April-5th-2006, 08:35 AM
President George W. Bush
Good morning people. I hope everyone has a wonderful fucking day.
But, enough of the small talk.
The subject of this thread is President George W. Bush. Shocking, I know, seeing that the guy receives very little air time around these parts.
Recently I have heard some rather interesting comments. Digging up more questionable evidence of Bush's pre-war chicanery will make this country a better place. It will also help solve the current problem of Iraq.
I find both of these comments curious. Though when asked for an explanation, those who make these types of statements usually respond with a statement that can be summed up as "if you don't know, then you are too stupid to deal with, and there is no need for me to explain it to you".
Sorry folks. That's not an answer. It's an evasion.
So, what I'd like to do here is delve a little deeper into the subject. I'm hoping that I can actually get the smarter folks around here to weigh in on the subject.
I personally do not see how digging up more "gotcha" documents will make this country better(impeachment aside), nor do I see how it will help with the current situation in Iraq.
General Anthony Zinni made what I thought to be the most insightful comment I've heard in quite some time Sunday on Meet The Press:
Interesting. I can't imagine why.
People in the Administration are spending all their time defending the past, trying to re-write history, instead of dealing with the present.
I'd like to have a rational discussion about this, and I will not entertain any dribblings from JC's HUD division.
What say yoose?
Last edited by Scott Dolan; April-5th-2006 at 08:37 AM.
April-5th-2006, 09:07 AM
I'd think it a given that a core aspect of a "good" functional government is accountability for poor governing. Scott, does the expressed desire that this administration be held accountable for their poor governing confuse you? For accountability is the goal of what I see being asked for when advocating "digging up evidence for chicanery". If this desire for accountability doesn't confuse you, then why act dumb about it? If you just disagree on the merits of judging the chicanery, then argue them.
Otoh, if you see accountability as a minor or superfluous aspect of government, you can perhaps imagine how large the disconnect is between your view and those who hold the first sentence above.
Last edited by Vince Kargatis; April-5th-2006 at 09:08 AM.
April-5th-2006, 09:13 AM
I don't have a problem with the accountability aspect of it, Vince. And don't get mouthy.
What I'd prefer at this time is something concrete done to help end all the shit in Iraq and bring our folks back home.
I think that would be MUCH better for the country than grabbing ahold of a leaked "secret document" or other hearsay for the sake of being able to say "I told you so".
There will be plenty of time for that later.
Zinni's statement makes perfect sense.
April-5th-2006, 09:33 AM
Here's an interesting dissection of the Bush policy in Iraq, along with some possible alternatives:
As for what to do with the arrogant louts who got us into this mess (despite well-reasoned arguments against it from all sides of the foreign policy spectrum), they need to be held accountable. And not "I take full responsibility" accountable, but "I'm doing time" accountable.
April-5th-2006, 10:00 AM
Scott, it's important to know the facts about government actions and intentions not only in the interests of accountability but also in the interests of establishing the historical record, itself important for contemporaries as well as future generations to be able to understand just what the hell we're doing/have done.
You would prefer concrete actions to end the war in Iraq--but there's no need to "prefer" one or the other. It's not an either/or choice. Both are necessary.
April-5th-2006, 10:50 AM
April-5th-2006, 10:50 AM
I'm the face.
Dissention is itself a model demonstration of democracy. Cuddling up to and supporting a guy who is continually lying to us and digging us into a bigger hole (both in terms of budget deficits and national security) each day is not the solution.
Personally, I would have no problem switching horses in midstream. You want to give the threat of impeachment some real teeth? Impeach him! Future presidents will learn from his inexcusable mistakes.
April-5th-2006, 10:56 AM
I hear what you're saying, Tom.
Originally Posted by Tom Storer
I just think the focus at this point needs to be more on the present than on the past.
I'm not saying that I'm right, but it is my opinion.
Haven't had time to read Rootz link yet. But I'll comment on it as soon as possible.
April-5th-2006, 10:51 AM
Scott, you telling him not to get mouthy. You are the king of mouth.
Originally Posted by Scott Dolan
Having an accountable government makes for a functional government. If our government cannot even admit where mistakes were made, nor be accountable and TRANSPARENT, or at least relatively TRANSLUSCENT, how can it correct mistakes. Are you to suggest that he is beyond the need of our checks-and-balances system, which he and his admin. thwarts with every effort? Are you to suggest the current squandering of our reputation as an honerable nation has no effect on Iraq or any other situation we are or may deal with?
The president's Beacon of Freedom is more a Beacon of Confusion to most of the world, and to his own nation. I am not expecting him to make any concerted efforts to alter his lack of self reflection and accountability, so I am hoping that outside him someone else holds him accountable, so that the world can see that democracy can work. If not, than we are a mockery of democracy and hardly the party to manage Iraq.
April-5th-2006, 07:52 PM
My biggest problem with the Bush Administration, besides the way these fearmongering war profiteers offend my peace-loving antiviolence tendencies and preference for resolving problems with intelligence and cooperation rather than reverting to subhuman neanderthals blasting men, women, and children to bits, is the haphazard way they have abused American taxdollars and spent us into ridiculous debt beyond imagination with their shitty decisions. The rich certainly should not have gotten a tax cut with the expensive path the Bush Administration has chosen. That is an obviously stupid and counterproductive decision.
I'd like to see the Bush Administration held accountable for all the money that has gone missing in Iraq. I'd like to see the people who profited from 9/11 brought to justice in a highly publicized manner. I'd like to see Bin Laden brought to justice, which would have involved giving Afghanistan the attention it deserved rather than changing course and steering our attention to Iraq. I'd like to have seen a whole lot more attention to detail in the decision to invade Iraq, the preparation for invading Iraq, the manner in which we invaded Iraq, the continuing occupation of Iraq, etc. I think they dropped the ball in Iraq from page one, and have continually done a sloppy, ugly job, and deserve to be relieved of their positions for stinking up the joint. They've sucked ass from day one and continue to suck ass.
April-5th-2006, 08:12 PM
Originally Posted by Noj
Don't talk about me like I'm not here.
April-5th-2006, 08:52 PM
My perspective is that accountability needs to be the first issue we deal with, because the people who made egregious mistakes in the planning of the war are still in control of the conduct of the war. And that's a problem. I'm not even talking about the justification for the war, because that doesn't interest me anymore. What interests me is the logistics, and specifically the haphazard way that the Pentagon went about planning the invasion, apparently not giving much thought to how many troops the U.S. would need, how those troops would maintain order after Saddam's downfall, and so forth. The folks who failed to account for these basic factors are still controlling the operation, and that's the problem. Bush isn't really the issue anymore, because he's already been reelected and barring an unlikely impeachment or his death, he's going to remain president until January 2009. However, Congressional elections are coming up, and it seems to me that pressure should be placed on Bush to overhaul his administration, specifically, to force Rumsfeld's resignation, and then to find some excuse for having Cheney retire. The latter is extremely unlikely, but really there's no reason that Rumsfeld should still be Secretary of Defense after all the crap that has gone down under his watch. Replace him with somebody competent. But then, maybe that's asking too much from Bush's administration.
April-5th-2006, 11:21 PM
Right. And they will continue to be in the immediate future.
Originally Posted by Ace Of Bass
That's fine. But many here don't share your position.
I'm not even talking about the justification for the war, because that doesn't interest me anymore.
What interests me is the logistics, and specifically the haphazard way that the Pentagon went about planning the invasion, apparently not giving much thought to how many troops the U.S. would need, how those troops would maintain order after Saddam's downfall, and so forth.
But how does looking back serve a purpose now?
Agreed, pt. 1. Disagreed pt. 2.
However, Congressional elections are coming up, and it seems to me that pressure should be placed on Bush to overhaul his administration, specifically, to force Rumsfeld's resignation, and then to find some excuse for having Cheney retire.
Rumsfeld blew it. You won't get any disagreement from me on that front.
But what would Cheney's retiring/resigning serve?
but really there's no reason that Rumsfeld should still be Secretary of Defense after all the crap that has gone down under his watch.
Last edited by Scott Dolan; April-5th-2006 at 11:23 PM.
April-5th-2006, 11:47 PM
I just think the administration needs a serious overhaul, and the two individuals whose performance has been most troublesome--both in terms of planning for the Iraq war and the conduct of the war, including the allowance of torture--are Rumsfeld and Cheney. In a perfect world, I would like to see both removed from the administration. Rumsfeld in particular I consider to be an impediment to progress. I believe that shaking up the administration and bringing in new people would also bring new energy to the operation. Our goals at this point should be to train troops, bring the different Iraqi leaders to the negotiating table, coordinate attacks on Sadr and the Sunni insurgents, and draw down the U.S. troop levels. I think the Bush administration would say that they are doing all these things right now, but they are not doing them effectively, which is why I think changes need to be made.
But really, I think people are just bitching about the past because this whole thing has already been lost. Maybe it never could have worked, but our chances would have been better with intelligent planning. The Bush administration is unresponsive to criticism, so there's nothing else to do but bitch. I don't blame people for expressing their frustration at the administration; given the circumstances it's quite natural.
April-6th-2006, 06:52 AM
Asking this repeatedly when it's been repeatedly answered in a simple and sensible way makes you look very very dense.
Originally Posted by Scott Dolan
April-6th-2006, 11:07 AM
Has quit quitting
Bush Approved Leak of Iraq Arms Intelligence, Libby Testified
April 6 (Bloomberg) -- President George W. Bush authorized disclosure of classified information on Iraq's weapons program to rebut war critics, a former top administration aide told a grand jury, according to documents filed in federal court.
The documents don't allege the president approved the identification of covert CIA operative Valerie Plame, although they were filed in connection with the investigation into who leaked the operative's name to reporters in 2003. The court filing by special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald also doesn't suggest Bush violated any rule or law governing the handling of classified material.
The document described federal grand jury testimony by I. Lewis Libby, the former chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney, who was indicted last October of charges of perjury, obstruction of justice and lying to FBI investigators probing the Plame case.
In the filing, Fitzgerald describes Libby's testimony about disclosure to former New York Times reporter Judy Miller of a 2002 National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq's pursuit of nuclear materials.
``Defendant testified that the vice president later advised him that the president had authorized defendant to disclose the relevant portions of the NIE,'' Fitzgerald wrote.
Cheney previously has said he has authority to release classified information, as does the president.
``There's an executive order that specifies who has classification authority, and obviously it focuses first and foremost on the president, but also includes the vice president,'' Cheney said in a Feb. 15 interview on Fox News.
The administration had no immediate comment on the court document, which was filed last night.
To contact the reporter on this story:
Richard Keil in Washington at firstname.lastname@example.org.
Last Updated: April 6, 2006 11:26 EDT
April-6th-2006, 01:32 PM
Has quit quitting
Excuse me, but more than 2,000 Americans have died in this irresponsible and criminal folly built on the lies of Bush and his neo-con coterie
Not to mention the 100s of billions of dollars that been wasted all while tax cuts to the hyper rich have inflated our national debt to the range of not just a trillion – but trillions AND trillions.
While this petroleum industry-sponsored administration sends working class Americans off to war for oil while cutting their own taxes, they rack up colossal tax bills for the surviving orphans.
It is offensive to have a group of self-satisfied prognosticators and would-be medieval theologians on here engage in “responsible” patter in a kind of pseudo-intellectual patois.
I have to laugh when Scott Dolan – who wallows in a pile of fetid fish heads dumped by Bush – tries to tell us that everything smells like roses.
And all you would-be Charles Krauthammer’s and Fred Barnes' sip tea out of china cups and eat cucumber sandwiches, and opin sagaciously, while oblivious of the offal.
I, for one, like thousands of us out here, are outraged by what this bucket of scum president has done – not only to our interests and our reputation abroad but on the basic principles of decency that we thought this country was built on.
I am not talking about lying about a blow job.
I am talking about lying about why we went to war that has resulted in the deaths of 10s of thousands of Americans and Iraqis
I am talking about lying about the official sanctioning of torture.
I am talking about lying about the spying on Americans.
I am talking about lying about revealing the names of covert CIA agents, and covering up for it.
I am talking about shitting on the great name of this great country.
All for what is manifestly the greed of a handful – in relative terms – of the richest people in this country.
The proper response to this administration and its criminality is not Scott Dolan’s “rational” discussion – which is predicated on a refusal to acknowledge reality – but is disgust.
Last edited by rollhead; April-6th-2006 at 01:35 PM.
April-6th-2006, 01:37 PM
April-6th-2006, 01:43 PM
ditto also (minus the spitting, brimstone warning, and vehemence of a babtist preacher).
Originally Posted by JamesH
Last edited by sonic1; April-6th-2006 at 01:44 PM.
April-7th-2006, 07:42 AM
Has quit quitting
The good news is that the number of ass-hats in the country, like Dolan, seems to be shrinking even more:
Bush, GOP Approval Ratings Hit New Lows
Just 36 Percent of the Public Approves of the President's Job Performance
By RON FOURNIER, AP
WASHINGTON (April 7) - President Bush's approval ratings hit a series of new lows in an AP-Ipsos poll that also shows Republicans surrendering their advantage on national security - grim election-year news for a party struggling to stay in power.
Democratic leaders predicted they will seize control of one or both chambers of Congress in November. Republicans said they feared the worst unless the political landscape quickly changes.
April-7th-2006, 10:43 AM
None of this means a damn thing until an election can both turn out a viable alternative candidate, and the election of that candidate. We can revel all we want in the failings of the republican party, but until the democrats can get off their lamocrat asses and do something about all this, we will still be subject to the lamer leadership of the republicans.
Originally Posted by rollhead
April-7th-2006, 11:11 AM
Well they finally identified the White House leak regarding the Plame case. Libby claims the authorization to spill the beans came from Bush himself. CNN reported this morning with the graphic titled "Leaker in Chief" More bad news for the Bush White House. Shucks and darn.
Last edited by lynn; April-7th-2006 at 11:12 AM.
April-7th-2006, 11:43 AM
We are the only reality
Originally Posted by lynn
And nothing will happen.
The President thinks he is a czar and that nothing he says or does can be questioned.
Judging by the support that the proposals to censure or impeach him are getting, I fear he is right.
Three years and change, people and who knows how many more lives.
Last edited by patricia; April-7th-2006 at 11:45 AM.
April-7th-2006, 01:31 PM
The April Glaspie "incident" has been well documented. The Iraqis took her response to mean it was OK to take Kuwait.
As it's been mentioned before, Saddam was our boy before he invaded Kuwait. Iraq and Iran were at war so you know what side we were on. There's a famous picture of Rumsfeld and Saddam shaking hands floating around.
April-7th-2006, 01:45 PM
No guts, no glory!
I'm praying Cheney drags Dubya along on the next hunting trip.
Originally Posted by patricia
April-7th-2006, 10:47 PM
▼ Molly the Barn Owl
Not exactly, Lynn. They haven't proved that Bush authorized the outing of Plame as being undercover CIA. Most of the news articles have made a point of noting that (perhaps under pressure to do so). If and when that happens, it'll be BIG news.
Originally Posted by lynn
See #1 in another thread.
Last edited by bluenoter; April-7th-2006 at 11:17 PM.
April-8th-2006, 01:41 PM
Well, I admit that I did get a little carried away. Interesting how they always time this stuff for Friday though. Tomorrow's morning talk shows will be crammed with administration mouthpieces working on the spin.
Originally Posted by bluenoter
April-7th-2006, 02:31 PM
Imagine a lawyer telling the judge to throw out a murder case because convicting his client won't bring back the dead.
Originally Posted by Scott Dolan
Or a kid telling his mom that punishing him won't fix the broken window.
Is a President beyond judgement? Is he somehow immune from learning from his mistakes?
If every American supported our President and his war efforts 100%, would the conflict in Iraq go any more smoothly?
If the white house concentrated on a winning strategy based on lessons learned and reactive adjustment vs. a deflective political defense system wouldn't they be more sucessful?
As long as the President and his administration continue to act as children this country will continue to suffer from uncorrected mistakes.
Of course this is obvious to most of us.
Last edited by JamesH; April-7th-2006 at 02:37 PM.
April-7th-2006, 04:13 PM
I would argue that Scott, by the very title and premise of this thread, is, to use the quaint phrase, "leading with his chin." I could be wrong about this. But after all this time, it strikes me that Scott, at least when he is typing here, is an Angry Guy. Somehow--and this is the merest speculation on my part--Scott sees George W. Bush as an underdog, besieged on all sides by "liberlas," who are categorized, to put it as bluntly as possible, as people who have Never Done An Honest Day's Work.
Of course, I could be full of shit, as I often have been, and expect to be at various times in the future.
April-7th-2006, 04:21 PM
That's an apt description of our President!
Originally Posted by Dr Dave
Last edited by lynn; April-7th-2006 at 04:47 PM.