Posted on 10/28/2002 6:39:28 PM PST by rintense
OMG! Did anyone else just hear Dick Morris say the President is acting like a p_ssy????
The above, I think, is key to understanding this, and I would be interested in any pro or con on this. To me, Bush doesn't lose any of his Presidential Aura, but I'm not in any of the categories you mentioned. Maybe that's why some of us are having trouble seeing this?
I hadn't heard about his inventing this spin.....news to me. If that's the case, then it makes Morris' statements less credible. And I'm no fan of Morris, btw. As I watched him talking tonight (and I've thought this before), I'm thinking to myself, this is not a safe man to confide to; one must watch himself if he has any dialogue with this guy....he'll sell your words to the highest bidder. He's definitely not a person Bush would ever surround himself with (and this would not be because of Morris' choice of words).
Dickey just can't control himself. I bet you got worried when Reagan said something like "we launch in 5 minutes".
Clymer!
As with abortion and the "Environment", I believe you'll find that it's the GOP who hands out the Talking Points. Both Bush I and Bush II have used "pussy".
After the interview, Bush made a comment when he thought the microphone was off:"The bastard didn't lay a glove on me." "He makes Lesley Stahl look like a pussy."
Bush later apologized at a South Dakota campaign stop:
"If I had known the microphone was on, I wouldn't have done it."
RatherBiased.com
If I had known the microphone was on, I wouldn't have done it
At the Republican National Convention in 1988, he was asked by a Hartford Courant reporter about what he and his father talked about when they weren't talking about politics."PUSSY," Bush replied.
Salon
Are there folks who still believe lines like these delivered from the likes of second and third generation politicians?
What do you mean? "Spin" how/what?!
The above, I think, is key to understanding this, and I would be interested in any pro or con on this.
This is just my opinion of course, but here's how I see it:
Idiots are people who are willfully ignorant and self-centered. Their only concern is with themselves. They cannot see, because they chose not to, the big picture. They can only focus on the little puzzle piece (themselves) and how they will fit into they picture. They don't care about what a particular policy "shift" (i.e., socialism) might do to our country in the long run, as long as they get things for free; as long as their "individual" needs get met. Their slogan might be "it's all for one, forget the one for all."
Undecideds are fence sitters. They fall over to the side that makes the strongest emotional tug while they sit on that fence. These kind of people, IMO, lack strong convictions and cannot be very productive to society in this state of existence because of their inaction and difficulty making up their minds. These people remind me of "doubting Thomas." Thomas was in a state of indecision....not knowing if he wanted to stay and follow Christ's teachings or go his separate way and "forget" about the past two years of Christ's teachings and instructions. He really did not believe in Jesus until he could actually see Him risen from the dead himself. At the end of the day, the undecideds still might not get off that cozy fence.
Independents are neither idiots nor undecideds. They have views and opinions that are sometimes a mix of Republicans and Democrats and some altogether different. If there's a candidate running who most espouse the important things to an independent, that's probably who they'll get their vote.
Rats. Well, we all know what they're like. I'd say there's three kinds of people in that party. There's the rabid Rats, like Carvell, Daschole, Klintoons, etc. Then there's those in that party because, well, everyone in their family's always been a democrat, so they might as well be one. Then there's the influx of immigrants who have been promised candy by the rabid Rats. IMO, it's the "family" democrat who would most likely vote outside party lines come election day, if they saw a candidate that seemed better than their own party is putting out.
As far as Republicans, I believe generally speaking, they look to the higher ground; think in terms of long-haul, not the touchy-feely instant gratification. Many are Christians and so they look at more moral issues, right and wrong, etc. IMO, most Republicans would not vote for a Rat unless there was some compelling reason to do so.
Then there's us. Quite a mixture in here, to some extent, but not really. Generally, we all want what's best for our country. We are active. Many of us have strong political beliefs and convictions and readily share them. Most of us are not easily deceived or swayed, and should we be, we have others to point out the "errors" or "flaws" in our thoughts. We think, we read, we discuss things concerning our country, our politicians, other countries, and other peoples. In short, we are "cementing" our convictions into something more productive for our society. We have long-term desires and dreams for this nation of ours, and these are not selfish desires and dreams. These are the collective visions handed down by our Founding Fathers which we hold as important truths to be given to our children.
That is why I don't think Republicans or us are measured by these national polls. (Now please don't flame me, lol.)
No, Morris is a gossip monger.
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.