• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Memoir by George W Bush to be published in November

It wasn't his job to care about what the American people thought of him. It was his job to do what he believed was the right thing to do, regardless of how people felt about him. I didn't agree with much of what he did, but I do believe he performed the job with dignity and class.

Kinda like with the health care bill, right?
 
Kinda like with the health care bill, right?

Yes, kinda like the health care bill. Many of us don't like it, and many of us are pissed off about it, but we put them in office, so we have the responsibility to put up with what we got. When we end up with lousy leaders, we did it to ourselves out of stupidity, laziness, neglect, or whatever the mood flavor of the day is.

Presidents and other politicians should not be elected to be saviors. If Americans have reached the point that we elect someone to fix our problems and take care of us, then we're already sunk, we just don't realize it yet.
 
Last edited:

No the unit commanders said they had no recollection of him. The 6 month pay gap during that period is because he was in a civilian training program working on a campaign. He was not performing flight duty because he had failed to appear for a physical and had his flight status revoked so its no surprise that this guy doesn't remember someone who was only serving as a desk jockey.


Really? None of them came forward? Hm.

USATODAY.com - Former Guardsman: Bush served with me in Alabama

:roll:





You're invited to provide your evidence. Just saying it, doesn't make it so.

The bi-partisan No Child Left Behind program which passed 384-45 in the House and 91-8 in the Senate?

The House of Representatives passed the bill on May 23, 2001 (voting 384-45),[6] and United States Senate passed it on June 14, 2001 (voting 91-8).[7] President Bush signed it into law on January 8, 2002.

No Child Left Behind Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

There were no lies everyone thought that the NIE was accurate and that the reasons listed in the AUMF were genuine.


All 16 members of the U.S. Intelligence Community wrote this report:

Key Judgments: Iraq's Continuing Programs for Weapons of Mass Destruction



Bush took Clinton's suggestions and implemented them and even went further.

The first point, I think the overall point is, there was no
plan on Al Qaeda that was passed from the Clinton
administration to the Bush administration.

Second point is that the Clinton administration had a
strategy in place, effectively dating from 1998. And there
were a number of issues on the table since 1998. And they
remained on the table when that administration went out of
office--issues like aiding the Northern Alliance in
Afghanistan, changing our Pakistan policy, changing our
policy towards Uzbekistan. And in January 2001, the incoming
Bush administration was briefed on the existing strategy.

They were also briefed on these series of issues that had not
been decided on in a couple of years.

And the third point is the Bush administration decided
then, you know, mid-January, to do two things. One,
vigorously pursue the existing policy, including all of the
lethal covert action findings, which we've now made public to
some extent.

And the point is, while this big review was going on, there
were still in effect, the lethal findings were still in
effect. The second thing the administration decided to do is
to initiate a process to look at those issues which had been
on the table for a couple of years and get them decided.
So, point five, that process which was initiated in the
first week in February, decided in principle, in the spring
to add to the existing Clinton strategy and to increase CIA
resources, for example, for covert action, five-fold, to go
after Al Qaeda.

The sixth point, the newly-appointed deputies--and you had
to remember, the deputies didn't get into office until late
March, early April. The deputies then tasked the development
of the implementation details of these new decisions that
they were endorsing, and sending out to the principals.
Over the course of the summer--last point--they developed
implementation details, the principals met at the end of the
summer, approved them in their first meeting, changed the
strategy by authorizing the increase in funding five-fold,
changing the policy on Pakistan, changing the policy on
Uzbekistan, changing the policy on the Northern Alliance
assistance.

And then changed the strategy from one of rollback with Al
Qaeda over the course [of] five years, which it had been, to
a new strategy that called for the rapid elimination of Al
Qaeda. This is in fact the time line.


Sen. Frist on "Outrageous Charges by Richard Clarke"

Ashcroft never stopped using commercial flights in fact his wife flew on September 7th 2001.

Ashcroft Commercial Flights

Richard Armitage not Rove, Cheney, or Libby leaked Plame's name.

CNN.com - Sources: State Department official source of Plame leak - Aug 30, 2006
 
Last edited:
Yes, kinda like the health care bill. Many of us don't like it, and many of us are pissed off about it, but we put them in office, so we have the responsibility to put up with what we got. When we end up with lousy leaders, we did it to ourselves out of stupidity, laziness, neglect, or whatever the mood flavor of the day is.

Presidents and other politicians should not be elected to be saviors. If Americans have reached the point that we elect someone to fix our problems and take care of us, then we're already sunk, we just don't realize it yet.

Consistency is a great thing. Good job. It does go the other way too. Arguing against Bush policy based on popularity is a weak argument.
 
I didnt know Bush knew how to spell complete sentences :roll:

(i voted for him twice AND campaigned for him too BTW :2wave: )
 
hmmm I believe that desertion can only be charged during a time of war just it has been a few days since I read the UCMJ.

You are absolutely correct.

Not quite.
Punitive Articles of the UCMJ
Article 85—Desertion

“(a) Any member of the armed forces who—

(1) without authority goes or remains absent from his unit, organization, or place of duty with intent to remain away therefrom permanently;

(2) quits his unit, organization, or place of duty with intent to avoid hazardous duty or to shirk important service; or

(3) without being regularly separated from one of the armed forces enlists or accepts an appointment in the same or another one of the armed forces without fully disclosing the fact that he has not been regularly separated, or enters any foreign armed service except when authorized by the United States Note: This provision has been held not to state a separate offense by the United States Court of Military Appeals in United States v. Huff, 7 U.S.C.M.A. 247, 22 C.M.R. 37 (1956), is guilty of desertion.

(b) Any commissioned officer of the armed forces who, after tender of his resignation and before notice of its acceptance, quits his post or proper duties without leave and with intent to remain away therefrom permanently is guilty of desertion.

(c) Any person found guilty of desertion or attempt to desert shall be punished, if the offense is committed in time of war, by death or such other punishment as a court-martial may direct, but if the desertion or attempt to desert occurs at any other time, by such punishment, other than death, as a court-martial may direct.”

Link

One can be a deserter in peace time.
 
It depends, did your dad also attended Yale being a legacy certainly doesn't hurt. Also being politically connected certainly doesn't nor does the fact Prescott at one time was a Senator from Connecticut (where Yale happens to be located) hurt.


Many universities have legacy points, including public universities. However, Bush earned his way into Yale and earned his diploma. Don't forget, he also graduated from Harvard. Now, do you have any evidence that he didn't early admittance and those degrees? If you don't, then you are best advised to stop on this one else you continue to embarass yourself.

*can't believe he is actually sticking up for Bush -- the perils of actually trying to be fair, I suppose*
 
I didn't start the damn thread and I wasn't the first one to bring Obama into it or how many books the Shrub read(s) or whether he was in a reading contest with Rove either so why jump me? :confused:

I didn't bring Hussein into it either. What's your point?
 
I think they are merely pointing out he's not all that bright. Which seems pretty obvious. This isn't about politics my friend. I know it's shocking to some, but some of us don't take sides in the silly Democrat versus Republican big government fest. In terms of smart the dude is Palin with a dick.

Two Ivy League degrees and he isn't all that bright? Granted, I am not a big fan of the man, but you have to give him his due...
 
I didnt know Bush knew how to spell complete sentences :roll:

(i voted for him twice AND campaigned for him too BTW :2wave: )

Interesting. One of my minimum requirements for supporting a candidate is the ability to form complete sentences.
 
I would be very interested in reading this book, and I do wonder how he will justify his thoughts on different subjects. Oh not everyone is a partisan hack well I try not to be anyway, but sometime when I get mad my partisan side comes out of me. I myself vote both democrat, and republican so not all of us are intolerant of others people political theology. :)
 
Many universities have legacy points, including public universities. However, Bush earned his way into Yale

How do you know this?
 
I just received an advance copy of the book. I thought I would share my favorite passages with you:


A. A is for Al Qaeda. Antichrist Al Qaeda attacked America and made me very angry.

C. C is for Cheney. Cozening Cheney cheated the Constitution with his consistent claims that CIA coverts could be compromised, that his company cronies could capitalize on the Iraq conflict, that coercion through torture was cool and constant surveillance of the country's citizens was compulsory. Though capable, he was also crook so he commanded no confidence of the citizenry. The creep was my companion, confident and comrade.
 
Two Ivy League degrees and he isn't all that bright? Granted, I am not a big fan of the man, but you have to give him his due...

He had many positive attributes. He was no dummy, but he was a bit ignorant and surrounded himself with a lot of bad people.
 
How do you know this?

St Edward in Austin Texas do have legacy points as well However, I still think he got their by being a trust fund baby himself. I am not saying he is stupid, or anything mostly I am saying that is the only reason he got to go to Yale is because he had family connections.
 
Cozening Cheney cheated the Constitution with his consistent claims that CIA coverts could be compromised,

Armitage leaked Plame's name.

that his company cronies could capitalize on the Iraq conflict,

A) Halliburton was the only company on the planet capable of the task charged to them in Iraq.

B) It wasn't his company, Cheney didn't make dime one off the Iraq war because he entered into a voluntary but compulsory contract which legally bound him to give the profits off of his stock options to charity, the only money Cheney got from Halliburton was the money which he received with his severance package which he was entitled to and which could neither go up or down regardless of how well or poorly Halliburton did.

that coercion through torture was cool

The current legal definition of torture both in domestic and international law is completely subjective and I don't consider waterboarding to cause severe mental or physical harm to the subject.

and constant surveillance of the country's citizens was compulsory.

No citizens phones were tapped only foreign calls coming into the country from known terrorist operatives were tapped, now if those known terrorist operatives called into the country the person receiving the call may have likewise had their phones tapped, but I believe that would stand up to probable cause and that their phones should have been tapped.
 
How do you know this?

I know the University of Georgia does (or did when I was a grad student there) because it was the subject of considerable controversy at the time. It was reported at the time that this was a common practice for both public and private universities.
 
He had many positive attributes. He was no dummy, but he was a bit ignorant and surrounded himself with a lot of bad people.

Not arguing this. As I said, I am not a big fan of his, but the man DOES have two Ivy League degrees, and it seems a lot of people seem to think that this isn't a big deal. Then again, both the presidents of Taiwan and the U.S. have Harvard Law degrees .....
 
I know the University of Georgia does (or did when I was a grad student there) because it was the subject of considerable controversy at the time. It was reported at the time that this was a common practice for both public and private universities.

I mean how do you know Bush "earned" his way into Yale?
 
He had many positive attributes. He was no dummy, but he was a bit ignorant and surrounded himself with a lot of bad people.

I agree and I think both he and President Obama do a poor job speaking off script that make people think they are not as smart as they really are. I also do not doubt the fact that President Bush read a lot. I think the number is a bit skeptical that he really read as much as he said. But it does not change the fact I do think he is in fact a relatively smart man.
 
St Edward in Austin Texas do have legacy points as well However, I still think he got their by being a trust fund baby himself. I am not saying he is stupid, or anything mostly I am saying that is the only reason he got to go to Yale is because he had family connections.

are you familiar with Yale's admissions policies circa 1964?
 
I agree and I think both he and President Obama do a poor job speaking off script that make people think they are not as smart as they really are. I also do not doubt the fact that President Bush read a lot. I think the number is a bit skeptical that he really read as much as he said. But it does not change the fact I do think he is in fact a relatively smart man.

former white house counsel and Yale Law School graduate Lanny Davis said Bush had incredible intelligence in several areas including figuring out what motivated a person and getting people to like him. for example, when Bush rushed a fraternity at Yale, all the pledges met with the members for a cocktail party. The president of the fraternity then asked the pledges to name the other pledges. There were approximately 50 men and Bush was able to accurately name every person there.

Not exactly the sign of a stupid man and a talent that would serve politicians pastors or salesmen very well.

When I was in college, one of my 7 suitemates was a Chess Master. HIs public speaking skills were not well developed. One of our other suitemates was the best public speaker at Yale and became a supreme court clerk, and a top guy in both the BUsh 1 white house counsel's office and later Bush II's DOJ. He was brilliant but he was no where near as smart as the Chess master. The best chess player there was a guy named Mike Rohde. He was an IM before he ever entered college and a grandmaster now. It was said that his IQ was beyond the charts. Yet having spent a fair amount of time talking to him when he would come over to hang out with the other player, you would never know it.

Intelligence comes in many different forms just as athletic talent does. If you only say measured athletic talent as say pure foot speed, you might claim that Michael Phelps or Pete Sampras were not great athletes. Same with measuring Bush on how he speaks.
 
Same with measuring Bush on how he speaks.

I agree with your post and I left that part out of my original post because I was rushing to get back to my studies. But I have no doubt that President Bush was smarter than he was when he spoke. And similarly most people when they hear my talk think I am not as smart as I really am and they are surprised by my papers and analysis of things. I am not saying that I am smarter than President Bush, although I would like to think I am, or any of the people you mention. But rather it is not uncommon for fairly well educated and intelligent people to have difficult in public speaking or when speaking come across less intelligent than they really are.
 
Back
Top Bottom