truth on hold Posted April 27, 2015 Share Posted April 27, 2015 (edited) What a butthole... Mr. Bush was the keynote speaker for the Republican Jewish Coalition's spring meeting at the Venetian Hotel, which is owned by conservative mega-donor Sheldon Adelson. The casino magnate - who has bankrolled several Republican campaigns in recent elections -- allegedly paid Bush $250,000 for the appearance, the Daily Beast reports. At the closed-door event, the former president also criticized the following administration for its handling of the terrorist group ISIS. Bush said he views the extremists as the "second act" of al Qaeda's reign of terror. "In order to be an effective president ... when you say something you have to mean it," Bush said. "You gotta kill em." Instead, the former president said that Obama was putting the U.S. in a position of "retreat" around the world. http://www.cbsnews.com/news/george-w-bush-knocks-obama-on-foreign-policy/ Edited April 27, 2015 by JTSP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted April 27, 2015 Share Posted April 27, 2015 What a butthole... Mr. Bush was the keynote speaker for the Republican Jewish Coalition's spring meeting at the Venetian Hotel, which is owned by conservative mega-donor Sheldon Adelson. The casino magnate - who has bankrolled several Republican campaigns in recent elections -- allegedly paid Bush $250,000 for the appearance, the Daily Beast reports. At the closed-door event, the former president also criticized the following administration for its handling of the terrorist group ISIS. Bush said he views the extremists as the "second act" of al Qaeda's reign of terror. "In order to be an effective president ... when you say something you have to mean it," Bush said. "You gotta kill em." Instead, the former president said that Obama was putting the U.S. in a position of "retreat" around the world. http://www.cbsnews.com/news/george-w-bush-knocks-obama-on-foreign-policy/ Agree, Obama is a butthole on foreign policy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4merper4mer Posted April 27, 2015 Share Posted April 27, 2015 (edited) Agree, Obama is a butthole on foreign policy. I think you misunderstood Joe the Sandusky Proponent. He was calling Bush the butthole, not Obama. Because Bush spoke with Jews. Edited April 27, 2015 by 4merper4mer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted April 27, 2015 Share Posted April 27, 2015 (edited) I think you misunderstood Joe the Sandusky Proponent. He was calling Bush the butthole, not Obama. Because Bush spoke with Jews. I completely understood who he meant, but since he wasn't specific in terms of who was the butthole, I thought I'd make him go back and read what he wrote. Edited April 27, 2015 by keepthefaith Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted April 27, 2015 Share Posted April 27, 2015 What a butthole... Mr. Bush was the keynote speaker for the Republican Jewish Coalition's spring meeting at the Venetian Hotel, which is owned by conservative mega-donor Sheldon Adelson. The casino magnate - who has bankrolled several Republican campaigns in recent elections -- allegedly paid Bush $250,000 for the appearance, the Daily Beast reports. At the closed-door event, the former president also criticized the following administration for its handling of the terrorist group ISIS. Bush said he views the extremists as the "second act" of al Qaeda's reign of terror. "In order to be an effective president ... when you say something you have to mean it," Bush said. "You gotta kill em." Instead, the former president said that Obama was putting the U.S. in a position of "retreat" around the world.http://www.cbsnews.com/news/george-w-bush-knocks-obama-on-foreign-policy/ I wonder if he's just preaching to the choir or really believes it. Bush critizing another presidents--any presidents--foreign policy is funny Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted April 27, 2015 Share Posted April 27, 2015 (edited) For more than six years, George W. Bush has maintained a professional silence on the actions of his successor in office. Bush has repeatedly said that the job of President is difficult enough without having former occupants of the White House criticizing from the sidelines, and has even mostly held his tongue about his own actions. Are the gloves coming off now? Josh Rogin says yes — at least privately: In a closed-door meeting with Jewish Donors Saturday night, former President George W. Bush delivered his harshest public criticisms to date against his successor on foreign policy, saying that President Barack Obama is being naïve about Iran and the pending nuclear deal and losing the war against the Islamic State. One attendee at the Republican Jewish Coalition session, held at the Venetian Hotel in Las Vegas with owner Sheldon Adelson in attendance, transcribed large portions of Bush’s remarks. The former president, who rarely ever criticizes Obama in public, at first remarked that the idea of re-entering the political arena was something he didn’t want to do. He then proceeded to explain why Obama, in his view, was placing the U.S. in “retreat” around the world. He also said Obama was misreading Iran’s intentions while relaxing sanctions on Tehran too easily. … Bush then went into a detailed criticism of Obama’s policies in fighting the Islamic State and dealing with the chaos in Iraq. On Obama’s decision to withdraw all U.S. troops in Iraq at the end of 2011, he quoted Senator Lindsey Graham calling it a “strategic blunder.” Bush signed an agreement with the Iraqi government to withdraw those troops, but the idea had been to negotiate a new status of forces agreement to keep U.S. forces there past 2011. The Obama administration tried and failed to negotiate such an agreement. Bush’s criticisms seemed primarily aimed at Obama’s policies regarding Iran and Iraq, at least from Rogin’s recounting of his source’s notes. He mentioned Vladimir Putin in a somewhat lighter vein, but warned that Putin’s hold on power was considerable, thanks to his ties to the oligarchy and his own grip on state media. “Hell, I’d be popular too,” Rogin quotes Bush as saying, “if I owned NBC News.” Clearly, Bush has become concerned enough about the Iran deal and the state of affairs in Iraq and Syria to overcome his usual reticence about criticizing his successor. That may be part of the answer to the “why now” question, as the Iran deal has become an acute issue, especially with the front-loaded loosening of sanctions that has already gone into effect. Bush worries that Obama has gone too far in unleashing Tehran, and for good reason. He’s also concerned that the US still has not had an effective response to ISIS, and that Obama and his team have had more than enough time to find one. Forget the "butthole" childishness, JTSP gives his bias away with is amazing "scoop" of who owns the Venetian Hotel. As if that possibly made any difference in President Bush's behind doors remarks. Hilarious. . Edited April 27, 2015 by B-Man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted April 27, 2015 Share Posted April 27, 2015 You can certainly criticize G.W on the decision to attack Iraq. But he's spot on with his criticism of B.O and most foreign policy experts happen to agree with him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted April 27, 2015 Share Posted April 27, 2015 I wonder if he's just preaching to the choir or really believes it. Bush critizing another presidents--any presidents--foreign policy is funny Fair to say he believes it as does the majority of Americans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reddogblitz Posted April 27, 2015 Share Posted April 27, 2015 If George thinks it's a bad idea, then I'm going with it's a good idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted April 27, 2015 Share Posted April 27, 2015 If George thinks it's a bad idea, then I'm going with it's a good idea. That's great logic you have there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truth on hold Posted April 27, 2015 Author Share Posted April 27, 2015 For more than six years, George W. Bush has maintained a professional silence on the actions of his successor in office. Bush has repeatedly said that the job of President is difficult enough without having former occupants of the White House criticizing from the sidelines, and has even mostly held his tongue about his own actions. Are the gloves coming off now? Josh Rogin says yes at least privately: In a closed-door meeting with Jewish Donors Saturday night, former President George W. Bush delivered his harshest public criticisms to date against his successor on foreign policy, saying that President Barack Obama is being naïve about Iran and the pending nuclear deal and losing the war against the Islamic State. One attendee at the Republican Jewish Coalition session, held at the Venetian Hotel in Las Vegas with owner Sheldon Adelson in attendance, transcribed large portions of Bushs remarks. The former president, who rarely ever criticizes Obama in public, at first remarked that the idea of re-entering the political arena was something he didnt want to do. He then proceeded to explain why Obama, in his view, was placing the U.S. in retreat around the world. He also said Obama was misreading Irans intentions while relaxing sanctions on Tehran too easily. Bush then went into a detailed criticism of Obamas policies in fighting the Islamic State and dealing with the chaos in Iraq. On Obamas decision to withdraw all U.S. troops in Iraq at the end of 2011, he quoted Senator Lindsey Graham calling it a strategic blunder. Bush signed an agreement with the Iraqi government to withdraw those troops, but the idea had been to negotiate a new status of forces agreement to keep U.S. forces there past 2011. The Obama administration tried and failed to negotiate such an agreement. Bushs criticisms seemed primarily aimed at Obamas policies regarding Iran and Iraq, at least from Rogins recounting of his sources notes. He mentioned Vladimir Putin in a somewhat lighter vein, but warned that Putins hold on power was considerable, thanks to his ties to the oligarchy and his own grip on state media. Hell, Id be popular too, Rogin quotes Bush as saying, if I owned NBC News. Clearly, Bush has become concerned enough about the Iran deal and the state of affairs in Iraq and Syria to overcome his usual reticence about criticizing his successor. That may be part of the answer to the why now question, as the Iran deal has become an acute issue, especially with the front-loaded loosening of sanctions that has already gone into effect. Bush worries that Obama has gone too far in unleashing Tehran, and for good reason. Hes also concerned that the US still has not had an effective response to ISIS, and that Obama and his team have had more than enough time to find one. Forget the "butthole" childishness, JTSP gives his bias away with is amazing "scoop" of who owns the Venetian Hotel. As if that possibly made any difference in President Bush's behind doors remarks. Hilarious. . Yeah he's a real man of principle. Keeps his mouth shut until some billionaire pays him $250,000 to open it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buftex Posted April 27, 2015 Share Posted April 27, 2015 You can certainly criticize G.W on the decision to attack Iraq. But he's spot on with his criticism of B.O and most foreign policy experts happen to agree with him. Yes, and all of these foreign policy experts are accurate...almost never... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted April 27, 2015 Share Posted April 27, 2015 (edited) Yes, and all of these foreign policy experts are accurate...almost never... So what you're saying is that you agreed with Obama and Hillary that the Russians could be trusted with the RESET button. And that you agreed that Obama should have made a clear Red line threat against Syria to only back peddle on his red line. And that you agreed with Obama that the status of forces agreement in Iraq should have played out the way it did, in that Obama pulling out completely was the right thing to do. And that you agreed with Obama that the Ukranians shouldn't receive any sort of support against Russia's proxy against them. And that you agreed with Obama in that the agreement we made with the Polish people to help beef up their missile defense system should have been null and voided because the Russians were to be trusted. And that you agreed with Obama's assessment of ISIS in that they were a JV team to not be taken seriously. And that you agree with Obama's view that as long as the Iranians don't get a nuclear weapon "on his watch" (which is what? 2 years?) is the right approach. We get it, you think Obama's Foreign policy has been successful. Got it! Edited April 27, 2015 by Magox Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted April 27, 2015 Share Posted April 27, 2015 Yeah he's a real man of principle. Keeps his mouth shut until some billionaire pays him $250,000 to open it So you're against anyone who gets $250K, $500K or $750K for a speech? Yes, and all of these foreign policy experts are accurate...almost never... Kissinger and those in the Reagan era did OK. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TH3 Posted April 27, 2015 Share Posted April 27, 2015 (edited) That's great logic you have there. GB and DC were at the helm of the worst 8 years of foriegn policy administration our country has ever had. We, and the middle east, will pay for those 8 years for decades. And i voted for him. Edited April 27, 2015 by baskin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted April 27, 2015 Share Posted April 27, 2015 So you're against anyone who gets $250K, $500K or $750K for a speech? Zing! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted April 27, 2015 Share Posted April 27, 2015 GB and DC were at the helm of the worst 8 years of foriegn policy administration our country has ever had. We, and the middle east, will pay for those 8 years for decades. Not only is foreign policy much bigger than the "Middle East," the Middle East foreign policy itself was, with a few exceptions, relatively sound. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted April 28, 2015 Share Posted April 28, 2015 GB and DC were at the helm of the worst 8 years of foriegn policy administration our country has ever had. We, and the middle east, will pay for those 8 years for decades. And i voted for him. Is that because they introduced totalitarian regimes and religious fanaticism into the region? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reddogblitz Posted April 28, 2015 Share Posted April 28, 2015 Not only is foreign policy much bigger than the "Middle East," the Middle East foreign policy itself was, with a few exceptions, relatively sound. What part of GB's Middle East foreign policy was relatively sound? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted April 28, 2015 Share Posted April 28, 2015 What part of GB's Middle East foreign policy was relatively sound? Policies concerning Syria, Iran, Egypt, Yemen, the Saudis, Libya (particularly Libya). Hell, even his second-term policies concerning Iraq were relatively sound. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts