Bush speech was embarassing |
Yes, Condi’s Q & A was much better. 
Hal Pawluk also thinks the President’s speech had zero substance:
President Bush opened with an 18-minute “set piece” which disappointed.
It is no wonder President Bush hasn’t had more of these prime time press conferences because he comes out looking like a lousy speaker. Mr. Pawluk further notes:
Clearly he had nothing to impart, and simply rambled on, repeating as much of his scripted responses as he could remember (there were long pauses, and responses that didn’t seem to fit the questions).
Did anybody else notice how Bush kept saying “right” as he was almost flustered answering some of the questions. It was like he couldn’t spin the spin.
Compared to Clinton, Bush has like negative ten charisma. He couldn’t come up with even one mistake he’d made? Please.
And he didn’t even seem to understand the question about why did Cheney and he both need to come to the 9/11 commission together. Duh, “to answer the commission’s questions” … like that isn’t obvious enough so you have to say it twice, Mr. President? The reporter should have asked: “Mr. President with both you and the Vice President coming in together to testify it gives the impression that you are there to corroborate each other’s testimony, why not go separately and testify?”
Bush needs to go or we’ll have another four years of financial misery and prolongued conflict in Iraq.
That June deadline seems like a sham … I heard a report that we could be there as long as five more years.
Five more years!
I don’t write about political stuff very often because it is frustrating to me logically and it takes away a lot of positive energy but the speech from the President last night didn’t make me feel more safe or secure, it made me feel like we have a war monger in office and a semi-competent one at that. The President said he didn’t make decisions based on polls, which I interpreted as he doesn’t care what the American people want. Then later on he said he believes in a Democracy and therefore is betting on his re-election being the continued war on terrorism. And Bush says this war is a “false” analogy compared to Vietnam? Bullshit!
Did this post make you go hmm?
(Hmm, no ratings yet)
Loading ...Related Posts
- President Bush googlebombed as ‘miserable failure’
- Bush: ‘The capture of Saddam Hussein does not mean the end of violence in Iraq’
- Low charge: Segway users take a fall
- Bush braindump Flash game
- Our MisLeader’s Intelligence Quotient
- Exxon’s record 3Q profits near $10 billion, but what about soaring gas prices?
I think Bush is doing a great job fighting terrorism. How would you fight terrorism? Stay in Afganistan? Terrorists are not arbitrarily all from Afganistan. It doesn’t matter though. You are going to continue thinking the way you do because you are a democrat. I will think my way because I am not a democrat.
Comment by Biff — April 14, 2004 @ 4:33 pm PST
Hi Biff - Thanks for the comments. I would say I’m more in the middle than a democrat. I’m the vote that usually swings elections. I’m the person who votes with common sense and logic on issues and doesn’t subscribe to either side of the political arena.
With that said, I am not suggesting that I would have done things any differently than Bush has regarding fighting terrorism to date except when it comes down to the open checkbook he seems to feel we have (nice how he spends our money like it is in neverending supply). But the main problem I have with him is at the present time he doesn’t seem to have a clear plan to really get out of Iraq. He didn’t address how many of our troops would be leaving in June, only that we would be transferring power.
Also, he publically voiced a total disregard for the will of the American people, only offering a ham-fisted and totally incredulous: “I believe in Democracy.” Polls all over the place are saying that people feel the war is too expensive and are disappointed in the level of involvement. Unless Biff you believe we are really getting out of there in any significant capacity in June as Presiden Bush says we are.
Bush doesn’t even believe this and has left open so many doors for continued occupancy that we might as well plan on being there through his next term *if* he is re-elected. Do you feel safer and more secure today, Biff, than you did pre-911? Do you think if Bush is not re-elected and a democrat is that it will make America any safer and more secure against the threats of terrorism?
I look at this war as costing a lot of money and I know what my taxes have been like during the Bush term and do not like the direction of the country. With Clinton we may have had blowjobs in the oval office but there was clearly fiscal responsibility that doesn’t exist in the Bush term. Over 100 billion for this war and him saying that he would be glad to write more checks if asked to … yeah, Biff, that’s the message that the American people want to hear when the economy is rocky at best financially.
I’m not saying we shouldn’t be in Iraq and that we shouldn’t be fighting terrorism, but I am saying that the finances of doing so should be balanced, just like any other government operation. It doesn’t seem like that to me, it seems like dollars are being wasted.
Comment by TDavid — April 14, 2004 @ 5:02 pm PST
freedom isn’t free…literaly
Comment by Biff — April 22, 2004 @ 11:04 am PST