Piece of Paper

December 10, 2005 12:03 PM

“Stop throwing the Constitution in my face,” Bush screamed back. “It’s just a goddamned piece of paper!” Does the so-called President realize his job description is on that goddamned piece of paper? (Article 2, Section 1) As Bush distances himself from the Constitution as support for it will soon label you a terrorist.
posted by augustweed (31 comments total)

Double post
posted by dd42 at 12:04 PM on December 10, 2005

Poodle toast (rack)
posted by slater at 12:08 PM on December 10, 2005

Double post, but this one is better than mine.

Besides, certain people have flagged the post because (IMO) they don't want it discussed or considered, and instead claim that MetaFilter should not contain rumours.
posted by Kickstart70 at 12:15 PM on December 10, 2005

bubble ghost
posted by cortex at 12:16 PM on December 10, 2005

posted by Gator at 12:19 PM on December 10, 2005

Sorry about the double post. I haven't been reading mefi for a couple of weeks. How many of the "certain" people in here are in-fact paid operatives doing their jobs. Yes they certainly exist.
posted by augustweed at 12:19 PM on December 10, 2005

Or, you know, it could be that it's pretty common knowledge that Capitol Hill Blue just makes shit up.

And I say that as a straight-up, bush-hating liberal Democrat.
posted by empath at 12:21 PM on December 10, 2005

Kickstart70,

You seriously think this is real? I hate Bush as much as the next man, but even he'd know that saying something like that around anyone would be political suicide.
posted by dd42 at 12:22 PM on December 10, 2005

Pot Roast.
posted by clevershark at 12:22 PM on December 10, 2005

dd42: Not particularly. I think that it's a possibility that he'd -think- that, based on external evidence and other things he's known to have said, but I find it doubtful that he's quite stupid enough to spout it openly.

On the other hand, I do believe this sort of thing is worth discussing. If Doug Thompson would get some real, open, sources or if someone else could substantiate this then it's a big thing. Even without this article at all, I think discussion on whether Bush has violated his oath is a good thing for America (and likely the world).
posted by Kickstart70 at 12:25 PM on December 10, 2005

How many of the "certain" people in here are in-fact paid operatives doing their jobs.

Buh?
posted by cortex at 12:27 PM on December 10, 2005

"Certain people" == "one person" (as of this writing).
posted by Gator at 12:29 PM on December 10, 2005

If you feel compelled to post tabloid trash please consider the Weekly World News. It is sometimes at least mildly entertaining.
posted by kjh at 12:29 PM on December 10, 2005

How many of the "certain" people in here are in-fact paid operatives doing their jobs. Yes they certainly exist.

you win a pissing elephant.


posted by quonsar at 12:30 PM on December 10, 2005

Take it to meta or stop posting unfounded rumors. Just because you think that the President is thinking something he shouldn't be thinking doesn't mean anyone else thinks this is even remotely thought worthy.
posted by elwoodwiles at 12:31 PM on December 10, 2005

Telling the the public that God talks to you should be political suicide. Yes I seriously think this is real, and I think people should start pulling thier collecctive heads out of the sand/asses/etc. And for those certain people: Twenty-five Ways to Suppress Information.
posted by augustweed at 12:36 PM on December 10, 2005

Take it to meta or stop posting unfounded rumors. Just because you think that the President is thinking something he shouldn't be thinking doesn't mean anyone else thinks this is even remotely thought worthy.

Isn't this a forum to discuss 'unfounded' rumors? Has metafilter been inflitrated by the real 'thought police?'
posted by augustweed at 12:46 PM on December 10, 2005

I heard that Dick Van Patten eats dog food.
posted by fixedgear at 12:46 PM on December 10, 2005

... saying something like that around anyone would be political suicide.

What augustweed said; in addition, as we all know, nobody who gets within Bush's inner circle would ever repeat anything like this on the record.

And why should we find ti implausible? After all, this is the guy who said to a pair of Congressmen in early '02: "Saddam Hussein? We're takin' him out. He's history."

I.e.: He's not the most discreet camper on the bus.
posted by lodurr at 12:48 PM on December 10, 2005

Some CHB history
posted by CunningLinguist at 12:49 PM on December 10, 2005

Isn't this a forum to discuss 'unfounded' rumors?

Oy. I haven't felt so sad since "this used to be a news filter."
posted by Gator at 12:49 PM on December 10, 2005

Has metafilter been inflitrated by the real 'thought police?'

um, no. that would require real thinking.
posted by quonsar at 12:51 PM on December 10, 2005

Newsfilter is OK by me, but certain sites like this one are really pretty worthless. We might as well just post our own bullshit; it would be more entertaining.
posted by 2sheets at 12:52 PM on December 10, 2005

Metafilter: We might as well just post our own bullshit; it would be more entertaining.
posted by mr_crash_davis at 12:54 PM on December 10, 2005

i only wanna see this posted again if there's a LEGITIMATE paper writing about it.


...thanks fo rthe pissing elephant btw! :)
posted by Doorstop at 12:55 PM on December 10, 2005

Put me in the skeptical camp too. This statement seems so much in character for Bush — petulant, frustrated, power-before-principles Bush — and it's so much the kind of damning candor that could play well on TV, that the article is getting a lot of play without a lot of critical thought. I don't trust articles citing only nameless White House sources when they tell me there are surely WMDs in Iraq, and I don't trust them when they say things like this either. If this is report is true, I'd love to see it substantiated and corroborated, but so far it's just hearsay.
posted by hattifattener at 1:00 PM on December 10, 2005

Heretical Boast
posted by aberrant at 1:05 PM on December 10, 2005

CHB history?
posted by Kwantsar at 1:05 PM on December 10, 2005

Interesting link CunningLinguist.

Not sure it's necessarily true that the site was formerly a "Rabid Republican" site though. Seems more likely the guy's just a nutcase who posts made-up paranoid nonsense about whoever's in the White House.
posted by TheophileEscargot at 1:08 PM on December 10, 2005

People, people, can we please get back to what's really important here: it's my birthday next week, and really I want Slater's Poodle toast rack?
posted by tula at 1:12 PM on December 10, 2005

Nutcase? Probably not. Certainly the anti-Bush stuff has a cleaner and more consistent feel to it than the anti-Clinton stuff, which resembled the spittle of a rabid dog. I think he's a frustrated novelist, cranking out thriller scenarios.

Still, as oft noted here and in the previous thread, it's consistent with Bush's behavior, and as I've pointed out, we would never ever have corroboration even if it were true. It's purely moot, with no resolution possible.
posted by lodurr at 1:12 PM on December 10, 2005