Friday, December 09, 2005
Bush on the Constitution: 'It's just a goddamned piece of paper'
Joining the Plastic Turkey, an article appearing on DC Indymedia has all the markings of a myth that will never die. According to it, George W. Bush, referring to the US Constitution said: 'It's just a goddamned piece of paper'
Of course if someone without such (how should I put this) issues could prove Bush actually said it, I'd be only to happy to retract the above. Until then, I'm doubtful.
Nevertheless, watch and see how this dubious quote spreads with all the agility and grace of a plastic turkey...
Update: Google Search for "Bush" "It's just a goddamned piece of paper" shows over 300,000 sites
Last month, Republican Congressional leaders filed into the Oval Office to meet with President George W. Bush and talk about renewing the controversial USA Patriot Act.What was the source of this rather concerning exchange? According to the author:
Several provisions of the act, passed in the shell shocked period immediately following the 9/11 terrorist attacks, caused enough anger that liberal groups like the American Civil Liberties Union had joined forces with prominent conservatives like Phyllis Schlafly and Bob Barr to oppose renewal.
GOP leaders told Bush that his hardcore push to renew the more onerous provisions of the act could further alienate conservatives still mad at the President from his botched attempt to nominate White House Counsel Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court.
“I don’t give a goddamn,” Bush retorted. “I’m the President and the Commander-in-Chief. Do it my way.”
“Mr. President,” one aide in the meeting said. “There is a valid case that the provisions in this law undermine the Constitution.”
“Stop throwing the Constitution in my face,” Bush screamed back. “It’s just a goddamned piece of paper!”
I’ve talked to three people present for the meeting that day and they all confirm that the President of the United States called the Constitution “a goddamned piece of paper.”Uh huh... Sure you did. It continues:
And, to the Bush Administration, the Constitution of the United States is little more than toilet paper stained from all the shit that this group of power-mad despots have dumped on the freedoms that “goddamned piece of paper” used to guarantee.This was originally reported by one Doug Thompson in his blog here. It is instructive to note no source URL was provided in the DC Indymedia article which blatantly lifted the offending piece. Visit Thompson's site and see some of his latest other material:
- It's the culture, stupid
- Americans no longer buy Bush's lies
- A failed attempt to sell a failed policy on a failed war
- Pentagon, intel pros tell Bush war cannot be won
- Doom and gloom sweeps over the GOP but Dems aren't home free
- Buying Congress
- Liars on parade
- Ain't no free speech allowed in Dubya's America
- The con man and his peers
- A gutless, draft-dodging coward named Dick Cheney
- Partisans can't be journalists
- Bush's betrayal
- Burn in hell, Mr. President
Of course if someone without such (how should I put this) issues could prove Bush actually said it, I'd be only to happy to retract the above. Until then, I'm doubtful.
Nevertheless, watch and see how this dubious quote spreads with all the agility and grace of a plastic turkey...
Update: Google Search for "Bush" "It's just a goddamned piece of paper" shows over 300,000 sites
Comments:
<< Home
this article appeared in Capitol Hill Blue, some kind of online newspaper based in Washington D.C.
I don't have a clue how reliable they are, but it's not the invention of a blogger.
I don't have a clue how reliable they are, but it's not the invention of a blogger.
My use of the term 'blog' is a semantic issue only. The site describes itself as: "a hell-raising, take-no-prisoners, in-your-face, non-partisan political news site."
I daresay however the distinction between the terms blog, website, news site etc. is changing in real time given the amount of traffic some 'blogs' get.
As to the question of "how reliable they are" as any form of primary source of information, I would suggest - not very.
I daresay however the distinction between the terms blog, website, news site etc. is changing in real time given the amount of traffic some 'blogs' get.
As to the question of "how reliable they are" as any form of primary source of information, I would suggest - not very.
Yup. I've had a look at the website and you are right. i wouldn't give it too much credibility. Cheers.
Post a Comment
<< Home