Bush's truth decay

mrmom2

Senate Member
Mar 8, 2005
5,380
6
38
Kamloops BC
By KENNETH R. BAZINET
DAILY NEWS WASHINGTON BUREAU

WASHINGTON - One of President Bush's most attractive traits has been his reputation for straight talk, but a new poll yesterday found that fewer than half of Americans think he's honest.
Only 48% of respondents to an AP-Ipsos survey think he's honest, while 50% do not, the poll indicated. That is a five-point drop from January, when 53% of Americans thought Bush was an honest President.
Moreover, some 56% of Americans think he's too cocky, up from the 49% in January who said they view Bush's confidence as arrogance.

A solid majority still see Bush as likable and a strong leader, but Bush's overall job approval was at 42%, with 55% disapproving.

"Clearly his credibility on things like Iraq is playing a role in how honest people think he's being," said AP-Ipsos pollster Michael Gross.

Bush launched the invasion claiming that Saddam Hussein was developing weapons of mass destruction and nuclear weapons. Both claims have since been determined to have been wrong.

Since then, Iraq has been difficult to pacify and American casualties have soared past 1,800.

"Bush has deceived the American people and they are not happy with it," said Baruch College political commentator Doug Muzzio. "He's going to start getting toxic soon."

Bush's poll numbers have been in a tailspin for months, and his sinking support this summer may mean trouble for the Republicans at the polls next year if the numbers don't turn around.

"Moving into the midterm elections, it's not looking good for politicians of any stripe," Gross said. "It's a 'throw the bums out' mentality."
 

Ocean Breeze

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 5, 2005
18,362
60
48
Bush has deceived the American people and they are not happy with it," said Baruch College political commentator Doug Muzzio. "He's going to start getting toxic soon."

as in bush getting toxic soon??? Most likely. There has been a distinct correlation between his "popularity polls" and either security alerts or some other distracting "event".

the question that remains is : What took the American people so long to figure out how deceitful he is???? Quite curious ...
 

Ocean Breeze

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 5, 2005
18,362
60
48
Re: RE: Bush's truth decay

no1important said:
"W" would make a good used car salesman.

probably....... Grinning his chimp grin as he sells "you" a lemon :wink:
 

GL Schmitt

Electoral Member
Mar 12, 2005
785
0
16
Ontario
Ocean Breeze said:
. . . the question that remains is : What took the American people so long to figure out how deceitful he is???? . . .
Had Jean Chrétien agreed to join Bush’s "Coalition of the willing" . . .

and had our most professional news channels competed with our least professional news channel in cheerleading the invasion . . .

and had our business community withdrawn sponsorship from any reporter or entertainer who uttered any message of opposition . . .

and had the hate we had heard spewing from our media been echoed — perhaps even amplified — in many of our churches . . .

and if we, like most humans, were slow — even stubborn— about admitting our mistake . . .


I wonder how long it would have taken us to realize that our leaders were ‘deceitful.’
 

Ocean Breeze

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 5, 2005
18,362
60
48
GL Schmitt said:
Ocean Breeze said:
. . . the question that remains is : What took the American people so long to figure out how deceitful he is???? . . .
Had Jean Chrétien agreed to join Bush’s "Coalition of the willing" . . .

and had our most professional news channels competed with our least professional news channel in cheerleading the invasion . . .

and had our business community withdrawn sponsorship from any reporter or entertainer who uttered any message of opposition . . .

and had the hate we had heard spewing from our media been echoed — perhaps even amplified — in many of our churches . . .

and if we, like most humans, were slow — even stubborn— about admitting our mistake . . .


I wonder how long it would have taken us to realize that our leaders were ‘deceitful.’

first: all leaders are "deceitful" to a degree. Nature of politics and goes with the territory. (that's the reality of it)

2nd. Don't think it would have played out that way. Cretien asked bush for proof to support his allegation about the WMD ( remember the first and primary "rationale" given by bush??).....and bush said he didn't have to and refused to. THAT alone was the big RED ALERT that something was amiss and bush was fabricating his propaganda for the invasion.

But most leaders will not lie to the extent that bush has to invade another nation and cause so much destruction.

maybe a better analogy would be if: Cretien got on his high horse and decided to invade another nation and lied to do it.......but even then......most Canadians would want facts as a bases for such extreme action. I (and this is my view) just don't see many Canadians gullible enough to buy into this. (EVEN IF CA had been attacked by terrorists.......as CA tends to be more reasonable and rational-not as "reactionary)) But of course there are "xtremists" in all nations......and hopefully CA has a minority of them.
 

Reverend Blair

Council Member
Apr 3, 2004
1,238
1
38
Winnipeg
Don't think it would have played out that way. Cretien asked bush for proof to support his allegation about the WMD

What if Martin had already been in charge? There is a fair bit of evidence that he would have joined the coalition of bribed and bullied.

In the end it was more or less an accident of who was on top in a 25 year old power struggle between two men in a single political party.

If the Conservatives would have been in power, we would have been in Iraq for sure.

Canadians likely would have been more informed...the CBC is less prone to pushing government propaganda than people think...but with Can-West, Quebecor, and CTV onside, there wouldn't have been too much information available. Considering that CBC bashing is a major pastime of the right-wing media, we would have had conflicting information at best.

The way this whole thing rolled out is an argument for proportional representation, so that we aren't dependent on one man making the decision; further steps to keep the CBC separate from government, including a de-politicized funding formula; and some serious rules to prevent further concentration of press ownership.
 

Ocean Breeze

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 5, 2005
18,362
60
48
good points. ( "we sure can be grateful for the timing and NOT having the "conservatives" in charge ---phew!!) ( the "conservatives" are too much in line with the same on the US side and tend to be "boot lickers" when it comes to the US. -- or a not so close fascimile of.)

where we diverge is on the proof: I (for one) did not see enough "proof" for a military invasion. Neither did many others. Of course the other possibility is : IF Iraq REALLY did have the degree of WMD that was indicated by the USG.......not sure the US would have been so gung ho to attack.. The risk factor would have elevated and the ensuing destruction would have been much worse... as Iraq would have deployed such capability in a heart beat. Because they did not have that kind of weaponry , they had to do the best they could.....and then resort to other tactics.

re: the media: I guess it depends on what one chooses to watch and buy into. Just because the media might spin a gov't propaganda, does not imply accuracy , regardless of which media it is. The media is a business , and the bottom line is money and ratings.
 

Ocean Breeze

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 5, 2005
18,362
60
48
Bush's lies are decaying too. Maybe out of all this "decay" some gems of truth will emerge. (one can hope)
 

Reverend Blair

Council Member
Apr 3, 2004
1,238
1
38
Winnipeg
where we diverge is on the proof

No, we don't diverge there. I'm in full agreement with you and so are billions of others. There was nothing but some cartoon drawings of some trucks. Every point that the Bushites made for war was either debunked of highly questionable before the war began.

The case for war in both the Conservative party and with the hawks in the Liberal party had nothing to do with proof. The reasons they cited were Canada/US relations and trade...nothing to do with the war itself.

re: the media: I guess it depends on what one chooses to watch and buy into. Just because the media might spin a gov't propaganda, does not imply accuracy , regardless of which media it is. The media is a business , and the bottom line is money and ratings.

The media decides what is news and what isn't. Most people get their news from television, the rest from daily papers. When you look at the ownership of the media, their influence over public perceptions is huge. They might spin a story, or bury in the back pages, or they might choose not to report on it at all, but in the end they have massive influence on how people think.
 

GL Schmitt

Electoral Member
Mar 12, 2005
785
0
16
Ontario
I have not been half so proud of my superior intelligence over Americans since I watched OutFoxed and gained some insight into the amount of obstruction placed between American viewers and the information required to form an independent and rational opinion.

It is not superiority, it is access to superior news outlets like the CBC, CTV, even CanWest, and Quebecor.





If you haven’t, yet, spend fifty minutes to Watch OutFoxed Online * from Information Clearing House. * The first minute is a Dutch language introduction, from there on it is in English.

It’s free! You have nothing to lose but your sense of superiority.




But I still reserve the right to laugh at Rick Mercer’s Talking to Americans.
 

Jo Canadian

Council Member
Mar 15, 2005
2,488
1
38
PEI...for now
 

Ocean Breeze

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 5, 2005
18,362
60
48
In George Galloways Own Words, Let Us Bury Bush!
Mary MacElveen, Radio Left


August 31, 2005


To My Fellow Americans,

It is especially important in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina to remind the American people that while this absentee government approved of the war in Iraq and spent billions doing so, these funds could have been better used to clean up after such catastrophes.

As corporations who run our government made out like bandits where our government gave them billions and with the tax breaks to those who do not need it, this is our time to fight back with everything we have to muster.

We must stand shoulder to shoulder with those that have been speaking the truth and there are three names that come to mind. They are of course heroes to democracy and their names are, MP George Galloway, Cindy Sheehan and of course my personal hero, President Hugo Chavez.

Please pass around this link where folks can then listen to an abbreviated version of MP George Galloway’s testimony before the senate subcommittee looking into the oil for food scandal. Hear his remarkable words, his inspirational words and words of great courage and more importantly where he speaks to the truth. People are suffering today not only because of Hurricane Katrina but because this absentee government has not held Bush’s feet to the fire to get the people’s business done. This government sat idly by and funded a war based on a “pack of lies” http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article8866.htm

As we pray for those who are suffering in the aftermath of this horrific hurricane, in their memory let us fight back. Let us expose the duplicity and dishonesty of the Bush administration to all. He spent billions ending lives instead of using those billions to help a suffering people.

Mary MacElveen!






"Senator, in everything I said about Iraq, I turned out to be right and you turned out to be wrong and 100,000 people paid with their lives; 1600 of them American soldiers sent to their deaths on a pack of lies; 15,000 of them wounded, many of them disabled forever on a pack of lies." George Galloway to US Senate Committee 5/17/05