It Didn’t Take Long…
November 14th, 2007 at 07:09pm Matt Margolis
…before some leftist blog/website to accuse us of “ditching Bush.” So congratulations to Think Progress for being as ignorant as it is predictable.
So, let’s set the record straight. Changing from Blogs For Bush to Blogs For Victory is merely a change in branding. We absolutely support President Bush. The morons at Think Progress can tell themselves all they want that we have “ditched Bush,” but nothing could be further from the truth. But, since when has the Left ever been concerned with the truth?
They can go ahead and keep an eye on our blogging here for as long as they want.. They’ll discover that we have not “ditched Bush.”
Entry Filed under: Kook Left
30 Comments
1. beefeater | November 14th, 2007 at 7:22 pm
Well I for one thank T(oilet)P(paper) for sending me here. I’ve been enjoying posting at their site for awhile, and you are right about the morons part. Hi Zooey, we know why the guy left you to raise your boys by yourself now don’t we?
2. Blue Texan | November 14th, 2007 at 10:37 pm
Well, as a matter of fact, you did ditch Bush in the name.
Can’t say that I blame you. 70% of Americans feel the same way.
3. Nate | November 14th, 2007 at 11:24 pm
yep, dropped bush, that’s the point, interesting
4. KCJ | November 14th, 2007 at 11:51 pm
I think the new name and site makes sense. B4B was originally about helping Bush get reelected. If anything you should have adopted this new name after the election. I mean, what else are you suppose to do? Do you have to keep Blogs for BUSH as it is until January 20, 2009? Websites change name or focus all the time. who cares what the lefties think?
5. Jeremiah | November 15th, 2007 at 12:20 am
Matt,
You guys are doing a superb service here! Keep fighting the good fight!
The leftists at “think Progress” will only progress by digging a hole for themselves.
Jeremiah
6. Mark Noonan | November 15th, 2007 at 3:55 am
KJC,
Right from election day in 2004 Matt and I were considering what would become of the blog - B4B was founded intentionally as a means of helping President Bush get re-elected; once that was done, the primary purpose of the blog was expended.
We didn’t want to just end the blog as we had built up a core of loyal readers and commenters and, of course, there were plenty of battles to be fought vis a vis President Bush. So, we pondered: what do we change it to, and when?
The “what” was figured out pretty early on - though Matt (being the more tech savvy guy) has continually refined the new concept and we do hope that everyone likes all the changes that are coming; the “when” became rather tricky…because as opposition to Bush reached crescendo, we didn’t want to be percieved as dropping support for a man we had worked so hard to help re-elect.
In the end, we figured that a rough year prior to the vote to replace him was a convenient time to do it - though right up to the last minute, we were debating between November of ‘07 and January of ‘08 as the time to make the switch.
Liberals, of course, are rather mean spirited and exceptionally hate filled, so right on cue they have accused us of ditching Bush…just as we expected them to. One of the fun things I’d like to do is write Hillary’s press releases for 2008 - you see, I’d even promise to write it in the manner she wants…because, given that she’s a liberal, I know precisely what she will say on any issue long before she says it, and that goes for almost all liberals…they really don’t think anymore, but just have knee-jerk reactions.
7. navydad | November 15th, 2007 at 8:30 am
The loons will never come around, nor would we want them to.
Mark, OT, but how do you think the left will spin this:
“WASHINGTON — House Democrats pushed through a $50 billion (euro34 billion) Iraq war bill that would require President George W. Bush to start bringing troops home in coming weeks with a goal of ending combat by December 2008.”
It’ll be interesting to see how they claim victory in changing GW’s direction if he doesn’t swipe it with the veto pen.
I’ll be ROFLMAO if Dolberman and Matthews claim a Dem victory.
8. DougH | November 15th, 2007 at 9:09 am
Unlike the Dems who haven’t been able to get past 2000, obviously the owner of this blog can.
Why would someone continue with a blogforbush, when Bush won’t be in office in November 2008.
Demcorats are living in the past and think the name Clinton will take them back to the late 90’s…. it will be horrible if Hilary doesn’t have a new tech boom to ride for her to claim she great at handling the economy.
Get over it Dems, it’s 2007 not the late 90’s or the year 2000
9. Almiranta | November 15th, 2007 at 9:23 am
The Dems are still running against Bush, so of course they are having a hard time understanding that a blog which was created to help elect a man who is no longer running would have to either disband or change its name.
Face it, this is just another of those issues that is just way too complicated for the simple-minded radical BS movement.
(I actually heard some radical BS dude whining about “Great job, Brownie…” It is hysterical that they are so desperate that they are still clinging to this, and helpful to us that they still have their heads so deeply planted within their nether regions that they still don’t get it—that at the time of the comment, ‘Brownie’ WAS doing a great job—had moved tons of material and staff into New Orleans and was completely ready for the mopping-up exercise for which FEMA was created. At that time, no one really had a grasp on the reality of the situation, which was that the total incompetence of the ruling Dems would make those materials and those personnel inaccessible to those who needed them. Who knew that Nagin and Blanco would insist that FEMA and the Salvation Army and the Red Cross would not be allowed to set up their kitchens and clinics at the most obvious place in the entire city. Duh. But some mouthbreathers have latched onto the phrase as if it meant anything other than a signpost to Democrat leader insufficiency…)
10. William Teach | November 15th, 2007 at 11:03 am
OMG, I just cannot laugh any harder at the liberals. Their hysteria and moonbattery really is amusing.
Explaining the point behind changing from Blogs For Bush to Blogs For Victory is really a losing proposition, Mark. Like most things, they will refuse to, nor want to, get it.
Reality based community. Snicker.
11. SteaM | November 15th, 2007 at 12:06 pm
“We absolutely support President Bush.”
Do you absolutely not notice that he is the worst president in our history? Seriously.
I’m all for Ron Paul for a Republican president. He is finally someone who actually cares about our Rights and the Constitution. Something that Bush has stomped all over.
12. William Teach | November 15th, 2007 at 12:17 pm
Would that be our “right” to surrender to Islamic extremist, our right to be white supremacists, and our right to be Truthers?
13. LaMano | November 15th, 2007 at 1:57 pm
Geeez ….. more Paul-bearers on this new website. At least their he will have plenty of support carrying him to his political grave.
Actually I preferred this ‘Paul’ as a candidate.
14. SteaM | November 15th, 2007 at 1:58 pm
William. To clarify, I was speaking of our “rights” as in the Bill of Rights.
As a US citizen I have the right to not have a religion forced onto me. Including Islam. I used to have the right to a trial but these days Bush has changed that. A US citizen could actually be thrown into solitary confinement and tortured if he/she is deemed to be a “unlawful combatant”. The Sec of Defense can make this decision. Would you want a democratic administration with this power? Not to mention that the US phone and internet companies are feeding the National Securty Admin and the White House our communications data. Without warrants. Do you want a democratic administration to have these powers? So my point is… Bush put this stuff into place, it goes against our Bill of Rights and is unConstitutional, these changes are still in effect and if left unchanged will pass onto the next Administration.
15. Diana Powe | November 15th, 2007 at 2:38 pm
Unlike those St. Francis of Assisi clones such as Rush “we’re going to find out where your kids go to school” Limbaugh, Bill “if I could strangle these people and not go to hell” O’Reilly, Michelle “Associated (with terrorists) Press” Malkin, Michael “they [lesbians] can all drop dead” Savage, Ted “suck on my machine gun [Barack Obama]” Nugent, Sean “friend and frequent guest on the program Ted Nugent” Hannity, John “unmasked them [Iraqis] as knuckle-dragging savages from the 10th century” Gibson, Melanie “We’ve got a bull’s-eye painted on her [Nancy Pelosi’s] big, wide laughing eyes” Morgan and Ann “rat poison in Justice Stevens’s crème brûlée” Coulter? Come on, Mark, you can disagree with those you define as liberals all you want, but don’t insult your readers’ intelligence with absurd claims about how exceptionally “hate filled” they are. That’s just silly.
16. DougH | November 15th, 2007 at 3:12 pm
The only timeI know Bush is the worst President in history is when the Dems keep repeating the phrase which if often
But then again the Dems called Reagon the worst President in history, same for Bush Sr, Nixon..
Matter of fact according to the Dems pst histoary, whichever GOP candidate wins Nov 08 will immediately be crowned the worst president in histoary within 6 months of winning the election.
17. neocon | November 15th, 2007 at 4:31 pm
but don’t insult your readers’ intelligence with absurd claims about how exceptionally “hate filled” they are. That’s just silly. - Diana
Diana,
That post was just silly. There are insults being lobbed from both sides, but if you can’t acknowledge that the volume on the left is quite a bit louder, than you live in denial.
Depending on your reply, I could post two pages filled with vitriol from the left, which is much much worse than what you referenced from Hannity, O’Reilly, etc.
18. Ricorun | November 15th, 2007 at 5:43 pm
neocon: Depending on your reply, I could post two pages filled with vitriol from the left, which is much much worse than what you referenced from Hannity, O’Reilly, etc.
I’d like to “hear” them. I’m assuming, of course, you’re not talking about annonymous bloggers, but vitriol from those on the left with at least some import.
I ask because I frankly don’t see much difference in the “volume” coming from either side — neither on the part of the rank and file, the pundits, or the so-called leaders.
19. SteaM | November 15th, 2007 at 5:54 pm
neocon: I also would to “hear” them as well.
Whether there’s a volume of hatred coming one direction more than the other is not the issue here. This blog stated that they absolutely support Bush. Bush has no credibility anymore except with a very small few who are misinformed and/or just don’t care about reality. How can this blog still have credibility if it supports Bush so much whom himself has no credibility with enough people to say that most don’t trust him.
20. neocon | November 15th, 2007 at 6:12 pm
The Senate’s top Democrat, Harry M. Reid of Nevada, called President Bush a “loser” yesterday
“I hate the Republicans and everything they stand for,” former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean told Democrats
Democratic National Committee chairman Howard Dean, unapologetic in the face of recent criticism that he has been too tough on his political opposition, said in San Francisco this week that Republicans are “a pretty monolithic party. They all behave the same. They all look the same. It’s pretty much a white Christian party.”
“The Republicans are not very friendly to different kinds of people,” Dean said Monday, responding to a question about diversity during a forum with minority leaders and journalists.
While on the House floor, Rep. Pete Stark (D-CA), took the SCHIP debate to a new low. He said, “You don’t have money to fund the war or children. But you’re going to spend it to blow up innocent people if we can get enough kids to grow old enough for you to send to Iraq to get their heads blown off for the President’s amusement.”
“The devil came here yesterday,” Chavez said, referring to Bush, who addressed the world body during its annual meeting Tuesday. “And it smells of sulfur still today.”
WASHINGTON - Representative John P. Murtha, the Pennsylvania Democrat and Vietnam War veteran pushing for a quick withdrawal of American troops from Iraq, on Sunday mocked Karl Rove, the president’s senior adviser, for championing the war while “sitting in his air-conditioned office on his big, fat backside.”
Murtha, a vocal opponent of the war in Iraq,…..Our troops overreacted because of the pressure on them, and they killed innocent civilians in cold blood.”
A Congressional Democrat has been reined in for calling President George W. Bush a ‘liar’ during a Thursday hearing of the House Judiciary Committee, according to the Monday edition of the newspaper Roll Call.
Olbermann asserted: “A President who comes across as a compulsive liar is nothing less than terrifying.”
but Democratic Presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton took it up a notch Wednesday night, calling the president’s No. 2 “Darth Vader.”
This is just the short list
21. neocon | November 15th, 2007 at 6:17 pm
Bush has no credibility anymore except with a very small few who are misinformed and/or just don’t care about reality. - SteaM
Do you realize the Democratic House is 0-40 against Bush. Bush beats them at every single turn.
0-40!!!!!
And evidently the Katrina victims finally grew tired of the Democrat utopia and elected a Republican Governor in Louisiana. Now that’s reality.
22. Diana Powe | November 15th, 2007 at 9:56 pm
Neocon, I assume that this vitriol you could allegedly post would thereby satisfy the elementary school-level argument of “well, they’re doing it, too”. However, you missed the point. The examples of Limbaugh, O’Reilly, Nugent, Morgan and Coulter were not “insults”. However, in the spirit of David W. Crockett Elementary which I attended in Wichita Falls, Texas, please feel free to offer examples of Americans “from the left” with venues and media reach of comparable scope to the examples I offered that advocate acts of intimidation, violence and murder at their own hands or at the hands of others directed against their foes. That means that garden-variety insults (”big, fat backside” or “liar” or “I hate the Republicans”) don’t count. Frankly, I’ve just got to read someone “of the left”, who is lionized as is Ann Coulter by the right, who said anything even comparable to “someone should put rat poison in Justice Stevens’s crème brûlée” much less something that is “much much worse”. That would be fascinating indeed.
23. Diana Powe | November 15th, 2007 at 10:08 pm
In the case of Ann Coulter especially, please don’t bother to trot out her threadbare “it was a joke” defense. As we say in Texas, “That dog won’t hunt.”
24. Ricorun | November 15th, 2007 at 10:54 pm
neocon: This is just the short list
Come on now, you have to do better than that if your intent is to show the vitriol on the left is “much worse” than it is on the right. Heck, Ken Mehlman, the former head of the RNC pretty much agrees with most of the first half of your post.
25. neocon | November 16th, 2007 at 8:49 am
Rico,
I just posted what your ELECTED rperesentatives have said. Would you like me to post quotes from the notable liberals such as Rosie, Moore, Penn, MoveOn, etc, etc?
BTW, find me quotes from ELECTED republicans that compare with those of your fine representatives.
26. neocon | November 16th, 2007 at 8:50 am
Oh and I enjoyed how you and Diane quickly dismissed and excused those above fine representatives.
Showing your true colors.
27. Diana Powe | November 16th, 2007 at 1:16 pm
neocon (since the pseudonym you duck behind is all lower-case),
Do you get the vapors often? When you do, do you have to lie down for awhile or does just fanning yourself briskly do the job? “Oh my, the uncivility, the brutishness, the high-handed unmanneredness, I do declare I think I’m going to faint dead away!”
Leaving aside the fact that Hugo Chavez is not an American, unlike the examples that I brought up which started this exchange, the examples I cited were deliberately members of the right-wing media elite who have far more media reach and exposure than even the President of the United States. He gets the occasional speech to the nation, the odd press conference and various sound bites on the news but people like Rush, Bill and Melanie are on for hours every day and Ann is all over the dial pushing her best-selling books. What do you offer in response?
Oh my goodness, that mean ol’ Senator Reid called the President “a loser”! That vicious Governor Dean said, “I hate the Republicans and everything they stand for”! That monstrous Congressman Murtha actually said out loud that Karl Rove has a “fat, backside”! The horror! I’m sure that Karl sobbed into his pillow for many nights after that nasty jab coming from Murtha, who, if I’m not mistaken, also has a fat backside. Hmm, maybe, just maybe, the point he was trying to make had something more to do with the fact that Murtha was a United States Marine Corps officer who volunteered to serve in Vietnam and Rove ducked out of serving in that same conflict. What do you think? Have you read or experienced any of the entire history of politics in the world lately?
So, since you’ve ducked out of answering the challenge which you’ve said you could meet, I’ll repeat it.
You said you could “post two pages” of comparable vitriol. We’re waiting. Just stay away from any crème brûlée made by Ann Coulter in the meantime.
P.S. Since you don’t know me beyond what I’ve written, please do add to your response to my challenge what you think my “true colors” are. While you’re composing those thoughts perhaps I could tell you some stories about having knives and guns pulled on me while serving as a police officer in Richardson, Texas or my three older brothers who are all veterans of the combat arms of the United States Army or of my youngest nephew who is a Marine Corps heavy machine gun operator in Haditha, Iraq this very moment. Do, please, take your time.
28. Diana Powe | November 17th, 2007 at 9:17 pm
29. Diana Powe | November 17th, 2007 at 9:18 pm
(crickets chirping)
30. marine in the garden of e&hellip | January 10th, 2008 at 12:16 am
marine in the garden of eden
Did you really think that, come on if you do a search on Google you will find that what you are saying is wrong.