Matt Yglesias

24 Responses to “Something to Think About”

1. Jamie Holts Says:
   September 19th, 2008 at 1:26 pm

   You know, I have to tell you, I really enjoy this blog and the insight from everyone who participates. I find it to be refreshing and very informative. I wish there were more blogs like it. Anyway, I felt it was about time I posted, I

2. Chris Says:
   September 19th, 2008 at 2:01 pm

   It’s not ideological commitment to conservatism; it’s personal loyalty to someone who was loyal to him during some difficult stretches in his presidency. Bush is less concern about the ideology than about the personal ties.

3. fulminating Says:
   September 19th, 2008 at 2:09 pm

   is it really a commitment to conservatism or to buffing his presidential legacy?

4. bakho Says:
   September 19th, 2008 at 2:13 pm

   If McCain gets elected he will hide the Bush wrong doings.
   If Obama gets elected, he might be tempted to out them.

5. Trevor J Says:
   September 19th, 2008 at 2:26 pm

   Ari Fleischer admits it.

   http://thinkprogress.org/2008/09/19/fleischer-bush-questions-hurt/

6. flo Says:
   September 19th, 2008 at 2:32 pm

   No doubt Chris Cox, Bush, and any other Republicans McCain lashes out at, are of the understanding that he has to do it to win the election, and won’t act on it if elected.

7. Br72 Says:
   September 19th, 2008 at 2:45 pm

   Although today Bush made sure at his economic remarks today Chris Cox was there next to him. McCain calling for his head probably decreased his chances of getting canned.

8. Adagio Says:
   September 19th, 2008 at 2:48 pm

   John McCain’s whole political strategy depends on him engaging in a lot of superficial Bush-bashing rhetoric

   Sorry, Matt, but I just don’t think that’s a true statement. Throughout McCain’s campaign the pundits have been telling him he needs to bash Bush and predicting that he was going to start any day now. But Bush-bashing continues to be a negligible part of his campaign strategy.

9. Brittain33 Says:
   September 19th, 2008 at 2:49 pm

   Bush’s devotion to McCain isn’t really the point of this post…

10. Jamie Holts Says:
    September 19th, 2008 at 2:59 pm

    A friend of mine just emailed me one of your articles from a while back. I read that one a few more. Really enjoy your blog. Thanks

11. Nate Says:
    September 19th, 2008 at 3:01 pm

    Bakho nails it. Bush’s support for McCain is CYA, plain and simple.

12. bob Says:
    September 19th, 2008 at 3:19 pm

    It’s more Bush-policy bashing than out-and-out Bush bashing.

    Bush mostly hid in a spider hole somewhere through Ike and the financial meltdown. I think it’s hilarious that the biggest gift he can give McCain is to continue hiding.

13. cmholm Says:
    September 19th, 2008 at 3:47 pm

    Regarding the UPDATE: unlike GWB, WJC doesn’t seem to have the knack for supporting his Party’s candidate.

    It seems axiomatic of politics: if you can’t think of anything bad to say about the other Party’s candidate, keep your mouth shut for a couple of months. Is that so hard?

14. Frankie Says:
    September 19th, 2008 at 9:21 pm

    Don’t get too excited Matt. Bush simply thinks 4 years of McCain will make his 8 years look not so bad in comparison. Much like Bush makes Clinton look all that much better.

    He’s probably right.

15. THS Says:
    September 20th, 2008 at 10:20 am

    Clinton’s behavior is really beyond the political pale. The idea of featuring McCain at his shindig is outrageous. Obama should be there q/ a big introduction as the next president of the United States. It really is time for him to grow up.

16. The Pop View Says:
    September 20th, 2008 at 10:27 am

    My colleague and I have discussed the Clinton factor at length. He argues that Obama needed the Clintons very much and it was a huge mistake, and a sign of arrogance and ego, that Obama didn’t immediately reach out to them after the primaries, grovel a little and repair the fences. He feels it’s a sign that Obama would rather do things his own way than appear weak – even if this means he might lose.

    As noted in the links you supplied, it appears Bill Clinton may be acting in a way that is unhelpful to Barack Obama. It appears similar to comments made by both the Clintons over this year. It’s one thing to attack your Democratic opponent; it’s another to suggest that even the Republican is more qualified. So, while I concede that Obama may have exhibited too much pride and made a mistake in not recruiting the Clintons, I understand that urge. I’m still annoyed at them myself.

    I think it also shows that if the sin in question is caring more about oneself than the good of the party or the good of the country, there’s been plenty of that going on for both sides.

17. Aatos Says:
    September 20th, 2008 at 12:11 pm

    Here is the dispute between between Maverick and Dubya, in SAT format:

    McCain : Bush ::

    a.) driver : mechanic
    b.) father : son
    c.) admiral : captain
    d.) snorkeler : SCUBA diver

    In 2000, Maverick only wanted South Carolina badly enough to sell out for the Illiterate Flag. Dubya wanted it badly enough to accuse Maverick of fathering a black baby.

    Bush went to considerably greater depth than McCain. But ultimately, they both swam in the same ocean of sleaze and McCain has transformed himself into a submariner for 2008. Therefore, the correct answer is D.

18. levitra Says:
    March 2nd, 2009 at 8:21 am

    levitraGreat site. Good info

19. xanax Says:
    March 14th, 2009 at 9:12 am

    Excellent site. It was pleasant to me.
    xanax

20. brand viagra Says:
    April 2nd, 2009 at 9:26 am

    It is the coolest site,keep so!
    buy cheap viagra