Bush losing control, lashing out at advisors

[tommywishbone]

My broker always told me TWA stock was cyclical; "Don't worry, it'll bounce back." I hate that guy.

 

[joshw10]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Sudheer Anne
So Genx you don't believe that Rove being ousted out of the White House is going to be a big blow to this president? I want some of what you are smoking please.

Scandals hurt any president, especially ones involving those close to him.

I dont see how an advisor being indicted will be worse than Clinton's lying under oath which had almost no affect on your avg voter.

Of course the media will continue to play it up while people tune out. The last poll I heard had something like 40% of this country no having any idea or not caring about the Plame case. The only people who care are partisan hacks from both sides of the aisle.

That's because people could understand the Clinton case, it was hot steamy sex! The Plame case just confuses your average voter, leaving them scratching their head so they choose to ignore it.

 

[CellarDoor]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: OrByte
indictments for Rove and Libby will be brutal. Any idea if they HAVE to step down from their White house positions as a result?

Probably wont be forced but I am sure they will be asked.

And I have to ask, most people are saying the only indictments that will be handed down appear to be for perjury and obstruction of justice. I fail to see how Rove or Libby getting the smackdown will hurt Bush more than Clintons lying under oath failed to hurt him.

I am guessing a large % of this country either doesnt care or doesnt even know about this case no matter how much the media shoves it down our throats.

I think it'll have a much bigger effect than Clinton for many reasons. For one, regardless of the Lewinski thing, Clinton was solidly in the 60's (approval rating) for essentially all of his second term. The majority of Americans approved of him and were happy with the direction of the country. He lied, but we're used to politicians lying (which still didn't make it ok), however, his lies really had nothing to do with his role in the government.

This case has much larger implications IMO. For one, I think the effect will be larger because Bush has been on a slow negative trend in approval for a while now. Rumors of indictments, arrests, insider trading, etc. are surrounding the Republican party and that isn't good news for the President (if true or not). Americans lose sight of substance in favor of style and whether true or not, any rumors of criminal behavior within the Republican party are bad for the president at this point in time.

I'm sure most people would agree that lying about a BJ isn't as bad as leaking classified information, outing a CIA agent or trying to cover it up. That's my opinion anyways.

 

[nageov3t]

Originally posted by: Genx87
I dont see how an advisor being indicted will be worse than Clinton's lying under oath which had almost no affect on your avg voter.

it's simple.

Clinton was the man, and with a wife like Hillary, who wouldn't cheat on her?

 

[MadRat]

Originally posted by: BBond

Originally posted by: MadRat
Come on, even Reagan had numbers as low as Bush today. Wait a few months and the Repub's will rebound. Its a cyclical game.

How does one "rebound" from indictments? Iraq? Katrina?

The ship is sinking. Soon, the rats will begin to abandon it. There won't be any "rebound" from this one. It's time to pay the piper and Bush is all out of the "capital" he arrogantly and falsely laid claim to in what now seems years ago -- way back in November.

Reagan survived Iran-Contra.

 

[filterxg]

Bush just needs a long vacation...six more months in the Western White House and he should be fine.

 

[Stunt]

The more vacation he does, the less he works...the less he works, the more popular he gets!

 

[Engineer]

Originally posted by: filterxg
Bush just needs a long vacation...six more months in the Western White House and he should be fine.

Early retirement is the answer...early retirement!

 

[stateofbeasley]

If this is true, it wouldn't surprise me in the least. Bush seems to favor loyal "yes men" who tell him what he wants to hear. When things get to the point where even the "yes men" can't conceal the problems, he's bound to get nasty shocks.

 

[HomerJS]

Originally posted by: techs
I think it will be real interesting if they are indicted for covering up, not leaking. I think Bush might use that as an excuse to keep them on.

Impossible to cover up leak you didn't cause.

 

[daveshel]

Originally posted by: HomerJS

Originally posted by: techs
I think it will be real interesting if they are indicted for covering up, not leaking. I think Bush might use that as an excuse to keep them on.

Impossible to cover up leak you didn't cause.

DOH! Homer, that kind of flies in the face of the whole concept of plausible deniability. I'm sure that you were thinking of all the wonderful examples of shining conduct we experienced during Watergate and Iran-Contra, but...MMM...Pie!

 

[aidanjm]

Originally posted by: Steeplerot
Nothing more dangerous then a cornered desperate rat, hopefully he doesent finally give into the funda-headcases and give them what they have been begging for...

nuclear annihilation so they can be off the hook with their rapture.

would 'man-made' rapture count, tho? what if jeebus doesn't arrive to whoosh them up to heaven?