This takes up a stray thread from the Bill Clinton - How did he become President? debate. I'm hoping that the following nested quotation will suffice as an introduction:


I can - if Danya doesn't mind.

• During the 2000 election campaign, Bush claimed that, during the Vietnam conflict, "My first impulse and first inclination was to support the country". His first impulse seems, in fact, to have been to avoid both the draft and active duty. George W Bush was, at best, a bit free with the truth.
  
• Bush said no one to his knowledge helped him get into the National Guard. In fact, according to testimony by Texas Speaker of the House Ben Barnes, Houston businessman (and Bush family friend) Sid Adger requested that Barnes refer Bush’s name to a high-ranking Guard official, Gen. James Rose. Rose got Bush into the Guard ahead of 500 other applicants (most far more qualified than Dubya). George W Bush lied.
  
• Bush claims to have "some recollection" of turning up for the drills required of Guardsmen during his last year of duty. In fact, there is no record that he showed up at all - and testimony from his commanding officer that he never saw Bush once during that period. George W Bush lied - and deserted.
  
• Early last year, Bush told Bob Kiss, Speaker of the West Virginia House of Delegates, that he had "been to war". In fact, he has never been to war - he's just trying to send tens of thousands of other people to war. George W Bush lied.
  
• Bush has repeatedly denied any wrongdoing in his sale of Harken stock preceding their disclosure of more than $23 million in losses, which caused the stock to fall 20 percent. In fact, on June 11, 1990, Bush attended a meeting on Harken's plan to sell off two subsidiaries to avert bankruptcy. The Haynes and Boone law firm advised Harken officers and directors on June 15, 1990, that if they possessed any negative information about the company’s outlook, a stock sale would be considered illegal trading. On June 22, 1990, Bush sold 212,140 shares (originally purchased 40% below face value) to a still-unidentified buyer (rather than on the open market) for four dollars per share. They are now worth two cents apiece. George W Bush lied, cheated, and broke the law.
  
• For years, Bush claimed that he sent the reports of that stock sale and three others in on time and that the SEC had lost them. Last year, he shifted the blame to Harken’s lawyers for the late filings, before changing his story again to say that he simply didn’t know what had happened. In fact, we still don't know why he missed the deadlines by up to eight months, but we do know that, regarding having sent the reports in on time, George W Bush lied.
  
• Bush has repeatedly avoided answering questions about his cocaine abuse and possible addiction. He has never outright denied it, but has consistently refused to acknowledge his abuse. Three independent sources now report that Bush was arrested in 1972 for cocaine possession and taken to Harris County Jail, but avoided jail or formal charges through an informal diversion plan involving community service with Project PULL, an inner city Houston program for troubled youths. Another witness admits to having sold Bush cocaine. George W Bush has refused to be honest or truthful.
  
• Bush cited the expansion of the Children’s Health Insurance Program as an example of his bipartisan efforts as Governor of Texas. In fact, Bush vehemently opposed the expansion of CHIP and, after losing the legislative battle (which did, indeed, have bipartisan support - just not Dubya's), he claimed credit for the CHIP expansion and his success in working with Democrats during the 2000 election campaign. George W Bush lied.
  
• Bush cited as his most significant environmental accomplishment as Governor the setting of new rules for grand-fathered industrial plants, previously exempt from Texas clean air laws. In fact, those plants were asked only to voluntarily comply with the clean air rules with no penalties for industries that didn’t seek a permit under the law; it was the kind of standard that polluting industries might have written for themselves (and as it turned out, they had). George W Bush lied.
  
• During the October 11, 2000, debate, Bush stated that the Clinton-Gore administration "took 40 million acres of land out of circulation without consulting local officials," an example of their administration "just unilaterally acting without any input." In fact, according to the Sierra Club, "the Forest Service conducted 600 public meetings about the proposal nationwide and more than one million Americans urged the administration to strengthen the proposal. There was ample opportunity for local officials and others to comment on the proposal." George W Bush lied.
  
• On his own record in Texas, Bush also claimed that "our water is cleaner now". In fact, the discharge of industrial toxic pollution into surface waters in Texas increased from 23.2 million pounds in 1995 to 25.2 million pounds in 1998, the last year with data available. George W Bush lied.
  
• As Danya has pointed out, Bush contends that he doesn't needed focus groups or polls to tell him what to think. "We've got too much polling and focus groups going on in Washington today," Bush said. "We need decisions made on sound principles." In fact, his campaign spent roughly $1 million on polls and focus groups, about equal to the Gore campaign’s spending, according to a report by NBC News. Indeed, Bush changed his campaign slogan from "Compassionate Conservative" (another egregious lie) to "Real Plans for Real People" because of poll analysis. Mike Allen describes Bush as "preoccupied by public perceptions of the war, looking at polling data from Rove, even after pretending to have no interest." George W Bush lied.
  
• In the first presidential debate, Bush claimed that the Gore campaign had "out-spent me". In fact, Bush had raised and spent more than twice as much money in the election at that stage as Gore had raised and spent. George W Bush lied.
  
• During the final presidential debate, Al Gore accused Bush of opposing a patients' bill of rights. "Actually, Mr. Vice President, it's not true," Mr. Bush replied. "I do support a national patients' bill of rights. As a matter of fact, I brought Republicans and Democrats together to do just that in the state of Texas, to get a patients' bill of rights through." He added that Texas was "one of the first states that said you can sue an HMO for denying you proper coverage." In fact, in 1995 Bush vetoed the first version of the patients' rights bill that the Legislature sent him and two years later he let the section of the bill granting the right to sue go into effect without his signature. George W Bush lied.
  
• While on the campaign trail, Bush promised that "as soon as I take office I will begin the process of moving the US ambassador to the city Israel has chosen as its capital." In fact, six months after taking office, signed a memorandum delaying the congressionally mandated relocation of the U.S. embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. George W Bush lied.
  
• Last May, Bush claimed to have read a 268-page report by the Environmental Protection Agency on global warming. In fact, as Ari Fleischer later had to point out, he did not read the report. George W Bush lied.
  
• In his infamous "trifecta" joke, Bush claimed repeatedly that he stated during the 2000 campaign that he would keep the budget balanced except in event of war, recession, or national emergency. In fact, he never made such a statement: Bush contended that he would balance the budget without qualification. Some guy by the name of Gore, however, did use those three items as examples of what could force the government back into deficit spending. George W Bush lied about his statement, plagiarized from Gore, and broke his promise about balancing the budget.
  
• When the SCI scandal broke in Texas, Bush swore in a July, 1999 affidavit, that he "had no conversations with [SCI] officials, agents, or representatives concerning the investigation or any dispute arising from it." In fact, according to SCI's boss, Robert Waltrip, and his lawyer, Johnnie B. Rogers, they visited Bush in the Governor's office and discussed the investigation. Bush and Joe Allbaugh later admitted that this was the case. George W Bush lied under oath.
  
• Regarding stem cell research, Bush stated that his Great Compromise was "way beyond politics... it will lead at once to breakthrough therapies and cures... and do so without crossing a fundamental moral line." In fact, his decision was completely about politics; it will slow the progress to breakthrough therapies and cures; and it did force the pro-life movement he ostensibly endorses to cross a fundamental moral line. George W Bush lied and lied and lied.
  
• Regarding Enron, Bush contended, in effect, "I did not have corporate relations with that man, Kenneth Lay." He claimed that he only "got to know" Mr. Lay in 1994. In fact, according to the Chicago Tribune, "President Bush had business ties with Enron and its predecessor companies, and first met Kenneth Lay, its chairman, sometime in the late 1980s... Previously, the president had not mentioned his business dealings with Enron and had said that he got to know Lay after he was elected governor of Texas in 1994. On Tuesday, White House communications director Dan Bartlett told the Tribune that Bush's relationship with Lay probably started when Bush was in Washington in 1987 and 1988, working on his father's presidential campaign. It could have started earlier, he said.George W Bush lied.
  
• Bush also claimed that Kenny Boy "was a supporter" of Governor Ann Richards. While Richards simply laughs this off ("It was so silly. Why didn't he just say Ken Lay was a strong supporter and gave him a half-million dollars and is a good friend, and he's really sorry Ken's in these terrible circumstances?"), Mr. Lay, in fact, told Frontline last year that he "did support Mr. Bush over Ms. Richards" in their Texas race. George W Bush lied.
  
• Bush claims to be "very supportive" of the Nunn-Lugar program and, according to Condi Rice, "The funding was not cut.. All the way back in the campaign, the president talked about perhaps even increasing funding for programs of this kind." In fact, the administration's budget request cut the Department of Energy part of the Nunn-Lugar program from $872 million to $774 million and the Department of Defense portion by another $40 million; the "materials protection and accounting" program was cut $35 million; the program to subsidize research facilities another $10 million. If Condoleeza Rice can be believed, George W Bush lied.
  
• A few months into his presidency, Bush wrote to the Senator Chuck Hagel, arguing that carbon dioxide was not a pollutant and was not considered as such by the Clean Air Act. In fact, carbon dioxide is specifically mentioned in two passages in the Clean Air Act. George W Bush lied.
  
• According to the Bush-Cheney "National Energy Policy", "no more than 2,000 acres will be disturbed" by the development of Area 1002 of ANWR. In fact, the Bush-Cheney plan would render over 1,000 square miles of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge useless for anything other than drilling and support activities. Bush-Cheney lied.
  
• Bush promised the world a "humble" foreign policy, "leading by example". Need I comment?
  
  
• And, oh yeah, as outlined by Quarkie in the Clinton thread - he lied repeatedly about his DUI conviction.

That was easy. I could, in fact, go on - and on and on and on and on and on - I haven't even touched on the misrepresentations, exaggerations, and cooked intelligence surrounding his demonization of Saddam Hussein and Iraq - but I'm getting tired (and disgusted). I think it is obvious to those who are capable of rational thought, that George W Bush has an extremely tenuous relationship with the truth - and that his lying is, perhaps, more chronic than any president in US history, Richard Nixon included. Those, on the other hand, who accept his infallibility as a matter of faith, will never be convinced that Dubya suffers from Munchausen Syndrome on an epic scale.

On the whole, I'd prefer a man who lied about cheating on his wife - or a man who was misquoted on the Love Canal story and the creation of the Internet - to a man who refuses to acknowledge his drug abuse, lies about his history of heavy drinking, lies about his military record, lies about his illegal business practices, lies about his corporate ties, lies about his political record - even under oath, lies about foreign policy, lies about national security, lies about his criminal record, repeatedly breaks his campaign promises, and doesn't even seem to know the difference between lying and telling the truth. But, hey - that's just me. The "liberal media" obviously looks at things somewhat differently.



And, Darcaine, if you are going to respond to this, please take the damned "Back to lurking" off of your signature. Your status as a "lurker" is about as honest as any given word which crosses the lips of George W Bush.

Actually Harken's shares are worth 26 cents each. Don't scare me, I thought my 401K had gone down by 90+% overnite.

http://www.newsmax.com/hottopics/Clinton_S..._Scandals.shtml

And the hits just keep on comin!

Back to lurking,
Darcaine

PS...just to annoy you Wertz!

Wertz.

I am impressed by your last post regarding that rabid demagogue the free World has for a leader.
Your investigative patience is commended.
You know the bloke I mean........Ummm...was it Bushitler.......no perhaps it might have been Bulshitler.

The terrifying thing about it all is that he is there, and even worse the American majority??? of people put him there and gave him the acute power.

Our leader will go, that is a people fact.

Your leader??...what next.
One more from the 'failed everything" asylum?.
May I suggest Dolly Parton?, at least she's straight up and down ( forgive the pun).

Addenda...
May I suggest that you are not provoked by Darcain. It is his/her habit to lurk and ask for proof and offer little in exchange.

Regards....Alan

I'm not that easily annoyed - or provoked. In point of fact, I have no especial fondness for Bill Clinton either. Granted, I'd rather see him back in the White House than Dubya - but the same could be said for just about everyone on earth.

Hugo: Apologies for nearly giving you a stroke there. I checked the page where I found the Harken reference and it did actual say "2 cents". I don't know if it was a typo, an exaggeration, or a Chief Executive style "misstatement".

Alan: I think the reference to Hitler is a bit strong. I've always found the current generation of Bushes much closer to Mussolini or Franco - without the Catholicism, of course. Now, Prescott Bush would be a different story...

Wertz.

Comparing Prescott Bush to the present genotypic declination is sorta like saying apples and pears are the same...ie fruit.

I make no apologies for the lateral inference to Hitler.

He is a small man doing a big job in a big pond.

Regards.Alan

Using the term small man...interesting. Ah, and of course, the gratuitous Hitler reference. Welcome to the internet!

Back to lurking,
Darcaine

The terrifying thing about it all is that he is there, and even worse the American majority??? of people put him there and gave him the acute power.

No, they didn't. Gore had the majority of American votes.The electoral vote was disputed. Surely you remember the 2000 election. It was Jeb Bush and Katherine Harris that put George Bush in the Whitehouse. With a little help from the Supreme court.

No one seems to be as worried about our future elections as they should be. Not every vote was or will be counted.

Maybe Bush is more like Stalin.
Those who cast the ballots decide nothing; those who count the ballots decide everything. Josef Stalin.

Danya

Without debating the Florida fiasco, I would venture to say that there hasn't been an election in history where one could make the claim that all votes were counted. The idea that voter error and systemic flaws will be completely eliminated is not realistic in my opinion. Hell, we can't get referees to make the correct pass interference calls in the NFL playoffs!

There will always be someone whose vote was disqualified. It became a huge problem because of the stakes that were involved in Florida. I believe that every state in the Union had problems during the 2000 election. It was only Florida's that mattered.

Back to the original thread.

Bill, I'll try to address this one, but your research is daunting. I cannot possibly take the time to refute your post (I sure would like to!). I hope that everything is explanable. Context of comments are so important. Has the context been considered properly? Who knows.

Mark

Please spare us. Being a bad LOSER solves nothing.

Back to lurking,
Darcaine

PS. OMG It's the great Republican conspiracy that spans every state to do in the Democrats. Give me a break.

For all the talk of the Supreme Court and Jeb Bush/Katherine Harris 'putting/installing/selecting' George Bush as the president, I would sure like for someone to tell me what was done illegally by the republicans to stop the recount.

For my research, it seemed that the law was followed. A lot of people didn't like the outcome.

You know, this probably doesn't belong here but, you can see from the posts that some people think we live in a perfect world where everything should be perfect...or sued into being perfect. The election of GWB is one example of voting not being perfect...not that it ever has been. I mean look at the fuss the media made over small pox vaccine innoc.. Made front page news when GWB took the shot like he was taking a risk of having a reaction...even though it's a 1in2 million shot that you will. What is going on in the US that causes us to be so anal about things? The funny part is they went and RECOUNTED those ballots after the election and GWB won by even a larger margin than was was officially reported. The excuses for doing away with the electoral process because some did not like the result? Hell, Gore didn't even carry his own home state..IMHO if you change the law for electoral college you should amend it to say if you don't even carry your home state...where they know you best...you should be automatically disqualified. It's rediculous to think everything is going to be perfect...also an illusion. The most perfect thing we have...and your going to laugh is the Airline industry. If you do the statistics on the amount of flights vs crashes...it's incredible..makes you scared to drive. Just a thought.

Back to lurking,
Darcaine

TAKE THE 2000 ELECTION DEBATE HERE: The Election that Wouldn't Die, For dead-horse beaters only

Mark: I tried to check the context on as many references as possible (where it wasn't already obvious) - though, as we saw with the price of Harken stock, it's possible that the odd error slipped through. Overall, I found sources for each item in at least two places (many, many more for most).

While we're referring to other threads, it's also worth pinting out that this whole thread could just as easily slot into the "liberal media" debate. During the 2000 election, Bush told far more lies than Gore - and on far more serious subjects - yet who did the media consistently portray as the candidate with a credibility problem (and almost always over false and/or trivial issues)?

So would that be like..... "I didn't inhale?"

No links, few quotes. Sounds to me like you are spinning his words and intentions to suit your needs.

Danya: The votes were counted 3 times...or so, and continued to be counted even AFTER Bush was sworn in. You don't recount something without making sure there is a need (ie, count them all and the outcome is not what you ant) EVERY time, Bush came up ahead. Sorry, he won popular vote in FL, and enough elector votes to win the presidency.

According to FL law, hand recounting in the mannor in which they did was illegal. The supreme court upheld the law in FL.



Then you should be ashamed of yourself. Why is it, people try to compare Hitler to someone they don't like, just to discredit them?

Read some history. Bush is not practicing genocide as hitler did. He has no plans for world domination. He is not a totalitarian nor a dictator. He might have lied, but if thats all you got, quit your reference to Hitler.....

Maybe because your Austrailian, I should compare you to your criminal ancestors....you know, to try to discredit you because I don't like your views.

Would that be fair? I think not....

--cheers

All I was saying to Alan is that the majority of people in this country DID NOT vote for Bush. The fact that his brothers state was the one that held all the straws must have been a coincidence. I'm sure...Bush ALWAYS deserves the benefit of the doubt with you people.

As neither a Democrat nor a Republican, I think we are all losers when Presidents lie to their citizens with the ease seen by our last two ( not to exclude others before). Neither party should be happy nor proud when a representative from their own party is elected when they are so obviously deficient. They lie and cheat and mislead as long as their party or circle of crows can gain some short term or long term benefit. As long as it OK to have such standards to become President we will continue to see central power increase in this country and the citizens will lose their freedoms which have been a strength and hope for individual people.

Oh yeah, Gore fits right in with Clinton and Bush. Do not interpret this as a post to champion him. The voters in this country have pathological-pick-a-chump.

It would be similar - except Clintion at least admitted to having a joint in his mouth. Bush has never fessed up to having a $100 bill up his nose.


Any items you have a particular question about, I'll provide whatever direct quotes and corroborating information I can find. Just ask...


I don't think Alan's reference was "just" to discredit Bush. A very good case can be made for such a comparison. One of the reasons I would avoid such comparisons myself is that they're a bit inflammatory, prompting emotional reactions like yours, and take too much time to subsequently support.


Read some history yourself - and some current events. It is only because Bush is not practicing genocide that I felt Alan's allusion was a bit strong. Politically, Hitler and Bush are quite close. Bush, in my opinion and based on my research, definitely has plans for world domination - as did his father (and his Nazi-supporting grandfather); his impulses are certainly totalitarian and he would dearly love to be a dictator - he's said so himself. The fact that Bush is a chronic liar is not all that I've got, DP. If you want parallels to Hitler, I'll provide them aplenty - in a new thread. Look before you leap, though...


Oh - just for the record, Bush did not win the popular vote in Florida. I guess you've been getting too much "liberal media" spin. And you're totally wrong about the Florida legislation. I live in Florida. I voted in Florida. I followed the election here and read the state election laws extremely closely. Take this up, if you must, in the appropriate thread (to which Jaime provided a link above). But, again, look before you leap...

Wow and now Bush is Stalin...gotta love the education in this country. I guesse Bush better get with the program and as Alan would say "whack" about 12 million more people in this country.

Back to lurking,
Darcaine

"Oh - just for the record, Bush did not win the popular vote in Florida. I guess you've been getting too much "liberal media" spin. And you're totally wrong about the Florida legislation. I live in Florida. I voted in Florida. I followed the election here and read the state election laws extremely closely. Take this up, if you must, in the appropriate thread (to which Jaime provided a link above). But, again, look before you leap... "

Wertz then you live in a cave somewhere. He did win the popular vote in Florida. Your laws were circumvented by about 100 trial lawyers the DNC sent in to foul up the election process. I am not a lawyer but even an 8th grade student that can read can see quite clearly what Florida's State election laws are. The ballots were counted again after the election and it was proven...once again Bush won. Very simply put, alot of Democratic and Anti-Bush cry baby's did not like the outcome..so as any good followers of the "brown shirts" err DNC tried to pull a fast one on the people of the United States and more importantly the good people of Florida and try and rig the election with the court system. The Supreme Court of the United States even re-affirmed what was happening...but I forget..they are part of the great Republican conspiracy run by the Furer Bush. God I love the internet! And go thank SBC for getting you phone service where you live!

Back to lurking,
Darcaine

I'm sure people like you would be cheering Bush on if he tried to 'WHACK' me.

And the only thing I said that was like Stalin is that quote. It fits Bush to a tee, IMO.

Please Danya...do you really think I want to see you come to harm? Hell, I would like to see everyone become wealthy and grow old, takes their kids to Disneyworld...which IMHO take them young because it's WAY overrated. Adults make the pilgramage to Las Vegas...which BTW is VERY awesome even if you don't gamble...be prepared to gain some pounds though. I don't see anyone being "whacked". If ANYONE is going to whack someone is if we get someone in power who believes they can control free speech and God forbid thought. Hate crime laws are right there with thought police and they are scary as hell. Convicting on motive and not result is damn scary...damn scary.

Back to lurking,
Darcaine

It looks like Wertz wins this one. Nobody has successfully refuted his list of GWB lies.

Obviously, people hate Clinton for some other deeply rooted reason than his political skills--whoops! I mean his ability to lie with a straight face. They must love GWB for some other reason too. It would be interesting to do some analysis along these lines.

No wins a debate, silly

I'm sure I'd be able to come up with similar lists for Clinton, GHW Bush, Regan, Carter, Nixon, Johnson, Kennedy....shall I go on?

I'd be more impressed with a list of truths said and acted upon by any president than their lies.

Wertz thanks for your wealth of information. I find the most frightening thing about today's society is the flood of information that pours over us. What is left is the perception of the events left with us by our immediate circle and the national media.

Of course the responsible thing to do is to follow all events and document transgressions, but doing that, working full time, raising a family, and pursuing a sliver of leisure time is an impossible task.

So much happens at once from a presidential administration that you can barely react to one policy or action or law before the next one comes at you.

The Bush team knows this and moves on quickly past less popular events.

I respectfully disagree, Jaime. If you put out a premise, support it with facts, and the opposition cannot refute, that constitutes a hands-down win in any debating forum. I know this from working on a speech minor in college. Argumentation and debate was a senior-level regimen. We had contests to see who could outdo the other, and we had judges. In this kind of formality, argumentation and debate is known as forensics.

Wertz has proven his premise that GWB is a liar. Just because other politicians are liars too does not change the proof of the premise. However, this observation does support another premise: All politicians are liars. Wertz has disproven one of the notions that some GWB supporters cling onto: Except George Walker Bush--he's an honest man.

I believe this is an important thing to keep in mind as we head into what is looking more and more like a risky, dubious war spearheaded by a secretive, restrictive administration.

But that's just me

You're right, AM. I concede

I guess I should have said that silence by the opposition does not mean victory by those who speak. Although, as for Wertz's post, I can not yet accept or reject what he has said because I have not taken the time to verify it.

What is important to think about here also, is what the liar himself believes. President Bush may actually believe that everything he has said and then retracted, backtracked or reversed IS the truth.

I'm sure Kisov or anyone else in law enforcement can attest to this. Sometimes liars make up believable lies and tell them so often that they begin to think of them as the truth themselves. I have seen people do this. It is the weirdest feeling to have someone look you in the eye with a deadly serious face and lie their butts off. Especially when you know darn well they are lying.

So what to do? Bush or any other lying politician would never allow themself to get in a situation where they would be confronted with their lie. I guess we just keep posting about them.

Thanks for the meal of crow, AuthorMusician. I need that every once in awhile

The underlying problem problem, as I see it, is not that Bush is a proven liar but the connotations of that fact.
This man, with so much power at his fingertips, cannot be trusted to use it wisely nor do his words in public ring true.

The deference given him by other heads of state is due to the power he wields, not the man his personality and political acumen.

He comes across to us out here as a 'loose cannon', a dangerous one.

I know little about the American Constitution but I am sure somewhere in there is a clause that will allow the people to rid themselves of this Idiot who, single handedly, is eroding any respect we out here had for America.

Regards...Alan

Rather than rid ourselves of him we have a congress that hands over their war powers to him. So, if you're hoping for him to get booted by choice don't hold your breath.

If you're hoping for him to get voted out...I don't think you're going to be much luckier. First because of the sorry candidates that are stepping up and second because I don't put it past him to cheat even if we had someone decent.

Amazing how both the major parties are reduced to demonizing the opposition candidate. It hides how small the difference on issues is.

Jaime,

I do understand your point about silence not meaning that good rebuttals of Wertz's arguments don't exist. I've actually come across some that could use more exposure in forums such as this. I'm not presenting them because, frankly, I find them lame beyond belief and would do an incredibly bad job of it. In college, I was forced to defend racist policies in one of those competitions. Arguing for something you don't believe in is painful!

I've not tried cooking crow to serve up, but I make a mean slow-cooked pot roast

Anyway, I've also worked with liars of the worst sort. You leave meetings with them feeling like the fabric of existence is unravelling, and very angry. These types are spooky indeed. I had a brother who was sort of like this at times. The eyes get strange.

I'm not sure GWB falls into this category. I'd need to meet him and press the flesh, search the eyes, get a soul reading. I hope he doesn't for the sake of our troops amassing in Saudi and thereabouts.

However, I don't want my politicians to be fools either. Being brutally honest can be more dangerous than using artful lies in the realms of politics. My politicians need to do the dirty work that I can't do, even if I had the power.

I don't think that GWB is the Anti Christ as some in this country (and board) do,
but I would sure like him to have an unscripted press conference, or a town hall meeting, so ordinary people could ask some questions without going through Ari Fleischer.
I think he means well, but his public affairs team sucks.

Alan,

We all got a civics lesson when Bill Clinton was impeached. Our constitution does not force a sitting president to resign after impeachment.

Richard M. Nixon resigned, but he was up for felony crimes, and the mood of the nation was a lot nastier toward him than toward Clinton.

I suspect that our federal government could keep GWB from doing something extremely stupid, and in fact I suspect his staff has intervened when his emotions started running away with his logic--as with the "axis of evil" speech where a good portion of his listeners thought, holy cow! The guy has blown a gasket!

I personally apologize for my country. I am sorry that more of the world is seeing us as, minimally, a destabalizing force. My hope is that the terrible mistakes made so far have been lessons well-taken by a president who came to office as an international freshman, dealt with a horrible situation in his sophomore year, and now tries to master his junior status. I hope we select someone better next time, or that GWB grows into mastery of international affairs.

One proposition that has been made is to have an international president and a separate domestic president. With the Clinton/Gore team, Gore took on the international role and campaigned on his experience. I bet Powell has this role now.

In any case, my prayer is that we transform from being destabalizers.

Since I'm a Neal Boortz listener (Libertarian radio talk show host), I saw this snippet on his web site concerning GWB's 'axis of evil'.
Let me specifically say I don't know if there is any truth to this, but he has had good inside info before, so who knows?
JUST SO YOU DON’T SLEEP WELL TONIGHT
About half way down the page.

That is an interesting idea AM, having two presidents. Once domestic and one for foreign affairs. They could keep their hands much cleaner that way.

Yes, that's a really interesting idea, but can you imagine a Florida 2000 x2?

Jaime/AuthorMusician: My intent wasn't really to "win" a debate, but to balance some of the claims made about the relative veracity of Clinton and, especially, Gore. I'm just tired of seeing one side portrayed as significantly different from the other - especially when the alleged white knight in this case is actually the guiltier party.



btw, one of my housemates has an excellent recipe for a sour cream gravy for pot roast, AM, if you're interested.

AAAACKKK!!!!

Oh, so Bush is "more wrong" than Clinton. Gotcha



I'll agree with you on that one.



heh...sure. As soon as afg. is brought in as the 51st state, and governors are elected, tax payer money is used to fund the construction of a capital building with a gold figure on top..... I will believe Bush is after world domination.



Hell, who WOULDN'T want to be a dictator? That'd be awesome...everyone at my disposal...waited on hand and foot

No, as soon as Bush single-handidly disolves the legislative and judicial branchs of the gov't, will I believe he wants to be a totalitarian. Or that that is his real agenda.

And, by then, it'll be a bit late, what?

And, by then, it'll be a bit late, what?


It's aleady too late, and has been for decades.
The legislative and judicial branches always will toe the line.
It's the same here.

It's about time we all woke up to the fact that percieved government is not the same as actual government.
Percieved is what we think we see, wheras actual is what is.

Now.........

Democracy is percieved as being the wish of the people, a vote for each of us, a choice, the envy of the enslaved world.
A magnificent 'con job'.

No matter how, and what, parties we vote for and the policies they represent , the actual is that we are DICTATED by those in real power, not our Presidents PM's or whatever else we want to call them, but those who hold the purse strings.
Dubya is the epitomy of a wax image, bent and moulded into whatever shape the purse wants.

Dubya is a perfect 'thick as a brick' President. It is those bending and moulding him who need to be asked questions, the REAL powers.
The Purse strings..............

We need to ask ourselves two questions........Who and Why.


Regards....Alan

AM.

Thank you. There is no need to apologise for the actions of others.

I hope very much that Americans will one day be allowed to be the friendly people I know they are.

Regards....Alan

Alan,

What amazed me about last election is how many Americans had no clue how our system of government actually works. I though the Democrats were supposed to be the "intellectual" party or "enlightened". I still can't believe people to this day don't understand we live in a represenative republic. Yes, our local officials are elected democraticaly, but we cannot be a true democracy because not everyone can vote on everything. How many time have you heard "my vote didn't count..." blah blah blah. Yes it did! The one thing this last election did show however is that we are seeing the end of personal responsibilty. The excuses for punching a ballot that was "confusing?" Come to Chicago on an election sometime you want to see a confusing ballot. Then, this last election...in a state like Florida where the everage age is like 100...we throw computers at them...YIKES! Anyhow, for those of you that have never driven in Florida...go sometime..it is...lets say an interesting experience that will enforce the notion that after 80 you need to be checked to see if you should be allowed to drive.

Back to lurking,
Darcaine

Never too late.

By then (or hopefully sooner) we Americans will use our God given and constitional right to bare arms, to revolt and install a new gov't.

Jaime would have you believe that "....necessary for the security of a free state...." phrase in the second amendment means that we can use our guns to protect us from a corrupt gov't.

While my jury is still out on that interpretation, I can see how she comes to that conclusion.


*************



Pardon my acronyms, but wtf are you talking about? Since when are we not allowed to be friendly? huh?

It is my sincere hope that Aussies and Brits are one day allowed to be as polite and tactful, when addressing Americans, that we all know they are.

--cheers

Off topic alert!

DP:




And I love to 'bare' arms


Now back to our regularly scheduled topic.

DTOM:

1) Mr. Hamilton states that the power of a militia, is more powerful than that of an army the gov't can conjur up. Doesn't mean that our right was given to us to protect us from the gov't....just that it's more powerful....

2) Federalist papers are not law. The constition is. Many of the framers believed different things about how America should be. Some of their ideas went into the constitution, some did not.

The federalist papers, while great reading, is an opinion paper. Little else. And could not be used to interpret the constition, as it is the opinion of one man, and not everyone who signed the constition.

3) OMG NO PLEASE KEEP ALL YOUR CLOTHES ON!!!! ...

One small mistake...sheeeeeeeesh



--cheers

As long as we are being pompous and correcting things. Don't slight our first Chief Justice and our fourth president. There were three authors of the federalist papers.

Additionally I would love to see the private militia that could muster up the power to deter any action of the United States military in the 21st century. Times have changed.

Thanks, DP - I've tried to make the same point on several threads - here and elsewhere. The Federalist Papers weren't even general opinions on the Constitution - they were propaganda pieces specifically geared toward trying to sell the Constitution to the citizens of New York and...


...John Jay was very ill at the time and contributed very little to The Federalist and James Madison subsequently revised several of the opinions he expressed in the Papers, largely due to the influnce of Jefferson - who disagreed strongly with much of what Publius produced.

I didn't read pomposity into DP's posting (perhaps because I agreed with it, though) - merely a qualifying statement of fact. And was DTOM also "slighting" our illustrious forebears by only quoting one of Hamilton's contributions??


Now I have to bare my arms and get to bed...

Sorry, I meant as long as I am being pompous and correcting things. The we was part of the Queen Victorian tone. My apologies if it sounded like an insult to someone else.

Madison did change his mind later and become a Jeffersonian Republican, then he became a fan of what Henry Clay called the American system to return a lot of federalist principles to the government, then he undermined the new system in the last days of his presidency by vetoing Calhoun's bonus bill.

So Madison was not consistent. But he was the father of the constitution and did help sell it to the people of Virginia in the federalist papers.