Island Life: This just in: incumbent President worst in history of the union
132 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Newer→ Last
-
I/O - Good Call on Condi-Rice for 2012.
Where are racists & sexists going to go?
It’s bound to draw on some of the Democratic base regardless of politics.Do we need to mention the war - the American Civil War - Republicans freed the slaves along with other harsh economic measures enacted upon the South.
Democrats have a long history of racism as competing for the same jobs. -
Machiavelli's Prince was supposed to be smart.
There are also regular nods in Machiavelli, as I remember it, to all of this cynical action being in the interests of the state (as Machy saw it anyway) rather than the individual.
-
<self promotion>
Mind you, I was blogging dubya as sub-machiavellian back in oh-four.
</self-promotion> -
jb,
Bush on the investigation 30 Septemeber 2003
Let me just say something about leaks in Washington. There are too many leaks of classified information in Washington. There's leaks at the executive branch; there's leaks in the legislative branch. There's just too many leaks. And if there is a leak out of my administration, I want to know who it is. And if the person has violated law, the person will be taken care of.
And taken care of, he was......
-
I'm yet to hear anyone suggest that a small amendment to the US Constitution might be in order so no President can pardon their staffers or big ticket donors on their way out the door
Consider it suggested. With maybe some sort of judicial body allowed to make pardons instead.
-
Right then. On the subject of wood trees and sock puppeteering.
The wood and the trees argument related to the fact that discounting Libby's sentence because he wasn't charged with an espionage crime is missing the story. You think that this is a relevant fact. I think its not. You think its the wood. I think its the trees.
Libby is Cheney's right hand sock puppet.
Cheney Bush et al lied the world into a disastrous war using the threat of nucular war as the bait - joseph wilson pointed this out - and then Libby as Cheney's good sock puppet (and Bush's too he was in fact designated an assistant to the president) enacted revenge against Wilson by destroying his wifes career - not to mention undermining her anti WMD covert operation.
This is a cowardly craven piece of toadery of the highest order.
When the fact that outing Valerie Plame was probably a national security crime The President then said he would look for the leaker. Instead he and his crew lied their heads off to cover their tracks.
Eventually libby took a bullet for his bosses and now when he is facing jail time - and possibly thinking about avoiding it by finally telling the truth and getting a deal - GWB pardons him.
To characterise this as trivial is silly.
To do so using the White Houses's own talking points is simply lazy.
To do so within minutes of the news appearing does indeed appear to be a course of action not dissimilar to that you might expect from sock puppet.
Robust debate is I believe the purpose of this forum. And in my mind People should not rush off appealing to the moderators every time someone makes a sarcastic observation.
-
"Eventually libby took a bullet for his bosses and now when he is facing jail time - "
Would you rather take a bullet for Bush or from Cheney?
Point though - Al Capone got done for taxes.
-
Alastair, most of which I agree with, but most of which is now largely irrelevant to the matter at hand, no matter how hot under the collar it makes you, and, indeed me.
You completely missed the point I'd made (some two hours after David's original post, and weeks into a multitude of online discussions about this..hardly minutes), which was that Plame has largely been lost in this story. If you'd read what I actually said, I was largely agreeing with you, but you leapt in snarling and then made a puerile insulting statement back at me. It was unnecessary (and no, not sarcastic either..that implies an understanding of my quip which you missed in your rush to judge) to say it and to follow it with "Robust debate is I believe the purpose of this forum." is simply digging yourself a deeper hole. Robust debate?...shall I be allowed to call you a fucking idiot if I feel the urge? No of course not (and I'm not BTW), your logic is utterly flawed.
And to clarify, nobody appealed to anybody, moderators or otherwise..we're not in scout camp, we are, I hope grown up enough to discuss without resort to such.I have to be honest though, its the first time I've been called a Bush Sock Puppet, and I shall wear it with bemused satisfaction as if to prove I am now a complete all rounder.
I'm done with this.
-
we're not in scout camp
We're not? You mean I've wasted all this f@#$ing time trying to groom you all? Who's going to roast my weiner by the campfire now??
-
There is not now, nor has there ever been, anything "there" in this fiasco.
When contacted by Novak about his article, the CIA's public relations office confirmed Plame's identify and employment with the CIA to Novak. So if Plame was under cover, the CIA blew her cover. Why isn't she pissed at the CIA?Fitzgerald knew very early on that Armitage was Novak’s source for the article he wrote that identified Plame to Novak and set off this whole load of nonsense, not anyone from the White House. The enquiry should have stopped at that point, as it was obvious that no law had been broken by anyone at the White House.
Cheney, Libby et al had very good reason to enquire about Wilson. Wilson stated that he had been sent on his mission to Africa at the request of Cheney's office, which obviously came as a surprise to Cheney's office, as they had never heard of the execrable little weasel.
This has always been all about politics, and attacking and discrediting the President and his policies, which should never be criminalized. Not now, not ever. In a free society people are allowed to make accusations (except libel etc.) and people are allowed to rebut them, by attacking the credibility of the accuser if appropriate.
Bush should have had the cahones to issue a full pardon; the whole thing has been a load of crap from the getgo.
As for Bush being the worst President in the history of the US, sorry, but Jimmah Carter has a lock on that title for all time. He was horrendous in office and senility has only made him worse.
Yes, Bush is at 29% approval, and his disgraceful performance on the immigration bill has a lot to do with that. Still, if opinion polls matter and Bush sucks because he is at 29%, what does it say about the Democratic controlled congress which is at 14% approval? It has taken Bush 6 years and a lot of water under the bridge to get to 29%, the Dems in Congress have gotten to 14% after barely 6 months in office. So who really sucks the most?
-
You go James, we Bush Glove Puppets are on a roll.
And I absolutely agree with you, Bush really sucks big time..and Congress too, on both sides. That's actually what quite a few of us having been saying for quite some time.
Did you apply the same burden of proof to Plame, and Libby's innocence as you did to your assertion a while back that not much happened at Abu Ghraib? Just wondering....
-
Actually Simon, when the Dems won in Nov, the consensus of this blog was a sense of relief and a belief that the Dems in Congress would be a decided improvement on the Repub Congress. My first posts to this blog were stating my view that the Dems would be worse, and I think it is fair to say that events have proven me to be correct on that judgement.
The hype about Abu Ghraib was more than somewhat disconnected to the reality. Based on the NYT running ABG stories on its front page for something like 60 days straight (in an election year), you would have thought it was the end of the world. It wasn’t.
If you are upset about Abu Ghraib, you must be apoplectic about Iran's Evin prison and torture chamber. What about your favorite buddy Castro’s well known propensity to imprison torture and execute? Does that bother you? Did you see that Al Qaeda torture manual that surfaced the other week? Must have driven you crazy, right? Oh sorry, I forgot, only the US and Bush do bad things. If anyone else does something bad, then you don’t seem to worry about it too much do you?
-
This topic is about American politics James, hence the focus on American issues. We could explore the examples you said, but that is outside the remit of this thread. It doesn't make us hypocrites, signal approval for the aforementioned actions nor remove our ability to speak about crimes (whether legal or moral) committed by the current US administration.
-
Ben,
I am aware that the post is on US politics. Simon G and I have had exchanges on various topics over a period of time, including Abu Ghraib. If you see his post at the bottom of page 3 you will see the comment I was responding to.My point above, and a point above that I have made a number of times is that, by all means criticise the US and the current or any previous US administration. Go ahead and knock yourself out, just have a bit of balance and perspective. The US should be held to a high standard, but that doesn't mean that it is okay to glibbly ignore the many other horrendous acts of other countries, governments or groups around the world.
-
Simon:
I'm of two minds over this. I'm no friend of the Bush administration at all but I agree with the earlier statement that the use of perjury in the US system to pursue alleged perpetrators of associated crimes when no route to a conviction can be found in other ways, smells badly.
I think that remark is what led to my sarchastic remark. To compare Fitzgerald to McCarthy is a long bow. But doubtless one which James will be happy to draw.
That said I am sorry now I snapped at you. Re reading the above I see that you are clearly a cynical realist with a knack for playing the devils advocate. Craig is the one that is prone on occasion to calling for moderation.... but if you look closely you will see it was he who introduced the term sock puppet to to the discussion.
P.S. Loved the creative use of F**k in a manner calculated not to offend.
James:
Good to see you holding your corner.
As for the 2006 election. Things have improved markedly since the mid-terms and the Democratic Congress and Pelosi Speakership. They would be even better if the craven democratic leadership hadn't caved on Iraq war funding... but the fact that there was a showdown does give the impression that they are growing a spine.
Leahey's promise to charge the White House with contempt is the beginning of the path to impeachment of * and cheney as I am sure you are aware.
As for other toturing regimes the problem - that clearly escapes your attention - is that when the US who preaches human rights and freedom, tortures detains and murders, they set a very bad example.
And finally a question:
Do you actually like elected leaders who consider themselvesabove the law? Would you be happy if Bush actually crowned himself emperor ? Where do you draw the line? What would make you lose faith in the Dim Son.
-
James, 'other people suck too' is not an adequate defence in court, and it's not an adequate defence of the US administration in interweb arguments, either. If the rhetoric of the entire country is based entirely on its being a 'beacon of freedom', it's just a tad galling to read this constant, disingenuous reframing of the argument by administration apologists. Besides, comparing the US favourably with dictatorships? Damned with faint praise there, homes.
-
Yes, Bush is at 29% approval, and his disgraceful performance on the immigration bill has a lot to do with that. Still, if opinion polls matter and Bush sucks because he is at 29%, what does it say about the Democratic controlled congress which is at 14% approval? It has taken Bush 6 years and a lot of water under the bridge to get to 29%, the Dems in Congress have gotten to 14% after barely 6 months in office. So who really sucks the most?
Good try James. But the idea that it's all "the Dems in Congress" should be tempered with the knowledge that while recent polls have the Democratic Party still (just) over 50% approval, the Republican Party is at 36%, its second-lowest rating in 15 years.
And the dreaded immigration bill is a controversy invented by conservatives so they didn't have to talk about Iraq any more.
-
The US should be held to a high standard, but that doesn't mean that it is okay to glibbly ignore the many other horrendous acts of other countries, governments or groups around the world.
Kind of turns the argument into a pissing down the wall contest.
-
And the dreaded immigration bill is a controversy invented by conservatives so they didn't have to talk about Iraq any more.
Oh, come on Russell... I know it falls below the radar somewhat, but Bush has been catching shit for being, well, being a wee bit too liberal when it comes to immigration since he was Governor of Texas, and while we may turn up our little Kiwi beaks in a totally unjustified display of moral superiority, there are chunks of the US where illegal immigration is a real issue and has been for a long time.
-
WH,
In a free society people are allowed to make accusations (except libel etc.) and people are allowed to rebut them, by attacking the credibility of the accuser if appropriate.
What people are not allowed to do in a free society is lie under oath and deliberately obstruct federal investigations. If you have a problem with the perjury laws I suggest you take it up with the US Congress. You might want to consider what (and who) Libby was lying to protect.
I have a problem with your suggestion that it is acceptable to use elaborate deception in order to advance political objectives. The Libby case references misrepresentations that led the US government into its biggest foreign policy crisis since Vietnam. It a tragic metaphor for an Administration that prefers the advancement of its own arrogant preconceptions and f*ckwit ideology to the truth.
Noone who really cares about the US can just sit there and watch this sh*t happen with such a blase attitude.
-
RB,
Rasmussen has those self identifying as Repubs at 32% and the Dems at 36%.
Rasmussen Reports linkAmericans are pissed wth both parties at the moment, especially after the way the White House and leaders of both parties in Congress constructed a bill behind closed doors and tried to ram it down the Senate when a clear majority of Americans opposed it.
As for, "And the dreaded immigration bill is a controversy invented by conservatives so they didn't have to talk about Iraq any more."
You are joking I assume? That is so paranoid that only someone like Keith Olberman could have dreamt it up.You can't be happy with a group of people who say they are going to be the most ethical Congress in history and then promptly try to ram through 32,000 earmarks in a bill with no review. Or Nancy demanding that her adult children can fly free on congressional trips. Wouldn't you be pissed if you were a relative of one of the Lebanese politicians who had had been killed by the Syrians and Nancy flies to Damascus (outside her perview) and says "the road to peace passes through Damascus"?
Danielle,
Glad to be galling you. Nasty job, someone has to do it.
The US holds itself out to be special and should be judged as such. But to endlessly excoriate the US while ignoring much worse travesties of numerous other countries is selective, inconsistent and hyprocritical. Sorry, it just is.Alistair,
You can relax. I can assure you that come one morning in Jan 2009, Dubya will be leaving the White House and someone else will be sworn in. No Emperorships or anything like that.No law was broken with regard to Plame and no cover up was undertaken. The only issue was that Libby's memory was different than Tim Russert's on one inconsequential point. Do you think it is reasonable for someone to go to jail for 30 months for that? I don't. Even the WaPo wrote an editorial the other day describing the whole thing as a nonsense, and the WaPo has never been accused of being a card carrying member of the great Neocon conspiracy.
What would make me lose confidence in Bush? How going to war and not fighting like you mean it?
-
Weston,
From the WaPo, a bit on Joe Wilson, the excreble little lying shit, if anyone should be in clink for lying, it should be him.http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A39834-2004Jul9.html
Well, its Independence Day tomorrow, so irony of ironies, I will wish you all, unfavorably disposed to the US as most of you are, a Happy American Independence Day and sign off!!
-
RB,
Rasmussen has those self identifying as Repubs at 32% and the Dems at 36%.Which isn't the same thing as either voting intentions or approval ratings.
You can't be happy with a group of people who say they are going to be the most ethical Congress in history and then promptly try to ram through 32,000 earmarks in a bill with no review.
Which would be a better point if the previous Congresses hadn't set whole new standards for pork. But I agree, the legislative process that allows earmarking on bills intended for a wholly different purpose is completely lunatic.
It's worth noting that Obama has made all his earmark requests public, and is the only presidential candidate to do so.
Or Nancy demanding that her adult children can fly free on congressional trips.
Sigh ... this is such a discredited talking point that even Tony Snow talked it down:
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/02/08/pelosi-snow-livingood/
Wouldn't you be pissed if you were a relative of one of the Lebanese politicians who had had been killed by the Syrians and Nancy flies to Damascus (outside her perview) and says "the road to peace passes through Damascus"?
She visited Syria shortly after several Republican Congressmen for much the same purpose. I presume you're similarly outraged that Israel is preparing to resume talks with Syria.
Honestly James, Bush-cult talking points are not the same thing as reality. At all.
-
Bush is pro illegal immigration.
Immigrants are wanted in America to work for next to nothing.
Bush is pro illegal immigration because it is cost effective to have an under the counter workforce to avoid normal moral costs of labour.
This is why he must also keep their status as illegal. And why his immigration policy will fail - it's all in the design. -
James,
I do understand your point of view, but again, we all know about these other situations you talk of, but if we were going to be fair to every major ill caused in the world we would never stop talking here. So we focus on things we know more about, or at least encounter often enough to form a strong opinion on. To an english speaking nation, and indeed the chattering classes of any state where one is able to speak freely Bush and his actions are a major part of discussion. I wish it were not the case, but it is. We here his speeches, see his actions, and they dominate the news.
We should be thinking about the other bad things that happen but we can't always relate them back to the current issue at hand. Besides, we all expect better from the US, it being the home of constitutional human rights and all.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.