I remember that in 2000 the press had a huge hateboner for Gore. Every little thing he said wrong was blasted up into a huge scandal. Of hand comment about him sponsoring a bill that helped universities to connect to the World Wide Web(which for all intents and purposes is the Internet even back then), became "Gore invented the internet".
Then there was the deference to W. The guy was obviously a drooling monkey even back then, but because he had the right last name, he became a serious contender. The average 2012 GOP candidate had more credibility then Dubya did back in 2000, but did the press notice.
"We have our own set of village rules," says David Gergen, editor at large at U.S. News & World Report, who worked for both the Reagan and Clinton White House. "Sex did not violate those rules. The deep and searing violation took place when he not only lied to the country, but co-opted his friends and lied to them. That is one on which people choke.
"We all live together, we have a sense of community, there's a small-town quality here. We all understand we do certain things, we make certain compromises. But when you have gone over the line, you won't bring others into it. That is a cardinal rule of the village. You don't foul the nest."
"This is a contractual city," says Chris Matthews, who once was a top aide to the late Speaker of the House Thomas P. "Tip" O'Neill. "There are no factories here. What we make are deals. It's a city based on bonds made and kept." The president, he went on, "has broken and shattered contracts publicly and shamefully. He violates the trust at the highest level of politics. Matthews, now a Washington columnist for the San Francisco Examiner and host of CNBC's "Hardball," also says, "There has to be a functional trust by reporters of the person they're covering. Clinton lies knowing that you know he's lying. It's brutal and it subjugates the person who's being lied to. I resent deeply being constantly lied to."
Republican Alan Simpson, a longtime Washington insider now teaching at Harvard's John F. Kennedy School of Government in Boston, still identifies with his colleagues in this situation. "There is only one question here," says the former senator. "Did he raise his right hand and lie about it and then lie again? Lying under oath -- that to me is all there is. Did this man, whether he is head of the hardware store or the president or applying for a game and fishing license, raise his hand and say, 'This is the truth'?"
Damn, sounds like a cult.
I notice they didn't consider what Bush Junior's administration were doing were lying.
Did Obama even say it or are conservatives making shit up again
It's how he's talking about the torture. Obama's using it in a negative light, if he was supporting it they'd secretly love it.
No, they'd suddenly be against it and would accuse him of being a war criminal and would demand the Hague immediately put him up on trial
Well yeah. But they'd privately be psyched that he is following Bush's example. And they'd never get him near the Hague, they know how much shit they'd get if America was bought under the Hague's jurisdiction.
Even before I came into office, I was very clear that in the immediate aftermath of 9/11, we did some things that were wrong. We did a whole lot of things that were right, but we tortured some folks. We did some things that were contrary to our values. I understand why it happened. I think it's important when we look back to recall how afraid people were after the Twin Towers fell and the Pentagon had been hit and the plane in Pennsylvania had fallen and people did not know whether more attacks were imminent and there was enormous pressure on our law enforcement and our national security teams to try to deal with this. And, you know, it's important for us not to feel too sanctimonious in retrospect about the tough job that those folks had. A lot of those folks were working hard under enormous pressure and are real patriots, but having said all that, we did some things that were wrong. And that's what that report reflects.
The President was actually totally full of shit, by the way. For one, most of the torture was done well after the immediate aftermath. But since the guy he appointed to head CIA was hip deep in this shit...
Ugh, I hate the Brennan appointment so much.
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
I'm having a difficult time conflating the term "patriot" with some poor bastard getting a car battery attached to his nutsack with alligator clips.
I mean, I get why the president didn't go after old Bushy and friends. It'd take a lot of time and effort to take all of them down and then you'd set the precedent for going after former presidents. Republicans would never abuse that!
Even if you don't go after the people who made the orders, you don't promote any of the people who are responsible to head the fucking CIA.
I think the tragedy of the Obama presidency will be that it took him six years to get to the point his supporters were at when they first elected him.
From an outside perspective, his major failing was that it took him far too long to realise that while he was someone who wanted to get stuff done, the GOP didn't care if stuff they wanted was done or not so long as nothing was done that he could claim the least credit for.
Even if you don't go after the people who made the orders, you don't promote any of the people who are responsible to head the fucking CIA.
I think the tragedy of the Obama presidency will be that it took him six years to get to the point his supporters were at when they first elected him.
From an outside perspective, his major failing was that it took him far too long to realise that while he was someone who wanted to get stuff done, the GOP didn't care if stuff they wanted was done or not so long as nothing was done that he could claim the least credit for.
And that this would persist even after he won reelection and that an attempt to smear democrats at large for ineffective governance was worth more then even attempting to govern.
RedTide#1907 on Battle.net
Come Overwatch with meeeee
Even if you don't go after the people who made the orders, you don't promote any of the people who are responsible to head the fucking CIA.
I think the tragedy of the Obama presidency will be that it took him six years to get to the point his supporters were at when they first elected him.
From an outside perspective, his major failing was that it took him far too long to realise that while he was someone who wanted to get stuff done, the GOP didn't care if stuff they wanted was done or not so long as nothing was done that he could claim the least credit for.
And that this would persist even after he won reelection and that an attempt to smear democrats at large for ineffective governance was worth more then even attempting to govern.
He should have taken note that the GOP and their real supporters - the very wealthy - were doing extremely well with the status quo.
One might suggest, however, that his tenacious bipartisanship in the face of republican recalcitrance helped to expose most of their horribleness. Sadly at the expense of getting things done, but it's much harder for the right to continue to push their exculsionary agenda without people finally noticing.
One might suggest, however, that his tenacious bipartisanship in the face of republican recalcitrance helped to expose most of their horribleness. Sadly at the expense of getting things done, but it's much harder for the right to continue to push their exculsionary agenda without people finally noticing.
Lets be honest, after losing the supermajority in the senate, nothing was going to get done regardless
Well, yeah, that too. He's just gone further in cementing it. But that's the long term tragedy of the Obama Presidency. The partisan shit is bad, but it's not really tragedy, it's farce. And it's not him betraying his stated positions.
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
I'm having a difficult time conflating the term "patriot" with some poor bastard getting a car battery attached to his nutsack with alligator clips.
I mean, I get why the president didn't go after old Bushy and friends. It'd take a lot of time and effort to take all of them down and then you'd set the precedent for going after former presidents. Republicans would never abuse that!
Republicans don't need to do that, they went after Clinton when he was in office for lying about a blowjob. And Dems didn't lift a finger while Bush was in office and now they'll ignore his administration for doing what amounts to war crimes, what could go wrong with that plan?
One might suggest, however, that his tenacious bipartisanship in the face of republican recalcitrance helped to expose most of their horribleness. Sadly at the expense of getting things done, but it's much harder for the right to continue to push their exculsionary agenda without people finally noticing.
The last few years Bush was in office wasn't enough?
Well, yeah, that too. He's just gone further in cementing it. But that's the long term tragedy of the Obama Presidency. The partisan shit is bad, but it's not really tragedy, it's farce. And it's not him betraying his stated positions.
Hasn't Obama publicly stated he's against torture? Wouldn't not investigating torture allegations from the past government be a betrayal of that stance, never mind the ethical ramifications for letting torturers not only go free but have maintained employment in the government when Bush left.
One might suggest, however, that his tenacious bipartisanship in the face of republican recalcitrance helped to expose most of their horribleness. Sadly at the expense of getting things done, but it's much harder for the right to continue to push their exculsionary agenda without people finally noticing.
The last few years Bush was in office wasn't enough?
For whom? The people who voted for him because he was the kind of guy they'd have a beer with? The kind of people who are just now noticing how shitty their side is are the people who'd been clinging to 'both sides' arguments. Slowly, ever so slowly, some people are finally seeing that no matter how bad one side can be, the other is demonstrably worse.
Posts
Damn, sounds like a cult.
I notice they didn't consider what Bush Junior's administration were doing were lying.
Man she just can't help herself, can she?
The Katy Perry concert was for Special Olympics participants.
PSN/Steam/NNID: SyphonBlue | BNet: SyphonBlue#1126
Yeah pretty sure torturing people was the victory for our enemies, denying it too once it became pretty well known we fucking did it.
pleasepaypreacher.net
War crimes are war crimes, yo.
It's how he's talking about the torture. Obama's using it in a negative light, if he was supporting it they'd secretly love it.
No, they'd suddenly be against it and would accuse him of being a war criminal and would demand the Hague immediately put him up on trial
PSN/Steam/NNID: SyphonBlue | BNet: SyphonBlue#1126
It's the word 'folks'
Like Folk Music, or Folksy, or County Folk and City Folk.
It just makes it sound totally nonthreatening and harmless.
Don't worry about them Militia Folks, they wouldn't hurt a fly.
twitch.tv/Taramoor
@TaramoorPlays
Taramoor on Youtube
Well yeah. But they'd privately be psyched that he is following Bush's example. And they'd never get him near the Hague, they know how much shit they'd get if America was bought under the Hague's jurisdiction.
Almost comforting if you imagine it in Morgan Freeman's voice.
Sleep well, citizen!
The "Nuh" factor.
The President was actually totally full of shit, by the way. For one, most of the torture was done well after the immediate aftermath. But since the guy he appointed to head CIA was hip deep in this shit...
Ugh, I hate the Brennan appointment so much.
Are we taking it on faith that a Republican is correct? Because that seems like a poor decision.
chair to Creation and then suplex the Void.
Everything is comforting in Morgan Freeman's voice
A telephone book is comforting in Morgan Freeman's voice
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QSyynT9IidU
chair to Creation and then suplex the Void.
I mean, I get why the president didn't go after old Bushy and friends. It'd take a lot of time and effort to take all of them down and then you'd set the precedent for going after former presidents. Republicans would never abuse that!
The very same CIA which just agot caught lying about illegally spying on congress...?
that's certainly one way of putting it
I think the tragedy of the Obama presidency will be that it took him six years to get to the point his supporters were at when they first elected him.
From an outside perspective, his major failing was that it took him far too long to realise that while he was someone who wanted to get stuff done, the GOP didn't care if stuff they wanted was done or not so long as nothing was done that he could claim the least credit for.
And that this would persist even after he won reelection and that an attempt to smear democrats at large for ineffective governance was worth more then even attempting to govern.
Come Overwatch with meeeee
He should have taken note that the GOP and their real supporters - the very wealthy - were doing extremely well with the status quo.
Lets be honest, after losing the supermajority in the senate, nothing was going to get done regardless
Long term the tragedy will be that he normalized torture as a policy disagreement with that quote.
chair to Creation and then suplex the Void.
Republicans don't need to do that, they went after Clinton when he was in office for lying about a blowjob. And Dems didn't lift a finger while Bush was in office and now they'll ignore his administration for doing what amounts to war crimes, what could go wrong with that plan?
The last few years Bush was in office wasn't enough?
Hasn't Obama publicly stated he's against torture? Wouldn't not investigating torture allegations from the past government be a betrayal of that stance, never mind the ethical ramifications for letting torturers not only go free but have maintained employment in the government when Bush left.
For whom? The people who voted for him because he was the kind of guy they'd have a beer with? The kind of people who are just now noticing how shitty their side is are the people who'd been clinging to 'both sides' arguments. Slowly, ever so slowly, some people are finally seeing that no matter how bad one side can be, the other is demonstrably worse.