Today's leader (that's "editorial" for you Americans) in the Guardian begins as follows:
Shortly before being elected US president, George Bush wasn't able to name the president of Pakistan when asked in a televised interview. Yet, according to his national security advisor Condoleezza Rice, in the months leading up to September 11, President Bush was fully briefed and supported a detailed plan to help General Musharraf cut off support to al-Qaida in Afghanistan. As Groucho Marx once asked: "Who do you believe - me, or the evidence of your own eyes?"
Precisely.
Posted by geoff2 at April 8, 2004 11:01 PMPredident Bush is a success businessman, successful Governer of Texas, a Jet Pilot, a great President, among other things. He may not be as glib as Pres. Clinton who could lie under oath and debate the meaning of "is", but He has more moral character than you like. What have you done in life???
Posted by: Jim at April 9, 2004 01:11 AMI have worked for what I have achieved in life. I didn't get it handed to me because of my daddy's name.
Posted by: Geoff at April 9, 2004 01:17 AMHow does President Bush's great moral character manifest itself?
Posted by: Susan in St. Paul at April 9, 2004 02:54 AMGeoff, so what HAVE you done in life? It amazes me the hate that liberals/socialists exhibit towards any conservative viewpoint, and especially our great President, George W. Bush.
Geoff - Great leaders are not made by memorizing facts. Instead, they carefully listen to subject matter experts to ascertain the facts, and then combine the facts with rules of character and moral principal to make wise decisions on the proper course of action. President Bush did not memorize the name of the President of Pakistan. Instead, he was wise enough to lead the President of Pakistan and the US into an alliance to defeat the Taliban in Afghanistan. Through leadership, he changed the policy of both the US and Pakistan away from the old policy that killed 3000 innocent people in New York on 9/11, to a new policy that is killing terrorists throughout the world and has avoided a repeat of 9/11 on US soil.
But I suppose liberals who are either not deep thinkers or filled with hate, would be more concerned with the proper spelling of potato or memorizing the names of the great liberal leaders who have ruled France ever since the US and British soldiers gave the French their country back from the Germans.
By the way, are you able to clearly explain the exact policy decision by President Bush that has personally harmed you or your family - that would justify the hate in you that makes you try so hard to find such small flaws. A discussion about policy would be more meaningful than your observation that most people (including President Bush) have not memorized the names of all the presidents of all the countries around the world.
Now if the president of Pakistan flew a plane into the twin towers, not only would George Bush know his name, but George Bush would be sending him a "personalized" greeting from the US armed forces. Might even put his name and picture on a playing card.
Posted by: Jerry at April 9, 2004 05:11 PMI am amazed that people would infer "hate" so readily. It is not an emotion or attitude that I feel very often, certainly not towards Bush and his cronies. I disagree strongly with their political opinions, I regret that Americans would choose to elect a stubborn, incurious, unimaginative, selfish lightweight as their president, but I don't feel hate. Perhaps those of you who sling the word around find that it's an idea that *you* are comfortable with. It certainly fits with the character of your black-and-white, "with us or against us", no-shades-of-gray, jingoistic hero.
GWB's father would never have governed so recklessly and dangerously as this one. Now responsible Americans need to correct the mistake of 2000.
Posted by: Geoff Arnold at April 9, 2004 07:15 PMHmmm... "stubborn, incurious, unimaginative, selfish lightweight". But no factual examples. Looks like you are pretty good at throwing insults around, but don't have much substance.
Are you able to provide one example of one policy of the President's that has caused harm to your family?
Let me provide an example from my life. First, the economy. Under President Clinton, my taxes increased $4,000, and worse, the taxes on my 70 year old parents social security income increased from $0 to $1,700 and on my 78 year old mother-in-law widow increased from $0 to $800. When Bush took office, our stock market had crashed with the economy in tow. Thanks to President Bush, we have had our taxes reduced back to tolerable levels.
Second, on our culture and moral strength. Growing up I was a boy scout, and my sons were boy scouts. Under Clinton, the money I have donated for years to the United Way, could now no longer be used to fund the boy scouts because the scouts don't want gay men sleeping in tents with young boys. And Clinton appointed federal judges decided that the the scouts could no longer use public camp grounds, the Pledge of Allegiance was unconstitutional, the ten commandments can not be displayed, Christmas must be renamed Winter Holiday, kids should get into college based on the color of their skin, men should be allowed to marry men, the Catholic church was forced to provide services that violate their faith, and baby's in the process of birth should be able to have holes drilled through their heads and their brains sucked out (no this is not Saddam Hussein's world). And he did use the oval office for frequent blow jobs, and probably spilled his semen on the carpet.
Lastly, the security of the lives of our loved ones. Under Clinton, we decided women should fight our wars. Osama Bin Laden tried to destroy the World Trade Center with a bomb in the basement (this was the first ever foreign attack on our mainland), the U.S.S. Cole was torpedoed (remember Pearl Harbor?), terrorists blew up 4 of our embassies killing hundreds, a terrorist flew an Egypt airliner into the ocean just off our east coast, and we allowed terrorists to illegally enter our country so they could attend flight training school. And Clinton's assistant attorney general had sent a memo to the FBI and CIA ordering them NOT to share information, even in cases where the letter of the law allowed. This was years after the democratic controlled congress had cut the CIA budget by $3 billion, and then John Kerry proposed an additional $2 billion cut for the following year (fortunately, even some Democrats told him that was too far). And democrats also told the CIA the could no longer hire "bad" guys to get information. But Clinton did manage to burn to death quite a few American's in Waco, Texas (not too far from where my family lives, we could see the smoke).
And you think John Kerry will be a better war time leader. Fortunately for you and yours, that while George Bush is protecting my family from harm, your family also benefits.
But I know you don't like specifics. So let me use language you might understand. We got rid of the liar and wife cheater, and we don't need the CIA and military hater.
Posted by: Jerry at April 16, 2004 08:14 PMI assure you that your comments give me no reason to reassess my opinion of Bush. I'm not quite sure what relevance your rants about Clinton have to all this, unless you are asserting that Clinton was so bad that it's a really good thing that we found a feckless lightweight to replace him. Hmmm. No, you probably didn't mean that.
Perhaps you should just start your own blog.....
Posted by: Geoff at April 17, 2004 12:30 AMAs for my characterization of Bush as a "lightweight", let me simply quote his own words from this week's press conference. Anyone who thinks that this is a "great president" is clearly using "great" in a manner inconsistent with customary usage:
Then came the bombshell. He was asked to name his biggest mistake since September 11.
"I wish you'd have given me this written question ahead of time so I could plan for it," Mr Bush appeared to joke, before taking a long pause.
"Er, I'm sure historians will look back and say, 'Gosh, he could have done it better this way, or that way'. I'm sure something will pop into my head here in the midst of this press conference, with all the pressure of trying to come up with an answer.. but it hadn't yet."
Even journalists familiar with the President's 'Bush-isms', a mix of misspoken words and grammatical errors, were taken aback by his latest ramblings and cast knowing glances.
Mr Bush zig-zagged from explaining his decisions to invade Afghanistan and Iraq to his firm belief that Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction.
Then he mentioned the discovery of mustard gas on a turkey farm in Libya for good measure.
Next came his most jaw-dropping reply: "I don't want to sound like I have made no mistakes. I'm confident I have. I just haven't. You just put me under the spot here, and maybe I'm not as quick on my feet as I should be in coming up with one."
About half of the 15 questions Bush fielded gave him the chance to admit a mistake or express regret for his administration's actions in Iraq, or on the 2001 attacks, but he never did.
---
From the Daily Mirror via Smirking Chimp:
http://www.smirkingchimp.com/article.php?sid=15796
"About half of the 15 questions Bush fielded gave him the chance to admit a mistake or express regret for his administration's actions in Iraq, or on the 2001 attacks, but he never did."
Maybe its because he didn't make a mistake?
Why did the press ask 14 more times, after the question had been answered. Wasn't there any other information worth asking? Or did they already have their "news" written, and just couldn't get him to make news the way they wanted it manufactured?
Posted by: Daniel at April 28, 2004 04:19 AMFor US Presidents, the greatest public speaker was Ronald Reagan. I trust you agree he was great then?
For the world, some of the greatest public speakers were Adolf Hitler and Mao. I suppose they also impress you as great leaders.
Al Gore and John Kerry are very stiff, very boring, terrible public speakers. I trust you don't like them.
Jesus warns us that the devil speaks with a silk tongue. I think the devil would impress you.
Judge a leader not be what he says, but by what he does. George Bush is doing the right things, even if he doesn't say it eloquently. Clinton was a great speaker, but did the wrong things.
Bush's greateset speaking skills you miss - is he does what he says he is going to do (ask Saddam and the Taliban). He doesn't lie. He doesn't flip flop. He doesn't point his finger at you.
I bet you would love Bush if he pointed his finger at you and lied to you face (with proper enuciation and grammar).
You Democrats are so shallow.
Posted by: Daniel at April 28, 2004 04:27 AMCurious that random visitors should keep plugging away at this particular entry. Almost like blog-spam. I wonder if they are human or spam-bots of some kind.
Posted by: Geoff at April 28, 2004 05:26 AM