Posted on 09/21/2005 4:54:29 PM PDT by goldstategop
That is not a scientifically valid method of polling.
Look I agree with you - the media has pushed the notion that the federal government was to blame when in fact FEMA is not a first responder. The problem is that Bush has done nothing to correct that false impression. His speech came across as a mae culpa and "I'll make sure we do better next time" speech.
AGREE!! Not much coverage of the other states either,where whole towns were wiped out completely.
It is always politics with the media to try and gain the control they are never going to have again and still are too dumb to know it! In the long run we should really be happy but it is enough to make you blow up the TV with a 44 revolver (that the chamber is empty) and have a brief second of happiness...they never quit, too many years of power they really do not understand they never are going to have again.
Read and understand my post before you go off on a half cocked rant.
I never blamed Bush for the mistakes the local and state officials made. I've pointed out several times that the local and state officials messed up and then tried to shift the blame onto FEMA and Bush. Is that Bush bashing?
Where do you come off on instant gratification? Where did that come from?
My point, and you even quoted it, is that Bush allowed the misconception that FEMA screwed up and is a first responder to continue. Rather than explaining in a politically savvy way what the proper role of FEMA and federal government is during and emergency, he just addressed it with a "We'll do better next time" speech.
Geesh, I was actually agreeing with you and you still find a way to call me a Bush basher.
Reagan went over the heads of the democrats and the media and made personal appeals to the American people. Neither the junior or senior Bush did/does so. "W' should make these attempts. His speeches are generally very well delivered. In fact, his delivery is excellent. He would do very well.
I'm sorry that you feel that the President didn't communicate effectively enough for every nitwit in American to understand how things work.
I'm sorry that you feel that the President should have stood up and said "not my fault. I warned them but they wouldn't listen to me."
I'm sorry that you feel that somehow a carefully crafted message should have been made that would have pinned all the blame somewhere other than the White House.
The media, who covered Katrina, understand how things work. They knew perfectly well that the foul-up was in NO and with the governor. They did not care. They only cared about playing "gotcha" reporting and drawing blood.
Now, do you think the President should have gotten into a p^ssing match the with mainstream media? Do you think he is going to win in that circumstance... considering the pictures that were coming out of NO at the time. Considering that the media was too busy showing the ugly in order to win the ratings race.
Every time there is a crisis, does the President have to tell us how our own country works? To whom? Those who don't care or won't listen to what he has to say because they oppose him on issues greater than what occured in NO.
I explicitly said in my post that he shouldn't get into a mudslinging contest. Look, when Reagan needed to get his message out, he went over the heads of the media and addressed the public directly. People liked and respected him for that.
Bush screwed up by taking the blame. I'm sorry you can't see that.
Rather than explaining in a politically savvy way what the proper role of FEMA and federal government is during and emergency, he just addressed it with a "We'll do better next time" speech.
I honestly don't know whether to laugh or cry when I read that.
Half the people in this country think that The Gettysburg Address is 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue and you're asking him to be "poltically savvy" with them?
Whether it's bashing or carping, I'm tired of this constant drumbeat for somebody's head on a platter, regardless of what the situation is.
We should be concerntrating on what we did WELL. And try to do better next time. You do realize, don't you, that this are PEOPLE earnestly trying to do their very best, right?
I agree with you also to a point.
How do you know NO ONE will listen unless you try with a firm strong message and grip on things and put them in the order they should be, without looking like an dictator..it can and should be done. This is not a time for the President to let the media take control at all, it is time for him to take control. It can and should be done.
I think that you have a very romantic idealized memory of what the Reagan administration was like. There were just as many balagans in that administration as there was in this one.
Bush speaks over the head of the media all the time. Very effectively too. People like and respect this President just as much as they did Reagan.
This is not a time for the President to let the media take control at all, it is time for him to take control. It can and should be done.
And he did not... He took control of situation... Even when the media was running around screaming "off with his head", he took control.
FGS, that was 25 years ago. The media has changed!
Coulter has a blind spot where Roberts is concerned. There was nothing inadvertent about President Bush's selection of Roberts. What Coulter refuses to understand is it is she who has been consistently wrong about Roberts.
Bush has already fulfilled all his campaign promises to liberals – and then some! He said he'd be a "compassionate conservative," which liberals interpreted to mean that he would bend to their will, enact massive spending programs, and be nice to liberals. When Bush won the election, that sealed the deal. It meant the Democrats won.Note to Bush: This isn't Walter Mondale. How about sending Pops on the road with Joey Buttafuoco?
I loved and respected President Reagan, but it's a bit over the top to compare any man to Jesus Christ.
In a way it was. Her position on Roberts has been locked in since her first column on him. She doesn't seem to have the capacity to admit she was wrong, so she continues to dig.
I agree wholeheartedly.
Its for people like you that follow these idiots blindly that the country has gone backwards for 50 years .George Bush is not and never was a true conservative .Most people know that ,but we didnt think he was a liberal lefty when it comes to immigration ,and social spending.If you cant handle it or are afraid to face it that is your problem.
Its for people like you that follow these idiots blindly that the country has gone backwards for 50 years .George Bush is not and never was a true conservative .Most people know that ,but we didnt think he was a liberal lefty when it comes to immigration ,and social spending.If you cant handle it or are afraid to face it that is your problem.
Honey, Scalia is the cream of the crop when it comes to Constitutional Law. That's one of the reasons Ann is suggesting he should've been nominated for Chief Justice. In addition, we know exactly what we're getting with him because of his prior rulings.
While Roberts appears to be a good man and extremely well versed in Constitutional Law, he is still an 'unknown commodity' --- much like Souter was at one time. We didn't get to see Souter's 'interpretation' of the Constitution until it was too late; he's now firmly ensconced in his lifetime appointment.
And BTW, just what do you have against Italians?
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.