Jackson Free Press

Keith Olbermann takes POTUS to task for a phrase uttered in anger (and a strawman argument made in the process) when Bush was confronted with a quote by Colin Powell at his recent Rose Garden press conference. (I haven't seen the whole press conference...it must have been a doozie.) This is important stuff:

Previous Comments

ID

107745

Comment

That was scary and unnerving. I can't imagine living in a republic that was founded on the ideal of freedom and having it stripped away by someone who is determined to be right and doesn't want to hear otherwise. What's next? Frontal lobotomies for dissenters? Lord, help us.

Author

LatashaWillis

Date

2006-10-04T10:27:48-06:00

ID

107746

Comment

I seem to remember Lincoln shutting down some newspapers. Having said that, I think part of Bush's problem is he doesn't hear enough opposing viewpoints. Rove discourages dissent. I've read what former members of Reagan's cabinet had to say when they served and they all said Reagan wanted to hear everything. Once the policy was established or decision was made, then he expected everyone to abide by it, but in a discussion, he wanted to hear other views as well. Hmm....and he was able to actually have Democrats help him pass some of his legislation. Might be a lesson in that.

Author

Kingfish

Date

2006-10-04T11:45:58-06:00

ID

107747

Comment

Not only Lincoln, but this has come up a few different times: Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798 Sedition Act of 1918 There was also a Sedition Act of 1861 which is surprisingly difficult to link to on the Internets. I can't seem to find the right pipe. ;-) Reagan may, in fact, not be the brightest shining example of a president who listened well to others, but your point is taken. I think perhaps the most discouraging things that Bush has said have been in this arena...it suggests a fundamental lack of understanding about the nature of our republic and the extraordinary experiement that it represents in terms of our Constitutional freedoms. To suggest, as Bush did, that mild criticism from Colin Powell is something that shouldn't be "thought" is symbolic, certain, but it's also extremely unnerving. No U.S. president should be so at a loss for eloquence, and so ignorant of history.

Author

Todd Stauffer

Date

2006-10-04T22:10:18-06:00

ID

107748

Comment

Exactly itodd. Reagan may not have listened but he encouraged the discussion of different points of view. Weinberger, Buchanan, Schultz and others have all said that was the case. Did Reagan ever strike you as someone who was scared or uncomfortable with hearing another point of view? Like I said, that might have been part of the reason he could use diplomacy with his enemies like Gorby and every now and then get Democrats on board for legislation. You are right about Bush in that respect. What turned me against him, or started to, was when that general stated how many troops we really needed and was sacked. good points about the sedition acts. I read Gore Vidal's Hollywood and some of those arrests were an eye opener. My personal favorite was the guy who made a movie about the American Revolution and was thrown in jail for sedition cuz it was anti British.

Author

Kingfish

Date

2006-10-04T23:56:57-06:00