Borders signing in Dallas, Texas
Matt Lauer’s exclusive interview with former president George W. Bush aired Monday night:
His memoir, Decision Points, available in book stores today (bought mine this morning).
Live interview with Matt Lauer on The Today Show, Wednesday morning.
A former fetus, the “wordsmith from nantucket” was born in Phoenix, Arizona in 1968. Adopted at birth, wordsmith grew up a military brat. He achieved his B.A. in English from the University of California, Los Angeles (graduating in the top 97% of his class), where he also competed rings for the UCLA mens gymnastics team. The events of 9/11 woke him from his political slumber and malaise. Currently a personal trainer and gymnastics coach.
The wordsmith has never been to Nantucket.
Unfortunately unlike yourself I’ve outgrown hide and seek games so I’m not going to trawl through FA archives even a weeks worth to find the usual lame blame democrats bs hidden away in umpteen comments. I’ve called you and Aye on this one and you are both unable to answer it. If there’s a link then post it, if you are tired discussing it then why post in the first place? The only thing you and Aye are doing is playing games as you can’t debate because you know Bush didn’t do enough. 😆
That’s some funny stuff right there ladies and gentlemen.
Funny, funny stuff from the Blunder from Down UnderTM.. The same guy who cannot correctly answer three very simple questions about American gov’t.
Let me ask you Gaffer…how confident are you that no reform legislation came to the floor of the House? How confident are you that no reform legislation was considered in the Senate?
Are you confident enough to stake your future FA participation on being right?
Well, are you?
Somehow I doubt it.
I, on the other hand, am confident that would not be a wise wager for you to take.
Of course, as always, I already know the answers to the questions.
Now, little man, get back to work trying to correctly respond to those three basic Civics 101 questions.
As soon as you do, I will gladly reveal to you another small segment of your vast ignorance.
For ease of reference, here are the questions again for you:
Run along now.
The grownups are talking.
@GaffaUK: and when did I call Fort Hood anything? I haven’t mentioned it at all. And I doubt VA considered The Beltway Snipers international Jihad terrorists. I’m getting bored.
Gaffer knows, or should know, that the Beltway snipers carried out their crimes not in the name of Allah but in a sick, demented effort toward extorting millions of dollars.
Of course, Gaffer is not really interested in facts.
He prefers to parse words, impart false motives, and attempt to do side by side comparisons of issues that are diametrically opposed to one another.
Yes, they are cute and this one, IMHO, was their best performance in a series of lip syncs they have released on youtube. It’s also representative of how silly(all in fun in their case) people can allow themselves to appear on the “Interwebz”(borrowed from Aye). Gaffa, however, hasn’t been so cute of late and I’ve been wondering just what’s up with him, silly best describes how his latest debate is appearing.
He doesn’t want to scour the archives where he’s already has had much of the workings of our government patiently explained, he has to remember, even I remember those conversations. So again, IMHO, Gaffa should put the big boy pants on and do his stuff, man up Gaffa. 😉
Firstly I don’t need to answer any of your questions as you aren’t true to your word…
I’ve answered your question.
However with the first two answers that is if all members vote – so just to clarify….
50% + 1 vote. So if everyone votes yes or no then currently I believe 218 votes are needed in the HoR and 51 in the Senate.
As soon as you answer mine I will answer yours 🙄
Is that the easy read version they presented to Bush? Or did he get a pet goat to explain and have some colouring crayons as well? 😆
Personally I found the below books informative…
I never said you did.
I never said VA considered The Beltway Snipers international Jihad terrorists.
@Gaffer, the one man wrecking crew on truth….
And your proof of this is…?
You also said:
The Fort Hood attack was perpetrated in a single, rash act of murder and mayhem, whereas the Beltway Sniper attacks were spread out over a considerable period of time and other than one lone court, not attributed to terrorism. And NO ONE attributed the Beltway Sniper attacks to Al Qaeda, Hamas, or any other terrorist sponsor.
Read the below
A good summary of warnings…
NO ONE except one lone court and oh…Muhammad himself. lol
pretty lousy shot if his far fetched scheme didn’t even manage to get his ex-wife.
Thanks – hmmm sounds like a terrorist doesn’t it?
Oh btw way since when does a terrorist need a sponsor now to be a terrorist? 😆
Here’s what we know of your expertise [snicker] on these matters so far:
a) In your original response you had the answers backwards.
b) In your original response you didn’t base your answers on 50% +1, choosing instead to give specific numbers.
c) You didn’t specify in any of your answers the requirement that a quorum be present for a vote to be held.
d) In none of your Senate related answers did you mention “60 votes” which is what is required to overcome a filibuster challenge prior to a final vote.
Now that we have the error of your ways laid out there for all to see, let’s see what Fannie/Freddie legislation was considered in the House and the Senate shall we?
H.R. 1461: Federal Housing Finance Reform Act of 2005
Passed by the House of Representatives 331 to 90, with 12 not voting. Among the “Nay” votes were the names that one would suspect to see…Pelosi, Barbara Lee, Maxine Waters, Henry Waxman, Cynthia McKinney, Barney Frank…that whole “Fannie/Freddie have no problems” crowd.
S. 190: Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005
This bill was considered on the Senate floor, then referred to Committee.
It passed the Committee vote on an 11-9 party line vote but was never raised on the Senate floor for final consideration because there were not enough votes to overcome the filibuster threshold.
So, there you have it.
Once again your idiocy has been put on display for all to see.
A “good summary” that debunks the advanced warning conspiracy put together throughout the years since September 11.
Bush knew because of the August 6th presidential briefing:
Malvo was a serial killer that acted on his own, he didn’t plot with the enemy, he randomly murdered across 4 states. Hasan conspired with a radical cleric to kill his enemy, members of our armed forces.
So lefty Gaffa believes in LIHOP about Bush and 9/11. No surprise there.
So thanks for the scenic detour – your latest post unwittingly strengthens my central premise that Bush failed to deal with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. before the crisis of 2008.
a) You forgot to mention that it has taken 4 years since Bush has inherited Clinton mess that such a bill has been presented.
b) Whilst you point out the minority of Democrats who voted against you forgot to highlight that a majority of democrats voted for his bill.
c) You forgot to mention that this bill failed – it was never voted upon in the senate
d) You forgot to mention this bill died in committee which had a majority of Republicans on it
e) You forgot to mention that Bush was against this bill!
a) So why didn’t this go to a vote in the Senate and see if the Democrats would filibuster it? Where’s your evidence this that there was a threat of a filibuster and that this would definitely of happened? Let’s here the lame excuse…
The fact is under Bush – the problem became worst!
So glad I could ‘edumakate’ you….you’re welcome. Snigger
um…. yes you did….
In order for you to know what I consider either to be, I would have had to say so. Please don’t assume my point of view or put words in my mouth.
Gaffa, there’s probably a lot that you and I agree on, but you’re making false arguments. Yes, the Bush administration did keep us safe. Did he keep us safe in the best/right/only way, and is that the only thing that matters? That would’ve been a much more interesting discussion than this boring, repetitive one.
But now my free time is over, and I have to get back to work and be done here for now. I hope than when I’m able to come back, we can find something to agree on. Just tell me this – I’m curious about your screen name, are you an American or an observer from outside somewhere? Based on some of your responses, I’m gonna guess the latter.
@Gaffer – You are really showing your ignorance, idiocy and dogmatic adherence to ideology.
Let’s just for a second PRETEND you have a point- which you don’t. Hmmm, and Obama has made Fannie/Freddie reform his TOP priority. Funny how you are upset with Bush about taking “4 years” to address the problem, yet give Obama a pass on doing the same thing for the last 2.
And BTW, your above statement just admitted that Bush DID present a bill and try to reform Fannie/Freddie, LOL!
You said this:
Then, as pointed out above, you admit Bush DID try!
As for the Beltway/Fort Hood comparison, Missy in #60 tore you to shreds on that one. Way to go Missy!
I don’t get your point — it is BETTER to take four years to address a problem than to take less than two years to address the same problem? Why is that? Bush had to mull it over an extra two years?
Another thing — Bush does not “present legislation” to Congress any more than Obama does. They can ask Congress to take up an issue, or send some guidelines, but it takes Congress to act.
Now keep forgetting, which party was in power from 2004 through 2007 a NEVER offered a single bill concerning Fannie and Freddie? Want to take a wild guess?
Yep . . . the GOPers.
We have whips in both houses for both parties that count yea or nay votes before a scheduled vote, if it’s not close they don’t bother with bringing it to the floor.
Timeline shows Bush, McCain warning Dems of financial and housing crisis; meltdown
On September 30th of 2008, shortly after Rush Limbaugh had played on his radio program an 8 minute audio of Congressional Democrats obstructing the regulatory efforts of the Bush Administration and Congressional Republicans, Congressman Artur Davis of Alabama (featured in the youtube video defending Fannie and Freddie) issued an apology on Fox News saying,
Like a lot of my Democratic colleagues I was too slow to appreciate the recklessness of Fannie and Freddie. I defended their efforts to encourage affordable homeownership when in retrospect I should have heeded the concerns raised by their regulator in 2004. Frankly, I wish my Democratic colleagues would admit when it comes to Fannie and Freddie, we were wrong.
There is a conspiracy that Bush was behind the 9/11 which is rubbish there isn’t a conspiracy, as far as I can see, that there were warning that an attack was coming.
Your http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Foreknowledge doesn’t address the following…
As for the PBD – that certainly wasn’t a myth
But unfortunately the PBD didn’t give Bush and Rice the exact time, date and method of the attack 🙄
and further more…
So although Clinton was also culpable during his time which of the above do you dispute as not being tru?. Where is there a conspiracy that there was warnings when plainly there were warnings – it’s just that the Bush administration failed to join the dots or take any decent preventative action.
As for the Fort Hood Shooter – I don’t deny that he was a terrorist. But you don’t need to plot with others to be a terrorist. Does that mean the Beltway shooter isn’t a terrorist because he wasn’t affilated with a islamic cleric or a known terrorist group?
Check out this list and let me know which terrorists you would consider not being terrorists if that was the case 😆
No I don’t believe Bush let it happen on purpose and those who believe Bush was behind 9/11 are as nutty as those who believe Saddam was behind 9/11
You’re right there was an assumption there. I did ask but you seem coy about answering a simple question. So I’ll ask again – do you believe the Fort Hood shooter is a terrorist? And let’s see if my assumption was right and if you are being pedantic and boring. 🙄
* As you can see we are debating Bush’s ‘Decision Points’ and I was responding to your preposterous statement “Like him or hate him, the man kept us safe, stuck to his principals and did the right thing, even when the polls said otherwise.”
* By the time Obama was president – the crisis already happened, a bill (too late to stop the damage) was in place signed by Bush in a congress controlled by the Democrats and Freddie Mac & Fannie Mae had already been seized by federal takeover.
* So any President after Bush – whether it would of been McCain or as it is Obama – has to mop up the mess left by his predecessor.
As B-Rob points out a President doesn’t present bills. Of the two bills that Aye mentions – one bill which did have a vote in the HoR – Bush was against (hmmm wonder why he failed to mention that?) and both bills died in committees where the majority were Republicans.
Oh I don’t doubt he tried. But trying is not the same as having dealt with the issue – as what he feared happened. So obviously the issue wasn’t dealt with as it happened. Pontificating about it isn’t dealing with the issue. His administration was unable to get through legistration through a congress they controlled and nowhere have I seen any bill that would have reformed Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae successfully vetoed by the Democrats. The one example Aye gives – actually passed in the HoR had a majority of Democrats voting for it! lol. His trying was weak and ineffectual. Indeed as I have mentioned his own administration greatly added to the problem with the HUD ratcheting up the main affordable-housing goal. You don’t deal or even try to deal with a problem by making it worst!
lol right – 90% or more of Missy post was about how the Fort Hood terrorist was indeed a terrorist in contact with an islamic cleric. Except I don’t dispute that. However the finally line – which only deals with the Beltway shooting is telling that it doesn’t make sense. Malvo didn’t act alone – he was actually the minor along with John Allen Muhammad, a member of the Nation of Islam.
Clearly they were inspired by Jihad and they were enemies of the country they lived in. And as I say you don’t need a connection to a cleric or ‘sponsorship’ from a terrorist group to be a terrorist – it’s not like a work visa 😆 Isn’t Theodore Kaczynski a terrorist? Or doesn’t he qualify either?
“advance indications…….might have uncovered the plot.”
Unless the threat was determined to be actionable or imminent our security agencies did not shut the country down. As far as “reports” our agencies get thousands of reports daily, our analysts and operatives do check them out to determine if they are worthy enough to be passed up the chain, actionable or imminent. As a rule they don’t rely on the Chicago Sun Times, History Commons or Wikipedia to determine what constitutes an actionable threat to our country. But, they do suffer the slings and arrows from armchair operatives who base their opinions on incomplete information and who aren’t taking a simple timeline of events or the pre-911 mindset into consideration before they, armed with muddle, point fingers.
Remarks Before the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States
Written Statement for the Record of the Director of Central Intelligence
Before the Joint Inquiry Committee
All our forces drill, that NORAD had drills of that nature is no surprise, might be a surprise to those ignorant of how our forces constantly train for what is known and what may be forseen. To hyperventilate and attempt to make an issue of this and relate it to failure to prevent the attack is silly.
Hmmm, nothing mentioned about the the Gorelick Wall that didn’t crumble until the Patriot Act, after 9/11, here’s a twofer for you:
Testimony of Attorney General John Ashcroft
The National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States
Michael Schuer’s intverview with Nora O’Donnell on Hardball:
Heh, Obama put CIA’s car in R:
Gary Berntsen led the CIA team in the mountains of Afghanistan before our troops arrived.
So Gaffer admits I was right, Silly Bob chimes in with his usual rubbish and Missy STILL tears them both to shreds.
Silly Bob: You said:
WRONG, this was covered already. Scroll up and read, that is if you aren’t too lazy.
Gaffer, thanks for admitting I was correct:
First you said:
Then you admit I was correct when you said:
I mixed up the names. Muhammad was evil, destroyed the lives of many families by murdering their family members and destroyed Malvo’s life as well. Yes, having an armed killer roaming your area would be terrifying, but he was a mass murdering coward. But being a member of the Nation of Islam is quite not the same as aligning oneself with al Qaeda. As a matter of fact:
More about Muhammad:
And this is the achilles heal of the whole Bush and his administration & party tried to avert the Freddie Mac/Fannie Mae disaster. We have already seen the the majority of Democrats in the HoR had voted for reform in the vote for the H.R. 1461: Federal Housing Finance Reform Act of 2005. So how do we know that enough Democrats would have combined to defeat the S190: Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005? Why didn’t the Republicans go ahead anyway – what would have been further lost if the bill have been defeated rather than lamely giving up? They might have won – and if they did lose by Democrats filibustering they could legitamately claim the Democrats blocks reform and so precipitated the Freddie Mac/Fannie Mae disaster. Instead you can’t – as there is no evidence to show that Democrats blocked the bill by voting against reform.
Indeed it seems that a number of Republicans were against the bill…
So by all means print as many quotes from individual democrats as you like – but it’s irrelevant because the Republicans were the party in power who failed to put any reform package through and none of the reform bills we have discussed were voted down by the Democrats.
How come your timeline doesn’t mention H.R. 1461 – Federal Housing Finance Reform Act of 2005 and Statement of Administration Policy: H.R. 1427 – Federal Housing Finance Reform Act of 2007? Two reform bills Bush opposed?
Except those two statements aren’t contradictory… 🙄
I’ll post this again and maybe you could re-read it slowly and see if any comprehension sets into your brain…
So points out of 10 in trying to deal with the issue (a.k.a effort)? 5/10
Points out of 10 in actually having dealt with the issue (a.k.a attainment)? -5/10
So I reiterate that Bush comprehensively failed to deal with the issue of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. Or in your world – if Obama simply points out issues then you are automatically satisfied that he has satisfactory dealt with the issue???? 😆
We’ve all seen what Pelosi’s House of Representatives passed as well. Even though the democrats enjoyed super majorities in both houses….until last spring. Couple of big ones come to mind…..Cap and Trade? Card Check? other items that were sooooo important to the dem agenda, couldn’t get the super Senate, led by their own party, with a president ready to sign anything, to act.
Up until last spring, they didn’t need consensus, the Republicans did not have the numbers to launch a filibuster.
When Hagel introduced the reform bill, the Republicans didn’t have the magic 60 to avert a filibuster. Frist would have already had noses counted and Senator Reid, Minority leader at the time, had said several times he wasn’t going to allow that bill to become law.
Prior to the monkey business that went on with the Hagel Senate 2005 bill…in 2006 mentioned in the article you provided, the Republicans attempted another bill:
And, Hagel reintroduced the bill in January 07 ….that remained in the new chairman’s(Chris Dodd-D) desk.
So, after the monkey business with S190, President Bush was still sounding the alarm for over two more years and the democrats kept telling all that the GSE’s were just fine, healthy as can be, and we all know what happened.
Now we have the Obama administration’s Treasury lifting the $400 billion cap and the billions the taxpayers are throwing down the Fannie/Freddie hole are non-budgetary, this year $126 billion just gets added to the deficit, probably more per year as this mess goes on.
watch from 5:20 on:
Ummmm Gaffe, all it took was for key dems to vote against it and the reforms went down. In fact, look at what dems voted against it. Unsuprisingly, the ones taking money from FM/FM. The GOP did not have a supermajority. At best it was a slim majority. Trying to comapre it to what the Dems have had until recently is a joke, but you know that.
In other words the claim stands. The GOP tried to pass the reform, and dems stopped it from happening. Your liberal dementia is tiring.
As for the warning about using airliners as weapons, I’ve seen a bit of it. It was SO VAGUE as to be useless. Your efforts to say he should have known only display your BDS.
I’m betting that next you’ll want to argue that Bush stole the 2000 election. 🙄
@Gaffer: Um, sorry you are wrong about being right…. lol
I took the time to scroll above and I still stand by my statement that you first say Bush did nothing, then that he tried to do something.
Dissemble all you want, but wrong is wrong.
Antics, Gaffe will never admit his views were built on a house of cards. Remove one and it all comes tumbling down.
Anyone else notice that Gaff is continuously changing the crux of his argument in an effort to make a some sort of point, or is it just me?
Gaff, I have answered some of your questions to me, and you’ve ignored them and put words in my mouth. Why should I continue to do so? Sometimes I don’t offer an opinion on certain things, because I don’t know enough about it. I don’t like to play rhetorical comparison games, they are meaningless.
He has wheels on his goal posts. 😉
Well certainly a surprise then for the ignorant National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice who
claimed no-one “could have predicted that they would try to use an airplane as a missile”. lol
If Gorelick’s wall was such an issue then why didn’t Bush’s administration simple remove it?
Clinton should of taken out Bin Laden when he had the chance but every President has to deal with the issues he inherits. Blame Clinton all you want – and for the most part I would agree – but as we are discussing Bush’s “Decision Points’ what action did Bush and his administration take or fail to take….
You mention Richard Clarke – let’s see how much the Bush Administration cared about national security in those key 9 months before 9/11…
Clearly the Bush administration wasn’t concerned about Al Qaeda nor were they listening to those in the intelligence community – particularly their own National Coordinator for Security, Infrastructure Protection, and Counter-terrorism Richard Clarke. At least Clinton tried to take out Bin Laden (and lamely missed his chance) – but how many attempts did Bush try to capture Bin Laden before 9/11? It appears Al Qaeda wasn’t even on his radar!
@Gaffer: You said:
And you are privy to the internal workings of any President of the United States’ inner circle of advisers, national security briefings (of which Bush had every morning by 6:30), Joint Chiefs of Staff meetings, etc… how?