17

‘He also had some important successes’


 

Monte Solberg blogs George W. Bush’s speech in Calgary.

I’m at his speech in Calgary. He is well received, and gives an animated and funny speech. He praises Canada. Speaks passionately about democracy and freedom. Good for him.

Lots of anti-Bush nutters outside wearing T-shirts like “investigate 9/11”. Okay….that’s real credible.

Former Ambassador Frank McKenna is interviewing him. Frank just noting that W is credited with saving millions of lives because of his support for malaria eradication and the prevention of aids. Hmmmm the nutters outside didn’t talk about that.

Sure W made mistakes, but a little balance please. He also had some important successes. If you don’t acknowledge those please don’t expect people to take your criticisms seriously. 


 

‘He also had some important successes’

  1. Uhh… is Monte expecting protestors to hold up signs saying:

    100,000 DEAD IN IRAQ
    1,000,000 ALIVE IN AFRICA
    LET’S IMPROVE THOSE AVERAGES

  2. I am going to kinda miss W. He is a funny guy, not nearly so earnest and smarmy as Obama. I thought his comment a few years ago thanking some Canadians for waving at him with all five fingers was classic.

    And I have not really understood the hostility so many on the left felt for him. He doubled the education budget and put seniors medical prescriptions on the Fed tab (along with his successful African policies). I wasn’t Bush’ biggest fan but, like Solberg says, have some balance.

    • Yeah, jwl! I’m still chuckling over all those malaproprisms and a few too many deaths along democracy way!

    • I agree JWL and the Dubya had an interesting character trait unlike a lot of other polticians as the guy actually had a sense of humour and could laugh at himself. In a strange way history may be a little kinder to him than we are today as after all folks look at Iraq the huge mistake the war crime bla bla bla but look at it objectively today and after all folks things are considerably better than they were and improving daily so who knows

      • Wayne, only you could write off the Iraq war as “blah, blah, blah” and predict that history will vindicate Bush.

        Don’t ever change dude, you’re hilarious.

        • There shall be wars and rumours of wars – wriiten a lopng time ago – since when has there been no wars. In point of very real fact : If you do not prepare for war you are a fool and soon to be culled from the gene pool. This idea of war is bad so we should never do it – well it’s real nice idea except when you wake up in the middle of the night and the barbarians (there are always barbarians) are at the gates – next stop out of the gene pool.

  3. Bill & Melinda Gates have done more for malaria and aids in Africa than W. To give him credit for that is just silly. I guess nobody told W that Darfur was also a part of Africa, or that people in Zimbabwe don’t have “freedom and democracy” either.

    Questions for Monte (since he doesn’t allow comments): how much was the ticket, and couldn’t W score an invite within the United States?

  4. I think we can finally say that Frank McKenna does not ever want to be leader of the Liberal Party of Canada.

    • He never did in the first place. He was just being coy.

  5. No mention of intelligence failures that may have contributed to 9/11 (e.g., Bob Woodward’s books on this), the Iraq disaster (including hundreds of thousands of dead innocent civilians), Katrina, Haliburton-style corruption, contributing to further market deregulation that led to the collapse of the American financial sector, etc. etc.

    The only question is why there weren’t more people out protesting his visit…

  6. Protestesters are nutters eh? Well maybe, maybe not? It does tell me just a little about the way Solberg views dissent. He’d rather look at Bush’s accomplishments then dwell on his mistakes. Just more well- to- do important people basking in each others glory, if you ask me. Wasn’t history suppossed to vindicate W? I guess Monte just got an early start! By the way! Are the taxpayers underwritting all this – all those tax deductible diners!

  7. Nutters. That’s the pure dismissive, marginalizing Canada’s New Goverment.

    • 9/11 conspiracy theorists are probably only half nutters; the rest are either credulous or just plain ignorant.

  8. Solberg is a hypocrite. He thinks Bush critics should display “a little balance please … [noting] some important successes. If you don’t acknowledge those please don’t expect people to take your criticisms seriously.”

    I bet it you ask Monte about past leaders of the democratic left in Canada – Douglas, Romanow, Trudeau – he wouldn’t display “balance” and note their successes.

    • I love how in his own blog post, Monte failed to acknowledge a single one of W’s so-called “successes”.

  9. “Lots of anti-Bush nutters outside wearing T-shirts like “investigate 9/11″. Okay….that’s real credible.”

    LOL. What nutters. It’s the utter lack of any warnings before 9/11, the totality of their preparations for the event for which they received no warnings whatsoever, and the utter clarity and sensibleness of Bush and Cheney’s actions both on and after 9/11 which really show what kooks these people are.

    • http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A387-2004Apr9?language=printer

      Briefing on Al Qaeda Included Specifics
      White House Says Declassification of Pre-9/11 Document Will Be Delayed

      By Walter Pincus and Dan Eggen
      Washington Post Staff Writers
      Saturday, April 10, 2004; Page A05

      The classified briefing delivered to President Bush five weeks before the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks featured information about ongoing al Qaeda activities within the United States, including signs of a terror support network, indications of hijacking preparations and plans for domestic attacks using explosives, according to sources who have seen the document and a review of official accounts and media reports over the past two years.

      The information on current threats in the briefing, titled “Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S.,” stands in contrast to repeated assertions by national security adviser Condoleezza Rice and other Bush administration officials as recently as this week that the document is primarily historical and includes no warning or threat information.
      —-

Sign in to comment.