Posted on 09/22/2004 5:05:47 AM PDT by beaureguard
John Kerry and his keepers are making a big deal out of the cool reception President Bush received at the United Nations yesterday. Even some members of the media are joining in. I listened to a CNN newscast where it was reported that Bush's speech was not interrupted once by applause, and that there was only polite applause at the finish. This is supposed to give you the idea that Bush's speech was in contrast with other foreign leaders who are apparently met with with multiple interruptions of raucous applause and a balloon drop at the end.
Compare the approach of CNN with that of Fox News. Fox reported that the custom at the UN is that speeches are not to be interrupted with applause, and that applause at the end of the speech is to be merely polite. You are, however, allowed to hammer your shoe on the table if that floats your particular boat. This report by Brit Hume is, of course, further proof that Fox News is merely a sounding board for right wing kooks.
But what about the speech itself? The speech was a home run .. the crowd just doesn't understand baseball. Bush's speech was filled with the kind of thing that the UN diplomats, dictatorships didn't want to hear. Bush talked of all sorts of crazy stuff about liberty, democracy, human rights, freedom and dignity. Those are the kinds of things that the United Nations is supposed to stand for, but clearly does not. Never really has.
President Bush told the UN diplomats that "Both the American Declaration of Independence and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights proclaim the equal value and dignity of every human life. That dignity is honored by the rule of law, limits on the power of the state, respect for women, protection of private property, free speech, equal justice, and religious tolerance." Limits on the power of the state? Just how many of the people in that audience wanted to hear any nonsense on limiting the power of the state? And what's this about protection of private property? Doesn't Bush understand that all property really belongs to the state? Free speech? Religious tolerance? Who is this cowboy trying to kid?
Do you know what these delegates really wanted to hear? They wanted the type of speech that John Kerry would deliver. They wanted to hear of appeasement. They wanted to hear that the United States was fully prepared to cripple it's own manufacturing economy for the sake of strengthening the economies of Euro-weenies and third-world dictators. They wanted to hear that American would, from this point on, only send its troops overseas when the United Nations approved. They wanted a speech ringing with the surrender of American sovereignty. Elect The Poodle this year and they may get exactly what they want next year ... but for now they deal with George Bush.
The fact is that the United Nations does not share the values of the United States. Try as he might, President Bush cannot say or do anything that will put the miserable and blatantly anti-American United Nations in a positive light. They have been a failure. It may no longer be in the best interests of the United States to continue participating. After all, we're paying the majority of the bill for this pathetic waste of avaluable New York real estate. Anyway, back to the speech.
Bush then started off six paragraphs with the phrase "Because we believe in human dignity..." and went on to talk about things that the United States has done to make the world a better place. Fighting AIDS, poverty, human trafficking, debt relief and so on. But you see, that doesn't matter. No matter what America does, it is never enough. There was nothing Bush could have said to that inept body yesterday that would have made them view America in a positive light. Nothing.
They hate the United States for the same reason terrorists do. They hate our freedom, they hate our way of life, they hate our economic and military strength. It's time to go.
Just one idea to leave you with. Can you imagine what would happen if the United States announced that at some time certain it was going to withdraw from the United Nations and cease all further funding. At that time the United States would form a new international organization loosely modeled after the UN .. but with one huge difference. Only states who's leaders are popularly elected in open and free elections, and who place civilians in charge of the military, will be allowed to join.
We (The US) start by asking the UN to leave the US. Headquarters should be moved to another location . I would suggest KABUL as a great location .
Fantastic speech by our President. The cool reception proved its effectiveness.
If the Libs think a cool reception from the U.N. is going to resonate as a negative with American voters, they prove they remain out of step with the majority of this country.
I would of have been concerned if he got a good reception.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights is an Orwellian socialist document that should never be mentioned in the same breath as the American Declaration of Independence.
Check out Article 25 of the so-called Declaration of Human Rights:
(1) Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.
Of course, in fairness, the UDOHR also includes a few actual rights, too. But even in those cases, check out the akarming paragraph 3 of Article 29:
(1) Everyone has duties to the community in which alone the free and full development of his personality is possible.
(2) In the exercise of his rights and freedoms, everyone shall be subject only to such limitations as are determined by law solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society.
(3) These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.
That was MY President speaking to that bunch of dictators, terrorists and socialists. Among them were a few on the same page as the US but many are not. GWB should have gotten big headlines for such an important speech that should have been quoted for weeks if the MSM wasn't turned so far to the left. Good for Fox News Channel to show the speech and to comment appropriately. As ratings continue to grow, more Americans will get a more fair and balanced approach to the news.
That's right, if the UN doesn't like him, it's because he's looking out for us. Whereas Kerry would be so afraid of offending our international "friends" he'd fawn at their feet.
i saw an article earlier this week that stated france wouldn't send troops to iraq if kerry was elected
Hit the nail on the head. Replace "inept body" with "most liberals" and it's just as true.
I wouldn't expect the U.N. to applaud the speech either. If they do, then G.W. wasn't making a very good speech.
Bush delivers the speech of the millennium to the weasels of the international community:
Go to http://www.cspan.org
Or click right here (you'll need Real Player)
http://switchboard.real.com/player/email.html?PV=6.0.12&&title=President%20Bush%20Speaks%20at%20the%20United%20Nations&link=rtsp%3A%2F%2Fcspanrm.fplive.net%2Fcspan%2Fproject%2Firaq%2Firaq092104%5Fbush.rm%3Fmode%3Dcompact
Exactly. When Bush talks about liberty, freedom, good and evil, the Marxists refuse to listen. Its like throwing holy water on a vampire. Any reports of the French representative ducking behind a cowl?
US out of UN. UN out of US.
Throw the bums out and let them go set up camp in Iraq or Darfur.
Those pigss come here and feed at the trough, while people in their home countries starve. They enjoy all the benefits of living in New York, instead of, say, Khartoum--and yet they badmouth us and our way of life.
Who needs them? They are nothing but parasites.
In May I was in Khatmandu while some UN-type conference or other was being held. The restaurant at the hotel stopped serving a la carte, and offered only a buffet during the time it was filled with multiple delegations from Africa and Asia. Maybe people were starving back home, but these fine representatives were fat and happy scarfing down the vittles.
That's all the UN is: a free buffet line for a bunch of America haters in costume.
Historically, with such UN addresses, there is never any applause until the end of the speech...
I frankly don't give a rat's rear end if the tyrants and despots at the UN liked the President's speech or not. He spoke the truth to them; they just didn't want to hear it.
A leader who gets raucous applause at the UN will be in the process of selling this nation down the river.
Considering the duplicitous nature of this organization, it makes me feel pretty good that they were cool to my President.
Prairie
Screw the UN. The more they hate us, the more I know we're the right thing. Bravo, W!
Who cares how the UN received W...the point is how do potentional voters feel about him, and I can tell you that the President is scheduled for a campaign stop (after he reviews the flood damage in the Pittsburgh area) today in Latrobe, PA (at the Arnold Palmer Airport). Over 15,000 tickets were distributed (I was too late--gone by Monday a.m and the notice went out on this visit just this past Saturday). The time is set for 4:00 pm. During the workday...I know of families taking their kids out of school today, parents missing work to go out there just to see/hear him briefly. That folks, is the reception that counts!!!
He basically told those dickheads, we have just done what you were supposed to do.
Now you'd better get with the program or it's off to irrelevancy for you.
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.