# Bush says nobody needs to be accountable **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [January 16, 2005, 6:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-says-nobody-needs-to-be-accountable/285042 "2005-01-16T18:00:04Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Brutus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/91b2a8/32.png) [@Brutus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Brutus)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2005, 7:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-says-nobody-needs-to-be-accountable/285042/61 "2005-01-17T07:49:39Z")
> [@Zoe](#): > > Only _some_ of the American people chose him – a slim majority of the voting Americans chose him to be President. No prize for second place, I’m afraid. (Well, there may be a book deal or something.) > [@](#): > > What about the millions of Americans who _didn’t_ chose him? What of them? GW ran on platform _X_. He was elected on platform _X_. It makes no sense to expect him to then switch to platform _Y_. You aren’t the first here to express that sentiment, though. I am just perplexed why people would expect him to piss off those who voted for him to appease those who voted against him. > [@](#): > > What would satisfy me is not as drastic as what you may be projecting. I want the torture to stop. I want our country to stop trying to find loopholes around the Geneva Conventions… Right then. All you have done is list some general grievances with GW. How does that pertain to the quoted material? ---
**Author:** ![Sevastopol](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/cdc98d/32.png) [@Sevastopol](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sevastopol)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2005, 9:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-says-nobody-needs-to-be-accountable/285042/62 "2005-01-17T09:14:25Z")
He’s gone awful quiet on the gay marriage amendment that reeled in the dumbfuck fundies. ---
**Author:** ![LouisB](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/dfb087/32.png) [@LouisB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LouisB)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2005, 10:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-says-nobody-needs-to-be-accountable/285042/63 "2005-01-17T10:23:34Z")
> [@Sevastopol](#): > > He’s gone awful quiet on the gay marriage amendment that reeled in the dumbfuck fundies. Didn’t he say he was **not** going to push for the constitutional amendment he squalled about before being re-elected? ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2005, 10:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-says-nobody-needs-to-be-accountable/285042/64 "2005-01-17T10:55:06Z")
Yes, as I mentioned in post #11 of this thread. The rationale is that Bush isn’t going to bother pushing for the amendment, at least until the courts have ruled on DOMA, because it wouldn’t have enough Senate support. (Of course, it was obvious since last July 14, when the Senate [voted](http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A49537-2004Jul14.html) to block the White House-backed proposal for an amendment banning same-sex marriage, that he didn’t have enough support. And it was equally obvious that the 2004 elections weren’t going to provide the extra 19 radical-right Senators he would need to pass such an amendment. But of course, this wasn’t admitted until after the elections were safely over.) ---
**Author:** ![Johnny\_L.A](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnny_l.a/32/1084_2.png) [@Johnny\_L.A](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_L.A)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2005, 2:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-says-nobody-needs-to-be-accountable/285042/65 "2005-01-17T14:03:17Z")
I hate to hijack my own thread, but… > [@Brutus](#): > > What of them? GW ran on platform _X_. He was elected on platform _X_. It makes no sense to expect him to then switch to platform _Y_. You aren’t the first here to express that sentiment, though. I am just perplexed why people would expect him to piss off those who voted for him to appease those who voted against him. ‘Winner takes all’, eh? We are a nation founded on compromises. In order to gain support of the minority, the majority must make concessions. If they don’t, then we don’t have a democracy; we have despotism. In the present case, there is a _very large minority_. Ignoring such a large minority can have repercussions down the road. For example, Bush (with his _slight_ majority) has turned much of the world against us. Some of them were against us anyway; but now our friends are antagonistic toward us. He has turned a surplus into a record-breaking deficit. He has made millions of people cynical about our political system, which can lead to ‘tyrrany of the majority’. Basically it’s like this: Our system is not designed for a ‘winner takes all’ attitude. The larger the minority, the more concessions the majority are expected to make. Here’s an analogy. You have two kids and a large muffin. Each kid wants to divide the muffin, so they toss a coin to see who gets to do it and a winner is declared. Now, being kids, each one wants the ‘bigger half’. But if the winner says, ‘I’m the winner, so I get to cut the muffin and I can take the bigger piece if I want to because I’m the winner,’ then there’s likely to be a fight that will destroy the kitchen. So you reach a compromise. The winner (‘majority’) can cut the muffin, but the loser (‘minority’) can choose which half to take. By being aware that a concession must be made to the loser, the winner will be very careful to cut the muffin _exactly_ in half. That’s where we are now. Bush gets to cut the muffin, and he’s claiming that he can cut it wherever he wants and is not responsible for destroying the kitchen because he is, after all, the winner. He doesn’t seem to understand the concepts of sharing and compromise that are the foundation of this country. Or as John Stuart Mill said: > [@](#): > > Like other tyrannies, the tyranny of the majority was at first, and is still vulgarly, held in dread, chiefly as operating through the acts of the public authorities. But reflecting persons perceived that when society is itself the tyrant — society collectively over the separate individuals who compose it — its means of tyrannizing are not restricted to the acts which it may do by the hands of its political functionaries. Society can and does execute its own mandates; and if it issues wrong mandates instead of right, or any mandates at all in things with which it ought not to meddle, it practices a social tyranny more formidable than many kinds of political oppression, since, though not usually upheld by such extreme penalties, it leaves fewer means of escape, penetrating much more deeply into the details of life, and enslaving the soul itself. Protection, therefore, against the tyranny of the magistrate is not enough; there needs protection also against the tyranny of the prevailing opinion and feeling, against the tendency of society to impose, by other means than civil penalties, its own ideas and practices as rules of conduct on those who dissent from them; to fetter the development and, if possible, prevent the formation of any individuality not in harmony with its ways, and compel all characters to fashion themselves upon the model of its own. There is a limit to the legitimate interference of collective opinion with individual independence; and to find that limit, and maintain it against encroachment, is as indispensable to a good condition of human affairs as protection against political despotism. — _On Liberty_, The Library of Liberal Arts edition, p.7. ---
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2005, 2:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-says-nobody-needs-to-be-accountable/285042/66 "2005-01-17T14:15:43Z")
To say that Bush was elected was a ringing endorsement of his Iraq policies is silly. First of all, the election was rigged. But of many that did vote for him, it may have been a backlash against gay marriage. Or it may have been because people lack the maturity to insist on fiscal responsibility, they just want to keep draining money out of the treasury. Or they may have faith that for whatever reason the Republicans might someday outlaw abortion (the very last thing they want to do). The point is that platform X included many planks, the election wasn’t merely a referendum on Iraq. Of those that _did_ vote for Bush based on Iraq, many were duped. If they thought that Iraq had any connection to 9/11 \*, they were duped. If they thought Iraq posed a threat to the US, they were duped. Bush is a frightening figure. He now believes that 51% of the vote, however rigged it was, is carte blanche to do whatever he wants with no accountability. No president that I know of ever uttered anything close to this in its arrogant hubris. - 9/11 is a registered trademark of George W. Bush. ---
**Author:** ![World\_Eater](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/f04885/32.png) [@World\_Eater](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/World_Eater)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2005, 2:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-says-nobody-needs-to-be-accountable/285042/67 "2005-01-17T14:57:17Z")
> [@](#): > > “We had an accountability moment, and that’s called the 2004 elections,” Bush said in an interview with The Washington Post. “The American people listened to different assessments made about what was taking place in Iraq, and they looked at the two candidates, and chose me.” I couldn’t agree more, he’s 100% correct. Enjoy the next four years you visionless morons. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2005, 3:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-says-nobody-needs-to-be-accountable/285042/68 "2005-01-17T15:02:36Z")
Is that what you thought when Clinton was re-elected? ---
**Author:** ![World\_Eater](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/f04885/32.png) [@World\_Eater](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/World_Eater)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2005, 3:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-says-nobody-needs-to-be-accountable/285042/69 "2005-01-17T15:05:43Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > Is that what you thought when Clinton was re-elected? I was repub up until the first year of Bush’s term. ---
**Author:** ![World\_Eater](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/f04885/32.png) [@World\_Eater](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/World_Eater)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2005, 3:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-says-nobody-needs-to-be-accountable/285042/70 "2005-01-17T15:06:45Z")
> [@World Eater](#): > > I was repub up until the first year of Bush’s term. Scratch that. I usually leaned right, but held assholes on both sides accountable for their bullshit. I don’t see parties, I see individuals. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2005, 3:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-says-nobody-needs-to-be-accountable/285042/71 "2005-01-17T15:09:16Z")
> [@](#): > > “We had an accountability moment, and that’s called the 2004 elections,” Bush said in an interview with The Washington Post. “The American people listened to different assessments made about what was taking place in Iraq, and they looked at the two candidates, and chose me.” At least he admits to the collusion and complicity of the two major parties in their monopoly on American government. Though I’m sure it wasn’t intentional. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2005, 3:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-says-nobody-needs-to-be-accountable/285042/72 "2005-01-17T15:11:09Z")
> [@World Eater](#): > > I usually leaned right, but held assholes on both sides accountable for their bullshit. I don’t see parties, I see individuals. So what’s changed for you? Why do you not hold Bush accountable anymore? ---
**Author:** ![Enderw24](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/ba9def/32.png) [@Enderw24](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Enderw24)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2005, 3:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-says-nobody-needs-to-be-accountable/285042/73 "2005-01-17T15:38:33Z")
Brutus, I think you’re missing the point. The goal of this thread is NOT to determine if GWB made any mistakes. There are millions upon millions of other threads debating that fine subject and they all end in way: the total annihilation of any rational thought. No, the goal of this thread is to ask one question: _IF_ the president has made mistakes in the past (or, indeed, makes mistakes in the future) within his role as Commander-In-Chief, should he be held accountable? To give you an example from the other side of the aisle, Marion Barry was caught on camera buying and using illegal drugs. But he was reelected! Does that mean he shouldn’t have been held accountable for breaking the law merely because the voters saw fit to keep him as mayor? That would have been an interesting approach for him to take, but no. The laws don’t work that way. Courts don’t work that way. He served a 6 month jail term for the crimes he committed. Is your position that Bush is above the law or that 51% of the voters determines what the law is? ---
**Author:** ![Baldwin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/baldwin/32/7264_2.png) [@Baldwin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Baldwin)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2005, 4:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-says-nobody-needs-to-be-accountable/285042/74 "2005-01-17T16:04:06Z")
_Posted by me:_ > [@](#): > > Brutus – I’m going to take my turn trying to explain this to you, because I believe you’re redeemable. Okay, you’ve convinced me otherwise. You’re a wilfully-ignorant intellectual coward, and a waste of my time. ---
**Author:** ![mhendo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mhendo/32/3159_2.png) [@mhendo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mhendo)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2005, 4:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-says-nobody-needs-to-be-accountable/285042/75 "2005-01-17T16:20:22Z")
So, re. the connection between Iraq and Al Qaeda, **Brutus** first asserts that: > [@Brutus](#): > > There were proven contacts between the two. Then, as evidence for this assertion, he offers a quote from Colin Powell, which says: > [@Colin Powell](#): > > “I have not seen smoking gun, concrete evidence about the connection, but I do believe the connections existed.” So, in **Brutus** ’s mind, a statement by the Secretary of State that no concrete evidence exists of the connection, constitutes evidence of the connection. :dubious: ---
**Author:** ![Homebrew](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/c89c15/32.png) [@Homebrew](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Homebrew)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2005, 4:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-says-nobody-needs-to-be-accountable/285042/76 "2005-01-17T16:29:10Z")
> [@Baldwin](#): > > Okay, you’ve convinced me otherwise. You’re a wilfully-ignorant intellectual coward, and a waste of my time. Slow learner, eh? I could have told you that back when he was still **Ottto**. (Not to be confused with the real **Otto** who is not a raving lunatic.) ---
**Author:** ![World\_Eater](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/f04885/32.png) [@World\_Eater](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/World_Eater)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2005, 6:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-says-nobody-needs-to-be-accountable/285042/77 "2005-01-17T18:52:01Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > So what’s changed for you? Why do you not hold Bush accountable anymore? I do still hold him accountable, but that and 25 cents will get you a bag of chips. We should have held him accountable when it would have made a difference, the election. Whatever insane shit he goes and does now is not on my hands, that’s all I’m saying. What the fuck is holding him accountable going to do now? ---
**Author:** ![ArrMatey](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/arrmatey/32/3522_2.png) [@ArrMatey](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ArrMatey)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2005, 7:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-says-nobody-needs-to-be-accountable/285042/78 "2005-01-17T19:19:47Z")
> [@World Eater](#): > > I do still hold him accountable, but that and 25 cents will get you a bag of chips. We should have held him accountable when it would have made a difference, the election. Whatever insane shit he goes and does now is not on my hands, that’s all I’m saying. What the fuck is holding him accountable going to do now? Normally, I don’t even comment on political threads like this, but I feel the need to respond to this one. The reason we need to hold him accountable now is because of his current attitude. Bush believes, or at the very least is saying, “Well, people won’t hold me accountable. I can do whatever I want.” Ergo, we -seriously- need to keep any sort of check on him, even if just in public opinion. Otherwise, we prove his assumption right. Before the election, I remember (although not the exact quote) Bush saying that he did not regret going into Iraq against UN ruling, and would do it again. To me this said that he would see re-election as an ‘okay’ from the US voting public to do just that. Lo and behold, that seems to be exactly his attitude. Until this past election, I have been far, far from politically active. But this time I needed to go out and vote. I have never been -angry- at a president until the interview that made up the basis of this thread. There has to be accountability. There **has** to be. Otherwise, we pave the way for any tin-pot dictator, legally elected or not, to jump up any cause and just say, “Hey, I was elected. Whatever I do is okay.” I shake with sadly impotent rage over this. There’s little I can do but rant, and try to convince others to keep their eyes open so that things like this won’t happen again. Not if I can help it. ---
**Author:** ![World\_Eater](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/f04885/32.png) [@World\_Eater](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/World_Eater)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2005, 7:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-says-nobody-needs-to-be-accountable/285042/79 "2005-01-17T19:40:00Z")
I certainly understand your frustration. > [@ArrMatey!](#): > > Normally, I don’t even comment on political threads like this, but I feel the need to respond to this one. The reason we need to hold him accountable now is because of his current attitude. His _current_ attitude? We’ve been saying for _years_ how much of an asshole this guy is. _Years!_ If people had listened to our “crazy” asses before the election we could have eliminated the reign of King Bush. > [@](#): > > Bush believes, or at the very least is saying, “Well, people won’t hold me accountable. I can do whatever I want.” Again, we’ve know this for years. Why do you think we hate the fucking guy? Hmmm perhaps because he’s a stubborn, fixed in his ways, and doesn’t listen to his electorate? > [@](#): > > Ergo, we -seriously- need to keep any sort of check on him, even if just in public opinion. Lot’s of good this “checking” is doing wouldn’t you say? We’re sending mixed messages to a guy that only listens to what he wants to hear. You know what he heard? 99% of the country must agree with what I’m doing, they reelected me. He doesn’t see nuance, he doesn’t see 51% of the country elected him, so he better try to please the 49% as well. He will rule as if 100% of the country voted for him, and people act surprised? > [@](#): > > Otherwise, we prove his assumption right. The assumption has already been proven right. Accountability? That’s like closing the barn door after the horse has been stolen. > [@](#): > > Before the election, I remember (although not the exact quote) Bush saying that he did not regret going into Iraq against UN ruling, and would do it again. To me this said that he would see re-election as an ‘okay’ from the US voting public to do just that. Lo and behold, that seems to be exactly his attitude. That’s exactly his attitude, and you know what? We’ve _proven him right_! > [@](#): > > Until this past election, I have been far, far from politically active. But this time I needed to go out and vote. I have never been -angry- at a president until the interview that made up the basis of this thread. There has to be accountability. There **has** to be. Otherwise, we pave the way for any tin-pot dictator, legally elected or not, to jump up any cause and just say, “Hey, I was elected. Whatever I do is okay.” Too late. > [@](#): > > I shake with sadly impotent rage over this. There’s little I can do but rant, and try to convince others to keep their eyes open so that things like this won’t happen again. Not if I can help it. Good to hear, keep fighting the good fight. ---
**Author:** ![MaxTheVool](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9fc29f/32.png) [@MaxTheVool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MaxTheVool)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2005, 7:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-says-nobody-needs-to-be-accountable/285042/80 "2005-01-17T19:49:33Z")
So… any conservatives OTHER than Brutus want to defend Bush here? Oh, and Brutus: there are at least two glaring flaws in your logic: (1) The 2004 election wasn’t a referendum specifically on the Iraq war, it was a choice between (primarily) Bush and Kerry. For all we know, 95% of Bush voters had the attitude of “well, I really don’t like most of what he’s done in Iraq, but MY GOD I hate that Ketchup woman”. If there had been a nationwide vote in which voters were asked “do you approve of EVERY SINGLE THING that the Bush administration has done in Iraq, yes or no”, and 51% voted yes, then you’d BEGIN to have an argument (2) The other major flaw is that the voters did not have perfect information. If it turns out that Haliburton has broken some law or ethical standard, but the information wasn’t available to every single person who voted for Bush, then how could their votes possibly have been a statement of approval of that violation? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-says-nobody-needs-to-be-accountable/285042.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-says-nobody-needs-to-be-accountable/285042.md?page=5)