We need another George Bush…


by Sunny
26th August, 2008 at 3:25 am    

… like I need a hole in my head. But oh no, here is Tim Montgomerie of Conservative Home arguing that what the world really needs is another ‘tough cop’ like George Bush.

On one hand you have to admire that – Tim sounds like one of those communists or Hizb ut-Tahrir nutjobs who believe that what the world really needs is a communist paradise or a HuT style Caliphate – who cares what the people think? Who cares about reality?

Saying these people live in a world of their own would be an understatement. Though people are sometimes of the view that only people on the left life in political fantasyland, Tim isn’t alone. A recent article in the US conservative journal National Review argued that Barack Obama’s candidacy was only possible because GW Bush made the world a safe place!

Presumably the Americans are stupid for rating GW Bush as the worst president ever. How’s that for anti-Americanism? None of these articles mention of course the corruption that was at the heart of the Bush regime. None wants to go into the lies that justified the war in Iraq. Oh, and there’s no measurement to indicate the world is a safer place. We just need a strong cop like GW Bush otherwise the world is a dangerous place. If John McSame does get into power and follow on from Bush, it will be the death knell of the Republican party.


              Post to del.icio.us


Filed in: Current affairs,United States






11 Comments below   |  

Reactions: Twitter, blogs


  1. Justin — on 26th August, 2008 at 8:57 am  

    Anybody else starting to think Montgomerie might be a fifth columnist for anti-Americanism? On that evidence, he clearly hates America more than just about anybody else I’ve ever seen.

    Most of us get accused of being anti-American when we’re not – we’re anti-Bush. Montgomerie is the opposite – pro-Bushism is just about as anti-American as you can be right now.

  2. MaidMarian — on 26th August, 2008 at 10:10 am  

    OK, perhaps a bit controversial but….

    It is way, way too soon to start rating GWB. Political careers can only ever be really evaluated and compared after at least a decade and probably more. The same applies to Blair.

    GWB may well have been ‘bad’ or maybe not. We will need the memoirs and so on before any non-knee jerk judgment can be made. I suspect that in years to come it is GWB’s handling of the US economy and the staggering decline in the dollar that will be the biggest black mark against him.

    Perhaps the really interesting retrospective will be Vladimir Putin who many in political fantasy land seem to have no problem rewriting history over. To my mind, that man is every inch the GWB.

    ‘Oh, and there’s no measurement to indicate the world is a safer place.’ Correct – and there is no measurement of one person’s contribution to making the world less safe or more safe either.

  3. Leon — on 26th August, 2008 at 11:21 am  

    We will need the memoirs and so on before any non-knee jerk judgment can be made.

    No we don’t we can measure it in blood. His legacy is apparent if you’re willing to see it.

  4. Tom — on 26th August, 2008 at 11:32 am  

    “We will need the memoirs”

    I seriously disagree. There are plenty of decent kids colouring books on the market already.

  5. Dan — on 26th August, 2008 at 1:05 pm  

    Fair play to Montgomerie, that might *just* be the worst article ever committed to paper. I don’t think I have ever seen such an impressive collection of non-sequiturs and non-arguments.

    Completely and utterly incidentally, the Guardian’s photo of him looks very much like Oliver Kamm. I wonder if they could in any way be related? The evidence seems compelling.

  6. shariq — on 26th August, 2008 at 1:28 pm  

    Tim Montgomery’s piece is a perfect example of how punditry, rather than synthesising complex arguments for public consumption, chooses faux complexity in order to argue against conventional wisdom for political gain. Or of course he could actually believe this stuff which would be a lot worse.

    1) TM – Al-Qaeda started planning 9/11 during the Clinton years. Obama is as popular as Clinton was. Therefore there is going to be more terrorist attacks. (Meanwhile, lets ignore the multiple attacks and build up of Al-Qaeda in Iraq and Afghanistan and the fact that Iraq is well on its way to becoming an Iranian proxy.)

    2) TM – Apart from neo-conservatism, Bush has actually been pursuing European policies all these years. The idiots.

    3) TM – America needs to continue neo-conversatism without actually spelling out any policies as to how it should do so. Liberate Georgia? Bomb Iran? Bomb Pakistan? Invade Sudan? Occupy the rest of the west bank and kick the Palestinians out of gaza??

    On the one hand there is one potential positive to all of this. If Americans don’t like the idea of Europeans telling them who to vote for, maybe we can convince them that Tim Montgomery is representing Europe and that we think everyone should vote for McCain.

  7. Sunny — on 26th August, 2008 at 3:36 pm  

    If Americans don’t like the idea of Europeans telling them who to vote for, maybe we can convince them that Tim Montgomery is representing Europe and that we think everyone should vote for McCain.

    haha! Yes, true.

  8. Standard and Poor — on 26th August, 2008 at 4:25 pm  

    We are all interested in the outcome of the US elections because we are ruled by them. Unfortunately we have no votes in their elections but just have to watch and worry. How is this any different to other countries whose populations are treated like unwelcome bystanders?

  9. Ravi Naik — on 27th August, 2008 at 2:00 am  

    A recent article in the US conservative journal National Review argued that Barack Obama’s candidacy was only possible because GW Bush made the world a safe place

    The National Review is the last bastion on Bush’s support. It’s not even funny. There is nothing funny about utter delusion.

    Presumably the Americans are stupid for rating GW Bush as the worst president ever.

    No, they are stupid for electing Bush… twice. And these idiots are seriously considering McCain. The real question is whether Americans are going to elect a President they deserve, or one that they need to get their country back on its feet.

  10. DR1001 — on 27th August, 2008 at 8:43 pm  

    What’s worrying is seeing how the polls show Mcain to be so close to Obama despite the seemingly anti Bush sentiments in the US.

    All it takes is probably another scare tactic ad about terrorism etc, or a goof up by the Obama Campaign to swift boat the Democrats again.

    “Unfortunately we have no votes in their elections but just have to watch and worry”

    Yeah it’s worse living here and not being eligible to vote (as an expat) and watching it all unfold.
    I can’t believe some of the comments from the Hilary supporters at the convention who state they may stay home and not vote even after her trying to rally unity …that’s sheer stupidity. And even crazier is thinking about voting McCain just cos Hilary’s not on the ticket!

  11. Don — on 27th August, 2008 at 8:59 pm  

    All this talk of the Clinton ‘dynasty’, and wheeling out Ted Kennedy as a reminder of the Kennedy ‘dynasty’. And of course Bush pere et fils.

    What’s with the dynasties in US politics?

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Pickled Politics © Copyright 2005 - 2010. All rights reserved. Terms and conditions.
With the help of PHP and Wordpress.