It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

POLITICS: In Secretly Taped Conversations, Glimpses of the Future President (Bush)

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 19 2005 @ 09:37 PM
link   
The New York Times is reporting that Doug Wead, author and former aide to Bush Sr., has disclosed the existence of audio tapes that were secretly recorded during conversations with George W. Bush.

These conversations reportedly took place during Bush's campaign for reelection as Governor of Texas, and during his first campaign for President of the United States.

Wead claims the tapes were used as a non-credited reference source for his new book The Raising of a President. According to the article, the disclosure of the existence of the tapes was made to defend the accuracy of a passage in this book.
 



www.ny times.com

WASHINGTON, Feb. 19 - As George W. Bush was first moving onto the national political stage, he often turned for advice to an old friend who secretly taped some of their private conversations, creating a rare record of the future president as a politician and a personality.

In the last several weeks, that friend, Doug Wead, an author and former aide to Mr. Bush's father, disclosed the tapes' existence to a reporter and played about a dozen of them.

Variously earnest, confident or prickly in those conversations, Mr. Bush weighs the political risks and benefits of his religious faith, discusses campaign strategy and comments on rivals. John McCain "will wear thin," he predicted. John Ashcroft, he confided, would be a "very good Supreme Court pick" or a "fabulous" vice president. And in exchanges about his handling of questions from the news media about his past, Mr. Bush appears to have acknowledged trying marijuana.


Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


The tapes reportedly offer several insights into the thinking of the soon-to-be president on a variety of topics, including his influence on Texas politics, his opinions of opponent Al Gore and sensitive political “hot button” issues. Also discussed were questions surrounding allegations of Bush's use of marijuana and coc aine.

According to the New York Times, the White House has not disputed the authenticity of the tapes or responded to their contents.

Aside from the content of the tapes, the question of the propriety of publishing details of private conversations that were secretly recorded is likely to stir controversy.

[edit on 19-2-2005 by John bull 1]




posted on Feb, 20 2005 @ 02:24 AM
link   
Finally, we've patiently been waiting for a screw-up. During re-election there weren't any microphone problems in which Bush was cussing, but now...ahh sweet vindication. This will be sweet.
Mr. Wead said. "If I was on the telephone with Churchill or Gandhi, I would tape record them too."

Mr. Wead sounds a little delusional.


Wow, I wanted this to be bad but now I have a new respect for Bush. Good job, mr. prez. Until the other parts are released,

[edit on 20-2-2005 by Caldron of Hate]

[edit on 20-2-2005 by Caldron of Hate]



posted on Feb, 20 2005 @ 05:54 AM
link   
I can't help thinking that we will hear from people soon who wish these tapes had a more sinister tone, or they may just claim that excluded tapes did.
The biggest fault I can see in the whole thing is that he didn't ruffle the feathers of Christian conservatives more. That would have been stupid and probably unnecessary, it's just that I personally loathe those hate mongers and their phoney faith.
That's why I'll never be president- I'd refuse to meet with James Dobson and when asked why I'd publically say that I think he's going to hell. Then I'd invite the youth pastor from my old church to come talk to me instead.
Anyway, at least Bush wouldn't stoop and promise to legislate hate for them. I'm don't think he's perfect on the issue, but I realize how much worse it could be if Bush didn't have a bit of a spine when dealing with "his base". If the psuedo-religious hatemongers had their way that homosexuality would be grounds to lose your health insurance and have your kids taken under protective custody.



posted on Feb, 20 2005 @ 06:22 AM
link   
Fascinating stuff, but nothing earthshattering.

I do however find it totally out of line that someone would secretly tape a private converstion and then use it years later without the second persons consent. Even if this was done in a State where it is legal to tape your conversations with another without their knowledge. In those States, the use of such material should at least be restricted to matters of personal safety, not for personal gain.



posted on Feb, 20 2005 @ 08:02 AM
link   
it depends if Bush knew about the recordings at the timel If he did, there is nothing he can do about it.

But it is unethical to release them after the fact because it might contain some dirt.. tho when have ethics ever stood in the way of the Bush administration



posted on Feb, 20 2005 @ 11:03 AM
link   
I don't believe this is anything more than a public relations deal......."secret tapes" and "candid conversation." Ohhhh, but the info is basically what he says anyway!


"It's me versus the world," he told Mr. Wead. "The good news is, the world is on my side. Or more than half of it."


This quote smacks of 20/20 hindsight, but I'll refrain from taking that route......


"I'm going to tell them the five turning points in my life," he said. "Accepting Christ. Marrying my wife. Having children. Running for governor. And listening to my mother."


For a candid conversation, this is highly dubious, it completely smacks of P.R.

Just another ploy by Damage Control, Inc to flood the media with references to the president that don't mention his faults........I'm not buying it for a second.........



posted on Feb, 20 2005 @ 11:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by MemoryShock

Just another ploy by Damage Control, Inc to flood the media with references to the president that don't mention his faults........I'm not buying it for a second.........



Occurs they are going to make sure that damage control steps in, we can not have our lord and saviour god send mar by any bad things, that is why we have all records gone.


I bet the damage control crew is working day and night to get the media into drilling the masses with the nices part of the tapes versus the bad ones.

But you know what I bet is going to be more to these tapes coming.


It's like me saying "I am going to rule the world" but " Jesus will guide my step with Gods approval"



[edit on 20-2-2005 by marg6043]



posted on Feb, 20 2005 @ 11:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by marg6043
I bet the damage control crew is working day and night to get the media into drilling the masses with the nices part of the tapes versus the bad ones.


But that's the thing about it......the bad aspects of the released tapes have nothing to do with anything........so he tried weed and coc aine.....big whoop.



It's like me saying "I am going to rule the world" but " Jesus will guide my step with Gods approval"


Pretty much....nice for him to have a fallback that is inaccessible....



posted on Feb, 20 2005 @ 12:30 PM
link   

"Steve Forbes is going to hear this message from me. I will do nothing for him if he does to me what he did to Dole. Period. There is going to be a consequence. He is not dealing with the average, you know, 'Oh gosh, let's all get together after it's over.' I will promise you, I will not help him. I don't care."


i find this admission of nepotism and backroom treachery more incriminating than admitting to smoking pot.
think, if bush lived in a 'three strikes' state, he might have done some hard time. saying, 'i don't want kids to try it', does nothing for the MASSIVE scale of injustice perpetrated on regular joes who like to toke.
if he was charged with white collar crimes, nothing would happen. all responsibility would be diffused through a filter of fingers pointing at everything else.

i agree that this is just propoganda. damage control for many of the grounded rumours, or 'float sewage' as bush phrased it, that is out there regarding bush.
he admits he is a sinner. he admits 'wild behaviour'. he admits doing drugs. he is repentent!


Asked about consequences, Mr. Wead said, "I'll always be friendly toward him."


there you go.



posted on Feb, 20 2005 @ 02:05 PM
link   
You know, now I actually respect Bush a little more. I don't care who he liked, and who he didn't like. But, in learning that he's not so beholding to the evangelicals as they think, and his feelings on the Gay issue, I feel much better. It at least shows me that he's rational and clearheaded, and if not even pragmatic.

Consider me relieved.

Otherwise, I wonder if there will be an evangelical backlash now, considering they did totally get hoodwinked for votes...and won't get anything in return.



posted on Feb, 20 2005 @ 02:11 PM
link   
The first involves Ashcroft:


John Ashcroft, he confided, would be a "very good Supreme Court pick" or a "fabulous" vice president.


What the hell was he thinking? Can you imagine this guy on the Court? At any rate this comment is something to keep in mind if Rehnquist decides to step down. There is no way this man should ever be allowed to be sit on Supreme Court.

The other involves the extreme right's view on homosexuals:


Early on, though, Mr. Bush appeared most worried that Christian conservatives would object to his determination not to criticize gay people. "I think he wants me to attack homosexuals," Mr. Bush said after meeting James Robison, a prominent evangelical minister in Texas.

But Mr. Bush said he did not intend to change his position. He said he told Mr. Robison: "Look, James, I got to tell you two things right off the bat. One, I'm not going to kick gays, because I'm a sinner. How can I differentiate sin?"

Later, he read aloud an aide's report from a convention of the Christian Coalition, a conservative political group: "This crowd uses gays as the enemy. It's hard to distinguish between fear of the homosexual political agenda and fear of homosexuality, however."

"This is an issue I have been trying to downplay," Mr. Bush said. "I think it is bad for Republicans to be kicking gays."

Told that one conservative supporter was saying Mr. Bush had pledged not to hire gay people, Mr. Bush said sharply: "No, what I said was, I wouldn't fire gays."

emphasis added


While I don't agree with Bush's agenda to forbid gay marriage - I have to give the man some credit for taking note that there are many within the Republican party who despise gays and seek to do harm.

B.






[edit on 2/20/05 by Bleys]



posted on Feb, 20 2005 @ 02:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by brimstone735
Otherwise, I wonder if there will be an evangelical backlash now, considering they did totally get hoodwinked for votes...and won't get anything in return.


Question if you were president- Would you rather suffer backlash from a christian organization that represents a small part of the population for religious differences...........

***********or**********

Would you rather suffer backlash from a considerable part of the population for your role in a war that has suffered much criticism and negative consequence?



Imo, caring about Bush's religious inclination at this stage in the game is a gross incompetance.



posted on Feb, 20 2005 @ 02:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by MemoryShock
[Imo, caring about Bush's religious inclination at this stage in the game is a gross incompetance.


This does nothing to dampen the criticism of the war, nor divert attention. It only results in less voices in the choir of support for Bush.

And, considering the future of the Republican party will eventually ead to some kind of split between the Religious Right and the Moderates, the smallest backlash creates tidal waves. In a single day, he pissed off the Moderates and the Religious Right, and unless he plans on becoming a Democrat tomorrow, that's not exactly the greatest position to be in...especially if you have 4 years left of having to deal with them.

The most revealing part about the artical, was the fact that Weed was asked to leave the White House, because of Bush's moderate stance on Homosexuals. Weed denounced the Administration to the Religious Right, which lead him to be fired.

This just supports my theory of an oncoming Republican Civil War. Arlen Spector was the opening salvo, this is round two.



posted on Feb, 20 2005 @ 02:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by MemoryShock

Originally posted by brimstone735
Otherwise, I wonder if there will be an evangelical backlash now, considering they did totally get hoodwinked for votes...and won't get anything in return.


Question if you were president- Would you rather suffer backlash from a christian organization that represents a small part of the population for religious differences...........

***********or**********

Would you rather suffer backlash from a considerable part of the population for your role in a war that has suffered much criticism and negative consequence?



Imo, caring about Bush's religious inclination at this stage in the game is a gross incompetance.



I don't think you guys understand the demographic situation in america.

1)Conservative christians are not a small group of americans. Poll after poll has consistently shown that the US population is far more conservative, when it comes to social issues, than the population of europe. Americans who think that liberalism is common are... how do I put this... people who just hang around with a small group of young urban adults.

2)Conservative christians shouldn't be confused with the specific people bush was talking about. He was talking about people who want to attack gays... not the people who want to prevent gays from making sweeping social changes in the US.

3) It would be wrong to say that Bush 'hoodwinked' the conservative christian population, because he has effectively prevented the legalization of gay marriage in the US. He may have 'hoodwinked' some of the virulent anti-gay groups... but most of the people who voted for him did so because they thought he would stick to traditional american values... which he has.

Ultimately, it's misinformed to think of the majority of americans who voted for Bush as angry gay bashers. Bush won because he was seen as someone who could defend american values against manipulation by cultural elites. Most of the people who voted for him did not think he would destroy gays.



posted on Feb, 20 2005 @ 03:17 PM
link   
I myself have also said some negative things about the man,...
But realistically it's selfish or unjust to blame one person for the actions of millions/billions... He's just as human as the rest of us.. just as uninformed as us... searching for the same truths, sure he may be privy to a vast amount of intelligence.. but honestly how could one make up their mind with so many truths.
I now sympathize (sp?) with the man, he has quite a hard job... the world with or without him is flying out of control and he makes himself respondsible for everything (essentially thinking he can fix everything)... You have to remember he's a recovered alcoholic.. that's a VERY hard thing to overcome and I commend him, but understanding the power that helped him quit is a difficult thing, he attributes it to God (faithbased programs) yet also realizes that it's physical himself who quit... But you cannot ride two horses at once...
Not to mention I'm sure that Bush was aware he COULD have been recorded... after-all whose family's right in there with the CIA? .. lol



posted on Feb, 20 2005 @ 03:30 PM
link   
Nothing of much importance. It is widely known he used drugs.

There is nothing secretive or earthshattering here.

Probably the reason the White House didnt dispute any of the contents.

I wonder what the point to this tape was. It certainly doesnt hurt him.

Was it meant to help him? So we could hear all about his religious convictions?



posted on Feb, 20 2005 @ 03:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by billybob
i find this admission of nepotism and backroom treachery more incriminating than admitting to smoking pot.
think, if bush lived in a 'three strikes' state, he might have done some hard time.

Your 3 strikes have to be felonies and I'm almost certain that one of them has to be violent. I'm not saying that nobody in this administration doesn't belong in jail (may I suggest Dick Cheney first?) but not for the reasons you are implying. How many times do I have to remind the mudslingers to only throw rocks? Why worry about the little things when there are real problems with the administration?



saying, 'i don't want kids to try it', does nothing for the MASSIVE scale of injustice perpetrated on regular joes who like to toke.

You realize that 90% of the time nothing happens to you if you just tell the cop the truth and hand over your bag right? And unlike politicians, we average joes don't get our careers run through a meat grinder just because we smoked once.



posted on Feb, 20 2005 @ 03:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by onlyinmydreams
Americans who think that liberalism is common are... how do I put this... people who just hang around with a small group of young urban adults.



I'm sorry, but that's wishful thinking. You won, but that had absolutely nothing to with 50 million Christians voting for a Conservative Social Agenda, it had everything to do with people being afraid of terrorists, and sticking with their war time leader. To deny this fact is not only short sighted, but arrogance in its purest, most distilled form.

I in no way feel bad for them. On the contrary, I think that this is a wonderful development, because true believers always become disillusioned when their leaders lie to them, and then never vote again in response.

Church attendance has been at a steady decline since 1955. People are giving less money. New generations of children don't feel the same way on conservative issues. The Faith is faced with some pretty dire consequences if they refuse to change with the times.

The electoral college stayed roughly the same. Bush won because of the 4 million Evangelical turn out. Without that turn out, and you'd be following President Kerry around. The new rise of American Conservatism is merely the invention conservative pundits and talking points issued by the GOP.
If you wanna believe it, more power to you, but you're in for a nasty shock come 2008.

I'm not trying to trick you, but ask yourself one one question. If the majority of the country agreed with you on social issues, why does Bush have to make his annual "March of Life PHONE CALL, instead of actually attending in person?

He can't be seen in public with them.

Why didn't he proclaim the virtues of his pro life stance and his "intent" to nominate pro life candidates to the Supremem Court? He jumped around the issue. And why exactly does this president have to use Code Words, instead of coming flat out and talking about his faith to the faithful? I just think that's a little funny myself. But, let's run down the list...

Is there an amendment banning gay marriage? No.
Has Abortion been banned? No.
Is Jesus in public schools? No.
Is creationism being taught? No.

Is euthanasia still practiced? Yes.
Are sex abuse scandals still plagueing the Catholic Church? Yes.
Are violence and Sex still on television? Yes.

So, it leads me to believe that the core issues that concern Christian Voters have been casually dismissed and cast aside in favor of Populism. Populism that is inherently moderate and pretty much against the agenda of the church itself.

Sure, you got some nice faith based initiatives, but what else? Even now, conservative power is waining. Every day, Bush has to reach over the aisle more and more for support. Now he has choice, Social Security Reform OR Christian Social issues?

Which does he want his legacy to be?

In conclusion: If feverishly supporting a president and a political party, AND getting absolutely nothing in return isn't being hoodwinked, what is?

People actually who support Bush, because he is somehow supposed to push their Christian Social agenda, are actually nothing more than nieve marks for themselves, who fundementally misunderstand the application and usuage of power, and the consequences that result. The corruption that inherently follows from having to juggling different wants and needs to retain said power.



posted on Feb, 20 2005 @ 06:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Vagabond
How many times do I have to remind the mudslingers to only throw rocks? Why worry about the little things when there are real problems with the administration?


they got capone on income tax. there are no little things when it comes to corrupt warmongering delusions of grandeur zealots.


Originally posted by The Vagabond
You realize that 90% of the time nothing happens to you if you just tell the cop the truth and hand over your bag right? And unlike politicians, we average joes don't get our careers run through a meat grinder just because we smoked once.


it's illegal. it shouldn't be.
can't cross a border if you've got drug charges. non-citizen status for you.
i met this 22 yr. old kid in nashville. he sold pot. nice guy. we talking about a recent rash of extreme violence in the neighborhood.
an innocent farmer kid, 21 yrs old, aspiring songwriter, drove into a parking lot at 9:30 in the morning. two thugs and an off duty cop, no less, were robbing hooters.
of, course, there was only fourteen dollars in the till, because they make deposits every night.
they shot the manager in the legs.
the kid never got out of his pick-up. he turned around and tried to drive away. one thug runs out and shoots him from like, a hundred and fifty yards. i saw the bullet holes in the garbage bin. big holes. dead kid. injured passenger.
the 22 yr old tells me, 'gotta have a gun.'. pulls out a .22, seemingly from nowhere. tiny. says it's only good for close range, but the spiralling bullets do more damage at that range. says he'd have to kill a cop if he got pulled over and he had pot. why? because, if you go to jail just ONCE, you are a lost soul. new boyfriend, anyone? try and get a life when you get out?
meanwhile, at the airport, customs agents are taking huge bribes to look the other way. $100, 000 to go get a coffee, anyone?
that's the state of your 'justice system'.



posted on Feb, 20 2005 @ 08:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by brimstone735

This does nothing to dampen the criticism of the war, nor divert attention. It only results in less voices in the choir of support for Bush.


I disagree. When added to the rest of the content found in "these secret tapes," you have a lot of people who are going to focus on these topics. Any amount of time that passes with no actual realization of any disgruntlement over the Bush Aministrations activities abroad fosters the "out of sight out of mind" mentality, especially considering the attention-deficit-disorder personalities in america.

Also, every source I have come across with regards to this issue refers to it as secret and candid.........whether or not that is true is immaterial for this point. By viewing these tapes as his real words in private is to have america infer that, in his personal conversations Bush hops around from topic to topic expressing his concern for the issues of a population that doesn't fit in his tax bracket. This carries over into the public reaction towards his more official statements......you have a continuity of agreement/disagreement on ideology, not facts. The facts of the past four years are what all the huff and puff is about. It's like the entertainment industry........get worried about broad social issues that don't necassarily effect their personal lives.......


"I'm going to tell them the five turning points in my life," he said. "Accepting Christ. Marrying my wife. Having children. Running for governor. And listening to my mother."


The five turning points in his life.........and I'm supposed to believe that inheriting a billion dollars isn't even a blip on the radar? That statement right there strongly suggests that his comments are custom-tailored for the majority of people........can't talk about how rich he is because most people aren't rich.


Originally posted by brimstone 735Is there an amendment banning gay marriage? No.
Has Abortion been banned? No.
Is Jesus in public schools? No.
Is creationism being taught? No.

Is euthanasia still practiced? Yes.
Are sex abuse scandals still plagueing the Catholic Church? Yes.
Are violence and Sex still on television? Yes.


This is a very good point and actually supports my thoughts regardless of my failure to express them coherently



[edit on 20-2-2005 by MemoryShock]




top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join