The truth is, they didn't find any gunpowder in this story----only wet rags. And such was the case in early November, the Democrats and liberals have another hangover. This one must hurt.
Posted on 02/22/2005 10:03:17 AM PST by Quilla
DEMOCRATS' eyes lit up like kids offered a pony ride when they first heard about secretly taped telephone conversations in which George W. Bush seemed to admit to a friend that he had smoked pot, and perhaps more.
If Dems were smart, they'd drop this cold potato, for a sackful of reasons.
Let's start with betrayal.
It's bad enough you secretly tape a friend. Conceivably, you might have a reason to do that - self protection, for instance. But to release the tape to grub bucks, as Doug Wead apparently has done, is about as low as you can go.
A Bush family friend, Wead recorded the conversations in the two years before Bush became the Republican nominee in 2000 because he viewed Bush as a historic figure, according to the New York Times. Wead said he didn't intend for them to be released during his lifetime, but his publisher made him do it.
And the dog ate his homework, too.
Wead added he believed Bush might regard him as a traitor.
You think?
Draw your conclusions
Wead's the author of a new book about presidential childhoods and the publicity around the tapes no doubt will drive his book sales. You can draw your own conclusions about his true motives.
I remember the last time a friend secretly taped a friend in a political case. That was Linda Tripp taping Monica Lewinsky and you may recall how she was torn apart by Democratic wolves. She betrayed a friend! they howled.
Gennifer Flowers secretly taped intimate conversations between herself and Bill Clinton, turning herself into the scourge of the Continent. She's a low-life, she's a witch! the Dems screamed.
So will Dems now drive an 18-wheeler over Wead? That'll happen when local TV stations stop hyping snow storms.
For Dems, this is a case where silence is golden.
Why? Because in the portion of the tape dealing with possible drug use, W comes off looking - dare we say it? - pretty good.
In the tape, he reveals his reason for not talking about drug use: Because that might send the bad message to kids that if he did it, maybe it was OK for them to do it, too.
Had he made that statement for public consumption, you - like I - would be, um, let's say suspicious. Since it was made in a casual conversation with a friend, it carries more weight.
Might he be lying to the friend? Yes.
Might he be self-deluded (not to mention self-important)? Yes.
But a fair-minded person should conclude Bush was sincere.
Bush no gay-basher
In even worse news for Bush's critics, in another passage Bush comes across if not gay friendly, then at least as a "sinner" who refuses to bash gays, not even to pacify his conservative Christian supporters.
Reading further, open-minded people also can conclude Bush's opposition to gay marriage was both politically expedient and heart-felt.
So now we get to the issue of friendship and trust.
Have you ever secretly tape-recorded a friend or a relative? If so, why? I'd be interested to know. Check the bottom of the column for ways to contact me.
Where were you at the time?
In Pennsylvania, you cannot audiotape someone without their consent. In New Jersey, you can. That's why most TV news "hidden camera" exposes are done in New Jersey, rather than Pennsylvania. It can be done legally in Pennsylvania if only the video, but not the audio, is used.
That wrinkle helps explain why under current Pennsylvania law it's difficult to prosecute creepy "upskirt" guys who use a hidden camera to shoot up a woman's dress.
Another taping wrinkle emerged in the recent Bill Cosby alleged groping case. The alleged victim's mother had a tape that supposedly buttressed the victim's claims, but it might have not been admissible because she was taping in Canada, where it is legal, but Cosby was speaking from California, where secret taping is illegal.
Technology has given people - and government! - the ability to capture almost our every move. Forget about audiotape. You are on videotape more often than Paris Hilton - from the Wawa to the department store to the ATM machine, it's "Smile! You're on Candid Camera."
Out in the world, you have no expectation of privacy, but when you are candidly talking to a friend, shouldn't you have confidence to believe your words won't be shared?
With all this taping going on, you've got two choices: Lead a clean life, or don't talk about it - to anyone.
You can't blame them for getting excited...after all, its like finding your dad's playboy collection under his mattress while he and mom are out to dinner.
Its pathetic, but exciting for them.
I am already hearing out-of-context bits and pieces on the national news.
The media loves it. "Hey, we have a quote saying "you don't want kids telling their parents 'President Bush smoked pot, so why can't I?'.... They left out how he got to that line of reason.
Wead is a maggot.
Maggot Bump.
The publisher made me do it. DUhhh!
This is a great post. These tapes only serve to emphasize the integrity Bush possesses and the lack thereof of Wead. To say his publisher made him do it is a cheap and sleazy out for him. This is just pure publicity for him.
The truth is, they didn't find any gunpowder in this story----only wet rags. And such was the case in early November, the Democrats and liberals have another hangover. This one must hurt.
Curious since I didn't see Brit's show last night - What were Kristol and Krauthammer's comments?
For someone to trade their friendship with President Bush for a few bucks is just unfathomable.
lemme see, Linda Tripp taping conversations at eh behest of le officials implicating the president with sexual harassments - BAD
this dude taping conversations with bush implicating - what? (the tapes don't seem to say hwat we're told they say) - GOOD
another liberal double standard?
Just another greedy journalist out to sell his soul for a buck.
Oops, sorry Red. My post at #10 was supposed to be a reply to you.
I guess "No harm, no foul" but I am sure he won't be getting any invites to the White House or to Crawford for that matter, anymore.
Is this guy wead's first name Richard? That would make him Dick wead, wouldn't it?
I've heard Doug Wead speak on a couple of occasions. I'm extremely disappointed. I would never have thought he would do something like this.
I was looking forward to the release of his book and intended to buy it. Now I will not and will encourage others to do likewise.
Absolutely! I will not be purchasing this or any other book by Wead.
LOL!
There's no traction in these tapes. Bush says nothing of great interest to those trying to trap him. The chief impression most people will get from this affair is that Weadon is a sleaze.
He will lose his natural audience, and I doubt if he will find a new one. If he did this for money and career, he made a bad mistake.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.