I agree that most of presidents, elected in democratic way (or close to it) are mostly just puppets in hands of bankers, army and some other rich pricks. The problem I have with Bush is that - this guy just talks empty ****!!! He just tells all those sweet, super patriotic (the greatest nation!!! who do you think you are!!!) crap. I think the only Americans who voted for him were women!!! Maybe he is charming, but is a leader?!?!
Bush's Speech
- Thread starter spycatcher34
- Start date
amadeus
Bishop of Bio-Dome
I can't vote yet <img src="icon8.gif" border="0"> because I'm only 15, however, if I could have voted in 2000, I wouldn't have voted for Bush, Gore, Nader, Browne, or Buchanan...I would have voted for Reagan <img src="biggrin.gif" border="0">
Archbob
Ancient CFC Guardian
I'd rather have clinton in charge now.
my syntax
Chieftain
If you want something done right you have to do it yourself. I think I should be in charge. <img src="graemlins/king.gif" border="0" alt="[King]" />
I came over from poly to get away from people making rash statements who have no clue about the situation they are talking about. I see that it might be a mistake in coming here. I read all of these statements and I wonder where you get your information. I would wager that you soak in most of your info from the all knowing media. Since there was no real question to start out with I will simply say this.
I don’t know what people were expecting. Maybe a FDR type speech. Or maybe a speech worthy of JFK or Clinton. Bush’s statement were straight forward and to the point. I’m sorry if you weren’t moved or felt something was left out. My only response is that there are more important things to do right now than to critique a speech that was probably written moments before. But then again some of you may only be interested in words and not actual action. My advice is to get over it. My advice to the foreigners that posted their distaste over one aspect of Bush or another, is to remember that there are more important things to be done right now than to argue over something that is none of you business.
We need to move deliberately and carefully in the coming weeks to determine who is responsible for this. When we know who it is, we need to move with terrible brutality. Try to keep collateral damage to a minimal but we should not shrink from the task at hand.
I don’t know what people were expecting. Maybe a FDR type speech. Or maybe a speech worthy of JFK or Clinton. Bush’s statement were straight forward and to the point. I’m sorry if you weren’t moved or felt something was left out. My only response is that there are more important things to do right now than to critique a speech that was probably written moments before. But then again some of you may only be interested in words and not actual action. My advice is to get over it. My advice to the foreigners that posted their distaste over one aspect of Bush or another, is to remember that there are more important things to be done right now than to argue over something that is none of you business.
We need to move deliberately and carefully in the coming weeks to determine who is responsible for this. When we know who it is, we need to move with terrible brutality. Try to keep collateral damage to a minimal but we should not shrink from the task at hand.
Ashoka
Reluctant Warrior
Somewhat reluctantly, I must agree with Sprayber
I absolutely despise Bush - I think the election was rigged, but that's another thread. He is doing a passable job now, because he has some very capable people behind him. My fear is that this event is so big (I've said unprecedented a few times) and the response will also need to be uprecedented. How do you do that while remaining compassionate and in control? Do even the Bush supporters really feel Bush could have handled the Invasion of Normandy, for example? Because that is the type of situation we are facing. I fear Bush lacks the competence to do this, and feel he will end up hanging on for the ride, historically.
I absolutely despise Bush - I think the election was rigged, but that's another thread. He is doing a passable job now, because he has some very capable people behind him. My fear is that this event is so big (I've said unprecedented a few times) and the response will also need to be uprecedented. How do you do that while remaining compassionate and in control? Do even the Bush supporters really feel Bush could have handled the Invasion of Normandy, for example? Because that is the type of situation we are facing. I fear Bush lacks the competence to do this, and feel he will end up hanging on for the ride, historically.
H Tower
Prince
excuse me, but isn't reagan a vegtable now? I thought he had alzhiemers.
Berzerker
Deity
Berzerker
Deity
Ashoka
Reluctant Warrior
Reagan was a vegetable *before* he had Alzheimers.
With respect, rmsharpe,if you are 15 years old, you obviously did not live through most of Reagan's term. I would avoid making comments about FDR, for example, for fear somone my Grandad's age would come and slap me upside the head for being sassy. I actually lived through the Reagan 80's, and it was not the "Golden Age" many conservatives like to talk about. He was an okay president - better than either Bush, and smarter (at first) - but he was certainly not in control of his administration after his first term. He got by the same way George II gets by now - he had a very capable staff. That's not at all a bad thing - except when leadership skills and charisma are desperately needed by the nation. At least Reagan had charisma - - I fear Bush lacks both.
In Peace -<br />Ashoka
With respect, rmsharpe,if you are 15 years old, you obviously did not live through most of Reagan's term. I would avoid making comments about FDR, for example, for fear somone my Grandad's age would come and slap me upside the head for being sassy. I actually lived through the Reagan 80's, and it was not the "Golden Age" many conservatives like to talk about. He was an okay president - better than either Bush, and smarter (at first) - but he was certainly not in control of his administration after his first term. He got by the same way George II gets by now - he had a very capable staff. That's not at all a bad thing - except when leadership skills and charisma are desperately needed by the nation. At least Reagan had charisma - - I fear Bush lacks both.
In Peace -<br />Ashoka
Magnus
Diplocat
I think the president is mishandling the situation so far, but its only 36 hours, in time perhaps he will show some spine.
Berzerker
Deity
Our "wimp" Bush, whaile you have been yapping about how angry you are, enginered and international coalition of all NATO + some other Nations for a war WHICH IS GOING TO BE EXPANDED to cover most international terrosim that attacks the members of this coalitian. By the end of the month it will include almost all industrialized nations including much of Eastern Europe and Asia (but unlikely China). NO Leader has ever accomplished a coalitian like this. It is going to be larger than the allies in WW2, and will have been put together in a matter of DAYS. Your are seeing history in the making here far beyond the terroist attack, and you do not even have a clue about it.
VoodooAce
Emperor
I, like more than half of America, did not vote for 'W'. Don't like him. He's a puppet for the rich and America is basically being run by big business.
BUT, what do you expect of the guy? What is he supposed to do? Thus far he's avoided making stupid, irrational, irresponsible statements.
He's done what he is supposed to do, which is go on TV and try to reassure America that our government is still functioning....mostly just symbolic. Our President and our government are fine, and so are we.
I must say, though, that while some are being a far too hard on 'W', Lefty gives way, way too much credit to him. The world is begging to join the coalition...unlike what his father had to deal with a decade ago.
And, yeah, I'm a tree hugger and my heart bleeds. And I'm as proud of this as I am to be an American!
[ September 13, 2001: Message edited by: VoodooAce ]</p>
BUT, what do you expect of the guy? What is he supposed to do? Thus far he's avoided making stupid, irrational, irresponsible statements.
He's done what he is supposed to do, which is go on TV and try to reassure America that our government is still functioning....mostly just symbolic. Our President and our government are fine, and so are we.
I must say, though, that while some are being a far too hard on 'W', Lefty gives way, way too much credit to him. The world is begging to join the coalition...unlike what his father had to deal with a decade ago.
And, yeah, I'm a tree hugger and my heart bleeds. And I'm as proud of this as I am to be an American!
[ September 13, 2001: Message edited by: VoodooAce ]</p>
VoodooAce
Emperor
Something else occurs to me as I read the above posts....
It may very well be a good thing that Bush didn't have the integrity to say "I realize the American people, or Floridians for that matter, didn't elect me. It's obvious that the majority of Floridians wanted to vote for Gore".
If this had happened, it would be the Democrats in power now and we'd have the same boring stuff we had for eight years under Bubba.
Instead of seeing Democrats stand tall and proclaim support for our President, you'd have Republicans already pointing fingers and saying it's all the Democrats' fault that this could happen in America.
It may very well be a good thing that Bush didn't have the integrity to say "I realize the American people, or Floridians for that matter, didn't elect me. It's obvious that the majority of Floridians wanted to vote for Gore".
If this had happened, it would be the Democrats in power now and we'd have the same boring stuff we had for eight years under Bubba.
Instead of seeing Democrats stand tall and proclaim support for our President, you'd have Republicans already pointing fingers and saying it's all the Democrats' fault that this could happen in America.
Thankyou Spraybar! I was feeling the same way. Its hard to see what you think he should be doing. You don't want him to rush into a full blown war yet you want him to move you in a speach. It was probably because he did not know, and still doesn't know all the facts about what has happened.
Btw I am only 16 if you are wondering about who are other young members.
Btw I am only 16 if you are wondering about who are other young members.
Even the somewhat pacifist countries of Sweden, Finland, and Austira have not joined pladging support, including military action against the terroists.
Similar threads
