Posted on 02/22/2005 7:33:39 AM PST by Flightdeck
I think when all is said and done, history will look
back on Bush as one of the finest Presidents ever.
Your two comments below, sum up the NY Slimes as it flounders around:
"The fact that the NYTimes had to pose the question is the best proof that there is nothing they could use to hurt Bush in any of the tapes."
"I guess it it time to back to the TANG issue!! LOL!!"
Or maybe trot out the old yellowcake, Plame/Wilson blame game.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1348716/posts?page=1#1
EX=PROSECUTOR: PLAME LEAK NOT ILLEGAL
NEWSMAX ^ | 2/22/05
Posted on 02/22/2005 10:14:45 AM PST by areafiftyone
The former prosecutor who helped draft the law that Democrats say was violated when someone in the Bush administration leaked a CIA worker's name to columnist Robert Novak now says that no laws were broken in the case.
Writing with First Amendment lawyer Bruce Sanford in the Washington Post recently, former Assistant Deputy Attorney General Victoria Toensing explained that she helped draft the law in question, the 1982 Intelligence Identities Protection Act.
Says Toensing, "The Novak column and the surrounding facts do not support evidence of criminal conduct."
So why with a special prosecutor now threatening to toss Time magazine's Matthew Cooper and New York Times reporter Judith Miller in jail if they don't give up their sources in the Plame case aren't their lawyers invoking the "no laws were broken" defense?
Explains the National Review's Rich Lowry: The Miller-Cooper defense hasn't made this argument because it would be too embarrassing to admit that the Bush administration's "crime of the century" wasn't really a crime at all, especially after a year and a half of media chest-beating to the contrary.
"It was just a Washington flap played for all it was worth by the same news organizations now about to watch their employees go to prison over it," says Lowry.
"That's the truth that the media will go to any length to avoid."
Possibly a liberal, rather than a leftist - meaning there's hope for him. I thought the piece was fairly well written and extremely positive, albeit the truth is couched in leftyspekk so the target audience will understand his points.
Of course there couldn't be the teeniest, tiniest possibility that the Private Mr Bush is remarkably like the public governor Bush and later President Bush because they ARE exactly the same person?
I'd say what you see is what you get, but the left collective doesn't SEE him, usually to their serious embarrassment.
ta for ping.
from the same author, Doug Wead
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/choice2000/bush/wead.html
"Is there any story you can tell us that helps define another aspect of him that you think is important?
Yeah, one thing I haven't seen covered in the press a lot is his almost anal sense of integrity; anything fishy, anything grey. When he was running his dad's campaign, there were girls who would have loved to have slept with the vice-president's son, the future president of the United States, and they'd send signals out and he'd send signals back saying, "Not interested."
There was even one that was kind of pushed. I remember sitting in his office when a very prominent public figure walked in and said, "G.W., you really made her feel bad, you really hurt her." G.W. said, "Good. I'm married. Not interested. Case closed. Good, I hope she feels bad, good. Glad she got the message." And in his business life I saw that. "
another story:
"There was a congressman, former congressman, who came to me with a wonderful business deal that would be good for the cause, it involved a media purchase, it was a good deal. They had one little piece of the puzzle missing and G.W. had the contact and could make the phone call to make this work, to add, to make this work. So this congressman, I said, "Ok, I'll get you in to see G.W."
And we were rehearsing in his hotel room before the meeting, and he gets to a part where he's going to say to G.W., "And there's something in this for you, if you can be helpful to us, da da da da da." ...So I plead with the congressman "Don't do this, don't say this to G.W., he'll spot it" and, he says, "That's not the way Washington works, this is what we do here, it's quid pro quo, this is long before Washington, this is the essence of people, of politics and business and there's nothing illegal about this." I said, "You understand Washington, I understand G.W. Bush. Please don't do that, you're going to embarrass me and it will backfire." He says, "Alright," I say, "Promise me," he says, "Ok, I promise." So I took him in there, and sure enough, we get in the middle of this thing, G.W.'s listening to it, sounds good, and then this congressman says, "And we're not going to take advantage of you, and if you can help us and da da da da da" and G.W. jumped out of his chair so fast and lifted the congressman up-- former congressman-- and said, "Well, this was great, thanks, buddy, thanks," and basically threw him out of his office... "
Of course there couldn't be the teeniest, tiniest possibility that the Private Mr Bush is remarkably like the public governor Bush and later President Bush because they ARE exactly the same person?
I'd say what you see is what you get, but the left collective doesn't SEE him, usually to their serious embarrassment.
As do I. Had a feeling about him from the beginning. Still do.
Thanks for that info/post. Very good.
My first experience with Dubya goes back to the days when he was managing partner of the Texas Rangers.I remember when I'd go to the games I'd take my binoculars cuz it was fun to watch the players and fans, etc. I remember checking each game to see if Dubya was there. He'd always sit behind the home team dugout on the first base side.
Amazingly, Bush is always accused of being the mastermind first, but since being a mastermind doesn't jibe with being a bumbling fool, Rove becomes the default Evil Villian. None of which ever makes sense to any thinking individual.
Most leftists don't think, but allow others to do it for them. Their brain cells have completely atropheid and are therefore non-functional.
The "others" who do the thinking are only nominally able to think, having been "taught" to think in indoctrination centers, and therefore just experiencing a preprogrammed response to any set of similar circumstances. Their brain cells are partly to mostly atrophied, depending on what their base intelligence was to start with, and therefore partly to mostly functional at best.
They're all voluntarily brain damaged.
Oh wow, now THAT is a cool story!
Me, too. I liked him from the first time I heard that he was running for the nomination. Interestingly, that was an article about him in the Wash. comPost.
I am so happy he is our President.
Great story, thanks! Must have been interesting following his career from such an early point on...
First time I saw Bush in person was at a rally last year in a baseball stadium. He was coming out of the dugout with Laura... yep, on the first base side :-)
When I meet people who, out of sincere conviction (usually religious) believe homosexuality is sinful and that public policy ought to be deployed to prevent this sinful behavior, I disagree with them, but understand that this sort of deep moral disagreement rooted in faith is a part of life.
When you see someone who knows perfectly well that the view he's adopted for political purposes is wrong, but who adopts it anyway out of cyncial thirst for power, well, then, that's just totally disgusting.
Spam!
You have quotes I assume?
I don't think you have your facts straight.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.