posted on December 31, 2002 01:23:31 PM new
Early excuses,Its Iraqs fault, in which way our economy heads,which will be the tolit.If we spend for the war,or if we are attacked,Its Iraqs fault.There will be people who believe this excuse.....Buy Gold.
posted on December 31, 2002 03:16:23 PM new
I'd rather buy plywood or gasoline or almost any commodity that is really needed.
Drank half a bottle of Champagne and it still doesn't look like he said any more of substance.
If they start a war it will hurt the economy - OK
So we'll start it first....scratching head(?)
Kinda looks like a guy holding a gun to his head and telling the police to back off or he will shoot.
posted on December 31, 2002 07:47:14 PM new
The man is a congenital idiot. I said that when he was first elected, and it becomes more apparent as time passes. Censorship, like charity, should begin at home; but unlike charity, it should end there --Clare Booth Luce
posted on December 31, 2002 10:26:40 PM new
So true. On the one hand, the jerk states that our economy is "strong". On the other, if Saddam decides to sneeze in retaliation at us, the entire economy will collapse into a deep, deep depression which will take decades to dig our way out of, if ever.
Does anyone else get the impression that Bush is hoping that Saddam will put up at least some token resistance?
posted on January 1, 2003 04:50:45 AM new"The resident responded abruptly when a reporter suggested that war was inevitable". “You say we’re headed to war.I don’t know why you suggested that,” he said. “I’m the person who gets to decide, and not you.”
posted on January 1, 2003 06:41:16 AM new
It's George stomping his foot while telling four year old Jebb that it's HIS turn to play with the toy soldiers!!!
posted on January 1, 2003 08:13:53 AM newSpoken like a statesman, or like a peevish child?
And also indicative of his dictatorial aspirations. I watched his so-called press conference yesterday and this snitty response conveyed more information about the character of the president and the real goals of his administration than any of his usual vague, vaporous political maneuverings. In spontaneous responses such as this one, or in his attempts to deliver speeches which his aides and speechwriters have prepared in an impromptu fashion, you get a glimpse into the character of the man behind the persona. The diction and methods of expression reveal the construction of mind, and as Hamlet said - most appropriate to this and many other such incidents with Bush-, in these "you'll catch the conscience of the king."
In the immediate aftermath of the terrorists' attacks up to the present, the rhetoric of the Bush administration has been directed toward creating an image of its own greatness and partisan political agenda at the expense of communicating clearly, directly, and truthfully the problematic state of the nation. While Ashcroft reportedly annoints himself with oil to assume his position of holy political mission, the people have allowed the terrorists to annoint an oily politician de facto dictator with thinly disguised pretensions of divine right.
But at a time when the most complex problems are believed to be adequately addressed through simplistic sound bytes and ignorance and superstition are confused for moral superiority, language will yield little insight.
Reamond's article conveys well the strategy of the Bush administration, akin to doublespeak, though rarely do the direct contradictions appear together. Those absurd statements with opposite meanings are usually delivered at least a day apart, but more usually a week or more. Only relatively noncontroversial or safe political questions are addressed with a single clear position. This practice allows for an easy out with the administration's hired spinmasters, talkshow minions, and other Bushbots who can always quote an alternative point of view and explain away the other in troublesome circumstances. I've seen this done a number of times.
Bush's handlers have taken the temper of the times well and given any form of reasoned discourse token attention. For those who bother to listen or read, almost any position liberally sprinkled with buzz words and delivered with a tough decisive tone will suffice in winning popular approval. While not unique to politicians, the Bush administration has perfected this practice to an unprecedented scope and degree. I imagine the Bush strategists laughing uproariously and elbowing each other as absurd speeches win public approval and solemn and serious media attention.
posted on January 1, 2003 08:43:28 AM new
"You said we're headed to war in Iraq. I don't know why you say that," Bush told reporters. "I'm the person who gets to decide, not you. And I hope this can be done peacefully."
posted on January 1, 2003 08:50:00 AM new
What I am trying to figure out.....
Inspectors have been there for weeks and found NOTHING.
Yet Bush(of Dumb & Dumber Part II, The President) says Saddam is still hiding stuff but WILL NOT tell the inspectors WHERE!
The 12000+ page declaration was issued and Bush immediately called it lies and incomplete, WITHOUT EVEN READING IT COMPLETELY(Like he could, this isn't the Hungry Catepillar) an refuses to tell anybody WHERE IT IS INCOMPLETE!
.................................................
We call them our heroes...but we pay them like chumps
As I recall seeing that segment, Bush mumbled that separate statement directly to the camera after a pause following his egotistical and unprovoked attack on the reporter. I've read that he has several aides stationed about to warn him when he's commiting his more potentially damaging political gaffes.
If he wishes to create a credible image in seeking a peaceful resolution to the Iraqi problem, I wonder why he doesn't chastise the steady stream of statements from his "team" and the Pentagon hawks which speak of a war with Iraq as a foregone conclusion.
mlecher,
Like he could, this isn't the Hungry Catepillar
You may be on to something there that explains the entire situation. The Lewis Carroll School of Political Thought. With especial credit to the character of The Red Queen.
That's also rather scary when you think about it. Of course, they can't prevent much of what he says, just signal him to stop or attempt to recover, but just think what the man would likely say without the safeguards!!!
posted on January 1, 2003 03:18:30 PM new
Karl Rove is certainly one of Bush's main handlers. What? You think that the President of the United States of America doesn't have a "handler" to take care of things? Then, why in the world did you vote for a moron? You KNEW ahead of the election that he was well below parr in the menal department and that it would require someone behind the scenes to keep him in check and to run things. So why be so surprized NOW? What a double-standard! No wonder you voted for him! Unless, you really thought that a complete moron could run this country properly?
Speaking of which, it takes a dedicated mind to run our glourious economy into the ground with such dispatch. The suffering and the misery caused by impoverishment pleases Republicans and Satan.
