A lot of things that Bush did do are extremely hard to back away from especially the areas where he strengthened executive power. Once you take that power it becomes hard to actually step back and assume a weaker role because well then you look weak and compromise your ability to lead.
I was under the impression presidents were supposed to be weak.
I'm not generally a fan of the death penalty, but I wouldn't mind if some of the former administration (those who profited most from corrupt policies / war) were tried for treason.
I'm not generally a fan of the death penalty, but I wouldn't mind if some of the former administration (those who profited most from corrupt policies / war) were tried for treason.
Blaming people who deserve the blame is not a bad thing. Pointing out legitimate obstacles the previous guy placed in your path is perfectly reasonable. Why on earth would anyone assert that a leader being honest about the challenges he faces is wrong? Oh wait, this is America. We much prefer bravado and rhetoric and can't deal with honest disclosure.
Howsabout war crimes?
To quote the West Wing, all war is a crime. It can be really hard to draw the line on war crimes. I have mixed feelings about them. Some things are obvious, but some things not so much.
To quote the West Wing, all war is a crime. It can be really hard to draw the line on war crimes. I have mixed feelings about them. Some things are obvious, but some things not so much.
While that is an eloquent thought and I love WW, there is a lot of very specified (and intentionally vague) law regarding war crimes. Just because it is difficult to define, doesn't mean it is undefined or undefinable. It should be reasonably clear (either one way or another) to those in the field if charges can be levied or not.
There's a difference between charges that CAN be brought and charges that SHOULD be brought, IMO. Sometimes people can be liable for things that seem ridiculous, and other people can't be held liable for something that seems obviously wrong. In war, things get even muddier because of limited knowledge and chain of command. Hindsight often breeds public animosity towards people who were doing the best they could with the information they had. It's easy to decry things as being wrong when you aren't in the middle of things as they happen. There are things that are obviously wrong at the time (rounding up Iraqi girls, raping them, and then locking them in a burning house) and then there are things that are not so obvious at the time (dropping a bomb on a target that you later find out was a civilian target). What level of questioning satisfies your duty of diligence? What are you expected to know? At what point do you accept the intelligence information you are given, and at what point do you question it?
Sure, it's relatively clear in hindsight. I just wouldn't be so quick to jump to conclusions about who acted criminally. Sometimes people just turn out to be wrong...but being wrong is not a crime. It can lead to horrible things, and even that does not automatically make it a crime.
And people in this nation have the gall to wonder at the religious and political nutjobs in other countries?! We think we are so civilized, but wake up America. That image is part of you. WTF?!
I want to thank my Cabinet members and senior administration officials who participated today. I hear that Dr. Joe Medicine Crow (ph) was around, and so I want to give a shout out to that Congressional Medal of Honor winner. It's good to see you.
Why everyone so serious? Is the guy made of glass and paper or something? Is your faith in the guy so weak that even the slightest reminder that he is only human is a threat to you?
*COMPLETELY RELEVANT AND NON-ANTAGONISTIC IMAGE* Why everyone so serious? Is the guy made of glass and paper or something? Is your faith in the guy so weak that even the slightest reminder that he is only human is a threat to you?
lol yeah that's it skippy, now you've got us pegged.
The lack of critical thinking evidenced on this forum as of late is downright scary. Do you know which hand the coin is in?
Steve, look around you; everyone is laughing. You've shown yourself to be such a fountain of stupidity that any attempts at satire are immediately assumed to be serious attempts at arguments, and are treated as such. To be fair the two are distinguishable when the difference is pointed out, but we have a thread on that phenomenon.
Sail whispered to me and didn't get it, so let me clarify. Evolutionarily speaking Steve is like a big dumb tiger headed straight for us, and to survive we make the snap judgment that he is going to do what big, dumb tigers do. This is why always assuming that Steve is saying something dumb is correlated with higher intelligence.
Are you really so desperate to see weaknesses in your opponents that you perceive utter dismissal to be a sign that you've struck a nerve?
The lack of critical thinking evidenced on this forum as of late is downright scary. Do you know which hand the coin is in?
KNow what would increase critical thinking? If you left. People reacting by saying "who cares" when Obama screws up an insignificant detail does not in any way indicate a lack of 'critical thinking'.
Comments
Sure, it's relatively clear in hindsight. I just wouldn't be so quick to jump to conclusions about who acted criminally. Sometimes people just turn out to be wrong...but being wrong is not a crime. It can lead to horrible things, and even that does not automatically make it a crime.
That is all.
Regardless, he was an addled actor that dragged the US economy into the mud and ignored the AIDS epidemic.
Oh the lols this President provides us!
Give me a break. At least the man can pronounce "nuclear." That's of more importance to me.
Why everyone so serious? Is the guy made of glass and paper or something? Is your faith in the guy so weak that even the slightest reminder that he is only human is a threat to you?
Sail whispered to me and didn't get it, so let me clarify. Evolutionarily speaking Steve is like a big dumb tiger headed straight for us, and to survive we make the snap judgment that he is going to do what big, dumb tigers do. This is why always assuming that Steve is saying something dumb is correlated with higher intelligence.
Pompous blowhard.