Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian
The Bush bashing going on here isn't digusting, but it is ugly truth. Stop side-stepping the issue and go ahead and try to defend them on this like you love to do on everything else. I honestly don't know what it will take for some of you people. I think if Bush came on national TV himself and fessed up to everything you'd still insist it was some liberal conspiracy.
Nope - it is the issue. I don't deny there are unanswered questions, but the posting and spinning of everything that could be remotely construed as damaging to Bush doesn't do any good either. Oh and there isn't a Liberal conspiracy just like there isn't a Right-wing conspiracy.
IF Bush admitted that he made up evidence and lied to us then I will eat crow - I've said similar before. But here is the problem with your argument - you can't prove it so you grasp on to every little thing to try to destroy him a different way- you know - kinda like you claim that people jumped the media reports of WMDs during the war as evidence. Do you not chuckle about their apparently misdirected conclusions?
What's the difference between "posting and spinning of everything that could be remotely construed as damaging to Bush," and reporting new developments that suggest Bush and his minions are dishonest? As you said elsewhere, we're not going to get a confession from Bush. This means we (the public) will have to build the case one brick at a time. Every new report, be it a leak, an insider who speaks up, a new discovery that contradicts Bush claims, whatever -- every new report adds to the wall, making it taller and stronger and harder to ignore.
Six months ago, most Americans trusted the President. They wanted to be patriotic. They wanted to believe he was telling the truth. They maybe didn't like the invasion, but they accepted Bush's word that he knew it was necessary. As more and more information comes out, people are changing their minds. They are starting to realize we were deceived. We may not yet be certain whether it was willful deceit or mere incompetence, but we understand that we weren't told the truth. We want answers. We want accountability. We are asking questions and slowly opening our eyes to unpleasant information.
Should we have ignored early Watergate reports because people didn't want to believe a U.S. President would be associated with an inept burglary? Should we have ignored early Iran-Contra reports because people couldn't believe the U.S. government would sell arms to terrorists? Should the Republicans have ignored Monica Lewinsky because we didn't care about the President's sex life? (Oops, never mind, bad example. That one had nothing to do with the U.S. public.)
This is the way the process works. We don't get dramatic, Perry Mason-style revelations where everything suddenly becomes clear. In the real world, the truth comes out a little at a time. We're just reporting it and trying to fit it into the puzzle. That's not spinning and bashing, that's democracy in action.
That's not to say there is no Bush-bashing here. It crops up all over the place, for any reason or no reason at all. Of course, so does Clinton-bashing and Clinton-bashing (the other one) and Gore-bashing and . . . Criticizing our political figures is another important part of the democratic process. It is an inevitable side-effect of discussing politics, and both sides indulge in it with great relish. Your missing comrades from the rabid right were quite adept at dishing it out. It seems hypocritcal, perhaps even cowardly, to run and hide now that they're getting it back.
Facebook
Twitter