The question posed is one that only exposes perceptions. Here is the list of Administrations which were supposed answers: Taft (sarcastic) Taylor (sarcastic) George Washington Every FDR Kennedy LBJ Woodrow Wilson Teddy Roosevelt My Mom Interesting enough, no once ventured GWB did they? I'm sure that's because I asked the question! Who else are we missing? Clinton Bush 41 Reagan Carter Nixon Eisenhower Truman BTW, you might read Corso's book. One of his claims is that all the cold-war sabre rattling was just an excuse to overbuild the military (both Russian and US) for an "anticipated" extra-terrestrial war; he dubs it your WWIII. The Cold War gave both natons the excuse to ramp up the military. For example, the U2 flights were also reconnoiting over vast parts of uninhabited Asia-- looking for signs of alien activity on the Asian continent as well as Soviet military stuff. According to him the government took this stuff very seriously because "they" were really here. Corso himself saw the bodies and most of the artifacts. In fact, it was his job to seed them into ongoing mililtary contracts so as to avoid detection (doing nothing new, nothing out of the ordinary). The book was published in 1997. Maybe the guy's in the looney bin. I'll have to google him sometime. Nevertheless it's an interesting read.
maybe I havent paid close enough attention, but I dont hear folks claiming that the alleged deceit by this Admin is unique in the history of American politics. You kinda hedged on your answer to my question giddy... Do you, or do you not think the accusations of deceit and misbehavior irt the war are valid complaints? I see you saying that everyone cuts corners, but in this case we are talking about more than just cutting corners...and since you are attempting to point out that other Admins have done similar things, does this mean you acknowledge the validity of the complaints? Simple question. Im interested cause if so, you would be the first Bush supporter to admit that problems occured with their handling of the war and its aftemath.
The Bush administration does not have to be "uniquely dishonest" to have been dishonest. You can try to deflect the criticism all you want, but Bush (at the very least) exaggerated the facts to lead us into war. The only other example that comes close is LBJ and the Gulf of Tonkin affair, which was just as wrong and got us into a war that was similarly unjust.
Again, the administration does not have to be "uniquely crooked" to be crooked. Good to see you admit that GWB's administration is crooked, though.
Guess which Administration is the first one in 130 years to have a sitting cabinet member indicted on felony charges?
1898 - Spanish American War - sinking of the Maine. 1915 - WWI - sinking of the Lusitania. 1941 - WWII - Pearl Harbor. 1964 - Vietnam - Gulf of Tonkin. 1990 - Persian Gulf - Iraq kills babies. 2003 - Iraq - 9/11, WMD, etc. It seems like every 25 years or so we go to war under false pretenses. I am not commenting on whether these wars are just or not. Thats another debate. I'm just pointing out that the public is almost always lied to about the reason for going to war.
Hey, I'm the one who a year ago posted the quote from Eisenhower which said that no war could proceed as planned because there is a determined enemy across from you who is doing their damndest to upset you and your efforts. Every war has screw-ups. As I understand it, the invasion at Normandy had a number of screw-ups (people at the wrong place, etc) but by sheer grit and might we persevered. I think that every administration gets caught up in deceit and misbehavior. Simple answer. When and if the time occurs that I feel that any administration is doing so without the best interests of America at heart, then I'll rant. This war is problematic because the enemy is so atypical from enemies we've fought in the past: no country, no uniform, no restraint on civilian casualties, etc.
Guess who is responsible for the following quotes? Tom DeLay • “This is [President Clinton’s] war.” Washington Post, 4/14/99 • “The Kosovo operation is different and oxymoronic. It is a ‘peace war’ waged by ‘peace hawks’ pursuing a dovish social agenda. Peace hawks are global idealists and former anti-war activists, including the youthful Bill Clinton.” Floor Statement, 4/15/99 • “Doing good on a worldwide scale appeals to peace hawks, who are motivated by altruism, not patriotism.” Floor Statement, 4/15/99 • “There's no national interest of the United States in Kosovo. It's flawed policy and it was flawed to go in. I think this president is one of the least effective presidents of my life time. He's hollowed out our forces while running round the world with these adventures.” The Guardian, 5/17/99 • “American foreign policy is now one huge big mystery. Simply put, the administration is trying to lead the world with a feel-good foreign policy.” Floor Statement on Resolution on Peacekeeping Operations in Kosovo, 3/11/99 • “Bombing a sovereign nation for ill-defined reasons with vague objectives undermines the American stature in the world. The international respect and trust for America has diminished every time we casually let the bombs fly. We must stop giving the appearance that our foreign policy is formulated by the Unabomber.” Floor Statement on Resolution on Peacekeeping Operations in Kosovo, 3/11/99 • “Mr. Chairman, I rise today to voice my complete opposition to sending American troops to Kosovo. There is simply no vision to this mission. There is a six-year trend to send American troops anywhere for any reason, but there are no consistent goals that tie all of these missions together.” Floor Statement on Resolution on Peacekeeping Operations in Kosovo, 3/11/99 • “I rise today to state that no defense funds should be used for ground forces in Kosovo unless authorized by Congress.” Floor Statement, 4/15/99 • “So what they are doing here is they are voting to continue an unplanned war by an administration that is incompetent of [sic] carrying it out. I hope my colleagues will vote against this resolution.” Floor Statement on S. Con. Res. 21, 4/15/99 • “It is clear that any deployment to Kosovo will similarly drag on and go enormously over budget.” Floor Statement, 4/28/99
So said the man in the gay bar. All Administrations are crooked, to a degree. GWBs Administration is crooked to the Nth degree. They've redefined slimy, and they make the Clinton Administration, who were quite crooked themselves, look like a Boy Scout troop.
Congratulations, Giddy. You've made my day. Please explain how being hounded by a special prosecutor funded by $60 million in taxpayer dollars, who winds up investigating your personal life when he couldn't find anything amiss with your Whitewater investment, can be considered "easy"?
Wire tapping without search warrents isn't political hacking. It is expicity illegal according to laws currently on the books. And if it can be proven that GWB (or somebody in his cabinet) knowingly authorized this activity, then it is grounds for impeachment. Suck on that. Can you say Watergate?
I don't think W should be impeached. I think he should be prosecuted, convicted and sent to jail. I think that would make W's legacy, serving his last year in office from a federal prison cell.
I think the point of the thread, that these criticisms are not unique to this administration, is moot. A) It does not mean the current criticisms are not valid B) if it is true about whichever democractic administration, it does not justify the current behavior of the government. If anything, it underscores the temptations of power. Democrats are CERTAINLY not immune, but that surely does not justify the atrocious abuses of power that are currently in play by this administration. If anything, it is worse just because we should be improving in terms of ethics and wisdom, not digressing or moving laterally.
To me, this is the rub: --When GWB ran in 2000, one of his catchphrases was that he would "bring honesty and integrity to the White House. Instead, he has made the White House smarmier than it has ever been.
