that one reason they were so excited about him is that he lacks any ties to any corporation that he might feel like he *owed* something? I feel certain I read something to that effect here, but now I can't find it.

The reason I ask is this article: Media frustration spills into briefing - Michael Calderone - Politico.com

I remember something to that effect being written, as well. It was probably on the Election board, and this is now defunct.

I am not surprised at this article, and honestly, every administration (not just the Bush Admin.) has its little, oh let's just say querks, huh???

What's that saying??? Same crap, different day??? Well, same crap, different administration??

__________________
Doing the right thing isn't always the same as doing the easy thing.

Pretty much!

Like I said earlier this week.... he puts his pants on one leg at a time just like the rest of us. I have a feeling the honeymoon is going to be pretty short-lived.

It was anna that said that, I believe. She was very excited about him not being affiliated with some of the same ties. But I believe the entire thread went bye bye..(I don't know why).

Me, being in Illinois, know differently about what he is or was affiliated with...but oh well.

I am off to read the link that was posted.

ETA.. okay.. but, I have to admit, "pay to play" is what Illinois (read: Chicago) politics does best!

What I meant was that Obama has nothing to gain financially by certain industries doing well or failing. George Bush, his Dad and Dick Cheney all own shares in the oil industry and the industry that makes tanks and cleans up after war. They personally have financial profit to be made 1)when gas prices go up 2)when there is a war and 3)by "cleaning up" after wars

That is what I meant. With all due respect it looks like you guys want him to fail and you are picking apart things looking for a needle in a haystack.

And for one more time nobody here believes he is some magical superstar idol who can single handly spin the world on his shoulders. That is something fabricated by FOX news and others of that sort. I am sorry you guys feel this way but I would hope that you guys would want something to turn around.

Why keep looking for him to fail? Why not hope that things turn around? It could take 2-6-8 years to turn this around we are not talking Samantha twitching her nose we are talking about having lost the manufacturing industry as well as others.

Please "can't we all just get along" for the sake of the future?

If President Obama does something scandalous and dishonest I for one will be the first to come here and apologize to you two personally and say I was wrong he is worse than the rest not better.

Truce? Hope for the future? Faith in God for giving us bad times to make us (meaning the whole country) change our lives back to simple meaningful ones and for perhaps now giving us something else to look forward to? Okay?

__________________
The political system is broke and it's a joke.

Anna, with all due respect, some of us wanted to get along during the last administration but because others did not support our President, that wasn't possible.

Do I want him to succeed? That's a loaded question. What defines success? Do I want the economy to turn around? Yes I do. Do I want him to enact many of the policies he has historically supported that, IMHO, are tantamount to socialism? No, I do not want him to enjoy any success in that arena.

I don't recall any liberals giving George Bush more than four minutes of fresh air, and find it a bit humorous that because the left is enamored of Obama that it seems to shock them that the right is not willing to extend that which they could not when they were not in control of the White House.

Please note - I am not implying that he has done anything scandalous or dishonest. I am just saying that he, like all the others, is just a man and is just a politician and that to naively presume that he is beholden to no one, no corporation, no other politicians who pull mighty tight strings is very dangerous.

Anna-

I have to admit that there's a little part of me that would LOVE to see him fall flat on his face. It doesn't really have anything to do with Obama though. The part of me that wants him to fail is a result of the heated nasty debates that led up to the election, and even the threads on inaugeration day. That's just immaturity on my part though.

Now that he's in there.. the best part of me wants him to do well without compromising the ideals that this nation was founded on.

What you say about George W. Bush is simply not true. Liberals did support him, especially after 9/11. He lost support when he chose to attack and occupy Iraq. Support further eroded when the country found out about his ordering torture. His handling of Katrina cost him even more. He was an absolute disaster of president. I have never wanted a president to fail this country.

I guess I don't find anything constructive to come from going back and forth on this issue.

George Bush was a very different story in many ways which I have clearly stated many times. First of all he was not technically elected by the people-he lost the popular vote. He also had a history of doing things that were irresponsible and dishonest and he did not present himself in a manner that was intelligent or positive.

I guess I for one will just agree to disagree and we will see what happens. I cannot in any stretch of my vivid imagination foresee President Obama doing anything as foolish or destructive as the administration that preceded him.

That is my final word on this subject.

__________________
The political system is broke and it's a joke.

Sorry - he WAS elected by the people.

You can't ride that horse forever and use it as an excuse to have been disrespectful to our President. He won, fair and square. Was it close? You betcha. Should Gore have been sworn in instead of him? Not according to anything I've read.

I live where Hurricane Rita hit right after Katrina hit. I don't think it's fair to put all the blame on Bush for that one. Where was all the press coverage for Rita? We didn't have thousands of people stranded on their rooftops. We all chipped in and helped one another. The initial crisis required people pulling together and working together. We needed the government in the aftermath. And they were there. People have been granted $$ to lift their houses according to the new gov't imposed codes. Our homeowners insurances paid. So, some of what went wrong with Katrina boils down to the local officials. I've always wondered why he (mayor of NO) didn't just load all the citizens who couldn't afford to leave into school buses and drive them to safety. The buses would have been safe and put to good use. Instead tax payers $$ had to replace the buses.
Anyway, we watched the weather reports and decided for ourselves whether we should leave or not and where to evacuate to. Due to the severity of our son's medical condition we made sure their was a hospital within 15 minutes of our evacuation point and that we knew how to get there via multiple routes. So, I went all around the world w/ my story to say people need to take more responsibility for their actions and quit waiting around for the government to step in.

Selena

__________________
God is not Santa Claus

Annadrose once again I totally agree with you 100 percent. President Obama has only been the president 3 days so far and alread we have so many people who are not willing to even him a try to succeed and put forth all the promises he has made, more affordable medical coverage for all, better health coverage, lower house costs, built better education systems for all, better our ecomony and rebuilt it, end the war and bring our soldiers home. Do you wowitdark not want these problems to be resolved. You mention about us liberals not giving ex president Bush no more then 4 minutes, that is not a accurate statement, he had the first four years not 4 minutes to make this wonderful country we all call America a better place to live. Then he turned around and had another 4 years not 4 minutes to fix this country and all our problems. But again things have gotten so much worse.The gas prices raising to all time highs, people losing their homes, so much continued bloodshed and innocent lives lost here in Amercia and the Iraqi nation and the cost of this war to date at what cost to all of us Americans and the senseless deaths of family members. So please please do not say we did not give ex president more then 4 minutes we gave him * long and extremely hard and difficult 8 years!!!!!. Finally more then 4 minutes how about the 5 thousand American lives lost, certain you must admit that means more then 4 minutes. I have total faith in our New President Barack Obama. Is he perfect, of course not no one ever is. Will he make mistakes along his administration of course there is a chance and could it happen yes. But I for one and am not alone and know we all must give this man a chance first and foremost. I also stated when they did have the election board and that I truly like ex President Clinton and thought he was a wonderful president and stood by him, but when time and time again and all this personal life and cheating and all those lies, that respect went out the window I do not like him anymore..At least I am honest and can admit when a president is wrong , but all you can say is that we did not give ex president 4 minutes?????. Annadrose do not stop posting all you say is true peace . Catherine

Lucy, I think your memory is faulty.

From day one, Bush faced terrible opposition from people still angry about the Florida recounts. Despite every count that included every dimpled chad still showing Bush ahead, the left still cried foul and refused to allow him five minutes of a peaceful transition.

Why do people think Obama is so special that he should be above the speculations and pressures that other presidents have "enjoyed" from day one?

Anna,
I hope you don't think that me answering the question was in any way being rude to you.

The question was asked, and I just answered it because I remembered. I hadn't even read the link yet to really know what was being said or commented on. Even after I read the link, I didn't think that your stand was anything wrong. You have every right to it!

Just wanted to clarify, cause girrlllll you are OK in my book!!!!

[quote=wowitsdark;3142595]Lucy, I think your memory is faulty.

From day one, Bush faced terrible opposition from people still angry about the Florida recounts. Despite every count that included every dimpled chad still showing Bush ahead, the left still cried foul and refused to allow him five minutes of a peaceful transition.

Why do people think Obama is so special that he should be above the speculations and pressures that other presidents have "enjoyed" from day one?[/QUOTE

The Bush election will always be in question. He did not win the popular vote. There were questions surrounding the 2004 election as well.

However, I believe that most people accepted his presidency. Bush did make the transition peacefully. He started to get opposition as soon as he started to take the country in the wrong direction.

And according to most liberals, that occurred the second he was sworn in.

wowisdark number one did you not read my whole post, do you not I asked the problems our country is facing do you not want those problems to try to be resolved by President Obama?? can you kindly answer that???. Also can you also kindly answer to me and others when you mentioned us liberals only gave him 4 minutes, wowitsdark, he had 8 years under his belt as a President and where did he leave us. If you truly think left us in a good suituation, then I and others do not know what else to say to you. My memory is not faulty at all. I clearly remember all those problems from Florida and the polls and the problems. I am not going to say I was happy to have Bush be our president because in my eyes and so many millions Gore should have won, he did have the popular vote. However the end result was he won and served this country for 8 long hard difficult years. If you are telling me because what happened 8 years ago with the election are the reasons we have been left with all the problems from the Bush administration then your so wrong and misinformed. Again as Annadrose stated the Bush family has profited from the oil companies and so has Dick Cheney its a know fact, whether you or anyone will admit it, well that I cannot say it is up to you. Like I said before and will not repeat I call it as I see it and like I said I truly liked Clinton because as President Obama I truly felt it truly cared about each and every single American, but when he choose to bring his personal life into the picture, out with him and they should have had him impeached. He is suppossed to withhold the highest standard above all . He is the the leader of our country, If I could not trust him to be truthful and come on national television and out and out lie about his affairs with Monica Lewinsky, then I admit his faults.But you simply cannot say one bad thing about Bush only you can say if that from the problems in Dade County caused us Americans to hate him from the start..Total and utter nonsense. He made many many serious mistakes . And hopefully and perhaps not a guarantee that President Obama and his administration can try and hopefully succeed to bring this wonderful nation back on track and be the most beautiful country to be live in and prosper. Peace. Catherine

Bush lost by 500,000 votes and became president. Yes, there was anger. Then there were lies, and Gitmo, and lies, and an unnecessary war, and lies, and letting OBL slip away, and lies, and exposing an American spy, and lies, and Katrina and more lies.

So, frankly, I don't give a rip whether the cons give Obama a break or not. Doesn't matter to me. I'm just glad your guy is gone forever. You could smell the difference in the air the day he left D. C. and we're all better for it.

__________________

Reading is Fundamental.

I am not a Bush fan, but I think it is very naive to think that all our problems are the fault of Bush. When it comes right down to it, Congress and the Senate might have had just a tad bit to do with the trouble we are in now, and as far as the banking problems....I think there are many americans who need to take a look in the mirror. If they hadn't tried to live above their means, they would be better off right now. To put all the blame on one man is not fair. I am hoping and praying that things do indeed change, but to pin all our hopes on one man is scary. As long as the system is the way it is, corrupt....I don't see much change happening.

TO me with ex president Bush is of course my disagreement with entering into war with the Iraqi nation. Ironic to say the least on his part number one for first entering a country and starting a war where there were no weapons of mass destruction, yet as a result of this horrific totally senseless war, we have had lost over 4300 American lives lost, over 100.000 injured. Well over 91.000 innocent Iraqi lives lost, and the cost of this war the dollar amounts are outragous costing us Americans each day since 2003. But more important was the fact that ex president Bush was awol after 1972 he failed to meet the requirements for attendence for the national air guard and air force. Also all his deferments for vietnam and also that Cheney had deferments as well. All this with his military background and he attacks a innocent country..That truly truly gets me upset.Finally with our new president Barack Obama who plans to withdraw our troops, it is going to be a very hard task and only God knows, I cannot even think about how much more innocent blood will be shed. So again us liberals most definitely gave your ex president more then 4 minutes..4300 American civilans gave their life other gave limbs and others so many others will suffer mentally and phsycially for the rest of their lives.. Bless their hearts and keep them all safe till they return. Peace to them. Catherine

Catherine...I am curious, do you think Bush is the only one who should be blamed for the war? Do you think it was his decision and his alone? The way the political machine works is far beyond the comprehension of most americans (me included). But, I am not naive enough to believe that Bush was the one and only supporter of the war. There are steps that have to be taken, he doesn't just say....Lets go to war. I understand that you believe Obama is going to come to the rescue. I hope you are right. My problem is that he is a politician....they tend to say whatever they think everyone wants to hear. Now...the proof will be in what happens. Only time will tell...but, either way, he is not God. He is a man with a very difficult job ahead..

I don't think anyone thinks ALL of our problems are Bush's fault. No one said that. But he did nothing to make any of them better and many of his actions made them much worse.

__________________

Reading is Fundamental.

Hillary, our new, wise, and wonderful Secretary of State concurred with GWB that there were, in fact, WMD's in Iraq, and she voted for the war.

Looks to me like if you're going to be consistent, you have to hate both of them. At the very least, you have to think that either A) she is capable of lying to the American people, or B) her judgment is no better than Bush's.

Did anyone notice that a shooting from one of our drone planes killed seven in the Middle East this week?

Is that Bush's doing? Must not be, since Clinton was in no way culpable for any of our terrorist issues that happened the second he left office.

Tammy I believe that George Walker Bush was the commander in chief. I was againist the war from the beginning. I am upset because of a comment made that we liberals only gave ex president Bush 4 minutes of our time. Thats true lie we gave him 8 years. Like I said before this war started in 2003 he had 5 years to make a change and bring our troops home and retreat from Iraq but he did not . So if you are asking me was he the only one who made the decision to go to war, no I do not believe that, however once again he is commander in chief of all armed forces and things have only gotten worse as time goes on in Iraq but he did nothing nada zip .He does not have to worry anymore its all in President Obama's lap now. Will Obama made all the right decisions, I discussed this before he is human and so capable as all of us are. He most certainly can and will not be perfect. Do I have faith in him that he will try his hardest and put his best effort forward 100 percent yes. Again there are many issues with me with Bush. But again the war is the biggest issue, the ecomony, house costs, health care this is also very important, better schools are all important issues that can be fixed. But Tammy lost civilian deaths and countless thousands of wounded civilians that Tammy we cannot fix or bring back??? What a shame because when we do and will leave Iraq again only God knows how much more bloodshed will happen that should be a concern for all Americans..But again we liberals only have him 4 minutes of our time???/ Did ex president Bush think this would happen that I cannot speak for all or say whether I believe or not, again this started in 2003 and long years later our American soldiers are still there..Sad sad all around. Catherine

What's the deal with the 4 minutes? Could someone clue me in?

cj/

__________________
I was walking home one night and a guy hammering on a roof called me a paranoid little weirdo. In morse code. -Emo Phillips

Based on information we now know was cherry-picked by Bush to support his lies.

What Bush did was the equivalent of the old story about three blind men describing an elephant. He saw what he wanted to see and shared what he needed to to support what he wanted to have done.

__________________

Reading is Fundamental.

I said:
Perhaps that is what is being referenced? Catherine says that no, they gave him eight years. Somehow, if memory serves, they were calling him The Shrub on this board before he even took the oath, so my five minutes was extremely generous.

I'll look later to see when Hillary first started nodding in agreement about WMD's. Did she not serve on the Armed Services Committee? Do those senators ONLY get their data straight up from the White House and nowhere else?

If so, then they're not very good at what they do. That whole checks and balances thing can't work well if they all just follow their CiC's intel without question.

Bush was called Shrub when he was still governor of Texas. IIRC, it was started by Molly Ivins.

Bush had the greatest support of the Americans right after 9/11. He squandered it.

As to your comment about information -- are you saying that the Sentate should have assumed Bush was lying and done their own investigation? They shouldn't have trusted the CiC on such a vital matter as U. S. security? Of course, as it turns out, if that's what you're saying -- you're right. None of us should have trusted him.

__________________

Reading is Fundamental.

I am saying that in general, I expect that as a separate arm of government ANY body charged with congressional oversight to do it's own legwork and not rely on the White House - whether run by a friend or a foe - to tell them what's going on when they have a responsibility to do their own work. If Hillary now says she was duped by Bush, she has nobody but herself to blame.

And for your reading pleasure....
snopes.com: Weapons of Mass Destruction Quotes

Where exactly do you propose the Senate gets the top secret information that Bush cherry-picked? Where? The local "Spies R Us" store?

__________________

Reading is Fundamental.

Doesn't the HASC (Congress vs. the Senate) advise the prez and others instead of the other way around? I just checked the HASC site and looked through some of their duties and sub comms. to make sure I (who never paid much attention in history class and now often have to look things up when confused) understood this conversation about who was at fault over the whole WMD controversy.
From what I can gather after looking at the site, and what I do know about what any kinda committee does, it does seem a bit like sour grapes for anyone from the committee to claim they were duped when it was their duty to get accurate info as participants in our gov't and advisors to a prez.
I also looked at the Snopes site and noted that besides the original quotes, Snopes cited that not all the quotes were taken within the original context of the statements, and many of those quoted, when quoted, were on the record as being opposed to a military answer to the problem.
MZ

Actually a report was available to senators to read. It was the NIS White Paper on Iraq. It outlined how very dubious the claims that Bush and Cheney made. I have heard that only 7 senators read this report. I know who two of them were; Sam Brownback, R, Kansas and Bob Graham, D, Florida.

Brownback voted for the use of force against Iraq; Graham voted against the resolution. Graham also didn't get re-elected.

This resolution would not have passed if it hadn't been an election year.

I can't find anything on that paper -- perhaps I have the wrong name. Can you provide a link to information about it?

__________________

Reading is Fundamental.

This document is not available to the public. It remains classified.

I ran across an article that says 22 senators say that they read the report. It's been years since I read about this originally. I believe that they were required to sign a book in order to read the report. My memory could be faulty, but, I believe that only 7 actually signed the book.

TheHill.com - Few senators read Iraq NIE report

Americans were overwhelmingly in favor of invading Iraq and it was an election year.

OK, I'm confused. If it's not available to the public, how do we know it contradicted Bush's info?

__________________

Reading is Fundamental.