Transcript: President Addresses the Nation in Prime Time Press Conference

White House Web Site ^ | 4/13/04 | Transcript

[Alia]

I wish President Bush would do more of these, too. It is true, that when President Bush says a thing -- he means it; acts on it. He's a man of his word. Which also means he acted upon "the best intel info" which could be had in the USA; and 911 happened. He didn't cower. He assertively addressed the enemy of the US.

What this press conference did most, IME? Show the man. When he gives SOU presentations, there's a pattern and presentation. In this press conference, he revealed the man behind the Oval Office (as well as in it). I don't just like this man, I love him.

He's a man I do trust.

However, this obnoxious "apology" chit is so over the top -- the media and their cohorts.

I have a horrid aversion to seeing dogs running lose in metropolitan areas. Long ago, I lived in a flat on a busy street, high up in the hills. My car was at street level. Sure enough, the hike down the hill on the walkway, I get to the street, and I see this happy-go-lucky hound -- obviously a loved family dog -- trotting along, celebrating its freedom, coming towards me. The dog seeing me in its path made a detour right into the busy street -- and RIGHT, IMMEDIATELY, into the path of an oncoming car going about 35. I was screaming at the top of my lungs -- the simultaneous impact of just a few seconds -- and there was the dog dying, me observing in horror wanting to help -- but witnessing it in its deaththroes. I was so shook up. Yes, the horror of witnessing a dog run over. The split second timing of it all.. JUST hitting pavement, dog detouring into the street, car hitting dog.

And the media, and anti-bushies demand I should either apologize for the death of the dog; or apologize to the owner of the car. They would be telling me: "You did nothing on your 'watch' to prevent that dog from getting hit."

And yet, there's no one to apologize to me, for the dog running wild, or the driver running over the speed limit. And nor do I ask for any apology.

Bush hasn't asked the Clinton administration; nor any previous administration for an apology of the mess they left him to be President of.

If the damned media had been doing its damned job -- maybe they could have prevented this. But no. They didn't. They were far too busy doing "puff" pieces for the Democrat administration. In this regard, they were like the owners who probably NEVER took the dog out for regular walks -- until one day the dog seized its freedom. And dogs will, if they don't get proper exercise.

Dear media and 9-11 commission: Your "apology" dog just ain't washin'. And the New Jersey Girls? All they'd shout at me was "you did nothing!" or "Thanks to YOU, Alia, the owner of the car is emotionally damaged for life, and its YOUR fault!".

The chorus line of the Jersey Girls and Media will follow with: Sue the Property Owners! They should erect mirrors so people living on that hill can watch for dogs about to run into the street! Enviro-whackos will shriek: Too much vegetation Blocked Her View -- Slap the Property Owners in Leg Irons! NOW/MS will simply assert that if I'd read their magazine, I'd have known HOW to fight for dogs about to run into the street. Anti-Military types will demand NEWER federal programs to subsidize "committees" to be formed to be posted on all busy streets to watch for "dogs about to get run over". Noam Chomsky will prate about the essene side of my inner self I've ignored, and had I been in touch with it, I'd have "perceived" the dog was loose.

Local Democrat Authorities will post "polling" centers all over the suburb for people to demand an "investigation" into "why the dog was run over" and Why Alia didn't protect the dog". Local Media will have toll-free phone lines to conduct "polling centers" on how "guilty" is Alia. They'll post it by percentages based on "nuanced" sentences. Pro-bono lawyers will be "charitized" by "hard to find grantors" to provide legal assitance to those driver's victimized by hitting dogs lose in the streets. Animals Rights Activists will demand that all dogs be unchained -- in memory of the dog who died; and will whack with a leash -- any dog owner found walking his/her dog via leash.

And John Kerry will demand I be evicted from the house; given that I was an unhelpful "occupation force" intruding upon the balance of nature between dog and man.

No attention will be paid to the owners who "loosed" their dog; nor the driver going over the speed limit. The body count they want is mine: and because it happened on my watch.

Bunch of twits. You vote for Kerry, you get "apology" dogs all riddled throughout the system. Again. Vote for Bush.

Bushies, OTOH, would put their arms around me, help me calm down, get me some water; hold traffic off until the dog's body could get moved off the street, they'd comfort the driver who hit the dog; and they'd locate the owners of the dog.

Vote for Bush.

Rant off.

[Two-Bits]

Hi, Please take a moment tomorrow and either call the President or send an email to let him know we, the American people back him. Also, if you could just tell one person to do the same and ask them to tell another, than God willing, we will flood the switchboard with calls and faxes like they have never seem. This is one way we can take it direct to the President and it can not be misled by the media or stupid polls.....
Please call or email to:
Comments: 202-456-1111 Switchboard: 202-456-1414 FAX: 202-456-2461 E-Mail President George W. Bush: president@whitehouse.gov Vice President Richard Cheney: vice.president@whitehouse.gov

[jonrick46]

The image you made about "dogs running loose in metropolitan areas" made me think of our American press as dogs running loose. They are so out of control I wonder when they will wander into an on coming train and be turned into cream of yellow journalism. They are so busy pandering to the public that they have ran away from their duty as watchdogs for freedom. This puts themselves and everyone else in mortal danger.

[Ichneumon]

He was clearly angry at the end. About three reporters asked him "will you apologize" .. these increadibly loaded questions.

All the "Vietnam", "quagmire", "apology", and "mistake" questions seemed to me to be variations on the same barking theme: "Have we lost yet? Have you failed yet?"

[Jaysun]

ARE YOU SORRY?

"Two-and-a-half years later, do you feel any sense of personal responsibility for September 11th?"

"Do you feel a sense of personal responsibility for September 11th?"

"And do you believe there were any errors in judgment that you made related to any of those topics I brought up?"

"Do you believe the American people deserve a similar apology from you, and would you be prepared to give them one?"

"You've looked back before 9/11 for what mistakes might have been made. After 9/11, what would your biggest mistake be, would you say, and what lessons have you learned from it?"

AMERICANS DON'T SUPPORT YOU!

"with public support for your policies in Iraq falling off the way they have -- quite significantly over the past couple of months -- I guess I'd like to know if you feel in any way that you've failed as a communicator on this topic?"

"...increasing numbers of Americans have qualms about it. And this is an election year. Will it have been worth it, even if you lose your job because of it?"

"Polls show that support for your policy is declining and that fewer than half Americans now support it. What does that say to you and how do you answer the Vietnam comparison?"

RANDOM GEMS.

"Mr. President, April is turning into the deadliest month in Iraq since the fall of Baghdad, and some people are comparing Iraq to Vietnam and talking about a quagmire."

"Mr. President, before the war, you and members of your administration made several claims about Iraq that U.S. troops would be greeted as liberators with sweets and flowers, that Iraqi oil revenue would pay for most of the reconstruction; and that Iraq not only had weapons of mass destruction, but as Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld said, we know where they are. How do you explain to Americans how you got that so wrong? And how do you answer your opponents, who say that you took this nation to war on the basis of what have turned out to be a series a false premises?"

"You, yourself, have acknowledged that Osama bin Laden was not a central focus of the administration in the months before September 11th. "I was not on point," you told the journalist, Bob Woodward, "I didn't feel that sense of urgency."

"One of the biggest criticisms of you is that whether it's WMD in Iraq, postwar planning in Iraq, or even the question of whether this administration did enough to ward off 9/11, you never admit a mistake."

"Your critics, including your Democratic opponent, say that's proof to them your coalition is window dressing."

"I guess I just wonder if you feel that you have failed in any way?"

---

Just a small peek at what an unworthy whore our media has become. Pretty amazing considering that he was only asked 15 questions.

[MagnoliaB]

On iwon.com the survey today is about the President's speech. I urge all Freepers to respond to it.

[scott0347]

Great post

[.45MAN]

PING

[wayoverontheright]

It is crystal clear from the despicable performance of the press that only ONE person in the room was aware of the fact that our enemy was watching.

[wayoverontheright]

And I might add that in the event of another attack on our soil, the safest place to be might be the office of the NYT, or a Network TV office, as the Fifth Column of the terrorists within our country has surely been identified.

[SamAdams76]

I saw the press conference last night and winced a few times when it was clear that President Bush was stumbling or at a loss for words. I knew that his critics were going to lap this stuff up and try to make it seem like Bush doesn't know what he's doing. As one who has similar problems speaking publicly, I can certainly identify with Bush.

During my career, I have often been lauded for my writing skills and for my ability to speak intelligently. But put me up on a podium with a microphone and I start making the same kind of verbal miscues and disjointed sentences that Bush is prone to. Everytime I do this (speak publicly in front of a large audience), I step down feeling like an idiot. It's not that I'm nervous to speak in front of people. It's just that being up there with all those people in front of me becomes overwhelming and distracting and I lose my focus.

I think many people have this syndrome. It does not necessarily reflect on their intelligence.

It should be noted that many of the liberals have the same problem with public speaking but the media tends to give them a pass on it. For instance, Ted Kennedy hasn't been able to string a complete sentence together since The Beatles were still touring. And he sounds much stupider than President Bush with all those "uh's" and "er's". But do you think he is ever called on it? Of course not. As usual, there are different standards being applied here.

Of course it would be nice if President Bush was as slick as Bill Clinton. But Bush is not Bill Clinton and for that at least, we can be very thankful.

Over my professional career, I have dealt with a lot of people. It seems that the polished smooth talkers - the "glad-handers" and back-slappers - are usually the ones who are faking it and they are also the ones who will stab you in the back when you aren't looking in order to get ahead. I'd much rather deal with somebody who is honest and decent.

[smith288]

[smith288]

So why is Bush and Cheney appearing together? Its a legit question that Bush didnt answer and I was sorta wondering it myself.

[r9etb]

So why is Bush and Cheney appearing together? Its a legit question that Bush didnt answer and I was sorta wondering it myself.

It is a legitimate question. I think the answer is: because the president gets to set the terms for this interview, and that's what he wants. He is doing this as a favor, and he doesn't want to set a precedent of having the president or VP being hauled up to testify for every Democrat commission that comes down the pike.

Also, this isn't a mid-term exam, and it's certainly not a legal proceeding. It's allegedly an attempt to find out what happened, and how to fix it. Bush has a lot on his plate, and it's helpful to have somebody like Dick Cheney there to help him keep track of what's going on.

So the commission gets to talk to both of them, but on the president's terms.

[smiley]

We LOVED that part!

[smiley]

That is precisely why we, since 1992, have no use for the main stream hate-mongering liberal press and their ilk. We now only watch Fox News and that's it. The rest of these arrogant cows can go straight to the spider hole as far as we're concerned. God Bless America.

[justshutupandtakeit]

It is unfortunate that Bush didn't go after the role of the media in affecting the people's views of success in Iraq. "Well, Don, it is not difficult to see how people can come to the wrong perception about what is happening in Iraq when that is the impression so many in the press work so hard to create. If we had a fair and balanced picture presented daily to them perhaps their ideas would be different."

However, I have a feeling that Cheney is going to come out soon hammering the RATmedia over their pointy heads about the bias and distortions flowing from it.

[r9etb]

However, I have a feeling that Cheney is going to come out soon hammering the RATmedia over their pointy heads about the bias and distortions flowing from it.

Bush has good instincts here -- the last thing he wants to do is pick a fight with the media ... the very same media that would be reporting the details of the fight.

Delegating the task to Cheney is plausible, but even then W needs to be careful, especially if he still wants Cheney to be VP.

I think the best approach would be increased visibility, so that the mediots can slit their own throats.

[GOP_1900AD]

RE: "None of these acts is the work of a religion; all are the work of a fanatical, political ideology. The servants of this ideology seek tyranny in the Middle East and
beyond." Behold. Our leader has called out the Trans-Asian Axis, and its rabidly GEOPOLITICAL (not theological) goal of destroying the West and our allies.

[GOP_1900AD]

What an incredible photo... awesome!