O'Neill Book Paints Devastating Portrait of Bush* (awesome details)

[kskiska]

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Former U.S. Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill's portrait of George W. Bush depicts a passive and superficial president surrounded by right-wing ideologues who lacks the intellectual rigor or even the curiosity to think through the effects of his policies.

(snip)

In the book, O'Neill says the tone of his relationship with Bush was set at their very first meeting where he was offered the job of Treasury Secretary.

Instead of a detailed discussion, Bush was more interested in why the cheeseburgers he had ordered were slow to appear. He interrupted the talk to summon White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card.

``You're the chief of staff. You think you're up to getting us some cheeseburgers?'' O'Neill recalled Bush saying. ``Card nodded. No one laughed. He all but raced out of the room.''

(snip)

At their first meeting after Bush took office, the president gave O'Neill a nickname -- Pablo. Later he started calling the secretary ``Big O.'' O'Neill viewed this as ``a bully technique. 'I've given you a name. Now you wear it'.''

more…
http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/politics/politics-bush-oneill-portrait.html

[Dagaz]

1. I saw O'Neill today on shows

I was less than impressed and thought the guy was all over the map. Do you find him coherent? The criticism I have is that Bush is supposedly some great delegating MBA and he picked this guy to run our economy?

[kskiska]

4. O'Neill doesn't matter. It's Suskind's book

and it's documented by 19,000 papers. O'Neill should just stay home at this point.

[Printer70]

5. LOL- this guy is plain confused

First, he says "he'll never say a bad word about Bush". Then a year later he slams him. Now he's saying he "regrets" it and backing away from the criticism in the book. I agree- he is all over the map. Now he says "hell probably vote for Bush". He'll vote for Bush but thinks Bush is easily "befuddled". It's just a confusing muddle.

[Danieljay]

7. I think he's afraid..

I think he received a phone call or two and now doesn't know just where to go. He may be all over the map, but with 19,000 pages of documents and others coming forward (see abc news article about another source) this ball is beginning to roll, with or without O'Neil. The last thing we need is a bunch of criticism. One thing I can say about Republicans and their hatred toward Clinton is they stuck together and didn't criticize one another OR anyone that might help their cause. Seems the democrats..as witnessed by the continuous attack on Dean from within his own party have a real problem working together, and that includes many of their supporters, many of who post on this board. For Goodness sake..lets stick together and focus our collective energy on the removal of Bush from office, not biting the hand that feeds us.

[stevedeshazer]

8. Spot on

Great post, Danieljay.

[Printer70]

12. I'm just pointing out...

that let's not put too much stock in O'Neill. I swear some people were about to make him our patron saint- and then he says he's going to vote for Bush. Before we elevate people, let's make sure they're on our side.

[Danieljay]

77. he's definitely not a saint..

he's a Republican! Did I just say that? In honesty, I do know of good Republicans (one or two), just none in the current acting administration. Regardless..O'Neill has given us something to bite on here, regardless of his backing off of claims. Fortunately, as reported on another thread..this thing is getting some teeth regardless. I do understand your point, however. I got excited about the Kean investigation too..and he was a big let down on follow-up.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

15. everyone even Tweety is saying that "someone got to O'Neil in 24 hrs"

"O'Neil is scared"...."like so mafia types have gotten him scared"..yeah The BFEE has gotten to him just like they threatened Ross Pereo's (ms)daughter and her wedding....perhaps O'Neil was threatened with his children and family???

[cliss]

34. Very nice post, DJ.

I do agree with you. We should be thankful for this amazing Godsend from O'Neill. Consider how ruthless these guys are.

It's miraculous that we've even got this much.

Here's to not looking a gift horse in the mouth.

[BuelahWitch]

38. Very well said Danieljay!

I agree with you completely :hi:

[goforit]

52. Yes .....great posts!!!!!

These Dem candidates are certainly gonna have a terrible write up
in history and rightfully so!!!

Yes unity is the 1st step toward progress.

[guajira]

61. Danieljay, with all due respect..... this forum is to air opinions

If everyone thought and posted alike, it would be easy to read the first post, then ignore all others.

I am sort of a maverick, and enjoy the diversity of opinions on DU. I too have had concerns about O'Neill, wondering why he did a one-eighty so fast! Wouldn't surprise me if he got threatened with jail or worse.

[Danieljay]

76. ..and I aired mine..

just as you did yours and I am thankful. I am also grateful for DU for providing such a forum. Perhaps you took it personally, I assure you that wasn't my intention. Peace Out.

[BootinUp]

11. Somebody got to him

I can just imagine the pretender king, and KKKRove going beserk to find a way to screw O'Neil.

[PennyLane]

74. You know.........

Old Rover-boy has had a few sleepless nights this week! Hee heeB-)

[Must_B_Free]

70. not true statements

you didn't pay careful enough attention, and you let the media tell you what you are now believing.

[cthrumatrix]

18. The book is so detailed - it clearly shows shrub is "puppet"....

I'm 2/3rd's thru the book...read it!

O'Neill took incredible notes...and Susknd talk with many people..not just O'Neill.

O'Neill has been shown to be a truthful, tell it like it is man and his record speaks for itself.

He has been "reached" and you would feel the same way if you were "reached"


The problem (or good point) is that "the horses have left the barn"...it's documented and this is going to make shrub look less like a leader and just a puppet.

There is soo much ammo on Iraq, NSC meeting "scripted", shrub not engaing in dialogue with cabinet and one on ones, how policy is really made, how EVERYTHING is based on politics......etc...

ANY media figure could blow this out of the water.

[louis-t]

53. you mis-understand....

people are NOT picked to run the economy, protect the environment, keep an eye on industry, or go after corporate criminals. Not in this admin. They are expected to say and do what they are told. Promulgate the party slogans, sing company songs, repeat the rhetoric. If they resist, they are asked to spend more time with family.

[SeveneightyWhoa]

2. Whoa, Bush doesn't mind bloodshed:

``Bush described meeting Sharon...'We flew over the Palestinian camps. Looked real bad down there. I don't see much we can do over there at this point. I think it's time to pull out of that situation','' he said, according to O'Neill.

Secretary of State Colin Powell warned the consequences of that could be more bloodshed. ``Bush shrugged. 'Maybe that's the best way to get things back in balance'.''

---
WHOA!!! We all knew Bush was heartless, but here's another tidbit of evidence to solidify that accusation.

[ignatius]

17. Cold-hearted reptile!!! Now he is being reinvented as a man of

peace by his handlers. I remember thinking, by his methods of destruction and madness, people will tire of ths and if the world isn't totally destroyed , maybe by sheer exhaustion of will and spirit peace will happen.

Sadly at what cost and wouldn't diplomacy have been a much better tactic?

The entire planet will be so much better off when Bush is back in Texas with the rattlesnakes.

[0007]

30. That's right up there with the Carla Fay Tucker comment

[goforit]

55. ya .....we thought the Nixon tapes were bad.....this is unbelievable

[Melodybe]

3. Wow, who knew that Will Ferrel was so on the money?

I think that this is worse than simply thinking Bu$h is evil, the mockery our government has become is far more painful.

[BeyondGeography]

6. Fucking cheeseburgers

You can tell how bored Chimpass is just listening to him try to form sentences about topics he'd rather not have to think about. Little things like the economy, international relations and the environment.

He wanted this job for the trappings, and to resolve his place in the family pecking order. The rest is all about getting even with those smartass liberals who treated him like the clown he was back in high school and college.

Sometimes I think the less we know, the better.

[susu369]

13. bu$h* is always preoccupied with food

If you will notice nearly every bu$h* story has mention of food...I think the so-called blueblood is a glutton.

[PaDUer]

22. Is he having

the "munchies"? Hmmm..

[Pax Argent]

73. Maybe its a crime family thing

I've noticed that about half of the scenes with James Gandolfini in The Sopranos has him eating something.

[HereSince1628]

16. Cheeseburgers...O'Neill observed Bush treated folks badly

The observation comes in the book after a statement about how O'Neill decided on the type of CEO he was dealing with by watching the way they treated secretaries and such.

In the incident...the CHIEF OF STAFF was made into a jumping toady while at the same time largely ignoring O'Neill's conversation.

[Leilani]

40. You can tell his character

by the way he treats the press:

He ignores them, but when he lowers himself to take questions, he belittles them.

Remember what he did to D.Gregory (NBC) for speaking French?

No class..

[ignatius]

67. Wasn't there an incident when he was preparing for a tv "performance

he wiped his glasses on a cameraman's jacket? Couldn't wipe 'em on his $10,000 ivy league suits,you know.

Arrogant little-bitty man, it makes him feel all macho when he can shit on the little people.

[janx]

43. If it comes across as boredom, that's because the guy is simply

not bright enough to lead our country. What was it that I remember from the book recently--he lacked curiosity.

He's not smart enough to be genuinely curious about anything. He's lazy, yes, but it looks more and more as if he's just not very bright.

[radfringe]

9. the "big" news

has been focused on whether or not O'Neill revealed "secret" documents

media is missing the picture - the story is what is in the documents
once again they are shooting the messenger and disregarding the message

[kskiska]

20. The media did the same with the Blumenthal book, too

The book is full of instances of how deeply Clinton was immersed in fighting terrorism, but they chose to ignore all that and focus on a few sentences regarding Lewinsky affair.

[goforit]

56. Well....just wait till it becomes # 1 on the bestsellers list!!

That will show how successful it is.

Media certainly have lost huge ratings.......so sit back and watch
the tide roll in.

[sidpleasant]

25. re: "secret" documents

I watched a tape of 60 Minutes last night and it was clear that no secret document was shown. What Suskind displayed (and carefully described) was merely a cover letter that listed a bunch of other documents, not the documents themselves. One item on the list was noted as "secret". It looked something like this:

1. NSA memo - SECRET
2. another document
3. something else
4. BFEE plan to take over the world

The cover letter didn't appear to have any security label on it. The claim that O'Neill showed a Top Secret document on national TV is a right wing fabrication.

[BootinUp]

10. Oh dear, it hurts, LOL

[Just Me]

14. Personally, I think he may just be playing the game better,...

,...than the "freon neocons". It would be hard for me to buy into the notion that he is simply flip-flopping. A more plausible explanation, in my view, is that he fully deliberated and planned everything he is doing.

The most important point is that,...he opened the door, inviting the whole country to take peek inside.

[Old Lefty]

19. O'Neil is sucking on his toes.

This guy is now backing off everything thing he said. He was a spineless wimp when he was king of cash, and he's worse now. He's making Suskind look like an ass. No one's going to believe a word in his book now. Dumb, balless shit.

[Bridget Burke]

21. Nope.

O'Neill didn't back off on EVERYTHING he said. The book will stand--I haven't read it yet but it's on the way.

Sorry, your hero-wartime-president is going to be revealed as an idiot. Of course, since I'm a Texan, I've known that a long time.

[kskiska]

23. Why shouldn't they believe the words

of 19,000 documents? Are they all lies?

[goforit]

58. Suskind is looking pretty good actually. He did his job...and well.

Either way Bush looses.

People now know that O'Niel has been bullied.....(bad for Bush)

The Facts are in print...........................(bad for Bush)

The fierce and fast speed the WH reacted..........(bad for Bush)

The slow and hesitant speed in Plame case.........(bad for Bush)

And those zombie bush supporters will all jump off a bridge
for Bush when asked......................(you can't change zombies)

[JohnOneillsMemory]

66. O'neill and Suskind on NPR today held the line, no 'crawdadding.'

The two were interviewed at the same time by Terry Gross on the Fresh Air program (as I recall) and O'Neill ONLY regretted using the expression "the blind leading the deaf."

BUT he said that the meaning behind those words (Bush was dettached and indifferent and everyone else did nothing to bring him into discussions)was absolutely what he meant and isn't backing down. In fact, O'Neill reiterated his point.

Suskind backed him up all the way by saying that he (Suskind) expressed repeated disbelief at what O'Neill was telling him and finally O'Neill blurted out that phrase to get Suskind to stop expressing disbelief and accept what he was being made to say over and over!

Very different from backing down, isn't it?

[underpants]

24. I am ~100 pages into it and this is a very good summary

It is a narrative nonficton work so Suskind follows O'Neill from getting ready to retire to getting the first call from Dick (on old friend).

O'Neill is not born of wealth he was an Army brat who met his wife in high school in Alaska and they have been together since. He is a careet beaurocat with a Masters in Public Administration from Indiana U and "some graduate economics work".

He and Greenspan are old friends and their approach to getting to a solution vs. the W admins is the main cruxt of the book. O'Neill believes in bringing in many different perspectives and following his tried and true method of decision making: If you follow the process of asking questions and rechecking conclusions you eventually will get to the right and reasonable conclusion.

This is pragmatists vs. idealogues.

He and Greenspan wanted triggers to put tax cuts into action. He realized that Larry Lindsey (taking Robert Rubin's position) as a broker of economic ideas and discussions to inform the President of what was in the pipeline, what had been discussed, and so forth was ill placed. Lindsey was a supplyside taxcut advocate and not a broker.

W lets no one know what he thinks, no feedback on ideas. They are formulating policy according to what they THINK his policy is. You can easily read that W doesn't have any policies and is just holding meetings because that is what is expected.

I am at the point where Whitman is GUESSING at what the Kyoto/green house policy is and is about to have the door slammed on her (and O'Neill) when W pulls out of Kyoto.

This is not a very flattering look AT ALL of W. O'Neill to tell you the truth (he is all about the truth) seems to be (obviously) very intelligent and very practical, no extremes let's just work within certain parameters to get to a conclusion. Some might have a problem with those parameters (Greenies) but he is very middle ground really. He made Alcoa make environmental changes and addressed global warming in his notes on the '97 financial statements. Very interesting.

[young_at_heart]

26. W doesn't have any policies????

That fact alone should be a red flag , not just for liberals, but for almost everyone!

[JohnyCanuck]

27. Sure Dubya has policies.

They're whatever the Dickster and Karl tell him they are.

[underpants]

29. Basically that is the inference I am getting

O'Neill and Greenspan are slowing trying to get the idea of "triggers" into the tax cuts because the know that idea is not going to go over too well, at this point in the book.

Whitman is literally playing blindfolded and can't figure out what to say at the pre-Kyoto meeting in Trieste. She states that global warming is a problem (O'Neil agrees that SOMETHING needs to be done) and should be considered a serious problem.

Like I said, thus far in the book it is foreshadowing what is already known:that policy (broad policies) decision have already been made and that W had no part in making them. He is a speechreader (my take but it is hard to miss knowing the known knowns we know now) and the wall is going to come slamming down on Whitman, Powell, and O'Neill when all their work is ignored or directly disregarded by statements W is told to make. Rove and Hughes are slowing being introduced as the wordsmiths of policy Dick, Rummy (Wolf-Perle), and Condi are telling them to shape.

Without knowing what is to come you could read it as a novel maybe even a mystery and contains hints at what is to come.

[Beetwasher]

28. The Reason For No Feedback is Simple

The Chimp wasn't told by Cheney yet what he was supposed to think so he just keeps his mouth shut instead of opening it and removing all doubt that he's an ignoramus. I'm not joking either, I'm sure this is the reason.

You're right. He held meetings because that's what he was SUPPOSED to do. So he sat there like a dimwit, not comprehending a thing and having no thoughts or the curiosity to ask questions. The meetings were completely irrelevant and only for show. He was going through the motions. Policy was made at secret meetings and then a script was created to be acted out at the more "public" cabinet meetings.

[underpants]

31. You can't come to any other conclusion

And I am READING the damned thing.

I don't want to keep posting (takes a bit of time today huh?)everything I read but suffice it to say O'Neill just realized that he and Whitman and Powell were only brought on board for the appearance of moderates.

In the last 10 pages I've read he has just become aware that it was Cheney who drafted a letter from Hagel, Helms, and Roberts (Kansas) on global warming, completely changed policy, and W told Whitman "Oh I changed my mind on that".

See, as hinted earlier in the book, no one really knows what Cheney thinks. Even O'Neill who has known him for 20 some years at this point.

This is really damning and quite a bit spooky.
O'Neill assumptions about what govt. service is supposed to be about and the way govt. is supposed to operate (you know that the PResident is actually in charge) has vastly changed and it is only March 2001 in the book. This I believe is why it is subtitled "..and the education of Paul O'Neill", I thought that was a bit demeaning but he is learning how DC operates now ("kill or be killed" he is warned earlier) and the den of thieves he has fallen into.

[DemonFighterLives]

71. I don't anticipate buying the book

I really appreciate your running evaluation. :yourock:
Even with "Big O" back pedalling, there is a lot of splaining to do for the emperor without clothes.

[Tatiana]

72. Fascinating, fascinating info and analysis, underpants!

Thanks so much for taking the time to give us better insight into this novel. I'm definitely going to purchase it tomorrow.

[Say_What]

32. Bush: "get me my CHEESEBURGERS"

OMFG he's even worse than I thought. From the article:

..At that first meeting and many others, Bush asked no questions.

...Bush described meetingSharon...'We flew over the Palestinian camps. Looked real bad down there. I don't see much we can do over there at this point. I think it's time to pull out of that situation',''

..O'Neill asserts that with Bush unwilling or unable to read detailed briefing papers, policy was decided on and controlled by Vice President Dick Cheney, supported by political advisers Karl Rove and Karen Hughes and National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice -- a ``Praetorian Guard'' that surrounded the president and kept alternative viewpoints out.

...Cabinet discussions were usually pre-scripted with the outcome determined in advance. On one occasion when there was real discussion on tax policy, Bush quickly became ``befuddled,'' according to O'Neill.

``If the president didn't connect in the first minute or two, it was a lost cause,'' he said.

[young_at_heart]

33. Bush doesn't read briefing papers???

I find myself remembering my outrage at him sitting in the classroom for 1/2 hr. on 9/11 and wondering why he would do such a thing? "They" didn't want him involved in any briefing, I guess!

[Jawja]

36. Yes and this

revelation makes me wonder out loud:

If * doesn't read briefing papers, then he never read any material related to warnings of Al Q'ueda and using planes as missles into American financial and historical targets.

But others read them and others possibly made the decision to hmmm, let it happen? Others such as Cheney?

Just wondering.


on edit: spelling

[underpants]

37. It's more a refudiation of this "Strong leadership" crap

He is a puppet.

[cthrumatrix]

44. It's amazing how the press "leaves that issue alone"...do they read?

[PaDUer]

62. Ya, he's a puppet..

mommy and daddy are so PROUD!!--sick!

[crissy71]

35. Lets deliver some cheeseburgers to the WH!

It's our patriotic duty!

[Say_What]

47. Sign me up!! Remember when Elian was returned to his father

and everyone sent flowers to Janet Reno? I think sending happy meals to SmirkBoy is a great idea!!

:yourock:

[crissy71]

49. OK so how do we get the burgers past the goon squad?

Definitely need some press (Democracy Now?) to capture the event on film..

just throwing out some ideas...

[Say_What]

64. How about gift certificates to Burger King?? Cheesburger key chains??

But you're right, we need press. :-)

Man, this guy looks like dog shit.

[alfredo]

39. Similar details at Yahoo news.

Not as much text, but damning anyway.
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&u=nm/bush_oneill_portrait_dc

don't forget to vote on the article.

[Danieljay]

45. this is getting good...

that yahoo article is grrrreat! I imagine the talk shows are going nuts, though I don't listen. Watch them squirm!

[centrist]

41. Any one know anything on this?

Say this the other day. Haven't heard anything substatial about it yet.



Laurie Mylroie sent out an email about Paul O'Neill's appearance on 60 Minutes last night; she notes what appears to be a major error in Ron Suskind's book, which casts doubt on the credibility of both Suskind and O'Neill. Here is the key portion of Mylroie's email:

"In his appearance this evening on '60 Minutes,' Ron Suskind, author of The Price of Loyalty, based to a large extent on information from former Secretary of the Treasury Paul O'Neill, made an astonishing, very serious misstatement.

"Suskind claimed he has documents showing that preparations for the Iraq war were well underway before 9-11. He cited--and even showed--what he said was a Pentagon document, entitled, 'Foreign Suitors for Iraq Oilfield Contracts.' He claimed the document was about planning for post-war Iraq oil (CBS's promotional story also contained that claim): http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/01/09/60minutes/printable592330.shtml

"But that is not a Pentagon document. It's from the Vice-President's Office. It was part of the Energy Project that was the focus of Dick Cheney's attention before the 9/11 strikes.

"And the document has nothing to do with post-war Iraq. It was part of a study of global oil supplies. Judicial Watch obtained it in a law suit and posted it, along with related documents, on its website at: http://www.judicialwatch.org/071703.c_.shtml Indeed, when this story first broke yesterday, the Drudge Report had the Judicial Watch document linked (no one at CBS News saw that, so they could correct the error, when the show aired?)"

What Mylroie says about the "Foreign Suitors" document is correct. The Judicial Watch link still works as of this morning, and as you can easily see, the document, dated March 5, 2001, has nothing to do with post-war planning. It is merely a list of existing and proposed "Iraqi Oil & Gas Projects" as of that date. And it includes projects in Iraq by countries that obviously would not have been part of any "post-war" plans of the Bush administration, such as, for example, Vietnam.

So Suskind (and apparently O'Neill) misrepresented this document, which appears to be a significant part of their case, given that Suskind displayed in on 60 Minutes. It would not be possible for anyone operating in good faith to represent the document as Suskind did.

But the truth is even worse than Mylroie pointed out in her email. The CBS promo linked to above says that this document "includes a map of potential areas for exploration. 'It talks about contractors around the world from, you know, 30-40 countries. And which ones have what intentions,' says Suskind. 'On oil in Iraq.'"

True enough; there is a "map of potential areas for exploration" in Iraq here. But what Paul O'Neill and Ron Suskind don't tell you is that the very same set of documents that contain the Iraq map and the list of Iraqi oil projects contain the same maps and similar lists of projects for the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia! When documents are produced in litigation (in this case, the Judicial Watch lawsuit relating to Cheney's energy task force), they are numbered sequentially. The two-page "Iraqi Oil Suitors" document that Suskind breathlessly touts is numbered DOC044-0006 through DOC044-0007. The Iraq oil map comes right before the list of Iraqi projects; it is numbered DOC044-0005.

DOC044-0001 is a map of oil fields in the United Arab Emirates. DOC044-0002 is a list of oil and gas development projects then going on in the United Arab Emirates. DOC044-0003 is a map of oil fields in Saudi Arabia. DOC044-0004 is a list of oil and gas projects in Saudi Arabia. So the "smoking gun" documents that Suskind and O'Neill claim prove that the administration was planning to invade Iraq in March 2001 are part of a package that includes identical documents relating to the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia. Does Paul O'Neill claim the administration was planning on invading them, too? Or, as Mylroie says, was this merely part of the administration's analysis of sources of energy in the 21st century?

There is only one possible conclusion: Paul O'Neill and Ron Suskind are attempting to perpetrate a massive hoax on the American people.

[underpants]

42. YEah it wasn't from the Pentagon it came directly from the White House

Where the pre-war planning was initiated and for the most part done. It was a coordinated effort to bribe nations that had better sense than to sign onto an illegal war (but France and Germany do have troops in the actual war on terror-Afghanistan) that had no end in sight.


They seemed to know (and it is playing out this way) that they didn't need to send troops to get in on post war booty. They have the expertise and contacts that make them the smartest choice (especially if you are concerned about conflict of interest issues) to give the Iraqi people access to their oil, that is the purpose of this right?

Just like with the spy plane, dealings with the UN, North Korea the puppet is getting played.*

* This is a measure of being nice and giving W credit for actually being in control which any reasonable person knows that he isn't. The O'Neill book is just concrete proof of what we all knew anyway.

[Danieljay]

48. your conclusion is its a massive hoax?

I doubt that. Please explain Why he would do this? Getting even? He'd ruin his reputation. Massive hoax to eventually be discovered and ultimately help Bush? no way.. the administration wouldn't even want the PERCEPTION of scandal. Remember, Americans read headlines and rarely follow up stories. How many times did headlines accuse Clinton of wrongdoing, only to be proved wrong and cleared months or years later in a 1 paragraph story on the back page.

[Stephanie]

54. don't worry - already debunked. This is spin from a RW website

They're spamming this all over. It's garbage.

[reprobate]

50. Some people go to such lengths to defend the traitors in power.

One must wonder at their motives. Particularly those with single digit experience here.

This email seems to be a hatchet job on the book, and we all know where it must have originated (can you say KKKarl?)

The one thing the book makes absolutly clear is that no matter who sits in the oval office, it's Cheney who is in charge. He's even the one who fired O'niel.

Or as KKKarl says: Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.

[PaDUer]

63. That's right...

and the puppet's too stupid to know any better..also pickles..wonder what pops and mama think about their prize?--pops in on it?--ooppsss..guess they told him don't worry, have a ball on the expense of the people because they don't matter. My, how they've trained their sons!

[Jeff in Cincinnati]

51. My God, You're A Genius!

You pulled one page from 19,000 pages of documents and managed to prove a "massive hoax" being perpetrated on the American people. You've managed to ignore volumes of corroborating evidence, including statements by (among other people) Colin Powell and Paul Wolfowitz, to come to the most pro-Administration conclusion imaginable.

So what's the RNC paying these days, and can I send you my resume?

[PennyLane]

75. Probably Pays Pretty

:evilgrin:

[RememberTheCoup]

57. This has been posted on DU several times over the past couple days.

With a modest donation (say $5) to DU, you will have the ability to use the Search feature. Search on the key word "hoax" and limit the search to the past couple of days. You will find several threads on this topic. I think that they will provide all the information you need. As others have informed you, this has been pretty well debunked, but don't take our word for it. Read and learn for yourself. Welcome to DU!
:hi:

[goforit]

59. Centrist?......Just to let you know I just bought the book!!!

And I'm even more excited to read it now that you bring
a challange from "Laurie".

And I will be the judge, not Laurie Myroie.

[ignatius]

68. One HUGE difference, we didn't invade Saudi Arabia or the UAE..

yet anyway.

But I am so glad you mentioned Cheney's energy meetings.

It is time for our beloved pResidnt to demand their release and to demand Novak give up the name of the traitor in the WH.


After all, he is the all powerful,all knowing Oz.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

69. centrist you posted this exact thing verbadum on another thread

what's the RNC paying these days?

[Skittles]

46. our "president" is a lazy, incompetent piece of shit

O'Neil is simply verifying what we have known all along - what I have known since Dubya was my governor.

[ramapo]

65. Bush is so successful at it

And so many love it...scary stuff indeed

[goforit]

60. New title: "The Price of Loyalty and the Price of Dizloyalty"

LOL!!!

O'Niel being threatenned is his Price of Dizloyalty.
And he is now one dizzzzzzzzy fella!