Bush fatigue, interrupted

[albed]

He's just mad because "the administration" wouldn't "allow" him to masturbate, "ordered" him to stop eating, "asked" him to poop his pants, and "discouraged" him from breathing.


You're obviously not bright enough to pick up on the clues that someone is spouting bullshit but the refusal to be specific is a big one. People give orders, requests and discouragement, not "the administration"; and how do you "not allow" someone to do something.


But you'd have to be incredibly stupid to think he could mention Bush 3 times on every page of every speech without drawing notice from the normal people who haven't damaged their brains with drug and alcohol abuse.


It's obvious to anyone who can think for themselves that he's just another lying nutcase that the liberal media loves to publicize. You must only comprehend a tiny fraction of the world you experience to be so clueless.

[malvachat]

Originally Posted by albed

It's obvious to anyone who can think for themselves that he's just another lying nutcase

Really?
So a Congressional committee doesn't think for them selfs then?
"lying nutcase"
I take it your under oath at a congressional committee?
"lying nutcase"
Former Surgeon General?
Who appoints the surgeon General?
I don't know?
Who would appoint a "lying nutcase"to such an important job?
Answers on a postcard

[theknife]

Originally Posted by albed

blah blah blah stupid blah blah blah liberal blah blah blah nutcase blah blah blah liberal media blah blah blah

your support for scientific illiteracy is duly noted

[Mazer]

knife, if stories like these didn't crop up every few weeks you'd go nuts, wouldn't you? I think the Betty Ford Center has a program for bad news junkies, maybe you should look into it, if not for yourself then for your loved ones.

Dr. James Hansen of the Goddard Institute for Space Studies was making similar complaints about the administration a few years ago. And before that a certain individual got a witch hunt started when he said Iraq wasn't trying to buy uranium from Niger after all. It's the same old story with new names, but I guess originality isn't a major concern at the New York Times.

[theknife]

Originally Posted by Mazer

It's the same old story with new names, but I guess originality isn't a major concern at the New York Times.

what, like this?

Carmona's remarks were the latest among complaints from government scientists about what they say are administration efforts to control - and sometimes distort - scientific evidence in order to support policy decisions.

NASA scientists have complained of political pressure to tone down warnings about global warming. EPA officials have complained that technical data on power plant emissions and oil drilling have been ignored.

Dr. Elias Zerhouni, director of the National Institutes of Health, recently dissented from the administration's position by saying its restrictions on federal funding for embryonic stem cell research were holding back progress and should be lifted.

Scientists outside the government also have complained about what some call the administration's "war on science."

see a pattern here?

[albed]

Yeah a pattern of omission; no names, dates, documents, emails; just a bunch of vague horseshit about "the administration". Much like the ufo freaks make their arguments.


Ever feel skeptical when hard facts are suspiciously absent knife? Or are you just so eager to swallow anything anti-Bush you'll mindlessly accept whatever you're fed?

[daddydirt]

= ???

the Wall Street Journal nails this; just the latest in a neverending list of non-scandals.

Iraq aside, the big political story of the week seems to be that Richard Carmona believes he was gagged, if not bound, by the Bush Administration during his tenure as Surgeon General from 2002-2006. Dr. Carmona made his case before Henry Waxman's never-sleeping House Government Reform and Oversight Committee on Tuesday, and most media outlets played it up.

At the beginning of his tenure as the country's top doctor, he "was still quite politically naive in the ways of the Beltway," Dr. Carmona said. "As I witnessed partisanship and political manipulation, I was astounded and unsure of what I was witnessing . . . [and] whether this was the norm for all Surgeons General." Cue the ominous music.

We hate to ruin a political scandal, but isn't this a tad overwrought as a story line? Let's assume that Bush officials did tell him to keep mum on such issues as embryonic stem cell research and sex education. This is what appointed officials of any Administration are expected to do -- support the policies of an elected President. If Dr. Carmona really thinks that the Surgeon General should be above politics, "naive" is not the first adjective that comes to mind.

Dr. Carmona says he was especially offended that his voice wasn't welcome on matters of "science." He misses a critical distinction: Science may inform policy, but it's no substitute for the political judgments that properly play a role in guiding public policy. In the area of stem cells, for instance, there is no ban on debating the science -- only a question of whether and to what extent it should be publicly funded.

In any case, Dr. Carmona was not an indentured servant. If he disagreed so profoundly with President Bush's policy, he could have resigned. Honorable people do it all the time, and no one should take a job in Washington unless he is prepared to resign to defend his principles. That Dr. Carmona failed to resign over so long a period suggests that his personal moral agony was rather less tortured than he now makes it seem.

Alternatively, the good doctor could have done what some of his predecessors chose to do: Speak up anyway, and face the consequences, such as being fired. C. Everett Koop did that on AIDS during the Reagan Administration and became a hero to the media establishment that had once dismissed him as an anti-abortion zealot. Joycelyn Elders also chose to use her pulpit to endorse creative sex education in public schools, at least until the Clinton Administration asked her to resign.

Either decision would have been more honorable than the one Dr. Carmona chose to indulge -- which is to engage in a late hit on the President who appointed him, and only now that he will pay no personal price and it is politically fashionable to do so.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1184...googlenews_wsj

[malvachat]

So he's not a "lying nutcase" than?
He's just

"quite politically naive in the ways of the Beltway,"

Because he,

"witnessed partisanship and political manipulation, I was astounded and unsure of what I was witnessing . . . [and] whether this was the norm for all Surgeons General."

But of course,

"This is what appointed officials of any Administration are expected to do -- support the policies of an elected President"

So he needed to be,

"more honourable"and less"naive"

Instead of,

"engage in a late hit on the President who appointed him, and only now that he will pay no personal price and it is politically fashionable to do so"


Yes,maybe he should have resigned first,so he paid a,

"personal price"

First ,then speak out.
After all,free speech is alive and well in the states,
but you must pay the price for it.
Shoot the messenger seems to be the norm.
What a strange place that there America is.

[Mazer]

malva, Dr. Carmona is only doing what a lot of people wait to do until after they quit their jobs because in non-European countries people risk dismissal when they openly insult their employers. He could have spoken up at any time but he chose to do so after he got his last paycheck. He would have acted the same way no matter who he was working for, and so would most people, so free speech really isn't at issue here.

[pisser]

Originally Posted by albed

"horseshit" "the administration"

That's just about right......