Constitution - Nothing But a Piece of Paper?

Forums: Politics
Email this Topic • Print this Page

Quote:

Bush on the Constitution: 'It's just a goddamned piece of paper'

By DOUG THOMPSON
Dec 9, 2005, 07:53

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.

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."

...Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, while still White House counsel, wrote that the "Constitution is an outdated document."

Link to Article

Is the Constitution a living document, intended to change with the time? Does it grant rights? Serve as a base for determining what is legal or illegal?

Or, is it just a goddamned piece of paper?

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 3,734 • Replies: 84

No top replies

squinney, As far as I'm concerned, the Constitution of the United States of America is sacred. It stuns me that a president would make that observation. How DOES he get by with that horrible rhetoric?

0 Replies

You guys actually believe he said that? Shocked

0 Replies

No McG, I believe the three people who were present during the meeting and confirmed he said it are liars................?

0 Replies

3 people...who were they?

0 Replies

Huh.

Statements like that undermine the moral of the military who have sworn to uphold the Constitution.

Maybe they can just quit and come home now.

Bush has been known to speak before he thinks.

0 Replies

McGentrix wrote:

3 people...who were they?

JUSTA ONEAIDE and TERRY THREEPEOPLE

You've heard of them, right??

0 Replies

I remain skeptical that he could say something so unbelievably stupid. But if he did then I guess that presidential oath means nothing.

0 Replies

Can anyone find any other source for this crappola? You'd think the president saying something like this would be big news...

0 Replies

I have it on solid authority from 3 people who were in the room and heard it that Squinney, when asked what she thought of GWB, exclaimed "He's the most wonderful man. So intelligent. We're lucky to have him in the White House."

Of course, I cannot name these three people who swear they heard her say this, but I assure you it is true.

0 Replies

Yes McG you're right, I am guessing that GWB said this in an open forum with lots of MM present. He said "Are the cameras rolling? Ok let me step close to the mike now "The Constitution is nothing but a goddamned piece of paper" "Ok, I hope everybody heard that, if not pick up the transcript as you exit".
God bless america.

0 Replies

I can believe he said it in the same way that he said "they treat social security like some kind of federal program".

I really and truly don't think he meant it, if he did indeed say it.

0 Replies

does it matter if he really said it? I'm thinking that if he said it or not, the basis is typical of the attitude he has displayed thoughout his presidency.

0 Replies

McG and others are fond of sneering at people for not having read the linked article when such a thread is started. Had he (or any other rightwing whiners here) actually read the article, they would have seen that the author, Doug Thompson asserts that he had spoken to three staff members who made such a contention. Then, still reading, such a chimerical conservative would have found a link at the bottom of the page with the rubric Who is this Thompson guy anyway? . . .

But of course, for that sequence of events to have enlightened McG, or whatever other of the right wing whiners showed up to whine, they'd actually have been obliged to read the article, and to investigate further.

0 Replies

Oh, how wonderfully haughty of you to make assumptions. Typical of your nature I suppose.

I am not fond of anonymous sources. I am fond of watching you guys make fools of yourselves though, and that seems to occur daily here.

0 Replies

Set, I won't speak for McG, but yes, I read the article. It is really easy to make claims that three people told me something without having to prove it. And it is even easier if you can manage to make the claims without giving names to these three staff members. Gosh, almost anyone can do that.

Funny how the only person these three confided in was Mr. Thompson. Guess he's just lucky that way.

0 Replies

Not that I don't agree that we should be skeptical of anonymous sources, but where were you guys with your skepticism when anonymous sources were telling us where Saddam's wmd was?

0 Replies

Indeed, so it would seem. My point was just to counter McG's typical whining (and the general tendency of conservatives here to whine) about the source of the allegation. Anyone who had bothered to investigate the article would know that Mr. Thompson is the source for the allegation, and not three WH staff members. Unless and until Mr. Thompson produces names, the persons attached to which either confirm or fail to deny the scenario--Mr. Thompson is the only source.

Of course, one would have had to have actually read and understood that page to have known any of that.

0 Replies

I have been read Thompson's Capitol Blue reports for quite some time now. I can't figure out if this is satire or just unconfirmed gossip. His reports always ring true.

0 Replies

FreeDuck wrote:

Not that I don't agree that we should be skeptical of anonymous sources, but where were you guys with your skepticism when anonymous sources were telling us where Saddam's wmd was?

Colin Powell is hardly anonymous.

0 Replies

Constitution - Nothing But a Piece of Paper?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know