I miss the George Bush presidency. Now, don’t jump down my throat, there was a great deal about President Bush’s rhetoric, policy and actions that I felt was just plain wrong. What is miss is, at least until near the end of his presidency, you knew where everyone stood. The liberals and Democrats hated anything related to Bush; the right and Republicans loved (almost) everything.

So now we have a (very) liberal Democratic president and everything is up in the air. Just a few recent examples:

 “A narrow counterterrorism mission sounds like a win-win. One problem: It won’t work.” on Afghanistan, from USA Today (usually part of the OMN – Obama Media Network)

“Lots of People Love Obama, But Does Anyone in the World Really Fear Him?” from The Australian, a country not generally inclined to be pro-Bush.

“President is beginning to look out of his depth.” from London’s conservative but usually pro-American The Daily Telegraph.

“There was, however, one large gap. Mr. Obama said almost nothing about Afghanistan, which just a month ago he called a ‘war of necessity,’ fundamental to American security and to the broader fight against terrorism.” from the flagship of the OMN, The New York Times.

“The Obama Administration plans to give $400,000 in funding to a Libyan charity run by the Gadhafi family…” from CBS, another OMN affiliate.

What will become of America if the liberal media ever so slightly does not tow the complete liberal line?

Now imagine the coverage if Rudolph Giuliani had implemented such a program. What if George W. Bush initiated a similar Federal program! One can almost hear the screams from the left.

According to The Liberal New York Times:

Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg defended a city program to send homeless families out of New York on planes, trains and buses on Wednesday, saying it “saves the taxpayers of New York City an enormous amount of money.”

Speaking in the Blue Room in City Hall to announce a new finance commissioner, Mr. Bloomberg was asked if the program simply shifts the homelessness program to a different place, as some critics of the program have suggested.

“I don’t know, when they get to the other places, whether they find jobs,” Mr. Bloomberg said. “It may be an easier place for them. If we don’t — we either have two choices. We can do this program or pay an enormous amount of money daily to provide housing.”

It costs the city about $36,000 a year to provide shelter for a homeless family. The average stay in shelter is about nine months.

But Mr. Bloomberg appeared sensitive to the image of flying homeless families to far-flung places, as the program is set up to do. In the past two years, families have been provided one-way tickets to Haiti, Peru, Mexico City, St. Croix, Trinidad and Tobago, Ukraine, Santo Domingo and Casablanca. (The most popular destinations are Puerto Rico, Florida, Georgia and the Carolinas.)

“The average cost is trivial,” Mr. Bloomberg said. “Most go by bus. Very few go overseas, very few go long distances. Bus is the normal ways we pay for transportation, rather than air.”

In fact, the most common mode of travel for families in the program is air, not bus. Forty-eight percent travel by airplane; 37 percent by bus; and 15 percent by train, according to city data.

President Obama 2009:

"I'm pleased to announce that this morning the Treasury Department began directing employers to reduce the amount of taxes withheld from paychecks, meaning that by April 1st, a typical family will begin taking home at least $65 more every month…"

Michelle Obama 2008 (On President Bush's tax refund):

"You're getting $600 - what can you do with that? Not to be ungrateful or anything, but maybe it pays down a bill, but it doesn't pay down every bill every month. The short-term quick fix kinda stuff sounds good, and it may even feel good that first month when you get that check, and then you go out and you buy a pair of earrings."

Unfortunately in America, and especially in the liberal media, it is not what is said, but who says it.

According to the AP: “Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said Friday that the debate with China over human rights, Taiwan and Tibet cannot be allowed to interfere with attempts to reach consensus on other broader issues.”

I can just image the uproar in the media if President Bush or Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice had said that!

Do you know Muntadhar al-Zeidi?

You may not know the name, but you probably know him – he is the correspondent for an Iraqi-owned television station who threw not one but both his shoes at President Bush.

The President was unharmed and showed quite good reflexes to dodge both shoes thrown from such a short distance.

Muntadhar al-Zeidi could face two years imprisonment for insulting a foreign leader. He has asked for a pardon.

According to reports, thousands took to the streets in Iraq to protest his arrest, and his actions were heralded across the Arab world.

Just a few questions for Mr. al-Zeidi, those protestors, and those in the “Arab world” who heralded his insult:

Assuming:

• there was a free press…
• there was a press conference…
• that Mr. al-Zeidi got into the room…
• and Mr. al-Zeidi threw his shoes, missed and shouted the same insult…

But that it was Saddam Hussein not President Bush, what do you think would have happened to Mr. al-Zeidi?

What should conservatives and Republicans do now? Simple, follow the Golden Rule: Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.

Treat President Obama with the respect you thought the liberals and Democrats should have treated President Bush.

Even when you disagree with President Obama’s foreign policy decisions, especially regarding our troops in the field, remember all those who so opposed President Bush that they said things that were not supportive of America. Support the President for the sake of America, if you cannot openly support his decisions, be silent. Never seem to be the position of not supporting the President to the determent of America.

If you thought it was “dumb” for the Democrats to complain about President Bush’s use of Executive Orders, do not complain about President Obama’s use of them. If need be, disagree on his position, but not his legitimate use of his Presidential authority.

Do not be against something just because the President is for something. Be silent in most opposition and again, save your vocal opposition for the big issues. Be statesmen and women in your opposition.

For eight years Democrats and liberals whined about how the 2000 election was “stolen”. President Obama won the election; you cannot change that so move on.

Regarding the President’s family, if you cannot say something nice, do not say anything. 

Remember all the name calling directed toward President Bush and do not do that to President Obama. Statements such as the recent Marxist, Hitler reference are not only stupid, but turn the people against you. When someone makes such a statement, quickly and strongly condemn it. If you cannot condemn it, at least issue a statement saying something to the effect of “I’m sure that is not what he or she meant…” Then, especially if it is a Republican official, get a hold of the person and tell them they need to: 1) retract/explain away their stupid statement, and 2) shut up.

So remember, do unto the Democratic President they way you wish they would do unto the Republican President.