White House Tells Musharraf: Never ‘Restrict Constitutional Freedoms’ To Fight Terrorism
White House Tells Musharraf: Never ‘Restrict Constitutional Freedoms’ To Fight Terrorism
During today’s White House press briefing, spokeswoman Dana Perino condemned Gen. Pervez Musharraf’s declaration of “emergency rule” in Pakistan. She said that the administration is “deeply disappointed” by the measure, which suspends the country’s constitution, and believes it is never “reasonable” to “restrict constitutional freedoms in the name of fighting terrorism”:
Q: Is it ever reasonable to restrict constitutional freedoms in the name of fighting terrorism?
MS. PERINO: In our opinion, no.
Watch it:
The Bush administration never suspended the U.S. Constitution; instead, it interpreted the document so broadly as to provide all the powers they desired. A look at some of the ways the White House has overstepped its constitutional powers in the name of national security:
First Amendment: In September, a federal judge ruled that the FBI’s use of secret “national security letters” to obtain citizens’ personal data from private companies for counterterrorism investigations “violate[d] the First Amendment and constitutional provisions on the separation of powers.”
First Amendment, Fourth Amendment: In Aug. 2006, a federal district court in Detroit ruled that the Bush administration’ss NSA warrantless wiretapping program was unconstitutional, violating the “separation of powers doctrine, the Administrative Procedures Act, the First and Fourth amendments to the United States Constitution, the FISA and Title III.”
Article I: Testifying before the Senate Judiciary Committee in June, then Attorney General Alberto Gonzales attempted to justify the administration’s detainee policy by claiming, “There is no express grant of habeas in the Constitution.” (Article I, Section 9, Clause 2 of the Contitution reads: “The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.”)
Article II: In June, House investigators revealed that Vice President Dick Cheney had exempted his office from an executive order order designed to safeguard classified national security information by claiming that he was not an “entity within the executive branch.” (Read the duties of the Vice President, outlined in Article II of the Constitution HERE.)
Musharraf also complained of “judicial activism” to justify his declaration of emergency rule. Despite Perino’s comments, Musharraf seems to have taken a page from the White House playbook.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Is Dana Perino using the royal “our”?
November 5th, 2007 at 5:02 pmhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
November 5th, 2007 at 5:03 pmsigh
November 5th, 2007 at 5:03 pmNever restrict constitutional freedoms to fight terror??? And this came from the WHITE HOUSE???
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
(ouch — I think I may have hurt myself…)
November 5th, 2007 at 5:03 pmThe irony is literally killing me. I have come to the conclusion that the only possible reason for Bu$h and his handlers painfully obvious disconnect from anything remotely tainted with reality is their complete and total insulation; the bunker mentality in its purest form.
Surely these people realize what a laughing stock they are, right…?
November 5th, 2007 at 5:05 pmOH. MY. GOD. Did Perrino actually say this with a STRAIGHT face? No, I didn’t watch it — I passed the point long ago where I can even stand to listen or watch these blooming idiots.
November 5th, 2007 at 5:05 pmReportedly, Decider Bush is suggesting to Decider Musharraf that he hold “democratic elections” using GOP Diebold voting machines…
Electrontic election rigging has worked for the Bush crime family and the GOP in the USA in 1997 (Nebraska – Chuck Hagel), 2000, 2002, 2004 and 2006, in Mexico and most recently, in France… No reason why it shouldn’t work in Pakistan..
November 5th, 2007 at 5:06 pmQ: Is it ever reasonable to restrict constitutional freedoms in the name of fighting terrorism?
MS. PERINO: In our opinion, no.
OMG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
November 5th, 2007 at 5:06 pmQ: Is it ever reasonable to restrict constitutional freedoms in the name of fighting terrorism?
MS. PERINO: In our opinion, no.
———————————————-
Unfortunately, I’m at work and I cannot play the accompanying video. Was there a follow-up question by the press following this exchange? The OBVIOUS follow-up question? Or was the press just too thunderstruck by the sheer brass (or stupidity) of Perino’s response to proceed further?
November 5th, 2007 at 5:07 pmTypical.. “Do as I say, not as I do”. Why does ANYONE listen to the stuff coming out of the White House? They have lost ALL credibility (if they ever had any to begin with..)
November 5th, 2007 at 5:09 pmPeople, keep in mind: IOKIYAR. The rule before which no other rule can stand.
November 5th, 2007 at 5:09 pmWhat’s really sad is that such an incredibly small percentage of Americans know what kind of crap this administration has pulled. It seems that the only truly informed citizens are those who frequent blogs like TP, TPM, and DailyKos.
It doesn’t do much good for a tenth of a tenth of a tenth of the population to know the truth.
Any ideas on how to spread the truth to the masses???
November 5th, 2007 at 5:10 pmOh, this is rich coming from a president who has done everything in his power to usurp the very foundations of governance in America. Give me a break.
November 5th, 2007 at 5:10 pmDO AS WE SAY – NOT AS WE DO.
#$^&%@#!!!
November 5th, 2007 at 5:12 pmMan, she really is clueless isn’t she?
November 5th, 2007 at 5:12 pmmore double speak.. we are living the script of 1984.
November 5th, 2007 at 5:13 pmDO AS WE SAY – NOT AS WE DO.
Comment by Leftside Annie
Beat me to it.
Buck Fush
November 5th, 2007 at 5:14 pmNo that is some funny shiite!!!
November 5th, 2007 at 5:14 pmThey don’t believe in restricting freedom in the unending pursuit of terrorists? !!!??
November 5th, 2007 at 5:14 pmOMG — and Perino said this with a straight face?
If this weren’t so g.d. serious, this would be hilarious.
Of course, this White House doesn’t restrict freedoms, it only re-writes the laws, re-interprets the Constitution and puts lawyers and judges in place who will support their subversion.
The Irony of Bush’s criticism of Pakistan is amazing, and could only be topped ,perhaps, by his reaction to Turkey, if they invade Iraq to fight a war on terror.
November 5th, 2007 at 5:15 pmI think she meant that it’s never reasonable to admit to restricting constitutional freedoms in the name of fighting terrorism. So long as you don’t admit it, or redefine what you’re doing, it’s all good.
November 5th, 2007 at 5:17 pm# 9. Unfortunately, I’m at work and I cannot play the accompanying video. Was there a follow-up question by the press following this exchange? The OBVIOUS follow-up question? Or was the press just too thunderstruck by the sheer brass (or stupidity) of Perino’s response to proceed further?
Comment by missmolly — November 5, 2007 @ 5:07 pm
If there was, the video doesn’t show it.
November 5th, 2007 at 5:17 pmSounds like the White House should follow it’s own advice here at home.
Nope, didn’t think they would. You didn’t seriously think they would, did you?
November 5th, 2007 at 5:19 pm*sitting at desk staring in dumbfounded amazement at the screen*
November 5th, 2007 at 5:19 pmHmm, was I asleep when they added being waterboarded into our constitutional freedoms? Did they add surveillance into our constitutional freedoms? If so, I guess she’s right!
November 5th, 2007 at 5:20 pm#9 – Transcript is HERE. There was no follow-up question.
November 5th, 2007 at 5:20 pmI agree that Musharraf is just taking a page from the Bush/Cheney playbook.
To criticize Musharraf for what he is doing is like the pot calling the kettle black. Frankly, Bush/Cheney are probably jealous because he did it first..
I just finished reading Naomi Wolf’s new book “The End of America”. It is one scary read. Ten steps to fascism, and we have been delving into all of them to some degree or other as we slip further and further away from our Constitution and freedoms.
November 5th, 2007 at 5:21 pmIf there was, the video doesn’t show it.
Comment by wijg — November 5, 2007 @ 5:17 pm
If there was, I’m sure that Keith Olbermann will have it on later. I wonder if the WH press corpse managed to hold in their laughter.
November 5th, 2007 at 5:21 pmObviously Bush’s plan to spread our kind of democracy is working. Well, in Pakistan anyway!
November 5th, 2007 at 5:22 pmGod, if what is happening in Pakistan were happening here….not a GD thing would be happening here. The American Apathetic is alive and well.
November 5th, 2007 at 5:23 pm…
…
WoW. I think She really believes that this administration isn’t curtailing Constitutional freedoms.
Un-F____ing-believable…
November 5th, 2007 at 5:26 pmUp is down. White is black. War is peace.
Seriously though. Dana is further proof of the incompetence of Bushco. When she is caught off guard she has a habit of answering logically, if not honestly. Their lack of ability to hear what they say may be our greatest weapon.
November 5th, 2007 at 5:26 pmWTF!?!?!?!?
Hello? McFly?
November 5th, 2007 at 5:26 pmGod, if what is happening in Pakistan were happening here….not a GD thing would be happening here. The American Apathetic is alive and well.
Comment by leftcoast — November 5, 2007 @ 5:23 pm
I diagree. If Bush cancelled the 08 elections the country would explode. Even the Right is sick of Bush by now, neither they nor the army would support Bush like the Paki army is supporting Mush.
There is a long tradition of authoritarianism in Pakistan. I know the collective wisdom at TP is that Bush has shredded the Constitution, but it is nothing compared to what is happening in Pakistan.
November 5th, 2007 at 5:27 pmWOW. I am seldom speechless, but…..
November 5th, 2007 at 5:28 pmThis episode may be evidence that there is, in fact, an intelligent being in charge of the universe.
I mean, come on, if you wanted a perfectly-crafted ironic exposure of BushCo’s governing philosophy, it would be tough to do better than this: they have to publicly criticize their closest ally in the Muslim world for the EXACT SAME BEHAVIOR (albeit on a larger scale) that they’ve defended as necessary in the fight against Islamofascistic boogeymen.
Why do they have to criticize it? Because the ally took the tactics just a bit too far, and now everyone can see them for what they are. And we can’t have that.
November 5th, 2007 at 5:28 pmlololololololololol!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
November 5th, 2007 at 5:28 pmGet a rope!
The hypocrisy will continue to escalate. The best thing to do now is to push hard to make them retreat further and further into their lies. Hopefully they will expend all their pathetic brain power trying to explain themselves, and the clock will run out before they can accomplish any more of their dirty deeds.
November 5th, 2007 at 5:29 pmI am listening to Bush on the TV while I am typing. Does anyone else notice how much he is starting to slur his words? What is up with that?
November 5th, 2007 at 5:30 pmDana should appear on Saturday Night Live.
November 5th, 2007 at 5:32 pmWhat is up with that?
Comment by nwmuse — November 5, 2007 @ 5:30 pm
I think the clinical term is “psychotic break”.
November 5th, 2007 at 5:32 pmComment by Keltoi — November 5, 2007 @ 5:27 pm
November 5th, 2007 at 5:34 pmI agree, somewhat. But, how close are we becoming to being an authoritarian controlled regime? The process of government is overlooked by most of us. There is little we can do if Bush calls for Marshall Law. Our military will do what they are ordered to do. Bush needs to be impeached now if we are to save America. He will find away to keep himself in power. War with Iran may be his way.
the administration… believes it is never “reasonable†to “restrict constitutional freedoms in the name of fighting terrorismâ€
…in other countries.
Seriously, when Musharraf heard that, he probably burst out laughing, until one of his aides whispered, “No, sir. They seem to not be joking.”
November 5th, 2007 at 5:34 pmIt’s the Daily Show with Dana Purina for Monday. Today’s comment from our favorite bubblehead press secretary:
Q: Is it ever reasonable to restrict constitutional freedoms in the name of fighting terrorism?
MS. PERINO: In our opinion, no.
And there you have it, LOL! Priceless…
November 5th, 2007 at 5:36 pmWow.
Surely, some Daily Show writer must be moonlighting for the White House Press Office.
Now, tell me why the press corps didn’t laugh in her face?
November 5th, 2007 at 5:38 pmThere is little we can do if Bush calls for Marshall Law.
How is Bush going to get “his” military, overstretched as it is, from Iraq to main street USA to enforce Marchall Law?
November 5th, 2007 at 5:39 pmI didn’t think of that.. With the writers on strike, they can just fill up time with tapes of Bush press conferences for the half hour Daily Show. Bush has been attempting to do standup comedy for years now. He will finally get his shot.
November 5th, 2007 at 5:39 pmSurely, some Daily Show writer must be moonlighting for the White House Press Office.
Now, tell me why the press corps didn’t laugh in her face?
Comment by Anonymouse — November 5, 2007 @ 5:38 pm
Nope John Stewart is paying his and Colbert’s writers two weeks pay at least while they are on strike. Gotta love that guy.
November 5th, 2007 at 5:40 pmTruly, this is the pot calling the kettle black,,,
November 5th, 2007 at 5:41 pm.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Hey there Shayne.
November 5th, 2007 at 5:41 pmHey muse, I’m off to gymnastics. Well not me personally but yippee.
November 5th, 2007 at 5:42 pmThats as funny as last week when they told Turkey they shouldn’t “rush to war†in Iraq.
:D
BAWAAHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAAHAHAH
Comment by BARTLEBEE — November 5, 2007 @ 5:33 pm
Okay, here’s an example (one of many) where I see things like you. In fact, the only thing that would be funnier than Bush telling Turkey not to “rush to war with Iraq” is if next week he tells Canada not to rush to cut taxes for the wealthy.
November 5th, 2007 at 5:42 pmHow is Bush going to get “his†military, overstretched as it is, from Iraq to main street USA to enforce Marchall Law?
Comment by Nature Rules — November 5, 2007 @ 5:39 pm
November 5th, 2007 at 5:43 pmGod, you’re right! Never mind. He will have to deputize Blackwater. It will take them weeks to ramp up.
Bush has been attempting to do standup comedy for years now
Bush is NOT FUNNY! And neither is what he has done to our country.
November 5th, 2007 at 5:44 pmAnd it is Martial Law….from Mars, the God of War.
Dear General Kettle,
You’re black
Sincerely, Bush Pot
November 5th, 2007 at 5:45 pmBeam me up, Scotty!
November 5th, 2007 at 5:47 pmThe Bush regime has spent eleven billion of our tax dollars into bribing the Pakistani military into supporting and propping up the Decider Musharraf. So Bush is being exposed for supporting fascist dictatorships, not democracy. Bush has zero interest in democracy, honest elections, Constitutional government or anything else pleasant or useful that has evolved in the last eight hundred years of human history.
It’s just greed, bullying, torture, tyranny and treason with these Bush thugs…
Decider Musharraf.
November 5th, 2007 at 5:47 pmBut seriously, folks,
November 5th, 2007 at 5:47 pmdoes anyone but me wonder if Bush is getting an enormous erection from this, out of sheer jealousy that Mushy can go full blown dictator?
No, Bush is not funny. He is sad, pathetic, and frankly embarrassing. But he sure uses trying to BE funny when he is trying to control the conversation and deflect direct, difficult questions, or questions he just doesn’t want to answer.
November 5th, 2007 at 5:49 pmNOT funny.
Every journalist who was present at this W.H.briefing should be fired.
November 5th, 2007 at 5:53 pmHow is Bush going to get “his†military, overstretched as it is, from Iraq to main street USA to enforce Marchall Law?
Comment by Nature Rules
By ordering them to do so. It’s that simple. We are one explosion away from this country’s demise. W would love it. He would finally be relevant.
November 5th, 2007 at 5:54 pmIf there was, I’m sure that Keith Olbermann will have it on later. I wonder if the WH press corpse managed to hold in their laughter.
Comment by Jane E. Schneider — November 5, 2007 @ 5:21 pm
If there was no follow-up question, it truly WOULD be a “WH press corpse.”
November 5th, 2007 at 6:00 pmThis is a joke! Impeach already! These idiots at the White House have no clue. They are like three year olds playing with a loaded gun. We need to impeach and remove before they hurt someone.
November 5th, 2007 at 6:01 pmOlbermann has a Special Comment tonight on Countdown. Its on torture.
November 5th, 2007 at 6:02 pm#12 Look up impeachbush.org
November 5th, 2007 at 6:05 pmOlbermann has a Special Comment tonight on Countdown. Its on torture.
Comment by nwmuse
Really?
November 5th, 2007 at 6:08 pmTomorrow, November 6, Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) is scheduled to bring to the House floor a resolution (H. Res 333) calling for the impeachment of Dick Cheney.
November 5th, 2007 at 6:08 pmI diagree. If Bush cancelled the 08 elections the country would explode. Even the Right is sick of Bush by now, neither they nor the army would support Bush like the Paki army is supporting Mush.
Comment by Keltoi — November 5, 2007 @ 5:27 pm
I hope you’re right. Even during the periods of greatest war involvement in our country’s history, neither Abraham Lincoln nor Franklin Roosevelt cancelled presidential elections.
I think that Bush is desperately trying to coast to the finish line. He is still championing an unwinnable war, hasn’t managed to secure the Iraqi oil for his oil buddies (and figures a last ditch effort to grab oil from Iran might help), hasn’t accomplished anything in his administration that will put him in the history books in a positive light, and probably spends most of his time dreaming about Paraquay these days.
No, the biggest thing Americans have to worry about (and this means Dems AND Repubs) is just cleaning up the mess left behind.
November 5th, 2007 at 6:09 pmOur military will do what they are ordered to do. Bush needs to be impeached now if we are to save America. He will find away to keep himself in power. War with Iran may be his way.
Comment by leftcoast — November 5, 2007 @ 5:34 pm
I seriously doubt the military would follow orders from a President who had cancelled the elections. No way to know for sure, and I hope we’ll never find out, but I think the military would rebel. Congress would impeach and convict.
November 5th, 2007 at 6:12 pmI think that Bush is desperately trying to coast to the finish line.
Comment by missmolly — November 5, 2007 @ 6:09
That is my take, too. I don’t sense there is much fire in the guys belly to be Presidente for life. Too much brush to be cleared in Crawford.
November 5th, 2007 at 6:16 pmNot to worry. She’ll be back on tomorrow saying either 1) she “misspoke,” or 2) her comments were taken out of context.
November 5th, 2007 at 6:17 pmComment by Keltoi at Night — November 5, 2007 @ 6:12 pm
8 years ago I would have laughed at people discussing the possibility of an armed uprising in our country. I think that the mere fact it’s part of ANY political discussion is the greatest indictment of our current government. I share your hope that it is not necessary and I don’t think anything short of canceled elections would trigger it.
That being said, it’s not totally insane to ensure a supply of ammunition. At least until after the next election.
November 5th, 2007 at 6:21 pmIf there was no follow-up question, it truly WOULD be a “WH press corpse.â€
Comment by missmolly — November 5, 2007 @ 6:00 pm
You were right, a “WH press corpse” it is…
Q Is it ever reasonable to restrict constitutional freedoms in the name of fighting terrorism?
MS. PERINO: In our opinion, no.
Mark.
Q Dana, in addition to this situation, the President has delegated authority for the management of the Middle East summit to the Secretary of State. And here, two days into this crisis, he hasn’t picked up the phone and called the guy who he stood here and called his “good friend.” Is it fair to assume that the President is reluctant to personally invest himself in a situation that possesses a high risk of failure?
MS. PERINO: No, Mark, I think — look, that’s apples and oranges. The President has asked Secretary Rice to work on the Middle East peace summit. She’s the Secretary of State, that is what she does. And she is the person that the President entrusts to carry his messages for him. That’s not unusual. We are working towards a summit on Middle East peace which the President would attend. So I just — I don’t think that follows.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/11/20071105-2.html
November 5th, 2007 at 6:23 pmThe Stockdale Paradox: “You must never confuse faith that you will prevail in the end — which you can never afford to lose — with the discipline to confront the most brutal facts of your current reality, whatever they might be.â€
The Conservative Corollary to the Stockdale Paradox: “You must never confuse faith that you will prevail in the end — which you can never afford to lose — with the discipline to ignore the most brutal facts of your current reality, whatever they might be.â€
November 5th, 2007 at 6:23 pmWho would think — Progressives would have to save the Constitution from the Republicans. IF NOT US – THEN WHO?
November 5th, 2007 at 6:23 pmNot to worry. She’ll be back on tomorrow saying either 1) she “misspoke,†or 2) her comments were taken out of context.
Comment by impeachcheneythenbush
od 3) she’s resigning.
November 5th, 2007 at 6:24 pmThat is my take, too. I don’t sense there is much fire in the guys belly to be Presidente for life. Too much brush to be cleared in Crawford.
Comment by Keltoi at Night — November 5, 2007 @ 6:16 pm
Agreed. However I’m not so sure about Cheney. Heck, all he would need is an assassination, by “terrorists”, to become our “Supreme Leader”.
A nation, of rational people, should not have to express concern about such things, yet, here we are.
November 5th, 2007 at 6:25 pmComment by pete
Cheney will just take Bush hunting.
November 5th, 2007 at 6:31 pmWatch it pete, he’s trying to bait you. He’s trying to get libs on the record publically supporting inssurrection.
Just trust me on this one.
Comment by BARTLEBEE — November 5, 2007 @ 6:25 pm
Haha! Yeah, Pete, watch out! I am one of THEM.
Boo!
November 5th, 2007 at 6:31 pmWatch it pete, he’s trying to bait you. He’s trying to get libs on the record publically supporting inssurrection.
Just trust me on this one.
Comment by BARTLEBEE — November 5, 2007 @ 6:25 pm
No worries Bart. I’m neither an insurrectionist nor a “librul”. Besides which, the era of the powerful lie is coming to an end. We are slowly, but surely, learning the difference between truth and spin. Let the World twist my words. It doesn’t change the meaning.
Besides which, with another Minnesota winter on the way, Gitmo has some desirable qualities. LOL.
November 5th, 2007 at 6:33 pmKeltoi – you absolutely MUST read Naomi Wolf’s book. Here’s the title:
THE END OF AMERICA: Letter of Warning to a Young Patriot
In fact, this book ought to be required reading for ALL Americans.
November 5th, 2007 at 6:46 pmAnd as for insurrection – if it comes down to that, I’m in. One of my ancestors was a general in the Revolutionary War – so it’s in my genes. ;o)
November 5th, 2007 at 6:48 pmPerino is good. She managed to say that with a straight face. She makes Tony Snow look like a whimp. She is an undersized Karen Hughes.
November 5th, 2007 at 6:50 pmKeltoi – you absolutely MUST read Naomi Wolf’s book. Here’s the title:
THE END OF AMERICA: Letter of Warning to a Young Patriot
In fact, this book ought to be required reading for ALL Americans.
Comment by Leftside Annie — November 5, 2007 @ 6:46 pm
Okay, I’ll see how far I can get into it. About all I know of Wolf is she was Gore’s Alpha Male consultant.
November 5th, 2007 at 6:53 pmI am one of THEM.
Comment by Keltoi at Night — November 5, 2007 @ 6:31 pm
I prefer to think that you are one of US (a concerned citizen) who may disagree on who is best suited to lead our country back to where it should be. The next decade, or so, will tell us a lot about who’s “right” but, it probably won’t be settled in our lifetimes, if ever.
November 5th, 2007 at 6:53 pmI am one of THEM.
Comment by Keltoi at Night — November 5, 2007 @ 6:31 pm
I prefer to think that you are one of US (a concerned citizen) who may disagree on who is best suited to lead our country back to where it should be. The next decade, or so, will tell us a lot about who’s “right†but, it probably won’t be settled in our lifetimes, if ever.
Comment by pete — November 5, 2007 @ 6:53 pm
Well, yes, that is what I am. And I enjoy probing the arguments of those with whom I disagree. Whatever happened to the America of Reagan and Tip O’Neil who would knife fight in the halls of power and then go have a beer after 5 pm? Now, you have to either hate the opposition or deny the authenticity of their very existence ala Bartlebee. It is a shame, and it has a corrosive effect on politics in general. No wonder most Americans tune it out.
November 5th, 2007 at 6:59 pmAbout all I know of Wolf is she was Gore’s Alpha Male consultant.
Comment by Keltoi at Night — November 5, 2007 @ 6:53 pm
Remember kiddies, Bartlebees Big Book of Blogtroll Busting, chapter 1?
They will INVARIABLY, verbally emasculate the the left, anyway they can slide one in.
Comment by BARTLEBEE — November 5, 2007 @ 6:57 pm
Dude, that is her major claim to her 15 minutes! I am not emasculating her by indentifying her primary place in my memory. She was a good looking female political consultant who was trying to make Gore look more macho – am I thinking of the wrong person?
November 5th, 2007 at 7:01 pmThe next decade, or so, will tell us a lot about who’s “right†but, it probably won’t be settled in our lifetimes, if ever.
Comment by pete
I disagree. We all know what’s ‘right’ now. We don’t have the political or intestinal fortitude to change it. If you ask a ‘normal’ person if torture is wrong, they will say sure it’s wrong – but the terrorists!. If you ask a ‘normal’ person about spying on innocent Americans, they will say sure it’s wrong – but the terrorists! Ask a ‘normal’ American about a constant state of war, they will say it is wrong – but the terrorists!
The ‘normal’ American will slowly grow a backbone and stop being afraid. It is then that Bush has to worry about war crimes, because the ‘normal’ American will be pissed. They will want revenge.
November 5th, 2007 at 7:04 pmOf course liberals have to save the constitution.
November 5th, 2007 at 7:11 pmLiberals wrote the constitution.
Remember kiddies, Bartlebees Big Book of Blogtroll Busting, chapter 1?
They will INVARIABLY, verbally emasculate the the left, anyway they can slide one in.
Comment by BARTLEBEE — November 5, 2007 @ 6:57 pm
I see your point Bart. Heck, 30 seconds of Fox News proves your point. However, I prefer “Pete’s first rule of political discourse”.
“All one needs to do is encourage further comment. Eventually the weakness of unsupportable positions becomes apparent and those who stick to such positions discredit themselves”.
I might add that dismissing a message because of the messenger is widely recognized, by logical people, as folly.
Stratrat, I didn’t make myself clear. What I should have said is that the near future will tell us much about the relative merits of “liberalism” and “conservatism”. I have no doubt the the current crop of neocons will be remembered with dismay and disgust. But, I consider them a dangerous aberration. All societies produce such extremists at some point in their evolution.
November 5th, 2007 at 7:20 pmAl Gore has more manhood in his left nipple than the entire RNC.
November 5th, 2007 at 7:43 pmI agree Bartlebee.
The US is the example for the rest of the world to follow. Am I right?
November 5th, 2007 at 7:46 pmComment by BARTLEBEE — November 5, 2007 @ 7:41 pm
No illusions here Bart. I just take a different approach to repartee. I find the exchange of insults boring. I much prefer eliciting contradictory responses from those who profess a single-minded purpose. Then, when they are way out on a limb, I hand them a saw and watch the crash. Sometimes it’s funnier than Monty Python.
Heck, merely introducing Al Gore to a discussion of a Bushco shill is damning to one’s credibility. To the best of my knowledge Mr. Gore hasn’t offered a public opinion on the crises in Pakistan.
November 5th, 2007 at 7:54 pmI must admit, however, a certain guilty pleasure in calling a troll a troll!
November 5th, 2007 at 7:57 pmI find the exchange of insults boring.
Comment by pete — November 5, 2007 @ 7:54 pm
I think I do a little more than that.
Comment by BARTLEBEE — November 5, 2007 @ 7:57 pm
Agreed. I didn’t mean to imply any such thing. Poor wording on my part. You must admit though, that you adopt a more aggressive approach than I. It’s really just a question of style. And calling an idiot (Like Mr. Pee) an inbred idiot is perfectly justified. In fact, I think it’s a healthy way to vent some of the frustration we have with the state of our country. I intend to use it myself, at least, until I can express my contempt at the polls.
November 5th, 2007 at 8:06 pmDude, that is her major claim to her 15 minutes! I am not emasculating her by indentifying her primary place in my memory. She was a good looking female political consultant who was trying to make Gore look more macho – am I thinking of the wrong person?
Comment by Keltoi at Night — November 5, 2007 @ 7:01 pm
Duuuuuude, her major claim to her 15 minutes is that she’s a successful author, starting with The Beauty Myth in 1991 and leading through several other books up to the one recommended to you. Her period as a consultant to the Gore campaign was a blip in her career.
November 5th, 2007 at 8:16 pmHeck, merely introducing Al Gore to a discussion of a Bushco shill is damning to one’s credibility. To the best of my knowledge Mr. Gore hasn’t offered a public opinion on the crises in Pakistan.
Comment by pete — November 5, 2007 @ 7:54 pm
Aaaaaaaa!!!
Okay: Leftside Annie, who I dare anyone to call a troll, recommended a book to me by Naomi Wolf. The totality of my knowledge of the woman is that Al Gore hired her as a consultant and an internal memo written by her leaked to the press where SHE said Al Gore had to project more of an Alpha Male image. So if anything, Wolf emascualted Al Gore.
But no, it is all a nefarious, yea “sublty brilliant” plot on behalf of an “uber” troll who pretends to be a moderate, a friendly one even, while actually I am operating multiple screen names in a cubby at the NSA in an effort to destroy Think Progress.
COME ON!
November 5th, 2007 at 8:18 pmI’m with you, about 96%, on this one Bart. I don’t know that Al Quaida per see is the chief danger in Pakistan. However, the unrest is a huge, real, threat. I remember thinking, when Bin Laden’s apparent move to Pakistan became an open secret, why we wouldn’t work with our “friends” to bring him to justice. Indeed, one could make the argument that American troops in Pakistan would have had a better effect than the overthrow of the Taliban.
As for the fear of nukes in the hands of criminals, it appears to be all but accomplished. Just another example of Bushco’s ability to make, virtually, any problem worse.
November 5th, 2007 at 8:25 pmDuuuuuude, her major claim to her 15 minutes is that she’s a successful author, starting with The Beauty Myth in 1991 and leading through several other books up to the one recommended to you. Her period as a consultant to the Gore campaign was a blip in her career.
Comment by gummitch — November 5, 2007 @ 8:16 pm
There! See? I learned something from you, and you even managed not to call me stupid because you knew something I didn’t. I will try to get ahold of her book as well.
Honest, Bartlebee, you suffer the same syndrome that Ann Coulter does. You are so ascerbic in your approach that if you were in a position to persuade someone you fail because of your condescension. The same is true of Tripmaster Monkey; the guy is freakin brilliant, but his tone is so sneering he turns people away instead of bringing them to his point of view. This does not serve the Progressive agenda. Since I am not a Progressive it is fine with me, but you might listen to Pete.
And Pete – watch out for me. I am one of THEM.
November 5th, 2007 at 8:28 pmDuh, that was gummitch, not Bartlebee, sorry gummitch, I should have noticed the difference in style.
November 5th, 2007 at 8:30 pmI’m with you, about 96%, on this one Bart. I don’t know that Al Quaida per see is the chief danger in Pakistan. However, the unrest is a huge, real, threat. I remember thinking, when Bin Laden’s apparent move to Pakistan became an open secret, why we wouldn’t work with our “friends†to bring him to justice. Indeed, one could make the argument that American troops in Pakistan would have had a better effect than the overthrow of the Taliban.
Comment by pete — November 5, 2007 @ 8:25 pm
Well, the Pakis have lost lots of soldiers fighting the Tribes in Waziristan. Those guys are tough bastards and their home is the most inhospitable place on Earth. It is like fighting the Apaches on their turf. Pakistan also has 160 million people as opposed to Afghanistan’s 25 million….I dunno. Pakistan is indeed a nightmare, I am not sure just how much power we have over events there. They were our allies against the Sovs, we got into a mutual pissing match in the 90’s over their nuke program, then 911 happened….a long and complicated relationship. On the plus side, Pakistan and India have cooled their jets somewhat, but the place is a nuclear powder keg no matter how you slice it.
November 5th, 2007 at 8:37 pmAaaaaaaa!!!
Okay: Leftside Annie, who I dare anyone to call a troll, recommended a book to me by Naomi Wolf. The totality of my knowledge of the woman is that Al Gore hired her as a consultant and an internal memo written by her leaked to the press where SHE said Al Gore had to project more of an Alpha Male image. So if anything, Wolf emascualted Al Gore.
But no, it is all a nefarious, yea “sublty brilliant†plot on behalf of an “uber†troll who pretends to be a moderate, a friendly one even, while actually I am operating multiple screen names in a cubby at the NSA in an effort to destroy Think Progress.
COME ON!
Comment by Keltoi at Night — November 5, 2007 @ 8:18 pm
All of which has, precisely, nothing to do with the discussion. There is a tendency, of people on the right, to use Al Gore as a bogey man. That argument doesn’t fly here.
An open minded person would simply read the recommended work and judge it’s relevance on it’s own merits. Connecting the author to Al Gore, and not in a positive way, without an impartial reading is, frankly, a “troll tactic”.
Furthermore, I don’t give much weight to the “troll conspiracy”. You seem to be ascribing behavior to me based on the words of others. Another “troll tactic”. As I said before, I choose not to think of things in an us vs. them vein. I think that there are people of good will on both sides of the political spectrum. Just because I have formed an opinion that Bushco, and the neocons, are dark and dangerous groups doesn’t mean I ascribe those traits to anyone who disagrees with me. That too would be a “troll tactic”.
November 5th, 2007 at 8:44 pmWhen we needed to deal with the terrorists, and we had the capital, Bush ran from where Bin Laden was, and decided to pick on the smallest most defenseless country he could find, and he couldn’t even that one!
Comment by BARTLEBEE — November 5, 2007 @ 8:45 pm
Ah! But one must always remember that Shrub is, above all, a bully. In that light his actions make a certain amount of sense. It’s a twisted and perverted sense, to non-bullies, but it does make his actions more understandable. Unsupportable but understandable.
BTW, I think that the inevitable biography of Georgie should be called, “Bully, son of Wimp”.
November 5th, 2007 at 8:53 pmAn open minded person would simply read the recommended work and judge it’s relevance on it’s own merits. Connecting the author to Al Gore, and not in a positive way, without an impartial reading is, frankly, a “troll tacticâ€.
Comment by pete — November 5, 2007 @ 8:44 pm
Which is what I intend to do out of respect for Annie. I’ll try it, anyway.
Pete, you seem like a fair man, I appreciate it. I have spent all day on several threads arguing with Bartlebee about whether I am who I am or not, guess I am burnt.
But, Mercifully, it ends here – I am ready for some FOOTBALL!
GO STEELERS!!!
November 5th, 2007 at 9:00 pmWhen I first read this, I sat there completely stunned and thoroughly flabbergasted as my jaw dropped to the floor (metaphorically speaking) and my eyes bugged out of my head. Then I started laughing — but only because I knew that if I didn’t start laughing, I’d either start sobbing or screaming.
Am I the only one who’s starting to feel as if she’s been drop-kicked into a real-life version of Terry Gilliam’s movie “Brazil”? (Other than Terry himself, that is — bet he didn’t think that his movie would turn out to be quite this prophetic…)
The colossal gall of this administration never ceases to amaze me. Just when I think that they cannot possibly sink any lower into the mire of hypocrisy, mendacity, and irrationality in which they are already up to their eyeballs…they do. I don’t know how they can possibly manage to breathe through that muck without choking, suffocating, or drowning themselves — but they do.
November 5th, 2007 at 9:01 pmSomeone needs to tell the Bush administration that they’re supposed to be using the *US Constitution*. The one that was ratified in 1781 by thirteen colonies. The one that contains the BILL of RIGHTS! The one that says that the writ of habeas corpus shall not be denied. The one that provides checks on each of three CO-EQUAL branches of the federal government. The one that bars illegal search and seizure. The one that establishes freedom of the press. The one that bars cruel and unusual punishment (Amendament 8), then immediately after (Amendment 9) says that the Constitution shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
November 5th, 2007 at 9:05 pmDoes any thinking person really believe that the President of Pakistan is able to make ANY political or military decision without the approval, if not the actual direction of the US Government?
The answer is so damned obvious as to be childish: NO, HE CANNOT… because US dollars protect Pervez Musharraf and keep him in power. The 700 MILLION dollars in economic and military assistance the US gave to Musharraf this year alone are most definitely not an altruistic gift that comes without strings. The 800 million dollars scheduled to reach the Pakistani government in 2008 will guarantee that Musharraf continues to do exactly what the Bush administration wants. It is not an exaggeration to suggest that President/General Musharraf would not last a day in office without US aid and protection. Not a single day.
Could the events in Pakistan be a testing ground for what Bushco might be planning in the US to avoid the consequences of fair and democratic elections here in 2008?
Read and think:
November 5th, 2007 at 9:08 pmhttp://tvnewslies.org/blog/?p=668
The newest directive from the White House to Musharraf: Do as we say, not as we do.
November 5th, 2007 at 9:43 pmMushharraf is in his position because he and HIS army deposed the DULY ELECTED president of Pakistan, by coup. Now, because George bush, jr tells him that he can’t declare a state of emergency, he’s going to go back to some “rule of law” that he overrode several years ago? I think bin Laden carries more weight in that neck of the woods than georgejr. The irony of georgejr encouraging ANYONE to heed ANY laws is laughable – no, it’s just tragic…….
November 5th, 2007 at 10:05 pmWhere Big O dwells, reason and morality die a little.
November 5th, 2007 at 11:14 pmAh! Bush, the “personal responsibility” President. I don’t recall him taking responsibility for invading Iraq based on inaccurate, and fabricated, “intelligence”. Heck, he’s never even retracted “mission accomplished”.
When the shrub admits he screwed up I might start listening to neocons claims of “personal responsibility”. As for independence, one needs to think independently to lay claim to the word. If one spouts the party line ad infinitum one has displayed a complete lack of independence.
I might add that resistance to oversight is a bit damning as well. One would think a responsible person would welcome the opportunity to identify, and correct, shortcomings. This, of course, can’t happen until one admits the possibility of imperfection. I haven’t seen much willingness to do so from the Republican party.
November 5th, 2007 at 11:58 pmMusharraf came to power during the administration of that wonderful liberal icon, William Clinton. Next question: What did President Clinton do about it? — O. Bigfoot
************************
Perhaps the relevant question — which I notice you rather conveniently skirted around — is not so much which President was in office at the time when Musharraf rose to power, but rather from which administration Musharraf received the greatest amount of funding. If you can cite a reasonably credible source that Musharraf received more funding from the US government during the Clinton administration than he has during the Bush administration, then you might actually have a point — especially since the zeitgeist was a lot different back then than it is now. If you can’t provide any such evidence, then I’m afraid to say that all you’re really doing is blowing smoke.
November 6th, 2007 at 12:22 amAnd we are about to confirm Judge Mukasey, who cannot even admit that waterboarding is torture? I am not yet willing to give up this fight.
Contact the Senate Judiciary committee members. Go to http://www.notacent.com. Every effort counts.
November 6th, 2007 at 12:28 am.
Bush is taking notes.
Feeling us out… how America reacts…
… a barometer of sorts.
.
November 6th, 2007 at 1:59 amKeltoi – please do read the book. And try to keep an open mind.
This is not merely an “I hate Bush” screed. Nor is this a book that sets out to bash the Bush administration. Naomi Wolf merely points out frankly scary trends toward a fascist shift in government. And she points out things that are happening right here in America – right before our apathetic eyes.
She backs up her conclusions and assertions with historical references – all footnoted and sourced. It’s a compelling case.
This book should be REQUIRED READING for all Americans.
p.s. I had no idea she worked for Al Gore. I don’t consider it at all relevant to the subject work anyway. It has nothing at all about global warming.
November 6th, 2007 at 1:28 pmMy nation has a first name it’s D-O-U-B-L-E, my nation has a second name it’s S-T-A-N-D-A-R-D,
Ooh, I love to live here almost everyday and if you ask me why I’ll say, cause my nation has a way with H-Y-P-O-C-R-I-S-Y
November 6th, 2007 at 2:14 pmThis video is a prime example of what Bush, Cheney and the like are doing to the U.S. Constitution:
(Authors of video can be contacted at LoveTheConstitution.com)
November 8th, 2007 at 11:31 am