Is George W Bush a complete moron ?

[jackson33]

:lol:

 

What a cop out!

 

They are not slaves. They took their position willingly, and most often ambitiously.

 

If I can not keep my facts straight, and if I'm on trial, then I will be prosecuted. Why should our leaders be above the law?

 

Fully commuted,

Freezy

 

I have recently written on this and will paraphrase for you what I said...

 

In the history of the US, we have chose 43 people to lead our Executive Branch and the duties required by our Constitution. They in there decision making have no doubt ALL broken what could be considered *Impeachable Offenses*, certainly be the loyal opposition. Now we are at War, for what ever reason, which 99% of Congress and 90% of the public originally approved signing on to the *Bush Doctrine 9-21-01.* He has chosen to maintain that practice, which is not only his prerogative, but as duty from its inception.

 

Personally, I feel many strive to be President for reason's of Patriotism/Duty, as all Presidents seem to have been well versed in History. They are not slaves, but have chose that volatile life style for reason only they could explain.

 

There is no way I could explain your average day and that of any President of the US. Guessing and I am sure there is no figure, tens of thousands of decisions are made daily on behalf of the US Government to every conceivable entity on the planet. A good many by field commanders and many of their sub-ordinates.

 

On any given day in peace and on any given day at War to much greater degree, the President is far above the laws which govern our life's. If you make up a caravan and drive through a major town, through stop lights and all that occurs, you will spend a great deal of jail time. This may sound like a stretch, but the importance of the office and duties require less restrictions than most could understand.

[InfiniteNow]

Personally, I feel many strive to be President for reason's of Patriotism/Duty, as all Presidents seem to have been well versed in History. They are not slaves, but have chose that volatile life style for reason only they could explain.

You don't read much about the psychology of the ego, do ya? All well versed in history? Hmmm... You make such odd claims with no support. You're a curious and funny man.

 

On any given day in peace and on any given day at War to much greater degree, the President is far above the laws which govern our life's. If you make up a caravan and drive through a major town, through stop lights and all that occurs, you will spend a great deal of jail time. This may sound like a stretch, but the importance of the office and duties require less restrictions than most could understand.

 

Having a police escort you through red lights in towns and being above the law are two completely seperate issues. Please recognize the laws being discussed by the other members here, and notice none of them have anything whatsoever to do with locally enforced traffic violations.

 

 

Further, having read the constitution as well as the federalist papers, which provide insight into what was intended when our republic was setup, I'd suggest that the President and the office, being SO important, actually require MORE restrictions and laws.

 

What you state above, Jackson, is counter to the entire ideology of our republic, and betrays your lack of awareness regarding what made our country so wonderful.

[jackson33]

History has been an influence on many, if not all those 43 persons who achieved the ultimate political position in the US. Newt G., I believe has a book or two on the subject.

 

Its hard for me to disagree that in theory every person in the US is subject and expected to conform to the same letter of the law. In practical terms its just not what happens.

 

If you take a square block of people from NYC or LA and place them in Omaha Nebraska, they will not be treated the same under law by the well intended people of Omaha. Law enforcement or the actual interpretation of law by the local governing force determines acceptability of offense. This is no less evident in folks that migrate to the US, from other countries, where much of whats considered criminal activity here is not addressed much less criminal where they came from.

 

I called my Caravan a stretch and meant it as such, but the person governing 300 million people simply cannot be subject to the same restrictions and controls most of us are. When Clinton was doing his thing in the Oval Office or Reagan was (no doubt) involved in Iran-Contra or any such events through out our history, I would come to the same conclusions, basing my opinion on *need to know* and *precedent of practice* by their only true piers, the few that preceded them in office. Even the laws that govern us are based on accepted ruling from the past, based on the decisions made in the past and we are judged by our piers....

[Buffy]

Well that explains a lot: its pretty clear that the Bush Administration thinks that it should be judged by its piers...

 

So if she floats, she's made of wood,

Buffy

[freeztar]

Well that explains a lot: its pretty clear that the Bush Administration thinks that it should be judged by its piers...

 

So if she floats, she's made of wood,

Buffy

 

 

A duck!

[TheBigDog]

Another week has passed. Gosh. How will I EVER find another issue which speaks poorly of our nations <cough cough ahem> leader?

 

 

Bush Is Prepared to Veto Bill to Expand Child Insurance - New York Times

 

 

 

Queue now the incoherent off-point distractors.

If it has enough bi-partisan support then Congress can over ride the veto. Otherwise we will have to live with the billions of dollars in savings. Or the Congress can find middle ground with the President who has proposed a *modest* 20% increase in spending on the program instead of the 140% working through the Senate or the 200% working through the House.

 

Bill

[InfiniteNow]

If it has enough bi-partisan support then Congress can over ride the veto. Otherwise we will have to live with the billions of dollars in savings. Or the Congress can find middle ground with the President who has proposed a *modest* 20% increase in spending on the program instead of the 140% working through the Senate or the 200% working through the House.

Fair enough, Bill. As per usual, were I to argue this point, I'd be forced to simply suggest the compassion and humanitarian points required to frame the issue properly. This would open me up to attack from those who disagree with my desire to make ourselves think more like a planet than a collection of nations or religions or colors...

 

 

How about I offer another example instead?

 

Surgeon General Sees 4-Year Term as Compromised - New York Times

Former Surgeon General Richard H. Carmona told a Congressional panel Tuesday that top Bush administration officials repeatedly tried to weaken or suppress important public health reports because of political considerations.

 

The administration, Dr. Carmona said, would not allow him to speak or issue reports about stem cells, emergency contraception, sex education, or prison, mental and global health issues. Top officials delayed for years and tried to “water down” a landmark report on secondhand smoke, he said. Released last year, the report concluded that even brief exposure to cigarette smoke could cause immediate harm.

 

Dr. Carmona said he was ordered to mention President Bush three times on every page of his speeches. He also said he was asked to make speeches to support Republican political candidates and to attend political briefings.

 

And administration officials even discouraged him from attending the Special Olympics because, he said, of that charitable organization’s longtime ties to a “prominent family” that he refused to name.

 

“I was specifically told by a senior person, ‘Why would you want to help those people?’ ” Dr. Carmona said.

 

The Special Olympics is one of the nation’s premier charitable organizations to benefit disabled people, and the Kennedys have long been deeply involved in it.

[TheBigDog]

Fair enough, Bill. As per usual, were I to argue this point, I'd be forced to simply suggest the compassion and humanitarian points required to frame the issue properly. This would open me up to attack from those who disagree with my desire to make ourselves think more like a planet than a collection of nations or religions or colors...

 

 

How about I offer another example instead?

 

Surgeon General Sees 4-Year Term as Compromised - New York Times

It appears to me that the SG may have an ax to grind. Reading through his public speeches I see examples of what he was "discouraged" from doing, and a lack of what he was *compelled* to do. Or better yet, just visit United States Department of Health and Human Services where *every* so-called banned topic is discussed.

 

As for the Special Olympics...

President Bush Honors Eunice Kennedy Shriver, Celebrates Special Olympics

President George W. Bush signs bill

Special Olympics Wisconsin: History

Secretary Announces Partnership with Special Olympics US Education Department Press Releases - Find Articles

Peace Corps Online | December 13, 2001 - White House Press Release: Eunice Kennedy Shriver's Special Olympics honored by President George W. Bush at White House Reception

Special Olympics Maryland - Inspire Greatness

 

This one was cute too...

Tennessee Democrats Compare Republicans To Special Olympics Children

 

Bill

[InfiniteNow]

Sure Bill. Cheers mate.

[TheBigDog]

Sure Bill. Cheers mate.

Damn you retract your words quickly!

deleted

I am far too fair and balanced to attack anyone. ;)

 

Cheers

 

Bill

[InfiniteNow]

I am far too fair and balanced to attack anyone.

Yes... very fair of you to quote a post I thought better of and edited out, as well as what I edited it to without explaining what you were doing.

[TheBigDog]

Yes... very fair of you to quote a post I thought better of and edited out, as well as what I edited it to without explaining what you were doing.

I'm only responding so I could capture your quote before you went on a mass tear deleting your posts...

 

PerpetuallyPresent, I have to let you know that I just finished a course in critical thinking. The practice that I got from debating with you helped earn me an A on the course (thanks!). My current class is Ethics, and I want another A, so we have another four weeks of this and then we can resume our more placid relationship.

 

Bill

[InfiniteNow]

I'm only responding so I could capture your quote before you went on a mass tear deleting your posts...

 

I can't say I've ever done this Bill, nor can you. Can you please advise why you are posting falsehoods?

 

 

As for ethics... I should never have had to ask you to edit your post. Talk about about a failure to lead by example.

 

Please also comply with the request I sent you just now via PM.

 

 

Cheers.

[TheBigDog]

I can't say I've ever done this Bill, nor can you. Can you please advise why you are posting falsehoods?

 

 

As for ethics... I should never have had to ask you to edit your post. Talk about about a failure to lead by example.

 

Please also comply with the request I sent you just now via PM.

 

 

Cheers. ;)

I found it ironic that you were angered by my quoting something that you had chosen to delete based upon a quote from you in another thread (US Immigration)...

I'm only responding so I could capture your quote before you went on a mass tear deleting your posts...

Request complied with. Thanks for the note, I will have a blast in Paris.

 

Bill

[jackson33]

Well that explains a lot: its pretty clear that the Bush Administration thinks that it should be judged by its piers...

 

So if she floats, she's made of wood, :phones:

Buffy

 

Not sure where your statement is coming from...I have only suggested that their are no piers to judge what any of the President's do, during their tenure.

Much of their work is held for years after leaving office and much classified material is never released.

 

In law that governs the mass, many judgments are made from previous rulings, called precedent. President's must use what the predecessors have established as acceptable, occasionally trying to establish new precedent.

Bush, IMO and to my knowledge, has not tried to set new practice for future leaders, but has used what other before have done, to lessor degrees.

 

All politicians are judged by the public. The public has few resources to truly judge what the leader of an administration fails in or accomplishes. The public has and could now, make the operation of a government difficult to function.

In this case, as with Nixon, the person can resign to allow a smooth continuance of governing. Many have continued in office, practically in total inefficient mode, not sought re-election or been defeated in an attempt. Personally, I feel Bush II, is not under public pressure to leave office and if it were a 1st term, would easily be re-elected. Although there is an appearance of this projected by Congress, the public has not embraced their actions.

[jackson33]

Infinite; In the US, we have a ragging debate going on, with regards to Social obligation of government. Our Constitution, does not mandate any obligation to individual decisions, actually protection public from government intrusion to make them. This Constitution allows *promotion of the General Welfare* and the Congress/Supreme Court has made law/judged some things which make Government Agencies liable for some social benefits. Social Security and the Equal Right acts have generated others. Socialized Medicine or Universal Health Care, involve much more than health care for the general public. This involves the Medical Industry in total, the people that have or will chose to work in this industry, the Pharmaceutical Industry, Nursing/Assisted living industry along with all involved in administrating and dispensing of the products and services. Many of us feel, INCENTIVE alone for the minds and talent that are now in the various fields will be lost, not only hurting our overall health system, but in the end the World's. The humanitarian thing to do is KEEP GOVERNMENT out, and get what government is involved with out ASAP. There is probably no reason to mention, but, NO ONE, in this Country can be denied care, even if that person is not from the US, or that virtually every person on Welfare or SS already has coverage, with limitations for acceptance so low, most any one could be classified disabled.

[paigetheoracle]

Well that explains a lot: its pretty clear that the Bush Administration thinks that it should be judged by its piers...

 

So if she floats, she's made of wood, :phones:

Buffy

 

In the UK we say 'Speak of the Devil and he'll a-pier' (same difference).

 

Jackson33: This is a play on words rather than one on a stage - it should read 'Peer' when you're talking of equals - pier is a plank of wood sticking its neck out - oh sorry, are we still talking about George Bush?