 PM

You can always move to France

tomas on June 4, 2007 at 11:28 PM

that wasn’t meant for Freelancer

tomas on June 4, 2007 at 11:29 PM

freelancer: you wrote an excellent comment. i agree completely

VinceP1974 on June 4, 2007 at 11:35 PM

I said you don’t get you way by calling for his impeachment and calling him el presidente…you ARE marginalising yourself. Nothing He say need help that.

Most of the american people are wrong about Iraq and they are wrong on this issue…for different reasons.

tomas on June 4, 2007 at 11:26 PM

Please speak in English or invest in a spell checker like most American people.

Once again, answer the question. Who is screwing who?

cmay on June 4, 2007 at 11:36 PM

Noonan has been shredding him over the past few weeks months, and he richly deserves it.

He’s worked damn hard to earn our disdain.

Bad Candy on June 4, 2007 at 6:20 PM

Noonan is a Reaganite Conservative from way back. I usually enjoy her columns, and this is not an exception.

She lays it on thick, and sticks the knife in nicely. Bush deserves everything she dishes out.

Wonder how it feels to get slapped down with a feather pillow?

BacaDog on June 4, 2007 at 11:36 PM

Alright tomas, lets break this down,

Conservatives…sit in the corner…until they dont’ agree with something. Then they cry like babies. Liberal always cry like babies.

Who the hell do you think elected him? Conservatives and the movement got him into the White House, Einstein. We’ve supported him on everything he has done correctly for six years, as the left shredded him and us during that whole time, using their dominance in media to smash away at both.

We defended him, he stood around and said “stay the course” like a robot for years, letting alternative media and conservatives take on all the responsibility to defend him, while he did whatever he was doing. Now the media is winning their PR war, they will have their Vietnam 2.0. Why?

Because Bush did nothing to defend this war! One of the most important duties of a president in an age of 24 hour media is to be able to articulate policy and convince the public that things are good. Guess what? You no longer just go in and do the job, you are effectively campaigning 24/7/365 for four years.

Bush has never grasped that, never bothered to try and seize the pulpit and fight like hell, he needed to be the guy standing on the pile of rubble with a bullhorn swearing vengeance, and he just wasn’t, it was “stay the course.”

You’re ‘You sound like Libs’ rhetoric is ridiculous, its the Admin thats resorting to Liberal tactics and smearing people who genuinely disagree with him for honest as racist. Pulling the Race Card is one of the oldest tricks in the Lefts tactical playbook.

He has done better than any candidate out there…time will reflect that. He is the right man at the right time.

tomas on June 4, 2007 at 10:37 PM

Hannity, is that you? Or are you a paper-pusher for Bush or something?

Yes, he’s better than the field of candidates that he faced, barely at this point. But if this thing passes, between the Left who will hate his guts anyway and discard him once they get what they want, and the conservative movement who will loathe him for an eternity for his betrayal and possible ceding of the country to the Left. You seem to fail to grasp what this amnesty and the huge boost to the Democrat voting ranks will likely do to the efforts to fight the jihadis.

Remember, if the Left seizes control, we will not fight this war, and in fact, the Left has consistently acted in order to lose this war, so why you think that we should give Bush a pass for making a mistake that will literally lose us the war in the long run by handing power to the Democrats is baffling.

Oh, and as an aside, jummy has descended into the same kind of madness that infests the hearts of rabid leftist trolls. you can see it in his refusal at points to use any capital letters, then later switching to ALL CAPS AND LOTS OF BOLD LETTERING. Curious really, to see him go so rabid. Oh, and before I get the North American Union smear or the Hal Turner smear jummy, I don’t buy the NAU crap, and Hal Turner is a prick of the highest order, so sod off.

Bad Candy on June 4, 2007 at 11:37 PM

The President didn’t betray anyone. He disagrees with you.

There is no such thing as Amnesty…it is impossible.

The time to take care of the Border was with Reagan and earlier…now won’t be as effective…while important.

Reagan chose Amnesty for a reason and that was 10 million people ago. Deal with reality.

tomas on June 4, 2007 at 11:37 PM

But there is no good reason, no legal justification, for failing to secure our borders, or to enforce existing laws against illegal entry into this nation, and our president has done EXACTLY that. What’s more, he has slandered the motives of those who are holding him accountable to those laws, and expecting better decisions regarding our society. It’s shameful, a failure of his oath of office, and it is absolutely the duty of right-wing journalists to say so.

Very well said.

cmay on June 4, 2007 at 11:37 PM

The President didn’t betray anyone. He disagrees with you.

He is bound by his oath of office and in his capacity as the President to enforce the laws of this nation.

There is no such thing as Amnesty…it is impossible.

Are you just saying really stupid things now or what?

The time to take care of the Border was with Reagan and earlier…now won’t be as effective…while important.

Although it might be true, it doesn’t excuse us for enforcing it now.

Reagan chose Amnesty for a reason and that was 10 million people ago. Deal with reality.

tomas on June 4, 2007 at 11:37 PM

Have you made a point? And once again, answer the question: Who screwed who?

cmay on June 4, 2007 at 11:46 PM

I think every program, school or anything really that isn’t based on english should be outlawed. You have to reestablish this country for what it was built on.

This will help as much as a fence.

tomas on June 4, 2007 at 10:59 P

Yes, then we can pave the streets with gumdrops and lollipops! It’ll be a glorious, magical land!

OK, dude, we actually are MORE likely to get roads paved with gumdrops and lollipops than seize control from the collection of leftists and lazy unionists that control the schools in order to do what you propose. It will never happen dude, evar. I’ll get struck by lightning and win the lottery on the same day it happens.

Bad Candy on June 4, 2007 at 11:46 PM

Although it might be true, it doesn’t excuse us forfrom enforcing it now

cmay on June 4, 2007 at 11:47 PM

Have you made a point? And once again, answer the question: Who screwed who?

Bush has never gotten vocal support from republican leaders…he has fought to protect marriage and this country has returned to god in a big way. He has fought for our country against terrorism as hard as any president. The only time I see conservatives on TV is for Gonzales, Harriet Myers and the border…otherwise they keep their traps locked tight.

You would be fudging the truth to deny this. If you think you got screwed I’m sorry. I don’t see it that way. I think conservatives are lost in their own arrogance buoyed by success with Harriet Myers (a good call). I find the conservative movement to be self-righteous and floundering in its search to hold onto Reagan. Bush has dealt with more issues than any president in recent memory and deserves that respect.

Stand down and you will find that you can stand up and fix this thing with honor.

tomas on June 4, 2007 at 11:55 PM

Stand down and you will find that you can stand up and fix this thing with honor.

tomas on June 4, 2007 at 11:55 PM

Stand Down? As Bush is on the verge of putting our movement on the outskirts for a few more generations while we are at war with Jihadis? Never!

Bad Candy on June 5, 2007 at 12:11 AM

cs,
Your psychotic fixation on the destruction of Fred! cracks me up,
The Ritz on June 4, 2007 at 10:26 PM

I’m not trying to destroy fred?. I just want him to get in or get out.

I’m glad it cracks you up. I have fun with it too.

Peace and cheers!

csdeven on June 5, 2007 at 12:21 AM

I am so sick of this f’ing gov’t. HOw much more of this are we supposed to tolerate??

NORTH GUANTANAMO BAY, Cuba — Military judges dismissed charges Monday against a Guantanamo detainee who chauffeured Usama bin Laden and another who allegedly killed a U.S. soldier in Afghanistan, marking a stunning setback to Washington’s attempts to try detainees in military court.

In back-to-back arraignments for Canadian Omar Khadr and Salim Ahmed Hamdan, of Yemen, the U.S. military’s cases against the alleged Al Qaeda figures dissolved because, the two judges said, the government had failed to establish jurisdiction.

VinceP1974 on June 5, 2007 at 12:40 AM

Bush has never gotten vocal support from republican leaders…he has fought to protect marriage and this country has returned to god in a big way.

He has gotten plenty of vocal support from the Republican Party, and too much to be honest with you. Lately that support has dwindled because well, Bush has no idea what he’s doing. But you’d probably rather have Bush Bots holding every seat in Congress.

He has fought for our country against terrorism as hard as any president.

That’s true by default because no president has actually engaged “terror”, which is a tactic by the way. An more accurate label would be “War against islamofacists”.

The only time I see conservatives on TV is for Gonzales, Harriet Myers and the border…otherwise they keep their traps locked tight.

Watch more Fox News, they’re on everyday. Or listen to some talk radio. You’d like Hannity.

conservatives are lost in their own arrogance buoyed by success with Harriet Myers (a good call). I find the conservative movement to be self-righteous and floundering in its search to hold onto Reagan.

It’s not arrogant nor self-righteous to criticize an administration which has strayed far from conservative principles.

Bush has dealt with more issues than any president in recent memory and deserves that respect.

How many issues he has dealt with is not what is relevant, but how he has handled them is what is important.

V15J on June 5, 2007 at 12:42 AM

OMG you guys must listen to Tammy Bruce address the YAF.

She (rightly) SAVAGES Bush… and i dont recommend this in order to revel in the criticism that’s been exposed here.. but instead in order to have her important point of view heard because she has ESSENTIAL insights that we all must consider

http://www.townhall.com/MediaPlayer/AudioPlayer.aspx?ContentGuid=9a21e873-0985-4cee-b120-ffae77e62281

the part that really got my attention is at the 28min 20 sec part… that’s a good prologue to her comments on the war we’re fighting and the absolute failure of Bush’s war leadership which is at 30min and 10sec .. (direct reference to miliatry is at 31min 00 sec). i give the time indexes so that those impatient can get right to the point.

VinceP1974 on June 5, 2007 at 12:56 AM

http://www.9news.com/news/world/article.aspx?storyid=71353

Now I’m really depressed.

France is fighting a battle that WE have surrendered on…

Romeo13 on June 5, 2007 at 1:43 AM

Romeo: it’s disgraceful and dispairing.

VinceP1974 on June 5, 2007 at 1:46 AM

thirty years from now after this happens, after we’re france with 500 cars burnt a month in anarkiddie/calafist riots our police don’t have the political authority to contain, i won’t suffer a word from any of the IMKMIGRATION IS THWE IMPORTANTEST CRAP ON EEARTGH chorus about how it was all the left’s fault or how bush dropped the ball.

jummy on June 4, 2007 at 7:39 PM

Your a joke dude. The illegals are here NOW! Thirty years my ass. Wake up and smell the tires burning. If you want to lay down with the beaner/wetbacks nice and cozy go ahead, but don’t accuse the conservatives of bailing on Bush when he is the one selling us out. It’s obvious he has an agenda that is based on monetary gain with total blantant disregard for the fabric of American culture and society. I think you need to experience first hand the total devastation of entire communities and cities as we know them that have and will take place with passing of the immigration reform POS now workiong its way through congress. With an argument like yours ,you must have alot to gain with the sell out of your countrymen. These people are here to colonize the US. They refuse to be assimulated into the American culture. Do you see anything wrong with that, or are you in an ivory tower somewhere? Mabey the invasion of the United States by a foreign country is too scary for you to comprehend.

sonnyspats1 on June 5, 2007 at 7:02 AM

THERE’S A GOD DAMNED F**KING WAR GOING ON IN IRAQ It’s alot later than you think. You have 0% street smarts.

sonnyspats1 on June 5, 2007 at 7:18 AM

Bush has never gotten vocal support from republican leaders

tomas on June 4, 2007 at 11:55 PM

Peggy Noonan took a leave of absence from the WSJ to campaign for him in 2004. Rick Santorum, at Bush’s behest, campaigned for Arlen Specter in ’04 and it cost him his seat in ’06. Rush Limbaugh and every other talk show host I’ve heard has banged the drum loudly for Bush for 6+years. Even liberals like Ed Koch have been in his corner since 9-11.

But your quote was that Republican leaders have failed to lend him vocal support. Who? Delay? Frist? MCConnell? McCain? Regardless, your point is off topic since this thread is about Noonan, who by the way, lost a heckuva lot of money to actively and vocally campaign for the guy your accusing her of not vocally support.

Once again I’ll ask you the question: Who screwed who?

Answer: Bush screwed his supporters when he stooped to calling them a bunch of names. You can answer the question however you like, but please try to make sense and be honest.

cmay on June 5, 2007 at 8:15 AM

He still has me on the WOT…and judges….that’s about it, though.

SouthernGent on June 5, 2007 at 8:18 AM

If you want to lay down with the beaner/wetbacks nice and cozy go ahead –sonnyspats1 on June 5, 2007 at 7:02 AM (who then links to a page about wwii internment camps suggestively)

hey, PRCalDude, tell me more about my “strawman” attacks.

in the meantime none of you can cite where the administration has used the words “bigoted” or racist” in reference to the bill’s opponents, yet you insist on being deeply and shrilly wounded by them. i suspect that, as it is with the left and their imaginary victimization at the imaginary accusation of treason by an administration which has similarly never spoken such a thing, this is just some of that telltale heart stuff we read of in junior high.

and that similarity in rhetorical feint is appropriate, because the “conservative” movement, as it has been demented by ultra-nationalist conspiracy theorists demagoguing the border, more resemble maoists than anything else.

jummy on June 5, 2007 at 10:50 AM

Seperated at Birth?

jummy/tomas

VinceP1974 on June 5, 2007 at 10:55 AM

Jummy and Tomas are proof that there is indeed koolaid drinkers that will swallow anything to support their man including Treason.

ScottyDog on June 4, 2007 at 8:50 PM

and yet there it in fact is. in exactly the correct place. the leftwing, “how dare you call me a traitor! bush and his supporters are the ‘real’ traitors!”

some of us in here are trolls, frauds, phoneys, and it ain’t the ones sticking with the president in a time of war.

jummy on June 5, 2007 at 10:58 AM

VinceP1974 on June 5, 2007 at 10:55 AM

you don’t really have anything too say to my last post do you?

jummy on June 5, 2007 at 11:00 AM

Peggy Noonan took a leave of absence from the WSJ to campaign for him in 2004.

Yeah, I thought that she had done that but I couldn’t recall.

Between President Bush and how the GOP acted when they had Congress, it’s no wonder that some are wanting to rebuild the party — even if it means taking a few punches in the meantime.

eforhan on June 5, 2007 at 11:13 AM

you don’t really have anything too say to my last post do you?

jummy

No, not really.

VinceP1974 on June 5, 2007 at 11:49 AM

It’s funny how you proved my point by pasting ScottyDog’s identical comment to mine right after I said it. lol

VinceP1974 on June 5, 2007 at 11:51 AM

what was your point?

“VinceP1974/ScottyDog, Seperated at Birth?”

jummy on June 5, 2007 at 11:57 AM

jummy on June 5, 2007 at 10:50 AM

So you are capable of saying something intelligent when you want. That said, you’ve used enough sarcasm and insult in this present conversation that I don’t feel the need to continue with you here further. Don’t get all huffy when people refer to you as a troll or a lib when you’ve demonstrated that you’re perfectly capable of communicating like a reasonable human being, but you choose otherwise most of the time.

PRCalDude on June 5, 2007 at 12:01 PM

San Diego is run worse, if you can believe it. It’s one of the most corrupt and poorly run cities in the country. I lived there for about a year when I was in the Navy.

PRCalDude on June 4, 2007 at 10:45 PM

Mayor Sanders is currently doing a very good job of trying to reverse that trend. He is a pretty solid conservative, and doesn’t run from a fight with the moonbat city council. Just FYI.

Freelancer on June 5, 2007 at 12:13 PM

At what point do you decide, Jummy, that President Bush no longer deserves your political support? Is there a line, beyond which, you don’t feel he deserves your active support,in whatever small capacity you might have?

Fred on June 5, 2007 at 12:14 PM

American Presidents seem to have fallen into a pattern of doing slapdash work in their second term and leaving behind a monstrous problem for their successor. I’m thinking of Bush I and Somalia, Clinton and al-Qaeda, and Bush II and Social Security, Medicare, immigration, and border security. The Americans seem to be harmed over and over again by the two-term limit their ancestors put on the Presidency.

Kralizec on June 5, 2007 at 12:27 PM

Noonan is right on target regarding Bush. I feel I don’t know him anymore either and I voted for him twice. Sigh.

UnEasyRider on June 5, 2007 at 12:36 PM

Kralizec: Bush I only had one term.. if he had done nothing in Somalia that would have been passing the buck to Clinton.

Clinton of course left everythihng for Bush II.. Iraq, Iran, NorK, the Border.

Bush attempted to handle SS and MC but the Democrats blocked his every attempt, so you can’t blame him. Also with immigration he is making an attempt (in his mind) at fixing it, so you cant say he “left” it for the next president either.

But I think I agree with your overall point.. the 2nd term is usually the graveyard for Presidential activity.

VinceP1974 on June 5, 2007 at 12:39 PM

fred, i don’t have to consider how i’ll support the bush admin in 2008 and beyond. i do have to consider how the war in iraq and the larger war on islamic radicalism will proceedin 2008 and beyond. i do have to consider the historical light republicans and conservatives are viewed under vis a vis these eight years; who’s myths and narratives will prevail, and so forth.

bush has been a good president, a republican president and, on ballance, a conservative president and a president of consequence. that legacy needs to be protected – yes, jealously – because the left will be working to destroy, subvert and mangle that legacy 30 years from now as determinedly as if it were still 2004.

i wish for the life of me i could understand what you people imagine you derive from this. is this the part where you get to come back at all those lefties who stung you with their tropes about “blind patriotism” or accusations that you’d “accept anything from this eeevile administration”? do you really think there’s a place in lefty heaven, or even limbo for conservatives and republicans who eat their own?

or are your priorities really so inverted, your focus on the imigration sideshow so myopic, that you can’t recognize that this crap is setting us up for a half-century of libdem dominance and unfettered strides on the part of our foreign enemies?

how much capitol do you think the conservative movement has? let’s for instance a successful terrorist attack on u.s. soil in 2010 under a dem administration. in the ensuing competition between the conservative explaination that the dem administration had reclessly dropped our defenses, and the lefty meme that the attack was blowback from bush’s stirring of the hornets’ nest, which do you think will prevail? do yuo really, honestly believe that voters will come streaming back to the gop in 2012?

when the history is written, do you think it will say that bush was the war president who liberated iraq but failed to see the importance of the border security issue, or that bush was an irresponsible warmongerer who tried to turn the country into a theocratic oil empire?

your aposty will not be recorded by history. it only serves the left’s agenda for the next fifty years.

jummy on June 5, 2007 at 1:17 PM

Peggy’s column in the WSJ was brilliant. Her last comment in this interview was well worth the wait, as Allahpundit promised. She mentioned she was “pounded” when she first criticized the President years ago but almost all of the reponse to her last column was “you expressed my feelings exactly. Thank you!” My feelings exactly.

It is time for the base to reclaim the Republican Party, which will either move beyond El Presidente Jorge Arbusto or die.

ptolemy on June 5, 2007 at 1:24 PM

I haven’t seen this kind of epic trolling outside of the World of Warcraft forums. Whats worse is you guys are falling for these illiterate, illogical rants and attempting to reason with them.

bj1126 on June 5, 2007 at 1:37 PM

blowjob1126 = 43

jummy = 460

there’s my record. find me an inconsistency, a divided loyalty or anything “troll”-like. people might take the short browse through your anemic contributions here as well to see what there is to see. compare it against my youtube account (clemtoe).

jummy on June 5, 2007 at 1:49 PM

or are your priorities really so inverted, your focus on the imigration sideshow so myopic, that you can’t recognize that this crap is setting us up for a half-century of libdem dominance and unfettered strides on the part of our foreign enemies?

how much capitol do you think the conservative movement has?

I think you might profitably pose these same questions to the Bush administration.

Fred on June 5, 2007 at 1:56 PM

I beat you because I love you, my wife, and remember that the others will treat you worse than I.

eforhan on June 5, 2007 at 2:12 PM

d’oh! That was in reference to this:

or are your priorities really so inverted, your focus on the imigration sideshow so myopic, that you can’t recognize that this crap is setting us up for a half-century of libdem dominance and unfettered strides on the part of our foreign enemies?

I lose the innernets.

eforhan on June 5, 2007 at 2:14 PM

Noonan, a class act, comes out and publicly defends her postition. Unlike so many lib. writer that write and then hide.
She has got it right, we don’t know Bush anymore. I guess he just doesn’t want to hang around us racists and bigots. A lie that we have been fighting for years, and he adds fuel to the fire.

right2bright on June 5, 2007 at 2:59 PM

compare it against my youtube account (clemtoe).

jummy on June 5, 2007 at 1:49 PM

You screwed up on the blasphemy challenge. What you did is not the unpardonable sin.

PRCalDude on June 5, 2007 at 2:59 PM

Drama queens is what you guys are

tomas on June 5, 2007 at 3:09 PM

I just read this thread, and All I have to say is:

Don’t feed the Lefty trools like tomas

Jones Zemkophill on June 5, 2007 at 4:15 PM

That’s a cute picture of her.

ballz2wallz on June 5, 2007 at 4:31 PM

I hate to say it but I totally agree. Bush has lost it and I could support the VP for president the next two years. This legalize all bill is an absolute disaster.

duff65 on June 5, 2007 at 4:35 PM

Errr my screen name is my initials. (Brian J) Sorry to disappoint you jummy. I also don’t quantify my existence through my comments on blog posts.

When you can find the shift key and type in coherent sentences I’ll bother responding to anything else you say.

bj1126 on June 5, 2007 at 5:10 PM

I agree with Peggy Noonan. It’s gotten worse and worse and finally with this immigration bill it reached the final breaking point. I thought I knew him and then he turned into something I never would have voted for, never would have supported. Whats worse he has literally torn the GOP apart to get what he wanted.

Buzzy on June 5, 2007 at 6:23 PM

In the meantime none of you can cite where the administration has used the words “bigoted” or racist” in reference to the bill’s opponents

Hey Jummy,

I’m deeply concerned about America losing its soul. Immigration has been the lifeblood of a lot of our country’s history. And I am worried that a backlash to newcomers would cause our country to lose its great capacity to assimilate newcomers.

I wonder what Bush means by “a backlash to newcomers”? Gee, that’s what bigots would do.

We’re gonna tell the bigots to shut up.

Sen Lindsey Graham

He and McCain are pushing the bill through at Bush’s bidding and Bush did not correct him (like he did for Trent Lott).

What about Chertoff saying that we want to execute illegal immigrants? Yep, he’s definitely part of the administration. Sounds like he’s calling us racists, does’t it? And Bush didn’t correct him.

So let’s get this straight: Bush says Americans are lazy and shiftless (won’t do work so we have to import a labor pool). He accuses us of losing our souls for not supporting open borders and having a backlash against foreigners. He may have stopped short of using the term “bigot” but his message is clear. His ally in the Senate called us bigots and Bush didn’t criticize him. Chertoff, Gonzales (Att Gen) and Gutierrez (Sec of Commerce) have joined the fray at times using similar language as Bush (although not as egregious as Graham’s).

cmay on June 5, 2007 at 7:29 PM

cmay, your liberal-like whining is rendered moot by what sonnyspats said and i quoted in the very post you’re “responding” to. i noticed you have no apparent quarel with him or the sentiments he expressed.

bj, your duck and retreat from this argument after having slung an accusation against my sincerity was the single most chickens**t thing i’ve seen in these blog comments so far.

jummy on June 5, 2007 at 7:48 PM

jummy on June 5, 2007 at 7:48 PM

You asked the question and now you don’t like the answer, huh?

As for folks who sink to calling others despicable names, we don’t need to address them. We know them for what they are. But you and he exhibit the same behavior; you stoop to name calling, just like the aforementioned person. You’ll notice that I haven’t.

So once again, you asked for proof. QED.

cmay on June 5, 2007 at 7:56 PM

you didn’t produce an answer.

jummy on June 5, 2007 at 8:17 PM

In the meantime none of you can cite where the administration has used the words “bigoted” or racist” in reference to the bill’s opponents

Jummy, this is your question.

This is the answer:

I’m deeply concerned about America losing its soul. Immigration has been the lifeblood of a lot of our country’s history. And I am worried that a backlash to newcomers would cause our country to lose its great capacity to assimilate newcomers.

I wonder what Bush means by “a backlash to newcomers”? Gee, that’s what bigots would do.

We’re gonna tell the bigots to shut up.

Sen Lindsey Graham

He and McCain are pushing the bill through at Bush’s bidding and Bush did not correct him (like he did for Trent Lott).

What about Chertoff saying that we want to execute illegal immigrants? Yep, he’s definitely part of the administration. Sounds like he’s calling us racists, does’t it? And Bush didn’t correct him.

So let’s get this straight: Bush says Americans are lazy and shiftless (won’t do work so we have to import a labor pool). He accuses us of losing our souls for not supporting open borders and having a backlash against foreigners. He may have stopped short of using the term “bigot” but his message is clear. His ally in the Senate called us bigots and Bush didn’t criticize him. Chertoff, Gonzales (Att Gen) and Gutierrez (Sec of Commerce) have joined the fray at times using similar language as Bush (although not as egregious as Graham’s).

Keep up here, please.

cmay on June 5, 2007 at 8:23 PM

you can present me that text a dozen times. you can bold the font, write it in longhand and send it through the post office to me.

when it arives, i’ll open it and still note that he neither used the word “racist” nor “bigot”, nor alluded to those words. you may insist on hearing those words. maybe feeling like a victim is part of what you’re trying to get out of these “buck fush” hysterics which seem to be all the rage amongst conservatives; a sence of that clinton-era underdogginess.

i’ll also note that even had he said that there was a racist element in the border control rabble, your protestations to the contrary would have been obviated by the words of your comrade, sonnyspats.

jummy on June 5, 2007 at 8:37 PM

Uh, what did Lindsay Graham say, Jummy?

Are you dyslexic or just wanting to make an utter fool of yourself?

cmay on June 5, 2007 at 8:47 PM

“…it makes one wonder about the illegal alien fuss. Are great numbers of our unemployed really victims of the illegal alien invasion or are those illegal tourists actually doing work our own people won’t do? One thing is certain in this hungry world; no regulation or law should be allowed if it results in crops rotting in the fields for lack of harvesters.”

tomas on June 5, 2007 at 9:32 PM

That dog don’t hunt no more tomas. We’ll talk about paths to citizenship and those permanant Z visas for people who broke our laws after the border is secured, not while we’re securing it and certainly not before.

Buzzy on June 6, 2007 at 7:15 AM

I grew up in farm country, tomas. Take a drive through most ag communities and you’ll find that they produce too much food. The government in many cases pays farmers not to grow anything or buys their goods and lets them rot. Otherwise the price of their goods would collapse and they would go out if business.

In eastern Washington, piles of wheat are bought by the government and left to rot. I always wondered why we didn’t send it to the third world.

cmay on June 6, 2007 at 7:58 AM

that legacy needs to be protected
jummy on June 5, 2007 at 1:17 PM

Here’s where you crash completely off the rails jummy! It’s THE COUNTRY and it’s citizens that need to be protected, NOT one president’s legacy. No president is more important than the country. The legacy is Bush’s to defend.

Please. sir. step. away. from. the. kool-aide.

The Ritz on June 6, 2007 at 8:31 AM

That dog does hunt…I think if they were european you would all have a different attitude. The Bill will be changed by the way.

tomas on June 6, 2007 at 11:15 AM

Whether:
Illegal aliens are needed or not.
Illegal aliens have a high crime rate or don’t.
Illegal aliens are hard working or not.
…are all not germane to the main issue of language barrier. We are on the cusp of becoming a two-language nation which will spell the end of America as we know it.

Bush is a moron.

MaiDee on June 6, 2007 at 11:43 AM

We can’t be a two language nation that is true. We can’t have a welfare state either.

Bush is a great man and always will be.

tomas on June 6, 2007 at 12:20 PM

“he didn’t stab you guys in the back…christ all mighty. You are stabbing him in the back.

tomas on June 4, 2007 at 7:01 PM

Who gave this clown a login??? I’d like to appeal that decision.

ricer1 on June 6, 2007 at 5:50 PM

NOONAN/RICE IN ’08 !!

NOONAN/RICE IN ’08 !!

NOONAN/RICE IN ’08 !!

NOONAN/RICE IN ’08 !!

NOONAN/RICE IN ’08 !!

Sorry…don’t mean to stutter…

seejanemom on June 6, 2007 at 6:10 PM

Bush is a great man and always will be.

tomas on June 6, 2007 at 12:20 PM

I had hopes, but they have been proven incorrect. He is a good man, of that I am certain.

He has chosen sides on an issue that has grave importance to the future of this nation, and it is the side which, should it win, will lose us this nation as we know and love it. The U.S. cannot afford to continue to allow people to illegally gain residence to this land, then presumptively gain citizenship. He is wrong, and those of us who supported him in the past are right to call him wrong.

It causes me no small pain that this is true. But first principles are just that because you must not retreat from them. If you believe that supporting an incorrect policy because it comes from “our side” is a first principle, then do what you must, but you’re sadly mistaken.

Freelancer on June 6, 2007 at 7:40 PM

I’m throwing in with tomas, jummy and kara26.
Maybe if you guys are hearing “bigot” even when it’s not being said, it’s because the shoe fits.

You should hear yourselves and the hysterical ranting and raving that you pass off as “arguments” against the bill.
Pathetic.
Rush said the bill would be the “death of the Republican party” and he will ensure that it will be by opposing the bill–who wants to be a member of a party or vote for its candidates when too many of them are bigoted, irrational lunatics?
Noonan is a traitor and she’s been plunging her knife into Bush’s back for some time now, long before the immigration bill.
As good citizens, we should always support the President, especially in wartime, but impeachment should never be spoken of unless there’s a damn good reason, and “failure to protect the borders” doesn’t rise to the level of high crimes and mismeanors.
In fact, that’s what Bush is trying to do, if you’d give this bill the chance it deserves.

Jen the Neocon on June 7, 2007 at 3:01 AM

I’m throwing in with tomas, jummy and kara26.
Maybe if you guys are hearing “bigot” even when it’s not being said, it’s because the shoe fits.

Jen the Neocon

We’re gonna tell the bigots to shut up.

Sen Lindsey Graham

Your right Jen. It’s not being said.

cmay on June 8, 2007 at 9:17 AM

Noonan is a traitor and she’s been plunging her knife into Bush’s back for some time now, long before the immigration bill.

Jen, Who is she a traitor to? Certainly not the American people. Or maybe to Bush who she helped get elected in ’04?

You accuse us of racism and “hysterical ranting” and then you stoop to the same level Bush, Chertoff, McCain & Graham, which is, BTW, nothing but race-baiting and hysterical ranting.

As good citizens, we should always support the President, especially in wartime

Does that include Bill Clinton when he and his wife were trying to socialize our economy? Or maybe Richard Nixon? Yeah, we should have just rolled over and taken it. This is such an asinine statement that it makes me wonder where you learned social studies. Believe it or not, the First Amendment was designed to protect political speech. More specifically, it was designed to protect political speech against the government. Believe it or not, the government is supposed to be rely on the consent of the governed, not the other way around. Read a history book, the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution some day. You will see just how antithetical your previous statement was to American ideals.

cmay on June 8, 2007 at 9:37 AM

“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

– Presidential oath of office. First responsibility of the office is to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution.

We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

– Preamble to the US Constitution (emphasis mine)

Section 3. He shall from time to time give to the Congress information of the state of the union, and recommend to their consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient; he may, on extraordinary occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them, and in case of disagreement between them, with respect to the time of adjournment, he may adjourn them to such time as he shall think proper; he shall receive ambassadors and other public ministers; he shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed, and shall commission all the officers of the United States.

– US Constitution, Article II, Presidential Powers (section 3)

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

– US Constitution, Amendment XIV

The framers were, of all men, most careful of their use of language. They were certainly aware of the effect of their use of OR and AND as logical operators. Hence born or naturalized provides two different but parallel requirements, each of which may help to arrive at the same result, while and subject to the jurisdiction thereof demands an additional requirement, that must carry an equal weight of burden to either of the former requirements in arriving at that result. They did not include arbitrary, ambiguous, or ambivalent clauses in their work, so there must be a concrete reading of this phrase, and of course there is. That reading, in the minds of the framers would NEVER have permitted the “anchor baby” concept to be viewed as permitted under this amendment, later SCOTUS decisions notwithstanding. The phrase “and subject to the jurisdiction thereof” is specifically exclusionary, and such exclusion, in accordance with european precedents from which this exact language is drawn, refers to people not legally on the subject soil.

The recently deceased bill (sure to be resurrected in similar form before long), did nothing to establish justice or ensure domestic tranquility, and in strongly promoting it’s passage while ignoring demands for enforcement of existing legislation, the President did nothing to take care that the laws be faithfully executed.

These are absolutely valid complaints, and in no wise represent “back-stabbing”, which is a far better characterization of the President’s own words aimed at opponents of this horrid legislation. After several paragraphs of an attempted guilt trip about “jobs Americans won’t do”, and referring to illegals as “decent”, “hardworking”, “honest”, “good people”, he shovels this manure at us:

Most employers want to comply with the law. The peach grower wanted to comply with the law. Believe me, he’s a law-abiding, decent man.

But shortly before that, when this peach farmer was first referenced:

There’s a — a lot of employers need a legal way to fill jobs that Americans simply aren’t doing. There’s a lot of jobs here in Georgia that require people from — that are willing to do the work that Americans aren’t doing. It’s just the way it is.

Even when he tries to avoid it, the description cannot be anything but a reference to illegal foreigners. I’m sorry, they aren’t good, honest, and decent if they snuck into this nation. In using such as an excuse for this misbegotten sham of a bill, the President insults the American intelligence and dismisses prevailing federal law.

To which does an American owe their first allegiance: The President, or the Constitution and Laws of the Land?

Freelancer on June 8, 2007 at 10:47 AM

This dialogue has clearly shown which commenters put conservative principles first vs those who put party loyalty first. Enlightening – thank you!

I’m in the first group, BTW.

CliffHanger on June 8, 2007 at 12:29 PM