posted on October 18, 2001 02:06:45 PM new
I believe part (maybe even a large part) of the reasons why terrorist counties have decided they could get away with attacks on America is the bashing and jokes we make about our leaders. I know this is a free country with free speech, but how do you think other countries perceive Bush, and Clinton before him, after the comedians and the public get through with them?
I'm not saying we don't have the right to speak out against government, but do we have to make them the topic of every late night show every single night? That's what we have done for the past 12 years and it might be time to back off and show some respect! Not because we have to, but because we should want to.
posted on October 18, 2001 02:32:36 PM new
plsmith:you said "Bushisms" funny and harmless. if that was all that the thread was about I would agree 100% but:
Military record of the "Moral Giant": proved that not to be the case .
your precise information definitely points to a loaded gun and a trigger finger.
I am not attacking you ,but you did ,after all imply (by name) that I am not patriotic and that is not the case.
TWINSOFT posted this: "Anyway, I thought this thread was about some new vocabulary Bush invented" I fell into the same trap as twinsoft...it sounded funny ,but it turned into something different.
posted on October 18, 2001 03:40:52 PM new
Breinhold, I'm not the one who took it (this thread) to uncharted, hostile waters. I responded to one who did, in kind. Never said you were unpatriotic, either...
I'm done with this now. Spaz isentertaining with cheese on another thread...
posted on October 18, 2001 05:07:40 PM newBreinhold, to imply that being an American right now means silent, unquestioning support of George W. Bush is decidedly unAmerican, imo...
Plsmith, I didn't say "silent, unquestioning support." I took exception to the comment that Bush engineered this war. That statement is somewhat more than innocent comic relief.
I don't know if Bush is a "moral giant" but this is a case of "damned if you do, damned if you don't." If Bush based his decisions on popularity polls, he'd be accused of electioneering.
I thought Clinton was the best president since white bread. But look at Clinton's history: A crook, a womanizer and a drug user. Whoops! I'd rather judge Bush on his record as president, with just a few jabs about his funny vocabulary-isms. Like it or not, Bush is our president now. I don't find suggestions that Bush engineered this war to be particularly patriotic.
(P.S. If VP Cheney had a son in the military, I'd fully expect him to get some cushy job. Hello!?)
posted on October 18, 2001 05:35:52 PM new
Plsmith, I knew you'd say that. Read the thread again if you don't follow.
The Bush "bashing" or criticism if you prefer in this forum goes WAY beyond funny jabs at the president's mannerisms or simple commentary. The Constitution may guarantee the right to free speech, but it doesn't necessarily follow that shooting one's mouth off against the president demonstrates any sort of patriotism.
posted on October 18, 2001 05:45:26 PM new
Guess I should not have used Bushism because it meant a made up word or phrase to some but I used it for an idea.
I find it hard to believe that anyone will attack America because I have made fun of Bush. I find it a greater danger that he is too easy to make fun of with sentances that make no sense and made up words.
I wish this statement I mentioned was a mistake also and he meant something else - but it seems too clear that he really was dismissing public support as irrelevant now that he has set upon a course of action.
That seems a very dangerous idea for the head of a democracy to espouse. Perhaps it will favorably impress the Chinese leadership with whom he is meeting that he really does know how to govern after all.
posted on October 18, 2001 06:37:38 PM new
twinsoft - would you please show me where it is stated and you have in quotation marks, "I knew he'd find some way to start a war."
If you are talking about my post, please reread it, and don't put words in my mouth.
posted on October 18, 2001 07:40:34 PM new
Perhaps she said it because that was the way Bush was heading. He hit the ground running, doing his best to antagonize just about every other country on Earth. Including China, a country he is now cozying up to.
In fact, many people were saying the same thing months ago. *I* remarked to friends that I feared that we'd have a war on our hands sooner or later.
posted on October 18, 2001 07:57:21 PM new
Bunni, I agree that every president seems to orchestrate their own little war. But in this case, it was clearly not orchestrated. We were attacked on our own soil, and in a big way. Thousands of civilians were killed, and the terrorists continue to thumb their noses at us.
I only wish people would think, and not give knee-jerk responses. It's sad to see how quickly the significance of WTC has passed, people don't seem to care, and they're complaining about "the war" like it's some kind of election tactic.
Nobody wants war, but sometimes there is just no choice. Even if you don't like war. Even if you don't like the president. As much as we all want peace, there is just no easy way out, and thinking people should understand this. Turning tail and running is bad, but publicly criticizing the people who are fighting to protect us is worse, IMO.
posted on October 18, 2001 10:59:24 PM new
Sorry twinsoft believe what you want but that is what I meant.
There is no way in h*ll that I even infered Bush enginered the terrorists attacks. Get real. Even as much as I still can't stand the man I know he could never do such a horrific thing. I'm still having a hard time believing any human being could do that to us or any other country.
posted on October 18, 2001 11:06:32 PM new
So Bush got his wish. His own little private, never-ending war. Boy, those dumb terrorists played right into his hands.
I wonder if we'd even be facing this situation now if America (and its presidents) had taken a harder-line stance early on. Despite the tough talk, America is still sitting at the table with countries known to sponsor terrorism. If we start giving out weapons, including biochemical weapons, to these tin dictators, what can the result be?
Even while Bush is calling for the head of Bin Laden, he criticizes another country for taking out a known terrorist leader. This is the problem with American policy. American military leaders see the world as some distant chess board. The result is now we have terrorists in our own house. We should have dealt with Jihad before they put a knife to our throat.
