Bush Untethered - New York Times

[VolcanoJen]

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/17/opinion/17sun1.html

Excerpt:

Watching the president on Friday in the Rose Garden as he threatened to quit interrogating terrorists if Congress did not approve his detainee bill, we were struck by how often he acts as though there were not two sides to a debate. We have lost count of the number of times he has said Americans have to choose between protecting the nation precisely the way he wants, and not protecting it at all.

On Friday, President Bush posed a choice between ignoring the law on wiretaps, and simply not keeping tabs on terrorists. Then he said the United States could rewrite the Geneva Conventions, or just stop questioning terrorists. To some degree, he is following a script for the elections: terrify Americans into voting Republican. But behind that seems to be a deeply seated conviction that under his leadership, America is right and does not need the discipline of rules. He does not seem to understand that the rules are what makes this nation as good as it can be.

Brilliant. Please click for to read the entire essay:

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/17/opinion/17sun1.html

[Erika]

1. He's a GOP elitist who does not believe in the rule of law

unless he writes it. With his stupid wishes to change Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions, he seems to care less that he would be subjecting our own troops to individual interpretations of that law and removing international law.

[rwenos]

2. Government by False Dichotomy

It's either Bush's way or complete chaos. It's a curious rhetorical device, one which comes across as extremely manipulative and authoritarian. It places the opposition in the position of defending a ridiculous position -- i.e., not interrogating terrorists at all.

I wonder what it is about Texas politics that allows this. Bush presents a false choice, setting up a straw man as the only option besides his plan -- then follows up with a generality, like "my plan is good for the American people."

I can't help but think this is an astonishingly superficial man, a person who never thinks about the implications of what he is saying. He's a puppet for a bunch of suits who care for nothing other than enriching themselves like pigs at the public trough.

He's really the perfect tool for Christian and corporate fascists to take over America.

[Erika]

3. Yes. and they did so

and the bushbot lemmings acted as enablers.

[ixion]

4. kicked and recommended

fantastic. :applause:

[vixengrl]

5. Immaturity in action.

We have lost count of the number of times he has said Americans have to choose between protecting the nation precisely the way he wants, and not protecting it at all.

Or, "If we don't play by my rules, I'm gonna take my ball and go home. (Pout.)"

But it isn't George Bush's ball. It's the safety and the freedom of this country that is at stake, and it is by no means a game. His job--yes job, and a damn crucial one, is to faithfully and lawfully execute the duties of his office, and if he can't or won't do it, he should resign so we can have somebody who will do it. And it doesn't look like he can do it, because he broke faith by lying us into war, and he broke the law via illegal wiretaps and torture. And it doesn't look like he will do the job right, because he just doesn't want to.

[mwb970]

6. Bush and his henchmen have ZERO interest in governing.

Money and power, power and money, for themselves and their rich, powerful friends. That's it, folks.

[opihimoimoi]

7. I look at it as PRESIDENTIAL EXTORTION

[Marrak]

8. The worst...

:wtf: :puke: :kick: