"But really, can we expect more from a rich, but not bright, ... son of an unstable narcissist and an elitist prig?"

" Thanks for giving the British people yet another reason to question the wisdom of a hereditary monarchy."

We have a lot to learn from this example.

be careful what you ask for...
...you know our glorious leader's family had quite solid and wonderful ties with the Nazis. You wouldn't want those old bones dug up now, would you?

This is what I could find on Prescott Bush:

http://www.thedubyareport.com/family.html#prescott

That's not quite up to the level of passing on official activities info to the Nazis in the middle of the war, is it?

I knew that I'd have people here comparing GWB to Harry Windsor. It's a liberal knee-jerk thing. In response, I guess I'm supposed to throw the Kennedy family in the liberals' face.

Can't we all just agree to get along and make fun of the British Royal Family together?

The debate over Prescott Bush's behaviour has been bubbling under the surface for some time. There has been a steady internet chatter about the "Bush/Nazi" connection, much of it inaccurate and unfair. But the new documents, many of which were only declassified last year, show that even after America had entered the war and when there was already significant information about the Nazis' plans and policies, he worked for and profited from companies closely involved with the very German businesses that financed Hitler's rise to power. It has also been suggested that the money he made from these dealings helped to establish the Bush family fortune and set up its political dynasty.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,1312540,00.html

I can't take The Guardian as an objective source.

I understand why people are bringing this up, my post was begging to have someone compare Harry to George W. or Teddy Kennedy.

But here's the thing. Who *really* cares if Prescott Bush was in bed with the Nazis (don't take this to mean that I believe he was)? George W. Bush was elected (twice), he's not a member of a hereditary monarchy.

He can stand on his own merits. If you don't like Bush, argue against his policies. Hell, lots of people who voted for him don't agree with all of his policies. But, when people immediately get on the "Bush=Hitler" or "Bush family loves Nazis" or "Bush is a chimp" train, no one is going to listen to anything else they have to say. Republicans are/were the same way about Hillary Clinton.

If you don't agree with them, Bush & Clinton can give you lots of ammo to debatethem through their statements and policies. No one has to resort to "Bushhitler" or "Hillary killed Foster" BS.

On the other hand, a COSTUME PARTY is the ultimate "COME AS YOU AREN'T" Party. That is why I believe that, while the costume in question was in poor taste, the furor is overblown.

By the way -- would there be this furor if he came as dictator Fidel Castro? Or Mao Tse Dong, who was responsible for substantially more deaths than Hitler?

...nor can I take "the dubya report" as objective...but that's not the point, really. Bush IS a member of a hereditary monarchy, but they are in a country whos system of government makes it much harder to stay in power...not that the royals have any power (other than money) at the moment.

Was he elected fairly? On the face of it...sure. But, we all know that most of the good flag-waving, support-the-troops-bumber-ribbon people were duped.

The presidency (and the Bush family) has been hijacked by a bunch of Zionist crazies, and King George I (his father was a president...) has found himself in a position where he has to defend the indefensible. Iraq is worse than VietNam...it's brought to us live 24/7. His fiscal policies are schemes...and on we go. You need no more illustration than Bernie Kerik...what was he thinking!!??!! Get it? Left on his own- "takin' the bull by the horns"- we get Berie Kerik. I'm sure that he got an earful from Karl on that one!

So, no. He can't stand on his own merits...as soon as you judge him on his merits, it all falls apart. He is judged by the appearance of merits, based on a false situations (Iraq is a threat, terrorists are under every rock, social security is about to go bankrupt and so on...) contrived by his "team".

As time goes on we will rapidly see the curtain come down, and the confused little man behind will be in deep doo-doo. Americans aren't the smartest bunch...but we really don't like being played like this. And that goes for everyone- conservative, liberal, progessive, Christian, Catholic, Muslim, gay, straight, bi-curious...and GWB and Mr. Rove have been playing EVERYONE (except Isreal...who is playing them).

*whew*

This illustrates exactly what I was talking about.

EXACTLY! All I ever hear is about GW's merits...but nobody who supports him really goes into what these "merits" are. All of the merits are indefensible..."he's strong in a time of crisis" - but he created the crisis.

He's a "man of faith"...er, is NOW that his wife threatened to leave him if he didn't stop partying. And for that matter, who's faith? James Dobson and the rest of the hard right are getting a little testy these days.

All I hear from Bush supporters these days, when pressed on issues and merits is "shut up shut up shut up!" and "he's a good man!"

Denial denial denial.

I dunno, Kris....I stopped paying serious attention at "The presidency (and the Bush family) has been hijacked by a bunch of Zionist crazies..." In my experience, when someone starts bringing up Zionist conspiracies, it's like a soap opera...you don't even have to watch to know what's coming up next. Quite a timesaver!

ok...point taken. let's drop the "Zionist crazies" aspect of things, and just focus on GW's merits, qualifications, etc.

Can anyone come up with anything other than nebulous character descriptions? Did you see how he backed off, and is now apologising for his infamous "bring it on" comment after the latest "insurgent" video threw it back in his face?

Is that all it takes? He's a monumental screw-up, and time and time again we let this man set fire to our house, and then he says "I'm sorry...I should have known better. Being president is hard work..." When will "the people" wise up and hold him accountable?

So... let's have some of GW's merits, qualifications and successes. This progressive lefty would like to educated.

The sincerity in that request threatens to overwhelm me.

Who do I look like, Montel Williams? ;)

ok...so, based on the exchange above, I agree you guys are being baited. But seriously, EVERY time I ask a Bush supporter why they support him, I get the same vapid statements about "character"...nothing of substance. And I do mean every time. Or silence (as in this case).

Hey I think Clinton was a pompous, arrogant, royal screw up...but I also think he was the most qualified and effective President I may ever see. If asked I could easily list his qualifications, merits and successes. Bush supporters "don't wanna go there".