George Bush: "Fuck You Congress"

[KaskadskyjKozak]

I'm waiting for the press conference of Dick Cheney claiming Executive Privilege for not submitting documents.

 

 

at least your to the point and funny

 

[mattp]

Jay and fairweather, you can't be serious. The evil leftists who are so unpatriotic and misguided that they would complain about the misdoings of the President are more dangerous to American prosperity or security or prestige or whatever than the current Administration?

 

You guys are tuly over the edge.

[tvashtarkatena]

Just a word on the 'biased media' non-issue:

 

Given that

 

a) 'the media' is a collection of market driven, for profit businesses and

b) America, per its voting history, is pretty close to half conservative and half liberal (using the broadest definitions of those too terms)

and c) Most people prefer media that supports their point of view

 

it would be impossible to have a 'mostly liberal' or 'mostly conservative' media in this country. Therefore, it should be no surprise to anyone that the range of media available here pretty much matches our political leanings. In the aggregate, its biases cancel out pretty well.

[mattp]

Bias in favor of those in power or those who have access to the sources of information the media relies upon is not offset by balanced reporting as you would suggest. Consider, for example, the media's repeating Bush administration press releases ad nauseam and recycling their lies in the run up to the Iraq war: yes, the truth about these stories was available, and even available in mainstream sources like the NYT if you read very carefully, but there was a consistent distortion in how the news was presented.

 

 

[JayB]

Jay and fairweather, you can't be serious. The evil leftists who are so unpatriotic and misguided that they would complain about the misdoings of the President are more dangerous to American prosperity or security or prestige or whatever than the current Administration?

 

You guys are tuly over the edge.

 

Read that bill yet, oh serious one? Have any comment on why a Democrat might co-sponsor such a thing?

 

 

My point vis-a-vis Condorcet is that those who agitate for domestic revolutions are often amongst their first victims.

[underworld]

Just a word on the 'biased media' non-issue:

 

Given that

 

a) 'the media' is a collection of market driven, for profit businesses and

b) America, per its voting history, is pretty close to half conservative and half liberal (using the broadest definitions of those too terms)

and c) Most people prefer media that supports their point of view

 

it would be impossible to have a 'mostly liberal' or 'mostly conservative' media in this country. Therefore, it should be no surprise to anyone that the range of media available here pretty much matches our political leanings. In the aggregate, its biases cancel out pretty well.

 

how 'bout that fairness doctrine BS... must...regulate...airwaves....

[JayB]

Bias in favor of those in power or those who have access to the sources of information the media relies upon is not offset by balanced reporting as you would suggest. Consider, for example, the media's repeating Bush administration press releases ad nauseam and recycling their lies in the run up to the Iraq war: yes, the truth about these stories was available, and even available in mainstream sources like the NYT if you read very carefully, but there was a consistent distortion in how the news was presented.

 

 

Consider the "9/11 Truth" movement. This is the most abundantly documented, exquisitely investigated incident in the history of mankind, yet an astonishingly high percentage of your ideological counterparts have convinced themselves that the collapse of the towers, the attack on the pentagon, etc were an elaborately orchestrated conspiracy conducted by their own government. This story has had no support whatsoever in any legitimate media.

[cj001f]

Consider the "9/11 Truth" movement. This is the most abundantly documented, exquisitely investigated incident in the history of mankind, yet an astonishingly high percentage of your ideological counterparts have convinced themselves that the collapse of the towers, the attack on the pentagon, etc were an elaborately orchestrated conspiracy conducted by their own government. This story has had no support whatsoever in any legitimate media.

 

As opposed to the grand Islamic conspiracy where we have a billion people trying to destroy the US in a grand social war that the right gets their rocks off on?

[dt_3pin]

 

As opposed to the grand Islamic conspiracy where we have a billion people trying to destroy the US in a grand social war that the right gets their rocks off on?

 

Unfortunately, that conspiracy is a bit closer to the truth than the 911 Truth crap.

[cj001f]

As opposed to the grand Islamic conspiracy where we have a billion people trying to destroy the US in a grand social war that the right gets their rocks off on?

 

Unfortunately, that conspiracy is a bit closer to the truth than the 911 Truth crap.

 

bullshit.

 

the majority of the islamic world (at least the parts I've been to lately) likes America and likes Americans

[tvashtarkatena]

Jay and fairweather, you can't be serious. The evil leftists who are so unpatriotic and misguided that they would complain about the misdoings of the President are more dangerous to American prosperity or security or prestige or whatever than the current Administration?

 

You guys are tuly over the edge.

 

Read that bill yet, oh serious one? Have any comment on why a Democrat might co-sponsor such a thing?

 

 

My point vis-a-vis Condorcet is that those who agitate for domestic revolutions are often amongst their first victims.

 

You have neither much of a point nor much knowledge of how congress works. Bills such as this always have bipartisan sponsorship if they are to have a prayer of passing. That's legislative business as usual. Yawn.

 

Let's have another yawn for the contents of the bill, which I have read. The only controversial sections deal with enhanced surveillance powers during wartime, and what exactly constitutes wartime. In the aggregate, the bill seeks to re-establish the rule of law and checks and balances over secret surveillance, something that has not existed since the Bush administration started it's extra legal (according to the courts) NSA spying program.

 

In other words, you can't possibly be serious with this 'hard hitting' posting...

 

...Oh Serious One.

 

 

 

 

[JayB]

Consider the "9/11 Truth" movement. This is the most abundantly documented, exquisitely investigated incident in the history of mankind, yet an astonishingly high percentage of your ideological counterparts have convinced themselves that the collapse of the towers, the attack on the pentagon, etc were an elaborately orchestrated conspiracy conducted by their own government. This story has had no support whatsoever in any legitimate media.

 

As opposed to the grand Islamic conspiracy where we have a billion people trying to destroy the US in a grand social war that the right gets their rocks off on?

 

Open hostility is one thing, a conspiracy is quite another.

 

 

[cj001f]

Open hostility is one thing, a conspiracy is quite another.

 

They are both fictitious

[KaskadskyjKozak]

Bias in favor of those in power or those who have access to the sources of information the media relies upon is not offset by balanced reporting as you would suggest. Consider, for example, the media's repeating Bush administration press releases ad nauseam and recycling their lies in the run up to the Iraq war: yes, the truth about these stories was available, and even available in mainstream sources like the NYT if you read very carefully, but there was a consistent distortion in how the news was presented.

 

 

Dude, Bush is not running for reelection. He's a lame duck. He's done, passe, over with. Get a grip and move on.

[KaskadskyjKozak]

Consider the "9/11 Truth" movement. This is the most abundantly documented, exquisitely investigated incident in the history of mankind, yet an astonishingly high percentage of your ideological counterparts have convinced themselves that the collapse of the towers, the attack on the pentagon, etc were an elaborately orchestrated conspiracy conducted by their own government. This story has had no support whatsoever in any legitimate media.

 

As opposed to the grand Islamic conspiracy where we have a billion people trying to destroy the US in a grand social war that the right gets their rocks off on?

 

Open hostility is one thing, a conspiracy is quite another.

 

 

A fair percent of that 1 billion IS hostile to the US. Even if it's just 10%, that's 100 million. As for the rest there's a whole mixed bag of feelings about the US, from mistrust and mild dislike up through "liking" us.

 

I find it ironic that someone like Hot Carl suggests that they all love us over there in Islamistan, since he certainly mocked the idea of being greeted as liberators in Iraq. Seems like the same flawed, naive idea rehashed over again.

 

[JayB]

Jay and fairweather, you can't be serious. The evil leftists who are so unpatriotic and misguided that they would complain about the misdoings of the President are more dangerous to American prosperity or security or prestige or whatever than the current Administration?

 

You guys are tuly over the edge.

 

Read that bill yet, oh serious one? Have any comment on why a Democrat might co-sponsor such a thing?

 

 

My point vis-a-vis Condorcet is that those who agitate for domestic revolutions are often amongst their first victims.

 

You have neither much of a point nor much knowledge of how congress works. Bills such as this always have bipartisan sponsorship if they are to have a prayer of passing. That's legislative business as usual. Yawn.

 

Let's have another yawn for the contents of the bill, which I have read. The only controversial sections deal with enhanced surveillance powers during wartime, and what exactly constitutes wartime. In the aggregate, the bill seeks to re-establish the rule of law and checks and balances over secret surveillance, something that has not existed since the Bush administration started it's extra legal (according to the courts) NSA spying program.

 

In other words, you can't possibly be serious with this 'hard hitting' posting...

 

...Oh Serious One.

 

 

 

 

Right - they need bipartisan sponsorship if they have a prayer of passing, so people in the legislature routinely attach their names to bills that promote objectives that they are vehemently opposed to because - that's just how things work over there.

That's also why they proposed legislation that amends the rules and procedures, because the ones in place already are clearly flawless and not in need of any modification.

 

 

[tvashtarkatena]

Consider the "9/11 Truth" movement. This is the most abundantly documented, exquisitely investigated incident in the history of mankind, yet an astonishingly high percentage of your ideological counterparts have convinced themselves that the collapse of the towers, the attack on the pentagon, etc were an elaborately orchestrated conspiracy conducted by their own government. This story has had no support whatsoever in any legitimate media.

 

Another fiction....

 

 

[tvashtarkatena]

 

Right - they need bipartisan sponsorship if they have a prayer of passing, so people in the legislature routinely attach their names to bills that promote objectives that they are vehemently opposed to because - that's just how things work over there.

That's also why they proposed legislation that amends the rules and procedures, because the ones in place already are clearly flawless and not in need of any modification.

 

Still waiving this wet noodle around, I see. Perhaps the sponsors of this bill are not vehemently opposed to re-establishing checks and balances and the rule of law. Perhaps they are also willing to compromise to attain these valuable objectives. Perhaps both Republicans and Democrats are interested in these very same goals. Welcome to politics.

 

And the fact that FISA, or any complex piece of legislation, may be amended every now and then, for political or procedural purposes, should be news to no one. Legislation need not be flawless to be fundamentally sound.

Edited June 29, 2007 by tvashtarkatena

[dt_3pin]

Dude, Bush is not running for reelection. He's a lame duck. He's done, passe, over with. Get a grip and move on.

 

 

Quite ironic, coming from a serial Clinton-basher.

Edited June 29, 2007 by dt_3pin

[mattp]

Dude, Bush is not running for reelection. He's a lame duck. He's done, passe, over with. Get a grip and move on.

 

Are you serious? He's the president. He's commander in chief and the decider. Even as lame duck, he wields tremendous power and given their entrenched position and continued attempt to stonewall discussion of virtually all the issues about which your disloyal unpatriots complain, there is no reason to think the President or his cronies are waking up and likely to show more respect for reality or for the Constitution or anything else "in their way" -- and certainly not without constant pressure.

 

As much as you would like everyone to leave your stooge of a president alone so he can continue these great programs you oh so appreciate, I don't think it would be a good idea for ANYBODY to consider him harmless and simply "move on."

[JayB]

 

Right - they need bipartisan sponsorship if they have a prayer of passing, so people in the legislature routinely attach their names to bills that promote objectives that they are vehemently opposed to because - that's just how things work over there.

That's also why they proposed legislation that amends the rules and procedures, because the ones in place already are clearly flawless and not in need of any modification.

 

Still waiving this wet noodle around, I see. Perhaps the sponsors of this bill are not vehemently opposed to re-establishing checks and balances and the rule of law. Perhaps they are also willing to compromise to attain these valuable objectives. Perhaps both Republicans and Democrats are interested in these very same goals. Welcome to politics.

 

And the fact that FISA, or any complex piece of legislation, may be amended every now and then, for political or procedural purposes, should be news to no one. Legislation need not be flawless to be fundamentally sound.

 

They didn't amend the rules for "procedural and political purposes," or for any vague and nebulous purposes such as "restoring the rule of law." If that was their only purpose, they would have simply insisted that the present administration and all that followed strictly abide by the existing, unmodified rules. They recognized that the statute, as written, needed to be amended to provide for effective intelligence gathering and they did so.

[tvashtarkatena]

Yes, I love the former Bush supporter strategy of just "waiting till its over". La la la la la!

 

Unfortunately, it's still going on. Iraq, Afghanistan, Guantanamo, secret prisons, torture, global warming without a coherent national policy.

 

So sit back and relax, fuckers. It's certainly not your fault. You didn't know.

 

And thank you for voting.

[underworld]

Consider the "9/11 Truth" movement. This is the most abundantly documented, exquisitely investigated incident in the history of mankind, yet an astonishingly high percentage of your ideological counterparts have convinced themselves that the collapse of the towers, the attack on the pentagon, etc were an elaborately orchestrated conspiracy conducted by their own government. This story has had no support whatsoever in any legitimate media.

 

Another fiction....

 

 

even .5% is an "astonishingly high percentage" for that lunacy...

[tvashtarkatena]

Well, somewhere around 90% of the same general population believe that there's a big old super powerful, incredibly smart creature in the sky who loves each and every one of us, special like.

 

At least the 911 conspiracy folks have SOME evidence for their lunacy.

 

Cue Seahawks, stage Right. Take one, Creationism Rehash.

 

Cue lightning strike, exit Tvashtar through trap door.

Edited June 29, 2007 by tvashtarkatena

[ashw_justin]

Step one in ruining the republic: invent a foreign enemy to silence your domestic adversaries. "We are immune to criticism or prosecution because we are heroic patriots." Really?

 

Revolution is implicit in our government. The top MUST be taken down periodically, for multiple reasons. Elections are one of many peaceful ways this can happen.