Bush declines Obama invite to Thursday’s Ground Zero event

posted at 10:00 pm on May 3, 2011 by Allahpundit

No reason given, but I think we can guess.

President Barack Obama plans to visit New York City on Thursday to mark the death of al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden.

NBC News reported that Obama invited former President George W. Bush to attend the event but Bush does not plan to attend.

NBC said Bush plans to mark the 10-year anniversary of 9/11 at ground zero in September.

Only two possibilities. One: Bush recognizes that this is, more or less, an Obama campaign commercial and would rather not be part of it. Two: Bush doesn’t want to encroach on the singular role that Obama, as president, should rightly have in leading the ceremonies marking Bin Laden’s demise. Given how gracious Dubya has been in retirement, does anyone doubt that the second explanation is correct?

Needless to say, it was also gracious of The One to invite him. Not everyone in his party is so big-hearted:

[O]ne Democratic communications hand sent advice to a slew of other Democratic operatives in the wake of the announcement hammering on the need to make sure Obama comes out on top.

“In your day jobs, do not let Republicans turn this into continuing the Bush legacy. This has to be about Obama’s decisive leadership,” the guidance said. “He is the one who oversaw bringing bin Laden to justice, much like how Bush failed to do so at Tora Bora and then claimed Osama wasn’t a priority.”…

Bin Laden’s death, said Rep. Gary Ackerman (D-N.Y.), is “the ‘Mission Accomplished’ moment President Bush only fantasized about.”

As a gloss on that latter point, go read Ace’s take on the left’s outrageous outrage over Bush’s seven minutes of stunned silence on 9/11 versus their perfect contentment with Obama for having waited months — plus an additional 16 hours — before deciding to take out Bin Laden. I don’t fault O for thinking long and hard about whether to greenlight a mission whose failure would have cemented his reputation as the new Jimmy Carter, especially when the CIA wasn’t 100 percent sure that Bin Laden was in the compound. Hard choices take time to make. But do understand that that hesitation carried incredible risk: Even though OBL had apparently been at the compound for years, the arrest of one of Al Qaeda’s top operatives in the same town just three months before must have alarmed him. He could have bolted at any time, and still Obama waited. No harm, no foul in hindsight, but had Bush done the same, we’d be buried underneath stories about Dubya’s “dangerous” propensity for hesitation, quite unlike The One’s cool, cerebral insistence on deliberation. What a joy it must be to be liberal, when even your mistakes are evidence of virtue.

Exit quotation from two of the kids who were in the classroom with Bush that day: “I think he was trying to keep everybody calm, starting with us… I think he was trying to protect us.”


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4

16 hours.

Rebar on May 4, 2011 at 12:14 PM
——-
Nothing will make you happy.

Dave Rywall on May 4, 2011 at 12:25 PM

Needless to say, it was also gracious of The One to invite him.

No…this was merely a political move intended to lend credibility to the lefty proposition that 0bama is as competent as Bush, instead of a lightweight pretender.

landlines on May 4, 2011 at 12:02 PM
——-
Nothing will make you happy.

Dave Rywall on May 4, 2011 at 12:25 PM

Dave Drywall

Are you being paid by the post, or by the line?

You being thrown out of your mom’s basement while choking your carrot will make me happy…. also Soros having a stroke

Rookie on May 4, 2011 at 12:40 PM

The Answer is C: Bush was never more than a rich kid egomaniac and he can’t deal with the obvious shame of his behavior in the White House.

bifidis on May 4, 2011 at 1:12 PM

“…..No Reason Given,…”

Does W. need a reason?

TimBuk3 on May 4, 2011 at 1:16 PM

What a joy it must be to be liberal, when even your mistakes are evidence of virtue.

Yep. And just that but to have water carriers in the media to do the opposite to your opponents. Sometimes I wish that I could buy into what the left is selling. It would just be so easy. Most of my friends don’t even realize how conservative they are because they associate conservatives with everything that’s wrong with the world and have no idea what the policy differences are.

Esthier on May 4, 2011 at 1:20 PM

bifidis on May 4, 2011 at 1:12 PM

Don’t feed trolls.

Esthier on May 4, 2011 at 1:21 PM

The Answer is C: Bush was never more than a rich kid egomaniac and he can’t deal with the obvious shame of his behavior in the White House. – bifidis on May 4, 2011 at 1:12 PM

Let me guess, you are an Obama supporter supporter.

SC.Charlie on May 4, 2011 at 1:22 PM

OT: Rush reports it’s been decided to NOT release the photos.

pambi on May 4, 2011 at 1:26 PM

Now a siren on Drudge.. No photos.

So much for the proof they wanted sooooo much that they risked the SEALS, vs bombs.
My God these peeps are unbelievable.

pambi on May 4, 2011 at 1:30 PM

Hit and run.
No thoughtful debate.
Just hit & run.

Badger40 on May 4, 2011 at 1:44 PM

Esthier on May 4, 2011 at 1:20 PM

This is one of my greatest frustrations as well.

I spent about 10 minutes discussing libertarianism with a guy from Amsterdam that was, literally, a card carrying member of the Communist party.

He agreed with every point about getting the government out of people’s lives (was especially fond of the legalization of drugs – ahem) and yet, if he were able to vote, he says he’d definitely vote for the Democrats.

There’s definitely a marketing issue when someone that gets excited about limited government interference in your life then votes for the nanny state Democrats.

JadeNYU on May 4, 2011 at 1:47 PM

Hit and run.
No thoughtful debate.
Just hit & run.

Badger40 on May 4, 2011 at 1:44 PM

Yes, Hot Air — that distinguished forum of debate between which law to pass first: the banning gay parents, or the requiring Jim Crow laws for presidential candidates of color. Some debate.

bifidis on May 4, 2011 at 1:54 PM

bifidis must be the name of a brain disease.

Gnats are indignant.

Schadenfreude on May 4, 2011 at 1:57 PM

“Yes, I can” on the photos.

The Child in Charge will drop in the polls, like swatted flies.

Schadenfreude on May 4, 2011 at 1:58 PM

Nothing will make you happy.

chinese drywall on May 4, 2011 at 12:25 PM

I reckon your country’s (Canada) taking a hard turn to starboard this week has made you happy, right? /snark

I can’t wait to see Canada $h!tcanning some of it’s more stupid laws. For example, the political-correctness law that allows murderous muslim mujahadeen muckrakers to maliciously malign conservative journalists & bloggers for THOUGHT CRIMES(tm). Conservatives like Mark Steyn are only reporting reality and telling it like it is.

People like you have your head so far up your a$$ that you need to open your mouth to see where you are going.

Get a life. Better yet, get a job.

CatchAll on May 4, 2011 at 2:02 PM

Obama invites Bush: obviously a political ploy, no chance he’s reaching out to share the credit and unite the country

Bush declines: he’s just being classy saying he’s staying out of the spotlight as ex-potus, no political agenda or statement whatsoever, not trying to avoid scrutiny for failing to get Bin Laden after 8 years

Hotair = highly entertaining

Dave Rywall on May 4, 2011 at 2:14 PM

There’s definitely a marketing issue when someone that gets excited about limited government interference in your life then votes for the nanny state Democrats.

JadeNYU on May 4, 2011 at 1:47 PM

When all your favorite bands and all your favorite actors support the party, it’s a bit beyond the cool thing to do. Look at our newest troll. He/she/whatever, knows nothing about us except that we’re racist old white men in Atlanta (why Atlanta?). What person our age (pretending for a second that we’re not the old people the troll assumes of course) wants to be associated with that even remotely?

Esthier on May 4, 2011 at 2:25 PM

Hotair = highly entertaining

Definitely… this is why most of us come here, to see commies foaming at their mouth.

16 hours? pffftt

Anyhow, this extra-judicial killing of an unarmed foreign citizen minding his own business in a foreign sovereign country should not go unpunished. I hope UN and ICC will take the necessary steps to bring the moral author of this horrendous assassination to justice.

As far as all the news outlets are pointing out, following his own confession, the moral author is Barack Hussein Obama.

Rookie on May 4, 2011 at 2:30 PM

Hotair = highly entertaining

Dave Rywall on May 4, 2011 at 2:14 PM

And as has already been said…

Bush waits less than 10 minutes: the idiot can’t make up his mind.

Obama waits 16 hours: the brilliant Spock doesn’t act with emotion but rather with deliberate planning.

Not saying that excuses it, but you’ll notice Allah isn’t playing that game and neither are many commenters. It’s not funny actually. Never was.

Esthier on May 4, 2011 at 2:31 PM

Bush declined. Smart move. Why face those families who you left down for 8 years. Shame is a powerful tool.

There is spring brush to clear anyway

Monkei on May 4, 2011 at 2:37 PM

And as has already been said…

Bush waits less than 10 minutes: the idiot can’t make up his mind.

Obama waits 16 hours: the brilliant Spock doesn’t act with emotion but rather with deliberate planning.

Not saying that excuses it, but you’ll notice Allah isn’t playing that game and neither are many commenters. It’s not funny actually. Never was.

Esthier on May 4, 2011 at 2:31 PM
——-
Comparing the two situations is ludicrous.

The question is: why did Obama invite him an why did Bush decline?
And are you disappointed at all in Bush for failing?
Are you disappointed that his efforts to find Bin Laden lagged?

Dave Rywall on May 4, 2011 at 2:40 PM

OBAMA: Voting “PRESENT” on OBL Kill Order?

Mutnodjmet on May 4, 2011 at 2:28 PM
——
Wow – that link leads to a cesspool of stupid.

Dave Rywall on May 4, 2011 at 2:42 PM

The question is: why did Obama invite him an why did Bush decline?

Dave Rywall on May 4, 2011 at 2:40 PM

You missed it? Some actress said yesterday that it w/b nice if Obama would invite Bush. A few hours later, Obama did.

Bush declined because he’s a classy gentleman. He wants Obama to bask in his glory, for once.

Schadenfreude on May 4, 2011 at 2:48 PM

And are you disappointed at all in Bush for failing?
Are you disappointed that his efforts to find Bin Laden lagged?

Dave Rywall on May 4, 2011 at 2:40 PM

Go find what Condi Rice said about both presidents, on topic. You’ll learn a lot and you might be amazed, and a bit pleased too, if you keep your mind open.

Schadenfreude on May 4, 2011 at 2:49 PM

The bigger question is – why is Obama going to the WTC now?

Bush said he’ll go in Sept. for the 10th anniversary.

Given how Obama treated the SC justice at the SOTU, and Mr. Ryan, recently, why show up anywhere?

Schadenfreude on May 4, 2011 at 2:51 PM

Monkei on May 4, 2011 at 2:37 PM

Given a choice to sit next to Zero and his drooling supporters or cleaning after pigs, I’ll choose the latter thank you very much.

bisifilis badly needs some help on the other thread, hurry up! But you two being roommates – possibly sharing the same brain – you already know that.

Rookie on May 4, 2011 at 2:56 PM

Bush declined, saying his presence at Ground Zero might inflame Muslim sensibilities and anti-Americanism abroad.

By the way, Clintoon declined too.

xblade on May 4, 2011 at 2:58 PM

There’s definitely a marketing issue when someone that gets excited about limited government interference in your life then votes for the nanny state Democrats.

JadeNYU on May 4, 2011 at 1:47 PM

Not really, no. Social libertarians should (and often do) vote Democrat, because Democrats oppose governmental interference into social decisions and relationships (e.g. pro-choice, pro-gay marriage etc).

Really, the only time Republicans are for “limited government” is when they support marginally lower tax rates on the richest 5% of Americans.

crr6 on May 4, 2011 at 3:00 PM

Rice’s statement:
“The demise of Osama Bin Laden is a tremendous victory for the American people. Justice has been done and we are all indebted to the American military and intelligence community for their skill and dedication. Nothing can bring back Bin Laden’s innocent victims, but perhaps this can help salve the wounds of their loved ones.

I am overwhelmed with pride in America and in those who protect us. We are all united tonight in gratitude and love for our country.

God Bless America.”

———–

Both presidents what?

Dave Rywall on May 4, 2011 at 3:00 PM

I don’t fault O for thinking long and hard about whether to greenlight a mission whose failure would have cemented his reputation as the new Jimmy Carter

Heh! Very funny! I think Obama cemented that a long time ago.

Susanboo on May 4, 2011 at 3:01 PM

Oh for crying out loud. He was insufficiently gracious to Bush during his speech on Sunday. And he was wrong to invite him to Ground Zero?

Short of resigning and ceding power to the GOP, there is nothing he can do to please some of you.

YYZ on May 3, 2011 at 10:11 PM

Some people are so dense, they cannot see the forest for the trees.

Susanboo on May 4, 2011 at 3:06 PM

because Democrats oppose governmental interference into social decisions and relationships
crr6 on May 4, 2011 at 3:00 PM

You’re funny. You should really get your own show on Comedy Central.

Left Coast Right Mind on May 4, 2011 at 3:08 PM

Not really, no. Social libertarians should (and often do) vote Democrat, because Democrats oppose governmental interference into social decisions and relationships (e.g. pro-choice, pro-gay marriage etc).

Actually, it is the government interfering in decisions already made by the people – redefining marriage, saying we can kill babies. The govt is saying you must accept these things – so who is interfering with who?

Zomcon JEM on May 4, 2011 at 3:17 PM

The question is: why did Obama invite him an why did Bush decline?

Don’t know. Do you?

I will say that I think it was good of Obama to extend the invitation but also probably appropriate that Bush declined it, regardless of their reasons.

And are you disappointed at all in Bush for failing?

Disappointed that he wasn’t president when Osama died? Sure, but how is it a failing that the intelligence gathered under Bush directly led to the man’s eventual death?

Are you disappointed that his efforts to find Bin Laden lagged?

Dave Rywall on May 4, 2011 at 2:40 PM

Who isn’t. But that doesn’t mean I believe this was his personal failure or that I believe he rejected leads that would have gotten us Osama’s head sooner.

Esthier on May 4, 2011 at 3:18 PM

I will say that I think it was good of Obama to extend the invitation but also probably appropriate that Bush declined it, regardless of their reasons.

And are you disappointed at all in Bush for failing?

Disappointed that he wasn’t president when Osama died? Sure, but how is it a failing that the intelligence gathered under Bush directly led to the man’s eventual death?

Are you disappointed that his efforts to find Bin Laden lagged?

Dave Rywall on May 4, 2011 at 2:40 PM

Who isn’t. But that doesn’t mean I believe this was his personal failure or that I believe he rejected leads that would have gotten us Osama’s head sooner.

Esthier on May 4, 2011 at 3:18 PM
——-
All very well put.

The failing is about not getting the job done on his watch.

Dave Rywall on May 4, 2011 at 3:30 PM

For D. Rywall

WASHINGTON (AFP) – Former US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice on Tuesday lavished praise on President Barack Obama for the US military raid that tracked down and killed Al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden in Pakistan.

“This clearly shows that the president and his team did a superb job of pulling all of this together,” Rice told MSNBC television.

“I’m very grateful to them for closing this chapter,” she said.

Rice, a former national security advisor and secretary of state under former US president George W. Bush, added that some credit also goes to the national security team that served under her Republican boss.

She called the successful weekend military strike on bin Laden’s compound “a good story for continuity across two presidencies.”

[ For complete coverage of politics and policy, go to Yahoo! Politics ]

“What it really shows is that the United States will be persistent and patient,” she said.

“Our reach is long. You may be able to harm us, but you will ultimately not defeat us.”

Rice, who currently teaches at California’s prestigious Stanford University outside San Francisco, added that the current administration had the benefit of an anti-terrorism infrastructure that simply did not exist when Bush took over the White House.

“They used the structures that have been evolving in the United States for quite a long time,” Rice said, adding that the Obama national security team also was able to make use of a trove of intelligence from interrogating accused 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Muhammad and other key terror operatives.

“This kind of integration wasn’t something that we had in 2001, and we got a lot better over time,” Rice said

Schadenfreude on May 4, 2011 at 3:35 PM

The episode where Obama invited Paul Ryan to a front row seat and then attacked him may have correctly taught the Republicans a lesson, that Obama is not to be trusted.

RJL on May 4, 2011 at 3:36 PM

By the way, Clintoon declined too.

xblade on May 4, 2011 at 2:58 PM

Simply with “calendar conflict”

Schadenfreude on May 4, 2011 at 3:37 PM

crr6 on May 4, 2011 at 3:00 PM

Pro gay marriage? Sure, except for their official party platform and official responses to direct questions.

And the choice is clearly only being made by one involved party. Slave owners could be called pro-choice as well. It’s the abolitionists who were trying to do away with choice in the matter.

And yes, Democrats want the government out of our lives unless you decide not to buy your own health insurance, decide you want salt in your foods and don’t care for diet sodas. Or if you like to play violent video games or like to use normal light bulbs that don’t release mercury into the air if broken. Or if you like toilets that actually flush your sh!t and showers that do more than trickle.

The GOP has its own problems with government meddling, but that doesn’t take away from what the Dems do.

Esthier on May 4, 2011 at 3:38 PM

The failing is about not getting the job done on his watch.

Dave Rywall on May 4, 2011 at 3:30 PM

You could write the exact same line about Bill Clinton.

Schadenfreude on May 4, 2011 at 3:38 PM

There should be no speeches made on the hallowed soil of Ground Zero. GW Bush knows instinctively that Ground Zero is a place which renders visitors speechless.

Because he is a classless narcissist, speechlessness is another of those concepts foreign to Obama.

Perhaps – just perhaps – someone will have the courage to clue Obama in as to just how crass is his plan to parade himself at Ground Zero.

GGMac on May 4, 2011 at 3:38 PM

The failing is about not getting the job done on his watch.

Dave Rywall on May 4, 2011 at 3:30 PM

It took them years just to get the courier’s fake name and then another 4 just to get his real one.

Before that, it seems they had nothing. I don’t fault Obama for taking another 2 years after all that intell had been handed to him. Why would I fault Bush for it?

If it was within Bush’s power to get Osama in the time he had left after getting that man’s name in 2007, then why did it take Obama almost 2 more years?

Esthier on May 4, 2011 at 3:47 PM

Schadenfreude on May 4, 2011 at 3:35 PM
—–

Finally, a mature, intelligent expression of congratulations and happiness about Bin Laden getting whacked from the other side of the aisle.

Dave Rywall on May 4, 2011 at 4:46 PM

The failing is about not getting the job done on his watch.

Dave Rywall on May 4, 2011 at 3:30 PM

You could write the exact same line about Bill Clinton.

Schadenfreude on May 4, 2011 at 3:38 PM
——
Yes you absolutely could.

Dave Rywall on May 4, 2011 at 4:46 PM

Keep away from Obama.

He can screw up even a major American victory like getting Bin Laden.

Let him preen and fall apart on his own.

profitsbeard on May 4, 2011 at 4:47 PM

Finally, a mature, intelligent expression of congratulations and happiness about Bin Laden getting whacked from the other side of the aisle.

Dave Rywall on May 4, 2011 at 4:46 PM

You’re clearly have a selective memory if you think that’s the first one.

Esthier on May 4, 2011 at 4:50 PM

There should be no speeches made on the hallowed soil of Ground Zero. GW Bush knows instinctively that Ground Zero is a place which renders visitors speechless.

Because he is a classless narcissist, speechlessness is another of those concepts foreign to Obama.

Perhaps – just perhaps – someone will have the courage to clue Obama in as to just how crass is his plan to parade himself at Ground Zero.

GGMac on May 4, 2011 at 3:38 PM
——
Yeah, because there have never been any speeches given at Ground Zero.

Dave Rywall on May 4, 2011 at 4:55 PM

It took them years just to get the courier’s fake name and then another 4 just to get his real one.

Before that, it seems they had nothing. I don’t fault Obama for taking another 2 years after all that intell had been handed to him. Why would I fault Bush for it?

If it was within Bush’s power to get Osama in the time he had left after getting that man’s name in 2007, then why did it take Obama almost 2 more years?

Esthier on May 4, 2011 at 3:47 PM
———-
I never said it was within his power.
I’m saying it took as long as it took.

Dave Rywall on May 4, 2011 at 4:57 PM

I’m saying it took as long as it took.

Dave Rywall on May 4, 2011 at 4:57 PM

Then why is that a failure? It took me 18 years to become eligible to vote. It’s not a failure that I couldn’t do it in 16.

Esthier on May 4, 2011 at 5:23 PM

I am so sick of that crap about Tora Bora. Bill Clinton had numerous opportunities to take out Osama Bin Laden and he did not do it..if he had we would not even have to think about all of this right now. As far as that is concerned, Bill was the guy who got the Iraqi Liberation Act passed, because you know…Saddam was our greatest threat.

The ability of these people to take any situation and rewrite it and revise it in an effort to gain political power for themselves…and then they will whine about unity.

Terrye on May 4, 2011 at 5:25 PM

Why do you troll libs even bother to come on this site? All you do is Bi**h and moan about the Conservatives on here and our viewpoints. We would just as soon you go to Huffpo or somewhere else, where you can talk about how much you hate this great Country, (except when your liberal friends are ruining it). Please go away, all of you, as you are making it unpleasant for the rest of us who love our Country and enjoy this site.

Susanboo on May 4, 2011 at 5:29 PM

I don’t fault O for thinking long and hard about whether to greenlight a mission whose failure would have cemented his reputation as the new Jimmy Carter, especially when the CIA wasn’t 100 percent sure that Bin Laden was in the compound. Hard choices take time to make. But do understand that that hesitation carried incredible risk: Even though OBL had apparently been at the compound for years, the arrest of one of Al Qaeda’s top operatives in the same town just three months before must have alarmed him. He could have bolted at any time, and still Obama waited.

I felt the same way at first. But then it occurred to me that if things went bad there would always be a cover story because no one knew this was happening. It was not as if we sitting in front of the TV watching it go down. I think that it did not take guts for Obama to make this decision, for the simple reason that he really had no choice. I think virtually any President in the same situation would have made the same call. What else could he do? Just let Osama go on living there as if we did not know a thing about it? I don’t think so.

Terrye on May 4, 2011 at 5:47 PM

Why do you troll libs even bother to come on this site? All you do is Bi**h and moan about the Conservatives on here and our viewpoints. We would just as soon you go to Huffpo or somewhere else, where you can talk about how much you hate this great Country, (except when your liberal friends are ruining it). Please go away, all of you, as you are making it unpleasant for the rest of us who love our Country and enjoy this site.

Susanboo on May 4, 2011 at 5:29 PM

This stupid post is so typically indicative of the intolerant, peevish, whiny wuss-factor at the root of the conservative mind. A liberal just laughs at trolls. You, however, actually feel irritated by them.

No wonder why conservatives join the NRA.

bifidis on May 4, 2011 at 5:52 PM

Obama invites Bush: obviously a political ploy, no chance he’s reaching out to share the credit and unite the country

Bush declines: he’s just being classy saying he’s staying out of the spotlight as ex-potus, no political agenda or statement whatsoever, not trying to avoid scrutiny for failing to get Bin Laden after 8 years

Hotair = highly entertaining

Dave Rywall on May 4, 2011 at 2:14 PM

Nailed it. Isn’t it fun seeing all these masterfully predictable wingnuts spewing their hate-goo at one another as though it were complex discourse?

bifidis on May 4, 2011 at 5:57 PM

A liberal just laughs at trolls. You, however, actually feel irritated by them.

bifidis on May 4, 2011 at 5:52 PM

You’ve clearly never been to a liberal website and/or are just making things up as you go along. Plenty here have been banned from KOS and HuffPo for ridiculous reasons, and those are just the ones who comments appeared in the comment section.

Esthier on May 4, 2011 at 6:05 PM

A liberal just laughs at trolls. You, however, actually feel irritated by them.

bifidis on May 4, 2011 at 5:52 PM

Bullshit..what they do is ban you moron.

Terrye on May 4, 2011 at 6:25 PM

Obama invites Bush: obviously a political ploy, no chance he’s reaching out to share the credit and unite the country

Bush declines: he’s just being classy saying he’s staying out of the spotlight as ex-potus, no political agenda or statement whatsoever, not trying to avoid scrutiny for failing to get Bin Laden after 8 years

Hotair = highly entertaining

Dave Rywall on May 4, 2011 at 2:14 PM

Nailed it. Isn’t it fun seeing all these masterfully predictable wingnuts spewing their hate-goo at one another as though it were complex discourse?

bifidis on May 4, 2011 at 5:57 PM

What the hell is the point to this? You don’t know why Obama invited Bush or why Bush declined. Maybe he thought that he would be insulted by some cheap shots from the left, it would not be the first time now would it?

I will tell you what is interesting, is that we get Obama and all the left can do is strut, gloat, lie, rewrite history and then pompously demand unity.

BTW, Drywall…go home Canuck.

Terrye on May 4, 2011 at 6:27 PM

Oops… I mean we get Osama and all the left can is….slip of the tongue there.

Terrye on May 4, 2011 at 6:29 PM

complex discourse?

bifidis on May 4, 2011 at 5:57 PM

Something terribly ironic about you even using the word complex.

So tell me are you for capital punishment without a trial? Entering sovereign nations without their permission? Not even an authorization from the UN? Really? And to top it off the action was all set up by rendition and enhanced interrogation techniques. Gotta love it.

CWforFreedom on May 4, 2011 at 7:47 PM

Obama invites Bush: obviously a political ploy, no chance he’s reaching out to share the credit and unite the country

Bush declines: he’s just being classy saying he’s staying out of the spotlight as ex-potus, no political agenda or statement whatsoever, not trying to avoid scrutiny for failing to get Bin Laden after 8 years

Hotair = highly entertaining

Dave Rywall on May 4, 2011 at 2:14 PM

Oh get off your high horse already, you useless parasite. You and your fellow parasites were going to flay Bush alive whether he chose to attend or chose to stay away. At least by staying away, he denies Obama the chance to roast him alive on international television, where he can’t get away, and to turn this whole event into the huge base-rallying campaign event you people had in mind all along.

Maybe now there’s at least a small chance that a small part of the day will actually be about the people who perished on 9/11/01, without Bush being there to serve as a physical focal point for your leftist hatefest and taking even that small chance away. I’m sure Obama will give it the old college try anyway, but his task just got a lot harder. And that just drives you liberals insane with rage, doesn’t it?

Gator Country on May 4, 2011 at 9:59 PM

Why do you troll libs even bother to come on this site? All you do is Bi**h and moan about the Conservatives on here and our viewpoints. We would just as soon you go to Huffpo or somewhere else, where you can talk about how much you hate this great Country, (except when your liberal friends are ruining it). Please go away, all of you, as you are making it unpleasant for the rest of us who love our Country and enjoy this site.

Susanboo on May 4, 2011 at 5:29 PM

This stupid post is so typically indicative of the intolerant, peevish, whiny wuss-factor at the root of the conservative mind. A liberal just laughs at trolls. You, however, actually feel irritated by them.

No wonder why conservatives join the NRA.

bifidis on May 4, 2011 at 5:52 PM

Oh yes. I would be treated with “just laffs” at Kos if I were to go troll there. Uh huh. You betcha. Idiot.

PS to Rywall: Stephen Harper majority!

kim roy on May 4, 2011 at 10:22 PM

Exit quotation from two of the kids who were in the classroom with Bush that day: “I think he was trying to keep everybody calm, starting with us… I think he was trying to protect us.”

This is an astute observation for such young individuals.

These two have developed critical thinking skills that most on the left are incapable of achieving.

rukiddingme on May 4, 2011 at 10:36 PM

I am relieved that GW Bush did not take Øbama up on the G-Zero offer… I didn’t want to see GW “Ryaned”.

Dasher on May 4, 2011 at 10:38 PM

What else could he do? Just let Osama go on living there as if we did not know a thing about it? I don’t think so.

Terrye on May 4, 2011 at 5:47 PM

He couldn’t take the risk that it would leak out that he knew exactly where Osama was and didn’t go get him. Hell, he’d known since February.

He had to do it. And if it failed, the media would give him cover and say “well, at least he tried.”

Missy on May 4, 2011 at 11:19 PM

PS to Rywall: Stephen Harper majority!

kim roy on May 4, 2011 at 10:22 PM

Been a rough couple of days for ol’ Dave, I imagine.

Missy on May 4, 2011 at 11:20 PM

Given what we see what Barry has done in similar situations in the past 2 years, why would we expect Bush to walk into the trap. Barry is so redundantly stupid.

steveracer on May 4, 2011 at 11:26 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4