« Bush Okayed Leak | Main | New Rules - Bill Maher »

Leaker In Chief

John Kerry discusses the leaker in chief with Chris Matthews.

It proves that the buck doesn't stop anywhere in this administration. . . It also proves the president has a funny sense of having an investigation when he says, when we get to the bottom of it and I'll fire the person who authorized it, and if he indeed authorized it, kind of tricky. . .Evidently he's been looking for himself the past few years. . . It's about as serious as it gets!
Hey George look in the fucking mirror, see that guy, he's the worst president ever.
William Rivers Pitt on our leaker in chief. This is an excellent summary.
Media Matters has more

Quicktime Video 5.62MB 6'30
Quicktime 7 required



There really is not much to say that has not already been said. Most of use already knew bush miss-lead us. This is just providing even more proof of it. Those who still support bush are so far out of reality that nothing going to make them turn on bush. This is the single most arrogant administration in the history of this country.

Bush believe that the demarcates have not backbone and we the people are easy to fool and mislead so he can get away with anything. The sad part is he might be right.

"If the president is a lying sack of shit, that's a pretty serious matter. But don't expect we Democrats to do anything about it. We'll vote for Bush's wars, keep our mouths shut while he shreds the Bill of Rights, and crap our pants while he steamrolls us with his corporate looting and theocratic judicial nominees. Gotta keep our powder, you know . . ."

John Kerry, you're a pathetic, cowardly tool. Isn't there a war against Iran you need to vote for?

Hmmm... To listen to Chris ask Kerry if people new all of Bush's bullshit would it have changed things. Drives me insane! Christ if the MSM did it's goddamn job and reported news instead of spewing righwing talking points, we won't be were we are now. And I see Kerry's still using the "IF" words, the asshat needs to grow some balls!

It can still get much, much worse for this administration.

What I love with US media is that the normal response now is to attack the messenger. Kali post is an example and I put even money that a fox news person will say the same thing.

This is turning into a circus. Its almost as if Bush is trying to outdo himself at how bad a president can be.

For those who still love Bush though, no need to worry. According to some people the president did no wrong..,1,1919280.story?coll=la-news-a_section&ctrack=1&cset=true

What is a demarcate? A Democrat demarcating..?

Look, we can all dream of this Dean-Moore-Kucinich-straight-talking-Democratic-campaign that will never happen. We can all turn our anger towards the Dems instead of the Reps. But the truth is that we "only" have to gain about 15 House seats and 6 Senate seats in November. Calling Bush a criminal in 2004, even though it would have been the truth, might very well have brought these numbers to 40 and 15. That's the sad reality.

Bush and his junta didn't fall down from Mars. He was made possible by the media and by the people. It is now dawning on rest of the US what we already knew for years. But pointing that out in 2004 in terms as stark as the left wing would have liked would have given to Rove what he always wanted: another generation of Republican rule.

I don't like this, either. But that's the way it is. And I'm glad it is changing.

It's interesting that if you go to CNN's website, that this story is buried. Really, there's nothing on their front page about it. And the breaking news red line at the top? "Suicide bomber kills at least four at Shiite mosque in Baghdad, police say."

Since when the hell is that breaking news?

What a rag...

Is it just me or does Senator Kerry sound like he's planning another go at it in '08?


Thanks IGM for posting this video.

I have to second kaliyuga's comments. Listening to Kerry is painful he is the most long-winded, least persuasive politician. I'm not saying I disagree with what he says, he just doesn't seem capable of simplifying his message. Balls--it'd be nice if he could find his or at the very least get some.

First, I want to make it clear that I do hate Bush, and agree with almost everything that you guys have said. I feel I need to say that, because I also want to say that this "interview" is a joke. It's the same crap that John Stewart has been speaking against for a couple years now. It's still just talking points, but it's our side's talking points now. Chris did almost all the talking, all the pertinent info came from him, and Kerry was just on as some kind of Yes Man. A transcript might look like this.

Chris: Bush did X and Y, and Libby said Z. Doesn't that mean that Bush sucks?

Kerry: Yes, and now we know just how bad he sucks.

Hardball? Didn't seem like any kind of hardball I've ever seen. My main point is why not just have Chris address his points directly to the camera and lose Kerry altogether? Don't disguise it as an interview when it is clearly an op/ed piece.

Chris Matthews of "hardball" throws Delay a softball. Delay is a crook, but Matthews reacts to him like a good ole' boy. See softball response from Matthews here

An even more disgusting softball from Matthews here

There is a clip of Chris Matthews and Tom Delay talking during the commercial break.. I can't find it now. It shows Matthews and Delay bad mouthing Hillary Clinton and Matthews says something like "I owe you one" to Delay.

Bush and his junta didn't fall down from Mars. He was made possible by the media and by the people.

Yup. This is the fact that's perhaps scarier than Bush&Co. in power: that nearly half of the US voted for him, twice.

Way back when, I was watching "Bush's Brain" with a friend and he said, "its not surprising that people like this (Bush, Rove, etc) exist; there's always some people like this. What is surprising is the people at large - that they vote 'em into office."

I'd get it if 1 out of 15 people voted for him, or 1 out of 20,.. but 1 out of 2??? All I get is a Seinfield rxn, "It just doesn't make sense".

Bush in 2002:

Q Mr. President, how important is it that that resolution give you an authorization of the use of force?

BUSH: That will be part of the resolution, the authorization to use force. If you want to keep the peace, you've got to have the authorization to use force. But it's -- this will be -- this is a chance for Congress to indicate support. It's a chance for Congress to say, we support the administration's ability to keep the peace. That's what this is all about.


BUSH: It's a chance for Congress to say, we support the administration's ability to keep the peace. That's what this is all about.

Bush said he wanted the authorization to use force so that he'd have a strong bargaining chip at the United Nations -- and that the U.N. would get new inspectors in, and that, maybe, this would lead to Saddam disarming without a war.

That's why Kerry voted for the resolution. As he said at the time,

KERRY: Let me be clear, the vote I will give to the President is for one reason and one reason only: To disarm Iraq of weapons of mass destruction, if we cannot accomplish that objective through new, tough weapons inspections in joint concert with our allies.

And we did get new, tough weapons inspections in joint concert with our allies. And then Bush blew it by invading anyway.

It wasn't just possible to support the resolution without supporting Bush's war--avoiding war was the specific reason Bush gave to support the resolution.

There's nothing incoherent about Kerry's position. Bush blew it. The resolution had the effect (getting inspectors back in) that Kerry had intended. He was right. W was wrong.

Kerry didn't "vote for the Iraq war" so it's idiotic to say he'd vote for war with Iran.

Funny. At the time, I knew this was a vote for war. Everyone I knew and talked to at the time understood that this was a vote for war.

Maybe John Kerry and Mitch are the only two people who were stupid enough to think this was anything other than a vote for war. They probably also believed Bush when he was swaggering around a month before the invasion, saying that he hadn't made up his mind yet, and that he really would prefer to avoid war. Not exactly the most politically astute people around are this pair of naive dupes, John Kerry and Mitch . . .

Oh, and we should toss Hillary in with Kerry and Mitch. She made some statement at the time that she was voting to give Bush the authority to go to war, so we could avoid going to war. Great political acumen at work there.

Bush and Rove must laugh their asses off every day at the sheer incompetence of their political "opposition." Many thanks to clueless DLC Democrats like Kerry, Clinton, and Mitch, who have helped to completely emasculate this once great party.

"A little rebellion now and then is a good thing. God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion. The people cannot be all, and always, well informed. The part which is wrong will be discontented, in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions, it is lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty... And what country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms."

Thomas Jefferson in a letter from 1787.

So here we are again, experiencing from this Administration what could only very generously be called a misconception. The popular phrase these days is "we were misled". Let's just call a spade a spade: we have been lied to repeatedly (or rather, continuously) and cascaded into one of the largest financial burdens our nation has ever seen for reasons that are still unclear: this President needs to go to Houston and defend his practices when Jeff Skilling is finished testifying.

But the worst part about this thousandth little transgression: nothing will happen after this but a drop in poll numbers and a slap on the wrists for this criminal. We have become a lazy, immobile, apathetic nation.


OK. I'm kind of having one of those days where I'm just a little depressed. A lot of the time I'm rather ammused by our Commander in Chief. Admit it most of it's funny.

But when it gets added up it's beyond scarey.

So just for my sanity, could some one PLEASE tell me at least one thing the Prez got right or did well...or didn't screw up? Please.

Throw me a bone.


Support this site

Google Ads

Powered by Movable Type Pro

Copyright © 2002-2017 Norman Jenson


Commenting Policy

note: non-authenticated comments are moderated, you can avoid the delay by registering.

Random Quotation

Individual Archives

Monthly Archives