Posted on 02/08/2004 8:55:35 AM PST by leadpenny
Call-In
Bush Meet the Press Appearance
C-SPAN, Washington Journal
Washington, District of Columbia (United States)
Ryan, April, Correspondent, American Urban Radio, White House
York, Byron, Correspondent, [National Review], White House
Guests will discuss President Bushs appearance earlier that day on NBCs Meet the Press.
I'm giving him an 81.
Which thread was that?
Californians: Click on image for more info and
go to this link for FR discussion on 56
True. True. True.
First of all, it is that 20% of undecided voters that I don't want to be uncomfortable listening to George Bush. If you read my post all the way through before your knee jerked you would have noticed that I said this one performance will not lose him the election. What the President does NOT need right now are Kool-Aid-drinking "yes men." He was not served well with the decision to appear on Meet the Press, and he came off as indecisive and unprepared. My criticism was with Karl Rove. The President *does* need criticism -- critical can imply an effort to see a thing clearly. If you really care about someone or a cause, you fight to keep it on track. Telling me and other concerned conservatives to "love it or leave it" not only shows a lack of critical thinking about the campaign to come, but shows me the same kind of unnecessary panic I see from Karl Rove and his team. Blind loyalty might be great for a rock star or actor, but I have seen it's toxic unintended consequences ruin many a fine political leader. Hopefully you and I, in our own ways, will get him that next term the country needs. Here's hoping.
Sadly, that is very important in this day and age. It has been a fact of political life since the first fully TV-influenced Presidential campaign of 1960. It shouldn't have to be that way, but it is reality. The fact that Rove and the staff agreed to such an early appearance is questionable, but that the President was so unprepared is inexcusable. He is not being served well. Hopefully that will change as the campaign moves on. It's nice that the choir is in agreement, but the hard fact is that we have about 20% of the electorate to convice by November. Hopefully with better performances -- and preparation --than we saw Sunday.
He has "it" in him -- and then some. What he lacks is the natural communication skills to get it across. What infuriates me is that his staff has access to specialists who do this for a living. It has become a science now. And yet they sent him out to face Russert unprepared. There was absolutely NO excuse for that. I would give anything to have someone like Lee Atwater back. I knew Lee Atwater. And Karl Rove is NO Lee Atwater.
From your keyboard to the ears of all those undecided voters out there. To me, the most important criteria is to try hard to view it as an undecided rather than a partisan who wants validation -- to try and get a feel for how he comes across in flyover country. Frankly, he came across as insecure and tentative...at least to me. That's not a problem as he already has my vote. But the fact is that both candidates are going after about 20% of the electorate who are toss-ups right now. It is also early. Which is why I want the person who insisted he go on Meet the Press in February assigned to stuffing envelopes in Massachusetts -- where, as they say in medicine, he "can do no further harm."
I believe the correct term is Shanty Irish.
Don't worry too much about the 20% of armadillos in February. They don't choose which side of the road to cross until after Labor Day.
If you read my post all the way through before your knee jerked you would have noticed that I said this one performance will not lose him the election.
Well, we almost agree here.
What the President does NOT need right now are Kool-Aid-drinking "yes men."
You got the wrong guy or the wrong "kool aid". I disagree with President Bush on CFR, illegal immigration and non defense spending and I let him know about it through the comments line at the White House. I also let him know when I agree with him, not that he stands by with baited breath waiting on my calls.
He was not served well with the decision to appear on Meet the Press, and he came off as indecisive and unprepared.
He is served very well by appearing on Meet the Press. First of all it is part of the Presidents duty to submit himself to questioning by a free press and Russert is, despite his partisanship, the number one interviewer in the political arena. W is out of practice with one on ones and needs tuning up before the debates. This will not be his last, in fact his next will be with Wallace at Fox.
My criticism was with Karl Rove.
Your criticism is misplaced. The criticism for a ho hum interview should go to the interviewer who asked the same question 6 different ways while ignoring such front page issues as immigration and the culture wars. Both Rove and W know that Kerry is a pretty good debater and the time to tune up is now when nobody gives a crap except junkies, like us.
The President *does* need criticism -- critical can imply an effort to see a thing clearly. If you really care about someone or a cause, you fight to keep it on track.
But of course, see above.
Telling me and other concerned conservatives to "love it or leave it" not only shows a lack of critical thinking about the campaign to come, but shows me the same kind of unnecessary panic I see from Karl Rove and his team.
You should get your vision checked. Nobody told you to "love it or leave it" although I personally think that the "right to pursue happiness" is one of the least used and most misunderstood of inalienable rights enumerated in the DOI and the Constitution. My suggestion was simply meant to compare Bush and Kerry's styles. I happen to think the President comes out way ahead. He speaks like I do, John Kerry, on the other hand does not speak, he lectures and spreads hubris like he was fertilising a field.
Blind loyalty might be great for a rock star or actor, but I have seen it's toxic unintended consequences ruin many a fine political leader.
Blind loyalty and unbridled loyalty are horses of different colors. Dubya is loyal to a fault, I'd like to think that I am as well but it is not done blindly by either of us.
Hopefully you and I, in our own ways, will get him that next term the country needs. Here's hoping.
Right on DT.
Gee, that was awfully close to a Bushism.
JUST KIDDING!! ;)
Welcome to FR.
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.