Posted on 09/15/2002 9:34:11 PM PDT by Pokey78
Furthermore - if it was a factual charge - what kind of person do they think he is, suggesting that he makes geo-political decisions that impact us all based on what is good for his family fortune? What a profound insult. I can think of few things worse than that.
Who would that be?
"After observing the spectacle of 9-11's first anniversary, is there any doubt as to the truth of this statement? I certainly wouldn't place all (or even most) of the blame for this phenomenon at Bush's feet, but I do think Steyn has a point Bush seems to have an unfortunate tendancy of not pressing the advantage when he should for the sake of being a nice guy."
I still think the problem with Bush is that he doesn't really understand the amount of power he has, and how Truman-like he has to become if he's ever going to get the U-S firmly behind this Iraq thing.
The U.S. is known for many things, patience is not one of them. He gave a great speech, but it was directed to the U.N., not to the U.S. And it included almost nothing in the way of new specific information.
Bush, despite all the tales told about him, will never be a manipulator.
He simply has a little trouble making up his mind. And that trouble shows, despite the wonderful speech.
Bush apparently decided against whipping us up into a war frenzy..because there's only one way he's going to do that..provide specific evidence of the Iraqui connection to 9/11. You can BET there is one, he's just not telling us, and Colin Powell is arguing that the country of Iraq shouldn't suffer for the actions of its leaders, and Ashcroft is arguing not to release the information because the prosecutions might be harmed, that it might endanger the intelligence agencies and on and on. All of these points are valid.
But I think the author here is trying to point out that despite the surprises Bush provided at both speeches last week, he still hasn't hit a "grand slam", to use a baseball analogy,either in the U.S., or at the U.N., in terms of making the case to invade Iraq. It seems more like we're in the fifth inning of a game that began Sept.12,2001,and we're behind 3-1.
That to me, is at least the public perception, if the public really looks into its heart.
I think Bush has to be a little more public about some of the evidence he has..not all of it, just enough of it to convince the world (and the media)...that Sadaam not only is a current threat to the U-S, but has actually used his "weapons of mass destruction" on us already, and is planning to do so again, soon.
There is such a thing as honorable propaganda.
For example, if there's any truth to this West Nile virus/terrorism thing, he might say so. And save some lives in the process. I don't think the whole country would freak out, as some alarmists (Ashcroft) might believe. I don't think too many people would be suprised. And it would help his case..as long as there is CREDIBLE evidence to support the allegation.
It's not that people don't believe Bush, they do. They just need something a little more solid to justify a war.
It's not so much that Bush needs to clarify his reasoning --he did that last week. And it's not really that he has to expand all that much on what he said. He simply has to realize that a lot of people in the U.S.on both sides of the aisle are concerned about the constitution, and civil rights in the wake of 9/11, and he needs to address all that in terms of Iraq.
If he expects Americans to put their lives and their children's lives on the line..he should understand that America needs to know WHY.
What else to say?
I hope you're right, Pokey -- but see Mark Helprin's article in today's WSJ: Written on Water.
Sorry pokey, but there's actually a lot of truth to what Mark Steyn wrote. Bush has squandered some of the opportunites afforded him last winter. He has caved into pressure on other issues not mentioned by Steyn, too, i.e., CFR. And yes, he could have used the bully pulpit, at least a couple of times in the past year.....to an effective end.
I still think Bush is a great President......but he has let his arms be twisted too much by those with no morals and no concern for this country (i.e., little Tommy fufu, Kennedy the murderer, and Leaky Leahy).
What's the point? IMO, the Republican party needs to select a fighting, consistent pro-Constitutional conservative to run for President. No more neo-cons.
Ditto. I see GW's approach on Iraq being the same as with the Taliban and Afganistan. Make it appear that we are giving them plenty of opportunities to peacefully negotiate a settlement, while putting into place a military force and plan.
Remember how most everyone here was screaming for an imediate invasion of Afganistan and GW kept giving Omar and the Taliban plenty of opportunities to hand over OBL? While all of this brokering was going on GW and our military were putting their formidable military forces in place. When the time was right and Omar continued on his path of refusal, that GW knew would happen, we struck and were victorious.
I see the same type of GW scenario taking place with Iraq and Saddam, when the time is right, all of our military forces in place we will strike and it will be a quick and decisive victory.
Wow! How many hugs for Ted Kennedy, literal or symbolic, did it take to convince you of that.
Or did "Islam is a religion of peace" finally nail it for you?
At the time during the campaign that Steyn says Bush disappeared, he WAS campaigning. The media imposed a news blackout to help Gore. In order to counter this, A Citizen Reporter and I had people document Bush's appearances, which were placed on threads called Bush/Cheney 2000 Victory Tour. Those threads are still bookmarked on my page. Bush campaigned almost non-stop, but the canard persists that he lazily stayed off the trail.
In addition, Bush HAS used the bully pulpit all summer. He has made at least 3 appearances per week making speeched, in addition to numerous press briefings. Anyone who watches Fox News knows this. He has repeatedly spoken about judges, and has been putting the presure on. National networks do not cover him, and that is why many people like Mr. Steyn, who lives in small-town New Hampshire, probably do not understand this salient point: Bush is busy, but the networks don't show him.
I am quite disappointed in Mr. Steyn in this article, because it demonstrates that he is unwilling to grasp the complexity of the situation the President faces.
Oh, and Saudui Arabia said last night that we could use their bases.
I hope with all my heart that this happens.
But, I have feared from the beginning that GWB's good old boy, put an arm around your opponent, techniques ... so effective in TX where a lot of the Dims are more conservative than the Rinos is Congress ... were just plain silly in the leftwing snakepit that is Washington.
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.