Bring It On!

Secret - Or Secret Code?

October 20th, 2005 | by Dr. Forbush |

Religion was once a private matter. But, religion has now become another of the Bush administrations secret codes. The Bush administration has always used secret code to signal its base as to what its thinking. This is because there are a number of people who attend Church and are conditioned to understand certain meanings that the general population does not recognize.

During the 2004 Presidential Election for example, in the second debate President Bush was asked who he would pick for the Supreme Court. He answered in some detail about which he would not pick. And he said:

“Another example would be the Dred Scott case, which is where judges, years ago, said that the Constitution allowed slavery because of personal property rights".

“That’s a personal opinion. That’s not what the Constitution says. The Constitution of the United States says we’re all — you know, it doesn’t say that. It doesn’t speak to the equality of America.”

Well, Bush mentions Dred Scott because it is code for Roe v. Wade. In fact Robert, P. Casey, Governor of Pennsylvania gave a speech explaining how they are the same. So, when Bush mentions Dred Scott in the second presidential debate he is talking to the anti-abortion groups that are familiar with this in order to avoid saying what kind of judge he is looking for to fill any Supreme Court seat. You can read the Governor’s speech online

So, in the third debate George W Bush answers the following question:

SCHIEFFER: Mr. President, I want to go back to something Senator Kerry said earlier tonight and ask a follow-up of my own. He said — and this will be a new question to you — he said that you had never said whether you would like to overturn Roe v. Wade. So I’d ask you directly, would you like to?

BUSH: What he’s asking me is, will I have a litmus test for my judges? And the answer is, no, I will not have a litmus test. I will pick judges who will interpret the Constitution, but I’ll have no litmus test.

But, in the second debate he used code to tell the anti-abortion group that he would find someone that would not support Dred Scott II as the anti-abortion groups call it.

So, why does he talk in code? This is because women don’t want to give up their right to choice. They may never need to or want to exercise it. But America is a free country based on freedoms and rights are not given away easily. So, if George W Bush sounds like he isn’t trying to take your rights away from you, then you may vote for him. It is so disgusting how George W Bush resorts to hiding the truth from people in order to coerce them into voting for him.

But, now Bush is talking in code once again. He is telling us about Harriet Miers’ religion. Just a couple of weeks ago during the John Roberts hearings religion was supposedly off the table. Just because the Catholic Church is against abortion and John Roberts is Catholic doesn’t mean that John Roberts would rule against abortion. At least that was the lie the Bush administration and John Roberts’ supporters said. But, now when George W Bush is trying to signal to the Religious Right he no longer knows about the secret code of Dred Scott. Perhaps Karl Rove wasn’t around to remind him what to say. Instead, Bush tells the religious right not to worry, because Harriet Miers is a strict fundamentalist Christian. She wouldn’t dare cross the Lord Jesus and vote for any abortion case. She knows it would be a sin….

But, then again does the Religious Right really know what George W Bush holds in higher esteem, Loyalty or Religion. We all know that George W Bush lies to get what he wants. We just don’t know what he wants. Does he want to put a Loyalist in the Supreme Court in case he is called on the carpet for any illegal activity that comes forward in the next few years? Or, does he want a Religious zealot on the Supreme Court who will legislate from the bench all of the Church law that “should” be in the US Constitution? George W Bush could actually be lying to his base this time around, and maybe some of his supporters aren’t so sure about him this time around. Or, maybe he is just lying to the mainstream American people like usual.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • Sphinn
  • Facebook
  • Mixx
  • Google
  • e-mail
  • YahooMyWeb
Sphere: Related Content

  1. 13 Responses to “Secret - Or Secret Code?”

  2. By Jersey McJones on Oct 20, 2005 | Reply

    Huh, I always thought he mentioned Dredd Scott because he was too stupid to know what extra-constitutional judicial activism is! After all, Dredd Scott was a Constructionist Decision. I laughed my face off when he did that!

  3. By The Cranky Liberal on Oct 20, 2005 | Reply

    Excellent article Doc. Now to follow up on Chris’s fine post from yesterday, the trick isn’t spotting the lie, it’s convincing those who took the bait hook line and sinker that what he is saying doesn’t job e with what he is doing.

    Good catch on the Dredd Scott case too. I hadn’t thought about it that way, but it makes perfect sense.

    Wake Up People!!

  4. By The Bastard on Oct 20, 2005 | Reply

    Umm, I was lied to? By who? Give me their name and I will fire them immediately!!!!

    Is that the type of code you are talking about?

  5. By Martin S Friedlander on Oct 20, 2005 | Reply

    George W Bush stands for nothing. He will do or say anything to get his agenda passed. He had a whole squadron of lawyers, including Alberto Gonzalez and John Yu (a former clerk to Thomas) now a law professor, write briefs on how Bush can torture humans, catorgorized as “detainees”.

    He speaks in Code because of his membership in “Skull and Bones” at Yale. If he ever confessed to what he really thinks, he would be telling the world that he thinks of nothing except how to obtain and retain “power”. He is a “street fighter”, and a backstabbing

    His character doesn’t fall too far from the tree. All of you must read the story of the “Bush Family”. It is a family of “skullduggery”, oil, and arms dealing. You have to go back to “Prescott Bush” who sold arms to the nazis before and during WWII.

    I believe that Cheney and Rumsfeld are vulnerable. Fitzgerald will indict Rove and Libby, and recommend a “Bill of Impeachment” for Cheney. Rumsfeld is just a “natural born killer” as revealed by the Frontline program on Wednesday.

    To end my comment, I strongly suggest that we think positively and develop a positive “Plan for America”. We Americans are positive, “can do” people. We cannot divert our energies to just throwing darts at Bush the “Despicable”. Where are our economic policies, our foreign policies, our recovery policies, our tax policies, our health care policies? The American People must be presented with a choice and not just a target.

    Martin S Friedlander, Esq.

  6. By Jersey McJones on Oct 20, 2005 | Reply

    Are we sure this is a code… i mean, is Bush really clever enough for this???

  7. By The Bastard on Oct 20, 2005 | Reply

    Right on Martin!!!! But can we atleast torment the power hungry buggers? Please?

    The house of cards is falling and falling fast.

    YOu know Bush is a pushover when Chavez can come on NPR or BBC (forgot what I was listening to this morning) and call the President weak and evil.

    Think of it a little old socialist state that had democraticaly elected official calling Bush weak!!! I love it!

    Chavez for President!!!! Just as soon as we can figure out a way to prove he was born here and get rid of his accent.

    YEAH, YEAH, YEAH, I’m a socialist commie pig that is just looking out for the dimwits in the Republican party (the lower half of course) that keep voting to have the rich and almighty fuck them where the sun don’t shine. And no I’m not talking about your arse I’m talking about the hole in between your ears!!!!

  8. By Dr. Forbush on Oct 20, 2005 | Reply

    Jersey, you wrote:
    ” i mean, is Bush really clever enough for this???”

    That why he has Karl Rove for a brain and Dick Cheney for his motivational speaker! He couldn’t do this by himself…

  9. By Lurch on Oct 20, 2005 | Reply

    I kinda sorta agree with Martin, because while Bush may be using the “secret code” of the Christo-Fascists it’s purely to gull them into supporting him, and then remaining, quiescent, in hope, as he pulls the bait-and-switch after getting his way.

    Bush is ONLY interested in Bush. Nothing other than the Bush family, power, and money holds any true appeal for him. The tax cuts were about cuts for Bu$shCo. The fact that others benefitted was incidental, and not the actual purpose.

    The appointment of Roberts, and Miers, true Bu$hCo loyalists is a precautionary move to protect his own hide in case something goes wrong later on and he might be called to answer for his misdeeds.

  10. By The Cranky Liberal on Oct 20, 2005 | Reply

    Folks, the idea of doing something positive and having a plan is something we discuss here all the time. Stay tuned for an announcement coming soon an just how we plan to tackle that subject. Remember, Democracy Needs You, because democracy isn’t something you have, its’s something you do.

  11. By Ryan gardner on Oct 20, 2005 | Reply

    This idea is ludicrous. I would consider myself a centrist - so I don’t really lean either way too far. On this idea, I think you are off your rocker. President Bush is too stupid to speak in English half the time - let alone code. And many members of the religious right are so literal in their interpretations of everything that they wouldn’t be able to understand it. You are seeing beyond the mark here.

    Good blog fodder, not reality though.

  12. By BYOC on Oct 20, 2005 | Reply

    There is really nothing off rocker about the concept of a politician making ambigous statements that multiple groups interpret as they would like to hear them, avoid creating negative press on one side of the coin and create positive press on the other, and in the end you are held acountable to nothing becuase you didn’t directly promiss anything, its how they get votes to begin with and it is the story of how the admin and the GOP have gone about the buisness of the country which is why everyone is unhappy about the state of the union. Reality; these wind bags have resolved nothing of consequence in all these years, which in and of its self is of major consequence to everyone.

  13. By The Bastard on Oct 20, 2005 | Reply

    Can anyone tell me one thing this party has done for this country in the last 6 years?

    Man, just read the legislation that passed on the gun shield laws. What a crock!!!!

    We have sell cigarettes with all kinds of death warnings all over them but guns, nope, nadda, nothing!!!

    The government sues the cigarette companies for millions because they are the distribution of death but guns are hobbies and a national pass time that doesn’t hurt anyone. What bullshit!!!

  14. By The Cranky Liberal on Oct 21, 2005 | Reply

    Umm you may think it is off the rocker until you spend about 10 minutes doign research about “judicial activisim” “strict constructinonalism” and the pro life movement. Search Dredd Scott in there as well. Remember Shrub doesn’t write his speeches, his speech writers do. All he needs is to grunt afew ideas their way….

Post a Comment