Bush: The Re-Set Memoirs

[Mr. Shaman]

There's somethin' WRONG with that boy.......

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g6LtL9lCTRA[/ame]​

"Human rights experts have long pressed the administration of former president George W. Bush for details of who bore ultimate responsibility for approving the simulated drownings of CIA detainees, a practice that many international legal experts say was illicit torture.

In a memoir due out Tuesday, Bush makes clear that he personally approved the use of that coercive technique against alleged Sept. 11 plotter Khalid Sheik Mohammed, an admission the human rights experts say could one day have legal consequences for him.

In his book, titled "Decision Points," Bush recounts being asked by the CIA whether it could proceed with waterboarding Mohammed, who Bush said was suspected of knowing about still-pending terrorist plots against the United States. Bush writes that his reply was "Damn right" and states that he would make the same decision again to save lives, according to a someone close to Bush who has read the book."

 

[Mad Scientist]

Did you know Shaman that after only 2 years, GW Bush is more popular than Obama! I know that's gotta' just frost you eh?

Oh, and how bout dem dere mid-terms?

 

[FlyingReganite]

 

[GWV5903]

There's somethin' WRONG with that boy.......

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g6LtL9lCTRA​

"Human rights experts have long pressed the administration of former president George W. Bush for details of who bore ultimate responsibility for approving the simulated drownings of CIA detainees, a practice that many international legal experts say was illicit torture.

In a memoir due out Tuesday, Bush makes clear that he personally approved the use of that coercive technique against alleged Sept. 11 plotter Khalid Sheik Mohammed, an admission the human rights experts say could one day have legal consequences for him.

In his book, titled "Decision Points," Bush recounts being asked by the CIA whether it could proceed with waterboarding Mohammed, who Bush said was suspected of knowing about still-pending terrorist plots against the United States. Bush writes that his reply was "Damn right" and states that he would make the same decision again to save lives, according to a someone close to Bush who has read the book."

When HELL freezes over, NEVER!!!!!

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Yeah.....Lil' Dumbya.....closet-Moderate; Republican-style (i.e. BULLSHITTER-EXTRAORDINAIRE).​

President Bush On Iraq War:

"I Was A Dissenting Voice. I Didn’t Want To Use Force"​

Whatta LYIN' SACK-O'-SHIT!!!!!!!

​

 

[Misty]

Mock away but this is a good marketing idea. I smell success at the bookstore.

 

[FlyingReganite]

Yeah.....Lil' Dumbya.....closet-Moderate; Republican-style (i.e. BULLSHITTER-EXTRAORDINAIRE).​

President Bush On Iraq War:

"I Was A Dissenting Voice. I Didn’t Want To Use Force"​

Whatta LYIN' SACK-O'-SHIT!!!!!!!

​

 

[Trajan]

*yawn*

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Yeah.....Lil' Dumbya.....closet-Moderate; Republican-style (i.e. BULLSHITTER-EXTRAORDINAIRE).​

President Bush On Iraq War:

"I Was A Dissenting Voice. I Didn’t Want To Use Force"​

Whatta LYIN' SACK-O'-SHIT!!!!!!!

​

Ah, yes......his response to HIS Military-Obligation....

*

 

[uscitizen]

Mock away but this is a good marketing idea. I smell success at the bookstore.

Yep all Tea Partiers will buy one.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

It's lookin' like "Turtle" McConnell might (very well) be "short-timing", as Minority Leader!

​

"But U.S. Rep. John Yarmuth, D-3rd District, was highly critical of McConnell's request, and analysts said they were stunned by Bush's revelation.

“If the story is true, Sen. McConnell will have to explain to the families of all the men and women who sacrificed in Iraq why he was willing to play politics with their lives,” Yarmuth, who was elected in 2006, said in an interview."

 

[skookerasbil]

Yeah.....Lil' Dumbya.....closet-Moderate; Republican-style (i.e. BULLSHITTER-EXTRAORDINAIRE).​

President Bush On Iraq War:

"I Was A Dissenting Voice. I Didn’t Want To Use Force"​

Whatta LYIN' SACK-O'-SHIT!!!!!!!

​

Only in the opinion of the internet k00ks on the left. In 2002.......the whole damn world and most of the Democrats wanted to use force!!!

 

[skookerasbil]

s0n.....I told you that absurd post total would get you in trouble!!!!!!

 

[Avatar4321]

Course, he might just have a different perspective than you because he was the President and had access to information you didn't.

Or is that just impossible in your eyes?

As for the water boarding, his position is completely consistant. He was arguing that waterboarding wasn't torture.

 

[Rinata]

Did you know Shaman that after only 2 years, GW Bush is more popular than Obama! I know that's gotta' just frost you eh?

Oh, and how bout dem dere mid-terms?

What is your source???

 

[skookerasbil]

Face of remorse?????

 

[Mr. Shaman]

The knee-slappers just-keep-comin'!!!!!​

"I took my responsibility to be a good fiscal steward seriously," Bush writes.

How's that? Bush chose to go to war, but, unlike any other wartime president, opted to pay the cost entirely with borrowed funds while pressing for additional tax cuts. He laments that he left behind "a serious long-term fiscal problem" of runaway entitlement spending but blames resistance from both parties in Congress - without acknowledging that he added an expensive and unpaid-for new entitlement, the Medicare prescription drug plan."

"The bill even included a provision on end-of-life counseling -- hey, look, GOP-approved "death panels" -- that the Tea Baggers of the day didn't seem to notice or care about. Indeed, at the time, conservative activists had nothing but good things to say about expanding an entitlement program by hundreds of billions of dollars, expanding the government's role in health care, and handing the tab to future generations. Where were the angry patriots comparing Bush to Hitler, and accusing Republican lawmakers of trying to turn the United States into Soviet Russia?"

 

[Mr. Shaman]

....As usual, it takes a Progressive-Dem to reverse a Bush-debacle.....​

"The governor of Montana asked Tuesday for federal permission to sell cheaper prescription drugs in his state through the federal Medicaid program, a proposal he expects will catch the eye of other cash-strapped states.

Gov. Brian Schweitzer, who launched his political career a decade ago by taking busloads of seniors to Canada to buy cheap drugs, said the waiver would allow Montana residents to get the drugs at about half the retail price.

Schweitzer said the federal government can get cheap drug prices for Medicaid, the federal program for seniors and low-income residents, because of Congress' negotiations with special interest groups. Those prices are far less than the price for those on Medicare, which usually serves the elderly, or private insurance plans, he added.

He said he got a copy of a highly confidential Medicaid drug price list by getting his chief of staff to sign a nondisclosure agreement that is usually handled at the state agency level. Schweitzer said it is obviously unfair to charge one group of people far less than another group of people for the same product.

He said his plan would cost the government nothing - and could even save it money because it would open up the doors for government-subsidized Medicare patients to buy-in at the cheaper Medicaid rate.

"It doesn't cost the citizens of Montana a dime, and it doesn't cost the federal government a dime," said Schweitzer."

"Back in 2003, when the so-called Medicare Modernization Act was being debated in Congress, we warned that this latest round of Medicare privatization contained severe flaws that would hurt consumers and taxpayers while lining the pockets of special interests. With nearly two years of hindsight, we can safely say we were right: The MMA has been a major disappointment for consumers and taxpayers, but a windfall for private insurance and drug companies.

We've laid out the extent of the MMA's failures in a new report: Medicare Privatization: Windfall for the Special Interests. The report chronicles the failures of the MMA in three key areas: Medicare Advantage overpayments, subsidies to regional PPOs, and drug prices.

Among the key findings:​

* Under the MMA, Medicare has been significantly overpaying private plans under Medicare Advantage. In 2005, Medicare overpaid private plans by at least 7% per beneficiary, costing taxpayers $2.7 billion. In 2006, overpayment reached 11% per beneficiary, costing taxpayers $4.6 billion.

* Under the MMA, Congress set aside $10 billion for an unnecessary subsidy (or "stabilization fund") to regional PPOs. This year, however, 88% of beneficiaries have access to a regional PPO, before the so-called "stabilization fund" was even tapped--no subsidy was necessary.

* Medicare Part D drug prices are substantially higher than the prices obtained by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), which negotiates prices on behalf of consumers. For all of the top 20 drugs prescribed to seniors, the lowest price charged by any Part D plan was higher than the lowest price secured by the VA. Yet Congress refused to let Medicare negotiate directly with the drug companies, as the VA does.

*Bottom line: this report shows that, unfortunately for consumers and taxpayers, the MMA has not even come close to meeting the high expectations set for it by Congress. Consumers are getting hurt and taxpayers fleeced, while insurance companies and drug manufacturers are raking in money faster than they can count it. Congress needs to move away from this deeply flawed privatization model, and instead focus on strengthening Medicare."

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Face of remorse?????

 

[BlindBoo]

Hahahahahahaha

NO. Now go away and stay away.