His book represents on additonal peice of evidence in a growing body of similar evidence. If you want to ignore his book, fine. But you need to make a choice when the mounting evidence against Bush has some credibility. Personally, I had enough evidence in 1999. I prefer a president that can reliably form a sentence. But thats just me.
I think most of the revelations in this book are neither new, unsubstantiated, or unverifiable. McClellan provides further corroboration, substantiation, and verification of what we have been told by several other prior members of this administration. None of this is new.
How many Republicans have called you a traitor? I can only think of one, maybe two, here on this board. Anywhere else? Your hostility towards everything Republican is more than tiresome and equally insulting. You wear it like a badge of honor but you bring it out to bludgeon everyone who might hold a different opinion.
giddy, several of us here have been called traitors here because we happened to disagree with Bush and his policies, especially those pertaining to the invasion and occupation of Iraq. Called that by some members here who should have been booted for it, IMO, and still support their hero, George W. Bush, regardless of the ever changing fiction "explaining" to the American people why we went into Iraq and why it was a "good thing." The story from the administration has changed numerous times to fit new revelations about conditions in Iraq pre and post-invasion. That anyone can keep track of the shifting reasons used to justify this disaster is a minor miracle. Some of us disagreed with the invasion before it took place, gave reasons why it was a mistake, and have been dismayed as events have proven us right. Dismayed because we love our country and have been appalled at the results of Bush's adventure, results so massive and widespread, so detrimental to our country and its economic health at home, the health and effectiveness of our volunteer military and those who serve, and its international standing, which hasn't been this low since Vietnam and an argument could be made that it is even lower today. At least during Vietnam, it was the Cold War and that was a good excuse to many around the world, even if they thought our intervention was a mistake. No cover of the like exists for Bush's adventure in Iraq. To say that it has been frustrating is a gross understatement. Where I agree with you is that this whole sorry, sordid affair shouldn't be used as a way to tar Republicans in general. Just the leadership of the GOP, past and current. After all... many Democrats and independents were taken in by the "uniter, not a divider" line, and all the attendent lies used to get Bush selected the first time, and "be afraid, be fearful... only I can save you" mantra used when he was elected the second time. Now, we have a chance to break cleanly from the nightmare for this nation that has been George W. Bush. And I welcome Scott McClellan's revelations. Believe them or not, take them with a grain of salt, but they further add to the evidence that the American people were deliberately misled by a President and his crew whose incompetence appears to know no bounds. McClellan was part of that crew. Because of that, it is natural to be suspicious of his book and his motives. Everyone who didn't jump ship due to principal and honor should be looked at askance. Even if everything McClellan says is true, he deserves condemnation. McClellan stood on the podium and repeated the administration's lies to the American people. If he had doubts then, he should have resigned and made them public. It is what you are supposed to do. Impeach Bush.
Deckard,...To me the worst thing about Bush was the people he appointed...He is a sour diappointment in many reagrds. I agree with a few things,...but it's limited...This would shock you, but I'd take Clinton if he could get a third term...#1 we know what to expect. I stated I'd rank only Truman and FDR ahead of him for Democrat Presidents for the 2th century (i'd say kennedy was even with him)...#2, I'm one of those weirdos who thinks you can have good, effective Presidents from both parties...#3, Bill has learned his lesson and has stated his mistake on the gun ban in 93'...makes him that much better in my book.... The unknown has me more concerned regarding politics...
It is regrettable that anyone is called names. Why can't you just forget or ignore it and move on. It's a very small minority (one or two, right?) who are doing this. I'm sorry that, apparently, it has shell-shocked your (and others') psyche. I'm not sure whose hero, if anyone's, GWB is... but he is the president of the US and he deserves some support rather than politically-motivated second-guessing from the get-go... which is what you've admitted to. I think we have more progress in Iraq than you recognize, but I also think that the constant form of terrorism we face from all this is economic.
The two-party system was put in place for the very purpose of "second guessing" the other party. To suggest we can't second guess our president is assinine. But at least you've softened your stance these days and stopped implying Democrats hate America and we would rather terrorists win than GWB as if GWB and America are one and the same.
You must have me confused with someone else. I'm not the least bit "shell shocked." As for forgetting a few folks here calling me a traitor, I'll pass. That's something no one could or should forget. I've never heard an apology for it, so why should I. And I didn't bring it up. giddy, he is quite obviously the hero of some folks here, who have defending him despite every twisted, gut-wrenching change of the story line from him and his crew the past 7+ years. "he is the president of the US and he deserves some support rather than politically-motivated second-guessing from the get-go... which is what you've admitted to." With all due respect, giddy, that's bull ****. "Politically motivated?" Bull ****. "Politically-motivated second-guessing from the get-go... " Even worse. I never voted for either Bush, or Reagan, or Ford, or Nixon, and I'm proud of it. Having said that, I never in my wildest dreams thought Bush could turn from the "get-along, bipartisan" governor he was to the President he turned out to be. The living embodiment of the Peter Principal, which is the nicest thing I can think of to call him. Deserving of respect because he is President? I respect the office. Bush has made a mockery of it. I'll never respect him, in or out of office. I might have had some respect for him as governor, but no longer. When we have a President worthy of respect, then I will respect that President. Not this one, ever. Impeach Bush.
Nice post, ROX. I'd respond further, but my daughter needs to do some homework on the PC! Impeach Bush.
Let it go. I think you are letting it control you. You are kind of rabid. Head out to Hippie Hollow and take a swim.
I personally feel that anybody who would call you a traitor for differing in opinion on what is best for the country certainly is not a real conservative. Conservatives traditionally support the ideals of civil disagreement, as it was one of the cornerstones of our nation's founding. Reposted for truth. See...we agree on some things. It is a very weak kind of evidence. I can write a book about how I saw Obama raping, pillaging, and killing puppies...but that doesn't make it true.
giddy! Great idea! I used to skinny dip all the time at the coves of Paleface Park. You ever go there back in the days before it became a county edifice? Impeach Bush. Hurry!
Has the President or any of his staff specifically denied those accusations? Honestly I don't know and like everything else political I will take McClellan's accusations with a grain of salt but I also don't think that just because he is making money off of this that means that these allegations are automatically untrue.
I think that is a very good point. But just because he wrote that he overheard some conversations doesn't make it automatically true, as some would suggest. I have no idea whether the allegations in his book are true. Nobody here does. There are some that will assume they are true because it makes them feel more correct about their loathing of certain people.
I'm not apologizing to anyone about calling someone a traitor who roots against our military, insults our own Generals (Petraeus) during a time of war, and whose entire political agenda depends on defeat in Iraq. That's a traitor in every sense of the word. It's time we start calling a spade a spade around here.
I would report you for that, Trader_J, but I don't believe in bothering the mods with your trash. Lucky you. Impeach Bush.
