Bush Press Conference/8/21/06

[tallcal101]

On my drive to work this morning,I had the opportunity to listen to the press conference w held from the White House.
I must say,I hope all my frinds on this forum had a chance to listen to the rantings of a now confirmed(in this listners mind anyway)individual who has so lost touch with reality as to be bordering on lunacy.I tried to listen with an open mind,I really did.But his response to every question,from the Middle East to Katrina, was so full of stammering,and babbling,it was,in the end,impossible to figure out what the man was trying to say.
At one point,he went a 20 minute rant about his Iraq policy,blaming the Democrats(and those critics in his own party)of being co conspirtitors with those who blew up the World Trade Towers!!He tied Suddam Hussan to those who blew up the Towers.In fact,he went off on such a tare,he sounded like an inarticulate Hitler figure.It was truly amazing!He made it clear he is above the law,and those who think that illigal wiretaps are problematic are co conspirators with our"enemy",even though he is not sure who the enemy is.
When pressed after this outragious,inaccurate tantrum by reporters,he promtly ended the press conference.
The Emperor is naked,and our destiny is now in the hands of a desperate,blind and profoundly disturbed individual.

 

[redytrk]

I think your observations are way beyond what he deserves.Clearly he was not the best qualified for the job.His IQ is low and he is easily manipulated by the money interest that gave him such a large campaign war chest.

He did not win the election but the courts gave it to him anyway.The good news is we can make a new choice in `08.

IF YOU DO NOT VOTE....YOU ARE PART OF THE PROBLEM!

 

[mcbride]

The Emperor is naked,and our destiny is now in the hands of a desperate,blind and profoundly disturbed individual.
================================
Clearly he was not the best qualified for the job.His IQ is low and he is easily manipulated by the money interest that gave him such a large campaign war chest.
================================

OMG----Thank you, thank you, thank you....

(Tony, more people that think like me....LOL)


-mcbride-
--What goes around comes around--

 

[greg334]

Well a few want me to say something so here goes.

I kind of agree, I see something here unravaling within the republician party as a whole.

The entire purpose for aid is not to aid the enemy but to help, the enemy has and will take what they can and turn it against us. Most Lebanese already said to the press that they hate us and many already refused aid. I am really concerned about this democracy at any price and the idea that we need to build up their military.

We are and have been at war for years across many administrations and what was annouced today lets them think that they are winning because we are weak. Yea I know what some of you are thinking, Bush is weak, yada yada yada but the truth is clear that so was clinton, bush 1, reagan and especially carter (who gave us this mess). we lack true leadership, Bush faced with a crisis did handle it well but than the party lines were drawn and we divided.

 

[tallcal101]

Perhaps the anlogy to Hitler is a little strong(I only meant it in the ranting manner of his defense of his policy).Other then that,how is my opinion over stated? If you did not hear his comments(sic),perhaps you should listen to his conference in it's entirety.If you think I have overstated,check out any of the late night shows,and see if they are any kinder to his rantings.In paticular,the Daily Show.
W sets himself up by his manner and his choice of words.He has held fewer press conference's then any other modern day President.His staff and writers cringe when he goes off script.
I'm sorry,I know I'm speaking as just one American,but he represents me,and you,whether we like it or not.The rest of the World is listening,judging,and laughing.Can you blame the French for not wishing to participate in any UN /US sanctioned program that W has signed off on?

 

[ACW4478]

To justify the war, Bush informed Congress on March 19, 2003 that acting against Iraq was consistent with “continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001.â€

But he said this: President Bush was in the midst of explaining how the attacks of 9/11 inspired his “freedom agenda†and the attacks on Iraq until a reporter, Ken Herman of Cox News, interrupted to ask what Iraq had to do with 9/11. “Nothing,†Bush defiantly answered.

Well, Ive posted this before, but I think it's worth watching for those of you who missed it before.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dlofjKEkSrA
and this one
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rRQM4tjOVc0

 

[Jayman]

Whether we agree with everything the President says and does is moot. One thing I am sure we all can agree on is this. We want a man in the white house with a back bone. Not goofs like Al Gore or liars like John Kerry. No matter who you put in the white house, democrat or republican they will make a mistake now and then. Who has done any job, President or truck driver perfect? The biggest problem with Iraq as I can see it is we didnt put enough troops in to begin with. Seems like Rummy and the President was operating off of a minimum force mindset. Which, may have been justified a couple of years ago. They just turned out to be wrong.

Here is a good article I saw today titled "Are Bush's Critics Right"?
http://ebird.afis.mil/ebfiles/e20060823452543.html

 

[teacel]

>OMG----Thank you, thank you, thank you....
>
>(Tony, more people that think like me....LOL)
>
>
>-mcbride-
>--What goes around comes around--

I know, that's scares me!!! LOL

 

[greg334]

Tallcal,
Using the Hitler analogy was somewhat off base - the two cant be compared. President Bush lacks many of the qualities needed to make really good speech (and a good facist leader)- he can't in anyway get people motivated like your example. I would say Clinton is close to Hitler in speech making qualities, Gore tries but lacks a seriousness to himslef (being a tree is hard) and Kerry, well kerry simply waffles too much to be believed. Oh Hillary, well funny thing about her is what people think of her; there was a poll taken about what Dems think about her and the words they used were down right nasty and R rated - not good.

The other thing is I can not in any way take seriously the Daily show, or any late night TV. The day's events are used for material and skewed to fit the comics format. If press conferences are a measure of a president, I think that this shows the mentality of the people he serves and it is sad that we got to that point.

 

[tallcal101]

A back bone,no matter how stiff,that has a diconnect at the brain stem,is a worthless waste of a back bone.
John Kerry was a decorated,Purple Hearted ,2 tour of duty veteran of Viet Nam.Bush was a cheerleader,Daddy's friend of Air natioanl Guard draft dodger.Cheany was a draft dodger,and Rumsfield is just an everyday idiot with a big ego.
Boy are we ever lucky to have such a brain trust running amok with our Marines!!Lets go to war based on lies and no plan,then dismiss the Generals who said it was a mistake.
Wake up and smell the corps's Jayman.

 

[Jayman]

It all comes down to what you want to believe. I can say Kerry is a silver spooned boob that lied and wrote his own letters for the Purple Heart. Then you can say whatever about the current administration. Then I would say Clinton was one of the biggest clowns ever to live in the white house with 8 yrs full of drama. (Vince Foster, travel gate, white water, Monica Lewinski, etc) Then, when he really wanted to do something good for the nation...nobody took him seriously. Then you can say the current administration didnt have a crystal ball to consult and accuse them of lying about WMD. Even though I remember as a younger man seeing kurdish women and children laying dead in some street after Sadam gased them... So...its all in what you "want" to believe.

 

[LDB]

>John Kerry was a decorated,Purple Hearted ,2 tour of duty
>veteran of Viet Nam.

Wasn't he actually a falsified Purple Heart thief who dishonored all the legitimate recipients with the deception he used to obtain his? That's a rhetorical question since I know the correct answer is yes.

Leo Bricker, 73's K5LDB, OOIDA 677319
Owner, Panther trucks 5507, 5508, 5509
Highway Watch Participant, Truckerbuddy
EO Forum Moderator
----------
Support the entire Constitution, not just the parts you like.

 

[cheri1122]

What TallCall & apparently, McBride, too, are saying about President Bush is what I was saying before he was elected - and a lot of people who thought I was crazy then, don't think so now.
How come whenever anyone points out that this Emperor has no clothes, his apologists can only refer to what previous Presidents did, or what the Democrats are wrong about?

 

[Jayman]

"How come whenever anyone points out that this Emperor has no clothes, his apologists can only refer to what previous Presidents did, or what the Democrats are wrong about?"

That may come from one or two things. 1)The other side provides lots of material to work with. Or 2) Its a good way to defuse an attacker. I watched the 04 election campaign pretty closely. One thing that was very apparent was the left's hateful, negative, and disprespectful conduct. People like Hillary, Kerry's wife, and Ted Kennedy's performance was very poor. I used to be a democrat. But, people like that changed my mind. I cannot support somebody who conducts themself in such a fashion. I dont agree with everything the GOP says and does, but its closer than the alternative by my estimation. Even in this thread there are examples of hateful, negative, and disrespectful comments. Here are the ones I quickly pulled out.

"listen to the rantings of a now confirmed(in this listners mind anyway)individual who has so lost touch with reality as to be bordering on lunacy".

"In fact,he went off on such a tare,he sounded like an inarticulate
Hitler figure.It was truly amazing"!

"Clearly he was not the best qualified for the job.His IQ is low..."

"A back bone,no matter how stiff,that has a diconnect at the brain
stem,is a worthless waste of a back bone".

"Bush was a cheerleader,Daddy's friend of Air natioanl Guard draft
dodger.Cheany was a draft dodger,and Rumsfield is just an everyday idiot with a big ego".

I guess some have forgotten that the right side didnt have to farbricate some story about Kerry as Dan Rather felt he needed to do about the President...

I try to be fair and open minded, but... how can I vote for 2 sitting Senators no matter who they are when they are not doing the job they are being paid to do now? (Meaning during 04) If one did some research...you would find that Kerry and Edwards was being paid to be in the senate. Not running around on the campain trail ranting about some great plan that they was not willing to share with anybody. (Kerry and Edwards was absent from the senate during most of 04)

Just putting my little thoughts forward and this is meant to be a friendly exchange. So, I hope to not offend.

 

[tallcal101]

Leo,what evidence does or does not exist about Purple Hearts,the man did two tours of duty,and defended the Constitution(the one you take so seriously).That is not in dispute.
W went to college,and kept the silver spoon well entrenched in his back side.That is not in dispute either.He did not even use his draft dodging status to try and end an unjust war,and left the job of impeaching Nixon the crook lier to those of us who used our Constitutional right to end a unjust war,then put Nixon out of office.
I am proud to have been a part of both of those under takings.
And I did them both legally,under the protections of the Constitution.I never used a f*****g gun,but brought down a criminal.
You can't have it both ways my friend.

 

[tallcal101]

Lets just go back to Clintion and bash and dance with everything except the events of today,TODAY,TODAY TODAY.Not 6 years ago,or 12 years ago or 100 years ago.The events of today fall in one person's lap,as hard as it is to stomach for some.It is impossible to believe that anyone,even my 23 year dog,could have screwed this thing up any worse.
Cherri is spot on.The eveidence on W was out there for all to read,but it was in the "liberal"press,like Rolling Stone.If you don't like the news,go out make some of your own.BUT QUIT BLAMING CLINTON AND CARTER GREG,IT'S GETTING OLD AND MOSSY!!!!!!!!!!

 

[tallcal101]

Regarding conduct,I strongly suggest you read the the current issue of Rolling Stone Magazine regarding how the Republican States Attorney General stole the Ohio election in 04.
There is also an eye opening article on the abuse's at Guandanimo as they relate to a 15 year old prisoner.
I know,more propoganda from the left.But it's your tax dollars Jayman.
With all due respect.
In case your interested,there are excatly 880 days,4 hours,25 minutes and 41.3 seconds left in W's second term.
I keep a running clock on my desk.I'm very serious about this paticular topic.Will the republic out last him,will he impeached for high crimes,only time will tell,and it's ticking down.
tick,tick,tick,tick...........

 

[Jayman]

As much as I like music...I am not sure how much credability Rolling Stone has about politics or current world events. I do feel that current state of the middle east "could" strengthen the GOP's position in 08. Much can transpire between here and there. If the Iranians continue to act as a threat as they do now...a great number of voters will favor a candidate that has a pro military background and has also been infavor of action in the middle east. Not somebody who has been sitting on the sidelines casting stones at those who are doing something. Here is why. The person who has been criticizing those who did something will have to prove that they had a better idea and actually voted against action in Iraq. That is hard to do. Especially since Sadam DID support terrorist. He paid money to suicide bombers families. Research that if you like. And...if he was willing to do that, its safe to assume that he supported terrorism in other ways too.

I wager that most candidates that come forward will put together an "after the fact" strategy and will sell it as better than the position the GOP took when they obviously didnt have the chance to know the future. I have served this nation's armed forces for 17 1/2 yrs. We all wish that things were better over there. But, when your in the drivers seat you have to take the information you have at the moment and know that you have to do something and do something fast because your enemy will not stop until your dead. The Iranians have been saying this for quite some time now.

We face a very explosive situation in that part of the world. And its not because of our current administration. Its because we face an enemy that cannot be reasoned with and after 911 we know they will stop at nothing. Clinton tried a "softer" approach to the situation, and at the time it may have seemed to be the best way. But, we have learned since then that those tactics do now work against our current enemy. There have been mistakes made in this endevour. But, you cannot prosecute this kind of action without making mistakes no matter who you are. Demorcrat or Republican. However, Republicans have an advantage. History has shown they "typically" are better at managing times of crisis. Like the one we have been facing for the last few years.

I just hope for the nations sake that when 08 rolls around, we look to somebody who has the best plan. Not somebody who merely says things in the world are bad (as we have always had one problem or another) so therfore the previous administration is all to blame.

 

[RichM]

Like him or not every so often we need a President and a Administration that is not afraid to kick ##### and put our country first instead of kowtowing to a bunch of appeasers. Talking history remember Chamberlain, look where that got the Brits.

If you really study history it is the Brits that screwed up the whole middle east,invading and deciding borders and Countries. After they took over India,then they spun off Pakistan then spun off Bangeldash. They ended Persia and created Irag and Iran and Saudi Arabia. Hell they even decided that some 2 bit island off the coast of Argentina was theirs.

Time to wake up , our Country and our Life style is hated by extremists who will do what they can do bring us down. We can stand and defend ourseleves in Irag or on the streets of San Francisco, but not much defense would come from there.

 

[greg334]

Rich,

I got to add something, the brits were partialy to blame, 50% while the french are the other 50% to blame. They went into the Sykes-Picot Agreement which partitioned the middle east and later with the 'league of nations' mandates (somewhat like the League of Extraordinary Gentlemen if you think about it) they screwed it up more and screwed the Arabs and King Faisal by further interfierence of the area. This was further screwed up by the league of nations replacement, the UN.