Unfortunately, once shown that policy X isn’t creating more problems than it solves, his position on policy X does not change. You can’t tell me with a straight face that anybody genuinely believes that gay marriage will lead to mandatory man-on-ungulate sex.
Hard to argue otherwise. On the other hand, I certainly wouldn’t suggest that most or even all conservatives are racists.
No doubt, LA, keep… um… on truckin’…?
Elucidator–the date and time of your show trial have been delivered to your mailbox. Were I you, I’d call my tailor and tell him to erase that neck measurement…
It is strange that Paulson who made 800 million dollars in the financial fiascoes ,while he was head of Goldman Sachs , gets credibility and people think he should have been in charge of TARP. He and his fellow bankers should not have been allowed near it. They should have been facing well lit, show trials to prevent it from happening again. But too late, it is happening again.
There were a lot of economic professors who saw what was going on and warned us. They should have been involved in the fix. Who is dumb enough to think those knee deep in rash and fraudulent behavior ,would let the mess get sorted fairly? Let alone put them in charge.
It has a good beat. Easy to dance to.
It wasn’t amusing the first time, and still not so 500 time later.
As for the topic of this thread… well, another “insider” is pimping a book.
I agree that it’s sad that people won’t blow whistles without a book deal, but does having a book out mean his claims are false. I see “he’s pimping a book” used to dismiss people often, but it’s never clear why it serves to do so.
The line being socially conservative and being socially immobile is sometimes blurry, I agree.
I’d love to see any good argument stating that social conservatism is pro-salvery
It’s not that it means his wrong, but it doesn’t mean he’s right, either. Memories are not particularly good. It’s one thing to cite a quote from a newspaper, and quite another from someone who is not a professional reporter and who is recounting events from the past.
Further, when I first read that quote, it sounded to me like he was mocking those advisers, implying that of course he understood the policy since he signed the bill. We don’t always understand what a person is saying and why. And of course, the author states above that it was Geitner who was at fault for not explaining the plan correctly.
So, yeah, Bush can often act like a “moran”, but this is a very poor example. Sort of like the “I told you so” thread the OP started about Tom Ridge’s book not too long ago. Not only was there no real there there, but Ridge came out a few days later and said that’s not what happened.
Well, what does it mean?
I’m not worried about interpretations of Bush’s fecklessness, and the excerpt from the book makes Bush out to be sort of kind of sympathetic even, but I have no reason to think this guy’s claims are wrong just because he’s pimping a book. And I don’t put much stock in professional reporters when it comes to US politics because I remember when the NYT was doing what Cheney told it to do and how many Iraqis died because of it. I have no reason to think this guy’s lying or misrembering anything any more than I would were he quoted saying the same thing in, say, the New York Times.
And as for Ridge, I rather assumed he was admonished for wandering off message. It’s pretty clear that your little Rainbow of Fear was being used to scare people into voting for Republicans. You can disagree if you like.
What’s that moving, over at the end of the field? Is it a goalpost?
Why yes, I do believe it is!
He went AWOL during a time of war instead of flying jet fighters.
Higher IQ than John Kerry? Damning with faint praise there. (I think you mean higher GPA, by the way.)
Multi-millionaire businessmen who ran his company into bankruptcy.
Highly popular in Texas ain’t too difficult for a right-wing Republican to accomplish.
What else ya got?
Meteorologist extraordinaire. Spontaneous masseuse. Master of Strategery. Raised “doofus” to levels previously unimagined.
It means that there is good possibility that they are embellishing things or that they simply are remembering incorrectly. I’m just not inclined to accept quotes in these tell-all books at face value. And I’m especially not inclined to accept snipets that hit the headlines before the entire book is published.
No, because it was slightly different in that case. It was the publisher who pimped the sensational headlines and Ridge who later corrected him.
The same goes for newspaper articles and court testimony. The claim might be true, it might be false. I’m no more inclined to think it’s false because it appears in a book than I am if it appears in a news magazine. I have no reason to think this guy is lying.
Conversely, would you lend Ann Coulter’s claims more credence if they’re printed in a newspaper than in one of her books? I wouldn’t. She lacks credibility in all her forms.
Okay, but that doesn’t explain why none of the threats they allegedly warned about disappeared or why the thing itself disappeared after the election or the remarkable string of coincidences regarding when the alerts were raised or lowered. I don’t want to debate the matter because there’s really no point and it’s history anyway, but my opinion of the matter wasn’t informed by Ridge’s book.
Reporters are going from notes and recordings, and they’re writing about things that happened usually within a day. And eye witness testimony is notoriously unreliable in court. I have no reason to believe that this guy has an accurate memory to be able to quote someone from a year ago.
She’s not a reporter. That’s a ridiculous comparison.
Nothing disappeared because there was nothing to disappear-- the threat level was not raised in the incident that made headlines from the publisher’s remark.
My boss can. He takes notes like you would not believe. In fact, I rely on him for quotes, when necessary, and they’re absolutely accurate.
I am not a court of law. The gist’s the thing as far as I’m concerned. He doesn’t need perfect recall, he just needs to be honest. I have no reason to think he’s not.
How did this go from “he’s just pimping a book”, which to my mind is questioning his motives and integrity, to questioning his powers of recall?
We’re not sure what she is, actually. “Statistical anomaly” is the best explanation I can think of. Anyway, I wasn’t implying she was a reporter, I was saying her being discussed in something written by one doesn’t lend her credibility even if she has no book to pimp.
The issue is whether Ridge was asked to or not for political reasons. It is my opinion that it was used for such, well and often. I get this from having watched the circus at the time, not from Ridge. Ridge is not important.
As I recall, the guy wasn’t actually there when he was supposed to be flying jet fighters.
Higher IQ than Kerry? Are you sure about that? For the record, I don’t think Bush is a moron. I think he was woefully unprepared for the Presidency and failed to understand the realities of national and international politics, preferring to stick with his own assumptions.
Multi-millionaire businessman? He ran a multi-million dollar business, which was built using other people’s money and was largely a failure. He made money from his investment in the Texas Rangers by calling in political favors to get the team a shiny new publicly funded stadium.
He certainly was a highly popular two-term governor of Texas. Of course, nobody should have been surprised that a man who held exactly one elected office and had no other relevant experience turned out to be an extraordinarily shitty President.
If you’re into this ‘Bush sucks’ thing, you might like reading Su Tong’s “My Life As Emperor”. It never mentions Bush- it takes place in fictional Chinese history- but I think you’ll get it.