Posted on 05/09/2003 8:57:24 AM PDT by ewing
Yes... Clinton was with our troops many times.
I defy any whining "progressive" to find a similar picture of the First Rapist getting adulation as well as respect from the troops.
Even the Commqander-in-Chief can't "order" respect, you know...
HOWEVER...
If the Commander in Chief chooses to visit a steaming aircraft carrier, then he SHOULD. Period. He is the CIC. He's supposed to visit the troops.
You can bet that if he waited until the ship came to port that that WOULD HAVE caused delay in sailors seeing their families.
YET, even then, he's the CIC and IF he chooses to visit his troops, then he's simply doing his job.
DemRats are idiots.
I'm pretty sure that was the Theodore Roosevelt.
In additioned to the aforementioned comments, the letter to the WhiteHouse also pointed out that some of what was stolen were personal items.
Clinton did visit the troops in Kosovo, I think. Same difference. One visit the Army and the other the Navy.
DemRats are idiots.
The reason the DemocRATS are so upset is the genuine affection and enthusiasm expressed by the Navy personnel aboard the Abraham Lincoln. This contrasts starkly with the visits by Clinton when he was president. Also, notice how President Bush did not play up his status as POTUS by stepping onto a red carpet or having the ship decorated with bunting and lots of oversized flags the way Clinton did.
President Bush wore a civilian suit when he made his speach. The only thing showing President Bush's status as POTUS was the presidential seal on the podium. The way some lefties try to spin this story, they try to claim he was wearing a military uniform when he landed on the deck of the Lincoln. No he was wearing a flight suit designed for flying on military jets with ejection seats. It was no more a uniform than the space suit Senator John Glen wore when he flew on the Space Shuttle.
I mind, but only because of the apparent way he earned the return: By stonewalling various investigatory hearings.
I also think we "here" are thinking, but do you honestly think the majority of this country really thinks things out as much as us. Not many people in this country take the time to discuss issues as we are on a political board.
Despite these obstacles, [Leslie] Stahl maintained that her early years with CBS were positive because they were "a huge learning experience." She had made her share of mistakes as a rookie and had learned from them.The RATS and their henchmen in the national media CANNOT win on this one. EVERY SINGLE TIME THEY SHOW BUSH ON THAT CARRIER, IT'S AN INCREDIBLE WIN FOR OUR SIDE. The words they use underneath the images are completely irrelevant.One such mistake occurred when she was covering Ronald Reagan's reelection campaign in 1984. Apparently, Reagan had proposed some budget cuts in federally funded nursing homes and benefits for the handicapped. These cuts were very unpopular, and during re-election time, he wanted very much to improve his image on the issue. So while campaigning, he would engage in activities such as inaugurating new nursing homes and hugging and putting medals around kids at the handicapped Olympics. During these times, he would, of course, invite the press along to get some free publicity.
While covering these events, Stahl was keenly aware of Reagan's ulterior motives. So every time the camera showed Reagan's affected support for nursing homes and the handicapped, Stahl would steadfastly remind her viewers of his budget cuts.
To her surprise, her words did not have much impact on her audience.
In fact, a CBS study found that less than 25 percent of Stahl's audience understood her message while most thought that her piece was a positive news story on Ronald Reagan. It was then that she realized that "when the pictures [such as Reagan hugging a handicapped child] are emotional and powerful and when you are saying something that conflicts with them, the messages aren't married; the pictures will drown out what you say."
[Note: The reason the quoted text is written with such an anti-GOP, anti-Reagan tone is because it's from the MIT student newspaper.]
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.