The treatment President Bush has received from this country is nothing less than a disgrace. The attacks launched against him have been cruel and slanderous, proving to the world what little character and resolve we have. The president is not to blame for all these problems. He never lost faith in America or her people, and has tried his hardest to continue leading our nation during a very difficult time.
Our failure to stand by the one person who continued to stand by us has not gone unnoticed by our enemies. It has shown to the world how disloyal we can be when our president needed loyalty -- a shameful display of arrogance and weakness that will haunt this nation long after Mr. Bush has left the White House.
Read the whole thing here.
What disingenuous crap! (And I am one who still feels that Dubya has been a fine President, maybe even a great one.) Shapiro is a Democrat, a former Kerry staffer, whose motives in writing this are all too transparent.
First, he waited until the election was safely in the bag and Obama elected to tell the truth. To come clean long after the damage to Bush and to the country as a whole has been done reflects no honor on the truth-teller.
Secondly, he fails to identify the culprits. Instead he blames all "Americans" and "the country". Honesty would have meant fingering the real liars -- Democrat operatives and their toadies in the MSM. By diffusing the blame, he essentially allows the originators of the vicious libels to escape scot free.
Yes, the attacks on President Bush were disgraceful, but so too is special pleading like this.
Another Democrat operative, David Greenberg, comes forward after the election to admit that there was massive misrepresentation on the part of his Party and its MSM toadys.
In the weeks before Election Day, we heard regularly that John McCain was running the sleaziest campaign in a generation, if not in American history. That claim might strike some as another case of journalistic weakness for hyperbole. After all, we've also heard claims that this was the most important election of our lifetimes (as if the outcome of the 2000 race hadn't altered history), assertions that the Internet changed everything this year (though Obama surely would have won without it), and effusions about young people's unprecedented engagement (an echo of 1992, when youth turnout actually spiked—as it did not this year).Read it here.
But unlike those exaggerations, the line about McCain threatens to stain a man's name for history. And when viewed without partisan blinders or presentist lenses, the charge doesn't hold up. Indeed, it says more about today's political culture, which has grown unusually high-minded, and the emotions that Americans invest in presidential elections, which are unfailingly intense, than it does about McCain himself.
Indeed, McCain's campaign probably wasn't even the dirtiest of 2008—a prize that belongs, arguably, to Obama himself for ascribing racism to Bill and Hillary Clinton in the days between the New Hampshire and South Carolina primaries.
Again there are ulterior motives at work in this admission of truth. Greenberg works for the Clintons and wants to portray Hillary as being, along with McCain, a victim of a vicious and unscrupulous Obama campaign.
Funny how Democrats only tell the truth when it is in their interests to do so.