Comments on: VIDEO: Bush Bobs and Weaves on Abramoff Photos http://thinkprogress.org/2006/01/26/bush-bobs-and-weaves/ Wed, 25 Nov 2009 23:42:09 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5 hourly 1 By: gieco http://thinkprogress.org/2006/01/26/bush-bobs-and-weaves/comment-page-3/#comment-1766141 gieco Fri, 16 Feb 2007 17:08:19 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2006/01/26/video-bush-bobs-and-weaves-on-abramoff-photos/#comment-1766141 Thank you for the great web site - a true resource, and one many people clearly enjoy Thank you for the great web site – a true resource, and one many people clearly enjoy

]]> By: buy cheap cialis fioricet http://thinkprogress.org/2006/01/26/bush-bobs-and-weaves/comment-page-3/#comment-1005506 buy cheap cialis fioricet Thu, 19 Oct 2006 04:54:22 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2006/01/26/video-bush-bobs-and-weaves-on-abramoff-photos/#comment-1005506 woe rest suffering conquerers duplicity - Tons of interesdting stuff!!! woe rest suffering conquerers duplicity – Tons of interesdting stuff!!!

]]> By: Frank http://thinkprogress.org/2006/01/26/bush-bobs-and-weaves/comment-page-3/#comment-487332 Frank Mon, 27 Mar 2006 18:46:10 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2006/01/26/video-bush-bobs-and-weaves-on-abramoff-photos/#comment-487332 MR PRESIDENT RULES!!!!!!!!!!! THE WORLD SUCKS!!! MR PRESIDENT RULES!!!!!!!!!!!
THE WORLD SUCKS!!!

]]> By: tizzrizza http://thinkprogress.org/2006/01/26/bush-bobs-and-weaves/comment-page-3/#comment-445201 tizzrizza Sat, 11 Feb 2006 06:01:33 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2006/01/26/video-bush-bobs-and-weaves-on-abramoff-photos/#comment-445201 I've damn near read every post here, and unconventional nonconformist is, by my declaration the WINNER! Please(rightpunch) for the love of G@D, don't tell other people that their entire opinion is wholly based on emotional stirings, since an "opponent" poster got under you skin, it triggered a knee jerk emotional reaction on your part. "If you are to be blindliy led to Washington like sheep, you will surely find yourself devoured by wolves." Benjimin Franklin I’ve damn near read every post here, and unconventional nonconformist is, by my declaration the WINNER! Please(rightpunch) for the love of G@D, don’t tell other people that their entire opinion is wholly based on emotional stirings, since an “opponent” poster got under you skin, it triggered a knee jerk emotional reaction on your part.

“If you are to be blindliy led to Washington like sheep, you will surely find yourself devoured by wolves.”
Benjimin Franklin

]]> By: unconventional nonconformist http://thinkprogress.org/2006/01/26/bush-bobs-and-weaves/comment-page-3/#comment-444390 unconventional nonconformist Fri, 10 Feb 2006 08:37:03 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2006/01/26/video-bush-bobs-and-weaves-on-abramoff-photos/#comment-444390 I’ve been in the process of creating a presentation about ethics for class and I’m pleased to have come across this page...there are several excellent comments!...The biggest thing that I have noticed about our elected officials is that they can only remember 2/3 of what it takes to get/be there...first part is "of the people"...second part is "by the people"...they have these down pretty well...and the third part is "for the people"...two out of three may not be bad and may be good enough for meatloaf but personally I think they need to remember where they came from and who they’re there for!...and no it's not for the rich oil mongers, highest bidders, and big businesses...it’s supposed to be for the American public!...They intentionally construct things in a manner that is so complicated and they hope (because they think the American public isn’t smart enough) that nobody figures out what they are truly all about...independence and freedom...where have they gone?..."peace, liberty, and justice for all"...when there is a rich justice and a poor justice the system fails!...mostly because absolute power corrupts absolutely! I’ve been in the process of creating a presentation about ethics for class and I’m pleased to have come across this page…there are several excellent comments!…The biggest thing that I have noticed about our elected officials is that they can only remember 2/3 of what it takes to get/be there…first part is “of the people”…second part is “by the people”…they have these down pretty well…and the third part is “for the people”…two out of three may not be bad and may be good enough for meatloaf but personally I think they need to remember where they came from and who they’re there for!…and no it’s not for the rich oil mongers, highest bidders, and big businesses…it’s supposed to be for the American public!…They intentionally construct things in a manner that is so complicated and they hope (because they think the American public isn’t smart enough) that nobody figures out what they are truly all about…independence and freedom…where have they gone?…”peace, liberty, and justice for all”…when there is a rich justice and a poor justice the system fails!…mostly because absolute power corrupts absolutely!

]]> By: Think Progress » EXCLUSIVE: Abramoff Photos of President Bush, First Lady ‘Just Sitting In His Office’ http://thinkprogress.org/2006/01/26/bush-bobs-and-weaves/comment-page-3/#comment-443453 Think Progress » EXCLUSIVE: Abramoff Photos of President Bush, First Lady ‘Just Sitting In His Office’ Thu, 09 Feb 2006 16:49:03 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2006/01/26/video-bush-bobs-and-weaves-on-abramoff-photos/#comment-443453 [...] The White House has continually refused to release photos of President Bush with Jack Abramoff. Moreover, Press Secretary Scott McClellan has said that if photos of the two together exist, they are shots taken at “widely attended” Hanukkah receptions in 2001 and 2002. But according to Eisler, none of the photos in Abramoff’s office were taken at Hanukkah receptions. [...] [...] The White House has continually refused to release photos of President Bush with Jack Abramoff. Moreover, Press Secretary Scott McClellan has said that if photos of the two together exist, they are shots taken at “widely attended” Hanukkah receptions in 2001 and 2002. But according to Eisler, none of the photos in Abramoff’s office were taken at Hanukkah receptions. [...]

]]> By: Santana Johnson http://thinkprogress.org/2006/01/26/bush-bobs-and-weaves/comment-page-3/#comment-441132 Santana Johnson Tue, 07 Feb 2006 20:26:10 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2006/01/26/video-bush-bobs-and-weaves-on-abramoff-photos/#comment-441132 bush and everything he daes is full of shit cause his an ass hoe bush and everything he daes is full of shit cause his an ass hoe

]]> By: This shit’s important…so you better pay attention: at ARMED 2 THE TEETH http://thinkprogress.org/2006/01/26/bush-bobs-and-weaves/comment-page-3/#comment-431602 This shit’s important…so you better pay attention: at ARMED 2 THE TEETH Tue, 31 Jan 2006 16:04:58 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2006/01/26/video-bush-bobs-and-weaves-on-abramoff-photos/#comment-431602 [...] Despite denials to the contrary, Bush has held meetings with indicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff - curiously, these photos were "deleted" from the database of the company that took them. [...] [...] Despite denials to the contrary, Bush has held meetings with indicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff – curiously, these photos were "deleted" from the database of the company that took them. [...]

]]> By: javier sheckles http://thinkprogress.org/2006/01/26/bush-bobs-and-weaves/comment-page-3/#comment-426376 javier sheckles Sat, 28 Jan 2006 08:18:10 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2006/01/26/video-bush-bobs-and-weaves-on-abramoff-photos/#comment-426376 ala richard pryor who ya gonna beleive, me or your lyin' eyes? ala richard pryor

who ya gonna beleive, me or your lyin’ eyes?

]]> By: unbelievable http://thinkprogress.org/2006/01/26/bush-bobs-and-weaves/comment-page-3/#comment-425387 unbelievable Fri, 27 Jan 2006 20:56:39 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2006/01/26/video-bush-bobs-and-weaves-on-abramoff-photos/#comment-425387 <em>****They can if they’re schizophrenic, or bi-polar…Don’t count RyaNNe out as RightSlap. (I can generally spot the angst driven unbelieved by her anecdotal evidence to EVERYTHING educational, architectural, and religious.) Comment by mighty aphrodite — January 27, 2006 @ 3:24 pm </em> The only one between us driven by angst is you. I'm not angry. Just inteligent and confident. But I suppose a woman who supports a political party as well as a religion that believes in degrading and dominating women could only assume all other women are as vitriolic and bitter as she. Don't read my posts with anger. They aren't written that way. It's why I still get carded when I by a biottle of wine at the grocery store... while boy scouts line up to help you across the street. RightPunch is definitely NOT Ryan. You want him to be so badly that you are missing the vast differences in their personalities. Both are extremely smart, informed and value women. I can see why you'd confuse them. And hate them. ****They can if they’re schizophrenic, or bi-polar…Don’t count RyaNNe out as RightSlap. (I can generally spot the angst driven unbelieved by her anecdotal evidence to EVERYTHING educational, architectural, and religious.)

Comment by mighty aphrodite — January 27, 2006 @ 3:24 pm

The only one between us driven by angst is you. I’m not angry. Just inteligent and confident. But I suppose a woman who supports a political party as well as a religion that believes in degrading and dominating women could only assume all other women are as vitriolic and bitter as she. Don’t read my posts with anger. They aren’t written that way. It’s why I still get carded when I by a biottle of wine at the grocery store… while boy scouts line up to help you across the street.

RightPunch is definitely NOT Ryan. You want him to be so badly that you are missing the vast differences in their personalities. Both are extremely smart, informed and value women. I can see why you’d confuse them. And hate them.

]]> By: mighty aphrodite http://thinkprogress.org/2006/01/26/bush-bobs-and-weaves/comment-page-3/#comment-425304 mighty aphrodite Fri, 27 Jan 2006 20:24:52 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2006/01/26/video-bush-bobs-and-weaves-on-abramoff-photos/#comment-425304 #130 - I apologize, Lily, if my softer gentler side escapes you. I don't hate anyone - I just don't suffer fools gladly. #136 - "He’s not Ryan. People don’t change this drastically in a matter of a month." - unbelieved ****They can if they're schizophrenic, or bi-polar...Don't count RyaNNe out as RightSlap. (I can generally spot the angst driven unbelieved by her anecdotal evidence to EVERYTHING educational, architectural, and religious.) #130 – I apologize, Lily, if my softer gentler side escapes you. I don’t hate anyone – I just don’t suffer fools gladly.
#136 – “He’s not Ryan. People don’t change this drastically in a matter of a month.” – unbelieved
****They can if they’re schizophrenic, or bi-polar…Don’t count RyaNNe out as RightSlap. (I can generally spot the angst driven unbelieved by her anecdotal evidence to EVERYTHING educational, architectural, and religious.)

]]> By: unbelievable http://thinkprogress.org/2006/01/26/bush-bobs-and-weaves/comment-page-3/#comment-425235 unbelievable Fri, 27 Jan 2006 19:56:44 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2006/01/26/video-bush-bobs-and-weaves-on-abramoff-photos/#comment-425235 <em>Some have said that you, RightPunch, are in fact the kinder, calmer Ryan Neat … if so, welcome back. Comment by Giacomo — January 27, 2006 @ 8:40 am </em> He's not Ryan. People don't change this drastically in a matter of a month. He's just smarter about what he's saying now. Don't believe MA, she thinks a liberal is a liberal is a liberal and cannot tell the difference. Even IRI told her that RP is not Ryan, and still, she sticks with it. Not someone you should believe... Some have said that you, RightPunch, are in fact the kinder, calmer Ryan Neat … if so, welcome back.

Comment by Giacomo — January 27, 2006 @ 8:40 am

He’s not Ryan. People don’t change this drastically in a matter of a month. He’s just smarter about what he’s saying now. Don’t believe MA, she thinks a liberal is a liberal is a liberal and cannot tell the difference. Even IRI told her that RP is not Ryan, and still, she sticks with it. Not someone you should believe…

]]> By: Clif http://thinkprogress.org/2006/01/26/bush-bobs-and-weaves/comment-page-3/#comment-424935 Clif Fri, 27 Jan 2006 17:38:12 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2006/01/26/video-bush-bobs-and-weaves-on-abramoff-photos/#comment-424935 Thank you Lily, now go back to your original post and you will see that Giacomc's argument is with out merit because he focused on words that he used to deny the violation of law not the word that the polster used to give the president the benifit of reasonable doubt until convicted Thank you Lily, now go back to your original post and you will see that Giacomc’s argument is with out merit because he focused on words that he used to deny the violation of law not the word that the polster used to give the president the benifit of reasonable doubt until convicted

]]> By: Lily http://thinkprogress.org/2006/01/26/bush-bobs-and-weaves/comment-page-3/#comment-424909 Lily Fri, 27 Jan 2006 17:32:01 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2006/01/26/video-bush-bobs-and-weaves-on-abramoff-photos/#comment-424909 <em>So Lily your argument is really with the word If in giacomo’s post well i can concur because Bush removed all doubt Comment by Clif — January 27, 2006 @ 12:14 pm</em> Exactly. So Lily your argument is really with the word If in giacomo’s post well i can concur because Bush removed all doubt

Comment by Clif — January 27, 2006 @ 12:14 pm

Exactly.

]]> By: Clif http://thinkprogress.org/2006/01/26/bush-bobs-and-weaves/comment-page-3/#comment-424863 Clif Fri, 27 Jan 2006 17:14:42 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2006/01/26/video-bush-bobs-and-weaves-on-abramoff-photos/#comment-424863 So Lily your argument is really with the word If in giacomo's post well i can concur because Bush removed all doubt So Lily your argument is really with the word If in giacomo’s post well i can concur because Bush removed all doubt

]]> By: Lily http://thinkprogress.org/2006/01/26/bush-bobs-and-weaves/comment-page-3/#comment-424851 Lily Fri, 27 Jan 2006 17:09:59 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2006/01/26/video-bush-bobs-and-weaves-on-abramoff-photos/#comment-424851 I'm not saying what the American public thinks is irrelevant. I'm not even saying the results would be different if the question was worded another way. I'm only saying that a number of polls have built-in bias. Look at Rove's tactics during the 2004 election, "If you knew that John Kerry was a drug user, would you vote for him?" The question here "<strong>IF</strong> Bush...should Congress <strong>consider</strong>... Actually there may have been more affirmatives if it had been worded "Bush wiretapped American citizens without a warrant. Do you agree or disagree..." For one thing, this is an undisputed fact. Including the word "if" in the poll may actually have weakened the affirmative results. Personally, I believe Bush should be impeached, convicted, investigated for criminal activity, hopefully convicted again. Then my motto in the next presidential election will be "No pardons." I’m not saying what the American public thinks is irrelevant. I’m not even saying the results would be different if the question was worded another way. I’m only saying that a number of polls have built-in bias. Look at Rove’s tactics during the 2004 election, “If you knew that John Kerry was a drug user, would you vote for him?” The question here “IF Bush…should Congress consider… Actually there may have been more affirmatives if it had been worded “Bush wiretapped American citizens without a warrant. Do you agree or disagree…” For one thing, this is an undisputed fact. Including the word “if” in the poll may actually have weakened the affirmative results. Personally, I believe Bush should be impeached, convicted, investigated for criminal activity, hopefully convicted again. Then my motto in the next presidential election will be “No pardons.”

]]> By: Clif http://thinkprogress.org/2006/01/26/bush-bobs-and-weaves/comment-page-3/#comment-424741 Clif Fri, 27 Jan 2006 16:41:35 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2006/01/26/video-bush-bobs-and-weaves-on-abramoff-photos/#comment-424741 Lily what the american public think congress should do is extremely relevant because they pay congresses salary and provide all the money congress uses, If you disagree that congress should hol;d hearings all that the responce means is the hearings would be a waste of time and money, but an congressional investigation into the possibility that the president by admitting he did not follow prescribed law is a constitutional duty, so the poll is actually asking whether the public thinks congress should hold a hearing about a possible violation to the constitution, but since a blow-job wasn't involved then the right can't see the foul. Lily what the american public think congress should do is extremely relevant because they pay congresses salary and provide all the money congress uses, If you disagree that congress should hol;d hearings all that the responce means is the hearings would be a waste of time and money, but an congressional investigation into the possibility that the president by admitting he did not follow prescribed law is a constitutional duty, so the poll is actually asking whether the public thinks congress should hold a hearing about a possible violation to the constitution, but since a blow-job wasn’t involved then the right can’t see the foul.

]]> By: Lily http://thinkprogress.org/2006/01/26/bush-bobs-and-weaves/comment-page-3/#comment-424670 Lily Fri, 27 Jan 2006 16:16:17 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2006/01/26/video-bush-bobs-and-weaves-on-abramoff-photos/#comment-424670 Also for the record, I very much agree that mighty aphrodite is so filled with hate, it's not worth reading, much less responding to her comments. Also for the record, I very much agree that mighty aphrodite is so filled with hate, it’s not worth reading, much less responding to her comments.

]]> By: Lily http://thinkprogress.org/2006/01/26/bush-bobs-and-weaves/comment-page-3/#comment-424652 Lily Fri, 27 Jan 2006 16:07:06 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2006/01/26/video-bush-bobs-and-weaves-on-abramoff-photos/#comment-424652 Whoops, bold type didn't come through. I agree with the first 2 sentences, but not with what comes after "Basically, most Americans think..." Whoops, bold type didn’t come through. I agree with the first 2 sentences, but not with what comes after “Basically, most Americans think…”

]]> By: Lily http://thinkprogress.org/2006/01/26/bush-bobs-and-weaves/comment-page-3/#comment-424643 Lily Fri, 27 Jan 2006 16:04:07 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2006/01/26/video-bush-bobs-and-weaves-on-abramoff-photos/#comment-424643 <blockquote><em>>The question was something to the effect of “If Bush wiretapped American citizens without a warrant, do you agree or disagree that Congress should consider holding him accountable through impeachment.” The words “should consider” are classic weasel words … specifically designed to be open to illicit more affirmatives. Basically, most Americans think this thing is a non-issue and the Democrats only serve to keep the news centered on a subject that resonates for Republicans (national defense) … they should drop it. The Abramoff things is fizzling as well … most could care less (I know progressives think it’s big deal, but conservatives thought the Clinton perjury thing was a big deal too … the public collectively yawned).</em></blockquote> <blockquote>Comment by Giacomo — January 26, 2006 @ 5:44 pm</blockquote> At one time I thought people who answered "Don't Know" to polls must be total idiots. Indulge me a moment while I tell you of an experience I had. A poll asked, "Do you believe the media is biased?" Choices were: A. Yes, biased to the right. B. Yes, biased to the left. C. No, completey unbiased. D. Don't know. I strongly believe that the media is (are?) biased, yet how could I answer the question? The closest answer for me was A. However, and I think this is important, answering A would suggest that <strong>I am</strong> completely biased, and may suggest that I can't think for myself because I am blinded by my left wing ideology. So in my opinion, I had no choice but to answer D. I commented that the wording was too restricted, but this didn't change my choices. Also please note that I strongly disagree with everything after the bold type.

>The question was something to the effect of “If Bush wiretapped American citizens without a warrant, do you agree or disagree that Congress should consider holding him accountable through impeachment.” The words “should consider” are classic weasel words … specifically designed to be open to illicit more affirmatives. Basically, most Americans think this thing is a non-issue and the Democrats only serve to keep the news centered on a subject that resonates for Republicans (national defense) … they should drop it. The Abramoff things is fizzling as well … most could care less (I know progressives think it’s big deal, but conservatives thought the Clinton perjury thing was a big deal too … the public collectively yawned).

Comment by Giacomo — January 26, 2006 @ 5:44 pm

At one time I thought people who answered “Don’t Know” to polls must be total idiots. Indulge me a moment while I tell you of an experience I had. A poll asked, “Do you believe the media is biased?” Choices were: A. Yes, biased to the right. B. Yes, biased to the left. C. No, completey unbiased. D. Don’t know.
I strongly believe that the media is (are?) biased, yet how could I answer the question? The closest answer for me was A. However, and I think this is important, answering A would suggest that I am completely biased, and may suggest that I can’t think for myself because I am blinded by my left wing ideology. So in my opinion, I had no choice but to answer D. I commented that the wording was too restricted, but this didn’t change my choices.
Also please note that I strongly disagree with everything after the bold type.

]]>