Topic 21 of 39: George W. Bush Presidency
Sat, Jan 20, 2001 (11:49) |
georgebush2000.net (sprin5)
George W. Bush becomes the 43rd President of the United States at the moment this topic is created. I'm watching the ceremony in my office at Cedar Creek. Though we parody and critique the new President, we also wish him well and hope the next four years are good times of the US, though the signs may be otherwise (eg. the stock market and the fall of the Dot Coms and the impending energy crisis). Dashell is saying the prayer, "give our new President calmness in the fact of storms".
52 responses total.
Topic 21 of 39 [politics]: George W. Bush Presidency
Response 1 of 52: georgebush2000.net (sprin5) * Sat, Jan 20, 2001 (11:52) * 1 lines
... approaching the swearing in.
Topic 21 of 39 [politics]: George W. Bush Presidency
Response 2 of 52: georgebush2000.net (sprin5) * Sat, Jan 20, 2001 (11:58) * 1 lines
Cheney just got sworn in.
Topic 21 of 39 [politics]: George W. Bush Presidency
Response 3 of 52: Karen (KarenR) * Tue, Feb 27, 2001 (23:38) * 50 lines
President "W" Bush gets an invite from the Queen to come and visit her in
England. One afternoon when drinking tea, he asks her what's the secret of
her success? She tells him that she relies on her people a lot and therefore
she must be certain that they are intelligent. She decides to show him
exactly what she means and phones Tony Blair.
"Now listen carefully, Mr. Bush. I'm going to ask Mr. Blair a question to
determine his intelligence."
On the phone she says, "Oh hello Mr. Blair, I have a question for you. Your
mother has a child, and your father has a child. This child is not one of
your brothers and is not one of your sisters. Who is he?"
Tony Blair responds, "It's me."
"Correct. Thank you, goodbye," said the Queen and she hangs up. "Did you
get that Mr. Bush?"
"Yes'm. Thanks a lot! I'll definitely be using that!"
Once back in the US he decides that he has doubts about some Republicans and
he's going to ask them the question. He arranges a meeting with Jesse Helms,
the Senator from North Carolina and asks him, "Mr. Helms, I know you're the
Chair of the Foreign Relations Committee, and I need to trust your judgment.
I have a question for you. "
"Anything to stimulate the mind of this old Southerner," Helms responds.
"Uhh, your mother has a child. And your father has a child. It is not
your brother and it is not your sister. Who is it?" asks Bush.
Helms thinks. And he thinks. Then he responds, "Umm, Y'all must gimme
some time to think about it."
Bush decides to give him a day to come up with the correct answer. That
afternoon, Helms calls a meeting to discuss the question and get an answer.
But NOBODY knows! They've drawn up a Jesse Helms family tree, to no avail.
The next morning, he realizes that he has to give G Dub an answer and as
a last resort, he decides to phone Colin Powell.
"Colin, Your mother has a child, and your father has a child. It is not your
brother, and not your sister. Who is it?"
Powell answers immediately, "Hey, Jesse, it's me of course, you dumb Cracker!"
Helms rushes to Bush's office, very impressed to know the answer to such a
difficult question! "Mr. Bush, I know! I know who it is! It's Colin Powell!"
"No, you dummy. It's Tony Blair!"
Topic 21 of 39 [politics]: George W. Bush Presidency
Response 4 of 52: Mike Griggs (mikeg) * Thu, Mar 1, 2001 (09:27) * 3 lines
Nice :-)
I think that perfectly encapsulates the idiot you have running your country at the moment :)
Topic 21 of 39 [politics]: George W. Bush Presidency
Response 5 of 52: Karen (KarenR) * Sun, Mar 4, 2001 (14:46) * 7 lines
People keep sending these to me. Sad but true....
Bill Clinton, Al Gore, and George W. Bush were set to face a firing squad in a small Central American country. Bill Clinton was the first one placed against the wall, and just before the order was given he yelled out, "Earthquake!" The firing squad fell into a panic and Bill jumped over the wall and escaped in the confusion.
Al Gore was the second one placed against the wall. The squad was reassembled and Al pondered what he had just witnessed. Again before the order was given, Al yelled out, "Tornado!" Again the squad fell apart and Al slipped over the wall.
The last person, George W. Bush, was placed against the wall. He was thinking, "I see the pattern here, just scream out something about a disaster, and hop over the wall." He confidently refused the blindfold as the firing squad was reassembled. As the rifles were raised in his direction, he grinned from ear to ear and yelled, "Fire!"
Topic 21 of 39 [politics]: George W. Bush Presidency
Response 6 of 52: Mike Griggs (mikeg) * Tue, Mar 6, 2001 (14:25) * 3 lines
hehee....very good one. He's not the sharpest knife in the block :-)
On a more serious note, I see that Cheney has had more heart surgery. I was reading that many people think of him as the 'brains' behind the Bush presidency (i.e., Georgey has plenty of charisma but doesn't have a clue about government). Will Cheney have to retire early? What would that mean for the US if he did?
Topic 21 of 39 [politics]: George W. Bush Presidency
Response 7 of 52: Karen (KarenR) * Tue, Mar 6, 2001 (14:41) * 3 lines
That Bush could name anyone he liked to fill the vacancy...like, for instance, some very right wing, fundamentalist (Pat Buchanan as an example).
I can't remember if the person has to be ratified by the Senate or all Congress. This goes back a while...to when Agnew resigned and Nixon appointed Nelson Rockefeller
Topic 21 of 39 [politics]: George W. Bush Presidency
Response 8 of 52: georgebush2000.net (sprin5) * Tue, Mar 6, 2001 (14:54) * 1 lines
Rockefeller being a very left leaning Republican, chances are Cheney's goint to make it, his heart blockage wasn't serious and it was a routine pit stop for a guy who's been getting treatment since he was 37. (heard on NPR this morning).
Topic 21 of 39 [politics]: George W. Bush Presidency
Response 9 of 52: Moon Dreams (Moon) * Tue, Mar 6, 2001 (17:38) * 1 lines
Speaking of making it. The Miami Herald did a recount of all the votes. The famous recount and GW had more votes. So the guy really won the election. I don't suppose the NY Times will be picking up on this story. ;-)
Topic 21 of 39 [politics]: George W. Bush Presidency
Response 10 of 52: Mike Griggs (mikeg) * Wed, Mar 7, 2001 (14:05) * 7 lines
I'm aware that Bush can simply nominate a new VP. I was wondering more about the impact on the political make-up of the Presidency.
Also, since the margin of the win was smaller than the margin of error, nobody can say whether Bush or Gore won the election with any certainty. I wonder about your statement, "The Miami Herald did a recount of all the votes.". How would the Miami Herald get access to all of the votes? How would they re-count them other than using hundreds of volunteers/paid employees? What they probably did in their 'recount' was to take a statistical sampling of a given area and then extrapolate it either to those counties that were in dispute or to the entire state. Once again, since the margin of the 'win' according to a proper machine/hand-count is smaller than the margin of error, and since the margin of error on a statistical extrapolation is larger than that again, their 'recount' is entirely invalid.
At the end of the day, either of them could well have been the 'true' victors (i.e., the victor calculated in the theoretical case of the margin of error being zero). The fact that Bush was 'ahead' when the counting was stopped by the courts gave him a psychological advantage that, to his credit, he used very well. Whether that really is enough to make him President, who knows? The only really fair way of proceeding would have been to have a re-vote; but, since 'having a decision' is more important than 'having the right decision' that didn't take place. Democracy my ass.
Topic 21 of 39 [politics]: George W. Bush Presidency
Response 11 of 52: Moon Dreams (Moon) * Wed, Mar 7, 2001 (15:32) * 12 lines
I wonder about your statement, "The Miami Herald did a recount of all the votes.". How would the Miami Herald get access to all of the votes? How would they re-count them other than using hundreds of volunteers/paid employees?
That is correct. They had lots of volunteers and it was all monitored by the press as well. Sorry to burst your bubble, Mike, but they did have access to all "votes in questions" from the election. Bush won by a small margin, but that was enough.
The only really fair way of proceeding would have been to have a re-vote; but, since 'having a decision' is more important than 'having the right decision' that didn't take place.
The re-vote should have been done across the US to be truly fair and democratic. As we learned from the election, there were other states with ballot problems as well and nobody made a stink about those votes being thrown out. The media should have been banned as well. There many people out in the west coast that did not go out to vote when the media called the election for Gore, remember?
And if you think I am taking sides all I have to say is: Long live the King.
And as for democracy? It's overrated. Read this, I think you will find this interesting:
http://www.geocities.com/motjuste7/westernculture2000.html
Topic 21 of 39 [politics]: George W. Bush Presidency
Response 12 of 52: Karen (KarenR) * Wed, Mar 7, 2001 (17:25) * 8 lines
it was a routine pit stop for a guy who's been getting treatment since he was 37.
But at some point, he isn't going to make it. Will he last four years?
the impact on the political make-up of the Presidency.
What do you mean by this, Mike?
'having a decision' is more important than 'having the right decision' that didn't take place.
That was certainly the message put forward by Bush and his crowd. v. insulting IMO. Unfortunately, most Americans don't know the difference.
Topic 21 of 39 [politics]: George W. Bush Presidency
Response 13 of 52: Evelyn Boake (lafn) * Wed, Mar 7, 2001 (20:20) * 1 lines
Get over it....
Topic 21 of 39 [politics]: George W. Bush Presidency
Response 14 of 52: Karen (KarenR) * Wed, Mar 7, 2001 (20:34) * 1 lines
...when my stock portfolio does.
Topic 21 of 39 [politics]: George W. Bush Presidency
Response 15 of 52: Moon Dreams (Moon) * Wed, Mar 7, 2001 (22:13) * 1 lines
Greenspan! That's another subject altogether. ;-)
Topic 21 of 39 [politics]: George W. Bush Presidency
Response 16 of 52: Mike Griggs (mikeg) * Thu, Mar 8, 2001 (16:32) * 11 lines
Sorry to burst your bubble, Mike
Please don't think you're bursting my bubble :-) I am intrigued that I heard nothing about it in the Press, though. Like I said, whether they did a full 'recount' or not the result still isn't valid because of the margin of error. Still, it's not who won that is important but who is occupying the White House :-)
the impact on the political make-up of the Presidency.
What do you mean by this, Mike?
Well, I think I said in my first 'serious' (*grin*) message in this topic that I had thought that Cheney was the 'brains' behind the Bush Presidency. Who would he choose for a replacement? What effect would this have on policy, particularly with regard to high profile issues such as abortion, the links between Church and state, etc.
Topic 21 of 39 [politics]: George W. Bush Presidency
Response 17 of 52: Mike Griggs (mikeg) * Sun, Mar 11, 2001 (17:36) * 1 lines
why did my last post kill the conversation in this topic?
Topic 21 of 39 [politics]: George W. Bush Presidency
Response 18 of 52: georgebush2000.net (sprin5) * Mon, Mar 12, 2001 (16:00) * 2 lines
It didn't, we can pick it up again!
Topic 21 of 39 [politics]: George W. Bush Presidency
Response 19 of 52: nick a'hannay (pmnh) * Thu, Mar 15, 2001 (04:38) * 18 lines
if i'm not mistaken, the miami herald also concluded that based on
the double-votes (resulting from the ludicrous butterfly ballot), bush
should've lost... more than 6000 people intending to vote for al gore
were effectively disenfranchised...
and regardless of any of it... whatever the herald or anyone else says
about this extremely illuminating episode... george bush didn't know,
didn't care... nor did any of his lackies, or masters... all that mattered
was taking the power, which they did...
and no matter what you think... you apologists for the moronic law school
reject that calls himself president... there will be repercussions, from
this... it'll make the bitterness from the 80's and even the 90's seem
pretty tepid...
"Get over it...."
right, right....
don't hold your breath
Topic 21 of 39 [politics]: George W. Bush Presidency
Response 20 of 52: georgebush2000.net (sprin5) * Fri, Mar 16, 2001 (08:06) * 1 lines
Bush may in for tough times getting reelected, the market is tanking, the energy crisis, and the threat lurking in the background of wide scale cyberwar (last week Russian hackers stole over a million credit cards off the net). These aren't going to be easy times and they honeymoon may be over soon.
Topic 21 of 39 [politics]: George W. Bush Presidency
Response 21 of 52: Mike Griggs (mikeg) * Fri, Mar 16, 2001 (15:12) * 1 lines
if gee dubya gets re-elected, I'll eat my head with my hat on it :-)
Topic 21 of 39 [politics]: George W. Bush Presidency
Response 22 of 52: georgebush2000.net (sprin5) * Mon, Mar 19, 2001 (23:11) * 2 lines
Today OPEC put on the brakes, that will have a huge impact on the economy later this summer. Gore's probably going to run again, and so will Bill Bradley (who I went to basketball camp with once).
Topic 21 of 39 [politics]: George W. Bush Presidency
Response 23 of 52: nick a'hannay (pmnh) * Thu, Mar 22, 2001 (02:48) * 7 lines
wow
did you meet him?
if so, what was he like?
i was a big knicks fan when i was a kid... loved bradley, debuchiere(sp.?),
frazier, reed, lucas, monroe... that was a great team
i think bill bradley would make a pretty decent president
Topic 21 of 39 [politics]: George W. Bush Presidency
Response 24 of 52: Mike Griggs (mikeg) * Sun, Mar 25, 2001 (07:42) * 1 lines
Surely they can come up with someone a little more dynamic than Al Bore?
Topic 21 of 39 [politics]: George W. Bush Presidency
Response 25 of 52: Mike Griggs (mikeg) * Sun, Mar 25, 2001 (07:42) * 1 lines
This is all dependent, of course, on whether Dubya manages not to nuke the Ruskies and everyone else.
Topic 21 of 39 [politics]: George W. Bush Presidency
Response 26 of 52: Mike Griggs (mikeg) * Sun, Mar 25, 2001 (17:48) * 12 lines
(http://www.cnn.com/2001/ALLPOLITICS/03/25/bush.gridiron.ap/index.html)
WASHINGTON (AP) -- President Bush struck back with humor at anybody who might suggest he is dumb, lazy, inarticulate and, worst of all, a puppet president allowing Vice President Dick Cheney to make all the important decisions.
"To those people I say ...," Bush said, casting a deadpan nod in Cheney's direction. "Dick, what do I say?"
--
At least the guy has a sense of humour. Still a man with a sense of humour and the release codes for nuclear weapons do not good bedfellows make :-)
Topic 21 of 39 [politics]: George W. Bush Presidency
Response 27 of 52: enlightenment777 (sniggers) * Sun, May 13, 2001 (15:14) * 33 lines
May 12, 2001
Dear President George Bush,
I never really thought that I would write to you. Well, here, I’m doing it, for better or for worse I suppose, and I hope that you will welcome this attempt to share my feelings and thoughts with an open mind. I will not ramble on as I seem to have done in letters of recent years.
Essentially, what I am writing to you about is the project called CSETI
. It seems to me that this is a project that can and should be taken seriously by both The White House and all members of Congress; indeed, by every human being on Earth.
The obvious, traditional means of dealing with people who wish to disclose secret to top secret information such as sightings and experiences with “extra terrestrial” intelligence (ETs) and unidentified flying objects (UFOs) is not acceptable. As a great number of people including
myself feel, any government should never lie to the people. Due to the nonstop sightings and
other experiences all throughout time, all over this planet, I believe that the time is now for American intelligence specifically to reveal the truth regarding advanced propulsion systems, energy sources, and what are called “black projects” or ultra-secret projects. In the past, I believe it was George Bush I who denied, more than once, real data to President Reagan. I do not know why he would have done that. I do not know why the intelligence community at large wants to keep these things secret much less lie to or kill people who disclose such illuminating information.
The root cause of much of what has already happened on the negative side seems to me to be fear. What is there to be afraid of? Well, noone wants to upset the economy with new advances (“new” advances) in the energy field. I don’t know what the answer is to that. Surely, there must be a middle-ground between advanced power (and propulsion) systems, those who know about and utilize those systems, and the current hierarchy of power known as “big oil” and other “big” organizations like Chrysler, Ford, and Chevrolet...and others.
Starting now, I hope that the past can be the past. I and many, many others hope that secrecy and brute, lethal force will no longer be traditional. When I think of the true capabili-ties of humanity I am both encouraged and overjoyed. We have, in our minds and bodies, the capabilities to travel in space-time, to utilize inexhaustible power and food sources, to reverse the damage done to human beings and to the environment we live in by animal-based products, fossil fuel products, and by what is true barbarism as far as the handling of much government business including (especially including) ultra-secret projects, sightings, abductions, and other experiences with advanced sentient beings.
I sincerely hope that you and your administration will support the CSETI project. It is a very important project with the potential to change life on Earth for the better, for all time. But before I end this letter, I would like to share with you how I am thinking. It has taken most of my 31 years of life so far to come up with what I believe is a solid hypotheses based on common sense. The way I think it goes is this:
I used to go hiking in and around this wonderfully dysfunctional city of Tucson, Arizona. As I did so, I noticed that there were ruins out there to the south and west of city center. These ruins were fascinating to me even though they were merely crumbled stone and burnt rafters. They were the homesteads of some of the first Americans to settle, to homestead American soil. I asked around. Amazingly, once, people could go out somewhere where there was lots of space, stick a flag of some sort in the ground, and claim the land as far as their eyes could see. Many of these homesteads were not successful as in the one that is in my mind at this moment which is located on the top of a large hill. The point is this, and it is a very important point: the windows started just above ground level and stopped below the line of sight. That is, they are much shorter than one would think they should be. I spent some time thinking about that and thought well of course they would be! People were just plain shorte
in those days! Then, I thought of the PBS specials I saw on television. You know, the specials on castles in ancient Eurasia. I remember one camera revealing the windows in a tower. Yes, the windows were much shorter than most any human being I ever knew!
The interesting point here is this: human beings are obviously evolving. That is, humanity changes over time. We become taller and our heads get bigger. Why is this important? Well, I just took a Biology class and learned all about the major observances and conclusions of Darwin. Science, it seems, is often not much more than very careful observance over time, questioning, developing a hypotheses, testing that hypotheses, developing an answer to your questions that fits the hypotheses, coming up with a theory (perhaps) which often leads to more questions. Keep in mind that none of science either proves or disproves the existence of God or the validity of Jesus Christ.
Okay, so if you can accept what I have written so far then perhaps you will accept the next step, which is this: How will humanity change in the future? What will our diets be like? What will the environment be like? How is the environment changing as I type this? If you can find for yourself ways in which life is changing that will affect the physiology and biology of human beings, perhaps then you will be convinced that doing the right thing means revealing what was, before, handled with narrow-mindedness, fear, and secrecy.
Science tells us that travel in space-time is possible. My own mind tells me that, if certain steps are not taken, life will change forever, negatively, considering the continued utilization of fossil fuels, chemical, biological, and radiological warfare and the terrible, global effects that such warfare would have on life on Earth. Do you remember that little chart that Darwin and others came up with that depicts the changes human beings have theoretically gone through? On this chart there are amoebas, early cavemen, and then “modern” man. Perhaps there is one image missing from that picture: a little gray guy with black, almond shaped eyes wearing no clothing smiling and waving hello. There is, quite simply, nothing to fear from other human beings and, more importantly, from the unknown and/or the future.
Time to go now. It’s Mother’s Day and I’m supposed to go visit my grandma. Her husband passed away a few years ago and I’m sure she would like to have me visit her. I have said what I wanted to say, what I wanted to say is simple enough, and I hope that this letter will not be intercepted nor tampered with in it’s course to you (If I can remember your mailing address that is). It seems that change is inevitable, but it could be either 1)change the negative way or 2)change the positive way. Keeping things secret, covering things up, and killing people, at least to me, would appear to be the negative way. So how about starting a tradition of truth and illumination rather than of secrecy and darkness?
Thank you for taking the time to read this. I hope that you will take the subject of the past, present, and future seriously. I also hope that you will take the lives of all human beings who live on this planet seriously, that you will value those lives, and will do the right thing to the full extent of your power which I know is vast and far reaching.
I have, in contrast to the way I normally think about the intelligence community, devel-oped quite a fondness (call it intrigue) with secret stuff, with the men and women I call the “Ssshh Guys” or, considering present politics, perhaps I should say “Ssshh People”. The Shhh People have made quite a few mistakes in the past but they, and the military, could put their power together and start solving problems rather than creating them, start making real changes and steps towards unity rather than division. Castro’s beard and other notorious, hillarious screw ups don’t really reveal the full extent of ultra-secret activities. I know that, in the past, intelligence has helped to free people and to make real, positive differences in the lives of human beings. Perhaps my own Great Grandfather, Colonel Louis Paul Phillip, who was born in Germany, raised on a farm in the U.S., and served on General Patton’s General Service Staff (the GSS) had a positive hand somewhere in the larger picture of things. Who know
. He was a towering, powerful man at one time before he died, an incredible force of leadership and strength that led people in the positive way of truth and dedication past many barriers that once stood in the way of people. It would be extremely difficult for me to believe or accept that those days are gone. People must still believe in truth, not just the truth of religion but also the full extent of the truth of science...and I could learn a lot more about that myself.
Sincerely,
Kevin David Bennett
Student, Pima Community College
Tucson, Arizona
Topic 21 of 39 [politics]: George W. Bush Presidency
Response 28 of 52: Paul Terry Walhus (terry) * Sun, Aug 19, 2001 (10:20) * 25 lines
Saturday August 18
THE GENIUS OF GEORGE W. BUSH
by Frank Rich
After months of deriding the president as an idiot, Democrats have to face
the fact that he is at the very least an idiot savant - and just possibly
a genius.
The final proof is The Great Stem Cell Compromise. "This is way beyond
politics," said George W. Bush while pondering his verdict. What's more, he
told the nation, he had found a solution to please everyone. His plan will
at once "lead to breakthrough therapies and cures" and do so "without
crossing a fundamental moral line."
In fact, everything Mr. Bush said is false. His decision was completely
about politics.
[...]
Denigrated as a lightweight and a slacker, he seized on the stem cell debate
to transform his image into that of our philosopher king
More:
Topic 21 of 39 [politics]: George W. Bush Presidency
Response 29 of 52: Marcia (MarciaH) * Sun, Aug 19, 2001 (17:31) * 46 lines
While visiting England, George Bush is invited to tea with the Queen. He asks
her what her leadership philosophy is. She says that it is to surround
herself with intelligent people.
He asks how she knows if they're intelligent. "I do so by asking them the
right questions," says the Queen. "Allow me to demonstrate."
She phones Tony Blair and says, "Mr. Prime Minister. Please answer this
question:
Your mother has a child, and your father has a child, and this child is not
your brother or sister. Who is it?"
Tony Blair responds, "It's me, ma'am."
"Correct. Thank you and good-bye, sir," says the Queen. She hangs up and
says, "Did you get that, Mr. Bush?"
"Yes ma'am. Thanks a lot. I'll definitely be using that!"
Upon returning to Washington, he decides he'd better put the Chairman of the
Senate Foreign Relations Committee to the test. He summons Jesse Helms to the
White House and says, "Senator Helms, I wonder if you can answer a question
for me."
"Why, of course, sir. What's on your mind?" "Uhh, your mother has a child,
and your father has a child, and this child is not your brother or your
sister. Who is it?"
Helms hems and haws and finally asks, "Can I think about it and get back to
you?" Bush agrees, and Helms leaves.
Helms immediately calls a meeting of other senior Republican senators, and
they puzzle over the question for several hours, but nobody can come up with
an answer. Finally, in desperation, Helms calls Colin Powell at the State
Department and explains his problem.
"Now lookee here, son, your mother has a child, and your father has a child,
and this child is not your brother or your sister. Who is it?" Powell answers
immediately, "It's me, of course, you dumb cracker."
Much relieved, Helms rushes back to the White House and exclaims, "I know the
answer, sir! I know who it is! It's Colin Powell!"
And Bush replies in disgust, "Wrong, it's Tony Blair."
Topic 21 of 39 [politics]: George W. Bush Presidency
Response 30 of 52: Paul Terry Walhus (terry) * Tue, Sep 25, 2001 (10:17) * 80 lines
A remarkable article from, of all people, Gerald Posner.
=====
I Was Wrong About Bush
By Gerald Posner. Mr. Posner is the author of numerous books including
"Case Closed: Lee Harvey Oswald and the Assassination of JFK."
What a difference 10 months makes. Last November I broke the unwritten
rule that requires journalists to be neutral political observers when I
got embroiled in the controversy over the presidential election and
publicly supported Al Gore.
It was not just with friends that I passionately argued the election had
been stolen and that Mr. Gore would be the better president. I was one of
the signatories to the pompously titled "Emergency Committee of Concerned
Citizens 2000," which took full-page ads in the New York Times demanding a
revote in Palm Beach county. I wrote op-eds for Salon.com and the New York
Daily News. On television talk shows from MSNBC to Fox News's popular "The
O'Reilly Factor," I made the case for Mr. Gore. In thousands of e-mails, I
urged voters to deluge Clay Roberts, director of Florida's Division of
Elections, with appeals for a recount.
Of course, I did not know whether the election had gone for Mr. Gore or
George W. Bush. As a partisan, I did not care. I was convinced that
Mr. Gore was by far the best-qualified candidate and the man most fit to
lead the U.S. Mr. Bush was not only untested nationally, but he seemed to
me bereft of the character or intellect to become a real leader, and I
feared that four years, and possibly eight, under Mr. Bush would set the
country back.
How wrong I was. Since the murderous terror attacks on the World Trade
Center and the Pentagon, President Bush has come alive in a way I did not
think possible. It was as though the attack on America -- which he rightly
called an "act of war" from the start -- gave him a focus and clarity I
had not earlier seen.
If there was a single event that convinced me my initial feelings were
wrong, it was the president's rather remarkable speech to the country and
a joint session of Congress last Thursday. Like Franklin Roosevelt or
Winston Churchill, he rallied a country's spirit, had the courage to tell
us the bad news that the upcoming battle would be neither swift nor easy,
and declared that those who would destroy our culture and values would not
prevail.
I had always found Mr. Bush stiff in his scripted speeches. But last
Thursday he was infused with passion and outrage. His sincerity was
heartfelt, and boosted almost all who listened to him. And precisely
because we all know he is not a masterful orator, the power of his words
and the forcefulness of his delivery carried even more impact. He rose to
this most important occasion.
Sometimes historians wonder whether great leaders are made by the crises
they confront, or whether they would be great leaders even in untroubled
times. More often than not, real leadership flourishes when faced with
imminent threats and dangers. That is what America faces at the start of
the 21st century from a radical perversion of Islam. And President Bush
showed all of us who doubted him, and voted against him, that he is indeed
a leader.
There will be numerous tests for him in the long battle ahead. But, as of
now, he has converted many of us to admirers, and he deserves our complete
support. The entire administration, from Colin Powell to Donald Rumsfeld
to Dick Cheney, inspires more confidence as we embark on this uncertain
war than we likely would have had in any Gore administration.
I must sadly admit that Bill Clinton, for whom I voted twice, could not
have delivered that same clear speech last Thursday. His almost compulsive
need to please all sides would have prevented him from casting the issues
as starkly or as unequivocally.
My late father used to tell me that one of the hallmarks of good character
is the courage to admit mistakes. Most people who lock themselves into a
public position want to keep defending their original stance, even when in
their heart they know subsequent events have proven them incorrect.
Well, I was vocal last year in stating my firm belief that the wrong man
was elected president. Now I am compelled to admit I was mistaken. The
best man for this incredibly hard campaign is now president. I suspect
many of my fellow Democrats feel exactly the same way.
Topic 21 of 39 [politics]: George W. Bush Presidency
Response 31 of 52: nick a'hannay (pmnh) * Mon, Oct 15, 2001 (12:04) * 3 lines
what monumental crap
posner is only another example of the simpering liberal, eagarly courting the approval of the Right, for reasons i cannot begin to fathom... whether this derives from shallowness/insecurity of his own principles, or whether it's pathological (bad potty-training, whatever), it is unique to certain of those on the left, and i find it sickening
Topic 21 of 39 [politics]: George W. Bush Presidency
Response 32 of 52: Rob Glennie (AotearoaKiwi) * Sat, Jan 12, 2002 (05:29) * 12 lines
Hi all
Well I am not convinced that Bush actually won the election given all the carry on in Florida. I wonder about the votes that were withheld. WHY were they withheld??
I have 5 problems with Bush's administration and am not convinced that he is the right man for the White House.
1)Environment
2)Defence
3)Foreign Policy
4)United States attitude to the world
5)Terrorism
Rob
Topic 21 of 39 [politics]: George W. Bush Presidency
Response 33 of 52: Paul Terry Walhus (terry) * Mon, Jan 14, 2002 (06:54) * 24 lines
"Bush Faints While Watching TV at White House
Jan 13 9:23pm ET
By Steve Holland
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Bush fainted and fell off a couch on
Sunday night after choking on a pretzel while watching a televised
football game, but a subsequent medical examination showed he was fine,
his doctor said.
The president's physician, Air Force Col. Richard Tubb, said Bush had
complained that he had not been feeling well in the last couple of
days. This condition combined with his having just eaten a pretzel that
he did not swallow properly caused his heart rate to slow, and as a
result he fainted.
Tubb said Bush, who was at the White House, ended up with an abrasion
on his left cheekbone and a small bruise on his lower lip after hitting
his head on the carpeted floor after fainting."
The rest of the not completely undisturbing story at:
http://www.go2net.com/headlines/general/20020113/404213.html
Topic 21 of 39 [politics]: George W. Bush Presidency
Response 34 of 52: Rob Glennie (AotearoaKiwi) * Tue, Jan 15, 2002 (02:35) * 8 lines
Hi all
Bush's foreign policy has been of concern to some around the world and I share many of those concerns, not least the threat of anti American attacks like the those perpertrated by faceless cowards on September 11. His response has been measured and remarkably well controlled considering the sheer mind numbing scale of the attacks. But there are problems some of which are interconnected and some which are older than most existing nations on earth at present.
Bush ought to pressure Israel and and the Palestinian Authority to reach a peace deal (something unheard of and unrealistic at the moment), but in doing so it might be wise to put both on notice that foreign aid will depend on how they behave.
In Palestine, I believe all funding for Hamas and like minded groups should be cut, their assets frozen on the understanding that they will be confiscated if the violence escalates too much. While that is happening the Israelis can look at alternative forms of action to bulldozing houses. That sort of action is guaranteed a violent response and if Ariel Sharon wants no more Israelis killed then he might be interested in changing the way the Israeli forces respond.
Rob
Topic 21 of 39 [politics]: George W. Bush Presidency
Response 35 of 52: Moon Dreams (Moon) * Tue, Jan 15, 2002 (08:22) * 2 lines
Bush ought to pressure Israel and and the Palestinian Authority to reach a peace deal
It is long overdue! But what did you think of the speech Senator Lieberman gave yesterday exalting Bush to get rid of Saddam Hussein? I'm afraid that peace in the Middle East is still far off.
Topic 21 of 39 [politics]: George W. Bush Presidency
Response 36 of 52: Rob Glennie (AotearoaKiwi) * Tue, Jan 15, 2002 (20:05) * 8 lines
Hi all
Before you so much as contemplate the possibility of finishing of Saddam Hussein, ask yourself this. What will the world think and how does he link with terrorism?
No one has shown a DIRECT link between Saddam and terrorism though one might be able to assume that he is involved. Furthermore, if you want to isolate Saddam Hussein then the Arab world has to be kept onside for they will not always come running to the aid of the US, and he still wields influence in the meetings of Arab heads of state. The problems in the Arab world are interconnected and some might say only a joint approach by both sides will ease the problems.
Rob
Topic 21 of 39 [politics]: George W. Bush Presidency
Response 37 of 52: Moon Dreams (Moon) * Tue, Jan 15, 2002 (20:17) * 1 lines
The fact is that oil and vinegar do not mix, no matter how much you shake them. The situation is too far gone, too complex and too old. It's the Crusades, whether you want to accept it or not.
Topic 21 of 39 [politics]: George W. Bush Presidency
Response 38 of 52: Rob Glennie (AotearoaKiwi) * Wed, Jan 16, 2002 (23:49) * 5 lines
Hi all
What about talking the North Koreans out of isolation and back into the real world? Clinton and Albright had the right idea and although they overlooked the fact that most North Koreans do not own a phoneline and basic infrastructure was being neglected in favour of testing missiles, the Clinton Administration had made progress with the North which I thought was a first step to easing the tension.
Rob
Topic 21 of 39 [politics]: George W. Bush Presidency
Response 39 of 52: Paul Terry Walhus (terry) * Fri, Jun 28, 2002 (11:44) * 6 lines
The Washington Post reports that multiple witnesses observed the
underaged Bush twins guzzling brewskis at a DC nightspot on Wednesday
night. No arrests.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A57775-2002Jun27.html
Topic 21 of 39 [politics]: George W. Bush Presidency
Response 40 of 52: JOE (g7hvp) * Fri, Jun 28, 2002 (15:15) * 3 lines
Is that not the law all over the world the family of
a poitician and the poitician can break the law.
Joe
Topic 21 of 39 [politics]: George W. Bush Presidency
Response 41 of 52: JOE (g7hvp) * Fri, Jun 28, 2002 (15:20) * 3 lines
oops sorry Politician not poitician.
both mean a lie is not a lie if spoken by a POLITICIAN.
Joe
Topic 21 of 39 [politics]: George W. Bush Presidency
Response 42 of 52: Paul Terry Walhus (terry) * Thu, Sep 19, 2002 (21:42) * 43 lines
Hi Paul
I did not know where to put this but seeing that G W BUSH had
a bit to do with Texas < lol >I put it here
Genealogists discover President's royal connections
By Ananova
Prince William and George W Bush are 17th cousins, according to
genealogists.
The heir to the throne and the US President can trace a common
ancestry back to 15th century Northamptonshire squire Henry Spencer.
His younger son William founded the line that eventually produced
wartime leader Sir Winston Churchill and Diana, Princess of Wales.
Descendants of Henry Spencer's older son, John, included Anne
Marbury, who moved from Lincolnshire to Massachusetts during the
1600s.
She was later banished for religious reasons and killed by native
Americans but a direct descendent of hers, Harriet Fay, married James
Bush, the great-great grandfather of the President.
Mr Bush is a great admirer of Sir Winston and keeps a bust of the
former Prime Minister on his desk at the White House.
The link between the families was made by researchers at US genealogy
company MyFamily.com, which is collaborating with the Public Record
Office in London on publishing census returns for England and Wales
from 1841 to 1901 on-line.
Details of Mr Bush's royal connections will be made available
on-line.
A spokeswoman for MyFamily.com says the discovery about the
President's connections to the royals was only made recently, and
research is continuing to find out more about Henry Spencer, who
lived in Badby between 1420 and 1478.
Joe
Topic 21 of 39 [politics]: George W. Bush Presidency
Response 43 of 52: Dubya (bush2004com) * Mon, Dec 29, 2003 (14:04) * 3 lines
http://netscan.research.microsoft.com/reportcard.asp?timespan=m&searchdate=10/31/2003&NGID=22553&searchfor=alt.politics.bush
is a good summary of Bush related newsgroups.
Topic 21 of 39 [politics]: George W. Bush Presidency
Response 44 of 52: nick a'hannay (pmnh) * Thu, Jan 1, 2004 (20:25) * 5 lines
is a good summary of Bush related newsgroups.
lots of pictures, huh?
(and not too many high-fallutin' words)...
Topic 21 of 39 [politics]: George W. Bush Presidency
Response 45 of 52: Dubya (bush2004com) * Sun, Jan 4, 2004 (22:26) * 1 lines
There's also the new site, http://bush2004.com and it has a bit of an interesting spin!
Topic 21 of 39 [politics]: George W. Bush Presidency
Response 46 of 52: zx6rider (zx6rider) * Wed, Nov 3, 2004 (19:43) * 7 lines
OK folks; it's the day after. Anything to say...
I am one of the disappointed... but, idealist that I am, I'm hoping W developes some listening skills.
I hope that someday I will see a government that works for "the people" instead of big business. I hope that someday I will see a time of accepted diversity within our country. I hope I will see a time where we don't have poverty here; where our elders are respected; where all of our children are educated equally and where one needn't choose between health and food.
I don't believe it will be under this President.
Topic 21 of 39 [politics]: George W. Bush Presidency
Response 47 of 52: Paul Terry Walhus (terry) * Sat, Nov 6, 2004 (19:36) * 16 lines
Molly sez:
Now, you know you cannot keep a dog that kills chickens, no matter how fine a dog it is otherwise.
The way to do it is to take one of the chickens the dog has killed and wire the thing around the dog's neck, good and strong. And leave it there until that dead chicken stinks so bad that no other dog or person will even go near that poor beast.
Thing'll smell so bad the dog won't be able to stand himself. You leave it on there until the last little bit of flesh rots and falls off, and that dog won't kill chickens again.
The Bush administration is going to be wired around the neck of the American people for four more years, long enough for the stench to sicken everybody. It should cure the country of electing Republicans. And at least Democrats won't have to clean up after him until it is real clear to everyone who made the mess.
Later in the same piece she says
So, fellow progressives, stop thinking about suicide or moving abroad. Want to feel better? Eat a sour grape, then figure out what you can do to help rescue the country - join something, send a little money to some group, call somewhere and offer to volunteer, find a politician you like at the local level and start helping him or her to move up. Don't mourn, organize.
http://www.sacbee.com/content/opinion/national/ivins/story/11326181p-12240892c.html
for the rest
Topic 21 of 39 [politics]: George W. Bush Presidency
Response 48 of 52: zx6rider (zx6rider) * Sun, Nov 7, 2004 (20:16) * 1 lines
I have always loved Molly. She does cut to the chase without detour.
Topic 21 of 39 [politics]: George W. Bush Presidency
Response 49 of 52: Paul Terry Walhus (terry) * Tue, Jan 25, 2005 (10:39) * 1 lines
Social Security ain't broke. Why fix it?
Topic 21 of 39 [politics]: George W. Bush Presidency
Response 50 of 52: Paul Terry Walhus (terry) * Wed, Jan 26, 2005 (07:07) * 4 lines
Condoleezza Rice is expected to win Senate confirmation as secretary of state on Wednesday, after hours of sometimes-bitter debate Tuesday that focused largely on the war in Iraq.
http://www.cnn.com/2005/ALLPOLITICS/01/26/rice.confirmation/
Topic 21 of 39 [politics]: George W. Bush Presidency
Response 51 of 52: Paul Terry Walhus (terry) * Fri, Feb 25, 2005 (20:45) * 19 lines
Amazing Facts to stop and think about:
With just one exception, there has been a Nixon, Dole, or Bush on the
GOP ticket since 1956.
56: Nixon ran for Vice President (won)
60: Nixon ran for President. (lost)
64: Goldwater and Whatizname (lost)
68: Nixon ran for President. (won)
72: Nixon ran for President. (won)
76: Dole ran for Vice President. (lost)
80: Bush ran for Vice President. (won)
84: Bush ran for Vice President. (won)
88: Bush ran for President. (won)
92: Bush ran for President. (lost)
96: Dole ran for President. (lost)
00: Bush Jr. ran for President. (won)
04: Bush Jr. ran for President. (won)
Topic 21 of 39 [politics]: George W. Bush Presidency
Response 52 of 52: politician (cfadm) * Sun, Jul 2, 2006 (12:51) * 1 lines
Well, Nixon and Dole are out. That leaves Jeb.
politics conference 
Main Menu