Quantcast

how has this administration screwed up?

LordOpie

MOTHER HEN
Oct 17, 2002
21,033
0
Denver
From seriously questionable to outright failure... I'm curious of the list of problems. Here's what I've got so far:


-- WMDs (false)
-- Iraq war (questionable)
-- escorting Saudis out of the country during 911.
-- Haliburton and similar financially benefitting (questionable)
-- planting a "journalist" in the pressroom tossing scripted questions.
-- "Mission Accomplished"?
-- Harriet Miers
-- Leaking Valerie Plame situation.
-- Katrina, Brownie, FEMA, many dead citizens.
-- Abu Ghraib and torture policy.

-- Saying he supports our troops but cuts VA benefits like a mofo (kidwoo's post)
--"Bring it on" (encouraing terrorism?) (kidwoo)

I think I'm missing a few?
 

kidwoo

Celebrating No-Pants Day
Aug 25, 2003
22,270
1,960
In my pants
LordOpie said:
-- planting a "journalist" in the pressroom tossing scripted questions.
?
Correction: A Male Prostitute who solicited his junk on the interweb posing as a journalist with full press clearance granted by the whitehouse.

LordOpie said:
I think I'm missing a few?
---"Bring it on"

----Saying he supports our troops but cuts VA benefits like a mofo
 

LordOpie

MOTHER HEN
Oct 17, 2002
21,033
0
Denver
DRB said:
Why was escorting Saudis out of the country after 9/11 questionable?
Because there is evidence suggesting that they might have actually been behind 9/11. Because Saudi is pretty much the financial capital of the world for terrorism.

Instead of being given the red carpet treatment and sent home, they should've been held for questioning like all potential subjects that are or have been held.
 

Radarr

Turbo Monkey
Feb 25, 2004
1,129
0
Helena, MT
Don't forget the secret CIA death camps or the staged interview with the troops in Iraq. Oh, and our economy is the pinnacle of perfection.
 

DRB

unemployed bum
Oct 24, 2002
15,287
0
Watchin' you. Writing it all down.
LordOpie said:
Because there is evidence suggesting that they might have actually been behind 9/11. Because Saudi is pretty much the financial capital of the world for terrorism.

Instead of being given the red carpet treatment and sent home, they should've been held for questioning like all potential subjects that are or have been held.
So you are saying that every Saudi should have been hauled in and given the third degree? Of course the FBI didn't vet any of those folks before letting them return when the airports finally opened. Maybe we go get bin Laden's sister, who still is in the US, and beat her a little bit to find out her involvement.
 

DRB

unemployed bum
Oct 24, 2002
15,287
0
Watchin' you. Writing it all down.
LordOpie said:
uhh, your average Saudi was not given red carpet escorts... that was some Saudi princes.
You mean the red carpet treatment by the Saudi government that flew home a number of Saudis or the Bin Laden family members that flew home on their own dime. Or do you mean being picked up by the FBI for questioning (they were all questioned before being allowed to leave) and taken to the airport where they were leaving from.

Some of the things on your list are valid, this one is kinda dumb.
 

Toshi

Harbinger of Doom
Oct 23, 2001
26,689
1,940
DRB said:
What should they have done with those they caught in Afghanistan?
either charging them with some crime and bringing them to trial or releasing them (vs. leaving them to rot in limbo) would be a good start.
 

DRB

unemployed bum
Oct 24, 2002
15,287
0
Watchin' you. Writing it all down.
Toshi said:
either charging them with some crime and bringing them to trial or releasing them (vs. leaving them to rot in limbo) would be a good start.
You don't charge a prisoner of war with a crime. You just hold them until the conflict is over. By releasing them aren't you just returning them to the pool of fighters?

But let's say we released them all tomorrow, where do we send them? Should we care that returning them to a country where they are going to be made even more unconfortable then they are now?
 

LordOpie

MOTHER HEN
Oct 17, 2002
21,033
0
Denver
you confuse me tho, you support sending people to Guantanamo who haven't been accused of a crime, but when Saudi Princes who are suspected of being THE financial backers and supporters of worldwide terrorism... let 'em go?
 

Tenchiro

Attention K Mart Shoppers
Jul 19, 2002
5,407
0
New England
Bragging that they were the party of small government and controlled spending, but in reality are neither.
 

H8R

Cranky Pants
Nov 10, 2004
13,965
4
CIA secret prisons. (new one)
Environmental regulation rollbacks
Not requiring automakers to adhere to better gas mileage minimums
Abhu Graib. (sp?)
No Child Left Behind.
Bin Laden never found
No Saudis ever brought up on charges for 9/11.
Nigerian yellow cake uranium BS used in State of the Union address as a fear tactic to justify Iraq invasion.

More as I think of em.
 

Westy

the teste
Nov 22, 2002
36,483
3,238
Sleazattle
-Cutting taxes while increasing spending.
-Giving tax breaks to oil companies despite them making more money than the pope.
-Instead of finding ways to decrease medicine costs create some social programs to pay for old people drugs.
-No child left behind
-Numerous policies that force local governments to spend money but are provided no federal funds.
 

DRB

unemployed bum
Oct 24, 2002
15,287
0
Watchin' you. Writing it all down.
LordOpie said:
you confuse me tho, you support sending people to Guantanamo who haven't been accused of a crime,
First who said I supported sending anyone to Gitmo? POWs are not accused of crimes they are simply held until the conflict is over. Now while the adminstration has not classified them as POWs, I think of them like that.

LordOpie said:
but when Saudi Princes who are suspected of being THE financial backers and supporters of worldwide terrorism... let 'em go?
Now wait a mintue specifically which Saudi princes that were the financial backers of any terrorism were allowed to go home after 9/11?
 

Slugman

Frankenbike
Apr 29, 2004
4,027
0
Miami, FL
DRB said:
What should they have done with those they caught in Afghanistan?
How about leaving them in a prison in Afghanistan...

And Gitmo had more than just people picked up in Afghanistan.
 

Westy

the teste
Nov 22, 2002
36,483
3,238
Sleazattle
-Steel tarrifs. Pandered to the Steel industry and ended up raising steel prices for US manufacturing that ended up forcing even more manufacturing overseas.
-Failing to address immigration issues. (talked crap to get latino vote but didn't do anything so as not to piss off xenophobic conservative base)
-Scaring North Korea into building more nukUlar weapons.
 

Inclag

Turbo Monkey
Sep 9, 2001
2,337
57
MA
Not becoming a member of the Kyoto Protocal stating that they need more scientific data, which they have yet to really look into and basically any environmental regulations that are anything like the Kyoto Protocal's are implemented by concerned state or local governments.
 

Westy

the teste
Nov 22, 2002
36,483
3,238
Sleazattle
Inclag said:
Not becoming a member of the Kyoto Protocal stating that they need more scientific data, which they have yet to really look into and basically any environmental regulations that are anything like the Kyoto Protocal's are implemented by concerned state or local governments.
Since global warming isn't real Kyoto is a just a ploy by third world countries to steal business away from the US.
 

Inclag

Turbo Monkey
Sep 9, 2001
2,337
57
MA
DRB said:
And treatment there would have been better than Gitmo?
I think that the problem most people have with the prisoner issues etc. is that this administration is basically picking and choosing what parts of the Geneva Convention they want to adhere to.
 

LordOpie

MOTHER HEN
Oct 17, 2002
21,033
0
Denver
Jabuttri said:
What do you guys think about the talk that has just started about the use of force being a possibility with Iran
If we did, I think it would be a great opportunity for our enemies to invade.
 

sanjuro

Tube Smuggler
Sep 13, 2004
17,412
0
SF
I know Harriet Miers makes Bush look stupid, but she was simply not qualified to be a Supreme Court justice, not that she was incompetent. She seems to serve adequately as White House Counsel, and was a decent lawyer.

Bush rewards loyalty, which can be criticized as a policy, since he does surround himself with Yesmen. But I think of Miers as a strategic mistake, not like the horrendous blunders that have already been mentioned.
 

Inclag

Turbo Monkey
Sep 9, 2001
2,337
57
MA
The administrations AIDS relief program - Money goes to organizations that teach abstinance as opposed to safe sex, goes to Big Pharma for development and production of their own drugs as opposed to companies in other countries that have already developed cheap and effective drugs that could adminstered immediately.
 

Andyman_1970

Turbo Monkey
Apr 4, 2003
3,105
5
The Natural State
kidwoo said:
Correction: A Male Prostitute who solicited his junk on the interweb posing as a journalist with full press clearance granted by the whitehouse.
Source please?

If this is true this puts a pretty big hole in the administrations integrity from at least a Christian perspective - I mean we're all for family values, but when we need something done we'll stoop so low to hire a male prostitute to do the job............:eek: (assuming that's true).
 

Westy

the teste
Nov 22, 2002
36,483
3,238
Sleazattle
Andyman_1970 said:
Source please?

If this is true this puts a pretty big hole in the administrations integrity from at least a Christian perspective - I mean we're all for family values, but when we need something done we'll stoop so low to hire a male prostitute to do the job............:eek: (assuming that's true).
You never heard of this? A neo-conservative journalist was given a press pass and given preferencial treatment over mainstream journalists during press conferences because he asked pretty much rhetorical questions that slammed Democrats. It later turned out he started and ran a gay porn/matchmaking website. Had his own very scary profile. Can't remember the guys name but it was one of those things on the Daily Show that was so funny as a fact no comedic spin need to be put on it.


Edit:
Found some info

Click here for the neocon journalist side. http://www.jeffgannon.com/

Google Jeff Guckert or Jeff Gannon for more info.
 

Andyman_1970

Turbo Monkey
Apr 4, 2003
3,105
5
The Natural State
Westy said:
You never heard of this? A neo-conservative journalist was given a press pass and given preferencial treatment over mainstream journalists during press conferences because he asked pretty much rhetorical questions that slammed Democrats. It later turned out he started and ran a gay porn/matchmaking website. Had his own very scary profile. Can't remember the guys name but it was one of those things on the Daily Show that was so funny as a fact no comedic spin need to be put on it.
How come Dobson and Sekulow aren't raising cain about this? I mean the administration that is so pro Christian, anti "gay agenda" turns a blind eye to it when it serves their needs..........I mean come on.
 

Changleen

Paranoid Member
Jan 9, 2004
9,890
4
Hypernormality
DRB said:
First who said I supported sending anyone to Gitmo? POWs are not accused of crimes they are simply held until the conflict is over. Now while the adminstration has not classified them as POWs, I think of them like that.
So you would also be in favour of the Geneva convention being applied to them?
Now wait a mintue specifically which Saudi princes that were the financial backers of any terrorism were allowed to go home after 9/11?
Well you'll never know now will you? I think the point is that these people got to to duck out of due process because they were bumchums with Bush.
 

H8R

Cranky Pants
Nov 10, 2004
13,965
4
A list of the current admin's mistakes.

This is gonna be a lonnnng thread.
 

DRB

unemployed bum
Oct 24, 2002
15,287
0
Watchin' you. Writing it all down.
Changleen said:
So you would also be in favour of the Geneva convention being applied to them?
Sure. In essence it is a war and the vast majority of these folks were found as combatants. I have a feeling the main reason was so they have the flexibility continually interrogate them with methods that would be deemed in conflict with the convention. At this point I believe that they continued interrogation is pointless and probably has ceased for all intents. However the application of the convention could potentially subject them to captivity forever, as it only requires repatriation at the completion of hostilities. Which is where most of them are at now.

And has been pointed out, releasing them to their home countries could end up making it much worse on them.

Changleen said:
Well you'll never know now will you? I think the point is that these people got to to duck out of due process because they were bumchums with Bush.
What due process? They were interrogated by the FBI, deemed not a threat and allowed to leave. If they had been held for any amount of time without charges then y'all would be screaming that their civil rights had been violated. Think of the cries of abuse that have been heaped upon the authorities when they have detained someone because of some fishy aspect of their story.

But why would they be held because of the events of 9/11 if it was a big hoax anyway?
 

Changleen

Paranoid Member
Jan 9, 2004
9,890
4
Hypernormality
DRB said:
Sure. In essence it is a war
Which congress did not approve...
and the vast majority of these folks were found as combatants. I have a feeling the main reason was so they have the flexibility continually interrogate them with methods that would be deemed in conflict with the convention.
Which is the problem, and is the beginning of the US's loss of any moral upper hand they could claim to any moderate Muslims. This type of thing made Muslims hate Bush and America. In essence, Bush made the situation
worse than it was already.
At this point I believe that they continued interrogation is pointless and probably has ceased for all intents. That could potentially subject them to captivity forever, as it only requires repatriation at the completion of hostilities. Which is where most of them are at now.
That's just great. Bush starts a war, and hundreds of probably largely innocent bystanders are locked up for the rest of their lives. Awesome.
And has been pointed out, releasing them to their home countries could end up making it much worse on them.
Worse than being locked up for the rest of their lives? I'd rather be dead.
What due process? They were interrogated by the FBI, deemed not a threat and allowed to leave.
BS. They were driven to their waiting planes by the Feds, not grilled.
If they had been held for any amount of time without charges then y'all would be screaming that their civil rights had been violated. Think of the cries of abuse that have been heaped upon the authorities when they have detained someone because of some fishy aspect of their story.
Now you're being naieve, on purpose I think.
But why would they be held because of the events of 9/11 if it was a big hoax anyway?
But you don't believe that. You can't have it both ways.