kentuck
Democrats wanted George W Bush to fail.
But they did not want the country to fail.
Democrats disagreed with the invasion of Iraq. Because it was not best for our country and our relations around the world. Soldiers and marines were dying for an unjustified war.
Democrats disagreed with spending huge sums of money off the record and running up huge deficits. They wanted George W Bush to fail in those endeavors. It was best for the country if we had an honest accounting of what we were spending.
Democrats disagreed with Bush on torture and suspending civil liberties and spying on our fellow citizens. They wanted him to fail because his actions and policies were anti-American and criminal.
In those respects, Democrats wanted George W Bush to fail.
However, Republicans want Obama to fail for different reasons. They do not share the same concern for the present economic crisis we are in. They are not thinking about what is best for our country - they are thinking about what is best for their Party and getting back into power.
They are not hoping Obama fails because he has invaded another sovereign nation or because he has crapped on our Constitution or because he has broken international and national laws. They want him to fail simply because they disagree with his politics- the nation be damned. There is a difference.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=5175235&mesg_id=5175235
We know Hussein's policies are bad for the country, and we hope those policies fail so that people recognize it and help put on the brakes before it's too late.
The overwhelming majority of the primitive's post is typical twisting of the truth to make out that conservatives are doing what liberals were, in fact, doing during the Bush years.
gratuitous
4. There is also a difference
Between looking objectively at a policy and the persons instituting and carrying out that policy, and deciding it's going to fail, and actively working against a policy so that it will fail.
Republicans/conservatives can't actively oppose Hussein, the Dems have Congress and the WH. The libs want to make out like even expressing the fact that it's going to fail is somehow working against the policy, but that won't work.
Tommy_Carcetti
5. I didn't want Bush to fail. He was simply doomed for failure from the beginning.
His policies and actions ensured failure regardless of what anyone thought, and there was no need to desire or want failure.
And if a conservative says that about Hussein, you little oafs start stupid threads like the kentuck primitive has done.
EstimatedProphet
6. No, we did not
We thought what he was doing was wrong. If Bush was proved right, would we have been mad at him? Would we be mad if the country had full employment and living wages for everyone now? Would we be mad if Iraq was now safer and better off for its citizens than it was before? No. That's what the difference really is. Rush wanting Obama to fail means that he will be pissed off if Obama succeeds, and the country fares better.
No, you wouldn't have been mad?!?
What a lair!!
More liars......
smoogatz
8. I wanted that ****ing weasel to succeed.
I wanted him to prove me wrong. I wanted eight more years of peace and prosperity, like we had under Clinton. Unfortunately, Bush proved me right over and over--American conservatism is a corrupt and empty ideology that FAILS miserably every time it's implemented on a large scale. You knew it, I knew it, we all knew it--but for the sake of the country I hoped against hope that Bush would get lucky and things would work out. Unfortunately it became apparent that no amount of luck could undo the damage done to the country by Bush's "drown it in the bathtub" approach to government.
zipplewrath
Response to Reply #8
10. This was me.
I hoped he would "succeed" in the sense that, much like Clinton, if he just stayed out of our way, and didn't screw things up too much it wouldn't matter all that much. Clinton wasn't a liberal by most definitions and I figured if Junior was like his father, it could only be so bad. After 9/11, I didn't like much of what he said, but I figured as long as he followed the Powell doctrine and moved ahead like his father did, we'd get through the thing. But with each decision, and each step, he got worse and worse. He wouldn't listen to critics in his own party, much less Blix or any of our "old Europe" friends. Heck, he didn't even really listen to Lap Dog Blair. It wasn't that I wanted him to fail, it's that I didn't see how he could succeed.
hfojvt
14. Republicans are being an opposition party
Are we gonna be like Bush and rightwing pundits and say that people in the opposition are traitors? Thankfully, Obama did not set that tone in his speech. "Every American who is sitting here tonight loves this country and wants it to succeed."
kentuck
Response to Reply #14
15. Perhaps?
But circumstances change. With our economy tanking, we need to work together to find a solution. We tried it their way. That is why we are here. They failed. Reality. What a concept!
Translation: Are we going to call conservatives "traitors?" Yes, we will.
Of course, a lib calling me a traitor doesn't really mean anything since that's like Aldrich Ames telling me I don't love America because I didn't spy for the USSR.
.
