yurbud
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jun-17-07 11:35 AM
Original message |
just heard Daniel Shorr of NPR calling Bush admin a "junta" and comparing their sins to Watergate |
|
not up as a transcript yet
|
BrklynLiberal
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jun-17-07 11:39 AM
Response to Original message |
1. He was there in '72, so he KNOWS of what he speaks. |
|
Guess at his age he has nothing to lose..so he can speak up.
|
whistle
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jun-17-07 11:40 AM
Response to Original message |
2. Jesus, that's pretty strong stuff for a government run broadcast network |
|
...but very accurate with regard to BushCo.
<snip> Definitions of JUNTA on the Web:
Military government coalition. www.infohub.com/Destinations/South-America/Argentina/85480.htm
a clique that seeks power usually through intrigue. missbunbun.tripod.com/id7.html
A group of military officers controlling a country especially after a revolution. www.apheda.org.au/campaigns/burma_schools_kit/resources/1074040257_16812.html
A Spanish word meaning a group of individuals forming a government, especially after a revolution or coup d'etat. www.comune.venezia.it/atlante/documents/glossary/nelson_glossary.htm
(Pronounced like "hoonta".) A small group of men who have taken control of the government In a military coup, and who govern in a dictatorship. Most states of Latin America have frequently been governed by a junta. www.naiadonline.ca/book/01Glossary.htm
|
Raven
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jun-17-07 11:40 AM
Response to Original message |
3. I heard it too. Dan doesn't mince words! He was speculating |
|
about how many years it would take before all of Bush's sins and crimes come to light.
|
yurbud
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jun-17-07 11:45 AM
Response to Reply #3 |
4. a few years ago I turned out NPR and heard Shorr and suddenly another voice came on an said |
|
"Well, aren't we Mr. Gloomy!" It was another commentator they had added for "balance" who was clearly a Fox-like know-nothing.
|
stubtoe
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jun-17-07 12:00 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
8. My guess would be Scott Simon. |
yurbud
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jun-17-07 12:11 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
9. it was a smarmy older chick |
stubtoe
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jun-17-07 04:28 PM
Response to Reply #9 |
yurbud
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jun-17-07 06:32 PM
Response to Reply #13 |
15. no, it almost sounded like a bad church lady impression, and you could hear the disgust in Shorr's |
|
voice when he responded to her.
|
Sal Minella
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jun-17-07 12:38 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
11. Poppy Bush's papers from the Iran-Contra scandal (trading arms for hostages, which Reagan denied) |
|
Edited on Sun Jun-17-07 12:39 PM by Idealist Hippie
are still under lock and key as they have been for 20 years -- IIRC they were supposed to be released to public ten years ago but * is keeping them locked up by some pretense or other.
At the time, the shredders in Ollie North's office kept jamming and North's secretary, Fawn Hall, was smuggling incriminating documents out in her boots.
I would imagine Poppy Bush's papers from the Iran-Contra scandal days would be of great interest, if we can ever get a look at them.
Seems like waiting 20 years is waiting long enough, somehow.
At least we know Iran has WMD(TOW missiles were one item I believe) -- we still have the receipts.
|
yurbud
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jun-17-07 03:00 PM
Response to Reply #11 |
12. one of the things that scares me about the Dems is they let Papa Bush off the hook |
|
on Iran Contra, and around the time of the '92 election, they got confirmation of the '80 October Surprise.
But because Clinton had won, they figured let bygones be bygones.
The problem is, the right sees forgiveness as a sign of weakness and comes back at you with longer knives to hot dress you for dinner.
I have a feeling the Democrats will ultimately do this with the Bushies:
"Oh, they are out of office and a minority now--there's no point in kicking them further down the stairs."
|
Sal Minella
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jun-17-07 09:25 PM
Response to Reply #12 |
17. ...and we'll just let them all move to Paraguay and live on their ranches there. |
|
======================== The problem is, the right sees forgiveness as a sign of weakness and comes back at you with longer knives to hot dress you for dinner. ========================
Very true. Any sign of "trying to get along" is perceived as buckling under. Willingness to compromise is seen as willingness to capitulate.
It's like they're hard-wired this way.
I just hope I live long enough to see Poppy's papers on Iran-Contra come out, because his "I was out of the loop" declaration was laughable on its face way back then, and we need him to be held accountable for his transgressions.
|
yurbud
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jun-17-07 10:08 PM
Response to Reply #17 |
18. it seemed like Papa Bush was running the show behind the scenes after Reagan got shot |
MannyGoldstein
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jun-17-07 11:50 AM
Response to Original message |
5. Watergate Was A Flea Fart Compared To This |
|
Bush has so utterly violated the Constitution that I wonder what the repercussions will be.
You know what else was different about Watergate? Congress acted. Triangulation was what you did with pool balls back then, it was not considered leadership.
|
kenny blankenship
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jun-17-07 11:53 AM
Response to Original message |
6. Dan the Man, still the Man |
|
Edited on Sun Jun-17-07 12:00 PM by kenny blankenship
I don't say Daniel Schorr is irreplaceable for sentimental reasons, the way people sometimes get sentimental about old folks, but simply because NOBODY has appeared who can replace him. That's kind of terrifying now that Daniel Schorr is like 112 or something. It's less the dread of losing him that gets me down than the knowledge that the system has ground on for decades now without allowing a Daniel Schorr to be admitted into the ranks of broadcast journalism. Or else budding Daniel Schorrs have been weeded out of the system during the same time before they could flourish. If the corporate media system can exclude, preclude, discourage and extirpate broadcast journalists of the caliber of Mr. Schorr for as long as it has now managed, there seems no reason to think it can't continue to do so forever.
|
stubtoe
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jun-17-07 11:59 AM
Response to Original message |
7. Good catch. Here is a link to that story: |
Frustratedlady
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jun-17-07 12:13 PM
Response to Original message |
10. I still believe this cabal's "break-in" to the Dem offices... |
|
Edited on Sun Jun-17-07 12:16 PM by Frustratedlady
(aka, today's Watergate) was done via phone tapping and email surveillance, before and after NSA. Dems = Terrorists. I'll never be convinced otherwise and it has to be the reason why they are so protective of their emails and personnel. The Repug party would "spin" out of control if that was ever proven.
It would only take one person to admit they had Kerry under their eyes/ears to blow the whole thing up. Where is that person? If my memory serves me correctly, it was someone who mentioned the tape recorder that Nixon had set up which blew the Watergate case wide open.
|
G_Leo_Criley
(553 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jun-17-07 05:04 PM
Response to Reply #10 |
14. alexander butterfield |
|
Yes, it was Alexander Butterfield who blew the whole thing open wide by revealing the existence of the taping system in the White House.
Read an interview in which he said he had waited until he was asked exactly the right question, and when it was asked, he had decided that would not lie under oath.
Who will be our Mr. Butterfield I wonder?
glc
|
Frustratedlady
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-18-07 06:52 PM
Response to Reply #14 |
21. Thank you for reminding me of Butterfield..... |
|
...and that he waited to be "asked" before providing the information. Memory cells are going bye-bye, I'm afraid.
|
yurbud
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jun-17-07 06:33 PM
Response to Reply #10 |
16. you would think email surveillance of the opposition party would be enough |
|
to impeach any other president.
Remember filegate during the Clinton era?
|
Marr
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jun-17-07 10:50 PM
Response to Reply #10 |
20. I'd say that's a very safe bet. |
|
Edited on Sun Jun-17-07 10:50 PM by Marr
1. Prior to 9-11, terrorism was not one of their priorities. Cheney's terrorism task force never met, they ignored warnings from Richard Clarke and other experts, etc.
2. The illegal surveillance began *prior* to 9-11. Shortly after they took office, in fact.
They clearly weren't using their illegal spying to eavesdrop on suspected terrorists for those first 9 months, so who *were* they spying on? Seems like the political, and possibly business, opposition are the only candidates.
|
baldguy
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jun-17-07 10:27 PM
Response to Original message |
19. Nixon was a piker compared to Bush. |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Fri Apr 26th 2024, 10:41 PM
Response to Original message |