Posted on 01/12/2009 7:56:11 AM PST by Publius804
Mickey Rourke sympathises with George W. Bush
Washington, Jan 9 (ANI): Hollywood actor Mickey Rourke has come out in support of US President George Bush, insisting he doesn”t understand why so many people blame Bush for a string of world issues.
In an interview to GQ magazine, the 56-year-old star urges the public to consider the tremendous pressure Bush was under following the terror attacks on the World Trade Centre in 2001.
“President Bush was in the wrong place at the wrong time, I don”t know how anyone could have handled this situation,” Contactmusic quoted him as saying.
“I don”t give a f**k who’’s in office, Bush or whoever, there is no simple solution to this problem… I”m not one of those who blames Bush for everything. This s**t between Christians and Muslims goes back to the Crusades, doesn”t it.
“It’’s too easy to blame everything on one guy. These are unpredictable, dangerous times, and I don”t think that anyone really knows quite what to do,” he added.
The Wrestler star revealed that he is baffled by the U.K.’’s approach to fundamentalists and revealed that he was taken aback by the freedom of speech allowed in the U.K.
“I was in London recently and I couldn”t believe all these hate-talking fanatics you have over here who are allowed to carry on doing their thing even when a bus full of women and children gets blown to pieces,” he said.
(Excerpt) Read more at silverscorpio.com ...
Amazing.
Maybe after winning he felt safe to say it.
There goes the Oscar.
He nailed it.
Nice to hear that someone in the financial and career situation he’s in is willing to speak out and risk it all!
Actually, this goes back to Ishmael, Abraham’s first...
No, actually AlGore would have been in the wrong place at the wrong time, for by now, NY would be a smouldering pile of nuclear waste. Wait a minute....
Franklin D. Roosevelt was president when I was born, then Truman, Ike,JFK,LBJ,Nixon,Ford,Carter,Reagan,Bush,Clinton, and Bush.
If I remember correct, the first President I voted for, that won, was Carter, then I voted for all following except Clinton, which I did not vote for.
Of all the above our president President George Bush, has had the worst media coverage, and the most slandered coverage of all.
It has made me more supportive of President Bush than ever, just knowing who was against him, made me more for him.
Way to nip your comeback in the bud, Mick. Your phone’s not broken, it’s just stopped ringing.
He said something similar last year in an interview.
By all respect to President Bush, it is the president's job to be in the wrong place at the wrong time, but still handle the situation effectively.
I don't know how anyone could have handled this situation [...]
Well, I guess that if the problem is beyond Mickey Rourke's ability to imagine a solution, then the situation really is hopeless.
Regards,
I wish more people could figure it out like you have.
The fact that he is so hated is proof he is good.
For all the Bush haters, ask yourself who are this mans enemies?
Bush has a great enemies list.
>>> President Bush was in the wrong place at the wrong time [...]
>> By all respect to President Bush, it is the president’s job to be in the wrong place at the wrong time, but still handle the situation effectively.
And, for the most part, he did handle the situation effectively. He responded to the terrorist attacks of 2001 by preventing any terrorist strikes for the remainder of his two terms, by routing Al Qaida in Afghanistan, and by distracting them in Iraq (while simultaneously overthrowing a despotic Iraqi regime).
There can be many judgments of the Presidency of George W. Bush — but his response to 9-11 was both decisive and effective.
SnakeDoc
Modern day Presidents need to be able to communicate clearly and in a manner that both controls the situation and builds confidence. He does neither.
I agree. Even with Reagan, there was a lot of snarky coverage in the media, but not the visceral hatred that's out there for President Bush. Now, if the digital media had been available during Reagan's time, we might have seen some of it, but I truly don't believe he was hated, like President Bush. I guess because he won his elections with no questions at all, and both of Bush's elections were so close, Reagan didn't bring out the crazies.
“W made himself my enemy with the “See you at the signing!” remark and the subsequent your(sic) are racist if you do not support amnesty stunt. He is absolutely tone deaf on that issue. Other than that I am just plain embarrassed for the man - every time he opens his mouth in public it is a disaster.”
My preference is for a deaf/mute President. I don’t give a rat’s patoot how or when he says something.
Style never wins over substance.
Is Rourke trying to jeopardize his comeback?
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.