Filler

Well first of all, Norwich Bulletin columnist Charita Goshay (not a local) has some nerve as a liberal characterizing a conservative as not a conservative in her op-ed Arrogance in White House feeds dislike of America . Bush may not have been a fiscal conservative, but then again, neither is Goshay. So you would think that Goshay would be happy that Bush was not a fiscal conservative -- no?

Maybe Bush was spending money on the wrong things. Instead taxpayer funded abortions Bush was busy spending money that is winning two wars. Apparently that's a bad thing in Goshay's way of thinking.

Bush was certainly a conservative when appointing judges (with the exception of Harriet Myers; a matter quickly corrected) and signing laws that protected fetal life instead of destroying it. Bush certainly supported a strong national defense and other tenets of conservatism.

If Bush was not a real conservative in most respects people like me would not be so proud of him. Goshay’s rash contention that Bush was not a conservative is unsupported by the facts.

Also I question the person who made up the headline “Arrogance in White House feeds dislike of America”.

Who says non-Americans dislike America? I challenge that assertion.

Clearly some do not like us but I think most do because America serves as a shining example of what civilization should be. The USA is peaceful but we are not a pacifist people. When we need to act, we shall do so.

This ain’t France.

Also I don’t think you can have effective foreign policy while engaging the popularity contest Goshay wishes we were in. America needs to do the things she needs to do. We can not always be worried whether individual actions are popular or not.

I also have to add that what is unpopular with domestic and foreign media is not necessarily so with the general population. Like many media liberals, Goshay is shielded from reality. She and her contemporaries exist in a bubble. She can say preposterous things like ‘Bush is not a conservative’ and it won’t be challenged except by pip-squeaks like me.

The rest of us outside the bubble know that Bush is a conservative.

What’s more, like Bush, I don't know why this jerk would throw a shoe at the man who liberated his country. Maybe he is a sympathizer of the former oppressors? Clearly, as Goshay conspicuously neglects to mention, is that had someone thrown a shoe at Saddam Hussein, he would have been killed on the spot.

The shoe-thrower certainly wouldn’t have been had the chance to file lawsuits on his treatment following his arrest. Under the Hussein government there were actual state-run rape-rooms but we don’t hear much about that in the pages of the Norwich Bulletin or from Goshay.

I find Goshay to be typical of most media liberals today. Goshay makes lazy arguments and picks easy targets.

--Slamming George W. Bush. That's a pretty safe thing to do these days. The editors will lap that up every time. But intellectually does it say anything new?

No.

Goshay just serves as mere filler for a Bush-hating newspaper that is indistinguishable from all the other Bush-hating newspapers.

At the end of the day, Bush was elected twice. Goshay’s and the Bulletin’s side lost. That’s all that counts. That is what history will record.

In this last election many conservatives felt we did not have a candidate in the race – unless you count Governor (The One!) Sarah Palin.

It needs to be remembered that Goshay’s candidate (and now our president) did not defeat Bush. Obama defeated John McCain who is a man who lacks Bush's firm resolve. Had McCain really had been a perspective third term for Bush, he might have had a chance. One thing is for sure, had he not picked Palin, he would have lost by a larger margin.

After 4 years of an appeaser, in 2012 we will have a better perspective of the Bush Presidency.

And in 2012 history might be made again. Till then, we will be forced to read lots of filler dressed up as thoughtful opinion.

The Norwich Bulletin Climaxes

-- Or maybe it was Obama. That's what they call a "facial". The Editorial Board really needs to wipe their chin after this one.

How uncritical can you get and still call yourself a newspaper?

I can't help but think about all the really cruel (many of them irredeemable from an intellectual standpoint) 'toons they ran daily of President George W. Bush over the last 8 years.

There are so many questions that went unasked while the campaign was going on. I guess this attitude is going to continue.

See no evil.

Speak no evil.

Hear no evil.

Sigh. How utterly gutless.