MetaFilter posts tagged with NYTimes and Bush

The Must-Do List

empath — Sun, 04 Mar 2007 11:17:03 -0800

The Must-Do List. The NY Times lists the administration policies that congress must reverse if it intends to undo the damage done to America by the Bush Administration.

The Road To Abu Ghraib

y2karl — Wed, 27 Oct 2004 09:03:17 -0800

The Road To Abu Ghraib A generation from now, historians may look back to April 28, 2004, as the day the United States lost the war in Iraq... It was a direct—and predictable—consequence of a policy, hatched at the highest levels of the administration, by senior White House officials and lawyers, in the weeks and months after 9/11. Yet the administration has largely managed to escape responsibility for those decisions; a month from election day, almost no one in the press or the political class is talking about what is, without question, the worst scandal to emerge from President Bush's nearly four years in office... Given the particular conditions faced by the president and his deputies after 9/11—a war against terrorists, in which the need to extract intelligence via interrogations was intensely pressing, but the limits placed by international law on interrogation techniques were very constricting—did those leaders have better alternatives than the one they chose? The answer is that they did. And we will be living with the consequences of the choices they made for years to come.

Without a Doubt

kgasmart — Sat, 16 Oct 2004 14:40:29 -0800

Withoug a Doubt (NYT, reg. req'd). My overwhelming reaction to this lengthy but startling Ron Suskind piece was just a tremendous sadness. A sadness that the greatest nation in the history of the world could be governed on the basis of faith rather than fact. How can dismissing the "reality-based" and relying instead on instinct result in anything but disaster?

First the NYTime, then CBS. Who will face reality?

HTuttle — Mon, 20 Sep 2004 00:35:40 -0800

Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them. First the NYTimes, then CBS. Who will face reality?

George Bushes's military record: critical analysis

Postroad — Wed, 08 Sep 2004 10:19:43 -0800

George Bushes's Military record: a critical analysis This pdf file is about as definitive a look as we are likely to get on the Bush military record. Clearly most post4ers/readers of Metafilter do not support Bush, but having some clear-cut evidence at hand to use in arguments against those who attack the Kerry militaryrecord, this will give the Bushites reason to move on to other topics

Well. of course.

XQUZYPHYR — Fri, 09 Jul 2004 05:00:56 -0800

The dog ate my service records. The Pentagon has announced that the payroll records for National Guard service for three months between 1972 and 1973 have been accidentally destroyed. These three months coincidentally cover the disputed period of George W. Bush's service in the Texas Air National Guard. (Similar Google link here, via dKos)

SandeepKrishnamurthy — Wed, 11 Sep 2002 05:41:56 -0800

George Bush's Article in NYTIMES. I was surprised to see an article by the prez on nytimes.com. We are used to presidents communicating through TV- but there the speech is picked up by all major channels in that case. It seems odd to see a sitting president use one newspaper to put forward a viewpoint. Perhaps, Al Gore's articles in the same space spurred dubya. Oh, by the way, what did you think of the story? Is this the work of a speechwriter or do you think it is genuine? Did everyone notice the absence of the word Iraq in this article? (The customary apology for the nytimes post applies. I believe you can still register as metafilter, metafilter.)

nofundy — Fri, 16 Aug 2002 12:21:33 -0800

The Axis of Medieval. Claims of support for women and women's rights in the current regime are nothing more than hot air according to Mr. Kristof. He says their record and the facts tell a different story. The details are shocking. Kowtowing to religious fundamentalists in the US causes devastating results abroad. Would programs like these qualify for using some of the wealthiest persons dollars instead of a tax cut?

nofundy — Tue, 11 Jun 2002 10:30:13 -0800

Special Agent Crowley Speaks Up (NYTimes link , normal rules apply) Ladies like this are the real heroes in our country and she has something to say before Congress about the new Bush agency. Ms. Dowd agrees and said, "The shape of the government is not as important as the policy of the government."

adrober — Mon, 18 Mar 2002 09:58:00 -0800

Is President Bush Gay? (Answer: No, but he says "fabulous" a lot.) Is Billy Joel washed up? (NYT required) (Answer: Sounds like it.) Is Star Wars Episode Two any good? (Answer: Yes, beyond your wildest dreams.)

willrich — Thu, 03 Jan 2002 05:24:48 -0800

Even Safire is getting sick of Bush in today's NY Times op-ed piece writing about the bogus executive privilege order he signed re: FBI missteps in Boston: "Why is Bush, so early in his term and with little to hide, going down this road to upset our system of checks and balances?...It's another mistake that will come home to haunt the Bush presidency." (nytimes.com Member ID: metafi, password: metafi) And with Lieberman and Levin opening up the Enron investigation ("Sen. Joseph Lieberman, D-Conn., the full committee's chairman, promised Wednesday `a search for the truth, not a witch hunt.' But he did not rule out an examination of Enron's relationships with the Bush administration.") does anyone not think the Dems are getting fired up for the fall elections, war or no war?

mattpfeff — Thu, 25 Oct 2001 10:47:18 -0800

From a piece in the NYTimes today, Home Front Is Minefield for President: "The lesson we're learning," one administration official said today, "is that you can bomb the wrong place in Afghanistan and not take much heat for it. But don't mess up at the post office."

Leave it to the White House to come away with exactly the wrong interpretation. But the facts are there, too -- most Americans are more concerned about the (relatively slight) risk of getting Anthrax than the rather significant risk that, if we screw up in Afghanistan, we might lose the current coalition against terrorism, Bin Laden, and any hope for "homeland security" for a long time to come....

Brilliantcrank — Sun, 16 Sep 2001 15:47:26 -0800

European leaders trying to bring balance to American response. "...Prime Minister Tony Blair, who has offered Mr. Bush his full support, insisted on Friday that any retaliation "must and will be based on hard evidence," and his spokesman has said that the support does not amount to a 'blank check.' "