English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

I've seen this rumor more than once, but it seems like libel, especially because as a professing believer in God it's hard to readily accept that Mr. Bush would use such language. If it's true, does anyone have a link to a video clip, etc. to prove it? What was the context of his supposed remark?

2006-08-07 18:45:23 · 11 answers · asked by .Yeshua Fanatik Prophetik. 1 in Politics & Government Government

11 answers

I do not see much, if any, proof that he utter these infamous words. They are 'Just words'...

Actions speak louder than words. He took an oath to defend the U.S. Constitution which he has failed to do. Sadly, his actions tell a more grim tale...

2006-08-07 20:16:32 · answer #1 · answered by Todd Maz 4 · 1 1

There was a scene in Law and Order where an author was in trial for murder. People were arguing that he shouldn't be killed because he was so gifted. In a conversation with his boss, McCoy said that the defendent could certainly write. He asked his boss what they should do.
Boss: You want the easy or the hard answer?
McCoy: The easy.
Boss: Its just a bunch of words.
McCoy: And the hard?
Boss, pointing at the Constitution: So is that.


I doubt its true, but I just had to share that bit of trivia.

2006-08-07 19:12:41 · answer #2 · answered by riven3187 3 · 0 0

It's rumored that he said it during a confrence with Republicans when some challenged the Patriot act, but mind you the sources remain "unamed". At most it was an emotional statement, and at the least it wasn't said at all.

In addition 'PeachTree' said "Im not surprised did he rip up a copy too and throw it at the american people and say take that hippie and now were gonna illegally tap your phone and track your every move. "

Yes PeachTree. That's exactly what he said. Because he and everyone is very concerned about conversations of how "pot should be legalized".

2006-08-07 18:54:31 · answer #3 · answered by mavs4701 1 · 0 1

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.”

And, to the Bush Administration, the Constitution of the United States is little more than toilet paper stained from all the **** that this group of power-mad despots have dumped on the freedoms that “goddamned piece of paper” used to guarantee.

Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, while still White House counsel, wrote that the “Constitution is an outdated document.”

Put aside, for a moment, political affiliation or personal beliefs. It doesn’t matter if you are a Democrat, Republican or Independent. It doesn’t matter if you support the invasion or Iraq or not. Despite our differences, the Constitution has stood for two centuries as the defining document of our government, the final source to determine – in the end – if something is legal or right.

Every federal official – including the President – who takes an oath of office swears to “uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States."

Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia says he cringes when someone calls the Constitution a “living document.”

“"Oh, how I hate the phrase we have—a 'living document,’” Scalia says. “We now have a Constitution that means whatever we want it to mean. The Constitution is not a living organism, for Pete's sake.”

As a judge, Scalia says, “I don't have to prove that the Constitution is perfect; I just have to prove that it's better than anything else.”

President Bush has proposed seven amendments to the Constitution over the last five years, including a controversial amendment to define marriage as a “union between a man and woman.” Members of Congress have proposed some 11,000 amendments over the last decade, ranging from repeal of the right to bear arms to a Constitutional ban on abortion

2006-08-07 18:56:10 · answer #4 · answered by tough as hell 3 · 4 2

Im not surprised did he rip up a copy too and throw it at the american people and say take that hippie and now were gonna illegally tap your phone and track your every move.

2006-08-07 18:53:05 · answer #5 · answered by PeaceTree 3 · 0 0

He said or he did not say , he acts as if the constitution and even the international law are only pieces of paper..

2006-08-07 19:07:53 · answer #6 · answered by Nilehawk 3 · 1 1

No, it's not true, and the website that originally posted it had to take it down, because apparently their sources were not reliable. They got the story from someone who wasn't even there...it was like a third party source, so there's no telling what the president really said.
The capitolhillblue site is the one that originally posted it.

And it looks like my impersonator has struck again (I now have four, it's pretty confusing. But if you look at each of the profiles, I've been here nearly four months longer than they have.)

2006-08-07 19:05:00 · answer #7 · answered by The_Cricket: Thinking Pink! 7 · 0 5

This is absolutely NOT TRUE.
He does not use that language and he respects the Constitution.

2006-08-07 19:22:27 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

I'm confident it's libel.

2006-08-07 18:48:54 · answer #9 · answered by Brad 2 · 1 0

More liberal lies, they just can't get over loosing.

2006-08-07 19:19:19 · answer #10 · answered by hexa 6 · 0 2

fedest.com, questions and answers