The Bush Thread

[cyborg ninja 14]

We have a repeat of the Gerry Ford situation here, imo. A lot of people wanted him to nail Nixon to the wall too, but he chose to move on and get things done. Putting Bush on trial for war crimes might sound satisfying but it would do more harm than good. Obama has enough on his plate for two administrations and he's been in power for 24 hours.

Well, David Frost took care of that and nailed Nixon for them.

I could see Kieth Olberman doing the same with W. somewhere down the road.

 

[Marx]

See, this is why even as a progressive liberal I think the far left are just as bad as the far right at times. It's all about revenge, and us vs. them which solves absolutely nothing in politics.

I couldn't agree more, Souv. This is a prime example of why the extremes in BOTH parties are bad news. The extreme left-wing liberals are no better than the Religious Right.

 

[Marx]

Well, David Frost took care of that and nailed Nixon for them.

I could see Kieth Olberman doing the same with W. somewhere down the road.

There is never going to be an Olbermann/Bush interview that echoes Frost/Nixon. If there ever was to be such an interview, it would have to be someone like Barbara Walters or Tom Brokaw. A well respected journalist, not an extremist with an agenda.

 

[Addendum]

While I am skeptical of any trial taking place, Watergate did show to some "how not to get caught next time" like Cheney, whose entire career in Congress was decrying any and all rolling back of an "imperial presidency", and the entire group of neo-conservatives and other authoritarians

Someone down the road could see the actions of Bush and his administration in a similar light

 

[cyborg ninja 14]

There is never going to be an Olbermann/Bush interview that echoes Frost/Nixon. If there ever was to be such an interview, it would have to be someone like Barbara Walters or Tom Brokaw. A well respected journalist, not an extremist with an agenda.

You're right though but Barbara Walters won't live long enough. Maybe someone like Tim Russert. Oh

 

[Oddzball]

Do you need to be reminded of why Congressional Democrats came into power in 2006? I'll give you a hint - it wasn't to go off on a witchhunt for Bush.

Cite.

The fact is 2006 was a year when the corruption of the Republican party, in control of House, Senate, Administration and Judiciary and running unchecked became so gross the public had had enough.

How do you come up with the 'fact' that putting the crooks in jail wasn't that mandate?

 

[Matt]

Cite.

The fact is 2006 was a year when the corruption of the Republican party, in control of House, Senate, Administration and Judiciary and running unchecked became so gross the public had had enough.

How do you come up with the 'fact' that putting the crooks in jail wasn't that mandate?

Zogby did a poll shortly after the 2006 election. Only 30 % or so supported impeachment.

 

[souvlaki]

I couldn't agree more, Souv. This is a prime example of why the extremes in BOTH parties are bad news. The extreme left-wing liberals are no better than the Religious Right.

I agree. Hell, I, of all people, was embarrassed by the people at the inauguration singing "Na Na Hey Hey Kiss Him Goodbye" as they announced him/as he left. Is it really so hard for people to just drop this stuff for one day? We get it, the guy sucked. He's not President anymore. It just feels to me like someone making fun of a person at their funeral. We all have our opinions of the guy, history will do him no favors. I certainly haven't forgiven him for a single thing. But the decisions he has made he will have to live with for the rest of his life, and unless he's oblivious, he will have to live with the fact that he is one of the most hated Presidents in our history. I cannot even imagine what it must be like feeling that hated.

 

[gap5ewl]

Speaking on prosecuting the Bush Administration, what about the United Nations? They could bring him and the administration up for war crimes. Manfred Nowak, a human rights lawyer and "torture" investigator for the United Nations (called The United Nations Special Rapporteur on Torture), went on German TV yesterday and stated the Administration should be looked at for their role in torture and for War Crimes in Iraq (specifically speaking about Bush and Rumsfeld). He could recommend the UN to prosecute Bush and the Administration on their own. Of course I doubt this will happen but if The Obama Administration doesn't go after them, the UN could.

 

[souvlaki]

Speaking on prosecuting the Bush Administration, what about the United Nations? They could bring him and the administration up for war crimes. Manfred Nowak, a human rights lawyer and "torture" investigator for the United Nations (called The United Nations Special Rapporteur on Torture), went on German TV yesterday and stated the Administration should be looked at for their role in torture and for War Crimes in Iraq (specifically speaking about Bush and Rumsfeld). He could recommend the UN to prosecute Bush and the Administration on their own. Of course I doubt this will happen but if The Obama Administration doesn't go after them, the UN could.

It's possible, but I don't see it happening. Turning this into an international affair would probably be worse than making it a domestic prosecution. Don't get me wrong, what he did is unforgivable, but I'd be shocked if actual charges were brought against him. Maybe people within his administration, but actual charges against Bush I just don't see happening.

 

[Marx]

Cite.

The fact is 2006 was a year when the corruption of the Republican party, in control of House, Senate, Administration and Judiciary and running unchecked became so gross the public had had enough.

How do you come up with the 'fact' that putting the crooks in jail wasn't that mandate?

Zogby did a poll shortly after the 2006 election. Only 30 % or so supported impeachment.

There have been several polls like the one Matt just posted. Google is a great thing Oddzball.

I agree. Hell, I, of all people, was embarrassed by the people at the inauguration singing "Na Na Hey Hey Kiss Him Goodbye" as they announced him/as he left. Is it really so hard for people to just drop this stuff for one day? We get it, the guy sucked. He's not President anymore. It just feels to me like someone making fun of a person at their funeral. We all have our opinions of the guy, history will do him no favors. I certainly haven't forgiven him for a single thing. But the decisions he has made he will have to live with for the rest of his life, and unless he's oblivious, he will have to live with the fact that he is one of the most hated Presidents in our history. I cannot even imagine what it must be like feeling that hated.

I guess, to a certain extent, people booing Bush at the inauguration was to be expected. That said, I belileve those people fall under the extreme that we have been discussing.

 

[Marx]

Speaking on prosecuting the Bush Administration, what about the United Nations? They could bring him and the administration up for war crimes. Manfred Nowak, a human rights lawyer and "torture" investigator for the United Nations (called The United Nations Special Rapporteur on Torture), went on German TV yesterday and stated the Administration should be looked at for their role in torture and for War Crimes in Iraq (specifically speaking about Bush and Rumsfeld). He could recommend the UN to prosecute Bush and the Administration on their own. Of course I doubt this will happen but if The Obama Administration doesn't go after them, the UN could.

It's possible, but I don't see it happening. Turning this into an international affair would probably be worse than making it a domestic prosecution. Don't get me wrong, what he did is unforgivable, but I'd be shocked if actual charges were brought against him. Maybe people within his administration, but actual charges against Bush I just don't see happening.

Again, I agree with Souv. Bush is going to fade away into history. And that history will not be kind to him.

 

[souvlaki]

There have been several polls like the one Matt just posted. Google is a great thing Oddzball.



I guess, to a certain extent, people booing Bush at the inauguration was to be expected. That said, I belileve those people fall under the extreme that we have been discussing.

I understand, and I probably shouldn't have been shocked. Maybe it's just I got over the excitement of Bush leaving a while ago because as far as I'm concerned he hasn't, for all intents and purposes, been President since November 4th anyhow. The last few months I almost forgot he was still in the White House.

 

[Addendum]

The booing didn't really bother me. I saw it similar to booing athletes or the officiating crew at a sporting event.

 

[Marx]

I understand, and I probably shouldn't have been shocked. Maybe it's just I got over the excitement of Bush leaving a while ago because as far as I'm concerned he hasn't, for all intents and purposes, been President since November 4th anyhow. The last few months I almost forgot he was still in the White House.

I would say that's completely understandable given the incredibly low profile he's been keeping since November 4th.

 

[Gilpesh]

I guess, to a certain extent, people booing Bush at the inauguration was to be expected. That said, I belileve those people fall under the extreme that we have been discussing.

They booed his carpet in the oval office.... HIS CARPET!


It's getting a little sad. Like Zack Galifianakis says.... be more specific.

 

[gap5ewl]

They booed his carpet in the oval office.... HIS CARPET!


It's getting a little sad. Like Zack Galifianakis says.... be more specific.

If he didn't give a **** about us, why should we give a **** about him? He didn't give us any respect and made a joke out of the position we must respect. He's done a lot of damage to this country and his reputation so I see no reason why he should've gotten applause simply because he was President. The only cheering showed of been from the happiness of him leaving. I mean, people want to press charges against him for crying out loud...



But look, it's obvious he won't be charged with anything, (as usual for corrupt officials..), and, as someone said earlier, he'll just fade into obscurity and will just go down as one of the worst presidents in modern history. So I guess there's just no point in arguing and discussing him. Now we must focus on cleaning up this massive mess he had a hand in creating.

 

[Gilpesh]

I see no reason why he should've gotten applause simply because he was President.

Um... I agree. I was talking about the night before when on MSNBC they talked about how Obama was leaving the W sun rug there for right now... and the crowd got so loud that it took away from the person talking.

We get it. Everyone hates Bush. Everyone. Now can we just move on and be able to say his name without having to pause for people to just "BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!" for an hour until they get done? If those people really want to do something... do something constructive in the area of making Bush face justice for anything illegal he did.



Booing at every mention just gives Fox News some clips to throw around.

 

[The Major]

edit

 

[The Major]

Zogby did a poll shortly after the 2006 election. Only 30 % or so supported impeachment.

It's 2009 now. More things have been revealed every day from whistle blowers. The more the authorities dig which the public could know about could have wanted them to be punished.

 

[The Major]

We have a repeat of the Gerry Ford situation here, imo. A lot of people wanted him to nail Nixon to the wall too, but he chose to move on and get things done.

Nixon isn't in Bush's league of corruption. Pity Woodward and Bernstein lost their fangs while Bush was in office.

Pardoning Bush would potentially alienate our allies again, America's credibility will take longer to recover no matter what Obama fixes, it will allow all the scum from the ranks in the Bush's administration to come back at a future date, we'll have a guaranteed president which may be worse then Bush later on and Obama will have sacrificed his legacy, credibility and second term for a war criminal.

Putting Bush on trial for war crimes might sound satisfying but it would do more harm than good.

It can't be any worse then what Bush did. He only commited war crimes and allowed his friends to personally violate America at every level.

Obama has enough on his plate for two administrations and he's been in power for 24 hours.

It will be much tougher to get done if Bush goes free.

 

[Matt]

Again, what the hell do you charge him with Major? This is very basic elements of criminal court. You need an act of the crime or there has been no crime. You know what, I'm sick of this, you're talking in circles just to stir **** up...either actually back up your case by giving y'know, an actual charge and evidence to back it up, or get the hell out, because its reaching the point where it is just trolling (you making an outrageous claim made to ignite argument amongst people while doing nothing to back it up).

 

[Nitehawk013]

Not really. Some of those examples have nothing to do with Bush's own actions. But since they did happen under Bush's presidency that displays rotten leadership. Walter Reed is a terrible scandal because Bush spent so much money on military spending but most of it obviously didn't help the welfare of the troops. Remember, he cut down the soldiers' benefits before the Walter Reed scandal broke.

Also, the country did not overwhelmingly vote for a ban on gay marriage. And that doesn't mean certain states shouldn't allow gay marriage.

Um, the President's job is not to micro manage every detail of every program going on in America. UPkeep on Walter Reed, I am willing to bet, does not fall under the responsibilities of the White House and the office of the President. Like many of the posters "sins" he wants to lay at Bush's feet, they are not issues he was elected to deal with.

And gay marriage was shot down and thoroughly trounced by the majority in every state that brought it to the ballots with the exception being Mass. unless I am mistaken. When the only state that embraces the practice is the state full of crazies that keep electing a drunk that got away with Manslaughter/neglegent homicide and even then they needed the help of judges to uphold it, I'd say the country did indeed overwhelmingly reject the act.

 

[The Overlord]

Um, the President's job is not to micro manage every detail of every program going on in America. UPkeep on Walter Reed, I am willing to bet, does not fall under the responsibilities of the White House and the office of the President. Like many of the posters "sins" he wants to lay at Bush's feet, they are not issues he was elected to deal with.

And gay marriage was shot down and thoroughly trounced by the majority in every state that brought it to the ballots with the exception being Mass. unless I am mistaken. When the only state that embraces the practice is the state full of crazies that keep electing a drunk that got away with Manslaughter/neglegent homicide and even then they needed the help of judges to uphold it, I'd say the country did indeed overwhelmingly reject the act.

How are laws against gay marriage not big government?

 

[Nitehawk013]

When those laws are voted in as States laws.

The Federal Amendment to the Constitution is only accepted by Federalists because it is a necessary evil. The states have spoken by voting to ban gay marriage over and over. That should be the end of the issue. The states have spoken. Sadly, there is always some activist judge willing to trample the rights of the states in the name of "equality" or "civil rights" even though gay marriage is neither an issue of equality or civil rights.

Since these judges would happily trample states rights, the necessar evil of a Federal amendment is needed to stifle these activist judges and allow the states decisions to stand without intrusion by activists.