BOOKS

Goodnight and Good Sales

A Bush-mocking parody of a popular kids' book catches fire.

By Brian No | Newsweek Web Exclusive
Jul 30, 2008 | Updated: 2:47  p.m. ET Jul 30, 2008

« Return to Article

Discuss

Member Comments

  • Posted By: opinioned-1 @ 08/02/2008 5:40:05 PM

    A war criminal, liar, destroyer of our constitution, that should have been impeached in his second year. Then maybe, we could have stopped some of the disrespect, secrecy and devious attempts of his at destroying my country. Sadly his lap dogs had no guts or he would have been gone long ago.

    • Posted By: Stephen.mellan @ 08/04/2008 10:39:22 AM

      Your a sad person. If you truely felt this way you should have acted on your beliefs. You could have organized others that feel like you and sought a congressional inquiry. Its to bad you lack the courage of your convicitions thank god my Commander and Chief didn't.

      • Posted By: thrasher32 @ 08/04/2008 11:08:01 AM

        Maybe we didn't wanna be shipped off to Guantanamo Bay for voicing our opinions....

        • Posted By: Skypoint @ 08/09/2008 4:20:53 PM

          Oh.... you mean like the 14 guys "who voiced their opinions" in New York on 9/11. Right.... got it.

          • Posted By: ghostmasseur @ 08/11/2008 7:31:10 AM

            Sorry Skypoint but your analogy is not a valid one.

            There are people in Guantanamo who did not engage in any action. This administration has an abysmal track record on human rights. Now I think that thrasher is wrong in his comment (even though it is probably sarcasm) but the idea that critics of this admin might be subject to more illegal wiretaps is a valid concern.

            • Posted By: Skypoint @ 08/11/2008 8:34:55 AM

              Ghost, you are correct in that there are some at Guantanamo who did not engage in any action. However, they are there because they pose a serious threat. From a NY Times interview: "a large number of the 610 detainees had not been cooperative with interrogators. At least 50 were ''ardent jihadists and have no qualms about telling you that if they got out, they would go and kill more Americans.''

              A tough situation... not a simple process to weed out the non-violent detainees. However, over the past 5 years, somewhere around 500 detainees have been released, and about 3 percent have been positively identified as having engaged in violence again. With that relative low number, Gitmo is releasing most of the non-serious threats. In the end, Guantanamo isn't perfect, not by a long shot. But IMO, if keeping it (as well as wiretaps) means even remotely preventing another 9/11, I'm all for it.

              • Posted By: ghostmasseur @ 08/11/2008 11:03:24 AM

                Skypoint,

                Sorry, but just because the CIA and the Admin says that they pose a threat does not mean that that is correct. I do not trust either source.

                Another question is whether some of the ones that now truly hate the US came in that way or are now that way due to the treatment they received. My problem with Guantanamo is the way it was done and how it all but voids any legitimacy for the US to comment on human rights, as well as the fact that it now puts our own troops at risk for torturous treatment.

                And who was quoted in the NYT interview? One of the people at Guantanamo? A CIA spokesperson, and military spokesperson? An Admin spokesperson? Unfortunately, none of them are very reliable sources anymore (well there are some reliable sources in the military, but not all of them are.)

                As for the wiretaps, IF they were done legally, and with court approval and supervision I would have no problem with them. It is this BS attitude that getting said approval and oversight is not needed that I find wrong.

                • Posted By: Skypoint @ 08/11/2008 1:35:12 PM

                  Ghost, you make a valid point on whether some of the detainees come in non violent and turn that way. I do not know. The number, if any is probably small, as like our own prisons here in the US, we're not out there actually looking for innocent people to incarcerate. (Hence, the release of around 500 detainees).

                  My take on this is I see terrorists as the cold blooded killers that they are. They remind me of the terminators of the film with the same name. They can't be reasoned with, and the only thing they truly understand is overwhelming force. Separating them from non violents is at best risky.

                  I would have to go back and look, but I assume it was an official at Gitmo NYT was interviewing. Obviously, The Times thought them a credible source, lest they would not take the time for the interview. Either way, I will take the word of one of our guys before the detainees.

                  Once again, we will have to differ on Gitmo. I see it as a necessary component to the war on terror to lower risk, and with the release of at least some of the non violent detainees, I think we're being as fair as we can. I do appreciate your thoughts though, and your points are well taken.

      • Posted By: ghostmasseur @ 08/04/2008 1:36:25 PM

        Consider the possiblity that the poster did in fact ask his representatives to do an inquiry but that they chose nto to.

        Your commander IN chief is a war criminal and liar.
        He has done long term damage to this country and made us a greater target.
        He is the best poster boy for terrorist recruitment there has ever been.
        He is a traitor to the US Constitutiton.

        • Posted By: Skypoint @ 08/05/2008 11:27:12 PM

          Traitor to the US Constitution? War criminal and Liar? I'm no fan of Bush, but could you please post a credible link or two (not your opinion) of where you obtained this information?

          • Posted By: ghostmasseur @ 08/06/2008 1:52:33 PM

            Let's see, got us into Iraq based on lies.

            Defends waterboarding, which is torture. Thereby a war criminal (he is the president and could order it stopped).

            Thinks that the laws do not apply to him and that he can go around the back so the both the courts and the Legislature. That is a violation of the Consitutution which he is to uphold and defend, not trash and destroy.

            I do not use the web as my source for this stuff. I have contacts both within the government and US military as well as contacts with constitutionsal scholar and international law experts. I am simply repeating the analysis they have made. Not my opinions.

            • Posted By: Skypoint @ 08/06/2008 3:08:32 PM

              Ghost, with all due respect this is still opinion. Remember that Hussein, colossal third world fool that he was, could've averted the invasion months before, but handed Bush ammo by playing games. After 17 resolutions and 12 years had passed, he was still firing shots over UN inspectors heads. As I mentioned, I'm no fan of Bush, but right, wrong or indifferent, the fact remains that at as much as I hate this war, he didn't break any laws. Trust me. I've looked.

              • Posted By: ghostmasseur @ 08/06/2008 4:20:30 PM

                Whether Hussein provoked it or not, Bush lied to us. I would have had no arguement with assasinating him and his sons. THAT would have been a legitimate move (since the prohibition against black ops of that type was an Executive Order, it could have been revoked.

                As for his not breaking any laws, his illegal use of executive priviledge, refusing to comply with court orders and his attempts to make US law based on religion is against the Constitution.

          • Posted By: thrasher32 @ 08/06/2008 1:15:02 PM

            www.nytimes.com
            www.nbc.com
            www.abc.com
            www.cbs.com
            www.cnn.com

            Pick a headline.

  • Posted By: thrasher32 @ 08/01/2008 4:41:48 PM

    "Actually, some may consider the anti-Christ to be better than Bush"

    You can count me as one of those.

    "I never remember even Jimmy Carter getting picked on this bad"

    I don't remember Jimmy Carter sending 5,000 of our kids to their deaths for nothing either. I'm talking about Iraq here, not Afghanistan.

    "To me it shows a complete lack of respect"

    That's because I have a complete lack of respect for George W. Bush.


    "People need to think of where we could be. It could be worse."

    It will be worse if another Republican gets elected.

    "If it's so bad in the USA go move to Iraq or Iran, hey for that matter maybe even Vietnam!"

    No, I'd just like our country back. You move if you don't like a free and peaceful USA.

    • Posted By: Skypoint @ 08/09/2008 6:41:37 PM

      Quote: Comment: "Actually, some may consider the anti-Christ to be better than Bush"

      "You can count me as one of those."

      Absolutely astounding. Your hatred for another human being is so great that you would actually rather have the Antichrist the president?

  • Posted By: gopindrag @ 08/06/2008 2:39:28 PM

    DON'T LET THE DOOR HIT YOU IN THE ASS.

    • Posted By: ghostmasseur @ 08/07/2008 3:57:14 PM

      Someone is carrying Bush in their back pocket? and they are passing through fast clsoing doors so that he will be hit by the door whenit closes on them. WOW!!! ;-)

  • Posted By: gopindrag @ 08/06/2008 2:38:49 PM

    DON'T LET THE DOOR HIT YOU IN THE ASS.

  • Posted By: Young Hickory @ 07/30/2008 3:55:14 PM

    How is it possible that Bush is not to blame for the attacks on 9/11? The PDB warned him that Bin Laden was determined to strike the US. We were attacked on our own soil. The primary purspose of our government is to defend us here at home. Jimmy Carter took much more grief for the Iranian hostage situation, something over which he had much less control.

    • Posted By: Skypoint @ 08/05/2008 11:31:06 PM

      You really must be young, young hickory. 9/11 was planned and underway while Clinton was in office. As in when the World Trade Center was bombed the first time.... Of course, you conveniently forgot to mention that....

      Sheeeshh

    • Posted By: Tired of Politics @ 07/30/2008 6:25:03 PM

      Do you honestly think that the attack on the Twin Towers could have been planned between Bush taking office in January and September 11? Training would have begun long before the inaugeration, student visas were applied for, strategic planning had to take place.
      Contrary to your short sighted view and obvious lack of world history knowledge, this war has been building for years. This is yet another step in a battle that goes back to the Crusades. - It's not about oil, it's not about politics or who is in office, and it is not about the world hating America. This war is about a fundemental belief that my God is the one true God (whether Christian or Muslim) and any who say different is a heretic/infadel. - America is not fighting one person or one country. Bin Laden is only an instrument in the bigger picture - the core of the matter is that prosperous Americans have become the symbol of the "white devil" that the French crusaders held 1000 years ago. We were as egotistical in our religious fanaticism then as we are now.

    • Posted By: varacefan @ 07/30/2008 4:32:25 PM

      You have to be kidding! You're telling me Al Gore would have done anything different. Of course not! No one could have invisioned that attack as it happened. Taking over airplanes with box cutters was never thought of. I can see the flying public understanding the crap we have to deal with when flying before 911. Come on get real!!

  • Posted By: john1117 @ 08/05/2008 4:24:46 AM

    That Bush enjoys an approval rating even "in the the high 20's" is testament to the complicity of the major news media in ignoring or minimizing the crimes of his administration. A public well-served by media who report real news instead of what Paris Hilton ate for lunch today would've pressured our lame Congress to boot his lying ass out of office months ago. Right after Cheney's, that is.

    • Posted By: thrasher32 @ 08/05/2008 1:40:02 PM

      Well stated. Liberal media my a--

  • Posted By: Emilli @ 08/05/2008 2:22:52 AM

    Well nice to make money off of someones good name

    • Posted By: ghostmasseur @ 08/05/2008 8:24:55 AM

      Even nicer to make money of someone's bad name. GW Bush does not have a "good name".

  • Posted By: Kam7 @ 08/01/2008 4:09:25 PM

    The only thing I can say is that we have now come to an era when all we do is cut down the Commander in Chief. It's absolutely horrible! I never remember even Jimmy Carter getting picked on this bad. To me it shows a complete lack of respect; its one thing to make fun of him on SNL and late night shows but a book. People need to think of where we could be. It could be worse. If it's so bad in the USA go move to Iraq or Iran, hey for that matter maybe even Vietnam!

    • Posted By: garysgary @ 08/04/2008 10:37:21 AM

      No...you move to Iraq or Iran...you and GW think they're so important!

    • Posted By: ghostmasseur @ 08/01/2008 6:58:02 PM

      Kam7,

      When a president has done as much damage to the US (and the military, according to private comments made by several dozen high ranking past and current officers I know [the current ones are not legally allowed to make public comments, and they know I would refuse to name them, and the past ones will not make public comments as a point of military ethics]) he is not deserving of respect. Carter did nto get picked ont his badly becasue he did nto deserve it as much as Bush does.

      As Teddy Roosevelt said:

      "The President...should be supported or opposed exactly to the degree which is warranted by his good conduct or bad conduct, his efficiency or inefficiency in rendering loyal, able, and disinterested service to the Nation as a whole.

      Therefore it is absolutely necessary that there should be full liberty to tell the truth about his acts, and this means that it is exactly necessary to blame him when he does wrong as to praise him when he does right.

      Any other attitude in an American citizen is both base and servile. To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."

      That is from someone who was President.

      The idea that if one criticizes either the US or the President that they shoudl leave the US is just as unpatriotic and morally treeasonable. Remember, the President (and any elected official) is only an employee. WE are the bosses. Unfortunately, this one forgets that fact.

  • Posted By: readaskiles @ 08/01/2008 4:11:38 PM

    Wow! The love shown here. Can't say I support all of Bush's policies, but seriously the way people go on about him it's as if he were the anti-Chist. Actually, some may consider the anti-Christ to be better than Bush. Go figure. I'm betting if the Republicans win the upcoming election to hear more of the rants and if the Democrats win there will be rejoicing - for a while and then the blame it all on Bush / Republican game will begin again because things didn't work out as expected. Rant, rant, rant. What a joke. If you want to change things, get off your butts and actually try to make change - besides typing on the computer and whining.

  • Posted By: CalexanderJ @ 07/30/2008 3:45:36 PM

    Goodnight Bush? Good riddance is more like it. That man can't leave office soon enough.

    • Posted By: good conscience @ 08/01/2008 12:09:44 PM

      To be exact, CalexanderJ, 172 days from today and counting, we will finally see January 20th, 2009!! The day the Obamas officially move into the White House. I have a special calendar that I bought last Dec. It's in my office, and my first act every morning is to cross off another day, until this lamest of "hobbled waterfowl" (per Jon Stewart) is out of our sight forever! What a great day that will be!!!

  • Posted By: Chaotician @ 07/31/2008 6:47:07 AM

    9/11 is certainly a failure of the Bush regime; they failed in so many ways; they didn't take their eye off the ball...they never put their eye on the Ball! However, the greatest failure of 9/11 is the shameless use of this tradegy for persoanl and political gain of the meanest sort; the rejection and misuse of world support for America; the colossal stategic failures of George's War on Terror which was used to dismantle the fundamental principals of America and complete the Fascist coup of the nation by the corporate bosses with the connivance of Neo-Cons, Evangelical puppets, and that dreaded military-industrial complex and their enabling Generals! The Bush cabal must be impeached, charged, convicted, and properly punished! All of the tenets of this corruiption must be reputiated!

  • Posted By: Duck Soup @ 07/30/2008 10:53:14 PM

    Goodnight Bush, goodnight McCain, it's reality. McCain campaign: Don't listen to McCain. No joke. Really. You probably heard this already. But let's seriously think about what this means: http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/7/30/211014/271/656/559705

  • Posted By: revhank @ 07/30/2008 3:49:24 PM

    Thank God it's almost bedtime for this inadequate little man and his criminal cadre of puppeteers.

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse